The Sun.
London, England, 1865-07-05 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TlMES.—After the debate in the House of Com-
mons on Monday night our readers will not be sur-
prised to learn that the Lord Chancellor has tendered
his resignation, and that Lord Palmerston has ad-
vised her Majesty to accept it. It was announced
yesterday that Lord Westbury would only continue
to hold the Great Seal for two days until the urgent
business of his department was despatched. The
motion of Mr. Bouverie was undoubtedly one of
want of confidence. He professed in the most em-
phatic manner that he had no confidence in the Lord
Chancellor, and had that profession been omitted the
motion spoke plainly enough for itself. In the Ed-
munds case, the fault of granting the pension to a
most unworthy officer was divided in something like
equal proportions between the Lord Chancellor
and the Committee of the House of Lords. Had
the Chancellor done his duty in laying before the
committee the evidence against Mr. Edmunds which
had officially come to his hand, or had the com-
mittee done their duty by instituting an investiga-
tion which the knowledge they possessed opened to
them, the mischief could never have happened,
while in the case of Mr. Wilde the whole responsi-
bility fell upon the Chancellor alone. If we com-
pare the conduct of the committees of the two houses
which sat on these two cases we find nothing to ob-
ject to in the conduct of the committee of the House
of Lords, and very little indeed to approve in that of
the committee of the House of Commons. The com-
mittee of the House of Lords pronounced a distinct
censure o n all that part of the Chancellor's con-
duct which seemed fairly liable to animadversion
—on his permitting Mr. Edmunds to retire with
heavy charges proved against him, and on his with-
holding from the committee of the House of Lords
the evidence on which the pension was ultimately
cancelled. The committee of the House of Com-
mons pronounced a verdict which as we showed at
the time was not supported by the facts which they
culled out of the evidence and introduced into their
Report, and which is still less supported by the
whole evidence from which those facts were selected.
The acquittal of the Chancellor of all charge ex-
cept that of haste and want of caution in granting
a pension to Mr. Wilde grated harshly on the
public ear ; and we only anticipated what has
proved to be the opinion of every impartial person
when we said that, on the committee's own showing,
a very different conclusion followed necessarily from
the evidence before them. There were, in fact, three
substantial charges ageinst the Lord Chancellor, on
all of which the committee acquitted him in order to
find him guilty of a fourth, which, in a great magi-
strate so fully occupied and necessarily dependent on
the assistance of others, can scarcely be called a charge
at all. First, the Chancellor was charged with
being cognisant of the corrupt practices of his son ; '
secondly, that, although not cognisant of those cor-
rupt practices, the Chancellor ought not to have
given any weight to the recommendation of his son
in favour of Mr. Welch ; to which we may add, as
collaterally springing out of it, the appointment of
that son, who had been, as he says, " a disgrace and
a source of infinite sorrow and reproach to him for
the last ten years," to a Registrarship in the Court
of Bankruptcy; and, thirdly, the granting of a pen-
sion to Mr. Wilde, in face of his grave delinquencies,
on a certificate which any medical man might grant,
with equal propriety, to any middle-aged gentleman in
the kingdom. Of all these charges the committee of
the House of Commons acquitted the Lord Chancellor,
to find him guilty only of haste and want of caution
in granting a pension to Mr. Wilde—two faults of
which assuredly he was not guilty ; for haste in
this case means precipitancy, and want of caution
means absence of reflection, neither of which can
justly be charged to the Lord Chancellor, who had
well deliberated befor he acted, and was not in any
way taken by surprise. It is worth while to consider
for a moment the probable cause of this miscarriage.
The committee of the House of Lords was appointed
in the usual manner—indeed, it may be considered as
extravagantly favourable to the Chancellor, because
it contained no less than four of his colleagues, men
of honour and intelligence, but naturally disposed
to take a lenient view of his faults. The committee
of the House of Commons was appointed with a
view to the single virtue A impartiality ; it was
chosen of what are called " fair men," that is, gen-
tlemen of high character and undoubted integrity,
