The Sun.
London, England, 1854-06-15 00:00:00

THEATRE ROYAL ADELPRI.

B. Webster.—Direetress, Madame Celeste.
Proprietor, Mr.
THIS EVENING, JUNE 15,

Will be performed the popular Drama of TUE DTSCA.RDED.
0017. Principal characters by Messrs. Selby, Murray, Bedford, and;
Keeley; Mrs Keeley, Miss Woolgar, and lilies F. Ma,kell.
After which will be presented the New Extravaganza, entitledt
A MOVING TALF, supported by Mr. Keeley, and Mrs. Keeley.
Followed by THE MOUSTACHE MOVE NI eINT. Principal cha-
racters by Messrs. 0. Smith, Keeley, and Parseno; Mrs. Keeley,
and Miss Mary Keeley.
To conclude with DID YOU EVER SEND TOUR WIFE TO
CAMBERWELL ?

ROYAL OLYMPIC TILE t TRE

Lama and Manager, Mr. A. Vrfgan.
TfilS EVENING, JUNE .5,

Will ha performed th 3 Comic Drama callat HUAIT MDNEY.
Characters by M ssrs. F Robson, Emery. Whi e, a id Vincent ; Mi.es
Dormer, and Mrs. A. Wigan.
To bo folloived by 'CHF, FIRS r NIGHT. Characters by Messrs.
itiCrai Wigan, Franks, Harwood Cooper, and Vincent ;
P. Horton, and MisS Wyndham.
.U.er which, T;I E MUMMY. Characters by Messrs. H. Wigan,
Ilobzon, H. Cooper; Misses Marston cud E. Turner.

STIi.kND TUCITRE.

Sole Lessee Mr. F. W. Alicraft.—Dlrectrem, M 153 Rebscea
THIS EVENING, JUNE n,
Will be presented TILE LOVE C a ASE. Constance, by_ M:sa
Fllzottrick.
After which, THE FET.: OF THE BILLET.
To conclude with X. Y. Z.

',tans, 55.; 11.7:tes, 35.; Plt, 1,. 6,1; Gallery, Gd.; Private M3x, s.
£1 I Is. Gd., to be bail or Air. Aileron. 15, New liond-street.

ASTLEY'S Et73o!)F.'3 NATIONAL
Lessee an 'Tanager, Mr. Willinrn Cooke.
THIS EVENING, JUNE 15,
Will be produced the new Grand Ilistorical MI itary spectacle, en-
titled THE COSSACKS ; or, Vive la Franc.).
Followed by a total change of the 5C2,,,s In the CIRCLE.
To conclude wl'h a new Grotesque Extravaganza, call.,d THIS
HORSE sv ILL BE -;01.1) ) 0 PAY EXVEN3E3 IF NOT
CLAIMED WIT .lIN FOURTEEN DAYS.
Box-ofnee open from Eleven till Four. Stage Manager, Mr. W.
West.

BOYA.L SURREY ZOOLOGICAL GA.RDEN3.

Open for the Season.

THIS EVENING, JL'N li,

Will be repeated an entirely NEW and BRILLIANT PIECE
a FIREWORK on a gigantic scale, representing the British LlOll
and aallic Cock Trarmling on the Russian Eagle. All the numerous
attractions of the gardecs c usual, ineludins, the beautiful Par orama
of Chusan, by D.aron—the extensive and interesting Menagere—
Vocal and Instrumental Concert : Miss Poole, Miss Ransford, and
Mr. Manvers, rze. Concluding with the attack of the British Fleet
on Chusan—Explosion of the Batteries and Ships, and final Grand
Display cf Fireworks, by Southby. Feeding the animal, Half-past
Fire. Concert, Half-past Six. Fireworks, Quarter to Ten. Ad-
mission to the whole, Is.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
Tina DAY —Morning 56 min.after 4 I Evening 24 inln.aft. 5
To•Moaxow—Morning 49 inin.after 5 Evening 17 tnin.aft. 6

Tint WEATHER.—Sus Oman, Ju 15.
THERMOMETER, TN VIZ SHADE.
68—highest since noon yesterday.
53 —lowest this morning and during the night.
59—this day, at noon.

