The Sun. — London, England, 1835-11-12 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS nto surplus, and making a wholesale transfer of it to he uses of the Romish priesthood. The mere pro position to divert, on any pretext, the income of our Church to the education of Roman Catholics, under the extensive direction of their Priests—that is, on principles of which the object will be to perpetuate their slavish subserviency to the priesthood, and their deadly hatred towards the name of Englishman and Protestant—is too monstrous to be listened to by any man who has not abandoned every practical object but the possession of office ; and indeed on this point one cannot help admiring the more than stolid simplicity of my Lord John Russell. Only hear the Noble re jected of Devonshire—" Where is the harm if, in as serting this (appropriation) principle, we happen to meet the support of Mr. O'Connell ?" and further, "It is singular that those so inimical to the Protestant Church should be contented with a measure so temperate and friendly as ours." !I We do protest that in all our experience of public men and of titled greenhorns, we never heard or read of anything half so rich as this. Oh, happy accident I That a Whig measure for the spoliation of the Protestant Church should, by the merest chance imaginable, attract the notice of Mr. Daniel O'Connell, and obtain the honour of his sup port ! Oh, bright and rose-coloured Lord John Rus sell that can find nought but " singularity" in the contentment of the Papists with a bill for making them lords and masters of what yet remains of Ire land ! My Lord, my Lord, learn to reason, if you have yet time. Flatter not yourself that the rest of mankind will find no shame, where you see only a sort of political curiosity. Depend upon it that sounder logicians than your Lordship will not be quite so com plaisant as to infer from O'Connell's extreme satis faction with your measure, that it is either " tempe rate" or " friendly" towards the Church. Again, the Noble Member for Stroud attempts to deal with questions which prove too many for him :—" The Duke of Wellington yielded Roman Catholic Eman cipation to the fear of civil war." The Duke of Wellington yielded because he saw that the British nation was penetrated with a sense of the jus tice of that great measure, which had for its object the communication of the rights of citizens to 7,000,000 of English and Irish Roman Catholics, comprehend ing thousands of educated and liberal gentlemen, many among them of the noblest blood in the empire, and almost invariably raised above the odious and malignant ascendancy of a priesthood with whom they could not sympathise. Such men we never have confounded with the surpliced ruffians who instigate to crime from the altar, and as little with the savage multitude. But England was on their side, and the press of England, and we are so still. The Duke of Wellington therefore acted like a wise and honest states man, by preferring a measure, which taken alone he dis approved of, to waging against the Irish Papists, a war wherein lie would not have been backed or assisted by this country. But does Lord John Russell flatter him self that the destruction of the Protestant church will obtain for him and his colleagues the same moral sup port from Englishmen as weighed with the Duke of Wellington in carrying Catholic Emancipation ? Does Lord John Russell conceive that if the Irish Papists go to war for the supremacy of their church, the peo ple of England will shrink from such a struggle, or leave his Majesty in the lurch when he appeals to them ? Does Lord John suppose that the domina • Lion of the Popish priesthood will, at the beck of a bully-beaten Cabinet, become as popular throughout Great Britain as was the civil freedom of the Roman Catholic laity ? If his Lordship makes. love to a civil war for the sake of Popery, his eulogium on Lord Althorp is not a little droll, where lie admires that nobleman so much for having threatened a civil war in preference to a repeal of the Union. Wherein do these two national mischiefs differ ? They are but one substance under separate names. Repeal of the Union is the coronation of Popery—the triumph of Popery, by the passing of the Church Bill, on the other hand, animmediate stepping-stone to the repeal of the Union. A large portion of the noble Lord's speech being a vindication of what he calls his consistency, is a mat ter which concerns us not. It merely proves, that instead of wavering in his attacks upon the Church, lie has been actuated by a steady and inveterate hos tility against her. But his assertion that he enter tained such sentiments some years ago, while O'Con nell still abused him and his colleagues, goes no way towards disprOving a subsequent league between them. It implies no more than that they have bought over the agitator, by pledging themselves to carry for him, and at his dictation, those measures which, with con sciences less hardened, and in circumstances less des perate, they formerly ventured to refuse. The plain and broad fact that without him and his tail they would be left in the minority contains the whole case— it needs not a word of explanation.—Times. To vindicate the existing Government from the charge of a disgraceful and degrading coalition with the Agitator, whom the Whig Ministry of Earl Grey denounced in the Speech from the Throne, is the great object of Lord John Russell's speech at Bristol. Like the recent speech of Mr. Cutlar Fergusson to his con stituents, it professes to refute the accusations so elo quently made and so ably supported by Sir William Follett, in his celebrated speech to the electors of Exeter. Having ourselves very lately replied to Mr. Fergusson, and adduced evidence to show that the Whig coalition with O'Connell, was founded on a dis graceful surrender of Whig principles and sacrifice of Whig opinions—having shown that O'Connell aban doned nothing of his extravagant claims or democratic opinions to the Whigs, while the Whigs departed from their more moderate and constitutional course to gratify O'Connell—there is the less necessity for our entering at any length into the refutation of the statements of r Lord John Russell. That lie and his colleagues should be particularly anxious to disclaim the con nection with the Agitator, since the utter failure of the late revolutionary crusade against the House of Lords, is natural enough. But the proofs of the disreputable • and dangerous character of that coalition are too many and too strong to be success fully grappled with, even by a much more able and elo quent advocate of the Melbourne Ministry than the Noble Member for Stroud. So long as the acts of the Melbourne Ministry are upon record, so long will the proofs be extant of "as unpriocipled a coalition as ever darkened or disgraced the history of political in trigue in this country." The high terms of panegyric in which Lord J. Russell'speaks of Earl Grey's Pre miership are not too high for the merits of that vene rable Statesman, when we compare his Administration with that of the rump of the Whig Cabinet under the official and nominal superintendence of Lord Mel bourne, and the real and irresponsible dictation of O'Connell. 