The Sun.
London, England, 1830-04-02 00:00:00

COURT CIRCULAR.

The Duke of CLARENCE attended yesterday morning
a meeting of the corporation of the Trinity-house, on
Tower-hill. His Royal Highness, as Master, presided at
the dinner given by the corporation in the evening.
. .

The Duchess of CLARENCE dined with the Duke and
Duchess of GLOUCESTER, at Gloucester-house, yesterday
evening. Their Royal Highnesses honoured the perform-
ance of Monsieur PoriEß, in Les Plaideurs, Le Jeuf,
and Le Cuisinier de Thar" at the fisyruarket Theatre,
with their presence in the evening. The Duke of CLA-
RENCE subsequently joined the party.
A Cabinet Counsel was held yesterday afternoon at the
Foreign Office, which was attended by the Duke of WEL-
LINGTON, Earls BATHURST, ROSSLYN, and ABERDEEN,
Mr. Secretary PEEL, Sir GEORGE MURRAY, and Mr.
lIERRIES.

The LORD CHANCELLOR. arrived at the Council about
an hour after it had assembled.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was prevented
from attending the meeting, owing to being engaged on
a Committee of the House of Commons.
The Ministers remained near two hours in deliberation.

The Spanish and Hanoverian Ministers had interviews
with the Earl of ABERDEEN yesterday, at the Foreign-office.
The Earl of CLARENDON and Lord ASHLEY had inter-
views with the Duke of WELLINGTON yesterday, at the
Treasury.

THE KING.—We are extremely to sorry to
announce that his MAJESTY is so unwell as to render the
attendance of more than one of the Royal Physicians neces-
sary. His MAJESTY has been occasionally indisposed in
the course of the last two months, but the late fine weather
seemed to have restored him to perfect health, and he con-
tinned so until within these two last days, when he again
became so unwell that the physicians were summoned ;
and we understand the indisposition is so serious as to con-
fine his MAJESTY to his bedchamber.—Morning Paper.

TOBACCO.--It has been determined by Go -
vernment to allow the growth of Tobacco in Ireland, subject
to a certain fixed excise duty. It is understood that a bill
will soon be brought into Parliament on this subject. The
duty to be imposed has not yet transpired, but it is generally
reported that it will amount to from Is. 6d. to 2s. 2d.
per lb.

_-.-~-~.


SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS..

We beg to direct the attention 0 f our readers to the-
proceedings in the Hous., of Cemino.ns, on Lord Ellen-
borough's Divorce Bill. In a questio n in its nature •,,
indicial, and requiring the strictest imp, vtialitY, we aril -
sorry to observe any symptoms of party 6 yirit, either in.,
those who oppose or tilose who support the I iiii• Let. tbe •
ease be discussed like that of any other plaintiff:. Tb e paint .
to be proved are--let, the adultery; that pros ,ed, a 1 giinct
facie right of divorce is established; but such . right, may.
,L_,e defeated, and is in nine cases out of ten I' lefeated,. 'by
the establishment against the husband of all, or even one
profligacy. ..
of the t°')llowing facts :.--Collusion or connivan es witt , the
wife—get,,l negligence of ker morals or comt *nrts--1 'ross
t:maotfterth(essedisfeateittssi,
mp.rovce dinthe
adultery,poin is xv
hni,iee ittitipeypot:ere
,ire
aalnoyne—i•issth(.em,
tluteerdeercazt:m.
,e no doubt; on the, 4 +the r
this case? nil'
nsideration of thtee om-
petent triburai, it does
present to hear it, to the i.
ellling the attention of th, Ise Membt.Ts who were. not
not become us to speak, 1)07 and
however, could evidently tell s.ll essential. That foi ry.
Steele: most of it is new, and ,
knows? Who is that person--a la‘
-az: o, ritratei tif e,
Steele: en:et
saf: i:es,
iy. it seems--again ,t
questioned. Why is she not called
whose society she particularly warned L
upon to state 91/ a he
lenborough ? Whatever the rank of tha,
-I appear. like
ord and Lady p -
, person may fie,
though she be a Princess, her name shout,
warning was disregarded in the present cas
the consequences. Let the name of this dank Terous metk,„
e, and we 6464
" e
ber of " respectable society," as Sir H. Hardit. ‘ge
h callays. its,
be generally known, that other persons may
means of avoiding that rock which Lord Eitel g
thor.ou the,
h'
chose to run against. For the present we say n ° more,
except to entreat the fullest, the most fearless, and above
all, the moat impartial investigation of, this extraoro laarY/

