The Sun.
London, England, 1839-01-28 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY, JANUARY 28, 1839.

gave up those his favourite Ministers, but did not appoint the
Marshal himself, nor empower him to appoint colleagt;e:
his own choosing.
" All those facts are correct; we have had them from un-
questionable authority, and we pledge ourselves for their ac-
curacy, in spite of the denials of the three Ministerial
Journals—the Presse, Journal des Debuts, and Aroniteur
Parisien.

" Thus, up to the moment at which we are writing, no man
in France has been commissioned to construct a Cabinet, al-
though four days have elapsed since Ministers tendered their
resignation, and that, in the opinion of all political men, on no
former occasion during the last eight years were circumstances
so critical as at this moment. The Prussians and Dutch are
assembling on the frontiers of Belgium, and the Belgians
themselves are preparing to resist; and, in such a situation, we
have not even a Ministry in France I
" The Crown must look to itself. It is now alone, and in
the presence of the country called upon to accomplish its real
constitutional mission. Its own interest requires that it remain
not longer uncovered,' (to use the expressions of the draught
of the address.) Under Louis XVIII., the formation of a
Cabinet was the work of only two days; the mission of the
Prince was then confined, as it ought to be, to the selection of
the President of the Council, on whom devolved the choice of
the other members of the Administration. It was only towards
the latter end of the reign of Charles X. that the process for
the organization of Cabinets became more protracted ; but
then that Prince, who had his own secret designs, was anxious
to commit each department of the state to devoted instruments
of his will. The Royalty of July cannot and ought not to
wish a comparison to be drawn between it and the Government
of that period. Still it may be truly said that there is at this
moment no 'Erecting- power in France. The evil is serious ;
in the Chamber every one is struck with it ; if the crisis last
until then, we shall not wonder if it give rise to a Parlamentary
discussion in the first days of next week."

BOURSE-PARIS, SATURDAY, JAN. 26.

First Highest 1 owf st Last
-- • •

I'rice. Price. Price. Price.
French 5 per Cents

4 per Cents.

... I

2 p.:r Cents.
Bank of France 269.5 ...2630 —.2625 ...2690
Belgian 5 per Cents.
3 per Cents. 65 9) ... 65 90 ... 65 90 ... 65 90
Bak O6B ... 560 ... 535 ... 525
Spanish Active
Passive 4% ... 4% ... 4% ... 4%
Roman
EXCHANGE ON LONDON..

One month. paper, —f —c,, money, 25f 7V. ; three months, paper,
21f. V21,2c., money, 24f. 90c.
BELGIAN I. UNDS—BaussELs, JAN. 26.
•
actual Debt, lN per Cent.
Itothschild's Loan, 5 per Cent. 9l)
Loan of Thirty Millions, 4 per Cent 87%
3 per Cent. 67
Lean of City, 1832, 4 per Cent —
Society of Commerce, 4y; per Cent ll5
Bank of Belgium, 5 per Cent 6O
National Society .
—Brussels Papers, Jan. 26.
AUSTRIAN FUNDS.—VIENNA, JAN.IB.
Five per Cents. Metalliques
'rotor per Cents.
Three per Cents.
Bank Shares .. 1492
•—,lllgemeineZeilung, Jan. •43.

Advices from Madrid of the 19th inst. inclusive
have reached us this morning. Rumours were in cir-
culation of a new loan being projected, to be raised in
London and Paris. We trust that our countrymen
have had enough of Spanish loans to render it un-
necessary for the Press to put them upon their guard
against being again bubbled by a Government noto-
riously proverbial for its bad faith. But to put the
unwary upon their guard, we shall anticipate the arri-
val of the scheming projector now on his road to Lon-
don, by the publication to-morrow, or the day follow-
ing, of a few strictures on the Spanish system of Loan-
contracting, in which we are materially assisted by a
clever pamphlet on this very subject just published by
RIDGWAY.

According to the Eco del Commercio, the advan-
tages in men and cannon, possessed by the QUEEN
over the PRETENDER at the commencement of the
current year, were 154,000 infantry, 8,500 cavalry,
and 48 pieces of artillery. But of what avail is
this overwhelming force, except to eat up and con-
sume the resources of the country ?
Three Carlists were shot at Seville on the 11th, for
attempting to escape from prison.

CABRERA having refused to hold any intercourse
with VAN HALEN, the Government has reluctantly
consented to the adoption of a system of reprisals.
England and France will surely not tolerate the car-
rying on of such an atrocious system of warfare in
the heart of Europe ? What England could not be
driven to tolerate to save the lives of her own subjects
in the maddest period of the French revolutionary
war, she will surely not suffer:to exist in Spain in the
middle of the 19th century.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

THE QUEEN V. VIRRIER.

