The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-01 00:00:00

Commence at 7 o'clock.

VERDI'S OPERA OF MACBETH. The
whole of the first Act of this Opera, now produced
for the first time in this country (the remaining three acts
being in course of rehearsal), is sung nightly at the CAN-
TERBURY HALL CONCERTS.
THE DELEPIERRE FAMILY,
consisting of three Juvenile Violinists, viz., Jules, Juliette,
and Julia Delepierre, aged, respectively, FOUR, Jul
and
EIGHT years. •
The perfect execution by these Lilliputian Artistes of some
of the most difficult and brilliant Solos, Duets, and Trios evcr
written for the violin, has excited mingled wonder and admi-
ration in Continental Musical Circles, and drawn forth enthu-
siastic tributes of praise from the Public Journals of France
and Belgium.
They will perform TWICE EACH EVENDTG, in addi-
tion to the usual Entertainments.

THE WEATHER.—StIN OFFICE, AUGUST 1.
THERMOMETER, IN THE SHADE.
67—highest since noon yesterday.
6 f—lowest this morning and during the night.
71—this day at noon.
BanommTEß-29.93.
WIND, South-Westerly; fresh, with fine weather.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
THIS DAY.—Morning, 3h. 26m.—Afternoon, 3h. 48m.
To-Molutow-Morning, 4h. 10n1.—Afternoon, 4h. 32m.

We are fast coming within view of the end of
the present piecemeal and fruitless session of Par-
liament. The House of Commons has all but got
through the very last of the estimates. Ministers
have nearly murdered the very last of the inno-
cents. Mr. GLADSTONE has presented us (with a
flourish) with his "little bill." Sir CHARLES
WOOD to-night is about to favour us with his !
Jowt BILL has his hands already deep in his
capacious pockets—he is fumbling up (already)
that inferial fourpence additional, to be in readi-
ness for his old enemy the Income Tax dun
in October. He is grumbling loudly enough while
ho is about it—but he'll pay, as is his wont, as a
matter of course. There is some comfort he thinks,
however, in knowing that, at last, he will be rid
for a little time of the din and hubbub of all that
useless palaver, in 1859, down at Westminster.
Sympathising with him heartily enough in this—
we wish Farmer BULL and his family a pleasant
time of it now in their autumn leisure down at the
seaside.

It is a melancholy fact, as we intimated on Satur-
day, that as yet, while the Election Committees
have gone far to exonerate the Conservatives from
all blame whatsoever, they have in every instance
condemned the Liberals, as proved by incontestible
evidence given upon oath, guilty of bribery and
corruption. Six constituencies have been already
hauled over the coals—they have trod barefooted
over the burning ordeal of a Parliamentary inves-
tigation Ashburton, Aylesbury, Dartmouth,
Gloucester, Norwich, and Wakefield. Three of
these six committees of inquiry have involved
he return of those doubtful representatives
Mr. SCHENLEY, the member for Dartmouth,
Mr. LEATHAM, the member for Wakefield, and
Mr. ASTELL, the member for Ashburton, The
remaining three have had to decide whether
double that number of seats were vacant or were
validly occupied namely, whether Messrs.
PRICE and MONK were properly returned for
Gloucester, Lord BURY and Mr. SCHNEIDER
were properly returned for Norwich, and
whether Messrs. SMITH and BERNARD were
properly returned for Aylesbury. Six com-
mittees have already delivered in their decisions to
the House of Commons, and these decisions are
precisely as we have here already intimated.
In each instance, without exception, the Libe-
ral is declared to have not been duly elected
—his agents having been guilty of the grossest
bribery and corruption. In every instance, on the
contrary, without exception, the Conservatives have
been duly elected—their agents not having been
shown to have in any single instance been guilty
of bribery or intimidation. Mr. SCHENLEY, for
example, is a Liberal ; as such we are doomed
to find that in his case the committee of
inquiry resolved, " That the late election
for Dartmouth was void by reason of bri-
ery and corruption by Mr. SCHENLEY'S agents,
and that Mr. ICHENLEY was not duly returned."
The decision of the committee appointed to inquire
into the late election for Wakefield, in declaring
the Liberal member there to be unseated is yet
more explicit—it expresses itself thus: "That WIL-
LIAM LEATHAM was not duly elected a burgess to
serve in Parliament for the borough of Wakefield ;
that the last election was void ; that the said
WILLIAM LEATHAM, by his agent, had been guilty
of bribery ; that it had been proved that four per-
sons named JACKSON, and others, had been bribed
with sums of £lO, £3O, £2B, and £lO ; but that it
had not been proved such bribery took place with
the knowlege of said WILLIAM LEATHAM." What
has tended to make this particular case peculiarly
noticeable is the fact, as we have taken occa-
sion before now to intimate, that Mr. LEATHAM, the
Quaker banker of Wakefield, is the brother-in-law
of Mr. BRIGHT, the Quaker member for Birming-
ham. _ _ _

