The Sun.
London, England, 1861-08-02 00:00:00

more in favour of peacethan I am; no man has de-
nounced war more than I have, probably, in this
country; few men, in their public life, have
suffered more obloquy—l had almost said,
more indignity—in consequence of it. But
I cannot, for the life of me see, upon
any of those principles upon which States
are governed now—l say nothing of the literal
word of the New Testament—l cannot see how the
state of affairs in America, with regard to the
United States Government, could have been dif-
ferent from what it is at this moment. We had a
heptarchy in this country, and it was thought to be
a good thing to get rid of it, and to have a united
nation. If the 33 or 34 states of the American
Union can break off whenever they like, I can see
nothing but disaster and confusion throughout the
whole of that continent. I say that the war, be it
successful or not, be it Christian or not, be it wise
or not, is a war to sustain the Government and
to sustain the authority of a great nation."
The reason for the line he takes appears to be his
views of the cotton question. He does not
agree with those who think the cotton difficulty
will blow over as similar things have done before ;
" All I assert is," he says, " that this particular
case is new, that we have never had a war in the
United States between different sections of that
country, affecting the production of cotton before ;
and it is not fair, nor wise, but rather childish than
otherwise, to argue from past events, which
were not a bit like this, of the event
which is now passing befere our eyes. They say,
"It is quite true there is a civil war in America,
but it will blow over; there will be a compromise;
or the English Government will break the
blockade." Now, recollect what breaking the
blockade means. It means a war with the United
States ; and I don't think myself, that
it would be cheap to break the block-
ade, at the cost of a war with the United
States. I think that the cost of a war with
the United States would give, probably, half
wages, for a very considerable time, to those
persons in Lancashire who would be out of work
if there was no cotton, to say nothing at all of the
manifest injustice and wrong against all inter-
national law, that a legal and effective blockade
should be interfered with by another country. It
is not exactly the business of this meeting, but my
opinion is, that the safety of the products on which
this country depends rests far more on the success
of the Washington Government than upon* its failure.
If that be Mr. BRIGHT'S view, we can well under-
stand how our " Friend" should be unwilling to
quote the New Testament literally against the war
of the North with the South.

The Building trades on strike seem to have a
pretty clear case in the complaint with which they
went on Wednesday to the New Secretary for War.
Whatever opinion may be held on the wisdom or
folly of the strike, no one will deny that the Go•
vernment ought to keep scrupulously clear of the
slightest interference, however indirect. When
large bodies of men are angry with each other, it
is the duty of the Government to protect by the
uttermost powers of law every individual from
violence and insult, but there its duties terminate ;
if a single mason choses to work on terms with all
the masons in the kingdom repudiate, let the law
enable him to work unimpeded, and in freedom
from insult ; and so long as the majority do not
attack individual freedom let their own freedom be
also fully respected.

But if the facts stated by the deputation to Sir
G. C. LEWIS be really facts, the Government is vir-
tually using its vast powers against the majority—
the men on strike—in the case of the Chelsea Bar-
racks. Mr. HIGGS, the contractor, determined to
adopt the hour system—that is, not literal payment
by the hour, but paying the men by the day accord-
ing to the number of hours they chose to make the
day. At first sight this scheme seems the most
equitable mode conceivable of settling the ques-
tion of the length of the day. It would give to
each man what he had earned, and would leave to
all who preferred, as they say, self-improvement
to long hours, the option of taking it. The Trades'
Unions, however, strongly object to it. It would
destroy a great part of the power they now
possess to order strikes at pleasure, and entails,
they say, some other consequences in regard to
overtime, which, however, the masters deny. Be
all this as it may, the Unions have ordered a strike
against the system, and Mr. HIGGS having adopted
it, ought, of course, to be left to fight it out with
his men. He had a perfect right to adopt the
hour system—they had a perfect right to refuse to
accept it.

Mr. HIGGS, however, was working for
the Government, and to the Government forth-
with he applies to supply the place of his
seceding workmen. He obtains all the
sappers and miners he desires, and if any
of them do not like the work he is able to have
others marched into their place. If the work be
one of urgency the public can have nothing more
to say. The national business could not wait on
the dispute. But otherwise, and we have seen no
case of emergency made out, the Government was
using its compulsory powers to give Mr. HIMGS an
advantage over his men. If the Government is in
the habit of allowing the Sappers and Miners to
earn extra pay in this way, and if it be a purely
voluntary act of the men to accept Mr. HIGG'S
offers, we do not know that any objection could be
made to it. But even then there ought to be no
favouritism ; if Mr. HIGGS can have the men, every
contractor ought to be allowed to have them too,
to any extent not injurious to the discipline of the
service.

The deputation, however, made statements, which,
if true, show that Mr. HIGGs had been a great
gainer by getting the Sappers and Miners. He was
paying his hands who struck six shillings a day.
But he paid the War-office only 4s. Bd. per man,
saving thereby, of course, ls. 4d. each. And as the
Sappers and Miners are, we believe, all well trained
hands, he must be a great gainer. The Sappers
received, it was stated, only 2s, 4d. out of the 4s. Bd.
earned by them ; but we presume that the Govern-
ment takes the half in consideration of pay or rations
furnished to the men. We can hardly think the
Government would make a pecuniary gain of its
soldiers' labours.

Sir G. C. LEWIS told the deputation, what we
may be sure is the truth, that the Government had
no thought whatever of interfering in the dispute
between masters and men; their only object had
been to expedite the completion of the work. If
the neutrality had been violated, it was uninten-
tionally ; and he assured the deputation, withrnit
pledging the Government to any course, that dili-
gent inquiry should be made, and what had been
stated receive the careful attention of the Govern-
ment. The matter may be safely enough left
in Sir G. C. LEWIS'S hands. One thing we
think should be specially guarded against—if the
case be one of emergency neither the trades nor the
public will desire that the work should be stopped,
but then, neither the contractor, nor the Government
ought to gain one penny by the employment of the
Sappers. The contractor ought rather to lose by
it since he will escape penalties for breach of con-
tract, and the Government ought to gain nothing