The Sun.
London, England, 1858-10-09 00:00:00

Box-office now open. No fees.

CCANTERBURY HALL, Westminster-road.—
OPEN EVERT EVENING.—The following,* Company
of Vocalists are engaged for the performance of Selections
from all the popular OPERAS, MADRIGALS, CHORUSES,
GLEES, DWETS, &c., viz.:—Miss Russell, Mrs. Badsey,
Miss Brunell, Miss Ray, Madame Bartoletti, Miss Montague,
Mrs. Lawrence, and Mrs. Anderson ; Herr F. Jonghmans,
Mr. Henshaw, S Jones, J. Barker, W. MellinSenor Antonio,
E. L Hime, Mr. Badsey, Senor Tiroli, Mr. cozens, Mr. Bell,
Mr. Barnard, and Mr. St. Albyn. Mr. John G. Forde and E.
W. Mackney. Pianoforte, Mr. "Cecil Hicks—Harmonium,
Mr. Courtnay —Director, Herr F. Jonghmans. Commence at
7 precisely. Suppers, &c., until 12 o'clock.
NOTICE.—The Proprietor begs respectfully to announce
tnat in the present month
A FINE ARTS GALLERY,
now in course of construction, will be thrown open in con-
nexion with the above Hall.

THE WEATHER.-SUN OFFICE, OCT. 9.

THERMOMETER, IN THE SHADE.
55—highest since noon yesterday.
41—lowest this morning and during the night—the
coldest yet.
57—this day at noon.

BAuourrEß.-29.96.
WIND, South-Westerly; light, with heavy clouds.

THE SUN.

SATURDAY. OCTOBER 9, 1858.

Although party politics are carefully eschewed
at the meetings of the Waltham Agricultural
Association—and. Lord JOHN MANNERS certainly
paid more attention to the regulation than has
been exhibited at the assembly of other bodies—
yet certain valuable hints were given worthy of
serious consideration, not only by agriculturists,
but by men of all classes and grades in society,
from the peer to the peasant. From what fell from
the noble Chief
_Commissioner of Works, it may
safely be assumed that the Government have pre-
pared, or are preparing, a new Reform Bill, such
as they may fairly present for popular acceptance.
They carefully abstained from giving any positive
pledge last session, save that they would take the
entire subject into their consideration. They de-
sired, in fact, rather to improve on, than to fall
short of, the anticipations that may be formed—
the hopes that may be excited—not to discount
any.portion of the popularity they might hope to
obtain by premature revelations.
But they did not restrict themselves to mere
words. They abandoned the property qualification
without a struggle. They did not avail them-
selves of the plausible pretext that the ques-
tion of Reform should be discussed as a whole,
and that no amelioration, however desirable, should.
be effected until the entire subject was before the
House and country.

The abolition of the property qualification was
not the Alpha and the Omega—the beginning and
ending of all that they intended to give. Lord
PALMERSTON had certainly promised a Reform
Bill, but its provisions were studiously concealed,
and it eventually appeared that there was no
preparation in any respect. All that oozed out
merely tended to show that, like Lord JOHN
RUSSRLL, he was a thorough and unflinching op-
ponent of the ballot, and was resolved that all
undue influences, so loudly and so justly complained
of, should be maintained with unabated force.
Lord JOHN MANNUS thought that it was ":more
than probable that the question most likely to
intereA an agricultural assemblage in the next
session of Parliament will be the much-
discussed question of Parliamentary Reform ;"
emphatically adiiing, " Upon that question, of
course, my lips are sealed; and I can only say

that, by one of those curious turns of the whee.

