The Sun.
London, England, 1859-06-09 00:00:00

THE FRENCH LOSSES.

A letter from Marseilles says that if there were
any alloy or drawback to the feelings of national
exultation, it was at the meagreness of the first
despatch. We were told of the capture of 5,000
prisoners—since grown up to 7,ooo—and of 15,000
Austrians killed or wounded, who have also ex-
panded to 20,000, but not a word as to the extent
of the French losses. Surely the impatience of the
public will be excused when it is remembered how
many of their relatives were on the field of battle.
Subsequent despatches, received to-day, raise the
French losses from 2,000 to 3,000, and there is a
shrewd suspicion that the whole truth is not yet
told. We have not vet received authentic accounts
of the French losses at Montebello and Palestro ;
and wishes arc expressed on all sides, which
have even found their way into the public jour-
nals, that the example of England might be
followed in giving exact returns, not only of the
superior officers slain, but also of the subalterns,
non-commissioned officers, and rank and file. It is
feared that the French losses are much heavier
than they are stated to be ; and many families are
plunged into most painful -suspense—the agony of
doubt.

THE AUSTRIAN LOSS.
The real loss of the Austrians is estimated at
from 13,000 to 14,000 killed and wounded, that of
the- French at more than double what has been
stated.

THE POLES.
A number of Poles on half-pay as officers of the
Piedmontese army applied to M. Cavour's Govern-
ment to be allowed to enter on active service during
the war. M. Cavour, who probably was unwilling
to offend in the slightest degree the Emperor of
Russia, declined accepting their offer. It may be
prudent as a politician, but how does he reconcile
this refusal with his large sympathy for "oppressed
nationalities ?" Is the right of the Poles to national
independence inferior to that of the Lombards?

MUSIC IN THE FASHIONABLE CHURCHES OF THE
UNITED STATES.—One of the most remarkable features in
the progress of the metropolis is the increase in the number •
of edifices for religious worship. Nor is this all. Con-
sidering our youth as a nation, we may safely challenge
comparison in the matter of religious architecture with the
leading European cities, if we except St. Peter's at Rome,
the Madeleine and Notre Dame iHn
uPgariss, new,and htcheah inthe
grandc old
cathedral at Rouen. Archbishop
Hushes'
he does FiftliAnvoent Avenue will
probably.illinvoed competefinancial with
likeietthheer
boafitlhdeemm,a iff
tshtiell,cainthaendraunl atitneisch)leodgnceo,nwdhitiicahn,hdausrbinetgene almost,eral actena
In the essential points of securing.
yppaersm,acaou-r
might almost say luxuriousease,
churches exceed anything
republican sinners are certainlY
of
hrivsalceo.inchfaoprtelsall.tsudtanrOiweudser.-
fhe
invite to sweet repose, the
thickest material, the cushionsan e
the Scriptures tell us of.
equally soothing nature, the
d smised road, instead of the roclpeatnsdarethoofrnthyawsaafythwsthanichd
sermons are frequently of
by ieonrearjr n'
soul,r
.delicate
The
excepttakent tthoegravmeershib
scl
arts, g lritt
attractionea
nr with i
itnh allfact
afe ottruh
toehwn
le eecalihs-
Pvlich like other
pofratyheerparnmdtherns
and
books-
with care and kept right side up.
been nlacw,o,mmo.rennitededicilpnoen, by the
iT:siserirtil iveecf talet
competition or
untried
est : hbte fashionable
las'enda cit
sne.
adrnroeleooge handled
ukfeuttrehi
er
in: n wealthierg
more
hrtn.t churchesheu
usual
uf
ao
lr
modi-
cum first-
class
luinersnwtnielihtfind the metropolis bringing from the
or any
best parsons, without the slightest regard to
are paid and lodged and feted like princes,
'owepioxtmhhp ieiionpssfaceP;l el.sp
theiaitltAh 'lht
brains,ladies,aespey
testifying, by appropriate cadeux, their devotion to the
guardian of their souls. The music, too, is a most interest-
ing feature of the metropolitan church. Some dozen or
more churches employ the best musical talent, vocal and
instrumental, reinforced on special occasions by volunteers
from the ranks of the principal operatic artists, and in a
quiet way there is as much rivalry and competition in the
choirs as in the coulisscs. Not only do the opera artists sing
but the opera composers write for the Church, as they have
always done in Europe • so that Lorenzo's Dow's mot—thst
if Satan did get nearly all the souls, that was no reason
why he should monopolise all the best, tunes—has come no
be generally acted upon. We have given an account of the,
religious music of the metropolis as one of the current
topics af the day, and in the belief that it will be found
generally interesting. It proves beyond doubt thetraard
progress of our churches in one of the most important
~,,
to the propagation of the Gospel. Where, a few yeays.
tenor,
and discordant instruments, a shrill soprano,
and a growling bass would lead off an inharmonious i
likemisheep sera: al-
gation, whose voices fell over eachoth
well-trained
choirs, high ay
bling out of a gate, we find stow
organs—the musical st aff
educated directors, and splendid
costing almost as much as the si m-
a _wouefccorngenreo r_,
of a fashionable church
gociTtraasivonael lwilibroncurlohi
y,—
New
xwsahetwiicohnyponiriairemheederrailheadzi.reealtf,sihnocrrdoinf

