The Sun.
London, England, 1870-04-08 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY, APRIL 8, 1870.

The passionate indignation expressed. on the other
side of the Channel at the mere mention of a ple-
biscite appears to be, if not altogether misplaced, at
any rate disproportioned. M. TmErts' mot is witty,
but splenetic—when he speaks of Liberty being born
thus through a Caesarian operation. But the steps
recently taken by the powers that be in France
for the replacement permanently of Personal by
Constitu ional Government, can nevar be re-
traced through the medium of a plebiscite is our
assured conviction. And hence it is that we conceive
the almost panic alarm, with which the proposition
has been greeted, to have been terrible all through
to a systematic exaggeration. According to one of
the Ministerial journals of France, the Prince NAPO-
LEON has recently remarked sententiouily and
axiomatically, "I do not approve the Pie-
biscitum ;" adding, "it on'y bears the semblance
of Democracy: It is the legidative power directly
exercised by the people. This power seems to me,
unle si,be in very rare cases, an illusory power. If
the EMPEROR has a right to make a direct appeal to
the people, that right should be seldom used—per-
haps, never ; for a Plebiscitum js a sheet anchor ; it
is- the last stage. before a revolution. What
an eiror it would be to ask cf a Plebi-
sciurn the approval of a modificati n in
the Constitution ! if the people answers Yes,'
it is a delusion ; if it says No,' it is a
revolution." While saying this the Prince NAPOLEON
adds : "I admit that the people may, under excep-
tional circumstances, be consulted with respect to a
person, with respect to a thfin'te question of peace
and war, with respect .to the cession of a province in
the event of a disastrous war ; but even in s•lch cases
it is necess ry tl.at be who answers sl.ould In°
and . understan 1 the purport of the q-estion.
It is neces,a-y that the question :holid. be chnr nn -1,
shuttle. How rawly such (Inez ions have occurred to
us in our pubq ; 1 fe? Let the Plebi,:cittun, there-
fore,
be rtser, ed. as a right of the Sovereign, but on
coal Con that he should have recour. e to .it
little as po sibie. To consu:t directly the people
is a kind of coup (Mat, and it sus p:s s a dissent
between the EMPEROR and the representatives
of the people. Were it otherwise, the Em-
TEI:OR would find it more na.ural to go
hand in haed uWh the representatives themselves."
Accepting the reasonableness of these remarks, as a
whole, the Cabinet of M. OLLIVIER might find in
the words of Prince NAPOLEON, as thus adduced, a
perfect justification of the very policy now envcighed
against. Allow the retention of this discretionary
power by the EMPEROR, and not a word is to be said
against this projected appeal to the plebiscite as the
only rational course that could be adventured upon
under the emerg, ncy.

THE speeches delivered by Mr. Peter Taylor and

Mr. Gladstone on the payment of members of the
House of Commons were both clover ; but it canno
be said that the second was a complete answer to the
first. Mr. Taylor advanced two arguments, one that
members ought to be paid because they performed pub-
lic service of a kind which deserved public remunera-
tion ; the other that through the absence of such pay-
ment the country lost the services of that large number
of :clever men who cannot afford to enter upon a
political career. To the first argument Mr. Gladstone
replied that M.P.'s are not the only personS perform-
ing public duties who are unpaid. He instanced
J.P.'s, poor-law guardians, members of town coun-
cils, churchwardens, and volunteers, and was slightly
embarrassed when a member called cut " Jurors."
We are inclined to belie co that Mr. Taylor will think
his case strengthened by the first of these experi-
ences. "The Great Unpaid" have become a proverb,
and every year sees us approaching more nearly,
though very slowly, to a stipendiary magistracy. Mr.
Cross attempted to frighten the House by asking who
was to pay the magistrates of Lancashire, where it
appears there is one for every policeman, 800 in all.
The answer is that if we had stipendiary magistrates,
we should not want 800, nor 80; for we shoull ex-
pect paid servants to do something more than write
":J.P." after their names. We should expect them to
fulfil the duties which they undertake regularly, and
not to appear on a bench only when a poacher has to
be tried, or a Roman Catholic priest has to be refused
a salary. Poor-law guardians, again, are not quite
the most efficient of officials.

But there is no occasion for going into the
question. We need point out only that there
is no analogy between the cases which Mr.
Gladstone cited and that of M.P.'s. A. man may
be a magistrate, a town councillor, a poor-law guar-
dian, a churchwarden, without incurring any expense,
and without abandoning his regular vocation. In fact,
this argument of Mr. Gladstone's tells exactly in the
opposite direction. A. mayor does incur expense,
and a mayor is the one member of the town council
who is paid. A. volunteer incurs expense, and a
volunteer receives a Government 'grant. To mahe
the comparison still cloQc-..., a Minister- of the Crown
incurs expens3, and ho toe receives a cheque upin
the Treasury. Not long ago Mr. Disraeli and the
Conservative party generally professed to think the
Constitution in danger becauso Mr. Gladstone,
in forming his Ministry, gave plaus to
two young noblemen without paying them.
We entirely fail to see any material
difference between the positions of Lord Camper-
down and Lord Lansdowne, and the 600 and odd
members of the House of Commons who' sit there
nic.l-ht and morning (or are supposed to do so) awl