The Sun.
London, England, 1863-11-07 00:00:00

7, nit, SON. LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, NOVEYII3ER 7, 1863

men of all par ties in the line of conduct he adopted
between the ruthlcss factions now distracting Mis-
souri. The Radicals of that State will not be easily
put down, nevertheless, and the time has perhaps
come when their " Committees of Public Safety"
will resort to violence and take the law into their o wn
hands. Already Governor Gamble, the President's
nominee—who, like Scholefield is charged with
" lukewarmness in the good cause," and worse than
suspected of a leaning to rebels, Southern sympa-
thizers, &c.,—has called uponthec
violence.entral Govern-
ment for protection against personal
Mis-
souri is ripe for mischief, and the anarcb
ywhich
reigns throughout the provinces is not unlikely soon
to reach the principal city.
COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.

THE COLLIERS' STRIKE,

Mr. Joseph Love, one of the proprietors of the'collieries,
in a letter to a contemporary, says:—" The first calve of
complaint is the discharge of 12 men from Oakenshaw
Colliery. These men received 14 days' notice, ac3ording
to agreement, but the Union men, in commencing the
strike, ceased work without a moment's notice ; therefore
they are the originators of the strike, and are answerable
for all the miseries such an act may entail. It is also
stated their conduct has been marked by the greatest
order.' I will leave you to judge of this from the fol-
lowing circumstance :—The men first commenced to reduce
their labour to 3s. per day, then to ls, 3d., after which I
gave 11 days' notice to the Brandon men ; they at once
commenced the strike, using intimidation to influence the
men at the coke ovens to give up their work also. This
was on Friday; on Saturday they went to Willington
Oakcnshaw, and Brancepeth with colours and music, and
succeeded in influencing both pitmen and men at the ovens
to give up work, without a moment's notice, at all those
collieries. One of their grievances was as to the contents
of the tub in use, and their statements were entirely false ;
the contents of the tub, which the owners require of the
men, are the contents they pay to the landlord, with an
allowance of 281 b. ro the men before a tub is confiscated.
This bas been the custom for 20 years. They state if a tub
comes to bank deficient by accident it is forfeited. This is
incorrect. In such a case the tub comes to bank with a cer-
tain mark denoting accident. They also state that, if a tub
is deficient, the landlord loses the tub as well as the men.
This is untrue; the landlord receives full pay for all deficient
tubs ; hence he is a gainer and not a loser in such a case.
And then it is stated that 6d, is given to the person whose
duty it is to confiscate a deficient tub. Now, I dispute if
there was ever such a thing Known in the coal trade; at
any rate, I never knew or heard of such a thing, I would
here remark that all fines levied in our c4ilieries are
devoted to charitable purposes among our own workmen,
and never once has one penny gone to the pockets of the
owners; therefore we have no interest in enforcing fines,
except for discipline, or carrying out the regulations of the
collieries. There has also been a misunderstanding as to the
281 b. allowed to the workmen before a tub is confiscated. If
a tub is deficient 271 b, the man receives full pay, as though
the tub was
and quite
havefull, and
never many
men have worked a num-
et of years lost one tub from deficient
h
weight. A great deal of misrepresentation has been made as
to the difference between weight and measure. The only
er
reason the owners prefer measure to weight is because it is
more simple, easier done, and a saving of time, as measure,

_ .
once ascertained, is weight. But for the great difficulty in
carrying out weight the owners would ranch prefer it, and if
the men had applied for such a change, without advance of
price, it would have been granted on application. I have
now done so.