BAROMETER, 29.77—falling.
Wm, E. to S.E.—Light breeze, with dell weather,
and drizzling rain.

,
11;11,

:LONDON, THURSDAY, JUNE 15, 1854.

Faithful to the important and arduous duty
which he had undertaken, the Honourable Gentle-
man
the member for Bristol on Tuesday evening ;
again brought forward his annual motion in favour
of the Ballot. Truth and justice were on his side.
The most convincing arguments were adduced in
favour of his proposition. Indeed, we know not
how any unbiassed or unprejudiced person could
have listened to the magnificent speeches of Mr.
H. BERKELEY, Mr. BRIGHT, and it WILLIAM
MOLESWORTH without arriving at a distinct and
positive conclusion on the issue raised. And yet
other influences prevailed. The motion was ne-
gatived, and leave seven to introduce a bill was
refused by the representatives of the people. The
majority was not, however, large—one hundred
. and fifty-seven consistent reformers, followed by
Mr. BERKELEY, while a motley group of one hun-
dred and ninety-four members, high Conserva-
tives and impracticable Protectionists, associated
with seeming Liberals in preventing the attain-
ment of purity of election, and checking, if not
altogether preventing bribery, corruption, intimi-
dation, and other abuses that have sprung up and
flourished to such an extent as to bring discredit
on the whole representative system.
Mr. BERKELEY need not be discouraged by his
temporary defeat. Even in the debate of Tues-
day he may find the most auspicious auguries of
future success. He may, indeed, rejoice at the
efficient support which he received in the House,
and at the almost complete unanimity among
all classes of reformers out of doors on the inte-
resting topic. Public opinion is, unquestionably,
' on his side. The " pressure from without" will
• be speedily felt, and professing Liberals will be
obliged to act in accordance with the spirit of the
age, if they desire to obtain a renewal of confi-
dence from really Liberal constituencies. Such
persons should not deceive themselves into fancy-
-• ing that there is any degree of coldness or bake- '
warmness on the subject—that the public are
. indifferent to its success. Owing to the war ex-
citement there may not have been as many de-
monstrations on the matter as heretofore, but
that is solely ascribable to the all-absorbing
interest in the events of the contest in which
°
we are engaged. We must remember that
the long-promised Reform Bill was withdrawn
on that account tit
Lordee j: RUSSELL,
whose sincerity cannot be questioned, 11
consented
to the postponement of his favourite measure and
that the different bribery bills were a 2
11. shelved
for the same reason. It was therefore scarcely t
could b to
, be anticipated that the " Ballot" e estab.
r" part and
parcel of the law
of the land, during the present
" secret voting" b„,
lished, and
session. Many even supposed that the- question
would not be lc ventilated ;" but, thanks to the
honest enthusiasm of the Hon. Gentleman, whose
- name will ever be associated therewith, it has
been heard in Parliament, to the surprise of the
•
" timid, the lukewarm, and the vacillating—to the
heartfelt joy cf every sincere and conscientious
reformer,
We fully and cordially concur with Mr.
BERKELEY in the opinion that, of all the points in
which modifications or ameliorations are required,
the Ballot is by far the most important. Even
the extension of the suffrage sinks into insignifi-
cance when compared with its independent and
conscientious exercise. If we greatly increase the
number of electors, we only subject a larger num-
ber to the operation of those flagrant abuses-
- those degrading and demoralising influences which
are so painfully notorious—that none can be
• found with
,sufficient hardihood to question the
s r extent. of the
.wide-spread evil. Bills of pains and
C,./.4% , ,„...."-:•yenalties are introduced to punish corrupt consti-
- „,_ -5 tuencies, or to disfranchise men who had proved
•?-011 'l.:
1.
;:.
: - i-4. 4- •''.'",9*4liselves unworthy of the, rtist. Why should
...p g ~ --'415-_,A4, that be adopted which would totally abolish
\‘ • .'' , -!pixt, grievance and prevent the tem •
ptationfrom
-,,: - ,---•:,- :s' 4- • ,
_ -- _ :4.- r"riaelng tithe= offered or meeptecl-Ttlae uthall owed ,
.-Tacrxicr-•

