The Sun.
London, England, 1839-11-30 00:00:00

ZbJc ---)ltlX+

LONDON:
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1839.

Mr. ex-Sheriff SALOMONS has entered the lists,

we see, on the subject of the Corn-laws. His
pamphlet entitled " Reflections on the Operation
of the present Scale of Duty," &c., has for its
object to point out the gross :.mperfeetions of the
fluctuating scale, and to advocate a fixed duty. In
the first branch of his subject Mr, SALOMONS
has succeeded admirably, and demonstrated that a
fluctuating scale of duty encourages gambling, in-
jures the fair trader, damages the farmer, deranges
our currency, and diminishes th;., employment of
our shipping, without conferring on the country
one adequate Advantage. So far Mr. SALOMONS
has done well ; but when he commences to advo-
cate a fixed duty, he seems to us to take a tnost
one-sided view of the matter,

For example, he speaks of regard being due to
the " rights of property, large investments having
been made on the faith of the principle of protec-
tion not being violated," But it is not proved that
to abolish the Corn-laws would diminish the value
of any investments ; nor has it ever been said
that should those laws be abolished, and any case
be established that the abolition has injured any
person, that redress shall not be afforded. The ex-
Sheriff has a great horror of a speculative violation
of the rights of property, while he disregards the fact,
or puts it aside altogether, that the present Corn-laws
are an actual violation of the rights of property.
They rob all the consumers of bread not being land-
lords, They plunder merchants, manufacturers,
and labourers—not actually to enrich the landlords,
for they fail to accomplish that, but to preserve the
relative superiority of the owners of the soil.
They take sixpence per day from the industrious
and opulent artisan, fourpence from the hard work-
ing but poor manufacturer ; a penny from the
starving agricultural labourer, and a farthing from
the hungry and famishing orphan, and for this
daily and worst of robbery, hallowed by a
law, the ex-Sheriff has no feeling, and is
only dreadfully alarmed far a speculative and
prospective violation of property, which might never
be felt. we call this one-sided, becatty_, it con-
siders only accumulated property, and totally dis-
regards,
though it be grievously oppressed, that in-
dustry which is the source of all property, even of
that accumulated property which Mr. SALOMONS
wishes so exclusively to protects

We notice, too, in M.
1--ag LiALONIONS' pamphlet
this naive t%tervient : "On an average of years
w.e probably raise a quantity of wheat sufficient
for the support of our population." No doubt we
do ; but why i" Because the landowners will not
to,Uolit the Population to increase beyond what they can
s"PPIY, The 14w will not allow corn to be brought into
the country, at the price which the people can give
for it. The law starves down and keeps down the

EY.vN I f. - EOl TiON

population to the quantity of food grown on of
own soil, which muq, therefore, on an average of
years, be equal to the wants of the people. The m-Te
correct mode of expressing the fact would be this;
On an average of
years, though the population is
sometimes behind an abundant harvest, and some-
times in advance of a bad harvest, sometimes riots

in abundance, and is sometimes slowly starved out
of existence, yet on an average of years it is kept
down to the level of the supply of wheat which
can be grown on our own soil, because the
law will not allow them to get food from other coun-
ries. Mr. SALOMONS, by his mode of expres-
sion, seems to us to be totally and thoroughly
ignorant of the laws which regulate the increase of
population, the production of food, and the relation
between them, and while we have such a conviction
we shall forbear to discuss his plan for substituting
a fixed for a fluctuating duty. We have already
stated our reasons against substituting a fixed duty
for the present plan. Mr. SA LOMoNs ought to know
that the plan he proposes, will, in point of fact,
levy a tax of probably 80,000,0001. a-year, in the
price of every thing that is used or consumed; al-
tering the distribution of the wealth of the country
to that extent ; taking away property from one class
and giving it to another, and so violating the duty
of the State, which is bound to give equal protec-
tion to the poor man's industry and the ricl.l man s
capital.

