The Sun.
London, England, 1848-12-23 00:00:00

THE SiTN, LONDON, BATtrRDAY EVENING,

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.
TIMES —Mr. Cobden has announced himself in a
new character. His letter to the financial reformers of
Liverpool contains the programme of a vast combination
of classes. The end is patriotic and simple; the means
politic and indirect. This is a novelty in Mr. Cobden's
career—a novelty which might perhaps have been antici-
pated, but which we have ourselves been unwilling to
anticipate. Unfavourable critics will be ready to say
that the same spirit characterizes the new movement and
the old. There is, however, all the difference in the
world. Free trade was a principle, like the abolition of
the slave trade or of slavery—like religious toleration
or equality, and some other points carried by the opera-
tion of a deep public sentiment. A republic is a simple
idea; but a mere compromise of parties to establish a safer
and more honourable government may indeed be moved
by patriotic instincts, but is nevertheless a factious pro-
ceeding. In like manner free trade is a simple idea,
and economy is a simple idea; hut an appeal to classes,
as classes, and to opinions, as opinions, is the work of
every-day politicians. Such a proceeding is sometimes
more effectual, and therefore wiser and better, than tin
attempt to realise a great principle at once. It is no
crime to combine the wisdom of the serpent with the
harmlessness o i the dove. The best men iu the world
have made themselves all things to all men. Mr. Cobden
is doing so, as he avows, to the partial surrender of his
Own private opinions, and to an extent which we do not
thick quite justifiable. He starts, of course, with wish-
ing to reduce the expenditure and the burdens of the
country. In that wo are all agreed. Then comes the
question of the possible reduction, and the most desir-
able means. For his possible reduction he has chosen a
very specious and intelligible estimate. Indeed, we
must congratulate him on the felicitous boldness with
which he has laid his finger on a strong point—on a
round sum in figures, and a round fact in history. The
annual expenditure, he says, is now about ten millions
more than it was in 1835, or even in the last year of the
Parliament of boroughmongers. So there you have in
one—a great figure and a great feet. No one can object
to the artist dashing off so bold an outline for his work.
Human infirmity craves a definite idea, and loves to re-
pose on that which is specific and palpable. The mer-
chant starts with the intention of making his 100,0001.
Some time since the We-leyans commemorated their
centenary by collecting 200,0001. Ambition and enthu-
siasm are equally accustomed to embody their objects.
Richard Cobden, however, must lay his account for
being charged with a dogmatical temper and visionary
de signs. While all else is varying; while the popu-
lation, the wealth, the value of money, the po-
litcal relations and the prospects of the country
change from year to year, and now present
a great contrast to 1830 or 1835, it will be said
that a fixed saving of so enormous an amount is an arbi-
trary and fantastic idea. Nor will it be conceded that
1835, a year of forced and even fictitious economy,
achieved by suspending works and by selling stores, and
which also brought increased expenses for the future, is
a fair basis of measurement. This mark for economical
ambition is proposed as a substitute fur any scheme of
direct taxation. The Live rpool financial reformers are
very blundering fellows, and do not know their business.
They have commenced operations by threatening us
with something which through the hazy medium of
their very stupid tracts looks like confiscation. Of their
two leading principles, the first was economy, the
second " to advocate the adoption of a simple and
equitable system of direct taxation, fairly levied
upon property and income, in lieu of the present
unequal, complicated, and expensively collected
duties upon commodities." And although it is very
true they have since chiefly confined their attention to
economy, they have done this in so silly, childish, and
gossippmg a manner, with so much quoting of trumpery
black books, and housemaids' tittle tattle about waiting
men, silk stockings, and white cravats, that one has
rather hated them for their proposed direct taxes than
respected them as judicious reformers. In fact, their
unreadable tracts have been a mere inarticulate moan,
slightly swelling the chorus of universal complaint.
Compared with such Lilliputians, Cobden is a giant.
They might have published till doomsday, without
making as much impression as his single letter,
which dashes into the subject with a bold and
intelligible plan. Mr. Cobden saw it was no use to
begin business with "crying stinking fish" in the
shape of a 10 per cent. income-tax. So he interferes to
set them right. " Do not talk of a substitute. Make
the money by saving. Lop off ten millions from both
ends of the account." This is the way to conquer. It
is the style of great and successful agitations. Wo must,
however, be permitted to express a suspicion that Mr.
Cobden does not overlook in his own mind the chance
of an extraordinary budget being wanted now and then,
and that he holds the proper way of meeting that
contingency to be what is called par excellence " a
war tax," viz., an income-tax. He wisely holds his
tongue about it just now, and leaves the morrow to
take care of itself. But it is in his reductions that Mr
Cobden's generalship chiefly appears. Ile avows it. " I
have not felt quite free to choose in every instance those
items of the Customs and Excise duties which I should
myself have proposed to abolish or reduce, but have been
partly influenced by the desire to enlist the sympathy
and support of every class and interest in the commu-
nity, whose co-operation will be abundantly requisite to
force the adoption of the plan upon Government." Such,
in fact, is the principle on which the reductions are se-
lected. It is only in one or two instateces that Mr. Cob-
den lets out a private leaning on the subject. His letter is
not a theoretical plan of taxation. It only enumerates
