The Sun.
London, England, 1863-03-05 00:00:00

THERMOMETER.

Highest since Noon yesterday 56
Lowest during the night 9• ••
This day at Noon

Barometer-29.79.
Wind—Southerly; light, with fine weather.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
TR ts DAT.—ltlorning, 2h. 14 tn.—Aft ernoon, 2h. 31m.
To •atonnow.-Morning, 2b. 49m.—Afternoon, 3h. 4m.

HE WEDDING SUN.

ON TUESDAY, 10TH MARCH,

Will be published

AN EXTRAORDINARY EDITION CF

The Amt.
SUPERBLY PRINTED IN COLOURS,

With Illustrations by the First Artists.

THE SUN OF TIIAT DAY,

Altogether unprecedented in Newspaper

Printing,

Will contain.

MEMOIRS of the PRINCE and PRINCESS,
IN DANISH AS WELL AS IN ENGLISH.

wrrn
A Full Account of the Marriage Ceremony.

(Terms for Advertisements, One Shilling per Line.)

Price of the Wedding Sun, 6d.; Stamped, 7d.
Orders received by all Newsagents, and at THE SUN
Office, 112, Strand, W.C.

4,7!
Zig sitt4E-14"1: ul-1

LONDON, THURSDAY, MARCH 5, 1863.

In the House of Commons yesterday afternoon,
Mr. HADFIELD moved the third reading of the
Qualification for Offices Abolition Bill, and the mo-
tion was seconded by Mr. BAINES. Mr. NEwDE-
GATE, in moving as an amendment that the bill be
read a third time that day six months, argued that
as a certain class of dissenters were anxious to de-
spoil the Established Church, such restrictions as
now existed, and which the bill proposed to remove,
were absolutely necessary.
Mr. SELWYN seconded the amendment.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER supported
the measure, contending that in the year 1828 Earl
Russell was justified in adopting the declaration
which constituted the qualification referred to in
the bill ; but times were changed. He was confi-
dent there was no benefit to eithi r Church or Dis-
senters in retaining such a statute, and he thought
it should be got rid of.
Mr. WALPOLE opposed the bill as insignificant.
The Dissenters had unfortunately, some of them
from conscientious motives, others with the avowed
design of attacking the Church, brought forward
so many sweeping measures, that they had raised a
formidable resistance.

Mr. FORSTER having addressed the House in
favour of the bill, and Mr. NEWDEGATE having
replied briefly, the House divided, when the third
reading was carried by a majority of three only—
the ❑umbers being 175 to 172. The bill was accord-
ingly-passed.
Mr. L. KING moved the committal of the Register
of Voters Bill, the principal object of which was the
publication of an alphabetically arranged list of
'voters. The motion was opposed by Mr. HOWES,
but upon a division was agreed to by 129 to 104.
The bill was then passed through committee.
The motion for going into committee on the
Salmon Fisheries (Ireland) Bill led to a long de-
bate, in the course of which Lord FER3IOY moved
as an amendment that the bill be referred to a
select committee.

Mr. Cox (deputy chairman of the Irish Society)
expressed the sentiments of that body, and sup-
ported the bill, on the ground that if it were
passed the rapid increase of salmon would shortly
indemnify them for any loss they might sustain.
Sir R. PEEL having supported the motion for
going into committee,
Mr. HA SSARD, amid cries of "Divide," moved
the adjournment of the debate, which being
seconded by Major Edwards, was agreed to, and
the matter stands over till Wednesday the 25th
instant. _ _ _

...—___
p
Leave was given to Mr. COLLINS to bring in a
bill to further limit and define the time ro
ceedin to election during the recess; also a bill to
define and render uniform the mode of measuring
the residence required for electors in cities and
boroughs.
The house adjourned at a few minutes before six
o'clock.

The narrow majority which carried the third
reading of the Qualification for Offices Abolition
Bill last evening will probably occasion some sur-
prise. The retention of such obsolete old statutes,
remnants of the bigoted intolerance of former gene-