THE SUN.
THURSDAY, JUNE 9, 1859.

The acccounts from the seat of war confirm our
previous advices. It is now clear that the conse-
quences of the battle of Magenta are entirely in
favour of the allied armies, and that the cunning
lies of the Austrians about the renewed battle of
Sunday were all a feint to cover the shame
of their defeat. For see how the matter
now stands. The Emperor of the FRENCH
and the King of SARDINIA entered Milan,
the capital of Lombardy, yesterday morn-
ing, amidst the rapturous enthusiasm of the popu-
lation, numbering about 180,000 citizens ! If this
be not the fruits of victory, we shall look for better
in vain. And not only this, but the (victorious ! )
Austrians not only gave up the capital, but left Pavia
also, we presume, as another token of their triumph !
But, in order to make the best of a bad job, they
have now taken up a strong flanking position
between Abbiate-Grasso and Binasco. Well, if
they remain there twenty-four hours or more we
shall be rather surprised, for now that their des-
tiny is being sealed and the terror is working on
their apprehensive nerves, we may expect to hear
of another run for it in the direction of
Mantua and so on to Verona, whither the
Austrian authorities have wisely preceded them, to
prepare quarters for a night or two for the wonder-
fully boasting brave army that was to pillage
Turin, and perform such prodigies of valour as
would astonish even themselves. No, their doom
is sealed, and Italy will yet be free, though it may
take a little time.

The Austrian journals in London are endeavour-
ing to undervalue the results of the Allied progress
following in the wake of the telegrams from Vienna.
But it won't do. Fate is too strong for them.

Their mendacity may be very natural in the shaky
state of their nerves, for when yeople are frightened
they hardly know what to do; and it is with nations
as with individuals—to endeavour to make the best
of it. Now, in proof of this, just see the Austrian
official account of the battle of Magenta. Why
they state their loss at only 4,000 or 5,000 men !
Why put " or" in if they knew their loss ? The
thing is ridiculous. They think that by deceiving
themselves they can impose upon others ;
and the best of the joke is (if joke it be)
that they make the loss of the Allies half
as much again. After this, let them say
their prayers and hope for a safe deliverance.
We firmly believe that when Prince NAPOLEON sets
out with his army from Florence in the direction
Venice, and the French flotilla ascends the Po,
there will not remain an Austrian soldier in arms
in Lombardy.

