The Sun.
London, England, 1856-02-04 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON; MONDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 4, 1856

Piedmont ; if Austria had a particle of fairness in
her, she would tell Russia that on their own prin-
ciples, and in accordance with their own practice,
this was a mere matter of course. The breaker of
peace must, of course, pay for its restoration.
Russia too confides in the " loyalty and generosity
of the Allies not to impose terms which they
would deem incompatible with their own honour."
Rather ambiguous. If she means incompatible
with the honour of nations who have merited no
punishment, this is not consistent with the con-
fession of guilt implied in asking to be guaran-
teed from giving indemnity. If the Allies were in
her place they ought to think, it no more than
honourable after such an outrageous offence to give
heavy bonds of every kind to keep the peace for
all time to come. If she means that they will
not dishonourably impose on a vanquished culprit
—that they will not sentence to fourteen years'
transportation provided seven satisfy the ends of
justice ; she may, we are sorry to believe, make
herself but too easy about that. If Russia be
really desirous of behaving " loyally" herself let
her give up everything south of the Kuban, the
whole of Bessarabia, and restore to Poland, at
least, the constitution agreed to by all the Allies
in the Treaty of Vienna.

Prussia, it seems, is claiming a place in the
Conferences, on the ground of that Treaty. She
alleges that the territorial arrangements settled by
it in Bessarabia are about to be changed. As she
was a party to the prior arrangements, her consent
ought to be asked to the alteration. We should
like that argument to be pressed. If the arrange-
ments of the Treaty are‘nokto be changed without
the consent of the signitaries to it, then let us
have a complete re-settlement ; let Cracow return
to republican self-government, and be released from
the gripe of Austria, and,let Poland again choose
her own representatives. Miserable justice that,
but nevertheless better than continuing and au-
thorising the gross injustice of entirely incorpo-
rating the nation with its cruel oppressor.
Hitherto England and France have never sanc-
tioned the last vile deed of 1831. Their pro-
tests stand on record against it. If Poland
be now passed over in silence, a positive
sanction will have been given to a piece
of wickedness far greater than the passage
of the Pruth. If we sacrifice thus much to
the COBDENS, the Coburgs, the Austrians,
and the German despots, the retribution of some
bloody political earthquake will sooner or later
rectify the wrongs of Europe.

One of the earliest, as it is unquestionably one
of the most important, matters that Gan be brought
under the consideration of Parliament will be the
revision of cur monetary code, and the substitu-
tion of a sound and judicious system of currency
for that which has already occasioned such serious
injury to the industrious classes, and more especi-
ally to the commercial interests of the country.
The Act of 1844 has already virtually expired.
It only exists on sufferance, for it will cease and
determine at any time, " upon twelve months'
notice to be given after the Ist August, 1855." The
all-important question should have been discussed
and finally arranged last year, so that the notice
might have been given at the earliest possible
moment. But the Ministerial changes, and espe-
cially those in the financial department, furnished
a plausible excuse for procrastination. We could
scarcely expect that Sir G. C. LBwrs would be
prepared to grapple with the subject immediately
on his accession to office, although he might have
obtained valuable assistance from Mr. JAMES
WILSON, who has bestowed serious consideration
thereon, and is thoroughly acquainted with all its
various phases. There can, however, be no pre-
text for evasion daring the session which has this
day been inaugurated ; and, whether there be
peace or war, the monetary question must be
placed on a sound and durable foundation. The
Times itself has admitted that " a re-discus-
sion of the whole question in Parliament can-
not be arranged too soon," and there is not
a single metropolitan journal, or one entitled to
the slightest weight in the provinces, that con-
tests the propriety of a speedy, and, if practicable,
a final arrangement of the vexata questio ! Even
"Mercator," or rather Lord OVERSTONE himself,
substituting the real for the nom de plume, has,
by his recent convulsive and spasmodic efforts,
proved that he, too, recognises that his favourite
theory is on trial, and that a decisive verdict
must be returned during the present session.
There cannot be any occasion for further in-
quiry. All the materials for decisive legislation
are already in existence. In 1848 the matter
was thoroughly investigated by Select Committees
of both Houses. The Report of the Lords' Com-
mittee very decidedly eondemned the Act, while
that of the Commons only decided in its favour

