The Sun.
London, England, 1857-07-30 00:00:00

LONDON, THURSDAY, JULY 30, 1857.

At length, Lord JOHN RUSSELL seems to have
discovered the utter inutility of proceeding with
the Oaths Validity Act Amendment Bill. If any
doubt Could have existed on the subject, it must
have been removed by the proceedings in the
Ho use of Lords on Monday last, when the 7th of
A ugust was appointed as the last day for second
Teadings of any bill, sent up from the Commons, a
step directly taken against the above-mentioned
measure, as we have already explained. The bill
has not, however, been formally
but
it has been postponed, and it is
now more than
probable that the attempt will be made in the fi.ra
instance,,to enable Baron ROTHSCHILD, WhOhason"
more been unanimously returned as one of the
Representatives of the City of Landon, to take
his seat by a resolution of the House on takin4
.the oaths in the form most binding on his con-
science.

It would manifestly have been absurd for the
Noble Lord to have entsred on such a discussion
at twenty minutes past five, when that dismission
should necessarily have terminated at a quarter
before six. Some of its opponents would have
spoken against time, and thus easily have made it
"a dropped order." Re had not, therefore,
much discretion as to the postponement. Bat
white fixing the second reading for Monday next
..—a Government day, by th© way—he ©xgreased a hope that "means would be found t;
cable Buon RoDISCIIILD to take his Beat

without its being necessary to have any bill for
that purpose !" This distinctly and unequivocally
points to a resolution similar to that of Mr.
DlLLwvres, and we have no doubt that the newly
elected Member for the City of London, who has
been willing to encounter any personal risk, will

be prepared
" To screw his courage to the sticking place,"
and to brave all the penalties and annoyances that
the vindictive malice of disappointed opponents
may endeavour to heap upon him. Indeed, sup-
ported by the resolution of the House of Com-
mons, we cannot perceive that the danger will be so
very great as to disturb the natural serenity of
his mind, or to fright the isle from its propriety.
Despite " the prave 'ords" of Lord CAMPBELL,
we doubt if any informer will dare to run
counter to the representative branch of the Legis-
lature, which has both the ability and the will to
vindicate its own constitutional rights and privi-
leges.

It is stated by a morning contemporary that
an act has just been discovered which will enable
the House to dispense with the formal words " on
the true faith of a Christian." The words of the
section are as follows :
" And be it enacted, that it shall be lawful f
the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and
for all other boli.s corporate and politic, and
for all bodies now by law or statute, or by any valid
usage, authorised to administer or receive any oath,
solemn affirmation, or affidavit, to make statutes,
bye-laws, or orders, authorising and directing the
substitution of a declaration in lieu of any oath,
solemn affirmation, or affidavit now required to be
taken or made ; provided always, th•+t such statutes,
bye-laws, or orders be otherwise duly male and
pessed according to the charter, laws, or regulations
of the particular University, other body corpo-ate
and politic, or other body so authorised as afore-
said."

It is also stated that the Attorney-General has
expressed surprise that "this statute should have
been so long overlooked, and that he will forth-
with be prepared t 3 call at-ention to it, in his
place in Parliament." We have never, from the
very first, doubted that Baron ROTHSCFULD was
entitled to take his seat, and we energetically
condemned the grave mistake that had been com-
mitted, in proceeding by bill rather than by reso-
lution. The same power existed tha', authorised
the reception of an affirmation in lieu of an oath,
in the case of Messrs. PEASE and BRIGHT, and it
ought to have long since been acted on.
All the procrastination, heart-burnings, and
annoyances that have occurred during the
last ten years might have been avoided, and
the Lords would have been spared the humiliation
which they have so richly earned for themselves.
We shall, however, be contented if, albeit at the
eleventh hour, the grievous error be amended and
a just course entered on. The House of Corn-
Dacus have been in the position of the man who
saw and perceived the correct path, but followed
the wrong one. It may be convenient to say that.
the Act alluded to has only just been discovered.
But the subject had been too strictly investigated
—both in Parliament, in the law courts, and by
the community at large—as to prevent so gross an
oversight. There were, in fact, ample grounds
for the resolution, but it was desirable t ) make
a little political capital, and therefore impedi-
ments not greater than mole-hills were elevated
into mountains. It was never thought that the
Lords would have displayed such perverse obsti-
nacy. Lord JOHN might exclaim—" Had I
known he was so cunning of fence I would have
seen him hanged before I meddled with him."
He has, however, foiled a troublesome customer,
and may therefore prudently revert t 3 the line
which he ought to have originally taken. Due
notice will be given of the time when Baron
ROTHSCHILD will appear to claim his seat, with
powerful credentials, endorsed by the metropolis
of Great Britain. We can scarcely doubt the
result, or imagine that it will not be such as t'ie
honour, the independence, and the character of
the Commons of the United Kingdom impera-
tively require.

