The Sun.
London, England, 1867-02-13 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TIDIES.—The next fortnight will test the sincerity
of the House of Commons on the subject of Reform.
The course pursued by the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer on Monday night has undoubtedly smoothed
the way both for those whose only wish is to shelve
the question, and for the equally numerous class
who desire, indeed, to see some measure of Reform
adopted by Parliament, but have a still keener de-
sire to regain office. Nothing could be easier than
a union between those actuated by these two motives.
A dozen amendments might be framed on the Mini-
sterial proposal to go into committee on the Re-
form Resolutions next Monday week, any one of
which would be fatal to the Administration. The
house might, for instance, declare point-blank that
it saw nothing in the method of proceeding by reso-
lutions but a means of delay, or it might decline
to consider the special resolutions proposed by the
Ministry on the ground that they were totally
inadequate to the occasion, and could not be mo-
dified so as to become the basis of a Reform Bill
which would satisfy the country. Either of these
amendments_and they could be multiplied at
pleasure—would be a declaration of want of con-
fidence which no administration could survive. On
the other hand, the House of Commons may boldly
take the conduct of Reform into its own hands,
may adopt such of the resolutions suggested by the
Ministry as appear to be sound, may reject alto-
gether those which are incurably vicious, and
amend those which are capable of amendment, and
thus fairly push a Reform Bill through Parliament.
If the former plan be adopted, there must be a
Ministerial crisis, probably a change of Ministry,
possibly a dissolution, certainly a postponement of
any settlement of the question for another year • if
the latter course be followed, a powerful Opposition
will be reduced to impotency, and a satisfactory
Reform Bill may be secured. The nation will know
how to interpret the conduct of the House of Com-
mons under these circumstances. Its character is
even now not unassailed, and if it shows a'determi-
nation to sacrifice Reform to the advantage of a
party, its best friends will find it difficult to defend
its sincerity. It is very hard to understand what
induced the Chancellor of the Exchequer to follow
the course he adopted on Monday night. lie knew
that within twelve hours of the time he was speaking
the resolutions ho had framed would be published
to the world, and that for a fortnight he would have
no opportunity of explaining or defending them.
He knew that some of them embodied principles
which are startling novelties ; but, instead of
Stating the reasons which may justify their adop-
tion, fie wasted the evening in a dreary retrospect
of the conduct of the House of Commons and of the
Liberal party, not very accurate in fact, and most
impolitic as a mode of conciliating opposition. He
touched, indeed, upon some resolutions, but they
were almost self-evident ; he avoided altogether
those which are in the highest degree debatable.
We shall not imitate his error. No one will deny
that the number of electors in England and Wales
ought to be increased. We hold it equally clear
that the increase may be best effected by reducing
the occupying qualification, and by adding other
franchises not dependent on the value of the quali-
fying tenement. Some ignorant sneers have been
directed against "fancy franchises," but the prin-
ciple of these was sanctioned by the Coalition Minis-
try of 1854—certainly the ablest boiy of advisers
serving the Crown in the present generation—by
Lord Derby and his colleagues in 1859, and they
have been approved by all independent thinkers
on Parliamentary Reform. The third resolution, de-
claring it contrary to the Constitution to give any
class a predominant power, is incontestably true. It
is the singular felicity of the House of Commons that
it is what it professes to be—a representative body ;
and so much as Mr. Disraeli proved on Monday
cannot be alleged of the popular assemblies of the
great nations which rank abreast of us in the march
of civilisation. Mr. Gladstone politely deprecated
criticisms on the institutions of our contemporaries,
but it is impossible to deny the substantial accuracy
of the position taken up by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, and there are occasions when we are
••- , •
others. The House of Commons will certainly in-
sist upon preserving its repreSentative character
intact. It might also have been assumed, after the
experience of last session, that little objection would
be taken to the Resolution proposing to base the oc-
cupation franchise on Rating. The first four Re-
solutions would be supported by large majorities, if
not with unanimity ; but a general consent to adopt
Resolutions not containing a single figure would not
much advance the solution of the question. They
do not, in fact, touch the difficulty. It is very well
to affirm the propriety of reducing the occupation
franchise ; it is very well to insist upon the
necessity of preventing any class from becoming
predominant ; but the task of statesmanship is to
reconcile
these two propositions in practice. Re-
duce the franchise, as the phrase is, making no
other alteration, and the most numerous class must
become supreme ; maintain the representation of
all classes, and you cannot, while making no other
alteration, reduce the franchise. This is a dilemma
from which there is no escape, except by the
adoption of some new principle. It is both
feeble and foolish to doubt and hesitate, and hope
that after all the difficulty may be evaded, when it
is plainly a lion in the path which must be directly
encountered. The Ministry deserve the credit of
having faced the difficulty, though we cannot ap-
prove the means they propose to meet it. They
would have the House of Commons sanction a
plurality of votes as a means of facilitating " the
settlement of the borough franchise on an extensive
basis," and it has been rumoured thar if additional
votes were conferred on those who possessed edu-
cational or professional qualifications, or occupied
tenements above a certain rental, household suf-
frage would be recommended for the rest of each
borough constituency. It must, however, be re-
membered that the means adopted for securing the
co-exist: nee of a variety of representation and of
enlarged franchises must be not only such to re-
commend itself to the present Farhat.. Jut, but
must be sound enough in principle to withstand
future onslaughts in, it may be, a more demo-
cratic assembly. It may be possible, though we
see no reason to believe it, that additional votes
given for educational qualifications would be re-
spected by a future House of Commons, but
who can believe that a proposal so invidious as
that of giving a voter two or more votes be-
cause he lives in a larger house than his neighbour
could permanently endure? Whatever doubt we
may have of the temper of the present House of
Commons—and for our part we are satisfied that a
plurality of votes will never be sanctioned by it—we
cannot but know that the bulwark thus proposed as
a defence of the constitution would be washed away
by the first wave of popular opinion. The Govern-
ment has indeed expressed the fifth Resolution most
hypothetically, and the House of Commons must at
once reject it. Something, however, must be done,
and the suggestion that each voter should be at li-
berty to give the two or three votes he can now

