The Sun.
London, England, 1837-09-14 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

It is not improbable that the next mail from Lisbon
will bring us the result of the struggle between the
Cnartists and Constitutionalists. We not only think,
'but we most ardently desire, that the former may be
successful. For this anxiety, to which we have al-
ready more than once given expression, we have been
taken somewhat roughly to task by contemporaries
both here and in Paris. Nothing is more-easy than
to attack any particular system or institution so long as
the assailant is permitted to deal in vague generalities,
cautiously avoiding any specific accusation. Look at
the English and French newspapers, such of them as
have favoured the public with disquisitions upon the
relative merits of the Charter and the Constitution. '
Look, too, at the sort of aid they receive from their
fellow-labourers of the Lisbon press—the Government
press—the only one permitted to exist under the Liberal
Constitution ! In what consists their objection to the
Charter of Don Pedro ? Is it that it gives too much ,
power to the Crown, and too little to the people ? Is
it that it does not afford sufficient guarantees for the pro-
tection of person and property, or that it has not estab-
lished political liberty upon aesufliciently broad basis ?
—No ; not only are none of these objections
true in fact, but they are not even urged
amongst the fictions of partisan warfare. We have
column piled upon column of abuse of the Devoristas
and the Estrangeirns—the changes are rung upon all
the notes that make up the monotonous gamut of the
grievance-mongers—" oppression of the people,"
" robbery of the public purse," " despotism" in all
imaginable shapes and forms. Now is it too much to
ask even for one single illustration, either in the pro-
visions of the Charters or in its practical operation,
which will justify this wholesale and inconsiderate con-
Oemnation ? It is sufficiently remarkable that since
establishment of the Charter by Don Pedro, there
has been scarcely one change of Administration which
'has not been effected literally by a revolution. One
of the worst effects, perhaps, of protracted civil war,
is the unconstitutional preponderance given to a mili-
tary power called into existence for the purposes of the
day, and which remains without an occupation, when
these purposes have been answered. In Portugal the
triumph of Don Pedro threw a large and armed mass
of unemployed men upon the resources of an ex-
hausted and worn-out country, for subsistence. Nut
only the troops of the line, but the very citizens, too
long accustomed to the arbitration of the sword,
refer all their grievances to its prompt decision.
A convention of the Clubs to-night—a precon-
certed meeting of " the Nationals" in the Campo
Grande to-morrow—then a deputation of officers to
the Queen-4.his is the history of a change of iVlinistry
in Portugal. But, frequently as we have been obliged
to loot: upon these burlesques of Constitutional Go-
vernment, we have been always struck with the fact
that nothing more was ever demanded than a change
of men. Even the boldest of that banditti which has
got the Lisbon clubs under its control, never suggested
the overthrow of the Charter of Don Pedro. To
think of applying this as a -remedy to any existing evil
was too great an absurdity. In the September, how-
ever, of last year, this bold project was for the first
time attempted, and with success. And now for the
first time it is discovered that this Charter, for which
Portugal made such unexampled sacrifices, is the very
vilest of political systems I We shall be excused if,
before we give credit to this statement, we require
something more than the mere assertion of those who
put it forward. Does the Charter confer upon the
Monarchy any powers inconsistent with the freedom
of the people ? What are they ?—point them out.
