The Sun. — London, England, 1830-05-04 00:00:00

no seditious movement. When•the paper was or dered to be prosecuted, the Government had no evidence that it was any thing else awn the indivi- dual opinion, or the personal proposal of the writer, whose name it bore. As M. de Potter was, however, in custody, the crown-officers thought it as allowable as it was easy, to seize his papers and to examine his correspondence. In the course of this examination, they found that he had communi cations from various persons who concurred in his opinions, or were directed by his superior talent. Hence the idea of abandoning the prosecution for an abuse of the press, and cemmencing a charge of seditious conspiracy. The persons whose names are mentioned above were in a short time apprehended, with the exception of M. de Potter, who was al ready in prison. The charge against them was ren dered foimidable by an announcement that they were to be tried for their lives. The two chief conspi rators were placed in secret confinement. All intercourse with their friends, or even with their legal advisers, was denied, except in the pre sence of the gaoler. Flints were thrown out of horrible discoveries and alarming dangers. Every letter that came to the prisoners from their friends, or was addressed to the journals with which they are connected, was opened, in expectation of new proofs of the grand conspiracy. After six weeks of this tormenting inquisition and harassing suspense, the charge of high treason was abandoned by the preliminary Judges, and the prisoners were ordered to be tried before the Court of Assize on the minor charge of sedition, exposed to a punishment on con viction short of capital severity. The trial began on the 16th ❑lt., and did not terminate till the even ing of Friday last, the 30th. Unfortunately we have left ourselves no room to give even a brief summary of the proceedings, or to make our readers sensible of the grounds of the sentence which was then pronounced. Suffice it to say, that the whole evidence against the prisoners consisted in the contents of their private letters, which the Govern ment had intercepted at the post-office, or had seized in their possession. The most important of these letters passed between M. de Potter and M. Tielmans, and the only circumstance that gave them a character of dangerous mystery, or political plotting, was an affected use of nick names, circumlocutions, or metaphorical phraseo logy, to express or to describe persons and objects whose common designations might have been used in their correspondence without exposing them to any suspicion. Thus the Government is called the padarclzy (or the regime of children), the King is called the tutor, the Second Chamber of the States General is called the family council, the provincial states are called the tribunal of the provinces; one member of the Legislature gets the name of the old man, another of the asparagus, and a third of the weathercock; but these enigmatical designations are never used except on occasions where the real name might have been employed with innocence arid safety. The letters in which these useless substi tutes are used for common names refer to projects for increasing a Belgic majority in the Chambers, — for getting up an opposition to the Ministry,—for agitating the questions of the liberty of the press, freedom of general instruction, as equal distribution of place and emolument between the inhabitants of the Belgic and Dutch provinces,—equality of tax ation,--equality of religious rights, and other topics on which the popular mind could be excited by the discussions of the journals. In no instance through out the whole corresponce have we seen any trea sonable or seditious purpose manifested. The end directly proposed was never criminal, though the means described or recommended might tend to fos ter disquietude, to encourage factious opposition, or to harass legitimate authority. The sentence passed on de Potter and Tielmans is probably imprudent, because too severe. If less harsh, it might have put a stop to the proposed association without ex citing the popular sympathy in favour of its pro jectors. The disclosures made in the course of the trial by the reading of their letters must have displeased their best friends. They showed that they were endeavouring to use the opposition members of the States-General as their tools,—that they had no gratitude for their services, except when employed in faction,—and that they would trample upon them as soon as they gave a ministerial vote or uttered a mo derate opinion. It was, perhaps, useful to make this exposure of the agitators, and to check their dan gerous artifices by a slight punishment; but so severe a sentence as a seven or eight years' exile will convert them into martyrs, while, by settling on the French territory nearest the Belgic frontier, the efficiency of their machinations will be rather increased than diminished. It will add to their po pularity that they have been condemned for osten sibly supporting Belgic rights against a Dutch Court and a Dutch Ministry,—that they have been refused the protection of a trial by jury, to obtain which was one main object of those counsels for which they are punished,—and that their punish ment has been awarded by Judges liable to be dis missed at the pleasure of the Crown, against which, in the risme of their fellow-citizens, they have so long protested.