rations, is at best profitless, and more frequently
mischievous in its effects. According to Mr.
HADFIELD the declaration in qustion, notwith-
standing the severe penalties attached to
its omission, is not made in nine cases out of ten,
, and he positively asserts that for the last 30 years
none of the highest officers of State have signed.
Where then can be the use of retaining such an
utterly useless act. The answer to Mr. WALPOLE'S
query, Why do you propose it ? is readily met.
The measure is proposed in order:to get rid of a cum-
bersome and obsolete act, originally passed to re-
place the shameful Test Act, whose abolition was
so hotly contested by a former generation. When
we remember the opposition made to that very
necessary reform, we shall most of us be willing to
admit that the restrictions thought indispensable
by the Legislators of that day, may be totally
unsuited to the increased enlightenment and
toleration of our own times. It is diffi•
cult to see on what grounds the opposition
to it is founded. The most eager enthusiasts for
the welfare of the Church of England could
scarcely suppose such a statute added to her
dignity or influence. The most fearful and anxious
of the guardians of her wealth and power could
hardly insult her by the supposition that such a
regulation contributed much to her authority.
There would be very little concern expressed by
the great body of the English public were a Catholic,
or a Dissenter elevated to the highest official dig-
nities. It would be felt that there were safeguards
social, political, and religious in plenty
for all that Englishmen cared to preserve,
and that it would be very unlikely that
these gentlemen would, in accordance with ancient
suspicions, upon their elevation, forthwith attempt
to undermine the hard-won liberties of England.
Why then should we retain this Qualification for
Offices Act ? The crowding of our Statute Bock
by extinct or useless laws, the retention of acts
which we never intend to put in force, is not the
way to secure respect either for our religion or our
legislation. Surely it is time these petty insults
to our fellow-citizens were swept into de-
served oblivion ; that churchmen should have
more confidence in their church than to de-
clare it rests upon such fragile foundations, or is
propped by such tottering supports. The speech
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer last night was
strongly in support of the measure, which the
member for the University of Oxford could hardly
advocate if it were really prejudicial to the inte-
rests of the establishment. Tests and qualifications
of this kind belong to a bygone age, the age that
insisted on the retention of Catholic disabilities,
and denied the Jews the rights of citizens. It
has been found by the experience of every suc-
ceeding age that they are worse than useless, for
the over-scrupulous men who might refuse
them would be very safe officials, while the crafty,
dishonest, or unscrupulous candidate, whose
appointment might really be attended with danger,
would certainly not hesitate to pronounce a brief
formula. We regret to see so much opposition
manifested to so desirable and, at the same time, so
harmless a measure, and only trust the Lords will
have too much good sense to reject it. There
is one fact that might teach the in-
tolerant a lesson if they were not almost
hopeless scholars; It is that it has never
been found neceesary or even desirable to retrace
any step in favour of toleration. Often have rulers, I
statesmen, and peoples rued the fierce and relent-
less strifes into which intolerance has drawn them ;
often have reluctant concessions been extorted from
unwilling Administrations; but our whole expe-
rience confirms the fact that to broaden our legis-
lation is to advance our social and religious progress;
that every fresh struggle successfully terminated
increases our security, our prosperity, our
internal wellbeing. This is not a land or an age
when oaths and restrictions are needed to make men
do their duty to their country. Let us hope that it
is not a time when we shall consent to retain on our
statute book rules and regulations strictly specified
which are never put in practice, and whose prin
ciples all men of common sense and enlightenmen
would strongly disavow.

On going into Committee of Supply this evening
on the Navy Estimates, Mr. COBDEN is " to call
attention to the large number of obsolete vessels of
war in the British Navy, and to offer some observa-
tions on the conduct of our naval administration
which has produced this state of things"—and a fine
1 field he has for trying his logic of facts. The num-
ber of vessels built long ago and put aside from the
fancy of successive controllers of the Navy, is
mainly due to the system—one Board of Ad-
miralty superseding another, undoing the
work of its predecessor. Hence the accummula-
tion till our harbours are almost choked
up with ships that become obsolete only because
they are not kept in employ while new ones are
being built to supply the place of those which are
not wanted ! If we had a Board of Admiralty not
subject to be turned out with every change of Ad-
ministration, these anomalies would not occur.
The working board, being permanent, would
become responsible for its conduct, and an efficient
navy would be the consequence, at a cost, perhaps,
less than half of what we have been paying,
simply for wasting the public money. No wonder,
then, that the dockyards are charged with the
faults of others. The people there employed have no
power to remonstrate, nor, indeed, would it be their
interest to quarrel with those who employ them.
Besides it would be a breach of discipline, as well
as of duty to themselves. Bat all this comes of
patronage—and patronage is both the bane and
antidote of party. The evil is born of power, and
will be continued by whichever is in office at the
national cost. 'We think that if one half the ships
lying idle, or perhaps Lome of those now become 1
unseaworthy, had been sold out of the service years
ago, our Navy would be more efficient, though less
in nominal strength. And now that a change is
taking place in the material from wocd to iron, see
what a treasure we have amassed of property ren-
dered almost unavailable for further use! This is
really too much of a good thing.

Some infatuation seems to pervade the conduct
of all those who take upon themselves to arrange
the plan and supervise the details of the Royal Pro-
cession. As fast as one difficulty is adjusted
another springs up ; and the last news is that the
civic portion of tha shOw will not be permitted to
proceed with the rest after Temple Bar. There is no
reason given for this arrangement that seems at all
valid ; and even if it were more convenient
for them to take their departure at that
place, the disappointment that this deci-
sion will cause to many should have in-
duced the authorities to forego their own ideas on
the question. The motive which seems to actuate
tehelem.inds of thoce who settle these arrangements is
to get it over, and be done with it as quickly as pos-
ib"Why this notion should have taken posses-
81°11 of their minds it is difficult to say, since such
an event does not, except under peculiar circum-
stances, occur more than once in a generation.
It is not likely that many who see
this procession will live to welcome
another Prince of WALES on his bridal march.
Why then should the public be disappointed in so

