The Sun. — London, England, 1831-12-27 00:00:00

trading craft of foreigners Or is a British merchantman insured at a heavier premium ? We believe that to both interrogatories it will be answered, " No." With regard to North America, her seamen's wages and sustenance are no cheaper than those of Englishmen. But if it were otherwise, suppose a great increase of foreign shipping to have actually taken place since the introduction of Mr. lltiskisson's system. How is it proposed to reduce it? By re-enact ing the old exclusive laws ? Then, to keep the British superiority at its former level, the ship owners must procure another Act of Parliament. interdicting to foreign Governments the right of passing retaliatory laws, by levying counter• duties for the protection of their own shipping against the intrusion of the British. It is noto rious that this mode of self-protection was on 'the point of being every where In , l recourse to, and that for every 1001. of shp capital which is now " annihilated" o< " depreciated," these very shipowners would have been declaring, that there was at least 10,0001. Then they tell us that such totally unprotected " competition is wholly unknown in any other department of trade" which British capital and industry arc th gaged in. This is not true ; there arc ,cozens of trades wherein the British capitalist is left to fight his way against foreigners, and where he has won the battle. Cottons, woollens, hardware, are they protected more than the things called ships There is a duty on raw cotton imported, more than equivalent to the duty on Foreign timber. At the same time let it be observed, that we are no especial advocates for the timber duties, which appear to us by no means among the best that could be selected for financial purposes, being a direct tax upon agriculture and health, and therefore an aggravation of the suffering of every poor family in England. If the ship owners will prepare a series of remonstrances against the duties on foreign timber and foreign corn—from which last, by the way, they, of all the community, are most exempted ; because they can victual at any foreign port they like e will join them heartily, and will throw into the bargain, if they ask us, a petition against the duties on foreign hemp and tar, until the ship ping interest can find substitutes for those ar ticles amongst our home productions. There is one thing certain, and the partisans of " protec tion," as it is called, must take it with all its consequences—no partial interests will hence forth have a chance of bullying the people of England into any exclusive or restrictive system which 'has been once abandoned ; and the rea son is obvious. The grand interest of all is that of the consumers, or, in other words, the nation, which has now begun to comprehend its own wants, and has resolved to protect itself against the old humbug of protecting duties— the great nightmare by which indu s try, s c ie nce , and enjoyment, have long been oppressed— Times. TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES. Stn,—The indignant feeling excited in the minds of 'shipowners by the undeserved, and I must be excused for adding, the ungenerous, severity with which they were assailed in your columns on Thursday last, has, I assure you, been responded to by every individual in the city conversant with the actual condition, or interested in the prosperity, of British navigation. If the statements and opinions of " these gentry" were so palpably erroneous as was assumed, the refutation surely was easy, and courtesy to your readers would seem to have demanded it. But the substitution of abuse for argument was so little in accordance with good taste, and the attempted identifica tion of obnoxious commercial sentiments with unpopular politics so inconsistent with fairness, that, left to the issue to which you had submitted their case, the misrepresented shipowners might safely have trusted for vindication to the innate love of ju , tice and impartiality by which, however for the moment misled, public opinion is always finally de termined. But in your Journal of yesterday the attack is reiterated in the form of a question ; and as the failure of a reply might appear to indicate either uncourteous contempt, or acquiescence in the inference dexterously interwoven with the inquiry, I venture, on the part of the shipping interest, to solicit the insertion of an answer, although the " reso lutions" which have elicited the question are in themselves so explicit, that had I been addressing an inqu;rer less astute than the Editor of the Times, I confess I should have felt half tempted to have replied with Johnson, " I have found you a reason, Sir; I am not bound to find you understandirg." You ask, if we do not wi,h monopoly, " what is it we sio want? Is it fresh taxes on foreign shipping?" And you conclude, " If not, the resolutions of the Shipowners' Society have no object at al►," r.? Plainly, distinctly, unequivocally then, Sir, we do not want monopoly. We ask no protections, no exemptions, no advantages, except such as are extended to other branches of the British community. We seek no exclu sive privileges, except such as are equitably involved in the imposition on us of exclusive restrictions. We reject with indignation the aspersion that we " feel a hankering after inordinate profits, to be wrung from the general dis tress and inconvenience of the nation." Heaven knows. such a hankering is little to he inferred from the state ment we are about to lay at the foot of the throne, that " a large portion of our capital being annihilated, the re mainder has become unsaleable, except at a ruinous loss, and nearly unproductive of income if retained." But we do want, we claim, and never will we cease to invoke justice till our righteous demand is conceded, '' equality of protection with that enjoyed by all other classes, in common with whom (in addition to our peculiar restrictions) we have to sustain equality of burdens." This, Sir, is the language of our " resolutions." Is this monopoly? Or have the resolutions really " no object at all ?" Once for all, Sir, to prevent future misunderatsndiug, and that the public mind may not continue to be misled by partial statements on' a subject involving interests so varied, extensive, and important, I trust you will permit me to challenge the most rigorous investigation of the fol lowing assertions which I unhesitatingly advance. I. That the British shipping interest is at this moment in a state of the deepest depression and difficulty. 