The Sun.
London, England, 1869-02-23 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUELIC JOURNALS.

The Times, after considering Mr. uoscuen's expositlox
of his new Assessment Bill, arrives at the conclusion tirti
the growth of the nation has been much slower in politica
intelligence than in material wealth. The " muddled'
condition of our local government appears in frightfn:
contrast with the simplicity and perfection of the adminis
tration of our forefathers. The framers of the parochia:
system were in reality persons of great politica:
capacity, and the best testimony to the value
of their work is, that our legislators, when
they try reform, are constantly working on the
Same basis. As far as the new measure is concerned, we
may certainly congratulate Mr. Goscben on the attain•
ment of a high degree of simplicity, though his plans
*mid be still more simple if the Central Board were
dropped out of them altogether. For all the good they
promise to do they might be spared the trouble of coming
into existence. If the scale of deductions is to be inserted
in the bill, why not the common basis also? The assessor
is the dominant person of the scheme, and, indeed, we
already feel some little awe of him. What power is
great enough to delegate such vast authority to
him? The Lord Mayor, according to the most
exaggerated conception of foreign fancy, is nothing
by his side. He will be able to say with command
to this union, " You are too low," or to that, " You are
too unreasonable," and they must obey him. We do not
find that Mr. Goschen explained how this omnipotent
creature is to be created. Perhaps he will be named in
the bill, and provision made that on any future vacancy
Parliament shall be called together to name his successor.
It might be just possible to give the sovereign a right of
making a provisional nomination. Or perhaps Parlia-
ment, in its wisdom, may hesitate to call such a
Frankenstein into existence ; and the President of the
Poor-law Board may be asked to devise some other mode
of appeal of one Union Assessment Committee against
another.

The Post thinks that the discussion raised is the House
of Commons by Lord Elcho on the subject of the viaduct
from' Hungerford Bridge to Wellington-street was oppor-
tune in several respects. Mr. Layard described, almost
pathetically, how he had contemplated the erection of a
public building on part of the very site of this objection-
able viaduct, which could not be carried out if the road-
way were made. The particular part of the Embankment
ha.alluded to is that on the west side of Waterloo
Bridge corresponding to Somerset House on the
east, and there can be no question about such
a building being aesthetically desirable, balanc-
ing Somerset House, as it would if rightly
designed, and combining with it and with Waterlco
Bridge to form an ensemble not easily to be matched. But
this need in no way interfere with laying out the Embank.
ment between Waterloo and Hungerford Bridges with a
sufficiency of gardens and open spaces. Some people
seem to desire to occupy the newly-formed site with con-
tinuous, or nearly continuous, rows of stately buildings
along its whole length. Others appear to wish for
nothing but gardens and promenades. But the hate
Milieu, the combination of detached buildings with
intermediate gardens, while probably satisfying both
parties sufficiently, and ensuring a good artistic
effect, would prevent the Strand site from being
deprived to a considerable extent of Pght and air. There
can be little doubt that Parliament, now that its attention
has been drawn to the matter, will take care that the
viaduct is not constructed. It should, however, also make
arrangements calculated to prevent the occurrence of
similar muddles to those already created in respect of the
Thames Embankment. Divided authority, and anomalous
arrangements, are at the bottom of contretemps of the
kind in question ; and happily the tendency of public feel-
ing is at present entirely favourable to the abolition of
these sources of infinite mischief.

