The Sun. — London, England, 1830-04-19 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS, We have received some very intemperate and foolish letters from persons interested in Greek bonds, on the remarks which we thought it our duty to make in Saturday's paper, condemnatory of the unreasonable demand of a guarantee from the Allies for these securities. For this abuse we were pre pared, it therefore neither surprised nor mortified us ; bat we scarcely anticipated such a misrepresen tation of our meaning as we find in the communica tions of some of our correspondents. If selfish pas sion had not deprived them of all power of reflec tion, they would have tried to comprehend our ar gument, and attempted to prove it unsound, instead of dealing in general expressions of rage, and absurd charges of corruption. The silly person who raves in one of the epistles, which we insert as a specimen, seems to think that he has answered our observa tions by telling us that he still retains " his bond," and appropriately quotes a celebrated bondholder on another Exchange as an authority for the efficacy and validity of the document. Did we ever attempt to deny so plain a fact ? Is there a single insinua tion in our article against the right of the Greek speculators to be ultimately paid, and the duty of the Greeks to fulfil their engagements when they rang Did we endeavour to rob this or any other classical Shylock of bis bond? Do not we, on the contrary, fully allow them the right to their " du cats" or " pound of Greek flesh," and only insist that, in taking their slice, they shall not bleed the Allies? Nothing, we contend, can be more unrea sonable than to require that England and her Allies, in placing Prince Leopold on the throne of Greece, should be bound to guarantee every engagement which the former governments of that country had contracted. If the bondholders retain their lien on the Greek territory, that is sufficient while their claim remains undisputed. They have a right to their " pound of flesh" from Antonio, but have no claim on Antonio's friends. None of the successive Greek governments have imitated that of Ferdi nand they have ail admitted their debts, however distant they have considered the date of payment. The present Provisional President, Capri O'lstria, has formally renewed the acknowledgment of the London loans, and the " Prince Sovereign" of Greece will do the sense, engaging, no doubt, to pay interest and principal before the Greek Calends. Had there been any indication Of a design to deny the obligations of former governments by the pre sent authorities, we would have denounced it as a fraud—a knavery—a robbery, like that of Ferdi nand. We only said, and we must again repeat it, that the bondholders are entitled to no consideration from the Allies—either on account of the assistance a'.hick they lent to Greece, the saerifices which they incurred in subscribing to the loans, or the under standing on which they accepted the contract; and that Prince Leopold would be acting wrong if, as the German paper to which we have alluded asserts, he had made fitt acceptance of the Greek Crown depend ent upon the guarantee from the Allies in their favour. At present the revenues of the commonwealth are not sufficient to support a third part of its establishments; nor can more taxes be raised in the present state of the country. The produce of all the estates confiscated from the Turks—all the crop of currants in the Mores, and all the honey and oil of Attica, would not, in present circumstances, be sufficient to pay the, interest of the London debt ;—but that debt exists, and has not either been denied or disallowed. The analogy which our correspondent suggests be t ween the cases of Greece and South America would be correct, if Bolivar or any of the Presidents of the new transatlantic republics required European Go vernments to guarantee their loans. As the words of the Jew usurer has been pressed by our Greek speculator into his service, he will probably forgive us for citing, as not less appropriate, a passage from the address of the Duke to that worthy, though we are convinced that the advice will be equally dis regarded by the Sylocks of London as of Venice :- --" Touched with gentleness and love, " Forgive a moiety of the principal,— " Glancing an eye of pity on his losses, " That have of late so huddled on his back,— " As pluck commiseration of his state " From brassy bosoms and rough hearts of flint,- -" From stubborn Turks." [Times.] It is with shame we make the confession, that the Government of this country is, as far as religious freedom is concerned, only a shade more liberal than that of Portugal or Spain. Is it beciuse Spain and Portugal and England have a wealthy Clergy, that the Governments resemble one another in this re spect ? It would seem that there is a connection between rich Bishoprics and intolerance. We can hardly call the emancipation of the Catholics and the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts a proof of liberality. In the former case, it was no longer safe to withhold the concession of the Catholic claims; and in the latter, the votes of the House of Commons indicated the strength of the Dissen ters in elections. The case of the Jews, how ever, is a fair . test by which the liberality of the Government may he tried. The Jews owe no allegiance to a foreign Potentate—their creed contains all that is essential to the constituting a good citizen—nothing can be alleged against them, except that we have long been guilty of in justice towards them; and though, as Christians, we are bound by our religion to forgive those who bare wronged us, we are more tenacious of the practice of deeming the having already injured a title to injure still more. A member of the Prussian Government, in a volume [recently pub lished, observes that " the very question which of the confessions is the right confession is irreligion, for it gives rise to struggles in which humanity still bleeds. Belief as a guarantee to action must he limited to God and a future state. This belief ex. As some of the speculators in Greek bonds, though claasical in their tastes, may not be so well acquainted with the dealings of the Greeks in ancient as in modern loans, we quote with pleasure an early example in which Athe nian good faith triumphed over feelings of national anti pathy, and which, a fortiori, they are entitled to call upon the Government of Prince Leopold to imitate. It throws a darker shade