2. That by recent alterations in our navigation system, the British shipowner is, in certain trades, driven to com pete, without any protection whatever, with the cheaply navigated shipping of foreign countries, in the importation of articles for British consumption. 3. That this ruinous competition in the trade referred to has partly produced and greatly aggravated the dis tresses of British shipowners, and must, while it continues, effectually prevent a revival of prosperity in these trades, and considerably retard it in every other. 4. That such totally unprotected competition is wholly unknow n in any other departnaent of trade in which Bri tish Capital and industry are engaged, and that the partial selection of the shipowner for this infliction is therefore irritating, invidious, and unjust. j. That this injustice is grievously aggravated by the facts, that by the operation of laws enacted partly for the benefit of particular interests, and partly for the protection of the whole community, but m which the shipowner has no separate or peculiar interest, he is compelled to build and equip his ship with expensive articles of home produc tion, and restricted to the employment of native seamen at high wages, by which restrictions he is absolutely incapa citated from sustaining the competition to which he is doomed. If these positions be true, I think, Sir, that even you illadmit they constitute a case of considerable hardship. II false, they are now open to refutation and exposure. They at least possess both interest and importance ; but while your strongly expressed hostility would, under ordi naiy circumstances, be sufficient to deter from encounter incr the fearful odds of your powerful opposition, I trust it will not be attributed to personal presumption, but to strong confidence in the justice of the cause I espouse, that I fearlessly enter the lists ; and, having thrown down the gauntlet, ask only a fair held for the maintenance of the positions I have advanced, and which I am fully prepared to defend. " Thrice is he armed that !lath his quarrel just." I remain, Sir, your very obedient servant, Lloyd's, Dec. 21. A SHIPOWNER. We see it stated in the Dutch Papers that the States• General, in order to meet the exigencies of the State, are about to impose an income tax, commencing at 14 per cent. on incomes of 300 florins and under 500 florins, and increasing to 24 per cent. on incomes of 200,000 florins and upwards. There is, at all events, fairness in this proposal, which is more than can be said for the principle according to which taxes are im posed in this country. In Holland, it is sup. posed that a rich man ought to contribute more proportionably to the State than a poor man, because it is much easier to give from super. fluity than from what is strictly necessary. But in England v. - e reverse the Dutch principle. Here the rich are exempted even from their pro. portional share of taxation, while they continue to add to their incomcs from the taxes paid by others. It hat, been often said that our system workz well, and why, therefore, should we ha zard Reform ? As a sample of the manner in which it works, we extract the following passages from the Manchester Guardian, of Saturday last : "Doting the list Session of Parliament, a return was made of ' the number of houses assessed to the inhabited house tax in each eonnty of Great Britain, in the year ending sth April., IS3O, with the total amount of rental at which class was assessed ;' from which return, so far as it relates to England and Wales, sve have obtained the particulars to which we are now about to advert. " Looking, at the relative extent of the counties of York and Lancaster ; considetitig that the former contains an area nearly tht-u std a half times as great as that of the latter (ei. as 3SI to 113), and considering further how touch greater a number of its inhabitants are persons in easy circumstances, than are to be found in this county, where so extremely large a proportion of the population consists of labouring manufacturers am artisans, our readers will naturally suppose that 'th tribution of Yorkshire to the house-tax must eater than that of Lancashire. What, howeve Why, that Yorkshire pays upon a renta 639/. ; and Lancashire upon one of 795,8321. its is a mon ! stress example of a vicious fiscal system. It will be a disgrace to the Legislature (we may almost say it will be a disgrace to the inhabitants of this country) if such an in equality is permitted long to continue. As another striking instance of the like unfairness, we may mention, that to wards the whole assessed rental of the houses in England and Wades, amounting to 11,154,109/, the contribution of the single county of Middlesex amounts to no less than 5,143,340!. This must be a great over-proportion. But the whole return furnishes examples, on one hand or the other, of gross inequality. "Perhaps in nothing is the unfairness of the present mode of rating property more palpable, than the great under-assessment of the splendid seats of our nobility and gentry. In Chester, which contairs, as every body knows, many residences of a very high class, there is but one mansion (we take for granted Eaton) assessed so high as 300/. a year. That magnificent Palace would be under assessed probably at ten thousand pounds. In Westmore land, which contains Lowther Castle, as fine a place, or nearly so, as Eaton, there is not one house assessed so high as 2001. In Durham, which contains Ruby Castle, and Lan:loon Castle, and Wyndward, and Ravensworth, and Brancepeth Castle—to say nothing of other mansions —the two first, we believe, are nearly equal to either of those we have before mentioned—there is not a single home assessed so high as 1001. and but eleven above 701. per annum ! In the rich and fine county of Hereford, con taining Eastnor Castle, there is not a single house assessed so high as 901. per annum, and but three at or above 701. In Leicestershire, which contains Belvoir Castle, there is not one assessment so high as 2001. per annum. In Nor thamptonshire, containing Althorp, and various other fine seats, there is hut one house rated so high as 1101 per annum. In Northumberland, which contains Alnwiek Castle, there are but two assessments of 2001. or upwards. In Oxfordshire, which contains the stately and far-famed Blenheim, there is but one assessment so high as 300/. In Shropshire, there are but two houses rated so high as 110/. In Suffolk there are but seven houses assessed at as much as SO/. In Yorkshire, which contains Went worth Castle and Harewood House, and Castle Howard, to say nothing of other numerous splendid seats, there is not a single house assessed so high as 400/. per