The Sun. — London, England, 1833-06-17 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE_ PUBLIC JOURNALS, Every one fores•w e efrom the fist announcement of the measure of re ( Ortn, which has since been passed into Ow, that the old faction --which-had for en many a ears held possession of the Government,. by the single tervi . re of an abuse of all the national institution, institutio, would resist to the utmost, and, if necessary', die in the last ditch of the last of the rotten boroughs. The Toty portion of the House of Lords—the great - dept of corruption anal public robbery—did, indeed, fight a hard battle for their boroughs, and were only' deterred from carrying the op position further by the dread of seeing a creation of liberal Peers, which would have wrested the fixed majority of the House out of the Tory hands, and thus deprived their own junta of the power of stopping the future progress of freedom, riding roughshod over the Whig Ministry, as often as occasion might s,rve, and eettine rid of them by one deadly vote at the most convenient mo ment. This, we doubt not, was the tactic of the Con servative camp, and to its evil ends it was contrived with subtlety. How these Conservatives had :employed their official power, is not unknown to the country. It w,ls a regular scheme of fraud and plunder. They used the produce of the taxes, as a landlord tines the rent of his own freehold estate; the treasury was emptied to find un earned incomes for their unprovided and expensive families, and the:public service pinched in many important branch. s that these swarms of patrician locusts might be multiplied and gorged. Due pains, however, were at all times taken by the Tories to shroudh these transactions in impe netrable darkness. For years it was with the utmost diffi culty that a single official document, when moved for, could be wrung from the Tory predecessors of the Reform Government, of a nature to throw light upon the pensions and sinecures held by their connexions). It was " harsh," it was " invidious and unnecessary !" As to any efficient check to this iniquity, the thing was laughed at ; indeed it was impracticable, and for this obvious reason—that a - Parliament which did not represent the nation, but the oligarchy, could he kept in order no otherwise than by a systematic bribing of the lordly proprietors of the House of Commons, and that no administration could stand fur a month which did not satisfy their cravings. But since the accession of Lord Grey to office, full information on the details of this abominable corruption has been laid before the country. In another part of this journal will be found an extract from the list of sinecures lately printed by he House of Commons, where the working of the Tory principle of government is illustrated by a few instances, taken almost at random from a catalogue of several hundreds, and which affords explanations of the virtuous impulses which acet ate the conservatives as a body. The efforts now making by the faction of which a certain military Duke is the leader to 'rush or clock the reform spirit (such is their madness !) before its fruits can be made available toathe people of England by specific measures for carrying the principle into effect, are just the agonies of a dying robber, clutching convulsively the purse of gold about to escape from him for ever. Lord Melville's influence with the Tory Cabinets for the last 25 or 30 years arose from his power over a large Scottish faction, which he anal his ancestor, the celebrated Harry Dundas, had hired into their service by a dexterous application of the public money ; nor were the personal interests of the house of Dundas forgotten. We find by this list that Viscount Melville (a prime favourite, be it knoll n, with the Duke of Wellington, and with the unfriended officers of the British navy—God save the mark !) had long ago bestowed upon himself a pretty sinecure, en titled " Keeper of the Privy Seal of Scotland," producing to this patriotic Tory a good 3,0001. per annum. His Lordship's son, the Hon. William Dundas, has another sinecure, that of the Keeper of the Signet, 2,300/., and a third sinecure (Good Heaven !) viz., Register of Seising, of 5,500/. per annum-11,0001. between father and son ! Lord Ellenborough (a Conservative, not without cause shown) has an office—a flagrant sinecure, cut down in defiance of all good government from 9,5001. to upwards of 6 000/. a year, besides half of another sinecure of 2,000/. ! The Irish Tory (Knox) Lord Ranfurly has wriggled himself, by a discreet management of his bo rough of Dungannon, into a sinecure legal office, for which he has been awarded the villanoul " compensa tion" of 7,1501. per annum. So, Lord Hardwicke, compensation to the amount of 7,150/. per annum; two Beresfords (" Beresfords," a name to turn a whole nation's stomach !) have sinecure compensation of 4,300/. per annum ; Earl Bathurst (old Bathurst), 3,700/. per annum ; the Duke of Montrose, an old Tory Duke, 2.000/. per annum ; so Seymours (Hertford Sey mours), Jenkingons, Percevale, Kenyons, Malme,burys, Manchesters (Duke of Manchester), figure in this precious list, all atrocious Tories. There are others, almost end less, male and female; they shall be notified and enlarged upon at the fitting season. They are alt of the same kid. ney—the Wellington faction. With them any guaiditte ship, by representatives of the people, over their oat n money, any obstacle to the Tory monopoly and perpetuity of plunder, is no less than "revolution." Equality of rights, and of legal protection, that, in the eyes of the Tory interest of the Wellington clique—that is republican ism, and must he put down by the sword. Yea, that is the final decision and doctrine of the Tories. " Make the Duke Minister," they cry, "and he will put the rascals down in a month." He will take off the as sessed taxes to gain a little passing popularity, He will give 1/. notes to augment the amount of gambling speculation and (utterly worthless) money. He will take reaction (ay, "reaction," the idiots expect that) at the flood, and then dissolve the Parliament. And what Parliament will he get by such a dissolution ? " Re tern a Tory Parliament through dint of enormous bribery, goverri by its votes, and marshal the army to support them." Why, the whole corporation has gone stark mad. What ! bribe the English nation, once awake to the plots . of its enemies, into a co-operation with them? All the treasures that have been dug out of the earth since the deluge would not buy the present, however imperfect, constituency of England to the return of a Tory 'Parlia.: mend Let that game, then, be abandoned at once as desperate—let the military faction, and that other spurious faction which torments and disgraces the Royal chambers —let them stick to more feasible devices—let them appeal directly to the bayonet. Fail of course it will, but fail it cannot more assuredly than the blockhead scheme of rating this roused people by a conservative Hou•e of Commons. Toryism and terrorism are equally bastard vvetpons ofsovereign power, and bastards enough may he found to wield them both ; but there is no Falconbridge about the Court of William.