The Sun.
London, England, 1869-01-20 00:00:00

IT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The Times thinks that the new Board of Admiralty ha:
Ixddressed itself to an arduous task. It is certain that
serious check must be applied to our naval expenditure;
and equally certain that the way to do it has not yet been
discovered. It is evident that the singularity of the cir•
cumstances is adverse to the attempt. That it may be
successful yet, by some new and unknown way, cannot be
denied ; but appearances are always against it. Of course
it is the new broom that sweeps clean, and the new
housemaid that always declares such dirt and dust and
cobwebs were never seen as those she inherits from her
slovenly predecessor. We have a sweep of the new
broom in the circular letter we published on Tuesday.
The charges against the late housemaid were fulminated
far and wide from the British hustings in December.
The Board of Admiralty seems to propose to attack the
establishments and the comprehensive subject of naval
expenditure in detail, at every point where it is possible
to apply a test. Appealing, in the first instance, to the
public spirit of officers and the whole staff employed,
they urge economy of time, labour, material, an_] generally
that saving which is commonly understood by the sub-
stitution of the head to save the work of the heels. Of
course material may be visibly wasted ; there may be
heaps accumulated only to rot, or to be thrown away ;
there may be bodies of men employed on work- mani-
festly useless ; officers may coal their ships where coal,
of course, is dear, because it has come the greatest
distance. There are persons who never think of the cost.
It is hardly possible to get up equal vigilance, or even
equal prudence, when one enjoys perfect immunity from
the risk, and perhaps wins equally, whatever the result.
The Board of Admiralty, therefore, proposes to supply,
as far as possible, this vigilance, this prudence, and this
calculation and common sense, which, under the circum-
stances, it is so difficult for the various employes to supply
for themselves, and it begins by an appeal to the officers
of the navy and naval establishments to assist in the work
of self-control.

The Standard considers that English statesmen must
shortly direct their attention to the question of emigration
as a means of national relief. The evil of pauperism is
great, and the burden is more than the nation can bear.
It is clearly time that some great national effort should be
made, in the interests both of the poor and of the country,
to deal with this frightful evil in some more rational and
less empirical way. To give money to those who either
cannot or will not make money is bad philanthropy and
worse economy. To keep a million of Englishmen in a
state which forces them to be idle, while it compels us to
maintain them in idleness, when, at the same time, there
are vast lands in oar possession which require only men to
develope their wealth, and to become productive to ourselves
and to the world, is a policy of which it is incomprehensible
that it should need condemnation. Yet this is precisely
what England is content to do. The owner of a territory
larger than that of any empire which the world ever saw,
she persists in confining her population of thirty millions
to two small islands ; in keeping all her swarms in the
parent hive ; in burdening herself with the charge of those
who have not sufficient room within her narrow bounds.
Here is a plain and obvious relief for an acknowledged
evil. We have an enormous domain lying waste for want
of men to cultivate it, and we prefer to keep our poor at
home instead of sending them where they can be of use to
themselves and to us. In North America we have a terri-
tory of some seven hundred millions of acres in extent
occupied by a population of barely four millions. In Aus-
tralia we have the whole of a vast and rich continent, equal
in extent to the entire territory of the United States, in-
habited along the sea-board by a population of less than a
million and a half. In New Zealand we have two islands
as large and as productive as our own, with a climate and
soil exactly analogous to those of Great Britain, occupied
by a population considerably leas than that of the city of
Westminster. Is it not monstrous that we should make
no attempt to turn these lands to use, by distributing
over them a portion of our superfluous population ; that
we should go on paying eleven millions a year out of
the national earnings in maintaining a million of persons
in idleness, while there is this grand field for labour lying
waste and untilled ? All that our colonies want is men ;
yet we complain that we are burdened by too many.
The Daily News declares that some people seem to
exaggerate the difficulties of the settlement of the revenues
of the Irish Church, and that they are not justified in so
doing. If, indeed, Parliament had to construct a new
Established Church, the forebodings we occasionally hear
would be more intelligible. As the case stands, however,
rarliament will simply have to make over a sum of money;
and the organisation required will be, so far as Parlia.
ment is concerned, strictly an organisation ad hoc. A
little reflection on the manner in which this necessity
arises may serve to put its nature and extent in a
clearer light. The property of an Established Church
naturally partakes of a double character. In the
eye of the law it is simply a fund reserved
by the State for certain specified purposes. But inasmuch
as these purposes are carried out by a private association,
and the fund itself has been largely increased by the
liberality of individuals, there arises a doubt whether the
donor of this or that particular benefaction may not have
designed to enrich the private association rather than the
State reserve. When the disestablishment of the Church
is determined on, it follows as a matter of course that this
reserved fund must for the future be appropriated to other
objects. Concerning the future position of the Irish
Church it thus remarks. Whatever social prestige may
continue to attach to membership of the Irish Church can-
not, of course, be touched by legislation, but the utmost
care must be taken not to add to this the smallest
iota of political prestige. There must ba no pretext
given for the notion that in Ireland Protestantism is
still the religion of the rulers, and Roman Catholicism
the religion of the ruled. If, then, the Irish Episcopa-
lians are anxious to make any such proposal as that we
have referred to— an anxiety of which, to do them justice,
they have shewn remarkably few traces —it will be to
their interest to hear in mind that it is by this standard
that their wishes will be judged. So far as these wishes
affect none but those who entertain them they may be
sure of favourable consideration. It is only when they
conflict with those more important objects for which dis-
establishment has been undertaken that they stand any
chance of being disregarded. But if they should so con-
flict, disregarded they assuredly will be. An ecclesias-
tical revolution cannot put up with half-measures.
The Telegraph thinks that it is a serious business to read
a bislnip's triennial charge, and commends the decision of
the Bishop of Gloucester in giving up the old custom of
the triennial charge and determining to deliver a short
address annually. The pastoral address which the right
reverend prelate has just published, is notable fur another
reason•besides its attack on triennial prolixity and dull-
ness. Dr. Ellicott does not shut his eyes to the fact that
the " Church is in danger." That is no longer a mere
hustings cry, raised to frighten timid old women of both
sexes into the idea that the Liberals are in league
with the Liberation Society, while the Liberation
Society is in .concert with the Prince of Darkness.
The truth is far otherwise. Neither clergymen nor lay-
men now deny that the Church of England is passing
through one of the most critical stages in her history, and
that she has to fear, not the attacks of Mr. Miall, but the
incompetence of her ordained champions. On this point
Dr. Ellicott uses the plainest language. "Subjects," he
says, " that a few years ago were but little noticed, are
now restlessly discussed ; questions that we might fairly
deem closed are now being everywhere re- opened, especially
in reference to the divinity of Our Blessed Lord, to the
authority of Scripture, to the whole cycle of questions
pertaining to man and man's salvation, and, latently,
but still very pervasively, to Eschatology, or the
doctrine of the last things. All these subjects are now
freely discussed ; they are touched upon even in our
newspapers and in the current literature of the day, end
can no longer be safely left unnoticed in our pulpits."
Passing to the subject of Ritualism, the Bishop of Gloucester
speaks of the decision recently pronounced by the
Judicial Committee in terms which are admirable for
their common sense. "Now," he says, " that the law has
been finally declared in the matters called in question, it
is the solemn duty of every faithful member of the Churcb
of England cheerfully to obey it."