The Sun.
London, England, 1865-05-12 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY, MAY 12, 1865.

It has been found necessary to adjourn the debate
on the. Union Chargeability Bill, in consequence of
the objections which it met with in its course, but
it is to be trusted that on Monday it will be defini-
tively settled, since it promises to remove obstacles,
and to progress in a way that has long been needed.
Mr. C. VILLIERS explained the necessity that existed
for this measure being passed, and the difficulties
that impeded the present working of the system.
He said that it was proposed to " facilitate in cer-
tain cases the alteration of the limits of existing
unions," but he showed that it was no easy
matter to do so, and if such a course were
sanctioned, there would be no end to the changes
made in the original plan. If the rural parishes
are separated from the towns, the parochial system
will be virtually destroyed. It is also true what Mr.
VILLIERS said, that by the time this change is
effected the rural districts will begin disputing
among themselves, and consider if some do not pay
more than others. The poor will be driven from the
country to the towns, and considerable confusion will
arise. The right hon. gentleman showed that the
instructions that were proposed to be given to the
committee would not be conducive in the end to
desirable results. One thing is certain, and that is,
that all charges, whether of a remedial nature or
not, must displease some persons. There are sure
to be found many who discover flaws in the affair,
and denounce the new system in part or as a whole.
The real question, then, for legislators to decide upon
in all their alterations is, whether or not the pro-
posed plans do not possess advantages which will in
the end outweigh the disadvantages alluded to. It
may fairly be said that Mr. VILLIERS succeeded in
showing that his Bill promised to secure decided
benefits to the community, and to do away with
some existing evils that greatly militate against the
comfort and convenience of those concerned. At
the same time, there can be no doubt that great care
and caution should be exercised in the working out
of the Bill and Sir J. PAKINGTON gave very wise
counsel when he said that as the extension of the
area of rating must necessarily cause changes in the
incidence of taxation, " it was therefore the duty of
the right hon. gentleman to do everything in his
power towards making the change operate as lightly
as possible." One of the chief advantages of the
proposed scheme is, that it will benefit the position
of the labourers, which has so long called for altera-
tion in many respects, especially as to the Law of
Settlement. It is not at all likely that the fears of
those who urge objections to this measure
will prove to be well founded, or that even-
tually there will be any cause to regret
this measure of Union Chargeability becoming law.
It will be well, if when the debate is resumed on
Monday, more moderation be observed on both sides,
if those who oppose the question will waive all
frivolous objections, and confine themselves to the
expression of the real grievances which they suppose
will obstruct the working of the scheme. It will be
desirable, also, that the promoters of the Bill ex-
hibit a less captious spirit of criticising the language
of the dissentients, and endeavour to smooth away
difficulties instead of obstinately sticking to trifles
as if they were integral portions of the affair. Mr.
VILLIERS did no service to his cause by quoting
a Passage from an article on the Poor Law by Sir
EDMUND HEAD, which suited his views, and to
omit that portion of the opinion which did not suit
his views. On the whole the debate of last night
was a factious one, which did • little credit to either
side, and did not M the end even succeed in dis-
posing of the subject under discussion.

that the New
It is not surprising
York papers
should be full of the details of the capture and
death of WILKEs BOOTH. That miserable man has
attained such an unenviable notoriety, not only
on
the American Continent, but all over Europe, that
all the particulars of his last moments are invested
with an unusual degree of interest. At the same
time, the more we learn of the affair the more un-
satisfactory it seems. There appears to be no rea-
sonable doubt that BOOTH was actually the assassin
of the President, and that consequently, by what-
ever motive he was actuated, whether by individual
fanaticism or party feeling, whether moved by per-
sonal malice, or anxious only to obtain the rewards
of others less daring though not more
scrupulous, he richly deserved his fate. But it is
moat unsatisfactory that when so much importance

