MELBOURNE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume IV, Issue 226, 30 December 1854, Page 5

MELBOURNE.

The Ballakat Riot.— The trial of Bentley has been followed by the trial of the men who were apprehended for setting fire to his hotel, and in both cases the majesty and supremacy of the law have been vindicated. The three men who were put on their trial for this offence-— M'lntrye, Fletcher, and Weslerby—were found jjuilty by the jury, and were yesterday sentenced by the Court to three, four, and six months impiisonment respectively. This may appear a lenient sentence; hut, taking- all the circumstances into account, we do not see how the Judge could have acted otherwise. It will be alleged that the punishment is not strictly commensurate with the nature of the offence ; but there is no reason for supposing that the Judge was guided by any other considerations other than wbat were forced upon him during the trial. The men were tried as simple rioters, not as simple political victims; and it was no part of the Judge's function to consider what would be the effect either of acquittal or condemnation upon the relation of the Government to the diggers. Viewing the case in this light, we are bound to say that Mr. Justice Barry gave the prisoners a fair trial, and passed sentence in accordance with the facts brought before him. The jury seemed to have found great difficulty in agreeing upon their verdict, and coupled it at last with a recommendation to mercy. This recommendation, coupled with the favourable impression which the prisoners created in their own behalf, left little other alternative than that of a mild sentence. If the Government had been anxious for a severe demonstration, as we can well imagine they were not, they should have brought up the real ringleaders in the affair, suid shewn that they were in earnest in conducting the prosecution." There is strong ground for suspecting that this was not the case. Of the four originally selected for trial, one was not forthcoming- on Monday ; and the reason we have heard assigned for this omission is, that he is an American. Whether this tenderness towards him lias arisen from partiality to the Americans, or from fear of irritating them by an adverse verdict against any of their countrymen, it is equally objectionable. The pardon lately bestowed on Carey wis not without suspicion on this score, and professing as it did to be granted, not in consequence of his unjust imprisonment, but as an inducement to the Americans at Ballarat to behave themselves, was the act of a weak Government, resorting to the arts of flattery in one direction, as a counterpoise to its oppression in another. It is not our intention to. palliate in any way

the outrage committed at Ballarat, or to excuse the misguided men who took part in the lawless proceedings on that occasion. But the result of the trial confirms the opinion previously entertained, that the men picked out for trial would afford the safest material for performing the ceremony, without risk to the Government.

Taking into account the conflicting nature of the evidence, we are not astonished that the jury were for along time unable to agree upon their verdict; and it would have occasioned no great surprise had they brought in a verdict of acquittal. The issue of the trial rested very much with the counsel for the defence. Mr. Ireland, who was retained ou the occasion, made a very able speech, hut it was not a wise one. It was a hustings harangue, not a piece of forensic pleading. He risked the whole case upon its political aspect. This might have been very well had the men in the dock been patriotic enough to consent to sacrifice themseU-es, In. order that Mr. Ireland might have an opportunity of abusing the Government. We apprehend, however, that they were most anxious in the first instance about their own fate. It may be all very well for them to entertain the belief that in this trial they are butthe representatives of|the diggers, and that extensive sympathy will be felt for them. They may buoy themselves up with this notion at present, if, indeed, they do entertain it; but the sympathy upon, which they calculate will die away, and meanwhile, they will be expiating their offence in prison.