— Times. In aggravation of the eharges against M. de Pot ter, before the Brussels Court of Assize, on which he was condemned, on Friday last, to eight years' banishment, the public prosecutor stated that the defendant had been associated with one Buonsrotti ia publishing at Brussels a work entitled '!'he con spiracy for Equality, otherwise called the Conspi racy Babeaf. The book, of which a copy lies be fore us, purports to be written by Philip Buonarotti, and is advertised for sale at the Librairie Ro mantique. It does not appear from any passage of the work, or from any part of the conduct of de Potter, that he could approve of the doctrines or plots of the conspirators, though he was inti mate with Buonarotti, who wrote the history of this singular incident in the history of the French Revolution. As these judicial proceedings at Brussels have recalled to notice a revolutionary transaction nearly forgotten, we make no apology for giving a brief notice of it from the work al luded to. " Babeuf and his coadjutors belonged to the ultra de mocratic party, which at the time of the conspiracy was insignificant, and had never been very numerous. In the early period of the Revolution, however, it appeared to be powerful, because alt the parties who from different mo tives opposed the Government fought under its colours, until events offered them opportunities for pursuing their own separate views, and because its ranks were swelled even by enemies of the revolution, who, willing to disgrace the cause of liberty by follies and crimes, found in the violence which the- mask of jacohinism enabled them to assume the means of at once concealing and aiding their purpose. The Babeufites were not satisfied with the abolition of privileges, but looked forward to an equaliza tion of property ; they wished to see established among the inhabitants of every commune throughout the whole extent of France, a perfect equality of labours and enjoy ments. Had they been sufficiently powerful, they would have tried to realize their impracticable system by force, without regard to the misery so insane an attempt must have produced. It might be supposed that Robes pierre was a favourite with the Baheufites, but even he did not come up to their idea of perfection : and the Constitution of 1793, the most democratic of all the codes promulgated during the revolution, was far from being satisfactory, as one of its articles sanctioned the right of property ! However, after the 9th Thermidor, that constitution was thought better of, and Robespierre became a hero and a martyr ! The Constitution of the year 111., •r 1795, being established under the Directory, it was considered advisable to make the resumption of the Code of 1793 a rallying cry. But the ultimate object of the party still being the equalization of property, the Con stitution of 1793 was not thought fit to be carried into operation. It was said th a t a re f orm o f manners an d opi nions ought to . .precede the full enjoyment of liberty, and that tle extraordinary measures necessary to produce this preliminary moral change were not practicable under a regular system. A society for promoting the object of the party formed in Paris corresponded with other clubs of the same kind in different parts of France. In the mean time Babeuf published a periodical under the title of Tribun du Peuple, in which he advocated with great seal the proposition that private property was the cause of all the evils on the face of the earth. Babeuf, Darthe, and Drooet (who prevented the escape of Louis XVI.), then a deputy, were the' leaders of the party, and the plot seemed to Le approaching maturity, but it was only ai lowed to ripen under the eye of the Government; for a police spy named Grisel, having insinuated himself into the confidence of the conspirators, gave daily information of their proceedings, and became the principal witness on the trial. When the Directory conceived that the proper time for interference had arrived, a great number of per sons were arrested in Paris and the department. Drouet, and some others, escaped from prison. The num ber of the accused, some of whom were not in cus tody, exceeded sixty; th.y defended themselves boldly be fore the High Court of Vendome. During the trial, they sang the popular patriotic songs. addressing to the Judges, and in particular the prosecutors, that stanza of the Mar scillais Hymn which commences Tremblez tyrans, et sous perfides I' They flattered themselves with the ex pectation of an insurrection in their favour, in which the troops would join the people. Nothing of the kind, how ever, took place. The trial terminated in the conviction of only nine of the prisoners; 56 were acquitted. Of the nine found guilty, Babeuf and Darthe were condemned to suffer death, and the remaining seven, of whom Buonarotti, the historian of the conspiracy, was one, were sentenced to he transported. On hearing the sentence, Babeuf and Darthe drew from their bosoms daggers and stabbed them selves; but the wounds, though severe, were not mortal, and they were prevented from repeating the blows. Babeuf's poniard broke, and part of it remained in his breast. It is stated that they endured great pain from their wounds, until the guillotine next morning put an end to their sufferings." Buonarotti, one of the conspirators, still lives. He resides in Brussels, where these memoirs have been published. He was a friend of M. de Potter ; but it is rather hard to charge the latter with con. spiring against the King of the Netherlands, because the former was a conspirator against the French Directory.—Times. The discussion of the Miscellaneous Estimates came on last night. Mr. R. Gordon, who opened the discussion, commenced with observing that " any observer of the proceedings of the House, not thoroughly acquainted with the Constitution, might sometimes be surprised at the manner in which Members voted away the money of their con stituents. Most Honourable Gentlemen took their departure, and the few who remained yawned, and exhibited other unequivocal symptoms of weariness, an►ounting to something very like disgust." Mr. lume observed, that, " at present, the whole cere mony was a perfect farce, and it was a mere mockery to say that money was conscientiously voted. On occasions when such enormoussums were voted, it was difficult to obtain as many co unty Members as were present that evening to vote about a mere Private Harbour Bill." The prin ciple which leads Members to absent themselves when the public money is voted, and to be present when Harbour Bills and the like are voted, may be set down as one and the same. The House of Commons is styled the guardian of the public purse, and there was a time when the House, however base in other respects, was firm as a rock when money was demanded. In those days the money de manded was that of the Members themselves; in the present day, the money demanded is intended for the Members themselves. Ever since the King found it necessary to associate with him the guardians of the Public Purse there is the best understanding in general on the subject of ex penditure ; and auy Member who pries too closely into money matters is looked on,' if not as a faux frere, at least as a troublesome fellow. In attend