annum, and but four so high as 300/. And lastly, in the whole principality of Wales, there is not one assessment that reaches 110/. per annum, and but 18 so high as 70/." Now how is it that these shameful partialities have been suffered ? They have been pointed out again and again. Our contemporary (the Scotsman) has more than once called attention to the gross partiality of the assessments in Scotland, which is still more glaring than in England. In that country, Ducal mansions, the materials of which would sell for as much as would build a moderately sized town, are assessed at the rate of one of the rickety brick structures in which, in the metropolitan districts, men of the middle class arc roasted iH summer and starved in winter. The reason of this injustice is well known. The great proprietors have re turned a majority to the House of Commons, and they have had interest enough to throw the burthen of taxation on their neighbours. And yet, with all this glaring partiality, if we were to believe the landholders, the whole taxation of the country is thrown upon them. At the Ber wickshire Anti-Reform meeting, on Friday last, Sir David Milne is reported to have asked, should the Reform Bill be carried, " can it be supposed that large landed proprietors will re main as hitherto on their estates, spending their incomes in the country, and enabling all around to partake of that wealth which they have inhe rited or acquired ? not the landed proprietor pay the great part of the burthens of the country—land -tax, ministers' sti- l pend, poor rates, and perhaps, not a pau per on his property—the poor being gene rally in the villages ?" This is amusing. We wonder Sir David did not include among the burthens on the landholders, the expellee of drain ing, keeping up farm-buildings, &c. What right has he to call ministers' stipend a burthen on the land ? The ministers' stipends are paid out of the teind or tithe, the property in which was distinct from the land, and which, when pur chased by the landholder, was subject to the pay ment of that stipend. The land-tax, before its redemption, payable for all Scotland, was a mere trifle. The poor rates are also trifling in Scot land. But be the burthens great or small, they are not taxes on landholders, because land is held subject to them, and whoever purchases an estate takes these burthens into consideration. But it is otherwise with assessed taxes. Sir David may escape the assessed taxes as well as the indirect taxes. But really we do not see the great obligation the nation has to Sir David and other landholders fin. remaining on their estates in the country, when the object of it evidently is to escape the taxation to which the people in town are liable. Sir David talks of " this great agricultural county," and Berwickshire is, no doubt, one of the richest agricultural counties in Scotland; but in that great county in which the landholders swagger so much, and where one of them (Mr. Buchan, of Kelloe) had the insolence to declare " in reference to the proposed creation of Peers, that if any Minister were capable of pressing that measure on his Sove reign, he would consider him as the greatest traitor that country had ever seen"—(Cheers)---- is there one of them who has his mansion rated at 801. a year ? When Sir Henry Parnell praises Lord Goderich for his firmness iii re fusing to allow the repeal of the assessed taxes, he does not take into consideration that the great objection of the people to the assessed taxes Is derived from the gross inequality with whielk . some of th em are i n i pose d. " Th e effort whicVlicas made in 1825, to obtain a repeal of the assessed taxes was founded (he says) in a total misconception of the comparative effects of different kinds of taxes on the interests of the people—no advantage would have arisen from the repeal of those taxes beyond the mere relief front so much taxation ; while, on the other hand, the repeal of the taxes on raw materials and manufactures, and the reduction of the enor mously high duties on tobacco and foreign spi rits, would be productive of considerable benefit to the consumer, would put an end to smuggling, and would increase the employment of capital, and - labour, and foreign commerce." This would be all very well if the greater part of the duty on inhabited houses were not thrown on the people in towns, who arc grievously oppressed by them. There are no taxes so unpopular as the assessed taxes, for the severity of them presses on persons often little able to bear them ; and the spectacle of Peers, possessed of princely incomes, evading them in so glaring a • manlier, is not calculated to render them more popular. Among the Parliamentary Returns of this year are copies, of the Assessment for tile Inhabited House Duty at which a hundred of the highest-rated houses in London are assessed, and the same in the country, distinguishing the counties. In the country list the rent runs from .1,0501. to 2501. One would imagine that the list would be almost filled with Peers or great landholders. No such thing ! Only nineteen Peeresses, and Bishops are included in it. But it contains several cha rities, as the Governors of York Asylum, 300/., the Governors of the Quakers' Retreat, 2501. Of course, the almost royal mansion of Lord Lon s . dale, the great borough proprietor of the north, is not included. The. Duke of Bedford does not seem to be in favour with the tax people, for he is assessed at 6001. for 'Woburn Abbey, one-third more than paid by any other Peer, twice as much as Lord Grosvenor, nod about three times as much as the Duke of Northum berland, time Lord of Alnwick Castle. These doings are beyond measure disgraceful. We trust they will soon be inquired into, that time people may not be longer insulted by such re volting partiality.—Morning Chronicle. Mr. O'Connell, as will be seen from the ac count of the proceedings at the Dublin Political Union, on Thursday last, availed himself, with some dexterity, of the declaration of Earl Grey with regard to him. " Let it be told to the people of Ireland, that I have only to alter the course I am to follow, and the Prime Minister says that there is no situation I am not fit for. —(Loud cheers.) This is not any poor vanity to say this; I do not vaunt it in the spirit of ex ultation ; but I proclaim the fact to the people of Ireland, but to beget their confidence in me for the times that are coming, when I say that 1 have only to abandon them ibr a single hour to become entitled to the possession of rank and dignities for life.