The Sun.
London, England, 1853-07-13 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JULY 131 1853

The Chancellor of the Exchequer appears deter-
mined to avenge his numerous defeats respecting
the Advertisement Duty. As the advocates for
the total repeal of the obnoxious impost did not
freely and willingly accept the crumb which he
let fall from his financial table, he apparently
resolved to punish their insubordination, and
teach them that they should receive with thanks
and gratitude whatsoever he pleased to bestow.
In this he is only carrying into practical execution
the threats which he already fulminated, or rather
insinuated, as the probable consequence of diso-
bedience. During the last debate, on the let of
July, respecting Mr. :MILNER GIBSON'S proposi-
tion for the total repeal of the Advertisement
Duty, in accordance with the resolution of the
House of Cforrunoi,s, on the 14th of April last, he
openly declared that the effect of the resolution,
if carried, would be to maintain the duty at
ls. Gd., for "it would just leave matters as they
were." His leader and colleague, Lord JOHN
RUSSELL, repeated the warning even more empha-
tically. The Noble Lord said, "He ought to
have mentioned, and intended to have mentioned,
that with regard to the subject before the
House, the question as placed by the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer was for a reduction
of duty. If the motion of the Honourable
Gentleman (Mr. CRAUFURD) were carried, and
the duties on advertisements were made nil in the
resolution, it would be necessary to bring in a bill
for the purpose of repealing those duties. Such a
bill would be opposed to the views of the Govern-
ment; and, if it were not carried, the result must be
that the tax would remain where it was, instead of
being reduced to 6d. !" These cautions and threats
were, however, disregarded. The independent
representatives of the people refused to be either
cajoled or bullied by the Noble Lord or the Right
Hon. Gentleman. They resisted the dictatorial
attempt, and obtained two successive victories
over the Government. The matter then stood
over until the following Monday, when it was
generally understood the final decision of Ministers
would have been communicated to the House an

country.
On Monday, however, there was, as we have
already stated, an ominous silence observed as to
the Ministerial intentions, and a still more omi-
nous course pursued with respect to the Stamp
Duties Bill, which, having received its second
reading, was to have been considered in com-
mittee that evening. Some statement as to the
course to be ultimately adopted was anxiously
looked for. It was considered certain that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer would have declared
his readiness to carry out the views of the majo-
rities of the 14th April or Ist July, or have
boldly persisted in acting on his original opinion.
Such a course might be deemed perverse and ob-
stinate, but it would be straightforward and
above-board. It would at least be free from de-
ception, or fraudulent concealment tantamount to
deception. It might, as the homely proverb hath

it, been greatly "blamed," but it could not pos-

sibly have been " shamed." It might not have
been a very wise or judicious course to alienate

the feelings of steadfast friends and supporters,
who had given so many and such frequent proofs
of their devotion to the interests of the Joint-

stock Administration, but it could not be consi-
dered as dishonourable or disgraceful
We regret, however, to be compelled to declare
that the same cannot be asserted of the line actu-
ally pursued. Mr. GLADSTONE has obstinately
refused to clear up the doubts that have been en-
tertained as to his final intentions, or to dispel
the mystery by which the question was encom-
passed. He divided the bill which was actu-
ally before the House into two distinct por-
tions, carrying through committee all the
uncontested clauses (which, however, passed
through the committee), and dropping the
disputed parts. And he did so, if not on false pre-
tences, certainlyon frivolous and inadequategrounds,
such as to excite a very natural suspicion that
he would delay and procrastinate the decisive con-
test until such a period of the session that the
victory, if achieved, would carry with it no sub-
stantial profit to his antagonists, and this sus-
picion is very materially increased by the petulant
answer returned to the inquiry of Sir JOHN

SHELLEY, as to whether "he could inform the

House when the question of the Advertisement
Duties would be brought forward ?" in which he
pooh-poohed the subject as one of the most trivial
consequence, saying, in the most depreciating
tone, that "i t was impossible in the presentstate of
public business, and with business of primary
importance pending, to make that business se-
condary to the Advertisement Duties(!) There-
fore, he was not able to say on what day the
iLatter would be resumed, though there would be
delay, so far as the Government was concerned,
be
Y°11(1 what was inevitable. Ample ,Notice,

to the first circular of Count NESSELRODE-all
answer that has completely rebutted the
assumptions and arguments of the Russian
Minister. Lord CLARENDON declared that at
the time "he had not had an opportunity
of reading that note." But why he should not
have had such an opportunity, when the docu-
ment itself had formed the subject of an article
which appeared that morning in the journal gene-
rally supposed to represent the opinions and to
act as the organ of Lord ABERDEEN and those of

his colleague; who are guided by his views as to
the duties of the British nation in such an emer-
gency seems strange. There must be something
rotten in the state of affairs when things so utterly
unaccountable can happen, and which induce us to
regret more especially the absence of those ex-
planations which would have been elicited by the
motions of Lord CLANRICARDE and Mr. LAYARD,
and which were only postponed in consequence of
urgent applications, and the supposed unanimity
in the Cabinet thereby indicated.
Another strange circumstance was elicited dur-

lug the brief conversation originated by Lord
LYNDHURST in the House of Lords last evening.
The Noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs admitted
that there were " some differences between the
Russian document, issued for home consumption,
for the use of the Russian people, and the trans-
lation which had been sent abroad." Here, then,
appears to have been a deliberate mutilation of
the document—a cowardly alteration in its terms,
calculated to deceive either the Russian people or
other nations, to induce the former to believe that
language had been used and terms applied which
must necessarily lead to hostilities, unless other
Powers exhibit an unprecedented degree of pusil-
lanimity, evincing their readiness to devour any
quantity of dirt which the AUTOCRAT may please
to administer ; while it makes wilfully false repre-
sentations to those other Powers, which amount,
at least, to a case of gross and fradulent decep-
tion on the part of the EMPEROR, or his advisers,
at the very time when he is putting forward such
energetic complaints on account of his outraged
honour and'dignity.
One satisfactory assurance was elicited, one
pledge given on the part of the Cabinet, which
cannot be evaded or got rid of. Lord CLAREN-
DON unequivocally declared for his colleagues, as
well as for himself, that they " did not consider
that the presence of the British and the French
fleets in Besika Bay is at all similar, or can in any
way be compared, to the occupation of the Danu-
bian Principalites," and that "certainly no con-
dition with respect to the departure of the one or
the evacuation of the other will be made."
This is something to know—to that extent at
least British honour will be safe from the insolent
aggression of the AUTOCRA T. Even " the excel-
lent ABERDEEN" himself could not submit to that
outrage. It is also gratifying, to know that the re-
ported occupation of Bosnia by Austrian troops,
which would so greatly aggravate the existing
difficulties, is certainly premature, and probably
al together without foundation. The Austrian
Minister at this Court altogether disbelieves the
rumour, and states his opinion that "it may have
arisen from some of the Austrian troops having
been sent to their own fortress at Peterwardein,
which is about 80 miles from the territory of
Turkey."
There is reason, then, to hope still that the ulti-
mate appeal to arms may be avoided, and that
without any derogation to British honour or
British interests.