The Sun.
London, England, 1838-02-08 00:00:00

and did send a legion to Spain with arms and atmnuni.
tion to assist one of the contending parties. If, there.
fore, the Americans violate international law by assist-
ing one of the parties in Canada, they only follow the
example we have set them, and by our practices they
will be justified in the eyes of other nations. The Ame-
ricans, however, seem equally in fault. A writer in
the Chronicle of t;...u'ay reminds us of the followil-Lg
circumstp-

1817 a number of adventurers, about 150 in number, took
possession of Amelia Island, being part of the Spanish terri-
tories, close to the frontier of the United States, and from
thence they either themselves gave annoyance or supplied the
Indians with the means of committing outrages on the neigh-
bouring population of the United States. The Spanish Go-
vernment were too weak to repress or restrain them. What
did the American Government do? They very wisely, pro-
perly, and vigorously took possession of Amelia Island, and
broke up this nest of adventurers.
In 181t5, again, the Seminole Indians were committing
outrages upon the inhabitants of the United States near
the Florida frontier. "As almost On whole of this tribe
(says Mr. .out), in his Message to Congress of the 25th
March, 1818) inhabits the country within the limits
of Florida, Spain was bound by the treaty of 1795 to re-
strain them from committing hostilities within the United
States." But it appears that Spain was then as unable to
restrain the Indians belonging to her territory as the
American Government, by its own confession, now is to
restrain its citizens from joining and giving active aid to
the rebel invaders of the territories of Great Britain.
What did the American Government do in that instance ?
They again wisely and vigorously ordered General Jackson to
march into the Spanish •territorics and abate the nuisance;
and he took possession of St. Mark's and Pensacola, Spanish
forts, garrisoned by Spanish troops. In his general order of
the 28th May, 1818, we find the following passage The
obligation to restrain them (the hostilities of the Indians) was
acknowledged by Spain, but weahn.ess was alleged, The im-
mutable laws of self-defence, therefore, compelled the Ameri-
can Government to take possession of those parts of Florida
in which tl,lO Spanish authority could not be maintained."
Now this is an analogous case to the seizure of the
Caroline, and her destruction in an American port, ex-
cept that the Americans, both in 1817 and 1818, went
a great deal further than the Canadians have gone, for
they both took possession of the Spanish territory, and
justified their conduct. They are placed precisely in
the same predicament as we are, and each nation may
justify its own present proceedings by the former con-
duct of the other. It may be shrewdly suspected that
nations, like individuals, are more influenced by a
sense of power than a sense of justice, and that the
United States being strong, and Spain weak, would be
overbearing, in a manner that England, hampered by
discontented colonin, will never be to the United
States. If brs.;:n now and in past times the practices
of natirn'is are, and have been, dictated more by a
Kilse of power than a sense of justice, it is clear that
it is no solution to the difficulty on either side, to prove
that the other nation has not acted according to former
practices. We make these remarks with no view
to advocate at present either side ; but to guard
the public against supposing that the question is per-
fectly plain, and can be settled by a little declamation.
We might add something on the protection which a
Government owes its subjects, and which has of late
here, in the case of Mr. BELL and the Vixen, been
supposed to justify a war with Russia, for detaining
an English vessel, accused of violating either a blockade
or municipal regulations ; and we might ask how
we, under such circumstances, could say a word to the
United States for demanding reparation, by the threat
of war, for the Caroline, and for the murder of an
American citizen ; but the length of our remarks com-
pels us to stop. We shall merely add, that the duties
of a Government to its own subjects, sometimes con-
flicting with its duties to other nations, make the
subject in dispute very complicated and difficult. To
decide it off-hand is to plunge into war.

In The Sun of this day will be found a second
Letter from Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD on the sub-
ject of the Irish Poor Law Bill, to which we earnestly
invite public attention. Mr. CRAWFORD will find, by
a reference to our Paper of yesterday, that we hold
precisely the same opinion that he does, upon the in-
applicability of the in-door workhouse system to the
social and physical condition of Ireland. What further
observations we may have to offer upon this measure,
we shall reserre till the Bill goes'into Committee.