the most crying grievances, the loudest cries, the places
where the shoe pinches most, and the lustiest grum-
bles. Mr. Cobdeu takes a rapid survey of the na
Lion, soon finds out the stoutest remonstrants and the
noisiest lungs, and impartially invites them to his banner.
" Instead of wasting your strength against one another,"
he says in effect, " why not make a common cause ?"
The policy of such means no one can deny. The wis-
dom of the end is another question. You must deal
with the malt-tax, says Mr. Cobden, " if you would
enlist the sympathy or the county constituents in your
raovement. To a man the farmers are in favour of a
repeal of the malt tax." Then pointing out another class
of malcontents, he sap—" In Kent, Sussex, and two or
three other counties, there is an active agitation against
the hop duty." The result of including the malt and
hop duties, he says, willtbe that " the landlords, too (at
least such of them as are not merely professional politi-
cians), will henceforth be found in the front ranks of
those who advocate economy and retrenchment in the na-
tional expenditure. Already they have begun to ask, and
with good reason, why should we not have cheap
government as well as cheap corn?" The logic of such
a demand, of course, is that which argues " Who drives
tat horses should himself be fat." There can be no
doubt, however, that if Mr. Cobden can offer much hope
of abolishing the malt-tax, he will enlist many farmers
and some landlords in this cause. Soap and paper are
the next articles to be freed. The clinching argument
for these items is, that they " will draw towards you the
sympathies of the Scotch Excise reformers." Then comes
the window-tax. " London, Bath, and other large cities
are pressing the abolition of this tax annually on
the House, through Lord Duncan, and you must not
think of excluding it from your national budget."
There is something quite artistic and picturesque in
the combination here suggested. It reminds one of the
poet or the painter, who obtains breadth of effect by
the variety of the character and circumstance introduced
into his story; and it is not unlike the policy by which
empires comprising various and discordant nationalities
are sometimes held together, Mr. Cobden proposes an
amalgamation of grievances. The motto of the financial
extortioner is "Divide et inipera." Set the tax-paying
classes one against another, and fleece them all equally.
But let your motto, says Mr. Cobden, be " Union is
strength." Agree altogether, and sign a round robin
against a lump of taxation. Join all your forces, take
the Exchequer by assault on all sides, demand
10,000,000/. a year by way of ransom, and then divide
the spoil, cr, rather, let every man take back his own.
CHRONICLE.—Mr. Cobden's letter on Financial
Reform, which we published yesterday, is a demonstra-
tion of some importauce. The association to which it is
addressed were groping about, like men blind and
benighted, in the mazes of economical statistics, with-
out definite plan or clearly discerned object, when the
Member for the West Riding holds up a light over the
subject of their researches, embodies their vague concep-
tions in a tangible shape, and points out to them, at
once, what they want, and how they are to set about
obtaining ite No wonder that they accept his scheme
with acclamation, and adopt his " National Budget" as
their motto and watch-word. We shall net be sur-
prised if this manifesto, compiled, as it is, with much
skill, plausible in its statements, and, above all, wearing
the aspect of a practical and comprehensive plan, should
enlist a somewhat wide extent of popular sympathy
in its favour. To our easy-going Chancellor of
the Exchequer, we fear that it is not unlikely to
occasion some little disquietude. Mr. Cobden's plan,
shortly stated, is to adopt as the standard of national
expenditure the Budget of 1835. The total outlay of
the Goverbment would thus be reduced, according to
his statement, by about ten millions ; and he would
apply that sum plus an additional revenue to be. obtained
by extending the probate and legacy duties to the trans
mission of real property, in diminishing the Customs
duties by 3i- millions, the Excise duties by 61
and in abolishing the window tax and advertisement
duty. These, no doubt, are extremely desirable objects
it they could be effected ; but there is some preliminary
difficulty as to the data on which his estimates are
formed. The ordinary expenditure, in 1835, Mr. Cobden
states correctly, at 44,422,0001., and he compares this
sum with the estimate for the current year, fur which
he quotes Lord John Russell's speech of the
18th of February last, where he finds it stated at
54,596,0001. But two circumstances escape Mr. Cob-
den's notice, which considerably qualify the result. He
forgets, in the first place, that we have had at least two
fresh budgets since the 18th of February, and that Lord
John Russell's edition is no longer authentic. Sir C.
Wood's last—positively the last—budget of the year,
which was announced on the 25th of August, put the
total ordinary expenditure rather more than two millions
below the statement of his collergue, viz., 52,422,3351.
The alleged difference of ten millions between the sti-
mates of 1835 and 1848 must, therefore, be reduced to
eight. Furthermore, Mr. Cobden appears, rather
strangely, to overlook the fact, most material to
be adverted to before proceeding to remit taxation
hy millions, that the revenue for the present year is now
actually in a state of deficit. In the same speech just
referred to, the Chancellor of the Exchequer informed the
House that he should be obliged to raise 2,500,000/. in
the market by the sale of stock, in order to make up
the necessary supplies, and the public is aware that this
operation has been for some time going on. Therefore,
inasmuch as to put the national income and expenditure
in equilibrio is the first principle of sound fieance, it is
obvious that, even if the cost of our armaments for the
pre sent year had been brought within the limits of
1835, we should have had not ten millions, but only
uuuL five wed a haif, to d,seose of in the remission
of public burdens. It is undoubtedly true, as Mr.

