The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-31 00:00:00

CONCERTS:

Donna Lucrezia Miss Russell.
' Maffio Orsini Mrs. Anderson.
Gtnttaro
Dbn Altonzo Signor Tivoli.
Conductor—Mr. Jonghmans.
Comic Vocalists.—Messrs. Georxe Hodson (the Irish Come-
.' Can and Mimic), W. T. Critchfield, and E. W. Mackney.
Several interesting Pictures are added to the Fine Arts
Gallery. The suite of Halls have been re-decorated and
beautified. and constitute one of the most unique and brilliant
eights of the metropolis.
The gallery is open from 5 till 11 on Sunday Evening.

.'; THERMOMETER, IN THE SHADE.
55-.-highest since noon yesterday.
- ' 48,-lowest this morning and during the night.
53—this day at noon.
BAROMETER-29.3 ; a fall of nearly an inch.
Wixn, South-Westerly; light, with rainy weather.

THE WEATHER.—SUN Orrice, MARCH 31, MO,

„ _ •

..*

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
V.iY.-LlSlorning, 7h. 33m.—Afternoon, Bh. 15m
*•MOntßow.-11orning, 9h. 4m.—Aftemoon, Oh. 54m

. '.*--, • ,
" - -... . • k ' u.,,,, kt„... --,
,1
, :,2?*-• ..,,„ . t:.
.-4(--..---, 't4:' -7'-,.
. ' AA' \ '4.:
1.C.1 di,,,,:il
' . kik v ,J,44sl,>sitt'' 1,--7. ' "L..-.4-`'
, _
-• I,- 7- '

',Z.,;',17,,

THE SUN.
LONDON,' SATURDAY, MARCH 31, 1860,

The discussion provoked last evening in the
• House of Lords by Earl GREY'S motion, although
that motion was eventually withdrawn, was not
without its importance. It elicited, as far as was
in any way practicable or reasonable under the cir-
cumstances, the views and intentions of her MA-
• &MY'S Government in sending out once more to
the Chinese waters a pacific agent or negotiator,
'in the person of his Excellency the Earl of ELGIN,
• at the head, or rather basked by the companionship
of another great warlike expedition. So far as the
entetprize can be defined by a figure of speech, it
merle said that England sends forth anew her
plenipotentiary, carrying in one (outstretched)
hand the olive branch of reconciliation,but retaining
firmly in the grasp of the other. (at his back) that
keen good sword of Britain which is never drawn
idly from its sheath,

It is hardly to be conseived that Earl GREY
could serin sly have counted upon his particular
motion being acceded to by the Government. For
in point of fact, did it really amount to but
!to.erlemand for a hypothetical estimate to be drawn
"ion a calculation of contingencies ! The noble
4,ord's argument was this : Here is a
•Adly expedition fitted out and sent forth
1, caßmst China by the British Government.
plt f has already involved an expenditure
{to begin with ! ) of £BOO,OOO, or from that to
,1.:1,000,000 ! I'his preliminary expenditure, more•
over, having been incurred by Ministers upon their I
own responsibility before the commencement of the
present s ession of Parliament, and consequently.
without t\ ie conelirrenee of, or the slightest autho-
rity from, the Imperial Legislature ! Added to
which, the probable cost of the next year, the
financial ye N'tr 1860.61, has been stated (of course
Ilyfothetica 1.1 y) by 'the Secretary of State for
War 'at ti qr amount, in round numbers, of
.£2,-500,000 additional ! Having reminded the
the House o Lords of all which—the Earl GREY
continued— " But when they considered the enor-
mous expense of military operations at such a dis-
tance from England, he must be a bold man who