In another part of The Sun will be found a letter

on Church-rates, from the pen of our respected cor-
respondent Mr. CHILDS, of Bungay. Mr. CHILDS
doubts the sincerity of Ministers in their unsuccessful
attempt last year to relieve the Dissenters from a
grievance of which they have so much reason to com-
plain. We should be sorry to answer for Ministerial
sincerity in this as well as in many other points of
policy ; at the same time we do not feel our-
selves justified in charging the Government with
hypocrisy, until we have been convinced of
the fact by a reasonable amount of evidence.
Now, with all deference to our excellent correspondent,
we think he has not adduced this evidence. We
may admit that Ministers were slow, and perhaps even
reluctant, to take up the question of the abolition of
Church-rates as a Cabinet measure. But might
not that have been owing to the Dissenters them-
selves ? Were they as active as they ought to have
been ? Did they agitate sufficiently ? As soon as
the Church-rate abolitionists showed that they were
in earnest by holding meetings all over the country—
and by petitions to Parliament, numerously signed,
furnished the Government with valid grounds for
proposing a change in the law—a measure for the total
abolition of Church-rates was introduced into the
House of Commons by the CHANCELLOR of the Ex-,
CHEQUER. The measure met with the unanimous
approbation of the Dissenting body. It was, in their
estimation, every thing that could have been wished,
reconciling interests apparently the most conflicting,
and laying the foundation of religious peace and har-
mony in the community at large. We really think
that, taking into consideration the circumstances in
which the Ministers were placed—the clamour, the
obloquy, and the misrepresentation to which they ex-
posed themselves from the numerous and influential
class of persons who regarded the abolition of Church-
rates as a measure that struck at the very vitals of
the Established Church—this desertion on this ques-
tion of some of their own firmest supporters, which
they must have anticipated ; the introduction of such
a measure is itself no mean test of their sincerity.
But be that as it may—for we are not called upon
to adjudicate on this point—the great question for the
Dissenters to consider is, What is best to be done at
the present moment ? Mr. CHILDS, ,and probably a
considerable number of the more sanguine among the
Dissenters, are for an immediate repetition of the agi-
tation that took place in the latter part of 1836. We
are unwilling to damp the ardour of conscientious
men in a good cause ; but it may be a matter
for reflection, whether much benefit would be produced
by a course of agitation, until the inquiry instituted

into those ecclesiastical funds, out of which it was
proposed that the fabric of the Church should be
supported, is brought to a conclusion. A Com-
mittee of the House of Commons, it will be
recollected, was appointed for this purpose last
year, and has been renewed this Session.
The Government therefore, we apprehend, cannot take
any steps of a legislative nature until the result of the
investigation be known. Let the spirit of resistance to
the hateful impost, however, be kept up without
abatement. Let the practical evil of the nuisance be
kept constantly before the public eye : and the remedy,
the abolitionists may rest assured, will not be long
delayed.

Mr. LUSIIINGTON, the Member for Ashburton,
acquired some well-earned approbation by the tempe-
rate and judicious check he gave in the debate before

