The Sun.
London, England, 1865-03-08 00:00:00

THE MALT TAX.

Several petitions from different parts of the country, and
from every class of society, were presented in favour of a
reduction of the duty on malt, or its entire repeal. The
presentation of petitions for this purpose occupied the
greater part of the time of the house this afternoon.
PUBLIC-HOUSES CLOSING ACT.
Mr. LAWSON moved for a return of the Town Councils
and Boards of Commissioners which have adopted the
Public-houses Closing of 1864, with the date of its adop-
tion, and the population under the operation of the Act in
each municipality and district.

rHE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 8, 186

of cattle food in barley, whether it be malted or tounalted.
(Hear.) My right hon. friend the Chancellor of the • Ex-
chequer, whose faith in the legitimate laws of competition,
and whose vast information on all subjects belonging to
philo'sophical inquiry must make him at heart somewhat
sceptical as to the value of those experiments on which the
Board of Trade seem to rely, saw that in the application
of malted barley to cattle food there was an argument with
which it was difficult to cope ; and, therefore, in his Bill
of last year, he attempted to encourage the experiment of
malting barley exclusively for the purpose of cattle food.
I wish, like my hon. and learned friend, to do the amplest
justice to the enlightened consideration for the interests of
the meat consumer—in other words, for the whole popula-
tion of England, which is evinced by the intention of his
Bill. But I am sure that his candour will at once allow
that the effect of that Bill must be extremely partial. lam
ready to concede, for the sake of argument, that it has done
more good than is generally supposed; but, on the other
hand, it must be quite clear to him, it must be quite clear to
everyman of sense, that only a very small number of farmers
and stockkeepers will attempt the experiment of malting
for cattle food, with all the vexatious restrictions heaped
upon the experiment, with all their jealous dislike of the
exciseman,with all their natural and excusable desire not to
co-operate in assisting a contrivance by which the tax itself
is to be retained—a very small number, indeed, compared
with those who would grow barley for the sake of malting
if malt were free from duty and they could count on the
double profit of malting, both for the food of cattle and the
drink- of man. And out of that great increase in the
quantity of malted barley the larger part would neces-
sarily go to the food of cattle, because that is the proper
destination of the inferior barleys which at this moment
are almost a drug in the market. (Hear, hear.) But
apart from the direct application of malt to 'cattle food,
and apart from the report of the Board of Trade, and regard-
ing only the application of malt to the popular beverage of
malt liquors, the repeal of the malt tax would inevitably
tend to the increase of the quantity of stock kept. For
malt so applied, if free from duty, would be a new and large
item of profit to the farmer; it would thus increase the
general farming capital, and that increase of capital would
find its natural, because its most profitable, vent in the in-
crease of stock; while, if the working class paid less for
their beer than they do now, they would, of course, have
more to spend upon butchers' meat—(hear, hear)—and thus
there would be at once created an additional supply of and
demand for that main article of human food—meat, all
tending to the encouragement of keeping stock, and by the
manure produced from the stock all tending to the increased
fertility of our soil, even for wheat crops, and, therefore, all
tending to the cheapening of bread itself. (Hear, hear.)
For it is clear that the manure which the farmer would ob-
tain by growing untaxed barley he would devote to the
land which is to grow untaxed wheat. Is it not a strange
anomaly that you should say to the bread produce; "You
must give us the cheapest bread which unlimited competi-
tion with foreign countries can secure ;" and then inflict
on the bread grower a tax which directly frustrates your
object of cheap bread stuffs; because it mulcts the capital
by which the bread crops are produced at home, and cheats
the land of the nourishment which the bread crops require ?
(Hear, hear.) If this tax raises £6,000,000 a year from the
raw material of the agriculturist, what is it but £6,000,000
withdrawn from one of the most reproductive sources of the
wealth of the nation ? (Hear, hear.) I ask, then, is not
this relief essential to the consummation of free trade ? Is
it not the fair demand of skilled labour to he free from a
tax upon the raw material ? And if you wish that raw
material to be worked up so. as to contribute a fair benefit
to the consumer, do you suppose that you can effect that
object by the partial experiment of a handful of maltsters
with the exciseman at their backs, and all the complicated
machinery by which malt may be rendered unfit for the use
of man? No; you can only effect your object in the common
sense natural way, by the unshackled competition of the
cultivators of the soil, by whose skill, industry, capita], and
labour the raw material of the soil is to be raised and in-
creased. (Hear, hear.) Now there has been a strong attempt
to prejudice the true merits of this question by narrowing
them to the mere effect of the tax upon malt liquors. But
quite apart from that article of consumption, I think we
have shown that the tax affects the price of meat and of
bread; that it affects the productive fertility of the soil, and
therefore, of course, everything which the soil produces.
But its effect on malt liquor is not a thing to be ridiculed.
First, as to quality, I bring no charge against respectable
brewers. Ido not believe that they adulterate beer by any
deleterious ingredients. But the beer of the working class
is bought reta 1, and we are told by an eminent chemist that
the beer retailed to the working class is agreeably com-
pounded of quassia, wormwood, and coculus indicus, which
last has the special advantage of being a poison that insures
speedy intoxication. (A laugh.) So here I grant that you
may say to the working man, " It is true that the tax raises
the price of your 'beer, but then it gives you these two bles-
sings in return—it accelerates the stupefaction of drunken-
