The Sun.
London, England, 1868-05-01 00:00:00

TO LICENCED VICTUALLERS.

ESTABLISHED 18,12.
ILLIAM HOLDICH and CO.,
LICENCED VICTUALLERS' DRAPERS, No.
105, Fleet-street, corner of Farringdon-street ; and at No.
5, Tho Pavement, Clapham-common (Southern Branch).

44
• 43
o;\

LONDON, FRIDAY, MAY 1, 1868.

Mr. GLADSTONE, no doubt, feels proud of his
doings, but there is in reality very little for him to
plume himself upon. He has stopped the progress
of business, and forced the House to consider a
question that did not belong to it of right, and all
for what? A factious purpose or jealousy that Mr.
Dlsßant had succeeded to the Premiership, and a
determination to revenge the Reform Act of last
session. This is very unsuitable conduct on the
part of a statesman of Mr. GLADSTONE'S reputa-
tion ; but so it is, and we feel convinced that what-
ever be the result of last night's debate he will not
raise himself in the opinion of the country.
The Irish Church question is one that called forth
various opinions, but it was not incumbent on
Mr. GLADSTONE to bring it forward now with such
baste and persistency. The bitterness with which
the right hon. gentleman criticised the speech of
Lord DERBY showed the factious feelings which
animated him, and he declared that he, for ones
would not take the word of command from the
House of Lords. He exhibited throughout the whole
of the evening a bitterness of feeling and an acer-
bity of temper that were very ill suited to an im-
portant occasion, but, unfortunately for himself, Mr.
GLADSTONE often dismays his friends and followers
by the outbursts of passion to which he gives vent.
Before the debate began he fired up at a very
simple question from Sir C. LANYON, in re-
gard to a petition he had presented ; and
then, again, when Captain SURTEES proposed
that the oath taken by the Roman Catholic mem-
bers should be read. All this betokened that he was
in a dangerous frame of mind.
It is now intimated that the tactics of the Oppo-
sition are not yet exhausted, and that a direct vote
of censure is contemplated. This only proves the
animus of the whole affair, and shows very deci-
dedly that to turn the Ministry out of office is
the main object, and the Irish Church question a
very convenient stepping-stone to office. Had Mr.
GLADSTONE been really sincere in his wish not to ob-
struct the business of the House he could, with a very
good grace, have withdrawn his Resolutions after
Easter, and have intimated that they should no
longer stand in the way of public affairs. The sense
of the House had been taken upon them, and it
riu
would remain for the next rarlia-4-on_g
. to do its
appropriate work of legislation. How tar otherwise
has been the result we have witnessed, it is of course
impossible for any one to say what the Govern-
ment will do; but it seems a pity that they should
resign under the peculiar circumstances of the case.
They are certainly in a very awkward position, and
will have some difficulty in extricating themselves
with success ; but the fault lies directly and imme-
diately with those who have forced them into it.
It had been supposed by good judges that this ses-
sion would be a quiet one, and lo and behold we are
plunged into the thickest of the strife ; and the ex-
citement of the controversy equals if it does not even
exceed the fierce tumult of last year on the Reform
debates. It is sad, after such convincing proof has
been afforded of the do-nothingness of the Liberal
party
when in office, that we should be again per-
plexed by their determined effort to recover place
and power. Apart from the subject in debate itself,
the House of Commons is
.offering a mortifying
spectacle to the world just now in lending its aid
to the furtherance of interested motives, and the
triumph of factious combinations.
We must wait until Monday to know what the
Ministers will do, but we can now at last affirm that
they have not been fairly dealt with. Had the Irish
Church question been settled a year ago, Mr. GLAD-
STONE would have found something else to dispute
about, and it was predetermined by the presiding
genius of the Opposition that this year should see
a change of places, and that those who lay sighing
in the shade of retirement should revisit the
sunshine of prosperity. There was nothing
very new in the debate last night, and
the chief feature was the irascibility o
Mr. GLADSTONE who, from first to last, comported
himself in a very overbearing manner. Mr. Dis-
RAELI showed his good sense in not speaking at very
great length on a used-up topic, and his moderation
contrasted favourably with the vehemence of his
rival. He explained upon what grounds he objected
to the proposition of Mr. GLADSTONE, and laid
great stress on the Royal Supremacy part of the
question. The sudden change that is advocated has
taken many by surprise, and startled others who
might have readily agreed to important modifica-
tions being made. As we said before, the whole
responsibility of this question rested with
the new Parliament. But Mr. GLADSTONE
disdains the dictation of the House of Lords, and
the new Parliament may return his charge with
interest—and "disdain" the dictation of a moribund
House. For one Parliament is not ruled by the
decrees of its predecessor, and may appropriately
object to receiving instructions as to the line of
policy it will pursue. The time of the session has
been wasted by this daring manoeuvre of Mr.
GLADSTONE'S, and the public have to thank him for
all the delay that will occur in the passing of mea-
sures looked forward to with interest. It is a heavy
sacrifice to pay for the privilege of having him as
Premier, but he seems to think the end so desirable
that it justifies the means he adopts to bring it
about.

