The Sun. — London, England, 1831-05-27 00:00:00

SPIRIT tP t'HE PUBLIC JOURNALS. The Comm ons of England having, in reply to the King's demand to know their sentiments on the Reform Bill, expressed their opitsiosi in its favour, fra'n one end of the kinadom to the other, not Sr tr uch by comparative suffrage as by gene ral acclama tion, the next question is, how will the House o' Lords, in the new Parliaraiere, conduct themselves in relation to the B ill ? On this subject we do no' share the anxieties and apprehensions of some Re- • formers, who fear that the aristocratic branch of thi Legislature may obstinately oppose the will both of the King - and the people, and thereby bring spot the couP.try all the calamities of civil commotion. We have not, indeed, a high opinion of the talent, or political sagacity of the Atenateformers of ani class ; but still we are of opinion that even the Anti-Reformers of the House of Lords are not sr deficient in that sort of worldly prudence which is closely connected with the most homely instinct of self-interest as to snake them vainly, and without the shadow of an a dvantage, place themselves in the invidious, if not dangerous, situation of attempting to stem the rushing tide of public i)pinion, which the momentary stoppage of any ob stacle would only make mere impetuous in its course. It is therefore we cannot indulge in the gloomy a nticipations which the writer of" _Friendly Advice to the Lords on the Refbrin Bill" seems in directly, to predict in the following passage Th e opposition of the Lords must be powerleia for any good purpose, but it yet may be pregnant with evil. Their continued resistance to the mea sure so ardently desired by the people may calls( convulsion in this now happy land—nay, even civil war ; and if this unhappily should he the case, it will be but a poor consolation to those who are fel low-sufferers in the anarchy aid confusion that would be thus produced that t'he immediate authors of it would be, as is certain to be the case, its first victims." Now the writer of this pamphlet has, in anticipating the possibility of a civil war, wholly overlooked the circumstance, that in no cotintry eat, there be a civil war but where the people are di vided in opinion. The Aristocracy might, indeed, be able to furnish leaders for the boroughmongers' army, if they could raise one ; but from among what class of the people would they drew their forces ? In the civil wars between the Houses of Lancaster and York the claims of each faction were pretty well balanced in point of legal right ; and as on neither side the struggle was one of principle, but of mere ambitious aggrandisement, the ignorant multitude joined the standards of the respec tive Chiefs, and mutually butchered each other for pay and plunder. The other great civil war --that between Charles I. and the Parliament -was a war of principle. The struggle was to decide whether an arbitrary prerogative, or power restrained within constitutional limits, was essentially to con stitute the future Uovernment of England. The people were not, at that era, sufficiently well in formed to understand clearly the nature of the quarrel, which in its outset was led, on one side, bv the Roman virtue of Hampden, and, on the other, by the generous chivalry of Falkland. They took either side, as passion, ignorance, the influence of a name, the feudal ascendancy of a Chief, or more sordid motives, induced them to enter the ranks of the " Cavaliers" or the " Round Heads," and carry through their native land the fire and sword of de solating conflict. But where are the two parties of the people, at the present day, to take opposite sides of the question of Reform ? Is it meant by the %leiter that the Aristocracy could, in any event, array themselves against the whole people ? Is it to be presumed they could be so in fatuated as to think of such a thing under any circumstances ? It is quite ridiculous, and we must rescue the character of the House of Lords from the imputation of such extravagant folly. On the Catholic question the majority of the House of Lords considered any concession as destructive of the Constitution until a Prime Minister expressed his determination to carry the measure, and them: the titled supporters of " Church and State," in cluding ten Bishops, who had previously expressed themselves in opposition to the measure in terms that would make one believe they would rather suffer :nartyrdom at the stake in Smithfield than agree to any concession, voted for unqualified emancipa tion. After this example of the consistency of the House of Lords, can we suppose they will long resist a Prime Minister supported by the King, and hacked by the whole strength of the people ? The author of the pamphlet relates an anecdote which ought to have been a sufficient answer to his own melancholy apprehensions. He says, " when Sir Joseph Jekyll died he left his fortune to pay the national debt." " Sir," said Lord Mansfield to one of his relations, " Sir Joseph was a good man and a good lawyer, but his bequest is a very foolish one ;—he might as well attempt to stop the middle arch of Blackfriars-bridge with his full-bottomed wig." We suspect that even the Pitt Club will hardly think of applying their Chairman's wig to such a purpose; and therefore the Thames and Re form will move on, and the power of the Aristocracy will have an equal effect in resisting the progress of both.-111orning Herald. A meeting was yesterday held in Exeter-hall, in pursuance of advertisement, to raise funds to relieve the famine now raging in several districts in Ireland. The meeting was numerously attended. We wish we could say that the conduct of most of the speakers wns calculated to promote the object for which the meeting was called. In short, the meet ing was throughout a scene of uproar and confusion, and ended in a downright tumult. The chief speakers at the meeting were Protestant clergymen, of the Evangelical school. We have no objection to clergymen or laymen meeting to promote the success of th e i r p ar ti cu l a r opi n io ns on r e ligion, or anything else; but when a meeting is called for purposes of charity, it shows an utter want of com mon sense to enter on religious polemics. Admit ting even with the speakers, for the sake of argu ment, that Popery is the chief cause of the diseased social condition of Ireland, the meeting of yesterday was not called to provide a remedy for that evil, but to relieve a famine now raging