Cobden states, that the great items of increase in our
expenditure, since the year 1835, are to bc found under
the head of our external defences. In that year the
military and naval expenditure reached its minimum,
having been, for several years before, many millions
above that mark. Thus, in 1826 it was 16,707,602/.; in
1835 it fell to 11,657,4861. It is needless to remark,
that the expenditure of any single year is hut an uncer-
tain and fallacious standard to reason from. For the
current year, according to the last Ministerial version,
these heads of expenditure stand at 18,033,111/. It
would be im;-ossible, within the limits to which we are
confined, to enter into the merits of this extensive ques-
tion. The great advance has, no doubt, been on the
navy, which exhibits an addition of about three mil-
lions, and upon the Ordnance, which has more than
doubled since 1835. The cost of the army, though
higher than in that year, is lower than in several of
the preceding years subsequent to the peace. Now,
we are disposed to go a good way with Mr. Cobden
in the opinion, that in these services considerable
retrenchm' nts are still practicable, and that, too,
without materially invalidating the public defence, or
derogating from the honour and interests of the country.
At the same time, to sustain unimpaired the strength ,
and competency of our marine, we hold to be a para-
mount
and indispensable obligation; and we must be
careful lest our pursuit of economy should lead us so
far as to adopt the standard of a period when this great
national arm was, confessedly, depressed, and was suf-
fered to lag behind the progress of modern improve-
ment. But the real field for retrenchment, in respect
to our armaments, is assuredly not confined to our
arsenals or dockyards. We agree with Mr. Cobden,
that it involves the consideration of extensive changes
in our foreign, and especially in our colonial, policy:
a more sincere recognition of the principle of non-inter-
vention in the first—a still more extensive and needful
reformation in the second. It is quite true that, if you
want to find the great outlet of profitless and indefinite
expenditure, you must look fur it in the colonies. No
man can say what is the aggregate amount which Great
Britain expends, accoming to her present mode of hold-
ing her full-grown children in golden leading-strings.
No statement of public accounts that has ever been ren-
dered can furnish the items. They are here, and there,
and everywhere. Army, Navy, Ordnance, Civil Services,
Miscellaneous Estimates—all include in the vague gene-
rality of their totals an unknown amount of colonial ex-
penditure. It is no departmental retrenchment, or revision
of details, which can cure this canker of our Exchequer.
It is nothing less than a total change and renovation of
policy. It is the application, to the vigorous off-shoots
of our empire, of that principle for which the public
mind is rapidly ripening, and to which Mr. Gladstone,
in one of his admirable speeches of last session, gave no
indistinct expression—the principle of self government,
combined with its natural correlative of self-support.
By such a policy, we may at once add to the wealth,
prosperity, and contentment of our dependencies, and at
the same time recruit the Exchequer by a most search-
ing and thorough economy. Into Mr. Cobden's schemes
for the re-adjustment of taxation we are unable, at
least on the present occasion, to enter. The question,
of course, is not what we might desire to do, but what
is attainable, with our existing means and liabili-
ties. Any proposition for the remission of imposts
upon such articles as tea, soap, and windcw-tax, will
attract very general sympathy, and accords with our
own often expressed wishes. As to some other features
of his budget, there will be more difference of opinion.
Divers amateur financiers have their own pet schemes
of re-adjustment, which they will prefer to Mr. Cob-
den's. But the grand objection to the manifesto is, that
it attempts too much. The financial system of a great
Empire cannot be reformed by a coup de main, nor can
one-fifth of a nation's expenditure be struck off by a
single dash of the pen. There is a wide difference be-
tween a volunteer and a responsible Chancellor of the
Exchequer—between a " National Budget" and a
Ministerial one. If Mr. Cobden were in Downing-street,
he would be obliged to do himself what he now under-
takes the easier task of bidding others do. He
woud have, not only to show upon paper that esti-
mates can be reduced, and that money is to be had,
but to execute the services within the estimates, and to
find tLe money that he proposes to deal with. At pre-
sent, if our calculations are correct, he has shown, ever.
assuming his basis of the Budget of 1835, little more
than half the ways and means necessary to carry out
his very liberal relaxations. As we began, so we must
end, by saying, that these are matters which should rouse
the Chancellor of the Exchequer from his lethargy. Mr.
Cobden is an antagonist to be answered, but not to be
slighted. During the two last years, the adminis-
tration of finance in this country has been virtually
in abeyance. In the direction of Financial Reform,
the Government has done nothing, and attempted
nothing. It has thrown off its official responsi-
bility upon the shoulders of the House of Com-
mons. After a single effort to retrieve the derange-
ment of the Exchequer, made only to be retracted, it fell
back into a listless inactivity, and, after three inconsist-
ent statements of our financial circumstances, it wound
ap the last session by the deplorable evasion of a deficit
and a loan. But the time for such negligence and su-
pineness is past. The demand for economical reform is
rising in the country, and will speedily be sounded within
the walls of Parliament. We make these remarks in no

