The Sun.
London, England, 1857-11-20 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY, NOV. 20, 1857.

When the first Sir ROBERT PEEL presented, in
1819, the celebrated petition from the merchants,
bankers, traders, and others of the City of Lon-
don and its vicinity against the bill introduced
by his eldest son, he expressed a hope that " be-
fore a measure so destructive of the commercial
interests of the country was passed (and when he
said that, he said that Honourable Members
would conclude every other interest to be com-
bined with those, and to go along with them),
the House would pause awhile to collect that in-
formation which they so peculiarly wanted."
The venerable Baronet clearly perceived t 1
terrible dangers likely to arise from the reckless
adoption of that most impolitic and iniquitous
measure. He had acquired a noble fortune under
the same system by which the gigantic one of Lord
OVERSTONE had been amassed. But although his
individual interests would be greatly promoted by
the Act, the effect of which was virtually to double
his wealth, he .was too patriotic and honest to in-
jure his struggling countrymen for his own private
advantage. He was contented with what he had
achieved, and did not wish to prevent others from
obtaining similar prosperity.

The petitioners, between four and five hundred
of the most respectable merchants and bankers of
the Metropolis, declared that the measure would
" tend to a forced, precipitate,4nnd highly injuri.
ous contraction of the circulating medium of the
country," and they expressed a very decided opi-
nion, that " the consequences of such contraction
would be to add to the burden of the public debt,
greatly toincrease thepressure of the taxes, to lower
the value of all landed and commercial property ;
seriously to affect both public and private credit ;
to embarrass and reduce all the operations of
nriculture, manufactures, and commerce, and to

throw out of employment (as in. the calamitous
year 1816) a great proportion of the industrious
and labouring classes of the community." Never
was there a prediction more fully and corn-
pletaly verified. It has been repeatedly accom-
plished, more particularly in 1825, 1838-9, 1847,
and 1857. Indeed, it so accurately describes
the present condition of the country, that if it
had been expressly prepared with a knowledge of
existing fact-, it could not have more appropriately
detailed the events passing before us day after day.
The Directors of the Bank of England also pro-
tested against the bill, and submitted the expe-
diency of being permitted to redeem its notes in
bullion at the market price of the day. And
they also asked that " Government should
repay the Bank a considerable part of the
sums that had been advanced upon Exche-
quer Bills." They declared that " These
two measures would allow time for a cor-
rect judgment to be formed upon the state of the
bullion market, and upon the real result of those
changes which the late war may have produced,
in all its consequences, of increased public debt,
increased taxes, increased prices, and altered rela-
tions as tointerest, capital, andcommercial dealings
with the Continent ; and how far the alterations
thus produced are temporary or permanent, and
to what extent, and in what degree, they operate."
They added, that this proceeding was not taken,
" from a want of deference to his Majesty's Go-
vernment, or to the opinions of the committees of
the two Houses of Parliament, but .solely from a
serious feeling, that they have no right whatever
t) invest themselves of their own accord with the
responsibility of countenancing a measure in which
the whole community is so deeply involved, and
possibly to compromise the universal interests of
the empire in all the relations of agriculture,
commerce, and revenue, by a seeming acquiescence,
or declared approbation, on the part of the Direc-
tors of the Bank of England."
Unfortunately, however, these prudent sugges•'
tions were utterly disregarded, and we have wit-
nessed the calamitous results. The bankers of
London—all, we believe, save a single firm—
signed an equally decided remonstrance against
the Act of 1844 ; more particularly against the
absence of a relaxing power, which they had been
led to anticipate, and which serious omission led
to the law being twice violated, by financial coup
d'etats, within little more than ten years, and the
most terrible misery and loss to the industrial

community.
Any person of ordinary experience and intelli-
gence must, however, have foreseen the untoward
results that must necessarily arise under such a
system. It signifies but little whether the ex-
changes be favourable or adverse—Thetlnr the
evil has aris'n under a domestic panicor a foreign
drain—whether the executioner strikes high or
low, the victim still writhes under the excruciat-
ing torture. We have been told over and over again
that the trade and commerce of the country was
in a perfectly sound and healthy condition, and
that even 10 or 12 per cent. for a short time,
cannot affect any real solvent firms. The very
same journal, however, announces in every num-
ber that even with all the disadvantage;
of a forced liquidation, there will be
ample assets —in most cases —t) ps
every creditor in full. Surely, then, there must
he s)mething rotten in the state of affairs, when
such solvent firms, whose credit was at one period,
and craght still to be, unimpeachable, are suffered
to fall from undue pressure and panic. The
panic was, however, as we have already stated,
inevitable. There was a general apprehension
that any description of property, no matter how
desirable, could not be converted into bank notes,
and that was even more alarming than the danger
that bank notes, which would discharge all the
functions of a doineAic currency, and be received
by the tax collector, the butcher, baker, and every
tradesman, could not be converted into useless
gold.

With inconvertible paper, or rather by means
of it, we were enabled to carry to a successful ter-
mination the most severe contest in which Eag-
land was ever engaged. During that time no person
was permitted to demand gold for his bank notes,
and yet the foreign trade was carried on
with the most perfect ease. Those who had to
export bullion to liquidate adverse balances, pur-
chased it at the market price, and they did not
find the additional element in the calculation by
any means embarrassing. Interest, or rather die-
count, was comparatively steady. It WAS. never
higher than 5 or less than 4 per cent. at head-
quarters, and every parson could, on fair se -
curity, obtain reasonable accommodation. And all
this was owing t) the despised inconvertible 11.
notes, which carried the nation triumphantly
through its trials.
These notes were freely received by the Go-
vernment, which, unlike that of the United Statea,
did not cast discredit on the potent instrument of
exchange, the'modern slave of the lamp, that pro-
cured all that could be desired for the owner. Let
us, then, again obtain an adequate domestic cur-
rency. Let there be really national notes of
small 'and convenient denominations issued, re-
ceivable in payment of every duty and impost,
let gold be purchased at its fair price, and let tho
English compete with the foreigner in our own
markets for that which comes to hand. Any exten-
sion of the issues on securities or relaxing power
is useless. Similar crises will inevitably arise
until the Act of 1819 and that of 1844 are alike
abolished. We have already had bitter experience
of their baleful operation, and the sooner we
strike off the incubi the. better for all parties con-
cerned, for the Government and the people of the
United Kingdom.

