The Sun.
London, England, 1869-07-03 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 3, 1869

was stigmatized by the noble marquis in no measured
terms—as one worthy of being envied by SHYLOCK !
The excitement caused by the very animated debate
which followed upon Lord SALISBURY'S caustic and
biting speech was hardly allayed when the division
was taken—with the extraordinary result just now
indicated. During the discussion, accusations and
recriminations were freely indulged in. The Secre-
tary of State for India attacked the Leader of the
Opposition, and the Mover of the Amendment, for
putting forward irreconcilable arguments. Lord
STANHOPE remonstrated very warmly with the
Duke of ARGYLL in regard to one of his statements.
Several Peers contended with almost unmannerly
e2gerness for the ear of the house in their solicitude
to take part in the discussion. And eventually, as
the debate itself foreshadowed, and as the Division
List has since then clearly enough demonstrated, the
number of the majority was appreciably enhanced
by many of the Liberal Peers voting, for once, with
the Conservative Opposition. How far the Cabinet
will feel disposed to concede in regard to this amend-
ment, and in regard to all the other amendments in-
troduced into the Irish Church Bill during its p issage
throegh the House of Lords in Committee, is the grand
problem of the session now remaining to be solved.
Rumours of the most contradictory character are not
unnaturally rife as to Mr. GLADSTONE'S determina-
tion as to this matter of vital importance as affecting
the whole policy of his Government. His tempera-
ment, naturally or constitutionally sensitive and im-
pressionable, has, according to some very confident
statements, been sofar acted upon by the course already
taken by his opponents in the House of Lords that hehas
already come to the fixed resolve of listening to no sug-
gestion of anything at all in the nature of a compromise.
The Lords, according to these rumours, are to be
ridden over roughshod. Their amendments are to
be rejected, one and all of them, in the lump. The
session is to be brought to an abrupt conclusion, and
Parliament, as soon after as possible, called together
again, for the purpose of passing the Irish Church
Bill once more intact (just as it was sent up only the
other day to the House of Lords) thtough the
Muse of Commons. All the machinery—very ques-
tionably constitutional some of it, as many of those
conceive who arc fond of assuming to themselves
par excellence the distinctive title of Constitutional-
ists—all the machinery which has, within the last
few weeks, been so frequently sketched and
described, and held in terrorem over the House of
Lords, is at last in real earnest to be brought to bear
upon the House of Lords and to be set in motion
adversely to the interests of our hereditary legislators.
In the truth of these rurneurs we cannot for an in-
stant believe. Mr. GLADSTONE is so strongly in power
that be can—if ever a Prime Minister could—afford
to be calm, and self-possessed, and considerate to his
antagonists. He is too powerful, as the undisputed
leader of the dominant party throughout the country,
to necessitate, or, as one might say, to admit of the
possibility of his being angered. The loyal majority
at his back in the House of Commons preclules
him from the hazard of being irri atvd. During
the session of 1866 and 1867 he had re Isons euow
for being fretted and worried to the last possiVe de -
gree, for—with all the will and all the capacity in the
world to lead—he c )uld not, for the simple reason that
his followers were utterly disorganized as a following.
They were broken up into rival secdons. They were
divided amongst themselves. There were Tea-
room cotnpacts, and Cavea of Adullam. All that
was in the old Ilouss—the house elected under
the auspices of the popular Premier who was dead
and gonebefore it could be called together—under the
auspices, that is, of Lord PALMERSTON. The new Ilouse
of Commons, on the contrary, has been elected,
as we all know, under the auspices of the name
and influence of Mr. GLADSTONE, and, what is
more, under that name and under that influence,
in connection with this very question as to the
sweeping away of the Irish Chu: oh by means of
its complete disestablishmcnt, c ;ITU, in some way
or another, with it; inevitable disendowmenf.
Strong in his position, a;. Leader of the Party and
Heal of the Government, Mr. GLADSTONE can afford
to be magnanimous and conciliatory in his manner
of dealing with the amendments of the liousq of
Leeds, or, in other words, with the rival policy of
the Conservative Opposition.

