The Press.
London, England, 1855-08-18 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

of the present rate of outlay (is its diminution
probable ?), we are defraying two-thirds of our
current expenses out of income, and the
remaining third mit 01 capital. In other
words, we stan4 exactV in the position of a
landed proprieter, w having an es
worth 4,000/. a year, already heavllp
mortgapd, is living at the rate of 1,500 .
That is, without abatement or exag-
geration, the present financial posture
of England. "But," It will be argued, " you
" must allow for the necessities of war. A
" nation engaged in fighting its neighbours
" cannot avoid spending more than its in-
" come : a few years of peace will set the
" balance straight again." Will they? That
is exactly the question at issue. If war were
reckoned on as a casualty certain to recur at
intervals more or less distant—if, for instance,
we calculated, as reasoning from past expe
rience we fairly might, on one year of war for
every two of peace ; and if a proportionate
attempt were accordingly made in peace time
to reduce the capital of the debt—then it would
be good logic and good sense to argue, " Never
" mind the incurred debt; ten years of peace will
" set it right." But no such reduction has
been, is, or probably will be, attempted.
Popular feeling runs strongly against it ; the
experiment, once tried, had to be abandoned,
and that decision, wisely or unwisely, has ever
since been regarded as final. Consequently
we are in this position, that, while every
fresh war certainly augments the debt, the
intervening periods of peace do not diminish
it. Its growth, therefore, has become, not a
matter of speculation, but of certainty; it may
be faster or slower, but the doubt is only as
to rate of increase, not at all as to the fact of
such increase. Here another defence is inter-
posed. " Look," we are told, "at the immense
" modern development of British manufac-
" tures and commerce. True, the burdens of
" 1850 are in themselves as heavy as those of
" 1820 ; but, relatively to the power of the tax-
" payer to bear them, they have diminished
" nearly one-half within the memory of middle-
" aged men. What has happened once may,
" nay must, happen again. Granted that the
" debt fifty ydiirs hence will be 1,200 instead of
" 800 millions. England, publicly and pri-
" vately, will be half as rich again as now; and
" so her liabilities bear only the present pro-
" portion to her means of discharging them.
" Read the prophecies of ruin in which eigh-
" teenth-century financiers used to indulge.
" Note how each successive increase from 50
" to 100, from 100 to 200 millions, was pointed
" at as the beginning of a monetary crisis, the
" sure forerunner of approaching bankruptcy.
" Have these croakings come true ? and, if
" not, why should yours be more worthy of
" respect '?"
We allow our sanguine friend to state his
argument in extenso, because it has consider-
able plausibility in its favour, and is not,
indeed, devoid of some greatly-diluted admix-
ture of truth It is the fact that danger, even
ruin, was predicted from the debt at a time
when it had not reached one-fourth its present
magnitude. It is the fact that, notwithstand-
ing those prophecies, national wealth, popula-
tion, and power, have enormously increased.
Such experience is not without its weight;
and no doubt it throws on us the burden of
proving, or of attempting to prove, that
a marked difference exists between the
state of things in the last century,
and that which we see round us. To be brief,
the question resolves itself into the follow-
ing:—Can we reckon, with anything like cer-
tainty, on the increase of such industrial im-
provements as have taken place within the
last 100 years, so that the advance in commer-
cial wealth in future to be anticipated shall
bear a fair proportion to that which we and
our immediate predecessors have seen ? If
this query be not answered in the affirmative,
the argument founded on past good fortune
falls to the ground. In that case, the circum-
stances which have saved us are confessedly
exceptional, and form no precedent. But if
the more sanguine view be taken, some pre-
liminary objections must be disposed of, to
which we at least see no sufficient reply. For
upwards of 2,000 years no advance had been
made in mechanical science which could com-
pare to the invention of the steam-engine.

SATURDAY,

That discovery, for practical purposes, dates
back less than a century. Can we reasonably,
in a mat* where iatioj safety is at stake,
count upoti the oirtainty of 'imother such ad-
vance being made in our time? We do not
ask whether it is poisible—tliat may well be ;
but is it probable ? Oan it iv any stretch of a
sanguine fancy be ileemod certain ? For
surely, in such a matter, mere hope and trust,
without something firmer to rest on, are not
sufficient. Again, assuming even so much,
will the discovery (be it what it may) be made
by an Englishman? Of steam power, England
has enjoyed, partly owing to priority of know-
ledge, partly to natural circumstance, a virtual
monopoly extending over many years. That is
an accident which cannot be expected to recur.
It is almost certain that, in the present state of
European communication no industrial inven-
tion will be long confined to one country.
Some years back an idea was rife among men
of science that electricity might be substituted
as a moving and working power for steam.
The experiments made with that view proved
a failure. But their success was a fair subject
of experiment; had they succeeded, not only
would another nation have preceded us in
mechanical enterprise, but that great source
of English commercial wealth, our coal-landm
would have lost half their value for industrial
purposes. In truth, if all chances come to be
reckoned up, it may turn out that from the
progress of practical science we have as a
nation more to fear than to hope. But, not
pressing that argument, the undisputed facts
stand thus :

It is improbable that within the next cen-
tury another discovery equal in its effect on
mechanical science to the invention of the
steam-engine will occur.
It is improbable, in that event, that the dis-
covery in question, even if made in England,
will be long confined to one country.
It is improbable, both the former conditions
being granted, that the natural resources of
the country will be developed by it, as, from
our superiority in coal and iron, they have
been by the steam-engine.
Now, put these three improbabilities toge-
ther, and apply the ordinary calculus of
chances. If each event singly be as likely to
happen as not—if the chances of its happening
or not happening be equal, the chance of ail
three happening is as one to eight ! Yet no
one will affirm that we have estimated the
probabilities too low—rather the reverse. And
unless this slight chance become a certainty—
unless this bare, remote possibility be realised
as a fact—the precedent of the last century
does not apply, the encouragement which we
derive from it is a delusion, the argument we
base on it fallacious, and England is squan-
dering treasure actually hers with a reckless
improvidence generated by the supposed pos-
session of au inexhaustible supply, which in
the hour of need will fail, and leave her
bankrupt. The present loss is certain, real,
tangible ; the future compensatiori doubtful,
almost imaginary.

EAST INDIA (TORTURE).
Tux Parliamentary paper thus headed is one
of great importance, though containing the
correspondence with the Madras Government
only—the Report of the Commissioners, with
its appendices, not being given in this selec-
tion. Comparatively slender, however, as are
the materials thus placed at our disposal, a
great deal of authentic information may be
gained from it on the subject of India and its
misgovernment by the East India Company.
The fact is, that in striving to hide as much
as possible the deformities of one part of the
system they have exposed those of others ;
and these, in our brief review of the paper
under examination, we shall not fail to notice.
The first point we learn from this document
is a confirmation of our surmise that the
official credit of this exposure is wholly and
solely due to the Governor of Madras, Lord
HARRIS. It is true that Sir CHARLES WOOD
ordered an inquiry, but iu such a shape as 6
must have proved ineffectual. Lord HARRIS
had, however, anticipated the order by the