The Sun. — London, England, 1833-07-29 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF TrIE PUBLIC JOURNALS The political conduct of the Tory Aristocracy, the House of Lords, is past comprehension. They appear, as they probably are, stone blind to the state of public opinion and the signs of the times. Faction and party are the grand fulcrum of their motions; and however sensitively alive to the ef fect and ends of the recent reform of the Com mons' House of Parliament, they have relapsed into their old habits and practices, and have forgotten what they apprehended and predicted during the discussion on the amendment of the representation, viz., the omnipotence of the representatives of the people. They now vainly seek to render the Re form Acts a political abortion. The real interest of their order—the interest of the King and ,Royal Family of Brunswick—the maintenance of the constitution and present form of the British Government, are conveniently overlooked ; and the " Conservative" Peers seem disposed to make a scorn and mockery of their assumed title of honour "Conservatives." It requires no foresight to discern the certain consequence cf their insane and suicidal course. Abandoned to the guidance of oi-deartat Liberals—Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Wyn ford, Lord Rosslyn—or of any bold Peers of cou rage, a trifle mentally superior to the mass, they form cabals for the palpable and declared purpose of pounding up public opinion, and smothering the electoral power recently created. They cannot see, moreover, that by degrading the present Ministry ;n majorities of Peers temporal and spiritual in the House of Lords, they are rapidly destroying the national confidence in public men, and approaching that period when one branch of the Legislature must necessarily destroy the other. Both cannot dwell under the same roof as matters now proceed ; and we can see no ultimate safety against a prema ture dissolution of the Constitution, save in the creation of new Peers. To that cure we must come at last, and without much loss of time, or the ultimate consequences all men of political sagacity foresee. The House of Lords has yet to legislate on the Irish Church Bill, the East and West India questions, and the Scotch Burgh Reform. Can it be denied that party motives will not influence the 'Cory Peers on these several important subjects ? Does any rational man credit that their Lordships re jected the Lord Chancellor's Local Courts Bill from the pure motive of securing cheap and speedy justice to the people ? Has Lord Lyndhurst—the subtle and cunning politician, and party manceuvrer —educated Field Marshal the Dnke of Wellington as a jurist, that the military Peer should ►ake such an intense interest in a question of remedial juris prudence ? Can Lord Wynford be suspected of any Intense anxiety to increase the supply of justice to the suitors of England ? Have the scales of prejudice and self-interest fallen from the eyes of "auld" Lord Eldon, that he so late and suddenly should turn law refor mer ? Did any of these patriotic Peers, while in the long possession of undisturbed power, originate or concern themselves on any one real question of State reformation ? Would Lord Lyndhurst hastily quit his duties on the circuit as a judge, and post to London from religious zeal and bursting piety, to watch over the remains of Christianity in the Irish Protestant Establishment ? His Lordship, in his Harlequin changes of mind on the Catholic ques tion, exhibited no such excessive evangelical feeling, and probably was moved by the same springs of human action which plainly influence his present political bias ! A more disgusting exhibition of fanatic party spirit was never acted by any " party" at any former period. Do the Carlton Club really conceit themselves that their country is to be go verned tinder the old regime ; that Mr. William Holmes, their old " whipper-in," and Lord Rosslyn, his new assistant in the Upper House, can hunt Tory Peers as in the old party chase ? We pity the obtuse and crack-brained minds deceived by such political dreams. They may in vain array Tory " Noble-men" against the reformed House of Commons. Their labours will be thrown away. The Crown—willing or unwilling—must soon be obliged, for self-preservation, to exercise the prero gative of creating Peers. Lord Grey and the pre sent Cabinet may be adverse to that measure of extremity, but come it must ; and what some Mi nisters will riot or cannot do, others must and will. The variance of the two Houses of the Legislature cannot continue, arid it behoves the Tory Peers arid their deluded followers, the Bishops, to reflect while there is time, and to work out a timely re pentance. Parliament will not separate without some significant arid decisive expression of opinion on the present anomalous state of the Legislature. —Morning Chronicle. This evening the printer of a contemporary jour nal is to appear at the bar of the House of Com mons, to answer the charge of a breach of privilege. The breach of privilege, in point of form, consists in having reported the debates in Parliament ; but, in reality, it is a charge of not having reported certain speeches of Mr. O'Connell, and the declining to re port any thing which he says in Parliament for the future, except upon condition that the Hon. Mem ber withdraws an accusation of designed and wilful partiality which he has made against the reporters of that journal. As this is not a question between one individual and another, or between the reporters of a particular newspaper and a Member of Parlia ment, but involves in its principle and consequences the interests of the whole daily press, we cannot pass it over in silence. Whatever may be our differences of political opinion with any of our contemporaries, we have always felt it our duty to make their cause our own, when a power subversive of the liberty of the press is attempted to be exercised by any person or any party. The war which we waged against the ea cjicio informations filed by the Attorney-General of the Wellington Administration, for the purpose of crushing certain journals, whose opinions were in• conveniently adverse to some acts of that Government, was dictated by this feeling—and never was a more fatal victory obtained—fatal, we mean, to the victors —than that which the Ministers of the Crown oh tiined in that day by the exercise of vindictive law nainst the liberty of the Press ; it was among the causes which led to the overthrow of that Adminis tration; for never yet did tyrannical power wan tonly coerce public opinion in a flee country with out paying the penalty in the consequences of