The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-26 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TlMES.—There is hardly a financial,question that
goes so deep into our domestic institutions EIS the
history of the Malt Tax. It is a question that con-
cerns every farmer, every considerable householder,
and every employer of labour. The history goes
back very far, and there is not an agricultural so-
ciety or a market table in the country in which the
tax is not frequently alluded to with the most un-
affected feeling of hardship. The farmer feels for a
thirsty man, and would gladly give his labourers,
or his harvest people, a better beverage than the
pale and watery stuff which is all that he can now
afford. Everybody would like to be independent
both of the brewer and the exciseman ; and there
are few village households that do not possess a
knowledge of brewing above their opportunities of
putting it in practice. It is the old wine of Eng-
land, as old as any civilisation among us ; and if,
as our antiquaries tell us, the Rowans natu-
ralised the vine, that plant never prospered after
they. left us to our fate, and was speedily superseded
by -Sir John Barleycorn. Our financiers gaze with
incredulity and envy at the immense figures to
which the consumption of good ale attained a cen-
tury and a half ago, when England was not a third
so populous as it now is, or a twentieth part so rich.
The good people of those days must have cared
more for good liquor than even good cheer, and for
both more then finery. All classes must have had
a large daily allowance of beer. To be sure, it stood
instead of tea and coffee, end sugar, of wine and
spirits. The jug of beer went round many a house-
hold where now you would see two decanters of
divers-coloured liquids making their appearance day
after day, with the water line, if we may so call it,
slowly sinking down to zero. Perhaps the new
custom is better than the old, but rough hospitality
has a charm unknown to the superfine habits of
these days. Ale was always called the Englishman's
drink. He was always proud to have it good, and to
be able to drink it himself and give it to all who had
done him a service and shown themselves his friends.
So we don't wonder at the agriculturists always
returning to the charge, and asking their never
ending, still beginning question about that Malt
Tax. You may drive out nature with a hay-fork,
says the old moralist, but she will come back again
still. So, here are the farmers and the farmers'
friends still at their old agitation for the reduction
of the Malt Tax. The argument this time is also an
old one; it has been advanced any number of times
within the memory of man ; experiments have been
made, and committees have reported on it. It is
quite clear that the agriculturists are no; yet con-
vinced. They say that this is a question of cattle
as well as of man. Cows and sheep like malt or
wetted barley, and thrive upon it. They fatten on
nothing better. Candid and intelligent farmers
affirm this most positively, and say they have tried
it. One would bave thought that everybody who
felt an interest in the question would have tried the
experiment of feeding a certain number of cattle on
malt, and an equal number on some other favourite
food. Agriculture is an experimental science, and
is learning something new every day. Sir F. Kelly
is remembered to have once stretched a point in
medical jurisprudence, but he would hardly amuse
the House of Commons with a positive receipt for
the quick fattening of cattle, it' he did not know
something about it. He pledges himself deliberately
to the nutritive qualities of malt and its value to the
feeder of cattle. It he says truly, than it is clear
England is losing a great advantage placed by
nature at her feet, and carelessly thrown away.
Barley is a hardy plant ; it can stand longer delays
and greater exposure to changing weather than
most other crops, and a summer that would almost
destroy wheat will take little more than the colour
out of barley. What will not do for brewing
will do for cattle. Sir F. Kelly, whose views on this
subject are endorsed byCol. Barttelot and Mr. Ben-
tinck, does not tell us the precise nature of the de-
velopment produced upon cattle fattened on malt,
Nor is it necessary that he should do this. If malt
will make an animal fat, that is enough. It is true
tbat many of us think beef and mutton fat enough,
and suspect that fat meat is a swindle between the
cook, the butcher, and the tallow-chandler. But that
is wholly beside this question. We assume it to be
an object to fatten beasts quickly and young, so as
to convert them as soon as possible into a saleable
commodity. The man who can make a sheep
thirteen months old assume the weight and form
of one a twelvemonth older is pronounced a public
benefactor. We conclude that Sir F. Kelly and
Mr. Bentinck have seen this done upon malt,
and wish the process to be cheapened and made
general. Of course there are other questions which
cannot be lost sight of. There are the taxes on tea
and coffee, and upon spirits. We must have the
money, and the money must be levied with as much
fairness as possible. Beer contributes too large a
sum to the Treasury to be carelessly tampered with
So malt must pay its share, since there must be
taxes. If it can be shown that a malt tax becomes
incidentally a meat tax, and that any important
branch of husbandry is actually fettered and in-
jute d by this tax, it would be worth while to find
out some way of malting for cattle that should pre-
vent the chance of fraud. The egriculturists them-
selves do not suggest the substitution of a beer-tax
for a malt-tax, which would certainly save the
trouble of distinguishing between malt for brewing
and malt for cattle. They see that quality, not quan-
tity, is the thing to be taxed. So we must look else-
where for the protection of the revenue. We can-
not, however, afford to lose a source of national
wealth simply because the officers of Excise will
have a difficulty in preventing it from being misap-
plied. Our agricultural societies, our cattle shows,
and the wonderful displays of butcher's meat with
which an English Christmas is celebrated, will
testify to the value of feeding. It is also the most
gentlemanly branch of farming. Let us, then, make
the most of it, and endeavour to save gentleman
farming from the reproach of unprofitableness. It
is now one of the most expensive amusements. Per-
haps we shall have to thank Str F. Kelly and Mr.