distribute among as many candidates cumulatively
seems the simplest plan of solving the difficulty—at
least where there is more than one member to be

returned. It would set the voter free to do
what he liked best with his votes ; it would give no

man an invidious privilege over his fellows ; it
would preserve the representation of the less nume-
rous classes from being overridden or extinguished;
it would do more to stop bribery and cor-
ruption than any penal legislation, and its jus-
tice is so apparent that we might rest confi-
dent it would never be set aside by a future
Parliament. It is not, however, necessary to pin
our faith upon this plan, simple and satisfactory as
it appears; but if the house of Commons rejects,
as it must, the Government proposal, it must find a
substitute. Everything turns upon the solution of
this central difficulty. The re-distribution of seats
may be extended or contracted according as other
modes are or are not devised to enable the repre-

sentatives of the different classes and interests in
the kingdom to enter the House of Commons. The
concluding Resolutions, if they are ever reached,
will probably be as little opposed as those that come
first. Parliament cannot decently refuse to acknow-
ledge the convenience of voting papers, after allow-
ing their use in the elections for the Universities,
and if any controversy arises about them it can only
be upon the efficacy of the checks proposed for their
due authentication. The revision of boundaries is
a subject the Chancellor of the Exchequer is never
tired of dilating upon, and it is confessed by all to
be sufficiently important to be a necessary part of a
complete Reform Bill.
THE WESTMINSTER GAZETTE ON DOVER TO CALAIS
By RAIL.—The time is past in which Englishmen
and Frenchmen thought it their sacred duty to
hate each other. Steamboats, railways, tele-
graphs, reduced rate of postage, the treaty of
commerce between France and England, and inter-
national exhibitions, have all helped to bring us
into nearer relation and more friendly intercourse
with our foreign neighbours. A few hours and ft
few shillings only now separate London and
Paris. Artisans and tradesfolk flock to the gay
capital to wander through the Louvre and get a
peep at the Emperor on the Champ de Mars.
As we have long ceased to fortify our cities, so
we begin to set less value on our watery ram-
parts. We do not " wish they were a whole At-
lantic broad." Generally speaking, we would
narrow them if we could. We would fly over
them in balloons, bridge them over with boats as
Xerxes bridged the Hellespont, or tunnel beneath
them as we have tunnelled the Thames. No doubt
there is much evil to be learned from the French,
but there is also much good. They are a great
people enterprising, advancing, and refined.
Self-interest with us as a nation is no longer
synonimous with self-defence. Our insular posi-
tion had immense advantages in times past, but we
have now more to gain by closer union with the
Continent. If easier access would expose us more
readily to the attacks of France, or France to
the assaults of England, it must be remembered
that the communication would be of such a nature
that it might, in the event of war, be cut off in a
moment on either side. It would be but to take
up a few rails or barricade a tunnel and our insular
position would be restored. We should retire,
secure as ever, within the roaring and billowing
breastworks of the deep. The Channel Railway,
if it could be laid at all, would be constructed by
the united Governments of England and France.
It would be worked in peace, and maintained in
happy and useful activity by peace, and by peace
only. It would be a sign of peace, and perhaps a
security for it too. It would add to our pleasures,
enlarge our experience, and assist our commerce.
There is an advantage even of a higher sort
which might accrue from it, and to which I shall
presently refer. But can it be effected ? Have
art and science, indeed, such power over the ele-
ments ; and supposing they have, could the enor-
mous capital such an undertaking would require
be realised, and, if realised, would it eventually
return an adequate interest? These are grave
