The Sun. — London, England, 1831-06-29 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. A w titer in a Sunday Paper has the modest assurance I to address what he is- pleased to eall " Half a dozen I words to the King," but which,- in fact, consist of a whole column of sermonising cant uppn this notable text, viz. " the extreme difficulty" which his Majesty must have in giving the Roy'al assent to the Reform Bill, " as respects the Csironatihn Oath." And to what part of the Coronation Oath do such of our reader s as may no t have seen this precious farrago imagine that the writer al ludes? To that in which the Sovereign undertakes "t preset ye unto the Bishops and Clergy of this realm, and to the churches committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges as by law do appertain to them." It re• quires no ordinary stretch of invention and of imagina tion, we should think, to discover either how religion in the abstract, or our Church Establishment in particular, is likely to be affected by the measure now in progress. The sly rogue, however, who thus sees in the downfall of boroughmongerism the ruin of the Church, is probably either one of those clerical Mayors, Aldermen, or Bur. gesses which, to the disgrace of our Church Establish ment, are found to exist, or else one of those many as pirants to Church preferment—and that of the highest rank—to whom the road of Parliamentary interest is too tempting to be turned away from without a sigh. We apprehend, however, that the real friends of the Church Establishment, whether lay or clerical, can have nothing to fear, but much to hope, from the consequences of Parliamentary Reform. Nothing in the whole range of our public institutions (not except ing even the House of Commons itself) calls more hiudl) for reformation than the Church—not in its principles and doctrines—not in its ability or design to answer the important purposes of its Divine Founder—but principally from the mode in which those purposes are defeated, by the singular fact, that the drones of the establishment con sume the honey, while the active bees scarcely partake, in too many instances, of enough to sustain existence; and which, with other abuses, it would not be at all difficult to trace to the very same source which has now united so large a majority of the people in calling for Parliamentary Reform. Fortunately the present heads of the Church (some of them at least), unlike the silly writer we allude to, have the wisdom to see the necessity of Church Re form, and the impropriety, if not the danger, to which the Establishment wou'd be exposed, of that Reform com ing upon it from without, if not in time looked to within : the. Archbishop of Canterbury, himself the Lord John Russell of the Church, having with his own band brought in a Bill, or Bids, which in all probability will have the eifi-ct of taking away some of those "rights and privi leges" of abuse which the sapient writer in question would have us believe are guarded and sanctified by his Majesty's Coronation Oath. That Reform, whether in Church or State, should be hateful in the eyes of those who have hitherto been fattening on abuses and corruptions, both in one and in the other, cannot surprise any one ; but, happily, the time is past when those who have the means of remedying those abuses can be deterred from so doing by the interested clamours of those who, like the image makers of the great Goddess Diana of old, think only of the profits of their craft. —.Morning Herald. A smart discussion took place last night, on the pre sentation of petitions for the removal of restrictions on the liberty of the Press. Captain Gordon (Member for Dun dalk) read extracts from several publications, the Poor Man's Guardian, the Republican, comparing the pre sent King and his Government to Charles the Tenth and his Polignac Administration, &c. " This," said the Hon. Member, " is a specimen of the knowledge, the wide cir culation of which is so much desired, and a specimen too of the light in which the petitioners viewed what they called the liberty of the Press." The argument of the Hon. Member is the argument of tyrants and persecutors of every country and every age. A free agent may do evil as well as good ; freedom of speech may be abused to the uttering of error and calumny; freedom of the Press may be abused to the publishing of dangerous doctrines , and incentives to crime. But we must not, therefore, deprive a man of free agency, freedom of speech, and freedom to publish through the Press. Because the Poor Man's Guardian and the Republican are ob jectionable, we must not, therefore, exclude poor men from all access to what is published. When a free agent abuses his liberty to do what is wrong, he ought to be punished ; when a man invites, by speech or writing, to the commission of crime, he might be punished also. But then let us not take the present libel law as our ground in determining what is or what is not wrong. The invitation to crime should he as invita tion to do that which is a crime by the law of the country. Mr. C. W. Wynne observed, " that publications which men to crime should be nunished yla criminal." self of the confusion of We.s of some of his hearers to class under this proposition particulars which do not fairly come under it. What he calls instigations to crime, are opinions, which may or may not be dangerous in their ten dency, hut which are certainly instigations to crime. "He (Mr. Wynne) thought that the extracts which the House hid heard read, containing such sentences as Down with Kings, Lords, Priests!' were of as mischievous a tendency as those which had instigated the peasantry in Kent and Sussex during the late outrages.—(Hear.) Whenever such doctrines were inculcated in a tone of moderation, they were defended on the ground of discussion ; but when the, writer assumed a bo'der tone as in the papers read by the Honourable Gentleman opposite, then Lis language was s aid to be too absuid to deserve notice." The Right Hon. Gantleman, with most Englishmen, thinks that a State cannot exist without Kings, Lords, and Priests ; but it is not surely a crime, though it may be a folly in any man to express the opinion, that Kings, Lords, and Priest are not essential to the well-being of a State. The Quakers, for instance, have no Priests, and think that Christhood lees not warrant a Priesthood. But the Right Honourable Gentleman, because be thinks this opinion mischievous in its tendency, would punish the expression of it. This is what he calls " down with Priests," inculcated in a tone of moderation. There are many books recently publist ed in this country, and in the United States, inquiring into the comparative advantages of a State with, end without a King and privileged classes. The Right Hon. Gentleman would prosecute the writers, if they gave the preference to States without Kings and privileged classes. In shirt, the Right Hon. Gentleman considers all opinions which lie does not himself entertain mis citfievous, and lie would consequently punish all opinions as being mischievous which he does not himself entertain. He does not see that the same reasons which prevailed on him to think highly of Kings, Lords, and Priests, may also prevail on others. In a very popular school book in Germany, A General Introduction to Geography," by Gaspari, of which we have the Weimar edition, 11414, the following passage occurs (p. 504) :—" The Monarchi cal Rulers are very costly to State'', on this account, that they requ're a great deal for the maintenance of themselves and their families, as it is assumed that this is demanded for the splendour of the Crown and the dignity of the State. The town Palaces, the Palaces for the sake of the chase and for pleasure, the gardens, the studs, the tables, the Body Guards, a numerous retinue of attendants called the Court, pleasures, especially theatres and operas, court music in chapels, hunting establishment+, the Privy Purse of the Ruler, and the appanage-a of the other branches of the family, consisting sometimes in estates, sometimes in pensions—consume altogether large mums." This de scription :of one of the features