The Sun.
London, England, 1870-01-21 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JANUARY 21, 1870.

POLICE IN7ELLIGENCE—This Day.

MARL I,)Etoi4-_'rTl-STREET.

GROSS HYPOCRISY.—A BEGGING- LETTER lIIPOS
TOR. —John Thwaitb!s, describing himself as a ear.
punter, was charged before Mi . Knox Wi( I. begging
by means of begging-letters, of the 11.6 r. Mr. Hall,
curate of St. Ann's, Soho.

The prosecutor said that it was the custom of one
of the clergymen connected with St. Ann's Church
to attend there every morning to hear appeals from
persons in distress. A few days ago the prisoner
who said he was a carpenter. called upon him and

-.;tid he bad walked from Windsor and was out of
work. He gave the prisoner some temporary r,s-
sistaitce ; he again called upon him and told him
that he had seen Mr. Martin, at Messrs. Jackson
and Graham's, about work, and that he was to call
again. Ile again gave the prisoner some assistance
to tide him over till the following Tuesday, when he
sail he was to go to Mr Martin. He afterwards re-
ved a letter from the prisoner saying that he could
get work if he had tools, and he advanced him 10s.
for that purpos Yesterday he received another
letter from the prisoner asking for assistance to
keep him till the end of the week, as he could not
borrow any, he being engaged at Messrs. Jackson
and Graham's, and it not being allowed by that
firm for advances to be made to workmen. He then
made inquiries, and found that the prisoner had
never been to Messrs. Jackson and Graham's, and
on the prisoner calling on him yesterday evening
he took him to Mr. Martin, and also to another
place where he said he worked, when he admitted
that he was not employed at either, and he then
gave him into custody.

Timbs, 150 E, said that the prisoner admitted
that he had not been to Jackson and Graham's to
seek work and had not got any. lie said he had
worked for Mr. Monk, of Hunter-street, but all
that person knew of him was that he went to his
school when a lad. At the station the prisoner
said that being out of work and having no means
caused him to do it.

Mr. Knox said the prisoner had not acted hastily,
but evidently from the letter before him with great
deliberation, and a more disgusting piece of hypo-
crisy he had never read. The prisoner concluded
his letter with " Yours, a Christian Brother, J.
llopkins," and a nice specimen he was.
The letter was as follows :--" My dear It?verend
Sir,—l trust this will find you quite well, as it
leaves me much better than I have been, for the
work made me feel better. I think, please God, I
shall have three months' work. My dear rev. Sir,
i could not get away this evening in time for the
even-song. I purchased some planes, but had not
enough for a rule. If you will lend me enough to
take me through the week I will thank you, and
will call for it in the dinner hour.—Trusting you
will oblige me, my dear rev. Sir, yours truly, a
Christian Brother, "J. HOPKINS.

Rev. Sir,—We are paid Bd. an hour overtime,
and I make three hours every night."
Mr. Knox committed the prisoner for three
months with hard labour.

SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE ON
RECIPROCITY.

Sir Stafford Northcote made a very important speech on
Thursday, at Exeter, on the subject of reciprocity. He
presided at the annual meeting of the Exeter Chamber of
Commerce. Referring to the discussion now going on in
the press and among the public on the question, Sir
Stafford said :—"I have no doubt whatever that the
expectations held out by those who were the great pro-
moters of the free trade movement were exaggerated
and over-sanguine. It is not at all unnatural
that being so, that at the present moment—
when there is a good deal of distress in
the country there may be some feeling of dis-
appointment on the part or those who believed they should
never see distress again. One can hardly wonder that in
some cases it should even have led to a kind of reaction-
ary feeling. But at the same time I think we ought clearly
to make up our minds upon this subject ; and I
should say do all we can at once resolutely to put a
stop to any reactionary feeling of the kind. I am
perfectly convinced that not only is such reaction im-
possible, but even if by any curious concurrence of
circumstances it should take place it could only lead
to very great distress and inconvenience. What is really
the case when you open trade, and especially if it takes
place at a time when the country is in some difficulty from
restricted industry and employment, what happens is, that
from that moment there is a very great expansion of em-
ployment, and there is a period of prosperity. Well, then
you work up to that margin which you have given your-
selves, and then the old causes which created the difficulty
before come into play again, and you feel the same
difficulty you experienced before the expansion
It would be quite a wrong thing if you
thought you could mend matters by returning
to the old limits. You would immediately cause a good
deal more distress by restriction. In connection with this
we hear a great deal about reciprocity. I presume there
is not a single man in the country who, in a certain
sense, does not desire, earnestly desire, reciprocity. We
all desire that other nations should admit our productions
on the same favourable terms on which we admit
theirs. But I have always held, as I hold now, as
strongly as ever I did, that our really prudent and
wise course is to regulate our commercial affairs,
without too much reference to the proceedings
of our neighbours. I believe we must look at this matter
of reciprocity in this way. Suppose you are considering
the exchange of the products of England for the products
of another country—the.exchange, let us say, of cloth for
wine. Supposing a bale of cloth would, if there was no
burthen on either of them, exchange for a hogshead of
wine; supposing the Government of France chose to take
one quarter, of your bale of cloth when you send it in
and apply it to the purposes of the Government
of France, you would be able to get only three-quarters
of a hogshead of wine for the bale of cloth which
you had scat from England. That, of course; is a restric-
tion on trade, and you get a less return for the article you
have produced in this country than you would if no such
restriction existed. Well, but you do not mend matters
by saying, " We, on our side, will in return, take a quarter
of the value of • •ihe hogshead of wine which France
sends back," because if you do that you will still further
limit the return which the English producer will get.
In the first place, he will get less because the French
Government took a part of the bale of cloth when it got
there, and he would. also
.get less when the French
wine got here; - it would be mulcted by the English
Government. No doubt reciprocity is desirable, but
you do not mend matters by saying we will impose
them on our side, if. restrictions are not taken
off on the other side. The only way in which
sometimes this doctrine of reciprocity has been
found useful is thisl—that by putting a pressure on
important classes in the other country, you are
able to induce them to agitate in their own
country for -the -reduction of the duties imposed by the
Government of that country. No doubt when the question
arose of a commercial treaty with France in 1860, it was
the case that certain benefits were to be got for our trade
with France by a bargain with France in that spirit;
.but we complain—many 'people complained at that time
and still complain—that the bargain made was not nearly
so favourable as it ought' to have been and might have
been. Ido not want to rip up old sores, but those with
whom I usually act were not quite content, lam free
to say with the treaty at the time, and we still think
it is not a treaty so favourable as might have been ob-
tained and could have been obtained with more care and
in- a different sp!rit. • Most unfortunately it was a
treaty which was negotiated with the Emperor of the
French rather than with the French people. It was
a treaty which the Emperor was anxious to pass
quickly, because it was not supported in France by public
opinion. And we see now that the consequences of
having made.a treaty which was not supported by public
opinion have been that there is a movement in France--
whether it is a strong one or not remains to be seen—
against the maintenance of the provisions of that treaty.
I chink we proceeded in a way which was not the true one.
We ought rather to have reduced our own duties where it
was right to do so ; we ought not to have attempted this
bargaining. It created a false impression here, and still
more so abrcad—that there was something which they
were giving up, when in point of fact they
were oniy conferring an advantage upon themselves
as well as upon us. I have thought it right to lay
down these doctrines, because there is rather a tendency
now to forget the old principles which we thought had
been pretty well agreed upon by all persons. Even among
those who were free-traders from the beginning there is a
tendency to glide back from the ground they had
occupied. But I am quite sure it would be most
unfortunate for the country if any such tendency
should be given way to. We ought to stand firmly upon
the principles we have adopted. Ido trust that France
will maintain the privileges which she has given to us. I
believe we shall find out that the relations which have
grown up between France and this country, between
France and Germany, and thus indirectly between
Germany and this country, will have established a trade
between the two countries which it will be difficult to
injure or destroy. I believe that the French will see that
it is for their advantage that this system should be
continued ; but I am sure we should be doing wrong if we
gave any encouragement to the idea that England is at all
likely to take a step backwards in this matter.