The Standard says that the Government intends to let
the bulk of the Fenian prisoners loose. Of eighty-one
persons at present under sentence of penal servitude for
treason-felony or kindred crimes, forty-nine are to be at
once and unconditionally discharged. We need not say
that we should have nothing to urge against the exercise
of the Royal clemency in favour of any particular Fenian
prisoner for whose release any fair grounds could be shewn.
But it is quite evident from Mr. Fortescue's own statement
that the Government did not look at the question from
this standpoint. The prima facie case in its judgment was
in favour of a remission of sentence which might serve
its party interests, and only those convicts have been
refuaed pardon, as Mr. Fortescue, with much sim-
plicity, explained, whom it would have been absolutely
suicidal to let loose. Everybody for whom any
possible excuse could he found, no matter the character of
his crime, has been released. It is an ungracious task to
suggest doubts as to the expediency of exercising the
power of pardon which the Constitution vests in the
Crown, but we must frankly say that we cannot conceive
a stronger encouragement to treason—and this treason
includes murder and half a score of other crimes—than
the release en masse, after a few months' imprisonment, of
ir.en whom juries of their countrymen, anxi,me, if possible,
to acquit them, have been compelled to find guilty of the
charges brought against them, :Ind to whom the judges of
the land have awarded the sentences which such offences
called for. If the prerogative of mercy is ttc remain, as
heretofore, one of the brightest and most beneficent attri-
butes of the Crown, it must not be prostituted by the
advisers of the sovereign for the promotion of their own
party purposes.
The Telegraph is surprised that such systematic and
flagrant unfairness is tolerated in these days as is shewn
in our present system of rating. We are quite in the
dark as to the exact weight of local burthens.
At present, to a great extent, we are forced to
go by guess work. That the East is scandalously loaded
in comparison with the West, is only too manifest ; but
how much the burden of the one district exceeds that of
the other, we cannot tell. As Mr. Locke pointed out the
other evening, no measure can be complete so long as the
rating of the metropolis is not equalised. On Saturday
we exposed the extraordinary difference between the rates
per pound paid in various parts of London ; and the sub-
ject is so fertile that on Monday it seemed about to provoke
a long and animated debate. As a member for the City,
Mr. Lawrence complained that the Temple, which is a
parish by itself, pays no poor rates at all. No doubt it
supports its own poor; but that is an easy task, since the
laundresses and other servants who wait upon the inmates
live beyond the sacred boundaries of the legal sanctuary,
and hence, even if they become destitute, they impose
no charge on the Temple. The same blessed freedom
from poor rates seems to be enjoyed by Gray's Inn and
Lincoln's Inn. Had London a Government worthy of the
the name, such an anomaly would not be allowed to exist
for a day. Even Mr. Chambers—who, as the member
for lightly-rated Marylebone, might be expected to
champion the present system of inequality—did not argue
that, in itself, such a system was defensible. He was con-
tent to plead that, before reforming it, we must ascertain,
by means of Mr. Goschen'sbill, the real incidence of rating.
No doubt we must. But as the President of the Poor-law
Board frankly admitted, the present measure is only a
'step towards that larger reform which, making East and
West contribute in equal proportions, shall destroy a
system that, while light to the ricb, is oppressive to the
poor.

The Herald declares that modern society has a certain
degree of impatience, which forbids that anybody or any-
- thing should have more than a tolerable degree of atten-
tion. The public have heard more than enough of the
Gulf Stream. Not a breeze could flow, not a shower
could. fall, it could not be hot, and it could not be cold,
but there followed the inevitable explanation that the
Gulf Stream did it all. We are tired of the Gulf Stream,
and we are deeply indebted to Mr. Findlay, of the Royal
Geographical Society, for trying to get rid of this trouble-
sonie creature. Mr. Findlay undertakes to shew that
it is physically impossible for the Gulf Stream to do all
that is said of it. The mouth of the Gulf of Mexico is
altogether too small for the exit of such a monster current
as would cover the ocean from Portugal to Greenland.
The Florida Channel has a minimum breadth of 45 miles,
and at that spot is only 325 fathoms deep, of which depth
—says Mr. Findlay, on the authority of the United States
Survey—the Gulf Stream occupies little more than half,
with icy cold water beneath it. The velocity and magni-
tude•of the stream, as shewn at the outset of its career,
are considered by Mr. Findlay utterly incommensurate
with the notion that it is the great modifier of climate in
the north-east Atlantic. So far from travelling an inde-
pendent course of 3,500 or 4,000 miles, the stream, accord-
ing to Mr. Findlay's conclusions, gets into trouble off
Cape Cod, and is soon afterwards so knocked about by the
Arctic currents that it becomes utterly demolished off the
banks of Newfoundland.

The Daily News refers to Henrich Christian's maxims
on the use of money, and quotes his conclusion after all his
experience: In clothing live up to your means ;in
food below your means ; in dwelling above your mealy.'
The first recommendation reminds one of Polonins and
his " costly thy habit as thy purse can buy "—in which.
of course, the modern system of tailors' bills and
" milhnited credit " was not taken into account.
With regard to the second dogma of the economical creed
v:e are considering, " In food live below your means," we
have Lo doubt whatever. It is as sound';, piece of advice
fol could be given, and is terribly needed, we are bound to
add, by En;lishmen, and pal ticularly Englishmen of the
present generation. We presmne however, that in this
pnrticnlar Bunsen would ha veanmoi ved them. "Indwelling
live above your means.' And on the whole we Arrive
at this conclusion, that whatever is calculated to preserve
s man's own self-respect, and likewise to uphold his tsti-
illation amongst his neighbonrs, should be approached and
treated with liberality. Thus, his home and his attire
should never wound his dignity or invite malicious
compassion. lint in all that serves merely to
pamper mat,Tial appetite, lie should bt, to him-
self and Isis fanny a jealons and vigilant watch-
dog. Nothing so transitory as a meal ; nothin4
so permanent, as far as tie individual is concerned, as a
roof tr2e, and even clothes lest a considerable time.
-these two do last they give a man a solid vantage-pm-nil
from which to encounter the stings and arrows of out-
rageous fortune ; but the costly banquet excites only to
depress, and too often lards him in what Mr. Disraeli has
so admirably described as "the ignoble melancholy which
springs from pecuniary embarassment."