factious spirit towards the present administrator of the
Exchequer. No Ministry, whatever may be its taleits,
can retain office in this country, at the present time,
without a❑ earnest appreciation and thorough compre-
hension of the great interests of our finance, and with-
out showing itself competent either to silence or satisfy
those popular demands for retrenchment and relief which
will otherwise soon swell into the chorus of a loud and
irresistible agitation.
POST.—Mr. Cobden has been _ indulging his genius

in the preparation of a financial budget, which be has
very considerately submitted to the notice and approba-
tion of tbe Liverpool Financial Reform Association. This
budget is worthy of Mr. Cobden, and very unworthy of
any man whose judgment and position in the political
world should give
_him a fair claim to the attention of
his countrymen upon the subject of public finance. He
proposes to knock off 2,000,0001. from the duty on tea,
945,000/. from the duty on foreign timber, 516,0004
from the duties on foreign butter, cheese, and other
small items of the tariff, 4,260,0001. duty on malt,
416,0001. duty on hops, 850,0001. duty on soap, 720,0001.
on paper, 1,610,0001. duty on windows, 160,0001. duty
on advertisements. The aggregate of these reductions,
or abolition of duties, is 11,477,0001. To reduce or abo-
lish taxation is always agreeable, but what are to be the
substitutes for all these taxes ? That is a point which
to such a statesman as Mr. Cobden.giveknot much un-
easiness.
__ln the first place, he would establish what he is
pleased to call " legacy and probate duty upon real
estate, whether entailed for unentailed," and from this
he would derive 1,500,0001. a year. This comes within
the trifle of ten millions sterling per annum of balancing
the account, and this sum he proposes to save by re-
duction of expenditure. From the expenses of the army,
navy, and ordnance, he would lop off only 8,500,0001.
As to the remaining 1,500,0001., he dispatches that sum
in a very brief paragraph, asserting that there will be
" little difficulty" in saving it from all the other heads
of expenditure, including the cost of collecting the re-
venue and the management of the crown lands. Mr.
Cobden observes that, in 1835, our armaments cost the
country 11,657,0001.; while they cost 19,341,0001. for
the year ending the sth of April last. That sum, how-
ever, as Mr. Cobden acknowledges, included 11,000,000/.
for the Kafir war, and yet he proposes a permanent
saving of 8,500,000/0 per annum, as if there was always a
Kafir war, which military indulgence, he thinks, might
very well be done without. He allows that the permanent
cost of our naval and military deleaces has been increased
only 7,000,0004 a year since 1835, and yet he proposes
to save 8,500,0001. a year upon these items of expense
by bringing our naval and military establishments down
to the level of 1835. We do not know in what day
school Mr. Cobden received his arithmetical education,

but until he becomes a greater proficient in the mysteries
of addition and subtraction of :money, we think he is as
little likely to be right in his financial calculations as be
has been in other calculations concerning the effects of
free trade and the intensely commercial aspirations of
continental states. It is unquestionably very fair matter
of inquiry and discussion how it has become necessary
to increase the naval and military establishments of the
country so much as they have been increased since 1835;
but of all the unguarded absurdities ever fallen into by
a public man, perhaps the greatest is to assume that
there was no reason at all for the increase which has
taken place, and that neither in the circumstances of
affairs abroad nor at home has there been any well
founded cause for making this nation more powerful by
sea and laud to resist foreign aggression or internal dis•
order. Such men as Mr. Cobden are to be mistrusted
upon matters of this kind, because they have no powers
of mind to elevate them to an extensive view of national
affairs. They are essentially men of the counting-
house, and it would give them no uneasiness that Great
Britain were reduced politically to the rank of a third
or fourth rate power, so long as trade was not injured.
That England should occupy in Europe and in the
world no higher a position tban that occupied by Hol-
land would give them no concern. Nay, they would
probably prefer it, as making it less necessary that ex-
penses should be incurred which diminish business pro-
fits, or that wars or defences should be undertaken
which are not for the good of trade. Mr.
Cobden thinks it • very foolish that Great Bri-
tain should have anything to do with what he is
please to call the squabbles of foreign Powers; and as
for colonies, his opinion is, they might as well be done
without altogether. We have now declared, he says,
that for all commercial purposes, theT shall in future
stand in precisely the same relationship towards us as
foreign countries. lle thinks that, under such circum-
stances, even the Protectionists themselves will not
maintain that the only exclusive connexion we are to
maintain with our colonies is the monopoly of the ex-
pense of governing and garrisoning them. But Mr.
Cobden forgets that the Protectionists do not mean
to rest satisfied with the policy which commercially
regards the British colonies as if they were not Bri-
tish colonies. Mr. Cobden may belabour the Whigs
and Peelites with his inferential logic as much as he
pleases, lout he a ill be so good as to remember that it
does not touch the Protectionists. They have never
given him an excuse for uttering the unpatriotic folly in
which he indulges. But why is it that in Mr. Cobden's
zeal for economy he abstains from dwelling upon the
miscellaneous estimates? Is it that the cant of Cobden-
ism cannot so well be brought to bear upon the commis-
sionerships which have sprung up in every direction ?
Ile rails upon naval and military expenses, because
to maintain the national security, and to guard the
national glory from being tarnished, are not matters
which come within the capacity of his mental sensa-
tions. But his political justice does not revolt from
jobbery. Ile is not angry with the various quackeries
and extravagances which the Liberalism of the day calls
into existence, and for which the nation is obliged to
pay. Between 1846 and 1848 the expense of the Poor
Law Commission was increased from 59,200/. to 103,000/.
Are he pocf any better taken care of than they were?
We find a cunsiaerable sum for a Government Railway
I Department, another for inspectors and superintendents

