The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-05-14
Parliamentary Reform in England.

From the Times
The unexpectedly small majority by which thu
British ministers have been sustained on th,
second reading of their Reform bill, indicate,
either an aversion to the question itself amount
ing almost TO dread, or a want of tact on The
part of those entrusted with its care. Elected
with direct reference to this question, it had
been computed that the present House of Com
mons would give a ministerial majority of about
1fty and though some of those included in the
calculation we're subsequently unseated, mar
gin of thirty was still relied upon at the COM
mencement OF the debate. Yet at the close, in
an unusually full House-63l members being
present-the measure was sustained, and the
Ministers were saved from condemnation by but
five votes. A loss OF STRENGTH so sudden a1d SO
serious renders the division virtual defeat, and
leaves little room for hope as to the success of
the bill in Its present shape. And alter the
events that have transpired, there can be no
change In the programme without some notable
changes in the personnel of the Government
ANY measure of Parliamentary reform would
have scanty likelihood OF success if the division
referred to revealed the exact relative strength
OF the friends and the opponents OF reform.
This, however, is not the case. AS between
liberalism and toryism-an enlargement of the
franchise and the maintenance of things as they
are-the superior strength of the former is in
ControveTtible. That it was not fully available
is a circumstance admitting of one of two
xplanations-either the ministry failed to meet
the prevailing expectation touching the prnc
pie or the details OF their scheme, or they
alienated support by the form and the manner in
which 1t was presented. Something was due,
perhaps, to both of these causes. There are
members whose liberalism is 80 near akin to
foryism that they are not Jealous in
tavcr OF any amendment of the existing
system. Members who sit as representatives
OF petty boroughs,, and are indebted for
their seats tG 1o, the patronage Of the
ance of what suits their own convenience to
nicely. These, therefore, however friendly to
the Government on general questions, naturally
avalled themselves of plausible pretext for
going for the nonce into opposition. And pre-
text was furnished when Ministers laid before
Parliament only that portion of their plan
which relates to the extension of the franchise:
leaving another part-that relating 10 the redis.
trlbution OF seats-to form the subject of a sub
sequent measure. Before passing judgment on
any part OF your plan,' said the malcontents to
ministers, let us see its remaining parts, that
we may understand its entire scope" But on
this point MIR. Gladstone and his colleagues have
been lnfeXible With persistency more re-
sembling obstinacy than frmness, they have re-
fused to reveal ulterior Intentions or in any
particular to conclliate their dissatisfied friends
To this Obstinacy Their loss of numerical
strength in the House of Commons is prnc-
pally attributable.
Apart from the expediency or inexpediency
OF this course, it must be admitted that much
may be said on both sides, though the balance
OF principle is clearly on the side of the Gov
ernment. In their behalf it has been urged
that, inasmuch as the infusion of popular blood
into the Commons has become necessary, the
question OF readiustng seats-or, as we under
stand it, reapportoning members among the
constituencies-should be left to be dealt with
by new Parliament, elected on the
basis of an extended suffrage. Logically,
or as matter of abstract right there
can be no answer to this proposition; for
If the present Parliament does adequately
represent the people, an altered suffrage is
not. necessary; while ii the representation is
inadequate in respect of numbers, that defect
should be remedied before approaching other
other hand, timd reormers-they who
contemplate every addition to the power of the
people with lear and trembling, or who see in
the redistribution OF seats possible disturbance
OF their oWn-may be excused for demanding to
be informed OF what is in reserve, before CON
sentng to action Of any kind. Mr. Love- who
represents the few hundred Inhabitants of Cane
by the grace OF some patron, or Lords Grosvenor
and Stanley, who represent paterna power and
property, may we'll be solicitous to know whittier
The Ministerial steps tend before moving an inch
for thtlr own parliamentary comfort may be in
jeopardy. And these members are the best
types of the quasrliberalism that helped Mr..
Disraeli to FIGHT the battle against a reform ad-
mInistration. They contend Tor polcy-the po- |
ncy that AIMS at SO restraining the proposed
become disturbing force IN the political ma.
Chinerv of the country.
Looking at the contest from an American |
standpoint the want OF confidence in the peo- !
pie, which is apparent at every stage of the |
debate in the House of Commons, is almost |
mcomprehensible. Accustomed to the freest |
possible exercise 3 OF popular power - living |
under system or government created by the |
people and administered by their servants for |
thor benefit is difficult to realize the rea-
sons for the alarm with which English states. |
men, not ordinarily liberal, talk of the SLIGHTEST
addition 10 the popular element in the third |
branch of the Government. Here we hold |
that the people are the best guardians of their |
own interests that they are OF rleht the man |
ayers of affairs which concern themselves as a |
people; and each succeeding trial ustihes the |
confidence. There, on the contrary, the peO. !
pie, as. people, are viewed with evident dis |
trust and apprehension; the Government is a |
government by classes, not by the people; and |
debates on a question so nearly affecting the !
rights OF citizen as this question of parha- !
mentary reform, are carried on without refer. |
ence to other considerations than those of eype-
dlency. The problem which occupies attention
is-not what are the rights of the people in the
premises, not what Justice dictates, but-how to
Concede something which the present governing
classes can atofd to grant without perilIing
their preponderanCe in Parliament Mr. Bright
has been branded as a reVolutiouist for daring
to demand reform IN the direction of instice.
and the growing faith of Mr. Gladstone i'm the
Righteousness OF the peoples cause, and his de-
Clared confidence in its Certain and not distant
victory" are an Ongst the most hopeful siens of
discussion in many respects remarkable.