retri butive reaction. If it be a breach of privilege to report the debates in Parliament—as by a standing order of the House of Commons, it is declared to be—it certainly is a breach of privileges, the daily and nightly commission of which lays the House of Commons under great obligations to the Press. If it were not for the continued violation of such a standing order, the House of Commons would have no more hold upon the mind of the people of Eng land than the Spanish Camarilla or the Turkish Divan. How long, indeed, any English Assembly of Representatives could exist that closed its door against reporters, and enshrouded itself in the darkness and secrecy of a Venetian Senate, is a question which we do not pretend to solve. Such a Representative body would certainly invest itself with more of austerity than glory. Its character would be more pompous than reputable—its career more mysterious than splendid—and, whenever its days should be numbered, there is no doubt th a t i ts ep i tap h wou ld conve y an in structive lesson t o p oster i ty . T o assert an imprac ticable privilege is absurd, and therefore it is not consistent with the character of the "collective wis dom" of the nation to maintain the doctrine that reporting the debates is a breach of privilege. It is a privilege which for many years past it was utterly impossible for an unreformed House of Commons to have acted upon. A reformed House of Commons should consider it as abhorrent from reason as impossible in fact. Yet the motion which calls the printer of the Times to the bar is founded upon the revival of what the public long regarded as an obsolete privilege, and which they had good grArts)td kkinsider so ever since a former House of out of the conflict into which it 1 77/ 11 i in this very point with the cele (( t.the*" I ilks, who committed to prison oLl:11.-*1( , -.tHouse kr endeavouring to exe- Y - Wtt • 7 "' _ . arrant on the printer of a paper, and refused to appear at the bar of the House to answer for his conduct. It is matter of history—and the voice of history ought not to be uninstructive—that the House having made a second order, calling on Wilks to appear at the bar on a particular day, and finding that he was resolute in his determina tion not to obey the mandate, saw no other way of getting o u t o f th e diffi cu l ty o f i ts own creation than to adjourn over the day fixed on for his appear ance. The order being thus dropped, never was renewed, so the contumacious Press went on pub lishing the debates, and, after a sleep of upwards of sixty years, the standing order against reporting the speeches of Members is attempted to be practically revived, and that too by a champion of liberty— who is indebted for whatever fame or popular in fluence he possesses entirely to the prodigal indul gence of the Press. If to report the debates at all be a violation of privilege, it follows that the more accurate the reports are, the more direct and pal pable the breach of privilege is. It might be ar gued that incorrect reports do not transgress the standing order, because they do not in reality send forth to the public that which has passed in the House. But no such palliative argument can be urged in favour of reports which are chargeable with the guilt of correctness and the crime of fidelity. Is it not inconsistent and absurd that Members of the House of Commons should com plain of inaccuracy in reports of their speeches, when they denounce the most correct reporting as a breach of privilege, and arrogate to them selves a right of visiting the offence of being scru pulously correct with penal consequences ? There is no tyranny so odious or oppressive as one under popular forms. If the House of Commons ever becomes tyratinical,it will be the worst tyranny that England ever saw. The possibility of the popular branch of the Legislature coming in colli sion, at some future time, with the people to whom it owes its existence, is a prospect which we do riot like to contemplate. Such an event would carry with it a long train of calamities to the country ; but we cannot help thinking that those Members are ignorantly and unadvisedly forcing on such an event, who vindictively draw from its antique scab , bard the rusty sword of privilege, to cut down the liberty of the press. When Mr. O'Connell de scended from die situation of a senator, to enter into the details of printing offices, and made state ments touching an alleged reduction in the salaries of parliamentary reporters, which, so far as we know, had no foundation in fact, we did not con , sider the matter worthy of serious discussion. But the case now assumes a different aspect. The champion of liberty, for the gratification of hisown personal feelings, strikes at the very life of public opinion—for, if the mere' reporting debates be treated as a breach of privilege, to comment on them must be a high contempt of Parliament. As to his quarrel with the reporters, we shall merely observe, diet there are among that body men of education, and gentlemen, who are as incapable of falsifying the debates, as they are of submitting to unmerited obloquy, or despotic domination.—Mora lug Herald. The spirit of Mr. O'Connell's present undertaking is in keeping with the whole course of his actions on his own theatre, at the other side of the water. In Ireland his single aim has been to make every man his subservient slave. Free agency there, or even the most direct vindication of personal independence, is treason against the dynasty of Derrinane Abbey. Abuse is the general weapon of the leader of mobs. He who shows the least resistance in Ireland is tor mented by systematic calumny, until its frequent and brazen repetition begins to stagger the better knowledge of the injured person's friends, whose original disbelief of the fiction gives way to doubt, or finally, perhaps, to acquiescence ; the self-confi dence and moral courage of the victim himself are gradually shaken, until, in utter despair of a suc cessful self-defence against one who boasts of his 6,000,000 of satellites, the best man in the commu nity may at length degenerate into a wretched brow beaten subject, nay tool, of this ignoble tyranny. Such are the means by which, in numerous cases, sabmis sion has been brought about among the Irish people. The learned autocrat plumes himself on having " put down" the Dublin reporters, and intimates that he will be equally victorious here. His Dublin triumphs have furnished him, we suspect, with but a miserable measure for the press of London. He may have moulded his anti-union meetings in Ireland, composed of his own creatures, to any purpose, however foolish or offensive, that