The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1885-09-26 00:00:00

THE PRINCESS OF WALES AT
COPENHAGEN.

The Princess of Wales on Saturday laid the
foundation stone of the new church of St. Alban,
Copenhagen, which is to be built from derigns of Mr.
A. W. Blomfield. The length of the nave will be a
hundred feet, and the breadth twenty-three, and the
tower and spire one hundred and forty feet high.
The style will be early English and Gothic combined.
The dedication has been chosen because the relics of
St. Alban having been brought by King Canute from
England, and placed in a church built to his memory
at Odense—while many churches and monastries in
Denmark are dedicated to his honour—it was thought
that his selection as the patron saint was peculiarly
appropriate through his close connection with Eng-
land and Denmark. Among those present were the
King and Queen of Denmark, the Emperor and
Empress of Russia, the Crown Prince and Princess of
Denmark, the Princes William and John of Mucks-
burg, the Princess Augusta of Hesse, the Duke and
Duchess of Chartres, the Princesses Louise Victoria
and Maud of Wales, many leading Danish officials,
Mr. and Mrs. Gosling, and officers of the army
and navy, the whole of the English colony, and many
visitors. Bishop Titcomb was prevented attending, as
were also the English chanlains in other DFlni.b frivins.
owing to the ceremony taking place on Saturday.
The Russian and Danish Churches were represented
by their clergy, and the Rev. C. A. Moore, M.A.,
8.C.L., was accompanied by the Prince and Princess of
Wales, the Hon. E. T. Monson, C. 8., her Britannic
Majesty's Minister, and fifteen boys and ten men
and trumpeters in cassocks and surplices—headed by
a processional cross—who sang the service as well as
an English choir, great credit being due to the
English-speaking Danish organist. The service com-
menced with "The Church's One Foundation,' which
was followed by the versieles," The Lord be with
you,' and "With thy spirit,' the Lord's Prayer,
"Praise ye, the Lord," "The Lord's Name be
praised," the Te Deum, the Apostles' Creed, some
special versicks, and a special collect. After the
singing of the versicle and response, "Other founda-
tion can no man lay than is laid, which is Christ
Jesus," the Hon. E. T. Monson presented the
Princess with a trowel, the gift of the architect. Her
Royal Highness then laid the stone, and the chair-
man of the building committee having thanked the
Princess, the Prince of Wales said a few words suit-
able to the occasion, after which the hymn "In the
name which earth and heaven "was sung, and, the
service concluded by the chaplain saying the collects
for St. Simon and St. Jude's Day and the Twelfth
Sunday after Trinity, and dismissing the congrega-
tion with a blessing. Before the Royal party left the
ground the first verse of "God save the Queen "and
"Kong Kristiern stod ved hojen Mast" were sung.
The sailors from the Osborne formed a guard of
honour, and subsequently there was a luncheon.

The revised version has it that "all is vanity and
e. striving after wind." How true this is, and how
often a man has died sissy, ly because his wind
stopped.
Judging from the following paragraph, newspaper
enterprise in Florida must be in a low way: "Long..
wood, Fla., July 20.—The Whisper, a weekly paper,
was sold on Saturday for a mule.
An hotel at a New England summer resort makes
the otrtling announcement that "Nobody dresses
bere.-fr

MR; GLADSTONE'S JUSTIFICATION
AND FUTURE POLICY.
Mr. Gladstone's "Address to the Electors of Mid-
lothian" is a very long document, covering 20 pages
of print, and classified under 20 different heads. We
give the substance:
A change, even more extensive; and, as I believe,
not less safe, than the changes made at former
epochs, has now been asssomplished in our repre-
sentative system. It consequently falls to you to
express your judgment on the conduct and the work
of the expiring Parliament. And it becomes my
duty, notwithstanding serious considerations which
would lead to an opposite decision, to submit myself
to this judgment, by asking a renewal of the trust
which you so generously conferred upon me in 1880.
I venture to add that I look with cheerfulness to the
result of the appeal.
The mention, however, of that year reminds me of
the flight of time. It is obviously not possible for me
to repeat, in a new Parliament, anything like the
labours of the older one. But I am too closely
associated with the public proceedings of the last six
sessions to withdraw myself from the acquittal or
condemnation which is about to be pronounced.