— Times. The same persons who were at the pains to designate the late vote of the House of Lords as the certain fore- runner of a serious eollision between the two Houses, are now not less sedulously employed in anticipating a similar result from the negative which they choose to assume that . _ . . the Upper House will put upon the Irish Church Bill. Whether such is likely to be the case or not, we cannot but condemn the tone in which the House of Lords is treated upon the occasion. We shall not be suspected of any want of zeal in the cause of reform when we say that we never yet saw the cause the justice of which Mild be promoted by clamour or intimidation, and that to take a% - ay from the Upper House the first characteristic of a - - d e lib e ,-ative assemb'y, is neither more nor less than to de. pr i ve it pf the main feature which can give value to its d ec i s i ons . Nor are we prepared to pay such botuav,e to the present Min i sters, or the present House of Com mons, as to say that, whatever the one suggests, or the other pdsses, is of nececaity so imbued with wisdom or justice as to put any discussion upon its provisions else where entirely out of the question, This would be at any time to reader the House of Lords a mere cipher in the Constitution, and would go very far inflect' to et,tdblish its utter imbecility, which some few public writtrs are at this time so unwisely and intemperately contending for. We are among the number of those who have never ceased to regret the course which the majority of the House of Lords took upon the Reform Bill—t; cour6e . which evinced a more narrow-minded attachment to existing and I eredi tary abuses, and a retreat in the rear of the spirit a the age, which could not fail to be injurious both to the cha- racter of the Horse itself, and, with it, to the inte ,, ,ts of the country. We lived, however, to see that ditli,•ulty overcome without recourse to any violent and une(ooititu- Coital measures, and we feel, therefore, the more confident that the House of Lords, however reluctantly, must be brought at last to yield to the force of public opinion, un equivocally and constitutionally expressed. But then comes the question whether the Irish Church Reform Bill is a measure which, in its present state, carries with it all that overwhelming feeling of assent which for,cd the House of Lords to give way upon the other measure ? Upon this point we apprehend there is great differeuea of op i n i on . At any rate we do not believe that the details and consequences of the proposed measure are yet suffi ciently understood by the country, to render its immediate rejection or approval a Matter on which any very strong feeling either has been or is likely to be evinced. We look, on the contrary to its approaching discussion in the Lords as more likely to enlighten the public mind upon the subject than any which it has yet undergone ; and even should such discussion end in the present rejection of the Bill, it does not at all follow that on that account any volli• lion between the Houses need take place, or that this , who feel the necessity of a reform in the Irish church need despair of seeing that reform ere long take place. Were the House of Lords capriciously to reject Bills either for the removal or laying on of taxre, or in any nth. r w•inner embarrass the machine, y of Ciovi:rnment, the rircuu,s! Jur& would be very different ; but the measure in question is •one upon which that House, from- the presence of its spiritual Members, among other reasons, is peculiarly qualified and called upon to deliberate, and we therefore most decidedly deprecate any interference with that right of deliberation, or any intemperate inference from its supposed result. —Morning Herald. We understand that the Lords are determined, before the Church of Ireland Bill gives them the opportunity, to afford a demonstration of their power, and their disposition to use it. The discussion on the Local Courts Bill ccmes on to night, and we understand that it is to be thrown out by a considerable majority. Of course we shall hear a variety of arguments, such as they are, against the Bill, by Lord Eldon, and it will be opposed also by a man possessed of a very different quality of intellect, Lord Lyndhurst. He will no doubt urge the best arguments that can be urged against the Bill ; but, after all, what do they amount to ? We shall hear a great deal about the degradation of the bench and bar, and the tendency of tl e system to destroy the uniformity of law and procedure. We shall bear a great deal too from Captain Hall, and writers of his kidney, of the litigious disposition gene rated in America by cheap law, the advantages of ex pensive law in frightening parties into compromises, and the risk which respectable country gentlemen would run of being worried by actions tried by juries of envious neighbours in little towns, and a number of other argu ments of this kidney. The advantage of the great body of the people, now literally excluded from the courts and denied justice, will go for nothing. Why should the people be considered ? No man ought to go to law if he have not a sufficiency of money to expend on lawyers of a high grade, in order that the decision may be pro nounced after the utmost attention has been bestowed in arguing the case. All who are without a sufficiency of money to fee first rate barristers in London ought to re nounce all thoughts of entering Courts of Law. We must not have cheap law but need law, and good law can only be obtained by excluding all from redress who are not able to pay largely for it. We recommend to the public to watch well the movements of their LordNhips this day. They will see from the temper of the Peers what hope they can have of any thing really beneficial to the people from Tory ascendancy. In this union between professional selfishness and aristocratic arrogance, the convenience of the middle and lower classes goes for no thimr. We defy any man to offer any argument in favour of a denial of justice to the mass of the community, which any men of plain understandings (having no professional or party bias) would not instantly reject. What, for in stance, would the people of Scotland say, who have the benefit of Local Courts which can decide causes of any amount, if it were propoeed to abolish them, and to place Scotland on the footing of Eng'and ? Why, the people would to a man rise against any such attempt. But be cause the p. ogle of England have hitherto In en sacrificed to aristocratical pride and professional monopoly, is that a reason, now that they have representatives who can give effect to their wishes, that they should continue to he treated with contempt and insult—why they should be worse off with respect to justice than the Scotch ? Morning Chronicle. Nothing can exceed the rage and disappointment of the Destructives at the slightest attempt practically to assert the ancient doctrine that the British Constitution is one of independent and balanced