of factories, another for convict expenditure in the Anti •
podes, another for the University of London, another for
scientific works and experiments, another for Corsican
emigrants, another for Polish refugees, another for com-
missioners on criminal law, another for the Sanitary
Commission, another for the Ecclesiastical Commission,
another for navigation in Ireland, another for steam navi-
gation to India. Some thirty years ago, if we recol-
lect rightly, the miscellaneous estimates were about a
million and a half. We find the amount for 1846
3,482,4261.; fur 1847, 3,782,6131.; for 1848, 3,770,4271.;
and be it remembered that it is these miscellaneous esti-
mates which cover the jobbery and favouritism and un-
just pampering of obsequiousness—vices which do more
harm than even an unwise orttlav of money in naval and
military armaments, if any such thing had taken place,
which we do not admit. It was through the miscella-
neous estimatea that a present was made to an Under-
Secretary of the Treasury of 2,5001., for a few months'
set vice in Ireland, the country paying that gentleman
all the while, for these same services, no less than 2,500/.
a year! Let us, then, recommend Mr. Cobden, if he
will dabble in finance, not to make himself more ridi-
culous than he need be by his preposterous recom-
mendations of knocking off immense sums of taxation
and expenditure; but let him address his industry to
the exposure of the abuses in the miscellaneous ex-
penses, and then he may do some good. For instance,
he is a free-trader, and thinks the Government should
in no respect interfere with trade. Very well! What
does ho think of a public department, called the Board
of Trade, which in 1846 cost the country 37,2551; in
1847, 37,7001.; and in 1848, 41,000/ ? Every shilling
of that money had much better been jerked over
Westminster-bridge into the Thames. A large part of
it goes in the misrepresentation of facts, and in dres-
sing up arithmetical delusions for the mystification of
Members of Parliament. Why should not Mr. Cobden
exert his energies to get rid of this expensive branch
of Government interference with trade, and thus, in one
particular at least, prove himself capable of doing some-
thing without doing mischief ?

- - -
CHARLES BULLER'S SUCCESSOR.
(From the Hull Advertiser.)
The London papers of Tuesday and Wednesday state
that Matthew Talbot Baines, Q.C., and Member of Par-
liament for this borough, is about to be appointed to the
office of President of the Poor-law Board for England
and Wales, vacant by the death of the late Right lion.
Charles Buller. To those who know Mr. Baines, as he is
known by all the respectable inhabitants of Hull and its
vicinity, it is needless to say that such an appointment will
reflect the highest credit upon Lord John Russell's Ad-
ministration. The office of President of the Poor-law
Board is second to none under the Crown in the im-
portance of its relation to the moral and physical condi-
tion of the indigent poor of this country'; and it would
be difficult to select a Member of the present Parliament
who possesses so many requisites 'for the humane and en-
lightened discharge of the very troublesome and very
respoesible duties which devolve upon the bead of that
Board as the Hon. and Learned Member for Hull. For
the ten years previous to the last general election Mr.
Baines filled the office of Recorder of this borough, and
rarely has the judgment-seat, even in the highest courts
of judicature in this land, been more an object of gene-
ral respect and veneration than was the Sessional
Court of Hull during the whole time that he pre-
sided as judge. To a clear and vigorous intellect—a
sound constitutional knowledge of law—and a dignified
and eminently judicial presence, he united the utmost
suavity of manners, a temper never ruffled by the breath
of passion, and a sympathy for the victims of ignorance
and want, as discriminating as it was inexhaustible. He
only ceased to be Recorder of Hull e hen public opinion
demanded that his services should be popularly
recognised, and his sphere of useful action extended by
a seat in the House of Commons. In what light Minis-
ters have regarded his brief Parliamentary career, may
be gathered from his rumoured appointment as the suc-
cessor of the late eminent Member for Liskeard, no less
than from the way in which his qualifications for an office
of so mucn responsibility aro spoken of in the Ministe-
rial papers.
Many persons here are desirous of knowing whether
the acceptance of the office of President of the Poor-law
Board, would entail upon Mr. Baines the necessity of re-
signing his seat for Hull. Most undoubtedly it would, but
as the office can only be retained by a Member of Parlia-
ment, Mr. Baines would be a candidate for immediate re-
election. His seat for Hull would be void by his ap-
pointment, just as if he were promoted to a place in the
Cabinet—but only to afford his present constituents an
opportunity to renew their confidence in him by his
unanimous re-election. From all that we know of the
feeling of his constituents Mr. Baines would be re-elected
without the shadow of opposition.
In an influential weekly paper, in which Mr. Baines's
appointment as head of the Poor-law Department is
spoken of as in all respects desirable, allusion is made to
persons in the south having mistaken Mr. M. T. Baines,
the member for this borough, for Mr. Edward Baines,
the editor of the Leeds Mercury, and which is said to
have provoked objections to the appointment of the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman to the office of chief of
the Poor-law Board, on account of his being a Dissenter
and an opponent of the national system of education.
We feel the delicacy of correcting an error which may
have the effect of appearing to cast an imputation upon a
gentleman of whom we desire to speak is a spirit of kind-
ness, prompted by a grateful recollection of the many
reform victories achieved by the editor of the Leeds Mer-
cury during the eight years following the close of 1828.
But as it is of importance that the persons of even
brethren should not be confounded, we beg to state, for
the information of all whom it may interest or concern,
that Mr. Matthew Talbot Baines, ex-Recorder and pre-
sent Representative of this borough in Parliament, has from
his earliest years belonged to the communion of the Es-
tablished Church, and has been an ardent supporter
of the Government system of National Education.
The first part of this statement we mention merely as a
matter of fact; for we do not allow that a Churchman,
as such, is one jot better qualifitd to be the President
of the Poor-law Commission than if he were a Dissen-
ter, or any known Denomination. A Nonconformist,
or a Baptist, has just as good a right to be appointed
to the Presidency of the Poer-law Board as the
most Evangelical Low Churchman in the world. We
repeat, therefore, that we lay no stress upon the ortho-
doxical point beyond its enunciation as a simple fact.
But we do regard with especial approbation the course
which Mr. M. T. Baines has always pursued upon the
education question, notwithstanding the adverse violence
of his brother's opinions, and the foolish heat with
which they were espoused by his unreflecting partisans.
In the course of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's