After an enumeration of the legislative achieve-
ments of the present Parliament, and a passing refer-
ence to "such an amount of obstruction as had never
before been exhibited,' Mr. Gladstone passes to a
comparison of the state of foreign affairs now and
when he took office in 1880.
With reference to the several questions which W 3
principally considered in 1879-80, I shall proceed to
contrast the position they then held with that which
they happily hold at the present time. With the
countenance and aid of some of the Powers, we were
enabled to obtain the fulfilment of the covenant with
Montenegro, s.nd to secure Thessaly for Greece.
Other important provisions of the treaty unhappily
still remain a dead letter, but they have not the same
immediate connection with the public tranquillity..
We found Afghanistan broken to pieces, held down
only by the might of British arms, and so perilously
hostile that it required a force exceeding 60,000 men to
maintain security on the north-western foontier.
Under the late Ministry that country was restored to
unity and independence in defiance of resolute oppo-
sition and motions of censure from the Tories. Since
that time there has arisen a controversy with Russia,
involving the security of the Indian frontier, for
which no particular Administration or party is re-
sponsible. We shall, us I trust, prosecute that con-
troversy, in the interest and with the assistance of the
Afghan ruler and people, to a happy issue. Need I
remark how different, and how far more formidable,
would have been the obstacles encumbering our path,
had we, by a continuance of violence and injustice,
driven that brave people into the arms of our op-
ponent?
At the very same time when the military resources
of India were thus heavily taxed, her internal liberties,
which we ought carefully and systematically to enlarge,
had been invaded by a law, passed with indecent
haste, which placed the freedom of her native press
at the mercy of the Government. This law has been
repealed. The press is again free,, and native powers
have been in other respects enlarged by the wise
policy of Lord Ripon, than whom, as every expression
of Indian opinion proves, no Viceroy has more ably
or more effectually laboured to cement the union be-
tween India and the British Crown.
Not less unfortunate was the position of aiTaiss in
South Africa. But we pursued a policy that has left
the Transvaal free, and divested of all hostility; and
has averted a war of European and Christian races
throughout the South African States, which would
have been alike menacing to our Power, and seen-
dalous in the face of civilisation and of Christendom.
As this has been with our opponents a favourite sub-
ject of unmeasured denunciation, so I, for one, hail
and reciprocate their challenge; and I hope the nation
will give a clear judgment on our refusal to put down
liberty by force, and on the measures which have brought
about the present tranquillity of South Africa.
The chief sources of comfort, in reviewing a series
of transactions generally painful, are that we have
respected, to the utmost of our power, international
laws and arrangements; have confined within Egyp-
tian limits troubles which menaced the general peace;
have used every administrative effort to support our
gallant forces in maintaining the honour of the British
arms; have, beyond all doubt, introduced most valu-
able improvements, too sorely needed, into Egyptian
law and government; and, finally, have indicated pro-
visions on a reasonable basis for the future govern-
ment of Egypt,and the exercise of its legal autonomy,
without foreign intervention.
Mr. Gladstane then enters into a long review of his
Egyptian policy, with a view of showing that it was
"the direct consequence of the agreement with
France for reciprocal support and for the main-
tenance of a native Government, which had been
concluded in 1879, before the accession of his
Ministry to office."
Lord Hartington has lately and justly stated, in
general terms, that he is not disposed to deny our
having fallen into errors of judgment. I will go one
step further, and admit that we committed such errors,
and serious errors, too, with cost of treasure and of
precious lives, in the Soudan. For none of these
errors were we rebuked by the voice of the Opposi-
tiont We were only rebuked, and that incessantly,
because we did not commit them with precipitation,
and because we did not commit other errors greater
still.
Our mistakes in the- Soudan I cannot now state in
detail. The task belongs to history. Our responsi-
bility for them cannot be questioned. Yet its character
. ought not to be misapprehended. In such a task,
miscarriages were inevitable. They are the proper
and certain consequence of undertakings that war
against nature, and that lie beyond the scope of
human means and of national and prudent human
action; and the first authors of these undertakings
are the real makers of the mischief.
