The Sun.
London, England, 1838-03-09 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, MARCH 9, 1835

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

What we anticipated has happened ; the Lords last night,
regardless of the majority by which it was carried in the
Commons, threw out the Parliamentary Electors and Free-
men Bill on the second reading. We explained formerly that
it consists (or consisted, for,
.fait ilium, it is now no more) of
two parts, the one extending the time for voters already on
the register to pay their rates and taxes from sth April to 1 Ith
October ; and the other for taking off the small stamp duty
on the admission of freemen. The last portion was of Tory
invention ; and had it stood alone it would have been passed
ithout question : but Ministers perceiving that the object of
it, though not in itself unreasonable, was to give an advan-
tage to the relics of rotten Corporations, the old freemen,
preceded it by a provision affording something like a corre-
sponding advantage to the new constituency created by the
Reform Act, but in perfect conformity with its spirit and
letter. This advantage was, that whereas at present all
ten pound householders—to entitle themselves to the
franchise—must, on or before the 20th of July, have
paid
their rates and taxes due prior to the sth April, the Bill
in question provided that electors already qualified by the de-
cision of the Revising Barrister should not in future be dis-
qualified if they happened not to have paid their rates and
taxes since the 11th of October. It does not seem that the
fact that the relief was only to be conferred on electors already
on Me register attracted the attention of any Noble Lord on
the Opposition side of the House ; and the Duke of Welling-
ton, the Earl of Haddington, and the Earl of Harrowby all
treated the Bill as if it were framed purposely to introduce a
new class of persons into the constituency. They went even
farther than Charles V., who held that no man who did not
pay taxes to him had the smallest right to interest himself in
any way about the affairs of the Legislature ; for if an
elector had by chance omitted, or had not been called upon
to pay his taxes, according to these Noble Lords he was to
be disfranchised, though he might be worth thousands a year.
The Duke of Richmond mentioned a borough in which forty
or fifty most respectable persons would have been struck off
the list of voters, if they had not discovered just in time that
they had not paid their taxes. His Grace added that be did
not know what might be the practice at the Conservative
Club, but at White's, Brookes's, and Boodle's a whole year
was allowed for the payment of arrears. Lord Alvanley, who
opposed the Bill, could probably have given the necessary in-
formation upon this point. It is worthy of remark, also, that
not a single Tory peer stated the slightest objection to that
part of the measure which repealed the stamp duty on the ad-
mission of freemen ; but as they could not separate the one
part of the Bill from the other, they threw out the whole by a
majority of 65. Let it not be forgotten that this measure did
not give any, even the smallest, additional facility in getting
upon the registry. No man who had not previously registered
would be entitled to the indulgence.—Morning Chronicle.

