The Sun.
London, England, 1831-02-08 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS,

There is much discussion in public on the subject
of the pensions, and the determination of Ministers re-
specting them. The principle on which present pensions
are to be continued is that of charity ; —an agreeable sen-
t'ment to the distressed, an unassailable one to the phi-
Irrithropist,—to the haughty beggar, to the alms-catchiug
no'ile, justly painful and degrading. Ministers, therefore,
may think they have acted adroitly in placing this outlay
of tie public money to that account. They may have
acted adroitly for two reasons: first, they will have
placed those who persevere in receiving the public bounty
in their proper light and character, as callous beggars;
and nest, it cannot be conceived but that some will from
a mere sense of shame relinquish the plunder. Will the
noble act of the King in foregoing his 50,0e0/. be a
solitary act? Will it not operate as an example? Of this
we are sure, that whatever example a King sets of an op-
posite character, that is followed and copied zealously
enough. Are the generous deeds of Royalty only to re-
main without imitators? There are many upon those
pension lists which have swelled our columns lately, that
are better able to relinquish a portion of their claims upon
the public purse than his Majesty--some even of the
wealthiest of the nobility ! It may be readily supposed
that such individuals as the Bankheads, for example, who
probably may not be well off, cannot now give up
what they never ought to have received ; they might else
be obliged to starve or work,---grievous alternatives, no
doubt: but such would not lie the case with Lady West-
meath, the sister of Lord Salisbury, or with Lady Morn-
ington, the mother of the Duke of Wellington, and of the
Lords Maryborough and Cowley ! These names occur to
us first, but we could mention scores of others. Can it
be believed, then, that the Marquis of Salisbury will any
longer suffer his sister, Lady Westmeath, or the Duke of
Wellington his mother, Lady Mornington, to be main-
tained, wholly or in part, as objects of charity, by a dis-
tressed nation ? Impossible. If they do suffer this,
there is not a shopkeeper in London, who by ho-
nest industry has got a little before the world, that
has not a nobler soul than the Marquis, and that
Duke. There is not an honest shopkeeper in Cheapside,
or the Strand, or in the town of Hatfield, or the ♦illage of
Mornington, that would not scorn to have his sister or
mother kept by the public through charity / We were
going to speak of the Holmeses, father and son,—the
latter, we believe, a youth at College ; but we found we
were launching into too wide a subject at present. As it
appears clear, however, that Ministers, in making all the
persons who figure on the pension lists objects of charity,
have tossed them down for the examination of that public
which supplies the funds of the charity out of which they
arc to be fed, we do say that the names of the objects
cannot be too often brought before the country, nor their
pretensions to eleemosynary support too strictly canvassed.
It will be seen, by reference to the report of proceedings in
the House of Commons, that some discussion arose on the
Pension List; and we infer with pleasure, from the candid
tone of Lord Althorp, that the list is not so peremptorily
unalterable as was hinted by an Hon. Baronet on Friday
last. Indeed, we have such confidence in the Noble Lord,
that we anticipate not merely reductions in this branch of
expenditure, but in others of a more extensive nature, so
that the public burdens may be sensibly alleviated.— Times.