'When, however, his Lordship com pares Lord Grey as a Statesman to the great Earl of Chatham, we must enter our protest against a pa rallel which is not exactly after the manner of Plutarch. Englishmen who know anything of the history of their country know that Lord Chatham, by his wisdom, decision, and energy in the conduct. of our foreign affairs, raised the policy and character of Eng land from a state of miserable depression to a pitch of extraordinary elevation and glory. It was said of him with eloquent truth, that " he smote with one hand the house of Bourbon, and wielded in the other the democracy of England." Never did England become more prosperous at home, or more feared and respected abroad than during the Administration of the elder Pitt. The whole course of the foreign policy of Lord Grey's Cabinet formed a melancholy contrast to that of the Statesman who, while he cultivated the prin ciples of enlightened freedom at home, raised the name of England among the nations of the earth. His was not a diplomacy of contemptible protocols, nor of base submissions to an insolent and barbarian Power. With such a man as Chatham at the head of English affairs, it would have been as impossible for the Au tocrat of Russia to have trampled in the dust a gallant nation, which we had pledged our solemn faith by treaty to protect, as to have sunk this island in the sea. Why should Lord John Russell allude to Portugal, and omit all mention of ill-fated Poland ? Even in Por tugal our interference has been followed by the loss of the commercial advantages which we enjoyed by treaty with that country since the reign of Charles I. and the Protectorate of Cromwell. As to Spain we have intermeddled in her: internal affairs, without any stipulation for the enforcement of those com mercial engagements which she had formerly made We were enabled to give, in the Chronicle of yes terday, an account of the proceedings at the dinner in honour of Lord John Russell, at Bristol, on Tues day, down to the close of his Lordship's speech. We this day lay before our readers a report of what sub-' sequently took place. His Lordship reviewed, suc cinctly, the claims of the Grey and Melbourne Admi nistrations to the confidence of the country, dwelling at most length on that part of the conduct of Minis ters which has chiefly provoked their opponents to as sail them by calumny and misrepresentation in every possible shape. His Lordship, disdaining the host of vulgar slanders, applied himself particularly to a distinguished member of the Bar, Sir William Fol lett, who misrepresented Ministers on an occasion when he knew he could do so with impunity. We think we can take it upon us to say that the at tempts to excite a religious prejudice against Mi nisters for their attempts to withdraw a portion of the ecclesiastical revenue of Ireland from clerical si necurists, to be employed in the moral and reli gious instruction of the people from whom that re venue is drawn, have utterly failed. The "No Popery" cry is now understood and appreciated at its just value. The Schoolmaster has been of late too successful in his efforts to allow the bugbear of Popery to frighten the people. Even in remote districts, where the Schoolmaster is comparatively unknown, as in parts of Devonshire, there is some reason to believe that several electors who pretended to be influenced by the cry of "No Popery were really intimidated by their landlords, but ashamed to own it. It is not only the duty, but the interest of the people of England to provide for the instruction and improve ment of their Irish brethren ; for they may be assured that theythemselves must suffer severely from the consequences of not providing in time a remedy for the evils in the social condition of the Sister Island. Lord John Russell avoided all mention of the House of Lords ; but Lord Segrave, Lord Ebrington, and Mr. Moore, parti cularly alluded to that branch of the Legislature. Lord Segrave " held it to be the greatest absurdity that could be uttered, to say that the House of Lords should assume to itself an irresponsibility not claimed by the first man in the realm ; ' and his Lordship dwelt on the advantage of Peers meeting the people, and laying their public condact before them. His Lord ship described the two parties in the House of Lords, and expressed a hope that in the next Parliament the Peers would see the necessity of acting more in con formity with the general opinion of the country. We trust his Lordship will be found a true prophet ; but though the first man in the realm is not irresponsible, we wish we could see how the Peers assume what they do not possess. Mr. Moore, however, after gilding the pill by some compliments to their Lordships, closed his speech with the following ominous remarks : " That if, from any vice inherent in the Constitution, which he for one was not prepared to admit, or from any fatal obstinacy of the individuals of which a particular class was composed, it should appear that the privileges of the favoured few were incompatible with the just rights and the privileges of the many, then would the serious question arise, of what should be done with the encumbering branches, which, though beautiful in themselves, endangered the vita lity of the parent stem." This sentiment was loudly cheered, and the Lords will do well to ponder on the warning conveyed to them in such very courteous language by the most polished of poets. Lord Ebrington stated, in justifi • cation of the conduct of the Lords with respect to the Corporation Bill, that they had totally mis calculated the opinions and feelings of the people of England ; but when they saw their error, they came, in a great measure, round to what was right. This defence, however, amounts to a confession of an instinctive inclination in their Lordships to what is wrong, to be corrected only by popular demonstra tions. And his Lordship's panacea is, that to ensure the good behaviour of the Peers, the people should take the opportunities which the Constitution affords of making their opinions known in such a way, that there can be no mistake with regard to them. This is rather an operose mode of keeping the Peers in the right course. But we will not now enlarge on the subject. We trust that next Session will not disap point the just expectations of the people, and that the Lords will justify the anticipations of those who have stepped forward as intercessors for them to the nation. —Morning Chronicle. A considerable portion of our paper yesterday was sacrificed to a long report of a dinner given to Lord John Russell by the radical tail of Bristol, followed by a copious interchange of compliments between those congenial parties. It is needless to assure