ness and shortens the probation of mortal life." (Laughter.)
Secondly, as to the effect of the duty on the price of liquors.
I, shall not here attempt to add anything to the calculations
of my hon. and learned friend. .Whether it only tax a quart
of malt liquor at 121- per cent., as my right hon. friend the
President of the Board of Trade assures us, or as my hon.
and learned friend contends, 50 per cent., that is a matter
Which I leave entirely to those more competent than myself
to deal with. 1 may indeed think it strange that malt liquor
is only taxed 12i- per cent., when the malt which we assume
to be its principal ingredient is taxed 70 pei cent., but I am
old enough to know there is no conjuring trick equal to
that of figures in the hands of a clever Minister. (Hear, and
a laugh.) lam contented to take my stand on the simple
certainty, which the President of the Board of Trade is the
last man to dispute, viz., that according to the law of compe-
tition, which affects the operations of trade, the repeal of the
Malt tax would give to the consumer of malt liquor his
most probable chance of having the best quality at the lowest
price, and while the tax lasts he certainly has neither. But
permit me to add that I think it would be difficult to per-
suade the working man that you apply your legislation fairly
to him when, in the name of free trade, you so largely re-
duce your duties on the beverage of the rich, .and then, in
the name of the revenue, refuse all mitigation of a tax on
such special Pains that
tghe best drink at the lowest
thet, e beverage
workng manof the
shallp o onro—t
havet ak i n
price that your last legislation on this subject exhausts the
ingenuity of mechanicians in 'order to exclude the man
from the advantage you are willing to give to a cow or a
pig. (Cheers and laughter.) But, sir, the malt tax is en-
titled to our first consideration, not only for the reasons I
have stated, but because it now stands prominently fore-
most.among the objects for which the income tax was first
imposed. (Hear, hear.) What' the farmers feel .and say is
this, " You have levied.an income tax of which we pay a
share, for the avowed object of
.establishing free trade as
the mainspring of all fiscal legislation. Availing yourselves
of this mighty instrument of the income tax, you have
given relief to other classes of the community in the taxes
or duties by which their energies were most crippled, or of
which ,their complaints were moat loud ; but, all alone, we
agriculturists have been thrust out of the pale of your be-
nignant consideration. (Hear, hear.) The exciseman
stands between us and the free culture of our soil, just as
he stood before free trade was an experiment tried upon
ourselves, or the income tax drew from our pockets money
Which has gone to the relief a. others. You have con-
ceded to fellow-sufferers far less. numerous than we are all
wthhoisechyou turn a
arguments against
deaf
the principle of excise duties to
ear
when they are urged by us.
Bricks and soaps and paper have all had priority over our
complaints. (Hear, hear.) But we now ask that the in-
come tax shall complete its object, and give us, however
tardily, some share of the relief which our contributions to
that income tax have so largely assisted to give to all
industrial occupations except our own." "Oh," but it is
said, "we do not dispute the justice of your demand, but
then your grievance is so lucrative to the Exchequer. How
can you expect us to repeal all at once a duty that yields
£6,000,000 a year? A mere reduction would not satisfy
the agitators,, and would not get rid of the exciseman."
And, finally, reasoners of this kind sum up by saying,
"Since we cannot give you all, we will give you nothing."
(Cheers.) But is that the way Reformers deal with reforms ?
—(loud cheers)—or is it in that way we ought to rest and
be thankful ? Why, every abuse would last to the end of
time if one party did not concede a something and the other
Party Accept a something as an instalment of the whole de-
mand. (Hear.) Do not forgot that in this motion we do
not ask you to take off the whole tax all at once. We only
ask you to begin to take it off by any instalment you have ,
to spare, and continue to bear us in mind whenever you
can take off old taxes without imposing new ones. I do
not deny that I desire and that I argue for the ultimate and
total repeal.ul thiS tax ; but I say. this on behalf of the far-
mers, that the/are like other Englishmen—show them that
you are in gamest to redress their grievance, and they, in
turn, will have confidence in you as to the mode and manner
of doing so, without too sudden a derangement of your finan-
cial operations ; but do not dismiss them by the mockery of
saying, "Since we cannot at once give yell complete justice,
we. will give you no justice at all." (Hear, hear.) Instead
of justice we give you a report from the Board of Trade. I
respectfully entreat hon. gentlemen on both sides of the
house to regard this question with that fairness and freedom
from prejudice which I am sure is their natural desire upon
all matters ,that affect the general interests of the com-
munity. Do not be biassed against the motion because it
emanates from these benches; do not suffer it to become a
Nifty question, and do not regard it as a mere farmers'ques-
tion, on which you have no interest if farmers are not your
constituents. It is one of those instances in which the griev-
ance of the producer is the wrong of the consumer. (Hear.)
And, indeed, if I have proved to you how the tax raises
the price of meat, meat is •much more consumed by your
constituents in towns than by our labourers in the counties.
(Hear.) And now as to the amount of the tax. Is it really
so great a difficulty if you will but grapple with it ? The
Chancellor of tho Exchequer told us last year, on introduc-
ing his Budget, that since 1860-61 the real diminution in
our taxation had been £6,668,000. That is within three
years above £500,000 more than the proceeds of this malt
tax which, we are now told is protected from even an ap-
proach by the sanctity of its colossal injustice ! Yet so
safely to the revenue did you sweep away more than six
millions and a half of taxes on industry in three years that
last year you had two millions and a half again to give
away, and this year I believe you have the same. All these
great reliefs were effected because you wore in earnest to