The true origin of the strike is an advance of wages from
20 to 25 per cent. This the men have demanded in our col
lieries, and I state, without fear of contradiction, that a good
workman, in an average placeupon any of our collieries, can
make ss. and upwards in eight hours. This is the standard
by which I fix the price in every colliery. I have taken the
average wages of 20 men for the last six fortnights at Bran-
don Colliery, and find it upwards of £3 net to each man per
fortnight. The advance asked would increase that average
to nearly £4 a fortnight. This is a model colliery for com-
fortable houses and gardens, and many of those houses have
cost the owners £BO each. The workmen are much better
rewarded for their labour than the owners are for their capi-
tal on this colliery, and, as it is a less evil to ley the colliery
in than to comply with their request, I have done so. I
would also add that the men in the west district are better
rewarded for their labour than the coalowners are for their
capital. Any advance is impracticable, much less the demand
of 20 to 25 per cent. ; and, however long the men may be able
to stand out, the masters have no alternative but to resist. I
have been asked to assign my reasons for opposing the Union
upon our collieries. With your permission I beg to do so. I
oppose it because it interferes both with the freedom of the
master and servant, and consequ'ently leads to a system of
tyranny. It denies the right of the master to choose or re-
move his servant, unless at the expense of the stoppage of
his works. This is one of the fundamental articles of the
Union, and is now carried out upon Inkerman colliery, near
Tow Law. When the owners gave notice to two men, about
a month ago, a deputation waited upon the agent to say that
if these men were not continued upon the works they would
lay the colliery in. The agents had to withdraw the notices
in order to prevent the stoppage of the colliery. A few days
afterwards, the same agent having had occasion to set on
some fresh men, the deputation already alluded to again
waited upon the agent, and said that if he continued to set
more men on they would all stop work. Now, I would ask,
is it within the range of possibility to conduct public works
under such a system of dictation and tyranny ? And yet
this is the universal practice where the Union is established.
When I gave notice to men upon our collieries whom I con-
sidered dangerous to the peaceable working of the collieries
I was given to understand this—that if these men were dis-
missed they would all cease to work. This is the result of
the working of the Union wherever it is established. The
Union Committee dictates all terms, both for agents and
men, and many men submit as reluctantly to their terms as
the agents do, but from fear are compelled, ani the agents
from necessity. This is the power the delegates are deter-
mined to possess—viz., the entire control of the working of
the collieries, to dictate terms, prices, and the quantity of
work done. Under such a state of uncertainty owners would
not dare to make those prospective sales necessary for the
regular working of the colliery, as they could have no cer-
tainty on the amount of produce. For instance, the Brandon
men, at the dictation of the Union Committee, reduced
their labour (and some of them were working for as much
as se. 61 per day) without a moment's notice to the owners
of their intention. After a few days at 3s. per day they
made a further reduction to is. 3d. per day, and about three
days afterwards they stopped the colliery. Under such a
system of uncertainty as I have described any person may
easily see the impossibility of owners entering into large
contracts, by which alone they can successfully work a coke
colliery. Hundreds of men who were in our employ have
been applied to by our agents to resume their work, and
many of them have expressed their anxiety to do so, but were
afraid of the Union men. We promised them protection;
they replied that after the strike was over they threaten to
drive the blacklegs out of the country. Is this a state of
things for any considerate man to tolerate ? And yet there
never was a Union established among pitmen without such
threats and consequences. Every colliery, sir, has its own
peculiarities; but it can matter little to the workman in
what way the work is done provided he is fully remunerated
for his labour. I believe no pitmen in the county have been
better rewarded for their labour than those upon Straker and
Love's collieries, and no collieries are safer, being free from
gas. I would here state that if any of the delegates could
prove to me that any colliery in the district is better paid
than ours, I should make ours the same as that colliery. I
am prepared to pay equal wages to any in the trade, and I
fully believe I have always done so; the fact was stated at
their public meeting, and none attempted to dispute it. I
have already said that a good workman can make ss. per
day within eight hours. I shall be glad to be called on to
prove this by facts; if so, they cannot justly complain that
they are not paid for their labour. If it be asked why the
delegates have attempted to stop our collieries first, the rea-
sons I have heard from reports at their own meetings are that
our works being so extensive, and being under large contracts
to the blast furnaces, that if the men were firm they might
force us up to any price or terms, as we dare not let our works
stop, owing to the fear of the parties coming upon us for
damages for non. fulfilment of contracts. Also, our works
being large, if they could succeed in bringing us up, they
could easily bring up every other colliery in the district. It
is stated that I have fixed a standard that the tub cannot
bring to bank. This would be extremely foolish. I have fixed
the standard paid to the landlord at Brandon at a less weight
than we paid last year; but, as we now propose to work
by weight, the standard is a matter that can be easily ad-
justed. The public express great sympathy for the families
ejected from their houses at this season of the year, and
properly so if the parties ejected had no choice. But no
person is ejected without the question being asked, " Will
you resume your work or give up your house ?" If they
consent to go to work, of course they remain in the house;
if they refuse the owners have no alternative, as the houses
are necessary for the working of the colliery. Other men
cannot be got without the houses to live in, and none will
come so long as those men remain on the place. Therefore,
until they are removed, it is impossible to get the colliery to
work. The men know this, and remain in their houses to
accomplish their object. I have received a document from
each colliery, stating the advance price wished, but at the
close of each document it is stated "We demand the resto-
ration of each dismissed man before we start work." Thus
they would compel the master to employ men of whom he
disapproves. If the owners submit to this they must give
up the control of the collieries to the men.
The strike has now assumed such a magnitude that it has
induced many persons to express their opinions in the diffe-
rent papers. The want of experience and knowledge of such
persons in pit matters leads them to very erroneous conclu-
sions, and as my name has been so freely spoken of by the
public, I think it my duty to lay before them a brief state-
ment of facts from the commencement of the strike. The
value and extent of the works over which I have the super-
vision are too extensive and important, as I have already
said, for me to hand over to the management of delegates
and committees, which is, I repeat, the great object the con-
ductors of the union labour to acquire. They appointed a
committee upon each of our collieries, and their duty was to
issue orders to the men when they were to work and when
not to work, how much to work, and what way to work.
Upon the knowledge of such proceedings, and not being
disposed to yield my powers to such committees, I gave
all those men 14 days' notice. Deputations waited upon
me and gave me to understand that if those men were
not continued they would stop the collieries ; and
knowing that to be the least of evils, I declined to withdraw
the notices. They then sent in a written document from all
the collieries, stating the advance they demanded, which
advance upon our present workings would amount to about
£20,000 a year. At the close of each document is placed,
"We demand the restoration of every dismissed man," A
deputation waited for my reply. I told them I could give
no advance of price, neither could I continue those men
under notice. If they were dissatisfied, all I desired was
our usual notice. This they declined. They then reduced
their labour, as I have before stated to 3s. per day, then to
le, 3d., and three days after ceased work without anY notice.