in certain districts of that country. The remedy for the chronic disease is one respecting which there may be difference of opinion ; the relief of famine is a point as to which all must be agreed. To connect the relief with objects of proselytising is to dry up many of the sources of charity ; to say nothing of the cruelty of offering to the victims of famine a relief which they conceive themselves purchasing at the expellee of their salvation. We do not believe that these very clergymen would act in accordance with the senti ments which they uttered, and withhold their loaf from the dying wretch till he had abjured his creed ; though we cannot blame Mr. M'Donnell fur de claring that " as it had been acknowledged that the funds then collected were to be employed in ' pioneering' the way to ulterior objects hostile to Ins creed, and that of the Irish people, he could not feel justifi e d in se n di ng th e m o ney to Ireland through such a c h ann el;' Wh at a strange f at rago most o f th ese Rev . Gentleme n uttered. We really could hardly have beli eved that so much stupi dity could have been brought toge t h er. The Rev. Mr. Armstrong, for instance, wished "to have the landlords encou raged to live at home • capital into the British capitalist induced to take his' a pi s t t al into Ireland; . and the introduction of such ay n to o f feeling into that country as should give stab ilit y which h e measures of Government. The only these . advan tages were to be accomplished was , 'Lb Irishmen, a moral influence into the breasts f the only way in which that influence mcoLunl'danbd introduced was by the propagation of the Gospel.e If the original sin was the great curse on mankind, he could not but look on apostacy as a greater curse; arid he deemed the Roman Cstholic religion to be the great apostacy from the truth of God." Well, then, the English are free from the great apostacy, but what is the moral influence which the Protestant religion h as had on Englishmen with reference to Ireland ? Let us hear the Hon. and Rev Gerard Noel :—" He could not contem plate without deep sorrow the history of the con iection between Ireland and hi§ own country. Eng iishmen ought to hence their heads in shame, when hey reflected upon the nature of that connection for centuries. It had been marked by everything the ipposite of kindness, humanity, and justice on the tart of England. Rapine, peeeecutioi), am; tyranny had floored on them from Lngland." Mr. Henry Drummond, with great good tense, endeavoured to itop Mr. Armstrong's ravings. "It was far from tiro to deity the wrongs which Ireland had suffered from England; it was far from him to deny the in ,ustice of the C'hureh oi Ireland, which received the money of the people without being able so much a , to instruct them in their own language. It was far (rorn him to offer any epolog:e for the errors of Popery. But when t ill; Rev. Gentleman spoke of moral indeente, surely he must know that they eould not enact laws to enforce moral influence; end what they had that day to think of, was a re medy for a tangible and pressing evil." We are ,lad to see that the conviction of the necessity of a Poor Law for Ireland is becoming more and more rte, Chronicle. The Article in the Journal des Thbats, to which we alluded yesterday, has produced a great sensation in Paris. Our readets will find in our correspondent 0. P. o.'s kttcr some account of the conjectures to which it has given rise. It had the effect on Change which so warlike an article; in a newspaper the organ of the Minietqe and conducted by a Minister, could her fail to produce ; and M. Casimir Perier took fright, and was at pains to d'eavow it. We are not of the number of those who are disposed to find fault with M. Casimir Perier for proceeding with great caution, when a general war in Europe may be the consequence of one inconsiderate step. So much lies already been gained by detaching the most powerful and influential of the nations of the Continent from the European Aristocracy, and so much more must be gained by the influence and example of that nation if peace continue, that with. out a strong ntcessity we should be unwilling to hazard this good by a general war. M. Casimir [ 3 ( rier has seen the consequences of an interruption of confidence in the distress of the industrious po pulation of France, and he is naturally anxious to have the people employed and contented. The prosperity of France will do far more in behalf of good government in Europe than her arms can do. With respect to the Italians, they are unquestionably a very clever people in many respects, and a very amiable people ; but life has so many attractions for them, that they would prefer ridding themselves of their enemies in any way rather than one by which their own lives might be hazarded. It is tolerably clear that the worthy men who have endeavoured to regenerate their countrymen have been but very partially seconded by the mass of the population. In short, the Italians are not fond of fighting, and we may appeal to the desertion of Murat by a more numerous and better equipped army than that against which he was marching, the ease with which the Austrians in the evasion put down the Neapolitans, end the poor stand which has now been made. The French could no doubt have given another torn to affairs, but then this would not have been an Italian revolution, but a French conquest. Under all the a circumstances, the French Government might well hesitate before it committed the resources of the French people to a struggle, which would have be come an European war. If the French Govern ment can only secure peace and order at home, a boundless career will be opened to improvements of all sorts. The chief evil with which the French have to struggle is the excessive ignorance of the people in all but a few provinces. The present Go vernment is liberal and enlightened. So far from discouraging education and improvement, we have no doubt that it will give every encouragement to them. The example of all this cannot be lost on neighbouring States, and the Governors of those States will be compelled to yield to the example. But war lets all the bad passions loose, and the Governments now paralysed by the example of France, and unable to injure her, would soon be able to revive forgotten national hatreds, and to array people against people. No Govern ment of the Continent, in the present day, durst meet its own subjects on so unpopular a ground as a war against France; arid therefore, if France do not herself take the initiative, she is perfectly secure. An anecdote, confidently mentioned in the diplo matic circles, will serve to show the public feeling in one neighbouring nation. When the news of the taking of Warsaw, which turned out to be false, as every one knows, reached Berlin, the Russian Ambassador proposed to illuminate his house. He was waited on by the head of the Police, who assured him that he might illuminate; but such was the feeling at Berlin in favour of the Poles, that if he did so, the probability was that his house would be a ruin before next morning. The Ambassador thought it better to save his house than to illuminate it at such a risk.