our readers that the most perfect harmony prevailed throughout the day, as is natural upon an occasion, where—for the most part—hospitality on one side, and gratitude on the other, seem to inspire the donors of the entertainment and the donee with but one sen timent of serious rivalship—namely, as to which shall most effectually saturate the other with praise for every possible act, and every possible omission. As this Bristol feast, however, there seems to have been a deviation from the usual order of such ceremonies, inasmuch as the panegyrics had no reciprocity about them. It was from first to last a " puff unilateral." The Radical Deputation extolled the Noble Lord, and his Lordship very cordially echoed them. With Lord John's references to the earlier periods of Lord Grey's Administration, which may be considered as more belonging to history than provokin,7 any pre sent controversy, it is needless now to meddle. In the Noble Lord's words, " 'What is done is clone, and (Lord Grey) has had his hour." But there was other topics touched upon by his Lordship which cannot be so coolly thrown aside. With infinite labour, but we may venture to add with no correspond ing success, the Noble Lord strives to clamber out of the difficulties wherein he and his colleagues have been floundering, since the day on which their fatal resolution for the ruin of the Protestant Church in Ireland was passed, and since their factious and vicious treatment of the whole Church question relating to Ireland was exposed to the world. Whether honest or otherwise, it is vain for Lord John Russell to attempt any mystification of this country with regard to the real question at issue : that question is not, as in his allusion to Lord Stanley Lord John Rus sell describes it—whether in parishes where there are no Protestants residing, and no congregation to hear the word of God, a clergyman shall never theless be appointed to receive the whole income of an active incumbent, and thus to waste, as a sine curist, the funds assigned by common reason and by a regard for the interests of religion, to an effective teacher of Christianity ? Lord Stanley maintained no such mischievous paradox. His Lordship was an as senting party to a measure which provided, that in parishes where no service had been performed within three years, the incumbency of such parish, if vacant, should not be filled up, but the tithes (whether in the old form or commuted) should be turned over to other purposes connected with the Protestant Establishment. It was therein further provided, that with the reflux of Protestants into the parish the income should be re stored to its local uses—viz., the subsistence of an offi ciating clergyman. Now this is, on the face of it, a stricter assertion of the right principle by which eccle siastical endowment )ught to be regulated, than that on which Lord Melbourne's Cabinet has staked its political being. Lord J. Russell and his colleagues say, where there are "no Protestants the income of a clergyman on the next vacancy shall be alienated, not merely from the parish, but from the Protestant establishment. Had the question been in any sense that which is as sumed by Lord J. Russell, in his, we must say, rather puerile attack upon Lord Stanley, there could be no harm in agreeing with him : our own conviction, main tained in this paper over and over again, was and is, that the bona fide application of a bona fide surplus, over the real wants of any one department of the pub lic service, civil or religious, to objects of admitted usefulness in some other line is, abstractedly speaking, not to be impugned with justice : the surplus, how ever, must be first fully demonstrated. But our objec tion to the law brought in by the Whigs is founded on the consideration that, taken with all its actual cir cumstances and adjuncts. ---with the attitude assumed by the Popish enemies of the church—and with the means and agencies through which such a measure must be executed, it amounts to nothing less than a law for converting, by rapid and irresistible encroachments, the entire revenue of the Protestant Established Church , THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1835. with us, and about which our Foreign Minister seems I to care as little as he does about the progress which Russia is making towards political and commercial supremacy in the East. Why talk of Chatham, un less to remind England of the height of grandeur from which she has fallen, when a Power that was but in its barbarous infancy when she was the arbitress of na tions, has become all but the acknowledged Dictator of Europe ? To the foreign policy of Lord Grey's Cabinet, therefore, we cannot give the humble meed of our approbation. 'We never did when that Statesman was at the height of his popularity. We were the first among the Journals of England to take up the cause of Poland, when our mock-liberals in Parliament, .who voted for the Russian-Dutch loan job, and made a great outcry'when it was too late about Polish inde- 1 ; pendence, were perfectly silent. We, in vain, re minded the Whig-Premier of his own exertions in behalf of Poland in 1794 ; but Lord Grey, the Mi nister, forgot the cause and the country which Lord Grey, the patriot, had so eloquently advocated. But weak and temporising as was the foreign policy of his Cabinet, Lord Grey was far too high-minded a British Minister to truckle, as some of his then col leagues have since done, to the insolent agitator of Ireland. Because he would not, and could not, be come subservient to his views, the rancorous dema gogue assailed his character in the bitterest terms of his fierce and foul vocabulary. Was not Lord John Russell one of the Ministers who joined in denouncing him in the Speech from the Throne, and has he not since laboured with him on terms of the most intimate political friendship ? Can Lord J. Russell deny the existence of the intrigue to drive Lord Grey from the Cabinet, which O'Connell himself revealed by dis closing the confidential communications with Mr. Lit tleton ? Can he deny that before that plot had been carried into effect, and Lord Grey driven in disgust from the Cabinet, the political clauses of the Irish Coercion Act were declared to be absolutely indis pensable to the measure by Lord Brougham and some others, who immediately after the resignation of Lord Grey, spoke against those very clauses, and, in conformity with the expressed opinion of O'Con nell, carried the Bill without them ? Was there no sacrifice of principles here, as the first-fruits of the intrigue by which Lord Grey was displaced, and which caused him to shed tears when divesting him self of power which lie felt he could no longer wield with honour to himself, or advantage to the coun try ? Does Lord John Russell forget when he was himself an advocate, and a zealous one, for rotten boroughs ? Does he forget when he told the people of England that in substituting representative consti tuencies for the close