The Sun. — London, England, 1833-05-16 00:00:00

•• , /nr riT,Tfinc , sly-, 'Tr though no longer subject to the brutalities of the driver, may be kept at a kind of com pulsory labour. They may likewise object to employment. of the produce of negro labour (during the one-fourth part of their time which they exchange with their masters for wages) to pay for that freedom of which it was a crime and a robbery to deprive the slave. They may even contend with justice that, instead of owing any thing to their masters for striking off their fetters, their masters, or the nation which, by its laws, warranted their o ppression, has an arrear of re paration and indemnity to discharge towards them which it will be difficult to pay. But who that has reflected on the present degraded con dition of the slave,—who that thinks of the motives from which such a being must act, hitherto driven to the canefield or the mill in gangs by the cart-whip, like brute beasts,—who that knows the ignorance in which they have been studiously kept, the few wants (and those of a merely animal kind) which they feel, the ease with which those wants can be sup plied by a few hours of labour in the week, and the present horrible associations which they must have with any kind of work imposed for the benefit of their cruel task -masters, can sup pose that, if unconditionally released from com pulsory toil, they would instantly leap out of their chains and start up industrious labourers ? A time of transition must be required, however short,— compulsory labour must be exacted, how ever lenient,—till they become acquainted with the ultimate intended change, and accustomed to act from the stimulus of wages and the hopes of bettering their condition, instead of the terrors of the master's lash. But it is hardly fair to say that they are still slaves, in the former sense of the word, because they must continue to labour ; that they have got nothing because they have got every thing; or that they may as well obey their master as a magistrate, because they cannot retreat at pleasure into " a castle of indolence." Look at the third resolution published above, and which we here repeat :—" That all persons now slaves be entitled to be registered as apprenticed la bourers, and to acquire thereby all rights and privileges of freemen, subject to the restriction of labouring under conditions and for a time to be fixed by Parliament, for their present owners." Is this nothing? Is this nat a mighty change, even though they are required tolabour 71- hours a day ? What would any abolitionist have said two or three years ago had the prospect been held out of surrounding the negroes with such a panoply of British rights ? Great hostility has been expressed by the abolitionists to the em ployment of the wages derived from the employ ment of theirspare time, and doubts have been ex pressed whether the contribution of 15,000,0001. to the planters is to be considered as a loan or conferred as a grant. We neither quite understand nor like what we do understand of this part of the plan ; we suspect and fear it will ultimately turn out to be a grant, though originally ad vanced as a loan ; and that part of the plan seems complicated which places the twelve years' emancipation-money of the apprenticed negroes in the hands of a Government officer as a liquidation of the planter's debt. Probably it would be better, if this provision of the mea sure can be altered, to consider these contribu tions as the formation of a species of saving bank for the negroes, to be given them after their complete liberation. We should thus make them pass through the transition state from slaves to free labourers the more cheerfully, as they would be accustomed to the idea that they were working for their own benefit and lay ing up a little treasure. But there are other parts of the plan which we have r no room to di-cuss at present, though they may deserve future consideration.— Times. The debate on the corn laws in the House of Peers on Tuesday evening was confined chiefly to two speeches—that of Earl Fitzwilliam, the mover of the resolutions, and that of the Earl of Ripon, who opposed them,—and was re markable only for two things—the almost unan swerable reasoning of the former, and the Minis terial declarations of the latter. The Noble 'Mover, both in the resolutions which he has placed on the journals of Parliament, in his address to the House of which he has become an ornament, and in an able pamphlet which he has published, in the shape ofa letter to " the landowners of England," has proved that the existing corn laws act as the most noxious im post on the industry of the country ; that they artificially raise the price of the first necessary of life to the great body of consumers, without a proportional corresponding benefit to the owners of land, or the producers of grain ; that they in jure the agricultural labourer by enhancing the difficulty o obtaining the article which consti tutes the chief part of his subsistence, and the chief source of his expenditure ; that they do not enrich the farmer, whose fortunes and calcula• tions they render more precarious than ever ; that though they tend to keep up rents, the advantage even to the landlord is liable to great uncertainty, and subject to many drawbacks ; and that to the great body of the manufacturing and commercial community they are positively unjust and op pressive, diminishing the profits of trade, cur tailing the wages of labour, and tending to deprive us of our foreign customers, by enabling other manufacturing nations, whose food is un taxed, to undersell us in foreign markets. It was lamentable to hear from the Earl of Ripon, after such an impartial statement from a great landed Peer, that the portion of the Cabinet in the House of Lords is determined to oppose all change in the corn laws, and to continue, at the risk of their popularity, and