The Sun.
London, England, 1837-02-24 00:00:00

THE MURDER NEAR UXBRIDGE.

INQUEST ON TIIE BODY.—On the arrival of the Coroner
the Inn was crowded to excess, and some hundreds of persons
were assembled outside. The two prisoners, Lamb and Bray,
were in separate rooms, in the custody of officers. A highly-
respectable Jury was empannelled, of which the Rev. Chris-
topher Parke was foreman.

•Mr. Charles Potter, surgeon, of _Uxbridge, had examined
internally the body of the deceased. On removing the scalp
appearances of contusion were seen on the inner surface of
that part covering the left temple. On removing the skull-
cap the vessels of the brain were found gorged with blood ;
there was a great effusion of blood on the brain, which was the
cause of death.

Mr. Charles Churchill, farmer, of Ruislip, was next exa-
mined. The deceased vv4s a very steady, industrious lad. I
am aware that the life of the poor lad had been threatened by
Bray and Lamb, in consequence of his giving evidence against
them at the Uxbridge Sessions on a charge of poaching,
Mary Brill, the sister of the deceased, an intelligent girl,
stated that after her unfortunate brother had given evidence
against Lamb and Bray, on a charge of poaching, she met
Henry Hill, who called her on one side, and told her to tell
Jackey-(alluding to the deceased) to keep a good 100k-out, as
Jem Bray said he would kill him whenever he had an oppor-
tunity.

The Jury returned a' verdict of " Wilful Murder against
some person or persons unknown."
The prisoners Lamb and Bray were then brought before
Mr. Dagnall, the Magistrate, will addressed them at some
length upon the great suspicion against them, but that the
evidence was not sufficient to warrant their detention. Lamb,
however, was detained or, a charge of horse-stealing.

Members of the House of Commons have been
arriving daily this week, who had been prevented from attend-
ing at the commencement of the session by the influenza, but
who are now convalescent ; though a few still remain indis-
posed, and are unable to attend to their duties in Parliament.

A carpenter received several kegs of nails from a
friend, with a request that he would sell them on comraiFsion.
Not being accustomed to sucl► business he wrote to his corre-
spondent, at the end of three months, and informed him that
he could not sell the article. The owner answered his letter,
and told him that if he could hot otherwise dispose of the ar-
ticle he might put them all under the hammer. He waited
some time, and not hearing from the carpenter went to town,
where he found he had been literally obeyed, as his friend had
driven them all into a board fence, which he had been called
on to build round a garden lot.

SPIRIT OF THE PU

The unanimity of opin. V ont
the metropolis, on the subje,
as
occupied Parliament for thr i t little
uT
astonishing. The partisans of the Tories wereliterally
shamed into silence. In truth, they were reduced to a
very disagreeable alternative, either to confess thr that
its cause of their party was a very hopeless one, c
its advocates in the House were unequal to the task of
asserting it, for any thing 'more lame and miserable in
the way of argument never was thrust upon an en-
lightened public. To the conviction of the badness of
the cause we must ascribe the striking increase of
sixteen in the majority against Lord Francis Egerton's
motion, as compared with the majority against a similar
motion last year. And here we must notice the paltry
disingenuousness of some of the Tory writers, for
which, however, we prepared our readers on Monday
last. The Morning Herald, indeed, would have
been glad to find its recollection defective, so much
was it taken by surprise by the great increase
in the majority. " This," observes our venerable
Contemporary, " is, we believe, a much larger
majority than was anticipated. Nobody, we' be-
lieve, reckoned on a larger majority than that of
last year, which, if we mistake not, was 64 ; so that
the present has exceeded the former by 16, supposing
our recollection, as we do suppose it, to be correct."
We can assure our Contemporary that its recollection
is perfectly correct, and that there is no mistake in its
reluctant homage to the truth. The Times, either
from a degree of candour (rare conduct in that un-
principled Journal), or from, being at fault for a story,
or from mortification at having so recently anticipated,
from Lord F. Egerton's motion, the destruction of the
Whigs, was silent on the subject of the majority.
But the Morning Post had the assurance to inform
its readers, that " the actual decrease of the Minis-
terial majority, instead of 16, was no more than six,
the majority on the 10th of June last year for disa-
greeing with the Lords' amendments having been 86,
and that of last night, substantially on the same ques-
tion, being 80. The present division presents, then,
a clear gain, although not a very considerable one,
to the friends of the Constitution." And the Standard,
which would be ashamed to be distanced by any com-
petitor in taking liberties with matters of fact, coolly
states, " that as compared with the latest division
upon the same subject, the majority has rather dimi-
nished than increased. It will be seen that in the ab-
solute force of the Conservatives there has been an in-
crease of four since June—in the Ministerial party
an absolute diminution of two." The majority of 86
was not on the latest division upon the same subject.
The latest division upon the same subject was when
the third reading of the Bill was carried by a majority
of 61. The rejection of the Lords' amendments was
voted by several Members who opposed the Bill, and
of these Members, some, whom, however, we will not
now name, voted for Lord Francis Egerton's motion on
Thursday morning, who, should the Lords repeat the
mad experiment of last year, will again swell the ma-
jority against them. The two questions are so distinct,
and the danger so evident, from following the insane
counsels of Lord Lyndhurst, that, should the Lords
persist in their insulting denial of justice to Ireland,
we have no doubt the majority will be swelled from
86 to upwards of 100. Who, indeed, can contem-
plate the consequences of so marked a demonstration
to a people like the Irish, as quick to feel insult as
they are easily led by kindness, that from the Parlia-
ment of the United Kingdoms they have nothing to
hope, that the Emancipation Bill admitted only in
name Catholics to equal privileges, and that their re-
ligion is to be a constant badge of degradation ?
Fortunately, however, for the good cause, while it has
been supported by the most conclusive arguments, Sir
Robert Peel, Lord Stanley, and Sir James Graham
exerted themselves in vain to find even a colourable
pretext for the injustice to Ireland which, in an evil
hour for the Tories, they resolved to perpetrate.
Triumphant in the House by strength of argument
and increasing numbers, the stream of public orinion
will set in on the Lords with a force which we trust
will have the effect of restoring them to their reason,
which has been so long in abeyance. Who can read
the debate without feeling contempt for the Tories,
who must themselves be heartily ashamed of the
sorry figure they cut ? Lord Stanley affords a fresh
proof that a deserter cannot make up by malice
for the energy which honest conviction gives ; with
the abandonment of his principles he seems to have
lost his former aptitude for debate. With the aid of
Sir James Graham derived from misrepresenting the
purport of the statements of the pamphlet on the
" Policy of England towards Spain," and suppressing
the high praise bestowed on the parish priests of the
Peninsula for the purpose of transferring to the parish
priests of Ireland the odium of the bigotry and fana-
ticism charged only on the Spanish monks, his speech
was merely a rificciamento of some of the worst parts
of Sergeant Jackson's. And as to Sir Robert Peel,
he never once attempted to meet the arguments on the
other side, but repeated a few of the vague assertions
which had been so successfully disposed of by Mr.
Charles Buller and Mr. Roebuck. It might be very
gratifying personally to the Right lion. Gentleman to
be able to patronise Lord Stanley, and to find an occa-
sion for requiting the efforts of Lord Lyndhurst to
supplant him in the good graces of the Tories,
" faintly excusing (to borrow the language of
our Contemporary the Globe) the alien' ebullition
of immortal memory, as a hasty expression that had
fallen from an individual." But whatever Sir Robert
re•