many immaterial ways ? This opposition is in
such bad taste, and when any particular thing has
been made the subject of angry debate, and the
ground of fierce discussion, even if the point is
yielded at last, the grace of the gift is gone,
and the prevailing sentiment is that of annoyance.
All that can tend to heighten the attraction, and
increase the adornment of the procession ought,
surely, to be welcomed ; but it seems to be ordered
otherwise. The inconvenience that may arise from
the civic portion having to turn back will be felt
just as much as at present arranged, for the LORD
MAYOR and his followers will have to turn back
and pass beside the rest of the procession. It
seems quite incredible that such arbitrary rules
should be laid down, and such stringent regulations
enforced, when the professed object is to give
a grand national holiday, and make the occasion of
welcomin g our future Queen for ever memorable with
those who witness it. Such an opportunity as has
now offered, seldom presents itself to Ministers, and
they seem resolved to throw away every chance of
ingratiating themselves, either because they are in-
different to public opinion, or else consider them-
selves independent of it. They should remember
that wiser and greater men than they are have
counted it among their highest honours
to wiu the favour of the community at large.
When Queen ANNE asked her Minister what it
would cost her to enclose the three parks, that
statesman impressively replied, it will cost your
Majesty three Crowns. Perhaps our Government
may find one day that their churlishness and un-
graciousness in this affair has cost them too dear.
It is the more inexcusable, because it is evidently
in direct contradiction to the public concuct of
the SOVEREIGN, who has always been dis-
tinguished for her affable demeanour, and taken
the greatest possible care on every occasion of public
rejoicing or processions to let all her subjects have
a chance of seeing her. To please every one is im-
possible, we all know ; but why should the wishes
of so many be studiously disregarded, the entreaties
of others be neglected, and the requests that have
been made in various directions decidedly refused ?
These questions cannot now be answered; but,
apart from all political considerations, an event that
belongs to history should be met•in an appropriate
spirit, and treated in a congenial manner. It is to be
trusted that the general feeling will be that of
satisfaction among the thousands who will flock to
welcome their Prince and Princess ; but the particu-
lar impression in many quarters will be a protest
against those who abased the power entrusted to
them, by setting up false standards of propriety,
and urging the desirableness of most undesirable
speed, and curtailing the show of a procession that
at the utmost length would have been over all too
soon for those who spent so much time and trouble
in seeking to do it honour.

The progress of legislation seems to be brought
to a dead lock for a time, and will probably so re-
main until after Easter, when some definite prin•
ciple will be propounded to test the pulse of party
strength. At present public faith seems to be
lapped in the Elysium of matrimonial expectancy.
Reform that was so long in the ascendant has been
turned out of favour just as its advocates got into
place. Lord PALMERSTON said but the other day,
as DE WITT said of old, that the best way to get on
with work was to do one thing at a time,
and he practices that principle almost exclusively
for the benefit of those who may one day return
the favours. He works in a circle of ambiguity,
professing much but performing little for the
public requirements in the way of sound legis-
lation. Hence the doubt engendered as to his
sincerity in reforming abuses of long standing
and crying out for speedy correction. Half mea-
sures produce little good, and palliatives serve but
to beguile. What is wanted is a thorough honest
investigation, probing to the core. Evasion
serves but to beget suspicion of insincerity in
the cause, and even where the purpose is
straightforward, the mode pursued in carrying it
out still provokes the doubt that there is no heart
in the business. This has been evidenced on more
than one occasion since the commencement of the
present session, and bids fair to continue, party
connivance duly permitting.
But we do not accuse the noble lord of personal
feeling in the matter. It is the legacy bequeathed
by his predecessors in the affairs of State; but when
a man of his long experience undertakes to mend
the ways of those who preceded him in office, it
looks questionable how little progress is made
and attention is diverted by an appearance
of show, while little is really done. Let one take
a glance at the past since the present Ministry took
office by storm under the mask of Reform,
and what has been the result of their patriotic
labours. They had not only snatched the cards out
of the hands of others who were dealing a fair
game, but they so shuffled the pack that the very
thing they promised evaporated, as if by legerde-
main, and the public were left in bewilderment at
the duplicity of the trick. They were so alarmed
at the honest progress of their rivals that rather
than let them do a good thing, they would, in
patriotic ardour, perform a much better, and in the
end contrived to strangle the child of their adop-
tion. And that's the way they do these things for
the public good.

But that sort of game cannot be permitted to
go on for ever. Public necessity requires that the
march of improvement should quicken its steps.
Deeds, not words, must be the order of the day.
That much is wanted to be done is admitted by
all parties; and if it will not suit the convenience
of one, another may find its interest in a due per-
formance of the duty, When the public become
impatient of excuses, and have too good reason to
express dissatisfaction, there is some hope for the
country ; but not till then.