The Sun. — London, England, 1831-07-15 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS: In the House of Lords lust night, the third read ing of the Frauds on Creditors' Bill was postponed by its author, Lord Wynford, on the suggestion of Lord Plunkett. Certainly, the evil sought to be re medied by this Bill is a very great one; but is not so harsh a remedy as great an evil ? We think that some plan might be devised by which fraudulent creditors might be punished as well as fraudulent debtors. The excessive facility of credit afforded by many tradesmen can only arise from a design of in demnifying themselves for bad debts by exorbitant prices demanded from the ignorant and thoughtless who are able to pay. In the Commons, after some amusing complaints from Opposition Members that their speeches wereridiculed by some of the" adverse faction" seated by their side, the Bill went into a Committee, but no progress was made beyond the defeat of a motion► of Sir Robert Peel's, intended to modify the first clause. On the clause itself, therefore, 110 decision, we believe, is yet come to. — But as the amendment, if we understand it rightly, touched upon the principle of the clause, its rejection is so far a gain. The numbers were, 290 for leaving the clause unaltered, and 193 for the modification. We may here take occasion to express our regret at seeing the majority on the Reform Bill falling off, owing to the remissness in the attendance of the sup porters of the measure. The numbers on the divi sion of last night were 290, and 193, showing a falling off of 77 from the majority, and only 38 from the minority on the second reading; and this is the more remarkable, as we are assured, that not a single Member who voted for the second reading voted for Mr. Peel's amendment to make (according to his own expression) "nonsense of the first clause in the Bill." Means should be takes to publish daily the names of Members who are absent from their duty, that their constituents may advise with them on the subject. The Anti-Reformers are ac tive and persevering, and nothing but the most zeal ous and punctual attendance of the supporters of the measure can enable Ministers to conquer the vex atious and teasing opposition they have to contend with, not only at every stage of the proceedings, but to every word in every clause of the Bill. Surely the Hon. Members who are friends of the Bill will not, from any motives of personal convenience, give their enemies the smallest chance of a triumph. Neither the urgent demands of private business, nor the intolerable fatigue of hearing the same dull trash repeated night after night, nor even the fetid jargon uttered by the blacking.maker, should prevent Members from unremitting and punctilious attendance to their Parliamentary functions on this transcendently important occasion. We sincerely trust and believe that this remissness has only to be pointed out in order to its complete .correction. Gentlemen of the House of Commons should feel that the eyes of the country are upon them ; and that a confident expectation is entertained through out the nation that every Reformer will do his duty. —nmes. Mr. Wynn's attempt, on Wednesday evening, to reverse the order in which the clauses of the Reform Bill proposed by Ministers follow each other, was so little supported by any thing like serious argument, that but for the known candour of that Right Hon. Gentleman, we might suspect him of employing a mere manoeuvre to gain time,—a manoeuvre less palpable, undoubtedly, and less offensive, than that of the seven memorable adjournment motions, but still altogether unworthy of a grave and conscien tious Member of Parliament. Mr. Wynn set out with a mis-statement of fact. He said that the main objection to the Bill was not the exis tence of such places as Old Sarum, but the non representation of large and populous towns. Now we affirm that the existence of such vile cheats as Old Sarum, Gatton, and the rest of them, is of itself the main and primary mischief, and that which has produced throughout the empire one unanimous cry of indignation at the non-enfranchisement of great commercial and other communities. if Manchester and Birmingham were never to send Members to Parliament until doomsday, does Mr, «ynn imagine that Lord John Russell and the people of England would be satisfied to have bad laws made for them by the nominees for rotten boroughs,—and enormous sums extracted from the nation at- the will and plea urse of such gentry,—that a per centage, and no small one, thereon, might find its way into the pockets of their Noble or Right Hon. Patrons ? Says Mr. Wynn, " our object ought to be to ascer tain what places deserve to be enfranchised,' and afterwards what ought to be disfranchised' to make room for the additional Members." There are obvious reasons against this plan. The posi tive nuisance ought to be first abated, and the nominee lordlings and jobbers removed from the House, otherwise they might con trive to pack together, as in truth they have done, and raise obstacles of no slight account to the exe cution of that which Mr. Wynn suggests as the se cond step in his improved Reform process,—viz., the disfranchisement part of it. Moreover, who can listen with patience to men talking of the disfran chisement of nomination boroughs as an integral portion of any effective Reform, when, according to their own creed, and that of their associates, no borough can ever be disfranchised until it shall first have been tried and found guilty of corruption ? How, for Heaven's sake, could Old Swum, or Corte Castle, or any other pocket-borough, be con victed of any act of bribery ? The whip of the autocrat who rules such kennels makes the proof impossible, because it supersedes the crime. He need not tempt, who has the power to extinguish ; and Mr. Wynn was wise in his generation, when he strove to make the existence of this trash of boroughs appear a secondary grievance to the want of repre sentatives for the populous towns,—more especially, seeing that he thought fit to tack, as a rider to the whole scheme,—a " confession" that to add to the present numbers of the House would be attended with much inconvenience. The proposition of the Anti-Reformers of Wednesday last, then, stands thus :-1. " It will not do at all' to begin with a disfranchisement of the boroughs, because you ought to begin with an enfranchisement of the towns. 