The Sun.
London, England, 1865-06-20 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF TER PUBLIC JOURNALS•

TIMES.—The King of Prussia has once more
parted in anger from his Parliament. One of the
Powers of the State has felt it its duty to administer
a severe lecture to the other. So it has always been
in Constitutional struggles. The King invariably
assumes to himself the position of the injured party,
and, by virtue of that " divinity which doth hedge
a King," the right to lecture his Parliament to
whatever extent he may feel necessary. Parliament,
on the contrary, uniformly takes a humble and de-
ferential attitude, and, however firm in matters of
substance, is tame and yielding as far as the mere
form of its proceedings is concerned. This custo-
mary contrast was never better illustrated than in
the very simple proceedings between the King of
Prussia and his Parliament. The truth is that the
King has flagrantly and notoriously, again and
again, violated the Constitution which he has
solemnly sworn to observe. He has laid before his
Parliament a Budget which they have refused to
adopt, and on their refusal he has taken and spent
the money without any authority at all. This prac-
tice has been habitual in Prussia for the last three
years, and if use and wont could overrule a written
Constitution in this instance they would have done
so. The King of Prussia has been guilty of these
unconstitutional acts under the advice of M. Bis-
mark, into whose soul must have migrated the spirit
of all the arbitrary Ministers who have oppressed
mankind from the days of Strafford to those of
Metternich. By way of rendering his proceedings
still more offensive, the King makes this very
Minister the medium through which it is his pleasure
to communicate ; so that the Assembly of Prussia
have the double pleasure, of being lectured by their
Sovereign because he has violated and they have
observed the Constitution, and of receiving that
lecture from the lips of a Minister who, if right were
a little stronger and might a little weaker in Prus-
sia, would have to answer for the evil counsels he
has given his King and the mischief he has brought
upon his country. Nor was the language of the
speech less irritating than the occasion on which it
was made and the person by whom it was delivered.
The King says that if the welfare of the country had
been the supreme object of all parties decisive results
for its welfare might have been obtained; but this
was not the case. In other words, Royal courtesy
tells the Assembly, not that they have been mis-
taken in the means which they have employed, but
that they never intended to promote the good of the
country. They have shown an intention to place
difficulties in the way of the Ministry by rejecting
the Budget, the Bills for the reorganization of the
army, the increase of the Prussian fleet, and the ex-
penses of the Danish War. The Assembly have
refused demands which the Government was com-
pelled to make. Instead of the desired understand-
ing the Session closes in mutual estrangement, and
the Government hopes that the day is not far dis-
tant when the nation, through its representatives, will
thank the King for the course he has pursued. It
is difficult to imagine language more foolish than
this, or better calculated to excite popular passion
against the person who uses it. We know that the
King claims his Crown by right Divine, but he has
not yet told us whence he obtained the power of
being always in the right, and the certainty that his
subjects must be always in the wrong. Does the
absolute nature of the title he sets up, proceeding as
it professes to do from a supernatural source, irra-
diate his mind with a corresponding amount of wis-
dom, and place him as much above the power of
being wrong as he believes himself above the danger
of being dethroned ? Certainly we should have
thought it enough to violate the law under which he
reigns, without reproaching those who have only set
him the example which he ought to have set them,
and refused to follow him in his violation of duty.
