The Press. — London, England, 1857-05-30 00:00:00

524 superadd the risk of a criminal prosecution, and a sentence of seven years' penal servitude? If the Attorney-General had proposed an alteration of the law, allowing trustees to be remunerated for their risk and trouble, parties might, perhaps, be induced to incur the addi tional danger for the sake of the additional recompense. But he does nothing of the kind; and should his Bill become law, every man who accepts the office of trustee must know that he can not only gain nothing for his pains, but that he runs the risk of losing his fortune, his character, and even his personal liberty, in the execution of his onerous duties. No sane man can, under these circumstances, be expected to accept the office. Even the ties of blood, however near, would not induce any person of ordinary prudence to run such risks. The bare possibility of a criminal pro secution to be incurred, it might be without blame upon his part, would justify a flat re fusal in any case. What, then, would be the inevitable result? Simply to throw the entire trust property of the nation into Chancery. That this is a consummation devoutly to be desired is probably the deliberate opinion of Sir RICHARD BETHELL. He is a great Chancery lawyer, and he not unnaturally seeks to extend the jurisdiction of the court to which he owes his fame and fortune. But, however pleasing may be the prospect of an infinite increase of business to equity lawyers, the result must prove the reverse of beneficial to the nation. Better far, we say, that fraudulent trustees should go unpunished, than that the entire trust property of the country should be placed at the disposal of the Court of Chancery. We know the evils of the existing system, but who can estimate those of the projected remedy ? The second section of the Attorney-Gene ral's Bill—which, by the way, only re-enacts in more comprehensive terms the provisions of an existing statute (7th aul Nth George IV., cap. 29)—is unobjectionable. It provides that bankers, merchants, brokers, attorneys, or agents who may convert to their own use pro perty intrusted to their charge shall be guilty of a misdemeanour. As to the expediency of this provision there can be little doubt. But, if we are not much mistaken, Sir RICHARD BETHELL will find some difficulty in obtaining the assent of the House of Commons to this proposed mode of dealing with public compa nies He is evidently determined that no future British Bank shall plunder the share holders with impunity, and with this view he has inserted a series of provisions of the most stringent character expressly pointing at direc tors, secretaries, and managers of every kind. He provides that any such person who shall take for his own use any of the property of the company shall be guilty of a misdemeanour. It will be a like offence to alter, destroy, or to falsify any of the company's books, or even to be privy to any such act. It will be a like offence to circulate, or to be a party to the circulation of any false statement as to the circumstances of the company, w ith the in tention of deceiving either the shareholders or the public. Such are the various modes by which the Attorney• General proposes to reach the directors of bubble companies. That the law is at present defective as re gards such delinquents is notorious; but care must be taken that in the present temper of the public mind we do not go to the opposite extreme If we make the law too stringent, we shall certainly deter the better class of men from having anything to do with public companies; and that this would be a serious misfortune no one can dispute. We aro in clined to think that if sonic plan could be devised which would give to the shareholders of public companies a more efficient control over their management than they exercise at present, it would prove a bett.er preventive of fraud than any increased stringency of the law. There appears to be something radically wrong in the constitution of these bodies. Experience has demonstrated that there is no sufficient check upon directors and officials. Captain GALTON, of the Board of Trade, in his interesting report upon American railways, tells us that thty manage these things better in the United Stai es. Tile shareholders of public con panics in that country have a more direct control over theix management than THE PRESS. with us, and with very different results. Sir RICHARD BETHELL'S scheme does not touch the root of the evil. It is a hasty anti onesided measure—a rough and ready attempt to deal with a question which demands for its solution those profound legislative qualities in which her Majesty's Attorney-General is notoriously deft cieLt. IRISH AFFAIRS. (From our own Correspondent.) DUBLIN, May 28, 1857. THE subject which has occupied a most prominent place in Irish politics for some weeks has now gone to its rest. The successor of Mr. Horsman has been appointed. A