on the hypocritical pretences and swindling conduct of Ferdinand respecting- the Cortes bonds, and can only be matched in recent times by the punctuality with which the Government of the Bourbons paid the debt contracted during the 100 days to overturn their dynasty. The following is the account of the trau matic's to which we allude, given by Demosthenes in his oration against Leptines " Now, that it is not altogether in consonance with your usual mode of acting, 0 Athenians, to ratify a law of this character, I shall endeavour to demonstrate, in as concise a manner as I ant able, by the relation of a circum stance that took place in this city. The thirty tyrants are said to have borrowed of the Laccdtemoniana a stun of money for the purpose of overwhelming those who had t..ken possession of the Pyrrens. Upon the re-establish ment of peace and concord among the citizens, n every thing seemed on all sides to be completely tranquillized, the Laeedsemonians sent ambassadors to re.deinand tnrir anoney. The whole affair being regularly debated, whilst some were of opinion that those, who being then in the city had been the borrowers of the money - , were the proper persons to refund ; others, that the payment in common of the sum borrowed should be considered as the Etat pledge of the cemplete reconcilement of all parties; it is said that the people came to a resolution to contribute also their share, and to partake of the general expense, ire order to avoid the least violation of any article that had been mutually stipulated Letweem them. Would it not then, Athenian*, be most preposterous, that ye should upon that occasion have manifested such wiilingness to midis those *iontribution s to persons frost whom ye had received in jury, in order that your good faith might remain unvio lated ; whilst, at the present day, haring it in your Fewer, without the leeat expense, to act honourably as justice requires, towards your benefactors, ye should make it your election to have recourse to is faithless abandon ment of what is dietated by the principles of honour ? Never, I ant persuadid, can this be the lin e of conduct you will think proper to adopt. As to what has been sniforaaly the ar;ral sense of this our city, 0 A thenian., in cirsumstancee of this nature, many are the occasion*, and, amongst others, that to which I have just alluded, from which it may be most clearly collected, that a film unshaken adherence to good faith, and unsullied integrity, not the preponderating balance in point of pecuniary transactioas, was the grand object of all their political east sionts. eludes all that is detrimental to society. The doc trine of Christianity is life through love. The Hea ther. who acts on this doctrine is in his actions a Christian, though he never heard the divine word of the teacher. The Christian who draws from this word dogmas destructive of peace is a Heathen." The writer from whom we make this extract is a Member of the Supreme Council of Government, and anything but partial to anarchical doctrines ; but on the Continent, except as we have said, where :s rich Church, as in England, seems to have in oculated Governments with uncharitable feelings, there is not the slightest disposition to trample o►► peaceable subjects on account of their religion. In the case of the Catholics, the people for centuries had been kept in constant dread of them, and Smith field faggots were associated in the mind of every Englishman, of the lower classes, with the natne:of Papist. Their fears were wrought on. But the people entertain no apprehension of the Jews. They are a harmless, peaceable body. In France, the Netherlands, Denmark, &c., the happiest results have followed the adoption of a liberal system to wards them. In this last county, ever since 1814., every office is open to Jews. The people of Eng land would, we are sure, view with satisfaction a similar measure of kindness to that body. The public repel the accusation brought against them by Mr. Goulburn, that they are prejudiced against the Jews. They have no prejudices on the subject. There would, indeed, be something mean and con temptible in wishing to retain a remnant of the old persecuting laws, merely because the Jews may be persecuted with impunity. Shame on the Govern ment—shame on the Church of Englatie, that this sort of sneaking love for persecution should still be manifested! We are glad to learn that the Jews have prepared their petitions, and that they will lie for signature at the several taverns after Wednesday next. The principal bankers and merchants have signed a petition in behalf of the Jews, with the greatest readiness and pleasure.—Morning Chron. The disposition lately evinced at several public meetings to interfere with Tithes has had the effect of calling forth the energies of the Clergy in their defence. It is not, indeed, to be expected that the Clergy should remain passive while the agriculturists are exerting themselves to free agriculture from a burden of such magnitude. A pamphlet of about 100 pages, entitled the " Revenues of the Church of England not a burden upon the Public," has just been put into our hands. If we may judge from internal evidence it is tile production of a Clergy man. We do not allude merely to the heartiness with which the appropriation of so large a share of the produce of the soil of the country to the Church is vindicated, but to a certain contumelious tone ' which would seem to cling to Churchmen in the discussion of all subjects whatever. They are so accustomed to anathematise all who differ from them in opinion, that they carry with them into questions the most foreign to theology, when they are pleased to discuss them, the same consciousness of infalli bility which they evince when they condescend to combat with heresy and schism. The pamphlet is, upon the whole, well written; but the older writers on Political Economy are orthodox, and M. Ricardo and his follower:. are heterodox. There must be an established creed in Political Economy as well as in Religion. The sin of Mr. Ricardo is, that he de monstrated, contrary to the received opinion, that tithe was not so much a question between the land owner and tithe-holder, as between the tithe-holder and consumer. " There are others (says the writer) who maintain that tithes constitute a burden, which falls not upon the occu pier or owner of the soil, but upon the consumer of tithe able commodities ; admitting that tithes neither diminish the net revenue or