The Sun.
London, England, 1863-02-20 00:00:00

C. $7
;q!:,., ;4, ,
44
att. tc4o
411 L

LONDON, FRIDAY, FEB. 20, 1863.

In the House of Lords, Lord ELLENBOROUGH
gave notice that he should ask the Secretary for
Foreign Affairs a question this day relative to
affairs in Poland.—The Marquis of NORMANBY
complained that Earl Russell had misrepresented
the words of a despatch written by him in 1849
referring to the revolution then going on, and
denied that the construction put upon them was
correct.—Earl RUSSELL said that the extract to
which the noble marquis adverted proved that the
interpretation he had made of it was the right one.—
Lord CARNARVON brought before the notice of the
House the present state of discipline in gaols and
houses of correction. He entered at length into the
question, and concluded by stating that the present
system was not a perfect one in his opiniou.
He took this opportunity of pressing the
subject upon her Majesty's Government, because
he believed it was one which the Royal Commission
would not inquire into.—Earl GRANVILLE said the
noble earl had made a clear statement on a subject
at present particularly interesting. Their lord-
ships were aware that the power of Government
was very limited in the management of gaols. If
the noble lord would move for a select committee of
that House it would, no doubt, be most useful, and
would not interfere with the details which were
now under the consideration of the Royal Corn-
reission.—Lord CARNARVON readily accepted the
proposal, and would to-morrow (this day) move for
the appointment of the committee.—Earl DUDLEY
asked if the Home-office would refuse to remit sen-
tences in eases of second conviction.—Lord GRAN-
VILLE said that this was under the consideration of the
Royal Commission, and the Government could not
anticipate its report. Their Lordships then ad-
journed.
In the Commons, the CHANCELLOR of the Ex-
CHEQUER replied to Mr. STANSFELD, that the Go-
vernment did not propose any change in the duties
upon spirits now payable by law.—Lord PAL-
MERSTON (amid cheering) proposed resolutions on
the provision for the Prince of Wales. He trusted
this marriage would be productive of happiness to
the Prince, and also secure to the country a race
of sovereigns who would partake of the virtues of
the present family, lie proposed that the House
should make a grant out of the Consolidated Fund
of £40,000 a year, and that the allowance for
the Princess should be £lO,OOO per annum.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY took exception to the
proposal, and said that £40,000 was
Mr. DISRAELI had hoped that this resolution would
have been passed nemine contradieente, but he rose
to say that his side of the house shared the convic-
tion that this was a temperate preposition. He
trusted it was adequate, and no one could call it
excessive. He trusted at all events that there
would b 3 no dissentient vote ; and, amid loud cheers
from both sides of the house, he suggested that hon.
gentlemen should defer their inquiries as to mat-
ters of detail. After some further discussion the
resolutions were agreed to nem. con.—The Corrupt
Practices Act Election Bill was read a second time
after some discussion.—The Union Relief Aid Act
Bill was read a second time,—The Telegraphs Bill
was also read a second time.—After some other
business the house adjourned.

Last night Lord PALMERSTON proposed the
provision for the Prince of WALES'S household.
His lordship made a very clear statement, and
taking everything
into consideration, it appears
that the Government have made very fair demand
upon Parliament. As Lord
PALMERSTON ex-
piained, in consequence of the excellent manage-
ment with regard to the Duchy of Cornwall, the
Prince of WALES is now in possession of most con-
siderable revenues. His lordship observed--_,, To
the honour of Her MAJESTY and the late PRINCE
CONSORT be it said, that in former reigns it was
the practice during the minority of the Prince
of WALES to ddd the revenues of the Duchy of Corn-
wall to the available income of the Crown ; in the
present reign these revenues have been studiously
and carefully set apart for the benefit of the PRINCE
when he came of age." The House received this
statement with loud cheers. Considering the fact
that the round sum of £60,000 may be considered
as the probable income arising from the duchy re-
venues, and that £lOO,OOO a year will not be dis-
proportionate to the expenses of one in so exalted
a position, Lord PALMERSTON proposed that the