—(Great cheering.) * * * But is it not a pitiable reflection and a humi liating conviction to think that the only way to become possessed of dignities is by trampling on and forgetting Ireland ?" By the bye, Mr. Stanley has been strangely imposed on with re gard to the Irish clergymen whom he singled out as reduced to great distress. One of them in particular, Dr. Butler, was stated by Mr. Laffan, a gentleman residing in his neighbourhood, to be a man of immense wealth— " It is quite impossible that he could have any cause to complain of poverty, or the slightest necessity to put his carriage to sale, as he was well known to be a man of very great and extensive wealth." . _ The Freeman's Journal of Friday says, energetically— " No management, no tampering, nn huxtering or cob bling shall do. Until tithes are cut up root and branch— until the Church lands are properly apportioned, and whilst Catholics and Presbyterians are ob:iged to pay an odious and an oppressive tribute to Protestant Parsons, there will not b±—there cannot he 'repose' in Ireland." We should despise the Catholics if they thought otherwise.—Morning Chronicle. The defective manner in which the law re specting " First Fruits" has been executed on the part of the hierarchy and clergy of the Established Church in Ireland, has been frequently brought under public notice, and very often, we believe, adverted to by Sir John New port and other Members of the House of Com mons, as a fit matter for direct and vigorous in. terference by the Legislature, failing the execu tive authority of the kingdom to enforce the provisions of the several statutes made already in that behalf. Considering that, so far as reli gion only, and the spiritual comfort and well being of the Irish nation, are concerned, the existence of the Protestant Church itself, even were its duties discharged in the most exemplary manner, would still, according to all just reason. ing, be a gross abuse of legislative power, and a heavy burden on the country, the least that ought to be looked for from a body so placed would be the immediate and spontaneous redress of any wrongs to which a tacit neglect of the pecuniary obligations imposed by law upon its several classes, from the Archbishop down to the paro chial incumbent, may have contributed. The fund called " First Fruits" was originally, as is well known, a Papal exaction from the native clergy, so extensive, that in the reign of Henry VIII. it had amounted to 800,000 ducats, which had been car ried off to Rome within fifty years. The " First Fruits"were,as the name imports, the first year's revenue of the Bishopric, or other church prefer ment. Henry, as the Pope's successor in his supremacy of the Church of England, transferred this revenue to the Crown, and Queen Anne restored it to the Church, to be applied to the improvement of the smaller livings, " in a spirit," says Blackstone, " of the truest equity, by applying the superfluities of the larger bene fices to make up the deficiencies of the smaller." Livings under the value of 501. are, by an Act of the same reign, relieved (and very properly) from the payment of first fruits. But the effect of this surrender of Royal revenue to the Church, however well intended, or rather plausible, has fallen far short of the good which it professed to contemplate. In the days of Henry it was a real tax, whereas the heads of the Church have so contrived it, that the valuation of livings made on the 26th of that reign, viz., about 300 years ago (called the King's Books), is the scale according to which the first fruit payments have ever since been made,— a manifest and crying fraud upon the poorer clergy, on the public purse, and on the interests of the Protestant re ligion. A correspondent, whose letter we can not publish, and whose accompanying reports and calculations on the subject of it are far too voluminous for insertion here, takes up the question of Irish First Fruits, and in a series of no fewer than 11 tables, describes the utter fal lacy of the so-called contribution, regarded as an instrument of relief to the poorer clergy, or a security to the people against extraordinary de mands for other ecclesiastical purposes. The writer heads his communication to us as follows: " Epitome of the revenue of the Church of Ireland, anti of the irregular payments of the first fruits of the Archbishops, Bishops, Dignitaries, and Beneficed i Clergy in that part of the united kingdom, who are enjoined by the Irish statute 2d Geo. I. chap. 15, to pay their first year's revenue or profits of their benefices respectively into the revenue of first fruits, within four years of their taking such benefices, viz. one-tOurth part of the whole sum of their first year's profits, at the end of every year, for the first four years, together with an explanation of the 20th parts remitted to the clergy in Ireland by that Act." He then goes on to state the number of acres of land now held, or let, by the Archbishops and Bishops of Ireland, together with the glebes. After deducting one-third for unprofitable land, at above half a million of Irish 'acres, which, at 265. per acre, produces A rent, yearly, of about £632,000 Income of 1,194 parishes, under Tithe Com- position Act Eitimated value of the remaining 1,271 parishes 241,200 Total Church revenue £1,161,600 Total sum actually paid as first fruits by all classes of Irish clergy, Archbishops, . Bishops, dignitaries, and parochial incumbents, from Au gust, 1812, to February, 1831, 9,9471., being about the one hundred and sixteenth part of what they ought to have contributed, according , to the amount of their income, and to the mean ing of the law, and leaving due to the poorer clergy of the establishment for the above 20 years no less a sum than 1,150,000/. sterling. The writer goes on to show, that even the annual receipts for glebe, throughout Ireland, have ex ceeded, seven times over, the total amount of first-fruits paid by the bench of Bishops and the clergy during the entire period. Some further calculations have been entered into by our cor respondent for the sake of varying and rendering more conspicuous the point of view in which he wishes the whole question to be considered by the public ; but as he does not thereby suggest any aggravation of the original vice on which he comments, or bring any new principle under our observation, we must decline to follow him. The opinion of learned gentlemen, law advisers of the Crown, within the last ten years, has been severely, we know not how justly, im pugned by the author of the tables to which we are now adverting. It is at the same time clear, that if they were too far below the mark in esti mating the annual value of the