The defendant in this case who was convicted, during the
last Middlesex Sittings, of perjure, crisiti„.7 out of the evidence
given by her before the Bristol Election Committee, was this
morning brought up for judgment.
Mr. Serjesnt STEPHEN said he had a motion to submit in
arrest of judgment. He sought to arrest judgment on certain
objections relating to the verdict, and also on objections founded
on the indictment itself. There were three assignments of
perjury in the indictment, alleged to have taken place on the
6th July, but the indictment did not charge that the alleged
conversation did not take place on any other occasion, and it
was only charged by inuendo. His objection was this—that
there was no allegation in the indictment, that the words, in
respect of which the perjury was alleged, referred, or were
spoken of and concerning the occasion when Mr. Berkeley,
Mr. Carlisle, and others called, or they were alleged to have
called ; and this was material, because perjury was not as-
signed except in respect of that particular occasion. If the
indictment had contained a general allegation, not only that no
sovereign was put into her hand on that occasion, but on no
other, it would have excluded this objection. If Mr. Berkeley
and his friends had called twice, there would be nothing in the
indictment. This objection to the verdict was, that there was
no finding on the third assignment of perjury, that it ►bad been
inferred that the Jury meant to find them guilty on that
assignment, and that the Learned Judge who tried the
cause, had, in fact, upon an application to him completely
altered the finding that the Jury came to under the impression
that they meant to find the contrary of what they had done.
The Court granted a rule on both points.
THE QUEEN V. THE MAYOR OF HYTIIE.
In this case a rule had been granted calling on the Mayor
of the Borough of Hytlie, in Kent, to show cause why the
name of six persons should not be placed on the burgess
roll, they having been expunged by the Mayor and assessors;
and also why the name of four others should not be put upon
the list, who were not on the original list, but had sent in
their claims. _

Mr. MANNING (in the absence of the ATTORNEY- GENZRAL,
who was engaged in the case of the Canadians in the Ex-
chequer), showed cause against the rule in the case of a person
named \Vni. Brown.
Mr. THESIGER was heard in support of the rule.
Mr. MANNING afterwards proceeded to show cause in the
other cases, and after the arguments had been conclud,d,
Judgment was deferred.

TIIE CANADIAN PRISONERS.

EXCHEQUER COURT-(THIS DAY.)

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the returns to the writs of
habeas corpus ordered by the Court on Friday had been made,
and he moved that they be read.
The return was then read by the Master ; it was a copy of
that made to the Queen's Bench.
Mr. HILL then said it was his duty to move for the discharge
of the prisoners upon the ground of an insufficiency of the re-
turn; his motion of courae would be, that the return he
quashed. He had seen some complaints that the prisoners
were not contented with the adjudication of one Court, but he
apprehended that the law allowed them to appeal to every
Court in Westminster Hall. Whether it would be necessary
or expedient to appeal to any other, rested with the prisoners
and their advisers. In this money-making- country a question
of time had been raised ; but in the case of Small v. Att-
wood, Lord Lyndhurst, in giving judgment, said it bad occu•
pied the
.Court 100 days—there was no question of public
principle in tnat case—there was no question of any kind
affecting the public, yet there was no one to say that it bad
wasted tho public time. In the case before the Court,
there was a great question of principle. In the case of B.
Cropley, which was first taken before the King's Bench, then
to the Common Pleas, and finally to the Exchequer, there
was no complaint of a waste of time. Yet the question in
the present case was not of less consequence than that one.
The case before their Lordships was founded upon the Ist
Victoria, chap. 10, an Act of the Provincial Legislature 9f
Upper Canada, by which it was contended by his Learned
Friends, the Governor of that province had power to pass a
sentence of transportation for life upon a pat ty who had never
been tried. That law was repugnant to the laws of England,
and ought to
have no force. In this country no one could be
transported without having bad a trial—no one could be sent in-
to exile without having seen the face of a Judge. His Learned
Friends would be obliged to contend that the Governor who
was acting under her Majesty's commission, had more power
there than her Majesty had in this country. He would ask
what power the Legislativ, Council of Upper Canada had to
pass such an Act. If the Court were to hold that they
had such a power, where was it to stop ? Had they the
power under any Act of the Parliament of England to make
any such laws ?—had they any power to trench upon the pre-
rogative of the Crown ? If they had such a power, where
was the limit ? Would they make the Colony independent
The whole act was an usurpation upon the prerogative of the
Crown.
Lord ABINGER—The law would have no effect if within two
years the Queen had signified her dissent to it.
Mr. HILL said that was to, but the two years had not yet