The Sun.
London, England, 1867-01-24 00:00:00

in political circles that the Liberal party in the
House of Commons intended to call upon Mr.
GLADSTONE to resign his leadership. There have
not been wanting indications of a feeling of dis-
satisfaction among the ranks of the ex-Ministe-
rialists, and in the stormy session of last year open
desertion and secret disaffection became common
enough. Still that the Whigs should willingly
detach themselves from the statesman who has
rendered them such brilliant services, and whose
reputation and ability have been prominent among
their claims on the respect and regard of the people,
is a piece of suicidal folly hardly to be anticipated.
The Whigs have given the country only too much
reason to distrust their professions of patriotism and
liberality. Seven years' tenure of office by their re-
cognised leaders, at the head of a strong majority,
not only left the question of Reform absolutely in
state quo, but gave us very few other administrative
improvements. The Admiralty mismanagement was
still a byeword, the Board of Trade and the Poor.
law Board failed to give satisfaction ; the holder of
the Great Seal became the subject of painful criticism.
Their foreign policy excited the indignation of
their allies and the contempt of their antagonists.
Almost the only brilliant exception to the failures of
the Administration was the eminent success of the
Finance department. Mr. GLADSTONE, whatever
his faults as leader of a party, certainly carried off
the laurels from his colleagues. While the Duke of
SOMERSET left the Naval reserve in such a condi-
tion that Sir Jonx PAEINGTON was ashamed to
give the details, while Lord RUSSELL had gained
the credit of being a " meddler and a muddler" at
foreign Courts, while other departments were in a
more or less unsatisfactory condition, the Na-
tional Exchequer was unmistakeably flourishing.
There had been a considerable reduction of taxation
in spite of many drawbacks, and yet the buoyancy
of the revenue showed the confidence and prosperity
of the people. Mr. GLADSTONE, as we have said,
was the great administrative success of the Whig
Government, and upon Lord PALMERSTON'S death
the leadership of the House of Commons fell to him
as a matter of course. Mr. GLADSTONE'S best
friends will not probably contend that he is specially
qualified for a party leader. He has too much of
the irritability of genius, and too little patience
with the opinions and sentiments of those whose
temperaments are different from his own. The
obstinacy of deeply-rooted prejudice and old asso-
ciations in a slow and unimpressible mind, the
dullness which cannot quickly read the signs of the
times, even the intelligence and ability which are
of a different nature from his own, find him
unable to understand or have patience with them.
He is inclined to be intolerant, if intolerance
does not spare friend or foe when he is irritated by
what he thinks unreasoning opposition. The tact,
the suavity and dexterity, the management and
finesse necessary to keep together a large and
heterogeneous party are altogether foreign to Mr.
GLADSTONE. The last session was undoubtedly a
very trying one, and Mr. GLADSTONE having suc-
ceeded in working himself up into an interest in a
bill which at first he had little enthusiasm about,
was indignant with every one who could not recon-
cile themselves to its deficiencies. Any hesitation
in accepting " The Bill, the whole Bill, and
nothing but the Bill," was immediately set down
by him as wholesale hostility to Reform, and the
malcontent was branded accordingly. But we
apprehend that Mr. GLADSTONE'S worst offence in
the eyes of the Whigs was his abandonment of
office. Weary of contention, disgusted with the
secret reluctance to reform which he detected in too
many of his colleagues and his followers, the bril-
liant leader of the Commons, more jealous of his
personal honour than of the dignities of his party,
resolutely resigned his office, and, by that resignation
compelled the -Whigs to abandon their easy seat for
the cold shade of opposition. In the bitterness
of their disappointment at an uncertain, per-
haps a lengthened exclusion, from place and
power, it was easy to lay the blame of
failure on the man who had worked hardest
in the cause which they profess to have at heart.
While Lord DERBY was mustering his followers and
choosing his Cabinet the Whigs began to perceive
that things would have been much better let alone.
What a pity it was that their Parliamentary leader
should have been so zealous. A little more con-
cession and conciliation would have smoothed mat-
ters over, and Reform in some form might have
been shuffled through Parliament without disturb-
ing the political balance of power. Now that the
expatriated Whigs find themselves on the eve of
a new Session, with Lord DERBY fairly es-
tablished, and preparing, it is understood,
social and administrative reforms on a large scale,
they begin to ask -whether they cannot depose a
leader whose convictions are so inconveniently
strong, and whose earnestness and intensity of pur-
pose so ill represent the quiet caution and superficial
patriotism of the Whigs. Mr. FAWCETT, in his
speech the other day, commented upon these grow-
ing rumours. Party organs have discussed their
probable truth or falsehood, and force and signifi -
cance have been given to them by an article in the
current number of the Edinburgh Review. At the
close of an able paper on the " Position and
Prospects of Parties," in which due prominence
is given to the question of Reform, we find the
foilwing significant passage :—" Who may be the
chief destined to lead once more an united Liberal
party to victory is a question which the future alone
can solve. We are not unmindful of the long and
illustrious antecedents of not a few who stand
foremost in the ranks of Liberal statesmen. We
would gladly see the party united under such a
headship as past services to country and to party
point out as eminently entitled to the high position.
But neither the experience of age nor the impetu-
osity of genius are infallible guides in a new state
of affairs, and in critical times patriotism and
loyalty to a cause may require that personal pre-
tensions should yield to experience and the general
good." It is not difficult under the polite
veils of " the experience of age," and " the
impetuosity of genius" to recognise the heads of the
RUSSELL-GLADSTONE Cabinet. But what is the
" cause" which exacts from their " loyalty" the sac-
rifice of personal claims ? "If it be Reform we
can well understand that Lord RUSSELL, whose con-
victions and inclinations alike bid him " rest and be
thankful," may be called upon to retire from the
leadership ; but ou what plea Mr. GLADSTONE,
whose principles are in advance of his party, who
is accepted as the representative of opinions which
are almost Democratic in their character, and
who has yet plainly declared himself averse to
all extreme, violent, and unconstitutional changes.
is to be required to abandon his pdst, is a mystery
not to be solved except by personal jealousy and
party disappointment. Very certainly if he breaks
off his connection with the Whigs, they will not
gain much in popularity or influence. Their ad-
vent to.power, without Mr. GLADSTONE, or with their
ex-leader in a subordinate office, would be a hope-
less dream. The Tories know better how to appre-
ciate his rare abilities, notwithstanding any draw-
backs, for Lord DERBY, as is well known, more than
once invited his co-operation. The Whigs have
been long famous for throwing away their oppor-
tunities, but in this rumoured design of setting up a
King Loo, in place of their lees popular but more