Ministers wore defeated last night, in the House of Lords,
by a very large majority, on their Parliamentary Electors Bill.
That Bill is one of the obvious results of the present desperate
position of the Whigs. The existing Cabinet feels its vast
inferiority to the Conservative statesmen opposed to it in both
Houses. The only chance. therefore, which the Melbourne
Ministers possess of retaining their places, consists in buying
the support of the active portion of the middle classes, by
sacrificing in detail, all the safeguards provided by our exist-
ing institutions, for the principles of monarchy, and aristo-
cracy. If this project for extending the time for paying
rates and taxes, had succeeded,—another project for abo-
lishing altogether the tax-paying clauses of the Reform
Bill would have been brought forward,' in a year or two.
Then, Household Suffrage would have succeeded ;—to be
followed by some measure, supplying the most liberal inter-
pretation to the word " house." Universal suffrage would
still have been in reserve. That would have been the grand
card in the hand of the Whigs—to be played only, in the last
extremity—to be played only for the stake of a long continu-
ance in office I The House of Lords has, once more, nobly
done its duty by the country, in rejecting this \Vhig clap-trap
Bill. Let the Conservatives in the House of Commons act
on all occasions, with equal promptitude. The Whigs have
little support out of doors—none whatever, in point of fact,
excepting amongst the ten-pound constituencies. The
" masses" hate the Whigs; and will hail with delight the
return of Conservatives to power—providing, the Conservatives
shall (as they very easily mny) show, that true Conservatism is
careful, in an especial manner, of the rights and comforts of
the labouring poor !--Morning Herald.
To console themselves for a degree of humiliation scarcely
ever before incurred by the members of an Executive Govern-
ment in this country, the prints in the pay of Ministers find it
necessary to employ some curious assertions with regard to the
motion of Sir William Molesworth, and the division by which
it was terminated. In one of the most prominent of those
Treasury Journals, we find it gravely vaunted yesterday morn-
ing, that " the first fruits of the union " between the Ultra-
Radicals and the Tories are not precisely what either of them
anticipated." The " union" between the Ultra-Radicals and
the Tories I What muddy ditch have the brains of that his-
torian been steeped in, who could refer to the recent exhibition
of the Member for Leeds in the House of Commons as a proof
of " union," or understanding, or approximation, of any
kind, between those gentlemen who wished " success to the
rebel arms in Lower Canada" and the Conservatives, who had
joined their bitterest political enemies in every measure pro-
posed by those enemies for the suppression of such rebels, at
the greatest of all sacrifices to political men—viz., their own
continued exclusion from office, when a different conduct
might have put it at once in their possession ! It does not
appear to us that a calumny so daring was ever yet risked by
a press the most devoid of principle as that which was
ascribed to the Conservatives on this late occasion a common
policy with the section of ultra- Radicals from which proceeded
Sir William Molesworth's motion. When Sir George Grey
ventured to apply on Wednesday evening the term " unscru.
pulous" to Sir Robert Peel and the Conservatives, well was he
answered by Mr. NV. Gladstone—" Had our scruples been
less, our numbers would have been greater ;" and so they
would. Nothing was easier for Sir Robert Peel than to
take the motion of the Honourable Membelefor Leeds as ho
found it, and to use that motion as the most convenient tool
that offered for an engine of annoyance to an Administration
which he despised. But such a course, however it might have
deserved the opithet of " unscrupulous" on the part of Sir
George Grey, does not appear to have been such as would
satisfy the fastidiousness of the Conservative leader, and of
those gentlemen whose feelings he consulted. Sir Robert
Peel's reasons for substituting the amendment of Lord Sans
don in place of the address of Sir William Molesworth were
stated at length in the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet.
" What," interrogated the Right Honourable Baronet,
" would the Right Honourable Baronet ( Sir George Grey)
have me do ?" And in pursuance of the topics suggested by
this question, he went on to state, that the motion being forced
upon the House, without any participation from hies, there were
but three courses open to himself and the Conservative party—
either to abscond from the House, and sneak away without
giving any opinion at all—a line of conduct which might an-
swer well enough, if the question were one with regard to
which it was irrpossible to pronounce either an affirmative or
negative opinion, such as a man could conscientiously agree to,
but which would be eminently disgraceful where an honest
opinion had been formed, and might have been expressed by a
vote. The second course—was for the Conservatives to
step out of their way, and throw a shield over the Whig-
Radical Ministers, by moving the previous question—as one
of that illustrious body ( Lord Howick) had done, out of
pure love and affection for his friend Mr. Daniel O'Connell
From the sort of success, therefore, which had attended the
" previous question" in that instance, we do not wonder that
Sir Robert Peel, had he been ever so inclined (which we
take for granted he was not,) could scarcely have ventured
to resort to it. There seems, then, to have remained
but one other expedient, which was, to have voted for
Sir W. Molesworth's motion against Lord Glenelg .by
name,_
by
which would incidentally, though effectually, if sup-
ported
a majority, have smashed Queen Victoria's Cabinet.
For ourselves, we are bound in truth and common honesty to
avow, that we should have felt no squeamishness whatever
about putting on record such a vote. There is nothing, we
apprehend, in Lord Glenelg, to be 'so much respected or ad-
mired, or entitling him so conspicuously to public gratitude,
cr rendering his future services of such vast contingent be-
nefit to the nation, as need induce any Conservative Member
of Parliament, having well-strung, nerves and a wholesome
stomach, to make wry faces at a vote of censure upon the
public conduct of that nobleman (his private life, we admit,
readily, is beyond reproach), because of its being directed for-
mally, though not substantially, against the Noble Lord in
person. Moreover, to the objection of voting with W. Moles-
worth upon one point in which we happened to agree with him,
lest it might involve us in the suspicion of coalescing with him
upon other points, on which we had made it notorious to the world,
that we totally differed from him—our answer is, that such a
very partial and insulated co-operation, in the enforcement of
an opinion which was common to both parties, would have
filled us with no alarm whatsoever for the respectability of our
general repute. When, once upon a time, a female of a cer-
tain description was quietly seated at the theatre, she ob-
served a lady at the entrance of the box start back with a
look of horror at the sight of her who occupied it, upon which
the Aspasia, with an air ofatronage, exclaimed, " Pray
walk in, madam, it's not catchinp
g." So might Sir W. Moles-
worth have assured the Conservatives of the House of Com-
mons that Radicalism any more than other frailties " was not
catching." In truth, we might affirm that the prevalent in-
fection is of a kind opposed to Radicalism. However, it is
but fair to acknowledge that Sir Robert Peel, in maintaining
the amendment of Lord Sandon, alleged very plausible argu-
ments when he stated it as the object of that amendment, in
which it is indisputable that the Conservatives, without excep-
tion, concurred by their unanimous vote, to embody in a
single document all the views and principles which they
had already professed in Parliament with regard to our
Canadian policy. It was, therefore, their business to repub
fish the determination to which they had pledged themselves
a few weeks ago for the defence of the Royal authority hi Ca-
nada, no less than their dislike and contempt for the incapa-
city of the Queen's advisers. Whether it is the persuasion of
the Conservative chiefs that they had better leave this Go
vernment to die a natural death, and therefore abstain from
any stop which might assist the process of dissolution, it is not
for us, who are not in their confidence, to pronounce. But,
assuredly, there never was a more absurd or slanderous pre-
tence on which to attack the Conservatives than that of their
showing the slightest symptom of eagerness to disslace the
Queen's Ministers, much less of readiness to accept any open-
ing for a league with the Ultra-Radicals in favour of such a pur-
pose. Why, the Conservatiyes deliberately threw the Molesworth
party overboard, and so far from deserving the imputation cast
upon them by Sir G. Grey, they declared, in so ninny words,
that " We will have nothing to do with you," and so framed
their amendment as to leave the Ultra-Radical no choice but
to run bodily out of the House, and absent themselves from
the division. To be sure it must be allowed that not much
was lost by this magnanimity of the Tories. The whole Moles-