ight gain, the Tories gained nothing from his incon-
clusive speech. In short, the Tories have been soundly
drubbed, and cannot conceal their chagrin. They
have advanced nothing which even resembles an argu-
ment against conferring on Ireland the benefit of mu-
nicipal institutions. The language held by Mr.
O'Connell at different times—the merit of the altera-
tion in the mode of appointing juries in Ireland—the
proportion between the Catholics and Protestants ap-
pointed to offices by the Irish Government, and a hun-
dred other matters of detail, have been lugged head and
shoulders into the discussion ; but they failed to
show that even if all Mr. O'Connell's speeches were
not emanations of absolute wisdom, or even if un-
packed juries do not always find proper verdicts
in Ireland any more than in England, that there-
fore Ireland should be deprived of beneficial insti-
tutions. It has been repeated, indeed, ad nau-
seam that the circumstances of Ireland differ from
those of England, and that difference of circum-
stances call for a difference in the legislation for the
two countries. Ireland, is, it is true, less advanced in
civilization, less wealthy ; but what does this amount
to ? The principle, that a man, whether rich or poor,
ought to be allowed to manage his own private con-
cerns, that the inhabitants of a neighbourhood ought
to be allowed to manage the concerns in which all the
inhabitants have a common interest, is not affected by
the wealth or poverty of a nation, by its greater or
less advancement in civilization. The poor nation is
assisted in its progress from poverty to wealth by the
possession of local administrations for local interests,
and the wealthy nation is enabled by them to preserve
the wealth it possesses, and to increase it. Some special
reason must then .)e discovered for refusing to Ireland
what is beneficial to a people in every degree of civili-
zation—what enabled the emancipated thralls of the
middle ages to become free and great in spite of the
feudal despotism that surrounded them ? But the
Tories can assign no intelligible reason. A people
must have some religion, and it so happens that the
majority of time Irish profess the Catholic religion, while
the majority of the English are Protestants; and the
Irish, forsooth, are to be deprived of what is univer-
sally admitted to be in all stages of civilization a
blessing because the religion established is that of a
small minority of Protestants, and it is assumed
(though the modus operandi remains a secret) that a
measure calculated to benefit the whole population
would be destructive of the religious Establishment.
We beg the pardon of the Tories. Some of them, and
Sir Hobert Peel in the number, did advance a sort of
negative argument, by way of apology for the injustice
of withholding municipal privileges from Ireland. It
was urged that the example of Manchester and Bir-
minham proved that towns could flourish without

•: . -
municipal corporations, and that iSouthwark and
Westminster, and other inetropolitan districts, we.e
also without those institutions. This is the arument
of the Head of Louvaine College against Greet—" I

J 4td JOURNALS!
\•-- •
• ion pra.yl tivnout
.. ct ()Wks
ivy has
ree days, was- 'flit-lA.I little