A large number of the men were wishful to work, but they
were intimidated, and said if they could get protection they
would work.. We then got a large police force, and a num-
ber of men went to work at Oakenshaw, Brancepeth, and
Willington pits. The working of these pits inflamed the
worst of passions in both men anl women. The annoyance
and insults passed upon the men going to and from work
became so brutal and vile that many of them could not pos-
sibly endure it, and ceased to work, for while they were at
work their wives and children had to fasten themselves into
their houses. The remaining men that continued their work
then waited upon my agent, and said unless those families
were removed they must cease to work, as they could no
longer endure such persecution. Thus a choice of evils was
placed before me—either to sject those families, or the col-
lieries must be finally stopped. Of course, I decided upon
what I considered the least evil. We gave sufficient notice of
our intentions to remove them to any place they might wish
to go to. We also offered horses and waggons to remove their
furniture; but they gave us to understand that they would
not remove from the place. As this is their principle, to
compel the owners to eject them, that they may secure the
sympathies of the public, I was informed the committee
of the union had made arrangements for all the ejected fami-
lies previous to their being turned out; but they were
urged upon to place themselves in the most pitiable condi••
tion, to cast odium upon the masters, and to create sym-
pathy for themselves. But for that motive they would all
have been housed on or before the day of ejection. I appeal
to any reasonable, disinterested person, whether it was a
greater evil to eject 38 obnoxious families from Sunnybrew,
or to stop a colliery in full operation, giving employment to
a large number of people. The latter would have been a
real calamity upon well. disposed people; the former wa
self-inflicted, and could have been avoided, but for the sake
of creating public sympathy, as there is accommodation for
twice the number of people we turned out within a very
short distance from the spot. The same remarks apply to
Oakenshaw. Everything that I could invent has been done
to prevent the evils of the strike. No ejectments would
have been sanctioned, but they were found necessary to pre-
vent greater evils, viz., the stoppage of three collieries which
are now at work. Since the ejectments the work has in-
creased instead of being stopped. The ejectment was the
evil of a day or two, but the stoppage of three collieries
might have been for months. The number of those ejected
is but a small portion to those who are in full and good em-
ployment; and to show that nothing has been done out of
resentment at Brandon Colliery, where the men have shown
the greatest hostility, I have allowed them to remain in
their houses, as I did not see by ejecting them a sufficient
prospect of getting the colliery to work. When the number
of houses we have upon our collieries is considered, the
number ejected bear but a small proportion to the number
of union-men who live in our houses and refuse to work.
Some of your contemporaries have expressed great better-
ness against us for using the power of ejectment ; but if we
do not use that power how can we gain possession of our
property ? It is the only means we have, and has always
been enforced. If once understood by the union men that
coalowners were intimidated by the public not to use this
power, we should have no end of strikes, for it is the only
protection we have. The houses are as necessary for work-
ing a colliery as the engine, and if the union-men are al-
lowed to keep possession of the houses they could effectu-
ally stop any colliery, and as long as they chose. If there
is any odium due against the firm of Messrs. Strakers and
Love for the ejections, such odium must fall upon myself,
as the Messrs. Strakers have nothing to do with the ma-
nagement of the collieries. I defy any man to prove that
I am the author of any unkind action, unless done to
prevent greater evils.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS,