worth faction was, after all, but the fraction of a faction. The
Molesworth portion of the House of Commons, which trum-
peted forth for weeks beforehand a vote of censure upon the
Government and a call of the House, comprehended neither
more nor less than four names, each in its peculiar line no
doubt respectable : but still the Molesworth faction does not
exceed in number the Vivians, by whom its leader was expelled
from Cornwall. Sir William being just able to make the same
boast as his gallant successor Sir Harry, and to apprise Lord
Melbourne, shaking his fist—" Remember, my Lord, by --,
there are four of us !" The distinguished s,:ceders from the
House on Thursday morning's division were as follow:—I. Sir
W. Molesvrorth ; 2. Mr. Fielden ; 3. Mr. Leader; 4. Mr. Grote.
But the real value of this last trial is, first in the striking su-
periority of the Conservative speakers and of the cause which
they pleaded over the unhappy Ministers and their allies.
Sir R. Peel, Lord Stanley, and Mr. W. Gladstone made
masterly appeals to public opinion, not merely with respect
to Canada, but on the ground of a proud comparison with
their adversaries, of whom we shall merely say, that Lord J.
Russell, though lie uttered a few shrewd personalities, was the
worst speaker on this occasion but one of all those who ad-
dressed the House, and that the speech of Mr. Spring ,Rice
was beyond all dispute the very worst we ever read or heard
of. As for numbers, we have given the details below :
The Conservatives in the Mouse, tellers included, were 289
Pairs

Absent on account of illness, or the recent deaths of re-

latives .

Members for Belfast and Rutland to be henceforth counted 3

317
Was such an Opposition ever heard of before ! Was any
Government ever suffered yet to stand in the face of such an
Opposition ? If the Conservatives choose to turn them out, the
way is plain before them ; in fact, if they fail, it must be from
some uncommon deficiency in sagacity or energy of purpose.
—Times.