first-fruits in the 29th year of Geo. 11. at no more than 300/. per annum, our correspondent has been full as far wrong on the other side, where he states them at a thousand times as much, unless he wishes to establish it as a recorded fact, that no incumbent at that period lived much more than a twelvemonth, and therefore that the tvitole re venue of the Church ought to be considered as first-fruits. His reference to the opinions of Counsel is as follows : " Messrs. Blackburn and Crampton, the present At torney and Solicitor-Generals of Ireland, in their opinions given by them to the House of Commons, on the Bth of August, 1831, intimated that one •ear's first-fruits and profits of the Archbishops, Bishops, and Clergy of Ireland, in the 29th year of King George 11., was computed at 300/. per annum. Those gentlemen, when they made that statement, appear to me to have known, or at least they ought to have known, that the net produce of all the benefices in Ireland, in any one year within that reign, exceeded 500,0001. ; and that in any year from 1812 to 1831, the net proceeds of the revenue of the Church of Ireland exceeded 1,161,845/., as shown above. I am very unwilling to suppose the opinion of those learned gentle men was given for the purpose of diverting the attention of the suffering population of Ireland from the spoliation committed on them by the spiritual part of the trustees of first-fruits there, to shelter themselves and their co-trustees from the responsibility that attaches to them for their neg lect of duty, but I have strong reason to believe the majo rity of people will be of that opinion, particularly as the average value of the annual fruits of every parish church in Ireland (and they are 2,165 in number) exceed 300/. (dignities inclusive), Archbishoprics and Bishoprics ex clusive. " How those learned trustees could bring themselves to suppose that any rational being who was acquainted with the history of the Church of Ireland could be led to believe, that 3001. per annum, in the 29th year of King George 11., was computed to be the whole of one year's first-fruits of the Church of Ireland, is to me inexplicable. They knew that the Irish statute of the 2d Geo. 1., chap. 15, sec. 3, which passed in the year 1715, and•which is now in force, requires every Archbishop, Bishop, dignitary, and beneficed clergyman in Ireland, all and every of them, to pay the whole sum of the first year's revenues and profits of their benefices respectively to the revenue of first fruits, and they must have known that 3001. per annum in the 29th year of George 11. was not a thousandth part of the first-fruits or revenue of the Church of Ireland in that year. They knew that the yearly revenue of the Church of Ireland at the time they gave their opinions (and from the 12th day of August, 1812, to the 26th of February, 1831, for incumbents that had been promoted within that time) amounted in each of those years to 1,161,8451. and that that sum, as one payment or set of first-fruits, was, pursuant to the statute of the 2d of Geo. 1., chap. 15, due from the Archbishops, Bishops, and beneficed clergy, to that revenue, and that they bad only paid to that revenue about 116th part of that sum." Upon the whole, however, it is plain that if it were desirable to do any thing effectual to wards the improvement of small pittances, falsely calling livings (more properly starvings), and for the relief of the poorer clergy, such an object could never be achieved by the miserable offer ing of 9,000/. or 10,000/. in a period of twenty years. The entire system, indeed, is one of vi cious theory, aggravated by oppressive and into lerable practice. But the subject of the Irish Church, and of the false principles on which it stands, as well as of the pernicious encroach ments by the bad working of such principles, has been so unhappily developed, both in relation to the people and the clergy themselves,—has now, at length, been so gravely propounded by Mini sters and received with so much eagerness by the Commons House of Parliament,—that the question of first-fruits will probably sink out of view amongst others of pressing, though secon dary, consideration.—Times. Among those who strongly advocated a change in our old system of bankruptcy juris diction were ourselves. We did so because we were convinced that the old system was bad in principle, and vexatious, dilatory, and expensive, in practice. It is astonishing, indeed, that a system for administering the bankrupt laws so vicious and inoperative, could have been so long tolerated in the first commercial country of the world. That the interests of the mercantile classes of London were sacrificed to keep up a system which swelled the patronage and emolu ments of the office of Lord Chancellor was ob vious enough to all who gave any serious atten tion to this subject. The want of a separate and regular Court for the administration of the bankrupt laws was a great grievance. The mode of administering those laws by fourteen lists of Commissioners, consisting of five to each list, whose jurisdiction altogether was part and par cel of the enormous and overgrown jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery, was a contrivance, it must be admitted, sufficiently complicated and clumsy—but when we came to see how the system worked, the thing was still worse. The Comm issionerships were understood to be a means of providing, at the public expense, for the depend ents of the Lord Chancellor for the time being, or for those who had interest with the Lord Chancellor. Talent or learning in the law had very rarely indeed any thing to-do with the pro emoluments of one of the lists of Commissioners young aspirant to the honours and motion of the of Bankrupts. The importunities of the political supporters or the sycophants of power —a lucky c onnection with a Minister, a Judge, a titled patron, or some other person of either direct or sinister influence, were more frequently the mo ving causes to those appointments than any con sideration of professional merit. Indeed, some of the Commissioners were not of the profession of the law at all. They were capable of receiving the fees, however ; and among our " glorious institutions" nothing finds mote zealous de fenders than any nice, snug, expensive contrivance which especially provides, by a convenient place of dignified repose, whether in the Law, Church, or State, for that fortunate incapacity which de lights to revel in the luxurious uselessness of a well-paid sinecure. Conservative patriotism cannot do too much for the preservation of such a thing, and therefore the fourteen