—elforning Chronicle. The elaborate judgment of the Lord Chancellor in !he ca'e of " King v. Hamlet," having drawn a good deal of notice to the transactions which had taken place between the parties, we are bound to say, with all deference to more than one of our re spectable contemporaries, that whatever may be the demerits of the usury laws (and those laws are cer tainly no favourites with us), the peculiar merits of Messrs. King and Hamlet, as they have yet been developed in these Chancery proceedings, appear to have little if any connection with the penal code alluded to. All the world knows that the usury laws are evaded every day ; and that the modern method of evading them, by the substitution of a deed securing to the lender an enormous annuity from the borrower, instead of a bond bearing inte rest at so much per cent., has long since obtained a legal sanction from the courts of law and equity. That the effect of exposing the money-lender to cer tain risks must be, in all instances, to entail con siderable hardships on the borrower, we do not mean to deny ; but if men so incapable of tendering any valid security, that no sane legislator could con template the chance of any but a madman supply ing them with loans—if such men are to succeed in becoming debtors—we hardly know how to deal between them and their equally foolish creditors, otherwise than by letting incalculable risk and mea sureless cupidity adjust themselves as well as they can each to the other. On the case referred to, the circumstances of which are again to be brought, and in a formal way, before the Court, it would be wrong to say more than can be avoided. It appears, that Mr. Hamlet received a security—or something pro fessing to be a security—from this gentleman, of the name of King, to the extent of 8,0001., without having lent him 8,0001. in money—(for that, if we remember rightly the facts, Mr. Hamlet refused to do) —but for goods, which Mr. King had not at first expressed a wish to purchase, but which, on being refused the amount in money, he took on credit—that is to say, on his bond and judgment— and which, though valued by Mr. Hamlet at 8,000/., produced in the market not more than 3,000/. We make no reflection upon this particular proceeding, but it general one upon the facility with which credit can be had in England, and in England only among all the kingdoms of the world, by non whose sole title to be accommodated is their utter inability to refund even a part of what they borrow. The system of paper credit—the system of exorbitant annuities for small principal sums—the frenzy of speculation in the funds—in merchandise—at the gaming table—all, all are parts of the same dreadful character vi hich has overgrown this country—the prodigal and spendthrift character, more general and more prominent amongst our countrymen than any other people on the civilized earth. E ven avar i ce , w h ere i t ex ist s , has assumed the theform of a p ecu li ar sort o f van ity : what was lie love of wealth, being now an eagerness to looked up to merely for the possession of it.— been created by usury laws, Such a mania has not b e must be found out for curt r a eP ili e r at, scheme credit, which now encourag e to i f.heir ' nor will it b e cure d b y the e fin f it a l c i a l i i i t d i es of cer tain destruction thousandswho might b ; , otherwise i,e taught, and at a less price than that of pleviouF. ruin, the necessity of adapting a man's expenditure to his means. The evil, we repeat it, may per haps be remedied, but no law for either liberating or regulating, tha ifiterelt of money will bt: worth one farthing for the purpose.=----Time.t. We gave an account the other day of some dis turbances which had taken place in the western part of Scotland, in consequence of the return of repre sentatives to Parliament, who, from their political sentiments and pledges, could only he expected to represent the f2oll'tiei'.l sense of the oligarchy, and not the political sense of the people. We regret—we deplore—and we condemn—the outrages which were there committed ; but when we recollect that the whole of the northern part of the kingdom has been, all along, but one close and rotten borough—that the people have had no voice in the elections —that they have been spurned, contemned, and ridden over, rough-shod, by the oligarchy,—that corporations and paper freeholders have been every thing, and the people nothing,—nay, that the latter have been not only most vilely and grossly insulted, but de clared to be indifferent to Reform,—we say that when we remember theee things, we are more surprised that the ele•till:tion of vengeance on the part of the warm-hearted, but rather irascible, northcrns, stop ped where it did, than it proceeded so far. They feel keenly the insult offered to them, and most clearly have they shewn that those who declared that they were indifferent to Reform,knew them not. To-day we give an account of two other elections in the northern part of the kingdom, which we have no doubt will be carefully perused, as they in deed amply deserve, by our readers. They are those for Banffshire and Aberdeenshire; and they furnish a glorious proof of the spirit in favour of Reform which now animates them. They may be both set down as close counties; yet, in both, Re form candidates have been found, and in both have they contested, though unsuccessfully, the represen tation. A day, however, is close at hand, as one of the descendants of " the Bruce" stated, when a very different result may be expected, and when those who headed the poll in the cases alluded to will find themselves at the bottom of it.