Bentinck, at least, for cheapening it.
POST.--It is not to be wondered at that the great
European Powers should undertake to settle the
of airs of Poland without consulting what is now
styled " the National Government' of that coun-
try. In the first place, it would be rather difficult
to find that institution ; and in the second, when
found, it would not be considered to possess any of
the qualifications which would justify official inter-
course with constituted Governments. Neverthe-
less the views of the National Government with
reference to the negotiations now penning are of the
highest importance, and we are therefore glad to
have it in our power to lay before our readers the
three conditions under which alone an armistice
would be consented to by the Polish National Go-
vernment. They are as follow : —l. The armistice
must extend throughout the whole Kingdom of
Poland as it existed previous to the first division in
1772. 2. A plenipotentiary on the part of the
National Government must be admitted to defend
the interests of Poland at the conference. 3. A
national diet, composed of delegates from the pro-
vinces, as well as from the Kingdom of Poland,
must meet under the gurantee not merely of Europe
but also of the national army which occupies all the
provinces. If these conditions are not complied
with, our information goes on to say, the Poles will
hold out to the last. Such being the temper of
that nation, we can hardly expect Russia to accept
the proposal for an armistice. With every desire
to do so, it would be impossible for her to suspend
hostilities if the Poles do not. Are the Powers
prepared to grant a conference upon the remaining
propositions, supposing that Russia should consent
to one, without an armistice as a preliminary con-
dition ? It is by no means certain, or even likely,
that she will do so; but the contingency being pos-
sible is worthy of consideration. The peace of
Europe and the interests of humanity being at
stake, would a conference under such conditions
secure the one or advance the other ? We venture
to think not. The same atrocities which we now
daily record would continue to be perpetrated, and
one of two results would arise. Either, which is
most improbable, Russia et ould concede the de-
mands of the Powers, in which case the conces-
sions granted to Poland would enable her to make
a much more successful campaign next year than
she has this; or the Russian Government, foreseeing
this, would break off negotiations as the season ad-
vanced and as the chances of the insurgents became
desperate, in which case the conference had better
never have taken place at all. With every desire
to find a pacific solution to the question, it will not
do to ignore the fact that the National Government
have it in their power to thwart the efforts of the
Powers in this direction. It is very natural that
they should say, "We will not submit to any
arrangement which may be imposed upon us
against our will. If we are excluded from taking
part in a conference we will continue hostilities,
and every concession which may be granted in
our favour at any such conference we will take
advantage of to secure the only result which will be
ultimately satisfactory—namely, our national inde-
pendence." The
proposals we have made to the
"
Cabinet of St. Petersburg are really an effort of
diplomacy in its favour. If they fail in consequence
of the determined attitude of the National Govern
went, the Russians have only themselves to thank
for it; had they, instead of driving the Po es to the
position of stubborn resistance which acts of bar-
barism and atrocity have justified them in assuming,
adopted a more humane and civilised policy, the
Poles would have been more easily appeased, and
Europe, apprecirtieg the difficulties with which the
Emperor has had to contend, might have interfered
in his behalf to some purpose. But how can we
exert ourselves to extricate the Czar from his em-
barrassment when such acts are being perpetrated
as are recorded in the private letter of a Polish

nobleman which will be found elsewhere in our
columns. Inasmuch, then, as in the opinion of the
Poles a conference from which they would be ex-
cluded could lead to co result, and inasmuch as by
r.-fusing to suspend hostilities they are determined
to render any such conference impracticable, it will
become necessary for the Powers to agree upon some
collective form of subsequent action. The indica-
tions which we have received from Paris do not
leave us in much doubt as to the readiness of the
Emperor to co-operate with us ; but the hsavieat
responsibility will devolve upon Austria, because
she has most to lose, most to gamin, and is in a posi-
tion to make her influence felt more decidedly than
either of the Western Powers. It is to be hoped,
therefore, that should France and England deem a
conference impossible without an armistice, Austria
would not refuse upon that ground to continue with
them in united diplomatic action, or hesitate, if the
infatuated policy of Russia rendered still stronger
measures necessary, to throw into the scale a weight
which might secure peace to Europe, or at any rate
render any prolonged resistance to so strong an
alliance impossible. We are far from wishing to
predict a European war, but we can imagine a
combination which would render such a war rather
a name than a reality. There is no reason why
it should consist in anything very much more
serious than the breaking off of diplomatic relations.