and my predecessors have ate, drank, and slept, with-
out feeling the want of Greek, and therefore Greek
may be very well dispensed with." No person attempted
to show that Manchester, and Birmingham, or the me-
tropolitan districts, suffered no inconvenience from the
want of municipal corporations. Dr. Kay has shown
that abuses of a frightful kind prevail in Manchester
from the want of municipal government ; and on Wed-
nesday night Mr. Brotherton stated—
" That the fact was, that among all classes of inhabitants,
and in every degree, it was the unanimous desire to obtain an
improved system of local government, on the basis of Cor-
porations.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The difficulty had been in
making an arrangement which would prove satisfactory to the
townships which constituted the town of Manchester. There
had, however, been a meeting held, and a Committee ap-
pointed to consider the subject ; that Committee had made a
report which he now held in his hand, and with the leave of the
House he would read the concluding part of it.—( Hear,
hoar.) It was that :--4 In conclusion your Committee beg
most respectfully, but earnestly, to impress upon their
fellow-townsmen the importance of an early arrangement of
this important subject, and they think that the present time
is a most favourable opportunity for effecting it. The subject
should not be viewed as a party question, but as one which
should have the good of the community for its sole object,
by the constitution of a local government, which will sustain
the acquirement and be worthy of the character of the town.
The interests of every part of the borough, which are' one and
the same to all intents and purposes, ought to be strengthened
by consolidation, instead of being weakened as they now are
by subdivisions and distinctions inimical to the general good.'
He thought, therefore, he bad proved that Manchester was de-
sirous of having municipal government.—( Hear, hear.")
So that the apology for injustice merely amounts to
this, that certain situations are so highly favoured for
the prosecution of certain branches of industry, that
they attract a great population to them, who thrive in
spite of the absence of municipal advantages. The
Catholics were slaves. Whether they could have been
retained in subjection is now an idle question—they
have been emancipated, and cannot be again enthralled.
To deny them corporate privileges on account of their
religion, is to fly in the face of the Act conceding to
them the privileges of the Constitution. Whether the
Protestant Church of Ireland ought or ought not to be
maintained is a question to be decided on its own
merits, but which it is not allowable to mix up with the
question of municipal institutions. It might with as
much justice be urged that Parliament ought to impose
a heavy tax on Catholics to keep them poor, because
an increase of riches might enable them to effect more
easily the destruction of the Established Church, as
that valuable institutions should be withheld from
them for the same reason. The Irish are entitled to
every civil advantage which the English and Scotch
possess ; and to interpose the Church as a bar between
them and the communication of equal and beneficial
rights cannot strengthen the Establishment, while it
will supply the Irish with powerful motives for seek-
ing its destruction. A word before we conclude with
respect to the majority of 80. It should have been
82, for two Liberal Irish Members, Mr. Cornelius
O'Brien and Mr. Fitzstephen French, left town the
very evening of the division, to attend the grand juries
of their respective counties. In our judgment they
would have better discharged their duty to their consti-
tuents by remaining for the close of the debate. Their
votes here might have been of use ; their presence at
Ennis and Roscommon could have been dispensed
with .—Mo rning Chronicle.
Few, we think, will dissent from our observation,
that as concerns the Irish " Municipal Reform" Bill,
brought in by the present Ministers, or the principles
on which it purports to be founded, or the real conse-
quences which would enevitably flow from it, were the
measure now to be passed into a law, no particle of
light has been shed by the three days' discussion which
ended on the morning of yesterday ; nor did the
nature, or provisions, or professions of the Bill excite,
for their own sakes, the least perceptible interest in the
minds either of those who took part in the debates, or
of those who heard or read them. And why was this?
Not merely because the subject in all its bearings had long
since been so completely thrashed out and disposed of,
that not another word remained to be said upon the
general merits of the Bill--nor merely because every.
body was conscious that the pretended measure for
" tranquillizinsflreland" was a wretched make-believe----
a sheer abortion, which would never come alive into the
world, but because, whatever might have been the intrin-
sic qualities of the Romish Corporation Bill, or its re-
moter consequences as a legislative Act, whether for good
evil, there was a specific influence by common consent
and understanding affixed to it, and one so practical,
so pungent, and so biting, as to supersede in its hold
upon the sense all claims to notice derived from its ab-
stract political tendencies. They who last year intro-
duced this measure under the name of a corporate
" Reform" Bill, but under the pressure of a grinding
necessity imposed on themselves by a fierce task-
master, did not foresee what was likely to happen be-
fore the expiration of ten short months—namely, that
the appropriation clause, dropping lifeless from their
arms, they would be forced to make shift with the
Bill for incorporating Popery in the place of it, and by
putting priestly supremacy in the front of their Minis-
terial battle. Last year the Melbourne Whigs were
to stand or fall with the appropriation clause, but
finding that the clause in question had not itself a
leg to stand upon, they have now, in the chival-
rous spirit which belongs to them, let it fall alone.
Something else whereby to " stand or fall " became
indispensable. The Popish Municipal Bill, in a less
advanced stage of mortality than its predecessor, was
at hand. The league, offensive and defensive, was
announced by Lord John Russell shortly after its
formation. Never were nuptials celebrated in a tone
more sepulchral than by the noble essayist on the Bri-
tish Constitution, who invoked a rash paradox of Mr.
Fox, as if eager to fling a sarcasm at the memory of
that eloquent, but impetuous, bold, and headlong de-
letter, while he (Lord J. Russell) proclaimed to the
House of Commons that the Irish Priest Corporation
Bill was " vital to the present Ministry." The Noble
Lord, it seems, and his colleagues, were only hoaxing'
us last year, in their promises to stand or fall with the
appropriation clause. "We but trifled with John
Bull in the Session of 1836, and it is well we did so,
or by this time we might have been kicking our heels
at the Reform Club,' instead of still panting for
quarter-day ; but now, now, we arc in earnest ; now
we do positively mean to go (if we cannot help it)—
now there shall be no mistake. If we cannot carry
the Romish Corporation Bill, out—out (alas ! is
there no recalling it ?)—out—out—we go." Very
well, was not this enough to spread a broad and
flowing interest over the debate on the Irish Corporate
" Reform'. Bill ? But it was an interest obviously
quite apart from any that could have proceeded from
the substance of the Bill itself. In fact, it transformed
the whole question under discussion from " what sort
" of municipal forms shall we have in Ireland" into
these—vii., on what principles shall the general po-
licy of the British Government towards Ireland be
founded, and in what spirit administered, and by what
class of British and Irish statesmen shall that Go-
vernment be carried on ? In was inevitable, therefore,
that had no attack been made by Lord J. Russell upon
the Protestant and loyal aristocracy of Ireland, the de-
bate must have burst the mere technical boundaries of
the Bill referred to by the order of the day, and em-
braced the whole of that vast field of politics at issue
between the antagonist parties with regard to Ireland,
involving much likewise of what might be considered
personal on both sides, and expressive of the spirit
generated by the approach of that political breaking
up which some would regard as a catastrophe, others
as a consummation. Under such circumstances, we
must not weary our readers with thrice-repeated ar-
guments upon the hypothetical operation of a mea-
sure which will not now pass into a law. Rea-
lities are too inviting, and foremost among such
are certain prevalent blunders, much insisted on
by lofty layers down of the law, as maxims
whereby an enlightened Legislature ought to be di-
rected. Mr. Charles Buller is a rampant stickler for
the domination of " a majority" in all times and
places. He makes no exceptions, nor does Mr. Roe-
buck., " Carry this out," and see whither it leads us.
NV. by, it condemns the whole principle of the Reform
Bill, which was that of establishing " qualifications"
for votes, that is, restraints upon the right of voting,
by virtue of which principle the majority—the vast
majority—of the people of England are ruled, in fact,
by a decided minority, and must be so under any system
short of universal suffrage. But when the Hon. and
Learned ATember puts his alternative with so much
free-and-easy brevity, " You must either govern by a