In giving the news yesterday of the election of the Duke
of Nemours to the throne of Belgium, we expressed our
conviction that the King of the French, Louis Philip,
would refuse his consent to his son's acceptance of the
proffered honours. We relied on the solemn pledges of his
Minister Sebastiani, but particularly on his own good faith,
which has never yet been sullied. We fully appreciated
the high value of those qualities in a new Government,
and felt persuaded that a dynasty just recognized by Euroie
would rather sacrifice an accession of territory, or an in-
crease of temporary power, than endanger its permanent
security by deceiving its Allies, and laying its foundation
on duplicity and perfidy. It is therefore with great plea-
sure that we announce the firm resolution of the French
Monarch to refuse his son to the turbulent people of Bel-
gium. Had he acted otherwise, we could scarcely find
language strong enough to express our opinion of his
character. The whole course of conduct pursued by
his Ministers would then have been liable to interpre-
tations destructive of all confidence in their future pro-
fessions or engagements, and Punic faith would scarcely
have been a type of the fashionable faith of the Palais
Royal. Some appearances had certainly excited suspicions
in the conduct of the Belgic negotiations, but we must
now believe them to have been accidental. Had not the
official refusal of Louis Philip to the appointment of his
son been announced at the same time that his Minister Se-
bastiani's last letter was published, we should have sus-
pected it part of a system of trickery, not only to get
Belgium, but to get disencumbered of its just obligations.
The French Minister objects to the settlement of the pe-
cuniary claims between Holland and Belgium by the
Allies; but this seems to us precisely a question in which,
as acknowledged mediators, they had a right to interfere.
The fortresses on the Belgic frontier, for the expenses
of which the Dutch have contributed so much money,
or contracted so much debt, were constructed or re-
paired, not for Dutch, but for Belgic or European
objects. Unless, therefore, the Allies themselves stepped
in to indemnify the King of Holland for a part of
the charge, he has a right to look to Belgium as his
debtor. Whether, then, is it fitting that the Allies
should settle a question resulting from a treaty to which
they were all parties, or allow a war to break out between
the litigants, which would endanger all their previous ar-
rangements? Besides, if M. de Sebastiani would look at
the series of protocols which have emanated from the
London conferences, he would see that such a settlement
of the Belgic obligations to Holland was contemplated
among the first of them. In a former document of this
kind it is said that Belgium, though politically indepen-
dent of Holland, had not released itself from its duties and
obligations to Holland and to Europe. Prince Talleyrand,
who has been a party to all those transactions, must cer-
tainly have understood his instructions, and therefore such
a disclaimer of his acts seems to argue a change of system,
either with regard to him, or to the policy which he has
pursued. In the first case, we may expect the resignation
of the Prince; in the second, a termination of the London
conferences. We solicit attention to the letter of M. de
Potter, in order that it may be seen how much Belgium
has gained by her late revolution. It completely confirms
every thing that we hare ever said on the subject.— Times.
A number of petitions presented by Lord King against
tithes, produced a discussion last night in the House of
Lords on the tithing-system and every thing connected
with it—as lay-impropriatiens, residence of clergy, com-
mutation, and the rest. From this discussion, we learn
that Lord King has many more petitions to present against
tithes, so that the subject will be frequently revived in the
House, and always in the way of attack. And the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury has some project in petto for further
enforcing the residence of the clergy. To both lay and
spiritual Peers we should say, "My Lords, do what yon
like, but leave us at last a national church if you please,
consisting of a body of well-educated clergy, and of man-
ners and habits such as usually distinguish men of culti-
vated minds: for if you eradicate these, we know full well
what extravagancies will overrun the land under the name
of religion." Lord King asserts that the church property
is public property, or the property of the state ; and how
any man can deny this who practically and positively saw
the state (under a peculiar form of Government cer-
tainly !) take the whole of it in France, and dispose of the
possessors in a manner equally compendious, we canna
conceive. The same may be done in England at any
time, if the will become general, both with the posses-
sors of church, and of every other species of property. It
is madness to attempt to controvert Lord King's principle
on this point, which is mere matter of fact and of history.
What has been done in one place, may surely be done in
another. Equally right and unanswerable is his Lordship
in his reply to the Bishop of Lincoln, that the property
which was left or given to the clergy, by pious men of old,
for the purpose of promoting the divine worship, and
supporting a resident clergy, was given to the Roman
Catholic clergy, and therefore never can belong, or of
right appertain, to a Protestant church ! The revenues
also, which anciently belonged to the King, belonged to a
Popish Ling, and therefore could in no case descend to a
King who was of the reformed faith : and, in truth, all
the property of the kingdom anciently belonged to Papists,
and therefore could not of right be transferred to Pro-
testants when the Reformation took place. So that there
is no such thing (though there be a lineal descent of
church from church, and of persons from persons out of the
pale of the Church) as a just and legal possessor of any
property in this kingdom of England, if we except the
few Roman Catholic noblemen and gentlemen who still
adhere to the ancient superstition. We cannot, in can-
dour, however, ascribe the merit of this argument to Lord
King ; for he, in truth, borrowed it from that eminent
statesman and honest politician, William Cobbett..— Times.
The business of Parliament last night was not unimpor-
tant. In the House of Lords, Lord King, in the course
otefnd
someed w excursiveere tiieproperty
remarksof
tupon p tithes, s,w
elicitedh ic h
front con-bt
i: t
e
' Bishops of Lincoln and Bath and Wells an aclrnisssonbto a
rather than that the subject should continueis to
Rock, the
source of discord between the pastor
co
uainnd b
ntrlyandupoinn liet oh i
Church would (sapient to a cominutati
tithes. Lord King congratulated the on