The prerogatives of Donna Maria are precisely
those of Queen Victoria. She has the right of de-
claring war or peace. She has the right—theore-
tically we mean, for practically it is assumed by
the clubs—of dismissing her Ministers, dissolving
and convoking the Cortes, and of appointing to such
offices of the State as are properly filled by the choice
of the Sovereign. Addressing ourselves only to those
who admit that the form of government best adapted
to Portugal is a constitutional Monarchy, we ask, what
further limitations would they impose upon the prero-
gatives of the Sovereign than those imposed by the
Charter of Don Pedro ? Nor does the Charter confer
any exclusive privileges upon the aristocracy of the
country. They are subjected to a responsibility rather
more efficacious with hereditary legislators than the
" responsibility to God" that is in such favour with Sir
Robert Peel. We now say nothing of the policy of
creating a second Chamber, for the course adoptel by
the Constitutionalists themselves obviates the necessity
of out entering upon the subject. All parties,
Chartists and Constitutionalists, being agreed upon
the necessity of a second chamber, the sole question
is, whether, under the Charter, the people had suffi-
cient protection against the obstinacy or infatuation of
any Lusitanian Lyndhurst who might rise up amongst
them ? Constituted as the Portuguese House of
Peers was, it is impossible, let it bear ever so
strong a resemblance in disposition to our own, to bring
the Government to a dead lock for more than two conse-
cutive sessions. But neither the existence of the Upper
Chamber, nor its peculiar constitution, was a ground
of objection to the men of September : for one of
the first results of their own crude legislation was the
re-production of this Chamber, as part and parcel of
their Utopian scheme. Well, then, what was there
objectionable ill the constitution of the Lower Cham-
ber—par excellence the People's House ? We confess
we are not very ardent admirers of the process of in-
direct election. Strange enough, the plan of double
election adopted by the Democrats who framed the
Constitution of Cadiz and that of Oporto, was David
Hume's perfection of the representative system. And
he was right, too ; for in its operation it considerably
circumscribes the poptdar power, which undoubtedly
would accord with Hume's notion of the " perfection of
the represantative system." But whatever may be its
cm: ct, the same system of double election belonged to the
Charter as to the Consiitution. Every man possessing
a property qualification to the amount of about la.
of our money had a voice in the election of the " col-
leges" by whom the representatives were subsevently
elected. Any " improvement" upon this must obvious-
ly end in universal suffrage, for which, as seems to
us, the people of Portugal arc scarcely yet prepared.
But the relative merits of the Charter and of the Con-
stitution will be best appreciated by the fact, and it is a
fact, that the chief force opposed to Saldan ha and Terceira
consists ofavowed and notorious Miguelites. The Morn-
ing; Post avows this. Our Contemporary tells uc that the
" imposing aspect of the National Guards is mainly to
be attributed to the number of Royalists who have
come forward to enrol themselves." We have no
doubt that a great number of Royalists have come for-
ward to enrol themselves, and from a motive that is
sufficiently obvious. They know that the Constitu-
tion is utterly impracticable, and, that if worked by the
tnen who have taken into Ineir heads to establish it,
it will necessarily throw the country into a state of
anarchy and confusion most favourable to the latent
hopes of the adherents of the old regime: while, upon
the other hand, the success of the Charter, by conso-
lidating the present Monarchy, shuts out for ever the
moss distant prospect of a restorations—Morn. Citron.
It will surprise no loyal and honest Eoglishman to
learn that the disgraceful compact between O'Connell
and our Cabinet has attracted the attention of fo-
reigners, and become as much a matter of surprise and
scorn abroad as it is at home. The Journal des
Debats, which publishes O'Connell's late letter (omit-
ting, as too absurd, his audacious and mendacious
trash about Ireland educating Europe, peaplino the
calendar with saints, founding. the Alier universities of
the world, and so forth), has ttle following observations
nn that epistle ;—"it is in some sort the programme
imposed by Mr. O'Connell for the next ession on all
those I'vlembers t)1 whom he is the absolute master
(that is to say) bn three-fourths of the representation
I)? IrelanT), and the treaty of alliance which he offers
to tilt Melbourne Ministry. It will doubtless be re-
rnirked with what pride Mr. O'Connell, in this
letter, puts himself forward as the arbiter of the desti-
nies of the Melbourne Administration, and of those of
the whole Reform party, by means of the representatives
of Ireland who are devoted to him ; with what haughti-
ness he insists on his conditions ; and while he makes pro-
fession of upholding the Whigs, how comformahle his
programme is to the most extensive demands of the Ra-
dicals. We do not understand the movement of opi-
nion which is in-progress in England, and which ma-

n:fested itself with mnch eclat in the recent elections,
if the language of Mr. O'Connell, instead of strengthen-
ing the Ministry, does not become for that Ministry
new source of embarrassment and a tieW cause of
weakness. Never bcfort Was the dangerous protecto-
rate of the Great Agitator so plainly and so strongly
avowed, and Lord Melbourne knows moth tun welt
what it has cost him up to the present time to hail
with much gmAtude this neWr slotu eVidence of it."
