The Sun.
London, England, 1849-04-26 00:00:00

THE NAVIGATION LAWS.

It almost escapes the public attention, and may there-
fore be very properly suggested to the notice of the
Lords, that the question does not lie between
the present Navigation Bill and no Bill at all. The
state of the law, the difficulties cf its working and
even of its interpretation, the commercial treaties
now about to expire, the just demand of foreign
States, the urgent wants of our colonies, and the recent
surrender of colonial protection, all call for a prompt
and extensive readjustment of the present system.
Something must be done, and so far from the Bill just
brought into the Lords being a premature measure it has
already been delayed rather too long. The question really
lies between a general, a simple, and a generous measure
on the one hand, and, on the other, a vast and compli-
cated system of patchwork compromise, which will
only render confusion still more confounded, and
which it will be necessary to cobble again before
two sessions are over. On the immediate necessity of
great alterations all authorities are unanimous.
Ministers, present and past, shipowners, Free-
traders and Protectionists, agree that something
must be done, and the strongest opponents of the
Ministerial measures has apologized for their hosti-
lity with the remark that they are prepared fur a
moderate relaxation of the law. There appears, how-
ever, to be a singular horror of positive suggestions.
Neither Mr. Herries, nor any of his more youth-
ful allies, have ventured to inform us what they
would do. We are not surprised at their shirking
a difficulty which they cannot feel more strongly than
we do ourselves. Such responsibilities, however, do not
always admit of evasion or postponement. Should any
chief in the Upper House, confident in his genius, his
rank, his position, or his fate, muster names enough to de-
feat the present Bill, he must be prepared with his own
solution of the difficulty; and we venture to assure him
that many and great as are the burdens a Protec•
tionist Minister would find on his shoulders, not the
least wilt be the duty of adapting our Navigation
Laws to the changed circumstances of the empire.
Should there be any man in either House ready to
undertake this onerous office, and should he also
succeed for the space of two or three years we neea
go no further back than Monday night for a warning
of his eventual destiny. The most unqualified, as
well as the moat able speech of the evening, going,
indeed, still further than the Ministerial measure,
was made, not by some enthusiastic novice, not by
the disciple of a new and more absolute school, but
by one of the very men who only four years since
framed, introduced, and passed the Navigation Acts
in their present amended form. Those Acts, consi-
dering the circumstances of that day, were just such a
moderate reform as, we presume, Mr. Herries or
Lord Stanley would recommend to the present Par-
liament. They would merely repair the old vessel,
caulk up its seams, replace its decayed wood, and add
a few bits of improvement. We will not even guess
how they would deal with Canada, with Russia, with
Prussia, with Holland, or whether they would even
attempt to add new facilities for the importation of
raw materials. We will suppose them so ingenious,
so bold, and so successful as to frame, to introduce,
and to pass a new Navigation Bat of a mode-
rately progressive character. By the example of Sir
James Graham sacrificing the navigation-laws, as
Sir Robert Peel Lad previously sacrificed the
corn-law, it may be confidently predicted that
in three or four years the author of such a new naviga-
tion•law, peddled and patched up on the same fatal
model, will stand up in Parliament and tear into Mart ds
his own once cherished workmanship. The only
doubt or curiosity we feel about the matter refers
to the manner in which such a man as Lord Stanley will
perform his political penance. Peel was a an whoa!
work it had been fur years the " the struggling pings of
conscious truth to hide," and accordingly he recanted
with a fury of penitence which his party could not follow
for very shame. Graham has retracted with an easy
composure which altogether escapes animadversion.
Time only may show how Stanley, or any other Pro-
tectionist, would pass a moth rate Navigation Bill in
1849, and pronounce it a mischievous failure in 1853.
Surely there are men in the Lords who can sue
that dignity es well as political morality requires the
adoption of a course which can stand the consequence of
its own success. The opposition to the pending measure
ought, in our humble opinion, to be much more practical
and constructive than it has hitherto been. When a change
is wholly wanton and gratuitous, it may be enough
to demolish it, but when a change so tar from being
unnecessary is thrust upon us by the course of events,
the only proper reply is a substitute. Instead of telling
us, what is nut always so agreeable to the ears of ship-
owners, of the vast increase of shipping under a protec-
tive system, and other arithmetical generalities, let Lord
Stanley, or some of his friends, tell us how they propose
to meet the existing pressure on the Government. How
will they deal with Canada? How will they make the
route of the St. Lawrence as cheap as that of the Erie
Canal? How will they put the upper province on a par
with the neighbouring States of the Union? Will they
open the commerce of the West Indian islands ?
What sort of treaties will they propose to the
various European Powers with whom we must
shortly be in communication on this delicate
subject? Will they attempt to remove the ridiculous
anomaly by which we can import articles in any stage of
! manufacture from European ports, though we cannot im-
port, in the very seine ships, the very same materials in
a raw state? Will they pay any attention to the circum-
stance that us the law now stands our merchants cannot
touch numerous articles of tropical produce at their
natural depots, in ports where our vessels are continually
looking for cargoes, but must leave the article where it
is abaudant and cheap, and seek it for themselves, at
mach cost of time, money. and life, in remote, deadly,
and inhospitable coasts? Will they continue the prohi-
bition of foreign-made ships in the British trade under
all circumstances, and the vexatious restrictions on
the employment of foreigners ? Will they carry out the
principle of indirectly taxing our staple menu actures
for the supposed benefit of a carrying trade
which those very manufactures have created ?
Will they leave the navigation-laws in such a
complex state that shiposvacrs and merchants
had need be lawyers to know what they are about,
and the most cautioos and honourable men amongst
them arc continually offending to their cost?
Unless they are prepared to act wholly in the dark,
and plunge themselves and the nation into an en-
tanglement from which they cannot escape without
Utter loss of credit, they will consider beforehand what
they will do, as well as what they will oppose. If they
have a rival measure, let them give us the oppoueunity of
selecting between it and Lord John Russell's. If they
have not, they must allow us to put up with the only
1 actual alternative.— Times.