of a Monarchy, written with all the innocence in the world, would be deemed a fit subject for prosecution by Mr. C. Wynne, because to say that Moriarehy is expen sive, is to say that which tends to lower it in the estima tion of the people. The moment we depart from the prin ciple, that all opinions may be freely expressed, we lay down the doctrine of persecution. An invitation to do that which is criminal ought alone to be punished. If we say that only mischievous opinions ought to be punished, we arrogate to ourselves infallibility, and the Pope and the Inquisition have the advantage over us in point of con sistency. In the case of 'the poor people, our business is not to retain them in ignorance, because bad publications ruay be a dd resse d to them, but to remove all obstacles to t_ . he iueulcati wi among th e m of the antidote as well as the disease. Sir R o b ert P ee l, while he thought the prosecu tions recommended by Mr. Gordon would do mischief rather than good, taunted d the Ministry with a disposition i t n o depart offi ce fro,m, li t e be di octrines which they maintained when re i v l i hope (lie said) his Majesty's Go vernment would upon less information than opinion they formerly main tainedin offic t e han they might now be sup posed to possess, being with . th i e le k hoped then, with their present information, and must possess of the efforts which, innote wledge which they being made to undermine the morals, ?Tent day, were loyalty of the country, they would neot'gir faith, and reconsidering the opinions maintained by them in from and if, from their experience in office, they saw any in 1519 ; to alter those sentiments, there was nu man so unworthy reason as to taunt them with inconsistency." We trust th j Ministers will be governed by very different principles.— We take it for granted that no man wilfully embraces error in preference to truth, and that the lower orders would prefer the truth to erro r, if the y could distinguish between the truth and error. We take it also for granted, that when truth anti errorare presented to our minds with equal advantages, we generally embrace the truth in preference to error. Let us instruct the poor as We ought, and faci litatis their access to good publications, and the same result will be observed in their case which is observed in the case of their more wealthy neighbours, the truth will generally prevail with them. We know of no means of securing the morals and the loyalty of the poor, in a state of society like ours, by repressive laws. Men like Sir Robert Peel do more to poison the minds of the poor than all the in flammatory writers who address them. By talking as they do of the necessity of protecting the morals, religions 'with, and loyalty of the people, they persuade the people that the rich have one rule for themselves and another for th,t poor, and, they thereby influence their desires to part-Ike of the forbidden fruit. We must be fair and candid towards the poor—we must meet their errors, reason them out of them, become their teachers ; hut not hold ourselves back, and when others press forward, call out crucify, crucify ! In The Scotsman, received yesterday, there is a sensible article on this subject, from which we give the concluding observations, as applicable to the present discussion : _ . _ " We regard the newspaper 'press as a moral engine of very great value. During the late incendiary proceedings in the English counties, was there one among the four hundred papers in the empire which did not deprecate the insurrectionary spirit producing them—which did not warn the people of the conse quences of their madness and guilt—which did not exert itself to restore habits of peace and subordination ? It was found that about two-thirds of the unhappy wretches concerned in these outrages could not read. We will venture to affirm that news papers were seen only by a very small proportion of the other third, and not regularly seen by one in thirty of the whole of these misguided men ! Surely the question is an important one how we shall prevent the renewal of such crimes in future ? Doubtless, by lessening misery, improving and extending educa tion, and various other means ; but we say boldly that by no single measure could so much be done toprevent tumult and out rage, and tranquillise the country, as by enabling every man down to the poorest labourer to have a newspaper. We hold the lessons of the school, the thunders of the pulpit, and the terrors of the law, to be all feeble compared with the moral agency of the press.—Morning Chronicle. It is very certain that the clause of which we spoke last night, in the Reform Bill, requiring that the rent shall he paid not less frequently than by the half year, in order to give a tenant the elective franchise in boroughs, does exist in the schedule of the Bill now published, and has occasioned very general eurprise: we presume that it was inserted in some degree to appease the apprehensions of those who dreaded the admission of too great a num ber of voters ; and next, probably, it might be thought that a rent payable quarterly would he liable to admit, by chicane, weekly tenants also. The number of leases and other agreements between landlord and tenant, for even valuable tenements, in which a quarterly payment of rent is exacted, might not have been suspected ; for, though a legislator ought to know a great deal, he cannot be, or rather could not have been, a third party present upon every contract between landlord and tenant. The most rational and easy way of getting rid of the clause is, to say nothing about the periods of payment ; but, as in the case of votes for counties under the old law, to require a year's occupancy before the tenant shall he entitled to a vote. There is an explanation also necessary on the relation between this and another clause, the 26th. In this, the 26th, it is said that Commissioners shall annex con tiguous districts to boroughs containing fewer than 300 houses rated at 10/. annually ; but this must mean rated at 101. and also liable to the condition of the other clause, that of paying the rents by nothing less than half-yearly payments; ; and if this he what is meant, how few borough-houses are liable to half-yearly payments of rent only ? There is something in clause sixteen of the sche dule which we do not clearly understand. Copyholders, of 101. and upwards, are to have votes for counties; lease holders, of 10/. annual rent on leases, of sixty years; and leaseholders of seven. years, and 507. .rent; hut what means the following paragraph in the clause ?—" Pro vided always, that such persons so seized or holding shall be in the acteial posseasion of each lands or tenements, or in the receipt, for his own use, of the rents and profits thereof from the person occupying the same." This pro viso would seem to 'lima the whole clause, so far as affect, leaseholders, to the tenants of corporate bodiem holding beneficial leases upon fine and reserved rent,whose soh-lessees cannot vote, whatever be the value of their occupancy. Is this what.he necuna?— Times. It will be reeolio.ted that Lord John Thariell, in - bring ing nivivattrunr-Reform Bill the other -nightv.,:alluded to sppromatiaNkAis plan of Par_ Reform whichwigivateti with-.the- celebrated Long Kar lionrent, lust.whibh, having been carried into exerutiun Cromwell, has usually been attributeti, A* AAA , There ill, heiwever, a 'pooh later authority in footle of chat plan of Parliamentary Reform, and, indeed, of-rarlituneutarY Re form generally. The . 'authority to which we allude is that of no less a person than ...a Speaker , of the House of Com mons. It is contained in nots of Nfr. Speaker Onslow,. to a passage ,in the lata,adition of ..144.rnet's history of la s Time. Buroot • had written— .g It is held a maxim, that in framing a dOveinnient, a pro. portion ought trot* observed between the share iar the legistature 1 40. 