Since my visit in 1884, two causes have swelled the
amount of public charge up to a point so high that I
shall rejoice if it shall effectually arrest the attention
of the nation. The preparations required in connec-
tion with Russia and Afghanistan, here and in India,
have probably cost 10 millions; on which I shall only
say that preparation in tens of millions may even be
economical, as a means of averting wars which would
certainly cost hundreds of millions. The second has
been the heavy charge of measures growing out of
the obligation to attempt, when the season permitted
it, the relief of the heroic General Gordon; measures
which, as I have shown, would have entailed, besides
the heavy past expenditure, further and probably
much heavier expenditure in the future bad the policy
of our opponents in favour of occupation been
adopted, in lieu of our policy of withdrawal from the
Soudan.
The present Government have rightly declared by
the mouth of Lord Salisbury, since their accession to
office, that no progress could be made in our Egyptian
relations until the finance of that country was ad-
justeci. As this long and wearisome process is now
complete, and as the yet more formidable barrier of
Soudanese operations is also removed, I take upon me,
with no intention of cavil or of censure, to express,
in terms if possible still stronger and clearer than
those I have used in Parliament, an earnest aspiration
for our entire withdrawal from Egyptian territory at
the earliest moment which honour will permit. A
mischievous idea has had some support among us,
from opinion and from public journals, either that
Egypt ought to be annexed, or that it should beplaced
undef a British Protectorate, or that at the least our
occupation of it ought to be indefinitely or greatly
prolonged.
To each and all of these measures I am altogether
opposed. It is said that we ought not to quit Egypt
without some compensation for our efforts and sacri-
fices there. On this I have two remarks to make.
First that we have, according to my conviction from
the very first (when the question was not within the
sphere of party contention) committed by our inter-
vention in Egypt a grave political error, and that the
consequence, which the providential order commonly
allots to such error, is not compensation, but retribu-
tion. Secondly, what is the supposed compensation?
It is a prolongation of our military occupation in
Egypt. Now, this is simply an aggravation of the
mischief for which it is supposed to compensate. The
best wisdom, when a policy founded in error has been
adopted, is to bring it promptly to a close.
When we shall have been set free from our irksome
and thankless task, we shall be restored to that ad-
mirable position in Europe, of perfect independence
and salutary influence, which nothing but our own
ors. onn put. in ionsasay, isss intlypuudenCe given
us by the Almighty, and surpassing that of every
other State; an influence which I trust will always be
held subject to a cordial recognition of international
equality, and will be exercised on every legitimate
occasion in support of the position of the smaller
States, of the infant liberties established in the East,
and generally of rational freedom, and of peace and
public right.
I will now approach the consideration of domestic
affairs in a prospective light; and at the threshold
I place the question of Parliamentary procedure.
I desire clearly to point out the three cardinal
points of the question. First, the congestion of busi-
ness, now notorious and inveterate, degrades the
House of Commons, by placing it at the mercy of
those among its members who seek for notoriety by
obstructing business, in stead of pursuing the more
honourable road to reputation by useful service; or
of those who, with more semblance of warrant, seek
to cripple the action of the House of Commons, in
order to force the acceptance of their own politica
projects. Secondly, it disappoints, irritates, and
injures the country by the suspension of useful
legis-
lation. And lastly, and, perhaps, worst of all it
defeats the fundamental rule of Parliamentary
system that the majority shall prevail, and puts it in
the power of the minority to prevent, by unduly con-
suming the time of the House, the passing of mea-
sures which it dislikes, but of which it is afraid
openly to declare its disapproval. This country will
not, in the full sense, be a self-governing country
until the machinery of the House of Commons is
amended, and its procedure reformed.
I am not sure that the views of the country are so
clear, and its mind so fully ripened, on the next
great subject which I have to mention, that of local
government. Here the first objects to be aimed at,
in my judgment, are: to rectify the balance of taxa-
tion as between real and personal property; to put
an end to the gross injustice of charging upon labour,
through the medium of the Consolidated Fund, local
burdens which our laws have always wisely treated as
incident to property; to relieve the ratepayer, not at
the charge of the working populotiOn, but wholly or

mainly by making over, for local purnoses, carefully
chosen items of taxation; to supply local manage-
ment with inducements to economy instead of tempt-
ing, and almost forcing it into waste; finally, and
most of all, to render the system thoroughly repre-
sentative and free. The gentry of this country have,
especially in the counties, long and with justice been
commended for the upright and intelligent discharge
of local dial/. lam confident that they will continue
to enjoy this honourable distinction none the less
when our system shall have been placed tlaroughout
under effective popular control.