to the detriment of the public interests, such a manifest course of impolicy and injustice. The resolutions, in such an assembly, and under such leaders, were, of course, negatived without a division ; but such a negative vote would not, probably, be given by any assembly in the kingdom beyond ° the view of the woolsack. The precipitate decision to which their Lordships have come, when ad dressed by a Peer who has formed a delibe rate opinion on the subject, and whose interests, as a landowner, arc identified with those of the majority, makes it of less consequence to enter at present into a full exposure, by the press, of the ini quitous system which he denounced. Other opportunities must soon occur for asserting the r ights of the community, though it would pro bably be too much to expect a change of the law in the present session. if anything like demonstration could ever be said to be brought into the discussion of a point of commercial policy, it would be found in the facts and reasonings which go to prove ther he manifest,, mischievous results of the corn monopoly. i even the avowed tendency of the corn laws is to make food dear,—not dear as during the Bank restriction, by a juggle in the currency—not dear like tea, tobacco, or foreign spiiits, by a tax levied upon it for the benefit of the Exche quer, but dear by its absolute scarcity,—dear by the infliction of a smaller degree of famine ou the great body of the people,—dear by its including a greater quantity of labour than that for which it could be purchased by a fair ex change of the products of our industry with other nations,—dear by the necessity of obtaining the supply from our more unpropitious soils, —dear, in short, in the sense in which Bur gundy or claret would be dear if made from grapes grown in English hot-houses, in stead of being obtained from the vineyards or the wine-growers of France. By our present most absurd system of laws for regulating the trade of corn, we even lose the benefit of a tax which, while it afforded to the agriculturists their darling protection, would bring a considerable revenue into the T►easury. Notw ithstan ding the high price to which grain must rise before it can find its way into the English market, such large importations have of late taken place as to convince some reasoners that the corn laws are actually devised, or at least calculated, to injure the English landlord and farmer ; yet, strange to say, little or no advantage is taken of the dif ference between prices abroad and at home to relieve the English tax-payer of a part of his burdens. It appears from the returns laid be fore Parliament, and embodied in one of Earl Fitzwilliam's resolutions, that within the last four years 4,795,746 quarters of foreign wheat have been entered for home consumption, and that nearly 3,000,000 of that quantity has paid a duty of about ls. 6d. a quarter! The sum total of the graduated duty paid for nearly 5,000,000 quarters was only 1,601,190/. Now, none of those who are most opposed to the existence of the corn mono poly ever proposed, in the first instance, to abolish every remnant of protecting duties, and many are willing to allow a duty of 7s. Ss., or 10s., a quarter, diminishing every year as contracts are renewed, or as the agriculturists are prepared for the change. Had either of these scales of duty been adopted, the farmer would have been re lieved from some of the great fluctuations of price to which he has been exposed, and the Ex chequer would have been enriched in a sum that would have enabled us to dispense with some of our most obnoxious taxes. But the ground on which any protecting duty can be demanded or justified will, we hope, soon be removed from under the feet of the advocates of the corn laws. They demanded a peculiar protection for their manufacture in the home market, because they alleged that they were subjected to the peculiar burden of tithes and rates. The tithes, by their proposed commutation, will become hencefor ward a rent-charge on the land, and not an ob struction to its improvement ; and, in the next consideration of the corn laws, we shall be ena bled to demand either the entire abolition of a protecting duty, or at least so small an impost as will not tend in any material degree to raise the prices of our foreign importations. When the House of Commons shall take up this sub ject, we shall expect a kind of discussion and de cision different from that which took Place in the Peers on Tuesday.—Times. We give a report of the proceedings at the inquest held yesterday, on the body of the policeman, Robert Cully. The inquiry is ad journed to five o'clock this afternoon. The evidence hitherto does not seem to point with any thing like certainty to the individual who deprived the policeman of his life. Thomas Bluck, a policeman, describes two individuals by one of whom it is probable that he was killed :—" I was near the deceased," he said, " at the time he cried out that he was stabbed. It was at the right-hand side of Calthorpe street. I was five or six yards behind him at the time ; I saw him come from a door-way where there is a porch over the door ; be said he was stabbed. There were two men attacking me and another constable at that moment. * The men who assailed us were armed with sharp instru ments, but what they were I cannot say ; the mob generally were armed with bludgeons ; the men who attacked us came from the same di rection as that in which Cully received his wound." Bluck then proceeds to describe the appearance and dress of the two men. The evi dence as to the mode of dispersing the mob is contradictory. The police state that they were assailed in a furious manner by the mob. The other witnesses seem generally to think that un necessary hastiness was used in dispersing the crowds. Charles Everard, surgeon, says, "that standing at the door of No. 5, in Gough-street North, I observed the