The people of Prussia have been appealed to more
than once in. this quarrel, and it is but justice to
them to say that they have given no doubtful or
uncertain answer. Again and again, by the most
crushing majorities, they have returned a Parlia-
ment faithful to the laws of the land and the rights
of the nation. Again and again have the decisions
of that Parliament been set aside by a Prince who,
while he knows no law but his own will, still clings
to forms of Constitutional Government, and is for
ever reproaching those whose money he takes by
force because they have not laid it, as a voluntary
offering, at his feet. The prorogation,which puts us
in mind only too forcibly of some of the most melan-
choly periods in our own history, was succeeded by
a short debate in the Lower House, in which down-
right Herr Grabow, the President, whose speech
at the opening of the Session attracted so much
attention, spoke very plainly, as is his wont, on the
present state of affairs. " The debates," he says,
" have given a gloomy picture of the internal condi-
tion of the country. The King complains that no
understanding is arrived at, but what he demands
is the submission of the Chamber. He tries to
transform a constitutional State into an absolute
police and military despotism, but his efforts will be
wrecked upon the loyalty of the people to the Con-
stitution, manifested in three elections, and if we
may judge by the language of the King's Speech,
about to be manifested in a fourth." This remark-
able harangue was succeeded by three cheers for the
King, given at the proposal of the President him-
self. It is thus, as we have seen over and over
again, that princes trifle with those precious mo-
ments which separate the first period at which a na-
tion becomes thoroughly convinced that its rights
are invaded from the second. From the time when
reverence for existing laws and institutions is fairly
worn out the nation divides itself into two camps--
the adherents of absolute power on the one side,
and the champions of popular supremacy on the
other. No one except the King of Prussia would
say that his subjects have not shown themselves a
patient and long-enduring people. They have seen
the same Government which tramples on their
dearest rights over and over again challenge them
to record their opinion on its conduct, and over and
over again, when that opinion has been given against
it, treat the will of the nation with the most super-
cilious contempt. Has the King of Prussia consi-
dered how long these things are to go on ? Does he
think that by perpetually violating the rights of his
subjects he will reconcile them to their violation, or
that by repeatedly setting at naught the opinion of
the country he will inspire it with a respect for his
own? Certainly no King has ever been more fortu-
nate in the constitution of his Parliament than this
very King of Prussia, whose whole life seems to be
spent in thwarting its wishes and abrogating its pri-
vileges. Our rough ancestors would have risen in re-
bellion long before this had they been submitted to
Buchan ordeal as Prussia has of late years undergone;
but the Prussian Parliament, to its honour be it
spoken, has been as temperate as it has been firm,
and, while insisting on the maintenance of its own
rights, has scrupulously avoided any attack upon
the other branches of the Legislation. The Danish
War was populated with the people of Prussia, but
they have not suffered themselves to be dazzled by
military success, nor shown the least willingness to
sell their liberties in exchange for its barren and
inglorious triumphs. With all their respect and
their defence, they are gradually urging the King
to the edge of a precipice over which he must be
precipitated unless, even at the last moment, he
consents to change his policy. He has long ap-
propriated the revenue with Out the consent of his
Parliament ; he will soon be driven, unless he can
come to terms with them, to raise taxes by prero-
gative. From that moment even semblance of
Constitutional Government is at an end, reconcilia-
tion becomes impossible, and the two parties must
sit watching each other with the resolution of avail-
ing themselves to the very utmost of the first ad-
vantage which the imprudence of their adversary
or their ow n good fortune may place at their dis-
posal.

POST.--If the condition of living in the presence
of a danger be inevitable, and the danger itself
irremediable, then the sooner that fact is established
the better for all concerned. It is quite time to
come to some conclusionlon that point, in respect to
the labour of coal mining. Hardly a month passes
without a record of some disaster from the explo-
sion of fire-damp ; hardly a year without a catas-
trophe so vast, a sacrifice of human life so tremen-
dous, that the parallel is not to be found, save in
the experience of active warfare. A comparatively
safe coal* field of Wales was on Friday last the
scene of another disaster from-fire-damp explosion,
greater than any subsequent to the Risca calamity,
when no fewer than a hundred and forty-two men
and boys were killed. The explosion which happened
on Friday, and of which the New Bedwellty pit
was the scene, resulted in a destruction of human
life, not so tremendous as the former indeed,
amounting to only twenty-six men and boys in all,
yet the number is, in itself, of startling magnitude,
to have occurred in any peaceful calling. It, more-
over, is associated with special circumstances that
would have demanded comment, even though ex;
plosion had not been attended with destruction of
human life. The case is one that goes further to
prove the inefficiency of Davy's lamp than any we
remember to have come under notice ; an assertion
that will be made good when we review the facts as
already evolved in evidence. The New Bedwellty,
pit belongs to the Tredegar Company. 'Hitherto it
has not had the character of being what is technically
called a " fiery" or a " sulphury" working—that is
to say, the fire-damp, although occurring there
sometimes, has never established itself continuously.