the recess) to the too generous ardour of Air. LEADER
in behalf of the Canadians: He has now rendered
the public another and a more important service, by
publishing an able pamphlet entitled the " Dilemmas
of a Churchman." The character' he has acquired
for moderation, and his standina
society, will give
great weL,O,-,., t^ I.;:i's statements, and we must inform
members of the Church of England, particularly
the Clergy, that they cannot allow his pamphlet to go
unnoticed or unrefuted. To the Dissenters it will give
sharp weapons impelled by a powerful hand.
He begins by relating an anecdote to show that
Churchmen cannot distinguish the members of their
own Church from Dissenters, he havi)V been taken
for both, awl he affirms that mill;.bns of Churchmen
twioontr,l,d be subject to the snie "contradictory representa-
by tion" lorethren, they-lieMg " discouraged from
the pursuit of theological enquiry." He next de-
monstrates very neatly, " from the young member of the
Establishment never asking why he goes to Church,"
while the son of the Dissenter is driven " to ask why
he does not go ?"—why he must, "in rejecting the
Establishment, submit to much worldly mortification,"
that the Dissenters are necessarily far better instructed
in theology than the members of the Church Esta
blishment. The latter he describes as having " doe
trines palmed upon their ignorance," which they " re-
peat by rote, and confound with prayer ; they follow
the manccuvre of a fugleman in the reading-desk, and
wheel round to the cast with the surpliced band of
choristers like a disciple of Zoroaster." Thus drilled
by rote) and sweetly bribed by numerous advantages
into an acquiescence in what is taught, the member
of the Establishment has physical means, but
not motives for acquiring knowledge. The Es-
tablishment stifles the mind. The principle thus de-
monstrated is of great importance at this time in re-
lation to the project of increasing the Establishment,
both in England and in Scotland.
In this part of the pamphlet, we find a most serious
charge against the English Clergy. Mr. LUSHING-
TON says " that the ritual is acknowledged, by
many conscientious clergymen, to be full of ob-
noxious errors," which he affirms, however, that
the " majority of the Clergy conspire to maintain.'
The Establishment not only stifles the mind, but the
Clergy conspire to maintain the errors which they
palm upon -the ignorant. That is the accusation of
Mr. LUSHINGTON, Member of the House of
Commons ; and the Clergy of the Establishment must
repel it by proving, that they wilfully preserve no
errors, or they must lie under the serious imputation.
The Church, Mr. LUSHINGTON observes, is di-
vided into Orthodox Churchmen and Evangelicals.
The late Lord LIVERPOOL filled the Church with
the former, " regardingthe latter as most mischievous ;"
and the latter declare that the " Gospel is not preached
by the Orthodox Churchmen;" whose preaching—so
say the Evangelicals—" leads their hearers down to the
chambers of death." The contest between these factions,
we are told, "continued _with unabated rancour, till the
imminence of Church Reform forced them to conclude
a truce, to avoid the evil." As they so solemnly de-
nounce each other, let us ask, in the name of the pub-
lic, which of these factions—both of which conspire to
preserve error—is to be favoured, in any increase of
the Church, at the cost of the Dissenters ?•

The public will recollect, that of late a number of
meetings of the Clergy have been held, at which, par-
ticularly at Northallerton, they declared positively
against the power of the State to alter the rubric in
any manner, without the consent of the Convocation.
They went so far as to say, that they preferred obe-
dience to the Church to obedience to the State, and
separation to submission. Their fervour for the
rubric was chiefly caused by their dislike of the
late Marriage Act. But while the Clergy deny
the power of the State to improve the rubric, they
themselves alter or omit parts of it as suits their
own opinion and convenience. Mr. LUSHINGTON
shows that they do this in relation to the ceremonial
of matrimony. He quotes Mr. CROLY, a great an-
tagonist of tile new Marriage Act, who has allowed
that " there are passages rather broad"—that is,
rather indecent—" but virtually extinct, for they arc
never read at the altar." "In this," says Mr.
LUSIIINGTON, " he goes too far ; the rich may pur-
chase an exemption from indecency, but the ex-
hortation is not unfrequently read for the edification of
the poor." The clergy alter the rubric for the money
of the rich, while they compel the poor to submit to
indecent exhortations. " Mr. CROLY," adds Mr.
LUSIIINGTON, " must know that every clergyman
who mutilates any portion of the prayer-book service
is guilty of perjury ;" but the clergy frequently do that;
claim the separation of Church and State, and loudly
when the Legislature presumes to perform what the
the meanest curate takes on himself.

We might refer to several other passages in this able
pamphlet, but we must stop. It becomes, however, a
most important subject for the consideration of the
Legislature, whether this Church, which fosters error,
and is now disobedient to the State—which stifles the
mind and checks inquiry—can with any safety, or any
propriety, have its power and its wealth increased.
The vast means already placed at its disposal have
not ensured the religious instruction of the people.
" Two-thirds of the lower orders in London,"
said Sir THOMAS BERNAR-D, 44 live as utterly
ignorant of the doctrines and duties of Christianity,
and are as arrant and unconverted Pagans, as if they
existed in the wildest part of Africa." The late inqui-
ries of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners have, in a
measure, confirmed this statement ; and Mr. LusH-
INGTON Shows that such " Pagan ignorance" is the
necessary consequence of our Church Establishment.