House should grant the yearly sum of £40,000,
with the addition of £lO,OOO to the Princess of
WALES. In the event of her Royal Highness
surviving her consort £30,000 would be secured to
her. It is to be regretted that these very reasonable
demands should have been made the subject of con-
troversy by somedoubtless well meaning but mistaken
members. That their objections did not represent
the general feeling of the House was proved by the
applause that was given to Mr. DISRAELI'S speech.
The right hon. gentleman, gave it as his opinion
that the proposition was temperate and doubtless
well considered, he trusted it was adequate, no
one could call it excessive. There was great truth
in this remark regarding the exceptions taken by
the previous speakers as to the Duchy not fur-
nishing sufficient resources for the provision without
the aid of Parliament. " What strikes me as most
remarkable in the observations is that the good
management of the Duchy of Cornwall is brought
forward as a reason why we should not assent to
this proposition. It appears to me that we ought
to be thankful for the good management of the
Duchy, and ought not to make it the basis of an
argument in favour of the reduction of the vote
proposed by her MAJESTY'S Government." The
right hon. gentleman was greeted with loud
cheers from both sides of the House when
he suggested that they should allow the vote to
pass without any dissension. That this fairly repre-
Iseuted the opinion of the House, was proved by
their agreeing to it subsequently ; at the same time,
it is bad taste to take such opportunities to cavil
at proposals that affect important interests. Some
of the objections were most trivial, and none of
them, indeed, of moment ; but the point is, why arc
they made when opposition is next to impossible,
and unwillingness is so very ungracious. However,
it is satisfactory to know that the dissentients were
put down by the general consent of the House, and
that the very desirable arrangement proposed was
carried out. Considering the immense sums that
Parliament had to supply the last Prince of \Taus
with to pay the debts he had incurred, these econo-
mical members should rejoice rather than repine at
the prospect of no such calamity ever being in store
for them. Brought up under the supervision of such
excellent management, and with the example of his
parents before him, we have no doubt that this
Prince will tread in the steps of those around him.
After Lord PALMERSTON'S explicit speech of last
night, there seems no reason to apprehend that there
will be any grounds for disapproval when the report
of the affairs of the Duchy of Cornwall is placed in
the hands of hon. members. It is desirable that
they should be fully informed on these points ; but,
considering the extreme care and caution which
always characterised the transactions of the late
PRINCE CONSORT, there is every reason to suppose
that the investigation upon which they will enter
will be highly creditable to those who have managed
the
_estate, and satisfactory to those who peruse
its records. Had the expenses of the Crown
been such as characterised that of last century
Parliament would have had a very different demand
made upon its liberality last night. It is seldom
that the arrangements of Royal alliances are so cre-
ditably conducted as those to which we now refer,
and there is no doubt that the voice of public opi-
nion will ratify the approval expressed last night
by many influential members on both sides of the
House. Her Majesty's Ministers have conducted
these transactions in a spirit suitable to the occa-
sion, and the various members of the community
will concur in the sentiments of the Houses of Par-
liament, as evidenced in their resolutions last
night in the Commons, and the preceding one in the
Lords.