THE disastrous explosion in North Wales coming
so soon after that at Newcastle is raising the ques-
tion as to whether the use of nitro-glycerine ought
not to be prohibited altogether. This is always
the first impulse when one hears of calami-
ties arising from comparatively new and
rarely-used materials. We have clone without
them hitherto, they are terribly destructive,
therefore let us go on as before, and surrender what-
ever advantage might be gained in order to avoid a
fearful risk. All this is eminently unphilosophical
and unpractical. As a matter of fact, nitro-glycerine
has been long and largely used in the very district
where this last explosion occurred. It has
been far less dangerous than gunpowder, for
it is far more manageable, and we have
no doubt that if the slate quarrymen were
asked even now if they would wish to sub-
stitute the older for the newer explosive, they
would say No. Of course, when nitro-glycerine does
explode the results are more terrible than those which
follow the explosion of gunpowder. This is a reason,
not for prohibition, but for greater care. Any-
one who
materialhoisac knowsaintedrit that it can b
with the properties ofrendered
sn r
dethedis
formidable
innocuous, and that the transport of it may be
rendered as safe as the transport of wine or beer.

THE Marquis of BATH was one of the Peers who
gave most assistance to the Government by persuading
a large number of Conservative Peers to read the
Irish Church Bill a second time. The Marquis is
now inclined to regret that assistance. Excited by
the Duke of ARGYLL'S confirmation of Mr.
GLADSTONE'S assertion that no part of the Irish
Church funds shall be devoted to the purposes
of any other Church, he vehemently declared
that if the noble Duke had made that
statement on the second reading, he (the Marquis)
would never have voted for the bill; that the
Duke had thrown down a challenge which he (the
Marquis) would take up. He was willing to accept a
moderate re-endowment, but without that he could
not accept the bill. "On that principle he must
stand, if he were to pull down the walls of that House
about his ears, bring down the Constitution, and
ruin himself and the order to which he belonged."
This emphatic declaration, say the reporters, was
received with " cheers and a laugh." The
cheers would seem to imply that certain lords
share the opinions of the head of the THYNNES ;
the laugh would indicate that one lord, at least,
thinks them ridiculous. We are not careful to say
which is the correct estimate. If the Peers really
believe that it is a solemn duty after they have dis-
endowed the Church to re-endow it, they are, we
suppose, bound to maintain that opinion at any cost
to themselves, though it is difficult to understand
what good object can be served by taking away the
revenues from the Church in order to give them back
again. At the same time the Lords, however con-
scientious they may be, must be prepared to accept
the consequences of their conscientiousness. The
Commons, for instance, will respect that noble
quality in others all the more because they them-
selves possess it. But that being so, they are as
much bound to carry out their convictions as the
Peers aro to carry out theirs. Consequently there
must be a collision, in which both parties, being
equally conscientious, but both parties not being
lequally strong, the weaker will have to give way,

Which party is that ? The Lords have already
answered the question by voting for a bill which
they did not approve. But the same reason which
made them take that step should, one would think,
make them go a little farther in the same direction.
The nation pronounced for the disestablishment and
disendowment of the Irish Church, and the Lords
voted for a measure carrying out that object. Having
done this, it is illogical to vote for re-endowment,
the more so as the nation will not listen to any
such proposal. This is clear and indisput-
able. The Times of Thursday argues in favour
of it ; the Times of Friday publishes its Dublin cor-
respondent's letter, stating that the proposal is
rejected at every side. Even Irish Churchmen will

not listen to the gift of glebes to Roman Catholic
priests ; English Nonconformists are equally
emphatic. The proposal will not be accepted by the
nation. Is is not, then, unfortunate that the con-
scientiousness of the Peers compels them, having
accepted the greater, to resist the lesser ? But pro-
bably they do not mean to carry resistance to an
extremity. Having " delivered their souls " by
turning the bill inside out, they will scarcely resist
the action of the Commons when in a few weeks the
Commons reverse that process and restore the
measure to its former condition.

THE narratives of thcwrreat commercial failures
which have been mand" since the memorable
Sit
Black Friday are mon onously uniform. It is
always the same story of prosperity attained by strict
adherence to the legitimate laws of trading, and
of prosperity thrown away through failure to recog-
nise the principle that the same care which is neces-
sary to gain wealth is likewise requisite to keep
it.