—Morning Advertiser. The meeting respecting the poor people of Ire land had yesterday a termination which we neither expected or wished; but we would fain hope that the indiscretions of individuals will have no effect on the current of English benevolence. The distress is great ; and it is not only human, but mere animal nature which complains of starvation and want. The people are perishing—the cattle dying—of hunger. What more can be said in favour of a subscription ? We pity both—every heart must indeed pity them ; and we have already received one substantial pledge of sympathy, which we shall hand over to the Com mittee, and which, we trust, will be followed by many more. At the same time we do hope and trust that the money subscribed will actually be ap plied to the relief of the poor people of Ireland, and not find its way directly, as it did on it former occasion, into the pockets of the landlords and mid dlemen—savages they must have been—for arrears of rent and other claims, against which practice we trust every Englishman will protest in presenting his mite.—Morning Advertiser. It is not a little surprising that the conduct of Austria towards Dtvernicki and his corps should still be a matter of controversy in the French Jour nals and among some of our London cotemporaries. A clearer case could scarcely have arisen. Whether Dwernicki retreated its the first instance into the Austrian dominions, or whether he took up a posi tion of which the neutral territory was the main pro tection, affects not the question. In the latter case, which is his own version of the affair, he virtually violated the neutrality of Austria by converting it into an ally. Had there, again, been no neutral ter ritory at hand, his corps must either have been cut to pieces, or must have surrendered their arms and been made prisoners of war. By retreating into Gallicia he saved his men from death, or from imprisonment. This advantage has neutral Austria secured to them ; but could she hare done more without be coming an active party in the contest against Russia ? Was she to protect the Poles when they were in imminent danger,—when by the admission of their leader their case was desperate,—to pro tect them in possession of their arms, and then allow them to go forth at the most convenient op portunity to renew hostilities ? Would this have been neutrality ? The Austrian Government is censured for refusing permission to the Poles to return to their own country, unless upon a pledge that they will not act against Russia during the present war. Nothing can be more equitable. Any other course would involve Austria as a party.— Morning Post. THE TALLY SYSTEM. Petitions to Parliament are to be immediately got up against the tally system in the city. The trade is carried on by persons who deal in almost every article of domestic economy, from the cradle to the coffin —tea, coals, linen, Sheffield goods, silks, lace, &c. &c. They keep in their e mployment per sons who travel through the working neighbour hoods, hawking from house to house samples of their various goods, with the tempting offer of taking payment by the low instalment of Is. 6d. and 2s. per week. Their customers are generally of the female sex, whom they persuade to purchase by the argument that the trifle can never be missed from their weekly earnings. The payment goes on well, enough while the husband (who knows nothing at all about the matter) continues at work ; but his employment failing, he is hunted after and harassed by rascals who live by summoning to the several Courts, on the terms of " No cure, no pay, and never cease till they succeed in locking him up in gaol, where the expense of his subsistence costs, in most cases, more than the whole amount of the debt, during his twenty or forty days of confine ment. One of these limbs of the law has been known to summon for one tally-man above thirty persons in one day, and has received the sum of forty pounds out of Court at one time, paid in by the unfortunate debtors. The truth of this state ment can be confirmed at the different prisons which receive Court of Request debtors. It is said that at the Debtors' prison, WhitecrosE-street, during the last twelve months, upwards of 100 persons have been committed at the suit of tally-shopkeepers alone, arid that thirty of that number were arrested by one man. But the misery is not confined to those who purchase. It is the practice of tally shopkeepers to get hold of others by way of security, and thus two are often confined for the same debt. If the wife of a poor man is given to drink, she gratifies her pro pensity by pledging the tally articles. The pawn brokers, however, now, in most instances, refuse to lend on such commodities, as the day of redemption seldom arrives, and they are consequently the suf ferers along with the original victims. One of that body declared that he had forty pledges from one woman, all, he believed, got from various tally-shops, and without the knowledge of the husband. The injury is not confined to the poorer classes. The dressy wives of respectable shopkeepers deck them selves from the tally-shops for monthly instalments to a large extent, and the first intimation the husbands receive is from a strip of parchment. It is, in fact, impossible to describe the misery entailed on whole families by tints mischievous method of trading. So convinced are the Commissioners of the great distress to which it gives rise, that in very few cases they order no more than sixpence per week to be paid into the Court in liquidation of the debts. With regard to the quality and description of the articles sold in the tally trade, they are generally of the very worst kind, being, for the most part, ob tained at sales of bankrupts' effects, and the stale and refuse stock of warehouses—stock not saleable by the fair trader. The progress of the evil within the last few years has been enormous, and the cor rection of it will, it is hoped, go hand in hand with that of the vile truck system, which it rivals in its pernicious consequences. Alderman Wood and Mi. Hume were prevented from taking up the subject iu Parliament last Session, by the sudden close of the business; but they are determined to call the attention of the House of Commons to it as soon as possible in the ensuing Session. PARLIAMENTARY REFORM. (From the Tyn'e Ahreury of May 24.) The majority in favour of the Ministerial plan continues to increase. The boroughmongers them selves, while they argue against the Bill, confess that there is now no hope of their prolonged exist ence. Without entering here into any statement