The Sun.
London, England, 1854-01-30 00:00:00

. . . quo cecidit sub crimini ? Quisnam
Delator ? quibus indiciis ? quo teste probavit ?
Nil horum. Juvenal.
Most pernicious is the trite saying that there
never is much smoke without some fire. As reason-
ably might it be said that there cannot be much
falsehood without some truth. The very nursing
mother of calumny is the proverbial inference ac-
crediting it from mere volume of rumour. The
slanderer is encouraged by the foreknowledge that
he has only to scatter his imputations far and
wide to obtain some belief in them ; he foreknows
that much noise will be taken to argue substance,
and that he has only to fill the air with calumny,
and that people will take it in and breathe it out
again, and pass it thus from mouth to mouth.
There is an offence common in society, which is
to calumny what in the law misprison is to treason.
The misprison of calumny is the entertainment of.
it upon the grounds of the pestilent saying we have
quoted, that there must be some truth at the
bottom of it because of its magnitude ; and in this
way every one helps on the lie to additional credit.
And as it grows in falsehood and malignity, larger
and larger is the allowance for the fire smouldering
under so much smoke. We repeat that nothing
can be more irrational, more mischievous, more
unjust and cruel than this rule of credence, which
mightly encourages the assailant of reputation, and
makes the activity of his attacks secure its success,
up at least to a very injurious point.
Most perverse indeed is the proneness of the
world to think of the truth that may be in common
defamatory rumours, instead of the falsehood that
must be in them. There is nothing more certain
than that a fact and the report of it are never in
exact correspondence. There is sure to be exagge-
ration nay, so much of course is exaggeration,
Aliktr4ensny fact were reported in the, precise lan-
guage of truth it would be misunderstood, large
allowance being always made in the interpretation
of the narrative for the usual excess in expression.
How much better, then, it would be if people would
think of the large amount of falsehood which enters
into all they hear, instead of the particle of truth
which may be, or may not be, at the bottom of a
piece of ill-natured gossip,
A few weeks ago it was our ungracious task to
dispute the seasonableness and fitness of a statue
in honour of Prince Albert : we have now to pro-
test against throwing down the reputation of the
Prince, if not upon mere suspicion, upon no better
ground than on dits and stories, carrying on the
face of them this stamp of falsehood, that they must
have been divulged by the persons implicated in
them, whose motives to concealment must have
been the very strongest. Is it to be believed that,
if Prince Albert had unconstitutionally inter.
meddled in the councils of the nation, the ministers
whose duty it is not to suffer such interference
would have been the very persons to proclaim the
betrayal of their trust and their base servility ?
And by whom else could the fact be promulgated ?
We have seen it superficially remarked, that
Prince Albert being a Privy Councillor, the Queen
may constitutionally take his advice on affairs of
state. But if her Majesty did so, the minister re-
sponsible, to whose counsels her Majesty preferred
the Prince Consort's should make his bow and re-
tire. Lord Derby and Mr. Disraeli are Privy
Councillors, and the Queen has the undoubted
right of recourse to their advice if her Majesty
thinks fit; but upon such a step Lord Aberdeen
and Mr. Gladstone would resign. Suspicion then
of undue interference can only mount up to Prince
Albert upon the preliminary conviction that her
Majesty's Ministers have betrayed their trust. If
there has been any wrong practice, it is they who
have to answer for suffering it, and upon them
should first fall the storm of indignation. Blame
cannot justly touch Prince Albert till the Ministry
be convicted of having failed to protect and assert
their constitutional rights. And this brings us to
a fair question of credibility. Is it to be believed
that such men as compose the present Cabinet
would be so servile, so abject, as to submit to the
interferences with their functions, which are al-
leged to have been of habitual practice ?
In order to begin thinking ill of tlyz Prince Con-
sort, how much worse must we think of all her
Majesty's responsible advisers, severally and col-
lectively ?
Let people whose minds are inflamed by the idea
of foreign .interference ask themselves fairly why
they should suppose such men as Lord Lansdowne,
Lord John Russell, Lord Palmerston, Lord Cla-
rendon, Sir James Graham, Lord Granville, the
Duke of Newcastle, destitute of the British feeling,
British spirit, and we will say British jealousy,
which are so powerfully stirred in their own breasts
by a mere rumour. If the idea is so offensive to
John Bull, let him think what the fact would have
been to ministers degraded personally by the med-
dling with their duties which also violates constitu-
tional rule.