In our Journal of the 13th instant we noticed the
strange assertion by Mr. GREGG, one of the
Ultra-Protestant firebrands, that it would not be a
greater crime to slay a child and offer it up on the
altar than to say mass. Mr. GREGG made that as-
sertion, as our readers will remember, on the autho-
rity of Scripture, in which he said no crime was 9°
deeply :denounced as idolatry. It seems to be a
settled and well formed logical opinion of the Rev'
rend Gentleman, and, after a fortnight's delibera-
tion, he has written and published a letter, in
which he defends his opinion. It is too long for
us to quote, but we shall state the substance of his
argument, in order that the public may appre-
ciate the principles of those who are the mere
guides of the nation.
Mr. GREGG quotes several passages from the
Books of the Homilies and the Book of Common
Prayer, in which the sacrifice of the masses is de'
dared to be " blasphemous fables and dangerous
deceits, idolatry--gross idolatry," &c. ; and he de-
clares that to the " Books of the Homilies I, and
every clergyman of the land, stand pledged:
They must all, therefore, agree with him, and (I°,
we believe, agree with him, that the sacrifice of the
mass is idolatrous and blasphemous.
Having fully established that point, Mr. GREGG
proceeds to quote several passages from the Old
Testament, such as the 66th chapter of Isaiah' v*
3 and 4, and declares that they bear out his asser-
tion to the letter. They denounce idolatry as °l/ a
level with murder. We are constrained to admit
that he appears to draw a correct conclusion from
his premises, and that the denunciations of Isaiah
and Jeremiah, if they are to be law to us, make the
practice of idolatry as heinous an offence as the cool'
mission of murder. That is the doctrine which Mr.
GREGG and his friends call religion.
Such inferences are by no means uncommon
amongst the clergy. We tatve a distinct recollection
of having heard Dr. CHALMERS, in the warmth of
his zeal, denounce a master who employed his ser-
vant or his clerk on the Sabbath as worse than a
murderer, for the former killed the soul, while the
latter only slew the body of his victim. Under such
instructions it is not surprising that our people have
not improved, especially in morality, for it confounds
vice and virtue, good and evil.
It is indispensible to the continued existence of
society that captains of ships, mail-coach masters,
newspaper editors,
servantsl to
mistresso work
family Sabbatih n.
thle t
and a great multitude of other
persons, should command their dependants and
keeps her domestics from Church. But Dr.
CHALMERS' doctrine is that this is a crime as
empire donewho
keeps stby
every w
great as that of murder, which the law punishes'
with the utmost severity. Thus actions indispen-
sable for the welfare of individuals and of society
are classed by our teachers with the greatest crimes,
to the utter confusion in the public mind of what.
distinguishes crime from innocence.
The latter remark applies with perfect strictness to
the Rev. Mr. GREGG'S observation. Infanticide is a
heinous offence which the law punishes with death ;
but, according to Mr. GREGG, all idolators, including
the Catholics, are as guilty as the person who slays
an infant. Only a small—very small—portion of
mankind profess the same faith as Mr. GREGG,
and all the rest, not only now, but in all times past,
are and have been according to him idolators,
and as guilty as murderers. Such a conclusion
shocks all common sense. According to Mr.
GREGQ a belief and a practice to which man is
born, and which are recommended by his parents,
friends, and every member of the society in which
he lives, is as great a crime as taking away human
life, which revolts the feelings and has been con'
demned in all ages. Rather than agree with Mr.
GREGG, we shall venture to suggest that he has
misinterpreted or misconstrued the Scriptures, and
that the Homilies on which he relies were penned
in a moment of zeal or anger, and are uot, to be
approved of by calm, reflecting, and rational men.
It may strengthen our argument to observe, that
the sacrifice of the mass, which Mr. GREGG de.
nounces as if it were murder, is practised by many
thousands of Catholic priests with a perfectly quiet
conscience, and is attended by many millions °f
mot.
Catholics, who think they are performing an acc-i
able service to their Maker. No natural sense' no
reflection tells them they commit a crime, such as
warns them against embruing their handsuA sn an i
in-
fant's blood. Moreover a people who should habitually
be guilty of infanticide would be ready to perpetrate
any enormities. Those who perform and assist at1
e. the sacrific of the mass, however, the B gians, the
Austrians, the Southern Germans, the French,
.
the Italians, are of an average morality, quite equal
to the most crack Prostestant nations, so that neither
facts nor reasoning afford the least justification 01
the wild assertion which Mr. GREGG makes in the
name of all the Anglican clergy.
It cannot, on this occasion, be forgotten, that
Mr. GREGG and his friends constitute that class of
men who would stop all education, unless in sub'
serviency to the Bible as they interpret it. Thl
have an admirable reason for so doing, as judiei°
education, and even natural sense, unperverted .11_,
their doctrines, would revolt against such disgo_ot.
ing and horrible conclusions. The nation and C
vernment are not only bound to establish education
independently of the control of the Clergy, but theY
I
should carefully exclulde the Clergy from inedditu.g
with it at all, if such be their doctrines, oolesst.
c•
be studiously desired to confound, in the public
mind, the idea of right and wrong.
Mr. GREGG couples his defence of his crude
doctrine with a reference to the numerous crimes
which have of late been committed, and infers that
the nation tolerating
I
they are all the consequence of
ti
their religion. On such a strained inference h
the Catholics, and contributing to the support of
e
and his wild companions would renew persecution
iias they obviously do, and
great
re-
membering, too, that a nation's manners do no 1
suddenly
and that the increase in ctriine has
been gradually progressive, it seems to us n
more probable that
bable that the immorality of the people.
l change, the
as land.has Erring
been their influence for ages,
arises from following those misleading guides, of
whom Mr. GREGG is the type, than from having j
countenanced the going to mass since 1829. Hit