compact from being entered into. If " preven-
tion be, indeed, better than punishment," if the
object should be that of checking the crime rather
than chastising the criminal, then should the
Ballot be carried by acclamation, and the purity of
the franchise insured by its secret exercise.
For what is the object of its supporters Pro-
tection to the voter—protection from the tyranny
of priest, of landlord, of employer, of customer,
of creditor, of the mob—protection from
his own weak and yielding disposition.
None can coerce or frighten a man into
voting contrary to his own feelings where
none can know how he has voted—none will bribe
where implicit reliance must be placed on the
word and honour of men, who, by accepting the
infamous price, sacrifice that honour, and show
themselves to be totally unworthy of credence.
For the masterly dissertation on the various phases
of bribery, from its complete anatomisation by the
L Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Southwark,
it will be seen that the infamous practice, if not
altogether annihilated, would be reduced to such
narrow limits as to render it practically innocu-
ous, and to put an end to those painful investiga-
tions that reflect so much disgrace on the British
character. The functions of " good and safe
men"—of "frail " individuals, would totally
cease. No persons would pay beforehand, because
they could not trust those who were giving such
practical evidence that they were not trustworthy.
No persons would pay after the vote, but before
the event was decided, because there could be no
security that they were not rewarding an oppo-
nent. And payment after the return would
be of comparatively little account, for every
bribable person should be paid, and the effect
even of that would be to make voteirs support
those whom they supposed to have the goodwill
of the majority. If persons chose to p❖ofess their
sentiments openly to take an active and energetic
part in favour of either side, of course they would
be at liberty to do so, acrd if they came forward
freely, of course reliance might be placed on their
avowals ; but if undue influence of any descrip-
tion were used, then doubts would naturally
arise. It is absurd to say that there would be a
temptation to violate a promise. The violation
of a sacred trust would be a far more heinous
offence. It is ridiculous to assert that it is an
un-English practice, when the Honourable Gen-
tleman has just come from his Club--perhaps,
after blackballing an obnoxious candidate. Every-
thing, then, combines in its favour, and if the
_people are only earnest in their demands it must
be conceded.

We cannot conclude without rendering the tri-
bute of our admiration to the Ministers who did
not suffer their views to be changed by the pos-
session of office. All honour to the Ohief Com-
missioner of Woods and Forests, to the First
Naval Lord of the Admiralty, the Solicitor-
General of Ireland, and the Judge Advocate—to
Sir WM. MOLESWORTH, Rear-Admiral BERKELEY,
War. KEOGH, and CHARLES PELHAM: VILLIERS.
They have earned the gratitude of the people,
and the just reward of their conduct shall not be
wanting.

In the discussion on the Divorce and Matrimo-
nial Causes Bill it was argued by the Lord Chan-
cellor that, inasmuch as the divorce cases since the
beginning of the present century had only ave-
raged two per annum, there could be no• necessity
for the establishment of a new tribunal. This
reasoning is, however, exceedingly fallacious, for
unfortunately that paucity of suits could not be
ascribed to the scanty number of evil-doers, but
rather to the numerous impediments and difficul-
ties interposed in the way even of parties who
were most decidedly entitled to it. It was not
that the offence was rare, but that none but the
very wealthy, who had a thousand or fifteen
hundred pounds at their disposal which could
be spared, could venture to seek a renaedy. It
cannot, however, be supposed that if the proposed
enactment should work well, if cheap and expedi-
tious relief can be obtained by all who are clearly
entitled thereto, that the applications may not be
far more numerous, or that the official members
of the new tribunal, the Lord Chancellor, Chief
Justice, and Master of the Rolls, whose duties are
already sufficiently onerous, can meet. the new
demands on their time. Thechief vice in the former
system was that a remedy could only be worked
out with golden tools, that none but th{a wealthy,
who could best sustain the evil, could hope for
assistance, and that there was thus practically one
law for the rich and another for the poor, whose
marriages were to all intents and purposes indis-
soluble, no matter how great the miscianduct of
the erring partner. We would see this altered,
without lessening the stringency of the proof de-
manded. We would, if possible, re m ove this reproach
to which the nation has long been justly liable. The
proposed tribunal will not, we fear, meet the exi-
gency of the case. It will not be easy i;o get the
Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice, the
Master of the Rolls, and two learned gentlemen
selected for the purpose—or any three of them
together—nor can the cost of a hearing before
such a body be small. The suitors will still be
of the same class as those who have hitherto applied
for private Acts, and relief will still be far beyond
the reach of the great majority of the sufferers.
In fact, as we have already stated, were it not
for the fact that the present measure may be re-
garded as the introduction of the sharp end of
the wedge we should scarcely consider it worthy
of acceptance.

