The Sun.
London, England, 1865-03-13 00:00:00

The Chancellor and the Edmunds' Scandal.

TIIE " SATURDAY REVIEW."—It is the un-
happy fate of ' our excellent Chancellor to be
a standing subject of calumnious reports. There
is no Minister with whose name rumour
has been more disagreeably busy. There is
scarcely any part of his public conduct upon which
she does not lay her uncleanly finger. It is not our
business to refute the tittle-tattle of which the clubs
and Westminster Hall are full. It is easy to see
that the Chancellor is the victim of virtues which
are ill-appreciated by an envious world. But his
reputation, however much he may expose it, can
never be a matter of indifference to his countrymen.
After all, he is the best imitation of a Pope we have
got among us ; and the judgments by which he
regulates the belief of the faithful in the Church of
England are composed in a style nearly as exciting
as the Encyclical which has recently issued from St.
Peter's Chair.. We shall listen, therefore, with a salu-
tary scepticism to all reports prejudicial to his good
fame. Evidence in support of charges of misconduct
ought to be required to bear some proportion to the
dignity of the accused. It is said to be the law of
the Papal States, that charges of incontinence
against a Cardinal of the Church shall not be lis-
tened to Unless five witnesses of the fact can be pro-
duced. At least an equal amount of testimony ought
to be required before we believe any evil of
the high official who has been selected under' the
English law -to explain the articles of their faith to
Churchmen, and especially to enlighten them as to
the future destiny of the profligate, the mendacious,
and the corrupt. The latest difficulty in which the
guileless nature of the Lord Chancellor has involved
him threatens to be more embarrassing than any
with which he has hitherto had to deal. The prima
facie case is one which few persons would like to
find themselves called upon to confront ; but it rests
upon assumptions which, whatever their versimili-
tude may be, have not yet been established by proof.
There are some points which appear to be undis-
puted, and which have excited many uncomplimen-
tary observations ; but some material links are still
wanting to make up the story which the active
imagination of the public has woven out of the ad-
mitted facts. It is quite clear that Mr. Edmunds re-
signed, and it is also clear that his resignation gave to
the Chancellor an opportunity, of which he availed
himself with startling rapidity, to promote his son—
or at least, to use the cautious language of the Attor-
ney-General, a person who stood towards him in the
relation of a son. The Attorney-General never
employs language without a meaning ; and, though
the laity may not be able to see at the first blush,
no doubt the time will come when they will appre-
ciate the soundness and importance of the distinction
which the first Law Officer of the Crown has drawn
between the Chancellor's son and the person who
stands to him in that relation. Anyhow, the gentle-
man who apparently unites these two sharply-discri-
minating characters did, by the resignation of Mr.
Edmunds, obtain anuncommonly good appointment.
The feeling of the public, upon learning this fact,
naturally was that Mr. Edmunds' tenderness of
conscience had been very serviceable to the Chan-
cellor's family interests. The next point which came
to light was that, to all appearance, there was no
need that Mr. Edmunds should have resigned at
all. His offence was in no way connected with his
position in the House of Lords. Nor does it ap-
pear, as far as the facts are at present known, to
have involved a criminality which would have made
him necessarily incapable of retaining any other
public office. It is clear that the Law Officers of the
Crown did not think that there was enough in the
story to support a criminal charge ; and it is pro-
bable that Mr. Edmunds rather erred by continuing
a vicious tradition than by originating any mal-
practice of his own. This is the result to which the
speeches of Lord Derby and the Chancellor lead.