which, mechanises modern politics, it seems to be
reserved for a Tory Government to render less
anomalous, and to make better adapted .to the
growing intelligence, property, and numbers of the
community, the Whig Reform Act of 1832 ! I can
only say that her MAJESTY'S Government will enter
upon that most serious task with the single and earnest
endeavour so to mend the representation of the
people in Parliament, as to secure the best electoral
body and the best representative body which can
be obtained for the people of this country."
This, considering the circumstances, is tolerably
plain speaking, and proves, beyond the possibility
of doubt, that a tolerably extensive measure, at
least as good as could have been expected from
Lord PALMERSTON or Lord JOHN RUSSELL, is
" looming in the future." We shall look forward
with consider-able anxiety to its provisions, because
on that will depend the future position of the pre-.
sent Government. They • have shown that they
listen to the voice of public opinion, and bow to
the wishes of the people. It iitrue that they may
yield with regret, but they do so fairly and above
board, without anything in the background. They
act while the Whigs talk, and it has at length been
noticed that the most important concessions, the
most valuable enactments, have been obtained from
Lord DERBY and the party with whom he has
for some time been acting. The true Liberals have
learned this truth, and they can no lono•er be
cajoled or wheedled into giving a thick-and-thin
support either to Lord PALMERSTON or Lord JOHN
RUSSELL, or lending their aid to constitute either
the one or the other the virtual dictator of the
popular branch of the Legislature. They now look
to measures, not men—to doings. rather than say-
ings ; and they will bestow fair consideration on
the bill of the present Government, and challenge
Lord PALMERSTON to produce his long-promised
measure, in order, calmly and temperately, to com-
pare the, two, and bestow the meed on the best.

One thing is certain, viz., that the great body
of the people will not be contented with any bill
which does not, afford full and complete protection

to every voter. The nation ;requires " the ballot
and the whole ballot ;" and althoUgh something
more is required, yet we doubt if any measure
which recognises the great principle of protection
to the humble elector, will not be acceptable to the
community at large. It is by secret voting alone
that intimidation can be set aside—the intimida-
tion, not only of priest or landlord, but also of em-
ployer and customer. A man who pays his rent
has surely a right to vote as he thinks pro-
per. He is not to be driven to the hustings
to record his vote as his landlord or
his landlord's agent choose. If he discharges his
religious duties he is not to permit the minister of
any creed to think for him, or to coerce him under
spiritual denunciations. If he bestows a fair day's
labour for a fair day's wage, the employer has not
thereby acquired a right to command his political
opinions—nor of providing fair value should he
be insulted by an unconstitutional threat of
exclusive dealing. Protection is required in any
respect, not merely against landlord, priest, em-
ployer, customer, or bludgeon men, but also against
himself. He should not be led into temptation to
which the very poor but too frequently yield.
This, at least, is certain, that bribery and corrup-
tion can never be eradicated until the ballot is in
full operation. Every friend of purity of election
must therefore desire it, and, desiring, be contented
with no measure of which it does not form part and
parcel.

Even bishops, when they condescend to speak in
public, must submit to the comments of the Press ;
and, if they give their reasons, must expeet to have
them canvassed. The Bishop of LINCOLN has pub-
lished to the world that he cordially approves 'of
Church-rates, except, perhaps, that he would prefer
some plan by which the money flowed into the
Church exchequer with "fewer obstructions. He
has also vouchsafed his reasons why he thinks they
ought to be retained—the sum and substance of the
reasons being that no plan which he has seen pro-
posed would bring so much money into the hands
of his friends. Now, on the subject of Church-
rates, we happen to think we know as much as any
bishop in the land ; indeed, rather more. Bishops
gliding about amongst their clergy, and that sec-
tion of the aristocracy to which they have been
elevated, hear and know little of the sentiments of
the great, busy, common-sense public ; hence they
descant quite at their ease on the theory that their
own Church is, with the smallest possible allowance
for the works of such mortals as HARRY VIII.
and CHARLES 11., about the ne plus ultra of
ecclesiastical perfection. It does exceedingly
well for them, and it ought to do well enough
for every Englishman. A secret or expressed rejec-
tion of the equal claims of Dissenting Churches lies
at the bottom of all their Church-rate eloquence.