I will not omit to observe that this subject furnishes
the medium through which we may most reasonably
look for an effectual adjustment of the laws relating
to the sale of alcoholic liquors.
The next of the important subjects which I have
presumed to name is the reform of the laws relating
to land. I shall only touch on those parts of the
question which I hope may be found mature for very
early handling by the Liberal party. Belonging to a
school which has much faith in economic laws, I
disapproie of interference with theta by entails, to
which I am still more opposed on social and
moral grounds. My desire is both to maintain freedom
of bequest and to establish freedom of possession
as our future system; and also to deal freely with
the transfer of land, the registration of land, the
taxation of land during life and upon death, and the
custom of primogeniture as it now exists in cases of
intestacy. I shall rejoice if the means thus to be
provided, or other means in themselves commend-
able, shall lead to a close connection between the
nation and the soil, through a large extension in the
numbers of those directly interested in its possession
and its produce, but most of all in the proprietorship
of their own dwellings.

The balance of taxation as between moveable and
immoveable property, and still more as between pro-
perty and labour, should be carefully watched, and
should be adjusted, when occasion offers, with a
scrupulousness which was unhappily too little
observed at the time when property had the absolute
command of Parliamentary, action. But as to the
fundamental principles which make property secure,
they wal, I believe, be upheld among us, whether in
the near or more distant future, with the same
courage and integrity as well as our liberties, of
which, indeed, they form an essential part.

Upon each and all of these legislative subjects, with
a reasonable freedom as to details, I believe that the
Liberal party is generally • and firmly united. They
are in basis and spirit truly Liberal; yet they ought
not to stir Conservative alarms. The work is ready,
and the workmen. The Liberal candidates await the
commission to proceed, which the constituencies alone
can give.
But Tories and Irish Nationalists, who have acted
in such unprecedented harmony for some years, are
united in reproaching, and even in mocking, the
Liberal party on account of its divisions. . . . But
Liberalism has ever sought to unite freedom of indi-
vidual thought and action, to which it so largely owes
its healthy atmosphere, with corporate efficiency.
This aim is noble, but it is difficult. For my own
part, although it is not the method best adapted to
the personal convenience of those who may lead,
nothing would induce me to exchange it for the high
regimental discipline which brings the two minorities,
each in a well-fused mass, into the voting lobby. For
this valued freedom, and this abundance of variety,
cherished in the Liberal party, have not disabled it,
during the last half century, from efficient action.
For more than two-thirds of that. period, the Liberal
party has held power, and fully nine-tenths of our
useful legislation have been due to its inspiration and
its labours. What modern Britain at this moment
is she has become substantially through the agency of
the Liberal party.
Such being the facts, it seems natural to ask, why
may not the Liberal party of the future be useful,
with the same freedom, and by the same methods, as
in the past? But, to bar an interrogatory doubtless
.very disagreeable to our opponents, it is now sought
to startle and inflame the country by pointing to the
views of our most advanced sections. But no section
constitutes the Liberal party. Eaeh section consti-
tutes an element of the Liberal party; and it is by
the mixture and composition of its elements, not by
the unchecked dominance of any one amorg them,
that its results have been, and will be, attained. I
have found honourable co-operation with Liberals of
all sections, especially during the last five arduous
years, for great public purposes such as the extension
of the franchise, perfectly attainable in the past, and,
were I a younger man, I should hope that it might
leng continue in the future.
