Lord Sherbrooke is still to all intents and purposes Mr.
Lowe, but Mr. Lowe, apparently, with less manfulness and courage. He has written a letter, in reply to a correspondent who bad requested him to deliver one of his old, great speeches against the Franchise Bill when it reaches the House of Lords, which runs as follows : —" Dear Sir,—Sam Slick says, 'It always jerks me terribly to kick at nothing,' and as Mr. Gladstone has not condescended to give one reason why the change should be made, but has carefully confined himself to stating its details, there is really nothing to reply to. He puts me in mind of Target. He. was said to ask the French taxpayer with what sauces he would like to be eaten. Answer : 'I don't want to be eaten at all.' Reply : Yoe are wandering from the question.' I cannot undertake to make any more speeches on Reform, and can only hope that things may turn out better than I think they will." There is all the old, cynical sharpness in the first part of this letter, but nothing like the old determination to bear witness against what Lord Sherbrooke thinks political injustice, in its close. The sarcasm itself has no sort of sub- stance in it. The reason why Liberals wish the county house- holders to be represented in Parliament is exactly the same,— and this Lord Sherbrooke perfectly well knows,--as that for which they wished to see town householders represented there, —namely, that they have grievances, miseries, interests, claims, none of which are adequately represented by the spokes. men of the present county voters, and some of which are not represented at all. The Liberal wants a reason why a citizen should not be represented in Parliament; Lord Sherbrooke wants a reason why he-should.
Previous page