boroughs, they might find that they acted as foolishly as the person in the Arabian tale, who " exchanged the old lamps for new ?" What right to speak of himself as a Reformer in the same breath with Lord Grey, who was a Reformer forty years before, and who, if he had no other merit on this point, had certainly that of consistency ? The chief argument of Lord J. Russell to show that the policy of the present Ministers is not the result of a disgraceful coalition with O'Connell, is to the effect that he had himself a similar opinion upon the " ap propriation clause" with reference to the Irish Church, before O'Connell became an avowed support of the Ministry as he has now. This only proves, suppo sing the statement perfectly true, that Lord John has not advocated the confiscation of the property of the Protestant Establishment to Popish purposes in con sequence of any compact with O'Connell, b u t i t does not prove that his colleagues have not come over to that opinion, because they know they could not obtain • O'Connell's assistance to re ' gain them their power and keep them in their places on any other terms. We know that the Whig Ministers as a body opposed the proposition when first moved by Mr. Ward, and declared that it would be improper to attempt to legislate for the Church of Ireland without the report of a Commission ; and we also know that the very next year, when urged on by O'Connell and his party, united with the English Destructives, to that measure, they advocated and car ried it without waiting for the report of their own Commissioners. Now, indeed, the Whig Ministers have become alarmed, and not without reason, at the impression made upon the people of England by the audacious attempt of their democratic " missionary" to revolutionise the Constitution by destroying the House of Lords. They would not settle the tithe question, because he, who is their task -master, would not permit them to do so without making a commencement, at the same time, of the work of destruction upon the Pro testant Church. They would not pass poor laws for Ireland, because their Irish advisers have an interest in that agitation which the misery of the people tends to pi omote. Neither the Ministers nor their Journals disclaimed the outrageous proceedings of the " mis sionary," until they 'found that his mad attempt at substituting a wild democracy for our mixed Constitu tion was a decided failure.—Morning Herald. The great Bristol dinner, and the presentation of the sixpenny subscription plate of the Reformers of that city to Lord John Russell, have taken place, as our readers will perceive by the report of the proceed ings in another part of our paper. The affair seems to have been any thing but brilliant. For some time after the intended feast was advertised, the tickets of admission, offered at no very extravagant price, hung lamentably on band. It was soon found necessary to promulgate a list of the great people who were to be present, and, as often happens in respect to such ex pedients of theatrical attraction, the representation did not quite come up to the promises of the play-bill. The Marquis of Lansdowne was to have been there, but had the good taste and prudence to stay at home, condescendingly, however, sending his son, who could not be committed by listening in silence to whatever the little hero of the day might think proper to advance. Besides the Earl of Kerry and Lord John Russell there were present, of distinguished persons, three Lords and one poet. The respectable and venerable Lord Segrave shed his genial influence on the banquet ; Lord Ebrington and Lord Andover decorated and ennobled the principal table ; and Mr. Thomas Moore was not improperly in attendance upon one who would be a poet if he could, and who, if he does not sing very tunefully himself, has the power, which is far better, of bestowing pen sions upon those who do. We have now mentioned the appropriate suite of Lord John Russell upon this occasion, and, such as it was, it sufficed in aid of the expected speech of the Noble Lord himself, and the other anticipated enjoyments of the table, to allure to the place of meeting about four hundred of the inhabitants of Bristol, not generally of the most respectable class, we presume, from the cau tious silence which is preserved as to their names. No Bristolian present, with the exception of the Chairman, a Barrister, we understand, in some practice at the Bristol Sessions, having been thought worthy of a special mention. The piece of plate, a candelabrum, fit emblem at once of illumina tion and conflagration, was presented in due course to the Noble Secretary of the Home Department, after a very long speech from a worthy gentleman, who is de scribed as the Chairman of the Plate Committee. Upon this elaborate and carefully concerted address, we shall offer only a single remark. When we recol lect that the sixpenny subscribers to the gift, in whose name the orator spoke, consist of the same class of society in Bristol, and in a considerable proportion of the same individuals, who not long ago burnt down the King's Custom House and the Bishop's Palace ; compelled an able, venerable, and upright Judge to save his life by flight ; and attempted, in their revolutionary phrenzy, to destroy the whole affluent and populous city—when we recollect this, we can not but express our gratification to find so much of Conservative sentiment expressed in an address proceeding from such a source. As to the sincerity of these expressions we are not called upon to offer an opinion, but it is a consolatory proof that consti tutional principles are once more in the ascendant, when we find a body of sixpenny subscribers to a piece of plate for Lord John Russell Insisting upon the suf ficiency of the existing powers of the Constitution to work out all needful reforms ; and deprecating any further organic changes in the structure of the British Government. This is probably no more than an in stance of that adaptation of language and conduct to the popular temper of the moment for which such Statesmen as Lord John Russell and all who cleave to them have always been distinguished ; but it not on that account the less satisfactory. The greatest danger of a country has passed when even its incendi aries discover the policy of affecting veneration for its institutions. Lord John Russell's speech, expressing his gratitude for the gift, and his sympathy with the donors, is just such a speech as might have been ex pected from the Noble Lord on such an occasion. It is vapid eulogy of all that the successive Govern ments of which Lord John has been a member have done or left undone, which, if it have no other merit, has at least that of coming at a fit season, just after another great encomiast of the present Ministry has been crippled - as an advocate, by the discovery that he has systematically employed the enormous political power conferred upon him by the Whig measures of emanci pation and reform, as a source