qualities that have appeared. It has pleased the "Times," however, to fasten only on that which is reprehensible and to hold it up to the contempt of England and Europe. Reckless of all consequences, it has indulged in a violence fitted only to rouse and exasperate the worst passions on both sides, and so to endanger the future relations of two great people. It has seized every occasion to create antagonistic feelings, and had there not been strong counteracting influences, might have succeeded in embroiling us in a war as discreditable to our chivalrous feelings as it would have been perilous to our commercial interests. It is owing, mainly, to its teachings that the mistake has been so very generally committed of imputing to the North all the offences of the Union, forgetful that till the last eighteen months it is the South who have held the power of the United States. It is Southern presidents who have treated us with insolence and often injustice-it is Southern statesmen whose policy has been marked by systematic hostility to England-it is Southern newspapers that have been noted for the intense and unreasoning violence of their attacks upon all that is British. The "New York Herald," a worthy counterpart of the “Times," was always a Southern paper. It is so still at heart, and has most effectually served the cause of the friends to whom secretly it is attached by articles which have served to alienate English sympathy from the North. The North now represents the "United States," and the sins of its predecessors in power-the very antagonists against whom it is contendingare now visited on its head by the thoughtlessness of some and the spite of others.

While assailing the North on one side the Lancashire manufacturers have come in for no small share of abuse on the other. The "Times" of course thoroughly un

derstands the cotton trade, as in fact it is familiar with everything in heaven and earth, and a few things besides. It has, therefore, undertaken the task of exposing the errors and deficiencies of the cotton lords in this great crisis of their fortunes. They ought not to have been taken unprepared, and they ought now to organize all kinds of schemes, practicable or impracticable, profitable or unprofitable, for obtaining a supply of the raw material. This is equivalent to saying that the great men of Printing House Square ought to have agents in all parts of the world engaged in collecting rags lest at some time in the future there should be nothing from which to manufacture paper. If we are to credit the representations given when the question of the Paper Duties was under consideration, there is far more danger of a famine of rags than there was two years ago of a famine in cotton. Are the proprietors of the "Times" providing against this? We know not why the same considerations that are urged on the Lancashire manufacturers should not be applied to them, but ideas that would be scouted as absurd in the case of any other trade in England are thought to be perfectly valid as applied to the unfortunate mill

ocracy.

More recently, it is their want of liberality towards the starving operatives that has been the constant theme. Sometimes we have leaders in which the "Jupiter" tries to launch some of his old thunderbolts against their devoted heads, and at other times correspondents are suffered to insert letters, in large type and conspicuous positions, which are filled with assertions too monstrous for even the "Times" to give them the authority of a leader. Thus one gentleman who signs himself “ A‚” and who out-herods Herod, would have the world believe that the Lancashire manufacturers are as pros

66

perous as ever; that the cotton famine is a grand delusion, or, at least, anexaggeration—that spinners could work their mills if they would— that they are sending the cotton out of the country, and that, in short, on them ought to rest the entire burden of supporting the operatives, especially as the war has saved them an immense sum, variously estimated at from £20,000,000 to £40,000,000. There is nothing like dealing in large figures after this fashion, if you desire to make an impression; they are written quite as easily, they make a much greater sound, and the probability is, that a large number of people will assume that, if the highest estimate be not strictly accurate, yet there is" something in it," and that probably a point slightly lower may be the true one. But where, we should like to ask, does this gentleman get his information, or where has his common sense fled? If there be cotton to be had easily, how is it that with so many mills closed, and the demand, therefore, so greatly curtailed, the price of the raw material has reached so extravagant a figure? Does he suppose that the closing of a mill is so trivial an affair that any one would resort to it, on the first appearance of diminished profit? If he had understood even a little of the subject of which he writes so confidently, although in relation to it he is in thickest Cimmerian darkness, he would have known that the stoppage of a factory involves a loss so serious in itself and its consequences, that no man would incur it so long as the margin of loss in working it was at all moderate. Is he ignorant that it is only through the diminished production that the supply of cotton has held out at all, and that had all the trade or any considerable proportion of it continued to work full time, every bale in stock must have been consumed long ago, and that we should have been dependent on the scanty sup