who are considered to be more free than the mass of
the house from the influence of party bias and poli-
tical animosity. To this committee were added two
eminent lawyers, without votes, to conduct the case
on either side. The result is curious, for while the
Lords' committee, appointed on the old principle of
taking a member alternately from each side, has
discharged its duty in a manner to which nobody
can take exception, the committee appointed with a
special view to fairness has produced a report which
even the Lord Advocate did not venture to propose
that the house should be content with. He, indeed,
annexed to the words of the committee a very grave
and pointed censure, implied in the recommendation
that some further check should be placed by law
upon the grant of pensions to the holders of legal
offices ; in other words, that the conduct of the
Lord Chancellor had been such as to render it neces-
sary that no future Chancellor should be allowed to
possess the power which he had enjoyed and abused.
It was a strange spectacle to see the members of the
committee rising one by one and giving their assent
to the amendment of Mr. Bouverie, which, coupled
with the speech by which it was introduced, entirely,
negatived the finding of the committee, and substi-
tuted for it a verdict of Guilty, oR the very points on
which the committee had pronounced a verdict of
acquittal. This seems to complete the proof, if any
fresh proof were wanting, that these gentlemen,
acting, no doubt, with the best intentions, were not
equal to the investigation which was intrusted to
them. The truth is that at the time in which we
live party spirit is so languid, and the business of
life has become so intricate and complicated, that in
an investigation of this kind we have much more
need of ability than impartiality. The great power
of public opinion, the discussions of the Press, and
the high feeling of honour which, we are happy to
think, actuates public men, guarantee fairness, but
give us no security for vigour of mind or keenness
of insight. To the House of Commons as a body
the greatest credit is due for its conduct in this case.
it really seems as if, in their desire to act fairly be-
tween the public whom they represent and a great
magistrate of commanding ability and considerable
public services, they had thrown aside the conside-
rations of party and risen to the height of judicial
impartiality. They acquitted the Lord Chancellor
of any knowledge of the corruption of his son, and
they convicted him, not of haste and want of caution
in the abstract, like their Committee, but of " a
laxity of practice and a want of caution with regard
to the public interests in sanctioning the grant of
retiring pensions to public officers against whom
grave charges were pending, which m the opinion
of this house are calculated to discredit the adminis-
tration of his great office." On the second charge,
that of acting on the recommendation of a son who
had been " a disgrace and a source of infinite sorrow
and reproach to him during the last ten years," the
house pronounced no opinion ; and, although we
have not hesitated to do so, we do not the least
question the propriety of their silence, especially as
the censure which they thought fit to pronounce
was not accompanied, like the Resolution of the
Committee, with a sweeping acquittal on all other
charges. We confess it is always withvery seriousap-
prehension that we see a personal question withwhich
the prospects of political parties may be considered
to be mixed up submitted to such an Assembly as
the House of Commons. History informs us that
it has not been in its judicial capacity that our great
Assembly has gathered its brightest laurels. There
is danger that the individual should be sacrificed to
the heats and interests of the moment, or that the
welfare of the public should be sacrificed to con-
sideration for the individual ; and if this danger
always exists, more especially is it to be apprehended
when the House sits, as at the present moment, in
daily expectation of dissolution. The House of
Commons has, we think, happily avoided both ex-
tremes, and, while vindicating with unmistakable
earnestness the cause of public morality and in-
tegrity, has refused to deal with more than was
absolutely necessary with the faults which it found
it impossible to overlook. It is only due to Mr.
Bouverie to record that in coming forward as he
did he has done good service to the country and the
Liberal party, of which he is an honest and con-
sistent member, by relieving them from the appear-
ance of unanimously postponing the public interest
to the ties of party and the mistaken necessities of
Government.

