The Sun.
London, England, 1858-08-16 00:00:00

the above welcome assurance from the lips of the
Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
It was perfectly well understood at the time that
the design for these colossal lions in gramt.: would,
as a mere :natter of course, not to say also a, a mat-
ter both of common sense and of common :ustice, be
open to general competition—a competiti ,r, it surely
need scarcely be added, addressing its allurements to
and exciting a wholesome emulation among Sculptors
—not painters, not engravers, not butchers, not
bakers, but Scumroas !
Yet, now, after some half-a-dozen or more of the
leading sculptors of the day have taxed their abilities
in the matter to the uttermost, the models produced
by their genius are abruptly returned upon their
hands, with the curt intimation that there will be no
competition, that the commission has been given to
one who is not a sculptor at all, who never has
been one, who has never either modelled
in clay or handled chisel and mallet—to Sir EDWIN
LANDSEER, Knight and Royal Academician, a man of
unquestionable genius, the greatest animal painter
of his age, and an extraordinary personal favourite,
not merely in his own private circle, but also, and in
a particular manner, at the Court of his SOVEREIGN.
" Call me horse," says Sir JOHN FALSTAFF. Another
JOIIN—Mr. Bum., to wit—is neither a horse nor yet
blind. Nevertheless, there is an old proverb, " A wink
to a blind horse," et cetera—which may at this point be
directly applicable to that arebtype of the national
character. Why Sir EDWIN LANDSEER has been
selected instead of the most successful competitor
among the sculptors of the day—BAILEY, or NOBLE,
or BELL, or FOLEY—is best known of course to those
who have made this most astounding selection.
Happily it may not be too late. Possibly Sir
EDWIN may see the absurdity, as well as the indeco-
rum, of the task thrust upon him—out of most mis-
taken kindness. It rests at this moment, we can-
not but think, with the great painter itself. Let
him waive his high claims upon Court patronage,
and the granite lions may yet be sculptured, not
merely by the hand of genius but by the hand of
genius guided by professional skill and experi-
ence in the art. May this graceful act crown the
fair fame of one of the most gifted and admired of
our living Academicians.

Reformers will be pleased to see the son of a Peer
trying his hand on the great reform question of the
new Reform Bill ; the petition for the good citizens
of Jedburgh, drawn by the Hon. W. F. CAMPBELL,
son of the Lord Chief Justice will, if for this reason
only, be read with not a little interest; it is, how-
ever, written in a style which shows that its author
has thought out the subject for himself; he has
viewed it on many sides, and is therefore an advocate
of the Ballot, not from any temporary impulse,
but from rational and settled conviction. It
is such supporters of the cause we most need. So
far as mere votes go, of course a man who Totes as his
constituency tells him, contributes as much to a ma-
jority as a GROTE Or MOLESWORTII ; but, your vote
and influence is the good old request ; and the iyiu-
ence which Liberals want, the only influence they
ought to wish for, is that of a man of intelligent and
strong convictions with the large number who will per-
haps listen, but will not give themselves the trouble
to think. The influence we fear of many who vote for
the Ballot merely to keep a seat, is rather against
than for us. They do not, we presume, scruple to
tell others not so fettered, that they are but too
thankful to be in a minority; they would be
frightened to find themselves called upon to vote for
the third reading of a Ballot Bill ; unless, indeed,
they looked confidently enough to the House of
Lords to be the conservators of electoral corruption.
The document referred to shows the son of Lord
CAMPBELL to be no such venal politician. His influ-
ence in his circle will be that of a man whose heart
is in the cause, because his reason has led him to
espouse it.
The four reasons which precede the prayer of the
petition should be, we think, conclusive with statesmen.
The sturegretted failure of the Bills of 1852 and 1854
does prove that even large and liberal alterations
fail to attract popular support, when unaccom-
panied by the Ballot. It is perfectly certain that
any Bill brought forward in 1859, whether by
DERBY, RUSSELL, or PALMERSTON, will equally fail
to command public support if secret voting form no
part of it. The two houses may make a show of

great liberality ; they may wish to please the people
in hopes of escaping the demand for a thoroughly
effective Bill ; they may, with such views, be
ready to pass what they will imagine the
people will accept as a substantial Bill;
but the public will not be thus hoodwinked. No
flood of petitions will be sent up for "the bill, the
whole bill, and nothing but the bill;" no public
meetings will be held, except to denounce it as a
makeshift, and to demand that the Ballot be added
to it ; and the bill will either drop from hands which
would rather have-no Reform Bill at all, or, if passed,
be but the commencement of a new agitation.
Something popular must be offered. Mr. CAMP.
BELL naturally takes for granted that it will be a
large extension of the franchise. We should think
so too. The language, not merely of Mr.
FITZROY KELLY, but of the animating mind
of the Cabinet, has frequently implied it. Mr. DIS-
RAELI is not opposed to an extension of the suffraae,
and Lord STAMM'S leanings to the people, we might
add Sir JOHN PAKIN‘TON'S, are well known. We
may be quite wrong, but all the probabilities are that
the old Tory section of the Cabinet must, on a Re-
form question, indulge very much the wishes of their
more liberal colleagues. They will want their in-
fluence with the country, and they cannot have it
unless they allow them to propose something which
honestly liberal Conservatives can indorse with
self-respect, and be prepared heartily to sup-
port. Now it does not seem easy to fix on
anything popular, except extension of the suf-
frage, which Tories would like so well. Another
schedule A would offend many of their supporters,
though somewhat in that line there must be. Re-
distribution of representatives, if it gave yet more to
the counties, would raise a hubbub which would
turn out any Ministry. There must, then, it would
seem, be an augmentation of the number of the elec-
tors, for which the scope is ample enough.
But will the people be satisfied with this ? Will
they quiescently accept a mere extension of political
serfdom ? Will they confound numbers of voters
with freedom of voting ? We warn both Whigs and
Tories that they are got now far beyond that. Every
man who under a new bill would receive a vote will
ask himself " Will it be my vote or not ?"
Every foreman in a factory, every enfranchised
workman or little tradesman, every journey-
man or clerk, will resent the thought of being
merely one of his employer's cards. To some
extent the lesser tenant farmers, if that franchise be
lowered, will have the same feeling—though, far be-
hind the operatives in intelligence and independence,
as they are, they may not feel the political yoke as
any yoke at all. The great mass, however, of those
whom any scheme can enfranchise will not wish for
the boon, unless it be conferred on them, not on their
masters. They will feel it but a nuisance to be al-
lowed to vote, while, like certain other voters, they
must receive from their superiors a conge (retire in
favour of the superior candidate?
Worse than all, as Mr. CAMPBELL suggests, is the
consequence of trifling with the wants and wishes of
the electors on points which must be conceded at
last. How deeply has the House of Lords injured
itself on the Jew Bill ! It will take some time—
almost require a new generation—to redeem that
nischief on behalf of the Pters of England. It has
taught the country to regard them, collectively, as a
mere obstruction—a House, not of Conservatives but
of Obstinates ; of beings who must be bullied to be
beaten. Both Houses ought to take the warning.
[f anything can be plain, it is that the Ballot,
many years of discussion,
wa )du
would
thatbe--that
bc —e t
hhafteraa
' and intimidation in high
no other political reform
VVOII
places, tilec do
corruption tion
wtobuelidnatilwonideateaand venality
ob-
ject to the change. The ho
in lowernepsltacaensd,