powers. These gentry first fl lter themselves that they have procured a House of Commons which they can urge to any extreme of profli gacy, and even treason, arid then assert that all the power of the State should be concentrated in that House, to the total and contemptuous exclusion of the co-ordinate au thority of the King and the Peers. Was this, after all, the real meaning of the boasted Reform Bill? We always knew, and duly and constantly warned the people, that such was its tendency ; but we scircely expected that the nefarious design should be so suddenly and impudently avowed as ripe for execution. Yet we r joice that such is the case, and we trust that, as the public enemy has brought on the collNion, and challenged the controversy, the mighty question involved will not be allowed to sleep till it be finally settled upon principles level to the appre hension of erery man in the kingdom. Let the question be fairly met, without subterfuge or equi vocation, and not at some indefinite future time, but now. The Times broadly asserts the principle that the existence of any authority independent of the House of Com mons is equivalent to the "absolute extinction of that Assembly," and calls upon the House to put this principle on record " instanter " by a formal vote ; the assertion of the contrary principle it represents as "a direct war upon the nation," which ought to he resisted to the last ex tremity. Now we are sure that we may venture, on be half of all that is conservative and constitutional (for the terms are now convertible) in the land, to join issue with the Destructives upon this single point, are we to have one power in the Constitution, or three powers ? The doctrine of the Times—we shall not minee the matter— points distinctly to the destruction of the Peerage, and the overthrow of the Monarchy, with the natural, if not ne cessary, accompaniments of civil war, and the uprearing, for a second time, at Whitehall, of a Republican scaffold, to be steeped in Royal blood. We are content to put the question first to the tenpound householders, and next to the people of England at large, whether this be what is intended by the reform of the Constitution ? Let all men choose, we say, and let none be n e utr a l, be- tween King, Lords, and Commons, each guaranteed in the independent exercise of their proper functions, and the unchecked and remorseless domination of a Ja cobin club. We protest, however, against any misrepre sentation of the real question at issue. The Peers simply claim to exercise rights which have devolved upon them through a series of ages, and which they have no power to relinquish, without the abandonment of a most sacred public trust ; and who, we ask, but traitors to their country, and apostates from all principle, can possibly be found to oppose this claim ? If the Peers have failed to perform their duties, let the fact be proved. and the guilty parties held up to merited disgrace. If the cir cumstances of the world have so alt-red, as that a House of Lords is no longer a valuable part of the constitution, let a Bill be forthwith brought in for its abolition. But so long as the Pe. rs shall remain in possession of legal and constitutional rights, every honest man• is bound, as be tenders the well-being of his country, and the very existence of social order, to support them i❑ the unfet tered exercise of those rights. This is not a question of reform, for reform is carried, and the enraptured mu;ti tude hive long since entered into full possession of " the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill.' Nor does the present question respect any of the legitimate and avowed fruits of the Bill, for they were all alleged to be perfectly compatible with the free and unquestioned exercise of the rights and privileges of the Peers : we were to have reform, not revolution, and reform to prevent not to precipitate re , volution. Neither can it in this case be said that any particular measure, loudly called for by the general voice of the people, is placed in jeopardy by the particular vote anticipated from the Peers, for the Irish Church Reform Bill has never, to our knowledge, won the special admira tion of any of the parties, political or religious, into which this versatile nation has the happiness of being divided. But then the opposition of the Peers would affect the sta bility of the popular Whig Ministers. We beg pardon, but in our ignorance we thought, judging from the press, from public meetings, from various elections, and from general report, that less popan Ministers never existed. Be this, however, as it may, their existence is not neces- . - sarily compromised by au adverse vote, and they hive. proved themselves to possess in a remarkable degree the faculty of adhering to office in defiance, not only of the House of Lords, but of the intelligence and general feeling of the country. Any objection, therefore, to the indepen dent exercise of the rights of the Peers upon the present occasion c m only be regarded as a wanton, and malignant, and treasonable attack, by whomsoever urged, upon the most sacred principles of the Constitution. We leive it to the country to decide whether such an attack shall be successful.—Morning Post. Upon what grounds, let us ask these Tory conspirators, do they calculate upon turning out the present Adminis tration, and a successful usurpation of their places ? Is it upon their unpopularity? There is some plea for the existence of such a ground of hope; for the Ministers, by their too great leaning to Toryism, have unquestionably lost much of the popularity which they so justly deserved from the passing of the Reform Act ; but are they, the Tories themselves, more popular? Hive they become favourites with the people in proportion as the harts cf the latter have turned away from the Whigs? Has their opposition, not only to the Reform Bill, but to every measure of useful improvement and necessary eco- nomy, endeared them to the country ? Or rather is it mit the fact now, as it was two years ago, that they have no support in the country—that they stand precisely in the same unenviable relation to it as they then did? Are they not the anthers of all the unne- cessary pensions, and undeserved sinecures, as well as of the enormous debt, which destroys the industry and galls the spirit of the country ? And is it for these things that it will support and cherish them? But, say they, the King ant the Court are with us. Be it so; hut we nevertheless 'question the fact. The King has hitherto never been wanting in a clear perception both of his own interests and of those of his country —on every great occasion he has always been found equal to butt. ; and until we have better evidence of the fact than we ) . t poß ses, we will rot believe that he will act otherwise. , 1:.:0 hie interest as Well as duty direct. But even supposing that be were to do so, could be and the Peers united crush the energies and subdue the spirit of this mighty empire ? The times of Charles I. and of James 11. are standing mementoes to the contrary, of which his Majesty cannot