The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-24 00:00:00

el'iniour

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 24, 1852.

We inveighed yesterday against the rashness of al-
lowing any mistaken economy in the Naval Estimates
to degenerate into niggardliness. Such has all along
been to us matter f, ,r very serious solicitude in the
13:Ilia of our unaffected anxiety to witness a rea-
sonable diiniontion in the amount of our annual
expenditure. We have dreaded lest the more en-
thusiastic advocates of this decrease should, through
what We could not but regard as a very dangerous
exert themselves to bring about reductions,
in reference to the maritime service of England, such
as must necessarily prove, in the end, most disastrous,
if it were not ultimately found to be absolutely irre-
trievable.
Instead of enervating the defensive power
of the empire in this particular, we would see it, on
the contrary, thorougbi_ .
y. re-organized, and very con-
siderablyre-invigorate4 So far from consenting to
witness without protest any •
such ill -Judged and
perilous retrenchment, we have
been long in readi
regard to the •
ness to evince, in toaaegement of the
f Great Britain, a
Royal Navy 0 preference even to a
munificence of expenditure that might designated
by designated
avagant. Rather than
by some as eX.I see the force
existence, very as a
upon which our 13 insular
power, is mainly dependents we should be
though we are—to cowwilling_
advocates of economy
ensnce
a disbursement of an almost prodigal description.
:consequently with regret that we observe the argument
of this very mistaken system of retrenchment plit
forward not only in the House of Commons, but
subsequently in the columns of a morning Contem-
porary, by the Hon. Gentleman the representative of
Tavistock. It would appear that Mr. TRELAWNY is
desirous that no misapprehension whatever should be
entertained ai to what he really observed in the popu-
lar branch of the Legislature, insomuch that he
appeals to the Times to repeat yet more explicitly
what might not be sufficiently comprehensible in
the pages of Hansard—be invokes the aid of Journal-
ism to render yet more clear the records made by
the short-hand writers of Parliament. Hence the
letter published elsewhere in our columns of this
evening, in which the Member for Tavistock en.
aeavours to show that another million and-a-half
might be spared to the nation from the Naval Esti-
mates, already reduced since 1847 by 2,000,0001. ster-
ling 1 Seeing that the moneys were on Monday night
actually rated, it certainly appears to us rather
timed and superfluous to demonstrate that 4,000,0001.
would be ample for the annual support of the mari-
time department, in lieu of the 5.700,0001. virtually
accorded to the Admiralty within the last forty-eight
hours by the House of Commons for the ensuing
twelve months.

A better emploympnt of the munificent sums
to the lioysi Navy
granted of England it, of
course, as
we hive again and again in-
sisted,
requisite. But a wholesale re-
duties to the tune of another
duction of those
1,500,0001, we are by no means prepared to regard
when the Member for Tavistock oh-
as desirable.
itknearly this very amount of
. .
tsivt M, , , expended upon the two items of
fr d materials for ship-building,
to I gof men
;.,Pt.:.tA - t-, tßtel:` Dar er supplies
74,, . -71. '' 3. . scut if at this time in our possession,
....,
.1.C4 a is-

