The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-10 00:00:00

S
4
MARCH 10, 1852.
• 7

THE LORD CHIEF JOSTICE,of the QUEEN'S
BBENCHBENCHand MR. SCOTTi:MURRAY.
Mr. Scott Murray presents his *twills:lents to the
Editor of The Sun, and requests teseertion in that
paper of the accompanying 01,1Atter which he
has sent to the Lord Chief justice,of the Queen's
ing hOe.
Bench.
Danesfield,
.March 9, 1852. e
• n's,
"TO THE EIGHT HON. THE Lowe mew ! -
J
ENGLAND.. r
• "My Lord,-In--the charge which' innr lordship
lately delivered to the grand jury arAylestntry (of which,
to strengthen 'Ely memory, I use the Times' report),
your Lordship adverted to a eirennistance which you
said had. caused' ' some surprise. not Doi ft little uneasi-
ness.' Thevirciumstatee stated by your. Lordship was
that I, being the high sheriff of the uouaty,and a Roman
Catholic, had appointed a chaplain of gtly own religion,
and that this chaplain had appeared ' isiethe garb of his
order' in accompanying the high sheriff andi her Ma-
jesey's judges from the place where; the 'sheriff meets
them, to the court. Of'my conduct in this respect your
Lordship said that you did not approve, and that you
thought it your duty to say that sots hoped such an oc-
currence would not be repeated. Your Lordship's
charge has now been before the Public for a week, and
on some accounts .I could with that I had addressed
your Lordship .on this subject at an earlier period, for
a portion
of the press has already dealt with the case in
a manner to create prejudice against
my conduct, and
to give additional currency to the opinions which your
Lordship expressed in your charge; but considering the
disparity between your Lordship and myself in respect
of authority and of learning, and bein-
g aware that the
part taken by your Lordship was,
,under
any
airnum.
stances, likely to meet with some .aeizin
IA of popular
a e yen2ollYe Jinn 'satisfied Iliatttavt,,the entitle
r eihich is at once most respectful to Your Lordship, and
most likely in the end to influence candid minds, by
taking time
for reflection and inquiry before I should
against those of theChief' Justice
venture my opinious
,if England.
"To that unequal contest I trust, however, now ad-
dress myself, and in doing so .Bu% at the outset, to
assure your Lordship of my gratitude for the personal
courtesy with
which I was treated in Your Lordship's
charge, and to venture the expression of it„..,y hope
that,
as feelings of kindness to myself did not hiuder your i
ee Me Lordship from discharging; what you dd, fe your duty
blaming
in publicly my conduct, so trio public defence
be thou
of that conduct by me will not ght by your
Lordship to derogate from those feelings of respect on
my part which are due both to your person and your
office.
" The circumstances which occurred were these
"On my appointment by office
the Crown to the of
high sheriff, an appointmen but
which
which, as your Lordship
well knows, I could not decline,
sired, I proceeded, with
in accordance the established
sheriffs, to appoint a chaplain, and
custom of all high
Ipursued the only being a Roman Catholic,
the chaplain y course
which, upon the supposition thato..
the
8.
.r. _
iappointed
by the sheriff is the chaplain fri iff Could in
conscience pursue, by appointing
a Roman Catholic
chaplain.
that " I think it right te state the gentleman whom I
neighbourhood selected resides in the
immediatetholic church at Mort' my
own hcuie, officiates in the Ca
and is in allMarlow
and also in my domestic
chapel, that I should p respects
-
the person whom it is most natural;zes,
accompanied bP;luyt. " On the opening of the as
Crompton, who arrived them
chaplain, I met Mr. Justice
e gard to the dress of y
day before your Lordship.
In
beene made, I wish to :Ili
chaplain, to which allu,ion has
religious order (fur,
apart it was not the habit of any
he is not a member of any
apart from any reasons,
full dress worn by the such order), but the usual fu
Ro-
man Catholic clergy on occhsihes unconnected with re-
ligious ceremonials. I received his Lordship at the
station, thence conveyed him CO court, thence to the Pro-
testant church, and thence again, after the service was
concluded, to the judges' 10dgIng5. Mr. Justice Cromp-
ton,' h
therefore, vyas repeatedly in
contest with my C hap-
lain before your Lordship's arrival, and as: I was most
anxious not to give offence in any quarter,
towards
lad to
arter, I was
Judge find, in the demeanour of that Learned
myself and my chaplain, the assurance that to his Lord-
ship at least none had been given.
arrived, d" On the following day your Lordship an ac-
companied by my chaplain I received .
your Lordship at
the railway station, and conveyed you in my carriage to
the d • it be
came
obvious judges' lodgings. In the course of rive
obvious that your Lordship was displeased,and almostd
immediately after your Lordship's arrival atthelog-
ings I was summoned to a room, in which I found, be-
sides yourself, Mr. Justice Crouseton and the two mar-
shals of your Lordship.
"Your Lordship then requested to speak with me,
and, as a preliminary step, desired that my chaplain,
who was with me, but whom your Lordship appeared
purposely to abstain trom recognising as my chaplain,
Lord-
should withdraw. This having been done, your d
having. ttelde , ship, expeesead lour diaßle eat nosits4eis .having
your .LORihip hIV . =We'
lain, a proceeding which your Lordship sie
• med to con-
sider an innovation; to which I replied, that I had
therein followed the example of other Roman Catholic
sheriffs since the Relief Act, who had pursued a similar
