The Sun.
London, England, 1830-04-12 00:00:00

f., by Alorisco—lna.

Mr. Thornhill's Captive, by Cervantes... Shoveler.

c , by Sam—Morel.
Lord Seitoli's c., by Emilius—Sal.
Mr. Nowell's f., by Orville—Rosanne.
b. f., by Bustard—Bequest.
Lord Jersey's f., by Comus—Cobweb.
f., by Tramp—Filigree.
Mr. Charlton's b. c., by Master Henry.
Mr. Rush's b. c., by Moses—Reserve.
c., by Moses—Romp.
Duke of Rutland's f., by Middleton—sister to Adeliza,
Lord Exeter's Mamor', by Sultan.
Red Rover, by Middleton.
Sweepstakes of 200 sous. each. N.M.
Duke of Grafton's Gondolier, by Merlin—Coquette.
Duke of Richmond's Aranda, by Figaro—Loo.
Lord Exeter's c., by Sultan—Augusta.
Lord Sefton's Mouche.
Lord Verulam's f., by Whalebone—Venom.

MATCHES.
200, D.M.—Captain Arthur agst Prodigy, by Woful.
200, B.lll.—Acacia agst Merman, Bst. 71b. each.
200, R.M.—Coroner, Bst. '7lb. agst Felt, Bst. 21b.
150, D.M.—Sontag, Bst. 121 b. agst Coulon, Bst. 21b.
200, A.F.—Lucetta, Bst. 71b. agst Clotilde, Bst. 31b.
100, First half of Ab3l.—Canary agst Jungfrau, Sat.
41b. each.

Half past Eleven at Night.
The field for the Ridillesriorth is not expected to include
more than five horses, of which we give the names:—
Duke of Grafton's Brambilla (J. Day rider).
Lord Exeter's Malimoud (either Dockeray or Armin).
Mr Chifney's Cressida colt (S. Chifney).
Lord Sefton's Sal colt (either Robinson or G. Edwards).
Lord Anson's Zillah.

Mr•. Thornhill's Captive and Lord Jersey's Cobweb re
main in. The betting is thus:-
7 to 4 agst Cressida (taken).
4 to 1 agst Brambilla (taken).
7 to 2 agst Mahmoud.
9 to 1 agst Sal.
10 to 1 agst Cobweb.

Lord Verolam's-Venom filly has paid for:the 200 sovs.
stakes to-morrow, and Lord Itanelagh's Sontag pays 60
sovs. forfeit in the match against Lord Worcester's Coulon.

CRAVEN STAKES.
Zinganee is the favourite.

WRESTLING.

On Friday the annual competition in wrestling by natives
of the counties of Westmoreland and Cumberland took
place in the ground attached to the Eyre Arms tavern,
St. John's-wood road. On the present occasion no indi-
vidual of great celebrity was on the list of competitors, but
the wrestling was, perhaps, on that account more uniformly
interesting than at former periods. When the Grahams,
the Goldings, and the Dobsons have been competitors, the
spectators felt confident of their success, and felt but little
interest in the exertions of men of less fame, and it was only
when the expected champion entered the lists that their
attention was aroused and fixed. It would be tedious to
enter into minute details respecting the wrestling on Friday.
Suffice to say that out of the competitors for the first class
of prizes three men retnained standing, namely, Thomas
Thwaites, of Brough-hill-end, near Appleby; John Dixon,
from the neighbourhood of Wigton, in Cumberland ; and
Timothy Dobson, from Bolton, near Appleby. Thwaites
and Dixon were appointed to wrestle together, and the
victor was afterwards to compete with Dobson ; but as the
latter had hurt himself severely, it was almost certain that
lie could not again exert himself effectually, and therefore
the wrestle between Thwaites and Dixon was looked upon
as decisive of the championship, and of course excited much
interest. They are both fine young men, about 19 years
of age. After a long trial of skill, in which both wrestlers
displayed all the resources of their art, a fall took place.
It appeared to, be the opinion of the spectators generally,
as we know it was of some excellent judges of wrestling,
that Thwaites had won the fall, and his supposed triumph
was hailed with acclamations. Dixon, however, alleged
the fall to be a " dog-fall,"—that is to say, a fall in which
both wrestlers come to the ground together, in which case
the parties wrestle again. After a long consultation, the
umpires decided that a fresh wrestle sould take place.
Thwaites was confident of success, and willingly acceded
to the proposition ; but, after a severe struggle, he was
very cleanly thrown by Dixon. Dixon then wrestled with
Dobson, whom, as was anticipated, he threw with the
utmost ease, and thus became entitled to the first prize, a
handsome silver cup, of the value of about 201. Poor
Thwaites appeared at first much mortified at having the
laurels which he thought he had fairly won torn from his
brow ; but he soon rallied, and congratulated Dixon on his
success. Dobson obtained the second prize of the first
class, Thwaites the third, and Henry Mossop, of Appleby,
,the fourth. These prizes were richly chased silver snuff-
boxes. The first prize of the second &ass was won by
William Fawcett, of Westmoreland ; the second by John
Atkinson, of Westmoreland ; the third by Thomas Bird, of
Westmoreland ; the fourth by Joshua Stamper, of Cumber-
land ; and the fifth by John Ellwood, of Westmoreland. John
11:ckwith, of Brough, obtained the youths'. prize. The
whole proceedings were conducted with perfect good order.