majority or a minority," and then exclaims upon the
wickedness of subjecting the many to the will of the
few, our answer is, that all must depend upon the quality
of the many and of the few. Which is it more desirable
for the go-od of all—that 5,000 peasants, or other
persons living by manual labour, should have the
power of legislating for themselves and for 500 gentle-
men to boot, or that 500 men of education and property
should legislate for themselves and for the peasants ?
The phrase of " self-government " has been some-
what arbitrarily applied by the democratic speakers, as
descriptive of the condition of the poorer class of Irish
Roman Catholics when invested with municipal rights.
Now, is such an assumption fair or honest ? Is it
true, that if privileges, ever so extensive, were granted
by Act of Parliament to the lower class of Roman
Catholics in Ireland, they would be suffered to exer-
else such privileges, according to their own free will ?
Is it not notorious to all the world, that in the use of
the privileges they do possess, the more ignorant and
helpless class of Irish Roman Catholics are bridled,
worried, bullied, intimidated, cheated by those who
pretend to have the keeping of their consciences, and
who have usurped an entire dominion over them, into
whatever course of action, no matter how repugnant
to their own wishes, may suit the selfish views of their
tyrannical directors ? What was the conduct of the
unhappy priest-pecked farmer the other day at Carlow
—in whose trammels was he, and who was at his
elbow, when at the polling-booth he exclaimed, " I am
come to vote against my own kind landlord, Mr.
Bunbury ?" Is the despotism of the Irish priests,
as employed in grinding down the humbler members
of their congregations—is that, we say, a gripe fiom
which any Act of Parliament can, by the most in-
genious contrivance, rescue the lower order of Irish
Papists ? Manifestly not. Then, is it not the basest
hypocrisy, in those persons who are aware of such a
fact, to allege that any real power of " self-govern-
ment" would be conferred upon such vassals of the
priesthood by vesting them with a nominal right to do
certain acts within certain towns or cities, well know-
ing that the legal possessor of the right would be no
more than an automaton in the hands of a secret and
arbitrary mover? But Mr. Woulfe, the Irish Roman
Catholic Attorney-General, puts aside with undis-
sembled audacity the objection founded upon a proba-
ble abuse of lawful privileges by a Popish majority to
purposes destructive of Protestant independence, and
answers in brief, " Well, what of that ? I care not,
I stand on my claim ; and if you resist it, I will go
for a repeal of the union." So, Mr. Sheil, with cal-
culating defiance, tells the gentlemen of England, you
shall give way to our demands. Mr. Sheil is of a
quick, but we doubt not, a penetrating genius. Has
he ever asked himself, what if England echoes Lord
Stanley's declaration, and to my " shall," replies " You
shall not ?" What then becomes of Mr. Shell's pug-
nacity ? But how far will the learned gentleman drive
this topic ? Or, having once had recourse to it, where
can he arrest its application ? If it be a good
argument now in favour of giving Romish cor-
porations to Ireland, that, according to Mr. Sheil,
we cannot help it, and according to Mr. Woulfe
we must concede, or else submit to a repeal of the
Union, where, we ask, is such a course of extortion
to terminate ? What resting-place do they leave Great
Britain ? How, in any future instance, are we to
escape from the precedent thus established against our-
selves ? Well has Sir James Graham said that the
man must be an idiot or a coward who gives up the
sword with which his own throat is to be cut. And
if we must now go to the wall, because we are threa-
tened and thus set the Papists on horseback in the
corporate towns, when they come within the next six
months and call upon us to sacrifice the Protestant
Church with its revenues, on pain of " you must,"
or " we will repeal the union," what reply, let us
ask, has the majority of yesterday morning left the
Protestant people of England any fair pretence for
offering ? It is on the part of the Roman Catholics
nova policy of petition or negotiation, but a system of
hostile and insatiable encroachment. O'Connell has
long since declared that lie will get " all he can."
Sheil flings it in our faces, that we dare not hence-
forth refuse him. Yet these are the men who, while
suing for emancipation, protested solemnly against the
slightest act injurious to the Establishment of the Pro-
testant Church, and who signed formal and distinct
petitions for the abolition of all corporate privileges
•
—Times.

In our leading paragraph yesterday morning, allud-
ing to the division on the Irish Municipal Bill, an
erratum occurred, in consequence of the transposition
of the numbers--those for the original motion being
placed opposite that of Lord Francis Egerton, and'
vice versa—the majority in favour of the Bill, how-
ever, was correctly given in this place, as well as in
our report and summary. The majority has far ex-
ceeded the expectations of Ministers and their friends,
and, considering all the circumstances under which it
was obtained—a House of Commons elected under a
Tory Administration—several subsequent elections, by
means of Tory corruption, decided against the national
sentiment—and the unparalleled exertions made by the
faction, during the recess, to alarm the public mind,
and muster, on the present question, the whole force
which, by coaxing, threatening, feeding, corrupting,
or alarming, they could bring together—consider-
ing these circumstances, this glorious majority may
be regarded as having demolished every vestige or
shadow of hope which remained to the Opposition.
Ail the vilification, and abuse, and falsehoods, and
sophistries, and incendiary harangues, of the Tories
and their organs have fallen innocuously on the public
car, and produced no other result than an increase of
sixteen Members to the majority who voted against
them- on the corresponding division of the last Session.
This progressive triumph of truth and justice over false-
hood andfraud, is a striking proof of the healthy tone
of the national sentiment ; and having more than any of
our Contemporaries exerted ourselves to lay the actual
condition and wants of Ireland fairly and impartially
before the British public, we confess we feel inclined to
indulge in more than ordinary exultation in the result.
Never were argument and eloquence more success-
fully enlisted on the side of right than during the three
nights' recent debate in the House of Commons. On
one side there was nothing to be found but personal
abuse, false accusations, rabid revilings, and monstrous
prophetic conjurations, which from the other met with
such a complete exposure and refutation, that if there
he any sense of shame or decency left to the Tories,
they will nut soon again offer themselves for a similar
exhibition. One event in the last night of the debate,
will stand a subject of prominent interest in the re-
cords of the time. It is briefly told. During the
speech of Mr. Shen, in commenting upon the term
" alien," he raised his hand, as he uttered the words,
in the direction of the gallery, where Lord Lyndhurst
was sitting, but had no sooner done so than a simul-
taneous shout burst from the Ministerial benches, and
being caught up by many on the opposite side of the
House, it continued in successive peals to thunder
for several minutes, in the ears of the obnoxious Baron,
the expression of a nation's indignation and scorn. A
denunciation more tremendous can scarcely be imagined.
The English and Scotch Members seemed to emulate
each other in the expression of their abhorrence at the
insult which was cast upon Ireland. The friends or sup-
porters of the Lyndhurst policy sat in silence and shame,
while the " Alien" Baron himself seemed overwhelmed
and appalled ; his countenance rigid, his eye glazed, his
body motionless, he seemed rather the sculptured re-
presentation of some spirit struck and blasted by divine
vengeance, then a being of flesh and blood. Strong
as his nerve is known to be, the scene of last night
will never occur to his memory—that memory where it
will live to the latest hour of his existence—without a
shudder. Even Sir Robert Peel, who was only in-
directly involved in the denunciation hurled at the
" Alien" Baron, seemed perfectly paralysed, nor—as
may be seen by the most ineffective speech he ever
made—did he recover himself when he addressed the
House towards the conclusion of the debate. Ireland
is yet saved from the horrors which the Tories were
preparing for her. The demon of civil war is for the
time at least held in control—but there is another ordeal
to be passed. We have yet to see whether or not the
Lords will again peril the peace of the sister isle, and
the safety of the empire---whether or not we shall
Stern Oppression's iron grip,
Or mad Ambition's gory hand
Loose, like bloodhounds from the slip,
Woe, want, and murder, o'er the land."
TtliS ill the question to be decided when the present