2d. After giving Members to the towns, it will not do at all' to disfranchise the boroughs, but in propor tion as you convict them of certain corrupt offences. 3d. Since the very nature of the nomination bo roughs makes such a conviction a thing a'most im possible, the said disfranchisement must be the work of centuries. 4th. As the House is quite numerous enough already, and as no room can be made before the lapse of centuries, by the disfranchisement of boroughs, for Members to represent the populous towns, to avoid, then, making the House too nu merous, you must nor, for centuries, enfranchise the aforesaid towns : therefore, in the name of God, do nothing at all at present, but vote for our amendment, which will in a clever and plausible, though curve-like manner, get rid of this odious Bill." The dogged integrity or Ministers and their supporters was not, however, to be so en trapped. They outvoted Mr. Wynn, and turned a deaf ear to his plausibilities. The Tory Papers, like "damned" dramatists, are fond of appealing from the numbers of their adversaries to the pro• digious discrimination, sound sense, and saga city of their patrons. " The number all on one side," they cry—" the reasoning on the other." And what was the reasoning ? " Why, only see," said a Right Hon. and ingenious Anti- Reformer, the late Secretary to the Admiralty, " what a set of dunderheads are the concoctors of the Bill ! They have actually raised to the distinc tion of electors that very class of 101. householders, whom"—(What follows ?)—" whom the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury proposes to exempt, by reason of their poverty, from poor rates !" For our parts, we are not so utterly confounded by the people of England, whether beeause an individual Member of Parliament wishes to relieve a certain class of householders from a particular tax, the Le gislature ought to be tied up from admitting that same order of citizens to the riht of c eosing presentatives, But Sir Edward Sugden quarrels with the 101. qualification because the nine-pounder will be dissatisfied. Why so he may : and, fix . . ...... _ _ the qualification where you will, the man who falls a step below it may ask, " Why was it not brought down to my own level?" This argument indeed holds good until we come to universal suffrage, or which, if Sir Edward do not henceforth avow himself the advocate, he is a more inconsistent and flimsy reasoner in the House of Commons than he has ever shown himself else- where. It is asked by this able lawyer, but party politician, " If you cut off 62 Members now, what is to prevent 100 from being taken away next year ?" We answer,—nothing—nothing but the opinion of Parliament and of the people of England, that there will exist no necessity for such a further purgation of that House; and if " opinion" be in favour of such a reduction, can Sir Edward Sugden suppose that the refusal to cut off the rotten boroughs this year, will make the country next year less eager for far more extensive alterations ? When Sir Edward Sugden states dashingly that the pre sent Bill was a total departure in "principle and de tail from the preceding Bill, we have looked for some proof or illustration of this dogma, and we protest that nothing can be found in the speech of the Learned Member himself but what everybady knew before; and what is to us a recommendation, that the details of the measure have been revised and carefully corrected ? If some two or three boroughs have been expunged from schedule A, and inserted in schedule B, or vice versa, that surely exhibits no change in the principle of the Bill, but merely a more complete knowledge, by his Majesty's Govern ment, of the facts on which the Reform is to operate. As for the too great comprehensiveness of the 101. qualification, from its tendency to admit the rabble into the elective franchise, that objection has been already and sufficiently answered, by the tables long since published, exhibiting calculations of the num ber of electors" who would thus he created in seve ral towns; and it may be further and more em phatically refuted by reminding Sir Edward Sugden, and other alarmists, that they have over looked the true spirit of the proposed Bill, which provides (as Lord Althorp well stated the point) that 101. shall not be, as it is too often conceived to be, the ma.rimum, but the minimum of the new qualifications, and that all Englishmen who have more than the 10/. qualification shall exercise a concurrent franchise with the ten-pounder; and, as has been shown in some great towns, a sensibly preponde rating franchise. To the charge of inadvertence in wording one clause of the Bill—namely, that which relates to the periods on whose expiration the rent shall be payable, so as to confer the franchise —Ministers have manfully pleaded guilty ; and the attempt to aggravate their offence, by imputing to them a design of obliquely raising the qualification, has altogether and signally failed. Upon the whole,' the proceedings of Wednesday last were satisfac tory, as the defeat of stubborn selfishness ever must be; and we do not anticipate so much left-handed vigour in the subsequent stages of the borough mongering policy. We would recommend, however, the friends of the Bill to be incessantly on their guard, and to imitate the undying vigilance of the people out of doors, if they would not be severely rebuked by it. Poor Alderman Thompson yester , day, when called to account by his constituents for the miserable vote he gave in favour of Lord Mait land's motion, seemed to admit that such a pros. tration of mind and body had seized him, from the fatigues attending the business of the House of Commons, that, with the rest of him, his conscience likewise fell asleep. Those who read our report of what passed between the worthy Alderman and the Livery, in reference to the above vote, may assure themselves that he will hardly risk such another piece of inadvertency. Such a spirit as has been displayed by the Livery is highly creditable to the people of which they form part.