From time to time it has been necessary to test the
workings for fire-damp, and, when the latter was
discovered, it has been deemed expedient to work
by the reduced glimmering of the safety lamp of
Davy. Ordinarily, however, the workings have been
carried on by naked light ; and this brings us to
the point of testimony which strongly impugns the
safety of Davy's so-called safety lamp, According

to a regulation long established for the working of
this mine, it was the duty of a fireman to descent'
the shaft every morning to test for the presence or
absence of explosive gas, and report accordingly
dependent upon which report the use either of safety
lamps or of naked lights for the time being was mica'
On Friday morning last, in pursuance of this regli;
lation, the fireman, John Jehu, went down, and
came up reporting the presence Of fire-damp in tha,i
department of the workings occupied by a man and
boy—David Jones and his son. Thereupon work-
ing by naked light was interdicted to these personsi
they were furnished with safety lamps ; and, arnica
against the enemy with these, they went down the
pit under full consciousness of the danger imminent
But, as may also be reasonably assumed, they Wen
down under as full an assurance that the Davy
lamp was, as they had often been -told, a completesafeguard; that no casualty from fire-damp exPIT
sion could happen to any individual thus protected.
That which did happen the record makes known'
Through fire communicated by these very lamb
—or, it may be, one of them—the explosive gas
ignited—blew up, and twenty-six human beioE,
were killed in a moment. Having regard to tin
immediate results of explosion, the calamity is "'"
great as in many cases when the actual destructie?,
of human life has been far more considerable. ;
usually happens that the " choke-damp," aB
is called—the resultof foul air accumulating throug
the break down of ventilating appliances, the con;
sequence of explosion—has been more destructive to
human life than the fire-damp immediately. Forta;
nately the means for insuring the ventilation of thi
New Bedwellty pit were more eficient than usual,
They did not break down under the shock of expl°..,'
sion, for which reason the death-roll of twenty-s,`
",
was not swelled by casualties resulting from ti',o
operation of choke-damp. The point to which Is
would draw especial attention is the following
Here is a case in which the ignition of fire-damp
actually brought home to the safety lamp—the in;
strument specially designed to guard against it,With
vaunted as unimpeachable whilst untampered
or not disordered. The most cursory review °f
attendant circumstances will show that the case 1'
far more illustrative than it would have been if, insi
stead of using the safety apparatus in an exception
way, the daily routine working of the pit had been
carried on by the illumination of safety 1030'
Under the last assumption the efficiency of the 1i
strument at any particular time could not be guat"
ranteed ; whereas, in the case under notice, the
guarantee is ample. That the two lamps take
down by father and son—delivered to them imlne"n
diately from store—were out of order is an assurn2,.-
tion so improbable, so next to impossible, that we
will at once dismiss it. The only hypothesis 0P
which the postulate of infallibity of the Davy 10;
can be upheld is, that the instruments taken elown/.°
one of them at least, was tamperedwith. Here WI::
in reference to this, we say that such an assuniPti!i,
is improbable—up to the very verge of the imPos'd
ble ; and this, be it observed, is the very limit f.
deMonstrative evidence such a case admits ,c)
Demonstration to the absolute there cannot vet
inasmuch as, in all the instances of fire-darort's
ignition by so-called safety lamps, the instrunlen.,h
are destroyed by the explosive shock vtl'io
follows. In such a case the utmost one can do
strike a balance of probabilities, and act ace°r„;
ingly. Even in the absence of all collateral e"„-f
dence bearing upon this matter, the peculiarities
‘‘`',
this most recent explosion are such that
would reduce the claims of infallibility urged °tit
behalf of Davy's lamp to a very low status.
other evidence there is and plenty of it. P, °,3
often will it be needful for us to state, as we 0.30,
stated on many previous occasions, that DavY In 0
self, the inventor, who should best have knowbe;
never regarded his lamp as infallible ? 11° 00
assured of this one has only to peruse his book
flame, wherein he acknowledges the lamp to be 'lll'o
safe in the presence of a current of air; and t!
advises a miner to guard the lamp with his Our
Now, the very essence of mine ventilation is a
rent. The better ventilated a mine, the strong iti
the current ; and thereby, anomalous thole „,
may seem, under some circumstances the more 1-I'o
safe. Other causes of danger to the safety bny,
are now well known ; the chief of which being ds
hesion of coal dust externally. Here then stance
the fact : the Davy lamp may be regarded as 5,30,
under the two stipulations, that air currents 51' of
not exist and that coal dust be absent. Is it /l
time to ask whether these conditions are notir
separable from the practice of coal mining ?