The Sun. — London, England, 1835-02-11 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. as may drive the King's Ministers from office, without allowing Sir Robert Peel the opportunity of proving, by the measures to be submitted to the House, that the " Address to the Electors of Tamworth " was written in good faith, and that the reforms which it promised the nation were really meant to be carried into execution. If, indeed, the contest was as to the ablest and best qualified person that can be selected to fill the Chair, if the personal and mental requisites, the judgment and tact, the knowledge and experience essential to that high and responsible station, added to a character for strict and undeviating impartiality in office, were the only matters taken into consideration in making choice of a Speaker, no person would have the presumption, not even a pensioned sinecurist from the other side of the Tweed, to put his claims in compe tition with those of the Right Hon. Gentleman, who for 16 or 18 years has occupied the Chair with the highest approbation of all parties. If any such per son were vain enough to announce himself as a rival of Sir C. Manners Sutton, he would find no supporters. It is only in consequence of the election being made a party question by the Whig-Radicals that Mr. Aber cromby can hope for any votes. The Speaker of the tirst reformed House of Commons, to whose unequalled merits the Whig Ministers, with Lord Althorp at their head, bore testimony in the strongest language of eulogium—the Speaker, whom after 16 years of ser vice, mostly during the Tory Government, Lord Ebrington, Lord Morpeth, Sir Francis Burdett, Mr. Tennyson, Mr. Warburton, and even Mr. Hume, spoke of in terms of panegyric, could have encoun tered no opposition on the present occasion, if it were not that the Whig Radicals had resolved to try if they could oust the Ministry, by showing that they were strong enough to put any one whom they pleased into the chair, to serve the ends of faction, without any re gard whatever to the national interests. Never was there a time when a new Parliament more required a Speaker of great experience, knowledge, and judg ment. Lamentable would be the consequences to public business in the ensuing Session, if any man should be placed in the glair of the House of Com mons who is a novice to its duties, and who has yet to learn that Parliamentary law and usage which the House ought to learn from him. But Mr. Aber cromby professes to come forward " wholly on public principle." It is then on " public principle alone" that he is willing to exchange a pension of 2,0001. a-year for a place of 5,000/. What patriotism ! what disinterestedness ! Mr. Abercromby is truly an in stance of the most exemplary self-denial. He ac cepted a sinecure office of 4,0001. a-year formerly from the Duke of Wellington, no doubt upon " public prin ciple" also. It was upon " public principle" that he accepted a pension of 2,0001. a-year as a consideration for resigning that sinecure office, after holding it for about two years ! Thus it was " public principle" that induced Mr. Abercromby to take 4,000/. a-year under a patronage of Wellington and Peel a few years ago, and the same " public principle" now impels him to try to obtain a place of 5,000/. a-year to turn Peel and Wellington out ! But then. say Mr. Abercrom by's supporters, " it is true the place which he ac cepted was a sinecure—a judicial sinecure—a Chief- Justiceship without twelve defended causes to try in the year,—but still he might have kept the place and the 4,0001. a-year if he pleased—but he chose to accept 2,000/. or half the sum, for giving it up." •This is a strange defence to make for one who pretends to be a high-minded patriot—an enemy of jobbing—an opponent of the rank and bloated Pension- List—a real Reformer. But what does the defence in reality amount to ? It is as much as to say it is greatly to a man's credit if, having it in his power to plunder the country of an unearned 4,000/. a-year, his conscience, or the dread of detection, interposes, and he resolves to plunder it in future of only half that annual sum. A , commercial correspondent suggests the following illustration :—" If I saw," he says, " a merchant on the Royal Exchange drop, unwittingly, two 1,000/. notes, what would be said of me if I. re presented to him that it would have been quite easy for me to have instantly turned them into gold at the Bank, so that he should never have seen them again, and should gravely propose to him, as an act of great honesty on my part, that I would keep only one of them myself, and restore him the other ?" The answer of the indignant merchant may be easily ima gined—he would say, " If you have a right to keep one of the notes, you have a right to keep both ; but if you keep either you must not talk of your honesty." So Mr. Abercrombie might have kept the sinecure office of 4,000/. a year, if Parliament did not do its duty in abolishing it—but the unearned salary of that judicial sinecure was nothing else than plunder out of the public taxes; yet Mr. Abercromby takes credit to himself for consenting to receive half the salary of a place, which, as a patriot—as an honest politician — as a Reformer—he ought never to have accepted. If this job had not been made a subject of commentary in the Whig-Radical Journals, as highly creditable to the " disinterested patriotism " of Mr. Abercromby, we should probably have said less about it ; but it is rather " too bad ' to ask us to applaud that sordid grasping of pelf by a Whig which would be most vehemently condemned in a Tory. As we are not accustomed to vote " black is white for any party, we must only speak of the public actions of men as we find them. The job of accepting a sinecure office merely to melt it down into a good substantial pension is a job all the world over, whether a Tory, a Whig, or a Radical derives from it the profits, which, without value received, were taken out of the pockets of the people. In the forthcoming contest we have no doubt that the Whig-Radical opponents of the public jobs and unme rited pensions will, with admirable consistency of prin ciple, vote for Mr. Abercromby. The Destructives will do so to a man ; he has the special patronage of Mr. O'Connell, who announces his coming over in time to organise the plan of opposition to Sir C. Man ners Sutton, we presume. upon the skull-and-cross bones system of intimidation. If he could bring over a ship-load of Kerry priests, and establish the system of ‘g exclusive dealing," besides hurling the thunders of the Vatican at the heads of the opponents of Mr. Abercromby, a great triumph on the part of those who struggle for the dismemberment of the empire might be anticipated. It was to please the Repeal Agitator that Mr. Spring Rice was set aside, after a canvass had been commenced for him. But what will the moderate Reformers, like Lord Stanley, Sir James Graham, and many others, say to having Mr. O'Con nell's nominee for Speaker of the new House of Com mons ? Happily the country will be spared that por tentous exhibition—the Whig-Radicals know elec tioneering tactics too well, not to assume a louder tone of boastful confidence, in proportion as they become conscious of their weakness—from all we can learn, of having an inexperienced and utterly unqualified Speaker thrust into the Chair of the new House of Commons.