In a House of 607 Members on Wednesday night there was
no more than a majority of twenty- nine that would not agree
to a vote of censure upon her Majesty's Ministers. It is im-
portant to observe that those Ministers had not the courage to
alter the question into one of confidence in their Government,
and then to take a vote upon the affirmative of that question.
They did not venture to move an amendment upon the motion
of Lord Sandon, to the effect that the House approved of their
colonial policy. All they attempted was resistance to a vote
of censure, and by their own votes they negatived the motion
which found fault with their own policy. To accomplish
this by a number of votes less than the number of those
who are of once Members of the House of Commons and
of the Government is the triumph which Ministers have
achieved. The real and important state of the case is this—
that of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom there
is no more than the paltry preponderance of twenty-nine who
do not condemn the existing Government as the cause of re-
volt against the sovereignty of their mistress, the Queen of
Great Britain. Now, when we consider that all the members
of the Government voted for themselves—that every Govern-
ment has some influence in Parliament beyond its own mem-
bers, and yet of a similar kind to that which induces Ministers
to vote for themselves—and, finally, that this Government is
pre-eminently one that manages affairs through Commissioners,
and therefore wields the influence arising from much expecta-
tion of advantage, as well as from advantage in possession—
when these things arc taken into account, and yet after all
they are within thirty of being actually condemned in the
House of Commons, we cannot say that we think they
are much to be envied. We know that they are not apt to be
very nice, and that—(to use a somewhat homely illustration)
—hungry dogs are wont to be very well pleased even with
dirty pudding ; but we feel satisfied that there have been Ad-
ministrations in England, and we hope there will be again,
who would feel shame and humiliation under such a vote as
of Wednesday night. In the House of Lords it is certain
that the majority has no confidence in the present Ministers—
in the House of Commons the present Ministers are within
thirty of being condemned for bad policy, leading tea colonial
revolt. Such is their situation—if they are proud of it we shall
only say that it is a most curious kind of pride, which honour-
able Ministers could not feel, and which honest men will find
it difficult to understand.-111orning Post.

Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chromelc
enlarged, and no additional charge—Price Fivcpence. On
Sunday, March 25th, the promised enlargement of Bell's Life
in London will take place, thereby affording additional scope
for the extension of its Miscellaneous as weil as Sporting In-
telligence. Extraordinary efforts will be made, by the employ-
ment of competent correspondents, to procure the most accu-
rate accounts of the approaching Coursing Meetings in all
parts of the kingdom—Steeple Chaces—Hunting exploits, and
every event interesting to the Sporting world—while, in the
Racing department, the high reputation and accuracy of this
widely circulated Journal, will be fully sustained. Orders
received by every News Agent in the United Kingdom. Sport-
ing Advertisements of Coursing Meetings, Steeple Chaces,
Race Meetings, &c., must be sent to the Office on or before
the Friday previous to publication—a rule also applicable to
the Sporting communications of our friends. Price of Bell's
Life in London, five pence. Office, No. 170, Strand, where
can be had for threepence each, together or separate, parts 1,
2,3, 4, and 5, of the Gallery of Comicalities ; the 5 parts
contain 438 comic wood-cuts, the cost of :which, designing,
and engraving, exceeded two thousand pounds—near two
millions have been sold—never out of print. Part 6of the
Gallery of Comicalities, price threepence only, will be pub-
lished at No. 170, strand, on the 30th of April. Any of the
Parts taken back, and the cost price of twopence each
returned, before Jan. 1, 1339. Placards for chop windows.

THE COURTIER'S DAUGHTER.-Utdy Step-
ney's new novel, under the above title, seems likely to attract
unusual attention in the Court. and fashionable circles—busying
itself, as we hear it does, not merely with the courtiers and
the " courtiers' daughters" of the day immediately preceding
our own, but with the very " head and front" of that brilliant
circle—the Regent himself, his illustrious mother and sisters,
and the immediate habitues of their private circle, being intro-
duced personally to the reader. This step, it must be con-
ceived, is as bold as it is novel, and the reading world will
look with as much interest as curiosity to the result.

Among the many " Men of Character" to be found
in Mr. Douglas Jerrold's new work of that name, the reader
cannot fail to recognise many of those eccentric individuals
who, with a noble contempt of conventional propriety, have
by their freaks and follies contributed to the " gaiety of
nations." High and low, noble and ignoble, rich and beg-
garly—the peer, the player, and the vagabond, all have con-
tributed some characteristic to the many-coloured volumes.

