The Sun.
London, England, 1855-11-24 00:00:00

a panic ensues, to the destruction of all confidence ;
and when prices sink almost without a limit, then the
said
monicd clasit buy. and get enormous bargains. It is
that a banking Lord, in the panic of 1846, made
70,006/. by one transaction, with a house run hard for one daT ! Thus, while they share in the
prosperity of
the country, their great harvest is in its adrersitr. It is
so calculated—it is so written in the bond. They 'flourish
in the universal distress.
• And why is this cycle of prosperity and distress en.
elured ? They profess to keep circulation and prices
steady to check over-trading, and to force back, by a
sort of bankrupt sacrifice of cur goods, the gold they
consider indispensable to lie ensconced in the Back eel.
Jars ! Gold ig thus made a curse ! The sinful love of it
is aggravated, and hoarding increases the evil. Why
should it not be left free, and come and go as daring the
war, when we were at the height of national prosperity.
Why should every one's property, from the Laiad's•ered
to the extreme North, be reduced in value in order to
encumber the Bank with coin intended to be useless!
Why should the value of gold be attempted to he fixed,
when everything else varies as well as itself ? By what
de!te-,ion Is our circulation said to he based on gold, when
tLe first fourteen millions of notes do not represent a
single sovereign ? In fact, our coin is only the small
change of our whole currency of notes, bills, bonds, stce
This artificial stele, with so many difficulties and dis-
asters in its train, results from the pretext of endeavour-
ing to regulate and control what should be left free in
all respects, except that the Banks which issue notes
should produce ample security; but that need not neces-
sarily be gold.—Your constant reader, and
A FREE-TRADER ll`f GOLD.

MR. COBDEN'S LETTER.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE MANCHESTER riAmniEn.
Dear Sir,—A. letter has appeared in your columns,
signed " Scrutator," containing the following statement
respecting the letter of Mr. Cobden inserted in the Leeds
Mercury three weeks since :
" I have heard it asserted that the first, and in some
respects the most important, paragraph of that letter, as
it emanated from Mr. Cobden, was withheld by the
editor without his permission, because it commented
with inconvenient severity upon a leader which bad re•
cently appeared in the columns of your Yorkshire cone
teMporary."
The fact is correct : whether the reason assigned is so,
you shall judge. Bill-) first of all, to dissipate all mys-
tery, and redress any possible injury which Mr. Cob-
den may have sustained, the paragraph of that gentle.
man's letter omitted in the Leeds Mercury is subjoined :
"In a late number of the Mercury, which circum-
stances prevented me from seeing at the moment of its
appearance, I have read an editorial article, which, after
an allusion to the limited supply of labourers for various
breeches of domestic industry, occasioned by the war
and emigration, and to the ' still greater difficulties with
which our employers of labour are threatened,' proceeds
to commend to the Government a plan for recruiting
our army from the ranks of the ticket-of-leave convicts.
Without pausing to snatch an argumentative triumph
upon the inappropriateness of such a proposition from
those who believe the present to be a 'just and neces-
sary war in defence of the civilisation and liberty of
Europe,' I appeal to your candour whether such a plan
is not merely impracticable, but whether its suggestion
alone is not an insult to our army, and that of our
Allies. free writer of the article is in error in saying
that a similar system of recruiting prevailed during theg
great French war. True, it was the custom, instead of
punishing men charged with such offences as poaching
and emuggling, or the commission of certain faux pas,
from which village life, as we learn from Crabbe, was
not exempt, to offer them the alternative of ' serving.
the King,' and undoubtedly very many such scapegraces
found their way int) the army and navy ; but tee in-
mates of our hulks and the population of our penal
colonies were never emptied into Wellington's regi-
ments ; and be assured that any serious attempt cf
the kind, in the present improved state of the mo.
rare of our army, would be viewed as so great an
insult by officers and men, and that it would be resisted
even to the extent, if needful, of mutiny in the ranks
and rebellion at the Horse Guards.
"But you have raised a question of supreme import-
ance at the present moment, on which I will, with your
permission, offer a word or two of remark—not as to its
bearings ou the employment of labour, but on what all
of us must regard as the honour, character, and interests
of the country."
Such was the passage omitted ; and as the omission
was my own individual act, I give the explanation in my
own person,—the same explanation which I gave Mr.
Cobden by the first post after receiving his letter.
My reasons for omitting the passage were twofold—
namely, first, that I perfectly concurred in Mr.Cobden'e
view as to the recruiting of ticket-of-leave men, and al-
ways had done so, and that article in the Mercury ap-
peared without my knowledge; and, secondly, that the
objections to the recruiting of that glass of men (though
in my judgment conclusive as against the article in the
Mercury) had no connection with the main argument of
Mr. Cobden's letter, either as to the difficulty of recruit--
ing the army, the state of the army before Sebastopol, or
the merits of the war with Russia. If I understand Mr.
Cobden aright, he would have entertained every view
expressed in his long and elaborate letter, had no such
article as that in the Mercury appeared, and would have
thought it his duty to lay them before the public.
If we had expressed the opinions to which Mr.Cobden
replied, in the course of a controversy with him, it
would have been the height of injustice to omit his an-
swer. But his name was never mentioned or alluded to
in the article, which was not controversial at all; and if
by excluding the passage, we deprived him of a triumph
over the Mercury, that did not in the slightest degree
weaken his general argument against the difficulties of
the war. Surely that little triumph over us was not
essential to Mr. Cobden ; if it was, that does not say
much for the general success of his letter.
lam aware that, in excluding a portion of Mr. Colo•
den's letter, I was taking a considerable liberty with him.
But I explained the reasons to him, and most fully be-
lieved they would appear to him satisfactory. I told him
that I did not object publicly to acknowledge myself in
the wrong, if convinced that I was so. But the awk-
wardness was, that I had not myself been in the wrong,
—that I was perfectly at one with him on that particu-
lar point, —that I had actually written the very same
views to a correspondent some months before,—and that
therefore I could neither with truth acknowledge myself
to have been mistaken, nor yet vindicate the article in
my own paper. Moreover the difficulty was increased
by the fact, that Mr. Cobden's letter was addressed, not
to " Editcv," as is customary with the correspondents
of the Leeds Mercury, but to " the Editor," and com-
menced "My dear Sir,"—thus as it were singling me out
personally. All that I cared to avoid was the un•
pleasantness of explaining to the public that I, the prin-
cipal
Editor of the Leeds Mercury, differed from one of
my fellosv•editors on a single point. It rather disturbed

