The Sun. — London, England, 1831-06-30 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF T-HE PUBLIC JOURNALS. Another discussion on the subject of the Pres took place last night in the House of Commons. Mr. Hume, on presenting a petition from Mr. He therington, the printer of the Republican, said he had obtained possession of the manuscripts of two of the numbers, and it appeared that the real writer was a person in the enemy's camp, a Mr. Lo rimer It was afterwards admitted, however, by Mr. Hume, that this was only suspicion. But bt Mr. Lorimer who he may, the attempt to debar the lower orders from all access to political writings, by allowing printers to print only at a rate which none but the rich could afford to purchase and read, is no doubt, one great cause of the circulation of improper publications. Sir C. Wetherell seemed to think that Mr. Gordon had not sufficiently called atten tion to the merits of the Poor Man's Guardian, the Republican, &c. ; for he last night favoured the House with a few a dditional specimens in the style of those of Mr. Gordon, from th publication in question. Though we _are far from thinking that prosecution is the way to grapple with :absurd or even mischievous opi nions, we do not partake of the squeamishness of Mr. Lamb, and several other Members, on the sulject of noticing them. We, on the con trary, think that it is advantageous to kaow what sort of publications are circulating among the lower orders, and that benefit can only result from exposing the sophistry and mis-statements contained in them• The question is, in some measure, one of fact. Are the publications extensively circulated among the lower orders, or are they not ? From what we have heard, we are inclined to think that a very exten sive circulation is given to such publication., and that it is not s .fe to leave them altogether unno ticed. The child hides its head in its frock, and because it cannot see thinks it cannot be seen. We must not imitate the child, and imagine that be cause we do not condescend to notice these publi cations they are not noticed by others. It is a duty we owe to the poor to exert ourselves to refute so phistries which they may be unable to detect, to correct mis-statements which they may be unable themselves to correct, to point out to them the dangerous tendency of opinions which they may have too easily adopted. But we would recur alone to argument and persuasion, being thoroughly con vierced that force is unable to grapple with opinions. Our contemporary (the Standard) has, on one or two occasions, exposed the absurdity of our present Libel Law, and pointed out a very im pertant improvement. " Your Courts of Justice (.3 Is our contemporary) and your Legislature have compounded fer the power of punishing innocent or meritorious men, obnoxious to party resent ment, by relinquishing the power of inflicting pu nishments of sufficient severity upon real criminals. Again, according to the general average of prosecu tions under the Libel Laws, a conviction of libel is commonly a testimonial of merit. Until the whole libel code undergo a complete reform, it is thus im possible that we can have generally a respectable Press, or that the flood-gates of blasphemy and se dition can be effectually closed. How this is to be done ? what a Press reform ought to be? seems to us sufficiently plain. We are not of the number of those who would leave to the Press an unbounded licence. As long as crimes are punished, they who excite to crime must, in justice to all, receive equal punishment with those who commit them. While there are stupid and ignorant persons in the world, they ought to be protected from the arts of traitors and incendiaries; and of those who kill not only the body but the soul. Let exciters to crime—let in- E endiaries--let soul murderers be punished ; but let them be punished as such, and let us get rid of the anomaly of name that actually seems to have pene• trated to the substance of our legal decisions, which melees the book or paper libellus,' the crime and not ' the act done by writing or printing.' In this way let it be left to the Jury, flinging on one side the abomination of legal constructions, as distin guished from the deductions of common sense—let it be left to the Jury whether the party accused ascent to stimulate to a particular crime—whe seeer he meant a special injury to A or B—whether ere designed to excite rebellion—whether his pur pose AVIS to shake the faith or corrupt tire morals of the ignorant ? Cases of far greater difficulty are daily submitted to Juries, and decided upon by them in a manner whicii gives full satisfaction." We have always maintained that the principle of the Libel Law is utterly untenable, and that it is only as ex etement to crime that a writing should draw down punishment on its author. But while our contem porary is n this respect correct, we demur to the criminal code, to which he would make his,libel law ancillary. Metaphysical crimes have never been adopted by the law-giver with any advantage to the community. The killing the body is what is at once evident to the senses. All men wino see a body killed can be at no loss about the matter. But how are we to substantiate soul-killing ? Not to men tion religions differing altogether from each other, the different divisions of Christians accuse each other of soul-killing. The Catholic says there is no salvation out of his church. Every Protestant, I.herefore, who either prevails on a Catholic to tern Protestant,or is instrumental to a Protestant not turn ing Catholic, is a soul-killer, because to exclude from salvation is soul-killing. The Protestant, in like manner, considers both the Catholic and his fellow-Proteie tant a soul-killer. The numerous body of P. on s tants, who follow the Assembly's Catechism, say that " all sins are equally heinous in the sight of God," and that " every sin deserves God's %wrath and curse both in this world mid in that which is to come ;" and most of those Protestants and the Church of England consider schism a sin, seed view each other as schismatics; consequently all who teach the schism are soul-killers. Arson appeals to the senses—murder appeals to the senses—but witchcraft assumes the existence of the alleged crime --soul-killing assumes the fact which is to be punished. A Criminal Code should steer clear of; all attempts to make crimes of opinions. Our con temporary ought to call out for a Protestant Inqui sition, and he ought not to condemn the Catholics for theirs ; because, if the Catholics conceived teach ing Protestantism soul-killing, they were justified in preventing it, according to his principle. Error can only be combatted by argument. Religion can only be upheld by argument. The mometst we say we will protect any one doctrine from inquiry, anal the possible consequences of inquiry, rejection, that mo ment we become persecutors.