The Sun.
London, England, 1861-05-28 00:00:00

THE SUN.

LONDON, TUESDAY, MAY 28, 1881.

Which is, after all, to be " 7lae Derby Day"—
and which the Favourite ? Wednesday (that is
to-morrow), the 29th—or Thursday (the day after),
the 30th of May ? Mr. MERRY's Dundee—or Mr.
SEYMER'S Amendment ?
There cannot be one moment's doubt about it but
that if the motion for the latter had last night been
pushed to a division her MAJESTY'S Government
must indubitably have been defeated! And that
they would have been defeated, moreover, by con-
siderably more than Eighteen.
The Constitutional amendment proposed by the
hon. member for North Warwickshire, as a matter
of course, came to grief. We said yesterday that
nothing whatever could be hoped for in that direc-
tion by the Conservative Opposition. The consti-
tutional part of the question had already been fully
discussed in the House of Commons, and so far
brought to something like a settlement. After the
remarkable ability displayed, to no effect beyond
the drawing forth from both sides of the House of a
large amount of admiration, by Mr. MACDONOGII,
in one of the ablest maiden speeches
delivered by any new member in the present
Parliament—it was seaicely probable that Mr.
NEWDEGATE could make very much out of the same
argument upon his forced revival of it in his own
tardy Amendment. There, consequently—in that
Amendment—as we intimated plainly enough last
evening, lay nothing whatever of danger to the
financial schemes of her MAJESTY'S Government.
And the result has certainly verified to the very
letter the perfect accuracy of the observation.
According to the-course pursued by the vast majority
of the Conservatives last evening, when the House
was " cleared for a division " upon Mr. NEWDE-
GATE'S amendment, the Opposition sire of the
House [which was literary, and in the str:ctest
sense of the words, "cleared for a division"] appeared
to regard the constitutional matter-in-dispute as
having already been decided by the House of Com-
mons upon the occasion of the previous discussion
of it, and to have been decided, moreover,
so far as it in any way affected the House of
Commons itself, definitively. After sympathising,
with no good result for themselves coming of itovith
Mr. MACDONOGII—they seemed not to be in any
way disposed to vote, in the same direction, with Mr.
NEWDEGATE. The great constitutional authorities
in the House had already spoken, and having spoken
had afforded not the smallest shadow of a shade
of hope in that direction. The Opposition had
learnt from the revelations of Sirtil at. HEATHCOTE
that one of their forernoJt men, then' precluded
alone himself from speakiEg by temporary indis-
position, (Mr. WALPOLE) was tliamett ically opposed
to the drift of Mr. MACDONOGII'S argument, and
consequently would have been directly antagonistic
to the tendency of mr.
NEWDEGATE'S Amendment.
Other leading men on the
front bench of the Oppo-
sition 2n VI t think with 'Mr. WaLroLE, probably
did think with Mr. Wai mix, and therefore
--everything considered—
nPun the mat urest
reflection—the bulk of the Opposition acted last
night with surprising promptitude and unanimity ! ,
They walker out of the House and away through
the lobby altogether to avoid taking any part
at
all in the division—leaving cruelly in the lurch
poor Mr. NEWDEGATE and his all but tabooed

Amendment. The consequence being, of course,
something almost ludicrous under the circum-
stances : ayes 34, noes 195—clear majority of 161
against the Amendment of the hon. gentleman the
member for North Warwickshire.

Afterwards, however, came, in due course—that
other Amendment, in which, as we said yester-
day, would be found the only chance of peril to the
financial projects of her Majesty's Government.
Clause 4 of the Customs and Inland Revenue Bill
—to wit the very marrow of that bone of con-
tention between the Ministry and the Opposition-
-Clause 4, i.e., The Paper Duties, came at length
in regular sequence under the consideration of the
House of Commons then in Committee. Where-
upon, after the addition to the clause of a few ver-
bal alterations by the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
up rises Mr. KER SEYMER and flings down that
little golden apple of discord which has now to be
scrambled for in real earnest—flings it down in the
shape of that much talked of, and long threatened,
and at length visible, other amendment. And there-
upon came the tug of war, when Greek met Greek—
when Ministerialist encountered Ministerialist.
For it was not simply that Mr. SEYMER'S amend-
ment for the setting aside of Clause 4—that clause
which, if agreed to, will abolish the Paper Duties
for ever and a day after the first of next October--