STEEPLE CHASE IN FRANCE.
The second Steeple Chase ever ran in France took place
on Tuesday, and although the small number of competitors
(only four), promised less sport than the last, it was on
the whole an excellent race. The horses entered were as
follows :

Capt. Locke's Robins Tiptoes, rode by the owner.
The Prince de Li Moscwa's gr. g., rode by M. Nor-
mandie.

Mr. Allois' brown horse, rode by the owner.
Mr. Cauty's b. m. rode by the owner.
The ground, which was chosen by the Duke de Guiche
and M. Standish, was naturally difficult, and had been
rendered very heavy by the late rains. It extended from
the Porte de Jouy to Bievre. When the word was given,
the horses went off at a great pace, Capt. Locke taking
the lead, and clearing his leaps in capital style, by which
means he had, at a very early stage of the race, beaded
his competitors by a quarter of a toile- The route lay
down the valley and through the town of July; arrived
at which, Capt. Locke, being ignorant of the winning
point, was obliged to pull up and enquire. Strange to
say, he took Mr. Allois for a spectator, (all the riders and
many of the amateurs present being dressed in scarlet)
and thus lost considerable time. Mr. Allois availing him-
self of
stohoen circumstance, passed
itphashseidm,Capt Locke, who, how-
ever,took place, which was terminatedwhbeyn
3 a
ir. severe. Allois
ini tr
s bu
thrown on his head into a bog. Thenceforward Captain
Locke had it all to himself, and arriving at the last fence
sgigolge
cleared it as cieserly as any of those at the commencement
of the race, and was declared the winner ; thus recover-
li
on
sg t o his fame
n the
as a
former
occasion n t n
Nom horseman,and whichet.Li he h
e i
ll ttd
se-
cond, Mr. Allois third, and Mr. Canty fourth. The cold
state of the weather prevented the attendance of numerous
spectators ; still a vast deal of interest was excited by it,
which was kept up to the last moment by the skill ar.d
courage of the riders, and the s'rength and fleetness of the
horses. —French Paper.