—Mareeng Chronicle. The French journals dwell with greet compla cency on their imposing military attitude. " The Bourbons," says the Constituiionnel, " faithful to' their promise of keeping our country in a state of depression, and dreading always to alarm the rest less jealousy of their allies ; our spoilers, the Bour bons, are expelled. They leave us only an stirs of 76,000 men; a cavalry half mounted; arsenals almost empty ; fortified towns badly provisioned; a .end altog e th er bearing no proportion to our ordinary wants, a . ltogether i nsu ffici e nt for the necessities; of a ar re " for' arms, or but few for our new soldiers; noi our National Guards. * * * Now nll our strong places h. are repaired, armed, and pro vided with p a o l s i se t ts trir necessary for their defence. Now we immense materiel ; we have under our colours nearlyu immediately men, who, exere cised every day, would co a hs t y t or p m r i e d eln i t e t a o rm o i u e s r enemies one of the finest a ; n m d w l t r ii that France has ever seen has sprungsud denly, as it were by enchantment, up orather by prodi gies of patriotism, labour, and experience. On the e other hand, our Marine, confided to an a bl e and laborious chief, answers fly its activity to the rapid movement impressed by a strong hand on our military system. Fresh cause of contidenee and security; we have given to the whole of our phalanxes a reserse of two millions of National Guards, which will soon be all armed. Musquets were wanting to the citizens in 1814 and 181 5 ; now, in the College„ in the wori:shop, in the house, every man has at hand a means of attack and defence. ' The bull is tro sooner aware of his horns than he longs to use them ; and in like ma nner our warlike and enter. prizing neighbours seem anxious to show that they have not made these preparations to no purpose. The Constkution►tcl, after alluding to Italy, Belgium, and the approaching punishment of Don Miguel, which will put an end to the military pre parations and intrigues of Spain, and prevent the necessity of keeping an army on the Pyrenees, concludes with this apostrophe :—" Ministers, you do not wish for war; you may have the highest and most powerful reasons for seeking to turn aside this scourge, which at this moment drags after it another scourge, a hundred times more for midable; undoubtedly this last calamity is enough to afflict unhappy Europe, which has only had within these few years a breathing time, after half a century of combats. But we do not owe merely ad miration to heroic Poland, we owe her both grati :tide and support. Without this ancient ally, whose generous sons have received with ours the baptism of blood in every field of battle in the wcrld; without the prodigies of courage which she has shown in an unequal contest, in which, accord ing to first appearances, the last Pole in arms ought to have perished, the Autocrat of Russia would have joined hands with his Allies, our old enemies, and Europe would have poured herself, for a third time, on France, passing over Belgium, our natural ad vanced guard. Such a noble devotedness has involved us in an immense debt towards Poland. Let us haste to acquit this debt." This, we are inclined to think is a language which speaks to the hearts of all Frenchmen. We fear a general war is almost un avoidable. We say we fear it, because experience [as sufficiently shown that the cause of the people always gains by peace, and the efforts of even the worst Governments are unable to prevent these re sults; and because war is the enemy of all improve ment, the parent of all the worst passions of our na ture. War may yet be prevented by the Govern ments of Austria and Prussia, and we are not with out hopes even from that quarter. The publication in the German Papers of an Address of one of the districts of Hungary to the Emperor of Austria, in behalf of the Poles, the example set by which has been followed by twenty-two other counties, would seem to indicate something like a return to a more enlarged policy on the part of the German Sove reigns. The language of the Address is striking : " We cannot (say, these noble petitioners) conceal the profound sorrow which we feel at the unjust war waged on our frontiers against a nation with which we are allied by neighbourhood, and which, when the increasing power of the Ottomans threatened Vienna, stretched out to us a helping hand, and having joined its victorious arms with ours, aided us in triumphing over the tyrant of the East, preserved the Throne to the House of Hapsburg, liberty to our country, and conquered for our ancestors the hope of a repose which nothing has troubled. " If we apply this example to ourselves, it ought to engage us to oppose a barrier to the Colossus of the North, who since that epoch has increased in an inconceivable manner, not by successions to hereditary dominions, nor by the will of the nations over which be rules, but by the force of arms; we ought to labour for our own safety by dis charging a sacred debt towards Poland, which combats with an heroic courage for its nationality and indepen dence, that if, when Poland is not only conquered but oppressed, we and our descendants should be threatened with the same lot by the same enemy, we may not have to exclaim with sorrow, there is no longer a Sobieski.' " A contemporary (the Times) justly observes, "The Sovereigns of Europe—even those belonging to the Holy Alliance, if they were not themselves steeped in the infamy of the partition—might safely interfere in behalf of the Poles, without affording any encouragement to the revolt, or giving any countenance to revolutionary principles." We are inclined to think that the instinct of self preserva tion will have some effect in improving their sense of justice. They must be aware of the immense strength of France in a military point of view, and the great support which France must derive from her cause. To redress the wrongs of Poland, would be to deprive France of the only colour for an ap peal to arms ; and this act of justice would besides secure both Austria and Prussia against a neighbour that, secure in her strength of position, can only choose her time for attack. It would be for the in terest of Austria and Prussia to detach themselves from Russia on this occasion. All Europe would suffer from a general war, but these States would probably suffer the most, and a war might even cost Prussia her existence as a first-rate Power. — Morning Chronicle. For the last three or four days all the Newspapers have been dwelling upon a clause in the new Re form Bill limiting the right of voting in towns, Ex. to those whose rent was payable not oftener than once in the half year. It was manifested that this clause would almost nullify the new franchise in towns, as seven-eighths