TIMES.—On grounds of policy, no less than on
grounds of justice, it was right that the doctrines
laid down in the Alexandra case should be recon-
sidered. Whether the Foreign Enlistment Act be
regarded as a municipal statute, or as an applica-
tion of a municipal sanction to an obligation of in-
ternational morality, the whole nation is concerned
in the construction put upon it. It is the country
in its capacity of a sovereign State which is the real
plaintiff; it is the country in its capacity of a com-
mercial community which is the real defendant.
Where such interests are at stake no uncertainty in
the law, nor even the suspicion of such uncer-
tainty, ought to be tolerated. It would have
been a grievous misfortune—nay, more, it would
have been a disgrace to our system of juris-
prudence, if a judicial statement which has been
so much criticized, and a verdict which has failed
to command anything like general assent, affecting
as they do the public character and private rights
of the British people, had not been subjected to
solemn revision. It is greatly to be lamented that
the Lord Chief Baron and the Attorney-General
were unable to agree upon the terms of a bill of ex-
ceptions. Such a bill ought properly to be drawn
up on the spot and before the verdict is given, while
the points to which objection is taken are still fresh
in the memory of judge and counsel. It is but fair
to say that this course was proposed by the late
Attorney-General, that it was resisted, but only for
the sake of convenience, by the Lord Chief Baron,
who professed himself ready to accept any bill of
exceptions which the Crown might tender, and that
it was not for want of repeated applications on the
part of Sir W. Atherton and Sir R. Palmer that the
substance of the big was not settled before the Judge
left the Court. It is fair, on the other hand, to point
out that the Lord Chief Baron protested at the time,
as he still protests, against the meaning attached to
his words, and would probably have declinedthen to
sign the form which has since been tendered to him.
This untoward conflict of impressions having arisen,
there was, of course, no alternative but to aban don
the bill of exceptions, and to move simply for a new
trial. Here, however, a new difficulty arose upon
two questions relating to the right of appeal, in
case the motion should be fruitless. Into these
questions we need not enter now. It is enough to
say that the rule nisi for a new trial has been
granted, and that the whole matter will be fully
discussed before the Court of Exchequer. If the
Attorney-General shall succeed in satisfying the
Bench either that the verdict was perverse, whether
as contrary to the evidence or as unsustained
by the evidence, or that the Chief Baron's direc-
tion was erroneous, whether positively or by reassn
of its inadequacy, the suit will be tried over
again. If the decison of the Court should be ad-
verse to the Crown as to the alleged default of the
jury, that part of the case will be at an end, but
there would still be an appeal against the alleged
misdirection, provided the Chief Baron acknowledges
the language
imputed to him, and is supported by
his brethren in ratifying it. In the meantime we
are not without the means of forming an independent
opinion upon the controversy which has been carried
on with some degree of warmth for the last three days
between the Attorney-General and the Court of Ex-
chequer. It is the more important that we shuuld do
so because the disputed expressions go to the very
root of the subject regulated by the Foreign Enlist-
ment Act. That statute, than which the unscholarlike
subtlety of legal draughtsmen, never constructed one
more elaborately slovenly, is confessedly modelled
upon one passed in the preceding year by the Ameri-
can Congress. Without the knowledge of this fact we
might despair of construing the famous 7th section
upon any grammatical principle. As it stands, it
appears to prohibit two things—the equipment of
transport or store ships " with intent" that they
should be employed in the service of foreign Powers,
and the equipment of any ships " with intent" to
cruise or commit hostilities against foreign Powers
in amity with her Majesty. It would thus impli-
citly legalise the equipment of ships of war for the
very purposes interdicted to store ships, and prevent
the equipment of these last even where they might
not be intended to annoy a friendly State. Such
an interpretation would obviously be an ab-
surdity; but it is only by comparing this 7th
section with the 3J of the American Act that we
learn the true origin of the confusion in our own.
There nothing is said of transport or store ships,
and the cruising or committing hostilities is so
clearly connected with the illegal fitting out for the
service of a foreign Power as to leave no doubt
what the object of our Legislature was in framing a
parallel but somewhat more comprehensive clause.
This object may be shortly expressed thus,—No
one shall, within British dominions, directly or in-
directly, " equip, furnish, fit out, or arm" a vessel
to be used as a transport ship, a store ship, or a
ship of war, by one foreign belligerent against
another in amity with the Queen, on pain of fine
and imprisonment, as well as of forfeiture. Another
branch of the same section is directed against com-
missioning ships with a like intention. Now, how
was this applied by the Chief Baron to the case of
the Alexandra? She was seized by the Government
before she was completed, and therefore before
any armament had been put on board of her, but
not before she had assumed proportions unsuited to
a merchant ship and eminently fitted for a gunboat.
There was sufficient evidence of her destination to
be laid, as it was laid, before the jury. Had it been
left to them with no other comment than that with
which the Chief Baton concluded, embodying the
very words of the statute, no exception could have
been taken, Such, however, was not the fact. Be-
fore putting the question in this form he carefully
explained that the " object of the statute" was to
obviate th 3 possibility of a hostile collision between
ships built in our own dockyards for different
Powers, and putting to sea at the same time. Nor
was this all. He referred to Webster' s Dictionary
to show that equipping, furnishing, fitting out,
and arming are identical, and continued, in words
which we quote from the report of the official short
hand writer :—" I own that my opinion is that
'equip,' 'furnish," fit out,' or arm,' all mean pre-
cisely the same thing." It is true that this pas-
sage was followed by a qualification,
.but it was
sale
of by a declaration that the building and ase
1e
of the Alabama was perfectly legal. We cannot
doubt that such obiter dicta, if they must be so re-
garded, produced the same impresoou oA the jury