We think with our 'rebel toaemporary, that Lord
Melbourne would father O'Connell had not written
this epistle ; for certainly, with our opinion or (won:.
Hell's treasonable designs:, and the Cabinet's diseatek
truckling to the traitor, we would willingly ray Daniel
largely for writing once asweac, because we are sure
' that if he did, many months would not pass away be-
fore he and his friends the Ministers Would have re-
ceiettl tl;e pusisinnent they both so richly deerve.
We can readily understand that any journalist of ohl;-
nary respectability will look with equal astonishment
and shame upon the national disgrace that at this mop
ment bows England to the dust—the dispettre of tole-
rating a Ministry which, instead of punishing a self-
proclaimed traitor, humbly craves his protection; end
pays and praises him, by themselves and the Swiss scrib-
blers they subsidize, for bestowing that protection. We
do not recollect any other instance of a great notion
being so utterly degraded, and bearing the stain and
stigma so quietly. The Journal des Debats must look
upon this compact between the Melbourne Adminis-
tration as it would look upon an alliance between the
Mole Administration and the French faction which
strews with garlands the graves of decapitated traitors.
But if the disgrace of the nation be great, the dis-
grace of the Government and of the individuals who
compose it is greater far. Let out French contem-
poraries consider the relation in which O'Connell and
the Whigs stood to each other but a few years ago.
The Whigs denounced O'Connell in a speech from
the Throne. In the debates on the Address in answer
to that speech every Whig, high and low, from Lord
Grey down to Lord Hatherton, vilified and reviled the
" agitator ;" and they held the same language to-
wards him in the debate on the repeal of the Union.
On the other hand O'Connell poured forth his abuse
upon them, collectively and individually, without mercy.
He wrote of them in 1834 thus :—" Everything has
been done by the Whigs to injure and insult the Irish
people." Again, " Ireland has nothing to expect from
the Whigs but insolent contempt and malignant but
treacherous hostility." After the Whigs had been
ejected from office in 1834, he said of them—" We
will be told that the Whigs did much good for Ire-
land, and intended to do still more. Oh, yes, we
coerced them into some matters of mere secondary uti-
lity. But whom have we to thank for it ? Not them,
but our determination to see Ireland happy, and the
vigilance and activity that enabled us to turn their im-
becility, their hypocrisy, to account." Of Lord Grey
he wrote, in 1834, thus—" Earl Grey actually appears
to have governed Ireland as if the principles of his
management were hatred and contempt of the Irish
people. Again, in the same year—" Of what value
is it that Earl Grey should have retired if he has left
to his successors the same proud and malignant ha-
tred he appeared to entertain towards the Irish na-
tion ? * * * * I know that Lord John Rus-
sell cherishes feelings of a similar description." Of
Lord Melbourne, he said in the same letter—" In
plain truth, it is quite manifest that Lord Melbourne
is uttetly incompetent for the high office he holds. It
is lamentable to think, that the destinies of the Irish
people should depend in any degree on so inefficient
a person." Of Lord Lansdowne, also, he said in the
same letter—" Lord Lansdowne, too, is hostile to
Ireland, with a hatred the more active and persever-
ing, because he is bound by every obligation to enter-
tain diametrically opposite sentiments." Nosy, all this
was coolly and deliberately written by O'Connell just
" five weeks and two days" (as Mr. E. Macdonnell
shows) before he and the Whigs commenced the con-
nexion which has sunk that profligate party into an
abyss of political and personal degradation from which
it is impossible that anything short of a miracle can
extricate them. If the Journal des Debats should
have time and space, it would do well to translate
these extracts, in order to show to French statesmen
what high-minded persons are Lord Melbourne, Lord
John Russell, and Lord Lansdowne, &c., who now,
• in order that they may retain their places and their
pay, humbly kiss the feet of that O'Connell who so
kicked them only three years ago. Let the Journal
des Debats tell its readers that the " base, brutal,
and bloody Whigs," as O'Connell then called them,
still hold themselves out for Liberals and gentlemen,
though they are now the toadies of the Big Beggar-
man who so blackguarded them in 1834.—Times.