The Literary Portraits" in the New Monthly
Magazine (the appearance of which has lately been retarded
from accidental circumstances) will be resumed, we under-
stand, on the Ist of April. The new subjects for the graver
arc the two distinguished naval writers, Captain Chamier and
the author of " Rattlin, the Reefer." Mr. Colburn has also
works by both these celebrated novelists in the press. One of
them will appear in a few days, under the title of " Outward
Bound."

We notice with regret—for, in spite of his politics,
he was an amiable and good man—the death of Sir Abraham
Bradley King, Bart., an Alderman of the Dublin Corporation.
Sir Abraham was at one time a leader of the Orangemen of
the Irish metropolis, and memorable for his refusal to answer
some questions put to him when before the bar of the House
of Commons, on the occasion of the riot in the Dublin thaatre,
when a bottle was flung from the gallegry at the Marquis
Wellesley, then Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. If we remem-
ber rightly, Sir Abraham King got his baronetcy on the occa-
sion of the visit of George IV. to Ireland. Ile enjoyed an
annual allowance from the Consolidated Fund, as compensa-
tion for his patent of King's Stationer in Ireland, an office
now abolished.

EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCE.- lii the
columns of the Suffolk Chronicle the following fact or fiction
is found :—" Oa Sunday last a couple wishing to be joined
in holy wedlock (the bans having been published as usual) at-
tended for that purpose at the altar in Syleham Church. The
ceremony had proceeded to that part where the Clergyman
asked the bridegroom if he would have this woman fur his
wedded wife ? when he received the following answer :—" I
don't know. I have a question to ax afore I answer you
that. I want to know if we are married to-day, and I can't
grit no work to-morrow, and have to go into the Great House
(the Union House) the next day, whether we shall be parted."
The Pastor replied in the affirmative, although he was bound
to Answer in the words of the ritual, " Those whom God bath
joined together, let no man put asunder." The bridegroom
immediately put on his hat, saying, " then I 'ont marry to.
day, so I wish you good mornin', Sir ;" and made his exit,
leaving the clergyman to comfort the disconsolate and disap-
pointed bride with what grace and spiritual advice he could.

- , .
As a young sweep was pursuing ins avocation in
Somers-town, a few days ago, he was seduced, by tire tempt-
ing offer of 3d., to clean an old woman's chimney, she adding,
that if he performed his task well, he should be rewarded with
an additional halfpenny. The job was done and paid for, and
he was about to go, when a fearful shriek, proceeding from the
bag of soot, struck the ears of the astonished ancient, who in-
stantly taxed the boy with stealing her favourite parrot. This
was stoutly denied, a scuffle ensued, and the youth was finally
handed over to the police, who walked him off, bag, and old
woman and all, attended by a pretty considerable mob. When
they were placed before the Magistrate, he desired to know the
particulars. " This here warmint," said she, " vot I paid ge-
nerous to clean my chimbley, has stole my poll parrot, and has
her in that ere soot bag." " Draw forth the bird," said the Jus-
tice. This was done by the little boy, nobody else volunteer-
ing to do it, when the justice-room was immediately filled with
clouds of soot, from the flapping of Poll's wings. As soon as
this cleared away a little, the Magistrate, who enjoyed a joke,
observed that it was a blackbird, and asked the old dame what
was the colour of her parrot. " Gr:ry, Sir," replied she,
looking doubtfully at her old friend, who, terrified at the
scene, turned from her, and uttered horrid screams. " Will
you swear, madam," said his worship, " that that blackbird is
your gray parrot ?" The old lady, fearful that the old gentle-
man might have had some hand in the business, hesitated.
The magistrate, however, eventually ordered the restoration of
the parrot to its mistress, and advised the boy to confine the
soot bag to its proper uses in future, unless he had a particular
desire to visit the treadmill. The old woman, enraptured at
the recovery of her favourite, bore it off ia her bosom, .herd.
less alike of its filthy condition, and the jeers of the mob, who
laughed heartily at the spectacle she presented.
GREAT FIRE AT BALTINIORE.—A most destruc-
tive fire broke out at Baltimore on the 3d ult., in the Theatre
and Circus belonging to Mr. Cooke, which soon reached the
large tavern occupied by Mr. Murphy. Beth buildings were
totally destroyed, including property to the amount of 120,000
dollars. Mr. Cooke's theatrical wardrobe and other stage pro-
perty, together with 47 valuable horses, were consumed. Mr.
Cooke was uninsured.