The Sun.
London, England, 1866-03-14 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 14, 1866.

with his Minister s has allowed himself to be com-
mitted to ants undoubtedly illegal. The deadlock
which the G•or eminent of Victoria came to origi-
nated, as we • all know, in a difference between the
two Houses. The Council or Upper House repre-
sents, we bell( :ve, chiefly the intelligence and edu-
cation of the colony, seeing that the Assembly
is recruited bfy something approaching to universal
suffrage. We may, therefore, conclude that the
Council woui'd I,.ave been the less likely of the two
to act in defiance of the Constitution, but in any
case the Goys rnor was clearly wrong in acting
upon a bill as law when it had not passed
through both :Houses. It would be manifestly un-
constitutional aid illegal for our Home Government
to proceed upon a bill which had been thrown out
by the Lo-cds, whether rightly or wrongly ; and Sir
CHARLES DARLING, in virtually superseding the
Council, was in reality showing as much hos-
tility to public liberty as if he had set
the popular assembly at defiance, and refused to
recognise the representatives of the masses. The
whole system of our constitution is based on the
principle of check and counterbalance. It is this
which keeps us happily oscillating in the medium
between Democracy and Despotism ; and however
inconvenient or tedious the old-fashioned obstruc-
tions may sometimes be to eager and ardent
apostles of progress, we in this country know their
value too well to dream of disregarding
or removing them. There is, as Mr. CARD-
WELL in his careful examination of the whole
matter, very clearly shows no perplexity
which can arise in colonial government without a
constitutional mode of redress, as it would have
been better, as he points out, for the Governor and
his advisers to have referred the difficulty to the
decision of the Imperial Parliament than to have ,
adopted unconstitutionalmeans for extricating them-
selves from their embarrassing position.
The history of the crisis is summarised by Mr.
CARDWELL in his despatch of November 27, so that
any one interested in the case may soon master its
history. It seems that the Assembly desired to
pass a law imposing certain customs duties, which
they had reason to believe the Councilwould dislike.
To insure its passage through the Upper House, they
therefore made it part of the ordinary Appropriation
Bill, or, in political phrase, " tacked it on," a prac-
tice which,as Mr. CARDWELL on a subsequent occasion
reminds the Governor, is always carefully avoided
in the Imperial Parliament. The Council, displeased
at the introduction of the tariff, refused the whole
measure, and consequently the Appropriation Bill
dropped. This is the point on which the Governor
and his advisers laid themselves open to censure.
Notwithstanding the failure of the bill in the Upper
House the Government proceeded to levy the dutie s
it imposed. Some merchants resisted the claim as
illegal, and an appeal to the Supreme Court issued
in their favour, but in spite of this decision the
duties were levied. On this head Mr. CARDWELL
speaks decisively. Irrespective of the judgment of
the Supreme Court, no ordinary consideration
should in his opinion have induced the Governor to
give his concurrence to the levying of these duties.
He shows that the reference to the manner in which
the Imperial taxes are levied by anticipa-
tion is entirely inaccurate, inasmuch as such
taxes are only levied because it is not doubted
that the resolution of the House of Com-
mons on which the bill enacting them is founded
will become law ; and if the other branches of the
Legislature withheld their concurrence, such levies
would be immediately stopped and the sums levied
repaid. In the case of the Victorian Govern-
ment there was a positive certainty that the
bill would not receive the necessary sanction.
" I look," says Mr. CARDWELL, " with extreme
apprehension on a state of things in which the
Government of a British colony is engaged in col-
-I,,,tiniz money by mere, nv-en
whom the supreme Court has declared it is not due.
It is an example of violence which may do incal-
culable mischief beyond the limits of the colony in
which it has been allowed to occur." The other
means of raising money for the public service to
which the Governor and his advisers were forced to
resort is also severely censured by the Colonial
Secretary. It was impossible for them to draw
the money from the public account with-
out the signature of the Audit Commissioners,
and it was therefore arranged with the Bank to ad-
vance the necessary funds ; and it was agreed that
the Bank should at once petition the Supreme Court
for repayment of this loan, that the Government
should at once confess judgment, so as to enable
the Bank to repay themselves out of the public ac-
count. This transaction Mr. CARDWELL disap-
proves of very strongly, asserting that it could only
be justified by an " overwhelming public emergency,"
which did not exist; and he declares his opinion that
i
without
t ht
oh
usr
ate
ne t rsi
oae snnpc re
sanction
nsf ,
law,o‘
fi n
law,ei
no l e
cc
ot in
and
nt g
r a
tdutiesg
out
a in
payingloan
salaries without sanction of law, the Governor
and his advisers have acted unconstitutionally:,
The immediate cause of the Governor's recall is
not, however, to be found in these errors of judg-
ment, but in his differences with the Council. It is
certainly not surprising that that body, indignant
at the manner in which they had been set aside,
should have addressed a respectful petition to the
Crown, representing " That the laws of the colony
have in a measure been dispensed with, the Constitu-
tion superseded, and her MAJESTY'S authority dis-
regarded, if not abused." And, in doing so, they
adopted the proper and constitutional mode of ob-
taining redress. But Sir CIIARLESDARLING denounces
their conduct in the strongest terms,and expresses his
hope that the course of events may never again elevate
any of them to the Ministry, "since it is impossible
their advice could be received with any other feel-