SPIRIT OF THE OUtltallitißNALS.
The Dublin Papers inform us that another Assr.
,ciation has been hatched; and is now on,the point
of breaking forth. A full report of a public meet-
ing, which assumed the name of " Friends of Ire-
land, of all religious denominations," is contained in
the Freeman's Journal of last Wednesday, but is
much too long for insertion here. Perhaps there
are many who would feel themselves justified in
forming their opinion of the objects really enter-
tained by such a society from any other source
than its professions. They would look to its
authors, their names, and history, and take no
further trouble. We do not deem such a key to
truth in all circumstances fair or necessary;
least of all so, when there is enough to direct
us towards a decisive and safe conclusion in
those purposes which are avowed on the face of
the proceedings, either in the structure of the asso-
ciation itself, or in the discourses of its leaders.
Acknowledging, as we do freely, that in the objects
enumerated by the report to which has been affixed
the signature of Daniel O'Connell, there are some
for which every honest man who knows and feels
the state of Ireland, might conscientiously co-operate
by lawful means with those of his fellow-citizens,
whose integrity and good sense he could confide In,
—we say, as frankly, that the attempt to reach
them through the medium of a permanent and or-
ganized, but unlimited, body, working by subscrip-
tions, public meetings, speeches, resolutions, and
other engines of political disturbance,—to fore?,
not one, but an indefinite series of enacting or ab-
rogating laws upon the Legislature of the realm,—
is, in its operation, so audacious a defiance of the
law, and in principle so utterly subversive of the
Constitution, that it must be put down at once.
The Catholic Association was not put down, although
it was in fact an opposition Parliament. But its
redeeming quality was the defined, and single, and
admirable object, which alone is professed and aimed
at. Had the emancipation-associators, like the
new omnibus-associators, avowed that they were
instituted for the accomplishment of 25 measures of
high state policy, leaving in the background God
knows how many others, but combining a whole
code of laws, many of them in their nature funda-
mental, and two or three at least, directly or indi-
rectly, destructive of the present frame of Parlia-
ment and of the empire, we doubt whether they
would have been permitted to exist a week; and
hs tai rvee wb
ee
eanr ea thatlt
ge
ttihei r
mr existence,
incompatible as a body,
ith that
oso
ft
at',
yd
constituted authority. There are legitimate modes
of approaching the Legislature,. and of producing a
strong power of opinion in this country, without
converting one-third of the United Kingdom into
a political club, whose designs are so artfully
sketched arid coloured, that a man may join
it fur one purpose, and find himself inveigled
into the promotion of numberless others.—
" I would not," says Mr. O'Connell, " have the
new society so modelled as to prevent others, who
might differ horn me on that point (viz. the repeal
of the Union), from joining us in the struggle for
Ireland's regeneration !" What, then, is Ireland's
regeneration ? It is evident that under this sounding
phrase, any thing or every thing may be compre-
hended, which to Mr. O'Connell may appear, how-
ever unattainable as a real good, convenient as a
pretence for keeping up the Omnibus-Association.
The very vagueness, therefore, of the language em-
ployed serves, in some sort, as a provision for per-
petuating this new instrument of disquiet ; since
there is no single measure, nor any catalogue of
them, nor any degree of national wealth, prosperity,
or enjoyment, the realizing of which can ever be
affirmed beyond the chance of denial on the part of
some dexterous agitator, to complete the " regene-
ration" of the country. With regard to the
class of measures which are declared indispen-
sable to that great end, we shall merely add,
that an abundant supply of fuel has been laid
for keeping Ireland in everlasting combustion.
The repeal of the Sub-letting Act,—an Act which,
in its principle, is one of the most salutary that ever
was passed by Parliament,—is, it seems, a sine qua
non to the " regeneration." A radical reform of
Parliament, on the nature and terms of which no
ten men in England or Ireland are agreed is another !
The repeal of the Union ! a third. Until the above
points are carried, therefore, we must submit to see
Ireland another field of endless and intolerable
speech-making. We have admitted, and we repeat,
that by far the larger portion of the measures osten-
sibly recommended by the new society, deserve
support from all well-wishers of Ireland. But they
never will be attained to through such an instru-
ment; and if they could, it would be preferable to
break up, at all events, a club so full of evil ten-
dencies as this (however plsusible and smooth-
tongued) association.—Times.
We recommend to all advocates for the preser-
vation of the sanguinary principles of our Criminal
Code the perusal of the following sentiments con-
tained in the statute of 1 Mary, sec. I, cap. 1,
" The state of every king consists, more assuredly,
in the love of the subject towards their Prince, than
in the dread of laws made with rigorous pains ; and
that laws made for the preservation of the Com-
monwealth, without great penalties, are more often
obeyed and kept than laws made with extreme
punishments." This passage, which deserves to be
recorded in letters of gold, and to be conspicuously
suspended on the walls of Parliament for the in-
struction and admonition of our law-givers, was the
production of an age, when, ist the. opinion of our
modern " philosophers," the " march of intellect"
had riot begun, and of a reign that is stigmatised
in history. " Happy had it been for the nation,"
says an able writer on the laws of England," if the'
subsequent, in matters of religion, had been cor-
respondent to those sentiments of herself and Par-
liament in matters of State and Csovertiment."
Happy would it have been for the nation, we say,
if our legislators had always kept those sentiments
in view, and, in matters of penal enactment, had
never deviated from the spirit of them ! Then
would a vast number of vindictive and merciless
statutes, which have since disgraced the character
and tarnished the civilization of England, never
have been passed. Then should we never have
heard of forgery being visited with the punishment
of murder; for all the statutes, numerous as they are,
which make that offence a capital crime, have
been enacted since the time those just and 4u.
mane sentiments went forth to the world with
the concurrent sanction of Parliament and the
Throne ! It is well observed by Mr. Justice
Blackstone, that " sanguinary laws are a bad
symptom of the distemper of any State, or, at least,
of its weak Constitution." The laws of the Roman
Kings and the twelve tables of the Decemviri were
full of cruel punishments; the Porcian law, which
exempted all citizens from the punishment of death,
silently abrogated them all. In this period the Re-
public flourished. Under the Emperors, severe
punishments were revived, and then the empire fell.
How unlike was this bold and effective improve-
ment of the Porcian law to Mr. Peel's plan of
" legal reform"—who demands credit for a prudent
and wise circumspection, while he is only acting
upon that weak and narrow-minded policy which
will not dare to effect any thing of substantial im-
provement, until he receives the ;commands of a
superior, or is forced upon the task by the irresis-
tible power of public opinion. A writer in a Morning
Paper, peculiarly prone to offer up to Ministers the
incense of adulation, says " the great and distin-
guishing merit of the system upon which Mr.
Secretary Peel proceeds in his laudable at-
tempts to impart to the criminal law of England
greater mildness and certainty, and thus to ren-
der it at once more congenial to the feelings of the
community, and a more efficacious instrument for
the repression of crime, is that of wariness and cir-

_ -
cunthiection; he will hazard no rash experiments—
he will not expose himself in any instance to the
ri,lt of failure." Here we are pompously enough
told of the negative qualities of Mr. Peel as a legis.
lator. It does not, however, require any oracular
authority to tell u 3 what Mr. Peal has not done in