course without rebuke; and your Lordship subse-
quently desired to know the names of the judges who
had been on circuit when these instances occurred, and
declared your opinion that there must have been an
oversight on the part of those learned persons; and even
if it were not so, though from curiosity your Lordship
would be glad to know who they were,. yet your Lord-
ship's opinion would not be affected thereby. To satisfy
this portion of your Lordship's wishes I append the
names of some judges whom I know to have acquiesced,
under similar circumstances, in the presence of a Roman
Catholic chaplain.
" I may here observe that, as the surprise and uneasi-
ness which, from your Lordship's subsequent charge, it
would appear were caused .by my conduct, had not been
manifested by either Mr. Justice Crompton or by any
one else to my knowledge before the arrival of your
Lordship, I was not prepared for the rebuke to which I
was subjected; still less, alter that rebuke had been pri-
vately given, was I prepared foi- the repetition of it in
open court. That, when embodied in the charge of a
Chief Justice, it should have led the grand jury, as I
have the best reasons for knowing that it did, to sup-
pose that I had been guilty of
a violent and wilful in-
novation, is neither to be wondered at nor to be made a
just matter of complaint against that body.
a I now proceed to the reasons upon which your
Lordship's public rebuke was grounded.
"They. wore thus expressed—, The sheriff appoints a
chaplain, who is to appear as chaplain of the judges, and
who is expected to take his seat in the same carriage as
the judges, and to sit beside the judges in the court.
That chaplain, therefore, becomes the chaplain of the
judges, and the Protestaht religion is the religion of the
judges of this country,' .
" There are here, then, two propositions.
01. That the chaplain appointed by the sheriff be-
comes the chaplain of the judges.
"2. That the Protestant religion, by which your Lord-
ship plainly meant the religion of the Established
Church, is the religion of the judges of this country.
e Having made inquiry upon these points, I am now
induced, not on my own account nnly or of my religion,
efi
0
but on account also of the high ' •
c 0 which I have the
honour to fill, and the privileges of
which it is my duty
to maintain, and on account of ell those who, being of a
different religion from that of the Established Church,
whether Roman Catholics or Protestants, may, according
to the constitution of this couture,
be appointed to the
office of sheriff, to submit! e to Your Lordship the reasons
for which I must decline to acquiesce in your opinion.
" And first, as to the claita;meee
by your Lordship,
that the chaplain appointed by the sheriff becomes the
chaplain of the judges.
" The office of sheriff, to which appointment is made
directly by the Crown, has attached to mit a variety of
important duties, amongst which, with great respect be
it said, the duty of personal attendance on the judges of
assize, important though it be, is not the most important.
"Upon his appointment to the office it has been cus-
tomary for the sheriff, as a part of the proper state ap-
pertaining to his position, to select a clergyman who
shall officiate as his chaplain.
"In the selection of this clergyman I never heard that
the judges were consulted. He is not appointed spe-
cially for the assizes, but', for the whole period of office
of the sheriff. I never heard him called, judges except by
your Lordship, the chaplain of the or the
chaplain of any one but the sheriff. His apL
pointment, as far as I can learn, is not even obli-
gatory on the sheriff, which, if the jihige,
had an in-
terest in it, I presume it would be. With the single ex-
ception of preaching before the judge, a custom which
in itself implies no official relation whatever between
the preacher and his audience, and which moreover can
only be practised by consent of the incumbent of the
church in which the sermon, is delivered, there is no
function either by custom or right performed by the
sheriff's chaplain which affords the slightest reason for
supposing that he has any official connexion whatever
with the judges. On the contrary, it is only through
the sheriff that his chaplain is known to' the judges;
aud it is only when the sheriff isAt ties
that he appears
by official right before them.
odpublic dinners
not attend
given by the judges he does
the sheriff does
by ac-
cidental invitation, because
the sheriff he
public dinners given byalways attends
in his official capacity.
dais claim of
" I cannot, then, regard
ncroachmentYuour Lordship
otherwise than as a directi
encroachment
encroachment,
pri-
vileges of the office which
lss warrantable because let
me add, which is the e, .
wee of he jud ,
se the law
anizes the ex's . ges
earschap-
expressy ranee
~ .
ri ate class from hose of the sherifrs
lains
_____.
c.
13,
the chaplain of the.
By the '2lst of Henry
fVIII
the 'Queen's Bench was -
specie y
Lord Chief Justice o
r h of neer
by the 25th Y VIM,' c.
privileged; and
16, similar advantages were extended to the
of the Queen's Bench and
chaplains of the Justices he
Chief
Baron
of
Common Pleas, and of t•n the power of the the Ea-
chequer.
It is thus
plainly 1 them on th ' judges
above mentioned to take with eir circuits
if for any cause they have
chaplains of their own; and
thought fit to discontinue their appointment, this can
endeavouring
hardly afford a reasonable pretext for ending to
and independent
officers of other
officers of the Crown.