questions, but let us see how they can be an-
swered. It is now nearly ten years since M.
de Gamond proposed to the Emperor Napoleon
a plan for linking France to England by means of
a tunnel. He was to reverse the mode of tun-
nelling proper to the mole. That creature tunnels
towards a centre where he resides. M. de Gamond
was to tunnel from centres thirteen in number,
consisting of thirteen islands, or huge mounds
of chalk and stones cast into the Channel.
Through these mounds he intended to sink shafts,
and then to tunnel right and left when he had
reached a certain level. Thus the artificial Chan-
nel Islands were to be drilled like Mount Cenis,
and navigation was to be impeded that Mons. Gre-
nouille and Mr. John Bull might avoid sea-sickness.
That scheme would not do, and M. de Gamond
was with infinite politeness bowed out of the Impe-
rial closet. But his Majesty favoured the Suez
Canal, and devised a plan himself for cutting
through the Isthmus of Darien. Other propo-
sals, therefore, for uniting France and England
materially were sure to court his smiles. Twelve
had been laid before him three years ago, but none
appeared altogether feasible. Some proposed tubes
submerged and lying in the depths of the sea.
Others preferred tunnelling beneath the Channel,
and, with this view, Mr. Hawkshaw, a high autho-
ity in Hydraulics, has, we hear, lately been taking
soundings between Calais and our chalk cliffs. A
French engineer inclined to a tunnel or arched
railway running along the bottom ; and one
Englishman, whose thoughts were of wider span,
proposed constructing a monster bridge from
shore to shore. It is hinted (but people are
so malicious in these days) that the Emperor
is resolved to have a meeting with the Queen of
England, as Francis I. had with henry
not near Calais, but midway between France
and England in the depths of the Railway
Tunnel, and that the " Cloth of Gold " is already
being prepared with great secresy. Hence the
gracious attention he gave to the plan for
building a tube on shore, floating it out to sea, and
dropping it into its watery bed. It would be only
20 miles long—a trifle in the 19th century—and
the two ends being made solid, it would be en-
tered, from the Calais and the Dover side, by chain
piers, or (sea-sickness again!) by a small steamer.
Perhaps some curious reader will ask, How upon
earth the French engineer I mentioned proposes
to build his arched railroad at the bottom of the
Straits ? I reply, simply by means of 40 submarine
boats, and 1,500 submarine sailors and navvies ;
and, not to pass over our fellow-countryman's
project of a bridge too lightly, I will add, that
he would build up 190 piers or pyramids in the
restless waves. They would measure 300 feet
square at the base and 150 feet square at the
water's level. They would support towers of
--- • • •,‘-. --A—, —A Inn
feet in diameter. Do you think they would stand
firm in a tempest? I have my doubts, nay, to
tell the truth, at once, I believe they would
totter like reeds. The projector, of course, says
otherwise. From tower to tower he would sus-

pend his tubular bridge, and passengers would
look down on ships passing under, like eagles
watching the wrinkled deep from their mountain
walls. Now the Channel is 160 feet deep midway,
and the towers, therefore, with their massive
pedestals, and 40 feet required for foundation,
would rise altogether 460 feet high from a base
of 300 feet square. If Old Neptune, with his ex-
perience, could not upset them all in a week, he
must be in his dotage. The proposal of Mr.
Joseph Chalmers promises better, and Dr. Wynter,
who is no mean judge in such matters, thinks his
scheme worthy of great attention. e sees, in-
deed, formidable difficulties in its execution, but
believes in " the ultimate accomplishment of a
land passage under the British Channel." Since
he wrote this, the Atlantic Telegraph Cable has
been laid successfully, and the principle of laying
tubes at the bottom of the sea has been reduced
to practice. If a cable from Ireland to Newfound-
land can enclose an electric wire, a tube large
enough to contain railway carriages may surely
be sunk between Dover and Calais. This is, in
Ilis tube
substance, Mr. Chalmer's scheme.