1 Mil ! ;4.0 Speaker Untaow hat .tae senowmg note: " In the first establishment or renewal ; for variations after' wards must happen in trading countries, especially by the in crease and decrease in the riches and value of different places, j and alterations upon such changes in property may be dangerous. and will be endless. Upon great emergencies and resolutions, it may, perhaps ' by a great spirit of government, be done with safety. The Long Parliament of If4l formed a plan for it in part. It was suggested to them in one of the representations to the Parliament (a scheme, very likely, of Ireton's), and Crom well carried it into execution ; but he lost his Parliament by it, and his son Richard returned to the old method of representation for England. What I mean was, the taking away elections from the small decayed boroughs, and enlarging the number of Re presentatives for counties and city of London ; but even this was unequally done. It was hoverer, a Constitution I heartily wish had been continued. This would be the most effectual cure of corruption in elections. e It is a sad mark of Courts or times, when corruption is deemed necessaryfor Government. lbw glorious and popular would a Prince be who should suppress it : every thing would bejust and great!"• Here we find a Speaker of the House of Commons ad mitting—with fear and great trembling, it is true, but still admitting—the propriety of a Reform in Parliament; and his apprehensions arise only from a douht—a very na tural doubt, by the way, in his time--whether this country would ever be blessed with a Government spirited .-nough to do their duty, and with a Prince who would be wise and great enough to pursue the surest path to glory and popularity. England, however, has ❑ow the good fortune to enjoy such a Government and such a Prince as it is obvious the Speaker at once yearned tor, but despaired of.— Times. Now that the anti-Reforni faction have lost all hope of defeating the Reform Bill in the House of Commons, they are straining every nerve to persuade the public tint The Bill has been greatly amended since its last presentation to Parliament, and that it does not partake of the same popular, or, as they are pleased to term it, revolutionary, character, which belonged to it in its original state. We confess ourselves to be of a very contrary opinion on this pint ; but there is at the same time, in the new Bill, of which-we gave an abstract yesterday, a clause respecting the franchise of ten-pound householders, which, we have no doubt, from an impropriety in the wording, and a desire to prevent those from exercising the elective fran chise who are only " birds of passage," and not annual or leasehold tenmts, gives a strong colour of truth to their statements. The following are the words of the clause : " Provided always, That no tenant so occupying such pre mises as aforesaid at a yearly rent of not less than ten pounds, shall by reason thereof acquire a vote in the election for any city or borough, if such rent shall be payable more frequently Man once in every half-year, or if by any agreement or con trivance, or by virtue of any local Act of Parliament or other wise, the landlord shall be liable to the payment of the rates for the relief of the poor in respect of such premises : Provided, nevertheless, that where by virtue of any local Act of Parlia ment the landlord shall be liable to the payment of such rates , it shall be lawful for any such tenant to claim to pay such rates, and upon his actually paving the same to acquire the right of voting as if his landlord had not been so liable for such rates." This clause is altogether so different in spirit from that of the Reform Bill, that we cannot for a moment imagine that it ever emanated from his Majesty's Ministers. There must be a mistake in the printing ; for what connection, in the name of Heaven, is there between the payment of a ten-pound rent annually and a vote for a Member of Par liament as the price of it, and the payment of a ten-pound rent quarterly, and a total disqualification? The object of Government, we have no doubt, both from the si:eechee of Lord John Russell, and from the context of the clause, was to prevent those from exercising the riglit of voting for a representative in Parliament who had no per manent place of residence,—who hired houses by the week, month, or quarter, and paid rent for them accordingly, and not to exclude those who rented houses by the year, but paid the amount quarterly. The clause, however, is so foolishly worded, that no one, whatever might be the amount of his liabilities in point of rent, would be entitled under it to the necessary qualification, unless it happened to be stipulated in his lease or agreement, that his rent should be paid only half-yearly or annually ! Under almost all leases rents are made payable quarterly, whether they he or be not so paid ; and the consequence of such a clause passing into a law would be, on the one hand, to disfranchise all who are at present possessed of leases, and, on the other hand, to enfranchise all who may have stipulated, or may in future stipulate, for half-yearly payments. An instant contradiction ought to be given to this absurdity.—Morn log Advertiser. The clause of the New Reform Bill restricting the fran chise in towns to tenants of 101. a year, not paying their rents more frequently than once in every half-year, has been animadverted on with much severity, as indicative of an attempt at wholesale disfranckisement. If we thought for a moment that this restriction had its origin in any other cause than ignorance, we should, of course, charge ' Burnet's " History of his own Time," with th e su ppressNi passages and notes, by the E ar l s of Da rtmouth, Ilardwieke, Speaker Omlow, and Dean Swift, Oxford, I t , JU—vol y, p. ;471. Mintaters with a complete dev;ation from the principle of the Bill. But that it is owing to sheer ignorance is ob • vious from this, that it would operate as a complete disfranchisement in the metropolis, and every other part of England, where, though rents are, in fact, often paid every year, and seldom paid quarterly, yet they are almost always made payable quarterly. He who pays 1,000/. a year of rent, stipulates to pay it quarterly as much as he who pays 101., and it never could he in contemplation to exclude all tenants. The truth is, public men in this country are taken from a class neces sarily with the details of business. Ws question if any Member of the Cabinet, except the Chan cellor, ever read a lease in his life. The wonder is, how chose who have been entrusted with the framing of the clause, could have fallen into the error. The error betrays such gross ignorance, that if drawn up by a man of busi ness, we should suspect treachery. We know that the public offices are filled with men appointed by the prede cessors of Ministers, many of them are by no means well affected towards their heads ; and it is possible that this clause has been framed with a view to expose Ministers to a charge of ignorance of business, Ministers are far too honourable to have intended what the clause would effect. An example or two, we fear, is wanted to keep the inferiors honest.