The Sun.
London, England, 1870-06-20 00:00:00

LONDON, 1110NDAY, JUNE 20, 1870.

JOHN BULL with his hands in his breeches pockets
counting out his money'• in Committee of Supply—
as represented now by one M.P., now by another—
is a moving spectacle. He pours out the golden
showers so open handidly—yet every now and then,
with a growl and a grumble. It was thus on Friday
evening when over £45,000 were voted as salaries for
the officers of the House of Lords, and nearly
£50,000 for those of the House of Commons, close
upon £60,000 for the expenses of the Treasury,
almost £90,000 for the item of the Home Depart-
ment, not far short of 65,000 for the Foreign,
still nearer £35,000 for the Colonial, £47,000
and upwards for the Privy Council office and
subordinate departments, and upwards of £lOO,OOO
for the Board of Trade and its subordinate depart-
ments. Altogether, not very far short of £400,000—
to be precise, just £386,164 —being handed over in
lumps, one after another, to eight of the great
Departments of Administration, certainly with no
niggardliness, and only now and then with an ex-
ceptional grunt of dissatisfaction. JOHN BULL, as
represented on Friday night by Mr. MELLOR, took
exception in passing, and no wonder, to the cir-
cumstance that one official personage connected
with our diplomatic system has ronoiyvi altogether

- - -= iris good services, the sum of
£75,000, or, as the member for
oddly put it, at the rate of £917 for every year from the
date of his (the diplomatist's) birth. No wonder
the House laughed—poor JOHN figuratively speak-
ing, having to grin and bear it—for, very soon
afterwards, one comes to the record on the Parlia.
mentary report intimating that "the vote was agreed
to." It always is. But for the sake of appearances
the House i❑ Committee of Supply goes through
the formality. Once, and once only, at Friday's sit-
ting of the House of Commons in Committee of
Supply, might it be said that JOHN grumbled, not
at having too little to pay, bnt at having too little
asked of him in payment. This was in regard to a
mere matter of detail, but a rather prominent one in
respect to the salaries of the Treasury, or, to come
at once to the point, in respect to the salary set apart
for the First Lord of the Treasury. Remembering the
enormous responsibilities devolving upon the First
Minister of the Crown, the Leader of the House of
Commons and the Head of the Government, every
one must surely agree in pronouncing the salary
of £5,000 allotted to him, as compared with his
immense labours and incessant drudgery, the
paltriest pittance, a meed in every way the most
inathquate. One of these days, we may presume,
that the time must come when a small amount of
discretionary power will at last he exercised by the
House of Commons sitting in Committe of Supply,
when [if only the good time would come at once !]
the salaries of the Ministers and other great officers
of State will be redistributed in more suitable pro-
portions.

" Tins Thorncliffe Reign of Terror must be put an
end to." Such is the verdict of the Bench at Shef-
field. Such is probably the verdict of all unpreju-
diced and right judging minds, but is there any hope
or chance that so just and reasonable a decision will
produCe any practical effect? The particular
offenders in question may get the two
or three months' imprisonment, which they
so richly deserve, but unless our future
experience prove very different from our
past, we shall not see the last of the Yorkshire
ROBESPIERRES, MARATS, and DANTONS for some
time to Come, CHARLES READE and the Sheffield
magistrates notwithstanding. The evil is by no
means confined to a single district ; if it were there
might be some hope of crushing it, eradicating it, or
starving it out ; but Sheffield seems so proud of Mr.
BROADHEAD and his associates that she need not
object to being selected as a represedtative city. Let
us look at the case in question. All the world
knows there have been strikes at the
Thorncliffe colleries, in fact those strikes have long
ago assumed the aspect of riots. Into the rights and
wrongs of the dispute it is not necessary at present
to enter. We have only to look at the matter as an
ordinary .trade dispute, arising from a difference of
opinion as to wages, hours of work, &c. In what
manner does the love of fair play supposed to be
characteristic of Englishmen exhibit itself ? Five
non-unionists are employed at Thorncliffe, and as
a matter of course the unionists on strike
endeavour to persuade them to leave their employ-
ment. Failing in this, a mab of unionists lie in
wait for the men, and as they are passing quietly
'home from work, they assail them with violence.
Sticks, stones, and other weapons are called into re-
quisition. What treatment can be too severe for a
man who dares to work when his fellows bid him
be idle. Such an intolerable exercise of individual
independence among the honest workmen of Great