the tense- oflegal reform—we want to krtow
he has done. " lie will hazard no rash experi-
ments." No, his rash experiments, as a Stistesman,
were limited to the currency question and one or
two other topics, which we shall not further allude
to at present, lest it might be supposed we wished
to entangle the question of legal reform with poli-
tical considerations. We only make this allusion to
show that the extreme reluctance which Mr. Peel
has evinced to do any thing really effective towards
the improvement of the law, is not to he ac-
counted for either by his prudential temperament
or legislative wisdom. A better reason is to be
found in his want of the energetic and comprehen-
sive intellect of a true Statesman. It is worth ob-
serving how the panegyrists of Mr. t'eel confine
themselves to vague and general declamation re-
specting his " amendment" of the criminal law; they
will not enter into particulars.. We gave the other day
a sketch of what the merits of his boasted acts are.
We showed that besides the consolidation of some
of the multifarious provisions of our Penal Law, and
the correction of some obvious technical defects of
form, be has absolutely done nothing ; and that, in
fact, he allowed the Criminal Code to go out of his
hands more sanguinary and barbarous than that of
any State of Europe. Let his admirers refute this
if they can ; and if they cannot what right have they
to talk of his attempts, to impart greater mildness to
the Criminal Law ? The same writer again says
" the Bill now before Parliament to consdlidate and
amend the law relating to the crime of forgery,
illustrates in a very striking manner that cautious-
ness which we esteem as the most necessary of all
qualifications in a reformer of the law, as well as the
principles and temper of those who are impatient of
slow and gradual change, and would impart to the
progress of reform all the velocity of their own
fancies and deduction ; we confess we cannot un-
derstand what connection there is between the latter
part of this sentence and the former, inasmuch as we
cannot conceive how the same Bill can at once
illustrate the caution of the Right Hon. Secretary
and the impatience of another class of persons from
whom he so widely differs. We admit, however,
the ctintiousness displayed by the Bill ; but we
think its uselessness is nearly as apparent. The
Right Hon. Secretary is so very circumspect
that he does not dare to abolish the punishment
of death, in any of those cases in which it is usual
to carry it into execution. Yet public opinion—the
enlightened opinion of the country, is altogether
against the infliction of death for forgery in any case,
and he, who as a statesman ought in some measure
to lead public opinion, is absolutely afraid to follow
it. Perhaps, when the Duke of Wellington has
made up his mind to abolish capital punishment for
forgery, Mr. Peel may think he " hazards no rash
experiment" by adopting the same opinion. When
the supporters of the law as it is have been unable
to defend their position on any ground of reason,
public policy, or sound jurisprudence, their last and
desperate refuge in argument has been the " com-
mercial interests," and particularly the banking inte-
rests; but even that argument now faiis them, the
statements contained in several petitions lately pre-
sented to Parliament on the subject, signed as seve-
ral of those petitions were by a large proportion of
bankers, are conclusive on the subject, seeing that,
at the same time, riot a single petition of a contrary
tendency has been presented. Then look at the
statement made by Mr. F. Buxton the other night,
relative to the opinions of bankers on this question,.
and let any. one who reads that statement deny, if he
can, that the time has arrived when, if those states-
men who have it in their power to abolish the
punishment of death for forgery neglect to do it,
they will be deeply responsitle for whatever blood
Wray be shed hereafter under the operation of this
impolitic, unchristian, and inhuman law.—Morning
Herald.

We noticed- on Monday last a pamphlet on the
subject of the projected Law Reforms in Scotland,
by Mr. Douglas, of Glasgow, the purport of which
was to show that they were of no great consequence
—at all events, far from answering the expectations
of the people. We have given in another column
an extract from the Scotsman, characterising the
so-called Reforms as having a tendency to render
justice more inaccessible than it is at present, and to
exclude a great portion of the community from its
benefit. According to the Scotsman, a curious re-
volution has taken place in Scotland respecting Jury
Trials. Before the Scotch had any experience of
them, they were unpopular with professional
wen, and popular with the rest of the community.
Now, it seems, they are in bad odour with the
people, and only acceptable to lawyers. The people,
it is said, consider them a sort of legal gambling,
and bate them for their expensiveness. Where a
,people have been always accustomed to Jury Trials,
they bear with them as with other practices to
which habit has reconciled them. People become
reconciled to every thing. The Swiss, for any thing
we know, may think a neck without a goitre a de-
formity. The wonder is not that the Scotch should
dislike Juries after a trial, but that they shculd ever
have been persuaded to have them. A Jury
is supposed to be a sample of the people,
slot tt selection on account of abilities or sic-
quilemenis, Even a Special Jury is no other-
wise select than as the pecuniary qualification
raises a little the condition of the Jurors. Now,
how any twelve men, taken at hazard from a popu-
lation can arrive at as correct a conclusion respecting
evidence as a Judge, who is presumed to have had
a mental training, and to be able to weigh evidence,
we are at a logs to conceive. A Jury is in every
respect a most objectional tribunal. In the first
place, the unanimity in the English Courts is
either a minority yielding to the majority, or an ob-
stinate minority forcing a majority to yield to it.
Then allowing to the Jurors the possession of the
requisite skill to form a correct judgment respecting
evidence, and to be able to withstand tte sophistry
of Counsel, hardly any responsibility attaches to the
taunal. The twelve men withdraw to their homes,
where they are secure from reproach. On the other
hand, a Judge knows that he cannot escape the blame
of an erroneous or unjust decision, and this know-
ledge must operate as a powerful motive to induce
him to exert his faculties that he may decide as he
aught. That Judges should be enamoured of Juries
is sattural enough, for who is there who would not
wish to rid himself of responsibility ? Accordingly
at a very early period, the advantage of the Insti-
tifon in this respect, forced itself on the attention
of the English Yudges, We have a most instructive
passage on this point in that very delightful book,
Roper's Life of Sir Thomas More—
,' And as few injunctions," says Roper, " as he granted
while he was Lord Chancellor, yet were they by some of
the Judges of the law rnisliked ; which I understanding,
rleclared the seine unto Sir Thomas More. Who answered
me that they should have little cause to find fault with
bits therefore, and thereupon caused he one Master Crooke,
ashitl of the Six Clerks, to make a docket, containing the
whole number and causes of all such injunctions as either
its his time had already passed, or at that pre;ent depended
in any of the King's Courts at Westminster before him.
Which done, he invited all the Judges to dine with him
in the Council Chamber at Westminster ; where, after
skinner, when he had broken with them what complaints
flee hest heard of his injunctions, and moreover showed
them both the number and causes of every one of them,
iss order so plainly, that, upon full debating of these mat•
tern, they were all enforced to confess that they, in like
ease, would have done no otherwise themselves. Then
offered he this unto theist; that if the Justices of every
Court unto whom the reformation of the rigour of the law
J.iy reason of their office, most especially appertained,
would, upon reasonable considerations by their own dis-
ezetions, as they were as he thought in conscience bound,
mitigate and reform the rigour of the law themselves,
there should from thenceforth by him no more injunctions
be grani, Whereunto, when they refused to conde-
scend, then said he unto them, Forasmuch as yourselves
my Lords, drive me, to that necessity far awarding not in!
junetions to relieve the people's injury, you cannot here.
after soy more justly blame me.' After that, ke said „e_
eretly to nu perceive, son, why they like not so to
do. For they sea that they may, by the verdict of the
Jury, cast off all quarrels from themselves upon them,
'chick they account their chief defence; mid therefore am
compelled to abide the adventure of all such reports.' "
one great reason why Barristers in EnVand are