We respect the British jealousy of foreign inter-
ference, nay, we share in it strongly ; but let us
beware that no lago practises on this passion for
mixed motives of selfishness and malignity. And
we cannot but be struck by the fact that the bitter-
est attacks on the Prince Consort for alleged sym-
pathies with despotic powers and policy, proceed
from the old champions of despotism and invete-
rate foes of liberty in every province of politics
and in every part of the world. When we see the
assaults on the character of the Prince from these
quarters, they make us think, to account for them,
of the good we know of his Royal Highness, and
not of the evil that may be imagined. They make
us dwell on what he has done for social improve-
ment, for humanity, for arts, for the comfort of
industry, and of his enlightened liberal views—
liberal not in the narrow party sense of the word/
but in the large original sense.
It would be most unfair to allow the Prince to
be prejudiced by injudicious or foolish defences,
and it is to be regretted that some degree of coun-
tenance was given to the letter of an Irish busy-
body, arguing that the Prince Consort is at once
the Queen's master and servant—master by mar-
tial right, and servant as Privy Councillor. Be-
sides this balderdash from Dublin, there has been
a weak defence made to the charge of interfer-
ence, on the ground of the impossibility of denying
the Queen recourse to consultation with her hus-
band. Her Majesty's opinions may undoubtedly
be guided or formed by her consort's opinions, it
is neither possible nor desirable to prevent that ;
but we all know that her Majesty has acted her
-part on such strict and high constitutional princi-
ples, that her own opinions never interfered with
the counsels of her responsible. Ministers. Lord
Melbourne, Sir Robert Peel, Lord John Russell,
Lord Derby and Lord Aberdeen administered the
affairs of the country upon different, and two of
them upon diametrically opposite systems of policy,
but never have her Majesty's opinions clashed or
even jarred with the principles of her responsible
advisers for the time being. The Queen cannot
have agreed with all her different Administrations,
but to all she has given for the period of their re..
sponsibilities a fair field and all due favour. We
may be sure, then, that if her Majesty's opinions
are influenced by the personage nearest and dearest
to her, such influence extends no farther than the
private judgment, the difference between, which
and state counsels has been so admirably discrimi-
nated in the conduct of the most constitutional
Sovereign that ever filled the English throne. Are
we to believe that there is one rule for the Queen,
another for the Prince Consort, that what the
Queen refrains from as wrong, the Prince practises
as permissible. If his Royal Highness were dis-
posed so to act, and her Majesty to acquisce in his
so acting, why should -the parts be divided ?
Would not the same influence more conveniently
and safely for the purpose cause the Queen directly
to take more than her constitutional share in the
conduct of affairs of State, which it is notorious she
never has done. There can be no occasion for the
intervention of a prompter when the part is got by
heart con amore.'
On Tuesday the Queen goes in state to open the
session of Parliament. It is a remarkable occasion.
It may make the date in history of events of mighty
magnitude for the weal or woe of nations. For
nearly half a century there has not been a juncture
when it was of such momentous importance that
the people of England should show themselves
actuated by one spirit, and eager to support their
Sovereign with heart and hand in a just quarrel.
Never was it of such transcen dant importance to
avoid any sign that may be misinterpreted abroad
and tortured to the significance of disaffection.
Our enemies have their eyes upon us, and tongues
amongstp mindsLf
uoseettwaeltheer:ils tbwoui
aidgrst
meritedee,
av andwonefdno
utactadi
iretaercenybtweni
eoohiasrlitldrwhichi
wlplay
occuraccording
wiycthno
tthoooouetiieisrrrvi intelligenteteosrirglpoyeappvmoiaenrrrettlelel.iiaargnmteniinterest
hassne
ostt
and give popular earnest of the support her Majesty
will have from its loyalty, wisdom, and spirit. We
may easily imagine the cares and troubles in the
Royal breast on the occasion of an impending war,
of which the duration, the fortunes, the issue, the
various consequences) Etil are unoertain—rnothiug

• ( From the Examiner. )
The hour is rapidly approaching when the secret
shall be revealed and the ineffable spoken. When
England shall be told why her statesmen, thrice
deceived by Russia, still put faith in her promises ?