charges the immorality of the nation on its attach
meat to idolatry, does he mean that practical
Idolatry ,which is exemplified in the lives of the
clergy ? They worship wealth. There is nothing
of consistmcv, nothing of honour or of justice—
witness the To:4I,INEs and the PRETYMANS—
Witness the Bishop's declaring they cannot live on
less than 5,0001. a yeat—witness the Bishop of
1-.oNtioN spending 14,0001. a year, and the Arch-
bishop Of CANTERBURY 17,0001. a-year, while the
sees of Canterbury and London are overrun with
Ignorance and vice, and much need, as these Pre-
lates say, churches and preachers,—witness,too, the
laws, which the Bishops and all the clergy
uPhold—there is nothing, we solemnly affirm, of
truth,
honour, and honesty, which our clergy do not
34eP.tflce to their cherished idolatry of riches. If
laolatry be the offence of the nation, it must needs
tie great, since our teachers and guides are all rank
Idolaters.

We cannot join some of our Liberal Contempo-
7ries in condemning the publication of Colonel
Rom As' letters. We are glad to see the whole
correspondence, in order that the public may know
the principles on which the army is governed.
The publication may possibly be a breach of dis-
cipline, of which we presume not to judge, but it is
not a breach of any of the obligations of civil life.
i ieneeforth the officers of the army will know, as
long as they are employed (officers on half-pay, we
presume, will not be interfered with, though the
Tories; as in the case of Sir R. WILSON, did not
spare them), that they most not listen in silence
and with approbation to the abuse of her MAJESTY
and her Court. If they adopt the opinions which
have been so zealously put forth by the Post, the
Times, and the Standard, till they fired the brains
of Messrs. ROBY and BRADSHAW, they must
keep their own council, and not express such
opinions. When soldiers were only employed
to defend the country against its external
enemies, an occupation which can never
be too much honoured ; they were at full liberty
to form political opinions as to parties, and as to
the Government at home ; but when they came to
be employed in preserving political order at home,
aiding to suppress one set of opinions, and to give
predominance to another, their whole character
underwent a change, and it became indispensable
that they should be the blind, obedient servants of
the Executive power, and have no opinions of their
own a$ citizens and partizans. They are honoured,
feared, and obeyed ; and the penalty they pay for
the pre-eminence they enjoy is to be neuter in
If the officers are subject to some little draw-
backs from their enviable situation, so are the men.
They carry weapons, and are dreaded by the
people ; but it is remarked that they are poorly
paiLl. At Newport, and at other places, they
have been, and will be again, in consequence of the
unpleasant temper of our people, obliged to per-
form the duties of policemen. But the police not
being so well-armed as the military get more pay,
as was pointed out at the recent meeting of Bir-
mingham. It is of late, however, become of im-
mense importance that the army should be con
tented. Placed side by side with the police, per-
forming duties equally arduous, it will probably be
found necessary, now that the subject has been
publicly broached, arid a comparison instituted be-
tween the pay of the solders acrd that of the police,
to augment the former. If Ow army is to be the
main instrument for preserving order in the State,
the greatest care will be required in order, to give
satisfaction both to the officers and the men.