might suit him; but will he be equally clever with the Imperial House of Commons ? Will he succeed in dragging the Parliament of the empire through the dirt, and making it the instrument of his own vengeance, upon parties whom he has one reason certainly (but no other) for hating—viz., that he has wantonly injured and insulted them ? Mr. O'Connell's rage has extinguished what little judgment nature ever gave him, or he must have seen that in this last attack upon the press he was pursuing a moral im possibility. Grant that he may so far prevail on the House of Commons to stultify itself as to issue an order that all speeches shall be published verbatim, —what follows ? Why, unquestionably, that there can be no more reports. Grant again that an order proceeds from the chair for all speeches to be " fairly" reported. What, again, is the opera tion of such an order ? That the reports will be just what they have been hitherto—the best that the gentlemen who frame them have, in the exercise of their extraordinary patience, vigilance, and in dustry, been able to produce, abridged only by the employment of their best discretion. And if dis cretion be at all consulted, whose but that of the re porters themselves can be appealed to? It is their general interest, and that of their respective journals, to give the most ample and the most faithful ac count of all proceedings that take place in Parlia ment —as much fulness as the space of a newspaper will afford, and as much fidelity as is consistent with that essential condition. That these obliga tions have in the main been fulfilled,so as fiot merely to merit the approval of Members of Parlia ment of all parties, but to excite their astonish ment, has been recorded everywhere. It is not a twelvemonth, to the best of our recollec tion, since this Irish disturber himself admitted that his speeches had been as fully reported, and had occupied as large a portion of the newspa pers, as his influence and position in the House of Commons entitled him to. Then what can have happened since to alter those feelings towards the Learned Gentleman which secured for him such an ample measure of courtesy so short a period back ? Literally nothing that we know of, nor do we be lieve in our hearts that any of those gentlemen who report debates, and who have been so shockingly in sulted by Mr. O'Connell, ever once conceived that he had the slightest ground of just complaint against them. But in what condition stands the man himself who deafens the House of Commons with his attacks on others ? Is he not at this mo ment in the act of circulating a letter to solicit sub scriptions for shares in a new paper, whose regular occupation will, no doubt, be threefold—first, to run amuck at all the property and institu tions of the country—second, to vomit forth, every four-and-twenty hours, the most spiteful and foul mouthed abuse of this Journal —third, to bolster up by every possible expedient, the name and projects of Mr. Daniel O'Connell himself, its chief proprietor ? What chance of upright and im proved reports may be contemplated on behalf of Members of Parliament enlisting themselves under such high auspices, it is not for us to anticipate ; but som e key may be furnished to the secret motive of the Learned Gentleman for thus assaulting establish ments already in ex'stence by recollecting the cld maxim about rival shops. Let us not be misunder ' stood. Our disposition is what it has always been, to correct every error which, from whatever cause, may be imputable to the journal. We can appeal to many Members of Parliament for the cerrectness of this statement, and, as the following correspon dence will show, we may confidently appeal to Mr. O'Connell himself, The correspondence refers to the case of Mr. E. Nugent, which Mr. O'Connell adduced on Friday night as the justification of his accusation against all the reporters of the Times— that their reports were " designedly false :" " 4, Parliament street, June 21, 1832. " Mr. O'Connell feels that he owes it as a duty to himself, and perhaps to others, to remonstrate with the editor of the Times upon the circumstance, which has now occurred for the second time, of assailing him in that paper through the medium of pretended reports. "Mr. O'Connell assures the editor of the Times, and is ready to confirm his assertio❑ by the most solemn sanc tion, that the report of the speech attributed to him is, with the exception of a few unimportant idea., a total and most unfounded misstatement. " He also is authorized by Mr. Hunt to contradict in the same manner the speech attributed to him. Mr. O'Connell has underlined part of the speech attributed to Mr. Hunt, of which not one word, nor any idea border ing on such sentiments, was uttered by Mr. Hunt. " The allusion is too plain to Le mistaken. Mr. O'Connell thinks he could treat the foolish story to which it alludes with silent contempt, as he has hitherto treated it ; but had that allusion been made in the House of Commons, he would certainly have found it his duty to give it a quiet but most emphatic contradiction. " He cannot bring himself to believe that the editor of the Times, as a m an o f i ntegr i ty an d a gen tl e man, could possibly countenance a proceeding of this description,— the circulation of calumnies not uttered but put into the mouth of a man quite innocent on this occasion of any sort of connexion with them. There is a very strong reason why Mr. Hunt should not be the person to make any allusion to that calumny_.. he certainly did not do so. " Mr. O'Connell is also authorized by Mr. Callaghan to assert in the most positive manner that, short as is the speech attributed to him, it contains matter totally different from any thing he said. " Under these circumstances, Mr. O'Connell, having:n o claim on the editor of the Times, but on the score of mere justice, thinks himself entitled to this redress,—name'y, that sufficient care should be taken to prevent the recur rence of similar attacks on him. " Mr. O'Connell demands no retractation—he requires no apology—he solicits no dismissal of any reporter. He would feel unhappy if any being were to suffer for an injury which he forgives. He is quite convinced that this occa sion will not be taken to aggravate the injustice done him by the shape of any thing purporting to be an apology. " Mr. O'Connell, however, does not shrink from any mode of warfare that may be edopted against him, and without deprecating hostility, and looking only for justice in future in the mere matter of reporting, he feels that be thus has discharged a duty, and rests content." " 4, Parliament -street, June 21, 1832. " Sir,—l venture to address