At 'Worth there is a charity—so old that it is not
known who was the founder—consisting of the rent of four
acres of land, and yielding £8 16s. per annum, appro-
priated to providing agricultural tools for the poor.

Sir William Stirling Maxwell has declined the
rectorship of Aberdeen 'University on th© ground that a
majority of students voted against him. A new election
will be necessary, and Mr. Disraeli is spoken of as likely
to be brought forward.

THE COST OF BEAUTIFYING PARIS.—SO many
contradictory reports as to the amount expended by M.
Haussmann on the rebuilding of Paris have been circula-
ted, that it may not be out of place to give the exact
figures according to an official return just published. The
total expenditure during the last seventeen years amounts
to 2,117,500,000 f. (X 84,700,000). Of this the city has paid
almost one-half-1,022,500,000f (£40,900,000) out of its
own resources, The balance, amounting to X 43,800,000,
has been raised by various loans.
AN ANTICIPATED VISIT- FROM AN APOSTLE OP
THE BEAEMISTS.—The Indian_ newspapers announce that
Baboo Kesheb Chunder Sen, the head of the religious body
known as the Brahroists, is about to visit England next
month or the month after. The weakness of a certain por-
tion of London society for dark faces will be excusably in-
dulged in the c.-.se of a very remarkable man, the leader and
second founder of a very remarkable Sect. This sect, which
originated with the well-known RamUlohun Roy, pro-
fesses a spiritnalised form of Hindooism near akin to pure
theism ; and all accounts agree in stating that it possesses
extraordinary attractions for the young generation of
educated Hindoos, whom it has relieved not simply from
the gross superstitions of their ancestors, but from the
somewhat coarse materialism of their immediate predeces-
sors. The visit of the chief of this body to England is
thus explained by the Indian press. He and
his followers have had much to suffer lately from
three classes very powerful in India—the missionaries,
the lawyers, and the ultra-orthodox Hindoos. The mis-
sionaries have accused the Baboo of allowing himself to
be worshipped by his disciples, but this charge is ener-
getically denied, and it is probably founded on some mis-
representation or misconception of the exaggerated
language in which Hindoos of all sects address their
spiritual advisers. The lawyers have dealt the Brahmists
a still deadlier blow by discovering that all their marriages
are illegally celebrated: They seem to have, in fact,
reformed the ordinary marriage ritual of the Hindoos,
which they declare to be idolatrous and obscene, but this
innovation on usage is stated to be technically fatal to the
marriages themselves, The Indian Government has, it
appears, proposed to relieve sects thus situatedby allowing
them to register their " marriages civilly ; but the Con-
servative Hindoos are not inclined to sacrifice such
an advantage as the power of bastardising the whole
Liberal party, and tiley have got up an agitation against
the proposal. The Brahmists, on the other hand, are
sending their leader to England to represent to the
Secretary of State for India and to the British public
what their case really is. It is satisfactory to learn
that Baboo Kesheb Chunder Sen speaks very pure
English, and that he is a most eloquent as well as
a most intelligent and 4000341iShed—.all Mall
Gin& ;