C

se firmly,nte
rt
so, dEe noso2'
Ehunmglbalnyd,
nbrutpis
tio,nhothi
jecspoarrtrorfotthesetahnigtsh
sheriffs of England, whether they be of the Church of
,
Your Lordship's first proposition, then, I venture
;ananCd
I enter my protest against it..
" Your Lordship's second proposition is of a graver
nature, and carries us from points of privilege cad eti-
quette into questions which affect the first principles of
that religious freedom for which this country claims to
be distinguished. Your Lordship says that the religion
of the Church of England is the religion of the judges;
the Constitution says that Roman Catholics and Protes-
tant Dissenters of all classes may be judges.
" Hder are these conflicting propositions to be recon-
ciled ? How is it that men who honestly dissent from
the Church of England can be lawfully invited to the
bench, and yet when on the bench be required to con-
form to that Church ? Are there two consciences for
judges—one to be saved or lost by, and another to go
circuit with? If this be not so, by what subtlevcontriv-
ance of law is it that the same conscience is to be at
once relieved and oppressed, declared to be free—aye,
and great credit taken for the declaration—and at the
same time made subject to a dominant establishment ?
"My Lord, these questions necessarily arise out of
your Lordship's charge to the grand jury. They are
inseparably_ connected with one of the positions on which
your Lordship's reprehension of my conduct, rested. I
venture, therefore, respectfully to ask an answer to
them, and I do so the more earnestly because the office
which I fill, being itself a judicial as well as a ministe-
rial one, I find it difficult to distinguish between the re-
ligious obligations of the judges of assize and those which
affect myself as the sheriff of a county.
My Lord, there is another portion of your Lord-
ship's charge which it would be unseemly in me to pass
over. It is that in which your Lordship repelled the
imputation of any illiberal motive, and declared that you
had alivays most strenuously supported the Roman
Catholics in their claims for freedom of opinion, in order
that they should be admitted to all the privileges of all
others of her 'Majesty's subjects;' in, which your Lord-
ship, from your own experience, spoke with esteem
of the personal quaiities of, the present head of the
Catholic Church; and in which you expressed your
respect for the feelings of . Roman Catholics, and for
the sacred order of their clergy. My Lord, for these
exertions of your Lordship thus referred to, and
for the . generous sentiments thus avowed, my best
thanks are due; but in tendering them I cannot divest
myself of the melancholy feeling, that if, in the judgment
of a man so liberal as your Lordship,- a claim to equal
privileges, trifling as that which I have made, does not
appear warranted by the spirit of the Roman Catholic
Relief Act, we need not be surprised if, in other quar-
ters, the influence of this healing measure should be still
more limited, and, in some, deprived of almost everything
which can render it acceptable to generous and educated
minds.
In conclusion, my Lord, I can for myself most sin-
cerely say that in acting as I did I sought no triumph
for myself or fur my religion. My first desire was so to
act as not to compromise either my own conscience or
the rights of the office entrusted to me. My next was to
avoid giving offence either to the judges or to my neigh-
bours. By following the precedents of other Roman Ca-
tholic sheriffs, I had hoped to secure, and till your Lord-
ships arrived I flattered myself that I had secured, these
different objects. Of the failure which tken occurred I
have in this letter given the history, and considered the
reasons, and as your Lordship's charge is before the pub-
lic, I think it due to myself that my vindication should
have the same advantage.
" I have the honour to be,
" My Lord Chief Justice,
" Your Lordship's obedient and humble servant,
"C. R. S. SCOTT MURRAY,
" llizh Sheriff of Buckinghamshire.
" Danesfisld, March 8, 1852.
" P.S. Tne instances referred to are these:—
" Ili 1837, Jsmos Wheble, Esq., a Roman Catholic,
was High Sheriff of Berkshire, and attended the judges
at asiizs, accompanied by his Roman Catholic onaplain,
the Rev. T. Ricgrose.
" JUDGES.—Spring—The Right Hon. Sir James Petite.
Sir William Bolland.
Autumn—Lord Abinger.
• Mr. Justice Coleridge.
" In the same year, G. T. Whitgreave, Esq., a Roman
Catholic, was High Sheriff of Staffordshire, and attended
the same judges, accompanied by the Rev. Edward Hud-
dleston, his Roman Catholic chaplain.
" In 1839, Charles Tempest, Esq., now Sir Charles
Tempest, a Roman Catholic, was High Sheriff of York-
shire, and attended the judges, accompanied by a Roman
Catholic clergyman, who was at that time his domestic
chaplain. _ .