police with uplifted staves, breaking the heads of all around." Some of the witnesses share a mistake, which is, indeed, very generally entertained, that till the Riot Act be read, a mob cannot be dispersed. An ille gal assemblage, which this was confessedly, if' ever there was one, can he dispersed by any of the King's subjects, without any delay whatever. The Home-office, which was evidently in full possession of the designs of those by whom the meeting was called, took the utmost pains to warn well-disposed people not to attend the meeting. The banners carried by the ring leaders were of the most seditious character. The authorities of the country would have been guilty of a gross neglect of duty, had they suf fered an assemblage, so convened, and of so se ditious a character, to remain one moment with out attempting its summary dispersion. We should, indeed, be in a singular predicament if' a mob must be suffered to proceed without in terruption till the Riot Act is read. The Riot Act has for object to subject all who do not disperse without delay to certain penal conse quences. It is a signal which no one is at liberty to neglect. But both before the passing of the Riot Act, and since, it was never doubted that an illegal assemblage could be dispersed without a moment's delay. We by no means advocate the employment of un necessary violence in the dispersing of an illegal assembly; because the tendency of such conduct is to generate vindictive feelings, which survive the occasion. We trust, however, it will turn out that the police did not act with unne cessary severity. It is quite clear that all those who came armed with pointed weapons to the meeting contemplated a conflict with the police ; and it is not to be supposed that the police would look quietly on while the mob were stab bing some of their body. They would naturally, even for their own security, wish to put a speedy end to the business. There is an immense dif ference between meetings of the people called for lawful and proper objects, and a meeting of persons called for an unlawful purpose. It is not necessary for us to argue that a meeting for the adoption of preliminary measures for the calling together of a National Convention is an unlawful meeting ; and that, even if the Home Secretary had not issued any proclamation, the taking pint in such a meeting would have been an unlawful proceeding. A National Conven tion supposes the destructio n of the existing Government ; and every Government, while it exists, must be supposed to possess the power of punishing attempts to overturn it. The meeting a t ,i.lancliester was for a lawful object—Reform . of may of Uij semq all Cl lawfu sons rliament. A meeting for a lawful object still be unlawful, if it be called in defiance provisions of any law, or if the people as ied conduct themselves illegally. But, under rcumstances, a meeting called for an un -11 object is necessarily unlawful. The per who are instrumental in getting up the ing at Coldbath.fields must not be con led with the people of the metropolis. They handful of desperadoes, who entertain the most dangerous notions with respect to property, and who avow purposes which no Government in the world would sanction or tolerate. These persons must not be suffered to keep the rest of the community in fear and apprehension. The well-disposed ought not to approach even such meetings as that at Coldbath-fields, nor to allow those over whom they have authority to approach them. People must be taught that they ought not to trifle with such matters as meetings for National Conventions, called by men armed with mortal weapons, to enable them to resist the authority of the laws. They ought to take warn ing from what happened on Monday, that they may involve themselves in the most serious con sequences by the indulgence of an idle curiosity. —Morning Chronicle. When Lord Lyndhurst a few days ago stated in the House of Lords, that crime had increased from one extremity of the island to the other, we observed that we had no doubt that though this might be true with respect to England, it would not be found true with respect to the agricultural districts of Scotland. There was yesterday distributed a Parliamentary paper which places this matter beyond a doubt. For the first time we have a return from Scotland, made out in such a manner as to allow of a comparison between the two divisions of the island. The whole number of persons com mitted in Scotland for 1832 was 1,898 males, and 533 females—together 2,431, Of these were liberated without trial and without finding bail to stand trial, that is, after a preliminary in quiry, termed a precognition, 437 males and 102 females—together 539. The whole num ber of persons tried was 1,324 males and 434 females—together 1,758. Of these were con victed 1,194 males and 383 females—together 1,577. There were outlawed 22, found insane 3, and acquitted 114 males arid 50 females—to gether 164. The first point of comparison with England should be the proportion of the acquit tals to the convictions. In England, the con victions in 1832 were 16,367, the acquittals 5,327, and the no bills found and not prosecuted 2,870. If we take the acquittals and no bills, we find them a little more than one-half of the convic tions, i. e., we find that one-half of the persons committed were either improperly committed, or improperly acquitted. In Scotland, on the other hand, we find the convictions to be to the ac quittals as 9.6 to 1. There is an enormous difference between one-half and one-tenth, and that difference argues a far greater care on the part of the Scotch functionamies than on the part of the English. Another point of compa rison is the certainty of punishment. In Eng land, the number sentenced to death in 1832 was 1,140, of whom were executed 99; i. e. the number convicted to the number executed, was 10-i to 1. In Scotland, the number