it was not simply that Mr. SEYMER'S daring

and dangerous Amendment was advocated by
other earnest Conservative members sitting among
the ranks of the Opposition ! Those of course—
a good many of them—spoke last evening ; and we
may be tolerably certain too that they will un-
mistakeably vote (when the question comes to a
division) for Mr. SEYMER'S Amendment. But—
with those heart-and-soul Conservatives, with those
thick-and-thin Oppositionists how many have
spoken and will speak—how many will indubitably
(when it comes to a division) vote upon the same
side, namely, in favour of this wicked Amendment,
though themselves sitting either above or below
the gangway, among the crowd of the
Ministerialists, among the rank and file of the cus-
tomary supporters of the PALMERSTON Govern-
ment ? For example, was there not, dead against
the Paper Duties, and therefore dead against the
Budget, and therefore dead against the Govern-
ment—the hon. baronet, Sir JOHN RAMSDEN, the
Liberal representative of the largest of all the con-
stituencies, the great constituency of the West
Riding of Yorkshire ? " Last year," said Sir JOHN
RAMSDEN, "he (the hon. baronet) voted against the
repeal of the paper duty for two reasons. In the
first place he did not think that the state of the
revenue was such that they could afford_to spare
the tax; and in the second, if they were going to
repeal any duty at all, he thought that the addi-
tional inc3me tax and the war duty on tea should
have the preference. This year," he added, "he
retained the same opinion, and was prepared to
take the same course." Referring afterwards to the
" baseless fabric of a vision," built up on the sandy
and shifting foundations of the Budget estimates, he
said—" They had this year a new definition of a
surplus. Heretofore a surplus had been money in
hand, or in some other form equally tangible and
secure. It was unprecedented for the Chancellor
of the Exchequer to come down to the house with
a surplus not verified by any facts or accounts,
but built merely on hopes and conjectures, every
one of which was as liable to prove fallacious as
the schemes of any speculator on the Stock Ex-
change. The process by which this surplus was
obtained," he said further upon this point, " was
very arbitrary, and, he feared, very illusive." This,
remember—not from Sir •STRATFORD NORTHCOTE,
not from Mr. BENTINCK, nor yet from Mr. HORS-
MAN, but—from the lips of Sir JOHN RAMSDEN,
M.P. for the West Riding of Yorkshire. Remem-
bering still who it is that speaks, and the side
of the House from which he is speaking—is
there not something in the way of A Sign of the
Times, something of an indication of the Way in
which the Wind Blows, in those after remarks of
the same Liberal representative, when he observed
—" The budget that was made for fair weather
must necessarily now be rent asunder. It was no
disgrace, no humiliation, to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to be beaten by events over which he
could not possibly exercise any control; and if he
persisted in the project now before the house, he
would be acting, he (Sir J. RAMSDEN) would be
bold to say, in the teeth of the real opinion of the
house and of the country, and would be exposing
himself not only to the charge of imprudence, but
of rash and wilful imprudence, and further, unless
every prediction was falsified, to future reprobation
and condemnation." Cheers, as a matter of
course, hearty and prolonged cheers, greeting
words like those from the confronting and
sympathetic Opposition. Then again—was there
not spoken by Sir ROBERT PEEL as bold and
thoroughly independent a speech as even that plain
speaking and vivacious baronet has ever yet de-
livered within the walls of Parliament ? Like Sir
JOHN RAMSDEN'S also—dead against the Paper
Duties, against the Budget, against the Govern-
ment ! It assuredly begins to look ill, in regard
to clause 4, direfully, dolefully ill for her
MAJESTY'S Government. Particularly now
when, with an exquisite tact of indiscretion,
the more liberal of the Irish members are wantonly
alienated from the side of the Government by the
curiously perverse, because ridiculously inopportune
proceedings, on the part of the Cabinet, in regard
to the delicate question of the Galway Contract. It
is whispered to our remembrance—Quern Zeus vult
perdere prius dementat, Has it thus proved again
with the once powerful and popular Cabinet of Lord
PALMERSTON ? The House of Commons will be
enabled to answer Aye or No to this on Thursday
evening—for until that evening the debate upon
the Paper Duties now stands adjourned.