long judicial connexion with Hull, he has had occasion
to study, with more than ordinary care, the operation of
the poor-laws, so that he will bring to the discharge of
the duties of Chief of the Poor-law Board a mind
well stored with valuable information on that par-
ticular subject. Mr. Baines has other most valu-
able qualifications for such an office. Though
a good lawyer, he is no red tapist. He is
not governed by mere forms and precedents—and
he looks more to the spirit and intention than to the ver•
'siege of Acts of Parliament. He is eminently a Frac-
tical as well as a humane man, and will not employ any
of the powers with which the law may entrust him to
grind the faces of the poor. It will afford us, therefore,
in common with the great bulk of Mr. Baines's constitu-
ents, great pleasure to read the confirmation of this ap-
pointment in the London Gazette. When the office of Pre-
sident of the Poor-law Board was first declared vacant,
we confess that we trembled for Ministers, as we were
apprehensive that they would commit the blunder of
conferring it upon some member of the aristocracy—an
appointment which would have detroyed all national
den
department and the destitute poor. But Mr. Baines has
sprung
ng from the any sympathy between the chief of the
people, and he has the nobility of wind
confidence in
to be proud of the parental virtues which enabled him to
achieve his present state and position.

BANK OF
ENGLAND.
(From last night's Gazette.)
An Account, pursuant to the Act 7th and ath of Victoria, cap. 32,f0r
the Week ending on Saturday, the 16th day of December, 1848.
costa DIPAILTILINT.
Z.
Notes issued.. • • .... 27,932,125

Government debt .. 11,01,100
Other securities. •• • • 2,934,900
Gold coin and bullion 13,474,216
Silver bullion • • • • • • 507,909

4;7,962,125

X 27,932,125
M. MARSHALL, Chief Cashier.
Dated the 21st day of December, 1848.
EANZING DEPAILTION T.

Proprietors' capital • • 14,553,000
Rest • • • • • . 3,376,613
Public deposits (in-
elndini Exchequer,
Commissioners of
National Debt, bay-
tugs-banks, and Di-
vidend acconnts) • • 7,908,643
Other deposits .. • • .• 9,249,619
Seven day and other
bills • • • • • • • • .... 964,106

Government securi-
ties (including Dead
Weight Annuity) . • 13,329,111
Other securities .• • • 10,669,617
Notes ••• • • • • ••• • • 11,246,410
Gold and silver coin.. 807,747

£36,052,786

A 36,052,786
M. MARSIIALL, Chief Cashier.
r. 11148.