Thus far I have only mentioned political matters
which have been for a sufficient time before the public
mind, which have undergone much discussion, and on
which it may be reasonably hoped that the Liberal
party is ripe for united action. But they constitute
only the vanguard of the host of subjects with which
the coming Parliament, and its successors, will, or
may, have to deal. It appears probable, even, after
all which the last half century has achieved, that the
growth of population, the expansion of our relations
throughout the world, the rapid development of
social interests, and the extension of popular power,
will, at least for a considerable time, be amply repre-
sented in new legislative wants. From any full
attempt to set them forth, the law of nature, at my
time of life, dispenses me. But there are some among
them, as to which the foundations of discussion have
already been laid, an which may therefore demand
froie me a few words
As respects changes in the House of Lords, by far
the best guarantee for the safe treatment of this im-
portant subject is one that can only be supplied by
that House itself, in the moderation and wisdom of
its future conduct. I certainly cannot deny that there
is a ease sufficient to justify important change. Those
who hold with Mr. Burke, as I do, that knowledge
and virtue alone have an intrinsic right to govern-
ment, might desire to constitute a second Chamber
strictly on this basis. But we cannot in the nature of
things exclude the action of other influences, espe-
cially the permanent, growing, and highly aggressive
power of wealth. Among these secondary influences,
as a link with the past, as a force congenial to the
character and habits of the people, and as a check on
other and yet more mixed agencies I hope that, in
the reconstitution of the House of Peers, when it
arrives, a reasonable share of power may be allowed,
under wise conditions, to the principle of birth.
When the subject of State religion comes into dis-
cussion, although it has been more fully probed and '
unfolded in Scotland than elsewhere, and although a
lively feeling, as was naturally to be expected, exists I
with regard to it in Wales, yet it is the larger case of
England which principally arrests attention.
Bearing in mind all the circumstances of the ques-
tion, in connection with the length of my own past
career, I might perhaps plead for an exemption from
all share in this controversy. But having regard, on
the other hand, to the deep interest felt in it, with
strong conviction, on the part of so many whose con-
fidence I have enjoyed, I think it right to say a few
wards, if they only tend to qualify over-sanguine ex-
pectations, and to mitigate alarms, which appesir to
me exaggerated, though they are entertained by many
whom, both officially and personally, I revere.
With respect to the severance of the Church of
England from the State, I think it obvious that so
vast a question cannot become practical until it shall
have grown familiar to the public mind by thorough
discussion. Neither, I think, can such a Change arise
in a country such as ours, except with a large
observance a the principles of equity and liberality.
We can hardly, however, be surprised if those who
observe that a current, almost throughout the
civilised world, slowly sets in this direction, should
desire or fear that among ourselves, too, it may be
found to operate. I cannot forecast the dim and
distant courses of the future. But, like all others, I
have observed the vast and ever increasing develop-
ment for the last fifty years, both at home and abroad,
in the Church to which I belong, of the powers of
voluntary support. By devotedness of life, and by
solidity of labour, the clergy are laying a good founda-
tion for the time to come, The English Church also
appears to be eminently suited in many and weighty
points to the needs of the coming time. And I have
a strong conviction that if this great modification of
our inherited institutions shall hereafter be accom-
plished, the vitality of the Church of England will be
found equal to the needs of the occasion.
The subject of a gratuitous primary education, to be
paid for from sources *holly public, is one on which
I desire to reserve a final judgment. But it appears
to me to suggest some difficulties which demand at
any rate a grave consideration. According to the
habits of this country a contribution towards the cost
of the article tends to its being more thoroughly
valued by the receiver. The rule of our policy is,
that nothing should be done by the State which can
be better or as well done by voluntary effort; and I
am not aware that, either in its moral or even its
literary aspects, the work of the State for education
has as yet proved its superiority to the work of the
religious bodies, or of philanthropic individuals. Even
the economical consideration of materially augmented
cost does not appear to be wholly trivial. Again, will
there not be under the new system an increased
jealousy of the introduction into the schools of any
subject not strictly rudimentary? There remains
the religious difficulty. The nation does not
appear to be disposed to confine the public
teaching in the primary schools to matter
purely secular. If this be so, how are we ask the
entire population of Churchmen, Nonconformists, and
Roman Catholics to accept one and the same scheme
of religious instruction, in despite of their denomina-
tional differences, and above all, a scheme prescribed
and limited by the authority of the State, in a country
and at a period when a large mass of opinion has
grown up which is totally adverse to the use by the
State of any prescribing and limiting authority at all
in religious matters? There may be modes of meet-
ing all or some of these difficulties, but until such
modes have been carefully weighed, and not found
wanting, it would be premature in me to endeavour
to press forward generally the subject of gratuitOus
primary education.
