The Sun.
London, England, 1852-05-04 00:00:00

DAILY WEATHER TABLE.

State of the Wind and Weather at each of the following
places at Nine o'clock yesterday morning.—The stations
are arraeged in order of latitude.
PLYMOUTH—Wind S.E., gentle breeze—partially cloudy.
PORTSMOUTH—Wind N.E. gentle breeze—partially cloudy.
BRIGHTON—Wind calm,—partially cloudy.
flagrucca—Wind N.N.E., gentle breeze—partially cloudy.
SournAwrros—Wind N.W., gentle breeze—cloudless.
FoLkEsro:4E—Wind N.E.. gentle breeze—partially cloudy.
GREENWICH—Wind N.E ,gentle breeze—partially cloudy.
ST SOOD —Wind N.E., gentle breeze—cloudless.
SWINDON—Wind N.E., gentle breeze—partially cloudy.
COLCHESTER—Wind N., gentle breeze—partially cloudy.
CAmaparcis.—Wind N., strong breeze—partially cloudy.
YARsiotrra—Wind N.E., strong breeze—partially cloudy.
The returns from the following places indicate the state of
the wind and weather on Saturday morning at nine
-;clock
CA.B.Low—Wind N.E., gentle breeze—partially cloudy.
lktuumiGAß—Wind W., calm—partially cloudy.
?wiz—Wind N.W., gentle breeze—partially cloudy.
Szzoon—Wind N.E., gentle breeze—cloudy.

LONDON, TUESDAY, MAY 4, 1852.

• Yesterday, Air. 6-- ----4"----
Bill gave rise to
discus-
sions that has markedoneof
Gentlemanur°
West Riding we explained le
threatened
o f
the
most
amendment
t
Committee on the Militia
important
of our last night's impres-
on.unres
going at once into
the present .
the Member for the
against
The precise
nature
session of the Le-
gislature.sion. It required a return
a view to bring home as much of ourtht force es might
navel force, with
be available prior to adventuring
such extraordinary measures of upon any
defence th
e
one t e
one here proposed by her MAJESTY'S Government.
A more cogent statement than the one •
e delivered
House of Commons last evening by Mr. c ounEN was
perhaps, never before heard within the 1 was,
wa ls of
Par-
liament. The Hon. Gentleman spoke
with all his
former acumen—" RICLIARD was himself -'ga• ~
m and
we doubt not but that the very arguments which
were listened to with so much manifest reluctance by
the majority of the Represenhtives will be hailed
with peculiar satisfaction by the people ofEngland, the
people whose opinions in this matter that n3ajority cannot
possibly be said to express. In illultration of the
actual weakness of those advocates of the Militia
Bill who arrogate to themselves, sinipry from their
numerical preponderance, the authority of now pro-
claiming the real sentiments of the country, Mr.
CoßD4ri observed that that boasted majority was iu

no way composed of the representatives of the large
centres of industry and intelligence. On the con-
trary, there were numbered among the minority such
important localities as Glasgow, Manchester, Bir-