We are glad to see that the Common Council of
the City of London have had spirit enough to refuse
to the Rev. Mr. CATQR the compliment usually
paid to the Lord Mayor's. Chaplain at the close of
his Lordship's term of office. The gentleman who
ventured to propose that fifty guineas should be
given to the Reverend firebrand "as a testimony
of the esteem and approbation of the Court for the
sermon preached before the Lord Mayor, Judges,
Aldermen, &c.," had the good sense to anticipate
that his motion would not be very cordially re-
ceived, and probably shaped it so that by pretending
to yield that portion of it which was so offensive to
the Court, he might secure the other, taking it for
granted that if the voracious Chaplain could but
get the fifty guineas—could but grab the solid
Pudding—he would care little for the empty praise.
An amendment was accordingly moved, which
lopped off the " esteem and approbation," and left the
intolerant parson the " fifty guineas." Some warm
discussion then arose, during which Mr. LAU-
RANcE justly observed that, as the Chaplain had
gone out of his way to abuse all who did not be-
lievo as he did himself, he could not bring his mind,
by consenting to the motion, to place a man who had
preached one of the " most bitter and most sectarian
sermons" that had ever proceeded from a pulpit,
on the same footing with those Chaplains who had
discharged their duties in a Christian spirit of
charity to all men. He, therefore, opposed the re-
solution in foto, and moved the previous question.
Sir P. LAURIE took the same view of the matter,
declaring that he would never agree to a grant
of money for a sermon, in which " two of the best
of men were stigmatized—in which WESLEY and
WRLTFIELD were put on a level with the apostles
of the Catholic faith," IGI,'ATIUS LOYOLA, the
fathet of the Jesuits, and ST. DOMINICK, .the
founder of the Inquisition. So indignant was the
Worthy Alderman at the conduct of the Chaplain,
that he went so far as to say that he would not
object to the money if the Court would " brand the
sermon as the most uncharitable that ever was
preached."
-fitter several other speakers had expressed their sen-
timents the motion, as amended, was carried. Thus
the spitfire parson, after, the true orthodox fashion
7°letly pockets the cash together with the affront.
buffet,"
a hungry dog, he takes the " bit and the
without a whimper—indeed, rather glad to
get off on such terms.

A
of copy theu letter addressed to her Majesty the
4.1 Ezbz,by the Imperial Commissioner LIN, the ter-
ror of opium
smugglers, whether Chinese or " red-
haired barbarians," will be found in another column ;
and we recommend all who are desirous of becoming
familiar with the Celestial Empire's system of political
economy to read it attentively. Though LIN never,
perhaps, heard of such a volume as the New Tes-
tament, his remonstrances are conceived in the best
accordance with what is sublimest in its spirit and
letter. Do not to others what you would not
have them do to you, is the sum and substance of
.....I.lN's curious and straightforward communication.
You do not smoke opium yourselves, because you
know it .4.0 be pernicious; wherefore, then, be guilty
of the crime of encouraging the use of it among us ?
The Imperial Commissioner appears to have a more
perfect idea than rri?ny Christian merchants, and
even Christian sovereigns, respecting the moral re-
sponsibility attached to all acts which tend to de-
moralize, corrupt, and ruin others. But while we
'improve of ',lN's morality as much as we condemn
' uis want of gallantry in writing to a lady in so rude
a fashieu as to frighten her servants by the very
suporscription, we are forced to remind the Celestial
Commisslntier t 4 at nothing is said about paying 'or
the illegally seizt7!.{ °Piann. Before his appearance
at Canton the laws at„.
-...inst opium-smuggling had
and were
virtually fallen into complete .desuetticle,
only referred to by each new Gover:lr for tire p-
rose of obtaining abribe from the opium
When now and then an unfortunate Chinaman was
executed for the alleged crime of smoking opium,
the •
circumstance was regarded as a hint to the
Hong, and, consequently, to the smugglers, that

I either the Governor's coffers were empty, or his
pipe wanted replenishing, and a box or two of
opium, and a quantity of dollars, made all right
rwam. But as LIN appears to be really in earnest,
and as the Chinese Government is fully determined
to put down the trade, at any cost, from the most
exalted motives, it is not too much to ask from them
the adoption of the policy of England in the aboli-
tion of slavery. Though the abstract right to abolish
slavery was ours, we cheerfully paid ten times the
sum for which China has become responsible by the
destruction of the opium, to reconcile those ini-
quitourrly interested to our exercise of it. Al!,
however, that is known about the question yet is,
that our Government will not trouble Parliament
to redeem Superintendent ELLIOT'S rash pledge,
made in their name. Perhaps the better way %You'd
he, to leave the whole affair to be arranged by
Lord AUCKLAND and the Government of British
India. Besides the exported opium, the poppy-
growers there have upwards of five milliorLs sterling
of capital sunk in the production of this drug, for
which their only market is China. Here is a pretty
prospect !