THE SUN,

he expresses an opinion in every respect
coincident with the views we ourselves
have for a considerable time past entertained. Ac-
cording to the well-known estimate, we should be
enabled to secure to the country new ships of war at
the rate of 1,0001. per gun, yet such has hitherto
proved by no means an accurate calculation. Had
it done so, we should now, in truth, have collected
together during the last 37 years of peace, no less
than 370 such vessels—as Mr. TRELAWNY has him-
self intimated—the ordinary duration of these vessels
extending over a period longer than the interval
from the present moment to the battle of Waterloo.
When, however, the Member for Tavistock, in con-
tinuation of his argument in favour of retrenchment in
our naval expenditure, contends that for 40,000 seamen,
' an annual outlay of 2,000,000/. ought at the very out-
side to bo sufficient " on the ground that able seamen
can be obtained for 1/. a week to find themselves," he
is himself guilty of an extravagance yet greater
than the very extravagance complained of by him in
the disbursement of 5,700,000/. in our Naval Estimates.
The suggestion we cannot but regard as one alto-
gether derogatory to the national character, revealing,
as it does, that very tendency to niggardliness against
which we have protested as unbecoming the wealth
and dignity of the empire, and as calculated in a
particular manner to prove injurious to our maritime
interests. Fancy the House of Commons resolving
that the sailors of England should be secured at
the rate of 1/. a-week, on the understanding that
they were "to find themselves !" Away
with these little quibbles of parsimony, away with
them l Let us re-organize the administration of
naval affairs by the Lords Commissioners of the Ad-
miralty, if we will. Let us see that the moneys
granted by the nation for the maritime service are
expended without folly and without prodigality.
Let us so arrange matters for the future in regard
to the manning of our vessels of war, in re-
gard to our building 'of ships, in regard to
the management of our dockyards, in regard
to provisions, and medicine stores, and cdl
the other items in our maritime expenditure, so that
not a thousand, or a hundred, or ten, or even a single
pound shall be squandered without the return of
some compensative advantage. But do not, in con-
sideration of the glory of our navy, and in considera-
tion of the wealth of our empire, and in considera-
tion of the national credit, and the popular munifi-
cence of Great Britain, do not be grinding down
the tars of England with an economy less befitting
the generous bands of JOHN BULL than the miserly
clutches of JOHN ELWES !

It was a fundamental principle observed both in
Courts of Equity and Common Law, that " wills
should be construed liberally, and deed strictly."
Certai❑ legal forms should be observed in the latter,
but the sole objEct cf the judges in adjudicating
upon the former was to ascertain the intention of the
testator, which, so far as practicable, in every instance
was carried into execution. There were abundant
reasons for this wise and salutary distinction. Deeds
were supposed to be solemn instruments, framed with
the utmost core and deliberation, the enacting parties
having the benefit of adequate legal advice. It was
not considered dz-sirabla that they should be di-
vested of the formalities essential to their efficiency,
or that any undue facilities should be given to the
execution thereof. It was rightly considered that great
security against fraud was afforded by the stringent
rules of interpretation, which rendered professional
assistance almost indispensable. Hsd it been other-
wise, the business of the tribunals, more especially of
the Courts of Equity, would be greatly increased by
proceedings instituted for the purpose of setting
aside deeds improperly obtained, or executed under
an erroneous impression of their effect and operation.

But it was otherwise with respect to testamentary
dispositions. Although every prudent man should
prepare himself fur the event that sooner or later
must occur to all without exception—although he
should have his affairs so arranged that his wishes and
intentions should be carried into effect, no matter
bow sudden might be the final summons, even though
it should arrive while he was in the possession of
physical and intellectual vigour, in the full enjoy-
ment of mental and bodily health—a large proportion
of persons were in the habit of postponing the execu-
tion of their wills. There were various reasons for
this dangerous omission. Same merely indulged in
habits of procrastination. They would give in
for their wills, to-morrow or next day, hut
there was surely no hurry. They were never
better, and might look forward to many
years during which circumstances might change,
so as to occasion the necessity for various
alterations, codicils, &c. There could, therefore,
be no harm in a little delay, hut they would take care
that everything was done before any necessity should
arise. o;hers might pause from real uncertainty as
to how they would wish to bequeath their property,
being too much busied in acquiring fortunes to think
seriously of the ultimate disposition. Some avoid
the small pecuniary outlay incident to the prepara-
tion of their wills, while the great majority are in-
fluenced by the dislike to think seriously on so
unpleasant a subject, and perhaps a superstitious
feeling secretly indulged in. The result in every
case is the same. It was only when the emer-
gency actually arose that the omission was felt.
But professional advice or assistance could not then
be obtained. It was therefore essential in such cases
to dispense with all formalities, to look only to the
substance, and to give effect to the intention of the
testatcr whenever it could he fairly arrived at,
adopting only such precautions as might be deemed
essential for the prevention of fraud.
Such was the case until the Statute of Wills (1