rent of the owner, nor the profits of the occupier of land, they allege that this burden makes an addition of one-tenth to the money-price of the article on which it - is levied. In order to place in a clear light the opinion entertained by this class of economists with re spect to the practical effect of tithes, let it be assumed that an acre of land subject to this burden, and let for forty shillings, produces twenty bushels of wheat, which sell for one hundred shillings; the tenth of the produce of this acre would be two bushels of wheat worth ten shillings. Adam Smith, and other eminent writers who have been hitherto regarded as authorities in questions of Political Economy, admit that if the ten shillings levied as tithes in the case here stated, ceased to be exacted, the amount would be added to the rent already received by the landlord, but that it would make no altera tion in the money or selling price of the wheat which this land produces. But the persons who have recently act themselves up as oracles in matters of this hind, pro nounce this to be an erroneous opinion; they contend, that if tithes were not levied on t'le acre he question, the result would he, not that the landlord :would add ten shil lin;s to the forty shillings now received by him as rent, but that the intrltet price of wheat would fall one-tenth, anti that the grower would sell the whole twenty bushels for ninety shillings, the price which he now obtains for eighteen bushels. This singular theory of what its 'authors quaintly term ' the incidence of tithes,' is made to rest on a basis equally singular ; it is aFlumed as a fact not to be con troverted, that the least fertile soil brought into a state of tillage pays no rent."_ This specimen is sufficiently decisive as to the character of the writer. We are not aware of any writer of any name in Political Economy, who has not, since the publication of the pamphlet of Sir Edward West, assented to his views respecting rent. But West, and Malthus, and Ricardo, and Mill, and M'Culloch, are a sort of unauthorised persons—of dissenters, as it were, in political eco nomy, who have dared to impugn the good old re ceived doctrines. If men of this description had tl:eir will, every science would have its 39 articles. This writer endeavours to combat the doctrine of the new political economists, that tithes are a tax on the community, in this way : " Suppose, however," he says, " it be conceded in the teeth of all practical experience upon this subject, that the least fertile soil, in a state of tillage, suldect to tithes, yields no surplus as rent, but barely makes the ordinary return of profits for the capital employed in its cultivation this concession will not support the inference which is drawn from it ; for it will by no means follow as a matter of course, that the abstraction of the tenth part of the produce of this least fertile soil' will affect the money price of the other nine parts, when brought to market. For this ' least fertile soil,' even upon the supposition that it yields no surplus as rent, evidently yield a surplus beyond the cost of tillage, as tithes. It the demand for tithes ceased to exist, the consequence in 1.1:;s very case would be—not that the market value of the whole produce would he diminished—but that the landowner, who is now said to receive nothing, would then obtain as rent the portion which is at present the property of the tithe owner." Gently, if you please. Let us take the case of a new country like America, with abundance of a fertile land, in situations distant from towns. In such a country the tenth of the produce as tithe would be a deduction to that extent from the cul tivation, which would, of course, be to him, as if the soil to that extent had been rendered less pro ductive. But suppose the tithe to be done away with, the possessors of the soil would benefit to that extent, but they would not the wore be enabled to obtain rent. In an old country, in which there are soils cf various qualities, the qua lity beyond that which the necessities of the com munity require to be under cultivation pays no rent. There are certain tracts in the Highlands of Scotland, of which the rent per acre is the merest trifle. If there no tithe, the cultivation in breaking up an inferior soil would merely leave the cultivator to consider whether it would reimburse him, at the existing prices, the labour bestowed on it. But with tithe, he must wait till the price rose to such a length as to reimburse him, not merely for his labour, but the tenth of the produce to be taken from him by the Parson. Let us suppose a High land landlord with some thousand acres of land worth sixpence an acre. If this land would at the existing prices remunerate the cultivator for his labour, he might be disposed to covenant for the sixpence ; but the price must be so high before he can cultivate, that it must not only pay him for his ltbour, but enable him to give his tenth of the pro ducerat: to the P arson , befo re h e can venture to cu l t i- There it tt s always a tenth o f th e p ro d uce a dd e d i(the puce paid by the consumer, so that tith e s ) nOt a bur den on the consumer, except in • cases where the landlords have no monopoly. This • subject is of great importance to the community, and we are glad to see the Church enterieg on the controversy.—elforning Chronicle. The propriety of the execution of all laws must of necessity, in some measure, depend upon the dis cretion and good sense of the functionaries to whom that execution is confided. Who the person or per sons is or are to whom the observations we are about to make may be applicable we are wholly ignorant ; ' and, therefore, we can have no personal motive upon earth in what we are about to say; but we will pre mise generally, what every day's experience shows, that no great share of discrimination has been at any time exercised in the appointment of those have to administer the laws which daily affect the comfort and well-being of the people. What is law at Bow street to-day is declared to-morrosv not to be t',e law at Whitechapel; and the applicant or informer, who is one day triumphant at Marylebone, may to morrow be floored and turned out of Court as an ignoramus by the authorities of Worship -street. Such and so various are the modes of interpreting and administering the same laws in different streets and places of the very same city ! For the truth of these remarks we appeal to a case which occurred on the first day