ease.--Times.
• .
Lord Ellenborough's Divorce Bill passed OM Commit I*B'
in the House of Commons last night, and it did not appeL
that any material" oppsitiOn is intended. 'We trust that
the expectation we arc now induced to entertain may be
realised, since it will then be seen that the House of Cosa-
tnons has ao sympathy with the propagators of cenvilet
insinuations which at this time are disgracin a portion of
the Press. To explain our meaning
in a jeer , words
those persons would attempt to force a belief tha);- collation
exited between the parties, that Lord Ellenbdeosig,ll con-
nived at the criminal conduct of his wife! Dieepst;rs;
as
it is to allude to such infamous machinations, we esavOt
but put it to the public judgment to say, %Out tame mi
the constitution of those minds which could givibirtfr tea
so revolting a suppostion. To establish the, fait that atto'
man could be a party to his wife's dishonont, for such
the broad assertion, the most conclusive, the most,
damning proofs would be necessary; but how stands• the
fact in the present instance ? Thus : that not a shadOW
of evidence has or can be adduced to warrant even
a suspicion ; so far from it, that the evidence of re-
lations, of acquaintances, and of servants, irresOttly
leads to the opposite conclusion. The examinAtion,
of Mr. Freshfeld also on this point last night ',le--
serves to be attended to. " From the first communicit,
tion witness had from Lord Ellenborough upon the subject,
his Lordship never swerved from his purpose of proceeding
legally, but stated to the witness that he considered it due
to his own honour, and to the honour of Lady Ellenbe—
rough, as-he had her assertion of her innocence, to havee
the reports investigated, and said the matter could not be'
allowed to stand still. Does not believe that Lord Elk's--
borough bash any knowledge of an acquaintance between,
Lady Ellenborough and Prince Schwtwtsenburg until the
public reports reached him." To what, then, does the
charge amount? To no more than this, that Lord Ellen-
borough
placed a, degree of confidence in his wife which
events proved to be unmerited. The report that Lord El-
lenborough contemplates a second marriage we have al-
ready contradicted ; it is obviously forced into circulation
with the view of giving some plausible colouring to the
other calumny ; they are worthy of each other, and of those
who imagined them—persons whose miserable afrectation
of morality tends only to expose more fully the blacknessa4
the heart beneath.—Morning Post.

The 1-2.onse of Commans edified itself last night, if it didi
not edify the public, by diving a little more—as a Scottish,
Presbytery ca" divines and elders of the Kirk—videlicet,.
that of Alford— -expressed itself on a similar occasion—,
into the affair of Lady Ellenborough—a most disgusting;
and immoral affair every Inc will allow, but with the de-.,
tails of which it ti" data appear that • the prurient curiosity; ,
of certain parties will nut be satiated. It,is but little-.
creditable to the English Ar:stocracy that such a flagrant:
case of adultery—we mention tlo.ngs by their right names—
should have occurred among them,. It is indeed in these
days, when their influence is de.pidedly on the de—
cline, a matter of somewhat serious moment that, at
will be perceived on a perusal of the evidence ad.
duced last night before a Committee •of the House
of Commons, the visitors of a Cabinet Itinister dfid
his lady, though extremely fashionable, alm;uld not,
even in the estimation of the parties minglin /vita% them,
be considered respectable ; but while in applyiec: this;
evidence to the case in hand, we allow the full for% 'e of
the doctrine, that the man is most culpable—say, alosCit
a particeps crinzinis—who permits his wife to aesseiata.'
with such persons, we must also, on the other hand, pro,.
test against the doctrine that, because a husband does not.
shut up his wife at home, as is the case in Turkey and
Hindostan, or does not watch her in all outgoings and in—
' comings, he had, therefore, no reason to expect any other,-
result than that which has befallen Lord Ellenborough.
The doctrine is insane, and the practice recommended

not only likely to lead to mischievous effects, but ut.
terly subversive both of individual happiness and of do-
mestic comfort and confidence. We protest against it with
all our might, and cannot for our life conceive what could
possibly have induced Lord Radnor to state in the debate-
of the 17th ult., in the House of Lords, as a reasons
why the Divorce Bia should not pass, that " the un--
" happy lady had been suffered to go abroad, driving her •
" ponies to Harley-street, without the least restraint ! '"'
Away with such twaddle. If women are only to be pre-
served in purity while under the immediate eye of their
husbands, why they are not worth preserving; and if, on
the other hand, every man is to be deemed a party to the
guilt of his wife when she commits adultery, who does
not attend her on her visits, there are few, we think, who
would think of binding themselves, for better or for worse,
to such a plague. Such practice would put an end-at once
to all good faith in the most intimate and confidential re-
lations of life ; and instead of conducing to the happiness
of individuals, render the most solemn tie the greatest of
curses. We scout the doctrine as baneful in practice--
degrading a n
tdo
utterlythe
of
fidelityth e
Nobleo fo u r
ocrodu country-
women; t—
ient it the sanction of his name.—Morning Advertiser.