New-York tribune., 1867-04-26
TUR TORY JRIUbfPH

One thing was certain IN regard 10 EnguSli
Reform, that Reform was to be conceded by
the ruling classes. Tho extension of the suf-
frage had been promised for years, and the
promise had not been kept. The Derby Ministry
entered power upon the pledge that it would
propose some measure of reform that should
not be snare or a trick, and could not break
it, The only practical question was OF the ex-
tent of the concession and the success OF the
Ministry after the debate in Parliament we
print to-day, means that the radical measures
of reform have been defeated, but that
some of the Radical principles have been
embodied in the very plan OF their OPP
pOnents Radicalism in England, so Tar as
it exists in Parliament, does not mean
manhood but household suffrage, and the
Ministerial bill provided for household
suffrage, restricting the franchise to every
householder who personally pays tax rates.
This, it il true, excludes large number
of houscholders who pay their taxes through
an arrangement with their landlords, yet 1t
admitted the true principle of the reform. Mr.
Gladstone's objection to the bill was the
exclusion it practically effected. and had he
rested on that objection alone, his defeat would
have been more creditable. But in proposing
not only to grant the franchise to household
ers, independently of the personal payment OF
rates-a good propostiOn-but To make I6
rentral necessary qualification, he made that
fatal error which had ruined many LEADERS,
the offer to sacrifice enduring principles for
immediate but incomplete success. Had Mr.
Gladstone's amendment been carried. suffrage
i'm England might have been extended now to
a greater number of persons than those who
will obtain il under Mr.. DisraclIs BILL but
this gain would have been accompanied
with an admission of Tory principles. Ii
was defeated by 3Oi to @S9 The issue IN
Parliament was, therefore, not simple, but
complex the Liberals had to choose between
the limitation of measure and concession OF
principle proposed by the Government, and the
extension of suffrage and compromise ot p1n-
ciple proposed by their leader The fifty
or sixty members of the Liberal party
who. by withdrawing from Mr.. Gladstone
their support. secured the success OF the bill of
the Ministry. chose wisely, perhaps, i'll ac-
ccpting a defeat in which the victor comedies
the justice of their cause. This was not ex-
pediency. Mr.. Gladstone was cxpedient
in appealing to the Conservatives The
men who deserted his standard when
they saw it begin to tremble have
made their appeal to the people, to whose in
creasing power parliaments and ministries will
before many years be obedient. They have by
their silent protest against compromise given
Great Britain basis of suffrage upon which
greater triumphs of reform may be achieved.
Household suffrage once granted, the personal
restriction will inevitably be swept away, and this
is the certainty which convinces some of the
British reformers that they are not so badly
beaten by the victory of Disraeli as they
might have been by that of Mr. Gladstone.
Yet this is but poor and preliminary conces-
sion from the aristocracy which rules
to the people who should govern;
one which may for moment sus-
pend the cry for Reform, but cannot silence
it. We. who by one sweeping act have given
the ballot to all men of all races and colors,
whatever their condition, may look with sorrow
as well as surprise upon this fierce quarrel over
subjects which no American would ever dream
of debating.