If Austria allowed the free transport of arms and
munitions of war across her Galician frontier, and
placed a corps darinee of 60,000 men in Galicia it-
self, and if the Russian fleet were blockaded in the
Baltic, so as to keep open the coast of Samogitia,
the Poles could do the rest for themselves. There is
no reason why any European power should send a
soldier abroad. It would, in other words, merely
am..unt to m king a ring and seeing fair play. It
is possible that Sweden might undertake operations
for her own behoof, but there could be no moral
obligation either upon France or England to do
more than make a naval demonstration. It is with
no desire to see any such consummation arrive that
we allude to these contingencies, but it is as well
that the bugbear of a European war, such as might
possibly arise out of the present complicatiens should
be reduced to its proper proportions. It is, more-
over, because we do not wish to be exposed to the
charge of " drifting into war," as though we were
the mere sport of circumstances, that we point out
the direction of those currents into which, for the
sake of certain great principles, we may, when the
time comes, deliberately steer. All foreign inter-
vention on the part of this country is an ineonveni-
ence. Could we avoid it consistently with our
position in Europe and our duty as a great Power,
bound by treaties and fettered by moral ooliga
tions, there can be no doubt that in a purely sel-
fish point of view it would be our interest to do so.
Our policy abroad, then, generally resolves itself
into a choice of evils. IF the alternative of assum-
ing a hostile attitude towards any one European
Power is dingle cable, it is less so when all Europe
is with us and the cause is one of justice and hums
nity. If we had from the first out break of the Po-
lish insurrection refused to take any cognisance of
it whatever, which was the only other course open
to us, we should have been false not merely to the
liberal principles we profess but to the actual obli-
gations imposed upon us by treaty. In this respect
the analogy fails between the case of Poland and
that of the Southern States of America, whose in-
pendent national character we never stipulated in
a treaty should be maintained. If the course we
have followed should lead to a rupture with a great
European Power, we shall at least feel that we
have exhausted every means furnished by diplo-
macy to avert it ; and that while the cause justifies
an active sympathy, the conditions under which
that sympathy will be displayed are such as will
secure a triumph to ourselves and freedom to a
suffering and heroic nation.
HERALD.—Her Majesty's Government are in no
haste to make public the award of the King of the
Belgians in the dispute with Brazil. The substance
of his Majesty's decision has been communicated to
Europe some 48 hours. The very words in which
judgment is delivered have been given ; yet, when
Mr. Bright asked a very simple question about it,
he was required to give notice, and when he re-
peated his question he was told the papers would,
as soon as possible, be laid upon the table of the
house. We can understand the repugnance of Mr.
Layard to precipitate the fiasco. It will undoubt
edly be a trial to the Government to have to eat the
leek, and, after having talked so loudly about the
honour of the British flag, to find that the King of
the Belgians has declared not only that there was
noinsult, but not even any intention to insult. Yet
this is substantially King Leopold's decision. He
dismisses the case of the officers of her Majesty's
ship Forte with costs—that is to say, he convicts
the English Government, or Lord Russell, or Mr.
Christie, of having trumped up an unfounded charge.
Could any reasonable being outside the small Mi-
nisterial circle have expected any other result? The
worst part of it is, that up to the latest moment
Lord Russell persisted in including the alleged in-
sult to the officers of the Forte in the list of crimes
for which satisfaction and pecuniary redress were
to be demanded. So that our Foreign Minister
stands arraigned at the bar of public opinion for
having exacted, at the cost of war upon a country
unabie to resist, reparation for an injury never com-
mitted. And the Liberal press defends this spirited
policy. The " leading organ," which could hardly
find epithets to express its disgust at Lord Palmers-
ton's attack upon Greece, a power which had sys-
tematically cajoled,swindled, and betrayed us, enters
into an elaborate defence of Lord Russell's last es-
capade on the ground that weak powers must nor
do wrong with impunity. It is the old story of the
wolf and the lamb. But the mischief is done, the
rupture is complete. Let us hope that the Govern•
ment will be satisfied with their triumph, and that
having driven M. Moreira out of the country they
will now put the best face on the matter, acknow-
ledge the mistake into which that blundering, irri-
table Mr. Christie has led them, make the anzende
honorable to a friendly Court, and shake hands.
Lord Russell has offered the affront : a graceful
apology may almost render it an obligation.