fail to be aware. Lastly, sup posing a Tory government to be the result of Tory in sanity and royal delusion, what is to be done with the Commons ? Are they to vote themselves idiots by aban doning an Administration in which, but the other day, they declared their entire confidence, or are they to he dismissed and a new House to be called ? And if they are sent back to their constituents, will one of a more Tory complexion, and more in harmony with the Peers, be re. turned? Is not the most probable result, in either case, the adoption of that ultimo ratio to which recourse was once before hid—the voting of the Peers to be a nuisance ? —lMrniny Advertiser. REFORMING THE LORDS. Paley said, that there was " not more paradox than truth in the much-decried apophthegm that an independent House of Commons is incompatibl e with the existence of the Monarchy." Had lie lived in our days and changed " Monarchy" for " House of Lords," the " apophthegm" would have appeared to be perfectly true and by no means paradoxical. For the writers and thinkers who were wont to maintain that the government of the country was carried on by a system of checks and balances—that King, Lords, and Commons, had each a concurrent, but neither of them a predominant power in the State—are fast disappearing. Experience has de molished their theories—if theories they can pro perly be termed, which will not bear reducing to practice. At one period of our history, as for in stance under the Tudors, the Kingly power was all but despotic; and both Houses of Parliament shi vered under the frown of the Monarch. At short and brief intervals, the House of Commons, with the aid of some mighty popular delusion, as in the days of the Popish Plot, bullied the other• tao Estates. But since the Revolution,—since the country has made the greatest advances in civiliza tion and wealth,—since, in fact, the ruling power has been most productive of good things to its pos sessors,—the aristocracy have coerced the Monarch and the people, by means of a corrupt House of Commons. In the British Constitution, then, as in that of every other country, there has always been one, though not the came, predominant power. At the present time, there can be no question as to the quarter in which that power is deposited : it is irre sistible i►► the hands of the Representatives of the people; and both King and Lords must submit to it, in like manner as the Commons have submitted in their days of thraldom. Fortunately, in regard to the Monarch, no ques tion arises. The King of England goes with, and does not thwart the nation; and there is no dispo sition to curtail or interfere with the exercise of his executive authority. But the House of Lords is refractory, and must be reduced to obedience. Their late decision, and the Ministerial avowals which it occasioned, prove beyond all question, that, as at present constituted, it is a s!umblingblock in the way of improvement, which it would be the merest imbecility not to remove. We attach no great im• portance to the Mignelite vote. The wellbeing of the country was little concerned in the question; but its decision► against the Ministers, and against the known fe:lings of the nation and its representa tives, reminds those who had forgot, that tl►e Peer age is determined to use the power which it must possess if suffered to remain in its present state, to render the Reform Act impotent for good. Lord J. Russell admitted that the fear of a collision with the majority in the Lords restrained the Ministers from doing what they knew to be advantageous for the country. It may be said that this is a mere cloak for their own lukewarmness or incapscity, of which the Ministers are glad enough to avail them selves. Suppose it were so—the effect is equally pernicious whether the excuse be real or feigned. It will serve the present, and not merely the pre sent, but future Administrations also, as a reason or pretence for numberless sins of omission. Unless, therefore, we are prepared to throw away the fruits of victory, and will lazily and infamously consent to see that reform for which we have toiled so hard, converted into a mockery arid abor tion, means must speedily be taken to reform the House of Lords. That matters would come to this at last, we have long ago arid very often de clared. It would seem that the time it come when the canveision of the House of Lords, from being an obstacle in the way of improvement, to an instru ment of good, must be effected. The question is, in what way this can best be done, and done quickly. The readiest remedy is the usual one—a large creation of new Members. The long reign of the Tories has crammed the House of Lords with Tory Peers : it might be of service to turn the scale by selecting a number of Whig gentlemen, who have become Reformers, and promoting them to the rank of hereditary legislators. But the objections which arise to the adoption of this mode of proceeding are numerous and important. A Ministerial majority might indeed he secured thereby for the present; but how long it would remain Ministerial, how soon a fresh creation would be required, no man can foretell. The King of the French created sixty ❑ew Peers for• the purpose of procuring a vote for the abolition of their owe► hereditary privileges; but the majority nevertheless soon afterwards became anti-ministerial; and more Peers were necessarily created. You can place no reliance upon the con• duct of any man who may do as he likes, and is responsible to no one but himself Earl Grey has found that some of his new-made Peers, the Mar quis of Westmeath for example, are not to be de pended upon. The evil, therefore, may be only remedied for a very short and uncertain period by the creation of new Peers, who are expected to take the popular side in politics —were they made to serve aristocratic purposes, the case, we grant, would be materially changed. Another objection to the augmentation of the Peerage is, that it is a great deal too numerous already for any legislative purposes. The few well informed and patriotic members which it contains are outvoted, and their influence is nullified, by the mob of ignorant, thoughtless, and dissipated Lords. This evil is glaring, and requires a remedy. Why, then, it may be said, would you resort to the as sured means to augment it P—for it should be re membered, that although virtuous and able men may be selected in the first instance, the chances are greatly in favour of their successors being scamps. Then again, the Peerage is an irresponsible body. The King may be controlled through his Ministers; the Members of the House of Commons must answer for their conduct to their• constituents; but neither King nor people can call the Lords to ac count. 