The amendment was seconded by Mr. WHITE.

effect them while you could avail yourselves of the income
tax. Be only as earnest to complete, by this relief, the ob-
jects of that income tax, and ways and means will be found
in this case, as they have been found in others, on which a
relief to the national industry has proved to be the readiest
means to increase the national income. I have always said
of this House of Commons, in which it is more than SO years
since I first had the honour of a seat, that there has never
been a popular assembly, on the whole, so alive to the
principles of political honour, nor an aristocratic assembly,
on the whole more desirous of doing equal justice between
man and man ; and it is from a respectful but profound
conviction that neither according to honour and justice
you can play fast and loose with those professions and
pledges in free trade which makes the repeal of the malt
tax the logical and inevitable consequence of the corn law,
that I entreat you not to reject the motion of my hon. and
learned friend. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. NEATE, moved, as an amendment, that considering
the immunities from taxation now enjoyed by the owners
and occupiers of land, they were not entitled to any special
consideration on account of the pecuniary pressure of the
malt tax ; and that if, on other grounds, that tax
should be reduced or abolished, compensation to the re-
venue should be sought, in the first instance, by with-
drawing from landed property the advantage it now had
over other property in the shape of total exemption from
probate duty and partial exemption from succession duty
and income tax.

Mr. DUCANE supported the motion ; and in the reply
to the remarks of Mr. Neate, observed that the landed in-
terest had special burdens from which other classes were
exempt, and that the extinction of the malt duty ought in
justice and good faith to be a consequence of corn law re-
peal.
Mr. THOMPSON, in opposing the motion, contended
that the removal of the tax would not confer the advantage
upon the farming interest that was spoken of by its advo-
cates, for it was still a moot point whether barley was not
as good as malt for feeding purposes, whilst the only land
that would be really benefited would be the lighter descrip-
tions occupied by sheep farmers.