—Morning Herald. Not an hour has passed since the first concoction of the scheme of setting , up an opposition Speaker, at which we have entertained the slightest doubt that it -would end in a signal failure. Not only has our judg ment respecting the success of Sir Charles M. Sutton been altogether unchanged from the beginning, but likewise our impression as to the nature and character of that party emergency which compelled the Whig leaders to vary their method of attack upon the Minis ters, and relinquishing all hope of victory through an amendment to the Address, direct their onset against the individual Conservative whom they had themselves son the last, and that a recent, opportunity, recom mended as the most eligible Speaker. The answer to the charge of gross and factious inconsistency, which has naturally arisen out of such conduct on the part of the Whigs, is neither more nor less than, Ist, a falsehood, and 2d, if it were true (which it is not), an illogical and silly excuse. The Radical impostors persist in asseverating, that Sir Charles Manners Sutton, since his re-election two years ago to the chair, has forfeited all claim to the renewal of such an honour try his Court-intrigues against the late Ministry. We have several times demonstrated the folly of this chi merical accusation. There were no intrigues for the dismissal of the late Ministry—an event of which the groundwork had been securely laid by Lord Grey's resignation some months before, and for which the parties destined to profit by it were absolutely and to tally unprepared—scattering themselves to all parts of the United Kingdom and of Europe. Nor was there, nor could there be, so far as the Speaker was con cerned, any partnership by Sir C. M. Sutton in those counsels which directed the dissolution of the late Par liament—a second count in the bill of indictment against him. We do not, indeed, insinuate nor ac knowledge that as a mere Privy Counsellor Sir C. M. Sutton might not conscientiously, and without the slightest impeachment of his honour or wis dom, have advised the Sovereign to dissolve any Parliament ; but the fact and practice are at open variance with every such surmise. The disso lution of a Parliament is always a Cabinet mea sure. The privilege of determining that it shall take place, or that it shall not, is always, we may ven ture to say, without exception, coined to the King's " confidential servants, who alone are amenable to the coming Parliament for that or any other act of high state policy. Sir C. M. Sutton was no member of the Cabinet ; and when the question comes to be investigated, we doubt not that his guilt in sending back the old House of Commons to its constituents was precisely on a par with that of his sending the late Ministers to grass. The whole plot about the Speakership was hatched in pure desperation. It was apprehended that the King's speech would open so good a case to the country, that with a respect for public opinion before their eyes, the better class of public opinion before their eyes, the better class of Whig and Liberal members would not dare to support an amendment hostile to Ministers. The question raised upon the Speakership became, therefore, the pis aller of the Opposition ; and even should Mr. Aber cromby be chosen Speaker (now this is no admission of the remotest probability of such an event, which we deem to be all but physically impossible)—but should Mr. Abercromby succeed to the chair, what do the Whigs expect would come after. Do they believe that the Ministers would resign ? Those who do are shal low greenhorns. The Duke of Wellington did not accept the seals of office, nor did Sir It. Peel return posthaste from Italy, to be sent to the wall by any factious vote—no, nor by a dozen such votes. They know what is at stake, and will stand the hazard. If a peevish address even were to be sent up to the Crown, his Majesty would not be pushed from his stool by such an apparition. Nothing but their delin quency would induce the Sovereign to dismiss expe rienced servants, in submission to a capricious or a selfish vote, dictated by those whose exclusive purpose was to trip up the heels of the Ministers whom they threatened, and to occupy their vacant places. But there are reasons of a specific and personal nature why Mr. .Abercromby should not be elected by the House. The Right Hon. Gentleman is close upon 60 years of age—that age at which, by reason of the average infir mity of those who have attained it, members of the House of Commons are exempt from being ballotted for election committees. Would it not be pre posterous, therefore, to select for the most incessantly laborious and overpowering office con nected with the House of Commons, a gewleman whose age is presumed to disqualify him for the easier and transient duties of an election committee, which seldom lasts for more than five or six days ? Mr. Abercromby, again, may, on the same score of ad vanced years and impaired health, be looked upon as soon likely to throw up the Speaker's office and retire ; but is there any precedent in modern times for a Speaker to be released without a retiring pension ? We believe not ; so that Mr. Abercromby's bargain in respect of the Scotch Exchequer would be improved upon by his contract for the Speakership. In the former case he got 2,0001. per annum for 27 months of idleness in a wig and gown, while here, as a recompense for half the term of duties imperfectly discharged, he would pocket 4,0001. per year during his whole existence. Why should not Sir Charles Manners Sutton be made use of by the House of Commons, while in the vigour of life, and while a large pension would be saved by it ? We repeat again, that the whole business is a low and vile job, calculated to revolt and disgust all indepen dent minds in England.—Times. Mr. Abercromby is likely to be added to the list of the victims of ignorant or injudicious friendship. His friends, instead of founding his pretensions on the basis of general respectability of talents and acquirements, persist in holding him up " as a mirror of ancient faith." With obstinate perversity, they appeal to the great (perhaps the only) blot in his public character as a sample of unparalleled public and private virtue. Now, what is the short history of the case, stripped of all varnish ? Mr. Abercromby, from his first sitting in Parliament, was a steady, and occasionally an ac tive, coadjutor of the Whigs. For many years one of the favourite and just objects of attack by that party was the Court of Exchequer in Scotland. It was re peatedly denounced as a board of sinecurists—a mere monument of the shameful waste of public money. In process of time the chief of this board of faineants, per haps frightened by the vehemence of the Whig opposi tion, resigns his appointment, and is succeeded—by whom?