of the present Old Bailey Sessions, when two children were tried for stealing a patty pan, containing a penny tart, from a pastry cook's shop in Sydney's-alley—a case which some Magistrates would never have sent to trial. We ad mit that the tart-loving children were proved to be common thieves, or, as the fashionai;le phrase of the day has it " juvenile delinquet ;" and we also admit that a pastry-cook's property is just of as much consequence to him, and as fit to be defended, as that of a jeweller; but there used to be such a principle as "de minindt non carat /c.r;" and if the minimum of injury and of 'crime can be conceived, we think it would centre in the trumpety offence of a child stealing a bun or a tart. Suppose an old woman, " not having the fear of God before her eyes, but moved by the instigation of the devil," were to pour a clandestine dish of bohea out of her neighbour's tea-pot, or feloniously take a pinch of snuff out of her neighbour's box, would any body alive (except some sapient Magistrate) dream of sending her to Newgate to be tried for a fe lony ? Yet such, forsooth, is to be the fate of an unlucky urchin, who, having the previous cha racter of a thief, gratifies his longing for an apple tart, to the still greater gratification of the vigilant policeman, who probably gets, in addition to his salary, from ten to twenty shillings for bringing these tart-devouring youths to justice ! And this happens in the highest criminal Court of the British Empire, and swells the statistical accounts of our national state of crime! If such things do not turn law, and justice, and its administration into ridicule, we know not what will. We pity jurors who are summoned from their homes to try such cases.— Morning Herald. The official returns of the exports of British ma nufacture and produce, from the year 1798, inclu sive, to the sth of January, 1830, and the exports of cotton goods from the year 1814 to the latter period, of the former of which we give extracts in another part of our colutnns, are among the most important Parliamentary papers printed this Session, as showing the actual and relative state of trade from documentary evidence. These papers, it will be recollected, were moved for by Alderman Waith man ; and certainly, if arithmetical proof be worth any thing, and that proof furnished under the hand of Government itself, they fully corroborate the statements which the worthy Alderman made in the House of Commons, and decide the question, as to the depression of trade of late years, by the most conclusive demonstration. These returns, it will be observed, specify the officio/ and real value of the exports for the last thirty years ; with the increase and decrease, as the same may be, in each year, of the real as compared with the official value, and the gross amounts. Thus have we brought under our eyes at one view the state of trade and commerce, with all the fluctuations, during the above-mentioned period, so that at a single glance may be seen the ruinous extent of depreciation which has taken place in the value of goods, and particularly siece the passing of the Currency Bill and the adoption of Mr. Huskisson's misnamed " reciprocity system." Besides the depreciation in value, which will ac count, in a great measure, for the existing distress, these papers show, in contradiction to Mr. Huskis son and his disciples, who have boasted of the in crease of our foreign trade, a great and alarming fall ing off, to the amount of several millions a year, which must have considerably increased the distress and embarrassment that have so generally prevailed, and affords the best answer to all that has been said and written in favour of those measures which, un der the spacious names of free trade and commercial reciprocity, have E 0 seriously affected the great in terest of the country. We do not say that the de lusion which a few wild and visionary theorists in political economy have been enabled to practise on the Government and people of this country is unex ampled in the history of nations, but we do say it would be difficult to find anything to surpass it in the history of legislative infatuation. In looking at the documents in question, our readers as well as ourselves can only wonder that the misrepresenta tions respecting the trade and commerce of the country which the " political economists" dealt in should have been trumpeted forth, year after year, without contradiction, in the face of such astounding facts, and that, out .of 658 " intelligent" Representatives of the people, none should have brought this evidence un der the public eye before, or, apparently, have made themselves acquainted with it. When Alderman Waithman stated those facts to the House scarcely and body seemed to credit them. So little, indeed, were the 658 legislators inclined to think they wanted any information from practical and experi enced men upon the question, that there was a ma nifest disposition to run him down, and rather to silence than to answer him. There were only Mr. Robinson and Mr. Attwood who had the boldness and honesty to stand up to support him, if we ex cept Mr. Sadler, who gave a powerful aid, and who, on more occasions than one, has dealt rather roughly with the cob-web sophistries of the theorists. It should not be forgotten, while upon this topic, that the Speech from the Throne, at the opening of the Sesion, announced " great increase of exports" as a subject of public congratulation, and a proof of the flourishing, or, at least, improving state of com merce. On that occasion the worthy Alderman ventured to predict it would turn out that no increase in real value had taken place; and the very Govern ment who put that statement in the King's Speech) now furnish the best evidence of the fallacy of their own assertion. In fact, say one who takes the trouble to look at the printed document will see that, as compared with the previous year, there has not only been no increase in the real value of the exports last year, but there has been a decrease of nearly one million, the real value of the exports of die year ending the sth of January, 1829, being 36,150,379/., and the real value of the exports of the year ending the sth of January, 1830, being only 35,212,873/., showing a decrease of 937,506/, or nearly one million sterling, as we have stated. In the year 1816, the year after the war, the real value of our exports was 49 ,653,2451., which, compared with that of the last year, shows a f a lli