aluu--- men, it is naturally- asKea, how came he to re-
sign ? What was it that terrified him into so un-
wise a step, which has thrown him upon the world,
absolutely without official salary, after so many
years of official service. The answer is plain
enough. He knew that the Chancellor was about
to communicate to the House of Lords the charges
that had been made against him, and the position
in which he stood. Now here we get into the region
of conjecture. One reason, and one reason only,
could have determined Mr. Edmunds to resign his
office under the House of Lords without waiting to
see whether the house was really inclined to turn
him out or not ; and that reason must have been
a hope that, by resigning, he would obtain his pen-
sion, from which he might be barred if he waited till
the cause of his dismissal was made known. But
here comes the difficulty. Mr. Edmunds had been in-
formed that, if he continued to retain his office, the
Chancellor would lay the charges against him before
the House. Reasoning by ordinary analogy, he would
have inferred that the Chancellor would equally feel
himself bound to lay the charges before the com-
mittee appointed to decide upon the question of
giving him a pension. How came Mr. Edmunds to
foresee that the Chancellor would not do this ? It
is quite evident he must have foreseen it, or his re-
signation would have been without motive. The
Chancellor declares that he never told Mr. Ed-
munds of his intentions in this respect, or incited
him to resign by any promise that he would, in that
event, abstain. from disclosures that would imperil
his pension. Lord Westbury is far too cautious a
man to indulge in written promises ; and " tell" is
a coarse word to express the mode of communica-
tion by which the Chancellor's benignant intentions
might be conveyed to Mr. Edmunds's doubting
mind. But was no hint given by any one ? Was no
understanding encouraged ? These are questions the
committee appointed on Thursday will have to re-
solve. If no such intimation was given tacitly or
openly the tale is one of the most extraordinary that
was ever told. That the Lord Chancellor should have
decided that it was his duty to thrust the accusations
(as yet unanswered) upon the House of Lords when
no question concerning Mr Edmunds had been raised
there, and yet that it was not his duty, when Mr.
Edmunds had resigned, to lay them before the com-
mittee appointed to decide upon his pension, is in-
explicable enough. But that Mr. Edmunds should
have foreseen that the Chancellor would take this
inexplicable course, and should have staked his
whole official means of support upon the accuracy
of that forecast, is ten times more inexplicable. The
public seem inclined to draw the light which is to
clear up this mystery from the fact that the Chan-
cellor's inscrutable reticence, and Mr. Edmunds's
mysterious foreknowledge of it, have contributed
to instal Mr. Slingsby Bethel in a delightful post.
If Mr. Edmunds had not foreseen the Chancellor's
reticence, and had consequently not resigned, a fat
appointment would have been wanting to the com-
fortable sum total which the Bethel family are en-
joying out of the proceeds of the taxes. There are
hard unsympathising men who have designated
these proceedings as jobs ; but they do not under-
stand the tender scrupulousness of the Lord Chan-
cellor's mind. He has always been a deeply reli-
gious man. He has felt an impulse, which
he could not control, to preach. Christianity
to Christian Young Men'g Associations. He
has, as ho himself has told us, offered con-
stant prayers to Heaven for the success of the
Reform movement ; and he has carefully avoided
throwing any doubts upon the efficacy of those
prayers by resorting to the merely human instru-
mentality of bringing in a Reform Bill. In the same
spirit, he has observed the Scriptural command to
provide for those of his own household. The fortu-
nate resignations of Mr. Edmunds have enabled him
to provide, not only for a son in the House of Lords,
but also for a son-in-law in the Patent-office. If
for no other reason, Mr. Edmunds deserves a pen-
sion for having contributed so largely to the depas-
turage of so excellent a family. But this appears
by no means to exhaust the list of the Lord Chan-
cellor's achievements in the performance of this
imperative and difficult duty. He feels deeply that
time is short, and that, if he does not improve every
occasion, the opportunity may pass from him for
ever. The following speech, reported to have been
made by Mr: Tidmas, at Ipswich, gives an idea of
his laudable activity in this respect :—" It might
be said of the Bankruptcy Act that it has been
a gigantic system of out-door relief to
Lord Westbury's relations. I hold in my
hand a list of some of the appointments
which the noble lord has made under that bill.
First, a registrarship to the Hon. Slingsby Bethel,
son of the Lord Chancellor, to the Court of Bank-
ruptcy at Exeter, and afterwards at London; second,
a registrarship of deeds to the Hon. R. Bethel, son
i Of the Lord Chancellor, under the NOW Dalikruptcy