—by one of the band of declaimers against the sinecure. Oh ! but, it is said (and here mark the soundness of these logicians), he accepted the office from the Duke of Wellington's Government ; as if this was not an aggravation of his offence. If his friends had come into power, it is just possible that they might have pretended to have arrived at a sincere conviction that the office was not a sinecure, and he might have yielded to their conviction : but no, the Whigs never changed or modified—they never even pretended to have changed or modified—their view of the utter uselessness of the appointment, and evinced their sincerity by abolishing it as soon as they had the power to execute their purpose. By what process of reasoning, then, did Mr. Abercromby jump to a con clusion directly opposed to that of all his friends ? What was the form of that logic, what the quality of that eloquence, which drove or seduced his mind out of its long-cherished opinions ? Mr. Abercromby alone can answer this question. Certain it is that he consented to receive 4,0001. a year for the " sinecure" office ; that he continued to draw the full income for twenty-seven months ; and when at last, at the bid ding of his old friends, even the name of the office vanished into air, the ex-sinecurist consented to be come a pensioner for ever, to the amount of 2,0001. a year ! And this is the exemplar of disinterested ness !—this the paragon of political integrity !—this is the idol which O'Connell and his Whig associates have set up, and which they command all the repre sentatives of this great empire to fall down and wor ship, on pain of " the fiery furnace" of furious invec tive and political infamy !— Times. The factious purposes of the supporters of the in experienced and unqualified Mr. Abercromby for the Speaker's Chair, in opposition to Sir Charles Manners Sutton, become every day more evident. Indeed, the Whig-Radicals no longer conceal their object to be not the election of an accomplished and efficient Speaker to preside over the new House of Commons, but the making such a " demonstration " of strength The name of " public principle" has never, perhaps, been so shamelessly prostituted by any party in Great Britain as it has been within the last few weeks by that disreputable, mercenary, and factious portion of the Whig-Radical junta of which Lord John Russell has placed himself at the head, and of which Mr. Abercromby, although with manifest and avowed re luctance, has consented to become the tool. Up to this moment the organs of the party have not been able to agree upon any intelligible definition or expla nation of the " public principle" said to be involved in the selection by the House of Commons of a worse when they have the offer of a better Speaker. The choice of the best man for any important office in the State, of the man who is known to possess in the highest degree the qualifications necessary to the bene ficial and satisfactory discharge of its duties, is an in telligible " public principle." But the " public prin ciple" of the Whig-Radicals is some incomprehensible thing, not merely different from, but totally opposed to, this. Sir Charles Manners Sutton, as every body knows, was two years ago, in the estimation of the very men who are now prepared to oppose his re election, better qualified for the office of Speaker than Mr. Abercromby. Nobody can say that in the inter val either Sir Charles 'or his competitor has undergone the least change ; that either of the two has acquired or displayed qualifications or disqualifications for the office which was not then known to appertain to him. If Sir Charles was the better and Mr. Abercromby the worse man in 1833, as the Whigs unanimously proclaimed by their language and conduct, these two THE 811 N, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1835. gentlemen must still be in the same relative position of superiority and inferiority. What, then, is the " public principle" of which we first heard in the correspondence between Lord John Russell and Mr. Abercromby, and of which we have since heard so much through the Whig-Radical organs of the press? Why is it that we have yet to seek an intelligible expla nation of a " public principle" which has been talked of and written about for the greater part of a month ? Is it a " public principle" which the Whigs and Ra dicals are ashamed or afraid to avow ? Is it the " public principle" of giving a preference to admitted inferiority ? Is it the " public principle" of rewarding and fostering inferior merit merely because it is infe rior? Why do not the Whig Radicals speak out ? The principle above alluded to, whatever it may be for the country, is a good one for them. It is the only principle upon'which, however they may shrink from its open avowal, they can hope to enjoy political power. This principle of meritorious inferiority the Whig Ra dicals at once disclaim and cherish. They justly con sider Mr. Abercromby as its personification ; and no thing will satisfy them short of beholding it, in his per son, clothed in robes of state, preceded by a mace, and elevated to the honour of presiding over the House of Commons. We do not expect, however, that this Whig Radical instinct will meet with any correspondent feel ing in the House of Commons or in the country. That the " public principle" adverted to in terms so vague and unintelligible in the correspondence between Lord John Russell and Mr. Abercromby is something, repugnant to the common sense and feelings of man kind, may be very safely inferred from the want of dis tinctness in its enunciation, and from the ignorance in which the world has been permitted to remain up to this moment as to its true meaning. But there is a stronger ground for the same inference than even this. Mr. Abercromby, as we learn by his own letter, re mained ignorant for some days, or even weeks, after the project of setting him up for the Chair of the House of Commons had been propounded to him, or thought it prudent to affect ignorance, that any " public prin ciple" whatever was concerned in the matter. Now we put it to the common sense of mankind whether it be possible to suppose that a Whig lawyer, already steeped in jobs, one who from his first en trance into public life has been eagerly looking out for the means of advancing his own fortunes, would have been so slow to discover, or so reluctant to pro claim, a " public principle" tending to his elevation to the Chair of the House of Commons, to his enjoy-, meat of 5,0001. a year in possession, and of a retiring pension of 4,0001. a year in probable expectancy, as Mr. Abercromby showed himself upon this occasion, had the " public principle" been such as the most clear-sighted politician could discover, or any but the most unscrupulous and profligate politician could ad vance ? Had the " public principle" been clear and honest is it