The Sun.
London, England, 1869-08-06 00:00:00

OMIT OF '2EII47IUBLIO JOURNALS.

The Times remar 'lts-tkit'the Habitual Criminals Bill
introduces no new 1 inn tiple into our criminal law. There
is a very sound and jos t feeling in the national mind that
every man is to be I area umed innocent until some ground
for believing him igenty is brought against him, but
there is nothing in :tile t bill in violation of this sentiment.
What the bill does lime ,vide, and that not as an absolut.,
novelty, but in du e-4 development of existing law, is that
,rounds for imput' guilt to a person accused formerly
excluded altogeth erf from the consideration of a jury shal.
be admitted as es dell ;nee against him, and under certain.
special circumst an! 3es shall raise a presumption of gulls
which he must rebut if he wishes to clear himself.
Again, the bill provides that where a person has
been twice convsirl.;ed of felony it shall be part of the
sentence passed cal the second conviction, unless the court
trying the criminal rejects the addition, that he shall ba
liable for seven yea rs—and if thrice convicted, then for
life—to be called upon to clear himself from the presump.
Lion raised by cirtan nstances inducing the belief that he
is relapsing into dsi 'onesty. If there were any hardships
in provisions like the le, it might be remembered that they
are hardships whicht • cannot befall any one until he has
ttil I vice found :uilty of a felony, and whatever
sympathy we may ha we for anyone who has been "in
tremble" once, it is ilia pared fur-those who add offence
to offence. In truth,.> te supposed hardship is as much
conceived in the best interest of the criminal as it is
demanded by regard fore.'he safety of society. There is a
class upon whom, unhappily, preventive legislation
appears thrown away. They have given themselves
osier to crime, and if this kind of abandonment could be
primed against anyone it would be sound policy and mere
justice to check his career a.&\ once. But there is another
cla;a:, about whom some persons are not so well assured
of the propriety of interference—the men who do not
mean- to be dishonest, but from mere association and
inabty to enter upon a new life step back into their old
conrses'. The slightest consideration must convince us
that it is best for such men that the Legislature should
enablee.a.proper functionary to given them an authorita-
tive -.cra-ning on the first danger of relapse rather than
permit ihem to sink back into crime before any inter-
ference slat be attempted.

The lloakt refers to the question of leaving ball ammu-
Ation initt e possession of soldiers, and says that officers,
non-commissioned officers, and privates have fallen victims
to the fat/al.:facility with which suddenly-exasperated men
bare beenmewbled to gratify their desire for revenge ; and
the temptritiect of having at hand such ready and sug•
;-Tstive meams of self-destruction has proved too much for
many a dejecttd or desponding man. Such being the case,
and no signs of a diminution of this class of crime having
presented thercvelves, how, it may be well to inquire, is it
that no changoithas been made in the system of supplying
soldiers with ammunition ? What are the reascnsthat have
hitherto prevaited with the authorities in refusing to adopt
the obvious remedy for the evil—tbe withdrawal of ball
cartridge from the custody of the private soldier? Are we a
Wow-moving, Lmg-suffering people, and are our rulers
prone to abuse..mr patience? May we not suppose that the
Eolciiers, so far from feeling slighted or injured by the
withdrawal of fiseir ammunition, would rather rejoice at
the opportunity ;being thereby denied to the few ruffians
a inollgst them of bringing discredit and disgrace on the
whole body ? Sas* we think, is the view which they
cught to take of ,the proposed change, and such, we ap-
prehend, is the way in which they would look at it. But
even if the position were tenable, it would not be right to
subject some men to the temptation of committing
murder, or others kto unnecessary risk of their lives, for
any consideration of mere sentiment. The temptation and
the danger have unhappily been proved to exist in a very
appreciable degree, and we can see no legitimate reason
why they should be any longer tolerated. It is to he
hoped that Mr. Cardwell will act with firmness and deci-
sion in the matter. Common sense, the duty of protecting
men's lives, and the feeling of the public, all point in
one direction, and the Government may be assured that
the army will follow them to the conclusion which is
indicated.