of results which the reader will find sufficiently deve loped in another part of this paper, and avoiding the oft-repeated details of occurrences at elections, which most of our readers must have already seen, we shall proceed in the course we have lately adopted, of discussing some of the strongest of the positions taken by the self-entitled moderateßeformers against the Bill. We are informed that it is a manufactured Constitution, and that our former Constitution was the growth of ages, and formed by the habits and passions, the conflicts, and contending interests of the people. The argument intended to be con veyed by this is, that the Bill must be totally unfit for the people, and that it will inevitably be fol lowed by rebellion and revolution—as great a non sequitur as that because the Bill is printed with black ink, the printer must have emigrated from Sierra Leone. It is needless here to refer to consti tutions in ancient histcry framed and promulgated by individuals, and which " worked well," and lasted at least for five or six centuries. We have a con stitution framed in modern times, that of the United States, which seems to render utterly nugatory and ridiculous the terrors of our Anti-Reformers respect ing this point in their opposition. Besides what is there in the argument if the Constitution is best suited to the present condition of the people ? That the Bill is in some sort a manufactured Constitution we admit, but it is not made in ignorance or in madness or without deliberation, without the ablest lawyers of the age having been consulted, without the experience of the growth of our past Constitution having been deeply considered, without the evils which its de fects have occasioned having been carefully examined —without a due regard having been paid to pro perty, representation, and an ample enquiry into the demands and necessities of the people. The Anti- Reformers call the House of Commons the repre sentatives of the people. The Bill does nothing more than make that House in reality what it is now only in profession. The House of Com mons, as at present constituted, has been the cause of the enormous debt, and the consequent heavy taxation ; and if it had continued as at pre sent constituted, a single turn of the political wheel might have brought back all the profuse expen diture, all corrupt patronage, all the abominable in fluence which the present Ministry have abolished, and the recurrence of which they intend to render totally impossible. Is this the way to, or the high road from, a revolution ? The fundholders will be satisfied that their property will be infinitely more secure than before, because they will know that no more profuse wars—no more crusades against the liberties of mankind will again take place. They will be satisfied that the frugality of Government will be the best guarantee for the integrity of their transactions. And can this lead to evil results even with so much a reformed—so almost new made a Constitution? Mankind are not in the habit of finding fault with any description of ma chinery, because it is new and has not been liable to the friction and the wear arid tear of centuries; neither do we believe are they particularly fond of old laws; why then so much delighted with old constitutions ? The code of Justinian was not a patchwork of by gone ages, neither was the code of Napoleon— neither is there any real importance or value what ever in a Constitution that has grown up in a thou sand years any more than one made in a few weeks. The truth is not that the Constitution has matured one excellence after another by reason of its age; but that there have been soundness of principle, correctness of political equipoise, anti self-preserv ing solidity of the component parts about it, which make it estimable in spite of the unwork man-like repairs, decayed timbers, and filthy, stopped-up common sewers about the building, and all the noisome pestilential vegetation of neglect which it is surrounded. But our re spect for the old house is 110 reason why we should not repair it as it ought to be, cleanse it thoroughly, modetn;ze it to suit present feelings and necessities, and improve the adjacent pre mises. It is the principle which the Constitu tion contained, which enabled it to exist to this day; that principle is sufficiently known, and open to the whole world, not secret and hidden from the eyes of me) ) ; that principle wants extension); time, the great Reformer of the corruptionists, would never have extended it; Ministers arc effecting what time and the comruptionists could not and would not effect; and in so doing they are maintaining the greatness, and rendering durable the prosperity and glory of their country. We are told that counties are to be laid prostate at the feet of the aristocracy, by their being divided into districts, so that the votes may be taken in the shortest possible time. The poor trem bling boroughmongers surely imagine the counties are to be really cut and carved into so many smaller coun ties; and that it is actually divide et impera with the Ministry—that i it is making the counties into boroughs ! The counties are to he divided into dis tricts, for the purpose of taking the votes, but no more; one district is not to send one Member, and another another, but the whole county is to send the two or four, or as many as there are to be sent„ as in former times. Time whole sentiments of the whole county will be just as well known as now ; the feeling will be just as much united as now, for the candidates and the friends, by personal visits, and through the Press, will take especial care that such shall be time case. Morever, we con ceive that a man always votes most honestly when he is amongst people that know him—when he sees his relatives, friends, acquaintance, and de pendents, watching his conduct. Then the opponents of theßill say the Government are establishing a down right despotism in allowing a Committee of the Privy Council to decide what shall be the extent of the boroughs. Of all others this is the most silly and contemptible ground of opposition we ever heard of. Almost every town in England has villages and suburbs around it which have hitherto voted for the neighbouring counties, and which under the Bill are to be brought into the town representation, as in justice they ought, for they clearly possess a town interest and not a county interest. But who is to settle what shall belong to each town ? It must be a Committee