of all the tenements which pay rent pay it by the quarter. After four days' outcry upon the subject, the Courier yesterday an nounces from authority that the clause in ques tion got into the Bill through inadvertence ! Such an announcement as this at once excites indig nation and provokes ridicule. A mistake is made by persons who fancy they possess skill to remodel the Representative Constitution of the nation—a mistake evincing the grossest ig norance upon a practical matter, and which, had the error not been pointed out, would have rendered the whole measure an absurdity, is described by the gentle term an " inadvertence," as though it had been an error in the date of a dinner invitation. For our own parts we are glad of the " inadvertence," if we see to call it by that name, since it will serve to show the public, if any thing cart, the pitiable ignorance upon practical matters of those who presume to meddle in a system inter woven with, and deeply affecting all the practical affairs of the kingdom, There has been no one proposition of the present Minister; applying to the every-day business of the people which has not been scouted as absurd—be witness the Budget and the Tia-,ber Duties. If the people generally understood the whole pf the Reform Bill as well as they did that clause wii;.:l; went upon the theory that rents were generally paid half-yearly, they would reject it ac a wholesale and blundering interference with matters not understood by those who izterfere.— Morning Post, The public were surprised at reading in the re ported debate on the Address, the speech of a Noble I✓arl who took that opportunity of announcing his decided hostility to the Ministry, and consequently his opposition i - . 9 their measure of Reform. Their Lordships, who renaem i l;rered the cordial and even confiding support which, two giipnths ago, he had t4.4ered both to the authors and the wipeiples of the Bill, ur.ere equally astonished. This marareet in • consistency couLl. not escape any body, in doors or out ; for the Noble i.. 7 a;:l himself took occasion to erzblazon the change, and attemi?ted an explanation of its 34d,7ep occurrence; but not being L'o:.;rid to remember every hipg which the Noble Earl had said two months ago, few people were fully aware ' of the complete revolution wincil hay ta)cen place in bic sentiments since the Ist of April last, We nave now befce us a speech which Lord Winchilsea made at Maidstcoe, at a county meeting to petition for Reform, on the 2ith of March last, and ano ther which he addressed to ; ill; House of Lords on wesenting the petition which ernanat e d from that meeting, end, contrasting the declarations and doctrines announced i;4 these orations, with the doe-1 trines and declarations which r.:.artled the Ministerial benches in the debate on the Atla':T.ss, we can scarcely believe that we are listening to the 321;1c' per3on, and are almost tempted to think that some of thou strange metamorphose ,s have taken place, described in thp Latin poet, where the s t ir, - ,e name is continued to criijects perfectly dissimilar. The Lord Winchilsea of the end of March was an admirer . of the character, and a supporter of the policy, of the preset Government,—the strenuous advocate of o P f ar h iamentar , iy.eform, and the indignant denounce:: 4 to c t on e fo h u y n i Tt r h i e t e f s ri o e r ad c s calumniators nl o a ,r t . m o rsw.‘ivt with who endeavouredh: enemies of our institutions.' The Lord Vv e r l ichile.2 . o r that period endeavoured to prove, that a' tentecelnsathrye_reepirtzeena7 tenon was. ot only expedient, b t u h a gratitude of their ; a a t s i v a r a e— as for his Majesty's Ministers' country for having introduced au g eT and, wising in the fervour of his admiration he approached the chief of the Cabinet, painted hire out as the object of his " eternal gratitude" for the manner in which he had brought forward the ques tion. The Lord Winchilsca of two short months ago cordially concurred in addressing his Majesty, to thank him for a course of policy which endeared him more to his people than any of his predecessors who ever occupied the British throne—gave it as his opinion that the Bill would establish, consoli date, and strengthen our glorious Constitution—de clared it an act of justice to the great body of the people—promised it his cordial and unreserved sup port when it should be brought before their Lord ships—hoped that it would obtain a complete triumph—denied the charge of revolution brought ' against it—and stated it as his opinion, that while it restored the just rights of the people, it left ample securities for the prerogatives of the Crown, and the privileges of the Peers. Such was the Lord Winchirsea of the Ist of April last, as may be seen by the following extracts from his speeches at Maidstone and in the House of Peers to wards the end of March. At the former he said— " Our Constitution consists of the three estates of King, Lords, and Commons, and it is from the just and proper influence of each that we derive the matchless beauty and symmetry of our Constitution. Take from the power of one and add to that of another, and you will destroy that Constitution which is the pride and boast of Englishmen, and which has been the cause of those liberties which we have long enjoyed beyond every other country in the world.—(Cheers.) I say this firmly, because I am a friend to constitutional Reform, and to nothing else.— (Loud cheering.) I repel with indignation the charge which has been brought against me and others who advo cate the Reform measure, with the principles of which I fully accord—(Loud cheers)—though some of its details I think might be better, yet with its principle I entirely agree: I repel with disdain any such charge as that brought against us—namely, that we are attempting to revolutionize the land. I say that one of the principal beauties of the Constitution is that it has the power within itself of correcting any abuses which may have grown up in the country, by the consent of the three bodies in the state, without endangering any of the fundamental prin ciples of the Constitution, which it is our object to renovate and restore to its original beauty.—(Cheers.) That there is necessity for this is evident enough. Gen tlemen, his Majesty's Government is entitled to the thanks of the country. Earl Grey, with his distinguished talents, unites a political honesty not to be surpassed, and leaves behind him, at an immeasurable distance, those who have abandoned their principles and deceived their friends.