Reverting to the above decisions arrived at by
the committees—there are the two Liberals un-
seated for Gloucester (Mr. W. PRICE ana:preinC:
MONK), the last election for the old city being
torily proved to have been a void election. It having
been proved before the committee that a large num-
ber had been bribed by the agents of the two Libe-
ral candidates ; and the committee, beyond this
expressing their decided opinion that corrupt prac-
tices were extensively indulged in at the last elec-
tion for the city of Gloucester !
As to the Norwich inquiry the result is rather
curious, and, in its way too, sufficiently significant.
Both the Liberals returned for Norwich at the last
general election, both Lord BURY and Mr.
SCHNEIDER, have been proved to have been
wrongfully returned, because they have been proved
before the Committee to have been guilty, then and
there, through their agents, of the grossest bribery

and corruption. According to which decision of
the Norwich Election Committee both Lord
BURY and Mr. SCHNEIDER would be, as a
matter of course, alike unseated. But—since
that informal or rather invalid return at the
period of the general election—they e has been
another election down at Norwich consequent upon
the late change of Governments. Lord BURY Still
sits for Norwich under that later return in spite of
the adverse decision in regard to its predecessor ar-
rived at by the Parliamentary Committee of In.
quiry. The inference is obviously this—that
Government influence with a candidate is equiva-
lent to the grossest bribery and corruption !
Compare with these aforementioned facts the de-
cision of the committee appointed to inquire into
the return of the three Conservatives—Mr. ASTELL,
the one member for Ashburton, and Messrs. SMITH
and BERNARD, the two members for Aylesbury.
All these returns are confirmed—or declared to be
valid—the charge of bribery and corruption falling
to the ground. A rather startling anti-climax all
this to the sinister insinuations and flagrant impu-
tations directed by the immaculate Whigs against
those vicious and perniciousDerbyites! Why, out
of the seven first revised returns before the five
earliest election committees, five Liberals were
promptly unseated because of their having been
guilty, through their agents, of gross bribery and
corruption—and three Conservatives were pro-
nounced duly elected, the charges of bribery hav-
ing utterly faded out and vanished under the light
of a Parliamentary scrutiny.

Previously eight petitions were withdrawn. Forty
seats yet continue to be dubiously occupied—forty
seats still are being contested, or remain to be con-
tested, before committees. Twenty-one of these
seats are held by Liberals—nineteen by Conserva-
tives. The prestige as yet is decidedly in favour
of the Conservatives—not one Derbyite having been
as yet unseated upon a charge of corruption ! and
every Liberal whose case has yet been inquired into
having been found guilty of bribery of the grossest
description !!

Another illustration has just been afforded of the
extraordinary injustice of the system hitherto in
vogue in the distribution of the Civil List Pensions.
According to Act 1 Vict., c. 2, the sum of £1,200
is annually placed (under this head) at the disposal
of the First Lord of the Treasury. Recollect the
very title is that of the Civil List Pensions. Yet
year after year we find conspicuously enumerated
on this civil list the mothers, or the relicts, or the
children of men who have died in the service of

their country, either in the military or the marti-
time department. The twelvemonths recently
completed yields no exception to the rule. For
ther3 at the very head of the catalogue of all the
pensions granted between the 20th of June, 1858,
and the 20th of June, 1859, we find " Mrs. HAR-
RIET LUCAS WILLOUGHBY, in consideration of the
gallant conduct of her son, the late Lieutenant