probable, we ask, that a gentleman of the character and in the position of Mr. Abercromby would have needed to be reminded of it by Lord John Rus sell ; and when so reminded, have spoken of it in terms so general as to show that he did not yet understand it, or, understanding, dreaded nothing so much as to present it clearly to the world ? The fact is certain, however, whatever may be its proper explanation, that we are still left to unassisted con jecture as to what the public principle really is upon which Mr. Abercromby is to be set up in opposition to Sir Charles Manners Sutton. It may be, and pro bably is, as we have already supposed, that interest which the Whig Radical party, as a party, unques tionably have in claiming preferment as the due ineed and suitable recompence of inferiority as inferiority. But since the party are bound to deny this, let us see what else the "public principle" of which we have heard so much can possibly mean. Credit might be given to the party for an object less manifestly absurd, although equally unjustifiable, that, namely, of forcing the present Minesters of the Crown to relinquish office in their own favour by means of an adverse division of the House of Comnions, were it not certain that no such effect can possibly be produced by the division on this particular question, be it what it may. If the " public principle" of Lord John Russell and Mr. Abercromby be that any means are legitimate by which they can dispossess their political rivals and possess themselves of office, and if it be in pursuance of this principle that they seek to instal inferiority in the Chair of the House of Commons, we tell them at once that their principle, and the means by which they are striving to give it effect, have no relation to, or connection with, each other. Even in the event of a majority of the House of Commons following in their train, an event which we believe to be impossible, the result aimed at would certainly not be produeed. The judgment of the House of Commons would be discre dited, its dignity impaired, the order and decorum of its future proceedings less effectually preserved, and the course of public business be rendered more liable to interruption and impediment. These great and ma nifest evils would undoubtedly accrue : but the desired consummation, which the Whig-Radical faction deem so great a good as to countervail these or any other imaginable evils, would be as distant as ever. Sir Robert Peel would still produce the measures by which he expects to affiard general satisfaction to the country ; and the Whig-Radical faction would still have to encounter the mortification and calamity of witnessing the manifestations of national gratitude and joy, in the possession of an Administration of talent and honesty, enough to bring forward and to effect sober, rational, and practicable improvements. When the question is thus considered it becomes evident that the " public principle " of the Whig Radical faction cannot upon this occasion be that of dissolving the Government, in the expectation that they may be per mitted to replace it. But if a Ministry cannot be dis placed by such means as the Whig-Radicals are now resorting to, it may be at least considerably annoyed and perplexed. In whatever degree the proceedings of the House of Common's are em barrassed and impeded, in consequence of having placed in its Chair a man inferior to the best, this will be so much additional vexation and trouble to the Mi nistry, so mu:11 of hindrance to the pregress of the beneficial measures they may introduce, so much of reduction to their power of establishing, upon a solid basis, their claims to the gratitude, esteem, and confidence of the country. This view of the sub ject opens to us a new " public principle;" which may possibly be that of Lord John Russell and Mr. Aber cromby ; the principle, to wit, that to degrade the cha racter, abate the dignity, and frustrate the deliberations of the Legislature, in order to discredit and enfeeble the King's Government, is a very legitimate and pa triotic course of proceeding. Assuming this to be the public principle" in deference to which Mr. Aber cromby is to be proposed to the House of Commos for their Speaker, it would follow that in case of his election he cannot possibly exhibit too much negligence, too much ignorance, or too much partiality, in the execution of his duties ; that to be learned or acute, courteous or dignified, assiduous or impartial, will be in effect to spurn at the very principle to which he owes his elevation ; that, in short, he cannot be a tolerable Speaker without being an inconsistent man. Mr. Aborcromby's consistency will not, however, be exposed to this test. He will escape so painful an alternative as that of being wilfully false to his party, or of wilfully abusing the power of the Chair of the House of Commons. The nation ought not longer to be left to guess at the " public principle" by which the principal actors in this affair profess to be actuated. if it be a principle which will bear the light of day, why is it so cautiously kept out of view ? From all that has yet appeared, the public must, indeed, con clude that party malice or sordid self-interest, rather than " public principle" of any kind, is at the bottom cf the whole proceeding.—Morning Post. or unfitness—but that the country cares greatly for the result, and cares for it precisely because it is not a question of men, but a question of measures—of honesty or of dishonesty—of whether the country shall have an Administration which op posed the Reform Bill, and invariably proved itself an enemy to the people—or whether it shall have the fruits of Reform from the authors and promoters of the Reform Act, and the friends of the peeple during the last seventy years ? Of the result we have no doubt. The people have to a great extent been true to themselves--and their Representatives must be true to them. We again repeat—but it is almost useless to do so—that the man who votes for Sir C. M. Sut ton, or for the address, whatever it may be, is a traitor to his constituents—to his country—to the cause of Reform—and a DESTRUCTIVE in every sense of the word. The galamatia of the Tory and renegade Whig press, on this subject, is beneath our notice.— Morning Advertiser. Two dinners are appointed to take place on Mon day next in honour of the return of Members for the Metropolitan districts. The one is to Dr. Lushington and Mr. Clay, the well-deserving Representatives of the Tower Hamlets, to be held, we believe, at the London Tavern. Our friends in the East will, we doubt not, gather strong to the feast. The other is given at the Horns Tavern, Kennington, to the Right Hon. C. Tennyson, M.P., by his friends and consti tuents of Lambeth.. The attendance will, we have reason to know, be as numerous as it. ought to be ; for never was Member better entitled to it on the score of zealous and consistent service. The Licensed Vic tuallers are bound in an especial manner to mark their sense of his endeavours in their cause. He was in the last Parliament the only man who stood forward for them, and most perseveringly defended their interests against further attempted encroachments on their rights and property. If they do not muster strongly, we need scarcely state that, however true Mr. Tennyson may prove to their cause, the effect upon other Members will be any thing but beneficial to their interests.