Bill comes under their Lordships' consideration.—
Morning Advertiser.
Throughout the debate on Municipal Corporations
for Ireland, the Ministerial side of the question has
been supported by ultra-Radical al gnmenzs. The old
Whig principles, which, however liberal, were still
constitutional, and always favourable to Protestantism,
were given up by the Whigs of the Government party,
for the sake of such support as the arguments and the
votes of the declared opponents of the British Consti-
tution could afford them. The dolpnata of democracy
formed the ground-work of every speech in favour of
the Ministerial plan ; and whether we look at the apho-
ristic declamation of Mr. E. L. Bulwer, or the make-be-
lieve argumentation of Mr. Roebuck, we find just the
same principles, though rather less disguised, as those
upon which Ministers themselves were obliged to rest.
As to the gems of wisdom which fell in such highly-po-
lished abstract propositions from the lips of Mr. Bulwer,
we need not do more than advert to them, and then
leave them to the admiration of the literary ladies for
whom, in all probability, they were intended. The
political world will, at all events, trouble itself very
little about them. Mr. Roebuck may, perhaps, be
entitled to a little inure attention from the plausibility
of some of his statements, and because he plainly
enough propounded those erroneous assumptions upon
which the Municipal Bill of the Ministers can alone
be defended. These are the assumptions of naked un-
disguised democracy ; and if they were practical truths,
instead of being, as they are, presumptuous imagina-
tions, which ail experience contradicts, not only would
the 'AI unicipal Bill for Ireland be defensible, but
every other extravagance of popular pretension would
be preferable to any settled system of government.
It pleases the organs of ultra-Radicalism, as it had
before pleased Lord J. Russell either to forget, or to
pretend to forget, the nature of the objections which the
Conservatives had advanced against elective Corporations
for Ireland. The Conservatives had said that upon
general principles, which suppose the people to possess
that degree of intelligence and of freedom which en-
ables men to see and to choose that which is most for
their good, they did not object to elective Corpora-
tions ; but they affirmed that there was a something.
peculiar and most pernicious in the social state of Ire-
land which made such a process unsafe. They said
that, in the present circumstances of by far the greater
part of Ireland, the people did not possess the intelli-
gence, and were not suffered to exercise the freedom
which would alone make such a system of elective
Corporations desirable or even safe. And what is it
the democratic champion advances in reply to this ?
What is it that he puts forward with an air as if he
thought that his argument was really as unanswerable
as any demonstration in geometrical science ? Why
he tells us—and this is really the whole substantial
support of the Ministerial measure—he tells us that
" there is a general rule• which long experience has
taught us to be the wisest in the case of every
• other people—viz., to trust to every man the guardian-
ship of his own concerns, because his interest in those
concerns is closer and more potent than any other
man's." And when he has enunciated this general
rule, he asks, " Why depart from it in the case of the
Irish ?" It is obvious that if this demand means any
thing at all, it means a begging of the question. It
means that, because there is a general rule, Ireland
ought to be included within that rule ; though the
whole argument on the other side is, that the peculiar
state of Ireland makes the general rule of municipal
government, applicable to England and Scotland, not
wisely applicable to Ireland. But the general rule
from which the democratic champion would deduce the
fairness and expediency of the Ministerial Bill, goes
much further than the general rule of municipal go-
vernment adopted in Great Britain ; and, instead of
being admitted by any servant of the British Crown,
ought to be resisted as totally wrong in principle, incon-
sistent with experience, and revolutionary' in its practical
tendency. It is easy forany man to assume a general prin-
ciple, and then argue from it; but it requires the self-con-
fidence of democratic champions to set down as an irre-
fragable canon of political wisdom, that which is
neither more or less than the erroneous dogma of a
party. We ask any man who has read history and
thought about it, what amount of truth there is in the
theory that "it is wisest to trust to every man the
guardianship of his own concerns, because his inte-
rest in those concerns is closer and more potent than
any other man's ?" Some people may be taken by
the superficial- plausibility of this dogma : but never
was there anything more shallow. If all men thought
that virtue was more for their interest than vice, and if
all men had the sagacity to do what was most expedient
for the furtherance of virtue, then the dogma would be
true. But because men do not generally prefer the
interests of virtue, and because if they did, they are
not in general wise enough to take the best means of
promoting those interests, the dogma is most untrue.
Experience certainly has not taught us that in general
every man is the best guardian of those concerns in
which his interest is merely that of an individual mem-
ber of a public community. Was Jack Cade the
best guardian of his own concerns in public affairs ?
Is the Irish slave, who allows a man in the garb of a
Ramis!' Priest to beat him to the hustings with a
whip—is such a one " the best guardian of his own
concerns" in public matters ? Is any man who is not
free, who is the victim of a supercilious tyranny,
the best guardian of his own concerns ?" Such is
the condition of the mass of the Roman Catholic Irish.
lu so far as this general rule of the competency of all
men under all circumstances to choose wisely for them-
selves in affairs of government, is the only one upon
which the Ministerial Bill can be defended, there may
have been some excuse for bringing it forward. Inas-
much as it is a false rule, and indeed, nothing better
than plausible nonsense, the arguments built upon it
ought to have no weight With an intelligent public.__
Morning Herald.
When we find an assembly like the British House
of Commons deciding by a not inconsiderable majority
to do that which we think has been proved to be very
impolitic and dangerous, we naturally look with great
anxiety to the probable cause of the difference of
opinion between the majority and ourselves. If the
number with whom the decision of the question re-
garding Municipal Corporations in Ireland rested had
been entirely composed of what are called the O'Con-
nell Members the result would have been easily ex-
plained. No one suspects them of caring for the in-
terests of the empire--they agree (such of them at least
as can think at all) in our view of the question, namely,
that the proposed Reform will be exceedingly injuriou's
to Great Britain ; and that is its greatest merit in their
sight. But there are more than the O'Connell Members
in the majority. How shall we account for the rest ?
Let us see. There is the whole Radical, or De-
mocratic party, which forms a part of the majority
upon the very same ground as we take, who adopt the
views of the minority. That which we hold to be dan-
gerous and detestable in the tendencies of the Bill they
hold to be very wholesome and desirable. They do
not, like the O'Connell Members, support the Bill be-
cause they expect by means of it to feed fat the an-
cient grudge they bear" to Great Britain ; but their
object in supporting it is to inflict a heavy blow and a
great discouragement upon the Protestant Establish-
ment. They support the Bill because they think that
if it shall become law they may make of it a cata-
pult wherewith to batter down the chief bulwark
of the Monarchy. 'They know
i Church and State
to be so bound together that f they drag one to
the
mustfall with it, or be so
weakenedgroundtheir force much sooner
as thet o other
yield
to
than it would before have done. Who can doubt
that, standing upon the rums of the Protestant
Establishment, the shout of the destroyers would
be "so Church, no King ! Hurrah for a Repub-
lic and President !" The ambition of Sir William
Molesworth fires at the thought, and Mr. Roebuck
digests an argument to " prove in five minutes" that
no one would be a better Secretary of State for the Co.
loMes than himself. We can easily account for the
votes of the O'Connellites, and of the Democrats,
upon the same ground of probabilities which we our-
selves maintain to be the true ground. Their objects
are exactly the opposite of those cherished by men
who are loyal to the British Crown and Constitution.
Our evil is their good, or seems to them to be so ; and
we can feel no surprise that, with similar cotivictions as
to the result of the Corporation Reform Bill, their
votes should be opposed to the votes of the Conserva.

