The Sun.
London, England, 1855-07-06 00:00:00

only of the shilling is to be given to the soldier,
who is to be permitted to allot the remaining
sixpence to his family, if he think proper so to do,
just as the seamen of the Royal Navy are now autho-
rised to do. But supposing that the men do not
wish to fall into this arrangement, which must
necessarily be purely voluntary, although encou-
raged by the country—what then ? Why, as
Lord PAYSTURE considers that paying it into the
hands of the soldiers would be injurious to the
discipline of the army, he proposes that it shall
be "in the power of the commanding officer,
under certain circumstances, in case of in-
subordination for instance, to step it, and
when so stopped that it shall be invested
in the savings bank for the man's benefit
at a future time." There is here a hiatus valde
deflendus. What is to be done with the 6d. when
neither allotted nor stopped ? The soldier is to
get but 6d. under the name of field money. He
may allot the remainder ; but if he does not, it
may be withheld as a punishment. But Lord
PANIIIIRE does not condescend to enlighten us as
to what he will do with it in the event of its not
being stopped. The men are not to get
it ! The savings bank is to be the
penal institution only resorted to in case
of insubordination ! What is the inter-
mediate condition ? On that point we must await
further information. It, however, seems to us,
that the attaching the idea of disgrace and punish-
ment to investments in the Savings' Banks is not
acting fairly to those excellent establishments, or
calculated to advance them in the estimation of
the parties from whom investments are sought. On
these points ewe think Lord PANMITRE will see
the necessity of again modifying his proposals—
and we assure him that ho will not injure his
character by so doing, for candid confession is
next best to not committing a7;fault ; and a man
never lowers himself in the opinion of honourable
men by recognising and retrieving a mistake.

The manner in which Mr. ROEBUCK'S question,
and the presentation of petitions by Mr. DUN-
COMBE respecting the police atrocities in Hyde-
park were met, was quite worthy of the oligarchic
clique into whose hands the government of the
country has fallen, being at once ridiculously ar-
rogant, unprincipled, and shabby.
Mr. ROEBUCK, it will be seen—having stated to

the House the substance of a letter from a person
in Oxford-street, who, it would appear, being
anxious on the preceding Sunday to ascertain the
news about the War, had gone into a news-shop in
that street which was entered by an inspector of
police and policemen, one of whom, on some
words ensuing, had struck him in the arm and
nearly broken it—inquired whether the Right Hon.
Gentleman at the Home-office intended instituting
any inquiry into the case, and into the conduct
of the police generally ? A plain question, de-
manding a plain answer.

But no—the Right Hon. Baronet of the tribe
of the GREYS was not prepared to assume that the
Commissioners of Police had in this case done
otherwise than their duty—shall we say as the
conceited Tenth of April in cambric had instructed
them ? Of course he was not prepared ;of course
he was ignorant of the case, and indisp)sed to
stir in it. Being what he is it was hardly unbe-
coming in him,' though most unbecoming in one
holding his place, under the circumstances, to
state that "if the facts were true the policemen
were as amenable as any other persons to the
magistracy." A reply like this, however, was
not by any means so clear as the Honourable
Member had a right to expect. The consequence
was Mr. PHMLIMORE pressed the question, and
demanded an answer. This was provoking. Sir
GEORGE GREY got ruffled, and having flippantly
remarked that he was not aware of the necessity
for so doing, said if the writer of the letter which
Mr. ROEBUCK had quoted "had first addressed him,
the matter might have been, inquired into," leaving
the impression that now it would not ! Aby no
means direct, but very notable answer.

ISo it has come to this. Administrative Reformers
—look to it. A sworn Secretary of State, in a case
where the very life of a British citizen was bru-
tally perilled by a subordinate protector of the
peace, refrains from inquiry into the affair, on his
own admission, because the injured party had not
addressed him, but the House of Commons, in the
first instance ! Why, this is arrogance, and some-
thing more, with a vengeance ! The culpability
of the Hon. Baronet, and also of the Government,
will more clearly appear from what followed. The
well-known Liberal Member for Finsbury, Mr.
DUNCOMBE, had petitions to present from persons
praying for immediate redress against the police ;
and the substance of their complaints ho thought
it his duty, following Mr. ROEBUCK'S example,
to read. But, though singly formidable, he was
not so dangerous to meddle with as Mr. ROEBUCK.
So every obstruction was put in his way ; he was
out of order—there was no urgent need for a
speedy remedy—the courts of justice were open
to all parties ; and—this came from " the comic
old gentleman," and was an attempt, as will be
seen, to pass a joke for an argument—" Did his
friends desire to refer the petitions to a select i
committee imply that there was an immediate ne-
cessity ?" Undeterred, however, by clamour or
joke, Mr. DUNCOMBE persisted, and, having read
the allegations of the petitioners with regard to
the conduct of the police on Sunday, advanced a
number of reasons of the greatest cogency why
an inquiry into that conduct should be instituted.
The working classes, lie justly remarked, were
greatly exasperated by it, and would not rest
satisfied by the matter being hushed up. It was
not enough to have withdrawn the Sunday Trad-
ing Bill ; something more must be done ; and he
was told that these persons were determined to
go to the Park next Sunday ; and, if molested,
would
go armed the next time ; and then who
Would saj- that there would not be loss of life ?
He hoped they would be told what Government
intended to do. At all events, he had done his
edutyvidenince he believedbringing il
couldm att ebr3 before
producedthe insupport
House;
everything he had stated,.
metropolis d
The peace and safety
on the manner in
of life and property in
the
ependel
which the question was dealt
with. To a plea
who
hamtesthifsal
impressive as were contained in •a
so urgent
was the nature of the reply'? ,-.
the pious Sir GEORGE,
loves the people, "denied these speech,seh ood
warning so
• Sir GEORGE GREY,
as ho
and general allecra.
by a tittle of evi_
statements, and
on the part of the police"—fit advoeatA ce
-- pro-
tested against such sweeping
tions, unsupported, as they were
dove," concluding by an intimation that while
any measuref conciliation like Mr. Durreounes
o
would meet with opposition from Government,
extreme measures would he taken for the preser-
vation of peace. Such is the consideration of
and the tranquillity of
(lovernra en t for human life,
the metropolis--suchasserti
°lla of Sir GEORGE--as Mr. ROEBUCK at also the gratuitously false
once Bhp,. i
and sweeping .
be said, ~
general
stated that the charges were
''''ci• "The Right flonourablo Baronet,"
butcharges which he
(Mr. ItoßEtrielt)
specific
had brought forward were
surely the
enough, for he a 4 -.
and name.
He had charged an T'en time, place,
insPector of police, who had
no number or letter on hi
a coat, and who, there-