In the history of these ruined firms
we invariably find an epoch to which a
distinct change in the . system of conducting
business is traceable, when ignorance and incompe-
tence find a place in the board of management, and
when some commercial MEPHISTOPHELES sees his
opportunity, and steps in to ruin the concern for his
own benefit. This is, in brief, the history of the
latter days of the OVEREND and GURNEY firm,
and it is the outline of a scarcely less remarkable
narrative—the failure of the Bombay Bank. For
many years the Bank of Bombay, like the great Lom-
bard-street firm, enjoyed a career of uninterrupted
prosperity. It was established in 1840, with a small
capital of about half-a-million, the management was
so sound that it paid very good dividends, and so
cautious that it never incurred any losses of
great moment. But about 1861, owing to
certain changes, a large increase of capital
was proposed, and an Act was at length
passed in 1863 authorising great and most
unwise departures from the old system of business.
It is needless to recount what these changes in the
position of the bank were. It is sufficient to
remark that they in no wise justified the alterations in
the mode of carrying on business under the old
Act. In its early days the Bombay Bank could dis-
count no securities unless two persons, not connected
in trade, were bound by them. The new Act
authorised discount on the signature of one
person. The old Act limited the amount of advances
and the tine during which they must be repaid ;
the new one abolished all restrictions of the kind.
The old Act forbade advances on bank shares
and perishable goods ; but these and other
salutary cautions were not deemed needful
under the itew system. It must be evident,
even to those persons most innocent of commercial
knowledge, hov widely the door was opened to fraud
by these new regulations, or rather want of regulations.
Large sums of money might be—and indeed were—
lent on the promissory note of one person. Accounts
might be overC,rawn, and money advanced upon the
security of perishable goods which might actually
turn out to be no security at all.
In short the Lew Act provided ample means for
the ruin of the bank, but something more was needed
to complete it. Good managers would have carried
on the bank in safety, notwithstanding the loose
principles on which they were permitted to do busi-
ness. In order to take full advantage of these
facilities, and launch the concern safely
on the way to ruin, bad management
was necessary ; and this was speedily forth-
coming in the shape of a weak and unprincipled
sccretai y, an incompetent president, and equally in-
competent directors. Mr. Buten, who was
president in 1863, as well as the officers
of succeeding years, knew nothing of com-
merce. They were dependent on the secre-
tary, Mr. BLAU:, who did not fail to use his power.
In August 1863 he commenced lending money
on personal security. This, it need hardly be
said, means that he supplied money to whomsoever
pleased him, on the faith of their personal signature
—a mode of business which would be ridiculed by a
village trader, but which is very commonly prac-
tised by men who have the command of other
people's money. The years 1864 and 1865 were a very
critical time at Bombay. Speculation was rife, and the
bank ought to have withstood the wild current by extra
caution. Under the management of Mr. BLAIR and the
recklessness of the directors the Bank onlyencouraged
the flow of the stream until it was swept away
with it. The business of the bank was dis-
creditably neglected by those appointed to watch
over it. Mr. Bawl!, the president, did absolutely
nothing, though he was quite able to embark
in many speculations of his own. In
fact, he received numerous allotments of
speculative shares, and laid himself open
to obligations from company promoters. He was
thus unable to protect the bank either from the
greedy speculators who swarmed to it for money, or
from the secretary, who was surely manoeuvring for
its destruction. The course of reckless advances went
on, the secretary
dishonestly concealing his transac-
tions from his superiors.

The dramatis personce, however, are not complete.
In order to fully destroy the Bank, the
MEPHISTOPHELES—the Mr. WATKIN EDWARDS—

was wanted; and it seems that Bombay could pro-
duce even a greater man than the illustrious
official assignee who "advised" Messrs. OVEREND and
GURNEY. PREMCHUND ROYCHUND was the hero
of the speculation period at Bombay. This gentle-
man had amassed a large fortune in cotton,
and he gradually attained such influence at
Bombay that nothing in a commercial way,
and especially in speculative commerce, could
be done without him. No company had a
chance of floating without his aid ; he was either
promoter or largely participated in all. He was
called by some the " key-stone of commercial
prosperity in Bombay," and the expression is so far
true that when the key-stone chose to get out of
joint Bombay suffered grievously. This man
ruined the bank. The secretary was weak as well as
unprincipled, and he, accordingly, soon fell a victim
to the worthy PREMCRUND, who was unprincipled,
but not weak. PREMCHUND did as he pleased with
the funds of the bank, procured loans for himself in
the name of friends, and, in brief, absorbed. the neat
sum of about £070,000. Between him and the
secretary lay the whole management of hundreds of
thousands sterling; the directors were neither con-
sulted nor cared to be consulted. It is needless to
prolong the story. On January 13, 1868, it was
resolved to wind up the concern, and in the follow-
ing November the liquidator issued a report shelving
that a total sum of nearly £1,900,000 had been
lost. A commission was appointed to inquire into
the history of the affair. We have given in
outline the result of its labours. The commissioners
blame the new Act ; they declare that the secretary
was a foolish and unprincipled man; that Mr.
Butcu, the president, was idle and incom-
petent ; that PREMCITUND was a designing rascal ;
and that the officers were generally unequal
to their duties. There the story ends. It is
simply another example of the general rule that
commercial failure, and especially the failure of
great firms that have once been prosperous,
is to be traced to cue uniform cause. But. since
the dishonesty and negligence of those who
thus precipitate the ruin of the hufainesa