plies that are arriving? As to the cotton speculations, he must surely be aware that the spinners and manufacturers are far from being the exclusive or principal gainers; whereas it is members only of that misrepresented class who have sacrificed their profits for the good of the operatives. All classes of society have hastened to peril their savings on the venture. Some of the most bitter foes of the cotton interest have not scrupled to enrich themselves by means of the despised fibre, and we have not heard that any of them were very particular to inquire whether or not they sold it to be sent out of the country. Perhaps some of these gentlemen think it was the duty of the cotton spinners to have paid a higher price and so enhanced the profits of the clergymen, landowners, old maids, and others who have been speculating. It is absurd to talk in such wanton disregard of all the facts of the case, and of all the laws of trade, as though spinners had been the only cotton buyers, or as though some obligation rested on them to interfere with the legitimate course of trade, by paying such advanced prices as holders might ask, in order to retain cotton in the kingdom. It may be said, indeed, that if continental spinners can afford to pay the prices, with all the charges of freight added, that our own traders must surely be in a position to do the same. So they would if all other conditions were equal, but there are considerations that serve to turn the balance and enable the foreigner to afford prices which our own spinners could could not pay. The lower cost of labour, the amount of protection extended to the trade, and it is said, in some cases, the help given by the Government in the purchase of cotton, all contribute to this end.

But while referring to this subject, it must not be forgotten that numbers of our spinners have sacri

ficed the whole, or nearly the whole, of the profits derived from the advantageous investments in cotton for the good of their operatives. Had any of these put his name down on a subscription-list, advertised in the "Times," for £10,000, or even £5000, the country would have rung with praises of his liberality. The thing has been done in many cases, in a much less ostentatious but infinitely more useful way, and the only result is, that insults are heaped by the "Times" and its correspondents on the men who have done it. It would have been easy for numbers to have sent their cotton to market, cleared a large amount, given a great subscription, and sat down considerable gainers. They have, on the contrary, considered the evils that would result from throwing large numbers out of employment, and they have, therefore, kept their factories at work, very much to the gain of society, but very much also to their own loss both of money and of that fame which would have been acquired by a much cheaper exercise of liberality. It seems impossible, however, for many to understand this. The charity which will not let the left hand know what the right hand doeth is so strange to them that they cannot believe in its existence, and they at once conclude that men whose names do not figure in the columns of newspapers are doing nothing.

corre

It has pleased the "Jupiter" recently to send down to Cottondom one of the remarkable individuals yclept "Our own spondent." The special qualifications for this office, whether exercised in Lancashire or New York, appear to be unbounded self-confidence, a power of selecting the facts most fitted to sustain the views of his employers, a dashing style both of observation and of writing, and an intolerable dogmatism which is in exact ratio to the ignorance of the writer on the subject of which he writes. A man of intelligence can

do a great deal, but it is simply absurd to suppose that some employé of the "Times," with no special aptness for the task, can, by a residence of a few days in a district, where he converses with a few individuals of whose prejudices and prepossessions he is quite ignorant, and the actual value of whose statements he is unable to estimate, arrive at reliable opinions on questions of the most difficult character, and on which those most conversant with the subject disagree. But this is just what is being done. This gentleman comes to a town and puts himself into communication with the few parties to whom he may be introduced; visits some of the homes of poverty, and listens to the narratives of their miserable inmates, in whose tales he is unable to sift the truth from any intentional or undesigned misrepresentation or exaggeration; hears the accounts, many of them of the most fabulous character, which are current in all small towns, as to the enormous wealth of some of the principal inhabitants; and then feels himself in a position to pronounce on the distress in all its aspects, its causes, its range, the best modes of relief, and the proportions of praise or blame belonging to the Boards of Guardians, spinners, etc. etc. He has, probably, some pet notions of his own, and he uses these as the test by which to judge both communities and individuals, and severe are his condemnations of those who do not happen to accord with them. It is manifest that the tendency of such an observer will be to generalize too hastily from too limited a range of facts; to ignore the special circumstances and demands of different localities; to distribute both praises and censures inequitably; and often to give an impression which more extended knowledge would have greatly modified. We do not accuse the correspondent in the present case of intentional wrong, but we do believe that his sympathies,

having been awakened on behalf of those who are suffering, have prevented him from doing justice to the manufacturers; that he has shared a common prejudice which has been aroused by envy at their prosperity and aristocratic hatred of a party that has done so much towards giving a broader and more liberal character to our national policy; that he has not sufficiently recognised the work that is being done, except where it has shaped itself to the patterns to which alone the "Jupiter" will give its sanction, and that he has thus propagated notions the full evil of which cannot at once be perceived.

Complaints are heard from all the localities that he has visited, of the injustice of which he has unconsciously been guilty. We will speak specially of the last town from which he has written, and that not simply because it is the last, but because the questions raised in his letter are of more than local import

ance.

