The Sun.
London, England, 1869-10-19 00:00:00

SPIIZIT OP TEtE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The i inze3, in referring to the gold controversy, observes
that it has not yet been shewn that the smallest fraction
of a grain could be deducted from the proportion of gold
in the composition of the sovereign without lowering it
current value in the market of the world to exactly that
amount. The British public at home are generous, easy,
and confiding. They do not often ask how much a sove-
reign has lost by honest use, and they do not know how
often the coin is really short of its proper value by several
pence. But even we at home might become more particular
and more sceptical if the State odiously attempted to pass
upon us a coin which made no secret of a small deduction
to pay for its manufacture, or rather to pay generally for
the costs of the Mint. But, whatever we at home might
please to do with the shortened sovereign, it is quite
certain that abroad it would only change at its true value;
and in all former controversies on the metallic currency it
has always been maintained that there is one law for li
home and for foreign use in dealing with the stan-
dard coin of a country. It must be worth its weight
in gold, and not a grain less upon any pretence. It
is quite possible that the grievance, which is undeniable
may one day become intolerable. It may be possible to
devise some way to make the world pay for the manufac-
ture, or rather relieve the British public of a part of the
cost. It is possible that some day the Bank of England
may be permitted to give ingots in payment of Bank notes
to a very large amount, unless a premium be paid for the
more convenient form of coin. But we have not come to
this pass yet, and need not yet attempt to anticipate the
ingenuity, or other qualities, of our remote descendants.
The Telegraph declares that Mr. Baines is a backslider
from the faith of voluntaryism, His letter to the secre-
tary of the National Education Union is a sad example of
infidelity to old teachings of sect. Only fancy the feelings
of an old English Nonconformist who should come to life
again and see a Baines throwing overboard the prin-
ciples of voluntaryism in education as coolly as if they
were so much dead weight or rubbish. In such depart-
ments of action as national education the day
of voluntaryism- has gone by, and that of the
State has come. An old Nonconformist might shudder
to see the multitudinous and irresistible evidence
of the fact ; but, after a little study of events, he would be
forced to admit the beneficence of the change; and thinking
with a sigh of the New Jerusalem, which was to be built
up by voluntary zeal in every Christian land, he would
at last join the crowd of perverts who, led by Mr. Baines
and Mr. Miall, are fervently invoking the aid of the omni-
potent State. Although the State must provide an edu-
cation free from every tinge of sectarianism, there is no
reason why it should not continue to lend its aid to sec-
tarian schools. An Anglican, a Presbyterian, or a Roman
Catholic school can obtain a grant from the Committee
of Privy Council if its teachers possess official certi-
ficates of proficiency, if tho class memo are
healthy, and if the teaching is free from the
spirit of proselytism. Mr. Baines sees no reason
why the system should not be upheld even when Mr.
Forster shall complete his arrangements for the education
of the whole people. Thus, he says, the State might pro-
vide " for moral and religiolis training, not by requiring it
as a condition of State aid, but by aiding denominational
as well as secular schools." ➢lr. Lowe, who so broadly
differs from Mr. Baines in feeling and character, is entirely
of the same opinion. When the representatives of the Old
Secularist and the Old Denominational creeds are thus as
one, the solution of the problem cannot be far off. When
Mr. Lowe recognises the necessity of a modified denomina-
tional system, and Mr. Baines emphatically demands the
intervention of the State, the righteousness and peace of
politics have, indeed, kissed each other, and the day of
English national education is at hand.

The Standard says that a circular has been issued pro-
posing a scheme which it sincerely hopes will not be
carried out. It has been announced that her Majesty the
Queen, should her health and strength permit, will be
present at . the formal opening of the new Blackfriars
Bridge. A proposal is made that the unemployed and
distressed working classes of the metropolis shall, in an
orderly and peaceful manner, evincing a loyal spirit,
assemble upon the occasion, and rank themselves along the
line in order to shew the Queen what an amount of misery
and destitution exists. Now, we trust that the working
classes of London aro possessed of too much good feeling and
good sense to take any such step. It could not possibly
be of the slightest benefit to them, and the
bare proclamation of such a resolve might keep
her Majesty away altogether. The appearance of
her Majesty in the City of London, after so
many years of absence, will of itself be a certain
stimulus to trade. It would be an ungracious pro-
ceeding to offer her, instead of a merry welcome, a
scene of dismals. No doubt those who are perishing
at the parish door can hardly enter into this senti-
ment, since they have no part in the festivity, and
have only to look out through the cold windows of
their famished homes upon the fortune and plenty
of those around them. Still, as there could be no
conceivable result profitable to them, and as the only con-
sequence would be that of a painful exhibition to the
Queen, let us believe the idea will be abandoned. We
'would advise them, in heartfelt solicitude for their inte-
rests, not to make the Royal visit to tho City an oppor-
tmity for a demonstration which could not be otherwise
than a mistake and a failure, and which, besides an afflic-
tion and almost an affront to the Queen, would cast a gloom
over a great and joyous ceremonial, Although the summons
has been circulated, we cannot imagine that the purpose it
explains will ne persisted in.