Anything more petty, more paltry, or in its way
more preposterous, could hardly be conceived than
the line of argument pursued on Tuesday evening
—during the debate upon the Amendment (to the
Address) moved on behalf of the Opposition—by the
11°u- member for Devonport. The question 'before
the house for discussion was one of confidence or of
no confidence in her MAJESTY'S Government.
That momentous question, moreover, was but just
then. submitted to the consideration of Parliament
in floe midst of the distant cannonade of the great
European war now raging in Lombardy, and
threatening to spread far and wide among the
irritattA and agitated nations of Chzistendom.
Yet e.ctually at such a moment, Mr. JAMES
WiLstoN, late of the Treasury, and probably hoping
soon to be again of the Treasury, contd tax the
patimee of the Commons with a dry array of
figures affecting in no serious way whatever the
imperial interests of Great Britain, but droned out
by him; with inexorable precision, as thoigh the
Legislt iture were crowded by schoolbo3rs bound to
do so D many sums in a given time, and a gonstrained

by a sense of academic obedience to listen respect-
fully to the oracular teachings of this
eminent Professor of Arithmetic. The exhi-
bition altogether would have been simply
ridiculous, had it not also been peculiarly
melancholy, of its kind. It weighed at last upon
the spirits of the House like the remorse of a con-
science ill at ease. It was like a waking night-
mare bestridden by a pedagogue. It grew at last
to be absolutely unendurable. The House roared in
sheer indignation " Question, Question"—and there
was an end at last once more to those perpetually
recurrent tasks in addition, and subtraction, and
division, and reduction performed again and again
to his own entire satisfaction, and to nobody else's,
by the great pragmatical, cheese-paring, flint-
skinning Economist, late of Westbury, now of
Devonport.
Rising to address the house immediately after
this infliction, Mr. DIGBY SEYMOUR, the indepen-
dent Liberal M.P. for Southampton, took the
liberty of reminding the hon. gentleman that the
question then at issue was " not the duty on Irish
spirits, the merits of the west coast of Ireland, the
distance between Cork or Galway and Liverpool,
or the subsidies of rival lines of steamers—(cheers)"
—and having spoken thus sententiously and sarcas-
tically, protested afterwards in set phrase against the
course adopted by the hon. member for Devonport in
" occupying the time of the House by such paltry
details." Whereupon some believers in Mr. JAMES
WILSON (for scarcely credible though it is to
believe—there actually are such) some astounding
believers in Mr. JAMES WILSON and his notions as
a profound Economist positively had the cool
effrontery to cry, "Oh ! oh!" Yet—remembering
what it was, actually stood there as aProblem placed
before the House and the country for its deliberate
solution—was it not, we ask, the most petty, the
most paltry, the most pitiable spectacle to
witness a rational man deliberately submitting
thereupon to the scrutiny of Parliament the
CUNARD contracts, the indirect taxation of tea
and sugar, the graduated reduction of the income
tax, and so forth—capping the climax of all by the
appalling intimation that he (Mr. JAMES WILSON)
could show that the expenditure of the country
last year was a Million more than had been antici-
pated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The
sum total of all which meant, that without the aid
of Mr. JAMES WILSON against the Treasury, the
national affairs were fast running down the groove
to inevitable destruction.

Voluble enough Mr. WILSON could be in rela-
tion to the Cunard contract, but not one whisper
did he volunteer on Tuesday in reference to that
miserable Australian. mail contract, which Sir
EDWARD LYTTON has the merit of having cancelled
with a stroke of his pen almost upon the morrow of
his assuming the guidance of the Colonial Admini-
stration. Contrast the two contracts, however, and
say now which of them is really the more credit-
able. Among the most successful, reliable, prac-
ticable, and prosperous of the great shipowners in
either hemisphere stand unquestionably conspicuous
the members of the house of Cunard. The renewal
of any reasonable contract with such a house is—
judging from past experience—certainly far
from being a discredit to any Admini-
stration. But—the dead and gone Australian
mail contract—the contract unheard-of on Tuesday
night from the lips of the censorious member for
Devonport—the contract bequeathed among other
remarkable boons to the newly-installed Ministry
of Lord DERBY, in 1858, by the far-seeing and
sagacious PALMERSTON Government—the contract,
in fact (to put the matter rightly and in the very
plainest English), for the conveyance of that mail
that was almost invariably a week or so behind
time—how about that Mr. WILSON ? Not a
word ? What, quite " mumchance ?" The silence,
the complete and absolute silence of the mem-
ber for Devonport upon that head was cer-
tainly, to say the least of it, most commendable,
as affording evidence of his discretion. It had,
surely, been still more discreet, however, if Mr.
WILSON had refrained altogether from uttering the
word contract—a word suggestive, in regard to the
late Cabinet of such extremely painful reminiscences.
And, certainly, most discreet of all would it have
been if the member for Devonport had not paltered
with the great and momentous question actually
before the House, by attempting (after the old
fashion, as a model Economist) a pitiable little ex-
periment in the way of skinning flints, when the
matter at stake is the character, the policy, and
the efficiency of the imperial Government.