Mr. MORRITT said that if he were Chancellor of the
Exchequer, in possession of a surplus, the course he should
take would be to reduce the income tax a penny, sweep
away the fire insurance duty altogether, and keep over the
balance of the surplus for another year to enable him to
remit £4,000,000 of malt tax.
Mr. HARDCASTLE suggested the withdrawal of the
amendment, to enable him to move the " previous ques-
tion," of which he had given notice. He also observed
that, so far as the interests of consumers were concerned,
there was every reason to believe that the tax was, after
all, a very small burden, whilst it did not by any means
injuriously affect the barley growers ; on the contrary, the
growers of the superior barley received. a large bonus
through the operation of the duty. One result of repeal-
ing the tax must be an accompanying remission of 255. a
quarter. They might, therefore, anticipate a vast impor-
tation of foreign malt, which would compete with the bet-
ter sorts of English barley, and though itself of an inferior
description would force down the price of the native grown
produce.
Col. BARTELOTT characterised the argument of Mr.
Hardcastle as a defence of the monopoly enjoyed by the
brewers. His conviction was, and it was supported by the
highest authority, that if the tax were repealed the best
barleys would command a better price than at present, and
the barley trade generally would be greatly invigorated.
The maltster, being then untrammeled, would go into the
market and buy different classes of barley at their real and
full value. At present the poorer sorts of grain, not find-
ing purchasers, became a drug in the market. As to the
feeding properties of malt, experiments conducted by Lord
Leconfield and Mr. Rigden showed that it competed ad-
vantageously even with oil-cake ; and there could be no
doubt that malt made a much better manure than barley.
He asked the house to sanction a reduction of the duty as
an instalment towards ultimate repeal.
Mr. GIBSON admitted that the first portion of the mo-
tion bore a moderate aspect, but thought it was unnecessary
to assume that this duty or any other would not be consi-
dered by a Government that was about to propose a reduc-
tion of indirect taxation. To ask the house, however, to
agree to this resolution would be to tie the hands of the
present and all future Administrations, and bind them to
the solemn promise that, whatever might be the claims of
other interests, and whatever the circumstances of the
country, a deaf ear was to be turned to all claimants except
those who required the abolition of the malt tax. If the
motion were carried, Parliament would be unable to dis-
regard it, and unless rescinded, it pledged itself not to re-
peal any indirect tax until this £6,000,000 was got rid of.
Moreover, the abolition of the malt duty would be a mea-
sure of injustice to other parts of the kingdom; for whereas
the relief it would give in England would be ss. sd. per
head of the population, in Scotland it would only be is.
10d. per head, and in Ireland Is. Id. per head. In his
opinion, public feeling preferred a reduction of the duties
on tea and sugar to that upon malt or any alcoholic drinks.

Mr. HENLEY, treating the question as one of revenue,
said that all previous experience showed that reductions of
duty had been accompanied by an increased consumption,
and there was no reason why a similar result should not
ensue from the abrogation of the malt tax. Comparing
the operation of the duty on malt with that on wine, the
right hon. gentleman contended that to the person who
bought by retail the former was a charge of 30 per cent. as
against only 7 per cent. upon the latter. He looked upon
the question as equally affecting producer and consumer,
farmer and labourer; and seeing that the duty on wine
and brandy had been reduced, he thought the claim of the
poor,man to a remission of say one-half the malt duty was
an act of justice, whilst in the course of a year or two the
revenue would be completely recouped.
Mr. NEATE then withdrew his amendment, whereupon
Mr. HARDCASTLE moved the previous question.
The house then divided on the motion " That this ques-
tion be put." The numbers were—
Ayes ... 171
Noes ... 251.
Majority against putting the question —BO
The question, therefore, upon Sir F. Kelly's motion, was
not put from the chair.
The announcement of the numbers was received with
loud cheers. .

Leave was given to Mr. BLAKE to bring in a bill to
amend the act for the regulation of municipal corporations
in Ireland ; to Sir R. PEEL a bill to provide for superan-
nuation allowances to officers in unions in Ireland ; to Mr.
COWPER two bills for acquiring additional lands for im-
proving the sites of the new public offices in Downing-
street and the India-office.