—(Loud cheers.) The Noble Lord is entitled to the eternal gratitude of his country for the manner in which he has brought forward this question. I maintain that he deserves the support of the country at large, and I cordially concur in the Address to his Majesty which has been proposed. I consider that we have a Monarch who deserves the loyalty and gratitude of his people in a greater degree than any of his predecessors , . He reigns truly in the hearts of his people, and he has the highest claims on them for their support to measures emanating from his Ministers by his Royal sanction, for the benefit and welfare of his people. They have not got Reform yet, but when the measure does come, as I am persuaded it will come, into the law of the land, it will consolidate, establish, and strengthen our glorious Constitution, and not only operate for the general welfare and happiness of the country, but will also render an act of justice to the great and influential body of the people. The mea sure has not yet been introduced to that House of which I am a Member ; but when it is brought forward there. I shall be at my post ready to give it my most hearty and cordial support."—(Three cheers were given the Noble Lord at the conclusion of his speech.) In the House of Lords he said— " He could not, in presenting a petition so important as that of the county of Kent, refrain from stating that he concurred most heartily in it, and that w:th it he had ap proved of the Bill brought into Parliament by his Ma jesty's Ministers. He hoped that that measure wouid be triumphant, as he considered that the demand now so eagerly made by the great body of the people was not fir revolution, but for that Reform of representation, which would prevent those ulterior measures which had bean alluded to from being resorted to. As to the charge of revolution, he denied it altogether, and he was sure that no such charge could be made out against those who had been instrumental in bringing forward this Bill. It neither took away from the just rights of the Crown, or the privileges of that House, and it was calculated to re store to the people those privileges which they had lost in the lapse of time." But " a change has come over" the Noble Lord since the latter declaration was made, and on Tuesday se'nnight we looked in vain for a lineament of the liberal, the reforming, and the Anti-Tory Peer. The Lord Winchilsea of the 21st inst. has deserted Lord Grey, in whom he formerly placed such reliance—has expressed alarm at the menacing ranks of Jacobins with whom his Lordship is sur rounded, and among whom he himself formerly mingled without feeling any revolutionary contami nation—has discovered that the promised extension of the rights and privileges of the Commons would destroy the equilibrium of the Constitution, or, in other words, would sweep away the Throne and the House of Lords—has found that a just representa tion of the people in their House is incompatible with the Protestant religion ; that under the mask of Reform the active supporters of the Government aim at revolution—and that, when they shout their gratitude to the King, for his patriotic concessions of their just privileges, they are only using his name to overturn his authority, and procuring his sanc tion to the preparation of a republic. Giving our readers credit for a laudable incredulity in such rapid changes, unless they can be supported by proof, we invite them to contrast the following passage of the Noble Lord's speech on the address, with the extracts from the speeches to which we have already adverted:— " One great difference which existed between him and the great body of those who supported the Government of the Noble Earl, and which, as a party, he was led to believe would cease to exist, was this,—that they advo cated the extension of the rights and privileges of the people to a degree which would destroy that equilibrium in the State which made the Constitution ofirthis country the envy of surrounding nations. Another great objec tion to his support of the Government of the Noble Earl was, that the great body of his party advocated principles which would destroy that connexion between Church and State, which had been productive of so much advantage to the Constitution. Another objection was, that when he declared his confidence in the Government of the Noble te:trl, he thought they would have upheld Protestant prin ciples, and what he called Protestant ascendancy ; for the maintenance of these he looked upon as the truest founda tion of the great principles of national freedom. Bet with such feelings, could he look on at what had passed in the country within the last two months, during which attacks of the grossest description had been made on that House ;—but he knew they had been made in vain, for no attack would intimidate them from the performance of their duty—(Hear, front the Opposition)—could he wit ness the attacks that had been daily made by that portion of the Fuse which affected to support the present Go vernment ;--couid be forget the principles which were avowed by the great body of tiles, ; syho were the supporters of Government, and still preserve that coaide;;;,e in the Covernment which he had once entertained? Let him also bear :n :hind that that party had, under the mask of correcting abuses (whiel.. be admitted to exist, and which he should do his utmost to corrix;),—but he repeated, that under the mask Of correcting abuses, had endeavoured to oweri.hro7 the remaining institutions of the country, and estabii+h a rep4blig on their ruins.—(Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances, he could net, boWever humble his support might be, consent to give it to a party the great body of which upheld such principles." We may now allow the Noble Earl to settle the qt.i.itior., Lf t t ;is own identity as he best can. It is plain that the noble orator at the Kent county 1 meeting, and the Noble Pee: w; - ,o spoke on the address, though they bear the same name, c;AIII scairce:y 1 . , e the same person. If they are, we have' no doubt that: L colloquy sometimes takes place in' the mind of his Lordship, tint unlike that of the farmer who, when sleeping in' his caa, I ,ost his horses, ,rid, awakening, exclaimed ‘.‘ Am I Giie;;, or am I not ? if Ciles, I have lost my horses; if not, I have found a care:: The change is entirely in the Noble I.i.' arl himself, though he arguep stre nuously that, it has occurred in - the feelings of the country. The Mllinistty and ate Bill are "supported by the same class of persons, and with the sans 2 sound intentions, as when he swelled their ranks. The Reform Bill is not more dangerous to our church establishment in June than it was in March, and William IV. is no more disposed to surrender the prerogatives of his Crown and th . , 2 privileses of the Peerg, to form the trappings of a republic, dur. ing the present Parliament, than he was in the last —supported as both now are by the gratitude, loyalty, and patriotism of a faithful and confiding people.—Times. SECOND EDITION. SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT OF THIS EVENING. HOUSE OF LORDS. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack shortly after Five o'clock. The Earl of RADNOR presented a petition from Berk shire against the tithe system. The Earl of ORFORD presented a petition from King's Lynn, against any violent Reform. FRAUDS ON CREDITORS. Lord WYNFORD introduce,' his Bill for preventing debtors from lying in prison for the purpose of de frauding their creditors. Originally he had intended to introduce a clause in this Bill for the purpose of reaching those debtors who had absconded be yond the seas for the purpose of defrauding their cre ditors, by which the law of outlawry would he materially altered ; but since he last had the honour of introducing this hill, he had discovered that outlawry was an extremely dilatory proceeding and attended with enormous expense, and therefore what he (Lord Wynford) proposed now, was to bring persons absconding beyond the sea, for such a nefarious act, within the operation of the bankrupt laws. At the present moment there were no less than a hundred persons confined in prison fur debt who were living most luxuriantly, whose creditors were actually starving. The Earl of FIFE stated, that when the Bill was brought before the House last session by the Noble and Learned Lord, he had entered his humble protest against it, consi dering it highly impolitic and not at all calculated to pro duce the effects intended. It was well known that the process of arrest and imprisonment for debt only tended to benefit the lowest and worst class of the legal profession, and he (Lord Fife) had been told that the most honourable part of the profession wished most anxiously that it should be put an end to. Under the present system, if an honest trader who had encoun tered difficulties, was placed in prison for a debt ; his money was divided among a nest of hornets, who had been principally instrumental in putting him there. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY moved that the Tithe Composition Bill be read a second time on Tuesday next, and that their Lordships be summoned for that day. (LIFT SITTING.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. At Four o'clock the SrEatcla took his seat, when several new Members took the oaths and their seats. Lord STANLEY, Mr. JOHN Woon, and Mr. HAY WARD presented several petitions from various places in favour of the Manchester and Leeds Railway Bill. Mr. HUNT presented a petition from James Hirley, who stated that he was an Irishman and had relations in Ireland, and the prayer of the petition was, that an im mediate enquiry might be made into the causes of the Newtownbarry massacre, that the yeomanry force of Ire land might be abolished, and that, if necessary, the regular military force of the country might be substituted. Ordered to lie on the table. The HON. MEMBER then presented a petition from the labouring classes of Tothill-street and its neighbourhood, in Manchester, complaining that they were not included in the plan of Reform brought forward by Lord John Russell, and praying for annual Parliaments, universal suffrage, and vote by ballot. The Hon. Member did not present this petition with any intention of defeating the Reform Bill ; but when be on former occasions stated that the people at Manchester and other places in the North were not satisfied with the Bill, he was met by contradictions from several Honourable Mem bers. He had, however, since received a great many petitions on this subject, confirming what be then said. He had presented one from Preston, another from Bolton, signed by 5,000 persons (although the newspapers chose to say the number was only 500), and he had a petition from Manchester, signed by 20,000 persons, all upon this subject, and iii confirmation of what he had stated. The petition was read, and ordered to be printed. The HON. MEMBER next presented a petition from the operatives of Macclesfield, signed by almost every male adult, who was excluded by this Reform Bill from voting for representatives. They complained of not having a share in the election of Members, and they prayed for annual Parliaments, universal suffrage, and vote by ballot. The Hon. Member then presented a petition from Alessrpi. Cumming and Dykes, who were deputed by upwards of 20,000 persons (wile were to be excluded from voting by the Reform Bill) to make known their feelings, and to state that the Reform Bill was an insult to the understanding of the people. They prayed to be heard at the bar of the House iu support of the petition.—Ordered to lie on the table. Mr. CHAPMAN presented a petition from the Grand Jurymen of Westmeath, and another county in Ireland, praying the House to take into consideration the state of the poor in that country; also a petition from the inhabi tants of Mullingar, in favour of the Reform Bill. Mr. PAGET gave notice that he intended to move that instructions be given to the Committee on the Re form Bill, to leave out so much of the Bill as related to the division of counties. Colonel LINDSAY presented a petition from the Pro vost, Town-Council, and Magistrates of the royal burgh of Cupar, praying that an alteration might be made in the proposed classification of votes in the Scotch Reform Bill that was brought in last Session, and which was intended to be brought in to-morrow. They stated that Cupar and St. Andrew's were intended to be united to Perth ; Perth would have five hundred and sixty-one voters, while the other burghs j , dned to it: would only have 363 voters, so that the power of returning the Members would rest chiefly with Perth. The petitioners prayed that the boroughs of St. Andrew's and Cupar tni 4 lit be united to some of the boroughs in the county of Fife, instead of to Perth, which was a town of sufficient importance, as respects wealth and commerce, to have a representative to itself. The Hon. Member thought it not only injudicious but unjust that the eastern burghs should be disfranchised, and that it was, as they con ceived, an infringement on the articles of Union be tween England and Scotland, which articles provided that the representation for the burghs should remain en tire, notwithstanding the Union.