;;F::-.

tive party. Let us, however, not quit this part of the
subject without earnestly calling upon the people of
England to mark the motives which influence so large
a portion of the Minister:al majority. We call upon
the people, by all the character which they so de-
servedly possess, for generous loyalty of feeling and
sound common sense, to ponder upon the composition
of this Ministerial majority. Let them remember that
tie Conservatives would have had the majority but
for the aid which Ministers have received from two
sections of the House of Commons, one of them hos-
tile to everything which is likely to promote the pros-
perity and the glory of Great Britain, the other ar-
dently in favour of everything which is likely to pro-
mote the downfall of the Protestant Church, and of
every political order in the State save one, to which
one they themselves belong. Let not the people of
England be deceived into the supposition that 322
Members of the House of Commons believe the Bill
proposed by the Ministry for the reform of Irish mu-
nicipalities to be a good thing for the State, as at pre-
sent constituted, or for the Church. As many probably
as one-half of this number have no such idea. They
are very well aware that the Bill is a very bad thing for
the State as at present constituted, and they vote for it
because it is so. They vote with the Ministers be-
cause they think the Bill will do a very notable in-
jury to those interests which it is the solemn duty
of the Ministers to protect. It must, however, be al-
lowed that the Democrats and the O'Connellites, how-
ever formidable they may be in number, and dange-
rous in design, could have not defeated the Conserva-
tives on Lord F. Egerton's motion without assistance.
A large number of Members must have voted from a
notion that the measure proposed by Ministers is a
good measure—not good in the sense of the Irish
Priest-nominated Members, because it is injurious to
Great Britain—nor good in the sense of the English
and Scotch Democrats, because it is destructive of the
Irish branch of the Protestant Church Establishment;
but good in the honest, loyal sense of the word—
likely to promote the welfare of Church and State, of
King and people. With those Members we would
respectfully have a word or two of expostulation.
They say they don't like to make step-children
of the Irish people—they don't like to 'treat them
with less confidence than is placed in the peo-
ple of Great Britain ; and for their part, they
cannot see any connection between danger to the
Established Church and municipal privileges for the
inhabitants of Irish towns. Now we agree with these
Members that, except for some well-ascertained prac-
tical reason, the inhabitants of Irish towns ought not
to be treated differently from the inhabitants of British
towns. We admit that all unnecessary distinction in
matters of this kind between Great Britain and Ireland
is impolitic, and that as much kindness to the Irish—
on the part of the Legislature—as is consistent
with the safety of our fundamental institutions, ought
to be shown. But these good-natured Members
must allow us to say that their not seeing the connec-
tion between danger to the Established Church and the
passing of the Bill which Ministers propose, is not
quite enough to justify their votes in the estimation
of those who have considered the statements and the
arguments brought forward on the Conservative
side of the House. Moreover, when they see a
considerable number of astute men voting for the mea-
sure, and admitting that they do so in the belief that
it will enable Ireland to overthrow the Protestant Es-
tablishment, it is surely worth their while to pause,
and not to depend too much on their " not-seeing"
faculties. They say that the connection between the
injury to the Church and the granting of Municipal
privileges is not perceptible to them ; but it was very
plainly exhibited to them, and it is no credit to a man
not to see that which is set before him, and which it is
very important tcr the right discharge of his duty that
he should examine. There are many who cannot see
because they will not see ; and to this class we think
the voters for the Ministerial Bill (not being De-
mocrats or O'Connelites) must belong. Can
any thing be more palpable than this—that
whatever power of a public nature is placed in the
hands of the Irish Romanist population is imme-
diately usurped by the Romanist Priests ? And is
is not sufficiently obvious (from the experience of the
last seven years) that the object of the Romanist
Priests is to overthrow the Protestant Establishment ?
These are facts which every impartial man, with his
eyes open, may and must see ; and how, then, shall
we be told that men cannot see the connection between
the granting of municipal privileges and the injury of
the Protestant Establishment ? It must be that men
shut the eyes of their understanding to things which
they would rather not believe. This may be in some
cases owing to very creditable feelings, but we warn
Hon. Members to prepare for the day when a rude
shock will open- their eyes. That day will certainly
arrive unless the House of Lords and the King see
better the. way to safety than the majority of the pre-
sent House of Commons seem likely to see.—Morn-
ing Post.