Which has beaten, the Incumbent or the Peer?
The Incumbent has driven Lord SHAFTESBURY
and his clerical corps from Exeter Hall, but his
lordship has stirred up the irregulars, headed we
believe by Sir MORTON PETO, the patron of the
grand Baptist Chapel, Bloomsbury, to occupy and
defend the entrenchments. It seems a kind of
drawn battle. The Earl, and his clergymen of
the Church of England, and the Bishop of LONDON
with them are fairly driven from the field. The
unknown incumbent said they should not preach,
and they dare not. They were compelled to
placard their own defeat on the hoardings of the
metropolis, and while they talked big of law to sing
small in practice; the closed Hall last Sunday night
proclaimed the triumph of the Rev. A. G. EDOUART
Over the Earl of SHAFTESBURY. The pariah
system is vindicated. In his own cure the In-
cumbent is,
Monarch of all he surveys,
His right there is none to dispute.

But, airs, there is toleration in England.
Dissenting clergymen if they are not at liberty
to finger tithes, Easter off' rings, or Church-rates,
are at liberty to preach when and where they
will. They need no passport to enable them to
enter the domains; of any of the ecclesiastical parish
landlords of England ; ecclesiastical geography is
nothing to them. " Wheresoever the carcase is
thither will the eagles be gathered together," and
wheresoever a Dissenting teacher can get a con-
gregation thither he goer,. The barn in a village,
the theatre in a country town, the Odd Fellows'

Lodge, Exeter Hall, or a Music Hall, it is all one
to them ; they have nothing to do but to make
the requisite commercial arrangements with pro-
prietors of public or private buildings, and all the
incumbents in England cannot say them nay.
The proprietors of Exeter Hall want rent for their
Hall like all other landlords ; the Dissenters are
ever ready for a sermon and a service wherever an
audience cau be found ; the thwarted Peer sees his
opportunity—he gives but a nod to the chief
ecclesiastical outsiders of the metropolis and with
an aristocratic glance at the Incumbent exclaims,
" The Dissenters be upon thee, 0 EDOUART
Some of our contemporaries have written very
big about the necessity of an ex post facto Act to
humble M. EDOUART, others have denounced his
temerity in opposing his diocesan,and it is said that
the Church of England must have the liberty to
hold such services as well as Dissenters. We imagine
it will be a rather difficult task to carry any such
law as is contemplated. All the incumbents in
England would be up in arms, all the patrons
would make common cause with them, and wo
suspect that even the sop of making the Bishop
the arbiter between invaded and invading incum-
bents, would not allure their spiritual lordships
to accept such a fundamental change iu ecclesias-
tical law. They would certainly be wise in their
generation t) resist; for it would, doubtless, be a
step towards the subversion of the establishment
itself. Any State system must be supposed to
appoint suitable persons to each post it has to fill,
and, except for legally declared incapacity, can
never authorise any other person to intrude on
another's province. If Mr. EDOUART be not a com-
petent minister for bis parish, let there be some
legal means of establishing the fact, acid " his
bishopric let another take."
We freely acknowledge, however, that like every
one else, we feel that there is a practical ab-
surdity in the whole affair. The absurdity is, that
Exeter Hall has little more to do with M. EDW.-
ART'S parish than with all the parishes of London.
It is simply a place for holding large meetings ;
was built like St. Martin's Hell and many other
large rooms to accommodate corners from every
part of the metropolis. Had Sc. Michael's been
the only parish covered with houses and fully
peopled, most assuredly no large public halls
would ever have beea thought of. Most pro-
bably Mr. EDOUART lost hardly one of his own
audience because the Earl of SHAFTBSEURY and
his staff occupied the hall. The-absurdity, there-
fore, is, that the incumbent of St. Michael's
should forbid the use of the hall to the millions
of Londoners who never would have heard of his
name but for Exeter Hall. The several parishes
of London are not suffered in many important
matters to interfere with the rights of the entire
metropolis ; and it is in prohibiting those who
probably never knew there was' such a parish as
Sc. -Michael's, or that Exeter Hall stood in it,
from using the ball built for them, that the ltev.
A. G. EDOUART appears to have committed, to
say the least, an ungraceful act.
We cannot object to the project of the Earl
of SHAFTESBURY, or of the Dissenters whom he
has called on to carry it out. With their mode
of doing it, the character of their sermons, their
doctrines, and the like, we have nothing to do.
the project, if we understand it aright, is to
lay side starch and buckram, and to address
themselves, without form and ceremony, to the
working-classes. We are advocit:s of freedom,
Outspokenness, and merging the priest iu the man,
and can therefore but hail every movement which
divests religion of formality and false dignity, and
brings its great realities with honest naturalness
bafore the masse=. This is what working men,
beyond doubt, appreciate ; and not working men
only—the continued visits of some of the highest
ari,t3cracy, and even the judges of the land, to the
Music Hall in the Surrey Gardens, show that
many, in all cliise4, prefer in religion, the un-
polished effusions of au honest, ardent mind to the
correct, but cold propriety, of the well-read