which be considered a most important concession, and
bailed it as the first step towards the settlement of an im-
portant and difficult subject. In the House of Common.
the Civil List became the subject of a " conversation."
Mr. Portman, in the execution, perhaps, of a precon-
certed movement, inquired of the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer whether the integrity of liis plan, as presented to the
House on Friday night, was a sine qua non of the present
Government's remaining in office, and whether the House
was to consider itself at liberty to deal with it without
being supposed to congcdier the Noble Lord in case it
should unfortunately differ from him. Lord Althorp
replied, with great candour, that Govermnent had en •
deavoured to do its duty in preparing the plan ; but, if
the better sense of the " collective wisdom" of Parlia•
went saw room for improvement in it, the present Mi •
tasters were not so sensitive ad to t offence, and, pro-
vided the alterations were " consistent with justice and
goof faith," they Would cheerfully adopt them. The
Noble Lord subsequently stated that he was not so wedded
to that part of his plan which related to retaining the
" Irish and Scotch pensions" in the Civil List, that if
Parliament thought proper to transfer them to the Con-
solidated Fund, he should interpose much objection. This
admission of the Noble Lord must have the effect of en-
larging considerably the jurisdiction of the House, not
strictly, but practically, in dealing with the Civil List.
The question of the barilla duties was brought under con-
sideration. Mr. Bankrs accused Mr. P. Thomson of an
irregularity in altering these duties without the consent of
Parliament, but the Right Hon. Gentleman defended him-
self by precedents, and the late officers of the Treasury
justified his conduct. A discussion then ensued upon the
policy and probable effect of the alteration upon the kelp
manufacturer, which was extended to a considerable
length, and occupied much of the remainder of the
evening.—iforning, Herald.

Lord King, on presenting a petition from a pace in
Somersettthire against tithes, said—
.. He knew that it was said that tithes were property, and so
they were, but very different from individual property. It was
said that tithes were the property of the Church, and it was
asked, if it were not as sacred as other property ? But the pro-
perty of the Church stood upon a different footing from indivi-
dual property. The Church Establishment was the creature of
the State; it was paid for, and in such a manner as the State
pleased. In that respect, then, it was perfectly different from in-
dividual property. A Reverend Prelate had stated, on a former
evening, that Church property was snore ancient than other
property: it might be more ancient than some other property,
but it was at all times the creature of the State mid public pro-
perty ; it was conferred by the State, and it was held as public
property, intended for the benefit of? the State. It was different
frons private property, which was necessary fur the good of so-
ciety. Without private property, we should have nothing but
the spontaneous produce of the earth ; but without tithes, we
should have a great deal more saleable produce of art and skill
than at present. Tithes, then, and private property, operate in
different ways. The institution of private property increased
the produce—the institution of tithes lessened it."