—Tintcs. That Sir Charles Wetherell could alone occupy the Pouse of Commons the whole of the interval between this and the day of the Coronation will hardly be doubted by any who are acquainted with his inexhaustible supply cf animal spirits, and equally inexhaustible supply of words. Sir Edward Sug den, too, wearies the House more, because he is dull and wearisome, having the prolixity of Sir Charles, without his low buffoonery and Merry- Andrewism, and elaborately quaint associations of words and phrases, as a set-off. Triumphing last night i❑ his superiority to his auditors, he tauntingly told Ministers, that " if Counsel would speak, they would not. They relied on their numbers, not on their arguments. They rested on their majority, not on their eloquence—and they looked only to the votes, not to the reasons for a decision." After out-heroding Herod in his peculiar vein, for a suffi cient length of time, some laughed, and a smile, it seems, overspread the countenance of Lord John Russell. This was quite a God-send to Sir Charles, as it enabled him to vary his rant. " The Noble Lord smiled, but whether it was at what he said or at his own foolish Bill be knew not ; the Noble Lord dealt more in smilery than in argumen tation ; he was redundant in laughing, but limited in speech; and he should like to know whether the Noble Lord's smiles were ex cited by the absurdity of his (Sir Charles Wetherell's) arguments, or the contradictions of his own Bill." Speech or silence, a frown or a laugh, became an inexhaustible source of eloquence to Sir Charles. Lord Althorp told him, in his plain and manly way, that he might in this way ob struct their proceedings, but " the people of Eng land would know how to estimate such arguments and to value such opposition." Sir Robert Peel, who looks a little beyond the present question, threw out a suggestion, which his adherents would do well to attend to :—" He rose," he said, "to offer a suggestion, which, if generally adopted, would facilitate the proceeding with the Bill. There were nearly sixty boroughs included in the schedule A; on every one of which it was certainly compe tent to any Hon. Gentleman to originate a discus sion involving the whole question. He must say, however, that he thought that would be unneces sary. When there could be no doubt that the particular borough under consideration fell below the line of two thousand, on which the House had al ready pronounced, he could not invite Hon. Mem bers to repeat the discussion upon the principle of making that the line.—(Hear, hear.) But on the other hand, he hoped that in simple justice, when a prima facie case could be shown that any particular boroughs did not fall within the line of two thou sand, a fair opportunity would be afforded of esta blishing the fact."—( Hear, hear.) He reserved the right of discussing the principle on the Report on the third reading, and " hoping that the Committee would enter into the discussion in good humour, and without useless impediments. Called upon to frame a new Constitution for the people, no time should be wasted which might be employed in con sidering how to make it best." This recommenda tion is creditable to Sir Robert Peel, and it was but doing justice to himself to give it ; for mixed up as he is with associates who place Colonel Pride's Purge in a new and more favourable light titan that in which it has been generally viewed, the public might one day suppose, if he had not raised himself above them, that he was on the same low level. This advice seemed to produce its effect, and the House at length was suffered to go into a Commit tee. The progress made with the Bill, however, was far from considerable. Sir Robert Peel moved the omission of the word each in the first clause ; and, after some argument, a division took place, re jecting the motion by 290 to 193—0 r 97. It is to be hoped that, having now come to an under standing respecting the course of proceedings, there will be no more Harlequinades to obstruct the pro gress of the Bill.—Morning Chronicle. The promptitude of the city of London in the case of Alderman Thompson, is as creditable to that body as it will be useful by way of example to the country. We refer our readers to our account of the meeting yesterday at Guildhall, for the purpose of instituting an inquiry iuto the conduct of the Al derman for his memorable vote in the Appleby case. At this meeting Alderman Thompson took a dif- ferent ground from that which he took on Wedoes• day night, in the House of Commons. " The fact (he said) were these t—He had not (be said) in consequence of great fatigue, arising from a labo rious attention to his duties, been able to attend tht House of Commons on Tuesday evening until tin House was about to divide upon the Appleby pe. tirion. He went into the House without a know ledge of the fact, that the prayer of it was, that Counsel should be heard at the bar upon the merits He had not heard a word of the debate which had taken place, and he had believed that the petition merely had for its object the production of evidence before the Committee as to the number of inhabi tants of Appleby. * * * He admitted that In ought to have made himself acquainted with the na ture of the debate, but he trusted that credit would be given to him when he declared that he hal erred from inadvertence." In our re marks in the Chronicle of yesterday, we assumed, as we were entitled to do, that he knew why he voted with the Opposition; but the e xplanation meets this part of the case. It is dangerous to sign papers without knowing their contents, and dan gerous to vote without knowing the question. The constituents of the worthy Alderman behaved ex ceedingly well on the occasion. They received the defence as a palliative, but not as a justification of his conduct, and unanimously adopted a motion of Mr. Coates's, " That the Livery of London, after a full and ample inquiry into the vote of Mr. Alder man Thompson, relative to the borough of Appleby, anl his explanation of the same, are of o pinion that he acted thereon inadvertently; and Mr. Alderman Thompson having renewed his pledge to give entire support to the Reform Bill, this meeting feel them -elves called upon to continue their c onfidence to Mr. Alderman Thompson, as one of the represen tatives of the city of London in parliament."