mingham, Westminster, Southwark, Marvlebone,
Lambeth, Tower Hamlets, Finsbury, Newcastle,
Hull, Oxford, Derby, York, Stockport, Worcester,
Sheffield, Canterbury, Aberdeen, Montrose, Bath,
Dundee, Preston, Greenwich, and Edinburgh. Be-
sides this, upon the same question the city of London
was divided, Leeds was divided, Bristol was divided,
and there were also divided the two great counties—
the one vast and the other populous—of York and
Middlesex. Speaking himself as Member fur the
West Riding, the largest of all the constituencies of
the United Kingdom, Mr. COBDEN candidly and sig-
nificantly remarked that there was only one subject
upon which he would more confidently ap-
peal to the electors than upon the question
of the Militia Bill, and that subject was
the question of free trade or of protection.
When it is remembered, moreover, in addition to
these somewhat suggestive particulars, that upwards
of eight hundred petitions had been laid upon the
table of the House against the obnoxious measure
introduced by her MAJESTY'S Government, it must
be allowed that upon its demerits rather than upon
its merits the opinions of the people appear to pre-
ponderate.
To a considerable extent nothing could well be
more reasonable than the suggestion now made by
Mr. COBDEN, that the national defences should
be secured by the concentration of that mari-
time power which has hitherto been un-
necessarily scattered over our widely-distributed
dominions. As upwards of a month since we our-
selves had reminded the country, so yesterday even-
ing the Member for the West Riding reminded the
House of Commons, that within the seventeen years
last past the naval expenses of England have been
increased by no less than 2,000,0001., the estimate
for that department of the public service being in
1833, 4,500,000/., whereas in 1852 they have
attained an aggregate of about 6,500,0001. Now, of
this increase in our maritime expenditure we are not
by any means disposed
.to complain. Mr. Comma
is, of course, as a member of the Peace Society,
and as a wholesale, and we cannot but think likewise
in this matter, an undiscriminating advocate for a
reduction in our expenditure. Upon this point,
therefore, we are compelled to differ tote ado
from the Honourable Representative, regarding
his judgment, as bewitched by the fasci-
nating: dreams of Arbitration. But, on the
other hand, we coincide with him to the full
and most cordially when (directing the attention of
the House to this increase since 1835 of 2,000,0001.)
he demands a more rational employment of this
munificence than has certainly been, heretofore, any-
where perceptible. Descending from the considers•
tion of abstract principles to particulars, Mr. COBDEN
insists upon the advisability of diminishing the
number of our foreign stations, or, at any rate, of
diminishing the number of the vessels on those
foreign stations. Our foreign stations, remember,
are seven altogether, namely—the East Indies and
China, where there are nineteen of her MAJESTY'S
ships in commission ; the West Indies and North
America, where there are thirteen ; the Cape of Good
Hope, where there are nice ; the west coast of
Africa, where there are twenty-two; the south-east
coast of America, where there are eight ; the west
coast of America, where there are nine ; and the
Mediterranean, where there are nineteen. A
force such as this squandered over so many
seas widely separated from each other, and,
in two or three instances, indisputably super-
fluous, might surely, as Mr. COBDEN suggests, be
more judiciously employed for the advantage of the
empire by a wiser distribution. It is, of course, as
undeniable as it is satisfactory, that the statements
made by the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Ork-
ney and Shetland prove beyond all question the ac-
tual as well as the numerical superiority of the mari-
time steam power of England when compared with
the maritime steam power of France. Testimonies
as to the extent of this superiority are easily given—
stitistical testimonies, showing that whereas the
Royal Navy of England, in 1848, had 174 steam-
vessels of all classes, with an aggregate of 44,480
horse-power, the Republican Navy of France, in 1849,
consisted merely of 78 steam-vessels of all classes,
giving an aggregate of 17.740 horse-power : while
the contrast presented by the commercial steam-
power of the two countries yields a result no less won-
derfully in our favour—the commercial steam• shipping
of France being estimated, in 1849, at 3,000 horse-
power, with an aggregate of 10,000 tons, whereas
that of the United Kingdom reached the extraordi-
nary tonnage of 300,000, with actually upwards of
100,000 horse-power. Thanks to the researches of
Mr. ANDERSON, facts like these have been placed be-
yound the reach of contradiction. Yet a knowledge of
our system of maritime administration must force upon
us at the same time the conviction that the superiority
thus revealed in figures is by no means so remarkable
in reality—by reason of our energies being superflu-
ously scattered abroad over the whole of the vast
superficies of our dominions. Better, therefore,
say we, than a hundred Militia Bills, one vigorous
and well-considered measure for the husbanding of
our naval strength Better a standing navy, than a
thousand rifle corps! Better a re-organizltion of the
marine artillery, than the drilling of a dozen batta-
lions of shopkeepers skilled in the use of the minie
bullet, or of COLT'S revolver, or of that yet more
celebrated weapon—the formidable zundnadelgewehr.