— Morning Advertiser. The election of Mr. Abercromby is safe. The ac counts received yesterday place the question beyond all doubt. We only trust that the Irish and Scotch Members will not leave any thing to accident, but be at their post in good time. At this season of the year, Members who are at a distance from the metro polis ought to make assurance doubly sure, by being in town a day or two at least before the meeting of Par liament. Bettin g yesterday was two to one in favour of Mr. Abercromby ; but the Tories would seem to indicate that Sir Charles will bolt, for they will only bet on the condition of an actual contest. The cases of doubtful voting among those who call themselves Reformers are few indeed. They are not even worth naming now, and it is certain that they never will be named hereafter as Reformers. One individual, once the hope of the people, reminds as of Johnson's lines— " From Marlborough's eyes the streams of dotage flow, And Swift expires a driveller and a show." We are unwilling to exhaust the patience of our rea ders by continuing a discussion in which nothing new can be urged. The Times continues to speak des pairingly of the chance of Sir Charles Sutton. Our Contemporary is inexhaustible in surmises with regard to the motives for trying the strength of parties on the question of who shall be Speaker. It admits the wis dom of the Reformers, by its anxiety to prove that on no other question could they hope to obtain so many votes. A splash must be made (says our Contem porary) that's flat ; The humbug must be spread abroad that the Ministers are in a dead minority—a panic is hoped for, and (by the mark) a resignation ; Or else what happens ? Why, the game of the Confederation is up." 'Well, then, a splash be it. It is quite clear, from the showing of the Times, that the Reformers have chosen their ground well. We will not anticipate the possibility of failure. We are not now under the necessity of demon strating what the Reformers could do were they to allow the Tories to walk over the course in the contest for the Speakership. We will assume, with the Times, that it is wise in the Reformers to endeavour to carry Mr. Abercromby. When that point is gained, it will be time enough to apply ourselves to the question next in order. The tone of the Standard is blustering, but evidently dictated by anything rather than a confident belief in the assertions so loudly made. Our evening contemporary is exceedingly anxious to prove that the Reformers cannot long hold together. That question does not press at present. The question which now presses is, how the Tories can be ousted ? The Standard may kill the Reformers by raison demon strative; it is enough for us to be able to give a practical refutation. The Morning Post is most amusing. It fairly meets the Reformers by arguing on the assumption, that Sir Charles Manners Sutton did take an active part in the intrigues which led to the dismissal of the Melbourne Ministry and the dis solution of the late Parliament, and contends that " The condemnation of the Speaker must imply heavy cen sure upon the King ; and the ' principle,' if carried to its full extent, arrives at this point, that the King infringes the rights of the House of Commons if he dismisses his Ministry during a prorogation, or at any time while they have, or might have been expected to have, a majority of votes in that House ; and that those who advise him to do so are enemies or unfaithful ser vants of the representatives of the people. It is scarcely ne cessary to observe that the principle' also applies in full force to any dissolution of the House at a time when it may be pre sumed that a majority would not have consented to it." This may be well calculated to recommend Sir Clias. Sutton to the Tories ; but they must be strange Re formers indeed who would make choice of a Speaker who, if they were to give effect to their views, would seize the first opportunity afforded during the recess for endeavouring to defeat their labours through a dis solution. We say nothing with regard to the prero gative : it remains to be ascertained by Parliament whether it was rightly exercised or not. But assuming that it was not rightly exercised, it will be prudent to deprive Sir Charles of an opportunity to do wrong a second time. No, no ; we must have no back-stairs Speaker. Sir Charles may take his reward in a peerage : on a Reformed House of Commons he has assuredly no clahn.—Morning Chronicle. So Sir George Murray is no longer a member of the Cabinet. Honour to the virtuous electors of Perth shire for this great moral lesson I Sir George has now found to his cost, that if a statesman owes some thing to his party, he owes something also to himself. By throwing away his character for truth, he has lowered himself in the estimation of his own associates, who point to the verdict of the Perthshire electors, and say,—You are no longer of the same value in our eyes. We trust this lesson will not be lost on public men. Differences of opi nion on public questions have always existed, and will always exist ; but there can be but one opinion with respect to the necessity for adhering to engagements. Let the fate of Sir George Murray be a warning to all politicians. They who profit by violations of pledges and declarations will be the first tb turn their backs on the faithless tools who thus evince so little regard for the good opinion of the public. We pity Sir George Murray ; but he has himself alone to blame for what has happened.—Morning Chronicle. The question of the Speakership hangs heavily on the souls of the Tories ; and in imitation of, if not from the same motive as, those who know that their doom is fixed, they cry out, " We are innocent—we are innocent !" We take them at their word. We also fear not the result ; but when they talk of the question of the Speakership being a mere personal question, we are bound to inform them that the re i s no personality in the matter— that it is the principles of the Speaker which are in question, and not the late Speaker himself—that the country cares not much whether Sir C. M. Sutton or Mr. Abercromby be, or be not, Speaker, so far as they are per sonally concerned—that it is no question of fitness COURT OF KING'S BENCH. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. WEBB V. WEEDON. The hearing of this cause was resumed this morning, and on its basing been intimated that it would not close to-day, and perhaps not to-morrow, several other cases were posponed till the next sitting, and the Juries dismissed. After hearing other witnesses fer the plaintiff, the case on his behalf was closed. Sir JOHN CAMPBELL then addressed the Jury for the defendant. The Learned Gentleman spoke from ten o'clock till two, and then called witnesses. The further hearing of the case was adjourned rt seven o'clock, till to-morrow (this day). EXCHEQUER COURT. SCHAFFER V. LE PFTIT. This was an action for compensation in damages for the seduction of the plaintiff's daughter, Julia Maria Schaffer, by the defendant. The plaintiff is a clock and watch dial face finisher, residing in Spencer -street, Gosvvell-street ; and the defendant an engraver. Mr. THESSIGER stated the case for the plaintiff. Mr. Sergeant ANDREWS objected in the course of the examination of a witness, to make her contradict what she had first advanced. Mr. THESSIGER defending this course, to which Mr. Baron ALDERSON objected, the Learned Counsel addressed some observations to the Jury, on which— Mr. Baron ALDERSON warmly remonstrated with him for appealing from the Judge to the Jury, and saying that it was irregular, and would not benefit his case. Mr. THESSIGER said his Lordship's impression was erro neous, and he (lid not consider such observations correct. Mr. Baron ALDERSON-Mr. Thessiger, you are not to school me. Mr. THESSIGER—I am not schooling your Lordship, but I saw an impression hastily taken up, which I endea voured to remove. Mr. Baron ALDERSON—If it was so, that was not the way. After some further remarks the examination of the wit ness was resumed. Mr. Sergeant ANDREWS addressed the Jury for the de fendant. Mr. Baron ALDERSON summed up. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 135/. SHERIFFS COURT.. THE KING V. BOST. This was an indictment for perjury. The parties dif fered and separated, and the prosecutor filed a bill in the Equity Exchequer for an account and for other relief. The defendant put in an answer, and in that answer swore that the prosecutor had represented himself as a person com petent, under the existing laws of this country, to carry on business as a general practitioner. On this part of the an swer the present indictment was founded. The prosecutor on being examined described himself as having served three years as an apprentice to an apothecary at Liverpool. The statement in an affidavit filed by the prosecutor in equity was that " he had been duly appren ticed to an apothecary at Liverpool, and had served his time." Lord DENMAN thought that this variance must prevent the case from being carried further. The Jury Acquitted the defendant. REES V. SIBLEY. This was an action to recover the value of a trunk and its contents, belonging to the plaintiff, and which the de fendant had negligently allowed to be taken from his office. The plaintiff was a young man of fortune, and the defendant was a person who kept a booking-office at Kensington. Sir J. CAMPBELL, for the defendants, asserted that the trunk had not been booked, but that the porter who brought the luggage appered to be the person entrusted with ti.e care of it. Verdict for the plaintiff-.-Damages, Thirty Pounds, RYDELL V. LORD HARLEY. This was a writ of inquiry, to assess the damages in an action for the hire of a carriage let to the noble defendant by the plaintiff, a hackneyman in Bond-street, at the rate of one guinea per day, from the commencement of 1833 down to the autumn of the same year. The hire was proved by Charles Hewitt, clerk to the plaintiff, and the amount claimed was 571. ss. It was also proved that due notice of the action b td been given to the noble defendant by William Lawless, clerk to the plaintiff's attorney, on the 31st of January. There was no defence, and consequently the Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for the amount claimed. LOVELL V. DANIELL, The plaintiff, a tailor, sought to recover 6!. 1 ls. for clothes furnished to the defendant. To the action the de fendant had pleaded, first, that he was not indebted to the plaintiff for goods ; and, secondly, that he was an infant at the time of the contract, being only 17 years old ; to which replication had been made, and therefore issue was joined, the plaintiff averring that the goods were necessaries fit for his station in life, to which the defendant had rejoined in the negative. After hearing evidence on the part of the plaintiff it was contended for the defendant that the case was one of law and fact ; that, as would be shown, the plaintiff's guardian always supplied him with clothes fitting for his station ; that the clothes in question had been surreptitously and im properly furnished, in order to promote the defendant's im providence, and that they were unsuitable with his station in socieq. Under these circumstances the law exonerated all infants from liability, and Lord Tenterden had so laid it down. George Daniel, the brother, was authorised by Mr. Go terman, the guardian, to provide him with clothes during his apprenticeship to Mr. Wardell, the shoemaker, and that he paid him out of the interest of the money in the Funds which will come to him. The Sheriff said, by the law of the land no tradesman could recover against a minor except for necessaries, and this was the only question in the case. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for 5/. lls., de ducting I/. as unnecessary, being the value of a silk velvet collar and silk facings. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT. .--4 she cannot be more than sixteen or seventeen years of age , performed the duties of a seaman ? Captain M'lntyre—lt is, my Lord. She performed them to admiration. She would run up to hand the top gallant sail in any sort of weather, and we had a severe passage. Poor girl, she had a hard time of it. She suf fered greatly from the wet, but she . bore it all excellently, and was a capital seaman. The LORD MAYOR—Is the account of the romantic pursuit of the person she was said to be attached to cor rect ? Is it true that she went to America after the Car tain, who was said to be her sweetheart ? M`Lean said that the account she had given to him corresponded %cah! that which appeal ed before the public ; but she would herself mention the particulars. Captain M'lntyre had no doubt of the correctness of her statement. She was not at all given to loquacity ;on the contrary, she did the duty of a seaman without a murneir, and had infinitely a better use of her hands than of he r tongue. This description of the female sailor seemed to be accu• rate. Her hands appeared as if they were covered with thick brown leather gloves, and it was by repeated clues' tioning the Lord Mayor got from her the facts, of which the following is the substance : Anne Jane Thornton is in the seventeenth year o f her age. Her father, who is now a widower, took her and the the rest of his family from Gloucestershire, where she was born, to Donegal, when she was six years old. He was then the owner of stores in that part of Ireland, and in good car' cumstances, and was always affectionate to her. .She re' gretted that she had quitted her homo, for her departure, of which she had given no previous notice to her father , must have