• so partial to Juries is, that ti 4 number of motions to
set aside verdicts presents them with an abundant
harvest of fees, without much additional labour. On
moving for a new trial, the facts of the case are
familiar, and a man used to speaking can always
argue plausibly on any case of which the facts ale
familiar to him, with more ease than he can make
himielf master of the facts in a new brief. How-
ever, in order that Jury-trials may have justice done
to them, an option should be given to parties to have
their causes tried by a Judge or by a Jury. This
has been suggested by Mr. Douglas, and the ex-
perience before the Assistant-Barristers' Court in
Ireland, proves that in that country good effects
follow from allowing such an option. It is true in
Ireland it seldom happens that the parties do not
prefer having their causes tried lay the Judge without
a Jury. In Scotland the same thing would happen.
Still there would be no harm in allowing those who
are charmed with the word Jury the advantage of
a trial by such a tribunal. At present in Scotland
the Jury Court is in bad odour with bona fide liti-
gants, and only acceptable to reckless and. desperate
suitors.—Morning Chronicle.
We suspect the infatuated Bourbons will ere long
deeply regret that they ever took lessons in the art
of Government from the Duke of Wellington.
Charles is an unfortunate name in history, and the
French Monarch seems desirous that so far as he is
concerned the fatality which atteeds it should be
continued. Had France possessed like slavish Eng-
land a rich aristocracy, whose limbs, and roots, and
branches are all closely and inseparably intertwined
with the briars and thorns of the taxes, there would
have been less to fear from the rising spirit or even
the clamour of the people. The lords of the aris-
tocracy hold the lands, their sons and brothers
hold official situations, and all are interested in
supporting the Minister, no matter who he is,.
whence he came, what he does, or what he con-
templates. In this source originates the power of
the Duke of Wellington. Unlike former Minis-
ters he has no son of the King, no Duke of York, no
independent man at the head of the army. The
patronage of the army consequently is exclusively his.
The Prelates are a timid, feeble, and divided body ;
consequently the church is at the mercy of the Duke.
The people have lost all confidence in their present
representatives—the majority of them have lost
every claim to character or consistency—they dread
a new election—consequently they fear him who
has degraded them, and, as they cannot vote with
their constituents from any hope of regaining
their confidence, they vote with the other party
in despair. In this way the English Premier holds
in leash a large portion of the aristocracy, the dig-
nitaries of the church, the whole of the army ex-
pectant, the needy part of the Whigs, a majority
of the Liberals on most questions, all the household
troops to a man, a few pluckless Tories, all the
Scotch serviles (who, if they cannot speak, can
vote), with one or two exceptions, and about se-
venty out of the hundred Irish Members who never
had any principles, or if they had would have sold
theta long ago. The Duke, therefore, so long as he
lives, or is suffered by his Sovereign to remain in
office, is in a condition to do with the country, the
church, the law, the taxes, and the liberties of the peo-
ple, just what he pleases. But Charles of France can
confer no such power on his Prime Minister. Ile has no
aristocracy having any more influence over public
opinion or the elections of the Chamber than a re-
spectable breeches-maker in the Petals Royale.
What the Duke of Wellington has done amid the
cheers of Parliament M. Polignac dares no more
attempt than he dares leap from -Napoleon's tri-
umphal column in the Place Vendome. Public
opinion is in France what aristocratic and Trea-
sury influence is in England. The middle classes
here are not represented in Parliament—their
petitions have no more effect on the Lower House
than would a red-hot poker if it were tossed
into the Thames. They cause a hiss, an expec-
toration, a scarcely-discernible evaporation, and the
sensation ceases. In this country there was a ma-
jority of the middle classes of about ten to one
against the Popish ascendancy bill, yet it was carried
triumphantly, the opposition was laughed to scorn,
and the petitions flung under the table by
a sinister-looking scribe in kid gloves, who was
fearful he would soil his fingers, and who turned
up his nose as he trampled upon the spoiled
parchment. But in France—and thank Heaven it
is so—things are exactly the reverse. Public opi-
nion is power. The middle classes think, and act,
and decide. They return the deputies, they des-
pise the courtier, they hate the priest, they have a
stake in the country, inasmuch as almost all of
them own some portion of land, which they divide
and subdivide among the breeches of their families,
so that no one need want who causes to work,
and that all may be as proud and more inde-
pendent than the highest Peer in the realm.—
Hence is it that France at this moment enjoys
more rational liberty, that her judges are more
pure, her law more cheap, her statesmen more
honest, and her patriots mose incorruptible, than
these persons and things are found to be in this
fallen country, or in any country in the world.
The French Monarch—the great Monarch we
shall not call him, for he is the puniest bigot in
Europe—he, however, committed a deplorable
blunder when he conceived he could rule France
by Polignac as England is ruled by Welling-
ton. Instead of seeking more exclusive power—
instead of aspiring to absolution—instead of bolster-
ing up the pretensions of an arrogant and dis-
gusting priesthood—instead of hunting, like Charles
the First, the poor " monarchical principle" to
death, he would, had he been a wise Prince, have
rather cultivated the reviving spirit and the consti-
tutional liberties of his people. Ile would thus
have based himself in the affections of a pseud and
great nation. He would thus have endeared him-
self to the highest and lowost of his subjects. The
strong would have been on his side—every sound
heart would have been with him, every honest
hand would have been raised in his defence. Ile
had only to chastise the insolence of his clergy—
expel from his dominions the execrable Jesuits—
seeder more perfect and more popular the municipal
rights of the citizen—encourage improvements long
deferred and much desired, and he would have been
the most popular and useful Sovereign in Europe.
But he had not courage—or rather we should
say he hed not sense to adopt a salutary policy.
Hence the murmurs that sigh among the orange-
trees. Hence the small black speck upon the
horizon which ushers in the storm. Charles
may not know it, but, alas ! it is true that every
night he sleeps upon combustibles. He is obsti-
nate—but the waves will not roll back at his com-
mand. He has resolved to pursue his own blind
and insane policy, and thus he has laid the train
which will fire his temple and accomplish his
ruin. His conduct is modelled after that of the
unfortunate Charles of Whitehall. He has con-
verted his best friends into open enemies.
The deputies are too strong for him—the elec-
tors have tasted freedom, and it is now too late
to drive them from the fountain. He has com-
mitted himself too much now to yield, and he
is too weak to have the slightest chance of success.
The dynasty of the Bourbons is on the brink of a
precipice, and the priests are ranged behind pushing
their imprudent and unhappy Sovereign into the
abyss. All eyes are, therefore, turned on France.
We in England are looking on with fearful interest.
Absolutism is in the one scale and public liberty in
the other. Intolerance is arrayed on ene side and
liberality and tolerance on the other. What we
have lost in England it is no wild hope to expect
to regain by the example of France. From
the bottom of our hearts we cheer the cham-
pions on. The expulsion of the Polignac Admi-
nissratiois would be a dreadful thrust under
the small ribs of the Wellington Ministry.—
Another revolution in France would be a death-
blow to Popery in every corner of Europe except
among the savage's of Ireland. The ascendancy and
the triumph of the middle classes in France would
have a refreshing and restorative effect on the hum-
bled, and devised,and and
mpled-upon yeomen of