would predict what their cost would be, to vi hat
limits they would be confined, or when they,'
be brought to a close." Let the words we havei here
italicised be particularly borne in considers ttion,
because it is especially worthy of note that—ha ving
uttered them—Earl GREY actually closes his re-
marks by moving for au estimate of the probable cost
of the expedition to China up to the close of
the financial year 1860-61 ! He does this—having
said that " he would be a bold man who would pre-
dict what the cost would be !" And having pre-
viously (as we have observed) reminded the House
of Lords that the probable cost of the operations
for the next year (namely, this very financial. year
1860-61) has been estimated by the Secretary of
State for War at, in all likelihood, £2,500,000.
Surely—that being the case—the very estimate
Earl GREY was last night moving for, he and the
country at large had already obtained ! He has
received it—the Parliament and the people have
received it—unasked—from the highest, from the
Mini,ter who will be held responsible, in the first
instance, for this expedition, from the Secretary of
State for War, from the right hon. member for
South Wilts, from Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT himself.
At the best, any estimate of this kind could only be
expected to be something approximating in round
numbers to the probable amount required. Such
an estimate is precisely the one already received
from the lips of Mr. HBRBERT, who tells
us frankly that the probable cost of these
operations against China for the financial year
1860-61 will, in round numbers, be somewhere
about £2,500,000. Any more precise calculation
than this it would surely be preposterous to ex-
pect—particularly as Earl GREY has himself very
reasonably remarked, " lie would be a bold
man who would predict WHAT the eost would
be!" The probable cost, the proximate amount,
as nearly as it can be reasonably con-
jectured, has been stated, and stated, too,
upon no mean authority, upon the authority
of the right hon. the Secretary of State for War,
at £2,500,000 ! No wonder the motion was with-
drawn—the very estimates moved for having, upon
Earl GREY'S own showing, already been obtained.
Idle, however, though the motion itself was, it
elicited, as we have before intimated, no idle dis
cussion. It drew forth the opinions of others be-
sides Earl GREY himself, whose opinions upon the
matter of this new China expedition we would all of
us naturally enough like to have. It afforded an
opportunity to the Earl of MALMESBURY and to
the Earl of ELLENBOROUGII upon the side of the
Opposition, no less than to the Duke of SOMERSET
and the Earl of ELGIN himself upon the side of the
Government—an opportunity (for speaking out as
plainly as was in any way practicable under the
circumstances), of which none of those noble lords
were in any way loth to avail themselves. We know
now as much as we could seriously want to know
upon the subject of this new Chinese Expedition. We
know as nearly as could be indicated at this junc-
ture what are the real intentions of her MAJESTY'S
Government. We know that the expedition has
already necessitated the outlay within the past
financial year 1859-60 of nearly as possible
£1,000,000. We know (from the assurance of Mr.
SIDNEY HERBERT himself) that the operations for
the next financial year, 1860-61, will require
a further outlay in round numbers of (probably).
£2,500,000. And we know, best of all, that
the whole scheme of this new enterprize
has been entrusted to the wisdom, the patriot-
ism, and, as Lord ELLENBOROUGII last evening
happily termed it, the "fortunate audacity" of the
noble Earl, who, in the same capacity as Envoy
Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary, con-
ducted our previous negotiations with the Chinrse
Government. If the dispute between China and
England can be brought to a bloodless
conclusion by anyone it will be by the
Earl of ELGlN—and in that contingency we may
rest confident that the honour of England would
suffer no loss from his negotiations. Supposing,
however, that the extended olive branch in his left
hand be spat upon and derided by the Chinese—
there will be, in the grasp of his right, the keen and
sheathless sword of England, ready to deal upon
the necks of that recreant race a terrible and
avenging retribution.

Reform must wait, it seems, upon the treaty—
not upon the budget, except as the budget is part
and parcel of the treaty—but on the treaty itself.
We might have proceeded in the usual course, and
taken the budget at its proper time; but there was
a treaty which must be considered accepted, and
thc: house pledged to pass the needful bills in time
—to prevent the tricks of the EMPEROR from ren-
dering the treaty impracticable. Were it now
before the house, no one doubts that it would be hard
to persuade the Commons of England to accept
such a one-sided bargain at the hands of the man
.
who had just filched Savoy from Sardinia, and in
doing so had equivocated, and falsified his own
word times without number. Be the treaty the
right thing or the wrong for this country,
it is a huge and clear advantage to France,
and the Commons would not have been
in the mood to give such an advantage to a Power
which had deceived our Government in the face of
all Europe. One of two things—our Government
has been grossly deceived by Louis NAPOLEON, or
it was privy to his designs. In the former case,
the House would not have given the EMPEROR his
treaty, and Savoy, too; in the latter, it would not
have endorsed the treaty made by a Government
which acted on secret knowledge. Perhaps, however,
a third supposition is admissible—it may, indeed,
be the most reasonable—that our Government,
though not privy to the designs on Savoy yet sus-
pected them, or at least suspected some such mis-
di_ ads on the part of the EMPEROR, as would endanger
the acceptance of the treaty here: This would
be sufficient to
.explain the setting aside
the Reform Bill for the treaty and bud-
get, and} making us wait just five weeks
for the former, while the latter was pushed
forward as fast as Mr. GLADSTONE'S sore throat
and arrangements at the Tuileries would permit.
And, now the budget and its bills are before the
House, the Reform Bill must wait nearly two
months more from its first reading before it can
get a second ! After the 20th of April we are to
have the five-and.twenty speeches of Mr. WHITE-
SIDE'S friends.

