The Sun.
London, England, 1861-01-12 00:00:00

Reform, or to any golden prospects of improvement
in the financial position of the country. And, let
it not be forgotten, Sir CHARLES WOOD'S reticence
upon the subject of the national finances cannot
but be deemed all the more noticeable, from the
circumstance of his having himself formerly held
during several years the responsible post of Eng-
land's Chancellor of the Exchequer ! Not a word,
however, said the ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer,
about the present critical state of our finances,
though it is a matter of European notoriety
that upon the treatment of that vital theme
during this next session everything may really and
truly be dependent. There was only one inkling,
and that too of a purely inferential kind, afforded
to those who listened on Thursday evening to the
remarks that fell from the lips of Sir CHAS. WOOD
—only one casual inkling afforded as to the fiscal
and financial probabilities of 1861 ! Meaning, that
is to say, the one yielded to view by those ex-
tremely significant observations with which Sir
CHARLES WOOD followed up his exultant allusions
to the pacific influences certain (according
to the Indian Secretary's opinion) to accrue
from the Commercial Treaty negotiated be-
tween France and England by the hon. mem-
ber for Rochdale, acting as the semi-official repre-
sentative of her MAJESTY'S Government. "
believe," said Sir CHARLES WOOD, in speaking of
this Commercial Treaty, " that the extension of
Commerce is the best security for good-will and
peace among nations. That was the main object
of the treaty of last year, and I believe that we
have contributed to the cause of humanity and
peace by that measure. But we are not such warm
advocates of peace that we are unaware of the
necessity of being prepared for war, and nothing
has been of greater importance than those mea-
sures of defence for the country which
were proposed by the Government, and sup-
ported almost unanimously by the House of
Commons and the people." A sufficiently distinct
indication, this, that, in regard to our war estab-
lishments, Ministers do not propose to adventure
upon any very bold or resolute course of retrench-
ment. Rather disappointing, by the way,
to those Liberal economists in the House of
Commons, who but very recently sent their
round-robin appeal to the PREMIER, beseech-
ing him to moderate, in the new year, the
extent of our late extraordinary war expendi-
ture ! Yet this was the only glimpse (and, as we
have observed, a purely inferential one in itself it
was) afforded to his hearers by Sir CHAS.WOOD, and
through these hearers to the country at large, in
regard to our financial future—that financial future
to which we are all of us looking forward at this
juncture with a more or less profound sense of
anxiety, if not even of absolute trepidation. The
solution of the problem, the answering of the riddle
he himself has helped to propound for the national
embarrassment, and in all human likelihood for his
own eventual destruction as a Financier, is left by
his colleagues (and no wonder !) entirely
to the skill and conscience of the Right
Honourable WILLIAM EWART GLADSTONE as—(we
wish him joy of those naturally heavy ministerial
responsibilities which he himself has contrived to
accumulate upon his own shoulders, almost over-
whelmingly)—as, her MAJESTY'S Chancellor of the
Exchequer. Precisely as the Indian Secretary was
dumb in regard to ithe state of our Finances, so
was he dumb also, as we have remarked,
in respect to the great question of Parliamentary
Reform. Sir CHARLES WOOD commented at some
length upon the satisfactory close of the war with
China, upon the negotiation of the Commercial
Treaty with France, upon the continued necessity
in regard to Italy for the maintenance there
of the principle of non-intervention, talk-
ing volubly enough, also "de quibusdam
alas," but he as wisely as significantly left the
question of Reform for the comments, later on, of
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—Ieft that topic as entirely to
Lord JOHN—With none of the bloom taken off it
(supposing it to have any bloom at all now remain-
ing)—as we have already seen, that he had pre-
viously left the yet more urgent and vital question
,f our Finances untouched for Mr. GLADSTONE!

The indefatigable Dr. LETHEBY has again called
our attention to an Act which ought to have been
among the most useful in daily life of the few
public Acts of importance passed last session—The
Act for Preventing the Adulteration of Articles of
Food or rink. Since his appointment by the City
to the office of Analyst, as provided by the Act, he
has had, he says, but four applications for analysis.
Why so few ? In his own words the reason is this

" I am, he says, very anxious that the practical working of
this Act should be of advantage to the public, ani
should be brought fully and fairly into operation within
the City. This, however, must be effected by the energy
of the citizens themselves ; for however desirable it may be
to expose the frauds and dangers of adulteration, the act
has not contemplated that the exposure should be brought
about by the offices of the common informer. In every
case therefore the public must initiate the inquiry by a fair
and open purchase of the articles suspected to be adulte-
rated."

That is, the duty of verifying the genuineness of an
article offered for sale is thrown upon the pur-
chaser, and must be done in great part at his
pecuniary cost, and certainly at the coat of creating
ill will between neighbours. For weight and
measure inspectors are appointed, and in regard to
meat, the quality is to some extent watched over for
us. But the genuineness of our flour, beer, and
other articles used for human food, is not super-
vised in the same manner. Xet, in truth, we might
with more safety to our own health be cheated a
little in the quantity of what we eat and drink
than in the quality, at least we might be with regard
to many articles.

The Act, Dr. LETHEBY says, has not contem-
plated that the exposure should be brought about
by the offices of the common informer, and there
was, we remember, much discussion on that
point in the House of Commons. The result
was that the traders so far triumphed, that
the Act has been almost redaced to a nullity.
If we remember rightly Dr. LETHEBY himself
o wished to have persons nominated,
of course
purchases,rse
trust-
worthy persons, to the duty ofmaking
for the object of testing the quality of what was
sold as genuine, but he was overruled. It seems, how-
ever, certain that without some such agency the
Act will be nearly a dead letter. Few, indeed, of
the humbler classes, the most liable to imposition,
would like to initiate an investigation in any parti-
cular case. His obligations are to give notice to
the person of whom he has made the purchase that
he intends to have the article analysed, to enable
the seller to attend him to the analyst, and see the
article safely placed in his custody, and to pay from
2s. 6(1. to 10s. 6d., according to the difficulty of the

analysis, for its being made. He is to be entitled
to a certificate " if the article contains anything
injurious to health," which, as the article may be
largely adulterated with "powder of post," or water,
or anything else equally deserving exposure, but
not directly injurious to health, would, in very
many cases of great culpability, yet throw the costs
on the complainant. Common informers are a tribe
no one would wish to create or to encourage ; but
surely there is a difference between hiring persons
as Lord BATHURST'S gamekeeper did, to make