I have reserved until the close the mention of Ire-
land.
Those grievances of Ireland, with which we had
been historically too familiar before and since the
Union, have, at length, been happily removed.
The poison of religious ascendancy, in its
various forms, has been expelled from the
country; and the condition of the cultivators of the
soil, constituting the majority of the people, which
has been a scandal and a danger to the Empire, has
been fundamentally improved, at the cost of no email
effort, by the action of Parliament.

But the wants of Ireland have to be considered, a.
well as her grievances. Down to this hour Ireland
has continued greatly in arraar both of England and
of Scotland, with respect to those powers of local self.
government which associate the people, in act and
feeling, with the law, and which lie at the root, as I
believe, of political stability, of the harmony of classes,
and of national strength. Nothing can be easier than
to mar and intercept by narrow prejudices and by
appeals to passion, any adjustment of this important
question; which cannot be satisfactorily handle.l
unless it be approached; on the one side and on the
other, in a spirit of enlightened moderation.
Should such a spirit prevail, I cannot believe that
the political genius of these nations, illustrious in the
history of the world, will prove inadequate to the
solution of the problem, without the heavy draw-
back of embittered civil strife. In my opinion, not
now for the first time delivered, the limit is clear
within which any desires of Ireland, constitutionally
ascertained, may, and beyond which they cannot, re-
ceive the assent of Parliament. To maintain the
supremacy of the Crown, the unity of the Empire, and
all the authority of Parliament necessary for the con-
servationof that unity, is the first duty of every re-
presentative of the people. Subject to this governing
principle, every grant to portions of the country el
enlarged powers for the management of their own
affairs is, in my view, not a source of danger, but a
means of averting it, and is in the nature of a new
guarantee for increased cohesion, happiness, and
trength,
The main question is, whether it is for the interests
of all the three countries that the thorough and en-
during harmony which has now been long established,
but only after centuries of manful strife, between
England and Scotland, should include Ireland also.
My personal answer to the question is this: I believe
history and posterity- will consign to disgrace the
name and memory of every man, be he who he may,
and on whichever side of the Channel he may dwell,
that, having the power to aid in an equitable settle-
ment between Ireland and Great Britain shall use
that power not to aid, but to prevent or to
retard it. If the duty of working for this end cannot
be doubted, then I trust that, on the one hand, Ire-
land will remember that she too is subject to the
authority of reason and justice, and cannot always
plead the wrongs of other days in bar of submission
to them; and that the two sister kingdoms, aware of
their overwhelming strength, will dismiss every fear
except that of doing wrong, and will make yet
another effort ta complete a reconciling work, which
has already done so much to redeem the past, and
which, when completed, will yet more redound to the
honour of our legislation and our race.
In this lengthened address, which from its very
length has enabled me to write with much of indi-
vidual freedom, I have avoided criticism upon the
proceedings of the Government now in office; the
most important part of them, so far as they are known
to me, relates to the government of Ireland, and 1 am
desirous to hold that subject altogether separate from
retrospective controversy.
I may, however, say that we have given, as was our
duty, a cordial support to the new Administration in
its endeavours to conclude an arrangement of the
Afghan frontier with Russia on the basis which had
been laid down by Lord Granville. And I have ob-
served with satisfaction that the Secretary of State
for the Colonies appears, so far as we are informed,
to exercise a wise caution in South Africa with re-
ference to any further extension of our territorial re-
sponsibilities, which I hold it most unwise to enlarge
without an overr-ling necessity.
In conclusion, it may be observed that much of
what I have written refers to a future which, accord-
ing to all expectation, lies beyond my reach. Never-
theless, as it appears to me, the great occasion of
choosing a Parliament entails the duty of preparation
for contingencies which it may take long to develope ;
and it is to aid, so far as I may, in the fulfilment of
this duty, that I have thus submitted my views to
your consideration.
Trusting that the constituencies of the country
may, by their devotion to the public good, prove
themselves worthy of the great and noble steward-
ship committed to them, and confident that you will
continue to hold your high place among those con-
stituencies.