strange variety of incongruous rumours has been served up by the Dublin journals during the protracted period of suspense. But the reign of surmise in this matter of the Chief Secretary for Ireland is now terminated, and we have fact to deal with, vice fancy deceased. It is, of course, known to you that Mr. Horsman's retirement was not occa sioned by any differences with Lord Palmerston, as was stated, in connection with the Irish elections. There is no doubt that before the dissolution he had resolved to resign an office which was distasteful to him. He found his lore in Church abuses did not assist him as a legislator for Ireland, and that its members almost universally did not accord to him the confidence and sympathy he desired. There is no question that his bearing was uncouth, and his tone arrogant to those it was his duty, no less than his interest, to have conciliated. It is to be hoped that in his next berth he will be more comfortable himself, and make others so also. He has con trived to do a good turn for his own kith and kin before evacuating the principalities, Sir J. Ramsden, his brother-in-law, representing the family in the Administration. As for Mr. Henry Herbert, M.P. for Kerry, and Lord of Muckross, opinions, as usual, are divided, but by no means equally. Before noticing his qua lifications personally for his new sphere of duty, it may not be inopportune if I glance at his political antecedents, for they are not to be disregarded in such a case. The old-fashioned idea that the good things and sweet at a Minister's disposal were reserved for those who have served him longest and most faithfu ly has not been recognised in this ap pointment. Mr. Herbert three Sears since sat on the front row of the Conservative benches. He generally acted with the Opposition during Lord John Russell's tenure of office, and was never thought a Whig until, doubtless better informed than the r •st of tho world, Lord Palmerston made him Lord Lieutenant of Kerry. Since that period he has cer ta•nly vindicated the penetration of the Premier by being a most regular, docile, and devoted supporter. Of course Mr. Herbert could not have done other wise. The man who had the sagacity to select him for so high an office as the Lord Lieutenancy of Kerry must be a superlative Minister, and entitled to his absolute confidence. I don't find fault, there fore, with him on this account, for gratitude for favours conferred, even though it makes a man's coat appear reversed, is not an unarniable trait in human charact2r. I think it a pity that he should have won his spurs on the side he has now espoused so soon. Thiu promotion of recent converts gives a stimulus to political apostacy, and serves to make it seem that " honesty is not the best policy." So far as anyone has had any opportunity of form ing an opinion on the subject, Ur. Herbert does not appear in any intellectual way capacitated for his post. He is doubtless very inferior in this respect to his predecessor, and certainly will not bear com parison with such men as Sir W. Somerville and Lord Naas. He is considered, too, by some persons a very bad man of business, and is totally devoid of all official experience. He is likely, however, to suit " poor Lord Carlisle," who would not like a masculine mind brought in contact with his own, for, under the circumstances, that would be indelicate. There is no question that Mr. Herbert is a gentle man, and his manners are said to be popular. The debate on the Ministers' Money Bill has been read here with lively satisfaction, though the division Has hostile to the Church. It is thought that the equity of the case was most admirably set forth in the speeches of Mr. Napier and Mr. Whiteside. The Irish Protestants believe that this is the first of a series of onslaughts upon the revenues of their Church, which are to be expected at the hands of the Record's religious Premier. The principle endorsed by the House of Commons, but which it is to be earnestly hoped the peers will not sanction, is fatal to the rights of property, and amounts to posi. tive confiscation. Lord Palmerston may rely on it that his day of reckoning for this act of spoliation Will come at no remote period. SATURDAY, THE UNITED KINGDOM ALLIANCE. A MEETING of the members and Mends of the United Kingdom Alliance " for the total suppression of the liquor traffic " was held on Tuesday evening at Exeter-hall. It had been announced that the Hon. Neal Dow, of Portland, Maine, would address the meeting, and at the time fixed for the commencement of the proceedings the large room was filled by an audience consisting in great part of members of the gentler sex. After the usual preliminary proceedings, in which the Earl of Harrington took part, The Hon. NEAL Dow, whose rising was the signal for loud cheers, proceeded at once to discuss the merits of the temperance movement:— This question was infinitely more important than all other