The Bishop of Lincoln, in a tone of mildness unusual
in a churchman, where the property of the Church is in
question, endeavoured to refute Lord King. "He must
maintain that tithes were not established by the State for
a State service. In many cases they were granted by in.
dividuals who had the power, in order to provide for the
due performance of religious service in every parish in the
kingdom. The individuals who granted tithes did not
intend them to be the property of the State." Even ad-
mitting the correctness of the Bishop of Lincoln's theory
of tithes, that in many cases the owners of estates granted
the tithes of their estates to particular churches, this does
not affect the question at issue between him and Lord
King. The Church Establishment is the creature of the
State, which can either annihilate it or change its cha-
racter. A very large portion of the land of the kingdom,
now in the hands of individuals, was granted in like manner
to the Church, but on the suppression of religious bosses,
the State seized it, and this land was the making of the
principal noble families of England. When estates are
given for a specific object, the parties to whom the estates
would have otherwise descended, may, in establishing their
title, claim such estates, if the intention of the donor
is disregarded. But in the case of tithes, even where
there is evidence of a grant, the antiquity of it precludes
the possibility of a challenge on the part of successors to
the donor. The State, therefore, is at full liberty to dis-
pose of tithes in whatever way may be deemed most ad-
vantageous to the public service. It is quite idle, there-
fore, to speak of the property of the church in the ordi-
nary sense of the word. The clergy are servants of the
State, appointed to communicate religious instruction to
the people, and to perform certain religious ceremonies;
and a certain share of the gross produce of the soil having
been granted to them, no matter by whom, it is now found
that the mode of payment, though in early ages attended
with no inconvenience, is now productive of many evils,
and hence the universal. desire of a change. Lord King
said, " the time for composition was gone by. Nothing
short of a commutation measure on a fixed corn rent, not
liable to alteration, and which would not give a greater
than a fixed share of the produce to the
,tithe-owner, not
increasing with the capital employed, would now satisfy
the country." The Bishop of Lincoln said "he was
not opposed to a commutation of tithes, on a fair prin-
ciple. It was necessary, he believed, that the church
should mate sonic sacrifice, and every commutation
must involve a sacrifice; but on that account he
should not object to a commutation." This is fair and
c unlit!. But with respect :to sacrifice, if the principle
of the commutation be just, the present incumbents can-
not be exposed to any material sacrifice. It is true, if
a fixed corn-rent be adopted, that corn-rent, two hundred
years hence, may be considerably less than the tenth of the
gross produce may then be. Two hundred years hence,
the population of England may probably be tripled, and
the wants of the increased population will demand an ex-
tended cultivation. But the Clergyman's stomach does
not increase in the ratio of the increase of the population.
If the fixed corn rent be adequate to the support of a
Clergyman now, it will be adequate two hundred years
hence. The Bishop of Lincoln, however, afterwards
stated, in explanation, that the commutation he meant was
an equivalent in land. This would be greatly preferable to
tithes; but we fear the execution of such a scheme would
be attended with great difficulty. The non-residence of the
English Clergy having been alluded to by Lord King, the
Bishop of London said, "It must surely excite the sur-
prise of their Lordships to hear the Noble Lord mention
that ; for if there was one fact better established histori-
cally than another, it was, that the absence of the Clergy
from different parishes was caused by Lay Impropriators
having taken the Church property. It was owing to the
system of Lay Impropriators that the Clergy were de-
prised of their property, and prevented from residing in
their parishes." This declaration so wrought on Lord
Winchilsea' that he observed—
" If the Legislature should pass an Act to restore to the
Church all the property that ought to belong to it, that would
do, lie thought, a great deal of service to the Church. He was
the proprietor of some tithes : and he should be glad if the Le.
gislature would pass a law to compel all those who possessed the
property of the Church to restore it. He could conscientiously
say that he was in possesion of property which ought not justly
to be his."

