The Sun.
London, England, 1867-07-31 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOUNALS.

TIMES.—The House of Lords has, by a single
vote, covered many errors, and justified the opinions
of its warmest admirers. The—proposal-sole.Lerd
Cairns for the Representation of Minorities in con-
stituencies returning three members was carried last
night by a majority of 91. Such a triumph of
reason and truth may well startle us, accustomed as
we have been during this session to the rapid growth
of convictions. The supposed crotchet of yester-
day has become a fact. Received, at first, by all
sections of the political world with the judicious
caution which befits Englishmen trained in the
school of practical life, the idea of modifying our
electoral machinery so as to secure in three-membered
constituencies the proportionate representation of
both the great 'divisions of party has made its way
by its inherent justice. The verdict of the Lords has
been decisive, but we do not believe that it in any
degree outstrips the independent opinion of the
House of Commons, still less that it is at variance
with the deliberate judgment of the country. It has
been everywhere confessed that the adoption in
one form or another of the principle of cumulative
voting was essential to maintain the character of
our institutions, and that through it, and through
it alone, could ie redistribution of electoral power,
which all prescient statesman recognise as inevit-
able, be reconciled with the preservation of our
Representative Government. The arguments on
behalf of the proposal advanced by Lord Cairns
were overwhelming. He himself treated the ques-
tion in the succinct dialectic style of which he is
a master, and, though exception may be taken to
some of his illustrations, the chain of his reason-
ing was perfect. But Lord Cairns did not stand
alone. In fact, every one who took part in the
discussion, with the exception of the Alinisters
who represented the Government, was on his
side. It mattered not whether, like Lord Russell,
they spoke from the front bench of the Opposition,
or, like Lord Stanhope and Lord Shlewsbury,
they avowed themselves faithful supporters of the
Administration, and resolute to do nothing which
would interfere with the success of the measure;
whether, like Lord Spencer and Lord Cowper,
they expressed the views of independent Liberals;
like Lord Carnarvon, they argued from the position
of a thoughtful Conservative; like Lord Stratford,
they uttered the sentiments of a man above party,
or, like Lord Houghton, confessed their sympathy
with the spirit of pure Democracy—the result was
the same. One and all saw in the proposed Repre-
sentation of Minorities a suggestion consonant with
the strictest principles of justice and equity, and
therefore to be depended upon as stable when arti-
ficial securities must prove worthless, and which
would at the same time secure, throughout all ex-
tensions of Democratic Reform, their proper share
iu the Government of. the country to the power, the
wealth, the intellect, and the education of the nation.
It is not the least admirable characteristic of the
debate that this essential justification of the Amend-
ment moved by Lord Cairns was apprehended by
all who urged its adoption. It might have been
supposed that some incidental and trifling advan-
tage would have been thrust into prominenCe, and,
perhaps, acknowledged by a speaker here and
there as the supreme motive which induced him to
support the proposal. Nothing of the kind was
said. The detailed operation of the scheme was,
indeed, amply explained, so that it was evident the
majority had not lightly taken up an
(they had not examined, but no one suffered detail t
to obscure the main recommendations of theplan.s
The whole debate was of a character tosis_taimi.rtnhse
i
high reputation of the House of Lords. Lord
d.
was exhaustive in his argument ; the scope of the
speeches of Lord Stanhope, Lord Carnarvon, and
Lord Russell was broader than is commonly found
in the House of Commons. Lord Cairnsiolafir,zaord_
the effect of his proposal on time composition
liament, on the legislative characte(ii
oconst ituencies,
fthe members
representing the three-membered .3
arid on the constituencies themselves.
necessary to remember that the !louse of Co
consults and deliberates as w(flolrlrnis
of its fund
necessary it is to the due per ari'loctoes to sec Low
Lions that it should contain members
re
The p resent-
ower
p
' ing all sections of the community.
of decision can never be endangered by the
proportionate representation of minorities,' but the
deliberate formation of opinion is exposed to great
hazard if the moderating influences of dissenting
minorities be excluded. Parliament itself must be
•
improved by the addition of such men as will be
chosen by the wealthy and intelligent merchants and
manufacturers who are now unrepresented in the
largest towns, and of the members who will be re-
turned by the Liberal minorities of counties. The
effect of adopting Lord Cairns' Amendment on the
members for three-membered constituencies must be
equally beneficial, and its consequenctes of the con-
stituencies themselves will prove of transcendent
importance. The voters who are now hopelessly
outvoted, and whose political energies become feeble
by disuse, will start into fresh vitality. Enfran-
chised in deed, and not merely in name, they will
be animated by the consciousness of power. They
will be brought into direct relation with the Legifi....