The meetings of the Society for the Liberation
of Religion from State Patronage and Control,
which were concluded last night at Freemason's Hall,
are worthy of some notice by the politician. For
fifteen years the society has now been quietly at
work, for this was a fifth triennial conference, at
which it appears the whole staff of the society in
town and country has to be re-elected, and even
the constitution of the society reconsidered, and, if
needful, revised. It was properly, therefore, a
meeting of delegates; but the society courts
publicity : we were indeed requested to attend,
and complied with the request. The con-
cluding meeting last night was a soiree
of quite a public character, and was certainly
an effective meeting. Several members of Par-
liament of a class not to be overlooked were
present, such as Mr. FRANK CROSSLEY, Sir
MORTON PETO, Mr. DILLWYN, Mr. ADAM BLACK,
Mr. LINDSAY, and others. Nor, we are bound to
say, was there anything of a sectarian character
whatever about the meeting—its purpose was, defi-
nitely, to obtain the ultimate object expressed by
the title of the society, but practically to avoid
mere theoretical resolutions, and to apply them-
selves to such workings of the Established Church
as interfered with the equal religious liberty of
every sect and denomination. We must say
that we were gratified with the catholic
tone of the speaking generally. Dissenters must
forgive us if we acknowledge that we naturally
apprehend a little contractedness of vision where
they have (as they must have in a society like this)
so large a share in the administration. It' is due to
the society however to state, that we heard nothing
bitter or vindictive against the Church as a religi-
ous institution, nor anything demanded which was
not perfectly fair on the great principle to which
we have always given our fullest adhesion, that of
RELIGIOUS EQUALITY.

__________
The society's account of its operations was not
uninteresting. The delegates present amounted, we
should say, to about 300. They were from all parts
of the country, and appe stred to represent every creed,
from the Churchman to the Quaker. To interest
such a large number of communities has been, of
course, a work of time and labour, but it has been
labour of a not very obtrusive kind. The Church-
rate controversy has been a great help to the society,
persons from all quarters having resorted to it for
legal advice. But, for the last few years they have
given their principal attention to enlightening mem-
bers of Parliament respecting their real views, and
seeking Parliamentary strength in this creditable
manner. The members of Parliamentepresent bore
remarkably cordial testimony to the universal re-
spect in which their chairman, Dr. FOSTER, is
held in the House of Commons, and to

the value of the assii tanoe which he was ever ready
to furnish the members, on all subjects connected
with religious libel qty. The public must have
noticed the growi tig strength of the Religious
Equality party in the House of Commons. It
consists almost entirely of firm Churchmen, the
Dissenters in the Ho' a se being but few ; and very
much indeed of this improved position of that
great question is due to the unremitting but con-
ciliatory and gentlemanly exertions of Dr. FOSTER.
So at least we were told I3st night by homourable
members themselves.