of some kind. Is it to be a Committee of the town itself? They would, per haps, take in half the county, or not enough of the n ighbourhood, just as local interests would guide them! We cannot see on what more independent or respectable persons than the Privy Council this duty could have been conferred. They will have fewer prejudices or feelings of favo►►ritism than any other body of men. Be it observed, also, the al leged tyranny is in the Privy Council being loosely designated as the men who are to say what shall constitute a town, as if the boroughmongers would have us believe they would cut down any place whatever to one-half its size, whereas the power is given them to annex such townships as are conti guous—to find, in reality, how much larger every town may be made—how many more voters it may obtain. We have much pleasure in announcing a fact •o honourable to the friends of Refortn in Kent, that the Members for the county, THOMAS LAW lionGirs and THOMAS RIDER, Esqrs., have been returned free of any expense whatever. The Central Reform Committee de frayed the whole of the charges at Maidstone, including even the Sheriff's return, &c. ; and the different Local Committees have each, in their departments, paid all ex penses of canvassing, printing, and the customary adver tisements of the worthy candidates. This is as it should he,—.Maidstorie Journal. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, Mar 26. It was stated in Cow t this morning that Mr. Bo teler and Mr. Simpkinson, who have been long spoken of as likely to be appointed King's Counsel, were to receive that promotion immediately. Those gentlemen afterwards appeared in the costume worn by King's Counsel, when the Lord Chancellor stated that his Majesty had been pleased to appoint diem, and invited them to take their seats within the bar accordingly. Mr. Boteler arid Mr. Simpkinson thereupon took their seats in the usual form, and soon afterwards quitted this Court for the Exchequer. ALEXANDER AND OTHERS V. THE DUKE OF WELLING- TON AND OTHERS. This case Was an appeal from a decision of the Master of the Rolls. The bill was filed to establish the right of the assignees of the late Marquis o f Hastings to what is commonly known by the name of the Deccan prize-money. That right was con tested by Sir Thomas Hislop, who had the com mand of that division of the army by which the conquest was achieved. The Master of the Rolls having heard the case, had decided that Sir Thomas Hislop's claim could not be maintained, and that the parties who claimed through the Marquis of Hast ings were entitled in various proportions to the fund. Before the argument commenced, The LORD CHANCELLOR thought it right to ap prise the Counsel engaged in the cause, that he had formerly been retained as Counsel in it himself.— His assistance had been engaged by Sir Thomas Hislop, he had been male acquainted with all the facts and points in the case, and he believed he had attended 40 or 50;consultations which had been held in Sir Thomas Hislop's behalf; as, therefore, it might be supposed that he had a bias in his favour, he would, if the Counsel for the other parties wished it, willingly call in the assistance of two of the Judges to hear the cause. Sir E. SUGDEN, for the phintiffs, was so con vinced of the law being in his favour, that he should be perfectly satisfied with his Lordship's decision. Sir C. WETIIERELL, for Sir Thomas Hislop, of course could have no objection. His LORDSHIP said that he should dismiss from his mind all that had previously passed when he was engaged in the matter. He was aware that there had been a warrant of the Treasury in 1823, it, favour of General Hislop, which had in some degree been reversed by a subsequent warrant in 1826. He wished to know whether it would be contended that this Court had jurisdiction, so :ar as that reversal was concerned, notwithstanding the pre rogative of the Crown to deal with prize-money at its discretion. Sir C. WETnERELL said that he intended, as Counsel for Sir Thomas Hislop, to contend that the Court had jurisdiction, considering the relative interests and the acts of the partie , , and he had no doubt he should be able to satisfy the Court upon that point. The Learned Counsel then proccded to state the case of Sir Thomas Hislop. The prin cipal point to be decided was, whether Sir Thomas Hislop or the late Marquis of Hastings was to be regarded as the Commander-in-Chief of the army whose victories subdued the Deccan.— The present bill was filed by Mr. Alexander, one of the assignees of any share of prize money of right belonging to the Marquis of Hastings, and it was . filed against the Duke of Wel lingtona nd Mr. Arbuthnot, as agents or trustees of the prize money appointed by the Crown, and against Sir Thomas Hislop. The prayer was, that the share of the sum of 45,7001. which had been awarded to the Marquis of Hastings, should be paid over to the assignee. The share in question had been paid into Court, and Sir Thomas Hislop had a claim upon it under a warrant of the Treasury of the sth of February, 1823. That warrant constituted a grant of prize money to him, and having once passed under the King's hand and received the sign manual, the Lords of the Treasury had no power to alter it. The attempt, then, they had made to alter it by their subsequent warrant was, he in. sisted, wholly nugatory. The first proposition which he relied on was, that the warrant granted in the first instance vested a right in Sir Thomas Ilislop; and his second was, that right being once vested, could not be divested by any act but that of Sir Thomas Hislop himself. This, then, gave the Court jurisdiction, and according to the principles upon which the Court had always hitherto acted, it would be bound to respect the right conferred by the first warrant. The case of two patents granted by the Crown for the same object was an analogous one. The first patent must be held to be in force until its effect was determined by the decision of a Court of Law upon a proceeding by scirc facias. The Lords of the Treasury having adjudicated upon the claims be fore them, had no power to resettle those claims. They had performed the whole of their office when the warrant was first signed. Now the warrant of 1823 recited fully and formally that the claims of the Marquis of Hastings, and those of Sir Thomas His lop, to this prize-money, had been preferred before them ; that those claims had been heard and consi dered by their