, .. ..
would be embedded in stones forming a ridge
from coast to coast 40 feet high, 150 feet wide at
the base, and from 40 to 120 feet under low-
water level. Iron boxes filled with stones would
be fastened to it as dead weights • it would
be 18 miles long, and would have three venti-
lators at about equal distances, so that passen-

gers could not, at the worst, be more than 41
miles from light and fresh air. But as some per-
sons might be disposed to complain even of this
moderate privation, the projector kindly proposes
a system of draughts up and down for the accom-
modation of weak lungs. Mr. Chalmers's prose
rises into poetry when he enlarges on the charms
of the way. The bright coloured iron, clean and
painted, with thousands of lamps at regular dis-
tances—the noise reduced to a minimum by the
equable and elastic pressure without—the perfectly
united rail—the speed and novelty of the pro-
gress through the caverns of the deep—will con-
trast
agreeably with the noise and darkness of
ordinary tunnels, and even with " the miles of
uninviting scenery" one is often condemned to
pass through ; and the traveller who enters the
Channel Railway will experience a sensation
allied to that which we feel when we step with
tired feet from a gravelly road "upon the downy
sward of a smooth greenlawn !" Oh, the strange
delight of this facilis descensos, this iter liquidum
(they are both expressions of Virgil, though he,
poor blind Pagan, had never even heard of an
underground railway) ! Could any diving-bell,
any canoe on the rapids, any aeriel ship offer half
the excitement and satisfaction of this gentle,
noiseless gliding under the seething surf? Say not
that it is all a dream, nor doubt that the art which
has preserved the subtlest of fluids—the electric
spark—safely across the Atlantic will arrive at last,
after many fruitless attempts, many cruel disap-
pointments, at conveying human life, horses, flocks,
herds, and merchandise in tact in a tubular railway
from France to England, and from England to
France. And is it to be all in one piece ? By no
means. The tube is to be laid out in lengths of
400 feet and 30 feet in diameter. The masses of
iron are to be floated out, then sunk, and united
together under water so as to exclude the intru-
sive element. Mr. Chalmers does not seem to take
much account of the difference between working
above and below water. But what of that?
Science annuls differences, and accomplishes the
impossible Look at the Menai Railway Bridge.
Think of Stephenson. Remember Brunel. Twelve
millions sterling would, according to the projoc-

tor's estimate, suffice for the enterprise. It is
but six millions a piece for the French and English
portion of a Channel Railway Company. If we
allow a few millions more for interruptions and
swindling directors, it is, after all, a mere baga-
telle for modern .millionaires. Once completed, the
profits would be immense ; and. Mr. Chalmers
has been thought moderate when he computes
them at £1,300,000 per annum, for the passenger
and goods traffic would certainly be prodigious.
The benefit of a higher sort than any merely mate-
rial to which I alluded was simply this. The
religious rule under which we live is eminently
central. Such is the divine order in the Church.
We find by experience, as well as hold in theory
and dogma, that the members work best when
closely united with the head. To the Pope and to
the Courts under his immediate control we sub-
mit all questions of doctrine and discipline in our
ultimate appeals; and the progress of Art and
Science has effected this good at least—that it ren-
ders the communication of distant dioceses with
the Holy See far more easy than it was of old.
The consequence is that the Church was never
more united in its members than it is now ; and
whatever tends to facilitate communication still
more by sea or land, by telegraph or personal
transit, tends also to tighten the bonds which link
the faithful to their common father. The Church
can make Science, as she has long made Litera-
ture, her vassal.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

LEEDS-TUESDAY.

Millers would not take freely of wheat at late rates, but
as factors will not sell except at an advance of at least ls.
por qr. from Friday's rates, but little business is doing. No
alteration worthy of note in barley or any other article.