lists of Commissioners of Bankrupts were thought worthy of all pre servation. Even where an able and experienced lawyer—as was the case in a few instances, hap pened to hold one of those appointments, he might be seen one day presiding at bankruptcy cases as a Judge, and the next practising as a Counsel. This was indecorous and improper. If it did not work injustice, it was certainly not calculated to inspire the public with confidence that justice would be done—and the administration of jus tice, like Cassar's wife, must not only be free from wrong, but above suspicion. We have stated but a few of the objections whichZmight be taken to the old system ; but these are, we thing, enough to justify the public and our de mand for a charge—a thorough change ; but we wished not any alteration for the mere sake of change, but with a view to real and substantial improvement, both in principle and practice. The principle is now recognised of the propriety of having a separate Court for the administration of the bankrupt laws. The mercantile classes of London are not more favoured in this respect than those of the capitals of some of the com mercial states on the Continent. It is true there is an appeal to the Lord Chancellor, who is still the Judge, in the dernier resort ; but still the establishment of a regular Court for the adjudi cation of bankrupt cases, with Judges of its own, who are not allowed to practice as barristers in any of the Courts, is in itself an improvement ; and ' it will be a greater or less one, according as judgment, impartiality, and discernment, are ex ercised in the selection of those Judges. if the arrangement had succeeded to procure the benefit of the judicial learning and abilities of Mr. Jus-. tice Bayley for this new Court, it would have started under the most respectable auspices. The appointment of Mr. Erskine to the situation of Chief Judge has not given satisfaction ; nor is it to be wondered at that such an appointment, to so responsible and difficult a station, should fail to inspire confidence. iNIr. Erskine, as a junior Counsel, showed ability, and had respec table business on the Western Circuit, but, we ask, what.was'known - of him in the Court of King's Bench since he put himself in the capa city of a leader by receiving a silk gown P We are decidedly of opinion that a barrister of more weight and experience should have been selected to start the Court with ; but still we should be glad to find that any apprehensions entertained by the public on this head should be disproved by experience. There are some other appoint ments in this Court which indicate a spirit of patronage not altogether consistent with that purified system of appointment of which the new Bankruptcy Court was to be a specimen. There are some other appointments which are good, because all who know the professional characters of the men will know that they have the qualifications which will ensure a faithful and intelligent discharge of their duties ; but we must protest against men who have been bankrupts being made official assignees, for we under stand that some such appointments have been made ; such appointments would infallibly lead the public to believe that a spirit of jobbing had found its way into the new Court. We hope that it is not true that any such appointments have actually taken place : men who cannot manage their own affairs are not the most proper to be selected, especially in commercial matters, to manage the affairs of others. If they be ever so honest, the public will not, cannot have con fidence in their judgment, steadiness, or capa city. We are sure there is no want of persons of the most unimpeached respectability, skill, and experience, in the commercial world to fill those situations, and therefore the selection of any man who has been unfortunate ill business is not justified by necessity. Having spoken of the formation of the Court—which is, in the principle on which it is founded, and in the pro portion of good appointments to bad, decidedly superior to the old bankrupt jurisdiction of the fourteen lists of Commissioners—we must defer, for want of space, to a future opportunity the consideration of its modus operandi as to dimi nishing or increasing the expense, delay, and litigation incidental to the administration of the bankrupt laws under the expiring system ; ehich he who regrets must be in possession of a stock of " conservative" credulity on which reason and experience can make no useful impression. —Morning Herald. The tithe question continues to be i:oeiano d i e lstt b ,oho a bpem te uricee d t with great vehemence in the Irish Press and in the Irish Unions. . It is just that kind of po litico-religious question which suits the meridian of Ireland, where every thing is either Catholic or Protestant, and where even the principles of right and wrong seem to have no determined meaning but as they harmonize with the views of either of the two factions which divide and ha rass the country. There is one thing, however, to be concluded from their present disputes. It is quite clear that, if the Ministerial tithe pro ject is to stop short at the suggestion hinted at by Mr. Stanley in his late speech, neither party will be satisfied, and no good will be done. But, what is of still more importance than the failure of the plan to satisfy either of the extreme parties in their present temper, nothing will he done to satisfy the moderate impartial men, in both countries, who wish to see the Established Church in Ireland essentially improved. Besides the great question of the Church revenues in e Parliament t " et i n ods i e i e g s s t i t : h e e p av r t n e o: q t:i uu o o ee u p s L t a i oiu l s r pp e lot l ni a iiiie r o l i c iv i l , dhbiis u ectf r lroi o brp i eu i tion too vitally connected with the well-being of the Establishment to be overlooked in any arrange ment which pretends to lay the foundation of fu ture concord and prosperity. No man can look at the enormous disproportion between the incomes of the dignified and working clergy, and contem plate the possibility of allowing things to remain as they are in that respect. The evil is one which people of all religious persuasions concur in denouncing ;—the correction of it, therefore, should form one of the first steps in any change that may be attempted ; for, while a defect so glaring is permitted to remain there will always be a mixture of reason, even in the appeals of the most violent men, which it ought to be the first object of an enlightened Legislature to de prive them of It is not as a compromise with fear, but as a concession to justice, that we would call upon his Majesty's Ministers to give up what is untenable in the present system, in order to preserve what is tenable and useful. It is not to gratify Mr. O'Connell and his adherents, but to deprive them of the truth which they are now enabled to mix up with error in their attacks upon .r%•' , - ,.