'This irresponsibility in the exercise of ex- tensive power is an anomaly in the constitution of a country pretending to be free. It is an anomaly, moreover, productive of much practical mischief. To increase indefinitely the number of persons to whom the exercise of this irresponsibl e power is conceded, must therefore be a questionable proceed ing, however it may be recommended by the neces sity of the case. _ Some of the readers of the Spectator may recol lect, that, neatly two years ago, before the idea of " swamping" the Peers had become popular, we suggested a mode, which, though by no means free from objection, might still have the effect of render ing the House of Lords more useful than it now is. The use of a Second Chamber is to prevent legisla tion from being precipitate and slovenly —t o revise and perfect the decrees of the First Chamber. Now the House of Loids is, and from its constitu- tion necessarily must be, a very bad instrument for this end. But if, with a due reservatio n o f ex i st i ng rights, the hereditary p rivileges of th e P eers as le gis lators were abolished, and m future, lif e peerages only were created, and regard had not so much to the wealth or birth, as to the virtue and acquire ments of those upon whom they were bestowed, then, we should stand some chance of having a sound constituency, out of which some fifty or a hundred really useful and well-info rme d as well as independent *n a tors might be chosen. These Srnators would be responsible to the great body of ; I the Peerage. It is to be observed that this propo .sition goes only to limit the legislatorial power of the Lords : their rank, titles, orders, and other gew- I gaws of distinction, might remain as before. But, in like manner as the Scotch Peers are elected by the members of their own body to represent them, so might the British Peerage also meet to elect their representatives. The anomaly of the absolute ir responsibility of the House of Lords would thus be got rid of. The Peers elected to Parliament would be simply trustees for the body to which they be long, and responsible to that body for the execu tion of their trust. There is one objection to this scheme, the force of which we do not mean to dis semble. It is certainly possible that, as the Scotch Peers at the last election returned a compact phalanx of Conservatives, so the British Peers might return none but anti-popular and prejudiced men to repre sent them. But this part of the plan must be taken in connection with that which suggests the propriety of a large creation of Peers for life—liberal and enlightened men of course. It would be also an indispensable part of the scheme that the twenty-six Bishops should cease to be legislators. The Times suggests a very simple mode of accomplishing this—namely, by re pealing the Act of Charles 11., which reseated them in the Lords as Temporal Peers, after their well deserved expulsion in the reign of his father. The same object could be accomplished in connexion with the reform of the church, by compelling them to tend their flocks--to constant residence in their own dioceses. Almost all these Bishops are bad senators in every sense. Their expulsion would benefit both church and state, and do harm to no mortal breathing. All these measures, it will be said, are merely palliatives ; the grand effectual remedy would be the total abolition of the House of Lords. The Examiner of last Sunday stated this broadly enough —" If the institution be useful and trustworthy, leave it free to work according to its discretion; if it be antagonist to the public interest, depose it." As the Examiner thinks the House of Lords is nei ther useful nor trustworthy, the alternative which it would recommend is obvious. It may one day come to this : but we imagine the public mind is not yet ripe for any such measure as the total abrogation of the Peerage. That, in the event of the abolition of the present House of Peers, it would be advisable to provide some substitute in the shape of a Second Chamber or Senate, chosen by the people, after the fashion of the United States, will be generally admitted. Were such a Senate composed of men of superior acquirements, more gravity of character, and of a higher standing than those sent to the House of Commons, the advan tages to be derived from it would soon be apparent. Into such an assembly several of the Peers would find admittance. We are not part;al to the discussion of changes of this description in our form of government. We h►d rather make the three estates of the realm the instruments of practical good to the nation, by judi cious, and not violent, reforms in their modes of working. But the folly arid obstinacy of the ma jority of the House of Peers render some momen tous experiment upon the constitution of their body absolutely necessary ; and the way to render it prac ticable and safe is, to prepare the public mind for it by discussions conducted with temper and gravity, and a total absence of mere party feeling and preju dice.—Spectator. THE DESPOTISM OF THE LORDS. " The cry is still they come !"—The Lords are, it is said, resolved to try their strength, and, if it be true that they are encouraged by assur ances that there will be no creation, they have the comfort and consolation of knowing that if they fall in the struggle, they will not fall alone, and more than one hereditary institution must be involved in the ruin. With this threatening prospect the magnani mous hostility of the Ministerialists takes its usual direction—of a set at the Queen and the Bishops. All the blame is flung upon the Bishops in the House, and a petticoat in the Court. This is a cowardly choice of objects of attack. To dislodge the Bishops from the House of Lords would not abate the vice of its principle, and there is an advantage, while we have a House of Lords, in seeing the fruits of a National Church so frankly exhibited in it. Worthy of the Lords are the Bishops, and the Bishops of the Lords. The people must now sufficiently well under stand the spirit and character of the House of Lords ; they know that no measure, abating abuses as profitable to the aristocracy as inju rious to the public, has a chance of success in that assembly. They see in it an obstinate ob stacle to all improvement, but the understanding of its character should be accompanied with an understanding of its constitution, whence the two things will be viewed in the relation of cause and effect. Responsibility is the essence of' constitutional government. The Ministers are responsible for the King, the Commons to the people; the Lords are responsible neither to the King, whose prerogative is the source of their authority, nor to the people, who are submitted to their autho rity. The authority of Peers is the only autho rity in the State which cannot be stripped away if abused. The King can make, but not un make, and the privileges which descend by birth cannot be taken away, except by death. A man who finds himself possessed of power, for le uses of which he is' not accountable, while he sees responsibility attached to all the other authorities around him, may easily come to the conclusion that the power for which he is respon sible to nobody, is to be exercised for his own particular benefit, and without regard to the in terests of others. It seems given to him for the exclusive care of himself, as neither King nor people can call him to account for his exer cise of his power. The perpetual