EMILY SANDFORD.
TO THE EDITOR OF TILE SUN.
SIR,-It will be an act of justice on your part to ad-
mit the reply of a subscriber to the fund for Emily Sand-
ford to the animadversions on that subject in your
paper of the 23d. I shall consider the case on its own
merits, setting aside the comparison with that of Eliza
Chestney, as not a fair argument against the contribution
for Emily Sandford.
I regret that this sub,cription was not prefaced by a
full statement of the grounds on which it was raised ;
for the destitution of its object was the weakest of them.
The strongest was, that she had turned from the error
of her ways," with feelings still manifestly under the
influence of her tyrant. One who heard her evidence in
court, and sympathised with a woman's heart, perceived
that her tones became tremulous from tenderness in
addressing Rush. Was it less an effort to decree his
doom because his guilt was of so deep a dye? No; the
very fact of the peril in which he stood, appealed more
than all, to her love. She could not so have acted from
any motive but a revive d sense of duty. Had she made
use of certain cant phrases, she would have been placed
in the favoured class of Magdalens', anointing the Sa.
viour's feet—but, like Mary Magdalen she did, and
said not. _

-In conquering herself to b3ar witness to the truth,
she gave you, Sir, a right which, acc,r.!ing to the judge,
you would not otherwise have had, to stigmatize her as
the paramour of a murderer.
For these reasons I offer her my small subscription,
with more ev( n of lespect than of pity—and I will here add
to it my earnest wish, that ht her future retirement the
mother's sins and sorrows may, through the Providence
which is always bringing good out of evil, b-come bless-
ings to the child by the lessons they will have left en-
gr.ven on her own mind.

Tiles', are not the sentimentalities of youth ; u may
look upon them as the puvrihries of one from whom
youth has long passed away. I ate, Sir, &c.,
AN OLD MADER.