"-Junozs.—Spring—The Right Hon: Sir J. Parke.
Mr. Baron Alderson.
Autumn—Mr. Justice Coltman.
Mr. Justice Maule.

" During the current year, Richard Swift, Esq., a
Roman Catholic, is one of the joint sheriffs of London
and Middlesex. He has attended the judges as well as
the Reoutclar and Common Sergeant; *Zit courts-at-
the Old Bailey, acdompanied by his 'Roman Catholic
chaplain. That chaplain has been prevent, officially, at
his judicial entertainments, and stood ,at the side of the
sheriff when he was presented at the Court of Exche-
quer to the Cursitor Baron for the approval of her Ma-
jesty, and when he appeared, according to custom, in
that and the other courts at Westminster, on Lord
Mayor's-day."

[PRICE SD.

of capital of 16,731/. 16s. 3d. The "Steam-boats, in-
Chiding alterations," have cost 166,7681. 9s. 10d.; the
" Interest to shareholders on calls from Ist October,
1844, to 31st December, 1848," is given as 179,030/. 15s.
6d.; th 4 "Interest on loans and debentures to 10th
January, 1850," as 103,2001. 3s. 6d.; and the " Dividend
on preference shares from Ist April, 1848, to 30th June,
1849," as 40,0261. '6s. sd.
The revenue account shows_ that the railway traffic*
has yielded 85,347/. 6s. 7d. for the past half-year; and
that the working expenses, including rates and taxes,
have been 40,782/. ss. 4d. The half-year's balance in
favour of the railway, is therefore 44,8651. Is. 3d. The
steam-heat traffic has produced 9,9511. Is. Bd., and theex-
ponces have been 6,805/. 12s. ld. The profit upon them
has therefore been 3,148/. 91. 7d. The total profit for
the half-year has been 47,7101. 105. 10d.
The interest on debentures to 10th January last is put
down at 26,509/. 16s. 9d.
The "summary of balances on the traffic and revenue
accounts" shows the following:-To estimated amount
of outstanding liabilities on traffic account, 14,442/. 17s.
7d.; leas, over-estimated, 2,3991. 178.; to interest on pre-
ference shares to 31st December, 1849, 17,325/..; to 30th
June, 1850, 17,3251.; to 31st December, 1850 (in part),
6,4751.; together, 41,1251.; less, interest forfeited, 71/.
11s. 3d.; to debenture interest to 10th July, 1850,
24,9431. Si.; to 10th January, 1851, 24,481/. 17s. 2d.;
to 10th July, 1851, 24,7611. 19s. 6d.; less, amount over-
stated, 1801. 14s. 3d.; to 10th January, 1852, 26,509/.
16s. 9c1.; in the total, 141,569/. 15s. 1 ld.
Against this are the following items.-By Shrews-
bury and Chester toll, 3,829/. 19s. Bd.; by balance on
traBlc account, 50,630/. 13s. 2d.; reduced by proportion
of return to post-office, in accordance with the award of
remuneration for mail service, 3.6591. Is. Id.; and out-
standings paid as per contra, 12,0431. Os. 7d.; by balance
of revenue account to 30th June, 1850, 16,0271. 13s.
10d.; reduced by proportion of return to post-office, in
accordance with award, 1,1621. 6s. id.; by balance of
revenue account to 31st December, 1850, 37,172/. Is.
4d.; increased by allowance of locomotive charges,
1.5531. 16s. 7d.; by balance of revenue account to 30th
June, 1851, 26,0461. 13s. 5d.; to 31st December, 1851,
47,710/, 10s. 10d.; making together 166,107/. is. ld.;
and leaving a balance of 24,537/, 55. 2d.