ing to Private Bills Members attend either to their own interests or the interests of their friends ; in attending discussions respecting grants of public money, they expose themselves to the inconvenience of either voting against their wishes, and, perhaps, thereby defeating an object they have at heart, or exposing themselves to the inconvenience of having their names placed before their constituents, if they have any, in an awkward association. However, it would appear that the reproach was less deserved last night than on some occasions. Mr. Flume, in deed, gave some sort of solution of the mystiry. " As, ere long they must have a new election:— (Order, order.) —He did not know what the Hon. Member meant by crying order,' but as this was the fifth year of the Parliament, and six was its na tural age, he did not see what there was out of order in what he said. He would say—come when an election might (which, perhaps, might please the Hon. Member better), he hoped that those who had to vote for county Members would remember how seldom their Representatives had attended when these money matters were to be disposed of." Per haps the Election, but more probably some other apprehensions which may have naturally enough come across them at the present moment, led to the rather unusual result of the first vote of 32,0001. being carried only by a majority of 139 to 123, and a sub•equent having been lost. There are reasons for everything.-111orning Chronicle. The publicans are greatly afraid that the morals of the people will suffer from the interference with the license-monopoly. They wish to secure their fellow-countrymen against the evil of unlimited tip pling. It is said of Moliere, that on a beggar, to whom he had given a Louis d'or by mistake, running after him to return it, he exclaimed, " Who would have expected to find virtue here !" Who could have believed that publicans were so anxious to dis- courage tippling—that they had the morals of the people so much at heart ! But England is the coun try of universal benevolence. Many men among us unfortunately are not so attentive to their own morals as they ought to be; but the man is not to he found who is not ready to take charge of the morals of Isis neighbours. In a country in which all men are so ready to sacrifice themselves for the good of the public, it is a miracle to us how any find time for their private interests. We trust the publicans will not allow their virtuous indignation against tippling to carry them too far. An excess of sobriety might endanger the establishments of the country. Let them remember the observations of a great poet " Ten thousand casks, For ever dribbling out their base contents, Touched by the Midas finger of the State, Bleed gold for Ministers to sport away. Drink and be mad then ; 'tis your country bids ! Gloriously drunk obey the important call ! Her cause demands the assistance of your throats ; Ye all can swallow, and .she asks no more."—M. Chron. Mr. Goulburn, feeble and short-sighted though he be, and in every respect unqualified to fill the office of Minister of Finance, is, nevertheless, not more responsible for his fiscal absurdities than the other Members of the Administration. The Chan cellor of the Exchequer may be a fool, but what must his colleagues be who tolerate him ? It can not be alleged that he has sufficient influence on Parliamentary patronage to command place, and therefore the natural inference is, that his associates are unconscious of his weakness or his errors, blind to his paltry shifts, and, in fact, as ignorant as him self. On no other grounds is it possible to recon cile the blunders of this one Minister with the pretended efficiency, energy, and unanimity of the Wellington Cabinet. The blunders of this unfortunate accountant and schoolmaster ought not, for these reasons, to be placed solely to the debit of Mr. Goulburn.— It is the policy of the present Government to divide and destroy—to fight one class of persons against another—to balance injuries-rather than re dress grievances—to pacify the clamorous by billet ti fig them upon the less noisy—to prop up a falling house by beams stolen from the adjoining one—to rob the farmer in order to keep the weaver out of the workhouse—to fleece the landowner for the be nefit of the sinking , planter of the West Indies--to increase taxes in one quarter in order to reduce them in another quarter—to encourage smuggling for the purpose of preventing insolvency, and to take from the people of Ireland an additional potato per diem in order that the English tax-eater and fundholder may not be compelled to drink one bottle of claret less per month. This being the needy and desperate policy of the present Ministers, it is no wonder to see the unhappy Chancellor dealing in shreds and patches, and making promises and hold ing out hopes which he, poor soul 1 has not the power to r e d eem or f u lfil. The repeal of the beer duty, and the opening of the trade in that article, were his grand remedies. He was told that the people were starving, which, by the way, he did not believe till he found that the produce of the Excise was declining, and then he proposed to relieve them by deducting the serious sum of OW far thing from the price of a quart of porter. Doubtful, however, whether such a reduction would take place under the present monopoly he resolved to cut off the leasehold and life interests of the licensed victuallers, dissolve the unholy compact between the the publicans, and the sinners, stop up the chimneys of the big brewers, and allow every man or woman, green-grocer or oilman, pastry-cook or cheeseman, to brew and retail beer on their own premises, on payment of a two-guinea annual re tainer to the tollmen of Somerset-house. '1 his was considered a measure of grace by the wide-mouthed and long-eared multitude. Mr. Goulburn was reckoned a wise and liberal statesman—he was hailed as the friend of the people and the evil genius of the monopolists, and Mr. Horace Twiss admitted that he was almost the shadow of the shade of the immortal Pitt. God of the blunderers ! —if there be such a deity in the Pantheon—behold thy votary, and crown him with thy own everlasting and odoriferous dandelion ! When this virtuous pro posal was promulgated from the Treasury bench some of the beer lords pretended to approve of it. They, ex