which they certainly produced cm the public. That
impression was, that, inasmuch as the Alexandra
was "in the course of building for the purpose of
being delivered in pursuance e:f a contract," and
was not acinially armed, the intent of the parties
engaged in the transaction, and whether they were
"attempting" or not to do an an Lawful act, was of
no consequence iu the eye of tae law. While this
clause is still awaiting judicial interpretation, it
may be worth while to notice one important dis-
tinction between the Alexandra case and some of
the analog es which have been suggested. The
right of neutral merchants fo clea), even in contra-
band of war, with belligerent pmchasers is gene-
rally admitted. Even this has Nam disputed by
eminent jurists, but the preponderance of authority
is in favour of the principle laid do wn by the Chief
Baron, that neutrals may sell or e: sport to bellige-
rents munitions of war (and even ai .med vessels, ac-
cording to Story), subject to the right of seizure in
transitu. The right of the neutral merchant to ex-
port, and of the belligerent Power to seize, have been
described as conflicting rights, and the assistance
given by the former to the enemy of the latter has
been held no breach of international law. But it is
quite the same thing when the subject of a sale,
being a ship of war, is designed to be employed in
hostile operation without being taken into any port
of the belligerent Power on the behef of which it
is built ? May not this be what Lord Stowell calls
a " proximate act of war ?" Is it not manifest that
by such a ruse neutral territory is made the basis
and starting point of a naval expedition, and the
right of the other belligerent to seize in transitu
entirely defeated ? If the Tycoon of Japan, for in-
stance, were at war with us, and were to procure
and import steamers from France, we should have
no cause of complaint against the French Govern-
ment ; but should we endure without remonstrance
the depredations of Japanese Alexandras issuing
from French ports in the English Channel ? Con-
siderations of this kind are not, indeed, legal ar-
guments, and we do not offer them as such, but they
may serve to illustrate the difference between tte
bona fide sale and the equipment of vessels. If the
Alexandra should be condemned after all, there is
no reason to fear that the legitimate business of our
shipbulilders will be injured or obstructed in the
slightest degree.