.ngs than those of doubt and distrust." As these

gentlemen are naturally those who are most likely

to furnish candidates for office, it is evident that

the political system could not work under such
circumstances. It is also desirable that, after such

an open disregard of constitutional law on the part
of those in authority, some open and decided action

on the part of the Imperial Government should
testify its disapproval, even though the late Gover-
nor is a man of ability and reputation.

MR. THOMAS CARLTLE.—We understand that the
installation of Mr. Carlyle as Rector of our University, to
which office he was elected in November last, will take
place in the Music-hall on Monday, April 2, at two o'clock.

It is, we are glad to say, confidently anticipated that the
health of Mr. Carlyle will permit him to speak his address.

-Scotsman.

FATAL ACCIDENT TO A CLERGYMAN.—We regret
to record a distressing and fatal accident to the Rev.
A. S. Pott, rector of Northill, which occurred on Monday.
The rev. gentleman had been on a professional visit to his
solicitor, Mr. Hooper, of Biggleswade, and was returning
home. It is supposed Mr. Pott lost control of the horse on
which he was riding, as the animal was seen to pass

through Siddington toll-gate on the gallop, and when about
100 yards from the gate the horse suddenly swerved and
throw its rider, who pitched on his head in the middle of
the road. On persons going to his assistance blood was
running from his mouth, nose, and ears. He was removed
to the house of Mrs. Williams, his mother-in-law, the
Grange, Caldocote, and medical assistance sent for. He
lived about an hour, but never spoke after the accident.—
Bedford Times.

DESTRUCTION OF A COTTON MILL BY FIRE AT
BURNLEY.—yesterday morning information was
received by the various fire insurance companies of the
destruction of Messrs. H. Knowles and Son's cotton mill
Burnley, known as the Frimley Mills. The loss is esti-
mated at ..f530,000. Several parsons working in the mill
aro supposed to Kaye perished.

LA TEST INTELLIGENCE.

(REUTER'S TELEGRAMS.)

AUSTRIA.

VIENNA, MARCH 19.

It is stated that the Imperial sanction has been
given to the proposal, that treaties of commerce
should be concluded by Austria with the Argentine
Confederation and Hayti. Negotiations for this
purpose have already been entered into by the
Ministers of Commerce and foreign affairs.

SPAIN.
MADRID, MARCH 14.

The Chambers of Commerce of Seville, Vallado-
lid, Barcelona, and other principal towns in Spain,
have sent deputations to the Congress against any
reform of the corn laws.

TURKEY.

CONSTANTINOPLE, MARCH 7.

A proposal made by the French representative
at the Cholera Conference to stop the sea commu-
nication between lledpaz and Egypt, in the event
of another epidemic, has been adopted. The Porte,
however, will not accept or enforce the measure,
fearing an insurrection among the pilgrims.

Reinforcements have been sent to Schumla, pend-
ing the decision of the Conference now being held

at Paris.

CALCUTTA, CHINA, AND AUSTRALIAN

MAILS.

MARSEILLES, MARCH 14.
The China, with the above mails, arrived here at

7 a.m. this day.
The mails leave for London at 11.30 a.m.
Letters to-morrow (Thursday) evening.

FRANCE.
BOURSE, March 13, Three o'clock.—The market
closed at the following quotations :-
41 per Cents 97 30
Do. end month —
3 per Cents.
Do. end month €9 771
Credit Mobilier 703 75
Do. end month 707 50
Bank Shares 3620
Credit Fonder —
Italian Loan 62 05
Do. end month 62 15
RAIL

Roman —
Ottoman Fives —
Mexican Loan 4B
Do. Bonds 307 50
Russian —
Austrian —

Spanish Threes —
Homo Debt —
Deferred

rAYP.
Cash.

Orleans

Northern

Lyons and Mediterranean.