cellent gentlemen, had no objection to the plan—oh, none whatever. It did not affect them personally— they were not afraid of competition—they were quite willing to sacrifice their " vested interests" for the public welfare! There was some who did, we did not, believe them. We were certain from the first that they would oppose the scheme in every possible way. They plotted in secret—they roused the publicans—they got up a storm among the pewter pote, and an insurrection among the spigots, so that it was dangerous to either by day or night. We really cannot tell all that these armed tapmen did do; but we suppose that they either threatened to poison the people in a serious way, or commence a much more serious run upon the bank ; for certain it is the Chancellor quailed, hoisted the white flag, and promised to withdraw the obnoxious measure by virtue of an amendment which we de scribed yesterday. The beer monopoly,therefore is to becontinued. The repeal of beer duties, without the abolition of the beer monopoly, is consequently nothing but a juggle. It will not cheapen the beer to theamount even of a dolt per quart. It will increase the profits of the brewer, giver better returns to the retail adulterator, enable the maker and the vender to cheat with equal facility and increased compensa tion, but the public will not be benefited in any way whatever. If any arguments or any facts were required, beyond the glaring injustice of the system itself, to induce Ministers to abolish the beer moue poly, the returns on the tables of Parliament might supply them with abundance. A document has just been published by order of the House of Com mons, which shows the number of quarters of malt used by the brewers, and the number of barrels of ale brewed since 1821 to 1830. We give the re sult of the first and last period : Qrs. of Malt BARRELS BREWED. paid Duty. Strong. Table. Total. 1821 ... 2,985,530 1830 ... 2,938,509 Add Intermediate ... 55,498 By looking carefully at these figures it will be easy to discover how far the public have been robbed, and to what extent adulteration has been increased and the profits of the brewer augmented since 1821. In 1830 the quantity of malt used, when compared with that of 1821, is less by 57,021 quarters. But out of this diminished quan tity of malt the honest brewers have managed to squeeze an increased quantity of beer of no less than 211,503 barrels. Read this, beer-bibbing reader, and judge for yourself. The brewers out of a less quantity of malt have made a much larger quantity of what they are pleased to rate as strong beer. As the people have become poorer they have the pleasure of knowing that the more diluted has become their national beverage. As their hearts have become more faint the brewers have poured in the more water; and as their sixpences have become scarcer they have gixen them a decreased allowance of malt for their money. This is a document which no casuistry can circumvent. It speaks for itself. Mr. Barclay may cover it with froth— Mr. Buxton may pray over it—Mr. Whitbread may close it with arguments as bitter as quassia— but they cannot erase its truth. It tells a tale of shame, which no drugs can make us forget. It ex poses the selfishness, the rapacity, and the iniquity of the system. It shows the effects of monopoly in figures as plain as the dome of St. Paul's. It proves to demonstration that this monopoly flourishes on the very vitals of the poor, encourages fraud, holds out a bounty for the use of deleterious ingredients, and gloats the more greedily on the decreasing means and falling wages of the labourer. And yet this is the system which bids defiance to Mr. Goulburn and his Majesty's Ministers—which laughs at their impotent threats, and forces them to retire from any hostile position which in their ignorance they may take up against it. Poor Ministers I happy brewers ! Proud nation of freeborn Englishmen ! held in chains, poisoned, cheated, and derided by a coterie of beer-boilers, whose establishments Jack Cade would have sent down the common sewers in one night.—Morning Journal. The second reading of the Bill for removing the civil disabilities of Jews was postponed hut night to the 17th instant, on account of the absence of Mr, Peel, who left town in the morning in consequence of the serious illness of his father, Sir Robert Peel, who has suffered a relapse, and who, it was reported, could hardly be expected to live until the arrival of his son. This melancholy event caused several other matters of an important nature to be post poned ; among the rest the Beer-trade Bill, and the presentation of the Birmingham petition, which Mr. E. Davenport deferred at the request of the Right Hon. Secretary, who addressed a letter to him for that purpose. The accumulation of business is already very great, and these postponements will have the effect of lengthening the Session far beyond its usual period, or throwing over to another year some questions which, it was expected, would have been disposed of before the rising of Parlia ment.—Morning Herald. It is gratifying to every friend of humanity to find that the public are becoming every day more and more convinced of the necessity of improving our criminal code. We believe more meetings have been held and more petitions presented on this sub ject during the present Session than at any former period ; from the east to the west, from the north to the south, the feeling of repugnance and disgust towards the useless and barbarous frequency of ca pital punishments has been manifested ; from every quarter the Legislature has been called upon to efface from the Statute-book those cruel enactments which, though passed with the view of repressing crime, are themselves criminal, confounding, as they do, all degrees of moral guilt, and violating the dic tates of reason and religion. The dictum of our Judges, since the days of Sir Matthew Hale, has been that " Christianity is part snd parcel of the law of England," but it is a bad compliment to the religion of mercy to identify it with a system of law whose principle is not justice, but ven geance,—whose end is not amendment, but extermination. Even Mr. Peel, in intro ducing his Bill for the alteration of the law rela tive to forgery, admitted the unparalleled cruelty of our criminal law—even the code which people who were captivated