entrusted to them is lucrative and safe, we can
hardly hope for a change in the policy of directors
until they are held answerable for their deeds.
From this, however, we appear to be far off at
present.

CORRESPONDENCE FROM PARIS.

(FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.)
PARIS, FRIDAY, July 2.

The political events of to-day are highly important.
The interpellation on the policy of the Government, of
which I spoke yesterday, will be supported by at least
eighty signatures, and may probably receive eighty-five.
It is couched in the following terms :--" We ask to
interpellate the Government on the necessity of giving
satisfaction to the wishes of the country, and of associating
it more efficaciously in the direction of affairs." Now, I
hardly need say that deputies are not allowed to question
Ministers at will, as in your highly-favoured land.
Every interpellation must be submitted to the
bureaux, of which there are nine, and which decide
whether the question is ono which ought to be put,
so that it is by no means certain that a disagreeable
question will be permitted, and if permitted, it is still
more unlikely that it will receive any very satisfactory
reply. But this interpellation is really a very
serious matter. Amom.-st the eighty or eighty-five who
have signed it, there is not one Red or any of the extreme
Liberals who sit on the far Left. In order, therefore, to
get so many signatures, a goodly number of independent
Imperialists must have joined the Third Party, or
moderate Liberals. The members of the Left who
have not signed—Favre, Easpail, Gambetta, and
all the lesser lights of the same persuasion—are about
thirty in number. These will certainly support the
Moderates on a division, so that there aro at least 110
deputies who favour reform of a more or less pronounced
character.

More than this, the .Petrie and the Constitutionnel,
whilom such staunch supporters of an inflexible Imperialist
regime, express themselves rather pkased with the pro-
ceeding. The former has no objection to the principle of
the interpellation ; it is of opinion, in fact, that the legi-
timate wishes of the country ought to be satisfied. It sug-
gests only that the terms of the question are vague, and
do not perceive what special reforms the eighty Mode-
rates woukl like. The Constitutionnel is delighted with
the manoeuvre.
It would be unwise to disregard the significance of these
symptoms. When Imperialist journals write in favour of
granting the country direct control over its own
affairs—that is, in favour of parliamentary government
more or less—and when Imperialist deputies, who owe
their seats to the prefects,prepare to support such changes,
it is impossible to mistake the direction the tide of affairs
is taking. In some well-informed quarters it is
estimated that one hundred deputies will sign
the interpellation, and these with the extreme Liberals
will very nearly number half the whole House !
M. Roulier is very low in the political share list to-day.
There can be no reform unless he go. The success of the
moderate Liberals can be attained only by his downfall.
There was nothing of particular interest in the sitting
of the Corps Legislatif yesterday beyond what I have
already announced. To-day the business of verification
goes on, inside and outside the Chamber being
crowded with listeners and spectators. It is agreed
on all hands that the business at the Palais
Bourbon never excited so much popular interest before.
The signs of this revival of domestic politics in France are
apparent everywhere. Au immense petition to the
Senate is now being signed in Paris in favour of elective
municipal government. Your readers will be aware that
the capital has no voice in the management of its
own concerns. The municipal council is purely an Impe-
rialist body. The Parisians are now petitioning to have
their old privilege of electing the men who spend the City
funds restored to them. If this request be accorded them
it will be odd indeed. The Parisians would at once elect
men who would stop Baron Haussinann's pulling down
and building up which have made Paris the most beautiful
city, but the Parisians the most heavily-burdened race in
Europe. . _

