The Sun.
London, England, 1868-02-19 00:00:00

SPIRIT OP TILE PUBLIC ma x=

Lord Russell's lstter to Mr, Chichester Portent:re do the
state of Ireland Is, the Times observed, one of many essays
called forth by the revival of the so-called Irish question.
It is distinguished, however, from the rest, and especially
from the pamphlet of Mr. Mill, which has just appeared,
py two characteristic peculiarities. In the first place, it
is entirely free from what Lord Stanley called political
quackery. It is the production, not of a doctrinaire, but
of a practical statesman, duly sensible, indeed, of the mis-
government which in former times justified Irish discon-
tent, but not insensible of the inveterate faults in Irish
character which the beneficent legislation of the present
century has failed to eradicate. Dealing with the second
part of Lord Russell's letter, which treats of the political
and moral state of Ireland, and contains his ultimate
views on the disposal of the Irish Church, the leading
joarnal points out that he abandons the old appro-
tion scheme without reserve as inadequate and
o'„)solt, te, and arrives at the conclusion that a triple
endowment of the Protestant Episcopal Church,
the Pre:byterian Church, and the Roman Catholic
Church, out of the existing Church revenues, is the best
solation of this most intractable problem. The reasons
he gives for deprecating the redistribution of revenues
within the Established Church, now under the considera-
tion of a commission, are not unworthy of attention.
Such a plan would not only fail to meet the demand for
religious equality, but would actually remove Protestant
cleroymen from places where their residence is most
valuable to places where it would be thrown away. The
bitterest enemies of the Establishment admit that an
educated man, living in a poor district, may by his
example, his influence, his custom, and his charitable
ministrations, confer great benefits on all around him,
witiaout distinction of creed. If you carry away this
"resident country gentleman in a black coat," as Swift
calls h:m, from a remote parish in Munster to a thriving
town in Ulster, you will have done what, in Lord Russell's
opinion, is positively mischievous. At all events, the
grievance of the Roman Catholics would remain wholly
mrre,iressed, and this grievance constitutes the
whole question. The course recommended by
Lord I-Zussell would not, as he maintains, involve
three Established Churches, but only three en-
dowed Chu:rches, all recognised by the State, but
none directly connected with the State. The most
serious objection to it is one to which he does not advert,
though it can hardly have escaped his notice. The pro-
vision which he advocates is not, as he expressly states,
" a salary voted by Parliament like the old grant to May-
nooth and the present Regium Donum," but a permanent
endowment, practically independent of parliamentary
control. Now, this is an arrangement which Parliament,
representing the State, will hesitate to make with any
religious denomination, and which it is very doubtful
whether public opinion would sanction. It would not,
however, be impossible to modify it in such a way as to
overcome reasonable scruples on the ground of State
policy. It would be too much to expect that it could be
satisfactory to members of the present Established Church,
though even they might prefer it to a secularisation of
Church property. With respect to its acceptance by the
genewl body of Roman Catholics, we are disposed to
agree with Lord Russell. The bishops naturally dread
the idea of becoming, in any sense, pensioners of the
State, but it has yet to be proved that their sentiments
are fully shared by the Catholic priests, or shared at all
by the Catholic laity, of Ireland, on whom the real burden

Speaking of the Scotch Reform Bill, the Post says:—.
Notwithstanding all his ingenuity, Mr. Disraeli has not
been able to hit on a fundamental principle for the apportion•
ment of representative power, or, if he has, he has not
ventured to submit it to the acceptance of Parliament.
As a sincere worshipper of Democracy, he might with
plausibility and consistency suggest the division of the
kingdom into electoral districts ; but though, for all we
know to the contrary, he may be educating his followers
with a view to the adoption of such a system, they are
probably not sufficiently far advanced to accept the
suggestion. The most that can be done is to make a
mild approximation to the new doctrine of the
representation of numbers. Seven additional mem•
bers will be given to Scotland, and (unless it be
the intention of the Government to take that number of
seats from Ireland) to the House of Commons. The num.
ber is arbitrary, and was, as probably as not, suggested to
the Government by the magic number which the ancient
magicians regarded with so much reverence. Hard-
headed Scotchmeu might be excused for not seeing the
matter in this light, and some who took part in the debate
on Monday night, like Oliver, asked for more. The retort
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the demand was it
his happiest vein. He said that if the present measure
was not passed, it was just possible that on a future occa.
sion Scotland might possibly be refused any increase what.
ever in her representative power. We entirely concui
with Mr. Disraeli, and, if the Scotch people really desire
to send a greater number of representatives to the House
of Commons, we advise them to close with the generous
offer which is now made.

