The Sun.
London, England, 1858-04-07 00:00:00

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 7, 1858.

It seems to be now generally understood that
the first great battle between the " ins" and
" the outs" will take place on the Government of
India Bills, the rival projects of Lords DERBY and
PALMERSTON. We confess we wi,h that it had
been otherwise. It will not give the people of
India a very favourable impression as to their
prospects under Parliamentary Government.
When they learn that a matter of such vital im-
portance to 150,000,000 of her MAJZSTY'S sub-
jects in the East, and involving so many important
interests, both at home and abroad, should be
made the ground of a factious opposition against
the actual occupants of office, and of a
merely political contest. The object of (fa
persons, without exception, should be to
render the measure that must be carried as
efficient as possible, and for that purpose, to work
harmoniously together, selecting the best parts of
each scheme, and gracefully to yield points of
minor importance.
But such, unfortunately, is not the case. There
is no subject that has been so incessantly attacked
by the Times, and its servile flock of imitators
amongst the public journals, by the Times led—
men who, unable to think or reason for themselves,
swallow with implicit faith all that the Times is
pleased to enunciate ex cathedra, or by the small
politicians of the Rouse of Commons and the
clubs, who look only to men, and are profoundly
indifferent to measures, caring only that the dis-
tribution of patronage should. be in the bands of
those from whom they might hope to obtain
something for themselves or their proteges. These
onslaughts are too systematic to be accidental.
Day after day, the Leviathan hurls its ponderous
missiles, deserting the principles it once professed,
and varying the attack in every possibly way ;
while those who derive their inspiration from its
columns re-echo its arguments, and with ominous
nods, assert that " the Government schomo can
never work 1"

As an instance, we may refer to the first leader
in the Times of Monday, which clearly indicates
the character of the opposition offered. The
thunder is directed mainly against what it is
pleased to term " The New Democratic Consti-
tution for India." The representative principle
which professing Liberals were once accustomed
to boast of as the best and most eligible that
could be devised, must now, according to the
oracle of Printing-hou,e-square, be regarded as
a mockery and delusion, something altogether
antiquated and obsolete, and by no means
suited to the spirit of the age. If large
constituencies are entrusted with elective
powers, there must necessarily be a breach of
trust. It is not men of high character and
unblemished reputation that will be selected, but
broken-down merchants—persons bankrupt alike
in character and. pocket, who will, by the simple
process of popular election, be pitchforked into
places of trust and emolument for which they
would be by no means qualified. It is certainly
not complimentary to the electors cf London,
Liverpool, Manchester, Glasgow, and Belfast to
suppose that "five Micawbers" could by any
possibility be " introduced into public life under
the auspices of the Ministerial Bill." It de-
clares that "a thousand a year and little
to do is the very thing for the turning up' of
which this amiable class aro continually waiting ;"
adding—" Indeed, we rather think that the bene-
volent mind of Mr. DISRAELI must have contem-
plated these very persons as the object of his
bounty." And again, after proceeding to show
that no prosperous trader, or retired trader in
good circumstances, would think of accepting the
office, sums up in these terms —" It seems, then,
that the very object of Mr. DISRAELI'S bounty
must be the unfortunate trader, and that we have
in this part of the Bill a clever expedient for
neutralising the injustice often done by Bank-
ruptcy Commissioners, and sometimes, we grieve
to say, by juries, to gentlemen who have been
unfortunate iu business, and we congratulate the
great constituencies, who are to elect five of the
Councillors upon the qualification of members,
which leaves them so fair a prospect of a selection
from the noble army of bankrupts."
Reader, the above extracts are not from the
Moniteur, or any acknowledged organ of a des-
potic Government. Nor are they taken from
those whose business and pleasure of late have
been turning into contempt and disrepnte the
time-honoured institutions of the United King-
dom. They are from the Times—the pro..
fessedly liberal Times ; and the object is to
bring back a professedly liberal party to power
in the place of those who offer " a new
democratic constitution to India," and recog-
nise the principle of representation ! What
really consistent Liberal can be led astray by such
flimsy pretexts—such shallow devices ? What
sincere Radical can support a party with liberality
tuner uu,a;u3, T4r):31,1 iu their i
hearts, agaihst men who desire to be judged, not :