PosT.—The anticipations which, a week since,
were entertained of a renewal of active hostilities
in Virginia prove to be groundless. The Con fede-
rate forces have again retired to the south of the
Rappahannock, and the relative positions in which
the rival armies have stood for some months past
have been restored. Gen. Lee has no doubt exer-
cised a sound discretion in contenting himself with
having inflicted a heavy loss upon the Federal army,
and embarrassed its operations by the destruction
of a considerable portion of the line of rail by which
it has hitherto received its supplies. On the other
hand, the Grand Army of the Potomac is in no
position to assume the offensive. The Confederates
have chosen to retire, and, in the absence of opposi-
tion, the Federals will quietly return to their pre-
vious encampments. The Southern accounts of the
recent operations which have now reached us afford
no indication of the motives which induced Lee to
assume the offensive. The destruction of the Orange
and Alexandra Railroad is, however, regarded as in
itself adequately repaying the Confederate general
for his advance into Northern Virginia, and at
Washington it is conceded that the damage done by
the Confederates will have the effect of precluding
attempts during the present year to advance on
Richmond by Gerdonville and Culpepper. It is
not improbable that the diversion may have been
dictated by a desire to insure, at least for some little
time, the inactivity of Gen. Meade's forces, and thus
enable the Confederate Commander-in-Chief to re-
inforce Bragg in Tennessee. Longstreet's division
did good service at the battle of Chattanooga, and
returned to the Rapidan to take part in the late
operations. The experimen t of weakening the army
covering Richmond probably appeared to Gen. Lee
too ha z irdous to be ventured on a second time, with-
out in the first instance striking such a blow as would
render an advance by the invading army extremely
hazardous. It is reported at Washington that the
Confederate general has already despatched two of
the divisions of his army into Tennessee, and that
with the remainder ho proposes to hold the line of
the Rapidan against any forces which under exist-
ing disadvantages Meade may be enabled to bring
against him. This, although extremely probable,
is, however, mere conjecture, as the Confederates
invariably arrange their plans with such secresy,
and execute them with such rapidity, as to leave
their opponents in ignorance of their movements
until they have actually taken place. That Bragg
needs reinforcements if the victory of Chattanooga
is to be turned to account is tolerably evident. No
attempt has been made to dislodge Rosencranz from
his present position ; and, indeed, if General Long-
street's assistance was necessary to enable the Con-
federates to defeat the Federal forces in a pitched
battle, similar aid would be sail more essential now
when attacking an army fighting behind entrench-
ments. Hbwever, the Confederates have at least
gained this advantage that both in Tennessee and
in Virginia they have compelled the Northern
armies to content themselves with acting on the
defensive. The tide of invasion, though not actu-
ally rolled back, has at least for the present been
effectually stemmed. We know from experience
that it is useless to address to the American nation
arguments which have been often repeated and pro-
nounced incontrovertible by impartial observers on
this side of the Atlantic. It is idle to attempt to
demonstrate that the American Union can never
be restored in its original integrity in the face of a
blind and obstinate assertion that it can. It is
useless to point to Virginia, and to the armies
which for upwards of two years and a half have
marched and countermarched over the narrow strip
of ground which separates Richmond from Wash-
ington, and to ask by what means the North pro-
poses to acquire the absolute dominion of a terri-
tory whose area is measured by hundreds of thou-
sands of square miles. To arguments the North
has always given one uniform reply : Europe knows
nothing of what is going on in America; rebellion
is on its last legs ; insurrection is virtually at an
end ; the Federal arms are everywhere triumph.
ant ;
the spasmodic, and (as must be confessed),
in some instances, successful struggle made by the
armies of the South, are but the Bickering of a taper
before it is quenched in darkness. Nor is it alone
in the field that the established Government has
secured the smiles of fortune; never were the loyal
States more prosperous, never was trade more brisk.
Whilst the rebels in Richmond and Charleston are
being reduced to beggary, the loyal citizens of
Washington and New York are amassing fortunes.
In a word, the population of the North, if the self-
constituted exponents of their opinions are to be
trusted, were never happier or more contented than
at present; never more zealous for the re-establish-
ment of the Union, and never possessed ampler
means for effecting the realisation of their wishes.
Under such circumstances America cantot help
feeling amazed that Europe should entertain doubts
of the re-establishment of the Union. Until there
is an agreement as to the facts which furnish the
premises of an argument, it is useless to attempt to
dispute. We understand wealth, happiness, con-
tentment, and freedom in a different sense from our
American kinsmen ; or, what comes to the same
tbing,we entertain a different opinion of what goes to
constitute them. But, however wealthy or wise,
however happy or contented, the population of the
Northern States may be, there can be no excuse for
their halting in the progress of that meritorious
work in which they are at present engaged. If the
Union is to be re-established, if the Northern and
Southern States are, as previously, to constitute a
single Republic, if, above all, some three or four
million& of human beings are to be relieved from a
state of bondage, surely the sooner all this is done
the better. A state of war is not preferable to one
of peace; and, however prosperous the loyal States
may be at present, it is not pretended that their
prosperity would not be enhanced on the suppres-
sion of the existing revolt. Why, then, does the
North, with its vast wealth and boundless resources,
hesitate to strike the final blow ? Why is a con-
clave of traitors still permitted to assemble within
a hundred and fifty miles of the capital ? Why
does a proclamation which gave freedom to the
slaves of every disloyal citizen still remain a dead
letter ? These are questions to which, in common
consistency, the Federal Governmentshould furnish