was attached to discovering the instigators of the
act the criminal should have been so effectually
silenced, without the chance of an official inquiry.
It is alleged, in excuse for the slaying of BOOTH,
that the man was desperate and would not surren-
der, but circumstances seem to have especially
favoured the captors, seeing that he was in a barn
which they were able completely to surround, and
thus to prevent any chance of escape. He was
armed, it is true, but it hardly became a band of
soldiers to shrink from the risk of one man's gun. If
the Federals were really anxious to discover the truth
it ought to have been a primary object to secure
BOOTH alive. Whether the pursuers exceeded their
orders in their eagerness to gain the promised reward
for the capture, whether the man who fired the shot
was anxious for special notoriety, or whether it was
merely the result of accident, may be doubted. The
sergeant who killed BOOTH is being lionised in New
York, and a thousand dollars, it is said, has been
offered for the gun that shot the assassin ; but in
reality the sergeant deserves neither praise nor fame.
There is nothing• very heroic in shooting a man
in a barn, nor is any great exercise of skill
demanded by such a feat. It is the more to be re-
gretted, because it gives rise to the darker suspicion
that a certain party in the North, who is anxious to
affix to the Southern cause the stain of the crime, is
not sorry to prevent a legal examination which
might completely exonerate the leaders of the Con-
federacy. Mr. STANTON, indeed, may assert that
he has " positive information" as to the complicity
of the Richmond authorities in the crime, but these
reiterated statements do not produce much effect in
Europe whatever they may do in New York. We
have heard of this information ever since the death
of the President, but no evidence whatever in sup-
port of it has been yet forthcoming. The active
imagination of Federal statesmen has before this
given us intelligence of uncertain . character, and
Mr. STANTON'S war despatches have been known
before now to collapse after a marvellous fashion.
No one who has watched the conduct of the South-
ern leaders throughout the trying period of the war,
the invasion of their country, the destruction of
their property by hostile armies, could for a moment
attribute to them complicity in such a detestable
crime. The act, too, which put JOHNSON and
STANTON in the places of LINCOLN and SEWARD
would have been as suicidal as it was treacherous and
cowardly. Mr. STANTON forgets that in displaying
such implacable hostility to the South he is himself
supplying an argument against his own assertions.
Besides the horror which all honourable men must
feel at the murder, and the natural indignation at
being accused of a pre-knowledge of the crime, the
Southern leaders have good cause to regret the re-
moval of ABRAHAM LINCOLN from the supreme
place in the Federal Councils. The few words
which the late President uttered after the fall of
Richmond pointed to moderation and prudence
rather than to violence and malignity, but all the
public addresses and writings of Messrs. JOHNSON
and STANTON tend to increase instead of allaying
the popular excitement. The fruits of this mis-
taken policy may be seen in the treatment of Mr.
INGERSOLL, a gentleman of supposed Secessionist
tendencies, who was mobbed in Philadelphia on
account of a speech made in New York. He was
with difficulty rescued by the police, after being
compelled to draw his revolver in self-defence,
although he did not fire it ; but was charged with
assault and intent to kill, and was locked up, the
crowd threatening to lynch him. If this is political
freedom, it is of rather a novel sort 1 Nor is this the
only case, for other Northern gentlemen, who are
too independent to abandon their convictions as to
the rights of States at the bidding of the mob, have
been threatened with personal violence. If this
state of things is to be suffered to continue we
shall have democratic tyranny in one of its worst
forms reigning supreme in the States, and every
lover of liberty will deplore so disastrous a conclu-
sion to the great Republic of the West.
Meanwhile, Mr. STArrroN's reckless assertions
have called forth an indignant rejoinder from
General EDWIN LEE, of the Confederate army.
This officer has addressed a letter to the editor of
the Montreal Gazette, in which he states that,
although thinking it beneath the dignity of a
Government or its subordinates to notice slander,
he feels that, being outside both Federal
and Confederate lines, he is qualified to speak. The
passage which has especially excited his indignation
is one that has already called forth unfavourable
comment in this country. In Mr. STANTON'S official
despatch of April 24 he says, " This department
has information that the PRESIDENT'S murder was
organised in Canada and approved at Richmond.
One of the assassins, now in prison, who attempted
to kill Mr. SEWARD, is believed to be one of the St.
Albans raiders." In referring to thiS paragraph,
General EDWIN LEE deblares his conviction that
the officials of the Confederate Government, with
whom he was in frequent communication, " were as
little promoters of the murder as Secretary STAN-
TON or Vice-President JOHNSON." He expresses
his wonder how Mr. STANTON, who knows many of
the leading members of. the Confederacy personally,
should " lend himself to this low slander when he
must have known it to be such. In denying it
indignantly, contemptuously, I fear, that I am even
in my own humble person condescending too far ;
but I think this despatch should not go uncontradicted
to the world, although, perhaps, our past record
would have been its best rebuke." This is the
natural language of a high-spirited and honourable
man, who feels his cause and his country aggrieved
by such a slander; and we cannot but regret that
Mr. STANTON should have been so carried away by
party feeling as to allow himself to make such a
statement officially. At least, if he is a man of
honour, he cannot refuse General EDWIN LEE'S
challenge. "If he has any proofs let the world
have them, and judge between the two
Governments." If the so-called " information"
is withheld from the public, Europe, as well as
America, will know what to think.