This is more than we expected in our knowing age.
There was a time in which Sir Henry Spelman's book on
sacrilege wrought wonders in the way of converting
Church robbers; but, unfortunately for the good cause,
in our days the possessors of Church lands and impropriate
tithes seem as much under the protection of Providence
as their neighbours. We fear that their consciences are
too hard to be induced to profit by the invitation of his
Lordship ; so that he will have both the credit of his
offer and the unchallenged possession of his tithes. But,
after all, what a lame justification of the Church is that
of the Bishop of London. Say that the impropriate
tithes amount to a fifth—even a third—of the whole.
Surely the lands of the Church, and two-thirds of the
gross produce of the soil of all England constitute a fund
sufficiently ample for a Clergy equal to the wants of the
people. The Scotch have a resident Clergy for about
one-fiftk part of what the tithes would amount to. If
the heads of the English Church had been so disposed,
'would it not have been easy for them to have digested a
plan for distributing the enormous revenues of that Church
in such a manner that no part of the population should be
without a religious instructor? When a parish in Scot-
land is too small to afford a competent living, it is united
to another, the first thing considered being the spiritual
wants of the people. It is really an insult to the under-
standings of the people to speak in the present day of lay
impropriatinns being au obstacle in the way of a resident
Clergy. Where there is a will there is a way; hut there
will never lm a will to regulate livings on any rational
principle; fur in such a case some Bishops would not
possess the incomes of a Sovereign, and some parish
Clergy the average incomes of members of the Peerage.
The Clergy have displayed much ingenuity in investiga-
tions connected with the Church power and Church pro-
perty, but they have not tasked their ingenuity much to
discover the means of curing non-residence..—Morning
Chronicle.

We have already sufficiently exposed the fact, that in
1 the plan of Ministers with respect to the Civil List there
is literally nothing to correspond with the 1d
sinus, or to redeem the solemn pledges of economy,euPr";
means of which they juggled themselves into la°ee and
power. Other opportunities will occur of showing that
the change of arrangement, for which the Administration
takes so much credit to itself, is really a change for the
worse. At present it cannot be too strongly impressed
upon the public mind that the scheme of these place.
hunting professors of economy does not reduce the value of
their own official patronage, ordiminish the public burdens,
by a single farthing. This, it cannot be denied, in a scheme
Noceeding from them, is a capital blemish; not because

the Civil List was or is too high, but beeanse their re-
fusal to reduce its amount is a proof of base and contemp-
rible hypocrisy on their part, awl an odious and impudent
confession that they are utterly destitute of principle. The
manoeuvre by which the promised reduction of the Pen-
sion List is altogether evaded, so far as the patronage of
the actual Ministers is ConCerneki, is an insult more gross
than was ever befOre offered by any Ministry to the under-
standing of the country. This charge, it is pretended, is
to he reduced some time or other to 75,0001, but,
as is just and necessary, it is to remain at its pre-
sent amount, 159,3731., dosing the lives of the pre-
sent pensioners. Now it is obvious that a Ministry sin-
cere in its desire of retrenchment would have proposed
a system of progressive reduction, by limiting the power
of the Crown to supply vacancies in the entire Pension
List to some fixsd proportion of the amount actually front
dine to time set free by deaths or otherwise. Instead o!
this simple, natural, honest, and effective mode of pro-
ceeding, what is the device of our hypocritical pretenders
to the character of au economical Administration? They
separate the Pension List into two classes, in one of which
classes
in the
vacancies are to be filled up as fast as they occur,
while the other tire vacancies are not to be filled up at all.
This separation of classes they take care to effect upon a
principle, the only merit of which is that it gives to the for-
mer class all the aged pensioners, who in the course of na-
ture are likely to fall during their possession of office, and to
the latter the mere recent pensioners and younger men
and women, City of whom can be expected to drop during
the present administration, or even during the present
reign. This arrangement is sufficiehtiy intelligible ;
we defy the most ingenious advocate of Ministers to ex-
plain it upon any other principle than that of hypocrisy__
than that of their earnest desire to be thought economical
without submitting to any of the sacrifices which such
economy as they profess would demand. It is said that it
would be injudicious and unfair to suspend suddenly and
altogether the power of the Crown to grant new pensions,
in order to retrench to the fixed amount in the shortest
possible time. And this is quite true. Put is this any reason
why the whole sacrifice of patronage and power should
be reserved for a future Administration or a future reign,
which is the certain effect and manifest intention of the
notable scheme we are considering ? Are our present Mi-
nisters so dull and incapable that they could discover no
middle course ? Or have their inventive faculties been
blunted upon this occasion by a sordid and selfish attach-
ment to the advantages of office? Those Who have re-
marked the high-minded and disinterested regard to the
public service which has distinguished the present Pre-
mier and his colleagues, in the exercise of official patro-
nage, will be at no loss tor an answer to these questions.
If there be any reason why the proposed reduction
should now operate only upon the younger &ass of
pensioners, according to the scheme of Ministers,
the same reason will no doubt exist in equal force when
the Civil List is again to be settled, and when the indivi-
duals who now compose the junior will probably have be-
come the senior class. Should the plea advanced by Lord
Althorp, of the hardship of the present Sovereign of a
sudden suspension of the power of granting pensions be
successful, will not the same plea, founded then upon
precedent as well as reason, equally avail a future Mi-
nister, whenever the same hardship shall really be expe-
rienced ? Can there be any doubt, in abort, that if the
self protecting scheme of the present Ministers take effect,
the senior class of pensioners will always, by means of
easy transfers from one fund to another, he the class in
which vacancies are, and the junior class that in which
vacancies arc not, to be filled tip ?-211orning Post.