ng o ff t o the amount of 14,440,3721. In 1819 it was 45,180,1501., which, on a similar comparison, gives a decrease in round numbers of nearly ten millions. The last four years, as compared with the previous four, which includes the great year of joint-stock speculation, show a falling off amounting to about thirty-five millions ; and if we look to the year 1826 we will see that the excess of official value over the real value was only eight millions, while in the last year it was no less than 20 millions. So have our exports as to quantity increased, but in value diminished ! We are aware that the argument, if so it can be called, which the economists have re course to in such a case, is that the price of the commodity exported is no object, if an equal dimi nution of value takes place in the imports, as the trader gets quantity for quantity. But let us see how this operates. If a merchant exports, for instance, one hundred huts, and sells them for 1001. and gets wine of the value of 1001., who will say that the transaction is not more profitable to him than if he sells his 100 bats for 701., and gets 100 dozen of wine, worth 70/.? Is he not benefited to the extent of 301. in the one case, and injured to the extent of 301. in the other ? Is he not in that proportion less able to pay rent and taxes, and poor rates ? hi short, does not the merchant suffer so far in his profit ? Must not the master-manufac turer in that degree diminish his prices ; must he not also, in the same degree, reduce the wages of his workmen ? and in the same proportion must not the workmen abate something of the comforts, or forego part of the necessaries of life ? Hence a rolling off in the consumption of excisable articles, and a consequent diminution cf the revenue. Thus does the system operate in breaking down the prosperity of our merchants and manufacturers—inflicting wretchedness and misery on the working classes, and producing embarrass ment to the State. It is true that, while the pro ductive classes suffer, the vary cause that oppresses them produces a temporary benefit to the unproduc tive clases, who have fixed incomes, and who live upon the taxes. The salaries of Ministers, public officers, and sinecurists, are enhanced in value in proportion to the fall in prices. The tax-receiver drinks his claret cheaper, but the weaver, the cotton-spinner, and other artisans, are obliged to reliquish their beer—perhaps give up a meel a day —and, after all, be obliged to seek a refuge in the workhouse. A morning Ministerial Paper, with a view to exonerate the " free trade" system from the charge of aggravating this state of things, says that the diminished value of the exports is to be accounted for by reduction of taxation, improved machinery, the change in the cur rency, lee. Now, the fact is, that, notwith standing the reduction of taxes since the war, the change in the currency has enhanced the value of the taxes in more than the proportion that they have been reduced, so that our manufacturers, merchants, and artisans, muy be said to be still burdened et ith a war taxation, while the value of exports has so greatly diminished, that in the last year of the war the qfieial value fell short of the real value by 10 mil lions, and last year the tables were so completely turned, that the real value, on the contrary, fell short of the official by 20 millions 1 Who, therefore, caii wonder at the embarrassment and distress which prevails among the productive classes, seeing that prices are so ruinously low, while the change in the currency makes the taxes higher than when the war prices existed, and the manufacturers of compara tively untaxed countries pour their goods into Eng land, and are enabled, by the cheapness of produc tion, to drive nearly ail competition from the field ? —Morning Herald. Our attention has been called to a pamphlet pub lished by Mr. Ridgway on the subject of emigra tion and colonization, and the same subject has been further pressed upon our attention by various other pamphleteers and letter-writers, by as many com munications as woul I sink a coal-barge, and whose varied schemes all profess the same object, namely, the relief of the existing distress. Without mean ing to pass any opinion on these numerous projects, which may amuse people who have a taste for every thing that is perplexiug and incomprehensible— without dilating on the tininess of Mr. Horton, the grave absurdities of Mr. Owen, the splendid bubble of the Swan River, the exporting plan, the trans porting plan, and all the various plans for dealing ..e:th population as a farmer would deal with a crop of Windsor beans—without, we say, getting aground upon any of these subjects, we shall at once state our reasons for resisting and rejecting all the schemes of emigration which have been or may yet be conceived. Before gentlemen, who form them selves into societies in order to promote self-ex patriation, have a right to call upon the public to provide funds or in any way assist them in their projects, they are bound to show that this country does not possess the means of subsisting the present or any increased quantum of population. The onus probandi is with them. We have nothing to do with the truism that there are ten thousand or ten millions of people in this country who are un derfed and suffering maily privations. This argu ment is inadmissible unless it can be clearly, satis factorily, and incontestably established that the re sources of this country, if fully developed, and its protective policy properly exerted, and its cultiva tion fairly encouraged, are inadequate to the main tenance of the existing population. This, however, is not proved—nay, it is not even affirmed—col:se queatly we have a right to demur to emigration on this ground alone. But supposing it to be affirmed, and that certain persons are of opinion that we ha% e carried our increase of population not only to its maximum but to excess. If this be affirmed, we are prepared to contest the proposition. We deny the existence of any redundant population.