solicitation of an irresponsible power is, abuse me; and its natural tendency is the narrowest selfishness and wilfulness, two qualities which are consequently seen extraordinarily developed in the House of Mischief. The only hold upon the House is the power of creation in the Crown ; but this can hardly be said to produce a responsibility, as the power abused is still continued to the individual, and the worthy and unworthy are equally affected by the discredit brought on the House collectively by the royal appointment of a majority. The more extensive the factious corruption and mis conduct of the House, the more injurious to the institution is a creation ; and the Lords have thus the encouragement of knowing that the wider their confederacy against good govern ment, the more unmanageable and difficult the coercion. There is no other i ns tit ut i on t h e errors and vices of which can only be conquered through a damage to the institution itself. In other instances, the present members are liable to removal ; in this they remain fixed, after sig nalizing their unfitness for the authority. The irresponsible power is o f course i ndefeas i ble. Curious it is that the Man of his Order has incalculably accelerated the downfal of his Order; and yet the Whigs have no wish to damage the House of Lords ; all they desire is to make it their own ; and this done they would extol the virtues of the institution to the skies. But the process must have its consequences. The con tempt with which the Whi gs treated the late vote cannot but have its effect. They said the vote mattered no more than the resolution of so many The Chronicle says—" We tell the public that a crisis is again at hand, and that they must be prepared to buckle on their armour for the fight. If our warning voice have no effect, then, as was said in the olden time, The Lord's will be done.'" We suppose the Lord's will will be done, even if the Chronicle's warning voice have effect; for we are not prepared to pay our contemporary so bad a compliment as he offers himself when he supposes that in failure of his warning voice, the Lord's will will hav e e ff ec t. A s f or the buckling on of armour, if the necessity arrives, the people will see the prudence of wearing it to such pur pose that they shall not have occasion to trouble themselves speedily with it again. They will not buckle on arm our t o ma k e a Whig House of Peers in place of a Tory House of Peers— to adjust the differences between the tweedledum and tweedledee ; but apply themselves to a settle ment of the Government cleared of all unreason able privileges, vicious principles, and barbarous remnants of feudalism. The national quarrel with the House of Peers will be with the institution, and not with the composition of the assembly. The evils of a hereditary and irresponsible Legislature are not to be cured by a Minister's packing. A des potism tempered with puppets were too gross a farce for legislation.—Examiner. LAW OF DEBTORS AND CREDITORS, (From the Town.) The Solicitor-General, on Thursday, brought in a Bill, to be read a second time on Wednesday se'nnight, to amend the law of debtor and creditor, and which we con sider to be the very best Bill that has been introduced for many years. The outline of this Bill is, Ist. To give immediate executions upon all bonds and bills when due; and when from the nature of the engagement to pay a fired sum, at a named day, the strong probability is, that there is no just ground for resisting the payment, and where the want of punctuality in payment would be in Lifect a fraud upon the creditor. Exceptions may arise in cases of infancy or fraud in obtaining the security, but these may be provided for by requiring the party who has been defrauded to file his bill in Chancery for relief, ha mediately after he has discovered the fraud, or by obtain ing time and investigation in a Court of Law, upon full affidavits of the facts. At present it is absurd that a party who has given his bond or bill to pay at the expira tion of a specified time, should be allowed to lie by and afterwards obtain further time by sham pleading or other wise. In Scotland and in France at present this is not allowed, and the rendering credit more fixe.l and certain —we consider great advantage will be afforded by this provision to the commercial community. The 2d proviAion is to enable creditors to levy upon every description of property, viz., copybold, stock in the funds. chores in action, and debts, and to enable creditors to take each in execution. At present, a debtor possessed of these, and owing 10,0001., may go to prison, obtain the benefit of the rules, and live luxuriantly upon the produce of these. On the eve of imprisonment a debtor may sell, and convey his freehold property or household furniture, and lend the proceeds to a friend, who, after he has gone to prison, may, from time to time, pay him the interest, and neither the principal money lent nor the interest dur ing life can be touched. These present results of the ex• isting law are manifestly unjust, and inconsistent with other provisions, for in caseof a commission of bankruptcy, or discharge under the Insolvent Act, the assignees at pre sent are enabled to take the whole of the debtor's property, and where will be the injustice of extending the provisions to all cises? As respects copyhold property, the great ob jection hitherto has been on the part of lords of manors, but if it should be provided that they shall receive a moderate fine from the creditor on his taking posses- sion, as upon a change of ownership, we think their scruples will probably be removed, and, even without that allowance, we see no reason why the present power of lords of manors will not afford them ample protection. With respect to the public funds, as pro perty vested in them has long been divinable amongst creditors, as well in case of bankruptcy, general insolvency, as death, we see no reason why it should not be seizable by every description of creditor. And why should not a bond debt, or debt upon a bill of exchange, or other ordi nary debt, be equally, or indeed rather more, subject to execution than wearing apparel, bedding, and household furniture, the taking of which generally occasions more immediate inconvenience and distress than the seizure of debts could occasion? The 34 principal provision is to exempt a debtor from imprisonment and from all future liability provided he bona fide, without concealment, gives up the whole of his property to his creditors, and that four-fifths of his credi tors give him their certificate in effect of his having done so. This is in the spirit of the present bankrupt law, and would extend its provision to every description of debtor. At present, it is true, every debtGr, not guilty of fraud, may obtain his discharge from imprisonment under the Insol vent Act after a short imprisonment, but which he must without any real utility endure, and then, after his dis charge, his future effects remain liable to his former cre ditors; so that the discharged debtor has no motive for industry or to acquire property, but becomes a lazy and useless member of society. _ But, 4thly, in order justly to distinguish between the fraudulent and the unfortunate debtor, it is proposed to make the obtaining goods or credit by falsa pretences, or without at the time possessing the means, or just expec tation of ability to pay, a legal offence punishable by law, or at least as constituting exceptions to the exemption from continuing liability to pay. This enactment will require more precision in its terms. So, stbly, it is proposed that any fraud or misstate ment in disclosing the debtor's property shall be an inaict able misdemeanor. And, 6thly, it is proposed to abolish or at least greatly limit or modify the power of arrest on mesne process, the useless expense of which, with its incident of putting in bail, it is stated exceeds 300,000/. per annum, spent in law expenses, without any benefit to credit o r s or debtors. 