The valuable Sec of Salisbury has fallen to the gift
of Lord Melbourne, by the death of the late Bishop, who
expired at Southampton on Monday morning, having recently
gone there for the benefit of his health.

The Royal Chapel, St. James's Palace, has been
almost entirely rebuilt. The accommodation for the congrega-
tion is much improved. The interior is quite new, and will be
ready in a short time for divine service. It has a very neat
appearance, and is considerably enlarged. The exterior im.
provements arc in keeping with the ancient palace.
A woman who resides at Lansamlet, near this town,
has for several years been labouring under ascites, which is
dropsy of the lining membrane of the abdomen, and has under-
gone the operation of tapping three times. On the first and
second occasion, a considerable quantity of serous fluid was
taken away ; but at the last operation, a few days ago, six gal-
lons were extracted from the poor woman. She has rallied
astonishingly since the last operation, and hopes are enter-
tained of her recovery.—Cambrian.
On the afternoon of Wednesday last, as a little
boy, the son of the Sexton of Saint Mary Magdalen's
Church, was playing in the Church-yard, he approached too
near a brazier-pan which was lighted there for the use of the
workmen who were laying the gas-pipes, and his apron took
fire. He was speedily assisted by the workmen and others
attracted to the spot by his screams. As we tore the
burning sleeve from the arm of the poor little fellow, the
scorched skin of the hand came off like a glove. He lingered
till Friday morning, when death put an end to his sufferings.
Somerset Gazette.

EXTRAORDINARY METEOR.—On Saturday even-
ing, shortly after dark, a meteor of extraordinary appearance
was, from this vicinity, visible in the heavens. But for its
colour, which was a variation from dusky pink to a deep rich
carmine, the phenomenon would have been pronounced aurora
borealis. Such was the deep crimson glare that was spread
from a little below the zenith to the north and northwest, that
the general impression over the town was, that an extensive
fire was blazing in the neighbourhood, and that this was but its
reflection in the aqueous particles in the atmosphere. In the
first instance, the meteor was seen in the form of a cloud,
which presented the ruddy glow frequently seen in the west
after sunset. As the moon was shining brightly at the time,
and the appearance was stationary, while the clouds generally
were driving behind it, we at first conceived it to be simply a
colour created on the air by the refranging of the moon's rays.
We were quickly undeceived, however, for, as the night ad-
vanced, the light moved about to different quarters of the
heavens, now converging to an oblong mass of crimson in the
zenith, and anon shooting out or dividing into numberless faint
blushes of luminous clouds, in the direction before indicated,
and generally about half way to the horizon. About midnight,
the appearance began to die away, and, by one o'clock on
Sunday morning, there was no vestige of it remaining. We
perceive, by the New York papers just received, that a similar
phenomenon has been witnessed from that city, though it ap-
pears there to have been more vivid than that which was seen
from this town on Saturday night.—Liverpool Albion.
Inquests were held last week in the parish of Down-
ham, on the bodies of James Johnson, and Sarah, his wife, who
died from the effects of charcoal burning in the bed-room. It
appeared that in consequence of their not stirring at the usual
time on Thursday morning, suspicion was excited that some-
thing had happened, A ladder was procured, by which one
of the neighbours ascended to the chamber-window, when
enough was discovered to show that the man was very ill.
The house-door was forced open by two neighbours, who pro-
ceeded up stairs. On entering the chamber, a most awful
spectacle presented itself. The wife lay dead in the bed, the hus-
band was out of bed, on his wife's side of the bed, lying partly
on the floor, and partly on the bed, in a state of insensi-
bility, breathing or snoring heavily. An infant of about one
year and a half old was lying in the bed, and was at first sup-
posed also to be dead, but presently showed signs of life, and
was removed. The man was then laid in the bed, and lived
about an hour. A pan of wood and turf ashes was in the room,
which it appeared the poor woman had taken up stairs to air
the room, which she had that day whitewashed, having ex-
pressed such an intention to a neighbour. The child is now
quite well. The poor woman was very near her confinement.etu r
ed
The Jury, after a long and anxious investigation, returned
verdicts, " That the deceased, Sarah Johnson, died from
r suffo-
cation, produced by the noxious fumes of charcoal being in the
bed-room in which she had been sleeping ; and that James
Johnson died from apople4yr produced by the same cause.' -
Cambridge Chronicle,

PRICES OF CANALS, DOCK STOCKS,

AS (TRANCE COMPANIES, Pty. &c. &c.

LONDON, TCTEDAY, Vtl3. 2i.
Number Dividend

rtic e

of l•Cr
Shares. Annum

CANTAI S.