LONDON MARKETS.

PRICE OF BREAD.

The highest price of Bread in the Metropolis is 101,4 d. fo► the
UN Loaf. There are others who sell from y2d. to below
that price.

PRICE OF SEEDS.-Feb. 7,
New Engli.h Red Clover Seed (per Cwt.) -s. -s. fine --s. -s.
Ohl Ditto Ditto- .... -s. -s. fine -s. -s.
Nov Foreign Ditto s2s. 70s. fine 9.55.1105.
Old Ditto
New White C10ver...........-......-.........._ 455. 755. fine -s. -s.
Old Ditto Ditt0.......--....-.........-....--..... -s. -s. fine -s. -a.
New Trelbil .............---...-.....--..._,..... 30s. 50s. fine -s. 68s
Old Ditto ....-
Rib Grass .......--- ~_ -10 s. 305. fine `2.55. 3/3.
English Carraway Seed -s. -5. 503. fine 545.
Foreign Ditto .. „ -s. -s. 555. fine 575.
coriander - . -s. 275. fine -s. 335.
St. Foin (per Quartcr).-......-. -s. 425, fine 435. 465.
Rye Grass - ----..... 20.5. 335. new 355. 435.
Pacey Ditto
Linseed, for feeding - -s. 38s. fine -s. 465.
Ditto, for crushing--.......--. 44s. 465. -s. fine --s,
Canary Seed, New -s. 465. fine -s. 52s
' 'itto 01d............... -5. •••(4. ••••li. fine -s.
White Mustard Seed -(per Bushel)-..... -a. I6s. IBs. fine --5.
Brown Ditto -s. lOs. 14s. fine -s.
Turnip Seeds, Rounds.--..-----...--..., -s. -s. -s. fine 14s.
Green and lied Ditt0..,.,.,.. ... -s. -s. -s. line 18s.
Tares, Old
Ditto New-- _ - -s. -s. fine 42,.4z5.
IZaz.e Seed, English, fine (per Last) 321. 35/........ Foreign 3:24 44'.

PRICES OF HOPS.-Feb. 7.
Kent Pockets . 81 10s. 9/. 9s. to 10/. 4s.
Se sex Ditto ..- 7l 15s. 8/. Bs. to 81. 15s.
11.sgex Ditto .-----.. 8/. Os. 91. Os. to 101. Os.
Earnham Ditto, Fine O/. Os. 16/. Os. to 201. Os.
Seconds ................„. 01. Os. 91. Os. to 15/. Os.
Kent Bnio 3/. Os. 81. 83. to 111. Os.
,
Essex Ditto , .. 111. Os. M. Os. to 01. Os.
'Sussex Ditto
Old Duty on last year's growth announced to be £88,047 8 1!.4