by a very slender majority, consisting of Sir
ROBERT PEEL and his adherents, and of Lord
JOHN RUSSELL and his followers, and the author
of " What Next, and Next 1" It was, indeed,
Mr. COBDEN who gave, in a Committee intended
to be packed, the casting vote, and decided in
favour of the currency quacks, against the best
interests of the nation. We have said "intended to be
packed," because the remarkable admission of Sir C.
WooD, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, clearly
established that he considered the Government
would be very wrong in consenting to any com-
mittee, of the nature of whose report they were
not previously satisfied. We do not profess to
quote the exact words, but merely to give the

purport and effect of the statement of that
unfortunate financier—a statement that occa-
siotied an extraordinary sensation in Parliament
-And in the country. Against that Report no less
than eleven independent members voted, conceiv-
ing that " the laws for regulating the issue of
B ink notes, payable on demand, aggravated the
commercial distress in Rngland in 1847 !" We

give the names of those who voted for and agains,

the Report, in order that the community may judge
for itself of the weight that should be attached
to their views, merely suggesting that a very
large proportion of the majority had been com-
mitted by previously-expressed opinions in favour
of the iniquitous and impolitic enactments on trial.
We can use no stronger argument to set aside
that erroneous decision than the publication of
the names, pro and con, which are as follows :--
AYES. NOES.
Mr. T. Baring. Mr. Chancellor of the
Lord G. Bentincic. Exchequer.
Mr. Spooner. Sir James Graham.
Mr. Herr:Les. Sir Robert Peel.
Mr. Cayl,ey. Lord John Russell.
Mr. Ald. Thompson. Mr. Cobden.
Mr. Hudson. Mr. Beckett.
Mr. H•ame, Mr. Goulburn.
Mr. D israeli. Mr. Cardwr.,ii.
Mr. C.:4lyn.
La./2"ouchere.
Mr., James Wilson. L. Ricardo.
?+lr. Thornely.
Sir W. Clay.
Mr. Home Drummond:
Noes, 13.

Ayes, 11.

We have so frequently expressed our views on
the nature of the changes that should be intro-
duced, and the paramount advantages of a really
national One-Pound Note, inconvertible, but re-
ceivable in payment of all fiscal charges, and every
Government demand, that we conceived no possible
doubt could exist on the subject. We, however,
Tladly gave, on Thursday, the opinions of a highly
f, Atelligent and Clearheaded , fozeignex 04 tit* ell'

important topic. We need not Say how fully we
concur with M. NOBILING, to whom we must ex-
press our thanks for his valuable co-operation.
The Government note, guaranteed not only by all
the accumulated and realised wealth of the coun-
try, but by the thews and sinews of its inhabi-
tants, and by its tax-paying, as well as its pur-
chasing power, would be fully equivalent for any
convertible paper, or for the bullion itself. As the
Times recently declared " Supposing the
circulation to be required solely for in-
ternal consumption, no necessity could exist for
gold being held against any portion of it. A
deposit of Government Stock, or the fact of its
being receivable for duties, would at all times keep
it from fluctuations in value !" There could be,
as Mr. NontLINGt truly declares, "no necessity
for its convertibility, the whole Empire serving
for its guarantee." The notes could never be at
a discount, nor, as we have repeatedly explained,
could there be any danger of a run on the
National Bank, in which every citizen would
feel himself to be a partner. We earnestly com-
mend the excellent letter of our correspondent to
the attentive consideration of our readers. It is
well worthy of perusal. 'We must, however, for
ourselves declare that our respected correspondent
is in error in supposing that we have overlooked
the distinction between a Government and an ordi-
dinary Bank Note—a reference to our publication,
for a long succession of years, will show that we
have urgently, and consistently, and, we believe
we may add, indefatiValy advocated a Govern-
ment One-Pound inconvertible note, width, as
we believe, would give a circulating medium ade-
quate to the wants and exigencies of the country,
and thus supply a sufficiency of that which has
been justly defined as "the life-blood of in-
dustry."