7thly, It is proposed to provide for cases of fraud by enacting that when a creditor shall make an affidavit that his debtor is about to abscond to a foreign country, the latt , r may be taken immediately and imprisoned. The former of these last two provisions is merely a restora tion of the ancient lnv , according to which no creditor could arrest or even take in execution his debtor for a debt—it being considered in ancient times that it ought not to be allowed to a creditor, who has himself thought fit to give credit to and repose confidence in another of his own accord, to withdraw the same, and that conse quently he ought not to be allowed to arrest his debtor, and the ancient and present law of France does not allow an arrest for debt excepting in particul►r cases. It used to be a favourite maxim, and still is in many respects a prin ciple of English 14w, that personal liberty has nu equi valent, and that, at all events, it ought not to be effected except in cases of crimes dangerous to the community, and as Lord Holt emphatically expressed, " The r,straint of liberty is a sufficient provocation even to bystanders to in terfere—a provocation of all the subjects of EnglAnd." And it certainly is absurd that a creditor should be allowed as in effect a compensation for a mere pecuniary claim ma lignantly to imprison his debtor perhaps for life, and thus ,o deprive him of the means of maintaining himself and family, and, et the same time, to throw upon the county drunken cobblers. What claim to authority— to existence, can any assembly have whose 'de cisions are treated with this scorn ? The Whigs will call the thing folly one day and wisdom the next, but the people will not believe that the same tree produces grapes and sloes. The King is said to be obstinately opposed to a creation ; were the personage of less dig nity we might compare his conduct to that of the toper, who, when his friend fell in the gutter, hiccuped out, " My dear fellow, I can't help you up, but I'll do what I can, I'll lie down by you in the mire." Supposing this is his Majesty's resolution, as it must have been long known to Lord Grey, and equally. well known to him that measures of efficient reform were im practicable without a creation, for what object has he been carrying on the Government ? Not surely out of complaisance to the King, who can have small claims to his Lordship's zeal, nor with any expectation of rendering substantial service to the people. The sooner this issue between the Peers and the nation is determined the better, and it is not improbable (if the in discretions of which we hear be true) that the general question of hereditary authority may be involved in it. Per i*"" Wheat. Barley. Oats. Pease. sis 80: First 63s Od —s Od 23 s 8d 31 s O d AA S cond sBs Od —s Od 20s Od 29s Od j Od Third 46s Od —s Od 18s Od 27s Od PRICES OF PROVISIONS, &C. Os. 4d. to Os. Rd. Fresh Butter, lb. 05.8 , 1. t° 9 9 0 5 0 6 Salt 0 0 0 0 041 0 8 Ditto, per ca t. 70 0 0 0 0 4 0 6 Eggs, per doz. 0 7 8 2 0 4 6 OatStraw(lcp!.) 7 0 g a ; 35 8 37 6 Wheat Ditto... 7 0 6 0 8 0 0 Barley Ditto... 6 0 0 I 0 4 0 0 Hay, per 0 8 Beef, per lb. Mutton, _ Veal ••••••••••••10~~ Lamb, per qr. Tallow, cwt.... Quartern Loaf Potatoes, 1731 b. EDINBURGH MEAI There was a moderate supply 1 and the sales were brisk, at last Per Sack of 2801 b. Imp. First Oatmeal £l 10 0 Second ditto 1 8 0 Barleymeal 1 6 0 Peaserneal 1 3 0 Pot Barley—No. I, per cwt. 12s , MA —June 1 1 -.oo° of Oatmeal at this day's '" week's prices. Per Stone ot 141 b.. .. e - 0 " First Oatmeal I 6 Second ditto 0 Barleymeal Peasemeal 1 s.-2d, .0,0 GLASGOW CORN MARKET.—J u n e 19- .40 40; The supplies of Grain are moderate, and pri ces are alteration. P 6 d. 14 d Wheat, per 2401 b. s. d. s . d . O ats, per 2641 b. 13 . 0 0 pf British, old 23 ()to 29 0 Irish l3 1 new 25 0 27 6 British l3 0 0 / Canada, free 27 0 30 0 Beans, per 2601 b. O. Irish 1 0 O Barley, per 3201 b. Scot 1 A .4 0 English 0 --C Pease, Scottish ... X 46 0. a v Scottish 22 0 23 6 Oatmeal, per 140Ib. 1 2 0 4P Irish CORNWALL. MARKETS. 0 4 ' .. Ss.Att Tauao—Wheat (average) 21s.—Barley, 9s. 61-oa. - ,..... , Sr. A °mix—Wheat, —s. to 2.ls.—Barley, --b. to r'' 00 7s. to 7s. 3d. PENZANCE—Wheat, 20s. to 21s.—Barley, 9s. to __, 1°5 1; 44/ os. to 7s. 6d.—Beef and Mutton, Od. to 6d.—Pork, r"' th Butter, 41. per lb. . cd.'" ° LauricesroN—Wheat (average) 19s. 6d.—Barley, 9'. 00 6, 6d.—Beet; sd.—Mutton, 6d. 0 0 ' Liskaaao—Wheat, —s. to 20s. 01—Barley, Bs. Oct.' . _, Do' to 6s. 6d. BonatiN—Wheat (average) 20s.—Barley, Ss. 01-oati, 60 __.. ...,. HE I.9TON—Wheai, 2 0s.A.LBatiey,2 ) 0d. 0446 ST. CoLUMß—Wheat, 20s. to —4.—Barley, 7s. to 10 0 . and Mutton, sd. to 6d.—Veal, od.—Lamb, od. rr o 0. V' MININC INTELLIGENCE. ~- - A l5 Quantity of Copper Ore sold at Redruth last Thurd - Y o, '" 6 Average Pr0duce....,,,. a / 0 -... 0 9 00 1 ' Quantity of fine Copper.-- ...—............ :: ..... 2 4 1, Amount of 5a1e.19,3201. 3s. fid.—Average Standard. 115 BIRTHS. f I f 116 r On the 16th inst., in Dover.street, th e l a dy of T. —' Esq., of a son. On the 16th inst., Mrs. C. L. Francis, of a son. of /. On the 14th inst., in Bolton.street, Picc a dilly, the la"' T. Smith, Esq., of a daughter. v A' MARRIED. On the 13th inst., at St. Mary's, Kensington, by the i i . i . e jolt e Badger, Mr. R. Badger, of York-place, Chelsea, to b so — L iti v Elizabeth, eldest daughter of the late Mr. Broughton) °f s op ampton-street, Strand. • do 0. • On the 15th inst., at Marylebone Church, Louis Ll° iste of Boulogne-sur-Mer, to Frances, eldest daughter of the Browne, Esq. DIED. awl -iv On the 15th inst., in the 43d year of his age, the 00 , tain T. R. Curzon, Royal Navy, of Cumberland-stree t, r° square, second son of the Right Hon. Lord Teynhan i * On the 14th inst., in Harley-street, Georgians "000. Sackville, youngest daughter of the Hon. George and Sackville Germain, in the 11th year of her age. e On the 15th inst., at the Vicarage House, CriPP leg-a t I Rev. William Homes, aged 63. .0 0 On the 15th inst., in Montagu.square, Anna , , 1 1. daughter of John Purdoe, Esq., of L e yt on , Essex, ag ed _ e ol On the 15th inst., in Weymouth-street, Lieut. -Gen T. Bowser, K.C.8., in the 84th year of his age. a ido On the 14th inst., in Conduit-street, Lady Anstruther, „1, of the Right Hon. Sir J. Anstruther, Chief Justice of PRINT'S AND PUBLISDLD BY :11 LIRDO YOin l LIN Orr; CE, 112, ST ft N u, LONDON. Oro to 14;:rle, t POS. tt the ] LS, on • icd C;a (` E RR ~. Poi ' l ed Ma )E -Aonei ,t o t e d %..........