A more daring and infamous attempt was never made
against the representative principle than that which the
Tories are now preparing to carry into effect, by raising
subscriptions to petition against the return of the Li-
beral Members of Ireland. Of all the devices to de-
feat the legitimate working of the Reform Act this is
the most iniquitous. We may be told, that as every
Member of the House of Commons is in the eye of
the Constitution regarded as a representative of- the
whole United Kingdom, as well as of the constituency
by which he is especially chosen, the inhabitants of
any part of the kingdom are justified in interfering
with and influencing the return of the representatives
selected by any other part. But to allege this
principle in defence of the outrage now proposed
against the Irish representatives is most absurd and
fallacious. It is true that, when elected, each
Member is a representative of the whole people
of the United Kingdom, as the general interests
should ever be considered paramount, and never
made subservient to the interests of individual con-
stituencies ; but this does not give any right to one
part of the empire to snake a systematic attack on the
representation of another part. Or if the principle he
admitted at all, the whole House of Commons should
he elected, not by separate constituencies, but by the
whole electoral body of the empire. In this way every
elector would have votes in proportion to the number
of Members in the House of Commons, and the ma-
jority of the electors only would be represented in the
House of Commons. This would rather be an awls-
- ward result for the Tories, yet it is the obvious sa-
pience of their position. On a tolerably close calcu-
lation of the number of voters who polled in the last
election, it appears that on the gross poll of the United
Kingdom the Reform voters exceeded the Tory by
several thousands. Now if this majority were to—and
if the principle upon which the Tories attempt to de-
fend the gross assault meditated against the representa-
tion of Ireland were acted upon, it would—decide upon
the whole of the Members to be elected to the Hou. e
of Commons, where would be the " miserable monopo-
lising minority ?" There would not be a single Tory
in the House of Commons If the electors of Ireland
and Scotland were to have the right of voting for
English Members, as is implied by the defence which
the English Tories set up for their unjust assumption
of controul over the elections of Ireland, there would
not be one Tory, from Sir Robert Peel to Peter
Borthwick, at present a Mensher of the House of
Representatives. But the Tories in their blind zeal
see not the dan:..;er of the general adoption of their own
principles, or that the weapons to which in their ex-
asperation they have recourse, may be wielded against
themselves. If they did, they would not furnish to
the Irish Repcalers such potent arguments against the
continuance of the Union, as are put forth in their
protests against the recognition of the majority in the
House of Commons, because about a fifth part of !hre
majority is composed of Irish Members. Neither
would they supply such irrefutable arguments in favour
of the Ballot as are set forth in their daily complaints
of intimidation at the election, and the barbarities
which they represent as practised against those voters
who demurred a compliance with the popular feeling.
in Ireland. Neither would they recommend exclu-
sive dealing, of all vile and diabolical influences the
most vile and diabolical—and which, if put in practice
by the people—and it is a game which two can play
at—in the manner recommended, adopted, and avowed
by the Tory aristocrats, would soon leave Toryism at
a discount. But these things are all unheeded
in the rage of the assault against Reform and its
jrepresentatives. Where a popular principle or indivi-
dual is to be assailed, the Tories consider all weapons
lawful ; but when the weapons of their selection are
I wielded against themselves, they ring the very welkin
1 with howlings. However, the systematic attack de-

MIT, SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, Is.

signed to he made on the Irish representation through
the agency of English snbcriptions, i 5 one :Thich the
Mu3e of Commons cannot suer to pass unrepciled,
without a serious and dangerous compromise of its
privileges. If such a system be tolerated, we may
better at once revert to the old borough n&nitujtioti.
system, fathet tlittn Meek the people with the sem.
blance of a representation to be invalidated by the
.
jomt-stock purse of Tory persecution.—Morning Ad-
vertiser,

port their own." If any one thinks he can make a
het' r de-setiption thf.m this of the present Ministry, Ict
him try.—Morning I'osl.

• M.