England. A political earthquake on the other side
of the channel might produce a shock here among
the fundholders and tax-eaters. A little confusion
abroad would have a prodigious effect upon the
Doke of Wellington's twenty-eight millions cf
golden sovereigns, These potentates fly to where
mischief is with a marvellous instinct. They would
leave England with all the alacrity of Mr. Canning's
Portuguese armament. They would travel as ex-
peditiously as one of Mr. Rothschild's expresses.
They would leave the poor mother bank high and
dry and lackadaisical, much puzzled, and in a most
amusing consternation. They would drive the for-
lorn Mr. Goulburn out of his little senses. Well,
God be praised !—it will be a happy day when it
comes. If the Jew Bill be but deferred for a few
months we do not think any of the sons of Israel
will be much inclined to ask admission into Parlia-
ment, for few of them would be able to buy a bo-
rough.—Morning Journal.
Buonaparte exhibited a thorough knowledge of
life in his memorable assertion that " from the
subl.me to the ridiculous is but a step." Every
day's experience must confirm its truth to every
man of common observation. We would take a%
an instance the pathetic lamentation and the would-
be patriotism of the brewers at the prospect of Par-
liament at length opening the trade in beer. While
one tells us that they will lose nothing by the meat
sure, or that at all events the taking off the duty
will more than compensate them for any Icss,
another, with a world of public feeling, only laments
the change on account of the injury it will inflict
upon the public by the quantity of " deleterious
trash" which it will entail upon the beer-drinkers.
" We thank thee,Jew, for teaching us.that word."
Deleterious trash indeed ! Why what else is it that the
public has been drinking but the deleterious trash
with which you, by the aid of your monopoly, have
been poisoning them? If this is not confounding cause
with effect we know not what is. The real truth
is, you envy the nerves of the man who can deny it
that the mass of the community, both in town and
country, who have been unable to brew their own
beer, have been, in fact, driven to forego the natural
beverage of the country, owing to the drugged and
poisonous state to which it has been reduced by the
avarice of those who, taking advantage of what Sir
John Sebright rightly calls a mere police regulation,
have converted it into an engine of their own mere
selfish aggrandizement, aided, let it never be forgot-
ten, by the worse than connivance of the sworn
guardians of the public peace and morals. To the
breaking down, then, of this hateful and most inju-
rious monopoly we look forward with unalloyed and
extreme satisfaction. It is much the same in its
nature and description as if a river were restored
to its natural channel after having been dammed
out and diverted for ages. We should regret if
any legitimate interests were likely to be injured
by the measure, but which we firmly believe
will not be the case. The Licensed Victuallers arc
the class from whom complaints profess to proceed ;
but we much doubt whether the truly respectable
part of that respectable and much-injured and op-
pressed body really complain upon the occasion.
On the contrary, we feel assured that nothing is so
essential to their comfort, independence, and re-
spectability as to be freed from that thraldom of the
lords of the mash-tub under which so many of them
have so long laboured. Certainly there can be no
free trade in beer as long as the great brewers are
the owners or mortgagees of four-fifths of the pub-
lic•houses ; and hence the lamentable outcry at the
prospect of the brewers losing the capital they
have invested in these houses. If men embark
their capital where it ought never to have gone, the
loss of it will not occasion much commiseration.
The truth, however, is, that their capital is, for
the most part, safe enough. ['heir bonds, their
mortgages, their bills of sale, will secure that;
but the return for the capital in interest will, we
admit, become precarious unless secured on a solider
foundation than it has hitherto depended. Compe-
tition, instead of producing, will, we are convinced,
rid the public of " deleterious trash." Beer-drinkers
are not so absurd or tasteless as to buy poison if
they can procure a wholesome genuine article. The
publican with a rival, wherever it is worth while to
become one, will find it his interest to deal only in
that which people will buy and drink ; while the
brewer, no longer able to dispose of his " deleterious
trash," will find it his interest to send out a com-
modity fit to compete with that which the opening
of the trade will of necessity bring into the market.
These are some of the advantages which the public
may look forward to from this long-wished-for
change—a change which no honest man in the
trade or out of it can have any just reason to corn-
plain of, or fear its consequences.—Morning
Journal.

