The Sun.
London, England, 1869-07-06 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY :EVENING, JULY 6. 1869.

of a clique of doctrinaries ; while the fact is very
evident that they are " discontented." The subject,
however, resolves itself into this, that the parties will
have to re-form, for they may with truth be said to be
getting into confusion when the leading Radical
paper is the leading Protectionist organ in one
State, and the leading Radical paper is the leading
Free-Trade paper in another State, the platforms
around which the new parties must form being
Free Trade and Protection. This the Nation un-
doubtedly sees, taking its stand on the former, and
commencing the war by attacking the Secretary of
the Treasury, regarding that post as the most im-
portant in the Administration, and condemning the
selection of a Protectionist, while perhaps inter-
preting it as a sign of hostility to its Free-trade
platform.

311S-CELLANEOUS NEWS

" QUITE OVERLOOKED."

Early in the year there was a ball at Willis's
Rooms for the benefit of the Great Western Railway
Provident Society. It was extensively supported
and patronised by the nobility and by the directors
of the company. The company danced with an
assiduity which shewed at once the warmth of their
hearts and the agility of their legs ; and the pleasure
which shone in their faces shewed how inspiriting is
the thought that you are sacrificing yourself for the
good of others. But someone, we do not know
who, has forgotten to send the proceeds of
this admirable and self-denying act of charity
to the institution on whose behalf it was
performed, so that as far as the Provident
Society is concerned all this zeal and all this mus-
cular energy have been thrown away. We fancy
that this is not an unusual result of charity balls.
The preparations are on the most liberal scale, the
dancing is most praiseworthy, but the balance-sheet
somehow or other gets quite overlooked. llowever,
no good deed perishes, even though its fruits are not
seen. As the poet has said—

" The actions of the just
Smell sweet and blossom from the dust,*
and we have no doubt that someone benefits even
from the dust of the ball-room.

Sequent resignation or .Mr..lsrlght and .31r. lcorster,
will suggest to some persons the question if the
Ballot is so perfect an instrument of election as it is
pronounced to be by its advocates. The theory of
vote by ballot at the clubs is that any man
may blackball a candidate without any reasonable
cause, and yet that no one will have the
right to complain of him because no one
knows who has put in the black ball, or what his
motive was in doing so. Jones may blackball Smith
merely because Smith squints, or wears a white hat,
or omits his h's, or has a vulgar wife, and neither
Smith nor his friends ought to complain, because
they are theoretically ignorant of the person who
has committed the offence. Practically the case
is far otherwise. For instance, at the present time
every member of the Reform Club knows,
and a good many outsiders know, who were
the gentlemen that blackballed Mr. Smalley. More
than that, their motives are known, and they have to
stand the fire of angry criticism. Nov of two
things one : either the Ballot is intended to allow
men to give a secret, irresponsible vote, or it is not.
If it is, what right has anyoite to say that Mr. A and
Mr. B ire the persons who excluded Mr. Smalley,
much more what right has anyone to blame them ?
If it is not, cui lono the Ballot ?

PRIZE-FIGETING IN AMERICA.

Prize-fighting has left England for America, and
it has not lost in danger or brutality in its journey
across the Atlantic. Two amateur worshippers of
the " noble art of self-defence" were recently
engaged in a " rattling mill" (as the sporting papers
call a fight), and they fought until one of them fell
dead; We have now•the account of another combat,
a ring encounter between Allen and M'Coole, an
Englishman and an Irishman. The English-
man, we are told, had the best of it,
for his opponent's face was " gashed and
furrowed like a ploughed field;" as early as
" Round 6 " he cannot see where to hit for the blood
that streams over his face and the passion that blinds
_ _

"him." Coming on to the finish there is a cry that
Allen is gouging M'Coole, and then the ring is
broken and the spectators draw knives upon the
referee to give a decision for the giant or take the
consequence. The referee, however, manages to
escape from the spot, and on his arrival at St. Louis,
to everyone's astonishment, delivers judgment in
favour of the Irishman, on the grounds of a foul.
This is another instance of the nobility and manli-
ness of the ring.

THE POLITICAL POSITION.
The London correspondent of the Manchester
Guardian says that one cause why the Duke of
Cleveland's proposal for concurrent endowment was
rejected was that many Conservative peers having
as.2.ertained from Mr. Gladstone's speech at the
Mansion House that this proposal would not be
accepted by him, and seeing well that a collision
between the two Houses on this point would
greatly strengthen him, and enable him to appeal
to the country with the cry of "No
Endowment for Popery," thought it better
to sacrifice their personal wishes to political prudence.
What is now vished by this party is that the clauses
for appropriating the surplus may be postponed; for
they hope, as the Marquis of Salisbury believes, that
the principle of concurrent endowment will grow and
become popular. The same correspondent says that
the amendment giving glebes to the clergy, though
carried by such an overwhelming majority, will cer-
tlinly be struck out by the Commons. It is other-
wise with regard to the fourteen years' commuta-
tion and the senatorial privileges of the existing
bishops. These amendments will probably be ac-
cepted.
Lord Talbot de Malahide writes to the Times on

the i;ce division in the house of Lords on the Duke
of Cleveland's motion, and says that many minor
Causes contributed to the result. There can be no
doubt that the ominous declaration of Lord
Cra.nville, that it would be rejected by the Commons,
was the death blow to the motion. Lord
Talbot th;nks that political hypocrisy is very
profitable in the present age, and suggests a
scheme for testing the sincerity of the Liberal
benches. During the reign of Louis Philippe there
was a provision for taking the votes in Parliament
on important questions by Ballot. What if the
Liberal supporters of the Ballot were to try this
experiment on themselves during the progress of the
Irish Church Bill ?