—Morning Chronicle. Whatever may be the prevalent ideas upon the subject of Reform, it is easy to foresee that the nation will woon be unanimously of our opinion as to the honesty and con sistency of the Ministers, who, by means of that question alone, have hitherto been enabled to maintain themselves in office, alter the proofs of incapacity more than suffi cient to discredit and destroy ten successive Administra tions. The Ministers, who adopted for the electioneering war•cry of themselves and their partisans, " The Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill"—the Ministers, whose friends and supporters in the House of Commons have to a man obtained their seats in the House of Com mons by means of a pledge to vote fur " The Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill"—the Ministers, who have said, and almost sworn, in endless repetition, that they would stand or fall by that measure, and never deviate in the slightest degree from any of its leading prin ciples —now, at this moment, stand openly confessed be fore the people of England in the character we have always assigned to them. They have laid upon the table of the House of Commons a Bill upon the subject of Reform, essentially different from that to which they have solemnly bound them selves to adhere--essentially inimical to the democratic prin ciples, by proclaiming which they excited a popular ferment, which gained them many an electioneering triumph, calcu lated evidently and impudently for the single end of increas ing permanently in the House of Commons the aristocratical power of the Whigs. The change to which we allude is that which withholds the franchise in cities and boroughs from those householders whose rent is payable more fre quently than once in every half-year—a change which does not of necessity narrow the constituency, or improve the materials of which it is to be composed, but which does of necessity place the whole constituency of every city and borough completely in the power of the pro prietors of houses. It was pretended, we recollect, that the original Reform Bill was not framed upon the principle of favouring the borough influence of the Whigs at the ex pense of the Tories (although the arbitrary line, which separated the boroughs to be disfranchised from those to be preserved, took the precise direction which was hest calculated to excite and justify such a suspicion), because the power of the Whig proprietors was to be super seded by that of the inhabitants at large. What, we beg to ask, becomes of that pretence now that no man is to have a vote but in virtue of an express agreement, and in ninety nine cases out of a hundred a new and unusual agree ment, with his landlord—an agreement which, when made, the landlord, except in the comparatively few casts in which he has granted a lease, will at all times have the power to revoke ? Will the new Bill of Lord John Russell destroy the political authority of the Duke of Bed ford in the borough of Tavistock, or that of Earl Fitz- William in his boroughs, or that of many other great Whigs who in various cities and towers is England are the owners of a large proportion of the hottees? We must isoirttge in a hearty laugh at the expense of the simple tons who have been trusting these selfish and artful Whigs. Who can fail to perceive that instead of losing t Tavistock the Duke of Bedford will gain another family Nocough, returning two Members, in the Bloomsbury dis tricta the metropolis, besides a considerable accession to his influence over the curtailed constituency of the city of Westminster ? A very remarkable circumstance is the facility with which this important change in the whole spirit and operation of the Bill is affected. It has required no morn than the introduction of a few words to con vert a measure most wildly and extravagantly democratic into a measure which must render the House of Commons ments awl place it permanently in the power of the Whig Aristocracy. Can better evidence be required that the Bill was framed from the beginning with a view to this change, and that the democratic spirit which it seemed to evince was a mere fraudulent manifestation, a hollow electioneering pretence ? The present Ministers have yet to learn, and the lesson, or we greatly mistake, will be speedily and vigorously administered, that the Bri tish nation is not to be thus insulted and derided with im punity. One of the partisans of Ministers, foreseeing the storm of public indignation by which they are about to be overwhelmed, kindly suggests to them the expediency of abandoning the fatal clause in their Flew Bill, and pretend ing chat it is all a verbal mistake. This is very ingenious no doubt, but it kill not do. The Bill is upon the table of the House of Commons. The words are written. They will remain. There can have been no mistake as to their operation. There shall be no mistake as to their import. The intentions with which the rkeW Bill has been framed are past all doubt; but these, plain and distinct as they are, are still scarcely so conspicuous as the utter want of talent or prudence in the mode of carrying them into effect. Was it not possible to secure the power of the Whig Lords in their preserved boroughs, without at the same time making each little proprietor of a single freehold house in every city and borough in England, a sort of legislator or constitution-manufacturer for himself? Is it possible to imagine anything more absurd than the power evidently bestowed by this Bill upon every such proprietor of choos ing from time to time, and according to circumstances, whether his little freehold shall entitle his tenant to vote fur the city or town, or himself to vote for the county? What a delightful little epitome of King, Lords, and Com mons will be every such freeholder giving himself a vote for the county this year by contracting to take his rent q tarterly, and his tenant a vote fur the borough in which Isis 101. house happens to stand the next year, by agree ing to take his rent in two payments instead of four ! Morning Post. Too great caution cannot be exercised at the present season in the use of unripe potatoes, which the experience of former years proves to have been too often the source of severe and dangerous maladies. As yet they are scare, but in the course of a short time they will be retailed in every victualling shop, and may induce fatal disease. Early ripe potatoes are not those usually sold, the shops being supplied with late kinds, which, from being larger, and better looking, take the market sooner than the early ones ; they are, however, generally unwholesome at the beginning of the digging season, because unripe, and ought to be eaten with the greatest caution.—Glaspow Chronicle. On Wednesday last the Court of King's Bench, in Dublin, granted a rule Nisi for a criminal in formation against PATRICK LAVELLE, Esq., proprietor of the Freeman's Journal, for publishing an alleged libel on JOHN ROBINSON, Esq., the land-agent of Lady Ross, in which he was charged with persecuting some tenants on her Ladyship's estates, on account of their religion. MARSHAL DIEBITSCH AND GEN. TOLL.— From a letter dated the " Russian Head-quarters, June 11," written in a very pompous style, we extract the fol lowing particulars respecting the late Russian commander and his successor :—" We had been about a week in Pul tusk. Since the battle of Ostrolenka the weather had been dreidful. Not a day passed without rain, the atmosphere was full of vapour, and the clouds seemed to press close upon the earth. The Field-Marshal, who had hitherto enjoyed perfect hea'th, complained, or. the 9th, in the evening, of heaviness and lassitude, but bleeding relieved him. Early in the morning of the 10th he was very well, but by noon he was a corpse. A stroke of apoplexy terminated his life. The impression which the news of this event produced on the army is indescribable. Until the Eater:Rotes decision he known, General Count Tor.r., the Chief of the Staff, has taken the command of the army. Amidst universal regret, this affords a consolation. Having been the confidant of the deceased Field-Marshal in all his views and plans, be will be able to bring to a successful termination what his friend had commenced. Rut what is more important, he is himself a great com mander, and has only wanted opportunities, not talents, to give proofs of his ability to the world. He is a pupil of Su warutow and KUTUSOW, and distinguished himself in all the campaigns against NAPOLEON. When Count DIEBITSCH obtained the command of the army against the Turks, he took Count TOLL with him, and since then he has constantly been the chief of the Field-Marshal's Staff. The most perfect harmony always subsisted between them, and death only could tear asunder the bonds of their friendship." f FROM THE GAZETTE OF LAST NIGHT. War Office, June 93, 1831. 4th Regiment of Light Dragoons—R. Knox, Gcnt. to be Cor net, by purchase, vice M'Donogh, appointed to the 10th Light Dragoons, dated June 28. 10th Light Dragoons—Cornet Hon. Percy Moreton, to be Lieu tenant, by purchase, vice Surman, who retires ; Cornet M. M'Donogh, from the 4th Light Dragoons, to be Cornet and Riding-master, vice Moreton, June 93. 9th Regiment of Foot—Captain W. S. Dalton, from the half pay, to be Captain, vice P. R. M. Browne, who exchanges re ceiving the difference, June 23. 