of corrupt revenue and an instrument of flagitious fraud. His Lordship claimed infinite honour and glory to himself for the share he had taken in the measure of Parliamentary Reform, but said nothing of the exploit by which one of his most zealous and powerful confederates in that act has recently shown to the world, that the Reform Bill has merely transferred the privilege of nomination to seats in the House of Commons from a higher to a lower class of persons ; from men who could not make this privilege the basis of a mean and venal traf fic, without the certain sacrifice of interests of much greater value to them than any possible gain they could derive from such pernicious and discreditable trad ing ; to needy and rapacious adventurers without visi ble mea ns o f , subsistence, other than the harvest they contrive to reap from mendicancy, corruption, and fraud ; and that, instead of securing a full, fair, and free representation to the people of England, that boasted measure of Reform has converted Ireland into another Cornwall, enabled Mr. O'Connell to deal in seats upon a large scale for his own pecuniary advan tage, and to collect, moreover, around him such a ga thering of dependent and subservient nominees, as suf fice to throw the decision of most important questions into his hands, and enable him to direct and controul the executive Government, to set the law at defiance, and to commit the most flagrant violation at once of the principles of common honesty and of the British Constitution in the fullest confidence of impunity. His Lordship boasted, as the Whigs generally boast, of the settlement of the West India question, forgetting apparently that all recent accounts from the West Indies give reason to apprehend that the effect of this settlement will he ruin to these impor tant colonies, and great and lasting injury to the wealth, power, and resources of Great Britain ; that the negro population even, for whose benefit the mea sure was primarily intended, seem likely to be plunged by it into deeper barbarism, and exposed to severer sufferings and privations than before. In this man ner, pleading before an audience so prejudiced or so ignorant as to yield an implicit assent to his as sumptions, the Noble Lord proceeded triumphantly to establish his claims, and those of his colleagues, to the gratitude of the nation, taking it for granted throughout, sometimes without any evidence, and more frequently in the teeth of evidence the most direct and irresistible, that every change already ef fected, and every change which is yet to be accom plished by Whig-Radical Administration, must of ne cessity be beneficial. His Lordship reckoned very largely indeed upon the ignorance and credulity of his auditors, of whom, however, he seems to have taken a tolerably accurate measure. There is one part of the Noble Lord's speech upon which much diligence and care has evidently been expended. It is that in which he labours to repel the imputation which has been cast on the present Ministers, that they carry on the Govern ment in combination with Mr. O'Connell. The effort was entirely unsuccessful, but it shows how sensible Ministers are of the degradation to which, for sake of place, they have submitted. Lord John's argument is simply this, that the support afforded by Mr. O'Con nell to the existing Government does not amount to a proof of collusion between the King's Ministers and the Irish demagogue boroughmonger whom the Re form Bill has given to the State. Now, so far as we know, nobody has ever said that this circumstance, merely, would furnish proof of collusion. But is it nothing that Ministers depend wholly upon this in dividual for their continuance in place ? Is it nothing that, after a long series of mutual crimination, by which the alleged confederates had manifested their contempt and hatred of each other, they suddenly united, for the purpose of forcing Lord John Russell and his colleagues into power ? Is it nothing that the power so acquired was immediately employed to promote the purposes of Mr. O'Connell in respect both to the civil and ecclesiastical policy of Ireland ? Is it nothing that the Administration thus installed by Mr. O'Connell immediately set about to confiscate part of the Church property of Ireland, with the intention, as they pretend, of pacifying the Roman Catholics of that country, while Mr. O'Connell, the political leader of these Roman Catholics, never at tempts to conceal his opinion that this partial con fiscation is no further a boon than as it introduces the thin side of the wedge, and renders the overthrow of the Protestant Church at no distant period absolutely certain ? Is it nothing that. Mr. O'Connell has de manded, and been permitted to dispense to his friends and retainers, an important share of the patronage of the Irish Government ? Is it nothing that he is in perpe tual conference with the nominal heads of that Govern ment? Is it nothing that, for sake of pleasing him, the military and police force in Ireland have been commanded to refrain from protecting the legal col lection of tithe, or from interfering in any manner for the preservation of the peace, until after full and safe opportunity shall have been afforded to the lawless hordes who do Mr. O'Connell's biddings to murder all who presume to set the law in motion, or to assist in giving it effect ? Is it nothing that Mr. O'Connell, relying on the favour and protection of Government, has ventured to turn the Parliamentary Representation of Ireland into a source of pecuniary profit to him self ? Is it nothing that, after full proof of this sor did and illegal traffic has been for a fortnight before the world, nobody even dreams of the Attorney-Gene ral performing his duty, by commencing a criminal prosecution against this gigantic offender ? These are the circumstances which denote collusion and confede racy between the executive Government and the Ro man Catholic demagogue, and to these Lord John Russell took especial care not to breathe one syllable of allusion.—Morning Post. We beg to point the attention of our readers to the report of the speech of Lord John Russell, at the dinner given to him on Tuesday, at Bristol. It will afford materials, for some time to come, of somewhat difficult digestion to Tory stomachs. The fact of such a dinner being given at the present moment, and in a place which has, since the origin of the distinction be tween Whigs and Tories, been considered a hot-bed for the latter, is one of no ordinary importance in itself, But we have not space to dwell on the considerations to which this circumstance gives rise. We should like to have seen the countenance of Sir William Follett when he first read Lord John's speech. Nothing could be more complete than Lord John's demolition of the assertions of the ex-Solicitor-General at the late Exeter feed," to the effect that Lord John's opinions on the Church appropriation question had been adopted in consequence of an " unprincipled coalition" between Mr. O'Connell and the Melbourne Ministry. Lord John told Sir William some plain homely truths, in a very plain homely manner. We dare say the Member for Exeter will be a little more guarded in his expres sions when he next dines with his constituents, and not calculate so much and so " contemptuously" on the i g norance" of his To r y f r i en d s i n that city.