Dated the 21st day of Deeeaal

UNIVERSITY INTELLIGENCE.
OXFORD, DEC. 21.
Congregations will be holden for the purpose of grant-
ing graces and conferring degrees on the following days
Februaryls ;
Thursday,
March 22;
22 ; Thursday,
in the ensuing term, viz. :—Monday, January 15; Thurs-
day, February 1; Thursday, February 8; Thursday,
Saturday, March 31.
Fmeabrrcuha r 8);
CAMBRIDGE, DEC. 21.
Thursday, March MrsdaaryCh
THE 11IILSEAN Plum—The prize for the Hulsean
Essay has been adjudged to Henry Thomas Wroth, 8.A.,
St. John's College.
CHRISTMAS EXAMINATIONS.
6T. JOHN'S COLLEGE.
THIRD YEAR.—First Class—Besant, Cort, Hayward,
Irving, Liveing Lethbridge, C. Lee, Woletenholme,
Boclen, Lees, Dingle, Bresher, Law, F. Smith, Boddy,
Jones, Jenkins, Kearney, and H. Williams.
SECOND YEAR.—First Callender, Evans, Du-
sautoy, J. N. Smith, J. S. Clarke, Rowland, Claydon,
Shears, Seed, Leicester, Yates, Everard, Jeckell,
Tatham, G. Rowe, W. B. Davis, Hudson, and Hubbard.
FIRST YEAR.—(The names arranged according to
their order on the College Boards.)—First Class: Cooke,
E. Calvert, Shaw, E. H. Lovell, Brodribb, Wade, Kemp-
son, Godfrey, Parnell, Langley, G. B. Morley, Radcliffe,
Cabell, Ward, H. E. Gough, Buckell, Haslam, Harbord,
page, F. A. White, Frossard, Duckworth, Rotherham,
ake, Ray, J. Lewis, W. J. Patchett, Coke, C. T.
Hudson, T. White, Monro, Woodward, Tomkins,
Mitchell, Ellis, Chambers, Le Sueur, Leycester, and W.
Matthews.
JESUS COLLEGE —MATHEMATICAL EXAMINATION.
THIRD YEAR.—First Class: Atkinson, Butterworth,
Every, Loathes, Scott, Sharpe, and Smith.
SECOND YEAR.—First ChM: biLUMOIIdS, Gammell,
Stone, Wemyss.

SOCIAL DISTINC7 ION; or, HEARTS AND
HOMES. By Mrs. Ellis. No. XII.
We have hitherto abstained from criticising Mrs.
Ellis's serial story, " Social Distinction." We pre-
ferred to wait till the plot should be somewhat deve-
loped and the plan of the work fully manifested.
Now that twelve numbers of the serial have appeared
we may form a tolerable estimate of the merits of the
entire work—a work every way worthy the authoress
of the " Women of England." In penning these
chapters upon " Hearts and Homes," Mrs. Ellis has
conferred another benefit on the women of England.
" Social Distinction" records the history of four or
five families differing from each other in a very great
degree. The various peculiarities, faulty or other-
wise, of the different " homes," and the " hearts"
by which they are influenced, are portrayed with
inimitable skill. Many of the minutiae are too pain-
fully correct. The Ashley family is composed of a
selfish mother, a group of spoiled daughters, and a
kind-hearted, miserable man, nominally its head, but
veritably its slave. The tyranny of this "female
domination" is, perhaps, somewhat overdrawn, but the
lesson is an effective one. Very different is the
household of Mrs. Lee, the sister of Mrs. Ashley.
In this home a warm- hearted, affectionate,
and weak-spirited wife, is rendered wretched by the
coldness and ill-treatment of a husband, whose whole
heart is engrossed in business. The old master of
Hatherstone hall and his wife somewhat resemble
" Auld Robin Gray " and his bride. The story of
Margaret, narrated by herself, is full of exquisite
pathos and beauty. Kate, and Lucy, and Dorothy,
the three young heroines of the tale, are admirable
specimens of three different classes of character. The
loving and loveable Lucy is gentle and timid to an
excess that degenerates into weakness. Dorothy is
impetuous, wilful, and good-hearted, endued with
many natural good qualities, deteriorated by. want
of education. Kate Staunton is the favourite of
the authoress, and she would be the favourite of
the reader, perhaps, were it not for the tout soil peu
of selfishness that mingles with her estimable quali-
ties. 'The history of these girls, and the families to
which they belong, has been rendered by Mrs. Ellis
a means of affording a useful lesson to all who have
" hearts" to discipline and " homes" to influence.
The lesson which it teaches in nowise diminishes the
interesting and attractive character of " Social Dis•
tinction " as a tale.