Why Turkey was required to surrender at Vienna
all she had been told to resist at Constantinople ?
Why Omar Pacha was prevented from attacking
the Russians until their reinforcements arrived ?
Why the winter is selected instead of the summer
for navigating the Euxiue ? Why England has
urged on Turkey the renewal of treaties which
have been the origin of all this disturbance, in-
stead of seizing a most favourable opportunity to
get rid of them for ever ?
Well may the / imes admire that a country with-
out a Parliament can go on. Pretty certain it is,
that but for the advent of the session, notes and
conferences and telegraphic despatches would have
constituted the most energetic measures of the
English Ministry. Nicholas might have moved
down his six corps d'armee into the Principalities.
He might, ad libitum, have shot and pillaged the
inhabitants. He might have ravaged the coasts of
the Euxine and burnt the last remnant of the fleet
of our allies, had it not been for the fatal meeting
of Parliament. Like wine—cc in proelia trudit
inertem." Placed between the benches of opposi-,
tion and the Black Sea, even our cautious Premier
prefers, to plunge wildly among the waves.
In the meantime there. is 0. voice from Manchester
—though not ~,freekoue-lref those-thronged and
tumultuous meetinowhich heralded the repeal of
the Corn Laws. "In consequence of the present
state of the Free Trade Hall, we are informed, it
was not possible to hold the meeting there ; and
in consequence, we presume, of Manchester pos-
sessing no other large room, " the room in
which the meeting took place was not capable
of holding more than 250 or 300 persons." In
short, the meeting resembled far more closely
an anti-free trade gathering at 40, New Bond-
street, than one of the old-fashioned Manchester
demonstrations. But still, as in all the principal
towns in the kingdom the largest halls have been
found insufficient to receive those who were anxious
to testify their abhorrence of Russian policy, and to
urge on our ministry a less timid and vacillating
course, the Czar and his friends will no doubt feel
grateful for the apologies which have been made for
them, although proceeding from a Manchester tea-
party.
As an artful defence of his somewhat unpromis-
ing clients Mr. Cobden's speech had indeed great
merit. No man can more dexterously insinuate a
variety of circumstances likely to induce his hearers
to form an erroneous conclusion. He will point
out every real and every imaginary defect in the
Government of Turkey, for example, and then say,
Now don't suppose that I am advising you to aban-
don her. Or he will enumerate the rare facts which
he can find to place Russia, and the Emperor in a
favourable point of view, and then say, Now don't
suppose I am making any excuse for the conduct of
Nicholas. No, ho clearly perceives that if he placed
his argument in the form of a syllogism it would
break down under him, and therefore when, as in
the present instance, he has to deal with the con-
sciousness of a bad cause, his labours are directed
towards prejudicing the minds of his hearers.
That the strong indignation entertained by
almost every Englishman. except Mr. Cobden against
the Russian Government has been occasioned by
any antipathy on the part of the Russian people
towards Englishmen, no one had ever asserted or
imagined. Mr. Cobden, however, finds it con-
venient to assume that the assertion has been
made in order to create an impression favourable
to Russia.
" Well, but this question about your hatred and an-
tagonism to Russia, what is it founded on ? Is it founded
on any antipathy on the part of Russia to England?
No. There is no such antipathy. Englishmen are no-
where more popular, nowhere exercise more social sway
than in Russia. If you go to- St. Petersburg you will
find there some thirty or forty English merchants, who
are far more influential than those English merchants
are in any other part of Europe, for our merchants have
been declining in numbers and influence in almost every
part of Europe excepting St. Petersburg. There is no
hostility on the part of Russia towards England : on the
contrary, their feeling is of a very different kind. The
Russians imitated us in most things. There is an Eng-
lish club in St. Petersburg, founded on the same prin-
ciples as one of our own clubs, and even called ' The
English Club,' and conducted after the manner of your
own in Moseley-street. The Russians have also their
horse racing, and, more than this, you can scarcely go
into a nobleman's family in Russia without finding the
children in charge of an English nurse, and I scarcely
know that they could pay us any better compliment."