The Society intends to ren‘ew its Parliamentary
efforts this year with vigour, whether the session
be long or short. Mr. DILLWYN, who was present,
mentioned, what our readers will have seen, that he
had re •in troduced his Endowed Schools Bill without
opposition into the House—that it stood, in fact, as
the first bill introduced this session. The bill is
one which certainly shows that Dissenters have
cause, indeed, to complain of the state of the law,
nor do we see how their very reasonable request
can be refused at the present day by legislators of
any party. By a very recent decision of the Lords
Justices, if the word " religion" is used in the
ancient endowment deeds of a school, or even any
secular charity, it must be interpreted the Church
of England, as the State legally knows of no
other religion ! To unprofessional persons this may
seem odd enough, but we suppose it is good law.
Still we can hardly imagine that any unprejudiced
Englishman can wish it to remain law. On the
same principle, trustees have been recently ex-
pelled from trusts of schools and charities, because
they must be men of " godly learning," and honest
and discreet men. It may not be very " discreet"
to be a Dissenter, when he has to build his own
chapel and keep it in repair, besides paying his own
minister and the rest of it, but we must think the
balance of " honesty" is in favour of those who do
it. So, however, Lord Justices do not think, and
the result is, that Dissenters, as ungodly and dis-
honest men, are driven from all charity trusts,
which require men of the opposite moral character.
The bill merely proposes that, in cases where the
founder has expressed himself in favour of no par-
ticular creed or form of religion, that none shall be
required of the trustees or officers of the schools or
chanties. Such a bill must surely pass both
Houses without difficulty—even the bench of
Bishops will surely be ashamed to oppose it.

Sir JOHN TRELAWNY should reintroduce his
Church-rate Bill to-day. On that topic, of course,
the meeting found ample matter for congratula-
tion. It was reported that so increasingly successful
was the Vestry opposition, that if Parliament did
not make haste not much would be left them to
abolish. It gives some insight into the quality of
a good deal of the liberalism of the late Parliament,
that Dr. FOSTER reported that the recent Liberal
losses had been a very insignificant loss to the
Church-rate abolition cause, since many who
had lost their seats had either constantly
voted against Sir J. TRELAWNY'S Bill, or
had regularly been absent from the division; while
an increased number of the Conservatives had de-
clared themselves in favour of abolishing the im-
post. We call attention to this. Church-rates may
not be a very great question. but it is what we
should call very much of a testing question. There
is nothing to be said for them but what may be
said for every vested abuse ; but against them it is
to be said that they must be, from their very
nature, excessively offensive to a vast body of re-
spectable and earnest men, who pay for their own
religious worship, and that it is a scandal
to Churchmen, wealthy as they are, if they
cannot keep their own churches in repair
as every other religious body in the kingdom does.
We cannot believe in the professed " Liberalism" of
any member who can stand out for such an unfair
impost.

From all we saw and heard of the society's pro-
ceedings, we could not but think that it is carrying
on its work in a catholic and comprehensive
spirit. It ignores political parties, and confines
itself to the question—Which will do most prac-
tically for religious liberty? It ignores equally all
sectarian distinctions, confining itself simply to the
object of placing all loyal subjects of her MAJESTY
on a perfectly equal footing as citizens, be their
creed what it may. Her 'MAJESTY herself, we
hope, desires this ; and we think, with Lord
STANLEY, that to this all the arguments and legis-
lation of the age both is and ought to be tending.
Our readers will see that the meeting gave us a
favourable impression of the Society's proceedings ;
and we must say that, so far as we understand
them from it, we wish them all success.

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM COM-

MITTEE.

At a meeting of the above committee, Mr. James
White in the chair, the committee having taken
into consideration the present critical position of
the reform question, in connexion with the amend-
ment now before the House of Commons, expressing
want of confidence in her Majesty's Ministers, it
was moved by Mr. S. Morley, seconded by Mr.
Duncan M'Laren, and resolved, " That, in the
opinion of this committee, it is the duty of all real
reformers to support the amendment ; and the com•
mittee trust that the Liberal party will succeed in
their effort to obtain a change of Administration, in
order to secure the early introduction of a measure
of real Parliamentary Reform.
By order of the committee,
EDWARD S. PRYCE, Secretary.
15, King•street, Cheapside, June 8.