The Star says that in England, as well as in Scotland,
we all know that a landlord has a right of distress for
rent due. But in Scotland he has more, he has a right of
attaching (though not of selling) growing crops for rent
that is not yet due. By this security he establishes a
priority over every other creditor, existing or future. And
from this favour to the landlord has grown up what at
first seems a very great benefit to the tenant. The land-
lord, being perfectly sure of his rent, allows it to run into
errear. The common stipulation in Scotland is, that no
cut shall be paid till a year, eighteen months,or even two
years aft, r the tenant's entry, so as to allow him to reap
and market the crop out of which the rent is to be paid.
And it is argued from this, and very strongly urged in
the Lords' retort, not only that the system is of great
value to all tenants, as virtually giving them
a lean, without interest, of the amount of their
rent, but that it is an especial boon to the class of poor
but industrious men who could not take a farm at all if
compelled to pay rent before any profit had been made.
:zit, on the other hand, the farmers answer that the advan•
loge is balanced by great evils. The landlord having this
immense and secret preference over the ternurt's property,
the tenant's credit is bad if he happens to need an advance
from any other source. Since ale° every other creditor
runs a risk, those with whom he deals for seed, manures,
or implements either demand ready money or put on a
higher price to cover their risk. But, above all, they argue
that the credit given by the landlords increases the com-
petition for farms, and conseeplentlyruns up the rents. As
they have won the security of leases, so we hope they will
win relief from the thraldom which the law of hypothec
indirectly engender.
The Daily News remarks that the name of the Lord
Chancellor is being mixed up in a local squabble in the
North of England in a way which gives the matter almost
national importance. We gather from the local papers
which come to us from the neighbourhood of the Tyne,
the Tees, and the Wear, that the newly-incorporated
borough of Darlington, having lately asked for and ob-
tained a Commission of the Peace, has been tremendously
convulsed on the question as to who should be its new
magistrates. One of the names left out was that of
Mr. H. K. Spark, a merchant of the town, one of the
leaders in the movement for its municipal incorpo-
ration and parliamentary enfranchisement, and
the candidate of the popular party at the election.
The townspeople believed that Mr. Spark was thus ex-
tinguished as a penalty for daring to become a candidate
without consulting the political wirepulleri of the borough,
and they made a stir about it. But all at once it ap
peared that Mr. Spark was disqualified. Now it happens
that Mr. Spark is connected with the "local press of the
borough." He is the proprietor of the Darlington and
Stoel.ton Times, and under this rule is disqualified for
the magistracy. But whence the rule at all ? Who in-
vented the idea that connection with the press should
disqualify a person, otherwise well fitted, for the per-
formance of magisterial functions? The other dis-
qualifications are old and intelligible. An attorney
can hardly sit on the bench one day, and plead be-
fore it on another. The holder of a wine or beer
or spirit license can hardly form one of the bench
by whom the license is granted, and its use is watched and
guarded. But what does the ownership of a newspaper,
what would even its editorship do, to make it undesirable
that a gentleman holding either of these relations to the
local press should sit uron the bench ? This is a matter
in which the whole newspaper press is interested, and
some explanation of it is surely needed. Can it be that
Lord Hatherley has resolved to celebrate his advent to
the Chancellorship by the invention of a new qualifica-
tion? If so, then surely the public ought to be made
acquainted.with the reasons which are thought to justify
it—if not, how came the words which inflict that dis-
qualification on Mr. Spark in Mr. Campbell's letter to
the Town Clerk of Darlington?
The Telegraph says that between the Act for the dises•
tablishment and disendowment of the Irish Churcleand the
Bishops' Resignation Bill there might seem to be little or
no connection ; nevertheless the discussion in the House of
Commons on Thursday night would suffice to spew that
the relation between the two measures is close. Before
the debate began an ominous note was struck by
Mr. Watkin Williams, who gave notice that on an early
day next session he would move resolutions in favour of
disestablishing and disendowing the Church in -Wales.
From the Tory no less emphatically than from the
Liberal side came the recognition of the fact, that
the Church is "in danger ;" that in some respects the
state of the Episcopate is deplorable ; that for years
the sees of Winchester and Exeter have been an oppro.
brium to our system by the incapacity of Dr. Sumner
end Dr. Phillpotts to discharge the duties. Both prelates
are so old that for years the diocese of each has had a
ruler only in name. Really, although not ostensibly, the
present bill is aimed at those two dioceses. It might
ee termed a bill for securing the retirsmeet of
two prelates,. one a of great uprightness,
Cie other of great ability, !..,t Itoth so thoroughly super-
annuated that, while th r-tA.II official presser, most of
the cpi,-,ctipat wofk is ii 1. ilt-y were apietinte,l t, dis-
ehArgo oust I e stispet, le!. TM, measure is to relnatn iii
oi•tratitto only for two years, by which time other
xt7:.:•111e3 of clvrieal reform ict-t he I,rotOit before
PArliament. nlr. P,otvcrle anal other members
fAncied the incur pint. tress of the bill a fatal argument
noainst it, and tl,ey voted for its rejeetion ; but the
House took a jit,tor view, and defonted the motion by
a large majority. The measure, in fact, is only the first
of a series. As the Prime Minister noted, there
is no reason why provision should not be made for
the retirement of itiontribente as well as of bishops;
and a bill to effect that ohjeot must follow soon, with
similar reforms hereafter. Aleanwhile, by passing through
eomntittee the Bishops' resignation Bill, the Commons
have assisted the. Lords to make a good beginning in that
great and Imperative task of ecclesiastical reform which
is to secure a higher standard of efficiency in the mixtisia-
trAtim QL Ole Ohluckt