The Sun.
London, England, 1838-02-23 00:00:00

An interesting discussion arose in the House of Lords
last night, on the presentation of numerous Anti-Slavery
petitions by Lord BROUGHAM, to which we direct the
attention of our readers. Want of space prevents us to-
day from dwelling upon it at greater length, than merely to
observe, that the readiness with which the Duke of WEL-
LINGTON and Lord ELLENBOitOUGH have united with the
Noble and Learned Lord upon this question, is most
creditable to them.

In the House of Commons last night, Mr. PLC siPTnE
brought is a Bill for the Better Obser►ance of the Sab-
bath. As we know not yet the nature of the provisions
of this Bill, we shall refrain from saying more on the sub-
ject at present, than that no interference on the part of the
Legislature can possibly cause the Sunday to be observed
with greater decorum than it is at this moment. Peoplo
are not to be goaded into virtue by an Act of Parliament
aided by a police force. Stringent legislation may indeed
succeed in making them hypocrites, but it will never make
them sincerely religious. We trust Mr. PLUMPTRE will
take warning by the fate of Sir ANDREW AGNEW, and be
discreet in time .

We were enabled yesterday to give an exclusive report
of the important evidence taken by the Parliamentary
Committee on the Coal Bill. Our readers will perceive
that the system by which the high price of eoals is created
and kept up, is explained more in detail than it has yet
been. Mr. CLARKE, a coal factor, and evidently a partisan
of the monopolists, deposed that—

" An alteration had been made in the scale of regulations by
the Factor's Society since the 2d February, 1837 ; in January,
1833, the regulation of the Factors was, that when the price
was 20s. per ton, the number of cargoes offered for sale each
market day, should bo forty. When the price was 21s. 3d.
to 21s. 6d. the number of cargoes should be fifty ; when the
price was 225., the number of cargoes sixty; and when the
price was 225. 3d., the number of cargoes should be seventy.
rue alteration made in February, 1837, was, that when the
price was 235. 6d. per ton, the number of cargoes should be
forty ; fifty cargoes when the price was 235. 9d. to 245.; sixty
cargoes when the price was 245. 3d. to 245. 6d.; and seventy
cargoes when the price was 245. 9d. On the first of April,
the scale was reduced about Is. per ton, and so continued till
the 30th September, when it was again raised."
Here is a pretty system I The supply is to be kept less
than the demand whenever coals fall to a—not reasonable
but—reduced price. When coals are at 20s. per ton, only 40
cargoes are to be allowed for all London each market day—
and then forsooth even this sum is found too low ; and in Feb-
ruary 1837 it is raised to 235. 6d. per ton, with the same li-

mitation ; and no captain of a vessel is to be allowed to have
any coals, unless he will sign a paper that he will conform to
those regulations, no matter how long he may be compelled
to lay in the River, blocking up the navigation, and de-
moralizing his own idle crew. And this, it is gravely argued,
is for the benefit of the poor ! We have a very strong
opinion, that these combinators to keep up prices
come within the law of conspiracy, and are punish-
able by indictment. It appears that the price of
coals in the north is eleven shillings per ton, while in
London they have been 455. and generally average 30s.
Whatever the amount of carriage might be per ton, with
the dues, should alone be added to the price at the pit's
mluth ; and without at all reducing the latter, we are satis-
fied that coils of the best quality might be sold all tho year
round at an average of 225. per ton, were this abominable
combination and conspiracy abolished by law.

In another part of our Paper will be found a Report of
the proceedings at the half yearly general meeting of the
Proprietors of the London and Birmingham Railway Com-
pany, held at Birmingham on Wednesday last ; a report
which we are sure will create a deep sensation through-
out the country. An attempt has been made, and we
are grieved to say, has partially succeeded, to stop all com-
munication, by means of this railway, after it shall have
been completed, on the first day of every week. A
Resolution to this effect was moved, according to
notice, by Mr. STURGE, a leading proprietor of the
Company, and found a very large number of suppor-
ters. It is true, an amendment was proposed and
carried ily more than twice the number of share-holders
that voted for the original motion ; but we cannot look at
the teims in which the amendment is expressed, without
considerable apprehension of the ultimate consequences. It
runs thus :
" That the business of the Railway should be suspended on
Sundays, except for such restricted conveyance of passengers
as seemed called for on the ground of public necessity ; and
that the Directors—to whom is hereby confided the duty of
defining the extent and particulars of such restrictions—shall
take, as their guide in discharging that duty, the considera-
tion of the public good, and not tho private interests of the
Company."