POST.—Yesterday the Americans of the United
States celebrated the anniversary of the Declaration
of Independence, and congratulated themselves on
the restoration of the Union. The former event
has lost all political significance. After the lapse
of nearly four score and ten years the secession of
the British colonies has not only been forgiven, but
almost forgotten in this country. The rebellion we
attempted to put down succeeded, and the Declara-
tion of Independence records our defeat. We ac-
cepted the fait accompli, and Englishmen of the
present day have no reason to regret the discretion
which their ancestors exercised. The reconstruction
of the lately divided republic is a matter of imme-
diate importance. We trust that the Americans will
be able to carry out an object for the attainment of
which they have made tremendous sacrifices. ,It is,
however, one thing to pour out libations and deliver
speeches on the restoration of the Union, and an-
other to give practical effect to the idea. Nor can
it be dissembled that the military subjugation of
the Southern States was, as compared with the
work which remins to be done, an easy operation.
There are problems war fails to solve, knots that
are not to be cut by the sword. Fora time it might

be possible to coerce States that have no longer the
heart or strength for resistance. But the policy that
compelled obedience and enforced loyalty would in-
evitably militate against the reconciliation on which
alone the Union can be permanently restored. On
the other hand, there are no doubt some grounds
for hesitating to make peace with the South on con-
ditions admitting of the redevelopment of its re-
sources. The revision of the Federal constitution is
at once an experiment and a precedent. That which
is now done by one party might hereafter be undone
by another party. There is, therefore, hard, solid
reason in the argument that reconstruction on the
basis determined upon can only be secured by mea-
sures which, it is assumed, the desired end would jus-
tify. The Southern spirit is not dead, and sleeping it
may still be dangerous. But the political difficulties,
formidable as they are, might possibly be reduced
to manageable . proportions if they were not
so terribly aggravated by social evils. It has been
truly remarked that slavery is a curse which pursues
those who trade upon it from generation to genera-
tion, and in point of fact the emancipated negroes
constitute the great obstacle to the consolidation of
the national unity. Their corpses are said to en-
cumber the woods of the famine-stricken State of
Georgia ; and in Richmond they are being driven to
work with the bayonet. These poor wretches are
now told that they are " men and brothers," not to
be kept and cared for as the personal property of
planters, who had an interest in their material well-
being ; but to them the change has brought un-
speakable misery. Although it is improbable that
the negro question was considered in the festivities
of the Fourth of July, it is the primary question to
be answered. Somebody must feed, and clothe,
and govern the wild black men who are swarming
over the face of the land. Philanthropy should look
to it, or the abolition of slavery will be anything but
a boon to the emancipated slaves. To starve them
into crime, and to hang them out of the way, is a
mode of provision scarcely compatible with the pro-
fessions of the Abolitionists. That, however, is
what idleness and license are leading to. To give
them small estates, and to admit them to the elective
franchise, is a proposition which may approve itself
to charitable people on this side of the Atlantic ;
but the Americans may not unreasonably entertain
objection to the suggestion on the score of race
and property. It is exceedingly probable that,
similarly situated, we should be equally intolerant.
One of the organs of the Abolition party has, in-
deed, intimated that for some time past we have
been fixed on the horns of this dilemma in Ireland,
and amiably menaces the Southern gentry with the
fate of the Irish. All we can say is that we sin-
cerely hope it will not be worse. But one thing
would appear to be evident, even upon the showing
of the Abolitionists themselves—the negroes must
be provided for, and specially protected by the Go-
vernment, or they must remain in a condition of
semi-slavery. It is very well for their so-called
friends to affirm that they should be received in
society on a footing of equality, and it may be com-
petent for Congress to pass a law regulating the rate
of wages to be paid to them ; but the rest clearly
depends on public opinion and the state of the
labour market. Now, the weight of public opinion,
in the North as well as in the South, is indisputably
averse from the logical consequences of the abolition
of slavery. It is not a party question. There is
generally an irrepressible repugnance to associating
with the negroes. This may not be right, but it is
natural. According to the theory of the Aboli-
tionists an emancipated slave should be eligible to.
sit in Congress, and to become President of the
United States. But as it is, a person with negro
blood in his veins is shunned. Of course in time
the feeling might be modified, but its modification
would necessarily to some extent change the
national character, and that is also not an imma-
terial consideration. Without going into any phy-
siological argument, there is prudence as well as
delicacy in the aversion that is manifested. It is
not a mere prejudice, but a deep-rooted conviction
which is susceptible of a rational explanation.
In truth, therefore, the reconstruction of the Union
has been complicated by the revision of the
Constitution. It is plain, too, that the secession of
the Southern States, and the course of the war,
enabled a comparatively small minority of the popu-
lation to take measures the tendency of which was
to re-establish the republic on purely democratic
principles, and consequently with a more centralised
system of administration. So that while the negro
element presents the main obstacle to be overcome,
or rather perhaps the point from which the majority
of the people may endeavour to defend the institu-
tions that date from the Declaration of Independence,
the reconstruction of the Union as proposed would
be an entirely new achievement. It may be agree-
able to observe the Fourth of July as a holiday, but
under a revised constitution, the Republic Wash-
ington declared independent will have entered into
another phase of its existence. For more than 80
years it controverted scepticism, standing firmly on
the ground its great Founder took lip, and it has
now come victorious out of a gigantic conflict. The
future, however, is beyond the scan of ordinary po-
litical prescience.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

.f.........,

LIVERPOOL-TUESDAY.

At our market to-day the demand for wheat was not so
active as on Friday, and only a moderate business was
effected at the currency of that day, being 2d per cental ad-
vance on the week. Oats scarce, and ld per bushel dearer.
There was a fair inquiry for flour at Friday's advance of
6d per sack. American flour also more saleable. Indian
corn in fair demand at late rates. Oatmeal 6d per load
higher.