-- Morning Advertiser. Between four and five o'clock yesterday morning ;here was a heavy fall of snow between Dartford ane London. The winter has set in with uncommon severity, and tho nobility and gentry are thronging into town. Yester day before the th ermometer was lower at one than it was duri ng l ast w i nter. Snow fell hdtieamayevailonyfdltahtshetedevayening in the neighbourhood of London. A gentleman, who suffered much by gambling at the west-end of the town, gave the following advice, a few evenings ago, to his nephew, in a coffee-house : " If you are anxious to be cheated play at cribbage, blind hookey, French hazard, or rouge et noir ; but if you wish to be happy, respectable, and comfortable, piay . not at VICE-CHANCERY-WEDNESDAY. MALCOLM V. O'CALLAGHAN. The Counsel in opposition to the :petition of Charles Burton Wyatt were heard yesterday, and the case was con cluded this morning. The petitioner's case was reported on Monday last. It will be recollected that Mr. Wyatt, the receiver in the cause, had been disallowed by the Master the expenses of four out of nine journies he took to Paris between 1817 and 1823, for the purpose of prosecutinc , in the French Courts a claim against a person named Parker, for the be nefit of the testator's (Colonel Stopford's) estate. The pe tition was, in fact, an appeal from that decision. The jour nies disallowed were the third, part of the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth. Mr. KINDERSLEY addressed the Court in opposition to the petition on the part of several of the persons beneficially interested in the estate of Colonel Stopford, including Mr. Carr, the solicitor, who was the representative of a de ceased party who had a beneficial interest, and whose op position to the claim had been much commented on. The present case the Learned Counsel concurred with the Coun sel for the petitioner in describing as one unparalled. His own experience furnished him with no instance, and in vain did he consult the books for a precedent where an agent, employed in the prosecution of a suit in a foreign country for the recovery of a debt, had been allowed so large a sum as 1,2601. for his expenses and remuneration in attending to the suit for a period of 496 days, and yet, not content with so liberal an allowance, had come forward, in opposition to the Master's report, to claim an additional sum of 1,927/. for a period of 974 days in addition. Mr. Jacob followed, on the part of Mr. Wyatt, one of the legatees of Col. Stopford, in opposition to the petition. Mr. Goldsmid appeared for the executors of Colonel Stopford. Mr. Knight replied. His HONOUR said—Under all the circumstances of the case, he was of opinion the matter should be sent back to the Master in regard to the four journies altogether disallowed. He did not sec any necessity for requiring the whole subject with respect to the journies allowed to be reviewed. But it appeared to him that although it might be difficult, and perhaps impossible, as was ma nifest from the objections, to point out to a penny or to a day what should be allowed, if the Master re-consi dered the thing he might find it more consistent with truth and justice to make something like an allowance for the four journies wholly: disallowed, than to refuse all compensation, as he bad hitherto done. KING'S BENCH.-WEDNESDAY. The Court was occupied during the whole day with cases of parish settlement, none of which contained any matter of ptiblic interest. Lord Denman took his seat in the morn ing with the rest of the Judges, but his Lordship appeared to be suffering under a somewhat severe attack of indisposi tion. He left the Court before the close of the day, and Mr. Justice Pattoson, in afterwards stating what were the arrangements for the business of to-morrow, said that the Lord Chief Justice would probably not be able to attend, so that the cases of new trials, in the new trial paper, which had occurred before Lord Denman, would not be taken. At the rising of the Court a person who had two or three times before attempted to address their Lordships, was called upon by thetn to make the statement which he seemed desirous of making. He then described himself as a singer who had come up to London to obtain an engage• ment, and he began to demand justice against Sir George Smart, respecting whom he was about to make some com plaints regarding professional business, alleging that Sir George had undertaken to obtain professional engagements for him, and had not performed the promise, when he was interrupted by Mr. Justice PATTESON, who asked whether the facts he was now stating were upon affidavit ? The applicant would swear to them. He would swear to them on the sacred book he held in his hand—the Holy Gospel. Mr. Justice PTTTESON—That is not what the rules of this Court require. You must make an affidavit. The applicant said that an affidavit was an oath, and that he was willing to swear. Mr. Justice PATTESON—An oath is not an affidavit. The applicant was ready to swear what he stated was the fact. He only wanted justice. He complained that it was refused him. Mr. Justice PATTESON—WC must act in your case upon the rules that we apply to others. It is very easy for you to put upon paper any statement that you know to be true, and then to swear to its truth. You must do that be fore we can hear you. If you will not do it, you must cot say that you are refused justice The applicant said that he had make his case known to the nation, and on the nation he relied for justice. Here the matter dropped. BAIL COURT-WEDNESDAY. THE KING V. BAGSHAW, ESQ. In this case an attachment had been obtained against the Sheriff of Derbyshire ; -and this day it was moved, on the part of the Sheriff, for a rule to show cause why the attachment should not be set aside, and all proceedings stayed. The rule was moved on the affidavit of the de fendant's 'clerk ; and Mr. Justice Littledale directed the Learned Counsel to take a rule nisi. COMMON PLEAS.-WEDNESDAY. I.IIILEY V. BONSOR. This was an action tried at York, at the last Spring Assizes, before Mr. Baron Parke. It was brought by the plaintiff to recover a sum of money, the amount of goods sold and delivered. The defence was the Statute of Limitations. The verdict passed for defendant. Mr. WIGHTMAN, upon a former day, moved for a rule to set aside the verdict, upon the ground of a misdirection of the Learned Judge, for' leaving a point of law to the Jury, when he ought to have reserved it for the Court above. Mr. ALEXANDER, to-day, moved to set aside the rule. Mr. WIGHTMAN supported the rule.