28th Foot—Lieut. F. B. Russell, from the 99th Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Griffith, who exchanges, June 28. 38th Foot—Lieut. and Quarter -master C. Wines, from the 50th Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Ware, appointed Paymaster of the 49th Foot, June 28. 46th Foot—Capt. R. Ellis, from the half-pay, to be Captain, vice W. Campbell, who exchanges, receiving the difference, June 28. 47th Foot—Captain P. Dundas to be Major, by purchase, vice Jenkin, who retires ; Lieut C. Thursby to be Captain, by pur chase, vice Dundas ; Ensign R. Allan to be Lieutenant, by pur chase vice Thursby • H. Tollemache, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Allan, 28. 49th Foot—Lieut. IL Ware, from the 08th Foot, to be Pay master, vice Brook, deceased, June 28. 50th Foot—Lieut. T.. Freer, from half-pay 63d Foot, to be Quarter-master, vice Willes, appointed to the:33th Foot, June:. 69th Foot—Lieut. W. C. Caldwell, from half-pay 50th Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice A. H. Hull, who exchanges, June 28. 3.9 th Foot—Lieut. J. Griffith, from the 28th Foot, to be Lieu- tenant, vice Russell, who exchanges, June 23. BREVET. Captain A. Irvine, of the Bengal Engineers, to be Major in the East Indies only, for distinguished services in the field, June Office of Ordnance, June 27. Royal Regiment of Artillery. Captain and Brevet Major H. Trelawny to be Lieutenant- Colon 1, rice Lloyd, deceased ; Second Captain T. Grantham to be Captain, vice Trelawny ; First Lieut. It. NV. Story to be Se cond Captain, vice Grantham; Second Lieut. W. H. Forbes to be First Lieutenant, vice Story, May 27; Second Captain F. Haultain to be Captain, vice Evans, retired on half-pay ; First Lieut. H. Slade to he Second Captain, vice Haultain ; Second Lieut. D. E. Wood to be First Lieutenant, vice Slade, June 20. Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Cam bridge. To be Deputy Lieutenants—W. H. Cheere, Y:sq., G. Newton, Esq., Jan. 25 ; J. Bendyshe, Esq., H. Hawkins, Esq. ' R. Hutt- Weston, Esq., W. W. Nash„Esq., J. Phillips, Esq., J. Northam, EN., Feb. 16; E. Foster, Esq., R. F. Pate, Esq., J. Wing, Esq., Feb. 25. Cambridgeshire Militia. W. S. Norton, Esq. to be Captain ; B. Poussin, Gent. to be Lieutenant, March 25; J. C. Daintree, Gent. to be Ensign, April 5. Whittlesea Troop of Yeomanry Cavalry. C. Smith, Esq. to be Captain ; J. Blunt, Gent. to be Lieu tenant,- S. Smith, Gent. to be Cornet, April 12 . Royston and Arrington Troop of Yeomanry Cavalry. G. Newton, Esq. to be Captain; H. Hawkins, Gent. to be Lieutenant ; W. H. Cheere, Gent. to be Cornet, April 25. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Middlesex. The most Hon. W. J. C. Bentinck, commonly called the Mar quis of Titchfield, to be Deputy Lieutenant, June 18. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the Tower Hamlets. C. B. Stuttield, Esq. to be Deputy Lieutenant. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the North Riding of the County of York. North York Corps of Yeomanry Cavalry. C. Wright, Gent. to be Cornet, June 16. DECLARATIONS OF INSOLVENCY. FRA NC isitii:Xii; Clifton, Gloucestershire, livery-stable. keeper. JOHN GOODE, Wilderness-row, St. John-street, Clerken. well, engineer. DAVID SHARP, Maldon, Essex, cattle-dealer. JOHN HUDSON, Norton, Leicestershire, grocer. BANKRUPTCY ENLARGED. JOHN WILSON and STEPHEN LYLLEYMAN, Gold smith-street, silkmen, from July 1 to August 19, at twelve, at the Court of Commissioners. BANKRUPTS. THOMAS METCALFE MOSES, Stockton-upon-Tees, Durham, joiner, to surrender July 8, Aug. 2, and 9, at eleven, at the King's Arms, Durham. Taylor, Clement's Inn ; Marshall, Durham. DANIEL BEAUMONT PAYNE, HENRY HOPE, and GEORGE HULBERT HOPE, Wells, Somersctshire, bankers, July 9, 12, at nine, and August 9 at two, at the Swan Hotel, Wells. Dyne, Lincoln's-inn-fields, London ; Brookes, Wells. JOHN PALMER, Birmingham, scrivener, July 7,8, at twelve, and Aug. 9, at three, at the Union Inn, Birmingham. Holme, Frampton, and Loftus, New Inn, London ;Parker, Birmingham. HARRIET TAPPER, Titch field, innkeeper, July 8, at twelve, 9, at ten, three, and August 9, at at the Bugle Inn, Titchfield. Holme, Frampton, and Loftus, New Inn, London ; Paddon, Fareham, Southampton. JOSEPH PHILLIPS, Brook-street, Holborn, tobacconist, July I, at twelve, 8, at eleven, and August 9, at twelve, at the Court of Commissioners. Norton, Jewin-street, Cripplegate. JOHN LUKE, Mark-lane, wine -merchant, July 1, 12, at ten, and August 9, at nine, at the Court of Commissioners. Cruick shank, King's Arms.yard, Coleman-street. WILLIAM WILLSHER and GEORGE WILLSHER, Oxford-street, bakers, July 8, 15, at ten, and August 9, at nine, at the Court of Commissioners. Young, Mark-lane. JEREMIAH BROWN, Sheerness, Kent, barge-owner, July 8, IS, and August 9, at ten, at the Court of Commissioners; Smith, Weir, and Smith, Cooper's-hall, Basingliall-street. ANN SA\ WELL, Queenborough, Kent, linen-draper, July 8, 15, at one, and August 9, at eleven, at the Court of Commis sioners. Aubrey, Hatton-garden London ; Edmeades, Sheerness. EDWARD WILLIAM BISHOP George-street, South ampton-street, Pentonville, surveyor,July 5,8, and August 9, at eleven, at the Court of Commissioners. Sylvester, Furni val's Inn, Holborn. WILLI AM MOORE and JOHN M'CREIGHT, Liverpool, corn.merchants July 25, 26, and August 9, at one, at the Cla rendon-rooms, Liverpool. Blackstock and Bunce, King's Bench walk, Temple, London • Bardswell, Liverpool. WILLIAM TASKiIR, Oldham, Lancashire, innkeeper, July 21, and August 9, at one, at the York Hotel, Manches ter. Shuttleworth, Rochdale; Smith, Chancery-lane. THOMAS WEST and AARON En AlV_ 1,, , ,4:llFrllat St, at twelve, at Dec's Royal Hotel, Holme, Frampton, and article, New Inn ; Meredith, Birmingham. WILLIAM CLARK, Ilford, Essex, victualler, July 5, at one, 12, and August 9, at two, at the Court of Commissioners. builder, j O Woolley, Liverpool-street, Broad-street. WILLIAM PATTISON, Wetherby, Yorkshire, spirit-mer chant, July 8,9, at four, and August 9, at eleven, at the Ang e l Wetherby. Battye, Either, and Sudlow, Chancery-lane ; Baillle, Tadcaster. s HN LO~V even, at t , Leamington ncgetoofn Mr.Pri sors H , Warwickshire, ksh ire, Leam ington-Priors, 12, and August 9, at twelve, at the Swan Hotel, Warwick. Sharpe and Field, Old Jewry, London; Haynes, Warwick. DIVIDENDS. W. Burton, Cornhill, auctioneer, July 22 at ten, at the Court of Commi ss i oners— C . H ars l e b en an d J. , G. Anthony, Long's yard, Lamb's Conduit-street, wholesale confectioners, July 19, at twelve, at the Court or Commissioners—J. and H. Middleton, Seven Oaks, Kent, upholders, July 19, at one, at the Court of Commissioners—M. A. de Freitas and A. da Costa, Tokenhouse yard, merchants, July 19, at eleven, at the Court of Commis sioners—R. H. Higham, New Bond-street, hatter, July 19, at nine, at the Court of Commissioners—it. Bristow, Lloyd's Coffee house, underwriter, July '.2(3 at ten, at the Court of Commis sioners—J. Branthwaite, Manchester, ironmonger, July 23, at twelve, at the office of Mr. .Booker, solicitor, Liverpool—W. Duff and T. Browne, Liverpool, merchants, July 22, at one, at the office of Mr, W. Thompson, solicitor, Liverpool—J. Hard wick, Cheltenham, carpenter, July 22, at three, at the Fleece Inn, Cheltenham. CERTIFICATES, JULY 19. J. Martin, jun., Swindon, Wiltshire, currier—W. H. An drews, Judd-street, Brunswick-square, ironmonger —J. Lander, Birmingham, merchant—B. Haines, Royal Hospital-row, Chel sea, grocer—H. Browning, Cambridge, innkeeper—D.C.Macnin Philpot-lane, Fenchurch-street, merchant—J. Petty, Mat, chester, joiner —G. Shillibeer, Bury-street, Bloomsbury, livery. stable-keeper. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. G. Aunger and W. F. Baxter, Oxford, tailors—T. Flintoff and T. Butterworth, cotton-spinners—J. Chretien and G. Gerard, 311 1 k-street, Cheapside, trunk-makers--T. Walker and T. Sculcoates, Yorkshire, lath-render—P. Wynne and Co. Paternoster.row, wholesale stationers, as far as regards G. Wynne—E. Dixon and E. J. Busvine, Wardour.street, Soho, surgeons —J. Cousen and Co., Bradford, Yorkshire, stone mer chants, as far as regards J. Bottomley—J. F. Taylor and J. Rylands, jun., Wigan, Lancashire, cotton-spinners—ll. Boyce and J. Rooker, Bideford, Devonshire, attornies—J. White and Co., Whitehall Wharf, Westminster, timber-merchants—J.