The income tax is, of course, the first and most
important object—and Mr, GLADSTONE, if he has
much conscience on the matter left, must have felt
himself not a little perplexed last night. He is
not, of course, the man to show it—being, as Mr.
DisRAELI told him, a first-late hand at defence.
Still, there the damning fact remains. A seven
years' splendid reputation he has enjoyed, first,
because he had promised to abolish the tax when
the £2,000,000 of Long Annuities felt in; and,
secondly, because of the " reason why" he wished to
abolish it—that the tax was the most immoral
of taxes. Mr. GALDSTONE we know is a famous
preacher of morality—in 1852 he gave Mr. Ms-
RAELI a parting lecture on morality, when his
object was to eject him from office—next year he
lectured on the intolerable immorality of the In-'
come tax, and sentenced it to death after a seven
years' reprieve. And now this immoral tax is the
one he selects for perpetuation and increase. We

never heard that the tax on French wine, or even
on their silks and gloves, wereimmoral taxes. Even
the paper duty, though a tax on knowledge, or
rather on its diffusers, like us, of useful knowledge,
we never heard condemned as an immoral tax—yet
now we have the very man who proclaimed, amidst
the applause of the nation, the immorality of the tax
—boldly, it is called, shamelessly, we say —proposiu g
to repeal taxes which no one condemns on that ground,
and reimposing and aggravating in amount the
tax whose iniquity and depraving tendency he
had himself so strongly asserted. We must quote
at length the just satire of Mr. DISRAELI on this

point .
"After all thesepromises of the reduction of the taxation
which is injuring the morality of the country, we have a
proposition that this immoral taxation shallbe doubled, and
that by the same Minister who had obtained and engaged
the confidence of the country because we believed that it
was his policy to terminate this income tax. And how is this
proposition introduced to our notice ? Strange to say, by
a declaration that, so far as the right hon. gentleman can
judge, though there are great objections to the income
tax, these are objections to which every other tax is liable.
What, then, is the conclusion to whick we must arrive ?
Either that in 1852 the right honourable gentleman
had not suNciently considered this question—had not
gone into all the bearings of this tax, of which he spoke
in language so unmeasured, or—which I do not believe
—he must have adopted a course partaking of that immo-
ral character which he has so often afiributecl to this tax.
This latter supposition is perfectly impossible. Therefore
we can only suppose that in that eager moment on the
memorable occasion in 1852 when the right hon. gentle-
man laid down the policy regarding the taxation which the
Government then, in a limited form, proposed for adop-
tion, he had not considered the subject sufficiently,
and spoke in a crude and unprepared manner."
As well have a good big bit of iniquity as a small
one, therefore Col. DUNNE'S proposal to lesson ini-
quity by one-tenth was dismissed without cere-
mony.. But a different reason must be found for
resisting Mr. WILLIAms' proposal to exempt in-
comes under £l5O a year. The reason was, " I
want the half million, or more, those poorest of
citizens pay me." The same " moral" argument
was the potent one against Sir M. FARQUHAR'S
suggestion—to commence payment of tax only on
the amount above the sum exempted—thus £lO5
would only pay on the £5. No—that would not
be worth the trouble of collecting ! So every
attempt to modify harshness, unfair pressure, or
inequality of any kind, was met by the one argu-
ment—l must have your money. ROBIN HOOD
gained part of his popularity by relieving the poor
with the plunder of the rich ; Mr. GLADSTONE
seeks popularity in just the opposite way—he says
to the poor clerk, who hardly knows how to
keep up a decent appearance on his £150;
how to pay his wife's draper's bill and his
children's shoe bill—" you must pull out, otherwise
I my richer friends must pay the same legacy duties
' as other people, or an advanced rate of income tax
' on their enormous incomes, or, worse than all, I
shall be unable to consummate my treaty with
France, and then I shall lose all my Manchester
friends—no, you must pay, and your children go
without shoes, or your wife without a new gown,
and you must be content with your office coat." In
sober seriousness there is not a class of persons in
England more pressed to live than the decent•look-
ing class who have to appear so on incomes ranging
between £lOO and £3OO a year. Mr. WALPOLE
rightly drew the lines of income pressure there.
Any man with Mr. WALPOLE'S humanity and of
knowledge of life would do the same.
We hope the public will arouse itself before
; next session. It may be hopeless to attempt
much now. But we shall pin Mr. GLADSTONE
to his immorality. The Income Tax is
• moral ; no other tax so tempts people to equivo-
cate and make false statements—why all
the lies that would be told under the Ballot arc a
trifle to the lies told to evade Income Tax. Let
the "conscience money," with which Mr. GLA➢-
STONE is familiar, bear witness. If so many con-
fess, what must be the number of the non-confes-
sing ? The Income Tax is immoral, for it is, and
ever will be, immoral to tax the precarious incomes
of the professional man and tradesman at the same
rate as that of the proprietor of thousands of acres
or of tens of thousands in the funds.