—Rule discharged. EXCHEQUER COURT, WEDNESDAY. PARR V. HINDSON. This was a special case, in which Mr. J. Jervis moved on the part of the plaintiff to be allowed to receive the whole of fife defendant's wages during the time he had been engaged as cooper in a vessel which sailed from Liverpool to Guinea, in 1832 and 1833. The action was originally brought against Mr. Hamilton, the owner of the vessel in which the defendant, at that time the apprentice of the plaintiff, was employed ; but the record was subsequently withdrawn, and the name of the defendant substituted. It was tried at Chester before Mr. Justice Vaughan, who sug gested that it should be made a special case, and come before the whole Court. The Court suggested that the money should be divided, and each'party pay the costs of the issue. CORONER'S INQUEST. THE LATE STEAM-BOAT ACCIDENT. It will be remembered that a sand barge man, named William Ibbott, of College-street, Lambeth, was killed on the river Thames, on the 17th of October last, in conse quence of a collision with the John Bull steam ship and a sailing barge belonging to the father of the deceased, on board of which he was at the time. The body was taken to Greenwich, in Kent, and afterwards removed to Ro therhithe, Surrey, and a Jury was summoned in Rotherhithe, before Mr. R. Carter, the Coroner for Surrey, when several witnesses were examined. It appeared from their evidence that when the collision took place the mast of the barge fell by the board, and struck the deceased on the head and killed him on the spot ; but, owing to the conflicting evidence of the witnesses on both sides, it was not satisfactorily ascer tained whether the deceased lost his life by mere accident, or through any carelessness either on the part of the per sons on board the barge or the steam packet. A difference of opinion prevailed amongst the Jurymen ; nine of them were for returning a verdict of accidental death with a deo dand of from 1001. to 2001. ; the other three Jurymen were inclined to return a verdict of manslaughter, and one of this party declared that nothing should induce him to change his opinion. In consequence of this, the Coro ner discharged the Jury, and declared he should not call another. The friends of the deceased, however, afterwards prevailed on the Coroner to summon another Jury, which met last Thursday at Mr. Okey's, the Hero of Waterloo Tavern, Waterloo-road, Lambeth, but the only evidence then received was that of John Billings, who merely identi fied the body, which had been interred in a brick vault, no earth having been thrown over it. The Jury also viewed the body, and the inquest was adjourned. Yesterday morning, at eleven o'clock, the proceedings were resumed at the same place. Mr. Clarkson, the coun sel, and Mr. Phillips, solicitor, of the firm of Phillips, Pearce, and Boulger, appeared to watch the case on the part of the General Steam Navigation Company. Mr. Ryland, the barristet, and Messrs. Pritchard and Goddard, solicitors, attended on the behalf of the relatives of the deceased. Robert Corduroy was the first witness examined. This evidence—which was a mere repetition of his former state ment, to the effect that the John Bull steamer was coming down the river very fast as the barge was going up off Ro therhithe ; that the people on the John Bull gave conflict ing orders to the bargemen, and then ran into the barge, knocked down the mast, and killed the deceased—has al ready been published at full length. Cross-examined by Mr. CLARK6ON—The barge in which the deceased and witness were, being heavily laden with sand, was level with the water at midships. There was scarcely a breath of wind. Would swear that he did not hear the pilot and Captain of the John Bull call out two or three times Stand clear, or your mast will go by the board." The mast fell instantly after the concussion. The wheels of the steam-boat were not working astern but a-head at the moment the barge was struck. Never told the pilot's son, that if the wheels had given one more tur n the barge would have been cleared. Had not said on A former occasion that the steam-boat was going 10 miles all hour, instead of six or eight, as he now stated. John Billings, another bargeman, who was on board th e barge when the deceased was killed, was next examined. The barge had backed astern to let the Majestic stellar boat pass, when the John Bull came down,' and the fende r of the paddle struck the barge. The .John Bull did no t stop till after the accident, which was entirely occasioned by her changing her course suddenly from northward to southward. There was room on either side of the barg e to have cleared it. Witness and his surviving companiese saved themselves by jumping upon the guard iron of the John Bull. Cross-examined by Mr. CLARKSON—There was voota enough for either a northward or southward course. The re was a straw barge forty feet astern. The sand barge wa s putting the helm northward, as desired by the people in the John Bull. By the CORONER—Witness called to them to stop the paddles, but they did not until the barge had been st ruck ' Witness pulled the larboard oar to the last moment, to ge t the barge's head northward. We were obliged to run f er our lives, and leave the oars unshipped. William Brown, who was in the barge at the time call collision, was next examined. Nothing material was elicit id except that he considered the John Bull could not alit ) : striking either the straw barge or the sand barge. au hlwever, he afterwards partly contradicted, by saying to was time enough to clear both, if she had borne 1 1 P t° the southward. Aaron Branier—Was on board the straw barge at th e time. The people in the John Bull called out fir st ' " Keep to the southward ;" and then immediately aft er ' wards, " Keep to the northward." The steamer was coming down at the rate of eight miles an hour. He heard a ma` on the paddle-box call out, " Ease her," at the wome n, she struck the barge. He was not certain she had not eased her way, before the blow was struck. If the s team er , had been stopped when the collision took place, it w ool° not have broken a broom-stick hanging over the side o f th° barge. Cross-examined—He never said he would hang the Car tain of the John Bull if he could. It was not his inten tios ' Mr. CLARKSON—No, no, no, never mind your i n tentioai Did you ever say at the Ship and Whale, where the la ' s inquest was held, to Mr. Evans, a Thames police-Act and Barber, that you would harp . the Captain, shoot te e pilot, and condemn the vessel if you could ? Witness' No, I never did say so. Mr. CLARKSON—Do you know a man named Barbe l ! Witness—No. 0 yes, I know two or three Barbers , We° are lightermen. A man named Barber was here introduced and shoW o t° the witness, who declared he did not know him. Cross-examination resumed—Did not know his maste rs name. 0, yes he could recollect it, for it had just got Ir. his head—his name was Christopher Page. Never said is the Ship and Whale, or any where