The more we examine the great question now in
agitation between the Legislature and the Licensed
Victuallers, on the one hand, and, on the other, be-
tween the latter and the country, the more we ate
persuaded that the proposed measure of a free trade
in beer is uncalled for by any existing necessity—
will prove most ruinous in its operation to the nu-
merous body whose interests are directly affected by
it—and most injurious both to the public morals
and to the public health. Had there existed a
paucity of licensed houses for the sale of beer, or
the: sale of beer become a monopoly in the hands
of one or two firms, the Legislature might very
properly have said, that the convenience and in-
terests s f the public demanded a change in the law;
but not only is there no paucity in the number of
public-houses on the one hand, but to such at, ex-
tent have they increased, as frequently to have been
the cause of grave complaints on the part both of
the public and of the magistracy ; while, on the
other, the sale of beer is not only not in the hands
of one or two firms, but of many,—between whom
there is as much competition as there would
be between a hundred, and whose immense
capital furnishes the surest guarantee of the article
being manufactured according to the express will
of the Legislature. Any one, in fact, who knows
any thing of the metropolis, must know, that instead
of there being a monopoly in the sale of beer, the
principle of competition in it has been carried to a
ruinous extent, and that any one can procure, within
thirty yards of his house, the beer of any firm
whatsoever. We assert, therefore, on the one hand,
that the proposed free trade in beer is wholly urine-,
cessary and uncalled for; and we will add, that it is
as unjust in principle, as it is certain to prove inju-
rious in practice. We say unjust in principle, be-
cause, in the first place, it is a direct invasion of pro-
perty acquired under the repeated ,sanction of the
Legislature, and, in the second, because there is no
provision in the proposed Bill for compensating
those who are to suffer by it. To prove the first
point would lie useless; for it is notorious to
every one that the present system, what-
ever be its merits, has not only grown up,
been mayf fostered, and sanctioned by the Legisla-
ture, but that on all occasions, the Legislature
and also the members of his Majesty's Government,
have embraced every opportunity of declaring that
no change should take place in it. Nay, so lately
as twelvetnonths ago Mr. Peel declared, in his place
in Parliament, that he never would consent to the
sale of beer being placed on the same footing as
the sale of tea, or any other commodity in general
use; while, with regard to the opinion of the Le-
gislature, the Bill brought in by Mr. Estcourt, and
afterwards passed into a law, was universally consi-
dered, both in and out of the House, to be the last
intermeddiing which would take place with the
matter. And what has been the consequence ?
Why that many persons, even since the passing of
that Act, have not only invested the whole of their
property in public houses, and which property is
now reduced to a mere name, but that by the pass-
ing of the Bill introduced by Mr. Calcraft, the pro-
perty of no fewer than 50,000 persons, and amount-
ing to upwards of 30,000,000/., will not only
be placed in jeopardy, but actually confiscated !
Had the Legislature, as we have already observed,
either given timely notice of its intentions—extended
the coining or the measure into operation, or accom-