sentenced to death was 6. The number executed was 2, the number whose sentence was commuted 2, and 2 remain to be disposed of. The sentence is therefore carried into strict execution in one third of the cases. If the two undisposed of should be executed, the proportion would be two-thirds of the cases. The Scotch Returns, however, included assaults as well as crimes. Of the 1,750 persons tried, 320 males and 35 females were for assaults. That they were trifling, may be inferred from the circumstance of 236 being tried by sheriffs, burgh magis trates, and justices of peace without a jury; 75 by sheriffs, with a jury ; and only 39 by the High Court of Justiciary and Assizes. Deduct ing the assaults, the crimes for Scotland would be 1,395. The number of commitments for Lan caster is 2,624, for York 1,537. But while crime is pretty equally diffused over England, it is in Scotland confined to a few great towns. Thus, for instance, of the great crimes against property—theft and burglary—the total tried for the former in Scotland were, for theft, 529 males and 250 females ; together, 779. Lanarkshire (Glasgow) had of these 188, Edinburgh 147, Forfar (Dundee) 65, Perth 49, Renfrew (Pais ley) 35; that is, of the burglaries, in all 179, Edinburgh has 66, Lanark 36, Renfrew 25. Mr. Hume lately allowed himself to be so far carried away by the declamations of Dr. Chalmers, as to believe that the south-eastern district of Scotland, in which there are assess ments to the poor, were demoralized. So far from this being the case, it appears that the counties of Haddington, Berwick, Roxburgh, and Selkirk, the counties alluded to, which are purely agricultural, have only thirty-four Thefts and seven burglaries. In the counties of Berwick and Selkirk there are no burglaries, and between them only eight thefts. So much for the crimes of England and Scotland, and the administration of the criminal law of the two countries. Scotland enjoys inestimable advan tages, in its having local judges and public pro secutors. The whole system of England seems calculated to encourage the growth of crime. The criminal law is barbarous, and its admini stration is still more barbarous. —Morning Chronicle. mee foun are When a Member of Parliament gives to the world his reasons for voting in a particular way upon any question, he must expect those reasons to be canvassed ; and if they are not sufficient to prevent his conduct being condemned in the public mind, he cannot object to the compe tency of that tribunal of opinion which passes judgment upon him, because lie has already appealed to its jurisdiction. The man who would wrap himself up in the new-fashioned doctrine of the irresponsibility of the represen tative characteroughtnot to desce n d f rom t h e " stern dignity" of his position by giving any reasons whatever for his conduct, or by appealing to public opinion at all. Dr. Lushi ng t on , though claiming an exemption boundless as that claimed by some of the most lofty patriots of a reformed House of Commons from the incon venient surveillance of a reformed constituency, has condescended to enter into an explanation of his vote relative to the motion on the assessed taxes, in a letter addressed by him to an individual w ho, w e p resume, i s one of the electors of the metropolitan diitrict which the Learned Doctor represents. Everybody knows that this distinguished civilian voted against Sir John Key's motion, and in favour of the tricky proposition of the Chancellor of die Exchequer, but everybody did not know his reasons for so voting, until he thought fit to publish them in the above-mentioned letter. Th e y are three ; and they are founded upon the three consequences which he says would have resulted from carrying the motion to repeal the house and window taxes ; the first being the resignation of at least a large part of the Ministry ; the second the repeal of the whole or a large part of the malt tax; the third, the imposition of a property or income tax. There is a story told of a worthy Dutch burgomaster, who, apologizing to a Prince of Orange for not firing a royal salute on his honouring the town over which he presided with a visit, began by stating that he had nineteen reasons for omitting that ceremony—the first being that there was not a single piece of artillery in the town. The Prince dispensed with the enumera tion of the other eighteen reasons, consi dering the first sufficient. Of the three reasons given by the Learned Doctor for voting against the repeal of the assessed taxes, we suspect that the first was the all powerful one ; for when a Member of Parlia ment is more anxious about the preservation of the power of a Ministry than solicitous to pro tect the interests of the people, the desire to keep that Ministry in place is always a sufficient motive for his conduct. When Dr. Lushington moved a not very temperate resolution against the assessed taxes at the Crow❑ and Anchor, the Ministers had not threatened to resign, and perhaps at that time he thought, like many other persons, that those taxes might be reduced with out putting the Government to any greater in convenience than the carrying into effect the sa lutary principle of retrenchment farther than it had yet gone. He knew, however, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had declared that, when he should have completed his " tile and taxed-cart" plan of fiscal relief, there would be a surplus of only half a million of income above expenditure. Now, as the house and window tax amounts to something about two millions, we ask, in what way did the Doctor think it possible, when he moved his resolution at the Crown and Anchor, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer could be compelled to give up this two million of taxes, and yet be enabled to go on with the affairs of the Government ? He must have been aware that his resolution at the Crown and Anchor, which