Last night the Corrupt Practices Elections Bill
was read a second time, and some discussion took
place upon it. It will be remembered that the Act
passed in 1854, and amended four years later, will
expire at the close of next session. It was therefore
necessary, if the present anomalous state of things
is to be maintained, to renew the bill in some form
or another, though, judging from the revelations
of election committees, and the reports that
occasionally fright the isle from its propriety,
the desired result is by no means secured. Seve-
ral modifications are made in the new bill,
some increasing its severity. The election auditor
is to be done away with, and agents appointed in
his stead, through whom alone all election expenses
must be paid. Any payment made otherwise than
through such agents makes the person paying guilty
of a misdemeanour. All claims against candidates
must be furnished within one month of the day of
election, or forfeited. Within three months a de-
tailed statement of all expenses shall be made out
by the authorised agents, and the returning officer
shall publish the same in the local newspapers.
Surely under these arrangements the visions of
Utopia will be realised, and Liberal and Conser-
vative will no longer have to mourn the loss of
a hardly won seat, or exult over the mortification
of a successful antagonist. Purity of elections,
instead of an unattainable perfection, will become
an every day virtue, and bribery, treating and
intimidation, vanish into the category of obscure
and antiquated malpractices—along with piracy and
high way robbery. Unfortunately there is a cloud on
this brilliant prospect—a doubt cast on these con-
fident expectations. In spite of theorists, phi-
losophers, and reformers, it remains a me-
lancholy fact, that we cannot make men
virtuous by Act of Parliament, and we apprehend
that, in spite of recognised agents, threatened
penalties, and published accounts, the bribery and
corruption attending the election of her MAJESTY'S
next Parliament will be very much on a par with
the preceding ones. It is very easy, as Mr.
BERKELEY remarked, to appoint SMITH as your
recognised agent, and to allow BROWN, JONES, and
ROBINSON to transact sundry awkward pieces of
business without any agency at all. It may be very
true that any person making payment m
subjecte n t wh
too is a
not a duly authorised agent a
will wi
penalty, but, if the money be passed from hand to
hand in private, nothing will be known of it, unless
by the avowal of the benefited party, which is not
very likely. Again the details of the election ex-
penses may be published in the columns of all the
local press, but we presume most men of business
have heard of such things as " cooked accounts,"
and there will be no proof that the sum total covers
the whole of the incidental expenses of a contested
election.

There is another very important point in the case
to which these would-be Reformers do not se
to attach sufficient importance—we mean the
intimidation of voters. The only feeble effort
made for their protection is the insertion of a
clause threatening to fine any individual who
puts a man to loss by reason of his vote. Really
the framers of this measure seem to think
we all live in Madame DE GENLIS'S famous Palace
of Truth. It is, they imagine, impossible for a land-
lord to eject a rebellious tenant, an employer to dis-
miss an unyielding employe, a customer to withdraw
his custom from an unaccommodating tradesman
without specifying in direct words that he does so
on account of the political opposition which they
offer him. Yet of the two evils intimidation is,
perhaps, the greatest, for however derogatory to
morals may be the results of bribery and treating
I both sides are open to blame and contempt. But it

is
falsify his convictions at the frown
angry a very great hardship when a mancomopeollfed
atno
rich customer,
whoselandlorda g
eo r a the t ss i g
his
trade. It is easy
ofa
to exclaim at the moral weakness of the concession,
but we must not expect ordinary English yeomen
and traders to be
" Like CATO, firm, like ARISTIDES, just,"
if with these virtues we couple the " noble" porei.}7
of "rigid CINCTNNATITS." Men may have very
strong opinions on the corn laws and the currency
without being prepared to sacrifice their own corn
and coin to support them. It is a different thing
to take an open bribe and to shrink from ruining a
family for what will certainly be represented by
the wife and mother as an obstinate crotchet or
foolish whim. The evils attending this state of
things are very great, for they gradually disgust
men with politics; they either decline to vote, or
vote against their wishes. A false tone is spread
through political society, and our much-vaunted
representative system rests on a false basis.
How then is this state of things to be amended ?
There remains one way, and that a way much ridi-
culed, much decried, and opposed with a suspicious
vehemence by a large preponderance of both sides,
but never tried. We allude, of course, to the
Ballot, of which we have been for so many years
the earnest and unflinching advocates. To all
assurances of its unsatisfactory results, its evil
effects, and its certain failure, we only reply, let it
be tried. It is strange that if the objec-
tions raised are honest, the objectors are so
unwilling to submit them to the very simple
test of experiment. Another favourite argument
frequently brought forward, is the un-English
character of the secret vote. Are we to conclude
that bribery and intimidation are "English" vir-
tues It is idle to argue and legislate as if men
were pieces of mechanical perfection. The real
wisdom and kindness is to adopt our laws and
theories to human nature as it is. We have Divine
authority for the prayer " Lead us not into tempta-
tion," and those who refuse to recognise the prin-
ciple contained in the words may depend upon
it that they commit a fatal mistake. The
adoption of the Ballot would diminish incalculably
the temptations to which the elector is exposed, and
would lessen likewise the inducements offered to
the candidate to exercise undue influence. The
real secret of the opposition to the Ballot is to be
found in the unwillingness of both sides to run the
risk of losing supporters by fair elections; and,
until reform has really begun in the camps and
cabinets of our leading statesmen, it is idle to
descant upon purity of elections, and to attach
penalties to isolated offenders.