- -
Al. Garabetta was present at the first sitting of the
House ; but his health is so indifferent as to lead to the
apprehension that he will be able to do little for the Left.
The orator on whom the mantle of Mirabeau was sup.
posed to have fallen is suffering from some affection oi
the lungs.
The trials in connection with the late riots still drag
their slow length along. One which took place two days
ago gave rise to a rather remarkable scene in court. A
housepainter was brought up charged with uttering sedi•
tious cries. He protested very vehemently against the
behaviour of the police, He dubbed them savages, brutes.
and dech,ted that they struck recklessly at everyuuoy.
Cayenne, he intimated, would be a more desirable reii•
dence than Paris under such a Government, and he
did not care if he were sent to Cayenne. The court, how•
ever, after ordering him to Ile removed for his violence,
decided not to gratify his proclivities for a voyage to thr
undesirable penal colony. Ile was sent to prison for three
months and fined a small sum. So also was a pr.( fc.sor of
the LycLe Buonaparte, who said that he was irritated b)
the violence of the police, but did not use seditious

language.
The men on strike at St. Etienne have again assumed s
menacing attitude. Twenty miners attempted on `Yednes•
day to stop the work which was going on at one of tho
pits, and, in fact, succeeded. The engineer was obliged
to bring up thirteeen men who were labouring below.
The rioters, largely reinforced, then went to other pits;
but some of these were guarded by soldiers, and at one a
charge was made resulting in the capture of about thirty
culprits.
An extraordinary story of domestic immorality nay
been revealed through an attempt at murder at St. Denis.
A man, named Sennery, and a woman with whom he
lived, named Muret, kept a wineshop at the corner of the
nue des Carmelites. The woman had a daughter 15i
years of age, and this girl the fellow Sennery proposed tc
marry, the mother, incredible to relate, giving her con•
sent. But the girl, who was at a boarding-rchool, refused,
knowing that the man cohabited with her mother. Being,
however, importuned by her parent, she at length
consented, but on condition that she should
remain at the school and complete her education.
The marriage took place, and in the evening, as arranged,
the bride returned to her school, and the bridegroom with
her mother to the wineshop. That state of thing?
lasted about three weeks, but Sennery at length
got tired of his equivocal situation, and exercised
his marital authority to force his wife to return
to the conjugal domicile, and she was obliged tt
submit. As may be imagined, peace did not reign long in
this household ; quarrels arose daily between the man,
the mother, and the daughter, and three evenings back,
after a fresh dispute, the husband fired a pistol at
wife, lodging a ball in her chest. She was removed to a
hospital, but is in no danger of her life. Sennery has beer.
arrested.

61).11
s", %TWILIT

HER MAJESTY.

WINDSOR CASTLE, July 2.

The Queen, accompanied by their Royal High.
nesses Princess Louise, Princess Beatrice, and
Prince Leopold, arrived at the Pavilion, Aldershot
Camp, yesterday, at 12 o'clock.
Her Majesty, with Princess Louise, Prince Leo-
pold, and Princess Beatrice, arrived at the Castle
this morning at 26 minutes past one o'clock.

MARY WARNER.—Crowded houses and enthu-
siastic audiences have no power to change the managerial
fiat which long since decreed the close of Miss Bateman's
engagement, and the termination of the Haymarket season
on Saturday next. Miss Bateman's benefit is appointed for
Friday evening, and the theatre will undoubtedly be filled
to its utmost capacity. All lovers of the drama will regret
that the English stage must be deprived for a short time of
an artiste who has done 53 much to elevate the profession
she adorns, and who has justly won the esteem and admi-
ration of all classes of playgoers.
A PHOTOGRAPHIC TOUR DE FORCE.—What would
our forefathers have said if some wag had told them tl.at
a time would come when men would travel on land and
on sea with the help of a small quantity of boiling water ;
that they would bold a conversation with each other from
one end of the globe to the other by means of a wire ; and
finally, that they would engage the sun as a miniature
painter, and make him take their likeness ? Probably the
unlucky prophet would have expiated in prison or at
the stake the unpardonable wrong.
,of being right tao
soon. Ana yet all these things have become true to
the letter. Photography is certainly one of tao
more wonderful discoveries of this ago of wonders,
and it is m king every day new progress. It has actually
acquired the power of raising tho dead from their grave,
and of bringing them to life again. Any person who
should have doubts on the subject might set them at rest
by looking at the splendid proof now on view at Mr.
Hewett's, photographer,' 4, Rutland-terrace, Abbey-road.
By means of an old oil painting, of some cartes de visito
sent from India and other parts of the globe, this artist
has composed a family group, all the members of which
seem to have been taken from life. He has united again
those who wore separated by death or by diatmit climes.