The Sun.
London, England, 1838-08-31 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The addresses presented to the Marquis of Normanby,
in the course of his progress through the west of Ireland,
will be found worth the attention of any who may wish to
satisfy themselves of the degree of enthusiastic devotion to
her Majesty's Government which happily prevails in that
long-alienated portion of the empire. While the influence
of the Tory faction continues sufficiently powerful to arrest
the progress of legislative justice towards the Irish people,
it is manifestly of importance, beyond all calculation, that
the opposite spirit should possess and animate the Execu
tive, and that there should thus be at least one safeguard
for the stability of the British power, and the maintenance
of the connection between the islands. The popularity of
the Marquis of Normanby's Administration saves us from
the natural results of the tyrannous and insulting proceed-
ings of the House of Lords ; and when we reflect that this
branch of the Legislature has now for four consecutive
Sessions withheld the most reasonable, the most just, and
the most moderate demands of Ireland, we cannot con-
template the Government which, notwithstanding this
mighty obstacle, has strengthened the bonds of union and
allegiance, without as much surprise as delight at its suc-
cess. Manifestly there is but one thing wanting at this
moment to that thorough incorporation of the two countries
which the interests of the empire so urgently require, and
which the wise statesman and the true patriot will always
propose as the grand end of his measures, and object of
his policy. Let the Legislature only imbibe the enlight-
ened and benignant spirit of the Government—let the same
liberal, impartial, remedial, and healing policy which has
been pursued by her Majesty's representative, be imitated
or adopted by those from whom alone the redress of the
greater wrongs and the accomplishment of the larger objects of
the Irish people can proceed—and what cause, what foun-
tain of disunion or discord between England and Ireland
would remain ?—what but the Irish Sea would distinguish
or divide them? We have now before us the excellent ad-
dress of the county of Roscommon to the Lord Lieute-
nant, and we put it to aay man in England, whom
nature; has not cursed with an abstract passion for anarchy
and confusion, whether the existence of a Government
which has created such a feeling in Ireland as this docu-
ment is a proof of, is not, as far at least as that country is
concerned, a 'Taming of the very first order ? The address
commences by assuring his Excellency of the " cordial con-
currence of her Majesty's subjects of this country in the
policy of his .rievernrnent, and of their sincere gratitude for
the anxiety he has evinced to promote the interests of Ire-
land." Did the ear of Tory Viceroy ever hear language
like this ? Did the county of Roscommon ever address a
Talbot or a Haddington in this style and sentiment? Who
but the Orangemen ever concurred in the policy of an
Orange Government, or poured forth their grateful ac-
knowledgments at its feet ? The address continues, " Ani-
mated with sentiments of devoted attachment to the
person of our beloved Queen, we feel that the ties
which unite the people to the Throne are best cemented
by the delegation of its power, as at present, to
one who has the intelligence to adopt and the energy
to execute whatever measures, compatible with the laws,
may best conduce to the improvement and pacification of
the country." A compliment like this may have been paid
to a Tory Lord-Lieutenant by the Dublin Corporation, or
perhaps by a Tyrone Grand Jury ; but we venture to say.
that no great body of Irishmen ever paid a Tory Governor
such a tribute. To be sure the Tories are indifferent what
the people of Ireland think about their Viceroys ! Are
they ? We have a shrewd suspicion that a little Irish
popularity would not be so very unpalatable after all. The
grapes are sour only because they are nut of their reach.
" For the best administration of the existing laws," continue
the people of Roscommon, " are indebted to your Ex-
cellency : if they are not in every instance in unison with
the wishes and circumstances of the people, we appreciate
on the one hand the difficulties that interrupt their
amendment, and on the other we feel that under your
paternal government they have been divested of much
of their former evils, by being freed from their past
partialities." Here we have the only mode in which
it is possible for a Liberal Government to exhibit
its benevolent spirit, in the present state of parties
and temper of one branch of the Legislature, very happily
alluded to. Such a government cannot pass good laws ;
but it can palliate the operation of bad laws. Such a go-
vernment cannot place the order of society upon a perma-
nent and solid basis ; but it can preserve that order not-
withstanding, and it is the only government that can do so.
The followir'i remark is admirable :—" If there be thoss.
who fancy that the balance of justice is unequally held in
the hands of your Excellency, it is because it has so long
preponderated in one direction that they have become
habituated to its inclination and cannot understand its ad-
;ustment. • Unticr your Excellency's administration all
participate in equality of advantages:" Men who have been
long used to think the crooked straight, naturally think
the straight crooked, when, instead of the zig-zag, they
are presented with a right line. The eastern prince
who had a harem of withered hags, and imagined them
the loveliest of their sex, felt of course infinite repugnance
at the sight of youth and beauty ; and it is just the same
with the Irish- Tories, who have been so long familiar
with the embraces of corruption and injustice, which
they mistook for the fairest forms of Government, that
when its true excellencies are set before them, instead of
. recognising their perfection, they turn away from them
with disgust. However, we arc all creatures of circum-
stance and habit ; even the Tories are subject to this
great law, and even the Tories will begin to discern and
admire the line of moral beauty, when it has been suf-
ficiently long and steadily submitted to their vision. The
permanence of the present Irish Government is all that is
wanting to make even its enemies admit its merits. Virtue
needs only to be seem said a sige of antiquity, to make all
men love and follow her. A mere glance, however, at her
perfect form is not sufficient : she must tarry in man's
presence, and suffer the childrt n of vice to gaze upon and
inure themselves to her charms.—tl'forning Chronicle.
Our limits preclude our offering more than a cursory
,notice of the tissue of misquotations and jesuitry contained
in the columns of a Contemporary Journal on Monday last
with reference to our remarks on the state of our foreign
relations. Our Contemporary accuses us of having stated that
Cracow is one of the most important commercial emporiums
on the continent ;" and adds, " the Times indeed says that
Cracow offers us a direct communication with the Black
Sea, the Baltic, and the Adriatic.' But unless the map
of Europe greatly deceives us, it is just possible that our
own goods might get to the Baltic and Adriatic by a shorter
and more direct course than by going through Cracow, and
it is not improbable that they might reach the Black Sea
by the Mediterranean or the Danube fully as cheaply
as by being tugged thither overland through Cra-
cow." Is this th manner in which Lord Palmer-
ston defends the sacrifice of " his flt. 'l, I,is reputation,
and his character," pledged to protect our commerce
by the appointment of a British Consul to the re-
public of Cracow, and evades the question of his
connivance in the extinction of the rights of 21,000,000 of
Poles to the " free navigation of the rivers and canals in
the whole extent of ancient Poland !" What the Times
did say was as follows :—" Cracow,' in the enjoyment of
the rights guaranteed to it by the European Powers, be-
comes the most important commercial emporium on the
continent. Situated on one of the noblest rivers of Europe,
it possesses mines of zinc, silver, coal, salt, and marble.
Entitled to freedom of commerce and direct intercourse by
steam navigation with all the worlds it offers, within 170
.-.miles of its frontier, a direct communication with the Black
Sea, the Baltic, and the Adriatic." The ingenious in-
sertion by our Contemporary of the monosyllable " us"
is the foundation for his assertion that we consider
Cracow the cheapest and shortest route for our goods
to the Baltic, the Adriatic, and the Black Sea.
But," says our Contemporary, " the Times is de-
termined to distinguish itself in smartness as well as
in geography." After the laboured specimens in the
Portfolio of Lord Palmerston's geographical precision in
reference to the limits of the independent municipalities of
Circassia, and the site of Soucljouk Kale, we should have
been surprised at his Lordship's ignorance of the course of
the Vistula, of the Dniester' and of the railroad in progress
from Cracow to Vienna and Trieste, had it not been mani-
fest that his Lordship mistakes, innocently no doubt, the
Republic of Cracow for Poland. " Perhaps," says his
Lordship, alluding to our trade with the provinces of the
ancient kingdom of Poland, " the economist of the Times
will tell us what is the amount of the produce of Cracow
in cotton and tobacco ?" Our Contemporary proceeds to
say—" the Times ought to blush at being ignorant of the
fact, that the treaty of 1827 related to nothing but the paci-
fication of Greece, and had no more to do with the French
expedition to Algiers than it had to do with the affairs of
China." We cannot pass so lightly over this misinterpreta-
tion of a treaty the most important in its stipulations, in its
effects, and in its probable consequences, that has been
contracted in modern times. The treaty of July the 6th,
1827, as explained by Lord Dudley, by Lord Aberdeen,
and by Count Nesselrode, was the compliment of the " act
of the Congress of Vienna," in so far as it debarred either
of the three contracting Powers from violating the treaties
of Vienna, which had definitively adjusted the limits and
influence of each separate State, and the commercial rights
of all. England, who bad refused her concurrence in the
internal
affairs of the continental Powers in the
affairs of Spain, Piedmont, Naples, and the South Ame-
rican Republics, did consent to intervene in the affairs of
Turkey, with the view, not of separating, but of re-
conciling and re-uniting her divided Provinces, and
depriving Russia of a pretext for aggrandizement by a se-
parate intervention. The condition on which alone Eng-
land agreed to act, first with Russia, and secondly with Rus-
sia and F:euice, to effect that reconciliation, was,. that
" the contracting parties will not seek in these arrange-
ments any augmentation of territory, any exclusive influ-

ence,or any commercial advantage for their subjects, which
those of every other nation may not equally obtain." So
completely was the maintenance of the integrity of the
Turkish empire the condition of the alliance, that Count
Nesselrode, even whilst complaining of the separate wrongs
of Russia, thus defines the meaning of the treaty :—" It is
sufficient," he says in his dispatch to Prince Lieven of the
6th of January, 1828, " for the Emperor to have signed an
agreement with his allies to insure his adherence to the
principles which it establishes." " The first and the most
essential of all this is that which prohibits to the Powers
who signed the treaty of London conquests and exclusive
advantages. His Majesty has already announced that in any
supposable casehe will never de%•iatefrom it." In what terms
can language more clearly define the obligations contractedby
the three Powers towards Turkey, towards each other, and to-
wardsmankind, or what stronger pledge could have been given
to all other nations of the absence of ambitious views on the
part "of Russia and France, whilst preparing their squa-
drons for the Levant, than the very words of the treaty
itself? With regard to the treaty of July, 1827, having
had nothing to do with the French expedition to Algiers in
1830, the assertion is a mere quibble. The • retention of
Algiers by France, after her repeated acknowledgment of
the supremacy of the Sultan in that province, is a distinct
and palpable violation of the conditions of the treaty of
July 7, which restricted the power of the three contracting
parties within the limits assigned to them by the treaty of
Vienna. With reference to our charge against Lord Pal-
merston of having recognized the blockades of Mexico and
Buenos Ayres before , they had been approved of or even
been known by the Government of France, it may suf-
fice to refer our readers to the letters of Mr. Backhouse
and Mr. Mandeville, inserted in the Times of the Ist and
7th of June.—Tinges.

The Tithe Commissioners for England and Wales have
just published a manifesto as to their " views and intentions"
in regard to the employment of " the compulsory powers"
with which they have been invested, for the purpoie of ef-
fecting commutations of Tithe ! Bythis document it would
appear, that the work of commutation goes briskly on.
" During the last six months 1,003 voluntary agreements
have been received." Such is the statement of the Com-
missioners! The necessity of Tithe-commutation—the ne-
cessity in other words, of getting rid of much scandal and
clamour, and, it may be, of some real evils, has long been
apparent to reflecting men ;—but the principles on which a
general scheme of Tithe-composition ought to be effected,
might admit of much doubt, and give rise to great diversity
of opinion ! We incline strongly to question the soundness
of the principles on which the Ministerial plan of Tithe-
commutation is based ! Tithes have, during a very long
period, been denounced by a particular section of
" reformers," on the ground that they affect the culti-
vation of the soil, in a most injurious fashion. Tithes
are alleged, by the whole tribe of political economists,
to operate very differently from rent, on the labours
of the farmer. Rent (according to the theory of that
class of speculators) is a fixed quantity—fixed at
all events, for a term of years. But tithes are described as
a fluent—as a burden that increases, or decreases, directly,
as the amount of labour and capital expended by the
farmer, increases, or decreases ! Hence, tithes have been
characterised as the most injurious of all the imposts to
which the cultivators of the soil can be subjected—as an
impost, repressive of agricultural enterprise—and, therefore,
as an impost, from the influence of which, the public suf.l
fers to a remarkable extent ! Into the soundness of this
theory—into the accuracy of the reasonings by which it is
supported, we do not intend, now, to inquire. We are
content, for the moment, to assume that the econeenical
theory is the correct one ! That theory, let it be observed,
seeks to establish the noxiousness of tithes, ,by seeking to
prove that the existence of tithes is most injurious to the
public ; in other words, to the consuming classes. Be it
so ! If, however, the public suffers from the existence of
the tithe system, the public ought, undoubtedly, to bear
the cost of the system of tithe-commutation. But such
is not the principle on which the ministerial scheme of com-
mutation proceeds. No :—although the burden of tithes
is alleged to rest upon the public, the burden of com-
muting tithe is destined to rest upon the class of land-
oWners ! The economists do, indeed, assign a reason for this
arrangement. They are aware that untithed land yields,
proportionably, a higher rent than land subject to tithe ;
and they argue, that if tithe were abolished universally,
tithe land would, universally, rise in value ! It is in ac-
cordance,
therefore, with this process of reasoning, that, as
the class of landowners may be expected to reap the benefit
of tithe-commutation, the class of landowners should be
saddled with the cost of the experiment ! Amidst the play
of their arguments on this point, however, the economists
are apt to forget the original ground of their fierce opposi-
tion to tithes. That ground was the interest of the public.
The public, we were assured, paid the tithes—and, the; e-
' fore, tithes were to be got rid of, at all hazards. But if, as'
we have already stated, the public really bars the burden
of tithe, the public, undoubtedly, ought to pay the price
required for removing that burden If, on the other hand,
it be true (as the economists also allege) that the land-
owners ought to sustain the expense of the process of
tithe-commutation, because they are to reap the benefit
of that commutation—why, th.-n, it necessarily follows
that the economists' special friend—the public—does
not—and that the_ landlords do, in truth, baor the bur-
den of the present tithe system ! Both propositions of the
economists in regard to tithes, cannot, in short, be true ;
but the economists have, at all events, succeeded in per-
suading the landowners of the congruity of these two con-
dradictory propositions. The landowners have, in other
words, fallen into the economical tithe-trap, as, in 1819,
they fell into the economical currency-trap. The results
trill will prove as dec:dedly injurious to the landed interest
in the case of tithes, as in the case of currency—although not
injurious, to the same•extent ! It is exceedingly doubtful,
be it observed, ehether the value of tithed land will ski) at
all—or more, at all events, than to a very slight ex-
tent—in . consequence of the commutation of tithes !
True, there is, at present, a considerable difference between
the market value of tithed, and of tithe-free land ;—but that
result arises from the circumstance, that the market value of
tithed land is regulated by the market value of land free from
tithe—and tithe-free land, under the present system, com-
mands somethinj like what the economists style a monopoly
price. But when all the land of England and Wales shall
he rendered tithe-free the fair presumption is that tithe-
free land will sink in market value! in other words, when
tithe shall be commuted, the price of agricultUral produce
will, in all probability, decline—and the landowners will,
therefore, in all probability, find themselves cheated in the
prospect which has been held out to them, of realising the
difference which now obtains between the rents of tithed
land, and of land that is tithe-free ! The public, that is to
say, the consuming classes—do now, we believe, bear the
burden of tithes ; and when tithes shall be commuted the
consuming classes, it will be found, will reap all the advan-
tage of the change ! The tithe-commutation scheme is, in
short, another wholesale act of robbery perpetrated by the
Whig economists on the landowners of England !—Morn-
ing Herald.

It is truly ludicrous to find public writers of the Tory
school extolling the Corn-laws as essential to the welfare of
the country, and, at the same time, affecting great concern
for the working classes, and making a vain and futile at-
tempt to write down a Liberal Government as the origi-
nators and supporters of the Poor-laws, and other measures
of a Malthusian character, as they are pleased to term
them. Down with the Poor-laws, say these writers, and
down with all those measures of Whig origin which tend
only to create distinctions of an invidious and hateful na-
ture between the labouring population and the aristocracy.
It should be first shown, however, that the Poor-laws have
this tendency ; and when this is done, care should be taken
to prove that the laws which these wholesale condemners
uphold are of another character. Every means has been
adopted to misrepresent the Poor-laws and to deceive
the lower classes in reference to them. Efforts of
every kind have been resorted to for the purpose
of exciting public prejudice against them. But
what ends have the traducers had in view ? Under
pretence of caring for the poor, they have been endeavour-
ing to promote their own party purposes, and to get them-
selves, or the leaders of their clique, once more elevated t
office. There was one Judas, a Conservative, of course,
and withal a traitor, who affected the same concern for the
poor. But he had the bag, and had what was put therein
at his disposal, and hence his desire to promote contribu-
tions to the poor. The Tories, happily, have not now the
bag ; but we know how they eared for the poor when they
had the control of it, and this knowledge will enable us to
appreciate their loud protestations of anxiety for the wel-
fare of the lower classes. They who, when they were in
power, failed not to oppress the labourer, and make pre-
tence of doing him service, paid his wages in part out of
the bag entrusted to them, to wit, the parochial purse,
are not the parties to obtain public credence when they,
boast of their great desire, their disinterested solici-
tude, for the elevation and domestic comfort of the
poor. They who have lost the opportunity of paving
their labourers in this way, or whose tenants, with
whom they condole, have lost it, may possibly have an-
other motive for their denunciations of the Poor-laws than
that which they desire to have credit for. That philan-
thropy is to be suspected, that benevolence cannot fail to
be mistrusted, which springs out of party spirit. It may
happen that the same motives that influence these gentle-
men of the Tory school to contend for the necessity of the
Corn-laws, under pretence of promoting the interests of
the agricultural labourer, may stimulate them to abuse the
Poor-laws and vilify their originators. Nothing can be
more certain than that the working classes will be very sus-
picious of that love and kindness, and that zeal for their
welfare which manifests itself in an article or a speech to-
dey in favour of the Corn-laws, and in another to-morrow
for their exclusive benefit in reprobation of the Poor-laws.
What is the spirit of the Corn-laws but a decidedly exclu-

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, AUGUST 31, 1838.

sive spirit ? And what their language but that of aristo-
cratic pride and overbearing arrogance ? " Whereas," sa:
they in effect, " certain classes of the people, commonly
known as the productive classes, were sent into the won't
for the sole purpose of labouring for the advantage of tic
aristocracy of Great Britain, or 'the landed interest,' ts
they are usually styled ; and whereas high rents, whidi
are absolutely necessary to the enjoyment of those luxuri!s
of life, and to the maintenance of that state, and dignity,
and distinctive character, to which we have been, frau
time immemorial, accustomed, can only be maintained oy
the prohibition, by means of high duties, of all for*
corn ; be it therefore enacted, despite all disastrous cm-
sequences which are likely to acccrue to the aforemin-
tioned productive classes," &c., &c. Who can do otter-
wise than smile, if he do not even indulge in a hearty
laugh, when be finds the supporters of such laws denoule-
ing the new Poor-laws, and other measures of the Liberal
party, as exclusive, and tending' to injure and degrade ,he
poor? Who can avoid feeling disgust, when the out-ald-
out friends of the starvation laws, as the measures adored
for excluding foreign corn from our markets have been
aptly called, set up for advocates of the rights and inte-
rests and honourable position of the poor? However, this
much is certain, that nothingcan be more necessary- than that
the working classes should be well advertised of the sympathy,
and compassion, and tenderness which their Tory and pro-
Corn-law friends cherish in reference to them. Nor can

.
anything be more needful than that their new friends
should themselves make proclamation of their ultra bene-
volence, and their zeal in the cause of poverty and distress.
The cheering and animating intelligence might otherwise
never reach those for whom it is designed. True it is, that
the best Friend the poor ever had, he who preached the
Gospel to them, healed their diseases, and went about
doing good, and making them the chief objects of his bene-
volent labours, has warned us not to be " as the hypocrites,
who sound a trumpet before them ;" but then the urgency
of the case, its absolute necessity, will prove an apology for
these friends of the Corn-laws and the poor, Now that
wheat is at 84s. the quarter, and likely to be higher, how
could the lower classes possibly be acquainted with the
friendly and kindly feelings which are cherished towards
them by the Tory supporters of the Corn-laws, but for
the assurances and loud protestations of the latter. Nay,
nothinc, can be more pardonable, because nothing can pos-
sibly be more requisite, than the daily reiteration of the

SECOND

announcement. It is most desirable that the poor should
know, and not be allowed to forget, who are their true
friends.—Morning Advertiser.
The London Journalists who are, or appear to be, in the
interest of Mr. O'Connell, take pains to lead their readers
astray as to Conservative statements and arguments re-
specting Irish politics. When, for exam* we, and others
of our party, dwell upon the undeniable fad, that the Irish
Romanists were a thousand times more tranquil under the
severest pressure of British power than the., now are, after
so much has been conceded to them, the &Connell Jour-
nalists exclaim, with well-affected horror-e" See there !
there is Toryism -for you—these men are easel oppressors
in their hearts, and that which they most ardmtly desire is
to re-enact the penal laws." For such a representation as
this there is not the slightest ground, nor could any
conjecture so monstrous be hazarded, if tie whole of
the matter were fairly stated. The statement of
the better behaviour of the Romanists under the
pressure of the severest laws against them, is not an
abstract statement, much, less is it a statement made
for the purpose of advocating or encouraging a renewal of
these stringent laws. But it is a reply to the allegation of
Mr. O'Connell's partisans, that there would be no agitation
but for the tyranny of the Tories, in not yielding to the
present demands of Mr. O'Connell. We say that expe-
rience (the best witness that can be called into Court upon
such an occasion) proves that this allegation deserves no
'credit. Instead of restrictive laws being the cause of Irish
agitation, we learn, when we call upon experience to state
the facts, that agitation never was so little as when restric-
tive laws were greatest, and that continually as the asserted
cause of agitation has been removed, the agitation has be-
come greater than it was before. Is it to be expected—
ought it in fairness to be expected—that, knowing these
facts, we should not state them, in opposition to the assertion
so confidently put forth by the O'Connellist journals, that the
existing restrictive laws are the .cause, and the reasonable
cause, of Irish agitation ? Upon the important question,
whether or no the political system of Romanism may by
any means (short of severe penal laws) be made consistent
with the tranquillity and safety efa Protestant State we are,
happily, not called upon to offer any decided opinion. The
history of this country for the last sixty years certainly does
not decide the question in the affirmative, and the experiment
has not been conducted with such skill, or for such a length of
time, as would justify us in a peremptory decision in the
negative; We, therefore, do not ask for a re-enactment a
the penal laws. We do not say that any such thing is
necessary. Wo do not know that it is possible. We do
say, however, that so far as the experlment has gone, the
enthusiastic prognostications of those most opposed to penal
' and restrictive laws have been completely disappointed.
Do we rejoice in this ? God forbid. We wish that the
Rornaniste of Ireland were tranquil and prosperous, and
trustworthy even as the English and Scotch are. But
while we know they are not, we shall 'not be so forget-
ful of the blessings of our Protestant Constitution
e shall not be so mad with faction,. or so crazy
with maudlin " liberality "—as to make no dis-
tinction between faithkss enemies and faithful friends.
They who exclaim so vehemently against British
stillCo n seesrevraetiis‘e•eds for
against whatt .hteh elyri callsh, o
otgyi7
b
to make allowance for the way in which Conservatives have
treated, and for the share which they (the complain-
ninnycoamnidnon candour
oppression,
complain-
ants) have had in that treatment. Supposing it true, as
the O'Connellists &lege, that the treatment of the :rish by
the Tory party—say from 1800 to 1828—was opressive
and harsh, still it was equally true that they who now com-
plain, admitted in 1829 that this bad treatment was com-
pletely at an end, and that the Irish had no longer any-
thing to complain of. We would very respectfully entreat
our Contemporary the Globe, for instance, to turn to its own
file of March and April, 1829, and after reading there the
ably and correctly written articles upon Ireland end the
Tory policy with regard to that kingdom, to tell us candidly
how it can reconcile its accounts of the free and emanci-
pated conditiOn of Ireland at that time, and of the tranquil
prosperity which was to be anticipated, witl: the pie-
lures of Tory oppression and cruelty which it now draws.
There have been no restrictive laws passed since then. The
hurthen of the Established Church (as it is called) has not
been increased since then. Buteat that time there was no
whisper against the Established Church heard from the
Romanists. No ;it was their interest to deceive, and they
did deceive ; and the Globe, whether knowingly or unknow-
ingly, aided, and very powerfully aided, in that deceit.
Much is said of Road gist irritatimeLbut have we Pro-
testants no cause for irritation ? Were ever men so syste-
matically, so grossly, so impudently cheated, as we have
been by the Irish Romanists ? And is it not rather too
much that the English Whigs, who, were either deceived
as well as we, or took part in the deceit—is it not
rather insufferable that now they shall change their
note, and charge us with oppression, whom they did
laud for our liberality ? The Tories granted eman-
cipation, but they granted it on the plainly under-
stood and expressed condition that the Protestant Church
was not to suffer in its security. The Romanists asserted
that all its insecurity had been owing to the withholding of
emancipation, and that they being once emancipated its
future peace and safety were certain. Did the Whigs object
to this? Not they.; they re-echoed the statement, and the
organ of the party—the precise and pithy Globe of that day
was the most earnest in maintaining that the Tory party
had done the best thing possible for the Protestant Church
in Ireland bygranting emancipation. Shall there be no allow-
ancet foundha t
tmht
that
adfite r
allsf ot r
ut Phs rs omtwea
asdtsea u
an
by
yrs
eut shpeie
craft,Rio °amnia
eanrndei
sigtr
gross
oi tsoasft i
rotahns
eewa hli et
Legisla-
tive and
oi
ds
e
c hu
rpcho wiear
rr
ealnatoedd
atsh e
wmrewtcalisedto as
render
stllar et i
vEstablished
Church in Ireland as wretched as Legislative persecu-
tion could make it? Is it not' monstrous that the Whig
ho
lcajpaogobrnauooci rtnueensrdsatetel
laboured
stntthotssesots
hth Ehl
eooasua Romaniststtl
long
bwlanii
tsohhdwoe udsjtoo
fear
that-
enaahuroew ;et
civilhhst
eutwhi
hefyeresdetaueeoldct
persuade
himetterhf:yueulyt
iahtdßmaetwoi
gamßhsatr Romanists
ell
which was
partici-
pation of legislative privileges, all they wanted,
or would ever contend for? When we urge in
forevery
e been
purpose
the continual system of the Romanists, and that therefore
no dependence whatever is to be placed upon any state-
ments which they now make, or which are made on their
behalf. It is at present held out to the nation by the
Whigs that if such and such things were granted to the
Romanists in Ireland, they would not agitate any more.
We say that the Whigs have been making similar assertions
any time these thirty years past ; but as fast as the things
they pointed out were granted, new agitations arose for
something else ; and instead of the Whigs confessing that
they had,been wrong, they renew the old impudent cry
of " concede this, and then you will have peace." Our
Toryism, then, consists in adhering to facts, and in demand-
ing that cheats and liars shall be treated as cheats and
liars, and not as trustworthy men.—MorningPost.

SU NT OFFICE, Seven o' Clock.

OF THIS EVENING.

CROWN-OFFICE, AUG 31.

WAR-OFFICE, AuG._3l.

BANKRUPTS.

THE IRISH LA TR APPE.—It is stated that amongst
the recluses at Mount Melleray, the religious and agricultural
establishment in the county of Waterford, so recently visited
by Mr. O'Connell, a monk was discovered who once shone
conspicuously in the musical world, and at the Opera in
London particularly. Signor Ambrogetti is said to have
joined the monks of La Trappe before they were expeHeil
from France, and to be now a member of the Irish branch of
this rigorous and laborious community of ascetics.... Globe.

EDITION.

THE LONDON GAZETTE

MEMBER RETURNED TO SERVE IN THIS PRESENT PARLIAMENT.
BOROUGH OF GREAT YARMOUTH—WiIIiam Wilshere, of Hit-
chin, in the county of Herts, Esq.

7th Regiment of Foot—Captain T. R. Baker to be Major, by
purchase, vice Lord W. Thynne, promoted ; Lieutenant G. G.
Glover to be Captain, by purchase, vice Baker ; Ensign Hon. W.
Pakenham, from the 52d Regiment, to be Lieutenant, by purchase,
vice Glover, Aug. 31.
5.3 d Foot--Captain FL S. Phillips to be Major, by purchase,
vice Butler, promoted; Lieutenant R. Dyott to be Captain, by
purchase, vice Phillips; Ensign W. R. Mansfield to be Lieute-
nant, by purchase, vice Dyott ; H. M. Atkins, Gent. to be
Ensign, by purchase, vice Mansfield, Aug. 31.
69th Foot.—Capt. lion. C. S. Clements, from the half-pay of
the 35th Regiment, to be Captain, vice W. T. Smyth, who ex-
changes, Aug. 31. Lieut.! H. D. O'Halloran to be Captain, by
purchase, vice Clements, who retires ; Ensign W. Coates to be
Lieutenant, by purchase, vice O'Halloran, Sept. 1.
76th Foot—Lieutenant-Colonel A. F. Macintosh, from the
half-pay Unattached, to be Lieutenant-Colonel, vice E. Studd, who
exchanges, receiving the difference, Aug. 31.
79th Foot—Lieut. G. W. Denys, from the half-pay of the 15th
Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Carter, promoted, Aug. 31.
Royal Newfoundland Veteran Companies—Lieutenant A. J.
Macpherson, from the half-pay Unattached, to be Lieutenant, vice
J. Grant, who exchanges, receiving the difference, Aug. 31.
UNATTACHED. _ _ _

To be Lieutenant-Colonels, by purchase.—Major T. Butler,
from the 53d Regiment; Major Lord W. Thynne, from the 7th
Foot, August 31.
To be Captain, without purchase.—Lieutenant W. Cartan, from
the 79th Regiment, August 31.
BREVET. . .

Lieutenant-Colonel A. E:3laCintosh, of the 50th Foot, to be
Colonel in the Army, June 2Mth.
MEMORANDA.
Lieut.-Colonel J. H. Phelps, half-pay Unattached, has been al-
lowed to retire from the Service, by the sale of an Unattached
Lieutenant-Colonelcy, he being about to become a settler in New
South Wales, dated Aug. 31.
Major-General J. Pringle has been allowed to retire from the
Service, by the sale of an Unattached Lieut.-Colonelcy, Aug. 31.
The appointment of Major William Cowper Coles, from half •
pay Unattached, to be Major in the 2d Regiment of Life Guards,
on the 21st May 1829, should be, vice llugh William Barton, who
exchanges, and not who exchanges receiving the difference, as pre-
viously stated.
The names of the Gentleman appointed to an Ensigncy in the
13th Foot, on the 17th August, 1838, are Frederick Van Strau-
benzee, and not William Frederick Straubenzee.

DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY.
CHARLES HYACINTHE DUBEC, silk-dyer, Princes
street, Spitalfields

RALPH STOPFORW:haI-manufacturer, Audenshaw, Ash-
ton-under-Lyne, to surrender Sept. 14 and Oct. 12, at eleven,
at the Commissioners' Rooms, Manchester. Kearns, Red Lion-
square, London; Todd, Manchester.
SAMUEL BETTISON, librarian, Margate, Sept. 12, at six,
and Oct. 12, at eleven, at the London Hotel, Margate. Boys
and Son, Margate ; Egan,: Waterman, and Wright, Essex-street,
Strand, London.

COAL MARKET.-(THIS D AY.)

.last market-day, 91.
.r'er Ton. s.
Walls End Lambton S3 3
Walls En•J Russel's Hetton 23 0
Walls End Stewart's
I Walls End ...... 22 6

Walls End Hartlepool -3 3
Dixon's Buttorknowl

--„..
Walls End Barrington Tees 21.1 0
Walls End Clarencg Tees 2O 0
JVnll r End South Durham
Walls End St. Helen's Tees lB 6
Walis End Tee,
'22 6

Walls End Victoria Tees i l 6
Walls End West Iletton
IVlanstoii Main l7 0

NGE.--( THIS DAY.i
f iibralLir • 4S
Leghorn l4
Genoa ti
Mi!an 11
Venice cifj

q 9
raltrroo per oz. :17%

'2y,
Rio Janeiro 27%

Bahia
Iluevos Ayres
--
New York, 21 days' sight
Philadelphia
OF BULLION, Pk H OZ
Portugal (1:71.1, ...... 0 0
Fr:relfn Gold, in bars l7 9
New Doubloons ...... 0 0
Dollars

Silv,r. bars, standard 0 4 11N