more by the name than the sub stance of legislative reform gave him the credit of having essentially improved—for he said " it was im possible to conceal from ourselves that capital punishments were more frequent and the criminal code more severe, on the whole, in this country, than in any other in the world." These were nearly the words which we used a short time before, when exposing the fallacy of the popular error that Mr. Peel's labours had actually reformed the spirit and character of the criminal law; but we see, on his o►vn admission, he allowed it to go out of his hands more sanguinary, and consequently more barbarous than that of any other country in the world ! But the disgraceful errors of legislators are likely to be rectified by the corrective intelligence of public opi ; the approaching discussion upon the law of forgery will show what a moral force has arrayed itself against vicious legislation. It will show how extensively prevalent among the well-informed and respectable classes of society the aversion to un necessary severity of our criminal laws has be come. We have adverted before to many in dications of this feeling so creditable to the ad vancing civilization of the age. We showed that even the bankers—to protect whose interests es aecially the terrors of capital punishment were directed against forgery—had discovered, by the most instructive of all teachers, the inefficiency of a principle of punishment which so far exceeded the offence as t• deter the greater number of those who suffered by this species of fraud from prose- cluing the offenders. Most of the petitions which have yet been laid on the tables of Parliament have the names of bankers attached to them; but the most important one, perhaps, is that from Edin burgh, which has lately been signed by about 700 persons, all respectable, as many signatures were de clined which is was thought would not add weight ro the dccument. Among the names are those of IS bankers, 14 clergymen, four magistrates, 48 pro fessors of the University, doctors of medicine, and surgeons, 11 advocates, 34 writers to the signet, 10 insurance and other agents, aNd the remainder private gentlemen, merchants, and traders. The petitioners pray for the abolition of the penalty of death for forgery; yet in a country and in an age in which civilization is. so far advanced as to call forth all respectable opinion in opposition to this vindic tive law, Mr. Peel proposes to re-enact, in his new Bill, the sanguinary principle which disgraced the old law, and rendered it nearly abortive; and that, too, whi!e the very class about whose interests he seems to be most anxious repudiate his proffered protection, and entreat him not to believe that, by advocating the barbarity of the law, he can do more than perpetuate its inefficiency.—Morning Herald. It is quite amusing to hear Mr. Peel declare that he had proposed a plan with regard to the reform and enlargement of the jurisdiction of the County Courts, which would have embraced all, or neatly all, the reforms contemplated by Mr. Brougham. If so, then why did not Mr. Peel carry his reform into effect ? Why has be allowed Mr. I3rougharn thus to step in and snatch the freshest laurel from his brow ? Was it not because he had not the cou rage to grapple with vested interests— e because one of his present colleagues, holding a large sinecure office, met him as a lion in his way, crossed him on his path, and frighted him from any further prcceed ings. The truth, however, is that Lord Althorp had the merit of p , ojecting t he improvements in the County Courts; that Mr. Peel took the matter out of his Lordship's hands, and then shrunk from the bugbear which defeated it. Mr. Brougham's, however, is a reform of a much more important and comprehen sive nature ;—it cannot pretend to originality, in deed, in point of principle, though in matters of de tail it is for the most part new. Cheap and expe ditious justice, under certain limitations, is admi nistered by local Judges in Scotland and Ireland— under the name of Sheriff's-depute in the former country, and assistant Barristers in the latter— though the district-Judgeships proposed by Mr. Brougham would be, in a great measure, different from both. We shall take another opportunity of entering into its merits, only observing at present that it will be difficult to find men of sufficient legal knowledge and practice to make those appointments truly efficient and respectable, who would accept the salary proposed on condition of abandoning their profession, and with it the chances of much greater emolument and distinction—and if ignorant and in capable men are appointed to such situations, it is evident that the increase of patronage will only tend to the diffusion of injustice.-11forning Herald. It will be seen, from the proceedings in the House of Commons last night, that the second reading of the Sale of Beer Bill was postponed until this even ing, on account of the absence of Mr. Peel, who had left town for the purpose of paying a ♦isit to his father, now said to be dangerously ill, and that Mr. G. Dawson stated, in reply to a question from Mr. Portman, that the Government had no intention of making any alteration in the Bill. This is an apparent contradiction of what we stated yesterday upon the best authority ; but be it remarked, in the first place, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was ❑ot in the House at the time the reply was given—in the second, that Mr. Dawson might not be aware of the intentions of the Government—in the third, that it is not usual for the Government to announce alterations in a Bill brought in under the recommendation of a Committee—and, lastly, that the proper and usual time for such alterations is when the Bill reaches a Committee of the whole House. We are, not, in fact, in the slightest de gree, shaken in our belief that the obnoxious clause of allowing the beer to be consumed on the premises, will be abandoned. The opposition to the Bill in its present form—not to speak of its injustice and im policy—is strong in all quarters ; and it will be seen from the proceedings of the House, that Mr. Portman has formally announced his intention of opposing it on the second reading, this evening, and that other Hon. Members are equally unfavourable to its being passed into a law without great modifi cation. We do not mention these matters for the purpose of inducing the Licensed Victuallers to abate their zeal in opposing the Bill—on the con ' trary, let the exertion be redoubled, and the object in view a ill be more certainly obtained ; but we again repeat, that we have no doubt of the accuracy of . e•tr information, and still less that, even were it not accurate, the offensive clause would be struck out in the Cominittee.