The facts that the Russians have a club in St.
Petersburg called " the English Club," like that
in Moseley-street—and that Russian noblemen
prefer English nurses to their own serfs—can
scarcely be considered very material to the question
of peace or war. A less skilful advocate would have
omitted them. But Mr. Cobden knew his audience
—the " English nurses" told with the tea-drinkers.
Here Mr. Cobden is a little drawn away from
his main argument by his jealousy of the English
aristocracy. He cannot resist the following apt
comparison (we quote from the Times, the passage
appearing to have been suppressed in the Man-
chester edition of the speech) :
e Might I beg your patience if I add, that there is some-
thing in the social organisation of Russia—not in its
political organisation, mind—which resembles that of
England more than of any other country of Europe ;
because Russia and England are the only countries
where .you find certain great families exalted to an inac-
cessible attitude above their fellows—the Demidoffs and
Potemkins in the one, the Sutherlands and the house of
Bedford in the other---and around them a peasantry en-
tirely separated from the soil, with a great gulf between,
over which they could not tread. Now, don't let me be
misunderstood. What I say is this, that in Russia there
is a rich aristocracy like that which we have here ;
while, in every other country in Europe, it has been ex-
tinguished, or laws exist which will have the effect of
extinguishing it by changing the law of succession.
Don't let me be understood to asperse my fellow-coun-
trymen by saying there is any resemblance between the
political condition of this country and that of Russia ;
but I repeat, I refer only to the social organisation of
the two countries.
The likeness between the 'Towards and Rus-
sells of England and the descendants of the
base-born lovers of Nicholas's grandmother is strik-
ing indeed—almost as striking as that between the
Russian peasant or sailor and the Englishman of the
extitt guoirehlainwg
same condition ; or between the domain of an Eng-
f
lish nobleman and the steppes of a Russian prince.
But Mr. Cobden apologises for the comparison by
saying that in every other country the aristocracy
hasha v e beenthe effectextinguished,
e
them.exist
Mr. wwill
Cob-
den might nevertheless have found a nearer paral-
lel for our own aristocracy in the Hungarians, who
not only possess vast estates, but in many instances
(as in that of Count Szechenyi) have devoted them-
selves to the improvement of their country, and up
to a recent period have taken an active share in its
government. Austria has not yet entirely extin-
guished them, nor succeeded in reducing them so
low as the level of the Potemkins and the Men-
schikoffs.
After this little escapade, Mr. Cobden pursues
the tortuous thread of his argument. He has at
last discovered that the outcry against Russia has
nothing to do with English clubs or English nurse-
maids.
"Now, on what, I ask, is founded this national out-
cry against Russia ? No doubt on the fact that Russia
is making an unjust aggression on a neighbouring state
—(cheers)—and upon that question of the acts of the
Government of Russia towards the Government of Tur-
key there are not two opinions in this country. (Cheers.)
If you ask me my opinion of the Government of the
Czar towards the Government of Turkey, I will say it
is unjust, aggressive, and insolent. (Cheers.) But if
you ask me to go farther, and to trai isfer the expression
of opinion on the conduct of Russia in to an act by which I
shall assume the right and power to chr ‘stise Russia because
she is unjust and insolent, then, I say, you have shifted
your ground completely, and I ask y ou to show me first,
how, as an Englishman, I am invesb ed with the power
and responsibility of acting as poll ceman all over the
world ? (Cheers.) Will you say yor. L will not allow any
government to go and take possession of another country
without interfering ? Well, that is a principle, and if it
be laid' down I will ask my interrogat, ir, in reply, Are
you prepared to act on that principle in every case ?'
Because what I want is, to have our foil 'eign policy set-
tled on a principle. (Hear.) Well, thon, I ask, will
you apply that principle throughout Eur type ? If so, you
must begin in Italy ; you must begin in Rome and the
Papal States, where you have a high-s, Mrited people
subjected to the yoke of a foreign interventi on. If you are
not prepared to do this as a principle—at id lam sure
you:are not—then let us consider the quest ion as one of
interest to ourselves, and ask are we called 4. m by regard
from safety to interfere ? I dismiss altogetl ter now the
questfon of our duty to interfere, and therefi 're without
referring to that which might be said to 48 by 6:ne in
another country Physician cure thyself,.,

" RESULTS OF THE TEAR 1853.