We learn that the French and Dutch Govern-
ments are negociating a treaty of commerce, one of
the chief articles of tvhich has for its object to admit
French Colonial Sugars into Holland at a lower
rate of duty than sugars of any other nation.

We publish in another column an account of the
deposition of the Count D'ESPAGNE by the Carlist
Junta of Catalonia for which we are indebted to the
Perpignan correspondence of our Tory Contempo-
rary the Post. The narrative is essentially defec-
tive, as the writer has omitted to state the real causes
of the deposition of the rebel chief. Count D'Es-
PA GNE was not more a lover of glory than of gold.
and in shedding innocent blood, had an eye to pelf
no less than to the assumed interests of the Royal
butcher in whose name and by whose authority he
acted. Though a most exemplary champion of the
rights of Church and King, and a sworn foe to all
democratic claims and institutions, he never scrupled
the rifling of a church or even the burning of
Priest's vestment for the sake of the little bits
of gold found among the ashes of the em-
broidery. In fast D'ESPAGNE, was a Tory
of the right stamp. He detested sacrilege in
the people, but he was quite willing to practice it
himself in the name of Kings and for the exclusive
benefit of nobles and courtiers. He would not
have touched a chalice with the naked hand, or
put it to his lips, for the world ; but gloved he
grasped it, as he would the philosopher's stone, and
after passing through the crucible, it retained in his
eyes no more of its former sanctity than it did of its
form. But though the Catalans:could tolerate robbery
and murder, either wholesale or in detail, by a Gue-
rilla chief, they had strong misgivings about the pro-
priety of sacrilege, the more especially as the Count
was supposed to appropriate the Church moveables
to his own use, without pretending to have a Papal
Bull authorising such a proceeding. When, there-
fore, they began to find the clergy the peculiar ob-
jects of the Count's solicitude, and that the
possesion of gold and adherence to the QUEEN'S
Government were sure, sooner or later, to
be confounded in the mind of the Presi-
dent of the Junta, they determined to get rid
of him as soon as possible. The other members of
the Junta responded to the wishes of the people.
How well their measures were taken, and how
admirably they succeeded, will be learned in detail
from the amount given elsewhere, to which these
remarks refer. What has become of D'ESPAGNE
i° still a mystery, but his disappearance has rid
Spain, at least for a time, of one monster of iniquity.

Lord Kinnaird, it is reported, is likely to be the
Master of the Bock Hounds.
THE HERALD AMP THE SECRETARY OF
STATE.—The Herald attempted yesterday to teach
the Secretary of State and the public the law of
high treason in the following language :—" We
have called on the Government press to inform us
by what legal authority Lord- Normanby took a
person charged with high.treason out of the hands
of the Mayor and Magistrates at Canter.
bury, and ordered him to be liberated on his own
recognizances. We ask again for that information."
The asking for information is a mere phrase to
convey censure. Mr. Davies was not charged with
high treason. A person was found on his premises
who was charged with high treason, but no proof
whatever was afforded that Mr. Davis had the least
cognizance of his crime. After an investigation,
it was not surmised even that there was connivance.
Mr. Davies is a gentleman, to whose respectability
his townsmen of all parties have borne testimony ;
nevertheless the Magistrates of Canterbury thought
it was their duty to detain him in custody till it
was known whether there was a a b4rge of treason
against him, That could only be ascertained by re-
ference to the Secretary of State, or to some of Ow
law officers of the Crown, The reference was
made to the Secretary of State, who, having ascer-
tained that there was no charge against Mr. Davies,
nor any foundation for spell a charge, sent down an
order for his release. Why Op Secretary of State
should interfere i 5 obvious. He i, p,,t the head of
that branch of the Government which eotninuni-
cates with the Magistracy, and it is his espccbil
business to direct proceedings in cases of treason.
The Herald, however, would teach him differently,
and insinuates that he violated the law in directing
Mr. Davies to be discharged,
THE REV. MR. DAVIES.—A. communication
having been received from the Home Secretary, on
Tuesday, this gentleman was brought again before
the Magistrates, and informed that recognizances
would be taken for his re-appearance when called
upon. Mr. G. Furley deprecated C 12.9 course of
proceeding against Mr, Davies, and designated it
as most unfair. He said ke had been committed
to prison for further examination upon
a charge of
harbouring and concealing his nephew, knowing be
had committed an act of treason, but was now dis-
charged without an opportunity being afforded of
proving his innocence. He was prepared to show
that Mr. Davies was entirely uneoniciogs of his
nephew having committed the offence imputed to
him, and that he did not conceal him was evident
from the depositions taken at the examination. The
Mayor stated that he could not then go into the
case, and that Mr. Davies would be discharged
upon the required recognizances being entered into.
Ihe Rev. Gentleman was then bond in the sum
of 1001., and immediately liberate4l,—Keni;sh
Observer.