- 1- Jan, jun., and J. Johnson, Manchester, small-ware manufac turers—T. Holderness and W. Ward, Kingston-upon-Hull, ship brokers—J. Read and J. Read, Mills, Sheffield, refiners of gold— C. Butterick and C. Postill, Snow's-fields, grocers—W. G. Lyle and I'. Walters, King's-road, Gray's-inn, attornies-I'. Bowen and W. Dowling, Albany-street, Regent's Park, linen-drapers J. Reaston and J. Piercy, Great Driffield, Yorkshire, joiners— E. B. Puddicombe and Co., Edgbaston, Warwickshire, haber dashers--T. Peer and J. Bruce, coach-proprietors—B. Fairburn and I. Ilemsworth, G rea t Newport-street, NVesttnitister, leather sellers—'f. and J. Hatch, Cheltenham, coach-makers— J. and A. P. Scaife, New Bond-street, tailors—J. Morris and J. King, Ludgate-street, engravers—S. Brantigam and J. G. Mullin, Leman-street, Goodman's-fields, publicans. RYE.—Sitice the return of Colonel EVANS to the House of Commons, this town lias exhibited scarcely any but happy faces. Usurpation and tyranny have fled the field, and envy has been driven to her cell, and gnaws her thumb in solitude. So complete has been the victory of the Colonel, that the boroaglimongers may be consi dered utterly annihilated, and his other opponents form a (action so contemptible in numbers and talent, that their e fforts excite no apprehensions. They are in their last agonies, and a futile attempt which they have this week made to divide the friends of Colonel EVANS, by breaking u p the " Independent Association," has served only to evince the strength of their antagonists, and their own feebleness. The friends of the Colonel have revived the " Independent Association," and connected it with the Colonel's Cominit'ee of Management, thus placing the independence of the town under the care of her long tried, approved, and gallant defender, and reminding us of the picture of Britannia with the British Lion couched at her f ee t. It is reported that hi s opponents i ntend to establ i sh an other association ; but such a hole and corner concern, as it must of necessity be, will be able only for a very short time to support itself under the load of ridicule which it will have to bear. It would be desirable no doubt that all factions in this town should now cease ; but it is impossible that any treaty can be entered into with the enemies of the Colonel until they abandon t! e object which they have set up,- and heroine again accessibl e to reason . L e t th em t a k e warning by the fate of the poor boroughinongers now prostrate in the dust! and learn that the path of pride and oppression is not strewed with fib t ers, but with thorns and broken glass; and that th e b es t way to se cure t h e i r ow n rights and privileges is to respect those of others. This town has overthrown one oligarchy, and will not now allow another and a worse to be established. It is be come a republic, and has chosen the Colonel for its presi• d e nt, and so long as his conduct is consistent with the high c haracter which hi s t a l ents an d p as t exert i ons have acq uired for him, this town will not be ungrateful, but will sF L iall its energies, against all oppo nenbmifoalEsheo;nm , 7 whose 2B‘hlirtis' method of treating the cholera has been so successful in Warsaw, is the son of a Jewish merchant in B er li n , b ut h as, f or many years, practised, as a physician, in Poland.—Hanibury Reporter. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT, HOUSE OF LORDS, JUNE 28. The House met at Half-past Three o'clock, when players were read by the Bishop of EXETEit ; the House then ad journed till Five o'clock, when the Loon CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack. The Marquis of SALISBURY deferred his motion on the Poor Laws till Thursday. The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE presented a petition from the town of Newry in Ireland, praying for the intro duction of Poor Laws into that country. The Noble Lord would favour such introduction if he was of opinion that they would improve the condition of the poor, but he thought that finding them employment would be a better way of giving relief. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY gave notice that on Thursday next he would present several petitions against Parliamentary Reform. Lord SKELMERSDALE presented several petitions from the North against the truck system. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE'. moved the first read ing of a Bill to regulate the appointment of Custos Rota loru min Ireland. _ _ The Marquis of LONDONDERRY enquired whether the Bill would interfere With the office of Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland ? _ Lord MELBOURNE replied it would not, the office of Custos Rotulorum was an office entirely civil, and would not at all interfere with the office of Lord-Lieutenant, which was a military one. Lord WHARNCLIFFE laid on their Lordships' tablas two Bills to abolish the system of paying workmen's wages, commonly called the truck system. The Noble Lord said, that his Bills were exactly the same as a Bill which was introduced in the other House of Parliament in the late Session. He would defer what he hail to say till the second reading, as he believed their Lordships were well acquainted with the provisions of the Bills. On the motion of Lord MEr.nquieNs: the Bills are to be read a second time on Monday next. The Duke of BUCCLEUGH presented a petition from the Freeholders, Commissioners of Supply, and Justices of the Peace of the county of Forfar, against Reform ; and praying, that if a future Bill was introduced the number of counties in Scotland might not be reduced. Lord DUNCAN denied that this was the petition of the county of Forfar. It had been got up in the most curious manner. Not more than eighty-four persons being present, and with such an assemblage, the resolu tions embodied in the petition were come to. To those resolutions he (Lord Duncan) moved as an amend ment the approval of the whole Bill, and thanks to Ministers for what they had done, and that amendment was carried by a majority of sixty to twenty-four. Under such circumstances he could not submit to this petition being called the petition of Forfar. He believed it to be the petition of very respectable individuals but got up under most peculiar circumstances. First, they had attempted to get the sanction of the county, and then they came forward with the present petition. He (Lord Duncan) believed that the county of Forfar stood single in Scotland in having passed a vote in favour of Ministers and the Reform Bill. With re spect to the acts of violence at the election, no one could lament them more than lie did ; and he considered the sooner the perpetrators were brought to justice the better. But he could not help thinking that the accounts received of the violence committed were much exaggerated. It had been said that expressions had been used at that election which could only be equalled by the blood-thirsty expres sions at the French revolution. He trusted that the people of Scotland would me every constitutional means of car rying this great Bill through Parliament_-(Hear) —by which they would obtain for themselves great advantage and immortal honour. The Duke of BUCCLEUGH said it was not pretended that the petition was the petition of the county of Forfar. It was the petition of some forty or fifty proprietors deeply connected with that county. He should not enter into the discussion of the committal of violences alluded to by the Noble Lord, as he considered that a fitter subject kr the Secretary of State than himself. The Earl of HADDINGTON felt hound to say, that the violence committed at the election for Forfar had not been exaggerated. Improper means had been resorted to for the purpose of preventing the persons assemblod from electing representatives fairly, and those means had only been defeated by the courage and firmness of the freeholders. He was not one of those who would object to any lawful