followed the Chan cellor's final expose, would have the effect, if realized, not only of sweeping away the half million surplus, but of causing a deficiency to the amount of a million and a half. How was so great a deficiency to be supplied, leaving the malt tax altogether out of the question, only by retrenchment or by a property tax ? Of the possibility of relieving the country from any por tion of taxation by retrenchment, Dr. Lushing ton says nothing in his letter—and as to a pro perty tax, he dreads the very idea of it. But why did the repeal of half the malt tax alarm the Doctor ? He says comparatively little benefit would be reaped from it by his constituents, and great benefit by the landlords. Thus he admits that both classes would be benefitted, only one in a greater proportion than the other ; yet he considered the repeal of the tax a great evil. Well, but Ministers had resolved that the vote for the repeal of half that tax should be re scinded, as it was rescinded, by the subservient Reformers," who are more zealous to pre serve the Ministers in power than to alleviate the burdens of the people. As it was resolved at all hazards to rescind that vote, why was Dr. Lushington alarmed at the repeal of the assessed taxes any more than when he stood up and de nounced them in a public meeting a few days before ? He was willing, he says, to sacrifice his popularity, but he says nothing of his hopes of preferment. If Ministers are to be main tained in power because they refuse to do what is right, we imagine they will always be entitled to his support, and to that of others who reason like him.—Morning Herald. It will be seen that an inquest is proceeding to investigate the circumstances of the death of Cully, the unfortunate policeman, who lost his life in the late affray at Coldbath-fields. There is evidently a good deal of excitement on the subject. It would be premature to offer an opinion at present, but we are bound to say, that so far as the examination has yet gone, it is not favourable to the conduct of the police. Mr. Hume alluded to the transaction, i❑ the House of Commons, the same evening, and complained that the Sheriff of Middlesex was not called upon by the Government. Mr. Lamb, how ever, defended both the Government and the police, the latter of whom he had no doubt would prove to have acted with great forbearance. We must know more of the evidence before we can come to the same conclusion—Morning Herald. The Ministerial papers, in a tone of disap pointment, inform the public that Sir Stratford Canning is on his return from Madrid, having failed in his negotiations regarding Portugal ; but, as a kind of set-off, reveal the secret " that Solignac will soon march out of Oporto, and a decisive struggle take place." How Lord Palmerston and NI. de Talleyrand ever expected that Sir Stratford could succeed in such a mis sion as that which took him to Madrid no one can imagine, unless it had been first ascertained that Spain was prepared to commit a suicidal act that would eventually end in her own ruin. The two countries have the same enemies, and these are the Revolutionists and Propagandists of Europe, who would gladly have made Oporto or Lisbon a stepping-stone into both. Their expeditions are immediately directed against Portugal ; but Spain is equally included in their aim. The spoils of the former would not suffice to repay their exertions and satisfy their expectations ; they would, therefore, have to draw lustily upon the resources of the latter. Could Sir Stratford, then, imagine that Spain would become a party to her own destruction ? Could it be thought that she ►would consent to be bound hand and foot in order to be tamely delivered up as a victim to her sworn enemies—those who for the last seve ral years have harassed her on the side of the Pyrenees, on the shores of the Mediterranean, and by constant endeavours to excite rebellion wherever their emissaries or incendiary papers could penetrate ? A Ministerial paper, speak ing, last evening, of Sir Stratford's return, says that he comes away " without having made any satisfactory impression upon the Spanish Cabi net, which not only declines attention to any proposed course of proceeding for the settlement of the Portuguese dispute, but even to unite its voice in proposition for an armistice to stop the effusion of blood, with a view to an ultimate arrangement." What our contemporary con siders a aatisfiictory impression the Spa niards would hold to be quite the reverse, and hence, doubtless, have very justly con cluded that any assent on their part to Sir Stratford's propositions would be precisely the same as sealing their own doom. Matters have gone too far for Spain to blink the question. She is no longer in a situation to raise artificial difficulties in the way of settlement, for as re gards an adjustment we have long deemed it utterly impossible ; nor was it the season to create ambiguities susceptible of any determina tion which interested parties might wish to give to them. In refusing to mediate on the affairs of Portugal she, therefore, consulted their com mon safety; and how she was ever asked by a British Minister to mediate in such an affair as that which took Sir Stratford to Madrid will appear one of the strangest acts of the Grey Cabinet whenever the truth leaks out. If what Sir Stratford had to propose comprised any equitable and efficient measure, respecting which the Portuguese themselves had a right. to be heard,, it was not possible for an agency undertaken and conducted as his was to produce the result desired ; nor, after what has happened in the affairs of Portugal, could it be likely that instructions emanating from Downing-street could set the matter at rest. It is, however, to be hoped that the Madrid mission will not be kept a profound secret, and that some spirited Member of Parlia ment w►ll move for the ungarbled papers