---(Hear.) The popu lation of those boroughs proposed to be disfranchised was upwards of 6,000 ; in England, by the proposed Bill, to a population of 4,000 two Members were given ; was it not unfair, therefore, that these eastern boroughs should be unrepresented ? It was highly desirable that Cupar and. St. Andrew's should be united to the eastern burghs, and that Perth should have a representation of its own. Mr. S. WORTLEY said if the learned Lord Advocate would not take up the subject, he should, in the Com mittee on the Bill, enforce the claims of Perth. The LORD ADVOCATE declined at present to enter into any discussion ur on this subject, as it would receive all proper consideration i❑ the Co►nmittee. After a few words from Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS, the peti tion was read, and ordered to lie on the table. Mr. HOBHOUSE presented a great number of peti tions relative to shortening the hours of labour; among t h e places were Renfrew, Manchester, Dundee, Bradford, a nd Arbroath. Mr. PROTIIEROE begged to ask the Hon. Member for Westminster as to the fate of a Bill in which his, Mr. p.' s constituents, were very partkularly interested ; he alluded to the Marylebone Select Vestry Bill. Dlr. HOBHOUSE said that the Bill had undergon last Sessions such alterations in its nursing, that he had felt it his dut y t o abandon it. If he had any chance of parrying it through the present Parliament, which was differently constructed from the last : he would haye no objection to bring it in again. Mr. EWART presented a petition from the corn millers of Liverpool, complaining of the importation of American Flour. Mr. LEFROY presented a petition from Trinity Col lege; Dublin, ageinst the Reform Bill. Mr. S'ADLER'rose to present a petition (we could not learn where from), most respectably signed, complaining of the effects of the 'New Beer . Bill. He • considered it r.ititled to great consideration, for the impression in the country was that the alteration made regarding the sale of beer had been most pernicious to the morals of the people. Th e opinion'of the Magistrates was that the committals for offences had more Mari doubled from the day on which the alteration had been made; it haft been prUmised that t h e quality of beer would be i m p rove d , b ut he appealed to e very one, ;f the itu , ,,ity had not in fact been much de. teriorated. If gentlemen, wno ca - 4ina;ly supported the Bill, now found that their expectitions had nit been an swered, the most manly course would be now to come for ward and avow it. Lord ALTHORP said, it was undoubtedly true, that many corapikants had been made of the effects produced Lv the Beer Bill, but he begged Hon. Members to recollect, that it was much more likely that any changes of this na ture should produce worse effects at its commencement than it should afterwards. He had advocated the mea sure when it was brought forward by the late Government, but although some disadvantages had arisen, be was not prepared to abandon it altogether, and resort to the old system, which had greater evils, and the getting rid of which had been one great object.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord was not desirous of placing under any party's controul the choice of: what licenses should be licensed.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord at the head of the Home Department had it under consideraeion to effect some poliee regulations, which would have the effect of preventing those disorders which were the subject of complaint ; at present he thought the trial had not been a fair ene, and be would be sorry to abandon it.—(Hear.) Mr. PROTHEROE could not see any reason to reject the vote he had given in support of the Bill brought in by the late Government. Fur his own part, he considered that most of the complaints raised against the operation of the Bill, proceeded from those who had been first op• posed to the measure. Mr. GOULBURN was sure the House would not postpone any thing that was calculated to afford relief to the poor, till the period arrived when the poorer classes of society should be so well informed poli tically and otherwise, as to be able duly to appreciate the effect of such or any other measure. The most zea lous promoters of the Bill could not have expected it to pass into a law, without entailing certain evil consequences ; and for his own part he had been able to see the possibility of removing the re straints which existed in the sale of beer by a gradual withdrawal of those restraints ; he should have pre ferred adopting that course of bringing forward the Bill, the effect of which was now complained of. The inconveniences which had arisen from the passing of the Bill into a law had certainly gone far be yond the extent which he had anticipated, accord ing to the informatio❑ which he was in possession of, furnished to him by the ablest and most impartial persons. It was of the utmost importance, therefore, for his Majesty's Government to institute at least some very diligent enquiry into the operations of the Bill. He believed the inconveniences prevailed to the greatest extent, and, indeed, principally to the agricultural districts.—(No, no.) This was according to the information which he received. He understood Government had already made general inquiries on the subject, and if that were so it would be better for the House to be put in possession of all the facts that had come to the knowledge of Government, before Parliament proceeded to legis late again on the business. Viewing it in every light he had heard nothing yet which made him entertain the most remote idea that it would be necessary to re turn to the state of the law in which it was before the passing of this Bill. Measures might be adopted for correcting the abuses without depriving the poor of the advantages arising from the Bill. Lord STANLEY could not agree with the statement that the evils arising from the Bill prevailed principally in the agricultural districts. He believed the Secretary of State received from the county of Lancaster one universal reply to 11 his enquiries throughout that part of the kingdom, and which was that the effects of the Bill were most mis chievous. His Lordship hoped Government would be able to bring forward some measure for correcting those mischiefs. Mr. WARBURTON deprecated the idea of proceeding hastily to pass further measures on this subject. He believed there was one chaise in the Bill which required that those who took out a license to sell beer must leave a place in which to consume it—this entitled them to have sol diers quartered upon them, and the idea of that prevented respectable shopkeepers selling the beer which otherwise they would do, and left it to persons of a very low class to engage in the sale of the beer. If this clause were re moved, more orderly persons would begin to sell it, and more orderly conduct be the consequence. Mr. PAGET regretted to hear that it was the intention of his Majesty's Government to interfere in bringing for ward any new measure for the purpose of increasing the authority of either magistrates or police with those who sold beer. Io his opinion, all the inconvenience that had been complained of arose, not from the Bill going too far, but not going far enough. He should propose the removal of all restrictions whatever. . . Sir M. W. RIDLEY thought that the proposition of the Hon. Member who had just sat down were it to be adopted, would produce incalculable evils. He (Sir Matthew) had opposed the Bill from the