"As established by the law of July 8, 1852, the
budget of 1853 presented an insufficiency of resources of
34,000,000 f. (34,192,794 f.) that is to say, the anticipated
expenses exceeded the estimate of the receipts by
34,000,000 f. The second part of the year 1853 was
affected ,by. different,eircumstances, which no human
prudence could either forsee or prevent the coin har=
vest was bad, and its insufficiency diminished the receipts
of the Treasury and increased its expenses ; nevertheless
Sire, in spite of these unfavourable circumstances, not
only will the anticipations of the budget be realised,
but, and I hasten to inform your Majesty of the fact,
will happily be exceeded. The year 1853 will be almost
in, equlibrio ; if its receipts do not completely cover its
expenditure, the difference will be insignificant, and
Only about 4,000,000 f. This unaccustomed equilibrium
between the receipts and expenses, so long hoped for,
and at which -we have arrived for the first: time, is a
financial fact of the highest importance. ,It will, I hope,
obtain the high approbation of the Emperor,
,at the same
time that it will inspire France with satisfaction as to
the state of her finances and give her confidence in her
resources.
" In order that this happy result may be completely
known and appreciated, I bpg your Majesty's permission
to point out in detail all the elements of it ; these details
are dry, but they are of great interest, as the situation
of the Treasury is the resuna of the state of the country.
" I have just observed that the budget of 1853 was
voted with a deficit of 34,000,000 f. (34,192,794 f.). Sup-
plementary and extraordinary credits were afterwards
opened for a sum of 64,000,000 f. (63,900,446 f.), which
carried up the apparent deficit, of 1853 to 98,000,000 f,
(98,093,240 f.). This deficit, however; almost entirely
disappears before the annulments of credits, and more
particularly before the increase in the receipts, which
reaches the enormous sum of 74,000,000. Notwith-
standing the system of • transfers which was introduded
by the Senatus-Consultum of December 25, 1852, and
which allows of the carrying to one service for which.
the grant has been insufficient the disposable re-
sources of another branch, an the credits opened will
not be consumed, and important annulments will take
place at the end of the year. During the last 10
years the annulments have amounted, on an aver-
age, to more than 42,000,000 f. a year. This year
they will be much less considerable, because the
transfers of credits from one chapter to another have
already swallowed up beforehand a great part of the
sums which otherwise would have been annulled. The
facts known up to thiS time allow the annulments of
1853 to be-estimated at 20,000,000 f. No astonishment
will be felt at the fact that, notwithstanding the faculty
of transfers which has already been made use of for
a sum of 15,000,000 f. (15,446,658 f.), it was necessary
to open 'supplementary or extraordinary credits for
1853. When the system of transfer was introduced by
the Senatus Consultum of December 25, the budget of
1853 had been already established, and its credits had
not been calculated in such a manner as to prevent the
opening of supplementary ones. It will, unless extra-
ordinary and unforseen events should arise, be different
for the following years. Vie faculty of transfer is, if
not t 6 suppress, at least to redu'ee the supplementary
and extraordinary credits in a large proportion. On
this condition, the vote of the budget by the Ministry
will have reconciled in the happiest manner the right
"Arch belongs to the Legislative body to decide on the
charges to be imposed on the country, and the right
which can only belong to the Chief of the State, to divide
and apply, according to the wants of each branch of the
service, the resources placed at his disposal for the go-
vernment and the administration of the empire. Your
Majesty will besides remark that, restricted with the
most rigid prudence to the most imperious necessities,
the supplementary credits remain 10,000,000 f. below
the increase in the receipts ; so that the supplements of
expenses, authorised by the Emperor, have not only
been in cases of urgent want, but have been in propor-
tion with the progressive increase in the resources of the
budget.