DIRECT LONDON AND MANCHESTER (RE-
MINGTON'S LINE).
Yesterday the official manager (Mr. Turquand) and
his solicitors (Messrs. Hardwick), with several other
parties, attended before Master Senior, when the further
settlement of the list of contributories and the considera-
tion of claims against the company were proceeded with.
On the part of the official manager, Mr. Marshall
contended that the name of Mr. George Remington, the
engineer—after whom the line is called—should be in-
cluded in the list, on the ground that that gentleman
had signed the deed in respeet of 500 shares representing
25,0004

Messrs. Phillips and Sons, who appeared for Mr. Re-
mington, did not deny the signature of their client to the
deed, but said that the number of shares (500), and the
amount of subscription (25,0000 had been filled in since
he had signed the subscribers' agreement; that he bad
not authorised or consented to the insertion of these
figures, and that, consequently, Hr. Remington could
❑ot be bound by a deed which had been altered since the
execution of it.

Mr. Remington was sworn, and upon examination
proved the facts stated by his advocate. He said also
that though he could not now remember the number of
shares ho intended to take (if any), yet that he bad cer-
tainly never intended to take as many'as 500.
A witness was called (on the part of the official
manager), who stated that he believed the figures had
bee❑ filled in at the time Mr. Remington executed the
deed; bat on cross-examination the witness admitted
that the figures representing the number of shar?s, and
the amount of subscription, might not have been inserted
at the time alluded to.

Mr. MARSHALL asked for time to produce the clerk
who had nc-wally written these figures; but
The MASTER observed that he would now expunge the
came of Mr. Remington flom the list, end if the official
manager thought ho had sufficient evidence, he might,
within a reasonable time, apply to review the case.
Mr. PHILLIPS then applied to have a claim, amounting
to 6,3001., in respect of engineering services rendered
by Mr. Remington, allowed as a debt.
The claimant was examined to prove the fairness of
the various charges made by him in his bill. It was stated
that Mr. gemington had been unable to bring an Winn
against any of the members of the company to recover
his demand, by reason of his having entered into an
agreement with the directors and shareholders not to
look to them personally for the amount of his bill, but
only " to the funds of the company."
The MASTER said it appeared that Mr. Remington
could not legally sustain his claim. In this mane
" company" had ever been formed, and he must refase
to allow the demand as a debt. In reference to the bill
of costs of the solicitor, Mr. Lacy, the Master, said he
was satisfied regarding the retainer of that gentleman,
and-ho-wottld etsw direct the bill to -beireerr ofte
taxing- master, with directions to tax it as between party
and party.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS

FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF TFIIS DAY.
TIMES.—The Derby Administration has made its
debit on the hustings with all the success that was to be
expected from the judicious selection of those who were
to go through this ordeal. The actual elections, indeed,
are far from over, for Mr. Henley's election comes on to-
day, Mr. Disraeli's on Friday, Mr. Christopher's on
Saturday, besides others of less note; but so far there
has been no contest, and, what is more important, there
has been scarcely any serious blunder in the election
addresses. The new Ministers have taken their cue
from Lord Derby's speech, reiterating their old opinions,
or at least referring to them, but referring not ),ass to
the peculiar circumstances of the new Government, and
asking for wider and more discretionary powers than
have hitherto been conceded by the " farmer" to his
Parliamentary "friend." There has, perhaps, been a
significent difference between some of these
election addresses. For example, to-day Mr.
Benkes is cautious enough. As chairman of the
Dorsetshire sessions he had every reason to defend the
predominance of his order in the now Government, and
he has turned Mr. Coppook to very good account. But
his speech is more humorous than explicit, and better
adapted to enlighten his constituents as to the organiza-
tion ef parties than as to the particular policy of his
own. On the other hand, Mr. Beresford has addressed
to the farmers of North Essex and the populace of
Braintree a reproduction of one of his Drury-lane
speeches, proving that a five-shilling duty will be so
much gain to the Treasury and the farmer, at the ex-
panse of nobody else in this country. As Mr. Beres-
toed is not in the new Cabinet, and his arguments will
pees for no more than they are worth, it is unnecessary
to sift them at this particular juncture. Much the same
may be said of the financial illu,tretions adopted by Mr.
A. Duncombe, the re-elected Member for the East
Riding, who, however, very wisely, defers till the ap-
proaching general election the delicate subject of pledges.
But, now that this first scene of tho new play is
so nearly over, everybody is beginning to ask what
everybody else is likely to do. What will Lord Derby
say on Friday night? Will he lay down anything in
the shape of a policy? Will he tell us what sort of ap-
peal he will make to the country? On the other hand,
what policy will Lord John Russell unfold to his adhe-
rents at Chesham-place to-morrow? Will he put it to
their allegiance to turn cut at once, by fair means or by
foul, the only other possible Minister but himself, in
order to bring back the old men and the old measures—
the old internal weakness and external difficulties?
Again, what will the people out of doors do? Will the
Liberals rally to the rescue of Lord John? Will the
agriculturists swear their Members to a five-shilling
duty, as the minimum of their torvice? These ques-
tions are not only asked; they are being rapidly an.
swered. In times of great }lewd and excitement
nothing is thought so safe as precipitation; no-
thing so dangerous as forbearance. The Peace of
.Amiens was not more difficult to be observed then
the present tottering armistice of parties; the retention
of Malta was not more intolerable to the enemy than the
Conservative occupation of Downing-street. The sight
gate;les t a.shall not
Fridayld we
week may
ch
of a rival in office isnaembseionrlduteteheleayi
Liantotrotdhleserable. Hamanti ad
jonodgreo ftstwohm the
while he seri.
bwoheththeesrigLnoarldfoDr eirnbsytacnatn
henoasktieliatiess. Thepeechwh
new Govern-
mentnom discretion,
must have not only more than common
tptehsehyi
hut more than common fortune, to es
shipwrecko bdeo-
fore they have even left barbourh.o
more than escape shipwreck. They
considerable measures; law have to pass some
reforms
de-
fences; otherwise they will make a
and national °
their appeal to the country. Of a very sorry figure in
by for the most serious all the above questions,
hat will the agriculturists
do? Will they, as heretofore,_ deal with their represen-
tatives as a landowner d
with a tradesman,
with his bailiff, and cus-
tomeraktobe done, or the very article orderingto. the
.vlirylwhaotr
has
hitherto been the comm be
ksupplied?
ble notion of a
on mar et-ta.
county Memberd must
or a Conservative Premier; an
be confessed that our statesmen have contributed to
their own depreciation in this respect. This, however,
we will say---if the British agriculturists send up their
representatives pledged to a corn-law, or to any other
particular measure, they aro sending slaves to a Parlia-
ment of freemen. It is of no use to send a man to
the [louse with his hands tied. The experiment has
been tried a hundred times, and there always have been
found, and always will be found, men who will submit to
that operation, but the result is invariably the same.
The farmers might as well mark their representatives at
one., as they do their horses and their sheep, as write
pledges on their faces and backs. Tho conduct
of the Manchester school, and of writers from
whom better might be expected, should open
the eyes of the farmer on this point. What are
Messrs. Cobden and Co. and tele contemporaries we
refer to doing at this moment? They are exhausting all
the arts of ingenuity and language to provoke the 'Jon-
servative party into a fatal obstinacy. The very writers
who for the last two years have proclaimed that Lord
Derby had given up protection, and have daily or weekly
amused themselves with stories of Protectionist detales-
tion and despair, now turn sharp round sal insist that
nothing has been given up, and that every man of the
party is as pledged as ever he was. Oue of our contain-