some replies. If the Northern populatiWanci. the
Northern resources are what Mr. Lincoln's Admini-
stration boldly declare them to be, then there is no
excuse for not bringing the war to a speedy termi-
nation. If they are not, then let us ask of what
avail is it to uphold a deception which, sooner or
later, must entail ruin upon all those who are
parties to it.

THE SOUTH WALES IRONWORKS.—This week
there has been a general advance in wages at the
South Wales Ironworks to the puddlert, bailers, and other
skilled workmen. The rise at the majority of the works
is 10 per cent. on the whole scale, while at some two or
three of the works the advance has only been 5 and 71
per
are
also The labourers and others employed at the works re
also to receive a rise, but the exact amount has not yet heen
decided on by all the masters.

EEvßTlsEmENT.]—Holloway's Pills and Ointment.—
Nature's— Monitor.—rain is the indicator of some disorder
or disease, and should never be neglected, for the pain of
cements
rove tile agony of to-morrow. Holloway's
tmedi stand pre-eminently forward, and are every-
where corsmended, for quickly removing all maladies when
the least uneasiness has discovered their seat and kind.
These remedies so purify the blood and regulate its circu-
lation that every organ acts perfectly, and ovary secretion
is natural, which is health, and may be secured by every
invalid at a trifling outlay. The purpose of Holloway's re-
medies is to mitigate suffering, abolish pain, and extinguish
disease; and they nobly effect t4i4 Pbject, Ono trial will
conyiAce Clio moat aceptic4l,

COUNTRY MARKETS.

-----

LIVERPOOL—FRIDAY.
At this day's market we had a moderate attendance both
of millers and dealers. £here was a fair demand for all
descriptions of wheat, which fully supported the prices cur-
rent on Tuesday last. Flour held for 6d per barrel higher,
but buyers were not disposed to comply. Barley a slow
sale, at late rates. Oats and oatmeal steady. Beans and
peas at Gd per quarter over Tuesday's rates. Indian corn
dull of sale.

STAMFORD—FRIDAY.
White wheat, 40s to 42s ; red, 36s to 40s per 38 stone.
Barley, malting, 35s to 38s ; grinding, 31s to 309 per qr.
Oats, 18s ;to 26a per 24 stone. Beans, old, 40s to 42s per
qr. ; new, 34s to 365.