STEPHEN'S COMMENTARIES ON THE
LAWS OF ENGLAN.n.
In our last rather hurried notice of this great work
we promised 'to revert to the subject, and gladly
should we follow the learned author through the, four
volumes (did space or time permit), for the pur-
pose of indicating his many valuable additions and
improvements, but we are reluctantly compelled to
confine ourselves to a few points, which appear most
important to the profession and interesting to the
public. The deviation from the general arrangement
of preceding commentators we look on as an improve-
ment of the first magnitude. The vast changes which
modern legislation has introduced, not only in the
all-important subject of the rights of property, but
in those ofter branches of law which may be strictly
said to belong to our social system—comprising the
" laws relating to the poor, to highways, to public
charities, and the like"—rendered a new arrange-
ment necessary, and we think that Sergeant Stephen
is eminently entitled to the thanks of the
profession for the just and natural order into which
he has distributed these several subjects, which under
the old analysis were but incidentally referred to. The
great importance of these subjects demanded for them
a distinct and appropriate place in a " Treatise on
the Laws of England," and the manner in which
the learned author has carried out this arrangement
has our highest commendation. The leading prin-
ciple of the general plan is—to make the distinction
" between persons and things the foundation not of
primary, but of a subordinate arrangement, and to
consider persons as constituting in a primary sense
the only objects of the law's] regard. First, as insu-
lated individuals, their personal (or bodily) rights are
examined ; next in their connexion with the things
around them—which introdnces the cousideration of
their rights of property. Next, as members of
families, which involves their rights in private rela-
tions; and, lastly, as members of the community—
which leads to the discussion of their public rights."
Public rights he subdivides into those," which con-
cern a man in his relations to persons in authority—
whether civil or ecclesiastical, and those which con-
cern him in his relations to his fellow-citizens at large
—the first of which will fall under the heads of the
civil government and the church, the second under
that of the social economy of the realm." The follow •
ing is the order of arrangement adopted, which appears
to us plain, simple, and natural, free from all embar-
rassment, and having many advantages both for the
student and the general reader over the. system
adopted by his predecessors. First—" I. Of personal
rights. 11. Of rights of property. 1. As to things
real. 2. As to things personal. 111. Of rights in
private relations. 1. Between masters and servant.
2. Between husband and wife. S. Between parent
and child. 4. Between guardian and ward. IV.
Of public rights. 1. As to the civil government. 2.
As to the church. 3. As to the social economy of
the realm. V. Of civil injuries, including the modes of
redress. VI. Of crimes including the modes of prosecu-
tion." The professional reader will at once see the conve-
nience and facilities which this mode of division gives,
and will, no doubt, fully appreciate the original and
important matter so ably set forth in the several
chapters on Uses and Trusts—on Conveyances
under the Statute of Uses—and on Conveyances by
Tenants in Tail, and Married Women. The sub-
ject of personal rights, under the first division, re-
quires little comment. They consist of personal
security, and personal liberty. Personal security
consists in the legal and uninterrupted enjoymont of
one's life, limbs, body, health, and reputation. Life
being the immediate gift of God, and inherent, by
nature, in every individual, can only be determined
by natural or civil death—personal liberty, or the
power of locomotion from one place to ,another, ac-
cording to inclination, is also a natural right, and cannot
be abridged without the express permission of the laws
The observations of the learned author upon these
rights are sound, learned, and constitutional. He
forcibly points out the watchful care with which our
laws guard against their invasion, and the remedies
applicable should they be improperly invaded.
We next come to the rights of property, which the
learned commentator places second in the order of
his arrangement—a subject wide, vast, and compli-
cated, but which he has handled with a master-hand.
He introduces this subject by a very able and elabo-
rate consideration of the origin and foundation of
those rights, which he defines to be, " Man's free use,
enjoyment and disposal, according to the laws of the
community, of all his acquisitions in the external
things around him"—commencing from the period
when an all-bountiful Creator, by His immediate
gift, bestowed on mankind dominion over the
earth and all things therein. By a clear
and beautiful chain of reasoning he traces from
this state of primeval simplicity, when all things were
in common, and man bad no more fixed or exclusive
right of property than that usufructuary interest
which a transient possession gave him, to the period
when the increase of mankind and man's ambition
made a more permanent dominion necessary, and
from the immediate use, which lasted only during his
act of occupancy, he appropriated to himself the sub-
stance of the thing to be used, over which he estab-
lished a right of ownership, in addition to occupation,
by an expenditure of his industry and labour ; this
ownership once established, naturally introduced the
right of transfer, by sale, grant, or conveyance, from
which sprung commercial traffic. The introduction of
wills and testaments was long subsequent to this
period, and until the reign of Henry the
Eighth no lands were permitted to pass by will;
" and then only of a certain portion ; nor was it till
after the restoration by the statute 12 Car. 11., c. 24,
which converted tenure in chivalry into tenure in
socage, that the power of devising real property be-
came so universal as at present." Thus far have we
(very imperfectly we must confess) followed the
learned author in his abstract notion of the " Origin
of Property and the power of tranferring and trans-
mitting it." He next enters into the consideration of
property, its " Divisions, Tenures, Estates, and
Titles, as settled by the Laws of England." In
treating of tenures, he is necessarily led into an exa-
mination of the feudal system established throughout
the European Continent in the middle ages, and
which forms the basis of our municipal law on this
subject. On this point the learned author has con-
densed an immense body of legal learning from the
beat writers ; but, being almost of a purely technical
and professional nature, we cannot in this brief notice
follow him as closely as we could desire. He next fully
and perspicuously treats of the different legal estates
in lands—viz., such interest as the tenant hath in his
tenure, comprising freehold estates of inheritance,
estates less than freehold, estates upon condition,
estates in possession, reversion, and remainder ; in
severalty, joint-tenancy, coparcenary, and common.
Estates of an equitable nature are noticed under the
head of Uses and Trusts, where the student and
professional reader will find much original and im-
portant matter. We now come to a moat important
branch of our laws—that which treats of " title by
descent, or the law of inheritance in fee simple, the
principal object of the laws of real property in Eng-
land." It is referable to so ancient a period as the
reign of Henry 11., afterwards matured in the reigns
of Henry 111. and Edward I. For more than five
hundred years it underwent no change, till in the
last reign an Act was passed, 3 and 4 Wm. IV., c. 106,
for the improvement of the law of inheritance,
founded on the report of the commissioners appointed
to revise the laws of real property. This statute bas
modified the old system and introduces many sew
and important changes, which tke Learned Sergeant
has embodied in his work with his usual clearness and