The Sun.
London, England, 1868-11-26 00:00:00

RUSSELL there are others of the old world Whigs'
whom it would be simply ridiculous for any one to
dream of seeing again inducted into official life as
members of an Administration. Such past and
gone Mummies of Ministers let us say, as
Lord HALIFAX and Lord STANLEY Of ALDERLEY.
They, at least, we are (thank GoD) rid of altogether.
Degraded long since to the position of mere Political
Fogies, they are, beyond all manner of doubt, Let aside
as men who are obsolete, cushioned, shelved com-
pletely. it might be, doubtless, if only out of respect
to him, as a statesman who has been himself
thrice Prime Minister of England, that a place even
now might be allotted to Lord RUSSELL in the next
Liberal Cabinet—as a Minister, as the phrase is,with-
out portfolio. Just as was done some years ago in re-
gard to that Nestor of the Whig Party, the late
Marquis of LANSDOWNE. And Lord LANSDOWNE had
never been Prime Minister, whereas Lord RUSSELL
has, and that thrice. But the nomination of such a
a nonentity mLord STANLEY of ALDERLEY, or of such
another nonentity as Lord HALIFAX to any similar
honorary position, much more, be it said, to any post
requiring administrative energy or ability, would
involve, in itself, nothing less than the covering with
ridicule of any Cabinet so monstrously overweighted.
They, too, therefore, are as completely out of the
question, though for a different reason, as Mr.
MILNER GIBSON, or as the Marquis of HARTINGTON.
Again, there are certain flighty, eccentric, unreliable
Liberals hitherto seated on the back benches, or
below the gangway, who might just probably, had
they been returned to the new House, have entertained
a faint idea of being appointed or reappointed to
lesser offices in a future Liberal Administration ; but
who, not having been returned at all, are now swept
aside from among the number of even—day-dream-
ing aspirants ! Conspicuous among these, being Mr.
HORSMAN, Mr. ROEBUCK, Mr. MILL, and Mr. BERNAL
OSBORNE. The difficulty hitherto looked forward to,
therefore, as threatening Mr. GLADSTONE, immediately
on his being called upon to select his colleagues
in the construction of a new Liberal Cabi-
net—that dreaded difficulty of an embarrassment
of riches— has been already very much and very ob-
viously diminished. Abstracting (from the list of
those at one time thought of as just possible
colleagues of his) merely the names we our-
selves have here quite casually enumerated—viz.,
those of Mr. MILNER GIBSON, Lord HARTINGTON,
Lord HALIFAX, Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY, Mr.
OSBORNE, Mr. MILL, Mr. ROEBUCK, Lord RUSSELL
even, and, we would add here, Locd RUSSELL'S some
time Under. Foreign Secretary in the House of Com-
mons as a politician utterly unfitted for office, if for no
other reason, because of his late disgraceful speech
upon the hustings at Southwark, Mr. LAYARD—Mr.
GLADSTONE'S choice of colleagues will be narrowed
to the really able and energetic members seated
around him or immediately behind him in the House.
Conspicuous among whom there will be of course Mr.
CIIILDERS, Mr. W. E. FORSTER, and, (happily for his
party, restored once more to the House of Commons)
the most gifted of all our diplomatists, the new mem-
ber for Tamworth, the Right Hon. Sir HENRY
BULWER. Conspicuous in the Lords, on the other
hand, will be the Duke of ARGYLL and the Earl of
CLARENDON. From statesmen and administrators
such as these, the new Premier, directly his time
comes, will hive to select his colleagues in the next
Liberal Cabinet.

able because the adjoining county of Yorkshire—
which is very similar to Lancashire, and where it
differs does so, as one would have supposed, to the
advantage of Convervatism—is decidedly Liberal.
Why, then, has Lancashire given its voice •
against the Liberal leader and the Liberal policy ?
-Why has Lancashire severed itself from the.legisla-
tion of the next few years—Lancashire, which, the
Marquis of SALISBURY said, was to rule England ?
We have already explained the reasons ; we foresaw
them, and foretold that which has happened. Very
briefly, then, we would repeat that, in the first place,
there is a hostility of races ; the Irish land in large
numbers at Liverpool, and go up and down the
county lowering the price of labour, and therefore
setting the Lancashire operatives against them.
Next, the No-Popery spirit—which is quite
distinct from real Protestantism, from the Pro-
testantism which demands equal rights for all—
is nowhere so prevalent as in Lancashire. In the
third place, the operatives, as a rule, like to oppose
their masters, partly in order to exhibit their inde-
pendence, partly because they have not forgiven the
masters their opposition to Factory legislation,
and especially the Ten Hours' Bill. Lastly,
the personal popularity of Lord DERBY,
gained, and deservedly gained, by his conduct
during the cotton famine, has greatly assisted his
party. When, therefore, the issue before the country
was a measure of justice to Ireland, the Lancashire
operatives, who hate the Irish both for their
nationality and their religion, vehemently opposed
the measure, and as it was brought in by the Liberal
party they opposed it still more.
Finally, we have to notice the unexpectedly Con-
servative feeling of the English counties. It was
thought that when the county franchise was re-
duced to £l2, Dissenting shopkeepers of the small
towns would be found so strong that the Conserva-
tive party would be in a great measure over-
thrown. This has not proved the case ; and that it
has not is due in great measure to the country clergy.
It must be remembered that these have identified
(disastrously, as we think) the Irish Church with the
English Church, and that they believe the mainte-
nance of the latter depends upon the preservation of
the former. They have therefore, as a rule, used
all their great influence on the side of the Conserva-
tive party. We do not complain of them for doing
so ; we believe that they have made a mistake which
will most injuriously affect them hereafter, that
they have only given another proof of the irre-
concilable difference there is between them and
the towns which, after all, do rule the country ;
but we are not surprised that they have taken their
present course. The result of it has been, that the
counties have exhibited an amount of Conservatism
which they would not otherwise have shewn, which
has for the time falsified the predictions of those who
anticipated that the £l2 householder in the country
towns would carry all before him.