you in your proper person, because I have to ask a favour. " Let me say by way of preface, that if the House had continued to sit another half hour, I should have exonerated the management' of the Times from all blame. I intend to do so in my best manner to-morrow. " I have seen Mr. Nugent, the reporter, and am quite satisfied on the subject of the report. The favour I ven ture, therefore, to ask is, that you will overlook his error. I should feel unhappy if I were the means of doing him any injury. " It is quite true that I can have no means of compen sating you in any mode for granting me this fivour, but 1 will not be the less sensible of it. " Will you, then, allow me to say that if, on the whole, you think 1 have any claim to have my feelings consulted, you will comply with my request and grant me this favour? " I have the honour to be, Sir, your very obedient ser vant, " DANIEL O'CONNELL." " Thursday, June 21, 1832. " Sir,—l have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of two letters with your signature, which have been deli vered to-day at the Times office ; one addressed to the editor of the paper, the other to Mr. —. You will, I have no doubt, at once recognise the propriety of the an swer to your letters being written in the name of the editor. In that character, therefore, I state most unequivocally, that my indignation eve❑ exceeds yours at the gross mis representations which you have imputed to our reporter. There are certainly many points on which you and the conductors of the Times bold very different opinions, but this very circumstance makes me peculiarly and sensitively anxious that every word which falls from you should be reported with the most scrupulous precision, and I should treat any attempt to distort the expression of your opinions as an act of intolerable baseness. " If our reporter, Mr. E. Nugent, can satisfy you that his error was unintentional, I shall be most happy for his sake ; if you will further extend your kindness to him, and declare your satisfaction as publicly as your charge, I oh Xll feel that the journal is also exonerated from all blame ; but unless this public declaration (which, how ever, I have no right to require) shall be made, it will be impossible for Mr. Nugent's connexion with the Times to continue for another day. " Permit me to thank you for the very courteous terms in which you have expressed yourself in both your letters. " I have the honour to be. Sir, your obedient servant, " THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES." " Mr. O'Connell feels gratified by the letter which the editor of the Times has favoured him with. He cheer fully and thankfully embraces the offer kindly made to him respecting Mr. E. Nugent, and will, he hopes satis factorily to the editor of the Times, comply with the con dition on which Mr. E. Nugent is to remain on the esta blishment. " 4, Parliament -street, June 22." On the same night Mr. O'Connell did make, ac cording to his promise, the following ample expla nation:— " Mr. O'Connell wished to be heard respecting a breach of the privilege of the House, and be should say but very few words. What he wished to refer to was the breach of privilege be had complained of with respect to the Times newspaper, in which matter had been attributed to him which he had not spoken. Upon that occasion the Speaker had seemed to intimate, that if the rnisrepre sentation had been intentionally committed, the House was entitled to proceed. Bowing to the Speaker's judgment, he (Mr. O'Connell) had inquired into the subject, and had ascertained, beyond any doubt, that the management of that paper was not at all to blame. He had also seen the reporter, who had satisfactorily explained to him that there was no intentional misrepresentation in the case, either with respect to himself or any other Honourable Member; and when he considered that, from the incon veniences with which reporters had to contend in the gallery it must often happen that speakers were only par tially heard, and also that one reports ;frequently followed another in the middle of a speech, he could easily see how misrepresentation might occur without any intention of attributing to the Hon. Member sentiments which he did not express. He would say no more upon the sub ject, except to repeat his conviction that no blame what ever could attach to the conductors of the paper, and that the reporter was equally free from the reproach of inten tional misrepresentation in the case alluded to."—Parlia mentary report of June 22, 1832. 1 Now, could it be supposed that Mr. O'Connell would afterwards refer to this very case as one of wilful misrepresentation and " deliberate falsehood," nay, that he would on such grounds at a public ta vern include a whole body of men in the charge of " deliberate falsehood ?" In what state are the accused placed ? Having been previously described as incompetent, and now, as liars, they, in the agony of resentment, abstain from reporting the speeches of a Member who has pronounced them to be inca pable, from ignorance and dishonesty, of reporting correctly : and they commit the further offence of stating in a letter the motive of their conduct. Un der these circumstances, may we not, on their be half, appeal to the House of Commons, as a body of gentlemen, and to the Speaker, as the first gentle man in it, whether this proceeding on their part de serves any severe visitation, and that on the motion and pressing instance of their unjust accuser ? We confidently trust that the House will rather sympathize with this natural ebullition of the wounded feelings of men of education and honour, and decline to interpose its power when invoked by one who, instead of offering amends, demands the punishment of those whom he has cruelly assailed. There is one other consi deration connected with this matter which must not be concealed, and which, if not kept carefully in view, will inevitably lead to the most prejudicial results, both as regards Parliament and as regards the public ; it is this :—that part of the Press of this country which consists of the reporters, was at one time filled by persons of lamentable ignorance and incompetence, and of characters very far from respectable. They were for the most part those low Irish, who may yet live in the recollection of some Hon. Members, and of whom it has been said, not with more smartness than truth, that they came to England to be porters or re -porters, as luck might have it. It is no longer worth while , for this class now to emigrate. With great pains, at no small expense, and with no less ad vantage to Parliament than to the country, this old leaven was rooted out, and