Now, how is it possible for any body of men to determine
what is to constitute "public necessity"? Is every person
that travels by the railroad to be subjected to an inquisi-
tion into his motives for travelling on Sunday ? Without
some such examination, how are the materials for a decision
to be furnished ? As to the instruction to the Directors
that they are to make " the public good and not
the private interests of the Company," the rule of their
conduct in defining the extent of the restriction, we think
it sheer humbug ; for if the public good had been the ob-
ject in view, the original resolution should have been
been met by a direct negative, and not by an amendment
so vaguely worded that it leaves it at the option of a
majority of the Directors, that is to eleven persons, to in-
terrupt the public communications, and to interfere with
the public convenience to an incalculable extent. We ,
have no doubt that fanaticism will now exert its utmost
energies to carry the point at which it has so long been
aiming in various ways, through the instrumentality
of the A6NEWS, the ASSILEYS, and the PLUMTRES. 4.
Sunday must be made a day day of pains and penal- 1

disguised in words, the same accusation against the indivi-
oriel members of the Roxburgh Committee, which Mr.
O'CONNELL made less offensive by making it more
general. To-day the same journal has a long arti-
cle on the Salford election, which classes the Mem-
bers of the Committee According to their political
opinions, and proceeds altogether in condemning
its decision, on the supposition that the Com-
mittee was biased by party cinsiderations. In fact, so well
known is the circumstance that it is a common saying—
" Tell me the names of your Committee, and I will tell
you their decision." We see no reason why Mr. O'Cos-
NELL, because he happens to be obnoxious to Lord MAID-
STONE and the furious Protestant party, should be
challenged in the House of Commons for "express.
ing an opinion at a public tavern which is avowed
by the great majority of politicians of both par-
ties. We see, on the contrary, many reasons why he
should not be questioned on the subject. His Parliamen-
tary privilege does not extend to what he said at the
Crown and Anchor ; and if it were, as possibly it might
have been libellous, to avow it in the House may lead
to a prosecution. Mr. O'CONNSLL'S language may per-
haps be thought by some such Peer as Lord MarnsToNes
father to reflect on the whole body of the English and
Scotch Peerage ; and if he admit in the House of Com-
mons that ho used that language in an unprivileged place,
he may the day after be summoned to the bar of the
House of Lords. He will be called a multitude of
ill names, if he refuse to reply to the Noble Inqui-
sitor ; and if he reply, he may put more formidable arms
than vituperation into the hands of his enemies. If he had
said what is rebellious or seditious, the law is open to Lord
MAIDSTONE to prosecute him ; but let him not first of all
torture Mr. O'CONNELL by the code of honour, in use in
the House of Commons, into an admission which may
afterwards be turned against him. Lord MAIDSTONE, let
us tell him, does not act handsomely and gentlemanly to-
wards a political and religious opponent ; and we hope that
the House of Commons will not suffer itself to be degraded
into a Court of Inquisition, to gratify the malice of political
and religious bigots.

Can any impartial Judge, too, deny that Mr. O'CONNELL
has grounds for his assertion, when a conspiracy has been
formed in this country by Tory functionaries and Tory
parsons, encouraged by Tory Members, one of whom at
least appears as a subscriber, the manifest object of which is,
to unseat, perfas aut nefas, some 20 or 30 Irish Members ?
Mr. O'CONNELL said he spoke advisedly, and tiro mistake
his character if he does not eonvince the House of the fact.
Is he, of all men in the world, to submit patiently to insults
without retaliation ? Has Lord MAIDSTONE forgotten 1
that Tory Lords and Bishops and Commons have de-
nounced him and all the Catholic Members as " perjured
men ?" And can he doubt that all who entertain such an
opinion would be guided as much by their feelings as by a
sense of justice, if, unfortunately for Ireland, they were
placed on Irish Election Committees ?