-• 4 , ' the Establishment. But, though we Government contemplate any propositi , kind at present, we do not think it sume, as our contemporaries at the ot, the chminel have done in all their co; as Mr.O'Connell himself has done in his that they have resolved to pursue an course. On the contrary, we think infer, from the appointment of Comm, something inure is intended than has disclosed. If the simple proposition by Mr. Stanley were all that is inter have recourse to the cumbrous ma Committees of the two Houses of One of the arguments with which the meat was assailed, on the very occasti which Mr. Stanley made his speech, had prepared no plan of its own. Ye . cry now would imply not only that it h of its own, but that the plan was fixed vocable. For ourselves we will freely ci if; when the measure comes out of the tee, it attempts nothing more than a r pulsory commutation of tithe, we shall disappointed. At present we deem - it men who have certainly a most difficul perform to suspend our opinion. FL they will disregard the violent of boti and apply themselves only to the reason tice of the case, we will still indulge the tion that Ministers are not only awal importance of the question, but pre' sonic measure of improvement col_ with its importance.—Morning Herald. In the course of the last three weeks than 83 children have died of the aniall-pox head.—Leicester Chronicle. GIBRALTAR, DEC. 12.—0 n the month an explosion took place next to Mai office, in the laboratory, which blew off the the two men employed in proving or cleaning able hand grenades. The consternation was the magazines were FO near; and search was diately after the assistant fire -master, who, foi nut there at the moment it happened. There or four pounds of gunpowder, which two ext had saved from the hand grenades, and it is Major G—, from the pieces picked up of hand grenade, and a part of a man's hand, (lent might have occurred from its imperfect and from the coat of rust accumulated, which, of iron found within, might have ignited and dreadful accident. A court of inquiry has and the Governor, Lieutenant-General Hot_ safety of the town and inhabitants, has reco; work to be carried on in future in the south, town. About a week after this, three gunners by the bursting of a gun, in the excavation of were buried in one grave.—Falmouth Packet. EXTRAORDINARY STORY.—The interesting particulars have just reached us, of lancholy catastrophe—nam&y, the death of day or two ago, in consequence of a pistol-shot commercial traveller belonging to this city (A we suppress names for the present. It a ppears young traveller had given some spirits and Ty' innkeeper of a small village where he meant f the night ; and having two pistol's by him, he innkeeper to be cautious of touching them, as loaded. He went to bed, and, before day-light paring to start in his gig, when he noticed that hid cast a slice ; he procured a blacksmith, "f' the shoe ; and having accidentally observed than of his pistols was loose, he desired the blacks' it. The man put the pistol to his mouth a nd - the barrel, when the traveller warned hint tl 4t loaded. The blacksmith replied in the negatisefo, led to the discovery that both shots had been elf l e jd ing the night. Thinking all was not right, h e r ig . both pistols before he set out ; and about three t ti ol ther on, two men came out of a wood, and dell's!: i d purse. The traveller immediately fired one 01 ,, b i l i es 1 over their heads to frighten them, when one of ', f if e , ,ented a bludgeon to strike him, upon which ri # ,t , '" instantly shot him through the heart. Retuf° l inn, which he did immediately, be called for til t but he could no where be found. The infer s" pretty obvious.—Aberdeen Journal. ef ltl An addition to the already long list ° f ii ef g sive robberies of jewellery which we have r ecea t '' t ifh l cularized, was on Thursday evening p er p e trate MN's Hotel, Regent-street; and the cireunista n y which it was committed are characterised bl l 6o°, mysteriousness as other losses of a similar deseorids property, which have fur the last few months oc c tie cf t ! attention of the police. The jewellery stolen on t 4, ing above-named, is the property of Lady JO' rl l l is, we are given to understand, of the estimated; of: about one thousand pounds ; in fact, to the otsi le r ;ics l : of the articles were deemed invaluable. The 1),/or,1° of this extensive robbery are as follow Lady JERMYN bad been for some time se l d WARREN'S Hotel, and on the day of the rolrigh" parations were made far their departure for, 1 14 . Her Ladyship accordingly packed up all lery, and deposited the same in a trinket-19'4:1r e she placed in a Russia-leather writing case, 0 folio, in her dressing-room on the second lioorvtroo evening preparatdry to her Ladyship leaVing t° s y el: following morning. Between nine and ten u"' Ladyship discovered that the case was taken asr all of r - wed ineffectual' CUR: , S JONES fk tae and STE lOf tli e only sa f e 14, a CHOLER 114, 4 t athe have I kh o ttnin e ot Ph It} Ol4 , more oe simple, e ~li i i. 44:4: dr.t,tii‘ititt u t:4; : o:ort , rietn,rh. ‘i ii joe , b i nsli t Nile ll pawnirrd t iv,ey ! timf l islet i ti ci the whole iqlaat, though ItIN J 9NES, I IW I qO LERA A tHE Pre 1., tigh Coil ei 4 :!ent of th e , tll ,asLl stoppini ili itir '4lti e , , 1 I ) , p oiteeperal AE lity 4 !several N , go lay b e fo 0 t i ,j t/leir gener 0044 torrobaral ii 44tittin ig acou (Gt x SECONE 1 EItAL AG 011:;, 10 MEssm i t orb 4 . , EMEN,—; `' , " , di t i4 Aland inquiry and seam Iter it pros Jeri. . r tc i ii , [nation was then given to the police at the llr, , i'r C u il t .at will° Station-house, Piccadilly. An agape for inst a ' l iev i i • l 'llif f ` n th % a • t hici paired to the hotel, who felt convinced that 1 01 0 pej ' il ‘' , pi 1 Morison: well acqu tinted with the establishment was coocer I,° i,:,11 °o. at leas cot t, I the robbery. The individuals belonging to °e lt o ' ill i vt 4 h a t ilrile :" ll were questioned, and it appeared that on a footuOiti or e t i Zt4: Smith, the house about ten o'clock, he found the front -u° o t ,t 4 .l ' '' hi a t na danger the tially open—a circumstance quite unusual, e' e : b e r ii ', t , , ti t 4r d e' so, as ve sl day-time. It is supposed, in consequence, tb 3t ; n ot 5 s tta t i l :heCta ß te engaged in the robbery, on leaving the hotel, di'';ieb t : i;t.t y - tcl h ssi u teCt l to shut the door, but made a precipitate retrel t . og t 'ti' 4l ;; in g' a s " 0 0 it q t, t t l i : lbu !l i T food booty. Not a lock was forced, and there w s ' slightest appearance of any violence having bee" 8/ et e :Z.'hO t lll 'a*Zt F r i oi or t.kttat n 'hg to be any part of her Ladyship's apartments. On jog, a man named Lee, ill the employ of th', llo C4 ll l l,,[ 1. (11, ..rf1 . ( 1 4 C h stoners of NlVoods and Forests, attended at '3 l3r.