sufficient inducements were offered to literary men and to students-at-law, in their progress to the bar, to persuade them to embark in this pursuit. Very many gentle men now at the English bar, and at the bar of Ire land, are indebted to this means of acquiring an easy independence by honourable exertion till better prospects opened to them in the profession for which they were intended, but in most cases those prospects never could have been realized had it not been for the certain, and not remarkably small, in come they derived from reporting. It may be suf ficient to state, that six Members of the House of Commons have been reporters; and to mention the names only of those, the brightness of whose career cannot be dimmed by an allusion to its unsunned outset, we may add that the present Solicitor- General, Mr. Sergeant Spankie, Str J. Mackintosh, and the late Master Stephen, were all reporters. Hence the high character, the unsullied integrity, and the talent, and extensive information of the great body of the existing reporters; but these qua lities must be lost, the old system must be resorted to, and this portion of the press will again become as low in character, as contemptible in efficiency, and as mean in acquirements, if it should be de cided that none shall be employed in it but men who will not only submit to be called liars with impunity, but who must expect punish ment if they resent an indignity which by common consent is admitted to be the last which one man can put upon another. We refer, in conclu sion, to two letters, one written by Mr. Woods, whose name appears first of the signatures to the statement published in Friday's journal, the other by Mr. E. Nugent, whose character has been so unmercifully assailed, and who has a right to be heard in self-defence. We entreat that every Member of the House of Commons who intends to sit as judge in this case will carefully peruse these letters, and we would especially recommend to Mr. O'Connell the perusal of Mr. Nugent's. We think its tone of thinking and feeling must make the learned person deeply ashamed of having injured such a man, For ourselves, we have felt it to be an act of duty to defend a body of men who, from their industry, their talents, their in tegrity, have the strongest claims on our respect and support.—Times. It is supposed the Lords will make fight to-day and will not give up their clause. If the amend ment means anything, it is intended to convey to the country that in a sinecure parish a church and glebe-house shall be built for the purposes of pro selytism, or to induce a Protestant population to settle there ; if, on the contrary, the amendment means nothing more than is conveyed in the words of the clause, it is only a gratuitous insult on the House of Commons, the country, and the Govern ment : in either case it is a proceeding that the House of Commons will not sanction, and the public and Ireland in particular, will then have to thank the Archbishop (whom the Ministerial papers com pliment by the term " simple-minded") for the consequences that must ensue from the rejec• tion of the Church Reform Bill. In common sense, to any reasonable man who looks fairly at the clause as it was sent up from the House of Commons, it will appear that the intention was to suspend these sinecure parishes while they con tinued under such circumstances as are there de scribed, and the word "suspended" implies, that if an alteration should take place in the situation of any such parish, and that there should arise a Pro testant population, then are the means provided for restoring the parish so suspended. If this was not clear, it would have been easy for the Archbishop to have proposed such an amendment as would have clearly explained to the people of Ireland that it was intended to relieve them from the abuse of tolerating these sinecure parishes, against which every man of common sense has raised his voice; but at the same time to mark to them that a case might occur in which it would be fair to call on the commissioners who suspended the sinecure to restore that which from altered circumstances had become fairly entitled to the • revenues, or some part of them, that had previously been withdrawn. This, however, would net have answered the purpose; it would neither have marked the power of the majority nor their hostility to the intention of this Bill. The result of all this must be that collision which the Tories have professed so much to fear—either the clause will remain in the Bill as amended, in which:case it will clearly be reported by the House of Commons, or the Bill will altogether be thrown out by the Lords, in which case it would appear almost impossible, after all that has occurred, that the House of Com mons should not express an opinion as to the neces sity of creating Peers,and thus restoring some chance to the people of measures being adopted which they have a right to expect to arise out of the Re form Bill, notwithstanding the declaration of the Duke of Wellington that all such measures were equally mischievous. One thing at least is clear, that Lord Althorp should not bring forward any proposition for an advance to the clergy of Ireland in lieu of tithes till this Church question is com pletely settled. It can only be looked at as part of a measure, and those who were most anxious for its adoption, with a view of preventing the effusion of blood, and the vexatious mode in which those ar rears of tithe Nere to be effected, pledged them selves to support the new arrangement only in the belief that the moderate measure of reform in the Church of Ireland proposed by Ministers, would receive the sanction of the House of Lords. If, then, the Bill is rejected either openly or by the in sidious mo d e a d opte d b y t h e Bi s h o p s , the responsi bility of all the difficulties that may arise out of the rejection must rest with them. It is probable some question will be put to Lord Althorp in the House of Commons on this subject.