The Daily News, dealing with the resignation of the
Premier as certain, asks the question whether Mr. Disraeli
or Lord Stanley shall be head of the Government as welt
as the leader of his party. Our contemporary can easily
imagine what would be the secret wishes of the majority
in the Tory ranks. They would ask but a short time to
consider whether they would rather acknowledge for their
chief the son of an aristocratic house or the parvenu poli-
tician who has made his way only by his own brains, and
whose authority they have a thousand times kicked against
even while submitting to it. But Tory wishes will go
for very little. Mr. Disraeli is master, and may have what
he chooses. He cannot be discarded—he cannot be die•
penned with. If he yields his claims, which intrinsically
are, unquestionably higher than Lord Stanley's, it will be
of his own self-sacrifice and magnanimity. Far be it from
us to doubt that such qualities may be displayed by the
pre'sent Chancellor of the Exchequer. In his career their
exercise has not yet been called for, and opportunity may
reveal their existence. Nay, we may go so far as to feel
certain that they will not be wanting if it is evident that
the existence of the party depend on the abnegation of
the leader. If, then, Lord Stanley's premiership should
be insisted on by the squires, it is far from improbable that
Mr. Disraeli would gracefully yield rather than break up
the Government.

The Standard, speaking on the same subject, says that
every Conservative feels that Lord Derby can be implicitly
trusted, not because he professes Conservative views, but
because his very nature is formed on the Conservative
model. The event of last session—the thorough unity
which on so trying a question as that of Reform was con-
stantly maintained between the party and their chief—is
a striking proof of this confidence. Had such a task de-
volved upon Sir R. Peel, the Conservative party would
have been broke up for the third time. But a leader
i whose heart s with his supporters, who is known to think
and feel as they do, and to have no interests or objects
apart from theirs, may command an almost unlimited
faith and allegiance from men who can say to themselves
" His ends are ours ; his views of honour and duty are'
those we understand and profess ; he is neither tricking us
for our good, nor sacrificing us to some new lights of his
own ; what he is willing to concede cannot but be neces-
sary, what he recommends cannot. but be the best that we
eau' accomplish." This is the feeling with which the Con-
servatives have always regarded Lord Derby. And the
reason plainly is, that Lord Derby's ideas of political expe-
diency and personal honour are those of his order and of
his party. The pride and ornament of his party, Lord
Derby is in an especial sense the pride and ornament of
the House of Lords. The same qualities which command
the confidence of the Conservatives endear him to his
order. He is in every respect the very type and ideal of
the English nobleman ; the representative man of ans•
tocracy which has preserved its manhood and its vigour of
intellect as of body by an equal rivalry with all competi-
tory in every field of public service and personal dis-
tinction.

Mr. Seely, says the Telegraph, has renewed his crusade
against the abuses of our Admiralty management ; mov-
ingi,Leor a select committee to inquire into the application
of
moneys voted by Parliament and into the state of
the dockyard accounts. Nor was he without grounds for
the. motion • ' for he showed' what mysteries of blundering
still remain to be unearthed. The public correspondence
printed some
weeks exist, and iback proved, not only that gross
thatthat
the official mind persists in ignor-
ing', them, but
themselves often do even the heads of departments
~
.not understand their own case.
The now historic
first discoverer"" which the honourable mem-
berthe subsequent cases of
the Frederick Wiulamand
a en ;inillie Brisk, and the Cad-
mus, were glarin
, and were certainly not
explained away by the vehement denials and retorts, on
one or two points, in which Isise't
charge is now more sweeping• Sucher indulged. But the
mr.the management of
the Admiralty accounts, that
Seely defies any one,
even a trained accountant, to tell wtsitteiisi the real cost of
anything. Whatever the results of
acktep tray for Lincoln deserves a public y be, the
he number
thanks for his useful and arduous labours,n"ledgment of
of our legislators who devote themselves
resolutely, to an
limited ;
assault on specific abuses is unfortunately t
but the high ground that Mr. Seely has already
public estimation, through his vigilant sagscr4'aainne,i,n
sustained energy in restoring the duty boasted by--01'1,1
(-; rand Inquest of the Nation," the Keeper of the people's
Purse, once more proclaims that the community is- neoi.
SI,,',Y to recognise a true servant of the country.
The Ss se does not appear to regard the deputation to
1`,11.. G la, lstene a.-> an u equalified success. Of the really
ileleeestet, qq,': ti,ll--- Lew far is a certain degree and kind
of .ss•reien al,s,,l?ttt•ly eT3(Aitial to the maintenance of such
• . , - .., I if c-,siritial how far is it justifiable?
f01fa1a,a,,,,,t, -,,, .. , ,
—I witii pane,; seem to have fought shy. When
Mr. Gladstone brought up this or that instance of
a wide of coercion, lie was generally met by the
statement, doubtless quite correct, that the ex-
ample he selected was that of some body. not be-
-I",i;iralT 40 the regular organisation. Again, when
Mr. Gladstone pointed to the unfairness of the regulations
which restrict or prevent the labour of women, tlieanswer was
so obvious and easy that we are wsrprised it was not
instantly given. Other trade organisations of a different
rank in society prevent the competition of women. go
legalised profession allows vs omen to work in its failkio.
Few organisations of any class or kind whatever-Are fully
open to women. It is obviously, then, quite ablitircl to
complain of mechanical organisations because they enforce
a limitatiionihe where , here otherotherastioci. associations supposed to be more
M etal-na enforce itnactual prohibition