The Sun.
London, England, 1870-06-21 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, 3 UNE 21, 1870.

he is called, the member for the Corporation. So
far as Mr. G OSCHEN'S remarks are to be
understood, the promoters of the bill are en-
couraged to hope that it will receive the
support of Her MAJESTY'S Government. Five
of the most influential Aldermen (CARDEN, FINNIS,

LUSK, PHILLIPS, CorroN), are known to regard the
bill favourably. In the exercise of their common
sense, of their love of justice, and of their love of
fair play, the popular representatives, it is earnestly
to be hoped, will not only see well to it, that the
second reading of the bill is secured to-morrow,
but that it shall be as rapidly as possible afterwards
passed through its other stages; so that the Lords
in their turn may be enabled this session to co-
operate with the Commons in relieving the London
Brokers at last from the preposterous and irksome
supervision of the Court of the Lord Mayor and
Aldermen.

IF the Epsom meeting was a great blow to those
who trust to the qualifications of favourites, the Ascot

meeting was not less so. The victory of Kingcraft
after the poor figure he cut in the Two Thousand,
and the defeat of Macgregor after his
two easy triumphs were staggering events. The
success of Gamos, the horse that could not run a
week before, and the overthrow of the famous Sun-
shine and Hester, in the Oahs,deepened the discourage-
ment of the public. And recent events have not been
of a character to dispel the gloom. At Ascot
Sunshine won one race and lost another. In the
Prince of Wales's Stakes, King o' Scots went out
first at the beginning, made all the running, and was
never reached by any other competitor. Yet this
is the very animal on which the discriminating talent
of Newmarket pinned its faith previo us to theTwoT hou-
sand, supporting its belief that he would win by invest-
ments to the extent of thousands, but which never
figured in the race at all, giving up disgracefully at

the end of half-a-mile. The same horse behaved
similarly in the Derby. A. fortnight afterwards,
however, he carries off an important race against
respectable competitors without the slightest diffi-
culty. Normanby presented another example of
faithlessness. He was third in the Two Thousand,
could do nothing in the Derby, and was beaten by
this rogue, King o'Scots ; but won an important
race against an equally good field immediately
afterwards. These repeated examples cannot
be quoted too often now that the public is
disposed to repent of its follies. It has long been a
turf axiom that though prophets, touts, and other
agencies of information were untrustworthy, yet
" public form " was in general a safe guide. It is
no such thing. It is true that the good horses win
many races, and the bad ones few; but unhappily no
one has yet found means of discovering which races
the good horses will lose, and which the bad ones
will win. The accomplished public performers
come to nothing when they are most trusted, and
the indifferent ones win on the most unexpected oc-
casions. Nor aro the professional racing men any
better judges than ignorant outsiders. It is notice-
able that at the sale oflllr.BLENKfuoN's yearlings on
Saturday fifteen youngsters fetched the large sum of
£11,220—an average of £748 each. Thirty-seven
others produced altogether only £5,185. Yet all
experience leads to the conclusion that the chances
are in favour of the low-priced horses carrying off
the great races, and against the probability that the
high-priced ones will ever earn thoir keep. There is
nothing certain in racing, save that horses will fail
to win. Those persons who trade on this assump-
tion make fortunes out of their less discriminating
brethren.

The Lords did not sit very long last evening.
The principal discussion arose upon a notice intro-.•
duced by Earl Russell, which practically involved a
consideration of our relations with the colonies. The
notice referred to the recent manifestations of
loyalty on the part of the colonies, and prayed her
Majesty to appoint a Commission to enquire into
the best means of guaranteeing the safety of our
colonial possessions. Earl Granville, in defending
the action of the Government in connection with
the colonies, alluded to the discomfiture of the
Fenians by the Canadians, and designated the ad-
venturers as " a contemptible body of filibusters."
He declared that if the colonies were attacked, it
would be the duty of the mother country to defend
them. The motion was withdrawn. In the. House
of Commons a very long debate ensued on
the motion of Mr. Richard, to the effect that
the grants to existing denominational school.; should
not be increased, that compulsory attendance of
children should be universal, and religious instruc-
tion should not be paid for out of the public
funds. Mr. Fowler, in a long speech, explained why
the Government could not accept the proposition,
and also remarked on the alteration which had
been made in the bill. The religious difficulty he
contended had no practical existence, and he earnestly
besought the House not to retard legislation on so
important a subject as national education by occu-
pying time in efforts to deal with what was an im-
aginery obstacle. He announced that the Govern-
ment did not intend to make any further alteration
in the bill. The debate was adjourned.

TOPICS OF THE DAY.

asked the Admiralty to omit certain words from
Articles 11 and 13 of the Regulations for the Pre-
vention of Collisions at Sea, their lordships state
that it was to meet the views of the legal authorities
who decide in cases of collision that the words " nearly
end on" were originally inserted. It was believed
that it would have given rise to end-

less litigation if the words "end on"
alone had been used, as it would have been necessary
to prove that the vessels were actually "end on "
that is, that their masts were positively in a line.
The addition of the word " nearly " provides against
this technical difficulty, and for this reason the
Admiralty has demurred to the memorial of the
shipowners.

1861. At the general election in 1865 Lord Arthur
Clinton was returned without opposition for Newark,

in conjunction with ➢ir. Grosvenor Hodgkinson. He
described himself as a Liberal, but voted against Mr.
Gladstone's Reform Bill of 1866, was opposed to the
ballot, and to the total abolition of Church rates.
After his retirement from the House of Commons
in 1868, his lordship passed through the Court
of Bankruptcy. His connection with the miserable
Boulton and Park case must be left to be decided by

the coming trial; but it is only fair to give the exact
words of the most important sentence in his decla-
ration:—" I have instructed my solicitor to retain
the services of counsel to represent me on my trial,
when I shall clearly and honestly show that nothing
can be laid to my charge other than the foolish con-
tinuance of the impersonation of theatrical charac-
ters, which arose from a simple frolic in which I
permitted myself to become an actor."