—Times. Scarcely a day passes which is not fruitful of spe culation, in one form or another, as to the probable and early retirement, as it is called, of the present Administration. Its adherents, however, are perpe tually asserting, as though it were a matter admit ting of no question, that another Ministry could not be formed without extreme difficulty, or that, being formed, its existence must prove of short duration. It would really appear, if we are to receive the dog mas of some of our contemporaries as authorities, that the people of England are, notwithstanding their repeated disappointments, so thoroughly devoted to the present Administration, and so fondly attached to Whig principles and to Whig promises, though they have so frequently been taught by bitter ex perience the instability of the one and the worthless ness of the other, that they actually would hesitate, if they did not positively refuse, to accept of any advantages that might result from any improvements that should be effected by a Tory Government. Are the people of England then such idiots as these Whig Journalists would have us believe, or rather are they riot now, as they ever have been, capable of dis tinguishing between the hollowness of mer e p reten d ers and the sincerity of real friends; between the worthlessness of theories, which have invariably deceived and disappointed them, an d t h e va l ue o f principles which have lived through successive ages, the glory of the British monarchy, the basis of constitutional liberty, of religious excellence, and of moral character? The British:nation can appre ciate the honesty and zeal of men who have ever exemplified and upheld t h ose pr i nc i p l es , an d w h o still boldly maintain them against the unremitting assaults of revolutionary f anat i cs . I t i s no t so en grossed in prejudice, so blindly and thoughtlessly attached to one patticular system (if indeed the present Government have any system), as to be unwilling, after having experienced its weakness and insufficiency, to exchange it for another and a better. We are fully satisfied, whatever the Mi nisterial oracles may assert to the contrary, that the retirement of the present Administration would at this moment diffuse throughout the country a feel ing of entire and unmingled satisfaction. But per haps the term " retirement" ought not to be adopted in reference to the Whig Ministry, seeing that it implies voluntary action, and suggests an idea in opposition to that conveyed by the more appro priate, in that case, word " ejectment." Now, without intending any disparagement to their honour, their consistency, or their spirit, we may safely ven ture to assert that no set of Ministers, from the earliest period recorded in history down to the pre sent, have ever adhered to office with equal tenacity of grasp or insensibility to disgrace after intimations so numerous and unequivocal (whether Royal, Par liamentary, or popular) that their further services would be gladly dispensed with. In every case of" em barrassment," and embarrassment appears to attend nearly every step they take, their cry is, " We will resign," yet as surely are they ready on the next day to sing in chorus with Lord Althorn, " You see here we still are." The people of England may therefore be assured that, threaten as they may, the present Administration never will retire. Whenever the golden fruits of office retire from them, it w ill be without their goodwill or concur rence. The slightest intimation of a deficiency of confidence on the part of one branch of the Legis lature was sufficient to determine the retirement of the high-minded predecessors of Earl Grey and his colleagues, while the open and avowed declaration of the same feeling on the part of all is insufficient to produce even a wavering on the point with them. Verily, if we may be allowed to personify for a moment the present Administration, and to decide upon its character " phrenologically," we should say that it exhibits a most extraordinarily promi nent development of the organ of " adhesiveness." —Morning Post. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. G UILDHALL. A FEMALE SWINDLER.—A young woman, named Anna Eschke, was charged under the following circum stances:— Mr. Gardner, the landlord of the Bull Inn, Holborn, said that on Friday evening the defendant came in and asked for a sitting-room, a sleeping-room, and some tea. At bed-time she was, according to the custom of the house, presented with the bill, which amounted to 3s. 6d. It then appeared that she had no money, and that she had just left an adjacent house, the Bell and Crown, where she run a bill of 91. in 14 days, and could be induced to quit only by being presented with a new bonnet. She had also favoured the landlord of the Nuns, at Aldgate, with her custom. The defendant said she had recently returned from the continent, and she conceived Mr. Escbke was bound to pay her debts. - The constable said she had been living with the gentle• man, but he had " abdicated her." The defendant was dismissed, on promising to pay her bill. MARLBOROUGH.STREET. A little personage, with a prodigiously luxuriant crop of hair, bearing the warlike names Nelson Augustus Wel lington, prefixed to his more peaceable patronymic of Jones, was brought before Messrs. DYER and CONANT, on Saturday, for having assaulted his wife. _ _ Mrs. Jones, a young woman of very mild aspect, stated that her husband had beaten her a few evenings ago, and she added, with some hesitation, that it was not the first time. Mr. Jones owned that his young wife had spoken the truth with regard to the assault; but he asserted that he had bees urged to commit violence by great provocation. Among other matrimonial matters, he had, he said, strictly enjoined Mrs. Jones to have his chops always ready at one o'clock precisely. But on the day of the assault, when he made his appearance, be found the chops were uncooked, and be was therefore compelled to propitiate the cravings of nature with a sixpenny cut of boiled mutton, at an ad jacent " slap bang" shop. His mind, as he said, being in a state of great irritation from what had occurred, he ad journed to a public-house, and having drunk rather freely, he returned home, inflamed with wrath and rum and water, and perpetrated the assault complained of. Mr. DYER....But surely the delicate situation of your wife ought to excuse any trifling neglect on her part, and ought to insure your forbearance. Mr. Jones—Oh ! I have taken all that into considera tion ; and I have provided a practitioner of the first emi nence to attend her in her confinement. Mr. DYER—But if you continue this conduct you wil f stand a fair chance of rendering the practitioner's skill o no avail. Mr. Jones—lt is not the first time I have had to com plain of my dinner being delayed, and my room disorderly. I'm in the medical line, and am therefore liable to have my skill required by all classes of his Majesty's subjects at a moment's warning. Here at this present moment my skill is wanted to a little child who broke its arm by a horse kicking it. You see it is of the highest importance, considering the great responsibility of my avocations, that my dinner should be punctually ready at one o'clock. The Magistrates concurred in thinking that as the dif ference was betwixt man and wife, it could be