— Members will see from this how narrowly their con duct is watched by the public on this all-engrossing question. They may rely on it that every devia tion from their pledges to support the Bill ho nestly and freely will be keenly resented. In fact, society is held together by the confidence which in dividuals repose in their pledges to each other. A man may refuse a pledge : but, having given•one, if he alter his mind, there is but one honourable course open to him. This is so well understood, that the nominee of a boroughmonger who should vote against his patron, except on an understanding with that patron, would be scouted as a dishonourable man. A pledge to the public ought to be observed as sacredly as a pledge to a robber of the public. — Morning Chronicle. It is understood that the Law of Debtor and Creditor has been for some time past under the consderation of the Common Law Commissioners, who will report whether any, and what, alterations, are, in their opinion, necessary. To this subject we have occasionally endeavoured to draw the at tention of the Legislature, with a view to the abo lition of the cruel and pernicious practice of impri sonment for debt. Imprisonment for debt is objec tionable in principle, as well as mischievous to so ciety in its pract , cal consequences. Let us leok at it in both points of view. In principle it confounds misfortune with crime, for it makes no distinction between the honest and the fraudulent debtor. It visits adversity with the penal rigour of the law. It gives to creditors the means of vindictive persecu tion, and puts the liberty of one man at the disposal of the malice of another. If a suddem and unfore seen calamity reduce an individual from a state of competency or affluence to poverty, he may be pre vented from ever repairing the misfortune by the re sources of honest industry if an unfeeling creditor choose to exercise the power which the law gives him, and to drag him from his home and family, and throw him into prison. There, excluded from the " common air and use of his own limbs," and whatever little substance he may have preyed upon by the harpies that infest the prison-house, to plunder all that remains to misery, under the sanction of the law, he languishes in idle ness, or becomes familiar with the habits and vices of a gaol ; or, if he escape the moral contagion of imprisonment, he finds, when he regains his liberty, that his affairs have not escaped its ruinous effects, and that he is restored from captivity only to be de livered up to the horrors of destitution. As to its consequences upon society, the power of arrest for debt upon mesne process produces great mischief, by creating a dangerous facility of credit, and thereby encouraging persons of moderate or humble means to live beyond their incomes. This is the cause of the ruin of thousands upon thousands of. indi viduals and families in this country—the persons with whom they deal, relying upon the aid of a law, in the last resort, which pledges the body of the debtor for his debts, rather encourage than re press the practice of dealing upon cre dit ; and thus persons who would otherwise have expended no more than their incomes might enable them to do are tempted into a course of extravagance, the end of which is too often a gaol and ruin. If it were, thetefore, only for the purpose of restraining credit in the middle and humbler walks of life within sound and reasonable limits, the power of arrest for just either ought to be abolished. Nor is it rig ht or either that, as far as arrest or mesne process is con cerned, any person, by an ex-party proceeding—an unanswered affidavit—should have it in his power to deprive a British subject of his liberty. This power, as might have been anticipated, has often been abused to purposes of malice and the gratifica tion of revenge. A man may he so circumstanced that a groundless arrest may destroy his prospects in life for ever; and what compensation is it to him that he case prosecute the party on whose affidavit the arrest is made on a charge of perjury ? The guilty party under an indictment for that offence fre erently escapes, in consequence of the technical difficulties which the law puts in the way of a con viction; or he may, indeed, resort to an action for a malicious arrest, perhaps against one who, if cast in damages, is as deficient in purse as in principle; and so the injured party may have to paY his ex penses for his pains. This arrest for debt, like many of the oppressive and cruel provisions of the Sta tute Law, was unknown to the Common Law of England. By that law no man could be deprived of his liberty but for crime. This principle was violated by the feudal Lords, who obtained the Statute 53 Henry 111., for the purpose of com pelling their bailiffs to render their accounts — for by that Statute it was enacted that " If bailiffs who ought to make accounts to their Lords, do withdraw themselves, and have no lands or tene ments whereby they may be distrained, then they shall be attached by their bodies, so that the sheriff its whose bailiwick they may be found shall cause them to come to render their account." Thi s wa i; ex tended by the Statute of Westminster the second, by which it was provided that servants, bailiffs, and chamberlains, in arrear in their accounts, might be imprisoned in irons until they satisfied their masters. At length the practice of feigniug a trespass, and de claring against the party when in custody for a debt, was adopted in the Courts at Westmiuster, and ar rest for debt became universal, except where there is privilege of Peerage or Parliament, or some other special exemption. The oppression and inconveni ence of the arrest for debt were soon felt, and the Courts alleviated, in some measure, the suffering of imprisonment, by allowing the privileges of the rules of the King's Bench and Fleet prisons to debtors; but, us these privileges can only be obtained by persons who can pay well for the indulgence, they contribute to the squandering of the property which ought to go to the satisfaction of the prisoner's cre ditors. Thus the very means adopted to alleviate the consequences of a law which is unreasonable and vicious in its principle are themselves productive of evil. There can be no real reform of such a law but abolition. The Lords Act, to relieve debtors taken in execution, and the Insolvent Acts, to relieve debtors imprisoned on [nestle process, cannot re medy the grievous injustice of confounding misfor tune with