The other business on the paper was also disposed of,
and the house adjourned at half-past one o'clock.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TIMES.—We seem to have arrived at that turning
point of the American war which brings us, as it
were, within sight of the final scene and the part we
shall be called on to play in it. The almost undisputed
progress of a Federal army through Georgia and South
Carolina, and the successive surrender. of strong-
holds believed to be impregnable at its very ap-
proach, are by no means the only signs of Confede-
rate exhaustion. The great maritime cities, for the
defence of which such immense sacrifices had been
made, have long been occupied by miserable rem-
nants of their former population. Two months ago,
as appears from the letters of our correspondent,
Charleston, the very cradle of the " rebellion," was
a deserted and half-ruined city ; the cattle pastur-
ing, and even the partridge bringing up her brood,
in the streets. No wonder that men could not be
found to stay the progress of Sherman. Every
place was under-garrisoned, and could not spare
soldiers without inviting attack. Material of all
kinds was wanting. If the garrison of Fort Fisher,
profiting by the experience of the first attack, had
supplied themselves with two or three rifled guns of
larger calibre, 'or had they completed the earthworks
where the causeway from the river ran into the fort,
or had they obtained the services of more officers
acquainted with• the works than the two who fell
' wounded early in the affair, or had the scanty gar-
rison not been raw recruits, then the fort ought not
to have fallen; but in all these " ifs" we read the
lamentable condition of the Confederate cause. The
men, the guns, the officers, the labour were simply
not forthcoming, and without them forts cannot be
held,, nor battles won. Energy, and even confi-
dence, it is said, are also on the decline. The Caro-
linas and their Southern neighbours showed the
true Southern temperament at the outbreak of the
struggle, when Virginia held back ; but it is she now
that holds her ground in the very face of the foe.
History and military criticism, however, will have a
good deal to say on the defence of -Richmond when
all is over. If that defence is now, as it is said,
maintained by only 35,000 against thrice that num-
ber, then the Confederates cannot complain of the
capital; and, whatever the object, that force does
well which keeps thrice its number in check. But
the strength of the whole Confedeiacy has long been
drained for the sake of the capital, when head-
quarters could as easily have been established in a
less assailable position. That, however, has been
the case on both sides, and it is very remarkable
that when the founders of the Union made it part
of their plan to do as much as possible without a
capital at all, except just for the convenience of
common deliberation, the chief features of this war
should be the obstinate defence of two capitals at
a cost of blood and treasure beyond' all proportion
to their value. The exhaustion we have mentioned
is the point to which speculations on the probability
of peace have been most generally confined. The
Confederates began with a much less population of
whites than the Federals ; and this disparity was
practically increased by the great distance of some
of the States, and the want of communication. It
was enough if the Southern and Western States of.
the Confederation could defend themselves. But
as the war advanced the Federal cause was continu-
ally and largely recruited by immigration, a re-
source entirely wanting on the other side. Europe
therefore saw with admiration the gallant stand