means being used to carry a point either far or against Reform, but he felt extreme regret at the courKe adopted on this occasion. Lord DUNCAN deprecated as much as any man ins those proceedings Ind been greatly exaggerated. Lord BELHAVEN also bore testimony to the exag gerated accounts given of this election. The petition was the❑ read, and the House adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, JUNE 28. The LORD ADVOCATE called the attention of the House to an error that had been made in the return of an Hon. Member for Newport. The Hon. Member was stated in the return to be John Joseph Hope Vere, instead of James Joseph Hope Vere, which was the real name of tEe Hon. Gentleman. He, (the Lord Advocate) was prepared to identify, the gentleman as being the individual returned, and he supposed the error in the return could be corrected. The SPEAKER said, all that was necessary was the identity of the individual, and as that had been done by the Lord Advocate, the clerk of the Crown-office, who was in attendance, could be instructed to amend the return. Mr. Alderman WOOD obtained leave to bring in a Bill to incorporate the General Steam Navigation Company. The Kenneth Navigation Bill was read a second time end committed. On the motion of Mr. ATHERLEY, the Southampton Pier Bill was read a second time. Mr. HOBHOUSE brought in a Bill to construct and maintain a Chapel of Else in the parish of St. George's, Hanover-square, called the Grosvenor Chapel, which was read a first time. On the motion of an How. MEMBER, leave was given to bring in a Bill to explain and amend the Acts of the 3d Geo. 11., and the 19th Geo. 111. for the more expedi tious recovery of small debts in the Tower Hamlets dis trict. On the motion of Mr. LAWLEY, the Birmingham and Bamford Rail-road Bill was read a second time. Mr. STRICKLAND presented five petitions from various places in favour of the Leeds and Bradford Rail road Bill. —Referred to the Committee. Lord MORPETH presented several petitions in fav our of the Manchester and Leeds Railway Bill. Also fi ve petitions in favour of the Bradford and Leeds Railway Bill. On the motion of the Noble Lord, the Leeds and Bradford Rail-road Bill, and the Leeds and Sheffield Rail road Bill, were read a second time and committed. Mr. HUNT rose to present a petition from the work ing classes, members of a society called the " North-wes tern District of the National Union," stating that the pe titioners experienced great evils from those Acts called the " Castlereagh Acts," particularly that which imposed restrictions on the liberty of the Press. The petition was couched in respectful language towards that House, but in rather strong language towards the Nobleman by whom the Acts were brought in. They believed that when the Act in question was brought in, it was the intention to keep the people in ignorance the better to plunder them. The Hon. Member was one who thought the House would be disgraced if they suffered these Acts to remain on the Statute-book ; they were passed hi times of great danger and excitement, but now that no such causes existed— now that the country had a liberal Ministry, who were then (r h , e o f p s te t dp t . o r e t s l: i r ,i s e e b (u A iNt i c nr t s o. , t H i f i Uu e rn w t) s s wi s ai u ese r fn p ot r ri i o s :ub d sen t eu l s i n e s y b; o w ua e nn r dd e e dastill liberty he s it confined itself to truth it ought to be upheld, and on the other hand it ought to be held responsible for publishing what was false either against the Govern ment or against an individual. Captain GORDON did not rise to object to the recep tion of the petition, but he thought it was irregular, as coining from a soc i ety o f persons not k no w n to the law. He wished, before it was read, to put the House in pos session of some publications which emanated from per sons who had prompted this petition. The Hon. Member here read extracts from " The Poor Man's Guardian," and the " Republican," both of which spoke in very vituperative language , of the conduct of his Majesty and his Ministers, comparing their conduct to that pursued by the Polignac Ministry, reviling the Royal Family of this country, and condemning the whole fra ternity of Kiugcraft, Priestcraft, and Lorderaft. Having read these extracts, the Hon. Member trusted that the House would agree with him in declaring them to b e gross libels ; he was sorry and surprised that, instead of a trumpery prosecution by the Stamp-office, the Govern ment had not prosecuted the parties for sedition and hlasphemy—(Hear, hear) —and he respectfully intimated to his Majesty's Government that he would take an early opportunity of making a motion upon this subject. Mr. HUME was happy that this petition had been presented, as it gave him an opportunity of making some observations upon the sentiments uttered by the Hon. Member who spoke last, and who bad read extracts from papers it 3 the course of his speech) which would have the effect of making them be read instead of by only about 100 or 200 persons, by perhaps many thousands. The Hon. Member had come forward to declaim against the Press, and to condemn the Government for not prosecuting. There 'vas not one of the Honourable Gentlemen on the Ministerial Benches but had, when these Bills were brought in, strongly opposed them ; they were laws instituted to keep the public in ignorance by repress ing public discussion, and he was proud to say that they had for some years been allowed to remain a dead letter. The Hon. Member (Capt. Gordon) did not seem to re collect that after the melancholy catastrophe at Manches t-r, during which a score of individuals were cruelly slaughtered, the conduct pursued by his Majesty's Govern ment was to introduce Six Acts, which were a disgrace to the country, and which he did hope the present Minis ters would have repealed before this time. The Attorney- General, when he brought in the Bills, admitted that he would not support the Bill relating to publications as an individual measure, but he took the whole as one measure, and as necessary to uphold the liberties of the country. The Hon. Member then adverted to the opinions of several Members of the present Ministry as delivered by them on the occasion of introducing the Bills, and he stated the opposition which the Bills then experienced. He (Mr. Hume) held it to be a primary principle that Englishmen should publish whatever they p!eased on their individual responsibility; such measures as these could not be war ranted, and was be now to be told that it was surprising that the Government did nut now prosecute under those Acts? He repeated that it was a disgrace they should have been so long on the statute-book. If Hon. Members thought by this course they could stifle public discussion, they were much mistaken ; the day was gene by when the public voice was to be muzzled and stifled by such Acts.—(Hear.) What wasthe consequence? Any of the Hon. Members might publish an octavo volume of blasphemy or sedition, but the poor roan was prevented from publishing a sheet or two sheets. He had taken a part in blaming the Duke of Wellington's administration for having attempted to ruin an individual by halt a dozen prosecutions for what were called libels in papers, but he felt bound to say that the Duke of Welling= ton's Government never disgraced themselves by prosecuting those small publications which his Majesty's present Ministry had adopted the course of doing.