We beileVe 'diet het- MajCSWS nustel:s have by
this tithe stefficititt season to doubt the prectioability of
getting on with such strength as 'they pds.;
sess in the Hobo 4 CbiliiilOhs. The success
of " Protector " in Ireland seems for a tine
to have set them lh•side them. elves. 'flier sreowl
to think that 'the tkeouragement of an
flnglieh opposition majority justelectcd, Mr.CrCen-
veil cou'd, nevertheless, enceced
return of Mihisterialivs from • Ireland, in the pro-
-I)..ri on o two to one, he muat be able to do
anything else that he pletiettl. luring this paroxysm
Lord Velinerston advertised his frivolous and frantic
address to the electors of Tiverton, from which he
appeared to think that Mr. O'Connell had settled all
Ministerial difficulties through the !Irish elections, and
that Cabinet Ministers were thenceforward free to in-
dulge their genius, and amuse themselves. But this
dream has already passed away. It has been found
that -even the Radicals are not willing, like Mr. O'Con-
neli, to make the keeping in place of a certain set of
Ministers the principal object of their political exertions.
The Melbourne Cabinet will not be allowed to repose
in salaried idleness, lest by attempting to do anything
they should be "embarrassed." The elaborate advice
to this elect which they caused to be promulgated
has been met by scornful derision, or angry rebuke ;
and their sneers at those Radicals who prefer the urging,
forward of their peculiar principles to the mere execu-
tive guardianship of the present Administration has
met with no better fate. We perfectly agree with an
evening contemporary, a very uncompromising advo-
cate of democracy, in what he advances concerning
the falsehood, as well as the ingratitude, contained in
the sneers of the Ministerialists against those whom
they call the " Tory Radicals." It is notorious, says
this democratic advocate, that they who are called
Tory-Radicals differ from the Whig-Radicals, not in
im political principles, but on the question whether
their common principles should be subordinate or pa-
ramount to keeping the Whigs in office. There can,
we think, be no question that this is a fair statement
of the case ; and we do not imagine that anyone who
does more than pretend to honesty in political matters
can hesitate to say which part is the more just and
honourable, and, therefore (looking to ultimate ends,
and not to 'present selfish purposes), the more po-
litic. On the one hand there are certain persons
holding extreme democratic principles, and strug-
gling to bring them forward, under the idea that by
'leaking the public acquainted with them the public
will acquire a preference for them, and insist upon
their being made the basis of Government. On the
other hand there are certain persons not denying the
validity of these democratic principles, but insisting
that it is better not to urge them upon public attention,
and with the weight of official authority, because to do
so would be to endanger certain profitable places which
they hold, and perhaps to place in the Executive per-
sons who are hostile to those democratic principles.
It seems to be almost an insult to any man's un-
derstanding and sense of justice to argue that the
first of these parties is to be preferred, as more
worthy than the second. When we say that the,
second sneers at the first as "impracticable men," who
are actually serving the cause of the opponents of de-
mocracy, we say enough to excite the indignation
every honourable mind. If the Whigs who hold the
Government disapprove of democratic principles, they
ought, as honest men, to say so, and to announce the
abandonment of the democratic measures they have
hitherto advocated. This they should do if they re-
solve on giving them up, from conviction either of
their abstract error, or the impropriety of their intro-
duction by Ministers of the Crown. They ought not
to expect the support of men whose principles they are
not willing to put forward, from fear of danger to their
own places. If they do not disapprove of these princi-
ples, it is the most flagrant depravity in the world to say
that they will hold them back, from fear that, if they
brought them forward, it might throw the Government
into the hands of the Tories. If their principles were of
an opposite nature, there might be someground for such
an argument ; but it is the most palpable violation of
all sense and reason to pretend that democratic prin-
ciples will be better served by an Executive which
does not bring them forward than by any party
whether in the Executive or not, which does. The
life and soul of democracy lies in its open appeals
to the people. Keep it in the back ground—keep
it locked up in official bureaus, waiting for a con-
venient season, in which it will not embarrass the
Government—and it necessarily languishes and
dies. If the Ministers be friendly to democratic
changes they say that which is not true when they