The Bishop, however, lays great stress on the
argument from numbers. He asserts " that by far
the majority of the people are not only favourable
to the rate, but to the taxing of all property" to
repair the churches of the Establishment. We
have before exposed the imposition attempted to be
palmed off on Lord PALMERSTON by Lord SHAFTES-
BURY and his committee of laymen (names un-
known), as to not more than five per cent, or so of the
parishes of the country being opposed to the present
system ; we need not recur to the figures, which,
after all, the public will always fancy may be made
to prove any thing. We would ask a moment's
attention to broader considerations. Granting,
merely for argument's sake, that a large majority
of persons, as well as parishes, do not actively
oppose Church-rates, of what class are they ?
Notoriously the class which is least educated,
least energetic, and least independent—the very
serfs, in fact, of the squire and the clergyman ;
the men who, if they have votes at elections,
vote to order, who have no minds of their own,
or who, if they have, dare not for the life of them
utter their minds. This is conceded by Lord
SHAFTESBURY, with his bishops and laymen them-
selves. Their appeal is always on behalf of the
poor, but dutiful, and unremonstrating country
parishes. They piously vote the supplies from
year to year, and never think of murmuring,
whether they have to pay twopence or tenpence in
the pound. Would it not be scandalous to deprive
these godly parishes of the power of voting their
own supplies ?

Now we beg to put a question even to so exalted
a dignitary as the Bishop of LINCOLN. Does he
really believe that his supposed large majority of
acquiescent parishes and Churchmen are in favour
of the rate for which they vote ? If he does
not, his majority is gone. He has only a multi-
tude of quiet but unwilling payers, and he cannot
claim them as his " vast majority" at all. But let him
take the other horn of the dilemma, and affirm that
they are willing rate-layers and rate-payers, and
then we ask him why he is afraid of unconditional
abolition ? He cannot have at the same time a
vast majority willing to pay what they do, and yet
need a law to compel them to pay it. We have
no doubt whatever that the minority in favour of
Church-rates is very small, and that the " vast
majority" are opposed in heart to laying compul-
sory rates. The truth is that the country parishes
dare not remonstrate, much less vote against a
rate. Deduct, however, the vast number who
unhappily do not care to support any religion, and
the still larger number who would prefer to give
what they liked, and not to be subject to any com-
pulsion in the matter, and the Bishop's majority
would be so diminished that he would be com-
pelled to rely on the good Mahommedan argument
of the right of the faithful to subject unbelievers to
tribute.

Take the votes of the country parishes on this, as
on some other subjects, by ballot. Give them on the
question, Shall Church-rates remain compulsory or
not? a simple oui or non ; cast up the votes in
divisions of counties, to secure them against detec-
tion and vengeance, and we believe the Bishop
will not doubt what the response would be. Every
man's common sense would tell him that nothing
could hinder him from subscribing what he
thought good towards the cost of his own worship,
and would also tell him that neither he nor any
one else ought to compel the unwilling to pay.
One thing the Bishop cannot deny, that a large
majority of the people's representatives are in favour
of abolition; neither can he deny that these repre-
sentatives are, for the most part, members of his own
Church. If they represent the majority of the rate-
payers, he loses again his majority. If they do not,
we humbly bog the Bishcp's vote and interest in
favour of a good hearty Reform Bill.

The Bishop, indeed, himself lets out a glimpse
of the truth when he objects to relieving Dissenters
as such, for fear lest some "tainted with the sin
of avarice should hypocritically rank themselves
with Dissenters !" Good heavens—.a Bishop trying
to prove that all the public should be made to pay
to Ms Church—should be compelled to save the
pockets of himself and his—yet lecturing others on
avarice ! It is no avarice, then, in him and his.
" majority," if he likes, to want to screw a tax out
of every one's property that he and the members
of his sect may save their half-crowns and sove-
reigns. When we hear a Bishop declaiming against
avarice, while attempting to prove that all persons
ought to be made to pay lest be and his followers

' l'a:*,.• I ... ' `'.....
I-. "
, ,4*--.11
.x.r:-€ ,•,,,
~,,,.. . - ,-5.., -:,-, .-s,
.4-, -.., Nrivg ,
A,,,t?.;;-...L -, a
~„„..., ...,. ... , , - ..'.., --,, 4
, „ ''T
• .ii 0 S ~.1;;;;* 1 -',, -`,---t -,."
• • t.„
_,, ,' , 1111_'",,,,,,1.Ni, „i:,,,yr‹.,...
' ‘110"1