THE WELSH COMMISSION...—Every one I.as
heard of the unintelligible_ farrago of wards that
cumber our Acts of Parliament, but even ibt,. is
all plain and elegant English compared to the ti r ns
in which the State Paper, just issued from ...e
Crown Office, is drawn up. Among other offowes
with which the Chartists may be charged , .ie
Judges are to inquire into clippings and washol,s,
:;
and other falsities, of the money of Great Bri ii,
and other kingdoms or dominions whatso:‘,. c,
and into " trespasses, riots, routs, retent. ~s,
dlieseteoitfs,t,h,
escapes, contempts, falsities, negligences, conc.( !-
ments, maintenances, oppressions, cham-pai .:..s,
and all other evil doings." The ti...!e
comprehend the w• ~le
words
jarltly.fievveil
offences enumerated.
enumerated. The ~,l
InOwl iel
daysr and a
n thatand
p i aa eight
,sgs
tbheaanuti.full piece of composition is rept !,..A
leags:ctetrittaniens—day" And therefore we c, Al-
which you, or any two of on
and place, or at cer tin
(of whom one ofyou, the said Sir N. Tindal,
&c., we will shall be shall,"
one,) &c.

It will be seen in the report of the trials at the
Central Criminal Court yesterday, that the Grand Jury
threw out the bill against W. F. Box, committed by the
Chief Magistrate of Bow-street, for stealing a gold pill
from the shop of Howell and James. On making some
remarks at the time on the evidence, we expressed our
firm conviction that the Grand Jury would at once ignore
the bill, and indeed every person of unbiassed mind
must have come to the same conclusion ; yet the young
mqp has now been confined for a month on a charge 14,r
whici p. 9 icy could possibly convict. We care nothing
other eiaaw Yrought against him after commit-
-. stand 6.4 a mvn merits, and can form
unwarrantabb stretch of Magis-
- •-• Halt.

for
tal ; that muo.
no excuse for this moo.
terial power on the part of An.

LORD HILL'S REPRIMNISD.

The following are striking proofs of the " win-
cing of the galled jades," and of the abuse which
the Tory journals heap 011 their friends who will
not ao the " whole hog" .Ivith them in insulting
our beloved Sovereign :

(From the Britannia of this day.)
Lord Hill has displayed anything but the feel-
ing of a British soldier and a highminded gentle-
man, thus in taking—retaining, rather, for he en-
tered under the great Duke—office, to which the
most humiliating conditions have been annexed.
Had he been a junior clerk in the Exchequer, we
might have excused him. His example would
have been but little injurious ; his honour would
have been a matter that concerned few besides him-
elf. But he holds an appointment among the
',ighest in the State ; and he is not in the condition
a person whose poverty may compel servitude
'lnch his heart abhors, or of a private in the ranks,
ho must carry out a bargain he made when he ac-
--pted the Queen's "bounty." His Lordship may
ave his ancient predilections, his memories of a
one when English glories were common themes:
,;d in secret abhor the paltry puppets who have
.icrificed the credit and honour of their country in

ery nation of the globe ; but he has sold himself
i work evil, and if not the actual perpetrator of
'!eds which shame England, he is as guilty as can
any accessory before or after the fact.
(From the Times.)
We quite agree with our correspondent : we
►w with great regret the reprimand of Lord Hill,
,vhich, as far at least as regarded Colonel Thomas,
vas unmerited. But, we confess, after looking at
Lord Hill's votes on some of the most important
questions of last Session, we do not feel the sur-
prise which would fo►merly have been excited by
such a proceeding. This is very painful, for who
does not wish that a:gallant officer, who has rendered
such vast services to his country should be free from
even the suspicion of an unworrhy motive?

MONEY AND COMMERCIAL N EWS.

CITY, TWELVE O'CLOCK.