—to oblige those who bad the misfortune to be involved
in litigation to maintain the judicial system"—a
proposition which had the high sanction of the
authority of Lords BROUGHAM and CAMPLELL, of
the late Lord LANGDALP, and indeed of every dis-
tinguished legal reformer whose attention has been
directed to the t•ubject. It will there be seen that
not only did the sums extracted from the suitors of
the Court of Chancery, under the designation of fees,
amount to 180,0001., but it was levied by no less than
330,000 difl'erent payments, which would occasion
' very considerable additional expense and annoyance
, to the sufferers.

It must, however, be borne in mind that this
statement by no means shows the full extent
of the grievance as it was some years since,
h en the system flourished in rank luxuriance, and
bwefor
to anyethepruning-knife
of the
uriing- knifeofthe legal reformer was
applied excrescences that had sprung
up in our courts, when the present Earl of ELLEN-
Ronovau received for a sinecure office in the Queen's
Bench far more than the salary of the Lord Chief
a o sterling
Justice. Indeed, the Noble Lord is still in receipt
of
the
per annum, as compensa-
tion for nearly,oooffice, while Lord CAMP-
BELL only receives 8,0001. per annum, and the other
judges
5,0001. per annum each, for the devo-
t
tiono onftlhyeir entire time and ability to the (ffi-
bool abolition
in of he p
cient discharge of the duties of their arduous
and important stations. From a Parliamentary
return just published, we find that the four late
sworn clerks of the Court of Chancery, Messrs.
MILLS, and WAINWILIGHT, have
between them since the passing of the Act
abolishing the situations (5 and 6 Victoria, cap. 103),
rGueplceTtioTyireaddßforieNtEshiu2sth day of November last, no less
than 236,2961. lls. 3d., of which 64,1081. 13s. 81.
was for salaries as taxing officers, end 172,1871.
17s. 7d. for compensation, being nearly three times
the amount of the salariee, which, being about 2,0001.
per annum for each, might be considered fair remu-
neration for the moderate duties imposed as taxing
officers, and for which we venture to assert that the
services of the most competent persons might be
obtained.

It also appears that the sums to be received by
these fortunate individuals are as follows—viz., by
Mr. GATTY, 5,424/. 14s. 4d. for his life, and to his
representatives for seven years after his death (! !!) ;
to Mr. BAINEF,
life 4,935/. 9i.
after his death 2,701/. 1 ls. 5d ! to Mr. MILLS, for his
5,403/. 23. 93., and for seven years
AINWR
his death 2,2,50/. 73., and for seven years after
IGHT,
r his
death 2,467/. l; and to Mr. W
for his life, 4,500/. 55. ld., and for seven years after
93. 73.! ! These are pretty pay-
ments for the country to be saddled with. Already
have these comfortable individuals received far more
than the advertisement duties realise for a year, but,
exorbitant as the compensation may be for their lives,
Messrs. GATTY, BAINES, and MILLS receive
some 8001. between them more for doing nothing
than Vice-Chancellors TURNER, KINDERSLEY, and
PARKER for their arduous duties. Some excuse may
be made, but we venture to assert that the allowances
for seven years after their deaths to their respective
representatives are utterly unparalleled. They would
surely not have received the fees and emoluments
after they had been removed by death and their suc-
cessors duly appointed. It certainly appears to ex-
hibit the symptoms of a rank job—such as SWIFT
shadowed forth in his tale of " The Old Watch Coat.''
We know not whether the matter can now be reme•
died. We would, however, commend it to the no.
tice of all legal reformers as an additional and
powerful illustration of the beauties of " the fee
system," and the mode in which things were managed
in the olden time. .

•
10-21 P
le A CO, •jhai".,
z.-. 1
-' • A
•• sr, -
a": us I. • M °
r.f Alsr,