first; but on this occasion he certainly thought the wisest plan would be to give a little more time for experiencing the operation of the Bill. Any proposition of amendment to the Bill might be well worthy of attention. An Hort. MEMBER considered the Bill had effected this benefits, it had enabled the poor to obtain an article at a cheaper price than before, and also raised the price of barley, thereby doing a service to the agricultural interest. Sir CHARLES BURROWS said, in his opinion the Bill had done incalculable damage to the country. One great object in passing the Bill was an increase of revenue, hut all increase of revenue that tended to the demoraliza tion of the public must be an abomination in the sight of any Government. Mr. PORTMAN regarded it as an expedient to attempt to amend the Bill, after only one year's trial. It ought, at any rate, to have another year's trial. He was, how ever, firmly persuaded that there was but one remedy fur all the evils that had now been alluded to complained of by the poor on one hand, and the Clergy on the other—that remedy was the repeal of the malt tax.— (Chem.) He hoped that in the course of next year His Majesty's present Government would introduce the measure for the purpose of repealing that obnoxious tax. Mr. SADLER, in bringing up the petition, denied that he had ever been opposed to the remission of any tax which was in any way calculated to benefit the poor. What was the operation of the Bill ? He spoke not on conjecture, but from certain knowledge. Ihe operation of the Bill was to make not meoely the father of a family but the feinala sex, the wife, the children, tipplers. He knew that every person wo was at all conversant with the state of society would agree with him in that opinion. His proposition for the relief of the poor, would be, and was, very different. He proposed to remit the tax on malt entirely. He had contemplated too, such a thing that the lower and lowest classes should have the opportu nity of brewing their own drink, as free from tax as from adulteration. It was a quection which involved the well-being, the morals, the happiness of the people of this country; and he would, impressed with that conviction, take leave, upon an early opportunity, to press on the consideration of the House no new ideas or new opi nions of his own, but those which he bad previously advanced on the question. And be would take the sense of the House on the remission of the tax, as it re garded the lower class, so as to put a stop most effectually to that vicious practise of tippling, which, under the present system, might be carried on in any num ber of houses, which, for a trifling consideration, chose to license themselves. Mr. HUNT gave the Hon. Member (Mr. Sad ler) credit for his good intentions. He would ask him, however, how could the poor of the Metropolis, with their scanty means, furnish the necessary implements for brewing their own beer. The good intentions of the Hon. Member were like some of his other Utopian notions, and if his plans were carried into executfon, instead of benefiting the poor, they would be driven back to the gin .shop, to drink that intoxicating blue-ruin, instead of good wholesome beer. Sir CHARLES I3URRELL was sorry to pto7ong the discussion, but as truth was the only object in that House, he would state a fact of which he had been assured by his own steward, that an old wo man of his acquaintanee—(a laugh)—had brewed excel lent beer from an old teakettle.—(Loud and general laughter.) The petition was ordered to be printed. The LORD ADVOCATE then rose and said he would to-morrow move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the state of the representation in Scotland.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. G. DAWSON presented a petition from Sir A. King for compensation for loss of his office. Lord ALTHORP said that as a very strong complaint by the lion. Baronet had been submitted to hint, he had sanctioned the bringing of his case before the Ilouse. PUBLIC SALARIES ! Alderman WOOD anticipated the support, not only of the pres e nt, but of the last Ministers, for ex-Ministers was an expression not very agreeable.—(A loud laugh.) (LEFT SITTING.) as English proprietor, OPPRESSION IN POLAND. ---RUSSIAN Jus ofahY rics.L.The Grand Duke CONSTANTI NE, when be wishe d to press Li conviction, has been know n to change the Jud ges four times before 'be could obtain i t. If this tells m uc h T n rar .e ll t z o 'n r g , could against the tyrant, it tells:someth in g also for the Ma g i stracy. estate in Yorkshire to one in Devonshire, without waiting months fO r a pass port from two Governmen ts, and when re ce i ve d , to fi n d . —W h Travelling -What would not go h e f r . t I, from e hisfeelings his route specified, as if for a prisoner 9i . War—his time limited—and a prols'hition to visit the capit a l? B u t so it has been in Poland ; and disgusted with thi s t rea t me nt, many have made themselves citizens of Qracow, which has thus become a true focus of liberalism, THE LOVAT PEERAGE. This case was beard at the bar of the House yes terday, in a Committee of Privileges. Lord SHAFTES. BURY, as Chairman of Committees of Privileges, in the Chair. There were also present the Lord Chancellor, Lord Wynford, the Dukes of Cumber land, Gordon, &c., and several other Peers. Mr. PEPYS, for the appellant, opened the pro ceedings, from which it appeared that the petitioner, Thomas Alexander Fraser, of Lovat, Esq., claims the title of Baron Lovat, as being the actual heir male of Hugh, fifth Lord Lovat, who sat in Parlia ment as a Baron in 1540. This Hugh died in 1544, and was succeeded by Alexander, 6th Lord Lovat, his son and heir. He died leaving issue male Hugh, his eldest son, Thomas of Knockie and Strichen, (from whom the present claimant is lineally desended), his second son, and James of Ardrochy and Glendo, his third son. Alexander died in 1557, and was succeeded by Hugh the 7th Lord, who was succeeded by his son Simon, Bth Lord, who was twice married, and left issue Hugh, the 9th Lord, Sir Simon of Inverallochy, Thomas, who died a child, and Sir James of Brea, who left issue. Hugh, the 9th Lord, had issue Simon, Master of Lovat, who died in his father's life-time. Hugh, who also died in his father's life-time, leaving issue Hugh, 10th Lord Lovat (also Thomas, called Thomas of Beaufort Frothey•) Hugh left issue Hugh, 11th Lord. This last Hugh had two sons who both died without leaving issue. On failure of issue male from Hugh, the succession opened to Thomas Beaufort, son of Hugh the 9th Lord, as nearest heir male. But this Thomas, together with his son Simon, corn mitted great crimes, and refused to lay down their arms to the sheriff of Inverness. The said Simon was tried in absence in 1698, before the High Court of Justiciary of Scotland (Thomas having