At the Conservative demonstration at Tunbridge
Wells some interesting speeches were made, and
the general state of politics at present ably dis-
cussed. The Hon. R. C. ABBOTT, the Conservative
candidate for the next election, spoke out very
forcibly, and denounced the course pursued by the
present Government in acting upon no fixed prin-
ciples, and in declaring that there was no real dif-
ference of opinion between them and their oppo-
nents. The hon. gentleman quoted some lines
which were very appropriate in connection with the
tactics of Ministers with regard to reform :

" I am forced to confess I have no predilections,

ArMe yjuhsteacTittnicseadi sabeovuetwfohreraensioommeenstcaotrtesreo,d affections
And the finer they are the more sure to fall through."
As for their foreign policy Mr. ABBOTT declared that
the Government took credit to themselves for their
non-intervention and for their support of the cause
of freedom, but failed to reconcile the two in a
satisfactory sense to the country. -When diplomacy
failed to effect any good for Poland and penmark
they abandoned these countries to their fate in a
manner that was very discreditable and very
inimical to the feelings of the country. Most truly
did the hon. gentleman declare that the " principle
of non-intervention was the correct one for this
ccuntrn but if there ever was a case for foreign in-

tervention it was that of Denmark." Certainly
the Ministers have played their cards very
badly in the matter of foreign affairs, for it
is a never-ceasing subject of reproach to them, and
as time passes on we can only the more fully under-
stand and completely appreciate the errors of judg-
ment into which they have fallen, and the unworthy
position which they have made the country assume
in consequence. Mr. BURRELL, in the course of his
remarks, very skilfully showed up the game of the
Government which they would probably play at
the next election. They have given up Reform
while they had the opportunity afforded them of
disposing of it, as they want to hold it out as a
grand catch to the electors. This, Mr. BURRELL
said, was a most unworthy course to pursue, and he
trusted that the electors would not be taken in by
it. He would not, he said, for he believed Dr.
JOHNSON was quite right when he said the devil
was the first Whig. On the whole, a good
humoured tone pervaded this meeting, and it is
desirable that all sides should have an opportunity
of expressing their opinions at such a critical junc-
ture as the eve of a general election. Perhaps if
more care had been taken on similar occasions be-
fore we should not now have to lament the results
of the mistakes that have been made, and the false
promises that have been held out to the country.

BANK OF FRANCE.

PARIS, MAY 11.

The following is the return of the Bank of France
for the week ending to-day, together with the cor-
responding figures of the previous account :

DEBTOR.

May 11.

May 4.

fr. - c. fr. c.
Capital of the Bank.... 182,500,000 182,500,000
Profits in addition to
capital (Art. 8, Law,
June 9, 1857) 7,043,831 81
Reserve of the Bank
and its branches
Reserve in landed pro-

7,043,799 16