These men were not on tbeir trial as political patriots, but as simple rioters. We are entitled to suppose that their first coucern was for themselves: and certainly their couusel was bound to assume this for them, and make it his business to use the most prudent means for securing their safety. We say this, quite irrespective of their guilt or innocence. But, instead of adopting this plan, and laying; himself out for grappling with the legal points of the case and mastering the evidence, Mr. Ireland took the more convenient course of lecturing the jury on the shortcomings of the Government. The result was what might have been expected. Had the jury returned their verdict immediately after the case was closed, it would very probably have been a verdict of acquittal. We give this*as our private conviction ; for we believe—and it will not be doubted by those who were presentthat they were so much moved by Mr. Ireland's declamation, that the verdict he asked for beamed through {their countenances, very much to the Attorney-General's displeasure." They ?retired with the plea of justification in their heads, and seemingly, as subsequent events shewed, under the impression that by the validity of this plea their decision might be legally "guided. But, in discussing the matter, doubts arose, and they returned to ask the Judge whether the plea of provocation from the conduct of the officials could be entertained. " Most certainly not," said the Judjje. "Then lam sorry for it/ said one of the Jurors. They again retired, and brought the prisoners in " guilty," at the same time strongly recommending them to mercy, and expressing their opinion that "it would never have been their painful duty to eive such a verdict had the Government officials at Bal-larat-done theirs:"—a declaration, which was rejected by the Court, but received by the audience with cheers so loud as to set all rules of propriety at defiance.

In our review of these proceeding we must make v marked distinction between the vindication of the laiv, and the vindication of the Government. The two thing's are radically and widely different; aud nothing but mischief can result from confounding them. It is the glory of all civilized countries to maintain the supremacy of the law ; and it has been equally the glory of those countries to challenge the supremacy of any Government rendered obnoxious by its corruption or tyranny. England boasts of its revolution ; but it also boasts of the faot of that a change of dynasty made no alteration in the supremacy of the law, as the great representative mid administrator of justice.

In ibis trial, as iv that of Bentley, the law has been upheld ; but, in both cases the Government lias been msjrnu-ed. The verdict of the jury, in the case of the riot, whs as adverse to the Government as it was to the prisoners. It so happens that the latter can be punished, while the former cannot; but if matters are not remedied, we shall require, as pan of our peculiar legislation, to have a law for the punishment of «//delinquents, he they magistrates, or private indivi<!uals.— Melbourne Argus.

Finances.—The financial .•statement just presenter! to the house by Sir Charles Hotbam will prove fertile in topics of discussion. The principal features which distinguish it, are, an excess of expenditure over the estimates for the current year —for which it will be necessary' to provide by a supplementary vote ; a projected outlay for 1855 greatly exceeding the income derivable faun present sources j and a proposal to increase the ordinary revenue of the colony by an extension of the system of Customs' dutfes, and the creation of a fund, by means of a foreign loan, for the promotion of public works. The practice of presenting supplemental estimates. to. the Council, is one in which it is dangerous to allow the executive government any great latitude; and it ■becomes the representatives of the people to scrutinize with extreme jealousy the circumstances which render a resort to it necessary. All ordinary demands upon the Exchequer can be foreseen with tolerable certainty, by any administration possessing in a moderate degree the requisite qualities of statesmanship; and our confidence is naturally weakened in a government ihat accustoms itself year by year to ask the Legislative Council for a bill of indemnity for expenditure, greatly in excess of the sum constitutionally appropriated to the public service. Whatever the faults of our.-Legislature, they have not hitherto been chargeable with want of liberality, and the disposition they have shown to provide amply for the necessities of the Executive, renders the habitual tendency to outrun that provision wholly inexcusable. The additional sum now demanded amounts in the aggregate to J2396,056 17s. 7d., and in the necessity of this vote the Lieut.-Governor expresses a belief that the Council "will, no doubt, concur." That it is necessary to make provision for an expenditure already incurred, may indeed be admitted ; but that such portions of that extra expenditure as have been really indispensable, could not have been foreseen, we are by no means satisfied, nor do we think the Council will be. And we feel it is incumbent on the house, as the trustees of a revenue derived from the general taxation of the people, to insist on the expediency of sanctioning the " carte blanche" powers, which government are so prone to assume. To "concur" too readily, and as a matter of mere routine, in an expenditure in excess of formal and specific appropriations, is to open the door to a great public danger. The Council have already recorded more than one vote in assertion of this principle, but the tendency they have thus sought to check, appears to have been little curbed by their remonstrances.