The whole of the Paris Journals of Tuesday have
been received. Those of an official and semi-official
complexion deplore the defeat of the Cabinet on the
great question of the grant of a pension to the widow
of General DANIREMONT. It will be remembered
that the Cabinet proposed to grant this lady and her
children a pension of 10,000 francs (4001.) a-year,
as a testimony of the national appreciation of the
gallantry of her husband, who was killed by a cannon
shot at the storming of Constantine. The Committee
to which the proposed grant was referred, recommended
its reduction to 6,000 f. (2901.) a-year during the life
of the widow, and in the event of her premature death,
to be withdrawn from her children on attaining their
majority. After a long debate, in the course of which
the Ministers, supported by M. THIERS, opposed the
amendment, it was carried against them by a majority
of sixteen votes. Another division took place on the
passing of the Bill in its amended form, when it was
carried by a majority of three hundred and fifty-five
votes to thirty-six ! This defeat of the Cabinet has
greatly annoyed the KING, who had previously pledged
himself to make an ample provision for the family of
the deceased Commander of his armies in Africa.

The intelligence from Spain, received this morning,
is wholly embodied in the following telegraphic de-
spatches, published in the Charte of Monday night,
and the Moniteur of Tuesday :
" BAYONNE, FEB. 3.—Brigadier Leon arrived on the 28th
at Pampeluna, having surprised on his road a battalion of Car
lists, who had lost many killed and 40 prisoners. On the 31st
he again attacked and beat the Carlists at Echarry, in con-
sequence of which they concentrated themselves in Ulzama,
and evacuated the vallics on the frontier. Rejoicings had
taken place at Bilboa for the affair at Balmaseda.
" BAYONNE, FEB. 4.—The interpellations commenced in
the Cortes on the 26th ult. terminated by an order of the day
with a motion in favour of Ministers, which was voted by 103
deputies against 125."
Letters from Bayonne to the 2d instant state that
in the rencontre between Brigadier LEON'S troops and

the Carlists, mentioned in the first of the above dis-
patches, the rebels had twenty kilW, besides the
wounded ape! prisoners. A Christino officer, named
URBAN, succeeded in capturing a Carlist convoy of
twenty intiles laden with wiiic i nil, qud cscort of
twenty men on their way from France to the Carlist
head-quarters. The booty was safely conveyed to
Pampeluna,
The following are extracts from the Journals :-
The Marquis d'gspeja has frequent conferences with the
President of the Council, and yesterday morning he was ab-
sent an hour in the Cabinet of that Ministers It is affirmed
that in conseqtienee dl dO,patelits which he had received from
Madrid the evening before, the Queen's Envoy has sent to the
Government new questions, as precise and urgent, respecting
its intentions with regard to
The Ariiiionj says, not only is the project of surrounding
he capital with forts not abandoned, bat the pfeservation of
the materials of Fort L'gpire, the expropriation of the site,
the retaining and enclosing of the ground already obtained,
are a striking proof of this ; but what is still more to the
purpose, the Budget of the War Department has paid for
hose four years the salaries of the Governors of these
torts, which exist at resent only on paper. Do you
wish to know their names? Take the Military Calendar for
1838, an official work published by especial permission of the
King on documents furnished by the War Department, page
88, you will read that Paris is enumerated among the fortified
towns ; that it has not yet been closed by the Ordinance
of 31st July 1827 ; consequently that it remains to be classed;
that Colonel Pozac, Captains d'Origny, De Sampiguy,
Thouiret, Ducondie, and Meurizet, and Lieutenant Chaco are
the Commandants.
Lyons, Nantes, Chateau Neuf, the Fo-t of Cancalle, Cape
Corre, and the fortifications of Isere, fortified since 1830, are,
like Paris, not yet classed among our fortresses.--Lc Commerce.
HANOVER, JAN. 25.-A report which, indeed, is by no
means authenticated, says that the Ministry intends not to al-
low such magistrates to bo elected as have taken the oath of
allegiance, with a reservation respecting the Constitution, and
also to declare individuals inelegible who have taken the oath
with such a reservation. As this measure would affect Ostia-
burer, Struve would have a less hope of obtaining a seat in
the Chamber. The daily allowance will be granted, it seems,
to the next Assembly of States, notwithstanding the
King's aversion to the practice. At first it was in-
tended to grant allowances to the Ministers of the Second
Chamber only, and to express a " hope that the Ministers of
the First Chamber would make it a point of honour to re-
nounce their allowances. However, the resolution to grant
the allowances is said to have been adopted chiefly at the sug-
gestion of the Equestrian Order of Lunenburg.
BERLIN, FEB. M.-The statements of the measures against
the Archbishop of Cologne, drawn up by order of the Go-
vernment, is now published, with the Appendix containing
24 original documents, and four translations from the Latin.
They were published only the day before yesterday, by A.
NV. Hayn, a great number of copies have been sold, and
the price being very low, only -41- dollar for eleven sheets, its
sale will doubtless be extensive. -AI/gamine Zeitung, Feb 2.
FRENCH FUNDS-PARIS, FEB. 6.
rive per Cents.. 109 f. 65c. 70c. 75c.
Four and a Half tier Cents. 105 f, 60c.
Four per Cents., 1021. 20c.
Dire, per Cents. 79f. 75c. 70c. SOc.
Actions, 2,652 f., 50c. 2,635 f. 2,640 f.
dente de Naples, 981. SOc.
Roman Five per Cents., 101%.
Spanish Actives, 193 y.
Spanish Passives, 44.
Belgian Loan, 1033 t.
Belgian Bank, 1,507 f. 50c. 1,510 f.
Portuguese Loan, Three per Cents. 1731.
Hayttan Loan. 385 f.
EXCHA NOR CI LONDON.
One month, paper, 25f. 45e. ; money, 25f. 42%c.
Three months, paper, 25f. 32%c. ; money, '2sf. 30c.
LAST PRICES.
Five per Cents. 109 f. SOc.
Three per Cents., 79f. SOc.
Bank Actions, 26421. 50c.
Romans' 101%.
Belgian Loan, 103%.
Belgian Bank, 1,510 f.
Spanish Actives, IfIN.
Spanish Passives, 44.
Haytlan Loan, 385 f.

