The Sun.
London, England, 1862-07-23 00:00:00

violated by the Government proposals. The old
law be argues requires persons to put their hands
into their own pockets, for the relief of their poor ;
the new proposal would enable them to put their

hands into those of their neighbours. But this
would raise a very old question—" Who is my
neighbour ? and the manner in which that
question was answered by the highest autho-

rity is little favourable to Mr. BOITVERIE'S
notions. He would make the other parishes of the

Union pass by a suffering parish like Priests and

- -
Levites; Mr. VILLIERS would have them act the

part of good Samaritans. Public feeling will, we
are inclined to think, go with Mr. VILLIERS. Mr.
BouYERIE is terrified by visions of " profusion and
extravagance," that there will be cases of imposture
is quite certain ; just as every great distant battle is
sure to generate beggars with limbs lost in it, who
never left their own country. But Lancashire is
a county certainly not wanting in intelligence, and
quite capable of guarding against anything like
general profusion or extravagance.
The general objection that the distress has not
yet reached the point at which additional legislation
is necessary, will meet with few sympathisers. The
poor law returns show an immense increase of
pauperism already ; but the distress is far wider
than is indicated by these returns. The Savings
Banks accumulations have saved thousands hitherto
from resorting to the relieving officer, and submit-

ting to what they feel the lowering act of taking
money which they have not earned. There can be
no doubt that the pawnbroker also has, for the pre-
sent, done his sad part towards lightening the parish
rates. These sources of support are, however, nearly
dried up, and a rapid accession to the list of reci-
pients of relief is now to be expected. As the sup-
ply of cotton also continues to diminish, the prices
which must be given fcr the little to be had
—indeed, its absolute insufficiency to feed half the
mills—will deprive increasing numbers of em-
ployment. We must confess that ever since
we perceived the backwardness of Lancashire to
operate in India, and the consequent failure of the
large hoped-for supplies thence, we could but fear
the worst for next winter. To lose almost at a
stroke more than a billion pounds of raw cotton,
and to find its loss met by only about 150 million
pounds, as the increased production of other coun-
tries, is the fact we must grasp if we can. Nearly
all who lived on working that billion pounds of
cotton must be out of employ next winter. We re-
peat—not to foresee, and not to make legislative pro-
vision for the consequences, next winter, of such a
fact, would have been criminal neglect in the Go-
vernment and Legislature.
We only add our wish that the intelligence
of what our Parliament has to do, and the melan-
choly reasons why it has to do it, would awaken
some compunction in the Federal Government of
America which is, now, the guilty cause of all this
starvation and distress. We are sorry to fear that
to the North, the sufferings of Lancashire are only
a cause of grim and cruel satisfaction. They will
bear their own extra taxation with somewhat of
malignant satisfaction, because it enables them to
bloekade cotton ports and distress millions of
Englishmen.

be then read a second time, and that his Grace

The Duke of BuccLeucH's conduct last evening
in the House of Lords ought certainly to put to
shame Mr. HoRsMAN and his backers. His Grace
acted like a sensible man ; and, with a due regard
to his own dignity, announced at once, yesterday,
his intention to offer not one particle of opposition
to the carrying out in its integrity of the whole
scheme of the Thames Embankment. The Govern-
ment Bill was in consequence advanced another
stage in the House of ,Lords. It was read there a
second time, and is next, of course, to come forth-
with under the consideration of their Lordships in
Committee. It has already, we know, passed
through all its stages in the House of Commons.
But—only after going through there, a whirl of op-
position—sometimes carried on in the most acri-
monious spirit—sometimes renewed almost with an
appearance of malignity on the part of those
chiefly concerned in originating it. All the effer-
vescence, so long bottled up in regard to this
question, however, it would seem, passed off in the
popular branch of the Legislature. It was there
so repeatedly ventilated that by the time it
comes to be quaffed in that " other place,"
it turns out, as a mere theme for de-
bate even, to be essentially " stale, flat, and un-
profitable." There is no opportunity left for any
further personalities, even if there had been any
inclination in the Lords to indulge in them. The
discussions provoked in the Commons by the right
hon. member for Stroud had pretty well ex-
hausted all the personalities that could have
been applied to the subject in dispute, by way
(if that had been possible) of somehow impeding
its further progress. Hence, it can hardly surprise
anyone upon reflection that no sooner had
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY resumed his seat upon
the Treasury Bench in the Lords yesterday, after
moving that the Thames Embankment Bill

the Duke of BUCCLEUCEI should hasten at once
to intimate, as we have said, that he, for one,
intended in no way whatever to oppose the pro-

jected improvement. While, however, the public
generally would hardly feel in any way surprised
that the Duke, as a rational man, and therefore
as one instinctively alive to what was due to his
own dignity in this matter, should so have resolved
to offer no opposition to the Bill, his Grace's con-
duct in so doing, we repeat, ought to carry a cer-
tain sense of shame to Mr. GORE, and Mr. HORS-
MAN, and other disinterested sticklers for the main-
tenance of the privacy of Whitehall Gardens.

The Duke of BUCCLEIJCII, we observe, expresses
himself, at the outset of his remarks, as having felt
himself aggrieved at what he terms " the most un-
fair manner " in which his name had been refered
to, in connexion with this whole project of a
Thames Embankment. For the •vri)-1,012, 1,0-,.,.,,
we would remind his Grace, he is altogether in-
debted
to those over-zealous " friends " of his who
filched the renewal of his lease of Montagu
House from the Treasury, under (to say the least
~ it) such extremely odd circumstances ! To
these other obsequious and sycophantic "friends"
who rashly ventured upon altering the whole
scheme in the
Thames Embankment Committee—
dirty work, this,
of
seven of the committeemen ! To
"friends," (one
and thoroughly
those other,l,l
ill-advised
en),who_. as much in
" (one or two of them, members
of that same committee,and participators
:esvo doin outraging all sense of
the
e gloriesproprieties
in
doing attempted
to brazen it out that the mean and: subservient
modification, foisted into the whole Plan
as revised
sub rosa, should be allowed to hold good 1 The route
followed out along the northern margin
of the river
Thames, from Biackfriars towards Westminster,
suddenly stopping short at the corner of Whitehall
gardens, for the purpose (a Nording to this modest
proposition of the Seven committeemen !) of easing
the traffic by causing it at that particular point to
diverge into Parliament-street !To these very
questionable friends of the Duke of BUCCLEUCII, his
grace is alone indebted, we would remind
him, for
his name having in ti,:v way whatever become mimed
up in the transaction, or .
' in the discussions