crime—for we speak only of debtors who have not incurred their debts by fraud. Where there is fraud proved, let it be punished—but that will be the punishment not of poverty, but crime. The Legislature has also, from time to time, passed Acts to limit the operation of the law of wrest for debt. Formerly no affidavit was required to arrest ► man and hold him to bail, or thro►v him into pri 4on. The Statute 12 Geo. 1., cap. 29, forbade the wrest of a defendant on mesne process in all cases .vhere the debt did nor amount to the sum of 10/. ; other Acts rai.ed it to 1.5/.; and by the 7th and ith Geo. IV. it was provided that no person should be held to bail unless the sum for which - he affidavit was made should amount to 201 At the time this Act ryas under discussion, Sir James Scarlett gave it as his opinion that it ought to have been raised to 1001. In a pamphlet published some time ago by Mr. Cooke, the barrister, he contends with considerable plau,ibility of argument for the preservation of the law of arrest for debt, and proposes, with the view of obviating the objections taken to tl'e law of arrest as it at present stand ,, , that the person making the affidavit should be obliged to specify particularly the nature of the claim, and also give security to the Sheriff either by depositing in his hands a sum of money, or by the undertaking of one or two responsible persons, that he will prosecute his action —and that, in case of a non-pros., a tronsuit, or a verdict for the defendant, he will sufficiently re munerate, by tine or otherwise, the in•lividaal whom he has caused to be arrested. If our objection to the law was in degree, and not in principle, these and some other improvements might remove it ; but a law which confounds misfortune with crime is so unjust as not to be susceptible of satisfactory im provement. It is a law from which Sheriffs' officers, spunging•house keepers, and gaolers, derive more advantage by their exactions than it confers upon creditors, and ought to be abolished.—Morning Herald. The impatience of discussion manifested by Mini sters would almost suffice, in the absence of other proofs, to shew that they have no great confidence n the wisdom, or what to them is of infinitely greater importance, the continued popularity of their own measure. In all the Ministerial circles, speaking in Parliament, inasmuch as it consumes . . . . time and affords opportunities for reflection, is unani - - - - mously voted a bi;,e. Lord Althorp having, as he imagines, a majority in the- House of Commons pledged to support by their votes every word and syllable of the Bill, excepting always such words and syllables as Ministers think fit to say have crept in through inadvertency, issues with military brevity a general order :—" Votes only, if you please, Gentle men, and no speeches; whoever encourages dis cussion can be no friend to the Bill." Such at least is the language which we understand the Mini sterial Leader of the House of Commons thought it decent and proper to address to a coterie of representatives of the people of England whom he condescended to summon to his private resi- dente, to hear these words of wisdom and au thority, on Monday last. The hearers of course listened and applauded, for to abridge the proeess of manufacturing a Constitution for the country must be a prime object with men condemned by their po sition or their pledges to the servile drudgery of sit ting in the House of Commons so many weary hours in the dog days, benumbed and oppressed by the paralysing and humil'ating consciousness that their votes are predetermined, that independence of action is not in their power, whatever impression may be made upon their understanding. To men so situ ated the task of listening day after day to speeches upon the subject of the Bill is little short of mar tyrdom. The scene of Tuesday morning affords con clusive evidence that these Parliamentary automata are not insensible to the utter misery of their situa- tion. They adopted the hint of Lord Althorp— perhaps they went beyond it. To refrain from speak ing themselves would, they naturally thought, be pro moting his and their object only by halves. They determined therefore to suppress speaking altogether. It was a fine thought 110 doubt, and entirely worthy of the men and their cause. But unhappily the forms of Parliament enable a minority to protect itself against the power of a majority whenever that power is employed to stifle discussion. It was ne cessary to shew these economists of time that more time would be consumed in the attempt to put down argument by clamour than in listening to it. The lesson was effectually administered, and there will probably be no necessity for its repetition. The pledged men must listen, although they are not in the capacity to be convinced. We have now reverted to the scene at Lord Althorp's and its immediate consequences, because we perceive the advocates of the Ministry and the Bill striving day after day to misrepresent the conduct of the Opposition in the House of Commons, and to impress upon the country the erroneous idea that the reiterated motion for an adjournment was merely a manoeuvre to obstruct and retard the pass ing of the Bill. There was a manoeuvre, no doubt, and a very improper and disgraceful one. It was intended to expedite the Bill by clamouring down all opposition—in other words, by assailing the pri vileges, violating the orders, degrading the character of the Ilouce of Commons. This was resisted in the only mode in which a minority can resist such a manoeuvre when the majority in Parliament so far degrades itself as to adopt it. It was resisted by the means which the House of Commons, careful of its own privileges, dignity, and character, has pro vided expressly for the purpose. The disorder con sisted in the interruption offered to Captain Gordon. It emanated from the hint of Lord Althorp, or per haps from the misinterpretation of that hint by his Lordship's too zealous arid officious friends. But in the course pursued by the Opposition there was no disorder. They strictly adhered to the orders of the !louse; and by merely exercising u power provided for the purpose, they have the credit of having re stored to the House that deliberative character of which their a ntagonists had for a moment deprived it.