SALFORD ELECTION COMMITTEE
(THIS DAY.)

WITHDRAWAL OF THE PETITION.

The Committee met this morning at eleven-o'clock.

Mr. TRESSIGER said, that since the Committee had separated last
night, the Counsel on behalf of the petitioners had consulted together,
as to the effect of the decision then come to upon their case, and they
certainly felt that it was quite fatal. It was not his wish to offer any
observation in the slightest degree disparaging to the decision of the
Committee; he felt respect for it, but he certainly must say that he
anticipated a contrary decision. It had taken him entirely by sur-
prise, and perhaps the Committee would allow him to say a few words
with regard to the hardship of the situation in which the petitioners
were placed. They had at a very considerable expense prepared
for this contest, in which, upon: his own responsibility, he undertook
to say, they had a strong, if not an overwhelming case. They
found themselves met, in the outset of their attempt to establish their
case, by that which was called by his Learned Friend, very properly, a
strictly. technical objection—that objection arising from no fault of
theirs, nor from anything over which they could have had the slightest
eontroul. The returning officer, who was a political opponent of the
petitioner, had, contrary to the duty which was imposed upon him by
the Act of Parliament, printed lists, which did not correspond with the
original register. There was no power given by the Act of Parliament
to any party to inspect the original register; he was permitted only to
have printed copies, which the returning officer was required to fur-
nish. His attention, therefore, would only be directed to those printed
copies, which were the copies delivered to the deputies at the poling
places. They were the only subject matter of reference, and all parties
considered them as the documents to which reference ought to be made.
Under the circumstances which had arisen, he submitted to the deci.
sion of the Committee, which was fatal to his case. It was wholly
unexpected, because he must confess, on the facts which he submitted to
the Committee yesterday, that he did not expect to be shut out from the
opportunity of establishing them against the sitting Member. The de-
cree, however, had gone forth, and he was bound to abide by it ; he did
not seek to reverse it ; but he would say on his own responsibility that it
terminated a case which, if the merits had been inquired into, would
have been seen to rest on no factious grounds, but on a very solid foun-
dation, and that the decision would most probably have been adverse to
the sitting Member.
Mr. AUSTEN saw that his Learned Friend having retired from the
Committee, the only duty of the Committee was to confirm the
choice of the electors of Salford, and report to the House of Commons
that Mr. Brotherton had been duly elected and returned, and was
the sitting Member for the Borough of Salford. It never occurred
to him before, to hear such a speech as had just been delivered
by his Learned Friend, the obvious intention of which was, not
to produce an effect upon the Committee—not to do an act of
justice to his client, for the Committee had done that, and so had
the constituency of Salford ; but the obvious intention was, that it
should be printed and distributed elsewhere for other purposes. His
Learned Friend said the objection was one of strict law. NVas not the
objection to the voter of that description ? Was it not absurd to sup-
pose that a man residing in a house worth 1001. a-year on the 31st of
July should, because he had removed to another on the 2d of August
worth 1501., he struck off the poll ? Could any objection be more tech-
nical than this? If the Legislature left the voter exposed to such an
objection, was it not the duty of every man to take any technical objee-
tion for the purpose of defending what ought to be the franchise, al-
though by some mistake or carelessness of the Legislature it might not
be sot His Learned Friend said he had no means of guarding this
objection. The agents for the sitting Member had guarded against it
by objecting to the voters on the poll, and the other side might
have done the same. Besides this, they had- access to the register,
and actually inspected it, and yet his Learned Friend came here and
uttered what was intended to have an echo in Salford, that they had
no means of preparing themselves; that they had a case of merit, but
that Mr. Garnett was sacrificed to a technical objection. Mr. Garnett,
however, might content himself, for he never would represent the bo_
rough of Salford so long as he lived. His Learned Friend had said that
ho had an overwhelming case. He (Mr. Austell) would undertake, on
his own responsibility, to say that he also had an overwhelming case, and
never entertained the slightest doubt, from the beginning, what the re-
sult of the inquiry would be.
Mr. THESSIGER remarked that when he addressed the Committee. he
had no intention of doing so for the purpose hinted at by his Learned
Friend. He felt it his duty to state the circumstances which had in-
duced him to retire from the contest.