by their "sayings," but by their " doings," who
wisk rather to exceed than to fall short of their
promises, and, instead of cautiously concealing
b air intentions, place them fairly before the com-
rfaunity, and invite discussion and criticism ?
The objects of the bills are similar. The
guiding principle in both cases is to substitute the
direct government of the Crown for the moribund
Company, now " stretched on its political death-
bed." The details on which differences may arise
consist of—the number and composition of the
Council ; and the qualification, if any, that should
be required in its members. Surely these are
matters that may be temperately and fairly dis-
cussed in committee, without being made the
topics of such virulent and incessant attacks,
which may, however, defeat themselves, as they
must disgust every disinterested and independent
man who is disposed to consider both measures on
their substantial merits.

It is said that the Budget will be introduced
on Friday the 16th instant, and that on that day
the Chancellor of the Exchequer will have the
opportunity of propounding his financial scheme,
and exhibiting qualifications for the most arduous
and least popular office in the gift of the Crown.
The duties on the present occasion will be peon.
liarly difficult. The Right Hon. Gentleman must,
as the Lord Mayor remarked, provide for " the
little bill" bequeathed by his predecessor, for which
he himself is in no way responsible. He will nut
be troubled with a surplus, the great stumbling
block of Sir CHARLES WOOD, when he occu.
pied the position. He has succeeded to a
dammosa hereditas, Insolvent Estates which
he must manage so a 3 to pay all
claimants. It is not, at this moment,
that there is a deficiency. As yet there is enough
in the Exchequer to pay all demands. But there
are matters coming to maturity that must be
met, and for which Mr. DISRAELI must provide
the ways and means. There will be a deficit of
at least six, and probably nearer scron, millions
to be made up, of which three and a half millions
may be regarded as payment of capital—viz., the
2,000,0001. of Exchequer Bonds falling due in
May (with an equal amount next year), and
1,500,0001. sinking fund towards the liquidation
of the war debt.

The Exchequer Bonds could be renewed with
the greatest facility, and as we have repeatedly
pointed ont, they ought to be renewed. It was never
intended at the time of the " ventilation" of the
GLADSTONE abortion that the stock, for which
notice of payment was given, should all be re-
deemed in money. A different kind was ten-
dered for acceptance, which it was supposed would
have been eagerly accepted. Even the Oxford
pet would scarcely have proposed denuding the
FbrAhequer of its balances for the purpose of pay-
ing off ten millions that were totally uncalled for.
Nor would he, after the breaking out of the
Russian war, have ventured in his place in Parlia-
ment to designate it as " a valuable finan-
cial demonstration." It was intended that
it should remain a portion of the debt,
and the tax-paying community of the present
generation have a right to demand that the
2,000,0001., improperly paid last year, should be
replaced in the Exchequer, and the 2,000,0001.
falling due in May provided for by the issue of
new bills. This would at once give 4,000,0001.
sterling, or perhaps a little more ; as in the pre-
sent state of the money-market they would pro-
bably sell at a handsome premium, which would
go far towards meeting the anticipated defi-
ciency.

But the income-tax is also to he reduced to
5d., by which there will be a loss of 2,000,000/.
to the revenue. There can be no doubt that
Sir G. C. LEWIS would propose that matters
should remain in, static quo for the next two
years, and Mr. DISRAELI might do the same,
although he objecbd because it w. 1,3 not clear that
it would be required. But circumstances changed.
The Indian mutiny broke out and heavy expenses
were entailed on the country—expenses which
occasion a consideratble portion of the deficit.
But still we hope that the Right Hon.
'Durable Gentleman will do better. He has
a glorious opportunity of carrying out that
which was the great feature of the
Budget of 1852—a discrimination between
permanent and precarious income. Let him, then,
let the latter receive the benefit of the reduction,
but increase the former to tenpence. He would
thus obtain an increase of about 2,250,0001., of
which half would be received during the current
year. With that, and a renewal of the Exchequer
Bond., he would be enabled to liquidate all de-
mands, and keep up the character in pecuniary
affairs which Great Britain ought always to
maintain,