died), and was sentenced to be executed as a traitor (his name, fame, memory, and honours to be extinct, their arms to be erased from books of arms, &c.) In 1716 the said Simon was pardoned by George 1., when he re sumed the title of Lord Lovat. He afterwards engaged in the rebellion in 1745, was tried, and executed. He left Simon, Alexander, and Archibald Campbell, &c. Suffice it to say, that after a long list of succes sions, the whole line descended from Hugh, the eldest son of Alexander, the 6th Lord, being extinct. The appellant claims as before stated. After Mr. PEPYS had been heard at some length, and Mr. RUTHERFORD was going to follow, be was stopped on a point of form, it appearing that this case had been partly heard before their Lordships at soate former period, and had arrived at a particular stage ; but after a consultation amongst their Lord ships, who, taking into their consideration that some of the parties present hearing the case had not had the opportunity of doing so before, and other sub jects brought under their consideration, it was de clared that, under the special circumstances of the case, the Counsel be allowed to proceed. On which Mr. I N tutherford proceeded in his argument, on the conclusion of which The LORD CHANCELLOR said, having another case to hear, they would adjourn till Wednesday next ; and in the mear► time the Lord-Advocate, who ap peared for the Crown, would get them what in formation he could on the following point,—(as there was this peculiarity in Scotch cases, they could not get the opinion of the Judges,)—whether there was any difference between a grant to A and the heirs male of his body, arid a grant to A, and after him to B, his eldest son, and heirs male of that eldest son's body : failing whom to C, his second son, and the heirs male of that second son's body. The latter case being what the law of Scotland called a descent by substitution. THE MARKETS. COAL MARK Adair's 28s. Od Beaumont 25 6 East Percy. 25 6 Felling Main 24 6 flebburn Man Holywell., _ Killingworth Ord's Redhugh .......... 25 0 Pelaw Percy Bensham.- ~ 26 6 lanfield t'ownlev 25 9 West Hartley 25 0 Willingto❑ „. 28 0 Wylam 27 0 WallsEndßewicke&Co. 29 0 Ditto Bell Robson & Co. 26 3 Wall's End Blake.-- 31 0 Walls End Brown's— 26 0 Ditto Burraton .27 0 Ditto Clarke and Co. 25 3 Ditto Heaton---- 29 6 Walls End Hi1da........ 27 0 Walls End Hotspur...—. 27 0 Ditto Northumberland 27 0 Ditto Peareth......«. 24 9 ships at market, KT.—June 29. Walls rind Newmarch.. 275. 9d. Ditto Perkins and C 0.... 27 0 Walls End Hidden's.-- 28 6 Ditto Walker —....—.. 28 0 Lambton Primrose—. 28 3 Walls End Helton 30 6 Walls End Lambton—. 30 3 Walls End Ly0n5,...,., 27 6 Walls End Stewart's 30 6 W. E. Russell's Helton 30 6 Ditto Russell's Lyon's... 23 0 Walls End Adelaide—. 28 0 Norwood's Helton-- 26 9 Cowpen 25 Wall's End Elgin 24 6 Hartley.., 27 0 New Flockton, Milne and Co. 24 6 Silkstone 26 6 Silkstone Wilson 26 0 South Hetton 25 0 Walls End Selby- ‘ . ..n 0 Ord's Redhugh Trader 24 6 Pontop Trader 24 6 NorwoodHettonTrader 26 9 Old Etherley small 20 0 ips sold, 62;4-Unsold, 51!4. COUNTRY CORN MARKETS DURING THE WEEK. Wheat. I Barley. j Oats. Beans. Per Quarter. 8 . to 8. 8. to S. IS.to S. to I. Abingdon-- 6`2 81 31 43 22 30 46 Andover BO 37 41 20 52 Birmingham.--64 72 22 41) 24 32 48 Bridport --- 56 74 32 39 26 30 54 Cirencester --- 60 76 38 44 24 29 42 Faringdon-- 54 86 36 40 26 38 - 46 Guildford 48 74 23 3 0 35 41 Henley 4 4 4 8 20 30 40 Hereford .---.... 84 92. 44 48 36 40 60 Highworth 62 80 32 42 28 34 56 Maidenhead Monmouth.-- 72 77 38 46 23 29 Reading 52 66 32 36 28 32 44 Southampton 34 78 37 40 28 3.2 - 50 Stroud Tewkesbury 65 74 40 42 30 38 48 Uxbridge 48 78 32 38 24 34 46 Wantage—.—..—.. 58 80 30 43 21 30 38 42 Warminster 42 74 '2B 45 28 31 42 46 Windsor 59 72 26 34 21 22 55 Worcester - „ 64 68 24 36 '24 28 —. 45 6 2 8 5. —s. —s. —s. .U . 34c 1 . 1 1 2 866, 3 K 5 s: E . T J OlNn u ldu n bw e 28. 1.... 245. 2(s —s '2's 24s . 1. —s. 40s. ,* Wheat, Old - Foreign Oats, Poland - Small or Feed - Foreign Barley, Norf. & Suf - Foreign Beans Pease, White... Tares Rapeseed, in bond , 425. Line. & Wold —s. 368 383. —s. 345. 365. 38s. 4 , 15. Foreign —s. 38 , . 40s. —s. 465. 48s. Grey —s. —s. —S. —s 50s. 7Us. Foreign —s. 30s. 365. none. MA IiKET.--June 28. Per lb. d. to d. Beef 5 6 Mutton Veal Pork Laud) 0 0 to 91. 13s. Cd. per ton ItKETS.—June 23. - s. d. e. d. Butter, 16oz 0 0 too 0 Eggs, dozen 0 0 0 0 Beef, per lb. Mutton Veal O4 0g Quartern Loaf 0 7 0 9 CHELTENHAM Per Bushel. s. d. to s. d. Wheat Barley 4 0 5 6 Oats 4O 43 Beans Pease 5 0 7 0 Hay Si. 10s. DUMFRIES MAI s.d. s .d. Wheat, Imp. Bush 7 8 to 8 0 Barley 4 6 5 0 Oats 36 43 Flour, 141 b. Oatmeal " 8 2 9 Potatoes, cwt. 1 8 2 0 Last week, on the resignation of the Rev. Mr. Prebendary SWILTEES, the Rev. WILLIAM MILLNER, one of the Minor Canons of Bristol Cathedral, WU pre aented by the Dean and Chapter to th e li v i ng o f S a i n t Augustine!s, Norwich. BIRTHS. On the 29th inst. at Park.crescent, the lady of the Hon. Mr. Justice Alderson, of a son. On the 29th inst. at Cheltenham, the lady of A. H. Hinuber, Esq , of a daughter. On the 25th inst. at Manchester, the lady of J. Reid, Esq., agent for the Bank of England, of a son. On the 27th inst. in New Norfolk-street, the Lady Ashwell, of a son. A R ME D. On the inst. at St: M George the Martyr's, Queen-square, Mr. A. M. Perkins, of the United States of North America, to Julia Georgiana, only daughter of the late Major Brown, of BlackrOck, Dublin. On the 28th inst. at St. James's church, C. Hoghton, Esq. of the Adelphi, to Mary Anne, eldest daughter of the late 'l'. Legh, Esq., of Macelesfierd. On the 28th inst. at Walcot church, Bath, Sir B. R. Graham, Bart., of Nortqn Conyers, to Harriett, third daughter or the late Rev. R. Cottam. On the 28th inst. at Bristol, the Rev. T. Butler, son of the Vendable Archdeacon Butler, D. D., of Shrewsbury, to Fanny, third daughter of the late P. J. Worsley, Esq., of Bristol. DIED. coOunntteshse nthvviinitsot.n. Lord Grey, the i n f ant son of the Earl and of On the oSth inst. in Queen Anne.street, Sir Francis John Hartwell, Bart. On the 29th inst. Mr. R. Goulding, of Lee.lodge, near Black. heath, aged 72 . • - On the 28th inst. at North Church, near Berkhampstead, W. Lowndes, Esq., aged 59, only son of the late W. Lowndes, Esq. of the Bury, Cheshain, Bucks, many years a Commissioner at the Excise Board. On the '29th inst. Isabella, wife of Mr. J. Weippert, of Soho. square. On the 25th inst. at Sunning-hill, on her way to Brighton, Philippa Baroness Sunderlin, late of Binfield.park, Berks. Her Ladyship was daughter of Godolphin Rooper, Esq. of Berkham. stud Castle, Hertfordshire, and relict of R. L. Sunderlin, of 13a. ronston, Westmeath, Ireland. PRINTED AND PUBLImED By AIURDO YOUNG,.. AT TSAR SUN OFFICE' ) 112, STRAND, LONDON. CO