The new tribunal should be one easily acces-
sible, whose portals would be opened to all classes,
and where any sufferer might, if necessary, be
enabled to apply in forma pauperis. It should
have jurisdiction in all matrimonial disputes, so
as either to dissolve the marriages or pronounce
for a separation, assigning at the same time the
amount of alimony or allowance for support of tie
injured party and the custody of the chUdren_
capable, in fact, of giving a complete remedy
in every particular. The multiplicity of suits
would thus be avoided. The one application
would suffice in place of the three now required.
The Court of Chancery would be perhaps better
than any new tribunal that could be constituted
for these important purpo:des but; as its various
Judges are already funy occupied, it might be
necessary to appoint 'a new Vice-Chancellor, with
jurisdiction in all testamentary and matrimonial
causes. From nim there might be an appeal, as
at present, to the Lords Justices, the Chancellor,
or even to the House of Lords. Surely there
could be little danger of injustice under such cir-
cumstances. There would be even greater
precautions against any improper dissolution
of the nuptial bonds than there are at
this moment for the life or liberty of
any of us. The two great questions would be
as to the fact of the criminality, and whether
there was any connivance or similar transgression
on the part of the applicant. If necessary, a
jury might be empannelled to decide on these
matters—and facilities should be afforded of
taking evidence in every district, either by the
County Court Judges, or specially appointed Com-
missioners. Should local Crown prosecutors be
appointed, as we hope and believe will be the
case before the termination of another Session of
Parliament, those functionaries might render
valuable assistance in
preventing any mistake.
The applicants should themselves invariably be
examined to see that
they come into Court with
clean hands-_
not fairly chargeable either
with provocation
operation,ecvarerryiedreingtuoisie
subTmhiits, pafflanor,dif or connivance.
guarantee algdai nwset
would,
improvident divorces ; while, on the
other hand,
every reasonable facility would be afforded to
those justly entitled to relief and that, whether
the applicant were male or female, or what was
the nature of the injury complained of, or the
remedy to be applied. This is what the nation
but which, we regret to say, is t requires, , pro-.
vided by time measure now under consideration,
and which has
just received its second reading in
ds
the House of Lor. .

Mr. SPOOnit has fairly beaten her MAJESTY'S
Government at last. In a house of very nearly
300 members, a majority of twenty-two have de-
dared him a wiser man than the Home Secretary ;
the latter supported earnestly a vote of 550/. for