Lordships; and that the evidence ad duced by either party in support of them had also been considered ; and that their Lordships, after all this, were of opinion that the most equitable prin ciple to abide as much as possible by was that which regulated all actual captures. At the period of the war in the Deccan there were two armies in India, —one of them commanded by Sir Thomas Hislop, and this was the force actually engaged in the victory over and the pursuit of the Peishwa ; and the other, which was distant from the seat of sear more than 300 miles, was under the command of the Marquis of Hastings, who was also Governor-General. The right which the Crown would have had to the prizes made in this war had been relinquished, and vested it in the Duke of Wellington and Mr. Arbuthnot, to be by them distributed conformably with the principle laid down in the warrant. It was after this impossible for the Lords of the Treasury to make an order divesting them of the property, or allowing them to apply it according to any other principle of distribution. But in June, 1825, the trustees had addressed a letter to the Lords of the Treasury, complaining of difficulties they met with in executing their commission, and stating that the decision of 1823 could not be carried into effect. They alleged that there had been no booty at a place called Nagpoor,—that the amount of some portions of the prize-money was incorrectly stated— that some of the money directed to be distributed had not been reduced into possession, and that their Lordships had acted upon inaccurate information. These objections he contended had nothing to do with the principle upon which the trustees were to act. But they proceeded to say that the actual captors could not be satisfactorily ascertained, and ' they therefore recommended that certain portions of the booty should be considered as the general acqui sition of the war, and be distributed among the whole of the Indian army, by which means the Mar quis of Hastings, as Commander-in-Chief of the grand army, would be entitled to an eighth of the booty taken at Nasser, and some other places, where neither he nor his army had actually ever been. This recommendation had led to a minute or warrant of the Treasury, in 1826, by which it wa. adopted; but the Learned Counsel contended, that the fact of the Marquis of Hastings being Commander-in -Chief in the Deccan ought first to have been p ut in issue, as well as the usage of the Indian slimy in respect to prize-money ; and the secon d warrant not bein g ii r i st c , or ,4 lf ,h or ic m h ity hal y over his property in quest ion, must be trewed as a nullity, and the Court m ust award to Sir Thomas lai Hislop the full amount of his claim, or direct an th divestedthe t he Crowni in righttl-le first downof its issue for the purpose of settling those matters of fact which the trustees had taken upon themselves to decide without due investigation. At five o'clock the Court rose, and his Lordship directed the argument to be continued to-morrow. COURT OF ICING'S BENCH, 211,ir 26. LANDSEER AND WIFE V. ROBINSON. The ATTORNEY•GENERAL WUB instructed to move in this case, on the part of the defendant, for a rule to spew cause why the verdict obtained by the plain tiffs should not be set aside and a new trial granted. The action had been brought for the publication of various libellous letters, written by the defendant, imputing to Mrs. Landseer that she had had criminal intercourse with him. Some of the letters had been addressed, to Mrs. Landseer, and some to her husband, and on those letters being tendered in evi dence as the trial, Lord Tenterden was of opinion that they were inadmissible, as they could not be made the subject of an action for libel, without some proof that the defendant intended them to be seen by other persons besides the plaintiffs, to whom they were addressed, and that by the course which he .adopted they had actually fallen into the hands of other persons. To make out, therefore, the publi cation of these letters, so as to sustain the action, his Learned Friend, Sir J. Scarlett, bad adopted a very ingenious mode of bringing them before the Jenny, by assuming that the defendant had put them in a course of publication. his argument was that the defendant having in the first instance addressed to some members of the plaintiffs' family a letter of a similar description to those which he after wards sent to Mrs. Landseer herself, clearly in tendedthat those letters (theletters to Mrs. Landseer) should fall under the eve of her husband's brothels and sisters, or some other members of the family ; and this fact he (Sir J. Scarlett) had proposed to make out by means of an anonymous letter which had been addressed to Mr. Landseer's brother, as from a friend of the family, stating that too great an intimacy subsisted between Mr. Lucius Hooice Ro binson, the defendant, and Mrs. Landseer, and sug gesting the propriety, for the honour of the family, of keeping a strict watch upon the parties. This letter was sent in the absence of Mrs. Landseer, who was on a visit at her father's in Kent, and it was followed in the course of a day or two by a letter addressed to Mrs. Landseer herself, at the house of the family in town to which the anony mous letter had been sent. His Learned Friend nad said that the defendant was sure that this letter would be opened by some of the members of the family (the anonymous letter having previously come to their hands), and be (the Attorney-Ge neral) certainly felt that provided the evidence could be considered as suflicint to convict the de fendant with the anonymous letter, there was enough to justify a reasonable inference that the intention was that the letters addressed to Mrs. Landseer should fall into the hands of, and be opened by, some of the members of the family; and that un doubtedly might be considered as sufficient proof of publication. Under these circumstances, it having been sworn that the anonymous letter was in the handwriting of the defendant, the other let ters—those addressed to Mrs. Landseer—had been allowed to be read. The witness who had been first called to prove the defendant's handwriting to all the letters, on being shown the anony mous letter, could forms no belief one way or the other, as to whether it was written by the defendant. The other witness, Miss Caroline Pocock, a sister of Mrs. Landseer, after looking at the letter, which was a very long one, for some time, said she believed it was the defendant's hand writing, and, being asked the ground of her belief, she said it was from a similarity in the formations of two or three of the letters. She stated this without hesitation, but there was a striking contrast between her ready knowledge of the defendant's handwriting to the anonymous letter, and the doubt she threw upon the handwriting of her sister, Mrs. Landseer, to some letters written by her. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL proceeded to say, that the Jury found a verdict for the plaintiffs for 3001. That verdict, he observed, was founded upon the evidence as to the anonymous letter, and the letters addressed to Mrs. Landseer, coupled with proof of other letters written by the defendant—one ad dressed to Captain Pocock, Mrs. Landseer's father, and one to the plaintiff's attorney, Mr. Evans. eLf Theeord ofi E NT, e eor T uy e N s r_e_eNGr ATTORNEY-GENERAL. ita o t c o mtie t i rd i ft arhot that siey t s those he e a l n et o t i e ly rs . mous letter and the letter addressed to Mrs. Land seer, and could not, he thought, of themselves have led to the verdict which the Jury found. He had now to state to the Court, that the defendant was very sensible of the odium which was cast upon him by being supposed to be the author of the anony mous letter, and although he had certainly been guilty of a good deal of indiscretion in other re spects, yet this charge stood upon so very dif ferent a footing from all the rest, that it was by no means unnatural he should wish to re lieve himself from it. The Learned Counsel went on to say that the defendant now stated in his affidavit that he had never seen the anony mous letter : he swore positively that it was not in his handwriting, and he had no doubt if he were now allowed an opportunity of inspecting it, that he should be able to bring forward witnesses to speak to their belief that it was not written by him. Under these circumstances, he hoped their Lord ships would feel, as the case was one of such a re msrkable nature, that the defendant was well justi fied, for the purpose of his character, in muking the present application. After his Lordship had conferred with the rest of the Court for a few minutes, he added that, sup posing the anonymous letter not to be receivable in evidence, still the plainliffs would have been en titled to a verdict on proof of the letter to Captain Pocock, and the two letters to the attorney, Mr. Hugh Evans, of Gray's-inn. It was possible that the anonymous letter might have had the effect of increasing the damages, but as the verdict must at all events have passed for the plaintiffs, the Court did not think they ought, in a case of this kind, to set the example of granting a new trial, merely on the defendant's affidavit that he was not the author of a letter which was proved by one of the wit nesses to be in his handwriting. The witness who was first called had said that the letter was in a " disguised hand," and that might be a reason why Miss Pocock at first hesitated in speaking to it. The Learned Counsel therefore took nothing by his motion. i IN THE MATTER OF GOVETT. In this case the COURT directed that an attorney, named Govett, residing at Taunton, in Somerset shire, should be suspended from practice for twelve months, for having assisted in a negociation to com pound a felony. A considerable number of white mice (as white as drifted snow) have recently been discovered at Mr, J. FI.NTOIsT ' S, at Great Whelmthani Hall. In threshing out a barn of wheat with the threshing engine, last week, nearly as many of this sort as of the common species were d e stroyed. It is believed that they were imported into this:country with foreign corn. They increased in a very rapid ratio, some litters being as numerous as fourteen...-. Bury Post. BIRTHS. On the 26th inst. the Hon. Mrs. Smith, of Belgrave-street , of a son. On the 2t3th of March, at the Government House, at Cerigoi the lady of Maj or L ong l ey, R oya l A r till er y, President of that Island, of a son On the 25dtit1st. at Guardian Lodge, Croydon Common, the lady of John Hearne, Esq., of Port-au-Prince, Hayti, of 3 daughter, still-born. MARRIED. On the 26th inst. at Chelsea, Mr. G. Hunter, of Bury-street , St. James's, to Elizabeth, eldest daughter of the late Mr. Butt, of Bond-street. On the 26th inst. at Islington, Mr. It. Moreland, jun. of Old" street, to Elizabeth, the eldest daughter of G. L Andrews, Esq'' of St. Vincent-place, City-road. On the 26th inst. at Mitcham, the Rev. C. D. Beckford, Fello of All Souls' College, to Charlotte Maria, second daughter of th e late J. C. Middleton, Esq., of Hildersham, Cambridgeshire. On the 25th inst. at Chelsea, Captain Storer, late blst Reg' . On the 24th inst. at Compt on Bi s h op, Mr. Parson, ment Light Infantry, to Miss laria Simpkin, of Cadogan-plae e • of So of ampton, to Lucy Anne, youngest (laughter of P. Fry, Esq., Compton House, near Axbridge, Somerset. DIED. On the 25th inst. Mr. W..l'. Mason, of Princes-street, Stanl' ford-, treet. On the 25th inst. at t h e East I'allant Chichester, Sarah, • dow of Wm. Smith, Esq , of Horsham Park, Sussex, aged 9 ',. On the 26th inst. Emma Augusta, youngest daughter of Meule, Esq. of Dover -street. On the 26th inst. Mr. Charles Rivington, of Waterloc-Pla ce and Brunswick-square, aged 77. On the 25th i nst. at Wheyborne-house, near Farn h am , tla Rev. G. West, M .A. Rector of Stoke, ne xt Guilford, perpettnr i Curate of Scale, and Domestic Chaplain to the Ea.rl of Orford !, in his filth year. PRINTED AND I' ERU:4IIEO BY AT " SUN OFFICE, 11'2, STRAND , UN°' LOYND°Ott, I UNITE N ° tb the Resolu is appointe the amoun' B A rikers to o►' before F No. is, RED LI( BE T-0 • sen PATRON, CONIMER them, that &ruble alte ROOMS, hie establis attention, a INN shonh COMNIED J. B. is offering hi favours he FRIENDS interest. further ael the nrinage their appri every effort MODATII exertions TERMS c continue to CIAL FRI TO WHI EDWARD rough, un vending La those affix Blacking I Holborn." rin g the lit and to offs any Printer FASTEN] TEETI -1111 0 N TI! D ILLY, g TRONAG Professiona tropolis, be Public in S TORE D I HNERA] mended h) ration is P out the SI allay s the for many WHETHE DISEASE NERAL at PLETE !..ourtAT] Meumbran, answer ev ~IASTICA N.B. CABINET bf 8 t•selecte England a Leadenliall 4bly to Act a nd bine to pro: Mernbe:s it at death. No. Just The SYph Ii fu • Ala or t er, n arty,' "glitteq}airn Carbb r id L Leed,. g e ; Platt tiald„ a " 4 bowding,ns.: