The Sun.
London, England, 1838-03-21 00:00:00

at present stands, foreign corn can be imported
into this country duty free; but it cannot be sold with-
out paying a duty regulated on such a scale
as to amount to an absolute prohibition, except during
seasons of absolute famine. The grain so imported may
be exported without paying duty, but the expense
of double freight added to the original cost price
usually prevents the importer from finding a profitable
market for it elsewhere ; it is therefore for the most part
warehoused in expectation of a demand, and often rots in
the stores within sight of the famishing artizans of England,
who are not suffered to purchase a pound of it at nearly
double the cost for which the owners would be but too
happy to sell it. In the meantime a scarcity of flour pre-
vails in the West Indies, and along the American coast ; but
as the inhabitants of these districts have no implements
for grinding corn, the exportation of raw grain from England
is productive of little or no advantage to them. Colonel
SEALE proposes that the corn now rotting in our warehouses
shall be ground, and exported to meet the demand for flour
abroad—that, instead of flinging it annually in heaps into
the sea, we shall establish a lucrative branch of foreign trade,
capable of finding profitable employment for a large
branch of our shipping, and the working people i❑ our
ports in imitation of the economical policy of the flour ex
porters of Hamburg, Bremen, Dantzic, and Copenhagen.
Both the PRESIDENT of the Board of Trade and Mr. Alder-
man THOMPSON proved by the increasing demand of flour
in America and the West Indies, and by a reference to
the trade of the above-named ports, that England is in a con-
dition to carry on a lucrative traffic in the arti-
cle of flour-grinding and exporting ; but monstrous as
it may appear, the measure was opposed by Mr. GEORGE
PALMER, from an apprehension that sailors, in such a case
would be guilty of the enormous crime of preferring un-
taxed to taxed bread ! What care the landlords for a
trade, however lucrative to the country, which would dimi-
nish the English corn-grower's profits upon sea-biscuit ?
What matters to them the nation's loss in thou-
' sands, while they are secure of a pence profit ?
But will the intelligent people of England will
the artizans, doomed to fifteen hours' daily toil to
obtain a sustenance, which, in the absence of grinding
Corn Laws, they might earn in half the time at
present allotted to labour, see the question in this light ?
Or, rather, will not the reckless selfishness of the corn
monopolists, if persevered in, drive them at once to the
adoption of such measures as must compel the Legislature
utterly to abolish the accursed Corn-laws ?

We iasert a correspondence between Mr. O'CONNELL I
and the Earl of WINCIIILSEA, which does great honour
to the latter. To Mr. O'CONNELL it only does justice ;
but the courteous manner in which he expresses himself,
and the readiness of the Noble Earl to correct his error,
ought to make the vulgar, little-souled, Tory scribes, who
continually speak of Mr. O'CONNELL as a mendicant and
a ruffian, utterly ashamed of themselves. If no gentle-
manly and generous feeling can influence their conduct,
and make them follow the example of Lord WINCHILSEA,
a selfish regard to their pecuniary interest will now speedily
teach them, that the public will not for ever patronize those
who continually outrage it by calumnious aftd false abuse,
even of Mr. O'CONNELL. While the frank and manly
proceeding of the Earl of WINCHILSEA—the trouble he
took to read over Mr. O'CONNELL'S evidence—and the
readiness with which he offered to make reparation to that
gentleman, does the Noble Earl great honour, it will, we
hope, by its example, exercise a beneficial influence over
the Tory Press.
The fact that the Earl of WINCHILSEA has been
led into an error by the Standard, and the other fact
that Mr. O'CONNELL cannot possibly " contradict the
multitudinous false charges daily published against him,''
ought to be a lesson to many gentlemen. It does no
credit to Members of the Legislature, that they allow their
minds to be irflamed, by the exaggerated language and
mis-statements of the Tory press, into a blind and stupid
hostility to Mr. O'CoNNELL. The public readily pardons
venial errors ; but those who found spiteful attacks on
false statements must expect to be severely castigated.
What explanation the Standard, which has incessantly ex-
hibited a bitter and malignant enmity to Mr. O'CONNELL,
will offer to the public, we shall not presume to guess.
We look with curiosity for its vindication. We shall, how-
ever, be much deceived, if, as the Chronicle says, the
Standard "be able to explain what requires explanation."
Our Morning Contemporary has been fighting day after
day, and week after week, with our Evening Contemporary.
To expose the fallacies and refute the errors of the Stan-
dard has been almost a daily task of the Chronicle. It
has, in truth, contributed much to the celebrity of the
Standard: and if it would not have the public suppose that
it has been all this time adroitly increasing the importance
of that journal, or merely practising dialectic skill for
amusement, it will be required to defend the Standard,
and show that the casuistry and the mystification it has
laboured zealously to expose, do not form, with the misre-
presentation exposed by Lord WINCHILSEA, parts of a re-
gular system for deceiving the public. The Chronicle
cannot, by sparing the Tory journal, wish to share the
Standard's reputation.

A public meeting took place yesterday week at Dundee
" to consider the recent conduct of Sir HENRY:PARNELL,
more particularly regarding his absence on the division fol-
lowing Mr. GROTE'S motion in favour of the Ballot."
The meeting was a stormy one—nevertheless resolutions,
condemnatory of the Right Hon. Baronet's conduct,
were carried by a large majority. This is as it should
be. We like to see constituencies keeping a sharp look-
out after their Representatives ; for it acts as a salutary
warning to all those who, allured by the smiles or professions
of a Minister, may be disposed to desert the pledges which
they gave on the hustings. As regards the particular case
in question, we consider it as one indefensible on any
grounds. Sir H. PARNELL'S opinions on the Ballot were
well known ; he had spoken out repeatedly and unequivo-
cally on the subject ; he had mixed himself up with it
almost as much as Mr. GROTE ; he had gained votes,
and secured his election, on the strength of it ;
yet, when the time of action arrived, what was
his course of conduct? Why, that of shuffling, time-
serving expediency! He evaded his pledges—forgot his
opinions, overpowered, no doubt, by that drowsy, oblivious
feeling which is apt occasionally to steal over Hon. Mem_
bers, when they inhale the malaria of the Treasury Bench
—and absented himself from the most important division
that has taken place during the Session in Parliament !
Doubtless, the Right Hon. Baronet had special good
reasons for this convenient absence. We have heard many
assigned ; and among others, that he is qualifying for a
Coronation Peerage.

The disturbances which have taken place at Lisbon, will
surprise no one who has paid attention to the state of
parties in that capital—the system of intrigue which pre-
vails—and the consequent jealousy and suspicion on both
sides, when any important change is proposed. It appears,
from all that we can learn on the subject, that the original
cause of the disturbance was the attachment shown by the
Court to the Chartist officers and soldiers, defeated by the Go-
vernment troops last autumn. After that event the Ministry
resigned, because the QUREN refused to deprive the chief offi-
cers of the Chartist party of their military rank. An under-
standing, however, was come to between the Court and the
leaders of the popular party. BANDEIRA resumed office,
and affairs went on quietly till the beginning of the
present month, when it was ascertained that the QUEEN
refused to listen to the proposition of the Ministers for
a promotion in the army, till on the proclamation of the
new Constitution, she could grant a general amnesty to
the Chartists, and include the officers of that party in the
new promotions. The Ministry objected to this—the
more violent of the National Guards took the alarm—and
belieT:ng that the Court intended a second time to form a
Chartist Ministry, and put down the principles of the revo-
lution of September, they mustered as on the first attempt
with a view to control the Court. Bat circumstances had
altered : the great body of the inhabitants, wearied
out with constant changes, were anxious to give the
new Constitution a trial—the army, too, in all probability,
had been tampered with, and with the exception of three
battalions, all the troops and national guards sided with
the Government. A convention was entered into be-
tween the Commander of the troops, with the sanction of
BANDEIRA, and the Commanders of these three battalions ;
but as soon as the men had dispersed the convention was
broken ; the arsenal battalion was dissolved and FRANCA
was dismissed. Believing they were betrayed, they again
collected. A collision took place between them and the