The interest which has been felt in the Fenian
trials yesterday reached a climax in the conclusion
of thecase against of BURKE, CASEY, and SHAW. The
Court was crowded. Every available seat was occu-
pied, and the proceedings watched with the most
breathless attention throughout. The Bar was well
represented in the counsel on both sides, and cer-
tainly the prisoners lost no advantage which they
could have had. The prisoner CASEY, after a brief
consultation with the Judges, was dismissed, there
being no evidence which directly affected him.

Baron BEI.MWELL remarked that he appeared to
have been a servant of BURKE'S, and as such he
might have acted without any guilty knowledge.
SHAW, being] regarded as the tool of BURKE,
was sentenced to seven years' penal servitude,
while BURKE himself, on whom the chief in-
terest of the trial centred, was sentenced to 15
years' penal servitude. BURKE, upon the delivery
of the verdict, asked for permission to speak, which
being granted he turned to very bad account.
Assuming the lofty tone of a martyred patriot he
declared that the Attorney-General had prejudiced
his case by allowieg it to be preceded by the trial
for the Clerkenwell murders. Mr. Baron BRAM-
WELL interrupted him with the intimation that
such observations were not allowed, and that what
he should do was to confine himself to any ob-
jections he might take to the proceedings in point
of law. BURKE declared that he wished to defend
his character, and went on to object to his trial as
an American soldier, and boldly declared that the
witnesses against him said what they knew to be false.
After some further language of this kind, during which
he was repeatedly interrupted by the learned Judge
for the impropriety of his conduct, he declared that
his lordship had made himself the proseCutor.
Baron BRAMWELL upon this bade him be silent, and
proceeded to pass sentence upon him. The learned
Judge added that, in his belief, it was a most mis-
chievous thing that a prisoner condemned by a
lawful tribunal should be permitted to assail that
tribunal, and have apparently the honours of the
contest. Baron BRAMWELL declared his own belief
that many men had committed offences of this
political nature for the opportunity of display thus
afforded them, and for the mere love of notoriety.
After this severe reprimand BURKE attempted
no further remonstrance, having, indeed,
nothing to plead in extenuation of his crime,
or in mitigation of his punishment. SHAW
contented himself with affirming that he knew
when he came to England that he should receive
this punishment. After these men had left the
dock, MULLANY, the approver, was brought up,
and Mr. GIFFORD proposed that the indictment
against him should be postponed until Monday to
give the Crown an opportunity of considering the
case against him. Being asked if he had any ob-
jection, the prisoner only said he was badly off and
very ill, a statement confirmed by his dejected

appearance.
With his removal from the dock the long-pending
Fenian prosecutions were brought to a close, and
judge and jury released from their arduous
labours. It has been a tedious and anxious in-
vestigation, conducted throughout with the utmost
impartiality, and every point which could tell in
favour of the prisoners has been carefully examined.
Instead of condemning all alike one of the three
accused is liberated, and one receives a slighter
punishment. Had there been any of that preju-
dice, which BURKE pretends, in the minds of the
prosecution or the judge, there would have been no
recognition of shades of guilt, no allowance made
for influence or dictation. BURKE, CASEY, and
SHAW would, no doubt, in many a similar case in
olden days, have received one common doom, but
we have happily learned in these days to temper our
natural indignation at such savage and dastardly
crimes as those of which Fenianism has proved
itself guilty by strict legal impartiality. The worst
criminal, whose guilt is most evident, can rely in
this country upon obtaining not only a fair hear-
ing, but every possible legal advantage which his
case admits. Even should suspicion be strong
against him, unless his guilt be indisputable in
point of law, he will escape the penalty of his crime;
and. we have had of late no stronger and clearer
example of the excellent administration of our cri-
minal courts than during the ten days of the Fenian
prosecutions.