say that the possession of the Executive by the Tories
is the worst thing which could happen for their po-
licy. It would certainly not be so unfavourable to
the progress of democracy as a holding of the Govern-
ment by the Whigs, in fear that if they stirred demo-
cratic questions it might throw them out of office. It
may be asked of us why, if this be so, we should wish
the 'Furies to have office ? We answer, because we
think they would conduct the Government honestly,
and upon the principles of the British Constitution,
which are not democratic. We are well aware that the
present democratic Ministers, being thrown into Oppo-
sition, would do much more to disseminate democracy
einong the people than they would do as Ministers--
partly because they would be under no restraint, nor
fear of personal loss by the advocacy of democratic
principles,and partly because they would thereby harass
the Tory Government. We arc not at all insensible
of the evils and disturbance which might thence arise ;
but we would rather u r any other evil than that
arising from doubt and distrust as to the real cha-
racter and views of public men. We would much
prefer what, in COllllllOll English phrase, we
will venture to call a fair stand-up fight with demo-
cracy,
and abide the issue, whatever it might be, than
go on with a Government halting between two opi-
nions—a Government which all know to be weak,
and which many on both sides of political questions
suspect to be treacherous. We repeat that, in saying
this, we are not unmindful of what might be suffered
in this struggle, nor too confident that in the end the
victory would be with us. But of this we do feel confi-
dent, that if there were a fair open struggle—we do not
mean of civil war, but of the intellect, and feeling, and
interest of the respective parties—there would be a far
better chance of preserving intact the bold, manly cha-
racter of the English nation, than there is in the manner
of proceeding which the Whigs seem to prefer. We value
this character too much not to-be willing to do or to
suffer any thing for the sake of its preservation. So
long as it is preserved we have no fear of any thing
more than temporary political evil. But if we are to
be debased by a long-continued system of Govern-
ment, which does not dare to be openly and valiantly
either one thing or the other, but pretends that by de-
grees it is to establish democracy through a certain
management of the Executive in a Monarchical Go-
vernment, then we may become a nation of hollow,
pompous puppies, like the French, or like Lord Pal-
merston. kV'e cannot better conclude these remarks
than by a sketch which, in our judgment, admirably
well applies to the existing Government. It leas
drawn, as many of our readers will remember, by a mas-
ter-hand ; the most thoroughly mean and worthless of
all English Kings being the character described. We
alter it only so far as to make the words apply to a
collective body instead of to an individual. " In their
personal character there is nothing uniform or sincere,
and this has introduced the like unsteadiness into their
Government. They are indolent, yet restless in their
dispositions—fond of working by violent methods,
without any vigour—boastful, but continually betray-
ing their fears—showing on all occasions such a desire
of peace as hinders them from ever enjoying it. Hay-
ing no spirit of order they never look forward--con-
tent by any temporary expedient to extricate them-
selves from a present difficulty. Rash, arrogant, per-
fidious, irreligious, unquiet—they make tolerable
leaders of a party, but bad Ministers. They have
talents fit to disturb another's Government, not to sup-

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
111 A NSIO fib
John Henning, a young fellow dressed like a carman, and
having the appearance of a country boy, was charged with
running away with a chest of teat value 8/, Be. 2d.
This Cita deited dtirlosity atid infighter,
Mr. H. Limby, of No. 8, Greek-street, Soho, wholesale
tea and coffee_ dealer, stated that the chest which was di-
rettbd MedWifi; Sittintvhourne; Kent, had been deli-
Vered to the porter Of the 18 taio )lead:
in the Borough. It was to go by Reikis's van.
Wm. Popie stated that he had been delivering goods
doing Tuesday and Oa elwsq. in question was taken off his
cart while standing at Mr. Hairs gates near the Custom
House ittayi,and while be woe abeent about three minutes.
On missing it be raised an alaftil, arid lie §odri aft& saw the
prisoner in custody.
A carman. named George Seaton, saw the prisoner
moving along very fast, aftee letting eroesed Tower-street,
with the chest on his shoulder. Suspecting that all tea,
wrong, he followed, and asked the prisoner where he got the
chest, to which he replied that he was ordered to carry it by
a gentleman in black.
The Prisoner—Please your Lordship, so I was. He told
me to carry it to Petticoat-lane.
The LORD MAYOR—The gentleman in black did?
