The Sun.
London, England, 1869-04-15 00:00:00

EPTEIT OF

:0 JOURNALS, •

The Tinto think: L___ the Married Women's Trope:.;
Bill is too extreme in it 3 nature. Flagrant evils enst.,
under certain circumstances, from the principle of the
present law ; the bill proposes to meet the difficulty by
abolishing the principle and substituting its direct oppo-
site. In an old established society like our own, it is evi-
dently preferable, if it be possible, to provide special pro-
tection in the circumstances in point, but to leave the
main principle of the law unaltered. This view of the
case was recognised by the opponents of the mea-
sure, but justice was scarcely done to it. We
cannot conceive a more complete change of prin.
ciple than the bill contemplates. The present law
goes upon the understanding that the family is a
kind of unit, under a single head, who is solely responsible
for it, and who is, consequently, invested with complete
control over it. This bill would render a married woman
as independent in respect of property as an unmarried
woman. The married state would, therefore, become a
contract between two equal partners, irresponsible to each
other, and neither wholly responsible for the family. In
its present form, indeed, the bill would leave the husband
under his present responsibility, while depriving him of
the corresponding authority. It would be impossible,
however, if the bill were accepted, to maintain so unfair
an arrangement, and Mr. Shaw-Lefevre on Wednesday ex-
pressed his readiness to place husband and wife on an equal
footing in that respect. But the more completelyand the more
fairly this equality is carried out the more complete
becomes the social revolution the bill proposes. As a
rule, the husband must always be the person who con-
tributes most to the family, and who is its principal
support and its chief protection. Is it fair, under such
circumstances, to deprive him of all control over the
expenditure of his wife? Is it right she should be told by
the law that she may act in complete disregard of his
wishes ? We grant it is not just that he should have abso-
lute power over his wife, but is it just that he should have
none ? Looking at the character of the relation and to
the facts of life, it appears to us that our law has followed
nature, and has laid a just foundation, in 'recOgniiing the
husband's supremacy and responsibility. It is only in
conditions of society more or less unnatural that a diffe-
rent principle has been or ought to be recognised,
The amendments to the Irish Church Bill of which Mr.
Gladstone has given notice are, says the Post, distinguish-
able from those of the leader of the Opposition in this
very material respect, that their object is to extend the
application of the principles on which that bill is founded,
and not to render them completely nugatory. It is
material to observe that none of Mr. Gladstone's
proposed amendments affect the general tenour
of the bill, nor can they be construed as conces-
sions to any objections taken to it by the Opposi-
tion. That some concessions may ultimately be called
for is not impossible, and the Premier declared in the
debate on the second reading that he was prepared to
entertain any proposals honestly brought forward by the
Opposition with the view of improving the bill. But, for
the present, Mr. Gladstone's task has been confined to
making corrections which are suggested by the additional
information he has received, and a more attentive conside-
ration of the possible operation of certain clauses of the

bill. The amendments of the leader of the Opposition,
As we have already had occasion to point out, attack the
foundations of the bill, and must be rejected without
exception by everyone who approves its principle. The
principal amendments of which the Premier has given
notice in no degree militate with the general principle of
the bill, and can scarcely challenge the hostile criticism of
any save those who are opposed to the disestablishment
and disendowment of the Irish Church.
The Standard declares that Sir Massey Lopes did good
service in calling attention to a very grave evil which for
years past has exercised a most injurious effect upon the
administrative system of the Church of England. In a
word, there is no legal provision for the voluntary or
enforced retirement of prelates who are, from age, ill-
health, or other causes, admittedly incapacitated for the
discharge of their duties. It may happen that, for one or
tither of the reasons we have indicated, a bishop may for 1
yeaf., have been totally unable to attend to the affairs of
his diocese, even so much as to go outside the walls. of his
palace, or to write a letter. We do not for a moment
assume that any member of the episcopal bench would
voluntarily consent to retain his post under circum-
stances fraught with such obvious detriment to the inte-
rests of the Church throughout his diocese ; but it is a
simple matter of fact that there is no provision known to
the law by which he can resign his office, and hand over
his trust to a competent successor. The system under
which the Established Church is at present administered
takes it for granted that under any circumstances the
bishops will die in harness. Whatever is now done in the
way of remedying this obvious anomaly is done by a side-
wind. What is wanted is an enactment by which bishops
who may he presumed to he permanently disqualified for
the discharge of their duties, may be enabled to resign
their sees with a fair provision for the remainder of their
lives. There should be no difficulty as to this latter point.
There should be but one bishop of one diocese.
Even the idea of a dual jurisdiction should be avoided,
and we doubt whether there is any case now extant in
in which the absolute avoidance of the see would not be
required by its special circumstances as well as on the
ground of the inadvisability of establishing a divided
authority. It might be fraught with hardship in some in-
stances, but we believe that on the whole the interests of
the Church would be most effectually secured by the
establishment of the rule that a prelate who requires per-
manent aid should give place toa capable successor.
The Herald asserts that Mr. Howard's petition was a
blunder. He gave the late Premier another opportunity
of chewing that in the exercise of his patronage he was
guided by an undeniable zeal for the public interests.
But, from the point of view of the Radicals, the hon.
member for East Cumberland did his party a very ill
service. If he had not provoked the discussion of
Tuesday evening, the Radical newspapers and Radical
speakers might have continued to declaim against the
shower of appointments which fell in the beginning of
last December, and instance the nomination of Mr.
Lowther to the lieutenancy of these two counties as
a flagrant illustration of their impropriety. Now,
however, even the most pertinacious of the assailants
of the late Government will be abashed and
silenced. Mr. Howard, sacrificing himself as Mr. Charles
Buxton did the other day, for the vindication of Mr.
Disraeli's reputation, elicited from the right honourable
gentlemen a statement which must satisfy everybody
that these appointments were not only in accordance with
constitutional precedent, but were the result of an earnest
desire to consult those local interests which would be
affected by the choice of a lord-lieutenant. About the
constitutional right of a Minister in Mr. Disraeli's position
to recommend such an appointment to the Queen there
can be no question. Of the perfect propriety of the parti-
cular recommendation no doubt can be entertained after
the discussion of Tuesday, and Mr. Howard may be
credited with having performed a service, which he never
intended, in the signal illustration which he was the
instrument of giving to the public of the fairness and
fitness of the appointments made by the Conservative
Government.