Vic., cap. 26), which came into operation on the Ist
day of January, 1838, and by which
certain formalities were rendered necessary
in the execution and attestation of wills. The
principal features of the new law were, that
every will should be in writing, signed at the end or
foot thereof by the testator, in the presence of two or
wore persons, who should, in the presence of the tes-
tator, affix their names as witnesses. It has, however,
been found that some one or more of these compara-
tively trifling points are but too frequently dispensed
with, so that wills which could not be impeached on
any other ground become inoperative. Many Learned
Judges have expressed their deep regret at being
compelled to disregard the clear and unequivocal ex-
pression of the testator's wishes on some merely tech-
nical difficulty by which the objects of their bounty
were reduced from a state of comparative affluence
and comfort to poverty and destitution. Persons of
even the highest rank were not exempted from these
mistakes, and we believe that her late Majesty Queen
ADELAIDE was included among the number.
The LORD CHANCELLOR has introduced a Bill to
.remedy these acknowledged evils, which last night
received a second reading in the House of Lords.
The Noble and Learned Lord directs attention to
three
Points which require amendment, and we can
scarcely
suppose that there can be any
tdif-
ference opinion as to the propriety of any
or either of hem
to. theT hefirst
important topic relates
signature oafndthe mosttes-
tator. Lord S. La ti
Alma denies that the execution
should in that respect depend on " the role of law,
and not on the rule of spa„
'and that if the signs•
tore be affixed with the bona
" "fide intention• •
of giving
validity to the document, it should be effectual,
although it might be placed tome half or quarter of
an inch lower on the page than Was heretofore con-
sidered correct. We have the authority of his Lord-
ship for the assertion that upon the construction
that the name should immediately follow
the disposition "hundreds
of wills have been
held invalid, and misery and wretchedness
have
found their way to hearths where wealth, and
Peace
their
and comfort, ought to have had habitation;'
The principle appears indisputable that "a will should
be considered valid and sacred where the form only
is impeached, and the substance is not objected to."
We trust, then, that the most inveterate advocate for
an early dissolution will acknowledge the propriety
of the most speedy remedy practicable, and give every
possible facility to the passing of the measure of the
Bill during the present session.

The other points relate merely to the attestation,
and although there are not by any means so many
cases of invalidated wills in consequence of

the existing rules as of that relating to the signature,
they are no less objectionable in point of principle,
and equally require amendment. For instance, the
signature must be made or acknowledged in the pre-

LONDON,

sence of the witnesses, and if a man, desirous of con-
cealing the provisions of his will from the inquisitive
scrutiny of the only eligible persons whose attesta-
tions he might be enabled to obtain, should
chance to turn down his signature with the
other portion of the will, the whole would
be vitiated. It is now proposed that it
shall be sufficient if the will itself is acknowledged
by the testator in the presence of the witnesses, and
also that the attestation may be affixed, when the
witnesses without fraud, and as part of the same
transactions, and without leaving the house,
sign their names, although not withi❑ the
sight of the testator. This is the first of the legal
reforms introduced by the LORD CHANCFLLOR, and
we believe that all will acknowledge its propriety.
It affords a favourable augury of future proceedings
on this very important subject.

The vulgar adage hath it, that " It is easy to find
a stick to beat a dog." Prejudiced judges, whose
minds are previously mode up, will easily assign
reasons for the decisions which they may deliver,
although from the very beginning these decisions
were little better than " foregone conclusions."
From the first we had but little hope from the ap-
pointment of the Treasury Commission of Inquiry
into the the cost and applicability of the Crystal
Palace, unless there was a vigorous pressure from
without, combined with strong and energetic de-
monstrations within the walls of Parliament. There
was a too manifest disposition to get rid of that
magnificent structure, to convert what should be the
honour of the country into a national disgrace, by
its being made the object of an act of Vandalism un-
paralleled among civilized nations in modern
years. The people, however, remained apathetic,
while the stirring events in Parliament and the an-
ticipated dissolution have prevented the energetic
efforts being made which could alone preserve
that magnificent structure to the community.
There is, however, yet time for combined and
strenuous exertions, and the designer and constructors
of the building are willing to afford every opportunity
to the people to give expression to their sentiments.