—Morning Post. n nform is fellow-citizens, g l l \ o l a N t e, - c o i l t d i y z e Guildhall,ancst, a i c e w o x ‘ e:d t e y y p e t s o o t i e n r t t d he a t y l i‘e%a' attentionlt eres of 6t m ee o t n - f . our readers to the report of that meeting, and ex press our ardent hope that its example will be fol lowed in any future case of failure, deception, inad vertency, or downright ratting. The meeting was held for the purpose of inquiring into the conduct of Alderman Thompson on Tuesday last, in voting against his Majesty's Ministers, after having given a solemn pledge to his constituents that he would sup port " The Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill ;" arid notwithstanding the penitent expla nation of the city Member, well, and justly, did he receive a severe castigation, at the hands of Dr. Bowririg. The Alderman declared that he gave his vote inadvertently, and that he did not know the e ffect which it might have upon the fate of the Reform Bill when he gave it; but how, let us ask him, could he be in error on this subject when he found himself encompassed with such a motley group as the Wetherells, the Peels, the Sibthorpes, and the Stormonts, of Tuesday last ? Had he no misgivings then as to his situation, or had the " la bwious duties" of the day so obscured his faculties, that he could not see the difference between them and the Russells, Althorps, and Ilumes, of the other side of the House ? However, the Alderman has been trounced, —made confession of his sin,—re eeived absolution, and given a solemn promise to be a good boy" in future; and we shall, therefore, drop the subject as a matter settled and done; but we trust that the effective example of the City of London will not be lost upon other cities, towns and counties, which may find themselves simi larly situated. We do not greatly deceive ourselves respecting the spirit which is abroad in the country, if even this example was necessary to promote a due exercise of the rights of freemen to inquire into the conduct of their representatives; and we also think that those Members will find themselves very egre giously deceived also who may flatter themselves with impunity in betraying the wishes of their con stituents in this matter. The public did all that it could, in a legal and constitutional manner, to secure t he passing of the Bill—it had begun to repose in safety, under the certainty that nothing more was re- quired of it; but the late conduct of the Opposition has kindled its passions afresh ; and woe be to those who, in breach of their promises, may dare to strive Against them !--Morning Advertiser. POLICE' INTELLIGENCE. MANSION-HOUSE. A woman, named Ellen Grady, was brought be fore Sir C. S. HUNTER. under rather curious circum stances. A gravedigger, named Langley, stated that his wife having left him for a better world, be took the defendant into his house to superintend matters. She, however, was so much the slave of drink, that she pawned most of her own and his clothes to satisfy her craving for gin. As everything was likely to go to ruin under such management, he did all he could to get lid of her. He turned her out of the house dozens of times—kicked her down stairs, and blackened her eyes; but all would not do. Whenever he returned home from his employment, he was sure to find her lying on the bed in a brutal state of intoxication. He, therefore, besought the Magistrate to compel so unruly a person to keep at a proper distance, particularly as she had a husband of her own. Sir C. S. HUNTER—Oh, then you took her to live with you as your wife ? Grave-digger—Yes, please your Worship ; and we have a child about three months' old, but if ahe suckled the baby it would certainly fall into my hands, for she lushes so much " blue ruin," it would go off in a fever. Sir C. S. HUNTER—Upon my word, you give a very respectable account of the couple. And, pray who supports the child ? Grave-digger—" Why, your Worship, it's natural that, as I am the father, I should be fond of the child. Now, although Mrs. Grady's husband is the person that's bound to sup port the child, I'ta willing to contribute my share." —(A laugh.) Sir C. S. HUNTER—How very kind in you to do her husband so many favours! Really there is no such thing as equalling the morality and obliging disposition of some people. You have done Mr. Grady the favour of going to bed to his wife, and then you offer to join with him in supporting the issue of that intercourse. _ _ The grave-digger took all this for serious com mendation, and said, " Please your Worship, I am but a poor hard-working man, but I'll give two shil lings a week towards maintaining the child, and I'll give another tanner as soon as trade gets a litle brisker; and God grant that that may be soon.— Laughter.) Sir C. S. HUNTER—Why I should think your trade is not bad now ? Grave-digger—Why no, your Worship, I have no right to complain. I gets my share, but I'm paid by the piece; and if I don't turn up no earth for to receive the earth, why then you see, my Lord, I gets nothing.—(Laughter.) Mr. Nobler said, the grave-digger very well de served what he had got, but the woman must n t continue to annoy him. Grave-digger—l hope I shall never hare no mcre trouble with her, your Ludship, again, barring once, and please your Ludship. I'll do that job for Ittr with the greatest pleasure.—(Laughter). Sir C. S. HUNTER—WeII, grave-digger, I hope that although you are not legally the father, you will act as if you were. At all events, you must not be interrupted in your business; grave-making is a se rious and important business, and ever since the days of Hamlet there have been strange fellows belong. ing to the trade. Go away. You and Mrs. Grady will contrive to keep the child, and if you don't the parish must. HATT ON- GARDEN. On Wednesday Mr. Chantre, the landlord of the Horse and Shoe tap, Tottenham-court-road, appeared to answer the charge of a man named Phipps, under the following circumstances : About a fortnight ago Mr. Chantre opened his house early in the morning, when the prosecutor and several other persons entered the place and created a disturbance, the prosecutor being the sole cause of it in consequence of a mania that he possessed for the histrionic art, and through placing himself in theatrical attitudes and repeating passages Shakespeare's