por
Paid. Spare

4700 8 per cent. Ashton and Oidliain ...Average 971. Ns. sh. 142
I,:112 41. Ashby .de-le-Zoitch Average I 13/. sli. 65
1,260 Basingstoke ll'o/. sh. 51
1,035 5!. Brecknock and Abergavenny... 150. sh. 100
8,000 1-16.11. 91. 9s. Birmingham, 1.16 th shale .... Bf/. It 711. '217
4,000 Ditto al.o Liverpool Junet...1:251. sh, 10(1 pit 01
6s) . Bridgewater and Taunton ....100/. sh. ali pd 61
400 4/, Clichner and Black water.. lOO/. sh. 1012
500 481. Coventry lOO/. sh. 700
4,515 Croydon Average all. 2s. 1001. . sir. 3
2,0601 44 Os. Dudley
610 71. Derby 1151/. sh. 1.20
211,000 Danulie and Mayne 4ll. las Id. 211,4 pd 1736
3,575; 31. Ellesmere and Chester Average 13:1/. sh. iv,
231 40!, Erewash • 104, 3h. 6,6
1,297 281. Forth and Clyde Average 44101.:i ;6. sh. 60,
11,500 12/ Grawl June"- lO4. sh. 201
2.•!,483 11. Grand Union 100/ sh. 2 ~i
1 511.1
123,000/. 4/. per cent. Ditto (optional) Loan lOO/. 70
3,096 Grand Western
600 13/. 12.5. Cd. Glamnrganshire, Average cost 1712!. Ms. Id. 230
741) ;11‘. Grantham 150/. sh. 2(0
6,13-1 11. 134 Huddersfield Average 57/. Cs. 6:1. sh. 35
100 Kensingl 'n lO3 sh all IA 10
25,328 I/. 2s. Kennet .7 id Avon, Average 39/.183.1101. sh. 22
2,81173 20/. Leeds and Liverpool 1991. sh. 530
5451 12!. Leicester llOl. sh. 195
1,897- 4/. 10s. Leicester and Northampton... Aver 53/. lirs. 77
2,400 101. ftlonmouthsliire lOO/. sh. 200
50 I(11. Melton Mowbray 100/ sh. 200
500 25/. Mersey and Irwell lOO4 sh. 505
3,000 11. 10s. Macclesfield 1001. sh all pd. 54
247 171. Neath . 1001. sh. 325
1,780 30/. Oxford . 1001. sh. 58,;
2,400 51. Peak Forest Average about 781. sh. ))14
21,118 \ 12s. Regent's (or London) Aver. 33/. 16s. Bd. sh. 16
5,669 el. per cent. n och d ale Average Si)!. sh. 1:9
5(10 84 • Shropshire I'as/. sh. 140
800 91. 10s. Somerset Coal ISO/. sh. 153
3,6004 43 percent. Ditto bock Fund Stock l2/. 10s. sh. 111
700 404 StafFord and Worcester l4O/. sh. 730
500 9/. Shrewsbury 1251. sh. 213
300 W. Stourhridge
3,647 2/. 6s. Stratford-on„Avori ...Average 79/. Os. 14d. sh. 50
533 12/. Swansea MO/. sh. 220
3,762 U. 4s. Serern and Wye and Railway-Av 351. sh. 193
2,6003 sir. 321. 10s. ' Treat an :1 Mersey, * share 100/. sh. 555
8,149
~ ,
1,0005h.7
I,ooolsh.
.5 '''''' Warwick and Birmingham , 1001. sh: 250
930 12/. Warwick seal Napton lOOl. sh. 138
6,000 41.05. Worcest- tr and Birmingham...A v. 784 Bs. 80. 82
5,000 225. Wilts an.. Becks .. Average 61/. 10s. Sd. sh. 21
800 W. Worley and Essington 125/. sh 75
126 ....... Wisbeach
905 1/. Wey and Arun llOl. sh. 223
DOCKS.

2,60" 1 3 s•c. Commercial 100/. sh. 56
1,06515 h = •
158,6671/. 6 per ck East India Stock 114
3,228,31011. ios.p.ct. London Stock 561
Ditto Bonds
1,380,0004 5!. per ct. West India Stock 105
2,209 2!. I 9s. Bristol
68,324/. Z. per cent. Ditto Notes, various amounts ll5
1.352,752 4 per cent. St. Katharine Stock 92
500,000 44 per cent. Ditto Bonds lOll
200,000 4 per cent. Ditto Bonds for 10 years lOO
Shoreham Harbour
2.500 ........ Deptford Pier
BRIDGES.

-.
1,600 ICs. Hammersm.ti. / 5O/. sh. 20
7,231 Southwark, Old AY. 63/. 2s. 6d. sh. 2
1,700 11. 15m. Ditto, New, of 7) per cent. 5O/. sh. 14
5,000 ........ Waterloo
5,000 18s. BS. Ditto, Old Annuities of W. 6O/. pd 19)
5,000 16s. 4d. Ditto, New Ditto of 71 40/. pd 15
60,0001. it. per cent. Ditto Bonds llB
6,000 17s Vauxhall Average 701. 10s. 3d. sh. 16)
AS.,URANCE COMPANIES.

2,000 3110, Albion -
---
-500/. ch. 50!. pd 79
50,000 prieuri esn..t'l Alliance, Britis h & Foreign 1001. sh. lo v. pd 12f
50,000 6 per cent. Ditto, Marine 1001. sh. 51. pd fit
24,000 1/. per sh. Atlas
1,200 }sh. it. Birnrungham t ire
20,000 41 per cent. British Fire . 250/. sh. 50/. pd 40
12,000 61. per cent. British Commercial 501. sh. 5/. pd CI
5,000 51. per cent. Clerical, Medi,:al,&c. Life, ICOLsh. 12110 s pd 3f
4,000 21 16s County 1001. sh. 101. pd 42
20,000 is. Eagle 5O/. sh. 5/. pd 6
onomic Lite
C 5 per cent., 1000/. sh. 2501. pd 375
200 Land sy bs. i Ec
2,271 225. per cent. European Lila 2O/. sh. all pd 22
50,000 2s. Ditto, New 2O/. sh. 2/. pd 2
1,000,000/. 71. per et. Globe Stock 152
20,000 5!. Guardian .................... 100/. sh. 2711 pd 331
40,000 6s. 6d. Hope 5O/. sh. 51. pd 51
2,400 5/. 7s. 6d. Imperial Fire 5001. sh. 50!. pd 125
7,500 93. Imperial Lite 1001. sh. 10/. pd
13,159 12s. perch. Indemnity Marine .... .lOOl. sh. EL pi 14
2,026 3! 10s Kest Fire 501. sh. all pd 92
31. Ditto Life. 79
10,000 16s. Law Life 1001. sh. 10/. pd 28
5.000 10s. London, Fir.. 251. sh. 12/. 10s. pd 16
3,900 10s. London, Ship 251. sh. 121. 10s. pd 16
30,0 N 1 51. per cent. Palladium Lite 50/. sh. 2/. pd 21 8s Od
50,000 Proteutor Fire 2O/. sh. 2/, pd 16., 6d
2,500 1!. Provident Lite lOOl. sh. 10/. pd 20
100,000 5/. per cent. Rock Life...- ....... ...... .. .......... 20/. sh. 2/, pd 61
669,2201 5/. percent. Royal Exchange Stock... 220
6,000 3 per cent. University Lite lOOl. sh. 5/. psi 51
iO,OOO 4 per cent. United Kingdom Life
____