—Morning Advertiser. DESTRUCTIVE FIRE IN THE CITY. Yesterday, between twelve and one o'clock, the inhabitants of Smithfield, Bartholomew Close, and their vicinity, were thrown into a state of alarm, in consequence of a fire breaking out, which threat ened destruction to the neighbourhood, and which dealN‘,e e o g f r e y t al t u o s b s l t e at has y e r ope s r t b y e . e n The destructive t r l u a c m t i e v s e s o v f a v e re firstits t observed in a cellar, under a Calvinist's Chapel, in a court in Little Bartholomew Close, belonging to Messrs. Hooper and Peto, the builders. The Chapel belongs to the Rev. Mr. Lakin, and would contain about five hundred people. The cellar was used for storing veneers and other light woods. Adjoin ing this Chapel was a well-filled timber yard, be longing to Messrs. Hooper and Peto. One side of the building was situate close to the Church of St. Bartholomew the Great, a very ancient structure. which escaped the fire of London, and is supposed to be nearly 900 years old. The approaches to the chapel being very narrow, it was with difficulty that engines could be brought so near the spot as to be able to play with effect, and above an hour elapsed before any water could be obtained except a small quantity which was supplied by the inhabitants to St. Sepulchre's engine with buckets. The flames, therefore, increased with an amazing rapidity, and in a short time the Chapel was in a general blaze. Adjoining was the Protestant Dissenters' School, This building erected over the south aisle of the Church of Bartholomew the Great, next caught ,fire, and it was feared that the church must fall a prey to the flames. The firemen of the Globe, the Norwich Union, the Sun, the Atlas, and other en gines, as soon as they obtained water, directed their exertions to save the church. They were assisted by the inhabitants in bringing their engines close to the church door which leads into Smithfield, and they were able to carry the hose of these engines through the church to the north and east sides, and thereby save the edifice. The church, however, did not escape serious injury, and at one moment, it was expected the roof would have been destroyed. The northern part of the building, which formed part of the old Priory of St. Bartholomew, was occupied by Hooper and Peto, and, although the great quan tities of very fine mahogany veneers were saved, yet much valuable. property must have been de stroyed in the building, as well as in the yard ad joining. The flames rushed from the Dissenters' chool, through the north windows of the church, Ind set the curtains on fire. At this moment the firemen played with great skill and promptitude upon that part of the flames which had communi cated with the north side of the church, and luckily the injury extended only to the destruction of the vestry, the north windows and frame', and the cur tains of the North windows. While the firemen were engaged as above described, other firemen had placed their engines some in the narrow part, and others in the wide part of Bartholomew-close, and had they ob tained a supply of water at first, they would have pre vented the fire extending beyond the Chapel and the timber-yard. The City officers and a number of Policemen came to the assistance of the inhabitants, The consternation of the housekeepers whose dwellings were contiguous to the Chapel was so great, that all were busily employed in removing their property to some place of security. The pre mises of Mr. Burgh, the silk-fringe and tassel-ma nufacturer, which were about eighty feet in length and fifty in breadth, next caught fire. A vast quantity of valuable stock was carried out of the building before the flames reached it ; but notwith standing all the exertions that were used, a good deal of machinery and silk was destroyed. The houses in the neighbourhood were filled with house hold furniture and property of every description, which had been saved from the flames. Before three o'clock the whole of Mr. Burgh's manufactory was blazing from south to north, and the roof fell in with a dreadful crash. The premises occupied by Messrs. E. and J; Davis, cabinet-maker, next caught fire, and the whole of the upper part was completely destroyed. The house adjoining Mr. Burgh's, occupied by one of the Mr. Davis's, was destroyed, and other premises at the other end of Mr. Burgh's manufactory. The house of a person named Johnson, situate close to the chapel, was destroyed, and several other small buildings, inhabited by poor persons, were wholly destroy ed. When the front of the chapel fell, three firemen, belonging to the Hand-in-Hand Office, had a very narrow escape with their lives. The fire at one period covered neatly an acre of ground, and had the accident occurred in the night-time, it is impossible to conceive the extent of loss to hfe and property that would inevitably have taken place.— As it is, we fear the loss will be immense. One man was carried on a shutter to St. Bartholomew's Hospital, who had received some injury while as sisting at the fire, and that was the only casualty we heard of. The fire is supposed to have originated in the cellar under the chapel, in consequence of one of Mr. Peto's men, who had been sent for some veneers, having left a candle burning while he went to dinner. —None of the books or furniture belonging to the chapel were saved, but the building and its fittings up were insured in the Imperial Office. Mr. Burgh and his family Aere at Orpington, in Kent, when the fire occurred, and a message was instantly conveyed to them, informing them of the dreadful calamity. Mr. Burgh's property, we understand, is insured in three Fire Offices. some stables, belonging to Mr. Wheeler, at the back, were slightly injured. Great complaint was made by the inhabitants of the houses in the immediate vicinity of the great want of water. The chapel was one entire body of flames before