The town is Ashton, where he finds the public agencies for the relief of the destitution very deficient, but where he finds also a great deal of private benevolence at work, to whose operation he does not attach the importance it deserves. The hints scattered throughout the letter may, at least, show that there is not that utter apathy which is so frequently imputed to those resident in the cotton districts, and, at the same time, that the tendency of writers of this class is to depreciate all that does not take a public and organised form, and even to impute motives, other than the best, for conduct which it feels itself called upon, to some extent, to commend. Thus, it is said, private benevolence has almost of necessity been called forth, as though there were a reluctance to admit that it could be the effluence of true charity and sympathy for the distressed. Again, in reference to a meeting where £2850 were subscribed in a

few minutes, £1500 having been given by two firms, we are told, "either because the distress had increased so rapidly as to startle them for the consequences of their inaction, or from some other motive, a meeting was summoned," etc. Now, why search for motives at all? We thought a correspondent was sent down to report on facts and not investigate motives as to which, indeed, he could have no insight at all, unless he was much better acquainted with the true state of the case than a few days' intercourse with a few people could make him.

Still further he says:-"It is true that private charity here has been practised to a considerable extent. People with anything like hearts in their breasts, have been compelled, as it were, to give or see the people starve at their doors, though there are some who appear to have gone through the trial with an uncommon degree of stoicism. A few of the masters have behaved with great liberality. One firm is paying 2s. 6d. per week to each of their adult hands, and 1s. 6d. and 1s. to others who are under sixteen. Another firm is lending to their hands, but probably it means the same as giving, on the same scale; another is giving 1s. per head. Bread, soup, and coals are distributed by others. I have heard of as much as £30 being given away at one mill in the course of a single week, and there is one gentleman in particular of whose good deeds I have heard in many a cottage," etc. All we ask is, why refer to such facts as these in a tone so disparaging? What if, instead of being almost forced into deeds of this character, these gentlemen should look upon this as the best mode of distributing relief, who has a right to complain? The poor are certainly helped in a way much more efficient, and also more agreeable to their feelings. Why not, then, do fitting honour to manifestations of a liberality whose exist

ence some are inclined to deny ? We know that it has already cost one of the firms alluded to not less than £1300 to administer the help that has been given and, in our opinion, the evidence of their true benevolence is just as great as though the entire amount had been enrolled in a subscription list. It is important to note these facts, for the cry everywhere at present is, that the manufacturers are doing nothing.

But another point in connection with the Ashton letter deserves notice. It was felt there, as in some other places, that it was better ministers of religion should not act on the committee of the Relief Fund, and a list was prepared accordingly, and proposed by a leading conservative and churchman, without any of their names. The "Times" correspondent says "In naming the committee all ministers of religion were, by a formal resolution, excluded by it." This is simply false. We do not wonder, indeed, that the writer fell into the error, for a clergyman of the town expressly stated in a large public meeting, that a resolution had been passed, on the motion of a leading Dissenter, to exclude the clergy of the Church of England. The statement was without any foundation whatever; such a resolution was never passed or proposed, and the gentleman in question moved no proposition at all relative to the appointment of the committee. The incident proves the unreliableness of the information that the "Times" sends through the entire kingdom; and the allusions to the whole affair indicate that, coming to a town where he found a good deal of party feeling, he chose, in the ordinary easy fashion, to pronounce that there were faults on both sides. He should either have left the subject untouched, or should have a certained the actual facts. He might then have learned that the work

was retarded by a number of Anglican clergymen and Roman Catholic priests, claiming to be on a committee where their services were not needed or desired; and that the disgraceful step of disfranchising the poor fellows who, in these unexampled times, have taken parochial relief, was owing entirely to the action of the Tories, who refused to accept the proposition to leave all such cases untouched, made, on behalf of the Liberal party, by a gentleman whom it suits this London critic to designate one of the noisiest and most implacable of the disputants," at the very time that he is compelled to do justice to his remarkable generosity. By what authority the "Times claims the right to send a roving commissioner into the country charged not only to inquire into distress, but also to pronounce as to the conduct of gentlemen in the maintenance of their own principles, we know not. Of course, a writer educated under the "Times"" influence cannot be expected to comprehend principle, and naturally regards those who pay deference to conscience and uphold what they believe to be right as noisy and implacable.

But have the Lancashire manufacturers done their duty? That is the grand question. It is of very little use pointing out the errors of the "Times" if it be true, after all, that it is substantially right, and that those who are able to bear the burden of this distress are attempting to devolve a duty belonging to themselves upon others. How is the case really? We must say, first, that we object in toto to the notion that Lancashire men alone should make sacrifices in order to save the sufferers from the terrible calamity that has fallen on the district. The county is paying the penalty of a great national policy, It has been held that England ought not to interfere, in any way,