The Sun.
London, England, 1864-08-05 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY, AUGUST 5, 1864.

_____.-- .-,,,-__-

Half-a-year's further retention of office—undii-
Pteed and unconditional—is the reward accorded
to her Majesty's Ministers for—well, frankly now,
For Wtsat So far as we can understand—for
three things. And those three things as diff,rent
the one from the other as they are each and all of
them, as Ministerial achievements, absolutely un-
deniable.

Firstly, then—in regard to the Home Policy of
England—for doing—Nothing !
Secondly, and very conspicuously, indeed,
achieved as this Ministerial feat has been under
the observation of the whole wide word—secondly,
we say, in regard to the Foreign Policy of Eng-
land—by contriving with wonderful skill, after
the fashicn of Bottom the Weaver, to induce
the British Lion for once to roar like any sucking
dove

Thirdly and finally—" the third'' here, is truth,
" being the charm," or, to express the fact yet more
plainly, this third being, quite indisputably, a
" clincher"—thirdly, we say, and finally, Minis-
ters have just now won their reward by according
to the Houae of Commons a reprieve 1 Obtaining
is return—from the Reprieved House—upon the
reciprocity principle, as a sort of a qua pro quo—a
welcome reprieve also for themselves.

Voila tout ! Here, in those three all-sufficient
reasons, the whole secret is fairly out—and Minis-
ters still in ! They retain office for another half.
year, undisputedly and unconditionally they retain
it—For not giving the coup de grace to the Mori-
bund Parliament ! For (wonderful to tell !) in-
ducing the British Lion (of all animals in the
world !) for once—under the marvellous influence of
that Political Van Ambnrgh, Earl RUSSELL—to roar,
as we have already expressed it in the words of
BOTTOM the Weaver (Earl RUSSELL'S, prototype,
wherwise crede Lord DERBY !)—to roar you
like any sucking dove ! Ministers, more-
over, retaining office thus, for half-a-year
longer as the especial reward of merit fur
doing—nothing ! As for the foreign policy of the
Cabinet—weil, the egregious failure of that espe-
cially and from beginning to end, is a fact long and
long ego perfectly notorious. It is printed
in only too legible charac'ers upon the
ample folio pages of a weary succession of blue-
books. It has been proclaimed only too audibly
in the one Great Debate of this recent session—
and proclaimed there, not by any means alone, from
the side of the Conservative Opposition ! The
sarcastic irony, nay, more than that, the openly ex
pressed cendemnation of the Foreign Policy of
the Government, coming more plainly than from
the lips of any one of the Tory members, from those
of the so-called Liberal Independents sitting on the
Government side of the House immediately below
the gangway Although but one of those Liberal
Independents, it is true, proved himself afterwards
consistent alike in his irony and in his condemna-
tion (Mr. BERNAL OSBORNE, to wit) by abstaining
altogether from taking any part at all in the
ultimate delivery of the Verdict of the House of
Commons by means of the Division. It was
especially and distinctly of the Foreign Policy of
Ministers, as that Foreign Policy had even then
become
apparent, that the Earl of DEhBT, a ,
the very commencement of the session, pronounced
sententiously and alliteratively that it was, from
first to last, definable only as an ex-
traordinary combination of " meddle and mud-
dle." Not alone, however, was the Con-
servative Chieftain's happy phrase, when so speak-
ing, applicable to the Foreign Policy of Her
MAJESTY'S Government. Of the whole complex
fabric of their
policy—Domestic es well as Foreign
—we might say, as
truthfully as STEPHEN
BLACKPOOL used to say in "Hard Times"—especi-
illy hard times to him, as they are now (let us sug-
gest by way of example) to Danes and to Reformers!
—as STEPHEN BLACKPOOL used to sty in " Hard
Times," of all things in general, and of everything

in particular—so now quite as truthfully might
we say, not of the Foreign policy alone
but of the whole Policy, Home as well as Foreign,
of her MAJESTY'S Government—" It's aw a
muddle !" But, so far as Ministers themselves are
concerned, it is evidently a muddle after all that
answers. It answers their purpose at least—by
keeping them in office—if it answers nobody
else's. If, let us say for instance, it in
no way answers, as it certainly does
not, the purpose, the very comprehensible
purpose of those amongst us English who care very
much—for the rational furtherance and develop-
ment (not hushing up and shelving) of the prin.
ciples of Reform—for the energetic progress of a
recognisable aad appreciable system of Legislation
—for— the Honour of this country ! That
Honour that used to be cared for at
one time (say in the days of the great Earl of
ClltiTmat) but apparently won't pay just now!
Now, when England's sceptre is lengthening out
into the semblance of a yard measure, and the globe
borne in the left hand of the Sovereign, is held
there no longer as a lordly symbol of power,
but as a mere sordid test as a metal weight
ready to be thrown into our huckstering scales as
a practical something weighing so much avoir-
dupois ! Yes, all this, no doubt, as a transforma-
tion of things here, in England, may be
very mean and very paltry—may be what we in
our national vain glory have been accustomed
to talk of hitherto as " un•English"—but_we
repeat, it evidently, in spite of all our objections,
somehow or another answers. It answers
the purpose of the House of Commons, and
it answers the purpose of Her Majesty's Govern-
ment. They mutually accord to each other, as we
have intimated, a snug little comfortable reprieve.
Perish all that old•fashioned miserable rubbish
about the Honour of England, and so forth—all that
wretched trumpery that has cost us so much both of
gold and treasures in the maintenance of it, in the
vindication of it, against every possible antagonist,
even against that mightiest of all antagonists,
that greater than CESAR, and ALEXANDER, and
CHARLEMAGNE, the Great NAPOLEON ! Rather
than that—says the Ministry, and Ditto to the
ignoble cry Says the House of Commons

