The Sun.
London, England, 1864-06-22 00:00:00

t the Ministerial side cf the House of Com-
mons—such a thoroughly out-speaking M.P., let
us say, as Mr. BERNAL OSBORNE—wiII seize the
opportunity now, we may be certain of that,
quite as readily, quite as eagerly to condemn this
meddling and muddling of Earl RUSSELL'S as be-
tween the Danes and the Germans, quite as readily,
quite as eagerly as the right hon. gentleman the
member for Buckinghamshire. Why do we say
this, and thus confidently, ut:on the very day
set apart for the sitting of the Conference here
in , London P Because, simply, upon this
vary day, the worst anticipations as to what would
ensue from all this pottering and procrastination,
from all these delays and mystifications have, so
far as any reasonable human being can judge,
been to the full realised. On the wings
of the lightning, the telegram comes to us Cris
afternoon from Frankfort-ou-the-Main, from the
old Imperial capital of Germany—and it comes
thus and thence as ominously as though in
a rolling crash of thunder, heralding a
general war in Europe. " Prussia," says
the Telegram, " rejects the English proposals
relative to the line of demarcation in Schleswig.
She also rejects the arbitration of any Power
represented at the Conference. Prussia will not
recognise the decision of any arbitrator as binding,
but will take it into consideration." There is talk,
too, about Prussia's readiness to accede to any pro-
posal for a prolongation of the armistice—but, in
that event for a prolongation of not less than
two months. Prussia saying this probably from a
consciousness that any prolongation of the armistice,
much less a prolongation of it for a couple of months,
it would be impossible to obtain Denmark's consent
to ! Wherefore Prussia babbles about it with an
air of safe magnanimity. "It is believed," adds the
Frankfort telegram, ' that the last sitting of the
Conference will take place to-day, and that hosti-
lities will commence on Monday. The armistice
terminating in due course, that is on Sun-
day
! From Vienna meanwhile comes another
intimation indicative of Austria's readiness
(if she can only find a plausible excuse for it!) to
back out of a war threatening, at last, to
become complicated into, what must prove
for her, very formidable dimensions! The
Kaisee's hinted wish now being to have the matter
here in dispute, so far as it relates to Austria, sub-
mitted to the arbitration of the Emperor NAPOLEON.
Not to the arbitration of England, observe—Eng-
land, so " fallen from her high estate" under the
regime of Earl RUSSELL—but to the arbitration of
NAPOLEON! Here, however, the suggestion is
blurted out merely through semi-cfficial channels. The
notion of arbitration being simultaneously rejected
beforehand by Prussia—supp';sing that arbitra-
tion to be one dreamt of by any Crowned head re-
presented at the board of this abortive Conference.
Altogether, a charming prospect! For which we are
indebted mainly, if nut solely, to our own Govern-
ment. A prospect, in one phrase, be it said, of con-
fusion worse confounded.

It is satisfactory to find that the " Gaols Bill'
has been read a second time. It wouid be very
provoking if another session were lest and more
time wasted without coming to any definite settle-
ment of this question, end making any alterat:one
in a system which so imperatively calls for change.
Sir GEORGE GREY showed great discretion in con-
senting to some of the changes that were proposed
and thus avoiding the chance of being defeated in
his attempt to get the bill through this stage. It
is true that there was a division, but not one which
involved any risk. The difficulties that lie in the
way of these changes are very great, and one of the
chief obstacles is found in the fact that the mention
of the case always brings forth the latent prejudices
and excites the angry criticism of those who must
find some fault, and are resolved to put their veto
upon the proceedings in some shape or other. Sir
G. GREY'S statement was a sensible eseposition of
the matter. There are few subjects of legislation
which offer more complication than those connecter.
with prisons, but that is no season why some reme-
dial change should not be effected.
." Hard labour"
has engaged much of the attention of the committee
of the House of Lards, and there seems valid grounds
for their engravers to arbitrate on that point. They
recommended that there should be a strict defini-
tion of the term, and this is only reasonable, and a
change greatly called for, since it has been found on
examination that this part of the discipline has
been very much neglected. Mr. ADDERLEY laid
great stress on this, and very truly declared that it
was imperative to make a decided definition. It is
well known to all attentive observers of the subject
that if some impassable barriers are not put up
advantage will be taken in every direction, and
that virtually the effect of discipline is- nullified by
the introduction of change, and the laxity too
generally observed. It is shocking to contemplate
the pictures drawn by those who have visited some
of those gaols, and to think of the criminal taking
his ease, as it were, while honest poverty is toiling
without the prison wall, and wearing out strength,
health, and spirits in the weary struggle for exist
ence. Doubtless from the best motives and actuated
by the kindest feelings, some well-meaning but
mistaken individuals have been very instrumental
in affording the prisoners every possible relaxation
from their toil, end also in giving them many
luxuries which, properly speaking, they should
never enjoy. It is only by the exercise of a firm
Will sad the interposition of a strong hand that
these anomalies can be rectified, and this very un-
suitable Stated affairs ameliorated. It is well that
Mr. ADDERLEY made such a strong point of " herd
labour," as that doubtless tended in a great measure
to ensure the fulfilment of the designs of the Com •
mimes After varying considerably in different
places, in some prisons hard labour meant nothing
at all.
is such a course subversive of dis-
cipline, moat ?rkeora© for a prisoner to
have
iis alsotodo. Mr. ADDERLEY also insisted
on the necessity for uniformity among the gaols,
and expressed his opinion that good results would
certainly follow from this practice. As things have
hitherto been arranged there seems no Conformity
to rules, and " in a considerable number of gaols
there were no rules at all, and some rulescontasned
every possible absurdity that could come into the
head of the wildest theorist." This is sure to be
the case where attention is not paid to orders—diss
crepancies will creep in, and, finally, no one could
recognise the proportions of the system as it was
originally devised, previously to the omissions and
corruptions that have b;en gradually introduced
and fostered. It is not the question whether the
present plan will be more convenient, more com-
fortable, or more practicable; but whether it will
more efficiently carry out the purpose which it
should effect, and more fully develops the scheme
of reformation, or at all events of discipline, which
it should be one of the first objects of all imprisons
enent to realise. Those who cavil at the change pro-
posed, and animadvert upon the prospect of this
alteration, seem to partially ignore, if not entirely
to overlook the fact, that the present system is about
as faulty as it can possibly be. It is rife with in-
consistencies, teems with improprie es, abounds
in absurdities, and altogether has been a reproach
to our lawgivers, and a grievance to the community.
If the plan is simplified, and the several prisons