In looking at the particular items of the present supplementary estimate, we can scarcely excuse the extra outlay of the sum of £\ 10,000 in the department of "the Civil Commissariat, oa the ground of "an unexpected increase in the price of forage, laboujyand transport ;" for, high as the cost of these things has been, the circumstances of the colony twelve months back were such as to take that cost out of the category of unforeseen casualties. Nor can we look at the sum of £153,838 10s. lid. set down for " works and buildings," without some painful misgivings as to the way in which it has been expended. • This item of " public works," indeed, figures largely both in the supplementary estimates for 1854 and the ordinary estimates" for 1855—the sum appropriated in the latter to this department of outlay, amounting to no less than £1,860,835 15s. We have no objection to sanction even a much larger oulay than this, for the promotion of those great public improvements which the colony require?, and the necessity of which we have been forward to insist upon. But we have seen too many instances already of a lavish expenditure of public money without any adequate fruit in works of public utility,—we have seen too many proofs of the utter want of system, prudence, and forethought with which these undertakings are carried out and too many circumstances of suspicioo attach to public contracts—to make us willing either to sanction what has already been dune, without very searching scrutiny into its economy and efficiency, or to make large provisions for future outlay without some better guarantee than we possess at present, for the due appropriation of the public funds. The "inconvenience and loss occasioned to the trade of the port, by the want of adequate wharf accommodation," is pleaded by the Lieut.Governor as justification for an outlay of

£45,000; but, if we mistake not, there has been no item of expenditure in which more money has'been wasted, or less skill and sagacity displayed, than in this matter of wharf accommodation. It is a subject not of mere rumour, but of public notoriety, that immense sums—the judicious application of which would have met all our present requirements, and provided for the exigencies of our commerce for years to come—have been so employed as to prove practically unproductive. And in the light of these facts, we cannot say that the antecedents of Government have been such as to create a claim upon public confidence. Sir Charles Hothum, it is true, hints very significantly at an "alteration in the system of management hitherto pursued ;" but we find it necessary to wait for the mystery of " the Holmes Contract" to be fully cleared up, before we are in a position to judge of the value to be set upon this implied promise of amendment.

That we must have public works carried out on a scale of magnitude, and that we must adopt a liberal outlay for their completion, we think no thoughtful man will be prepared to dispute. And that there is no party to whom a great national undertaking of this kind can be so properly entrusted as the Executive Government we are free to admit. Few, perhaps, would go beyond ourselves in the extent to which we should be glad to see this matter taken up in a liberal and comprehensive spirit. But system, economy, and skill, are indispensable. And'of these we must have guarantees. We have had enough of patch-york—of parts executed badly at enormous cost, without any reference to a great whole. Let the Council look to this; and whilst prepared, as we trust they will be, to make ample provision for improvements that cannot fail to be largely contributory to our prosperity and national developement, let them take care that the plans of the Government are wisely conceived, and exact security that the public money will not be wasted, either from official incapacity—or from worse. At the mere fact of a present deficit we are not greatly alarmed. We are a wealthy people, and though the colony is suffering from temporary depression, we have the fullest confidence in the elasticity of our resources. But in the face of so large an "excess of expenditure over income, and the necessity of devising means for equalizing the two, it is wise, we think, to adopt some .definite principle of public revenue. The time for mere financial expedients has gone by. Let us determine with cautious and mature deliberation upon a settled system of taxation, sound in principle, flexible and elastic in application. We have the experience of older stales to guide us, and have attained sufficient social consolidation to enable us to profit by the lessons of that experience. The colony has passed out of its transitory and exceptional condition, and the time has come for us to decide upon the permanent basis on which our Allure financial system shall rest. Sir Charles Hotham recommends a foreign loan fur public works, and a customs* revenue for the ordinary expenses of Government. To the former we say—Yes. To the latter—No. We shall return to the discussion of the questions thus opened.— Melbourne A<je.