LIVERPOOL COTTON MARKET, FRIDAY. -- " The
transactions during the week hare been moderate, with-
out change in prices worth notice, and the market, on
the whole, though flat, has been steady, as rcgarda the
disposition to sell at the present rates. Little anxiety
is observed, our holders resting their confidence in the
belief that no supply of moment of the new crop can be
looked for for some time hence. Some New Orleans
has made its appearance, and commanded from Bd. to 94-d.
for good, to choice quality, but as a greater selection
arrives, the latter price cannot be expected to rule. To-
day there is more business, the sales of all kinds being
about 4,000 bales, at about the closing prices of last
week. The operations for resale here are 1,500 Ameri-
can, and 1,000 Surats, at a small profit, which would no
doubt bring the greater part again on the market ; and
for export 2.50 bales American."

We have no arrivals this morning, either of Foreign
mails or ship letters as yet.
It was generally expected that we should have had
the arrival of the Great Western steamer this morning.

CHANCERY COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

WELLESLEY V. WELLESLEY.-JUDGMENT.

The Loan CHANCELLOR. gave judgment to-day in
his case, which was argued before his Lordship a few

days since!. The case came before the Court upon a
demurrer by two cf the (iefendants, who were the trus-
tees of property over which Mr. Wellesley obtained a
power of charge in the month of Deceirdier 1834 ; and.
the question was, whether the bill stated• such a case
as against the defendants as entitled the plaintiff, Mr.
Wellesley, to a decree against them, or whether, ac-
cording to the statements of the defendants, the Court
was bound to say the plaintiff had no title? The title
of the plaintiff was denied under articles of separation,
executed between Mr. and Mrs. Wellesley in 1834, by
which the former undertook to secure an annuity of

1,000/. a-year to the plaintiff before the Ist of February
1833, either by a charge on freehold estates of inherit-
ance, to be situated in England or Wales, or by in-
vestment of an adequate sum of money in the Funds,
or by the best means which might then be in his
power. At the time the contract was entered
Mr. Wellesley was oniy tenant for life of certain estates ;
in December 1834 an arrangement took place between
Mr. Wellesley and his son, under which, according to
the statements of the bill, he obtained a power of jointer-
log his then or any future wife to the amount of 1,3001.
a-year. Mr. Wellesley on being applied to, had refused
to carry into effect the covenant be had entered into in
June 1834, and the plaintiff stated that the defendants,

the trustees,instead of applying a sum of 462,000/. which
was to be raised upon the estates under the arrange-
ment of 1834, in the discharge of certain incumbrances
and debts of Mr. Wellesley, had raised only part of that
sum, which they were about to transmit to Mr. Wel-
lesley for his own use. The bill then stated the
acquisition of property in 1834 by Mr. Wellesley
which would enable him to carry the contract he
had entered into with his wit into effect. If at
the hearing those facts being proved, the Court
would have had no power to make any decree, except
specifically to perform the contract, and could not act
upon the land, then the demurrer ought to be allowed ,
but if the Court could act upon the land, then the de-
fendants had been properly made parties, and the de-
murrer must be overruled. If there was a contract for
sale, and the vendor proceeded to invalidate the con-
tract, the Court would proceed upon the land. In
" Prebble v. Roghurst," where the question was whether
the agreement affected the land, Lord Eldon did not
doubt the power of the Court to appoint a receiver.

The only grounds on which the defendants could con-
tend that they had been improperly made parties, were
either by establishing the fact that the bill must be
dismissed against Mr. Wellesley, or that if a decree was
made it could only be a deene personally against him,
because it was clear that the moment the Court de-
clared the right of the plaintiff against the defendant,
Mr. Wellesley, and that she was entitled to have the
annuity charged on his estates, the defendants would at
all events become trustees for the plaintiff, to that extent.
In " Lloyd v. Lynn" the husband had covenanted to
charge an annuity to his wife upon separation. He af-
terwards acquired other property, and thereupon, a
bAI being filed, a decree was obtained to carry the cove-
nant into effect. His Lordship was clearly of opinion
that such a case bad been stated as against Mr.
Wellesley by the bill that the defendants had been
made properly parties. and that therefore the demurrer
must be overruled. His Lordship founded this opinion
on the construction of the articles of separation,
amounting to a contract to charge such lands as the de-
fendant had a power to charge, and under such circum-
stances the Court would, by its decree, secure to the
plaintiff the benefit of such agreement.
Demuirer overruled.