WILLOUGHBY, in blowing up the magazine at
Delhi (in trust to Mr. THOMAS WILLOUGHBY and
Mr. HENRY WILLOUGHBY), £150." Not but what
the mother of that heroic soldier had an undeniable
claim upon the grateful consideration of the
country. We maintain this pension of £l5O a year
ought to have come out of some other fund than
that set apart for the Civil List pen-
sions. This, moreover, is not the only exception
The very next pension mentioned upon the list is
that of Mrs. SKINNER, "in consideration of her
having lost three sons in the service of their coun-
try (in trust to Sir JOHN D. HARDING and ALLAN
MACLEAN SKINNER, Esq.), £50." Subsequently
there is mentioned the following pension, to
" MARY STEPHEN S, LAURETTA, RACHEL, SARAH,
and AMY TUCKER, daughters of the late JOSEPH
TUCKER, many years Surveyor to the Navy, £25
additional." Together with these there are pensions
for scientific attainments, one for eminence in photo-
graphy, another (it is a pension of £lOO per annum
to his widow), in consideration of the merits of JOHN
HOGAN, the sculptor, and five for labours (hardly
one of these for fame) in literature ! The fifteenth
pension upon the list, bringing up the different
amounts to the prescribed maximum total of £1,200
is a pension of £75 a year awarded very faintly,
dimly, casually for literary merits, but in reality
almost entirely out of military considerations. The
award is thus expressed—to " Mrs. FRANCES
MARTHA AGNES SIMMONs, in consideration of the
military and literary services of her husband, the
late Captain SIMMONs, and also of the eminent
military services of her sons, two of whom lost their
lives in action, and two of whom died from illness
contracted in the execution of their duties (in trust
to THOMAS FREDERICK SI3iMoNS, clerk, and
HENRY PARSEY, Esq.), £75." So that the
last as well as the one intermediate and
the two first awards on the Civil List
Pensions—we have found avowedly made
for military services. One pension of £l5O,
this latest distribution of the £1,200 set apart for
another pension of £5O, a third of £75, and a
fourth for £2s—the four together making a total
of £3OO to be deducted from the paltry maxi-
mum set apart for the encouragement of art,
science, and literature. Subtracting that sum
of £3OO given in reward for military or naval
services from that already sufficiently restricted
amount of £1,200 —we find, of course, no
more than £9OO, instead of the £1,200 promised by
Act I. VICT. ch. 2, for the yearly encouragement
of art, science, and literature. Of those £9OO the
proportions are as follows—£lso to art, £275 to
science, and £475 to literature. Under the first
section, HOGAN'S widow, as already shown, has a
pension of £loo the other £5O being set apart for
" ALICE, CoNSTANCE, and JANET ARCHER, in con-
sideration of the valuable contributions of their
late father to the science of photography."
For scientific attainments there is one pension
of £75 given to " ANN MARIA and CATHERINE
COPPARD, in consideration of the services rendered
to nautical science by their grandfather, Mr. T.
ROBERTSON ;" and two for £lOO each—one of them
in general terms, to " JAMES BOWMAN LINDSAY,
in consideration of his scientific attainments"—the
other to " Mrs. A3IELIA GRESLEY BALL, in con-
sideration of the services of her husband, the late
Dr. BALL, the naturalist." As to the five pen-
sions—amounting, in aggregate value, to £475
awarded for literary attainments, one is for £5O
(to " JOHN BOLTON ROGERSON, in consideration of
his literary merits and destitute condition")
—three are for £75, and two for £lOO. The
last-mentioned two are the Rev. JOHN
HIND, £lOO, in consideration of his literary
services, and W. DESBOROUGH COOLEY £lOO, for his
literary services and discoveries in Central Africa.
The three literary pensions, for the £75 each, being
really and truly the only three of any sort of in-
terest to the general public. Mrs. SUSANNA BART-
LETT obtains £75 for the literary merits of her hus-
band, the late WM. HENRY BARTLETT. CHARLES
D. YONGE obtains £75 for his literary services, we
believe chiefly, if not entirely those of a lexicog,,,rapher.
And the third £75 (we shouldhave been better pleased
had the amount, in this instance, been at least
trebled) is awarded, in consideration of his literary
merits, to the gifted, but only partially popular
poet, EDWIN A THERSTANE. The analysis we
have here given of this latest distribution of the

annual sum of £1,200, set apart (nominally) for the
Civil List Pensions, pursuant to Act 1 VICT. c. 2,
we will here minutely epitomize :

For Art .
For Science

For Military and Naval Services . . . .
For Literature.

Total

Ll5O
275

300
475

. £1,200

That total of merely one thousand two hundred
pounds sterling being, as the italics indicate, most
unjustifiably diminished this year to a minor maxi-
mum of merely £9OO altogether. The mode of re-
duction is characteristic—and is, in fact, only
according to precedent. But it is full time that
the system should be put an end to, and the grant
appropriated henceforth in the manner originally
intended and expressed by the Act of Parliament.

''., • •
)1:41. `''„,,.--,-,:,,, .)
~
4.,r, .; --, !. •
,-1-:;,..i,1,•-„. 41.4.0b114 ;5,.. it , ),,:44t
•-•=,.154.:,..,-,,.. ji-,iii-ii ~ • .x,1",,0ic
' bIEV ^ ;., 1,. t,"
, ^ ''' ? ':•',. , f.. : . 4211 ~ ~.2.:
0„, ",,,r, v. :,,,,„„ . k,- 41,
• ' --, -... ~. ..1:-,7,

THE SUN.
MONDAY, AUGUST 1, 1859.