This Hertfordshire Baronet has taken so prominent a part in the play of REFORM, in the character of “THE RENEGADE—an ENGLISH LIBERAL,” that it becomes a duty to briefly criticize the performance. If there is one spectacle more humiliating, or one sight sadder than another, it is that of beholding a man of letters, and of unquestionable ability, laboriously using his talents as a cloak of maliciousness, and ungratefully reviling that democracy which gave him bread, and raised him to power. “_Et tu_, _Brute_!” Why, a more grossly insulting, unpatriotic speech never issued from the lips of the most rabid Tory! Can it be possible that “ENGLAND AND THE ENGLISH” was written by the “Poverty and Passion” Orator? QUANTUM MUTATUS! “How is the gold become dim! How is the most fine gold changed!” How unlike that Bulwer who discoursed so eloquently of the rights of man—of man as a greater name than President, or King! From my youth up, Bulwer was my _beau ideal_; he is now my realization of perfidy and tergiversation, and before such an elaborate sham, even the star of Disraeli must pale. Like your confrère novelist, Disraeli, you have turned your back upon yourself, and brought a slur on the literary calling. You, who began your political career by associating your name with the freedom of the newspaper from all fiscal restrictions, end it by doing what you can to hamper and enchain it. On the night of the third reading of the PAPER DUTY REPEAL BILL, May 8, you absent yourself from the Division, when EVERY VOTE was of the utmost importance to the Finance Minister, though I am bound to add you were not alone in turning your back upon yourself, and your speeches about giving the people education and intelligence. Lord STANLEY, with an inconsistency equally glaring, votes for £300,000 for the Promotion of Education, and then evades the Repeal Bill Division by flight! I prefer DISRAELI’S, and ADDERLEY’S, and PAKINGTON’S adverse vote to such mean, pusillanimous Absentees, and Patrons of Educational Institutes, as Lord STANLEY, the Member for King’s Lynn, Sir Robert PEEL, the Member for Geneva, and the immaculate JOHN ARTHUR ROEBUCK, {17} the stern guardian of Political Purity. STROUD will rid itself of HORSMAN, and the Metropolitan constituencies of FINSBURY, ST. MARYLEBONE, SOUTHWARK, and WESTMINSTER, will have something not very complimentary to whisper to Mr. DUNCOMBE, Mr. JAMES, and Sir De LACY EVANS, who absented themselves from the Division, and to Sir CHARLES NAPIER, who voted with the Noes. If LISKEARD favours the absence of Mr. OSBORNE from a Reform Bill, compared with which a £6 franchise is as nothing in the scale of moral value, it is time this Cornish borough was disfranchised. The honourable member for OLDHAM, I regret to notice, has a legitimate excuse for his absence, but what can be said of his colleague, the son of COBBETT, voting against Free Trade in Intelligence and Ingenuity, voting