- he C '' '' t h t e 23d. I h .sbi l 1:i:,:l! i);'‘ o ' i r t t h Cho street police-office, and delivered to Mr. PLAsg' o . fficer, the identical box which contained her l' a jo tri 1, 1 His are ' 0 0 00 0 f ,te t lttlr own jewellery. The man stated that he found the 0 ,i t i, ,,,a b ee 1,, ,, z ,, 1 0,,,,,,t w 1 f. stone-yard in Rose-street, Newport-market, trivial articles in it, and believing that a robberY , 1(0 0( 4 ' ::'.,s 4, :' b 4 ° , w" e rominitted, he thought it his duty to make the o ° 7ol o r t i7. , i t ):,i nc . e • ter i 4 4 P ic "cl t a t f r 4; at the above office. Notwithstanding every i i.° lit'', tease the I had been given at the Station-house., within a f eW ' I : or.dk of the office, the m igistrates were le ft j p laC„ i * 'l t i e ttt) (le st l V ignorance of so extensive a robbery having tak e° re Se; s l a', is t a t t ,ltoliert the vicinity of the establishment. The officer' °/ ; ,0 f r° ,,;, l Y' ti ,' - 1- ' ; , ill 01 respecting it, but not one had received i n forrna t e '',ol V ( tlitil - i!',-, e ' , ? ,:m . . ll apa ' the inspector on duty; and it was not until Sat il. vv eit ,he' r ito 4 1 1 , — , d ). t wl any person connected with the establislitnellt, . 4 1 fOr.' i N i t i ntre a lf ( l i Lady J E H. 311" N . S loss, and then not in an orri e ',,, - left,rt Datoelairnii, What object the inspector could have in not 1° , 1' 14 4 , ;,',l , l t c i e nle; a ' ' the necessary information to the above offic e : 0 1 rct,'N,` l.l ,.ll.Pg said, be subject of investigation. 'rile Entigi ,ug !; i r g:, - 141 4 , 4 10 , 8 . ,, Y ,, ar t i d d ruanded him fa- his neglect on a recently s ir tl ,,''ir Saji"lic a ei s a' - ar„„atound b: sion. His Lordship has offered a reward of Iv''' ~1,-iii_trici came Plii h MtVe cure r i`?tieave to reio _____ nol' tiler 4 EVii. M BIRTHS. , B. ' , ,gt (lefficacy o On the 2•2 d inst at K. i'• e isington, the lady of ,• - • ..o.' Ai ) ol era ,i,i, Esq., of a son. • i A. CID ' '''ill''lnee 'lOO On the 9th inst. at Brixton, the lady of Captain of & 0 s iNe, . of a daughter. top t. ,! ot the .ie r ava g On the 26th inst. at Baldock, Hertfordshire, MTS. S . C " I ar a daughter. MARRIED. CPO On the `24th inst. at Paddington, J. Farwell, Esq. of ton Norton, second son of the late Rev. A. Farwell, of ~a o ' Devon, to Maria, eldest daugter of Mr. J. K. Sew' o f' Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire. On the 17th of October, by special lice nce, at the Call" Hope, W. M. Ford Esq., Assistant -Surgeon in his 72e1 Highlanders, to Henrietta Hester, the e ldest of W. A. Davies, Esq. M.D., of the H on . East In dia service. server. A., 203 ' beansg 4 Brhe, 12th : Y ,l Al t • Br; • 10 , j tv o ir i : ' t ‘ °:;:'4‘ ol l' ' ! I 1 : ,, t e r i . : 471 Si I: n z el n g c d‘ bl e : t g a n fit e n: l l . MED. k Li on Esq.,() tohfewl7htheaittiisetid,inoxthoen,64tthheyeeakriesotf ~l o i ii s , a o g f e t , h i c n , „;gl l ,,i, 1,1 uri. Lord Charles Spencer, and cousin of his Grace the p eu "Llttlif f ' l ".-Ct Marlborough. of l it k epb; e NI On the 24th inst. Anna, wife of John Sanderson, 4, 414 iung, cl, Jewry, aged 46, a member of the Society of Friends. , _ ix , 'Y; A i : On the 23d inst. at Winehmore-hill, G. H. Brown" g y.' - irk h 'ims 1 the 6:M year of his age. I , 0 (s ha„ , Th'i. On the '2.2k1 inst. in Chapel-street, May-fair. Mr. (' jil. t r . Ole, D ill Ins 31st year. dr Itly ' ,o ' illiAt her 'house, Peckham Rye, Mrs. Elizabeth 11) . '" v iitelvor t e :"reet; tie 81st year of her age. r fi t ii i Mr. l ' Mr. On the 25th inst. in Queen Anne-street, the in ,, i - 7 , .(. ". 'l' . T of the Marquis pie La Vallette. I ° ' 4 A . Y _,,l i . 1, 14 ,,,5tne. i , Ith,;" of c .ie () f at 1 PRINTED AND PUBLI3DED nr AIUHDO SUN (in.:RA, 11:2, STRAND, LoNDOM• R. E4tti he e l -1:' G.a0,1.13ed ,:iatcilfalai:r':ke,,,,yoal 'F t: s r ti :W T. :h ' i ci l ti 'l: Part n l u t p i e ' l a l a c d r h i e j i s, ll°; ; aces to nu 11,‘ 4-- GF, an : nont E ob : and 0 Cherlottt honour i e t n ß t r , 311i1111liils15ei: 4'ngt°ll, Sari 'oSitthheril II mittee Ni,A.L M, has b b. 9, U P Per he cone ii,..........__________,_ ) 11 an°, " MARS the G°',t,he „:.PPIY NA rip, 0. tetteful pi ecasiert 'ng, Extracting,t Woburn -1 1, waS I 11Nery tic Y et tht fi B. 11. on modern it had s Principles, ti fi cial 59' led 0 1 I NP.R ' AL su y cent? AYE TE CC the 0 Vs iti ODIB E LE I i a iner ( 1 i*'" other L Mall feel°ll' -"SIEU in it (I‘,,,:ritt 4" Dent Hcult O•oclneiv , BLOO] 4 , e patronage Hopog,i4 P r oftsnional r both iti: i 4'4 e P oli si respect x asolt snv_irtytnin general, the r . 0 (I,tCeEDATEETH aware °P t lty of London NI Irepareci k o h i , perfot tnet7 :oMMetls'lEiTheat, or pro rerald. IN ° 11, in a man] 444 1.,„E" PAR' 0 04' .CORROI reeks ti ti tt 4 ""i without W -pox /A :. i t ti i• 4 ansler evo of ,l Faculty he 2a . ~ rt are 6/ N 7 ti i .eult of the 3 14 .i° r 0 4 ' 1 '0 t „' One of th e roof, cirP,xo,r 2 veriod on nine noitt 1, Clemen4-s Kilqi,,qBand , wan 0." 0 ""th ' —att de i4 \... 4 1 13 . vas M 3 ILPC4 14 f o rtU 0 rf I °PREST here Nre' .4 o4lc A TER's SA exe apiv,i, ..I. pi,' , I ,i , tidirn 'LC En is sortevaa e , at m , cooki of the sltacititre" Gravies d, that the ,1 1 1: ta r .) and desnat ' t rfect for, l atin fished b . ). I hick, oitihei 6 1 ... ;'trect, Bee and 0 1 pal Nrers. tam talisPoctillekles A eclectic lusrotiStAdt'tteded o t . U., &c ecotniceoi t r, The for remittc loth, 0 01 v;imlosee,lleceipts i ',tiers we re ) ,P eta,lnrs Sauce no f a I°' Ale h t tr Y ; and chef. ii unt' '''-----.2 1 : a } tie si rhe foll°Woh A F( LS, Of 'I,,rILO.4.IICL A' of 3 r e' , O h tl• 'Ai ham, for m .shot bYsi'dolthichte from the its (.-kberFAita„: in the Wi s tbs j tel l) ' Its effsc PPrar 0 t i , h rich 4 ._ nd ;vee r , 1 b ° euffe'rom the :tent to 11311414-teparr from d t he o r isisondoa, Pared only ni , a s thei ! te , , °i and no! • ht ° I A ?*l.l ord-stre lig , 1 1 1 1 iI ; a d that b i ' M t , ,tine ..,nd al th, o•b ° / :'lns t inel Venders t trlt, tided. , ed that ,etk ek of ~ Bard dackeroit'? ' Its' 5 , .....) . t ..___ and biel,,, ~,t 1.,;, CUPP. ,A 'ffe(