We would direct public attention to a letter in
another part of our impression respecting the recent
terrible accident at Burradon Colliery. The number
of sufferers by that fearful explosion is very great,
since not only the unfortunate men who were killed
and injured at the time are the victims, but their
families, suddenly deprived of their support, have
the hardships of want superadded to the affliction
of their bereavement. The widows are 32 in
number, and the orphans, boys under 11 and girls
under 15 years of age, are no less than 72. These
are the chief losers, but there are many aged and
infirm persons on whom the loss falls heavily. It
is, therefore, only consistent with our national be-
nevolence that a project should be set on foot to
relieve, the misery and destitution which awaits
these unhappy mourners. We trust that those
whose means give them the fortunate privilege of
assisting others will not neglect these truly deserv-
ing- cases, and that those more especially who derive
any part of their income from our collieries will feel
themselves called upon for a liberal donation.
Messrs. Barclay and Bevan have kindly consented
to receive the subscriptions, which we may hope
will soon reach an amount that will raise the suf-
ferers above the reach of want.

LYCEUM TREATER.

TO TIIE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

• SIII,-Nrmit me, through your columns, to in-
form the public that the drama of " Marie Ducange,"
announced for representation at this theatre on
Saturday next, has been withdrawn. I have just
received a letter from Mr. Sterling Coyne, inform-
ing me that Mr. Webster, to whom the right of
playing "Marie Ducange" in London belongs,
" will not permit its being played at the Lyceum
Theatre." The announcement having been out for
a week, it is a matter for regret that Mr. Webster
did not think it necessary to intimate his prohibi-
tion at an earlier period, instead of delaying it un-
til the eleventh hour, when all my arrangements
were made, and very considerable expense incurred ;
so compelling me, most unwillingly, to disappoint
my friends. I have determined to substitute
" Suzanne; or, the Power of Love," for the with-
drawal piece, and I trust to the kindness of my
friends for that indulgence which the circumstances
of the case requires.—I remain, Sir, yours, &c.,

CELESTE.
Lyceum Theatre, March 29, 18(30.

SUICIDE OF A YOUNG FEMALE.

Last evening Mr. Humphreys, the coroner, held
an inquiry at the Bricklayers' Arm', Gloucester-
street, Commercial•road East, respecting the death
of Julia Louisa Baker, aged nineteen years, who
committed self-destruction by shooting herself
through the heart with a pistol, urder the follow-
ing circumstances :
It appeared from the voluminous evidence that
the deceased had been in service, hut was of a very
haughty. di:Tosition. She was frequently quar
relling, and recently she had been discharged from
her situation, which gave her great annoyance.
The deceased had taken a lodging in Thurlow-
place, Commercial-road, Stepney. She c tided to see
a Mr. Berkley, and remained until half-past nine
o'clock on Wednesday night. The landlord saw
her, and after taking a glass of water she went
downstairs to the kitchen. She had not been ab-
sent more than a minute when the report of fire-
arms was heard. The landlord ran into the apart-
ment, and found the deceased in the act of falling
upon the table. A pistol was lying by her sick,
and blood was issuing from a wound in her breast.
A messenger was sent for medical assistance, but
life was extinct before the surgeon arrived.
Verdict—" Temporary insanity."