made by the Confederates, their military genius,
and their personal courage ; but it saw also that the
end was only a question of time on one side or of
weariness on the other. It appears as if the South
is exhausted by the war before the North is
wearied of it, and that the end is not far. The
cause is simply bleeding to death. The Confede-
rates can make peace whenever they please by re-
turning to the Union, and they will find the way
made easy. As to conditions of peace, it is need-
less to discuss more than one, and that is a joint
stock of grudges against this country. As in many
other quarrels, a common object of hatred is the
occasion and ground of reconciliation. The trea-
suries of the two sides will not produce a large sum
but their grievances with England mount up to
something considerable. We are prepared for this
A bloody quarrel must leave bitter remembrances
and much indignation. These must have an object,
and if the combatants shake hands the next victim
that can be found is an unconcerned and unsympa-
thetic bystander. Who better indeed than the po-
liceman himself, if he can be attacked with impu-
nity ? As the Federal Government maintains that
it has a quarrel with us in the shape of claims which we
do not acknowledge, and it has a great deal to gain
by a successful war with us, the question to which we
have to address ourselves is simply whether they
can go to war with us with a fair prospect of suc-
cess. If they can, they certainly will. The first
consideration that occurs is that if the Confederates
are exhausted, the Federals are only less so ; and if
the latter only succeed by the exhaustion of their
Southern foe, they are not likely to find success
easy by turning against a new foe, with untouched
strength and resources. It is true that there is a
large army, many of whom may be called veterans,
and all in the hands of men with some experience of
actual fighting. But the soldier, in all ages, after a
certain period of hardship, pines for repose, and
longs for his snug farm, even though after a brief
interval he is again ready for fighting. Throughout
the whole of the States industry is more or less at a
standstill for want of men, and it offers wages that
compete with the enormous bounties and pay of the
soldier. The attraction of peace will be irresistible
after five years or more of this desperate work. So
we must consider whether the men will enlist again
for a new war against a new and certainly not less
vigorous foe. They must be paid first on the old
account ; and there is not a soldier in the service
whose pay is not many months in arrears. But that
will be a trifle compared with the new bill. The
American Treasury, hopelessly insolvent, will have
to try conclusions with the Treasury which paid a
hundred millions sterling for one war 10 years ago,
and has been reducing taxation ever since. It would
have to do this with a crippled commerce, for though
both would play this game, America would have her
full share of its forfeits. For every Alabama that
has sneaked out of our ports a hundred would steam
out with the British colours. New York, too, which
has hitherto fought at a distance and given money
rather than men, would have to bear the brunt of
the new struggle, and might haply share the fate of
Charleston, Savannah, and a few other of its victims.
The Federal territory might not be inviolate, and
if Canada can be reached it can also strike home.
Long wars, distant enterprises, familiarity with com-
mand, the exercise of proconsular authority, the
mutual jealousies of chiefs, and a real dictatorship
at head-quarters, are sure in the end to break up a
Republic. The statesmen of that Republic have
lately had some reason to survey their past policy,
domestic as well as foreign, and to apply to it
higher and truer principles than those which satisfy
the vulgar tests of everyday life. They may pos-
sibly have come to the conclusion that States are
not to be founded on violence, aggression, and fraud.
They may discover that, after all, the New World
is amenable to the same moral code, the same poli-
tical wisdom, the same laws of providence, as the
Old. On comparing notes, they may find that the
men and the States that successively started with a
very reasonable hope of conquering and annexing
all Asia, all Europe, all Africa, and even all together,
did not succeed, and had even to pay fearful penal-
ties, sooner or later, for the very attempt. So, put-
ting all things together, we are inclined to believe
that the Government of Washington will not attack
us immediately on the conclusion of the present war,
and that it will therein show its wisdom. It would,
however be most inconvenient, and costly, and dis-
agreeable to have the quarrel hanging over our
heads waiting for American convenience and oppor-
tunity. When the time comes our statesmen will
have to see that we are not placed, under that pen-
nance. If that, indeed, is to be our fate, and if we
are to live in daily expectation of news that the
United States have marched upon our provinces for
the satisfaction of some old claims vamped up for
the purpose, we may be excused if we are less
anxious to see the present war over than we other-
wise should be.