the parish-engine, which was the first on the spot, could obtain a supply, and then it was discovered that this engine was so completely out of repair, that it could not be brought into motion, and it was drawn off. At eight o'clock last night the flames were subdued. POLICU INTELLIGENCE. MANSION-HOUSE. A case of a very singular description came on before the LORD MAYOR. Tire officers of the parish of .Allhallows, London-wall, were summoned before the Lord Mayor, by a young woman, aged about twenty-one or twenty-two, for having turned her and her illegitimate child out of the workhouse, although she had, with the knowledge of the parish, esta blished a settlement there by servitude. The circumstances were these. About eleven months ago, the claimant, who resided with her father, took it into her head to go to a fair, and told him her intention. He, however, put a stern pro hibition upon her, unwilling that she should set a bad example to the rest of the family. In fact he said, " If you insist upon going, don't come back to my house." She persisted in her object, and she also attended to one part of her father's instructions, she never entered his doors. By what means she procured a livelihood between the period of that un fortunate visit to the fair and a few weeks ago, is not known, but she applied, in great misery, to a humane parish-officer of St. Stephen's, Coleman street, to whom her family were known, and he at once passed her to her own parish, in the workhouse of which she was delivered of a child. As soon as she was able to answer the interrogatories usual upon occasions of adding to the numbers dependent upon parochial relief, she was questioned by the proper authorities. She proved her claim, but she declared herself wholly unable to point out the father of her child. This failure in fixing the pa ternity was fatal in the eyes of the officers, and it was determined that until she should enable them to put the saddle upon the right horse," she and her child should be minus as to the necessaries of life. They accordingly made her a present of 35., and turned her out of the workhouse. She could riot apply to her father, for even if his heart should have softened towards her after her long absence, and the sufferings she had undergone from her dis obedience, another calamity had occurred to him in the change of the conduct of his wife, who had of late taken most unmercifully to gin, and was now supported by him in a workhouse. The LORD MAYOR asked the officer of Allhalloe s, London-wall, what grounds there were for refusing the necessary relief. The officer stated that she had peremptorily re fused to let the authorities know who the father was; besides, her father was able to support her, and she ought not therefore to be allowed to remain a burden upon the parish. Mr. Ellis, the officer of St. Stephen, Coleman street, who had passed the young woman to her own parish, stated that she had solemnly declared that she did not know who the father of the child was; but her ignorance upon that point did not arise from her promiscuous intercourse with men. The LORD MAYOR asked whether it was meant that on the night she left her father's house she met some man to whom she allowed the last familiarity, and that she knew nothing about him before or since. The officer replied, that she had asserted some thing to that effect. Mr. Nobler said that numerous cases had occurred at that justice-room, in which mothers swore that they could not point out the fathers of their chil dren, and he had no doubt of their having sworn the truth. It seemed, however, to be an established maxim with parish officers, that the women must know in all cases. The LORD MAYOR could not exactly subscribe to thst doctrine, but he believed that they sometimes knew a little more than the men upon the subject. laugh.) Mr. Ellis said the young woman most solemnly declared that having despaired of being received by her father, she wandered about without the means of supporting existence, and at last purchased the means by prostitution. She persisted in saying that she had never since beheld the man who addressed her, and that she never had known any man either before or after that time. He (Mr. Ellis) knew the young woman's father, and said he had not met with many reverses of fortune, but was still very respectable, and held a situation in a public office. The LORD MAYOR said, that under all the cir cumstances the parish were bound to protect arid support the young woman and her child. She might one day meet the father, and Mould no doubt not easily lose sight of him if it so happened. Mr. Nobler said, that mothers, under such cir cumstances, generally acted their parts with great energy. It was not very long ago, since a girl was accused in the justice-room of having refused to give up the father of her child. She swore she did not know who he was, but as she was walking ur Cheapside one day she suddenly seized a gentleman by the collar, and dragged him along, saying, " Here. he is,—here's Billy's father."—(Loud laughter.) , It turned out that the girl was perfectly right, and Billy's father was now supporting Billy, and very well able he was to do so too. The LORD MAYOR said the case of the unfortu— nate applicant for parish relief was a melancholy . one, for she hal totally ruined her own prospects in life, as well as aggravated the miseries of her father,. NV ho , although far from being free from blame in the course he had adopted, ought to have met with obe— dience and affection from his child. The parish then received directions to support the young ►woman. The officer said that the authoritie3were disposed to render every assistance in their power. They were only anxious to have his Lordship 4 smAtinn under the peculiar circumstances of the case:. NEW STAMP DUTIES' BILL. (From a Correspondent of the Morning Herald.) The comparative statement of the stamp duties proposed to be made payable throughout the kingdom, showing also those now payable in Great 'Britain and Ireland respectively, has, at last, been delivered. It occupies one hundred and sixty-five folio pages, the proposed duties appearing in one column, and the existing duties appearing in parallel lines. This was called for in the first instance, and promised ; but the pro mise was not very promptly kept. The new schedule was brought