-: IS S A libliehl EM( G: Lc ron ßs . ,is LA. ,„ 0 101 July si rATI HEA %don IkPubli j, l' to et. 131 "s " - eo n his , , ',, 1_ :81inr0+:11 I „I,lo lin , - rate and inhabitants at large the expense of '-' ' atil . • choly maintenance of his debtor by a bare supplf ' On and water from that fund. S ol ,iOV, of i The last provision appears to us to be someW ' ; Illy 1 • gous to the ancient custom of the city of Lone' ' (!i t ' on sE , an expected fugitive debtor, as still technically ' . nd ' even before the debt becomes due, be arrested ' PT . , 'l7 of his being about to become a fugitive. sconding prima facie indicates fraud, we see ne ,ed all to that exception in the law of arrest. Upon " , s e „ :- 1 we hail the proposed alterations as highly salutart . . 4 ' l " °a re , inanely counteracting the malignant spirit of re ' b e, ar frequently evinced by disappointed creditors, W 16 "Mit e perhaps invited the credit and encouraged the'' ' l , lit s 7eh improvident expenditure, and on the other hand of 1 0, ti ing fraudulent debtors and preventing them from 4. Lai plying property which should be justly distributed ' ~ aeon' rather their creditors. We confess, however, that 0 ill " n 1 e 'aid rather have the certificate of an honest disclosure lep , " perty in the power of a judge, than in that of I; I'' a of creditors whom we apprehend may, from an 001 ,t, aforr dulgence of feelings of disappointment, be too fr ' Zeu.ta '''',"rnit induced to withhold the same. Clerk , i f GERMAN PAPERS. Old ail 1 ....1 CONSTANTINOPLE, Max 26.--(By Express. i--- 1 , the apprehensions of a longer duration of the o s ai Egypt have wholly vanished, as Ibrahim Paella he' 0 /, it is said, begun his retreat, our immediate prol e Or l , tar from being encouraging. New reports of much alarm; a breach between Russia andAvl'afF'r,-.0.1 feared, and where but here could he the theatre d "" the I contest? It is said that the English and French . l a the w governorhichhasap o p f ea t r h ed e off forts,the thDadt it rdan h el a l s es, or h d a e s rs in to tit o p i s i 4,l 7 ari k i l lto aj ne channel, and in case o f re f usa l or oppos i t i on, i t would ( t inned the the passage; but no t w i t h stan di ng t hi s, the Turkl i i " vernor answered, that he could not permit the P,,, That on this a sm a ll F renc h schooner bad ventured "' into the Hellespont, but bad been received with s o ittiqueity, fire. How far these statements are true cannot be , li t i ‘if :... ascertained ; but it appears from many circumstance' I. a . , " and they are not wholly without foundation. It is positively af fi rmed that Count Orloff has 5 0 " - 4 1 li dge to the Turkish Government a eate 4 :il demand, ''' in shall, at all risks, oppose the entrow e of a foreign SI force into the Dardanelles. di' 1 " It remains to be seen whether the combined IA- will be contented with a refusal. The accounts from Bosnia continue to be unsitist . l 7 ; The plague is increasing in Pera and Galata. ' ~, . tranquillity has not been interrupted here. VIENNA, JUNE 4.-An English courier from 1 ." t ti .rY has passed through on his way to Constantinople, st ies despatches for Lord Ponsonby. They seem to be ' 1 of kno, satisfied in London with the turn of things in the ' . %AI 4 the and change their language towards Mehemet Ali-- 4 , - 'tf A u ., no longer to threaten him even if he should persist in , 1 tad toot demands on eh,. Porte. It is evident that they h i , ' ut thi, London too much business of their own to mind , - n elt fat ' b much attention to foreign affairs. Count Munch Bellinghausen, President of the D 5 1 9 e ' II t. P ° l3 B4 ll l B a • t $ l'p o day. left Vienna to return to his post. We shall pr o ~' , ~,' iiifehor I soon have interesting communications from Frankfa' . 1 VIENNA, JUNE 5.-Five per Cent. MetallienT ' lle n , o 9-16 ; Four per Cent., 85 5-32; Bank Shares, 1 241 ' ' to . ti Allgemeine Zeitung, June 10. _ . Party COUNTRY CORN MARKETS '' " Parti DURING LAST WEEK. ...,; kl! and / that O r Y red T Wheat. Barley. Oats. - -. l ' 7 4 1 th ; Per Quarter. s. to s. s. to s. s. to s. D 5 1 9 e ' ', Il ltli o i . Carlisle 5B - 21 - 18 -- " ' htt a : Elexham ~ 52 ‘64 27 30 17 21 „.."" f, of Morpeth ...-........ 44 50 25 27 17 19 , o f' ' . Let and Penrith .................. - 59 - 24 - 20 ‘... i i 'l. ' Will 5heiffe1d............,.... - 55 - 27 - 17 " a .h . ~, Winchester 44 55 22 26 22 24 " A 1., Per Per Bushel. s. d. s. d. ,s.d.s.d.s. d. s. d. O AI, ' 4 rated to Carmarthen...-. 6 0 661 2 6 2 9 1 4 1 7 v 6 c to Cowbridge 66 70, 2 9 34 26 30 -.. ~, , .. he Newcastle (Sta ff .) 8 0 86 4 6 50 2 9 33* a ~ ,edesi Northallerton -.. 70 9 3 3 6 46 33 40 5 • ' kly • Stone...- . 80 88; 4 0 48 30 36 Swansea 6 8 7 0 2 4 2 8 1 9 2 0 1 2 g 1 -, betty Warwick . 9 0 10 9 3 0 4 6 2 0 3 3 j - . ----- Per 8011. Rarnardcastle.,... 11 0 17 6 8 0 8 6 5 6 6 8 -„ 7 ' 1 k i .., in 0 i t, tASI Durham 120 139, 73804660 ,; 6 - `4•Ed Richmond ll 0 16 6 90 96 50 66 • k0ckt0n...........-. 11 611996 10 0 4 6 50 6 9 Q t4 l / 1 11 WAKEFIELD CORN MARKET.-June 14• Al, ~,, Wheat, Red, Norfolk and Suffblk...-s. 475. to 58s. fine "41, IV Rive Lin. and Cam. -s. 40s. to 523. fine io. Nit a Q Yorkshire s 365. to 503. en. • au , fine volP, - White -s. 46e . to fine se. ---- Foreign, Red -s 425. to 53L e6O ,het, ' to .58, one n gi, , White _... s 525. Barley, Norfolk and Suftblk Lincolnshire --- Yorkshire Wold ----- ForeignV. t eta Will t Beans, Old S o! 2 422 :1 : t t tt o o t i ° ,EsSI: Noe fifi fine n nge ~ . . s :; :“ T h at ll4t ed e° t : h dk e 313 to Ms. fine 9 4$ h tree ' - New 30s to 325. fin. ao , 0 , o e Oats, Potato lBs. to 21s. fine" - ''' July f c egl i - Poland -s. I6s. to 20s. fin e - Friezland and Small ---... Seating o ny' s ny's f, -s. Iss. to 1&. fine 191, 4,4h.(1 Shelling 20s. to 245. Od. per i ,-i. l ivered Malt 3os 34s fine 38s. per ..4, Rapeseed 0 1/ Os. 22/. Os. 231. OS. Per ______......„_. R OYAL -Y SCOTCH MARKETS. to di HE Wheat. Barley Oats. 1 Beans. ........1 11a ......_-•"" 44 . berdeen «..«.. 40 48 22 26 16 19 - 25 0 - 26 i kiss' erwick........... 34 56 17 19 12 14 118 20 __, , r , lOT oldstrearn ... 36 38 18 19 13 14 19 21 ---, , o ne s upar «,.,..,,.«,.,..,,.48 56 26 31 18 22 22 26 _, , '', , undee-......... 50 60 30 33 20 25 30 31 1gm.............. 40 49 24 26 16 20 23 30 46 4 6 ', iverness...... 40 48 24 25 17 18 23 2 1 ~. ' i , elso ................ 36 38 19 21 12 14 20 2 3 4 3 4 ' VA( irkaldy.....- 48 61 23 29 16 20 45 48 .. / s erth ....-... 50 56 23 26 20 22 2 5 tf .11, in tl 0- The size of the measure varies throughout th e/ s'i , w a di .. _ EDINBURGH CORN MARKET.-June 12 ' ocet Pupils We had a large supply of all kinds of Grain to-dayLdir - 4 .. g. arley, and the sales were heavy in general, part ially.- k _ refer /beat. ,sot L' e n in