the harmless public illusion us to that my-steriou;;;l-
- "the Editor," who is popularly regarded as
plurality in unity and unity in plurality, besides having
other attributes allied to infallibility and omniscience. I

did not think it a very great trespass on the generosity
of an old friend to ask him to excuse me giving such an.
explanation. However, I was mistaken. Of course
Mr. Cobden must have complained to others, as he did
to myself ; and therefore I now lay the entire matter be-
fore the public,—giving Mr. Cobden all the advantage
of his argument against the 21/e.cury, and taking to
myself the whole blame of having omitted a portion of
his letter.—l am, dear sir, yours faithfully,
EDWARD BALINEL

NEW MARBLE BVST OF THE QUEEN.:

We have much pleasure (says the Manees It le) Citardieen)
in being able to announce to our readers the -intention
on the part of Mr. Alderman Barnes to present to the
corporation of Manchester a colossal bust of her most
gracious Majesty the Queen, in marble, to be placed in
the Town Hall, in commemoration of her Majesty's visit
to this city in October, 1851. We know that Mr.
Barnes has long had this intention ' • but any intimation
of it till the present time would, for obvious reasons,
have been premature. A short time since, drustopg
wthaes
mayoralty of Benjamin Nicholls, Esq., his
informed by Mr. Alderman Barnes, his predreacepsisdorpl:
the office of chief magistrate of the city, that he had
given to Matthew Noble, Esq., of Bruton-street, 13er.
keley-square—in whose studio, we may state, the Man.
pre
nsceunettoemt
oa.
cheater Wellington memorial is now making
gress towards completion—a commission to execute
colossal marble bust of the Queen, which,
plated, it was his (Mr. Barnes's) intention to
the corporation of Manchester, for the purpose of being
Majesty
a rnm
etoolahli
sof
city.the auspicious
visit
ausveciuonus.
ycHioMuloisdel is already in a forward state,
dvp
eil sarisetteoadnf in
hertaet mosttTboe wgernlaa
and that it hasevebneeinn
judgeshappy atnodbseiriking itslikepnreosasouofnctehde
Qbuyeemno.st competent
to
oy tbhee mayor,very
Noble, the honour well as by Mr. Alderman Barnes,
to accomplish the
bust ; and the ofdesirable 8
ittot
insgeec secure, if
b e
ri‘ possibleia jo ty, fionr
orderAlr.
our noble reighbmaymoorstwsisaetliysfadcetoterrymcionmedplettoioanppolfy
our the Earl of Ellesmere for his kind thet
o
assistance in obtaining the necessary consent
o be
f: ) f
the
the
Queen. Lord Ellesmere readily undertook to medium of presenting the humble request of the mayor,
as the representative of the council, to her Majesty;
and in his letter to the mayor his lordship stated his
opinion that Mr. Noble's works place him, young as be
is, in the first line of living English sculptors ; that heir
one of many who have worked their way to eminence
from a starting point of no adventitious advantages; and
that though his lordship did not think personal caracter
should be much considered in the matter of public com-
missions in art, it was a satisfaction to him to find that
in this case a good opportunity
for distinctionm
vancement was afforded to one whom his lordship knew
s and ad.
to be worthy of it in all respects. T
_he application to our
gracious Queen, we are proud to say, has not been un.
successful; for in a subsequent communication received
from Lord Ellesmere the mayored iswshhianelnlorbimneed that her
Majesty has graci"BlY consehtic:
honour Mr. Noble with a sitting.
tdchiorync
e'uniaonot-
stances
we may' expect ere long to see Within the T
but to some
Rail a bust of her Majesty,
l't.ist,
eoxntlyenotfntfhtebreisgirnegatfaelenotf
wthheicyhoilltlfs
Is intended to corn.
memorate.

THE BELLS FOR THE HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.—
Alessrp. Warner, of Jewin-street, London, are about to
cast the bells for the great clock of the HouFes of Par-
liament. The principal bell is to be nine feet in ciiame-
tr!r, and to weigh about 14 tons, and will be the largest
bell, they say, ever cast iu England. It is calculated
that the four quarter-bells will weizli about ten tone
Alige.ftwT4o ki4ackr