forward, but unaccom panied with any comparative statement or illustra tion, as was stated in the Morning Herald of Saturday ; and though that new schedule affected the interests of hundreds of thousands of per- Sons in England, Scotland, and Ireland, no one of that immense mass of people could gain the remotest information of the projected changes, or " consolidation," without procuring a sight of the said new schedule. That new schedule occupied 100 folio pages—no portion of its con tents ever got mentioned in the House, in the Committee on the Stamp Acts, so that not one of the hundreds of thousands of individuals in- terested in the stamp duties, either by trading in stamps, engaged in the profession of the law, or concerned in the security of property, had any chance of obtaining the most shadowy knowledge of the said schedule, except by purchasing the schedule at the Honourable House,—a purchase that cost seven shillings and sixpence each copy r That was no trifle ; and when obtained, it proved, nothing--at least it proved nothing as to the com parison. It said what were to be the du ties ; but amidst various changes it gave no ides, by way of the promised comparison, of the con templated duties. The original statement, how ever, had to be purchased, if the immense num bers of persons interested in stamp duties, either commercially, professionally, or as concerns pro perty, required information ; and now they have to purchase that statement (with the additional Comparative Statement) over again ; which, as it is somewhat in the nature of a second tax. will be an additional burden to them, a burden not having the sanction of the House in the shape of a tax. The Comparative Statement now printed and ready for delivery occupies one hundred and sixty-five folio pages, and which wholly con sist of items; and as the schedule embodies so many new forms, new definitions of what come within the meaning of the Stamp Acts, and, in so many instances, new scales of duties, and as the Chancellor of the Exchequer ad mitted that even with those who were, from un divided attention, conversant with the complex affair of stamp duties, the making out of the. promised " Comparative Statement" (now de livered) was a matter of " considerable difficulty." can it be asserting too much to say that at leas e some time ought to be given for the considera tion of the new system ? It may be perfectly just ; but when those who are conversant with every detail find some " difficulty" in making , out the required and promised " Comparative Statement, surely there may be some little apology for those who require to have informa tion, who are only personally and professionally interested in parts of the details. The Stamp Act of 1815 (commonly called Mr. Neild's - Act) was the result of five years' deliberate consideration. Mr. Nield was a Barrister, and had paid particular attention to the subject, in consequence of which, and the necessity of a new Bill, he was appointed to the Board of Stamps. He framed that Stamp Duties' Bill on principles, and with regulations, that were consistent with the known and recog nised laws of property ; and when it is recol lected how many questions constantly occur to harass Courts of Justice on the subject of stamps and how extensively those questions affect, and have affected, the security of property, it was consolatory to reflect (if stamp duties must re mai❑ in such questionable and feverish detail), that at least they were, generally speaking, so imposed as, with few exceptions, to experience , the comprehensible recognition of the Courts of Law. Now the system, instead of being con solidated, is to be " changed ;" and " consoli dation" is again to adopt the language of Sir J. Newport, to mean " augmentation ; therefore ought there to be any refusal of time to understand the changes ; eve- , cially as, after having had to purchase the schedule, folks will have to purchase the Com parative Statement ; and as the Bill of Mr. Neild was five years in preparation, that is, he con suited every body who was likely to give infor-' ►nation, or to be affected; whereas the present new system has been concocted without consult ing any body ? It comes out as a novelty and a surprise, it is the exclusive production of the stamp office ; and seeks only to enhance duty by indirect means, whereas the Bill of Mr. Neild (as the duty was to be continued) sought to secure duty, and consistently with the known and recognised principles of property. I forbear to add to the instances of increased duties. In previous communications I troubled • you with many items ; but should the new a nd indirect taxation scheme be persevered in, I perhaps may trespass on you farther. May 1. S. BIRTHS. On the 2d inst. at the Rocs cry, Roehampton, the lad,' of A. B. Belcher, Esq., of a daughter. On the 2d inst. in Dover-street, the lady of Capt. Belson, R.A., of a daughter. MARRIED. On the Ist inst. at Islington, Mr. Thwaites, of Bishop!' 4.ate-strevt, to Mary, only daughter of tie late Mr. Coffee, of the North-road, Islington. On the .2d inst. at Trinity Clime'', St. Mar) lebone, N. swinsun, Esq. of Birmingham, to Miss Mary Anne Morgan, only daughter of Mr. Morgan, Clipstone-stieets Vortland-place. DIED. On the Ist inst. in Grosvenor-square, the Marehiorn o if Bath, in her 57th year. On the 3d inst. Mrs. Middle:nig, of Great RoviciP ettTet, Noornshuly.squate. PAINTED AND PUBLISIIED BY MURDO YOUNG, A TUE SUN OFFIC F, 112, STRAND, LONDON• `~~--a PUBLI Sir FR Aci f Crown next, th, Sideratio nected propose tended t Polis, a i from ea( o'clock. TR 13 y the hienr ton-atre ....------ P' nenr tort-otre, T Hem street. . ~C al two, e ll many 0 picture The inl the cab popular Hem ton-stre i ~~ o " Th ablest n en the abound: quently Henr ton-stre T " TI scenery rican, a interest Gazette Hem ton-btn C° Anti Hem kn-strl The of ME INGs Lette Price 1 Thi s di r Ft • *e nturi Crop sYnipat and mu Thus e that an thy ph Literar Hen ton-itri By CH And n( e( m i Cannin real col being i tins, a !lei to Hem ton-atr ~_ Pi " than, a eltteida to be re 4, 0 ordinar ---Aila lien ton-str CA LIST and D: raapnn to he t Superic the I' gant, Their sivel 3 mert! N.I Stock. The Veneti lIEAI LONI TEIt tlerl v Fraud Pub& Ai EL !'"? u in nny Artifil withol and fi clin e ., set m made he ha which clean* Metal, imitat defy i that tions At ho