The Herald alludes to the recent duel between Count
Metternich and Count Beaumont, and asks if it is not
a spectacle to be ashamed of when an Emperor's ambassa-
dor at one of the highest courts of Europe provokes and
accepts such a challenge ? When will this barbarous
habit be abolished by the common sentiment of the world
We can readily understand raw German students defying
one another with their innocuous blades, having no inten-

tion to kill or hurt; but that a Minister, a representative
of peace, a nobleman entrusted with a lofty mission should
engage in a bloody combat to defend his own wrong is a fact
which seems utterly irreconcilable with his position. Who
has ever benefited by a duel ? Men have earned ghastly and
infamous reputations as successful duellists, or, in other
words, unprosecuted assassins. But what -wife would wish
her husband, what daughter would wish her father, to gain
so murderous a renown ? If a man be a dead shot and
matches himself against a tyro, he is a coward ; if he be a
master of fence, and matches himself against a tyro, he is
a coward again. If both be equal, then we must exclaim
with Puck, " Lord, what fools these mortals be !" If
princes, diplomatists, and noblemen tell them by example
that these monstrous parodies of barbarous usages are
lawful and par dona.ble, what have we to say if young students
and journalists resort to the rapier and the revolver? To
give such a lesson to the inexperienced and the foolhardy
is a crime in itself. Without at all considering or caring
to guess at the promptings of the recent duel, we submit
it was an offence against the public opinion of Europe, or,
if not, that• the public opinion of Europe is much cor-
rupted. There is an old saying—they manage these things
better in Prance, and the author of it was responsible for a
great deal of nonsense; but the truth is, that in these mat-
ters they manage a good deal worse, although in this par-
ticular case the scandal was transacted abroad.

The Daily News remarks that a telegram is seldom pub-
lished which gives such universal satisfaction and relief as
that which announced the recovery of Colonel Hickie's
child. A loss such as Colonel Hickie and his family had
sustained is the very worst form in which bereavement can
come. Death rifles home of its best treasures, and friends
hear and pity, but it is the common lot, and the world
goes its busy way too careless to sympathise. But for
a child to be stolen from the fireside, and carried
out into the wide wastes of civilisation, leaving
no track behind, is so dreadful a loss and so
unusual, that the world stands still to hear the story,
and every nurse and every mother joins the search.
Such a loss is worse -than death. it makes a vacant
place, but fills it with vague apprehensions and the
heart-sickness of hope deferred, instead of tender mem-
ories. In the absence of evidence as to a lost child's fate,
imagination sees it in all conceivable circumstances of
degradation and distress. Colonel Hickie and his family
have been saved this misery, and as they appealed to
the public to help them to find their child, we may
on behalf of all the fathers and mothers in the
country congratulate them on its restoration. It
is satisfactory to know that, even at such a distance from
home, the child has been so speedily found, and that the
nurse who stole it had treated it kindly. But the public
will not be content even to know that the little one is
restored. It must be clearly shewn that such a theft
cannot be perpetrated with impunity, and therefore
Elizabeth Barry must be made an example of. It does not
at present appear that she stole the child for the sake of a
ransom ; but this makes the crime none the less, and
certainly cannot be urged in mitigation of punishment.
The Times thinks the on,gagement ferried by an insurance
company with au insurer—to pay au much on the insurer's
death on cendition cf reecivieg sr, much from him annually
duriag his life—is a harg,in which can be struck witlitut
the slightest ri,k-uf loss on either silo. The tr nth of the
:natter is. as we sugi:ested on rrevi,uts cc:!asiii, that the
WIS ;Una proporti,“ t.f ho;ur:lure loisho.ss, wha tcvcr that may
be, is 1111'.! to oxen-ave C011111,1:tiOn. Three yrays ago it war
argued, on liehalf 1 f r:ertain titainei,l ccinpanie.s, that
is all the good hu,iness men in their line hail been fore-
stallcd by tither estahli,d,ment.4, tiny bail only the option
of more doubtful business (ii no business at all. .Now, it
is one of the privileges of life insurance business that
there can be no such thing, as a Lad costumer, except in
the form of an unsound life, which can always ii
rejected ; and the competition, therefore, took
place in bindings for custom itself. Too much
money was, perhaps, paid to another office for its good-
will, or too much to an agent for a fresh customer procured
by his reetrninendatious. hut. except fur such mistakes, it
is hardly too roach to say that no insurance company with
a given numbei of policy holders should ever be otherwise
than secure. In a few words, insurance business itself is
infallibly safe; it can only be retitle:oil unsafe by the anti
ctpation of its necessary profits iu the acquisition of the
custom w4ich brings them.