The Sun.
London, England, 1838-03-19 00:00:00

LONDON :
MONDAY EVENING, MARCH 19, 1838.

We copied on Saturday an article from the Times at-
tacking the decision of the Hull Committee for admitting
the clerk of Mr. EARNSHAW, the Under-sheriff of Hull,
to give evidence after he had heard the evidence given by
his master. Our Contemporary was fired at this un-
seemliness, with all that virtuous indignation to which
he knows so well how to give vent ; and poor
Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND, with all the Committee, were
lashed as became the turpitude of allowing, what is every
day allowed in our Courts in civil cases, one witness to
hear another's testimony. The language of the Times was
quite withering, though we have not yet seen Sir GEORGE
STatcxLasin's death in the obituary. But there was
another great man who was hit equally hard by the Times,
and we believe ho has not perished under the castigation.
Jr. the case of the Hull Committee the question, the Times
says, was decided by a vote, and Sir G. STRICKLAND
was with the majority. In the Evesham case, Sir ROBERT
PEEL, the Chronicle tells us, " ruled that the witness
should be examined, and admitted his evidence." Sir Ro-
BERT, as the Chairman, appears to have taken all the re-
sponsibility on himself, though the objection was precisely
similar to the objection in the Hull case, and his decision
must be either condemned by the Times, or admitted to be a
justification of Sir G. STRICKLAND'S conduct. In the Eve-
sham case, the evidence of a Clerk to Mr. Bownswic Zs agent
was objected to, because he had heard every word up to the
flue his evidence was required. In this case, too, the fault,
ii► any, is aggravated by Sir R. PEEL having given notice
et the commencement of the inquiry, that no witnesses
...1,41at to enter the room unless summoned, and that
potiee was posted on the doors. He was sensible
therefore of all the impropriety—if any—of that
enduct which was common both to him and Sir GEORGE
STRICKLAND. For us, who are great admirers of the im-
mense powers of vituperation possessed by our Contem-
porary, when they are directed against a proper object, it is
great pleasure to see them so strongly applied, by impli-
cation, to Sir ROBERT PEEL.

The continuation, by adjournment, of the proceedings
at i_zeter Hall through two whole days, is a circum-
st,,nce, we understand, quite unprecedented in the
history or public meetings. Upwards of 12,000 tickets, it
i, said, were distributed on this occasion. If the sense of
t..e community is to be ascertained by such meetings, the
inhabitants of the capital of the British Empire have de-
clared, in no equivocal terms, that they are for the imme-
al,.ite release of the negroes froi* the grinding bondage
under the false pretence of apprenticeship, they have
keen suffering since the Ist of August, 1834. That a I
similar feeling—a feeling as strong and decided on this sub-
,j::ct prevails throughout the country there cannot be any
.lauht, and that it will manifest itself in a manner as autho-
ritative is, we hold, equally certain. The voice of indig-
nant millions will be raised against the horrible enormities
have been brought to light by the transactions of the
last few days, and that voice will demand, in a tone that
eAnnot be resisted, the instant emancipation of the negroes.
There cannot new be any compromise with those who have
Acted so faithlessly as the West India planters have done.
The man must be an idiot or something worse, who, after
what has taken place, can put any trust in laws made to se-
cure the negroes against the cruelty of their tyrants, while
one single link of the chain remains unbroken. We, there-
fore, call upon the people to instruct their representatives,
pithout any reference to the narrow views of party, zealously
to support the measure to be introduced into the House
of Commons on the 29th of this month by Sir GEORGE
LICKLA ND, the object of which is to terminate the appren-
ticeship on the Ist of August, 1838. Should this measure be
adopted, the negro will still have reason to complain that he
has endured four bitter years of slavery after the British
Parliament pronounced him free, and the British nation that
it has paid Twenty Millions for nothing—not one of the con-
-I,iderations for which all this money was given having been
realized. The only party who has really profited by the
bargain—the only party who has reason to plume himself
upon the success of his stratagems—is the planter. He has
got more labour out of his slave than he did before the
Emancipation Act, has doubled the value of his estate, and
pocketed an immense sum of the public money to boot. Such
is the new theory of compensation Confer an important
benefit on the West Indies and you must compensate them
for so doing, otherwise you are devoid of all sense of justice.

Again was Mr. O'CoNNELL's statement of the character of
Election Committees confirraed on Tuesday night in the de-
bate on Mr. Serjeant \\TWILIT'S Bill to amend the Irish Re-
gistration Acts. Lord STANLEY was the Tory who then
set his seal to the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin's

certificate of perjury. Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT, another

Tory, in a manner, confirmed the statement by imputing a
readiness to commit perjury to all classes. English gentle-
men, he said, would never rely on an oath to decide the
value of property. English gentlemen, those to whom he
was addressing himself, know that oaths do not make men
tell truth or do justice on political questions, or why
should they so readily suspect perjury in others ? It is
rather curious to find those who profess to be so extremely
sensitive to such accusations when made against themselves,
resting their arguments and their laws on the supposition
that men in a humble situation of life are ready and willing
to commit perjury. Their own dark suspicions, which they
.express so freely against others are a justification for re_
orting such accusations, which in truth they invite back
ai themselves.

Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT made another observation in the
debate, which confirms a remark of ours, made on Tuesday.
He was not disposed to think, he said, that it would be
rash in the House to part with its jurisdiction over Contro-
verted Elections ; for he thought those questions would

- •
never be properly decided till the House parted with that
jurisdiction. We may, therefore, anticipate that the House
of Commons will by and by be brought to confide all dis-
puted points of Law, concerning elections, as it now con-
fides all questions concerning titles to estates, to the Judges
of the land. A worse tribunal than the House of Com-
mons, which is composed exclusively of political partizans,
in all its shapes and forms, cannot possibly be invented ; and
we quite ave.' with the Chronicle of Wednesday, that Mr.
C. BULLER'S measure, which continues the jurisdiction in
the House, will now satisfy no man. We must havo a
more sweeping Reform.
As there seems a growing attachment in the House of
Commons to form rational opinions, we regret that Mr. Ser-
geant WOULFE does not propose to introduce at once a more
vomplete system of registration for Ireland, instead of tin-
ng up the present scheme. He proposes to improve it by
.tving only one Court of Registration instead of four in the year,
and by constituting a Court of Appeal which shall finally
decide all questions of registration both for and against
those who are once placed on the registry. At present,
,vhen a man's name is once on the list, it cannot be removed
for eight years, which is a source of many complaints. We
apprehend, however, that the evils of one registration in
r.the year, though not so great as four, will still be found so
vnbearable, that the Irish, like the English, will demand a
more simple and practicable method than one which places
'.heir franchise at the mercy of quibbling attornies,
uencing revising barristers. Mr. WOULFE obtained leave
to bring in his Bill ; but as it relieves the Irish to some ex-