caused him many a sorrowful hour. When she was only thirteen years old she met Captain Alexande r Burke, whose father resided in New York, and was the owner of vessels there, and before she was fifteen they he: came strongly attached to each other. S oon afterward s Aleck Burke was obliged to go to New York, and she took up the resolution to follow him. She quitted her fa ther's house, accompanied by a maid servant and a boy, an d having procured a cabin boy's dress, she exerted herself to obtain a passage to America. She succeeded in her ob ject. The servant maid and boy took leave of her imrne; diately upon her embarking, the latter being char with a message to her father informing him of her 1 0 ' tention. By degrees she became reconciled to the labours of her new employment, but she beheld with joy the shores, of New York, where she thought her labours would terminate. The moment she landed she went off in he r cabin-boy's dress to the house of Captain Burke's father , and said that she had worked under the Captain's o rders. and wished to be engaged by him again. It was by the la: ther of the young man she was informed of the event whie° placed the eternal barrier between them, and she retired from the house disconsolate. America was, however , 00 place in which to look for sympathies. In the belief that the sea, which, no doubt., her feelings of affection for Burke recommended to her, was a more probable mode of es' istence than any she could adopt in the dress of her serl she applied for and obtained a situation as cook and stewar d in the Adelaide, and subsequently in the Rover, in which latter vessel she sailed to St. Andrew's, where she fell 'I with Captain M'lntyre. The Captain of the Rover ha' engaged to take her to Belfast, but he received an order from the owners to sail for the West Indies, and as sh e was resolved to return to her father as soon as possible, s e l refused to accompany him. For thirty-one months she ha, been engaged in these remarkable adventures, and partio" pated in the most severe trials of the crews of which she formed part. The Loan MAYOR—And are you not weary of so bar rassing a life ? The Girl— Yes ; I am anxious to g et home. I hope and believe that my father will forgive ro e for the sorrow I have caused him. I have had my 0° sorrows too. Captain M'lntyre—l am anxious to pay her the wages owe her, and I never had any idea of giving her less tbs° I agreed to pay. The LORD Mavoa—How did it happen that you fancie d the sailor's dress, well knowing that by assuming the ar pearance of one, you pledged yourself to perform such ter' rible duties ? The Girl—l could not think of any other way, and I did the duties as well as I could. I underwe nt a good deal. I travelled from East Port, in North rice, to St. Andrew's by myself, a distance of 70 rou e " through the woods. I walked all the way. • ? The LORD MAYOR—And without sustaining any injury ? The Girl—l received none. I knew the sailor's clothe s would carry me through safe, and at St. Andrew's 1 10 Captain M'lntyre. Captain M'lntyre—lt was but a few days ago I learne d that we had a girl on hoard. I was the last person' in t he Vessel who was informed of this fact, and I could scarcely credit the mate when he told me of it. I can bear tes t ; mony to the extraordinary propriety of her conduct, and ask her again whether I have not acted properly towar d !' her, and particularly from the moment I beca me acqu aint with the secret, which she was anxious not to h ave di s close' The girl was in gratitude bound to acknowledge t hs kindness and humanity of the captain. The LORD Mavou—l shall give directions that you b e taken care of until I hear from your father, to whom I sh7 l write to-night. You have done him great wrong by al' s ( ' donine• him under any pretence, but you have sufered bi terly for your disobedience ; and I trust that you will 4 your future attention and care prove to him that your nu, affection is as strong as your courage in such circumstan e ' of danger and toil as you have been placed in has been immeasurably beyond that of the rest of your sex of 1 0° ; dern days. Many gentlemen to whom I have spoken ° be the subject looked upon the case as the coinage of t e brain ; but the investigation has, if possible, added to tp interest of the story. that Captain M'lntyre mentioned to the Lord Mayor t the proprietor of the Cooper's Arms, in Lower Thame s ' street, where the young woman had lodged, was a resP e- ;, table person, in whose house she would be properly ta ke ; care of, and his Lordship desired that she should remelt' that asylum. -The girl then retired, after having gratefully ackn e u er , ledged her thanks for the humanity and solicitude of t "..„ d Lord Mayor. She is of low stature, and her limbS the firmly knit together. I er face is comely, her eyes are e r A and brilliant, and her teeth are extremely white. The he r" ships to which she has been so long exposed, have O a r, pletely tanned her face end neck, but the sailor who s ec ; dentally detected her secret, declares that the natural Cole of her skin is as white as snow. Many antiquaries and connoisseurs have late l i e visited the church of the united parish of St. Edmund th t King and Mart} r, and St. Nicholas Acons, re-opened ell, a year ago by the Bishop of London. It was rebuilt by Christopher Wren immediately after the great fire of Lond'i and under the superintendence of Messrs. Walker, Etty, T. Collinson had been under repair for more than a year Pr i f e to its recent re-opening. The whole of the repairs, with t u . . addition of a new organ (by Bishop), cost rather more OOP, 2,0001., the greater part of which, much to the credit of t h parishioners, was defrayed out of the parish funds. The O nl e ; munion table is adorned with a finely-painted picture of M use and Aaron, the work of Mr. Etty, R.A. ENGLISH WOOL.--This article sold at an advan ce of 2d. per pound at Warminster on Saturcay last. ORNITHOLOGY.—A fine specimen of that r% strayer into Britain, the Bohemian Chatterer, or Wax I V ! ) : t ( Ampelis Garrulusi, Linnaeus), was last week shot at g srP o - . Weighton. It is variegated with a beautiful mixture of %, lours ; red, ash-colour, chestnut, and yellow ; but what d i sfo sti pi guishes it from all other birds are the horny appendages of the tips of seven of lesser quill feathers, which stand bart.e beards, and have the colour and gloss of the best red sea wax. There are two or three monkeys now in the Z OO O ll gical Gardens in the Regent's-park whose passion for s i t i ot affords much amusement to the visitors. They seem to zealously into their eyes and ears, as well as their n°_, st f o - gf and, after some minutes of triumphant sneezing and se°',:slie to enjoy the narcotic influence of the Nicotian weed W it " calm contentment of an old-fashioned philosopher. IN THE MATTER OF CAPTAIN NV. STOKOE. This matter, which had been several times before the Court, was to-day finally disposed of. The insolvent, a Captain in the service of the East India Company, was