It is at length more than probable that the
just demands of the civil servants of the Crown,
in referenee to the Superannuation Bill, will be
conceded. They have had the justice and equity
of their demand distinctly recognised by three
different tribunals, viz., by a Select Committee of
the House of Commons, by the Royal Commis-
sioners, and ultimately by the representative
branch of the Legislature, which, by a majority
of 60, last night affirmed the principle of the bill,
notwithstanding the opposition so improperly
offered by the Government. But they had, be-
sides, the intrinsic equity of their claims, which
must convince any unprejudiced and disinterested
person of the impolicy and impropriety of offering
any further resistance thereto.
We have always considered that " the labourer
is worthy of his hire," and that when once
a salary was fairly and honourably earned, the re-
cipient should do as he likes with his own. It is
absurd to give a nominal salary, and afterwards
to reduce it by deductions, of which but a small
proportion of the recipients can ultimately benefit,
and then by no means to the extent that they
could readily obtain from a wel-conducted and
perfectly solvent private establishment. Even if
the full and fair equivalent were offered in the
shape of a retiring pension, the large majority
would greatly prefer obtaining it in a shape that
would be available for their widows and children
iu the event of their own deaths. They would
naturally feel that so long as they were spared
they could provide for themselves, and the dear
ones dependent oa them, not only for the comforts
but the actual necessaries of life. An insurance
which would provide a specified sum on the death
of the parties, and which could be disposed of at
any time during his life, when a sum in hand
might be required, would be better in every re-
spect for the parties the_nselves, and still more
for their families.

We need not dwell on the duty of an employer
to provide for a faithful and efficient servant, who
has bestowed the best years of his life, and
worn himself out in his service. No man of
ordinary feelings would permit such a person
to come to destitution, or even to endure serious
privation in his old age. The sacred claim is
fully recognised and promptly and adequately re-
sponded to by all who have sufficient means at
their disposal. Where such is net the case, it is
the ability and not the wi;l that is wanting, and
it would be disgraceful to the wealthiest nation
in the world if they should permit their Govern-
went to refuse to act in a similar manner.
But, at all events, if it. was considered
desirable to establish a provident fund,
it should be optional with the parties for whose
benefit it is avowedly established to join it or
not as they thought proper, and an ample equiva-
lent should be returned for any contributions
thus voluntarily rendered.
But is this the case with the Civil Service
Superannuation Fund? Must decidedly not. It
was but an ingenious device to extract from the
pockets of the worst remunerate) dim of
public servants the means of defraying
pensions to their more fortunate brethren.
Eulinent actuaries have made calculations show-
mug that the parties subjected to these deductions
justice, ',receive far more than
4h,ould,in common
has b6,en .off; red to them. It has been proved

beyond the possibility of doubt, that the sums
received have amounted in the aggregate from
August, 1829, to January, 1856, to no less than
843,433 L, to say nothing of the compound in-
terest, which should far more than have doubled
the actual receipts within the time, while the
actual contributors, and no others should be
taken into account, have received but 92,2331.,
leaving a balance of 750,0001., unfairly extracted
from their pockets, and that they are actually
paying at this moment some 75,000/. per annum.
while nearly 12,000/. a year is returned in the
shape of pensions. This is so palpably unfair—
so manifest a swindle, that it is alike disgraceful to
the nation, and to every successive Government
by which it has been sanctioned and main-
tained. It should at all events be forthwith
altered, and a just account taken of the receipts
from, and payments to, the contributors. The
balance would form the nucleus of a handsome
Ifund to be applied for their benefit ; and we
really think that all who have bean dismissed or
resigned the service, and the representatives of
those who have died " in harness," should be
entitled to fair equivalents for what they
actually paid. The British Government

should not shelter itself under pleas which
would be considered disgraceful to any per-
son in private life, and which would be fatal to
any reputation for common honour or honesty.
Lord NAAS'S bill will obviate future injustice,
but the next session should not be suffered to
elapse without providing for the equitable claims
of those who, for 28 years, have been plundered
under an iniquitous and unwarrantable law.