relating to it to be laid on the table of the House. It is further to be hoped that, when granted, it will not be a pick-and-choose affair, as it was with the last Portuguese papers. But, if this cannot be done, let us know by some other means what Sir Stratford proposed to the Spaniards. The best of the joke, however, is, now to hear of an armistice to stop the effusion of blood ! Let us ask those engaged in the negotiations who are the persons now spilling blood in Portugal, whence did they sail, and under what flag ? Are they not Englishmen, many of them en listed within call of Lord Palmerston's own office ? Did they not go forth from our own ports, and in British vessels ? The first 10,000 not having sufficed, is not the same num ber of Frenchmen now going out at Solignac's request, and at the expense of the French Propa• gandists, with Louis Philip at their head ? Have not 1,200 of these same Frenchmen been brought over to England to embark, some of whom boasted in our coffee-houses that they had pulled triggers before the walls of Antwerp ? In a word, are there not detached parts of the expedition daily sailing from our ports ? With all these movements going on, publicly and with out the slightest interruption, under the eyes of the British and French Governments, how then could Sir Stratford expect to succeed in Madrid; or how is it now that any Ministerial paper can talk of the effusion of blood as if it were advo cating the interests of humanity ? Fortunately, the Portuguese who are thus compelled to de fend their native land, will rejoice whenever So lignac performs his pledge to the London and Paris contractors, by quitting the fortified lines of Oporto, and commencing his march. They are fully prepared to receive him, and then it is that the decisive struggle will take place. —Morning Post . The darkness of the plot against the lives of his Majesty's subjects, on 3londay last, in Coldbath fields, thickens—the evidence of the outrages per petrated by the police force increases every hour-- the barbarity and needlessness of that outrage be come more apparent in proportion as the matter is more deeply probed ; and it is now clearly a ques tion of the utmost moment, in a constitutional point of view,as well as to the individuals who attacked the policemen, and slew one of them, whether the re sistance made was not justifiable and constitutional. Upon the first point, the brutal conduct of the police is confirmed beyond all possibility of doubr. The proof of it does not now rest upon what might be termed mere newspaper authority, but upon evidence given upon oath by persons in every way entitled to credit—upon that of a Magistrate, who witnessed the whole of the transaction, and who declares that be could have dispersed the meeting with the aid of only six policemen, instead of the 1,500, who were called into action against the people I—by a re spectable tradesman, who, himself, received several blows from the semi-military force—and, finally, by the surgeon who first attended the deceased police man, and who has not only sworn that he saw them " with uplifted staves breaking the heads of all who were near," and pursuing numbers of people, who fled for safety, but that " he saw no disposition on the part of the people to break the peace, and that he does not believe that there would have been any tumult if the police had not been there !" Such irrefragable evidence is not to be lightly disposed of. A meeting was advertised to take place in Coldbath-fields, for the purpose of express ing certain opinions—the meeting was declared in a proclamation, signed by " the Secretary of State" (but what Secretary did not appear) to be illegal— a certain number of persons, however, did meet, with flags, banners, &c.; but whether the meeting of these persons was the meeting proclaimed to be ille gal, remains yet to be proved—the meeting was not only peaceable, but, according to all accounts, com mitted no breach of the peace, either in word or in deed—yet, without any warning given, ex cept that of the almost unsigned proclamation de claring the meeting to be illegal, a force consis ing of 1,500 men, is drawn together, leaving all other parts of the metropolis exposed, and rushes upon the persons present, making no distinction either between the innocent and the guilty or between age and sex—striking down every one 'who comes in their way, and thereby prompting to violence and outrage those who had no thoughts of resistance, of sedition, or of treason ! A correspondent, who does not give his name, says in a letter to us last night, " I was in company this day, at a public house in the neighbourhood of the Sessions house, Clerkenwell, when the meeting of last Monday, and the death of the policeman, was the subject of conversation. A policeman present observed, Somebody would swing for it, for the Commissioners had offered a reward of 1001., and promotion in the force, to any one of them who would swear to the murderer.' Now, as this may be an inducement to swear to an innocent person, I beg, through the medium of your respect able journal, to suggest that all persons make a memorandum how they spent their time on the day alluded to, lest they might be innocently hanged for murder." The letter may come from a " right and true man," or it may riot; but the cau. Lion it conveys is not to be despised, arid furnishes another argument for the most minute and scrupu lous inquiry. As for the evidence either of the policemen or of the parties actually engaged in getting up or in supporting the meeting, it is not worth a rush. The esprit de coips of the former, if not some worse motive, will induce them to swear anything which may help to save the police force from the odium so justly incurred by its conduct, arid with regard to the latter, although, upon their examination, they ex hibited no favour or partiality, still who would wonder, under