re manded, in September last, for a period of fifteen calendar months, for fraudulently contracting a debt to a large ex tent with a gentleman named Dunne. He had married some years ago Miss Emily Dunne, the sister of Mr. Dunne, and had on the nuptial day executed a deed, by which he granted her an annuity of 1001. in the event of a separation ; he left her soon after the marriage, went to India, where he remained some years, amassed some mo ney, and then returned to this country on leave of absence ; be was soon afterwards arrested by Mr. Dunne, the survi ving trustee, under the settlement, and on his application to this Court, was sentenced to the above imprisonment. In December last a rule was obtained to set the judgment aside. The rule had been argued at great length, and the Court made it absolute ; a day was fixed for the rehearing, but the insolvent had made an offer to execute another deed to allow his wife 1001. a year out of his pay. The offer was accepted, and the case stood over until the deed was prepared. The insolvent to-day again came up, and it was stated that he had executed the deed. Mr. COOKE on his behalf, prayed that the judgment pro nounced in September might be reversed. Mr. CRESSWELL, for Mr. Dunne, consented to the dis charge of the insolvent. He stated that he had executed a deed to allow his wife 1001. a year. Mr. Commissioner BowEN then reversed the judg ment recorded at the original bearing, and ordered Captain Stokoe to be discharged. He had been many months in confinement. The Court, on its rising, adjourned till Friday. SURREY SESSIONS. Thomas Sta f ford, a well-dressed and respectable-looking man, carrying on the business of a wax and tallow chandler at Chertsey, was indicted for stealing some beans, value 3d., the property of John Harris, a livery-stable-keeper, residing in the same town. The Jury returned a verdict of Guilty, but strongly re commended the prisoner to mercy in consequence of the excellent character given of him. The prosecutor stepped into the witness' box, and, addressing the Court, also joined in the recommendation. The Magistrates consulted together for some time, and the Chairman, addressing the prisoner, said that the sen tence was that the prisoner be imprisoned for three months in Guilford Gaol. The prisoner exclaimed, on leaving the Bar, " I'm an in nocent man ; the prosecutor has done this and ruined me, to save himself from an action." POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MANSION-HOUSE. The Loan MAyon having read the statement which has appeared in the newspapers relative to a female who has for sometime performed the arduous duties of a seaman, and whose sex was accidentally discovered, directed M'Lean, the inspector of the City Police, to make inquiries into the circumstances, in order that if the girl required assistance, it might be rendered to her without subjecting her to annoy ance. M‘Lean thought that the best thing he could do after having heard the story of the girl from her own lips, was to bring her to the Mansion House, and introduce her to his Lordship. He accordingly appeared before the Lord Mayor, accompanied by the girl, the captain of the vessel in which she came to London, and several gentlemen who felt an interest in the remarkable details of the case. Captain 111'Intyre, of the Sarah, from Belfast, met - the girl whose name is Anne Jane Thornton, at St. Andrews, in North America. She was dressed in ,sailor's clothes, and had all the appearance of having been brought up to that employment. He engaged her at nine dollars a month, to act as cook and steward, and considered that she was what she seemed to be, until a few days before the arrival of the vessel in the port of London. It appeared that some of the crew had suspected her sex before she was seen wash ing in her berth, and from the circumstance of her having repeatedly refused to drink grog. The LORD Mtivoa—lt has been reported that she was ill-treated by her captain and the crew. I wish particularly to be informed upon that point. Captain APlntyre would call upon the girl to say whether he had not uniformly treated leer with kindness, and whe ther when her sex was discovered the degree of kindness and care was not increased ? The girl declared that Captain M'lntyre had acted to wards her with humanity, and had desired her to complain to him if any of the crew attempted to treat her harshly. She had been in the course of the voyage struck by some of the sailors because she could not work so hard as they did, a thing she found it difficult to do in a gale of wind, but she did not tell the captain, as she determined to endure as much as possible without grumbling. The LORD MAYOR-45 it possible that this mere girl, for DIED. On the Bth inst., at Broad Green House, Cro' i 0 het rdon, _Surrek fg: _.,.........reenx,... oyu.. , e.,_ _ 1 68th year, Elizabeth, relict of the late Alexander Caldcleug';ore. On the Bth inst., Sarah, wife of Mr. Wm. J. Tilley, o f Surrey-street, Christ Church, Surrey. ° O. On the 4th inst., at Isleworth, Miss Robson, daughter of lel James Robson, Esq., of York. On the 7th inst., J. Walton, Esq., of Kensington,ag. ed tit . 06 On the Bth inst., Emily, daughter of William Was° Esq., of Horton, aged three years. . . .1r On the 10th December, on Plantation Best and Ph cou ' merara, Joseph Becte, sen., Esq. _, I , Ol d On the sth inst., at Walton-upon-Thames, Richard Nor'"' r in his 67th year. f CIO ° On the Bth inst, in his 86th year, John Crabb, Esq. , ° ;-, t y ford, Essex. R bec e ! On the 7th inst., in Dartmouth-row, Blackheath , — e 4 wife of George Joad, Esq., in her 67th year. iiito' flit' On the 9th inst., at Dalston, Rosa, daughter of 31r. ikar of Bishopsgate-street, and Dalston, Middlesex, and sister Newton, 95, Cheapside tio' -----..----- of ti o r L.,ll(ion : Printe:i iu:Li I)iihilLd Lv i11)Tl YOVII; C otO , ' 112. Strand, at The Sun Office,No. 112, Strand, il , of Middlesex. Gently I 'ztii Meld Port tc tion (It failed I had of 11---si won ap Yello oi w 48,4 , al Packet alm ond 6s. ed. At t • ppositf a4 y eth ,___ T( C tnglisl Aloule ! The B, Very G The be Irish a i the s vatent Pi ne 01 Aighl ii.uottle wed hii."tt:nOcerd Tt,their e c Patr; .sta blishm the trot I* %anti 4, ' Dr a i w n i 5. Silk, oPlate g. 3 o — tro 1 9. 10.11aIr. G 12. oltscel Auctio MARRIED.' On the 10th inst., at St. Martin's, William Oliver -a„..tje Esq., son of Warren Hastings Rowland Jackson, Esq., of 'ab' view, in the county of Cork, to Georgiana Maria Jane, onlY' ter of Dr. James Johnson, of Suffolk-place. B °l' On the 10th inst., at Edmonton Church, Charles Jamesuirs' Esq., eldest son of the late Charles Bevan, Esq., of Dev 013744., place, to Emma Charlotte, second daughter of T. A. Curti* of Southgate, Middlesex. On the 2Sth ult., at the scat of Lentran, near Inverness, Gec'reiti Waddell, Esq., of the Hon. East India Company's Bornbal ter si Service, and of Walmer, Kent, to Catherine, eldest dog° William Falconer, Esq., of Lentran. ,and 8 1 Stout Fine Super ouper Very Good Ditto Super Genui