tragedies exciting the attention of every customer that entered the place. At length a lady well known in the neighbourhood by the name of " Slashing Sal" came in while the prose cutor was delivering a soliloquy in which he had io allude to the " poisonous draught" while he held a pot of porter in his hand, but before he concluded, Sal, who seemed to fancy the reality better than the mimic representation, snatched the pot from his hand and poured a " cup of Rhenish down," which led to a catastrophe between the parties, and Mr. Chantre determined not to have further disturbance in his house, after civilly requesting the " would-be actor" to leave his place, to no effect, he ejected him. The prosecutor, whose very " look and gesture " indicated that he possessed a soul above buttons, with studied expression and posture, held up a coat that had seen " better days," and peeping at his Worship through a rent in the back part, us if he imagined him to be one of Otway's Senators, ex claimed, with peculiar emphasis, " Your Worship, he tore my garment." Mr. Wooler attended for the defendant, and re quested to put a few questions to the stage-struck youth. Pray, s.iid Mr. Wooler, havn't you some taste for the drama ? Prosecutor—Why I thinks a little. Mr. Wooler—What is your forte, comedy ? Pro secutor—No ; tragedy (looking solemnly). Mr. Wooler—An admirer of Shakspeare, I pre sume ? Prosecutor (smilingly)— Why, certainly. Mr. Wooler—Fond of Richard, no doubt ? Pro secutor—" My soul is in it ; touch me not so near." Mr. Wooler—On the morning in question you were entertaining Mr. Chantre's customers spouting from King Richard the Third, while standing on a • table. Don't you recollect ? Prosecutor (putting his hand to his forehead) —Never. The waiter came forward to prove this fact, and 7 that Mr. Chantre repeatedly requested him to desist, but he would not. All the persons forming his audience were chaffing him as a fool.—(Laughter.) • Mr. ROGERS requested the term chaffing to be • defined. Mr. Wooler said, it was ridiculing or larking him.—(Laughter.) Mr. ROGERS thought the world was becoming extremely classical, and said that the prosecutor deserved all he got, for he brought it upon himself. He had no right to cause a disturbance in the house by his foolish nonsense, and Mr. Chantre had acted very properly in ejecting him ; he, therefore, would discharge him without paying the usual fee. The prosecutor left the office iu " low and melan choly mood." UNION-HALL. Jack Simpson, the sailor against whom a com plaint was made on the preceding day by his wife, at tended again on Wednesday, and stated that he had no sooner left this office and entered his house, in order to get possession of his clothes to go to sea from such a spitfire, than she attacked him like a bull dog, tore his traps (clothes), and beat him out of the place. I promised you, added he to the Ma gistrate, that I would not lay a finger upon her if she tantalized me ever so much. I have religiously kept that promise, and must say that it was a struggle to do so. I itched to give her a few stripes with a rope's end to make her know how to treat a sailor and her fourth husband better. Mr. CHAmßEßs—What do you want me to do for you now, I thought all matters were arranged be tween you and that hot-tempered little old woman that you married for the sake of her money. You caught a tartar though in her, added the Magistrate. Simpson scratched his head and looked very foolish. He said that if he had his seafaring clothes out of her grip, that was all he wanted—he blessed his stars for such a deliverance from such a she devil. Mr. CHAMBERS was convinced if Simpson went to his wife and civilly requested her to deliver up would d to d g o e t a it, as she s a that rid of him tl seemed belongedeorn.l anxiousy h h e i m d“ s y li eb before Simpson—l am not a romancing when I tell your Worship that rd rather face a gun than face Mr=, Simpson again—there she stands with a poker in her fist, and swears that she will batter my skull if I venture within arm's length of her. Mr. CIIAMBERS sent an officer with Simpson to prevent mischief, and to insist upon the wife deliver ing up his clothes, to enable him to go to sea again. On Wednesday Patrick Danayne, an Irish la bourer, was brought before Mr. CHAMBERS, charged with beating his w:fe, and refusing to give her shelter. Mrs. Datiayne, who has lately come over from Ireland, commenced the complaint against Paddy by saying, " Arrah, then your Worihip, is'nt it a poor case to be bate and knocked about like a shittle cock by the likes of this blackguard of mine, and all for nothing at all, at all." Mr. CHAMBERS—Have you given him no provo ca ion to behave unkind to you ? Mrs. Danayne— Nb, not a b t in the wide world save and except a little bit of n slip I made one day in my own country, but its all over long ago, and where's the use of bothering about it now. _ _ Patrick—Tell his Honour what that slip was; spike the t ruth out, and shame the devil. Mrs. nanayne—Then your Worship, the little slip I made in my own country was, to have a child by another man. I tould Paddy all about it before I married him, and this is the- return I meet with for speaking the truth, and not keeping the secret to myself. Paddy assured the Magistrate that she had ano ther husband living, and that he was a great feflow from Connaught. Now, added Paddy, sup pie he came over and found me living with his wife, why what a murdering shame it would be, so I thought it best to give her money to pay her pas sage by stame back to Ireland. Mr. CHAMBERS inquired whether the parties were married according to the forms of the Established Church ?—Danayre replied that they were married in a Catholic chapel, and in answer to the Magis trate, as to whether the priest had instructed them get married over again by a clergy Man of the Church of England, the reply was in the negative. Mr. CHAMBERS—Then the law does notrecog- ti'ze this as a valid marriage, and you are at liberty, added the M.lgibtrate, addressing Danayne, to leave the woman as soon as you please. Paddy—By my soul, your Worship, I am right glad to hear that same, for I would rather go at once and drowned myself than live with a woman that deceived me, and had, by her own confession, a b tstard. But, said he, I shall be able to prove, if it goes to trial, that she has another husband. After some discussion, Mrs. Danayne consented to return to Ireland upon Paddy undertaking to pay her passage back to the man who had the most right to her. THE MARKETS. COUNTRY CORN MARKETS DURING THE WEEK. Wheat. Barley. I Oats. 1 Beane. —...