all the circumstances of provocation, that they should give the account which appeared to them the most favourable stritheir own side? But impartial testimony is not to be treated in this mariner; and all the impartial evidence which has hitherto been given, goes to prove that the attack of the police was wholly uncalled for, unnecessary, and most brutal. Nay, the very policemen engaged in the fray, which the general body had created, contradict one another; —, the Superintendent Baker declaring that he gave no orders to his men " to rush forward," and that they appeared to think that " they had a discretionary power to act as they pleased ;" arid one of the policemen, on the other hand, declaring that he received his orders from his superior officer ! Is there not now ,round for inquiry ? Are his Maj es ty' s peacea bl e subjects' to be knocked down and to be trampled under foot, men, women, arid children, and no in quiry to ti.ke place —no justice to be rendered ? And then listen to the language of these peace eservers, but really peace-breakers, according to all authentic accounts I " Ruffians," they say, in speaking of the people whom they knocked down or those who had their no`,l/ a ti n a d no tram T p h le e d po u l n ic d e 7 foot ; but who were the broken by their staves ? And then, again' dent, i think of Mr. Thomas, the Superintentwod calling Mr. Stallwood, a man of propertildrel; of the highest respectability, " a se br and telling him " that it was such m en tr a er iip that encouraged such mobs as the prese nt !" : hool d the blue bottles tip it in gallant style. We l g! not wonder to hear of their insulting no o ' ' e kto The march of impud enc e does not assuredly sla r 0 its pace with them, ho we ver slowly it may P r t e it with others. Els e wh ere a letter will be foun . some respects eliminatory of an opinion whicii_inw gave the other day. We plead guilty to the erd of a hasty judgment, an d we insert the letter of or correspondent as an at onemen t. It will, unquesc II ably, attract attenti on , an d we trust Our , ° others, it will attra c t th e at t en tion of the i n q u : e l jury. Why are not the reporters for the newsPa,P,t, examined ? Are not they a portion best evidence upon the subject ?—ilforn. AdVer Earl Fitzwilliam's resolutions were on Monday ne(g.i.i,, in the House of Lords without a division. His Lordocuaro indeed, had stated, that " considering that in the sti , the subject had not been taken into considerstion for Y id o he should adopt the course which he considered wed t o most conducive to the interests of the country t ot convenience of their Lordships, and merely 11101 e f for their Lordships should enter into the consideratioa ° po resolutions which he had had the honour of introducledged a former evening. He was desirous of breaking g reuri n e o f bringing those laws under discussion, for the P urP g r ie having them finally set at rest." The Earl of d fastened upon an expression of Lord Faze/alien: l'o gl t . tributed a meaning to it which it could hardly be si fairness to bear. of ° at least ortis'(, " Before proceeding," he said, "to the consideration ,h 0 , 4 j le "„, resolutions—resolutions which he thought it iniP° — their Lordships could pass—he wished to advert to an sion made use of by the Noble Earl. That Noble P r ole• said, that he was addr ess i ng an assem b ly which did Pr quately feel the interest of th e wor ki ng people o f this Or d ' t e " Earl Fitzwilliam said, that he had not said so• merely said, that that House did not fully appreciate t"' portance of the subject to the manufacturing classes: t 11 " The Earl of Ripon tho ug ht th e sen ti men t was i" e i - the" the same; and he (the Earl of R.) would say, t hat , l e O t : Lordships did not fully appre c i a t e th e i mpor t an ce °' , s -b i ppfr ject to the manufact ur i ng c L sses, t h ey were no t fit Ni er cio eiate the proper force of th e different conflicting to which were involved in the subject.—(Hear, hear.) oi) when the Noble Earl t o ld th em o f t h e different cno r i !, ° , he would have pursued if h e h a d con ti nue d to b e a )I"e•hlive; the House of Common s , h e sa id t h at h e wou ld then ", en dt , ert with u n thefe,h.opoe: however,t impenetrable p t e t nh h e e et r subject ao r i sk h un o ce u hs l os i np b e e to. t h; s le ur s r t ou lan nd gt e lhi d mat wi mil of Lords, and he had not even a glimmering hop e sie could penetrate it.—(Hear, hear.) He (Lord ~i tp .lo ' heard such a statement from th e N o bl e E ar l w ith g r " . " here; It was but too much of a pi ece w ith op i n i ons stated ellt)Or: and was calculated to cre a t e muc h m i sc hi e f ; an d he nth such a sentiment expressed by a Member of that 11°11-e , much pain.—(Hear.)" t bP Now all that Earl Fitzwilliam meant to say 04 )0 1 their Lordships were landholders—that the cor e „fel' taxed the rest of the community eight millions a r i cider ° the benefit of the landhold ers ; an d th at t h e latwiaeof being but men, with the p ass i ons an d f a iling! could not be supposed to be the most impartial i l n,of' a cause in which they were opposed to the people', 103 3 ' Fitzwilliam attributed no particular inferiority "' holders to any of the other classes ; on the contrarl;to admitted that any other class, if allowed to judg,e, sc r edi ; their own interests are concerned, would be ego'' , " d o to judge in favour of themselves. In the lane s ' Burns,— " If self the wavering balance holds, It's rarely right adjusted," e He (Lord F.) said he h a d no d ou b t b ut t hat 0 . on e holders of England were as goo d men as the weaver s or OOf sweeps—(A laugh)—or any clas s ; b u t thi s was n o reas on 0 0i e the rest of the community should be taxed, in order this 01 0 those lanholders to live finely, and to have seats in 010 o House." ober, Corn will always be dearer in this than in au' ve te country