— We deny that the people are poor or starving from the circumstance that we have exhausted our do mestic resources, or pushed cultivation or improve ment to the utmost extent. In short, we maintain exactly the converse. We admit distress—admit more of it than even the projectors against whom we contend—but at the same time we assert, that this distress is caused by bad laws, by ignorant Mi nisters, by an ambitious body of mercantilists, by the weaving and spinning interests, which would, if they had the power, convert England into a work shop for all the corn countries and colonies of the world. No man who travels over England can fail to discern that there is ample room for extended and unproved cultivation. The money that is an nually expended, and for ever as much lost as if it were flung into the sea, in carrying corn from the Baltic to the Thames would go far in reclaiming many thousands of acres of waste lands. Here is one error, and if we had leisure we could state fifty others, all tending to show that it would be better policy to nurture and improve our domestic re sources than vainly strive to remedy existing evils by removing the best part of our population. But we may recur to the subject.—Morning Journal. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, AMU, 17. COOPER V. COURTENAY. This was an action against Dr. Courtenay of the Adelphi, by the executor of the late Mr. Cooper, a tailor, in Bond -street, to recover the amount of his bill for clothes supplied to a son of the defendant, a young man now serving his clerkship to an attorney. The articles were supplied in December, 1828, and subsequently, and the amount was about 40/. The defendant, it appeared, had bad some difference with his wile and other members of his family, and in May, 1827, gave notice in writing to the late Mr. Cooper, not to give credit to any one on his account without his written order for that purpose. The clothes in question were ordered by the wife a con siderable time after the service of this notice, and the defendant now resisted the demand, on the ground that after such a notice he was not liable to pay it. Lord TENTERDEN acquiesced with the defendant's counsel in this view of the case ; and, by his Lord ship's direction, the plaintiff was nonsuited. INCEST.-PUBLIC JUSTICE DEFEATED.- j oin ( Bourn, aged GO, a gaunt ill-looking fellow, frost Dockenfield, was placed at the bar at the Chester Assizes, on Thursday, for violating his own daughters, MARY ANN SAnate 13oonr, of the ages of IS and 14 respectively. The Attorney-General requested the Court to postpone the trial until the next Assizes, on account of the daughters having absconded. The Judge said, he regretted he had not the power to grant the application. As there was no obligation on the witnesses to attend, they might be mis) sine at the next Assizes, and at every sureeed.ng one also, which would subject the prisoner to n perpetual impri ,onnient. his Lordship then informed the prisoner that for the present he was dischargssl ; but intimated to him that he was liable to be taken up at any moment, and cau tioned him to be careful bow he conducted himself towards his daughters—especially towards the younger, who is bound apprentice to hire.-.-lie was then discharged. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MANSION.HOUSE. On Saturday a Jew, named Moses Moses, of very smell and pitiful dimensions, and embellished with a most cadaverous aspect, was charged with having hit a porter, of more than double his weight, right and left about the face. The porter stated that as he was carrying some goods to a wharf in Thames street, he saw Moses with a sieve of oranges on his head, standing with some other persons at the ea trance, and heard him say that he'd like to give a slavey a warming. The prosecutor believing that the words were directed to him, told Moses to go about his business; but the Jew waited, and as he (prosecutor) returned, " pitched into him" with both hands, and at onco swelled his head to an enormous size. The LORD MAYOR—" Didn't you return the blow ? I should think that you are large enough to make such a fellow skip."—The prosecutor said the thing was done so suddenly, and the Jew's knuckles were so hard, that the light hew eut of his eyes before he knew where he was. No provocation whatever had been given. The Jew gave a very different account of the matter. He said that as he stood quietly with his oranges upon his head, the porter gave him a tap, and tumbled him. He then got up, and, of coarse, defended himself against his opponent, who fought like a tiger, "but as he knowed nothink about it, he wan't likely to succeed."—(Laughter.) The LORD MAYOR said the oranges were all clean, and asked whether they did not fall to the ground when the Jew received the tap that tumbled him. The prosecutor asserted that the Jew had laid his sieve upon the ground, and regularly made fight, and that he (the prosecutor) did not give the least offence, nor strike a single blow. An Irish orangeman, a friend of Moses, was ready to swear drat the Jew had his sieve on his head all the time of the row. The LORD MAYOR—What I when he was tumbled ? The Irishman, who had gone too far to retract, loudly declared that the oranges stuck to the Jew even in his fall, and during his exertions in beating the porter about the head. Mr. Hobler—l suppose you can account for that scientifically. Fighting, they say, is now upon a very improved principle; but I don't believe that Dutch Sam could fight with a sieve of oranges on his head.—(Laughter.) The Irishman—l don't know how the —it is, your Worship, but whatever the Jews take in hand stick to them like putty. be on my oath that he fought ail the time with the sieve of oranges on his head; but they have got such a way of milling now, that a man's eye-balls are sent bang into the back of his head before he can see whether it's a Jew or a Gentile that's afore him.—(Laughter.) Moses all this time looked as sharp as a razor in the countenance. Look at him, my Lord," said the Irishman, " why his face is enough to cut any man's fist in two."—(Laughter.) The LialtD MAYOR—WeII, he has found a straight forward witness in you, at any rate; but we won't encourage any of the fancy in the city, whatever they may do at the West End. I wish that an end could be put to this brutal practice. Moses—Please your Vorship, the Jews lams in their own defence ; ve are so exposed to insult, that ve're obligated to pitch it in as yell as ye can. The LORD MAYOR—WeII, you are all going into Parliament very soon, and then I hope there will be no occasion for the fighting system. Moses—Please your Vorship, ren ve gets mancipated, I hope the milling viii be reg'lated properly, for upon my word, ii's so bad of late, that I'm ashamed to be seen near the ring.—(Laughter.)