The Charleston correspondent of a contemporary,
who is never tired of adverting to the ill-success
• of Universal Suffrage and the Ballot in America,
furnishes a striking confirmation, from what he
sees and hears on the spot, of the view we gave a
few days ago. It is not democracy, but I aristocracy,
aristocracy aristocracy in spirit, and aristocracy in one
fact, which lies at the bottom of the present dis-
ruption. We must even own that we were not
aware that the purely aristocratic temper was any-
thing like so marked and bitter as it appears 'to be
from the description of the Times' Correspondent,
hardly that it went to such lengths in theory.
Our observant traveller hears on all sides wishes
for a monarchical regime, with the European
grades of hereditary rank and title, and there was
no concealment of admiration and envy of our own
institutions as compared with those of Repub-
licanism. With a sigh, it was confessed, that the
blessing of Monarchy was beyond their reach.
however, could exceed' their contempt
for the
eilow-bred descendants of the Puritan
Republicans of the North. South Carolinians look
down on New England
as quite another race to
themselves ; as a set of e t
monopolists
pnnalri
sr
toswi narrow-minded
me de
commerce.
ieg. o t s
Theili
religion and selfish
State
was founded by gentlemen, and
h
ders of the New England State cut
we
n theo f
founders
Carolina
off the head of the first CHARLES, the cavaliers of
Carolina offered his son the sovereignty of their
State. It would really seem as if we ought, in

gratitude, to side with the South and slavery; for,
mingled with the pride of having achieved their
independence, a strange regret is felt for the results
and consequences, and " many are they who would
go back to-morrow if they could." They know,
however, that by our aristocracy, now, slavery would
be ixn incubus not to be endured. They astonished
their visitor by wishes that the May-flower had
gone to the bottom, instead of cursing them with
the presence, on American soil, of the Pilgrim
Fathers and their descendants. But they could get
on even with fanatics, " If they had been either
Christians or gentlemen, for in the first case they
would have acted with common charity, and in the
second they would have fought when they had in-
sulted us; but there are 'wither Christians nor gen-
tlemen among them.' Such, we are told, are
the expressions common in South Carolinian
society. With the bitterest execrations they pray
for a despotism, a tyranny, anything—but nothing
will induce them to "submit to any union with the
brutal, bigoted blackguards of the New England
States, who neither comprehend nor regard the
feelings of gentlemen ; man,woman, and child they
would die first."

All this is surely equal to any sentiments cherished
for BRIGHT, COBDEN, and the Manchester School,
by the House of Lords itself and its wide-spread
connections down to the rural squirearchy in the
mother country. But our traveller follows our re-
presentation of the case, from what strikes him as
an eye-witness, by describing the Caroliuians as a
Sparta aristocracy, resting on a vast population of
Helots; and, with nothing else to rest on. They
have the leisure and tastes of a genuine aristocracy,
but, after all this is, he tells us, the true represen-
tation of Carolinian aristocracy. It really rests on
the most immoral and unchristian basis con-
ceivable ; and its deadly hatred for the North,
which has been growing.now for thirty years, has
arrived at an implacability which must for ever
prevent re-union under one Government.
It seems, however, that a great change has come
over their warlike aspirations since they have
learned of the preparations of the North. "There
is a sudden admiration, we are told, of pacific ten-
dencies," which it is not easy to account for, except
on the supposition that tidings from the North have
had their influence. No more threats to seize on
Washington or Faneuil-Hall ; and JEFFERSON
DAVIS' Message is now praised for its " moderation,"
and for other features which were not in such
favour while the exaltations over the capture of
Fort Sumter were resounding through the States.
There is, we are informed, an evident change come
over all, since it has become evident that the North
is uniting as one vast army, prepared to reconquer
all that belongs to the Federal Government as soon
as the weather is suitable for operations in the
South.