POST.—If General Lee, in the carrying out of his
plans for establishing the independence of his coun-
try, should find it necessary. to abandon Richmond
as Charleston has been abandoned already, and
leaving to the Federals a worthless and anything
but glorious acquisition, they will then be in posses-
sion of the principal places on the confines of the
South—and of very little 'besides. The prosecution
of the war by the invaders, without the aid, direct
or indirect, of their ships, will be something very
different to what it has been 'hitherto. The chief
points on the circumference of the Confederacy
having been secured, such as the forts on the
Atlantic and in the Gulph of Mexico, together
with the Mississippi, and Richmond--if Rich-
mond should really fall the work of occu
pying the interior will have to be commenced.
Of what value that occupation is likely to
be we have some, though not adequate, illus-
tration in Louisiana. But, to overrun a coun-
try of the magnitude of the Southern Confederacy
will be a work of time, even with Richmond as a
base for Federal operations, instead of being, as it
is now and may for an indefinite time continue to
be, a bulwark which the Federals cannot pass. But
the occupation of all the chief towns of the South
by no means implies a cessation of the war. In the
form of guerilla hostilities it might be prolonged for
almost any length of time, even after the large armies
had been disbanded. But it isnot until after the regu-
lar operations of the war are at an end, as well as
after the convulsive efforts of guerilla tactics have
failed, that the process of pacification can, in such
a country as the Southern States, be commenced ;
and this part of thetask which the North has under-
taken would be the most difficult of all. If, then,
we look at the actual position of affairs, the pro-
gress which the North fancies it has hitherto made
towards what it calls the restoration of the Union is
as nothing compared with that which would have to
be passed through before the South were reduced
even to such a condition of reluctant passivity as
that which Poland exemplifies at the present time
relatively to Russia. Is it likely that even such a
restoration of the Union as this should ever be
achieved by the Federals ? Their armies, accord-
ing to the latest news, were in an exceedingly
critical position. There appears to be no doubt
of the ability of General Lee to assemble under his
standard the entire forces of the Confederacy long
before there was any possibility of massing the armies
of Sherman and Grant together for united action
against the South. What, then, is to prevent Lee,
thus reinforced, from overwhelming Grant and
Sherman in detail? The discomfiture of Grant alone
would be sufficient to stop the progress of Sherman,
who would then have to seekothe refuge of the fleet;
and General Lee might carry the war into the
Northern States, with most important results.
The time has unquestionably come when the South
is about to make a supreme effort, which may have
the effect of repelling the invaders, and which, even
if it fails, will not leave the Confederacy in any
worse position than at present. Now that all the
Southern armies are under the control of
one mind, there is likely to be that har-
mony in their arrangements, and that adapta-
tion of means to end, which is not to be found in a
divided command. It has been, at the very moment
when the North has been upon the point, as it
fancied, of striking the decisive blow, that it has
found itself signally defeated, with all its work to
begin over again. What has happened so often on a
comparatively small scale may again take place
upon a much larger one, with proportionatelylarger
consequences. We have been just told by one of
the highest living authorities, enforcing the doctrine
of one of the profoundest writers of the last century,
that if the fate of a country is decided by a single
war, it was because there was a more general and
permanent cause at work beneath- the surface of
things. H the resolution of the Southern people
should remain firm for independence, is it feasible to
suppose that the Federals will ever make so much
progress as is implied in the defeat of the main
Confederate armies, and the occupation of the
country ? Will not the rising of the people en
masse preN ent this ? But even supposing that a
combination of adverse circumstances should render
it possible, still, if their determination and spirit
remain firm, a people of six millions can never be
permanently subdued and held by a commercial
nation of three times their number. A commercial
nation would soon discover that the experiment
was not worth the cost. A nation of patriots six
millions strong, who have been able to do what
the South has done, are sure, if they retain the
will, to find their way to independence. There
was a point in her history when Rome was in a
far worse plight than the Southern Confede-
racy. Hannibal held for years undisputed posses-
sion of all Italy, and had shut the Romans up in
their capital. Yet the spirit of the people remained
unbroken, and their firm will enabled them to
triumph in the end. The Federals and their parti-
sans appear to entertain very singular notions about

the progress of the war. However slight or delusive
the advantages gained by the North, there seems to
be no end to their joy and congratulations. They
appear to have thought that there was to be an end
of the war and a restoration of the Union imme-
diately after Grant took Vicksburg, and when he
uttered his boast about marching to Richmond in
given line if it took him all last summer. The saw!
sanguine expectations were raised by the capture o!
Atlanta, and then again by that of Savannah ;
now that Charleston has been abandoned, and pa,7..
of a profound plan of defensive strategy, there ig
surd boasting in the North about the rebellion beh!F
upon the point of suppression. The Federals
it may be safely asserted, have to gain more impor-
tant victories than any which have yet crowul
their arms before they have got possession of the
the principal points even on the mere confines of
Confederacy. A still more desperate ordeal Nvetu.o-
"_
be gone through before they occupied the Soutll 1
the sense of making themselves masters of the Prin.
cipal places in the interior. And after that al
would find before them the most arduous word
of all—the work of pacifying the count which
restoring by force a Union the essence of
is friendship and consent. But it is not JAthiseY
that matters will ever go so far a 2„„
point. The Federals cannot but know the '7411,5ei
ticable nature of such an enterprise ; at leas' "hey
would find it out by experience long before t_e
have even overrun the South ; assuming, of course
that they should continue successful instead of we'of
ing with some crushing overthrow at the ha_incishat
Lee and his lieutenants. When it is suPlx's' ri,
enough has been done for what the North call gic'heir
they will probably find it expedient to stop
career of bankruptcy and ruin, and cease to sttrg.
themselves in the vain hope of destroying the S°u