The Sun.
London, England, 1864-07-30 00:00:00

eljt _„.

LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 30, 1864.

Few persons, we should imagine, will be much
inclined to regret the close of the late session, whose
interest for the general public had completely died
out with the great struggle of a few weeks since.
But, nevertheless, the very abrupt termination of it
has taken a good many by surprise, and excited
sums displeasure. The Ministerial whitebait feast
closely precedes, as we all know, the final disper*
si°a of the Parliamentary combatants, but why so
much mystery and uncertainty should be suffered to
surround the actual date fixed for the prorogation
has puzzled some people. At first no day was
mentioned, it was only announced that the day was
close at hand, but presently an intimation appeared
in a semi-official organ that this day (Saturday) was
to be the one finally decided on. The very mem-
bers themselves Were left in doubt ; so late as
Thursday evening Lord CHELMSFORD found it
necesiiary to ask when the great event was to come
cff, to 'Which appeal the Lord Chancellor replied that
the prorogation would take place on the following
day. Lord REDESDALB expressed his regret at
learning this fact, since some bills had come up from
the Commons which it would, consequently, be
impossible to consider. it appeared, from further
observations mad© by the noble lord later in the
evening, that up .to Wednesday there was
no idea that on Friday the Houses would be
prorogued, and on the minutes of the
Houses was a notice that a judgment would
be given on Saturday. The amendments to
the Railway Construction Facilities Bill, which

Among the many contradictory statements and
anomalous maxims laid down now-a-days by those
who seem to be inaugurating a new state of things
both in the foreign and domestic policy of this
country, there has bean no rule laid down which
should provoke more criticism or give rise to more
censure than that of the Attorney-Generals for
England and Ireland, that after a certain time has
elapsed, the claim for redress must be held invalid
and untenable. This is a view of the case which is
thoroughly un-English, and which ought not for a
moment to be tolerated. In the first place it strikes
at the root of all the principles of justice, and holds
out a temptation to the oppressor to pursue his
plans of iniquity and continue in his course of perjury
and prevarication, secure that after a time all
restitution will be put out of the question, and all
demands made will be unattended to. It is one of
those dexterous shuffles and convenient species of
jugg'ery, which those who represent the
laws of the country, as the cfficers of the
Crown, should never stoop to employ. It
makes their case bad, indeed, if this is the best
they can say for it. It is to be hoped that this
matter will not be suffered to rest in the unsatisfac-
tory state into which it has been placed by this
startling enunciation of repressive doctrines, but
that next session the case of Mr.lnwtst may be again
brought forward, and if it is proved that injustice
has been done to him, that the House will insist on
cognisance being taken of his wrongs, It is well
known how all in office delight in making use of
all possible delay ; whenever it is at all practicable,
they invariably interpose endless obstacles in the
way of all unfortunate petitioners, claimants, and
others who advocate the cause of friends or consti-
tuents. This idea of " limitation as to redress'' will
certainly add another irresistible inducement to
those in authority to pursue their shuffling course
still more fully, in the hope and expectation that
by dint of this year lost in excuse, the next in
denial, and so on the time may pass and the period
for redress elapse before anything definite is done.
It is high time that such a scandalous mode of
procedure and eo contemptible a device should meet
with the reprobation that it deserves, The law
teams with all sorts of inconsistencies and abounds
in hard and harsh measures which often militate in
practice most completely against the theories which
it professedly is bound to uphold ; but, really, this
new-fangled notion bids fair to take the lead of all
cruel and unfair statutes. It is not the way to
make citizens respect the laws of the State to let
them see such a perversion and mockery of justice,
advocated by the men who represent the majesty of
the law in the Legislature of the land, and are the
adNisers of the Crown and the directors of the Go- ,
vernment in cases of emergency. If it be strictly
true, which no one believes, that this harsh statute
of a limitation as to redress is in reality in existence
among us, and if its use interferes with the desires
which should reign paramount in the minds of al;
members of the Government, to render the fullest
restitution to all who have sustained injuries, small
or great, then, it is evident what course it is the
duty of the authorities to pursue. They bliQUild