The Sun.
London, England, 1839-03-25 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

Sta,—Among the many curious arguments employed
in support of the Corn-laws, I have not seen any which
is more absurd than that used by Lord Maidstone on
Thursday last, in the House of Commons.
Having assumed that a fall in rent would be the
immediate consequence of a repeal of the Corn-laws,
he coolly tells us that landlords cannot afford any re-
duction whatsoever, because rents have fallen already
forty-five per cent. since the peace. Indeed, Mr. Edi-
tor ! rents fallen 45 per cent. ! Wonderful discovery,
we must own, provided it be true. But I doubt the
truth thereof ; because, previous to falling to 45 per
cent., rents had risen 100 per cent., that is, had been
doubled. Consequently, after a reduction of 45 per
cent., as stated by Lord Maidstone, there will still re-
main a permanent increase of rent to the extent of 55
per cent. Now, add to that great increase the further
relief from the abolition of th property-tax, as well as
the reduction in the prices of many articles of necessity,
and the landowner will seem to be upwards of 70 per
cent. better off than formerly. So much then for the
logic and the knowledge of this very hopeful heir to an
Earldom ; and if hereditary Senatorship has always
generated a like progeny to this enlightened scion of an
ennobled house, we may cease to marvel at the daily
reproach cast upon a certain Right Hon. Assembly for
its lack of political wisdom.
I am ready to admit, Mr. Editor, that where a land-
owner has to pay charges and annuities fixed upon his
estate during the time of the highest rents of land, he is
to be pitied. Such we have been told is his own case,
by another luminous speaker on Thursday last, Sir
James Graham, who published the matter in print not
many years ago. He then advocated very strongly the
seizure of a portion of the funded debt, in order to in-
demnify himself and all other persons in a like difficulty,
because their fathers had been so inconsiderate as to
die at a wrong moment for their children. When in
office as a Cabinet Minister of William IV., why did
not the worthy Baronet follow up his own honest pro-
posal of docking the fundholder for the benefit of the
landowner ? Were his colleagues too thick-headed to
comprehend the strict justice of the plan, or were they
more honest than him ? For myself, as a plain south
countryman, I shall not pretend to follow an astute
north countryman through the various mazes which his
ingenuity would lead me, were I to commit myself to
his guidance. But, unquestionably, Mr. Editor, now

or ,ever is the time for the Cumberland Senator to

bring forward his notable plan, once proposed, of
making me and others in the south repair out of
our fortunes the stupid blunder committed by the
man who left him his estate in the North.

The landowners must inevitably losesomething when
the Corn-laws are altered ; and a cunning person like
the worthy Baronet would act wisely by having broached
his financial remedy for the landed interest, before the
evil day shall arrive. For, if he defer mentioning it till
the evil has come, Parliament will be taken too much
by surprise to understand it off-hand. I would recom-
mend, therefore, that the two wise men of whom I have
spoken in this letter should confer together, and each
give his aid to the other. The Noble Lord may begin
by insisting upon keeping up the seventy per cent ad-
vance in rent ; and the Right Honourable Baronet can
finish by pointing out a fair and honest way of doing it.
I have the honour to subscribe myself, Mr. Editor,
your most obedient servant,
Q IN THE CORNER,
Margate, March 17. 1839.:

HOW TO SETTLE “ THE BOUN

DART QUESTION."

