The Sun.
London, England, 1867-03-27 00:00:00

a Reform Bill must pass, and he is not a man to be
daunted. It requires more real courage to with-
stand taunts than to fly with virtuous indignation
and resign in a huff because one's enemies are too
many for one. The present Government have been
too wary to destroy their bridges and to burn their
boats, though the tempter was most subtle and the
charmer charmed ever so wisely in seeking to make
them do so.

It is difficult to select the most striking passages
out of a speech which is so comprehensive as the one
before us, but we would direct particular attention
to the passage i❑ which Mr. DISRAELI spoke of the
lodger franchise, and showed the absurdity of his
being lectured in the matter, and ordered by the
right hon. gentleman the member for South Lanca-
shire to insert it in the measure. He was the
first to introduce it himself in 1859. The incon-
sistency of Mr. GLADSTONE'S course is very
plainly shown by this fact, that he said last year
that the " lodger franchise was a very insignificant
affair, and would produce very small results ;" but
we now find that it has become a question of very
great importance, and at those meetings where the
" mob of the House of Commons" attended the
leader of the Opposition, it was decided that
the fate of the Government should rest upon it,
and they were not to be allowed to go into Com-
mittee until it was conceded. Mr. DISRAELI, as
the first Minister who proposed the adoption of the
lodger franchise by the house, could not certainly be
charged with inconsistency when he announced the
willingness of the Government to entertain the ad-
visability of considering it in committee. Thus
ends one of Mr. GLADSTONE'S grand schemes, and
we see upon what a solid foundation his " stern
appeal" rested. No very enormous sacrifice is
required for the Government to agree to this fran-
chise ; and, indeed, on the contrary, we think that
the general demand for it is a tribute to the wisdom
and sagacity of its inventors, while it shows that those
who denounced it at first did so from party motives,
without taking the trouble to consider its merits.
Mr. DISRAELI laid great stress upon the manner
in which Mr. GLADSTONE had criticised the mea-
sure of Government, and the way in which his re-
marks were received showed that the House
coincided with him. He made a speech upon the
introduction of the measure which was well fitted
for the second reading, and upon the second reading
he spoke as if the Bill were in committee. Besides
he addressed the Government in a tone not at
all usual in the House, so much so as to call from
the Chancellor of the Exchequer the amusing
remark that his manner was "so excited
and alarming that one might almost feel
thankful that gentlemen in this House who sit
on opposite sides of the table are divided by a good
broad piece of furniture." It is long since a leader
of any party in the House has so far forgotten him-
self as Mr. GLADSTONE has done in this matter, and
members of his own party can feel and appreciate
his mistake. He has been arrogantly presump-
tuous in pretending that he, and he alone, could
represent what the House wanted, and what it
did not want. He has been excited where
calmness was required, and bitter where
moderation was called for. In short, he has
sought to make a faction-fight out of a great na-
tional question that especially called for the self-
denial and good feeling of all patriotic legislators.
Ws think that he has now to rejoice, and his
friends for him, that he has failed in his sinister
attempt to make political capital out of the diffi-
culties of the Government, for the public would
not readily have forgotten or forgiven the ma-
nceuvre, however dexterously it was carried out.

While he defended the general principles of the
bill, the Chancellor of the Exchequer did not
fall into the fatal error of setting up points to stand
or fall by. Under existing circumstances such a
course would be very prejudicial to the success of
his scheme. The most important announcement
made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer was that
concerning the " dual voting," and as that most
concerned the fate of the measure it is very satisfac-
tory to find that the Government does not pledge
itself to maintain the proposition. While declaring
that men of great mark and standing were prepared
to support it, the right hon. gentleman admitted
that their friends had not encouraged them to persist
in the course they had indicated. "I am prepared
to fight against the greatest difficulties," said the
right hon. gentleman ; " but we stand here as prac-
tical men, with a duty to fulfil, and that is to pass
a bill for the amendment of the representation of the
people, and it would therefore have been more than
idle to persist against such opposition." In a spirit
worthy of the occasion, and in language that
was eloqinent, from a conviction of the import-
ance of the subject treated of, and thus
was natural and effective, not studied and
specious oratory, Mr. DISRAELI concluded his re-
markable speech by declaring that parties might
struggle and combinations be made, but that the
Government had no other wish but to bring the
question of Reform to a settlement; and truly de-
clared that it was not for the weal of England that
any delay should take place in such settlement, and
warned those who thought that ambition might be
gratified in preventing the passing of the measure
that a deep responsibility rested not upon the Go-
vernment, but upon the whole House of Commons in
respect to this measure. " Act with us cordially and
candidly, and assist us to carry out this measure
which we hope will lead to a settlement of the ques-
tion, consistent with the maintenance of the repre-
sentative character of this house. Act with us, I
say, cordially and candidly—you will find on our
side complete reciprocity of feeling. Pass the
Bill, and then you may change the Ministry
if you like." We are not surprised that loud
and continued cheers greeted this announce-
ment, for it was one worthy of a Minister
of the Crown addressing Parliament on a great
national question, and the House of Commons al-
ways appreciates spirit. Mr. DISRAELI rose to the
height that was due when he delivered the closing
passage of his discourse last night, and we feel
convinced that the country will rightly estimate the
position of the Ministers, and encourage them with
their support and sympathy. We know now that
the Government are the friends to Reform, and it
remains for those who oppose them to show us who
are its enemies.

The country has good reason to be satisfied with
last night's work in the House of Commons. Those
who were fortunate enough to be present had no
unfavourable specimen of the debating talent of our
Parliamentary cliVtains, but it was the substance
rather than the form of the achievement which made
the evening remarkable. The Reform Bill was read a
second time, and an early day was fixed for going
into committee upon it. It is true that the bill of
last year got as far as thie, and collapsed in its pas-
sage through committee, but there are indica-
tions of a more favourable character in the
poli-
tical horizon. The House of Commons is evi-
dently anxious to pass the bill, subject no
doubt to certain modifications. The Government
as we anticipated, have frankly declared their
lingness to abandon the dual vote and to accept the
lodger franchise—the two points of most importance
—and many other minor matters they leave open
to discussion in committee. No more can be