The Sun.
London, England, 1849-03-22 00:00:00

ward iri the " Badget far the Million," has, as yet,
remained unimpeached. No doughty champion has
entered the lists in opposition—no knight-errant
has donned his beaver, or couched his lance
to maintain the justice of making children
who have received no inheritance from their
parents liable for the debts of those parents—of
enabling an existing generation to mortgage the
labour of posterity, and thus practically to render
their descendants slaves, bound to toil for the benefit
of others. What has been thought of the iniquitous
code which enabled a vindictive creditor to sell into
bondage the unfortunate family of his insolvent
debtor ? What will hereafter be thought of the law
that makes provision for the debts incurred by a pre-
ceding generation out of the hardly-earned wages of
the operative, whose only capital consists of his
labour ? It is contrary to every principle of natural
law, and cannot therefore be sustained or justified.
In his subsequent propositions Mr. WAsoN points
out how justice may be rendered to all. He shows
" not only that it is discreditably dishonest in the
owners of property not to pay off the national debt ;"
but that, secondly, "it would be very easy for them
to pay it off," and, thirdly, " that it would be very
profitable for them to pay it off." No
cavil or objection ca❑ now be taken to
the basis on which his arguments are founded ;
if the question is to be decided, it must be on the
" merits," and not on " special demurrer." He
calculates that ten per cent. on the accumulated and
realised property of the country would be sufficient
for that purpose ; and to render the settlement more
easy he would give " ten years for the liquidation, with
interest in the meantime, at the rate of four per cent.
per annum." He then enters into calculations to
show that the remaining nine-tenths of the property
would be more valuable when the public debt had
been satisfied, and the nation freed from that incubus,
than the entire is at present with the existing
liabilities, and thus establishes " that it would be very
profitable to pay off the national debt." We heartily
; commend the " Budget for 'the Million" to the con-
! sideration of all financial reformers, and of those who
are anxious to act with integrity in their relations
with all. A principle is there laid down, the good
seed is sown which cannot remain barren or unpro-
ductive, but which will undoubtedly bring forth its
fruit in due season, and lead to the emancipation of
the national industry from the fetters and chains with
which it has been so iniquitously hampered.

We are not surprised at the rejection by the Sici-
lian Government of the ultimatum proposed for their
acceptance by the bombarder FERDINAND, and his
creature, the bankrupt FILANGIERI. The terms pro-
posed were purposely so drawn up as to secure their
rejection by the Sicilians, in order to afford the cruel
and superstitious bigot who, grovelling at the feet of
the POPE at Gaeta, from thence issues orders for the
bombardment of the fairest cities of his dominions, and
the massacre and plunder of the industrious portion of
his subjects, the opportunity which he has avowedly
long desired, of turning Palermo into a garden in
which he may luxuriate in vicious privacy—another
TIBERIUS wallowing in a new Caprcea. We are not
surprised at the rejection of the ultimatum by the
Sicilians, but we are surprised to find that Admirals
PARKER and BAUDIN should have so far forgotte❑ what
was due to themselves, as to consent to
insult the brave and honourable Sicilian nation
by being the bearers of a proposition intended only
as a bitter mockery, and that Lord PALMERSTON,
frightened from his propriety by the empty threats
and braggadocio falsehoods of those " Noble Lords"
—who, to recover the privilege of plundering their
fellow-subjects, by the re-enactment of the corn-laws,
have condescended to rank themselves in the same
category with TESTE and GulzoT and SOPHY Dawes,
by becoming the tools of the old man of Claremont—
should have so forgotten what was due to himself
and to his country as to become the policeman of the
Holy Alliance, and by seizing the Bombay, on board
of which neither arms, ammunition, nor warlike
stores were found, have
_done his best to emulate the
conduct of his predecessor in the affair of MAZZINI.