(From the Spectator.)
The disorderly proceedings of the State of Maine
are said to furnish proof of the peculiar weakness
of the United States Executive. Then, what is
proved by the disorganized state of the Canadas ?
Is the British Executive peculiarly weak ? It is
so in the Canadas ; it must be so anywhere but at
home. And this answer points to the true cause of
the weakness of the American Executive. Demo-
cracy is not the cause, but Federation. The Im-
perial Government of England is miserably ineffi-
cient in so far as it is Imperial or Federative—wit-
ness the state not of the Canadas only, but, more
or less, of every British colony where the people
are sufficiently numerous to have any will of their
ei 3
aofan i
fcbi
col averting
.1:: 1 r
own. Viewing the Imperial system of England a
a great federation comprising the Colonies as wel
as these Islands, which Federal Executive is
the less efficient—that of the United States in
Maine, or that of England in the rebellious Ca-
nadas, and scarcely more manageable colonies of
Jamaica and South Africa ? The Supreme Execu-
tive of the United States, defectively operating in
any State of the Union, appears to advantage when
compared with that of England, set at naught, or
productive only of mischief, in her distant colonies.
We have made the comparison merely for the pur-
pose of illustrating an important truth. The Federal
system of the United States—every federal system
of the government—is necessarily wanting in exe-
cutive power. Federation is nut a principle
that wise statesmen would adopt in construct-
ing a government from the foundation : it is
but an experiment for so far uniting a number of in-
dependent States, as to prevent war amongst them-
selves, and for constituting a league against common
enemies. Every federation is rather a congress than
a government. Such is, in form as well as in fact,
the American Union ; such is, in fact, though not
in form, the whole British Empire. The State of
Maine and the Province of New Brunswick have in
some respects interests totally separate from those of
the empire of which each respectively forms a
part. What conceivable interest have the people of
the United Kingdom, or of other parts of the
British empire, such as Bengal or Jamaica, in the
present subject of dispute between New Brunswick
and Maine ? Of what importance is it to any
State of the American Union, except Maine, whether
the disputed territory form part of Maine or
of New Brunswick ? The answer is, that the
whole British Empire except New Brunswick, and
the whole American Union except Maine, can nei-
ther gain nor lOse anything by any mode of settle-
ment,iteuio,
which,tTeioriErtl
eini i
ad, butgit
agilso:w,tintlahaadtriaree Issw with:euafa l
rthert
ea.l
,s
eEcDldrvaeiaerii
scarcely
England
waloeywni
is:to(
less
leuti
slill ilsd.Ateoefubmrroleuerdesmi
America.
ii
cdiuephgeou upon
envtohiael
the
evils
\V
cottonh a t-
muaniiituefdactsutraet,estb,evoruulidn
porfodcoototoongcouoletrha'al tiosnoffienrintlgie.
It would be a great mistake to suppose that
tlieSo
of cotton. TheuthernStatesalone
great are interested
marketrestedin
the
cultivation of
the North-western States for their surplus pro-
duce is the cotton-growing States of the
South. The North-eastern States are the
carriers of the exportable produce of the . South,
and they also own a good part of the capital in-
vested in Southern cultivation. It has been said,
and we believe with truth, that if the abolition of
slavery, or any other cause, should put a stop to
the cultivation of sugar, tobacco, and cotton in the
Southern States, grass would grow in the streets of
Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New Yolk. Besides
this great interest in preserving peace with Eng-
land, all the States of the Union, and especially
those of the North and West, are deeply concerned in
maintaining that vast stream of capital and labour
which now flows continually from Britain to
America. Thirty millions sterling, at least, of
British capital are supposed to have been recently
invested in public works in America ; and none
know better than the Americans, that their great
public works now in progress would be as
effectually stopped if Irish immigration should
cease, as-the mills of Lancashire by a want of raw
cotton. A civil war, as we termed it last week,
between these kindred and mutually-dependent na-
tions, would be equally injurious to both of them.
Is it, then, possible to believe, that they will go to
war about the miserable boundary question between
New Brunswick and Maine ? Every consideration
of mutual interest inclines both nations to peace.
A suggestion has been made by influential per-
sons both in the British Colony and the Ame-
rican State. They propose that the whole question
should be referred to Commissioners appointed by
both the Local Legislatures ; both the National
Governments declaring that there should be no
fighting, and that the dispute should remain un-
settled until settled by the Commissioners so ap-
pointed. If Lord Melbourne's Government had
half the sense and vigour of Mr. Van Buren's, this
suggestion would not be neglected.

THE THEATRE FRANCAIS.—This Theatre,
of which Mademoiselle Rachel is now the greatest orna.
ment, is the private property of the d'Orleans family, to
whom the sum of 320,0001. was due for arrears of rent.
Louis Philippe has just remitted this debt, and reduced
the rent from 62,000 f. to 50,000 f.
SHEEP WORRYING.—We are sorry to say that
the canine villains have again commenced their destructive
work. On Sunday night last nine sheep were worried in
a field belonging to K. Greenway, Esq., adjoining the
race.course, one of which was found dead and half eaten,
six others have since been slaughtered, and the remaining
.two, it is thought, will recover. A piece of chain below,'_
mg to a dog's collar was found in the field, but nothing
further has been discovered.—Warwickshire Reporter.