THE result of the elections is now so far certain
that we can estimate it without waiting for the con-
clusion of the few remaining contests. The Liberal
majority will be something under 120, or say
fifteen more than the 100 which we assigned to the
Opposition before the elections began. It is impos-
sible that the Conservatives can continue to hold
office long in the face of a hostile force so over-
whelmingly large. Even those of them who have
the most boundless faith in their leader's skill as a
tactician admit that this majority cannot, at all
events for the present, be withstood, and that they
must for a time go out of office, though, as they
affirm, only for a very short time. But the elections
have an interest far beyond their effect upon the
position of the two parties. The independent poli-
tician values them less for the changes which they
will cause than for the spirit which they indicate.

There are a few broad facts concerning which
there is no room for doubt. All the arithmetical
feats in which party journalists delight will not
explain away this fact—that Ireland, Scotland, and
Wales have decided for Mr. GLADSTONE'S policy ;
or this—that Lancashire has decided against it ; or
this—that the extension of the county franchise has
not elicited that amount of Liberalism in the counties
which was anticipated. Let us consider these facts,
and try to estimate their importance.
In the first place, it was obvious from the outset
that Ireland would pronounce as it has done. The
circumstance that the Roman Catholics are to the
Protestants as ten to one (the proportion on the poll-
book is somewhat smaller) rendered it inevitable that
the voice of the Irish people would be given against

the Protestant Established Church. The verdict
has been even more decisive than we expected.
In Ultra-Protestant Belfast and Londonderry,
the supporters of Mr. GLADSTONE'S policy have won
two seats. The opponents of that policy explain the
circumstance by mentioning that the Presbyterians
voted for the Liberal candidates. But this fact
aggravates, rather than extenuates, the importance
of the decision. If the Presbyterians, the Protestants
of Protestants, pronounce against the Irish Church
—pronounce against Lord MAYo's scheme of
giving them Government grants, what hope
is there for that institution, for that
scheme ? Their fellow-religionists in Scotland have
arrived at the same result. In Scotland, Protes-
tantism is far less identified with State religion than
in Ireland, and there the decision has been pro-
nounced with an approach to unanimity that is quite
unprecedented. Not only do all the Scotch boroughs,
without a single exception,. return Liberals, but
ancient Conservative strongholds in the Scotch
counties have been wrested from the great
territorial magnates, to the surprise as much
of the victors as of the vanquished. That the Duke of
BUCCLEUCH should be unable to retain the seat
which his son held, that in Peeblesshire and Selkirk
he should be within four votes of losing another seat,
that Sir W. STIRLING-MAXWELL should be put to
flight by a London -alderman and Major WALKER
by a London attorney, are facts perfectly astounding
to those who know anything of social life in Scotland,
who know the old feeling of clanship which still exists
among the Scotch tenantry, and the reverence which
they have for their lairds. But the Scotch are
an intensely religious people, and their religion over-
comes all the traditions of fealty to their hereditary
chiefs. Add to this the very important consideration
that they have long leases, and therefore are not at
the mercy of their landlords as the English tenant
farmers are, and we are able to estimate the force of
this great demonstration in behalf of religious
equality. In this respect Wales is very
similar to Scotland. The Welsh are nothing if
they are not religious, and though they, too,
have great regard for the old Welsh chieftains,
they do not hesitate to reject them in favour of
" Sassenach" strangers, if these come forward as the
representatives of religious equality.
We turn now to Lancashire; and here we find the
voice of the people as decisively against Mr. GLAD-
STONE'S policy as in Ireland, Scotland, and Wales it
has been decisively in favour of it. Three Liberal
Cabinet Ministers, including the Liberal leader himself,
have been rejected by Lancashire constituencies, and,
remembering that this great county is very little
associated with agriculture, and is closely identified
with manufactures, this rejection is a phenomenon
which requires explanation. It is the more remark-

THE SUN, LONDON, HUBSDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 26, 1868.1