We trust, however, that it is not too late for
Lord PALMERSTON to retrace his steps; we be-
lieve that his wiser counsels have been overborne
(we trust only for a time) by the sinister influence of
others; and we hope to find Lord PALMERSON again
pursuing with renewed vigour the liberal and honour-
able course of action which the Sicilians have an
especial right to expect from the pupil of CANNING
and the friend of Lord WILLIAM BENTINCK• The
present conduct of England and France in relation to
Sicily is disgraceful to them as nations. Be it re-
membered that after the events of January, 1848,
after the Sicilians had expelled the mercenary troops
of a traitor KING from Palermo, they stopped short
in the course of victory at the request of Lord MINTO,
and thus gave the bombarder of Messina an oppor-
tunity of rallying his forces, and of leaguing with
the Lazzaroni for the purposes of massacre and plunder;
that the flag of independent Sicily was acknowledged
and saluted by the fleets of France and England ;
that in consequence of the representations of England,
Sicily abstained from declaring herself a republic;
that the deputation which offered the crown to the
Duke of GENOA was escorted from Palermo by a
French and English fleet ; and that the mediation of
France and England was accepted by Sicily, who was
merely claiming her own constitutional rights—rights
which King FERDINAND had solemnly sworn to ob-
serve—rights on the observance of which his title to
the Crown of Sicily rests—rights which, neverthe-
less, he has deliberately violated, in contravention of
his oath and to the forfeiture of his crown. Surely,
when Sicily consented to this mediation, she had a
right to expect something more than a mere promise
of a constitution, to be granted some time in the
month of June, at the will and pleasure
of the excellent King of the Two SICILIES—
such promise being preceded by a pastoral exhorta-
tion to the people of Sicily to cultivate the fields of
Ceres, and followed by a threat from this most pater-
nal KING to ravage the island with fire and sword,
and to repeat the scenes of Messina in every town in
Sicily, should the Sicilians not at once submit to the
yoke of their illegitimate Sovereign. The Constitu-
tion of Sicily is as old as that of Great Britain.
After having been in uninterrupted existence 700
years, it was reformed in 1812, under the auspices of
England, who, in consideration of the support aflorded
to her by Sicily during the war, undertook to
" protect and support" (to use the words of Sir WM.
A'CounT) the constitutional liberties of Sicily. That
Constitution, so guaranteed by Great Britain, was
violated and ultimately destroyed by the KING,
and that violation, according to the articles
of the Constitution itself, which the KING
had sworn to observe, and which Great Britain
had guaranteed, involves forfeiture of the crown.
These are facts which cannot be contradicted,
they are patent to all the world, and it is merely
necessary to peruse the Constitution of 1812, and the
ordinances of 1816 and subsequent years, to be con-
vinced that the violation on the part of the KING and
the consequent forfeiture of his crown has taken
place. The Sicilians then are in their right, and Great
Britain by the guarantees she gave in 1812,1814, and
1815 is bound to support them in the whole of their
demands, so long as those demands are confined to the
restoration of the Constitution of 1812, and it is
therefore, on the part of Great Britain, a breach of
national faith, to propose to the Sicilians to accept,
instead of their own Constitution, to which they have
an undoubted right, the unsupported promise of a
notoriously promise-violating KING to grant to them
as of his own free will, a Constitution differing en-
tirely from their ancient Constitution as reformed
under the auspices of England in 1812.
The mediating powers, in consenting to be the
bearers of this offer, have entirely forgotten the rela-
tive position of King FERDINAND and of the Sicilians
He has no power to grant a Constitution to Sicily:
insomuch as he is no longer de jure King of SICILY.
He has forfeited his throne by his violation of the
Constitution of 1812, and in point of right and justice,
he is in the position of a person seeking to have that
forfeiture annulled upon terms. Instead of his pro-
mising to grant a Constitution to the Sicilians, it is
for the Sicilians to state the terms and guarantees
upon which they are willing to accept him as KlNG—
and it is upon this basis, and this basis only, that
Great Britain should have consented to take any part
in this mediation. The terms now offered to the Sici-
lians by the mediators, are not only different from the
Constitution of 1812, but are different from the first
propositivo made through the intervention of Lord