Pray What sort of a gentleman was he ? Prisoner—l can't
just tell, please you, my Lord. I only knows he was in black.
The LORD MAYOR--I am afraid it was the gentleman in
black that directed you in the matter. Had he a tail ? Pri-
soner—A tail I A. pigtail do you mean, please you, my
Lord ? No ; I can't say as he had.
The LORD MAYOR—Did you look at his feet? What
sort were they ? Like a cow's ?—(A laugh.) Prisoner—l
can't say as they were like a cow's, but he says to me,
. " Take this here box," says he," to Petticoat-lane."
The LORD MAYOR—Aye, I believe the gentleman in
black does a great deal of business in Petticoat-lane. He's
' always giving directions of the same kind to the people in
that neighbourhood--( Laughter.)
Prisoner—l don't know as he does, my Lord, for I never
seed him afore.
The LORD MAYOR—Oh, yes, you have. He has given
you a good many orders, which you have executed as faith
fully. He has a very general business, and has employed
most of the people who have stood where you now stand.
Prisoner—l wish I could catch him.
The LORD MAYOR—Follow my advice, and endeavour
to shun him. You see he has got you into a bad scrape.
Mr. W. Hall, the proprietor of the Custom House
Wharf, complained that the carts and the workmen from
the Tower to the Custom House were exposed to the most
serious depredations, and requested that additional police-
men should be placed in the district. Fellows, who dis-
guised themselves as carmen, committed robberies every
day in the neighbourhood.
The LORD MAYOR said he believed there was ground for
serious complaint, and gave directions accordingly.
The prisoner was remanded.
A Frenchman, named Alphonso Alleaume, was intro-
duced to the LORD MAYOR by a lady of rank, who stated
that she resided in the neighbourhood of the place in which
the foreigner had been making such inquiries as showed
that he was an utter stranger, without friends or the means
of living. She said that Mons. Alleaume, although not
educated in practical science, applied a considerable portion
of his time to the study of mechanics, and constructed a
machine for filtering and clarifying water. This machine
he took with him from Paris to Brussels, with the intention
of making a pecuniary speculation of his skill, but, strange
as it might appear, the police of that town mistook it for
an infernal machine, having reference to the opposite ele-
ment, and apprehended the owner as the diabolical agent of
conspirators against the throne of France. The inventor
of the improved plan of making muddy water bright was
then cast into prison, and his machine underwent examina-
tion, when it was proved that there was no sympathy what-
; ever between its powers and those which, by explosion,
dealt destruction around. After a confinement of two
months, the matter of accusation came on before the Court
of Appeal, and the supposed infernal agent was acquitted.
He was, however, soon after his acquittal, ordered on board
a vessel bound for England, and, without passport or cere-
mony of any kind, he was brought off to London, where he
was landed without money, or friends or acquaintances, and,
in fact, just as if-he had been dropped from the clouds.
The LORD MAYOR asked whether the machine was of
so complicated a kind as to be likely to be mistaken for
such an engine as would blow people to atoms ?—Monsieur
Alleaume said it was of simple construction, and, whatever
ignorant persons might hate supposed, could not have been
thought capable of doing mischief by men of any scientific
acquirements.
The LORD MAYOR—It was merely for clarifying water?
—Mr. Alleaume said it was most decidedly and palpably
for no other purpose.
The LORD MAYOR said that the circumstances just de-
tailed were extremely mysterious. He could not for the
life of him see how a machine made for filtering water could
on a sudden be converted into so terrific a species of fire-
arms, but he supposed it was by some infernal machine of
the kind " the Thames was set on fire."—(A laugh.) His
Lordship advised Mr. Alleaume to approach the King of
Belgium through the medium of his Majesty's Minister, and
respectfully represent the case. A better opportunity could
not be afforded than presented itself at the moment, when
his Majesty happened to be in the dominions of his niece, in
which he so long resided, and where the complaints of the
oppressed might reach him through the most pure channel
of communication.
The Frenchman, who is a young man of extremely mild
and unassuming manners, expressed himself in terms of the
warmest gratitude to the Lord Mayor and the lady who
introduced him to his Lordship, and stated that he should
follow the advice so benevolently given.