Already, indeed, the South begins to find that
the North is a power not to be foiled in its determi-
nation. The harbours of Virginia, Maryland, and
Charleston are by this time sealed up, and probably
those of the extreme South also. The Niagara,
with, of course, a proper complement of swifter and
smaller vessels, was to blockade New Orleans ;
and the movements by land are hardly less instruc-
tive to the South. Maryland, though her mob and
more fiery politicians are hot against the North, is
compelled to succumb ; Baltimore is a Federal city,
whether it likes it or not, and the Government
uses the territory of the State for the transit of
the numerous troops just as it pleases. Western
Virginia has given in its adhesion to the Union ;
and the " Old Dominion" will at least
retain but half its former greatness; but
it is highly probable that it will early become
—indeed, may be while we write—the theatre
of battles which will reduce it to submission. Her
neighbour border State Kentucky, has already felt
the power of the North; not only in its attracting
regiments from its population, but in its not daring
to venture beyond neutrality. Missouri has even
witnessed the capture of 800 militia at Camp Jack-
son ; and Illinois commands the entire navigation
of the Missisippi from the corn producing States
of the North, by its position at the junction of the
three great streams which, by their union, form
the vast stream which conveys food from the North
to the South. In Texas, betrayed by their officers,
the States of the Federal Government have been
disarmed by, the South. This was unfortunate ;
but the scheme of the North seems to be to blockade
the South, and to operate on the Border Slave
States till the weather permits operations further
South.

Since M. DE PERSIGNY holds the press so com-
pletely in fetters that one Paris printer dares not
even publish the speech of the Duo D'AUMALE at
the anniversary dinner of the Literary Fund, and
a second is compelled to give up a harmless
youthful literary publication, La thane France,
because the authorities advised it—we can hardly
err in believing that what does circulate in France
does so by the wish of the Government. On such
a subject as the temporal power of the POPE, for
instance, one so purely political in regard to the
French Government just now, it is hardly conceiv-
able that anything striking, pointed, just adapted
to popular apprehension, should be permitted to
circulate, were it not wished by the Higher
Powers. We may, just possibly, mistake the
reason for permitting the unrestricted circuiation,
but can hardly err in supposing that a reason for it
does exist.

What, then, can be the reason for allowing the
unrestricted circulation of the handbill—" Our
Holy Father, the Pope." Were it necessary to
conciliate the clergy, we may be sure that fines and
imprisonment would await all concerned in giving
publicity to this, in a Catholic country—audacious
document. From its small size, and sententious,
clear, and racy style, it is obviously intended
for the million. We should judge that the remark
of a contemporary is correct, that while it affects, to
a certain extent, the language of the uneducated
and half educated, it betrays a higher origin. The
thought is not vulgar; and the lucid style and
arrangement show the work of a hand accustomed
to the pen. It can hardly fail to create a sensation
among the bourgeoisie and the reading portion of
enunciated are n
the peasantry. If their creed be shocked at first,
yet the
suggestions
o t e
aeres
easily
forgottene has when
distinctly
so
carry their own evidence
with them, that if resisted
at first, they may return and gain assent.
The paper is divided into three short sections, of
which the first keenly satirises the " Holy Father"
as a temporal ruler. "It is sickening to hear per-
petual discussions about the Holy Father—the poor
old man has made some mistakes which are his
own look out "—his broken faith, his curses of
civilization, his mistaking obstinacy for dignity,
arid abductions of children for virtue, are all ridi-
culed, and if he overbalance himself and fall head-
long from the summit of temporal pDwcr—why, it
is his cwn look out.

But the last two sections are a direct attack on
his Spiritual position. We can do without him,
for—"it is not he who saves us"—" his name is not
to be found on the lips of JESUS and his Apostles"
—"the first Christians did without him, and were
none the worse for it"—and after a longer
and. severe attack,—the writer concludes—