rather than any further bosh about the Honour of
England—let us see, henceforth, in regard to any
questions—Will it Pay ? is it—whatever the ques-
tion before us may be—ls it one that is likely
to affect—not that stuff and nonsense, Oar Hon-
our but—Our Pockets, Our Balance at the Bankers,
Our Own Sense of Ease, Our Own Ideas of
Respectability. Hearing this, seeing this, mus-
ing over this—the cry of our very heart and
conscience seems to be instinctively, 0, for One
Hour of the Earl of Chatham !

The result of the trial at Guildford of the engine-
driver and stoker for manslaughter in the recent
accident at Egham has given general satisfaction.
Tire public are not to be deceived by so palpable
a pretext as the implied culpable negligence of the
driver, whose real fault, if any, lay in the too
faithful discharge of the company's reprehensible
instructions. In the " good old times" such a mode
of extricating themselves from a difficulty might
have succeeded, but those days are past, and
public opinion will no more sanction the unjust
imprisonment of an engine-driver to shield a rail-
way conspiny than it will the murder of an Ad-
miral to save an Administration. As the case at
present stands the company have not improved
matters by the evidence produced at the late trial.
It would have bee❑ far better to have made a virtue
of uteuesity and admitted that the arrangements
for the truffle were faulty, rather than have ob-
stinately maintained that they were sufficient for
public safety in the face of what had actually taken
place. As it was, three witnesses, on cross-exami-
nation, were compelled to contradict their own
statements, and Mr. Sergeant BALLANTINE elicited
some startling disclosures, which produced much
laughter by their absurdity, aithongh the conse-
quences were too serious for merriment, In the
examination of Mr. STRAPP, the resident engineer,
that gentleman admitted that the practice of run-
ning engine-tenders first or backwards was
objectionable, and that there being no turntable al
Ascot the practice was unavoidable. He owned
further that telegraphic notice was not given of the
starting and arrival of the trains, which he consi-
dered unnecessary for public safety, although it was
practised in the case of Royal trains. In fact, said
Sergeant BALLANTINE, you use the telegraph whe❑
you particularly desire to save people's lives, but not
otherwise. Mr GODSON, the traffic manager, ad-
mitted that instructions had been given to the ser-
vants of the company which the arrangements of
traffic rendered the fulfilment of impossible. Plate
layers were stationed along the line with directions
to show the danger sigiral (a red flag) for five
minutes after every train had passed, and then the
caution signal (a green flag) for five minutes more,
and after ten minutes had elapsed the all right
signal (a white flag). According to this arrange-
ment, had the ordinary rule of the company been
followed, the accident would not have happened.
'The drivers of trains are strictly ordered to stop at
once when they see the danger signal; but on the
day of the accident, when extra care and precaution
should have been taken, this rule was set aside, and
the engine drivers were ordered not to step
when they saw the red flag, but to go on
with caution. Of what use, then, was the green
flag ? Now, although the red flag was to be
shown for five minutes—l.e., while there was
danger, and the regulations implied that ten
minutes should intervene between the trains, they
were started at irregular intervals of five minutes,
in fact as fast as they were filled, so that the danger
signal Was constantly flying. It was the old story
of the cry of " Wolf," for when the actual danger
was at hand there was no means of imparting infor-
mation to the driver. This was one of the causes
of the accident, and Mr. GODSON was so hard
pressed by Sergeant BALLANTINE that he was
actually forced to admit the startling inference
drawn by the learned gentleman regarding the
special rule as to stoppage, " as combined with the
construction that the red signal was not to be taken
es meaning 'stop.' " He asked, sarcastically, when
the conjoint effect of the special regulations was not
merely this, that the second train would run into
the previous one a little less violently than it other•
wise would and kill and wound a smaller number
of persons. 'Well might Justice WILLES inquire
with surprise, if the witness was serious in his ad-
mission, and although the witness said he was not,
he gave no explanation. The real cause of the
accident, however, was not in the signals, though
that was probably more by luck than management.
In the present instance nobody seems to have tried
to stop the second train, though had they
wished to do so we do not see how it could
have been done. The danger signal was up,
but the driver had orders not to obey
it. The actual cause was tare culpable,
nay, almost insane act of starting one train, with
orders to stop at Egham, and another train, five
minutes afterwards, with orders not to stop there,
informing neither driver of the orders given to the
other. In our opinion the coroner's jury were wrong
in their verdict of manslaughter against the driver