Mr. FROST, the boroughreeve, said he wished to clear himself from
the imputation which had been cast upon him as returning officer.
The CHAIRMAN said he was not aware that there was any imputatio❑
against him.
The room was then cleared; and on our re-admission the Chairman
announced that the Committee had agreed to the following resolutions :-
1. Resolved—That Joseph Brotherton, Esq., is duly elected to serve
as a burgess, in the present Parliament, for the borough of Salford.

2. Resolved—That the petition of William Garnett, Esq , and others,
aga;nst the said return, does not appear to this Committee to be frivolous
or vexstious.

3. Resolved—That the opposition of Joseph Brotherton, Esq., to the
said petition does not appear to this Committee to be frivolous or
vexatious.

ROXBURGH ELE
HISCTIONDAY COMMIT-

The Committee met at eleven o'clock ; but immediately after assem
bling, orders were given by the Chairman that strangers should withdraw
On our readmission, the CHLIRMAN announced that the Committee
had come to the following resolutions, by way of recommendations to
Counsel for petitioners :
_

" 1. Counsel for petitioners are recommended to bear in mind the re-
solutions passed yesterday by the Committee.
2. counsel for petitioners are recommended to proceed with that
Part of the case which relates more particularly to the last election."
Mr. THESSIGER wished to know if, by these resolutions, Counsel for
petitioners were debarred from going into evidence with respect to the
riots which took place at the election for 1835. This he conceived to be
a most essential part of the case, as showing the systematic violence that
had been resorted to, to deter the Conservative electors from going to
the poll.
The CHAIRMAN said that he had received no particular instruc-
tions whatever from the Committee to that effect, but he under-
stood such to be their intention at present. It would be afterwards a
matter of discretion with them as to whether they would receive such
evidence.

Mr. AtiSTEN then tendered in evidence the letter of Baillic Good..
fellow, dated July 31, offering to take upon himself and his brother
Magistrates the preservation of the peace in the town of Hawick during
the election.

"--
Mr. Sergeant MEREWETHER objected to the admissibility of the do-
cument, and after a lengthened argument the room was ordered to
be cleared.

After a few minutes' deliberation the doors were again opened, and
the Chairman announced that the Committee had resolved upon not re-
ceiving the letter in evidence.

Mr. At7hTEN then tendered evidence in support of the charges of inti.
midation and rioting; and a voter named Berwick was under examina
tion when our Reporter left.

IPSWICH ELECTION COMMITTEE.

(THIS DAY.)

The Committee resumed its sitting this morning, at eleven o'clock,
and went into consultation upon the vote of Philip Spizcy, the objections
against which were heard yesterday. The division was in favour of
the vote.

Mr. THESSIGER next moved that the name ofJohn Parker be struck off