• 'The Starcannot doubt that Mr. Hughes's Trades Unions
Bill will receive frank and friendly consideration from the
Government and from the majority of the House of Com-
mons. It believes that nothing could more tend to the
development of a healthy life in the great associated trade
societies of this country than their recognition by the
Legislature as an integral part of our social system, and
their admission —without any attempt to impose humi-
liating conditions which would certainly prove inopera-
tive—within the pale of the law. Ignorant pre-
judices have had time to subside, although they
yet linger in the report of the majority of the
Trades Union Commissioners. It is not proposed to
legalise that which is dubious or unjust—least of all to
give sanction to outrage or to the threat of outrage. All
that is contemplated is to empower working men to asso-
ciate together for the legitimate purpose of mutual protec-
tion and assistance, and at the same time to secure to em-
ployers similar rights. Abnormal acts have been the
natural consequences of an abnormal position. But even
bad deeds, which all right-minded men must deplore, have
Leen so far exaggerated that the offences of a compara-
tively few black sheep have been visited on tens of thou-
sands of honest working men, who regarded them with
undisguised horror. While crime is punished the innocent
should be protected ; and when we speak of the innocent
iu this connection we have in view all the great trade
organisations of this country.
The Daily News asks if it is not Byron who writes,
" Thou, the vain lord of luxury and ease, Whom slumber
soothes not, pleasure cannot please ;" and was it not Lord
Stanley who, the other day at Glasgow, spoke of "pleasure
that is not pleasure ?" Not only their sentiments, but
their expressions, on this head, are almost ident,cal. When
two such contrary spirits arrive at the same conclusion a
strong probability arises that it is a sound one. " Pleasure
that is not pleasure." What is pleasure? Millions of
people are pursuing it, and . have been doing so for an
unknown number of ages. It is strange, therefore, that we
should not by this time have arrived at some definition, or
at any rate at some notion, of what it is. Yet have
we 9 Do not Lord Stanley's five simple words express, as
far as grown-up people are concerned, a most incontro-
vertible, if a most melancholy, truth. But may we not
possibly get nearer to our object by not consciously and
incessantly concerning ourselves quite so much about it?
'tile man who stops to count the milestones only lengthens
his journey, and he whose mind perpetually dwells upon
pleasure only lengthens the distance between it and him.
Pais ton fait; that is the whole secret. If the thing that
lies nearest and most imperative be work, do that ; and
the result will likewise be somewhat of happiness. In each
case, and in each case alike, if you do it when it is not
the thine. you are called upon to do, not pleasure, not
haspiness, but tedium, disappointment, an I.self-reproach
will be the result. That, lofty birth, or boundless
wealth, need net and does not exempt anybody from this
rule, may be seen in the instance of Lord Stanley or
that Prince Paul Demidoff, of whose doings we gave
an account the other day, and who has just sold his pre-
cious collection to better the fortunes of mpstresses In
fact, the richer and the more
potent p t
es s)ep'e-are the °more
obvious are the tasks waiting for them perform. The
poor and lowly may be sometimes a little perplexed ; but
they, too, should do what is most pressing, and the sense of
opdression will he lifted from their hearts.- Thus, pleasure
which is really pleasure, and which everybody must desire,
is that which anybody will find,
ibeye
kit very. far as it can be found,
method,.of abstaining from solicitously
s-

'ICE.

PROFESSIONAL BEGGARS. —AtWestminster Police•court,
on Wednesday, a sturdy-looking man s' as charged with
begging. The magistrate took the opportunity of referring
to a recent letter in the Times, in which it was stated no
constable could interfere with a beggar unless given into
his charge by a civilian. Mr. Arnold took occasion to
correct that impression. If a policeman saw a vagrant
in the act of begging, it was his duty to arrest him, and,
as a rule, such cases were dealt with in the absence of
corroborative evidence.

A FATAL ACCIDENT. - At Clerkenwell, on Wednesday,
a carman, named Stephen Ford, was charged with causing
the death of a solicitor, named Ware, of Chard, Somerset-
shire, and Arthur-street, London Bridge. It appeared
from the evidence that the accident was not due to the
prisoner, as the deceased fell under the wheels of his cart

while in a state of intoxication. Ford was accordingly
discharged.