adjusted amicably out of the office, especially as the complainant displayed a strong reluctance to press the assault, and thereupon they intimated that the warrant for the present should be suspended. _ _ _ " I'll settle the matter in another way," said Mr. Jones, marching out of the office, without taking any notice of his wife ; " I'll leave London, and go and live with my mother." Mr. DYER having caught the purport of his observation, directed the officers to bring back the defendant, and then questioned him as to the meaning of his words. The defendant, with some confusion, said he only meant that he would go into the country for a little recreation. His wife, however, said abe believed he meant to leave her to shift for herself. Very well, said Mr. DYER, then the best way will be to require him to find bail. Mr. Nelson Augustus Wellington Jones was the❑ re moved in custody. WORSHIP-STREET. A Miss Louisa Stokes, a young 1 Illy apparently in her " teens," was on Saturday brought befere Mr. BROUGHTON, from her residence in Bridport-place, Hox ton, charged with fraudulently obtaining a bill of exchange for 111. 10s. from Captain Dunn, of 25, Great Surrey street. The prosecutor stated that he was an officer in the South American at my, and formerly resided at St. Ives. In the month of January last he frequently went to the Fleet prison to see a friend of his, Lord Glenworth. During those visits he became acquainted with the pri soner, who introduced him to her papa and mamma, as she designated them. Witness found that her papa and mamma were leading a very gay life there, and sometimes gave his Lordship some good dinners. "In short," added the Captain, " we became so intimate that the papa, whose name is Henshaw, induced me to accept a bill of 711. 10s., promising to give me the cash for it in a few days after, but which I never received, nor have I since (until a few days ago) seen them. On making inquiry I found that he (Renshaw) had left the prison considerably in debt there." Mr. Baoucarrox—Who first spoke to you about ac cepting the bill ? Prosecutor..-The prisoner, while I was one day walking with her and her mamma at the west end of the town. The fact is they bad put their heads together to deceive me. They used to see me go in and out of the prison daily, when the prisoner, who was al ways dashingly dressed, used to attract my attention by exhibiting a beautiful French dog she always bad with her. She told me her papa would get 100/. or more at any time for me. you more support forthe accommodationt that in !aw ?—i at Mr. BROUGHTON-What were you to g i ve t h em f or that w wo u ld time l d . have given 20L or cashing your bill ?—Ten pounds. How can Mr. BROUGHTON—Who d rew th e bill ? — H er d as hi ng papa, which afterwards I acc e pt e d i n th e i r presence . Th e prisoner then hand e d it over fi rs t t o h er m a mma an d t h en to her papa, wh en th ey a ll prom i se d to g i ve me cas h f or it. The bill was dated January 11th, 1833, payable three months after date, and now lies in the bands of a hatter in Oxford -street. I have since ascertained that full value was given for the bill. Are you so well known ?..—Yes; if I bad wanted 5001. I could have got it. Huw came you to `art with the bill before you got the money ?—He appeared to the to be a gentleman. A gentleman in the Fleet ! But why is the prisoner answerable ?—Because I think she worked up Mr. Papa and Mrs. Mamma to do it. I assure you, your Worship, she is a most extraordinary girl of her age. She speak s French fluently, and can tell a story that would astonish you. Mr. BROUGHTON (to the prisoner)....What have you to say ?—The prisoner, who had exchanged her dashing ap parel for clothes of a more humble cast, denied having obtained the bill fraudulently. She said her mamma gave the bill to a Mr. St. Julian, of the Opera.howe. In fie., said the prisoner, I never had the hill in my hands. He swears you bad?-_I know nothing about bills. What is your papa 7—A gentleman. What does he do ?—Nothing. H e i s no t myPia' my uncle. How long were you in the Fleet prison ?—Six 0 9 , Mr. BROUHTON-During which you lived Yell,. 0 fortably, no d ou bt—T o t h e prosecutor—lt aproi me you have taken the wrong person. 1, ai l : , Prosecutor—l for go t t o sa y th at I met h er tineV. now calls him, the other d a y, w h en h e apo l o gird conduct, and took me to the Fleet, where he said be: at o give me th e money f or t h e bi ll. I gladly accompani 14,0 there, thinking the matter would be settled at on ce. ot io inside he k e pt me i n conversat i on w i th himself and snoi, gentleman, an d t h e next moment " bolted out" uncl t, 'r,,sol by me.—(A l a u g h.) H e goes i n another name , t Fitzgibbon. ?his j Mr. Brtouctirox—l can do nothing for you. t o a Criminal Court. Your remedy must be by civil The prisoner, after receiving an admonition ft° Magistrate, was discharged. COUNTRY CORN MARKETS DURING LAST %VERY. ea Wheat. Barley. Oats. Per Quarter. s. to s. s. to s. a. to s. !'Carlisle 58 „ "6 18 Hexham 49 53 25 29 19 23 Penri Nlorpeth th ...--__.. 47 54 24 26 17 19 _ ,28 _ 19 •••••• Sheffield — 59 0 6 0 0 Winchester 52 58 22 26 22 24 " A r Per Bushel. s. d. s. d. s . d. s.d. s. d. s. d. a. Carmarthen— 6 0 66; 2 6 2 1 4 1 8 0 " 6 ; Cowbridge— 66 70; 2 9 3 0 26 Newcastle (Staff.) 80 8946 Northallerton....... 70 9 3 3 6 46 33 40 56 , " 80 86, 4 0 48 30 34 60 Swansea 69 72 30 39 1 9 22 0 0 0 Warwick 90 10 9 30 46 20 33 5 6 Per 8011. 1 1 1 Barnardcastle........ 120 176 80 86 60 7 8 10 0 1 Durham ;12 6 146 70 80 40 63 7 9, Richmond Stockton 4 13 0 9 6 10 0 5 0 5 6 72,;., WAKEFIELD CORN MARKET.-July 26. 61 Wheat, Red, Norfolk an d S u flblk - s. 47 5. to 6 0 s. fin , Lin. and Cam. -s. 41s. to 555. fin 511 -- Yorkshire -3.33 x, to 525. fin:ol - White -s. 465. to 625. 6 8e 600 - Foreign, Red -s. 435. to 56& 6 0 e, 40 , White s. 523. to 625. tin e Barley, Norfolk and Suffolk - Lincolnshire 2ss. to 27.. fin e 11 -. Yorkshire Wold - Foreign Beans, Old 3 3'2-26 1i : t ttt ocl o o - 34 328 fi n e fifi cee 536°314 541 1. • Oats, Potato 2os, to 23z. fi 95a. - Poland -s. 19s. to 22a. fine - Friezland and Small - Healing Shelling 24s. to 275. 6d. per ' L o - sit Malt 3ss. 40s. fine 435. per poi Rapeseed SCOTCH MARKETS. Wheat. Barley Oats. Beans. t! ... t.„./ Aberdeen ...... 40 49 22 26 18 20 9 . 7 36 40 18 21 13 15 18 20 ' 26 / Coldstream 36 38 18 19 13 14 19 21 / Cti par 48 56 26 31 18 22 22 26 "" / Dundee—..... 50 60 30 33 20 25 30 31 "" / 40 49 24 26 16 20 23 30 5 Inverness—, 36 44 25 27 18 19 27 't" Kelso 34 42 19 21 13 15 20 23 5 Kirkaldy-- 48 61 23 29 10 2 0 45 48 ." 1 1 Perth 50 50 23 26 20 22 22 25 The size of the measure varies throughout EDINBURGH CORN MARKET.