—The first thing ve ought to do, your Vorship, is to stop this here robbing sys tem, for it's scandalous that a gentleman can't fight now, vithout it's said he's ageing for to cross. It's a shame, your Vorship.—( Loud laughter.) The LORD MAYOR said that the Jew's language was getting fast out of kis latitude, and he should put a close to the discussion by calling upon him to find bail. The prosecutor then groped his way out of the Justice-room, and the Jew was obliged to find bail, which he quickly did from Petticoat-lane. BOIV.STREET. A gang of seven miscreants were detected at the Bull-inn public-house, Bull-inn -court, Strand, on Friday night, and brought to the offiee on Saturday morning, before Sir R. BIRNIE and Mr. ilAms. Robert Eagle, the landlord of the house, was one of the accused, and the names of the re maining six are as follow :—John Renard, Charles Williams, William Trimmer, (a man nearly sixty years of age), Joseph Barnard alias Jones, (a Jew), and William Franklin, a private soldier. Their appearance in the dock excited the greatest disgust, two of them having paint ❑pon their cheeks, with their hair curled in drop ringlets, such as wo men wear. William Humphreys, a private in the 2d Battalion of the 3d Regiment of Foot Guards, was sworn, and deposed that about four o'clock, on Friday, he rent to the Bull-inn public-house, accompanied by a fellow-soldier named Cheer. They went into the parlour and saw two of the prisoners, Barnard and Williams, playing at cards. A soldier was there also. The witness deposed to acts which he saw committed by the prisoners whom he named, and others in the room. He and Cheer left the house together, and immediately proceeded to the police station, Covent-garden, where they gave informa tion of what they had witnessed, and in a short time after they returned to the house, accompanied by a serjeant of police, two constables, and two soldiers. Witness and Cheer went again to the parlour, and saw all the prisoners there, with other persons not in custody. They were all behaving with great im propriety except the prisoner Franklin. Trimmer squeezed witness by the hand, and was proceeding to take other liberties, when he (witness) made a signal, and his comrade and the police-officers im mediately entered the room. ['he prisoners, and the others not in custody made a rush towards the door, for the purpose of escaping, but the street door having been secured, they ran up stairs and concealed themselves in different parts of the house. The prisoner Renard was found concealed in a bed, and Williams was discovered under a bed on the second floor. The prisoners were then secured, but several of the gang escaped. Mr. Hams asked the witness if the conduct of the landlord in the room was such as to induce him to believe that he was aware of the practices which were carried on. The witness replied that the landlord must have been aware of the fact, from the expressions he used when addressing the prisoners. Thomas Cheer, another soldier in the same regi ment, corroborated the above evidence. Coffey, a porter employed in Covent-garden market, was in the house at the time, and saw the prisoner Brown offer money to the last witness to let him go, but Cheer refused it. Serjeant Wheatley, of the police, went to the house with two constables, in consequence of the information he received from the two soldiers who were first examined. The moment he entered the house, he ordered the door to be closed, and when the signal was given, he seised the prisoner Barnard, who was standing at the bar smoking. The landlord, in his defence, denied the charge. His wife and a female servant were in the habit of attending in the parlour. He never heard any im proper songs or expressions. The prisoner Barnard said that it was all a con spiracy against him and his companions, and added, that the witness Cheer had trumped up the charge, because he (Barnard) refused to treat him to a pint of ale. Franklin, the soldier, said he was not in the room when the other prisoners were secured, nor was he taken into custody until that morning. The witness Humphreys was recalled, and wl. mitted that Franklin was not in the parlour when he returned to the house. To a question by Sir R. BIRNIE, Franklin replied that he had once been tried by rt court-martial, but for nothing disgraceful. '1 he prisoners, with the exception of Franklin, who was given up to his regiment, wero all held 10 bail, and directed to give 48 boors' notice; and the witnesses were ordered to lose no time in indicting them at the sessions. Three of the prisoners were recognized as old offenders. bIARLBOROUGII.STRICET. A CLOUDED HoNEYNrooN.—A young man o f the name of .Icahn Furneller, a porter belonging to one of the club. houses, was brought up on a warrant before Mr. DYRIt, charged with threatening tha life of his wife. The complainant, a remarkably interesting looking young woman, about eighteen years of age, stated that in consequence of the ill-treatment of her hus band she was obliged to apply to the Magistrate for his protection. Mr. DYER— What has he done to you ? Has he struck you ? Complainant—He did last Thursday ; and he has another wife living, but I am not able at present to prove it. - Mr. DYL—Has he done any thing the to you ? Complainant---Oh, yes, Sir, he has threatened to s'ab me, and also to poison me, and I am in danger from hi 3 threats. Mr. DYBR—WeII, young man, how is this that you make use o; - such horrid threats to your wife ? Defendant—When I said so, I was i n a passion. Complainant—You have often said that you would stab me, and if you could not succeed in getting rid of me by- this means that you would put some poison into my tea. The reason of this conduct is owing to his having another wife, which he has often said is the case. Defendant—l have no other wife. Complainant—l have only been married to him eight weeks. After the first few days he never came home of a night to me. At the end of the first fortnight be proposed that I should go to ser• vice and he would go into the country. I replied that being married I would do no such thing, but I was ready to have any kind of work at home to assist our exertions. This, however, he refused to comply with, and which is the origin of his threats. Instead of being at home with me of a Sunday he has been taking out a young wcman who is a ser vant in the neighbourhood in which he lives, although he has another wife beside, myself.