" In order to pass in review the increase in the re-
ceipts, I begin by the most important—those which bear
on the taxes and indirect revenues. The year 1852 pro-
duced in taxes and indirect revenue 66,500,000 f. more
than the preceding year. This was a wonderful result, and
exceeded all that had ever before been witnessed. Some
persons, by attributing a part of this increase to what
might be called the arrears of affairs and of consumptions,
which had been left by preceding years, were disposed
to think that this improvement could not continue, and
that it would be fortunate if 1853 was able to be
maintained on a level with 1852, without exceeding it.
Such has not been the case. 1853 produced 42,500,000 f.
(42,470,000 f.) more than 1852 ; and if, in order to ren-
der the comparison more exact, we take one day from
1852, which was bissextile, the year 1853 really produced
44,500,000 f. (44,507,000 f.) more than 1852.
"This ascensional movement in the public and pri-
vate wealth, of which the indirect revenue is the proof,
is extremely remarkable. During the 16 years com-
prised between 1831 and 1846, exclusively, the increase
in these revenues was 303,000,0001., or, on an average,
19,000,000 f. a-year. During these 16 years no important
change had been made in the taxes or the tariff. It may
be, therefore, said that during that period the increase
in the public wealth was 19,000,000 f. a.year. In 1852,
the first year of your sovereign authority, the increase
was enormous, having been 65,500,000 f.; in 1853, the
first year of the Empire, it was 42,500,00 f.; being for
the two years 109,000,000 f., or an average of 54,500,000 f.
a-year—about triple the average of the preceding reign.
These results, which are unprecented in our financial
history, and which have been obtained in spite of
the adverse circumstances which weighed on a part
of 1853, are due to the deep sense of security with which
France is inspired by a consciousness of her force, by her
faith in you, Sire, and her confidence in the institutions
which you have given her. In the midst of this move-
ment of prosperity all the financial departments have
given proofs of a devotedness and skill which it is my
duty to point out to the attention of your Majesty.
They have secured to the Treasury the receipts which
were due without embarrassing the taxpayer and the
consumer by inopportune exigencies ; they have assisted
them by all the forbearance which the law would allow,
and they have known how to unite moderation to zeal.
"The increase of 42,500,000 f. in 1853, as compared
with 1852, is a sign of the general development of busi-
ness and of the public wealth, for it bears on almost all
its elements. The registration dues stand for 18,500,000 f.;
the stamp duties for 2,000,000 f. ; the duty on sugar for
6,000,000 f., 3,500,000 f. of which are for home-made
sugar, and the remainder divided almost equally between
colonial and foreign sugar ; salt for 2,000,000 f. ; potable
liquors for 4,000,000 f., notwithstanding the bad vintage
of 1853 ; tobacco for 8,000,000 f., and the postage on
letters for 2,500,000 f. This increase, divided into
months, stands as follows
Comparison with the corres-
ponding month of 1853.
Increase. Decrease.
January, 1853 9,032 000 f.
February 2,303,000f.
March
April
May
June
July ................... 4,648,000 f.
August 5,513,000f.
September
October 4,645,000f.
November 1,855,000f.
December

Months.

1,321,000 f.

3,379,000 f.

Total

4,700,000 f.

Increase 42,470,000f.
"The decrease in April was owing to a partioular
cause ; the receipts in the duties on sugar in April, 1852,
were exceptionally increased in consequence of supplies
being laid in at that period in anticipation of a modifica-
tion of the duty. The decrease in December wasp artly
owing to the general situation of the country at that
time, but in part also to the large amount of the produce
of December, 1852. The taxes and indirect revenue were
only estimated for 1853 at 803,500,000 f. (803,451,0000 ;
they produced 852,500,000 f. (852,544,000 f.) or
49,000,000 (49,093,0000 more than the provisions of
the budget. This part of the budget of receipts is not
the only one which has exceeded expectations, it is the
same with all the others. The sales of domains alone
appear to form an exception ; they give about 3,000,000 f.
less than was supposed. This difference has not, how-
ever, arisen from the State having sold at a lower price
than it had estimated, but only from its having sold less.
What was not sold in 1853 remains unsold, and forms a
`resource to be realised hereafter. The exception is, there-
fore, only apparent, and the realisations will have every-
where °exceeded the anticipations. The direct taxes will