—JuIy „atil t We had a larg e supp l y o f a ll ki n d s of Grain to-day, an sales were rather better. Wheat. Barley. Oats. Pease. 13e11 0:: : . First 63s Oct —s Od 21s 4d a3s Od " , " Second sBs Od .—s Od 20s Od 32s Od Third sos Od —s Od 18s Od 30s Od •' j PRICES OF PROVISIONS, &C. 8. 1 Beef, per lb. Os. 4d. to Os. 6d. Fresh Butter, lb. Os. 9d. t 0 0 ~ Mutt0n.—......—.... 0 5 0 6 Salt Ditto—. 0 8 0 u Veal —......—............ 0 4 0 8 Ditto, per c% t. 70 0 0 0 0 Pork 0 4 0 6 E ggs , per d oz. 0 7 6 . Lamb, per qr. 1 6 3 6 OatStrawocpl.) 5 6 6 0 "Fallow, cwt.... 85 8 37 6 Wheat Ditto,,. 5 6 5 I ', Quartern Loaf 0 8 0 0 Barley Ditto,., 4 6 0 II; Potatoes, 1711 b. 0 5 0 0 Hay, per 5t........... 0 8 ____/ EDINBURGH MEA There was a good supply of and the sales were dull, at last Per Sack of 2801 b. Imp. First Oatmeal Second ditto 1 8 0 Barleymeal 1 6 0 Peas era eal 1 3 0 Pot Barley—No. 1, per cwt. 12 L M A RKET.--July 23. a rice‘ Oatmeal at this day's °I week's prices. Per Stone 01 141 b 044 1 0 First Oatmeal , Second ditto Barleyrneal ........ 0 Peasemeal v .. 1 0 / s.-2d. 145.-3 d, 165.---• . . GLASGOW CORN MARKET.—JuIy 24. , o ns A t i have advanced Is. per boll, and oth er descript , el , are likewise held at some advance. I , 1 Wheat, per 2401 b. s. d. s. d. Oats, per 2641 b. l• d. 0) lii British, old 230 to 29 0 Irish l4 0 t IP new 26 0 28 6 British l5 0 Canada, free 2B 0 30 0 Beans, per 2601 b. n .11 Irish Barley, per 3201 b. Scottish .0 1 u English — 0 C Pease, Scottish ... 14 , C). o i , Scottish 23 0 25 0 Oatmeal, p er 1401 b. 12 ',lli Irish CORNWALL. MARKETS. Tadao—Wheat (average) 21s.—Barley, 9s. 6d.—Oats, 8.4. 6 ` 1 "d/ ST. AUSTELL—Wheat, —.9. to 21s.—Barley, —4. to 95.0" 74. to Bs. 6d. 0 01 ',. PENZANCE—Wheat, 20s. to 21s.—B ar l ey, 9a. to 10e.., 0,- Os. to 7s. Od.—Beef and Mutton, Od. to 6d.—Pork, Od. t° Butter, Sid. per lb. 0 0 LA U stcEsToN—Wh eat (average) 198.6.1—Barley, Ps.(4l.•*" ss. 31—Beef, sd.—Mutton, Cxl. ' OP LtsFcEAßD—Wheat, —s. to 20s. o,l.—Barley, Us. 0ct.... O atj to 6s. 6d. 0 Bon:gut—Wheat (average)2a.—Barley, Os. Od.—Oats. ii A HELsToN—Wheat, 9.15. 6d.—Barley, 9s 6d. .0.1 3 v ST. CoLumn—Wheat, 20s. to —L—Barley, 7s, to 1 0 s. and Mutton, sd. to 6d.—Veal, Od.—Lamb, Od. MINING INTELLIGENCE. Ton , . `0 Quantity of Cpe Copper Ore sold at Redruth last Thurday 3,0 ‘ C Average Produce - 7' . 0 jo Quantity of fine Copper-- ,416,°1' Amount of Sale. 18,3101. 10s. 6d.—AverageSt a nd a rd. 113- - WO' FISHING EXTRAORDINARY. ---011 • .4( nesday last as two pilots (who were at sea figitj mackerel) were hauling in their lines they &ser f o il solan goose hovering near them, which made a pluug h e •Os seized the bait. It was brought to land at South S l ' l- 0 and is considered a great curiosity, birds of this deserir being rare on this coast.—Newcastle Journal. fiS THE LATE DEATH OF WOOD, WATERMAN, I N SHADWELL.--.011 Friday, a long itl f- i peo gation, relative to this affair, took place at the 113 :(10 Police O ffi ce , b e f ore M r . B RODERIP. On 1 1°r re morning Mr. S MITH , su p er i n t en d en t o f th e K divisioU t rof ceived informati on th a t policeman HALPINE bad :s 00 that he had seen th e deceased WOOD knocked opposite the White Hart. Mr. Swam immediately ° o 4 be HALPINE before him, and on questioning him by vine' had seen WOOD knocked down, he shook his head, ° , or , plied, "He shouldn't like to say who it was. i fb° SMITH carried HALPINE before Colonel RowArlf tbd took down his statement in writing, and then se° ors statement to the Thames Police Office. When Of BRODERIT questionedHALritie,he equivocated very 01 0 11 ; and said, he did not say he saw a man "knocked dol t o t but " shoved down." Th e f o ll ow i ng was the atatel e l taken down in w r iti ng . - 4. I sa w the deceased 1 3°. fat out of the White Hart by Sergeant DOUGLAS ; he rau t bf about ten or fifteen yards, stumbling, and said Curs 1 0 police,' on which Sergeant PATERSON (K 9) rim of him, and put his hand to his neck, and he fell doivi l ' o tt which I run over ; I assisted to carry him, and 10/ show the spot where he fell. I saw no blow strut a r il Sergeant P A TERSON deni e d this s t a t e m e nt.---S e i e policemen stated that on Thur s day m orning no ry s e W who was drunk, stated that he knew something 0100 death of WooD. He saw him knock e d down. bed' the policemen questioned him further, he shook M t He likewise stated that DOUGLAS w as i nnocen t ; "' o re said anything more another must suffer. All coa l , Jr in saying that HALPINE was intoxicated.—HALrl, g dared that he said what he did in consequence of b e 'ZIS toxicated ; he knew nothing more than that 1N ... ," 0 4 ( ' pushed the deceased out of the White hart' cbrk BRODERIP said HALPINE must know more th an to say, or that which he bad stated must be un", u " .ll l verdict of m ur d er h a d b een re t urne d aga i nst a Fw i r c. o t of the K division unknown. It was f or the in te c i e - r e be the policemen to find out th e g u ilty pa r ty, a nd u° er, present circumstances he should leave M r . SMITH i t SIF e deavour to arrive at the truth. HALPINE then l L ot office.—lt will be recollected, that at the i l ly, pieman, named BENNETT, deposed to having see n knocked down by a policeman with his staff. BIRTHS. „ On the 27th inst., the lady of W . J . L awson , place, Regent's.park, of a son . f 14°6 ij' On the 27th inst., th e w if e of E R. Daniell, Esq., square, of a son. MARRIED. Po fib p On the 24th ult., at th e B r iti s h Ambassador's ChaP e "l'to by the Right Rev. Bishop Luscomb, W. Warren, O g t ,. ° zabeth Courtenay, second daughter of Sir W. Sti ll Island of St. Vincent. .„k et s t On the 27th inst., at St. John's Church, 11 °., n o ulu Thomas R. Kemp, late of Hackney, to Esther , daughter of Mr. William Nesbitt, of Old-street-road. 0 0 DIED, mr Off 0 1 On the 25th inst., at 'his house, Goswell-road, ye.- Fleming, late of the Bank of England, in the bn"' leo his ago. ~,, 1 on. /3 ,, i btt On the 21st inst., at Babbicombe, near Torquay. d `- 1 Sarah Anne, wife ot Sir John Arundel, of Hunting d ° "' 1 0 aged 61. n ' On the 27th inst., at Westmoreland.plcae, CRY" road DionJO 70th year, Mr. William G race , f orm erly of th e —1 surance-office. PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY MURDO YOUI"" Surf OFFIC I P, RAND, 14010°F. CONTRA PEPARTII I f v4l 4:,"' th talq g Slay on l. ," • Couraekt._ p . Tale . itti ll o 4 . be 4 Th e : 1 41:1 THE W t i l PaPerp • Coust of I L izt at . :v e Ytd e 1, al the in () T ar f t „ % o c r e 7 on 44 d ed ' „ "l4 th Kati e ee 4vlees G,(,.$ ,the. ti e 1 , t . Gaz a . "Aetch of ti„, °f.lions ao th P u b, , I. dune, ,netou.s4.,