panied it by a Bill of compensation, for the indemni-
fication of those who would suffer by it—there would
have been comparatively little to object to it; but
mark how different the proposed Bill is in this re-
spect from all other 13ills, and all other cases where
individuals are l'kely to suffer from the acts of the
Legislature ! If a patent office is to be abolished,
the patentee is invariably compensated—if a public
'mprovement is to be made, the property affected
by it is valued and paid for—nay, if two scions of
the Aristocracy have, even through ministerial fa-
vour, been displaced from lucrative, but, so far as
the public is concerned, useless situations—instance
Messrs. Dundas and Bathurst—why even they, poor
fellows, must be compensated:by handsome annuities,
until they can be otherwise provided for ? The Li-
censed Victuallers, however, have no friends at
Court, and on them, therefore, are the phials of de-
;truction to be poured forth, without justice or mercy.
Finally, with regard to the public, we have no
hesitation in averring, that it will not only be dis-
appointed in obtaining either a purer or a better
article, than it would do under a continuance of the
present system ; but that the adulteration of beer
will be carried to an extent never before heard of,
and a great injury inflicted on the morals of the
public. The present system affords every security
which could possibly be desired against both of
these evils :—the new measure none ; for its first
and most immediate effect will be to throw the trade
in beer into the hands of persons as destitute of
principle as of property, any utterly reckless of the
mode in which their houses may be conducted, or
the extent to which the health of the community
may be injured. We beg both the public and the
Legislature to pause and consider the effects of the
prOposed measure, before it be passed into a law.
There are ninny questions and considerations in-
volved in it, as well of justice as of policy, which
ought not to be decided without the greatest caution
and the most mature consideration.—Morn. Advt.

WESTMINSTER SESSIONS, APRIL 10.

LICENCE APPEALS.

KENNY V. THE REFUSAL OF THE HON. MR. BYNO,
Slit GEORGE lIA3IPSON, DR. PATTERSON, AND
MESSSRS ROWLES AND FITZGERALD.

This was an appeal on the part of Peter Kenny,
landlord of the Rodney's Head public-house, in
Robert-street, St. George's, Hanover-square, against
the refusal of the respondents, justices of the pence
for the city and liberties of Westminster, to renew
his licence for the current year.
Mr. ALLEY, on behalf of the appellant, said in the
present case the appellant had paid 1,200/., which
he had partly collected amongst his friends for the
lease and goodwill of his house, and the respondents
had thought proper, without assigning any reason
for their so doing, and without the shadow of com-
plaint against his conduct, wantonly to deprive him
of his little all, and blast his prospects in life, by
withholding his licence from him.
Two of the respondents, Dr. Patterson and Mr.
Fitzgerald, were on the bench, and occasionally
communicated with the learned Chairman; upon
which Mr. Alley objected very strongly to their
presence in that situation, and added that, perhaps,
as they were not much in the habit of attending
these Sessions, they would be glad to learn that at
this hour of the day there was always an excellent
lunch provided for the Magistrates in another room.
Mr. Fitzgerald very good humouredly took this
hint, and retired. The doctor kept his seat.
The learned CHAIRMAN was clearly of opinion
that in point of law the respondents hail the power
of refusing the license, supposing that in point of
fact they had grounds for so doing, which, in the
absence of any proof to the contrary, he was bound
to suppose they had.
Several witnesses then came forward, and proved
that although this house had formerly borne an ex•
ceptionable character, the present occupier, who
had been in possession of it a year and some months,
had done all in his power to make it a respectable
house by conducting it with exemplary regularity
and decorum.

The COURT declared the appellant entitled to his
license.

MILLAR V. THE SAME.-BARRON V. THE SAME.

These were appeals, under similar circumstances,
by the proprietors of the Duke of York, Union-
street, Bond-street, and the Pelham Arms, St.
George's-street, Hanover-square.
The COURT, after hearing the testimony of se-
veeral neighbours in support of the respective
characters of the houses,granted the license in each
case.