Southern
Western
Eastorn
Sardinian.
Austrian
Lombard
North of Spain
Saragossa
Ditto to Barcelona
Roman

Acct.
... 882 50
... 1140 -
- ~. 915 -
- ... 557 50
- ... 568 75
547 50
140 -
- 411 25
422 50

'''''' --. •••

- - ... 232 50
... 98 75
I" -
... 117} -

The Interest of France in the Right of

Search.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SIN.

Sin,—You have this day given to the former
member for Stafford a hearing on a subject in which
he is particularly qualified to speak. The Right of
Search can be thoroughly understood only by one
who, like him, has had the opportunity of combining
the knowledge of the lawyer, sailor, and diplomatist.
Besides, no one can understand a thing after it has
happened unless he understood it before it hap-
pened. Now what Mr. Urquhart says in your
columns to-day is only what he published in a
pamphlet in 1855 ; that is, a year before the Decla-
ration of Paris.
In private conversation everybody is now saying,
"We must get rid of the Declaration of Paris,"
but nobody has the courage to say so pub-
licly. But why do not people speak
out what they think on this matter ?
This reticence arises from th 9 fear of France.
People believe that France is anxious to maintain
the Declaration of Paris. The Lord Advocate
actually declared on Friday week, in the House of
Commons, that by the French law neutral goods
cu Cllo.uaw lAnGvais were Ilabic w capture, while
enemies' goods in neutral bottoms were free. The
very words of the French Declaration of War
show the contrary to be the truth. " His
Majesty will waive a portion of his rights. He
will not seize enemies' goods in neutral vessels."
A very little reflection will show that the De-
claration of Paris is as inconsistent with the wishes
and feelings of France as with her laws. France
can desire to cripple maritime power in general
only for the sake of crippling it in England. But
France has nothing to fear from England. If, in-
deed, she wished to invade her, the Declaration of
Paris would assist her in the project. But
she has no such intention, or she would hare
availed herself of the tempting opportunity offered.
With any other view it can be of no benefit to
France that England has given up her maritime
power. France, too, has given up her maritime
power, and with it half her strength ; which means,
in certain cases, all her strength. Allied as she
now is with England against Russia, her alliance
is barren. The joint intervention in favour of
Poland had no result but to embitter the
sufferings of the Poles. England and France were
powerless against Russia in 1863 as they were in
1855 ; but in 1801 England alone prevailed over
Russia, though Russia had for allies France, Den-
mark, and Sweden. Russia wasthen beaten solely by
the English cruisers taking her goods wherever she
could find them. In 1855 and 1863 England had
France for an ally, but she had lost the right of
search, and Russia did not even need to
send out ships against her. England and
France, too, were opposed to Prussia in her
conduct respecting Schleswig Holstein ; but
here again their alliance was useless. England and
France being deprived of their maritime power,
there is no one but Austria left to resist the con-
tinuous encroachment of Prussia.
Let us now suppose France allied with Russia
against England. There is nothing for France to
gain from Russia. Russia may invite her to con-
quest in India, which is now open, as she has done
in Algiers and Mexico, but she will only lead her
into a financial abyss, from which she will af-
ford her no means of extrication. If there is
one country more than another whose Govern-
ment is openly subservient to Russia it is
the United States, but Russia has not used her in-
fluence over the United States to give up the right
of search so as to make things pleasant to France
On the contrary, they hold it over the head o,
France, and shake her power in Mexico without
striking a blow.

France cannot be independent without the right
of search. Like England, she is unable to do any-
thing except at the bidding of Russia. She has,
indeed, a European Congress assembled within her
capital. It is even said that she is to nominate a
Polish Prince for the Danubian Principalities, and
that Russia is to oppose her choice. No doubt she
may succeed, but will this be opposing Russia ?
Russia can get Prince Czartoryski into the Princi-
palities only by haying him put forward as her
antagonist.

France, then, can have no motive for maintaining
the Declaration of Paris. If she proposed it in 1856,
it was because she, like England, was, to use the
words of Sidney Herbert, " agreed with her enemy,
but not with her ally." Thus, these Powers con-
cluded a war undertaken in defence of Turkey by
laying down a new international code first promul-
gated by Russia.
From the Congress now sitting in Paris nobody
knows what new and fatal proposition may emanate.
It is called to consider the state of the Danubian
Principalities, but it is quite as competent as
was the Congress of 1856 to destroy the Law
of Nations. May we not hope, then, that
some patriotic Frenchman may protest against the
competency of Congresses to alter that which is in
its nature immutable, and may put that protest in
a practical shape by demanding the abrogation of
that Declaration which has made France as well
as England a nullity in Europe. England will not
venture on such a proposition, alarmed as may be
her Ministers, through her fear of France. It is,
then, for France to take the step.
areh 12, DuLOMATICT.7S,