the services of Roman Catholic chaplains in Go-
vernment prisons, Mr. SPOONER as earnestly op-
posed it, and the house "in its wisdom" pro-
nounced Mr. SP° °NEB. conqueror in the ecclesiastical
tournament. Mr. SPOONER and bigotry are evi-
dently at a premium. To be sure, it must be
anything but pleasant to the Hon. Member, to
survey the company which followed him into the
lobby, to find himself in close association with
Mr. HADFIELD, Mr. CROSSLEY, Mr. •W. J. Fox,
Mr. MIALL, and others, who avowedly helped him
to treat the Catholics as they intend to treat his
own chaplains of the Established Church, as soon
as they have it in their power. Extremes in
politics are cften said to meet. Tory and Char-
tist have been more than once successfully allied
against Whiggism in electioneering contests ; and
certainly, in the preslent case, ecclesiastical extremes
unitedto effect a common object, with motives mor-
tally antagonistic. Messrs. SPOONER, NEWDEGATE,
MILES, and HORSFALL made a principle of paying
the Established clergy, and none besides, of main-
taining them, not only in their present pecuniary
prerogatives, but also in the honourable position
of being the sole recipients of State pay, for
visiting those who are " sick and in prison." The
Dissenting members, on the other hand, made a
principle of voting against any one at all receiv-
:ng State pay for religious services, whether ren-
dered in a prison or a palace. Here, perhaps,
the Nonconformists overstrain their own princi-
ple. If we remember rightly, in the United
States Government, chaplains are appointed for
prisons and ships of war ; loss of liberty and em-
ployment in the navy being justly considered ex-
ceptions, even in a country which has no esta-
blished church. The Nonconformists, however,
act, at least, upon an unselfish and equal princi-
ple, whatever we may think of its soundness; they
refuse others national pay because they refuse it
for themselves. Mr. SPOONER, on the contrary,
with his comrades, is the uncompromising advo-
cate of sheer selfish bigotry. We quite acquit
him, indeed, of any consciousness of this truly
Christian quality ; he " thinks he does GOD ser-
vice ;" to him it appears the perfection of pious
legislation to pay Dr. PIISEY for a service in a
gaol, and to deny a penny to Dr. WISEMAN ;
or to reward Mr. MACNEILL for visiting the sick
inmates of a prison, but to bid Dr. CcrizEN do
the same duty fcr nothing. Compared with this
the most thorough-going Voluntaryism challenges
our respect, and we only regret that its protest
was not louder against such intolerable exclusive-
ness. We cannot believe that the majority of
Tuesday night was a fair representation of the
views of the great majority of English Churchmen
outside the house.

It is really rather curious to notice the sliding,
scale of Parliamentary liberality in religious mat-
ters. First, we have the out-and-out Church ex-
clusives ; Mr. SPOONER informing us that, on the
oath of the QUEEN, Popery "is blasphemous,
false, and a dangerous deceit," and alleging the
fact that if Catholic priests are paid, Dissenting
ministers must be paid also, as ample proof that
the Church would be betrayed for the vote of 550
pieces of gold. To this, of course, Mr. NEWDE-
GATE adds his solemn Amen ; Mr. HORSFALL
and Mr. MILES chanting responses, with a few
variations on " the Constitution" and the
erection of a rival " Establishment." At a
respectable distance follows Sir JOHN PAKINGTON ;
he seems to halt between two opinions.
He would vote either for limiting pay-
ment to Anglican clergymen, or extending it
to ministers of all denominations. To him utter
exclusiveness seemed as good as thorough libe-
rality ; but anything intermediate was a sort of
Egyptian darkness, between the light of our
Established Goshen on the one side, and the light
of a dissenting desert on the other. Next came
Lord PALMERSTON—as " sincere a Protestant" in
his own judgment (we may add- in ours) as his
" more veherckent" antagonist. He is a friend to
his Church, but he has numerous Catholic pri-
soners in the Government gaols ; he thinks soli-
tude and confinement a desirable time to bring
religious instruction to bear upon the criminal ;
he knows that no one can advantageously receive
such instruction from the ministers of a religion
which lie rejects, and therefore, as Secretary of
State for all classes of her MAJESTY'S subjects, he
would offer equal spiritual advantages to all whose
crimes have placed them under the most painful
department of his administration. The Volun-
taries, with. their equality of universal disendow-
meet or non-payment, come fourth and last ; the
religious Radicals and ecclesiastical Republicans of
the day, who would sweep the Government and
Legislature clean of all church matters whatever.
Mr. SPOONER must certainly vote with these last in
favour of Sir War. CLAY'S Bill for the abolition
of Church Rates. He and his fellows have been
loud in protesting that it was not a paltry 5501.
which they wished to save the nation ; no—it was
solely a question of principle ; they would r_ot
pay for a creed they rejected. Very noble tke cry
no doubt, " not the amount, but the prin,;,/,,,,e,,
but, assuredly, the Nonconformists demand
reciprocity of sympathy and suppor:, when they
-
tri
ask not to be spared the indi:dually trifling
amount of a Church Rate, but to be relieved from
the hardship of compulsion, to pay for religious
services which they object to receive.