—The defendant, in reply to this catalogue of truisms, merely said, " You wished to be separated." Mr. DYER observed, that it was not probable that any young married woman would wish to be sepa rated from her husband after so short a wedlock had not his conduct been very bad to her. De' fendant—l have behaved very kind to her. Mr. DYER—I know nothing of your conduct to-. wards your wife except what has transpired upon this occasion; but I will not encourage those abo mineble threats towards any female, much less to wife. Under these circumstances you must find bail. Defendant—l have not any bail in attendance. Mr. DYRR—Than you evil' be committed. The defendant was accordingly consigned to the hand , of the gaoler, without receiving one parting look . from his nenly 7 married wife. COUNTRY CORN MARKETS. DIMING LAST WEEK. Wneat. Barley. Oats. Means. rer Quarter. s. to s. Is.to s. 8. to g. s. to s. CttliBle 62 —33 25 Carmarthen —s7 16 36 ll,:xham 152 72 33 41 22 59 50 52 50 60 32 34 18 25 35 50 Penrith .. I 60 31 23 Shenield 73 29 41 WiYcr nchesterel. 5. ;4 d. 8 7 . 0 d. i 4 2 . 5 (1. 8 34 .4. 1 2 .‘ 1 1. .. 95 d. 8 4 . 2 d. 4. 1 Newcastle (Staff.) 10 0 10 6 4 6 5 6 3 9 4,3 59. Coventry 7 0 9 0 4 8 5 4 3 6 4 0 5 6 6 0 Northallerton 7 0 9 3 3 6 4 0 3!I 4 0 5 9 6 6 Stafford 90 94 59 69 36 40 74 80 Swansea 90 86 42 46 99 33 00 0 0 Warwick 90 100 46 6 0 S 3 40 73 7 6 Per 8011. Barnardeastle.......... 15 0 180 86 90 70 80 96 13 Durham 136 170 86 96 50 76 110 12 0 Richmond . 12 0 160 90 108 70 8 6 11 0 180 3t0ckt0n..... ~12 6 14 6 8 0 9 0 4 8 7 6 0 0 0 0 WAKEFIELD CORN MARKET.—ApriI 16. There is a large supply of Wheat both from the farmers and up the river here to-day ; the best fresh samples eell slowly at a decline of Is. per quarter, and other descrip tions are nearly 2s. per quarter lower than the rates of last week. Oats ate ready sale at last week's prices. The best fresh Barley is taken off at an advance of Is. per quarter, bet there is no improvement in ordinary qualites. Beans are plentiful and meet dull sale, and late prices are barely maintained. Wheat, Red, Norfolk and Suflblk 575. 60e. to 661. fine 70s. New 575. 60s. to 644. Ane 6Ss. White Old &4e. 675. to 745. fine 76e. New eos. 61s. to 68s. tine 'lg. - Foreign, Red sls. 61s. to 675. fine 71s. White ........... ... .635. 665. to '7os. fine 734. Barley, Norfolk and Suffolk 30.. to 353. fine 375. - Lincolnshire 27s. to 325. fine 3441. - Yorkshire Wold 275. to 314. fine 346. - Foreign ... ..... - ...... ...-...... -s. to ....8. fine --s. Beans, Old ».-...... 36s to 3Rs. fine 41. ----- New ....... .. ...... ...•..................• 345. to 355. fine 375. Oats, Potato .......... -.......... ...... ..... 25*. to 275. fine 31s. - Poland Its. 233. to 245. fine 294. - Friezland and Small ils. 225. to 21s. fine 265. - Mealing ...-........ ............. --12 d. to 13)44. per Stone. Shelling .3ls. to 93*. Od. per Load. Malt 3Bs. 40*. fine 435. per Load. Rapeseed CORNWALL. MARKETS. TRURo.—Wilea (areraige)2ss. 6,l—Barley. 13s. 64.—Oats, Ile. ST. A MOTRLL—.Wheat, 2.35. tU S.s6.—Barley. 12e. to 14F.--Date. As. to 10s. Od. Bonants—Wheat (average) 253. 03.-13arley, 12s. 6d.—Oats, 124. LAIINCRISTON—Wheat (average) 248. Od.—Barley, I es. 04.—Qats, St. o.l.—Beef, s.f,(l.—Mutton, liaLsvon—Wheat, 245. 9d.—Barley, I3s. Od. PENZANCII—Wheat, 21s. to 26s.—Barley, --a. to 150.—Oats, Ss. to 10s. 6tl.—Beef and Mutton, 41. to sd.—Pork, 21d. to 01- Butter, 10.1. per lb. LiaLnaan—Wheat, 21s. Od. 241. 9d.—Barley,l2l.-..Outs, 108. to 100. 64. Sr. Counan—Wheat, 235. to Sits.—Barley, 19s. to 15s.—Beef. and Mutton, sd. to ed.—Veal and Lamb, Od to 6d. REMOVAL OF THE HAYaitARKET.---TEW Bili for the removal of the Haymarket having passed the Howse of Commons, aed no opposition being apprehended in the House of Lords, will probably become a law in the course of a few weeks, and it is expected the removal will take place by Midsummer. The situation chosen for the new market is certainly excellent. It is bounded ou the west by the Regent's Park, on the east by the Hampstead road, lying between the New-road and the Regent's Canal, one of ate baaine and wharfs of which form part of the northern boundary, and will of course admit of hay being landed from the canal boats immediately in the market.--- Bvbides the advantage of situation, the increase of space over the present market will be very considerable. A survey of each has been made, by which it is found that the present market contains 4,400 square feet, and the new market will contain 10,600. It is said an extensive roof, supported on columns, will be erected in the centre, to keep the hay dry in wet weather. BIRTHS. On the 17th inst.. the lady of R. Hamilton, Esq., of Bloomfield Lodge, Norwood, Surrey, of a daughter. On the IGth inst. at Hatchford, Surrey, the lady of Wm. Beckford, Esq. of a son, which survived but a few hours. On the 17th inst. Mrs. 11. Treacher, of Finsbury square, of a daughter. Oa the 16th at Weston-green, Surrey, the lady of the Rev. E. Wodehouse, of a daughter. MARRIED. On the 17th inst. Mr. P. C. Oppenhebn to Milo Well, of Coborn-terrace, Boa-road. Oa the 17th inst. at Hanwell, Win. Nicholls; EN. of Tavistock-square, and Lombard -street, to Jane Elizabeth, eldest daughter of Martin Livesey, Esq. of Kent-lodge. Hamra, and grand-daughter of the late Dr. Worthington) M. D., of Liverpool. On the 15th inst. at St. Andrew's, Mr. W. Shrubs°le. of Devonshire-street, to Sarah, eldest surviving daughter of Capt. J. Westbeeeh, R.N. DIED. On the 17th inst. at Kensington, Mark, eldest eon of the late Hon. George Winn, ALP., of Worley Lodge, Essex. On the 15th ing. at Marlow, Vice-Admiral Sir J. N. Morrie, K.C.B. On the 16th inst. Mr. Hard/14, sets. of Savlle.honse, Leicester•square, aged 62. On the loth of February, at the hind of Ascension, Commander Griffenhoofe, of his Majesty's sloop Primrose. On the 16th inst. Mr. Randie Hopley, of Tower-street, aged 82. On the 14th inst. at Deptford, Elizabeth; wife of 11. Botheroyd, late of the King's Arms, Beech-Street.: On the 14th inst. Anna Maria, wife of J. Knowlets Esq. Stratford-grove, Eiger: Oa the 11th ingt. at Kirk-E'la, dear Hutt, the. eel/ daughter of Capt. 'Whitaker, rt.N., aged five years. _ PARevao AM) PBBLIMBB BY lIVADO YOUNG, At TAB Sox OnPrNi, 11% eThhtfil l Lumett ~-' 7 L.-- €OIS Tigir siva follui hula pur RU Vert, Vow rifty • One 1 And lewd the I *eft and I •ed 1 hie b in T ceive folfoi t *lli .Pne! • Five Five TA One Ten' Ope One' Ten' Five JA Five] One' Tß CO Five Di Two One' tend' above 'Sitio] lanrt app. vane( ARI Five DAY of th, DUE of tt Deei: TO of Al —..... Devi TO eult CL !Ito ball Si: Of and CIE Tb,