The man who introduced garrotting has ren-
dered the public a service, although at the expense
of certain private individuals. People's eyes have at
length been opened to the fact, that in attempting to
be humane, the authorities of our prisons have be-
come unjust. It has long been a common saying
that better food was to be obtained in prison than
in the workhouses, but little attention was paid to
it by the public, believing it to be said only as a
slap at the relieving-officer and other parish autho-
rities. The truth—the whole truth—has now come
out ; and we find that the meaning of the fearful
words, prison discipline, signifies, simply, regular
hours for meals and exercise.

At a special meeting of the National Association
for the Promotion of Social Science, held at Bur-
lington House, on Tuesday evening, the advisability
of renewing the practice of transporting criminals
beyond the seas was considered; and after long
discussion, the motion of Mr. HASTINGS, to the
following effect :—" That it is not desirable to at-
tempt any return to the old system of transporta-
tion, which, apart from the opposition it would
provoke from the colonies, would entail heavy and
permanent expense on this country without pro-
ducing any adequate advantages, or any result
which would not be better as well as more cheaply
obtained by well regulated convict establishments
at home," was carried by a large majority. In their
anxiety to protect the colonies from the infection of
crime, the gentlemen who came to the above con-
clusion forget that it is not proposed to force crimi-
nals upon any state, province, or colony. West
Australia has petitioned Government to send "long
sentence" men and " lifers" to their not over fertile
or productive colony. Lord ALF RED CHURCHILL
justly maintained that West Australia, separated as
it is from the nearest colony by a distance of up-
wards of 600 miles of arid desert, was a fit place to
send convicts, so long as the colonists can
find employment for them, yet his argu-
ments found but little favour with the
meeting, and if Sir WALTER CROFT'S remarks
are reported truly it seems to us that his
opposition to transportation contains strong argu-
ments in support of it . He said " that, looking at
transportation in its deterring aspect, he did not
consider that the prospect of being sent to a
flourishing colony would prevent bad men from
crime. If they were to be sent to West Australia,
instead of five garotters there would be ten. If
penal settlements were established in rugged and
bleak places, where stern discipline was to be
exacted, how were the convicts to be controlled ?
Why, a large army would be necessary, and our
soldiers would have to be punished like our crimi-
nals. Look at our penal settlements. Why, the
convicts used to commit murders in order to be
hanged for the purpose of escaping from the horrors
of the settlements. Tho proper way of dealing with
the sabject was to pass long sentences with no remis-
sions; and when the convicts were discharged they
ought to be placed under the control of the police."
The statement that sending garotters to a flourish-
ing colony would double their number, reads curi-
ously in conjunction with the information that in
old penal settlements convicts used to commit mur-
der in order to get hanged, and so end their
misery. Again, what he says about the
injnstice of subjecting soldiers and others to
the hardships of penal settlements, if situated in
rugged and bleak places, is not fair, because they
might be relieved from time to time, and he might
just as well say that it was cruel to immure
prison matrons and wardens in our gaols. We do
not wish that the old system of New South Wales
and Norfolk Island should be revived, nor would
we have a large military force engaged in guarding
the convicts—that duty should be performed by
obviating
repugnant
special officers engaged and trained for the purpose,
thus
tseenidrintgassteo.ldie:vshiolen
adutynaturally to
there is work to be executed in new colonies—
while in rugged and barren districts ro.tds have to
be made to enable the emigrant to traverse the
country, there let our convicts be sent. In the
Nor-West portion of the Australian continent there
are wide-spread tracts of fertile land ; but many of
these are divided from the coast by stony wastes.
The climate is healthy, and if roads of communica-
tion were opened, and Government showed the way,
immigration would soon set it. Would New South
Wales and Tasmania ever have been made produc-
tive colonies, but for convict labour, which opened
up the resources of the country. Why not turn
the evil of our country to advantage in pro-
ducing new fields for enterprise. Let the convicts
be treated well, but let them be worked hard, and
ilet them feel they are not at play, Care mot be