The Sun.
London, England, 1860-07-04 00:00:00

first resolution, then, we may pass it over. All

parties will agree to it. It is but the reaffirmation
of old and accepted declarations of the House of
Commons. The second, also, is one the Lords them-
selves will not deny—the exercise of their power to
negative money bills as a whole has been so infre-
quently used that a committee of precedents was
appointed to see how often, and on what occasions
they had used the power. The resolution omits the

definitions proposed by Mr. BRIGHT and Mr. GLAD-
STONE in committee, by which the precedents

seemingly favourable to the Lords would be
affirmed to be inapplicable to the case
which has caused the dispute. It merely affirms
that the Commons "jealously" and " justly" watch
the exercise of their power by the Upper House ;
this, however, expresses only a shadow of opinion—
that conveyed by the word " justly"—which can
hardly be denied, and all the rest is mere history.

But the last resolution, like the everlasting post-
script to the lady's letter, contains the sting if
there be one. As it stands, however, even in this
one, we can see nothing which the party in the
Commons who stand by the Lords need object to.
It threatens nothing. It proposes no steps for
practically rescinding the obnoxious vote of the
Lords. Its sum is that the Commons have power
to frame their tax bills se as to prevent an undue
exercise by the Lords of their negativing power,—
to insure that " the right of the Commons as to the
matter, manner, measure, and time, may be main-
tained inviolate." This seems to be hardly an
opinion, but a fact. The Commons, had they sus-
pected what the Lords would do, could certainly
have made the repeal of the !paper duty part
of a supply measure, in such a manner that by
' rejecting it the Lords would have stopped the
, wheels of Government.

One curious circumstance struck us in the reso
lution. It is not exactly bad grammar; but one
short sentence is such a misfit as shows pretty
plainly that the resolution as it stands is a better
one marred. That dragging clause, "for the facture"
—how came it there ? Without it the sense is
clear as described above. " That to guard against
an undue exercise of their power by the Lords,
this house has in its own hands the power
so to impose," &c.—that is, it has it constitu-
tionally. But why insert that "to guard for
the future" against the Lords' abuse of their
power, and so forth. Plainly in the draft resolu-
tion the connection was this—that to guard for the
future against the Lords' abuse of power the House
of Commons has and will use the power, so to shape
its tax repeal bills that the Lords must pass them.
The advertence to " the future" points to a sup-
pressed clause worth all the rest of the resolutions
put together. A clause which said in effect, we do
not mean to fight the battle this time, my Lords ;
but :we
,warn you that we will take good care,
for time to come—we will give you no opportu-
nity, in future, to reject a bill which repeals a
tax. That the House can do this is self-evident,
for it can make all taxing bills annual, and the
chief mischief the Lords have done, perhaps,
practically comes to this, that it will favour
annual taxation bills.
While we are writing our reporter informs us,
that Mr. DUNCOMBE has given notice that on the
Premier's moving his resolutions on Thursday, he
will propose to add to them, that an humble address
be presented to her MAJESTY requesting her not to
prorogue Parliament until a bill has been presented
for her sanction, to Repeal the Duties on Paper
The hon. member will have against him not only
the friends of the Lords, but the summer days
at last—when other members will care much more
about enjoying them out of doors, than about fight-
ing the tenants of " another place."

The Parliamentary Committee appointed to that
end is steadily working its way to the demonstra-
tion of the perfect feasibility of the Thames Em-
bankment. Witness after witness is examined
day after day with the same result. Engineers
and architects, contractors and theorists, all tell
the same tale—all insist upon it that the change
can be made, and ought to be made. And made
assuredly it will be sooner or later—of that every-
body is by this time tolerably well satisfied. The
sooner it is commenced say we the better. Why,
in truth, should not the good work be begun at
once without any further procrastination ? At the
best the whole scheme will require some years for
its complete accomplishment. Its early, or rather
immediate commencement, consequently, is for two
obvious reasons assuredly most advisable. In the
first place, the work that is to be done will be the
sooner brought to its final completion. And,
secondly, the fear entertained in regard to the ex-
penditure requisite in carrying out such an en-
terprise may be at once dissipated. The labour
requiring so many years before it can be expected to
terminate, that labour will not manifestly have to
be incurred instanter—the disbursements will in
due course be periodical, year by year, instalment
upon instalment. What should hearten us all the
more towards the realisation of this long-cherished
design is the recollection that already, in two ways,
the preliminary works have been adventured upon
successfully. The Embankment is there already, to
a certain extent, on the Middlesex side of the river,
in the vicinity of Vauxhall. Upon that bank the
scheme needs only gradual elongation and develop-
ment. And as it advances along the margin of the
city of Westminster towards its twin city, the
great capital of London—does not the pro-
ject come at its very next move upon
those debris of the old bridge there close by the
Palace of the Legislature—those debris which will
have to be removed from the bed of the river imme-
diately the new bridge shall have been completed.
And that can be removed nowhere so conveniently
or so advantageously, or even for that matter so
economically as to the contiguous bank of the river,
where it would be most acceptable and serviceable
in carrying out the great project of the Thames
Embankment. Government is willing—even eager
t hGovernment
in g —t,
ea d cani be
n the eager about carrying
sooutfaarnasy
superb metropolitan improvement. The
Board of
Works looks upon the scheme with complacency,
and is prepared to lend it not only its coun-
tenance, but
.to give it the most positive
assurance of its encouragement and appro-
bation. The Chief Commissioner views it in
like manner with cordial approval. The very cor-
poration of the City is most favourably disposed to
this plan of embanking the river—as projected.
Yesterday, in truth, the City Chamberlain stated
such to be the fact quite explicitly—adding, for the
information of the committee, that a full score of
years back they had actually originated a plan for
the embankment of the river Thames upon both

sides—the very enterprise that now twenty years
afterwards all are bent upon co-operating in the
realisation of!

The information given to the Committee during
the course of yesterday's sitting by Mr. SCOTT, the
City Chamberlain, while in some parts it may
appear to have been somewhat irrelevant, will
undoubtedly prove to the majority peculiarly accept-
able. It shows that if so much more remains to
do, already much has been actually accomplished
an the diversified labours of carrying out these
grand metropolitan improvements. Setting out
with the production of those three Acts of Par-