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) These publications were begun and continued for six months under the late Government, but there never wag a single prosecution instituted by that Government under the Six Acts—prosecutions there were for sedition, undoubtedly, which was quite a different thing ; and he was surprised that the present Ministry had, in this instance, adopted a prosecution through the Stamp-office, which had never been deemed right by the Duke of Wellington's Ministry. He held in his hand publications containing expressions much worse than those which had been read, and which the Hon. Member who had preceded him might see, but which he (Mr. H.) would not be the means of circulating. He was willing to consider the papers in his hand poison—the rankest poison,—and he was persuaded that every prosecution undertaken would only be the means of spreading that poison more effectually through the country. There were in London no less than 32 publications, illegal as the law stood, selling under 6d., some consisting of half a sheet, others consisting of a sheet, and against which persons, by the existence of the Six Acts, had no protection. Some of the publications, which he was bound to call illegal, contained information of a most excellent description. There was one put down lately at Manchester which was a publication better calculated to inform the lower classes of society than any publication he bad ever read ; and if any thing in the shape of a letter, or any unusual expression got into such a publication us that, he did not see wl y its usefulness was to he disre spected any more than the dignity of ths House in which lie stood, was to be considered injured by the strange, ano malous, and inconsistent speeches which some Members thought proper to make within its walls.—( Laughter.) Again, the Trades Herald of Glasgow, which had been suppressed, had discussed topics of general policy, and par ticularly the truck system, with an ability which he had never before observed. Many other each instanced might be brought forward. When the Combination Acts t w h e e r ~or o e pt te o a e t i co d , and when the oi on Pleasw a pre se r so s e l i n c t i t oLordr-General, e Ch . et i a e i o Justice conse quence of an attack made on the House, and himself (Mr. .) for having recommended the repeal of those laws, he thought it right, with some other gentlemen, to commence publication, and a ,av fo s r theto b esold purpose oaftpennyanswering o su r lctiwopce. attacks, eo which After it was commenced the promoters of it were informed they could not answer the scurrility and abusive language which hail been employed without subjecting themselves to :the lash of the law. lie took the opinion of the Solicitor •taenerat upon the question, and he had new that written. .opinion, saying the Six Acts prevented them. He then made up .his mind as he should recommend every other person to do, if persons cannot with safety answer such publications, then let those conducting them go on till they had completely exhausted their vocabulary of abuse; and he would request the Honourable Gentle man to abstain from urging the present Govern ment either to continue to keep or to put new .fetters on the Press, the result of which could only be to, cause ignorance .to spread over the country. Instead of recommending such injudicious prosecutions as had been adopted, it would be infinitely more to his credit to come forward and advocate free discussion—free dis cussion being calculated in the highest degree to elicit truth. For his (Mr. H.'s) own part, he advocated the removal of every shackle that was at present imposed on the Press. He had inure experience of the Press than the Hon. Gentle man who had just spoken, and the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth would recollect, that whilst prosecutions were going on against Carlile for blasphemy under the former Government, lie (Mr. Hume) proved by papers which he brought clown to that House, that though before the prosecution the paper to which he alluded, published by Carlile, had only a circulation of 1,000, it immediately after the prosecution obtained a circulation of 20,000, and under which prose cution that individual was imprisoned. By the judicious conduct, in that respect, of the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth, Carlile was soon allowed to leave prison, and no more prosecutions took place. . Carlile was then very soon brought down to a state in which he could scarcely ob. tain the means of existence. Since that time two gentlemen very well acquainted with both parties, prevailed with his Majesty's Government not to persevere with another prosecution against Carlile ; Carlile thought the prosecution would not be carried on, and he wrote a letter, which he (Mr. H.) had seen, in which he expressed himself as greatly enraged at the idea of the Government not proceeding with the prosecution. His object was notoriety, and unfortunately for the principles of the Government—unfortunately for their principles, Carlile's publication went on. He would say nothing at present of the disgraceful circumstances under which that verdict was braught in against Carlile—a verdict brought in by starving a Jury in the midst of winter, after they had two or three times returned into Court unable to come to an unanimous verdict. He would say nothing about that disgraceful circumstance, but what was the result with respect to Carlile's publication ? Why it had increased ten-fold, and since that time an annuity had been settled upon that man for his life of 50/. and a similar an nuity to his wife, to support them against those prosecutions! In the same way then, any of these prosecutions would only tend to spread libels throughout every part of the country, to demoralize the public, and to work mis chief in every possible way. He thought these prosecutions most ill-timed on the part of his Majesty's Ministers, and equally ill-timed was every effort on the part of any Hon. Member in that House at this late hour of the day, to support any proposition calculated to fetter or to destroy the liberty of the Press. He held in his hand a petition from the National Union of the work ing classes of society, and which it was his intention to bring up when it came to his turn, praying for the repeal of the Six Acts. Charles the Tenth had put down the liberty of the Press by an ordinance with his own hand—the House of Commons of England, by a very small majority, had put down (for it amounted to that) the liberty of the Press in this country ; therefore, if there was any credit due to the French people for driving that King from his throne because of that ordinance, there would be equal credit due. to the people of England for driving the statutes which fettered the Press off the statute-book here.—(Cries of " No, no," and " Yes, yes," the Lord Advocate's voice being uppermost in the noes.) The Lord Advocate might think that he (Mr. H.) was not serious, but he could No;" assure him hsiimaceardly etvreursytedMethmebeprrein. that House that he was neve tih r lrei t ys n ts o rwwu re serious in any thing he had ever uttered in that House. It was very well for Gentlemen by whom he was surrounded,,%,already lfanor a er n slaerd d ittayr rtuweht prevailede:o there t ht li nh a oin d st always endeavoured to curtail the liberty of the Press, ished th, hich s t e o ot ca A l i l io c is u t t ry would not be drawn most they but important df s i v n at o i ld p l u de o l y d r i t nw a fi n e t x n t s, h c i s it l e u e a di b i:t . n tt — o c u t. st ` ht ` : L i ed i e i t s : there be free disc usoio n , " only continue the existing shackles, but load others upon the poor unfortunate Press, and which he was persuaded wou throughout the country. If the editor of the " Poor Man's Guardian," should in a little while be thrown into prison, which he (Mr. II.) had very little doubt would be the case, another editor would make his appear ance the very next day, and so it would be toe) case bad the Publicati( done wh( down. koceedec tk ; ken in ' 4 g of the along wit bad just 1 4 ) Govei 111, 7 thot hi c h tj 14 give ti T areased ti i l tbotediat bound to mode of It'. of nic ution i] tit such 1 of the (nil number.. fl diffusio their scot 'tcutions !Ility to 4,eunven t 1 Mons dw ouragen rore e they Dot shrin If this n ttered 11 )' papa kgainet u 1 1 " , -e -- edings ivvareof Japer of law ex I s esitatioi 1 1. 1 1 e passi] he felt k this witt with hitt hf the Si Person w hutionr f iividual fZlVou r letter s w b ite to POVernli hi ghest C 44( 1 hist Property Bleat sal ! 41 11i or t utiii intl tl' il '° : t itt° :::: n e Ys s eig t a t c i l i d o ,n i : 4 tritst b .' I tlcli pet 1 4 iiell th Sir RI 't'an holy Qurian uvern ' tr 14 Way 1 h ere to L lh e Hon. 1,0,t t o be t thoug lo n. Ai( ften ten( 'glee p( I