Oa Monday we inserted the letter of Messrs. Fox
and HENDERSON, containing an invitation to all
comers to visit the building gratuitously during
the present week, so that they may be enabled
to form a just estimate of its capabilities,
and also of the conduct of those who insist
upon its destruction. We now earnestly in-
vite attention to the letter of Sir JOSEPH
PAXTON, which will be found in another part of this
day's impression, and which throws considerable light
on the animus of the CommissionerP, who, in their
report, only adverted to a single detached sentence,
the meaning of which they totally misunderstood—
a misconception, probably arising from the omission
of affording him an opportunity of making verbal
corrections in the printed evidence. We be-

lieve that there are but few disinterested
persons who will not coincide in the opinion
that the destruction of the building would be " a
wanton sacrifice of property," which should not be
sanctioned under any circumstances, but most
certainly not under erroneous—we shall not
say false representations of the evidence
of Sir JOSEPH PazzoN. Let, then, the
people speak out boldly and unequivocally, so that
the voice of public opinion may be beard within the
walls of Parliament, and let some of our representa-
tives insist on the matter being calmly discussed, so that

the opinion of the Legislature may be fairly ascertained.
We venture to assure those who may make them-
selves active on the subject that their chances of re•
election will not be diminished thereby, and that such
conduct will be apything but displeasing to their re-
spective constituencies.

LLOYD'S SHIPPING--(THIS DAY.)
LONDON, MARCH 24.—Wind this day at noon N.E.,
light bran and fine clear weather.
ALICANTE, MARCH 15.—The Occidenton (Swedish
ship), and Flora (Russian ship), are on shore near Tor-
revieger ; the latter is expected off.
SUNDERLAND, MARCH 23.—Wind S.E.—Sid. Bower,
Boston, U.S.
HARTLEPOOL.—SId. Graafstrom, Wakefield, South
Aubtralia.
HULL, MARCH 23.—Wind W.—Sld. Anne, Davis's
Straits.
DEAL, MARCH 23.—Wind Westerly ; P.M., a calm.—
Arrd. from the River and sld. Sultana, Cape Coast
Castle; Jane, Dominica; Penelope, St. Lucia; Jenny
Lind, Newfoundlsnd.
OFF THE SOUTH FORELAND.-11( !Rees, New York,
fur Bremen.
PoRTS3IOUTH, MARCH 23.—Wind S.S.E., light.—Sld.
Her litljes:y's steamer Polyphemus, Plymouth and
Coast of Africa.
LIVERPOOL, MARCH 22.—Wind N. to S.S E.—Arrd.
Robert Barbour, Calcutta; De Witt Clinton, New York.
Sld. Caronatu, Calcut'; Mahtoree, Table B.ty; Jenny
Rio Janeiro; Joseph Walker, New York; An-
drew Foster, ditto; Catharine, Quebec; America, Mon-
treal; City of Manchester, ditto; Britannia, ditto; St.
Lawrence, ditto. Off port, Beejapore and New World.
The Sumpter, Wilmington to this port, was on shorn
near Smithvelle Bar, N.C., March 4, but was expected
off next tide.
PLYMOUTH, MARCH 23. Wind E.— Sid. Emma
Eugenia, Portland Bay.
Urn SCILLY, MARCH 22.—Wind S., very thick.—
Gothe, Richmond, for Bremen.
FALMOUTH.—SId. Tay, Honduras.
SWANSEA, MARCH 23.—Wind S.W.—Sid. Schilde,
Hong-Kong; Minna, Cuba.
QUEENSTOWN, MARCH 22.—Wind S., thick.—Arrd.
Berwick Castle, Va'paraiso. Put back, Zephyr, for Bar-
badoes.

CitooKiiivEv.—Arrd. Dolphin, Buenos Ayres, and
not the Peter Juhl, as before repertcd.
BELFAST, MARCH 23.—The Reynard, which was
taken into D3riagbadee, derelict, 19th inst., has been
towed up here; the cargo is entirely dam-Iged.
WARRENPOINT, MARCH 23.—The Bret ZO, Trcon to
Newport, has put in here leaky.
MALAGA, MARcH 14.—The Signet and Ranger, were
driven on shore at Vera Cruz during a severe gale;
crew saved.