—.... Per Quarter. s. to s. s. s. s. to s. s. to 8. Blandford ---.— 56 35 26 4d Brigg... 56 63 20 24 34 38 Cambridge . C 6 36 23 38 Chard --......—.. 60 GS 32 31 22 25 38 42 Iluntingdon ......—. 58 70 33 39 22 30 35 39 Long Sutton_ 56 (5 _ 20 25 37 39 Lout li .--. . 55 63 28 32 18 23 34 38 Lynn. 54 14 30 34 24 30 36 40 Newark —... (3 65 30 38 24 30 40 43 Nottingham —.. 76 SI 3.3 48 24 31 42 44 Peterborough —,— 54 14. 33 34 22 30 36 38 Plymouth --....... 62 68 28 34 ,23 26 38 50 Ponteliact...« . 67 43 27 43 Sleafor I ..--.....—... 65 70 36 36 22 28 41 43 Uppingham ....... 56 66 34 42 24 32 34 40 Wisbech.....--. 55 C 4 25 24 26 36 38 LEEDS CORN MARKET.—JuIy 12. Wheat, Norfolk and Stifiblk, 601 h. York. and Lincoln. 601 b. Barley, Norfolk and Suffolk -- Yorkshire and Lincolnshire _ } 60s. to '72s. 41 50s. to 68s. a 325. to 345. , , ...... ‘2•2s. to 256. q, 15s. to 435. el, 2Ss. to 30s. re Eng. 14d. to 15d. per st. ~. 345. to 355. per load. gn, —l. to —/. per last. - Grinding Beans 63lb. Oats, l'otatoe Idealing, For. Ltd. to 14%d Shelling Rapeseed, English, ltit. to '241 Foreii LIVERPOOL CORN' EXCHANGE.—JuIy 12. WHEAT, English, White, per /01b. o s. 31. to 98.94 Red ' ' _ _ Scotch, Welch, and Manx Irish, White 6 I() 7 3 70 7 6 Pled -- Foreign 9 6 910 OATH, English, Welsh, and Scotch, her 451 b 3 9 4 0 Irish -- Foreign 3 0 3 2 BAncßy, Engl.!), Malting, per Imp. quarter 4O 0 46 0 -.----- Scotch and Irish, per 60Ibs. ... ...... -- Feeding 3 10 4 3 BEANS, English, per Imperial quarter 43 0 47 0 --- Irish, &e. --- Foreign Pease, English, per Imperial quarter - FcAreign 36 0 42 0 FLOUR, English, per 2801 b. - Irish OATMEAL, English and Irish, per 2101bs 27 0 29 0 INDIAN CORN, per 44011). liar, per Imperial quarter MALT, per Imperial quarter I mrowr OF GRAIN for the Week ending July 11. Wheat.l oats. I Barley Flour. Oatme al. Qrs. 2rs. Qrs. Foreign, Rrls. Irish, &c. Sad Loads. 9,053 2,201 i 330 1 16,6 I 9 9 l 103 .... MARKET. —JuIy I`2. Pei lb. tl. to d. Beef 5 ' 6 Mutton Veal Pork Lamb 0 0 to 31. 13s. Cd. ver ton CHELTENHAM . __ Per llushel._ s. d. cols.d. Wheat Barley 4 0 5 6 Oats 4 0 4 3 Beans Pease 5 0 7 0 Hay 32. 10s. BOURRIENN'E'S LIFE OF NAPOLEON.—S O great has been the success of this work in the English. translation (with variorum notes), rec•latly published la three volumes (price 18s.) in the National Library, that we understand a new edition has been caked for, and will appear forthwith. This work is profusely decorated with a number of plates, among which are portraits of NAPO: LEON, JOSEPHINE, and MARIA LOUISA, and graplac views of the mock conflict at Brienne—the attack Pp St. Jean d'Acre—the revolt of Cairo—the battle of Aboukir—the Council of Ancients—the battle of Marengo —the camp of Boulogne—the battle 4 Austerlitz—the battle of Jena—the death of Marshal LANIxEs—NAPO . LEON'S e from Fontainbleau, besides maps, and a Lac-simile of the abdication of NAPOLEON in his own hand' writing. Mn. Fox.—ln the course of the presentation of petitions in the House of Commons on Tuesday e vening :, the Speaker i n the ordinary wa y ca lled on " Mr. Fox• There were a few Members in the House, and some fre quenters of the gallery, on whom the name produced an effect almost starding—for they remembered with what a feeling the House used to hear about thirty years since that name called upon. Mr. Fox, who is the eldest son of Lord HotLAND, has little to remind one in his features of his great uncle, whose names, " CllaiaLEs JAMES,' he bears. The coffin containing the remains of HENRY TRIGC, who died in 1721, is still to be seen in a shed used as a stable of the Old Castle Inn, Stevenage. It will be in the recollection of many, that the deceased bequeathe d certain landed property to his brother, upon condition that his body should be deposited in the shed in question. When Mr. BELLAMY, the present landlord of the Inn' took possession, he had the curiosity to inspect the content' of the coffin; and found the hair upon the skull of the de" ce,sed in a perfect state of preservation.— County Press; THE DUTCHMAN'S FIRE-SIDE.—The nOre' under this title, by the celebrated Mr. PAULDING, °f w ill, we understated, be published in a few days' The story is that of three brothers descended from the early Dutch settlers in America, and in plot, characters and scenery, it is said to be new to English readers. of FinsburY BIRTHS. \bcr• -- !11. lah inst. at C; J. Younl tin the . Amberwell, Mrs. J. Young, square, of a daughter. On the 10th inst. the lady of L. Pommier, Esq., of Peckharn, of a daughter, who survived only two hours. On the 12th inst. at Stoke Newington-road, Mrs. B. Oct/WO' of a daughter. On the oth inst. the lady of C. Hamar, Esq., of Clarkesfie near Oldham, Lancashire, of a daughter. MARRIED. On the 12th inst. at St. Mary, Somerset, Charles, the younge st son of NV. Pulling, Esq., 'lrttestre4 House, Devon, to r, 117 „1: beth Sarah, the eldest daughter of the late Captain (1. C. e" ling, R.N. On the 12th inst. at St. Alphage, London-wall, J. Elis l3 ' youngest son of Mr. E. Wilson, of Graceehurch-street, to o ,l ' tiana, second daughter of W. Smith, Esq., of Fell-street, Cit, and of Brighton. On the 29th ult. at Paris, at the British Ambassador's ChaP ci ,j. Edw. Broughton, Esq., of London, to Elizabeth, daughter of tp,, late 11. S. Blanekley, Esq., formerly his Britannic MajestY A gent and Consul-General at Algiers. DIED. On the 12th inst. A. Forster, Esq. of slount-street, Lambe in his 84th year. te On the 11th inst. in Fi ns b ury-c i rcus , W. Dawes, Esq., Chief Accountant of the Balk of E grand, :Ted 72. d 66 ' On the 12th inst. in Great Quee.-street, Westm.nster, age o y I. Swan, Esq., of the A rmy P ay-o tti ce , Whitehall, and 1 1 1 o f years Lieutenant and Q uar t er-mas t er o f th e Dorset Itegiraen Militia. On the Ilth inst. at Hammersmith. Mrs. Margaret Honor° Edwards, aged &;. ~ocl, On the 10th inst. in G rove-s t ree t, Camden town , Mr. Is.. P" in his 78th year. —oo_l PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY MURDO YOUNG, AT SUN OFFICE - ,.112, STRAND, LONDON. 1