else, that he would ha n g the Captain. By Mr. RYLAND—Does not know either Mr. Ell in n s f or Barber. Never used any expressions to the effect those put to him. John Duckett (this was a new witness)—Was on W ard a Windsor barge as watchman, opposite Bell Wharf, will he saw the deceased's barge and the straw barge abou t yards apart. The steamer was approaching when the ea . pie in the sand barge, which was going northward, cane out to the John Bull to keep off. She was going at the rate of five or six miles an hour, and did not stop until th e j barge was struck, which, on receiving the blow, swung P`) ° , ° „ . to the steamer's stern. The concussion made a great 00,1, e i and the mast of the barge fell instantly. Some one ea ue , out " a man killed," but the people on board the steal° did not appear to believe it. Cross-examined—lt was rather a hazy morning• frbe steamer stopped as soon as the accident happened. CORONER—Do you think this was an accident or n °t _A Witness—l think if the steamer kept to the North Wc " . the barge would have been cleared. James Biomold, a bargeman, stated that he was in a b ang : lying alongside the last witness, and confirmed his e videa s in every particular. He spoke positively as to the flitting orders given by the steamer to the barge, and sa i l the steamer might have been stopped, and her pad dir, backed so as to prevent the accident. Cross-examined—The steam-boat went as far to southward as the depth of water would permit her. "P''' object seemed to be to avoid the barge. At the conclusion of this examinatien the inquest We adjourned until Saturday, and the Jurors were bound ove in the sum of 401. each to appear on that day. Per Ton. Adair% THE MARKETS. T.—Nov. 11. Per Ton. Walls End Hilda .................. uT.. 0 Walls End Hotpur ..... ....... , Walls End Killingworth Walls End Lanchester, Stan - 9 1 1 : 0 , hope and Tyne Company ••• 0.! Walls End Newrnarch ..... . 1 Walls End Northumberliod..., „ 0 0 Walls End Peareth ............... 5 Walls End Riddell's .......... :4 Walls End Braddyll's ........ 4:! Walls End Hetton ........... Walls End Lambtort ....... Walls End Russell', Lyon's... Walls End Stewart', ........ w Walls End Gordon ........ last market-day, JO. TEEN EJ/ C Bea Ts. Poi , .. to,' Per Quarter. Abingdun.««-,. Ando/er Birmingham...—. Bridport ........—.. Cirencester —,--.. Faringdon«.—, Guildford Hereford Wheat. I Barley. Highworth Maidenhead Reading Salisbury a. to. s. 34 -- 43 *5 SOLI thampton ow", Stroud Tewkesbury Uxbridge .-., yydatase—..--. Warminster W0rce5ter.......... 40 48 29 18 :32 52 36 ~3 28 32 6 32 28 343 '26 32 MEETINGS OF CREDITORS TC J. Nightingale, victualler, Oxford-street S. Gaitley, licensed victualler, uolden.lane, St. Lul H. Rich, tea-dealer, Lime-street W. Polley, bootaiker, Blackman-street, Southwar. W. NV. Peirce, cabinet-maker, Northampton 32 40 3 I. 40 33 40 41 46 33 40 34 40 30 44 ►-MOll - - - -- , ,-.. , ke's ....... ..... ..... • •• 40 ....., 4 l / -- io 35 ..- -34 ' 45 ROW' I ...... 1 ..... -::.1 (ADVERTISEMENT.) PATENT LEVER WATCH 0 6 With silver double-bottom cases With silver hunting cases " 6 16 This celebrated construction (the most accurate - On ob i : 1 0 .40 watch can be made) is now offered, with the latest imwovero`tiel, i. c. the detached escapement, jewelled in four holes, egorwer hand to mark the seconds, hard enamel dial, and maintaitongtos to continue going while winding up, at the above price, 11 ir• 00. SAVORY, Working Silver and Goldsmith, 47, Cornhili, , .HS. • On the 11th inst., in CI BIRT ares-street the lady of Colonel F re e' mantle, Coldstream Guards, of a son. On the 9th inst., at Swansea, Mrs. Robert Lindsay, of a 000 ; :i f On the 9th inst., Mrs. Robert M. Watson , of Devonport• • daughter. On the 10th inst., at Palatine-house, Stoke Newington, *. Henry Henderson, of a son. co t! ' On the II th inst., in Grosvenor-place, Mrs. Henry Kings of a daughter. MARRIED. On the 10th inst., at St. Mary's, Bryanston-square, the„;of mossy having been previously performed according to the R o bert the Roman Catholic Church, John, only surviving son of lby6 of Selby, Esq., of Bryanston-street, Portman-square, of the ge 1 of Biddleston, Northumberland, and nephew of the late Shrewsbury, to Anna Maria, youngest daughter of John oe Esq., .ofn the Gloucester-place. C u O 7 7 th inst., at Bassenthwaite Church, Keswick, A-00 land, Harry Pollard Ashby, Esq., of Mitcham, Surrey, t ° Gibson, late of Hampstead. StoPh efi . On the 9th inst., at Bo ton, Wilts, Major-General o Sir Remnant Chapman C.B. and K.C.H., Governor and On °l33 r of der-in-Chief of the Bermudas, to Caroline, youngest daughtfrior the late Rev. George Pyke, of Baythorne-park, Essex , and ' of Wickhambrook, Suffolk. Phi 7 On the 10th inst., at St. Stephen's, Coleman-street, - ,1% . Whitaker, of Cateaton-street, to Maria, youngest daughter 0' G. Jones, Esq., of Finsbury-circus. I A t OA ° On the 10th inst., at St. :Mary's, Islington, Cornelius, e.-e9thir. of Cornelius Paine, Esq., of Highbury-place, to Caroline, daughter of Robert Heintz, Esq., of Canonbu DIED. A denlP On the 10th inst., at Pilgrim Cottage, Camberwell, ou'''l3. Mrs. Jane Allison, formerly of No. 1, Finch-lane , Cornhill, Agyven, On the 6th inst., at Hop-grounds, near Stratford, Etses, wife of James Gingell. On the 7th inst., Mr. Thomas Butcher, of Regent-street„ of On the Bth inst., George, infant son of Henry Green, Blackwall. r• o On the 9th inst., in Palace-sreet, Pimlico, John Finn° Esq., aged 84. bec es i On the 9th inst., at Newington-butts, in her 95th year, other o relict of William Brodrick, Esq., late of that place, an d rn otP .3o , the late William Brodrick, Esq., of Lincoln's Inn, barrister-at On the 9th inst., at the house of Mr. Arch, Cornhill, L" Mr. Henry Newman, of Worcester —00! 1 4° ' London : Printed and Published by_MURDO YOUNG , ° I 112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand , i n the 0° of Middlesex. COAL MARK' s. d 20 S East Percy 2O Holywell 22 0 Ord s ltedhugh l9 0 Tan field 22 0 West Hartley -7 _ Wylam Bell's Primrose lB 6 I,ambton's Primrose Hartley_ `.2•2 0 Howard's Netherton Main... 21 0 Kay's Old Flockton Walls End MI, Robson & Co 23 0 W •Ils End Bewicke and Co 23 6 Walls End Gosforth Walls End Heaton 23 9 1 Ships Arrived since L COUNTRY CORN MARKETS DURIN Oats. BR , RAILV The CONTI and aftc NATU also at t eltors, T subscrip for the Railor ,-- L In Hie Ilford, l KeFred° tance of Suffolk, Lord i Bankers. Solicitor, tngine ea Applit Secretor Prop it th e c 'Easter C ir-R- biCIINE Th. it Canal fri th e Tha another increase( ties to th and easy I aYE and saying a But tl itailway the Saul ford, nez th e G ro , Th e prop • Railway N ewSo Pots), t 4 Grand -the Afeti the use, may be pease of might Will be t thereof: A ear aPpears intei all ether 'meet t Cornp an gather v In t h e p From shown that laq Prosf Samuel to Who' Post psi Th e Lust be Shares. The I CO, N( ..__ 7 th D John Peter Adam ga s James Willia end th e ,. th e Soh