of Europe, precisely because our country to 104 with large citi es , an d we h ave a l arge manufa e n th population, who not only supply o ur own ,- p.O 01 but export manuf ac t ures l arge l y . Th a t we ' manufactures, is the r eason w h y we o ught f toe J o e port food, because, if we could employ our clot ' more beneficially in c u lti va ti ng l an d, th an in Man° s o re ing, we should ex p or t f oo d an d import manufe c . o ers There is no way of r en d er i ng us independent of forW fot for food, but by rendering us also independent of tbe °3 ,,,ife a market for our manu f actures . T he landlords de4de the people of this coun t ry o f t h e a d vantage t h ey wig; ;V rive from their mechanical improvements, by tfaiO t bil food they import in return for their manuiactures, ll to they are literally toiling t o e xt en d t h e i r mar k e t s fre te rf eti benefit the land owners . I t i s not d es i rable, aswas ebseaffe, by Earl Fitzwilli am , t h at we s h ou ld h e i n d epen dent l ige reigners for food, b ecause i n t h at case we s h ou ld he' the to limit our population, so that the manufacturers Oothett producers of f oo d s h ou ld b e i n proport i on to each,. 01° But there can b e no d ou b t t h at i t wou ld b e mud" 0 ge t beneficial to th e country t h at li m i ts s h ou ld he seine the increase of the population, by prohibiting ell )° . r olli of manufactures, th an t h at we s h ou ld be 6°ooo increasing our exports, and increasing, i n eoweq the demand for food, and giving to the landlord t it° fot , rence between the price at which the tax allows the aid to he imported, and the price at which it would bei e c o° we cease to export manufactures, and consequen t / o f to import food. It is true that the landlords dO l3- / are nefit from all that is taken from the people. consumers, as well producers ; and they pay ba n " bo - ate for what they consume. By pauperising the la c osi° classes, too, they have everywhere created an e c oo.,‘, population that must be fed. What the ultirost e o , `'; quences may be, we cannot say ; but in the mea t° ',,p° several parishes of the South, the poor are eatilig o - rait" rents. Short-sighted rapacity often ends in its oet .d bicil We have had hitherto a landowner government , " d notwithstanding the prote•tations of Earl Ripon l e ree ee Winchilsea, have consider e d ever ythi ng w ith t e a, ;V/ chiefly to l an d owners ; b ut , f ortunate l y f or man ki° who wish to benefit by wrong, give to the Wa r ts° striking example of falling victims to their own d e e ' from justice. —Morning Chronicle. ! • a JP S THE LATE MEETING ON THE CALTA. ° ESTATX. —Some idea may be formed of the ve ry fre, :joS' which the New Police made of their truncheons ol i l l par t : dsy, by the fa c t th a t a great many surgeons 10 a;, of the metropoli s h ave pat i ents of all ages and b° l ',lY . 0. 1 under their care, w h o rece i ve d i n j uries, p a rtirt ,3- ,0: 1 ; their heads and arms, from the Police. 00e gentleman, residing i n S out h war k, was ca ll e d 11 1 3 0' 1 : attend five pers ons , f our men an d a boy, orli°'e were cut open by the policemen's truncbeao' be ,p ° , ; parties wounded wer e m ere l y l e d b y curiosity t..°1v,03,' A surgeon and a cc ou c h eur w h o res id es i n the . 01e ` P St. Pancras, was on Mo n d a y even i ng called up ° . ° j I: tend a respectable married woman, who was set' c hiP o premature labour, and gave bi rt h to a s till-bor ° oo owing to the unmercif u l b eat i ng s h e rece ived if policemen of the C division. —2lfor iiing Advertise' 0 r We understand that it hat been fir l3ll/ dvid ed i ranged by Government that this county shall be e, on into two ridings. The two Orinonds, the two f t ; r 4 3 ;1 33 e• those baronies adjoining the King's County, can t ''re e e Roscrea, will form the north riding of the cou rl . t) ,l 13 , r rary, for which an assize will be held in Neva; met days in each circuit, the other three days in t I '•; 9 heretofore. An engineer, deputed by Gover n, ', 3 - b n l t s l . visited Nenagh for the purpose of selecting a i 413 1" i 4 s, to erect a court-house and gaol. The site seleat.....e joiningt v h c e rts n i ew r. barracks and the Limerick roa d. me! rid Johnson, th e lady 0 o f f j a a m son. es Ono t t i h i e e 13th 12th lust., in at E ti a t : B o r if e - R i s clace, Belgrave-square,— ' 01 1- E Bth Royal Inlat:it,ill. , Sr' . „ Dawn, sq., daughter. a ce, of her At Camberwell, the lady of Edw. Smalley Esq. , c ' 0 3 ( d a j ' ° ' - ' ' • r On the 15th inst., at Clapham, Mrs. A. Scriveno , iv irr , MARRIED. to 11 ' e 3 56 11 At Bath, the Hon. Richard Howe 13rowne,!on,.co, cl j and brother to the present Lord Kilmaine, to Llizau 00 0 ter of the Hon. Colonel Browne. n IA A On the 14th inst., at All Saints, Southampton, ~,, 5 .0 f) Rowe Dzuison, Esq., of Park-square, Regent's 1 al,' on , ic , second daughter 01 Frederick Hill, Esq., of the l'oqb oct if i l, Furzey Hurst, Isle of Wight. the Il es ' . ir e ' ill On the 15th inst., at Hampstead Church, Fitzroy _squs..,. Samuel Foyster, of Upper Charlotte-street, _. t, f., tl' 13Birhohilanisdisti:ts".tt:ar'eta t Bushey , Child's-hill, Hampstead. Sarah, youngest daughter of the late Thoma ri s e'hti. iii, tef , ' . , P e ' DIED. ' Ludlow, third daughter of the latex,,i Lady Harriet , 1 y .( o ),i n tßt t ait h re e t.l l 2 4 t t h h i n in st s . t , ., i I s t NSte. w Le ß o u n t a i r i d ng 's t , e, l t i_ s a t s r t e i e n t g , s, th S e ir i.,3; j i n etr i t , aEgst) O oeqd n ii,:srt:lt t fhi l: e(c e mild44 l ahtisithloauckseheaatth:rliitltl,m(hia. in ßa: c c 0.., . , ,,,.; B. 13 ' Ludlow, and sister to tl e ie t, p a r g e e s d en s t l E . arl. . 1W agent 74. PRINTER ANU PUBLISHED BY MURDO youblo• SUN OFFICE, 112, STRAND, lANDO:6 7tRAI ,ci N "EPA] Of ; I : I AIN a, MY 3 :t A 16. r I" for RIGA 41G ;To b . , R A :1 7 net; t. "ttrd e 'ode