political questions. At the last election in this country much stress was laid upon a saving of 6,0000001., which it was said the Government might effect. The sup pression of the liquor traffic would save 75,000,0001. per annum in money, in addition to an equal saving in time; so that the whole saving would amount to 150,000,0001. In addition to this the suppression of this traffic would greatly increase and improve the physical strength of the nation. And yet the members of Parliament did not know about it. Unless England put down the beershops, she could not retain her position in relation to the con tinental powers. The grogshops slew 60,000 Englishmen every year—more than twice as many as fell in the Crimea; and there were at this day more than 600,000 drunkards, more than 600,000 starving women, and more than 1,000,000 children growing up in vice and crime on account of the traffic in intoxicating drinks. With all this against the amount of this traffic, what benefit were they to set to ita credit? The man did not live who could mention one single ite u. Yet it was said that a Maine Law for Eng. land was impossible, and that the Government would hold fast by beerahops and ginshops! Unless the beershops were suppressed in England, America would outstrip her in the race for national wealth, national honour, and national power. And why? Because America, which had fist 3,000,000 dols. and 30,000 men a year by it, would put down this traffic. The statesmen attempted to resist the movement, and the people put them down. Let English statesmen take warning by that example. He predicted that before long the statesmen of this country would feel themselves driven to take cognisance of the demand for the legislative prohibition of the sale of intoxicating drinks. This was properly a political question. It was said that the movement involved an interference with the rights of the subject. It did nothing of the kind, because the subject had no right to do anything which was inconsistent with the general good. Sales populi supremo lex. All laws were founded on that principle, and that principle would equally justify this prohibition. He had no doubt that a Maine Law would be passed in England. With respect to the effect of the law in the State of Maine the speaker observed : The Times had said that in Maine this liquor law had been a failure. What were really the facts? The law had been repealed in Maine, but that had occurred only in obedience to the law under which moral progress was effected by alternate advance and retrogression. A political party which had for thirty years held power lust it in consequence of their opposition to this law. At the election of the year before last that party formed a union with the strait Whigs, and abolished the Maine Law. They introduced a license system ; the result was a revival 3f intemperance, and at the last annual election the people swept the Anti- Maine Law men from their places. In New Hampshire and Rhode Island the Democratic party had opposed this law, and had been in consequence crushed out. In the constitution of Ohio there was a clause that there should be no license system in that State. In Michigan the Maine Liquor Law had been enacted by a popular vote. In Penn. sylvania the enactment of a similar law had been prevented by a majority of only 4,000 votes, given by the German counties, and in Indiana there was an equally strong feeling in favour of such a measure. THE SOUTH KENSINGTON NfusEnt, which will be opened to the public in June, will be under the following regulations :—The collections of objects relating to education, architecture, and trade, of pictures, sculpture, ornamental art, and models of patented inventions, will be open to the public daily, from ten till four in the daytime, and from seven to ten in the evening on Mondays and Thursdays, except during the appointed vacations. On Mondays, Tuesdays, and Saturdays, and daily during the Easter and Christmas weeks, the public will be ad mitted free ; but on these days books, examples, models, casts, &c., cannot be removed for study. On Wednesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays the public will be admitted on payment of 6d. each person. This sum during the daytime will enable any person to consult any books, diagrams, !cc., in the collections 01 education, and to copy any article in the collec tions of art. except modern paintings, for which special permission in writing must be obtained. In the evening works cannot be removed. An annual ticket of admission to all the collections, morning and evening, may be obtained for lOs. All registered students of the Central School of Art will have free admission to the library. Occasional students will be admitted upon payment of ti., which will entitle them to entrance for six days from the day of the payment of the fee, inclusive ; a monthly ticket may , be obtained for Is. Od., and an annual admission for 10s.