' lature. Lord Stanhope urged the same views. The
independence of 'his attitudes, and the thoroughness
of his convictions, gave his speech a force which, in
spite of all his many accomplishments, Lord Stan-
hope too seldom exhibits. Frankly confessing that
he had been mistaken in 1832, he trusted that the
lanxiety with which be awaited the operation of the
present hill inigli, prove equally unfounded, and he
regretted that Government had not at the very out-
set incorporated in their bill the Representation of
Minorities. Lord Carnarvon's argument manifested
the same elevation of tone and tlimglit which has
dignified his recant speeches ; and Lord Russell,
-taking the true historical view of the 1-gislation of
our country, a,.: the result of many co-existing forces,
insisted upon the necessity of maintaining every
clement of political action in full vitality, if we
would not have the machinery of Government
thrown wholly out of gear. To all these arguments
what had Lord Maltnesbury and the Duke of Marl-
borough, who represented the Government, to bring
in reply ? If we may not say " Nothing," we must
say that their counter-arguments were paidallY
trivial. "Do not," said Lord Malmesbury, " treat
the great towns
.with unfairness ;" but is it, we ask
with Lord Russell, unfair that the three members
for a great town should be two to one, when the
electors are divided in the same proportion, or even,
as is probable, nearly equal ? - "Do not," urged
both the noble lords,, adopting Mr. Bright's argu-
Ment, diminish "contests." If a diminution of the
`number of contests implied a diminution of political
energy, we should be the last tan . advocate -the pro-
posal. In truth,. the. c_geet. of the.,eksticiNoV.l4l.4l,l4l
Ibe whoWthe other way: How many real contests
have there been in the town of Birmingham or in
the county of Buckingham in the last twenty years;
and, judging by recent events, how many are there
likely to be ? The minority in each case, now con-
demned to impotent inactivity, will henceforth start
into life, and whenever circumstances may ari▪
se
which would justify a contest—that is to say, when-
ever
what has been a minority believes it has become
converted into a majority—there will be a contest
for the third seat, just as there has been a contest '
for two seats hitherto. Lord dalmesbury and the
Duke of Marlborough had, however, two more pleas.
The one may be called the ' standing
argument of
the Ministers, so hard have they ridden it in the
absence of Lord Derby. It is—" Respect the
opinion of the House of Commons.". Unlucki▪ ly,
however, on this occasion it is notorious that the
independent judgment of the House of Commons
was in favour of the proposal, and nothing but the
obstinate attitude of Mr. Disraeli as the spokesman
of the Ministry caused its rejection. Respect for
the opinion of the House of Commons thus
meant no more than respect for the prejudiced
blindness of the Government, and the Lords
treated this plea with the respect it deserved. 'I he
last plea—the Duke of Marlborough advanced
it—was, coming from such a quarter, the most
astonishing of any. "Pause," said the President
of the Council, " before you take a step from
which there may be no receding in a matter vital
to the interests of the nation." Under ordinary
circumstances it is the duty of a Ministry to incul-
cate caution, and it cannot be too much encouraged
in a scrupulous and thorough examination of every
proposal. Bat that Ministers, who harq outstripped
the most ardent Reformers in their proposals of en-
franchisement, and have made advanced Liberals
anxious, if not apprehensive, of the future, should
turn round when they have introduced new forces
into our representative Constitution, and deprecate
necessary alterations in them, is an outrage on the
judgment of the Assemby to which they may ap-
, peal. The Lords have shown their independence
and their foresight. At a point of the highest im-
portance in the history of the representative insti-
tutions of the country they have been faithful to
themselves and to their great duties. On minor
questions they have shown themselves too ready to
defer to the decision of the Ministers of the Crown,
but when the character of the future Governtnent
o f the nation was at stake they asserted their own
judgment against all attempts to betray them to a
false conclusion. It may appear, indeed, a trivial
matter how a el.inse affecting some 12 seats in an
an assembly of 658 members should be treated, bat
even if the redistribution scheme of the bill be left
unchanged, the adoption of the amendment was of
the gtavest importance. Lord Cairna acknowledged
that in any case a further redistribution must be
made—that it was probable it would take the form
of creating more three-membered constituencies,
and therefore it was most, desirable that the pro-
posal for the representation of minorities should be
at once adopted. But we would fain believe that it
is not too late to enlarge the scheme of redistribu-
tion so as to apply the proposal at once more ex-
tensively. Lord Stanhope, as we have said, ex-
pressed his regret that the Government had not de-
termined upon such a policy in the beginning, and
the cheers which greeted the statement from the
Ministerial benches showed the feeling of the
warmest supporters of the Government. If the
Ministry be wise, they will act upon the Bugg's-.
tion. Lord Cairns has carried his amendment by an
overwhelming majority, and Lord Halifax's abstract
resolution has been defeated. Let the Ministers of
the Crown show their statesmanship in at once
bringing forward an enlarged and revised scheme
of redistribution, and to avert that agitation and
forestall that further redistribution which their
most sagacious supporters declare are otherwise
inevitable.