The Sun.
London, England, 1836-09-28 00:00:00

FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE•

OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, SEPT. ✓4.
Ordnance Medical Department—A. A. Staunton, Gent., to be
Assistant-Surgeon, vice Mahon, resigned, Sept. 20.

Commissions signed by the Lord Lieutenant of the County Palatine
of Chester.
King's Regiment of Cheshire Yeomanry Cavalry.
Stockport Troop—G. Andrew, jun., Gent. to be Lieutenant,
vice Caistor, resigned, Sept. 9.
Macclesfield Troop.—J. C. Ilyle, jun., Esq., to be Captain, vice
Powell, resigned, Sept. 15.
Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of Worcester.
Worcestershire Yeomanry Cavalry.—J. Dixon, Gent., to be
Cornet, vice Round, deceased, Sept. 24.
Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Kent.
East Kent Regiment of Yeomanry Cavalry.—The Right Hon.
G. J. Sondes, to be Captain, vice D. Denne, resigned. W.
C. Fairman, Gent., to be Lieutenant, vice T. Denne, resigned.
S. G. Lushington, Gent., to be Cornet, vice Deeds , resigned,
Sept. 20.
DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY.
HENRY LEWIS, grocer, Swansea, Glamorganshire.
BANKRUPTS.
CHARLES PEARCE CHAPMAN, metal broker, Cornhill,
to surrender, Oct. 11, at eleven, and Nov. 8, at twelve, at the
Court of Bankruptcy. Paterson, Old Broad-street ; Clark, official
assignee, St. Swithin's• lane, Lombard-street.
JOHN LASHMAR, merchant, Brighton, Oct. 10, and Nor.
8, at twelve, at the Town-hall, Brighton. Cooper, Lewes, Sus-
sex ; Sweet and Sutton, Basingball-street.
RICHARD HODGKINSON, builder, Leamington Priors,
Warwickshire, Oct. 10, and Nov. 8, at two, at the Lansdowne
Hotel, Leamington Priors. Cox, Red Lion-square, London ;
Burbury and Lampray, Warwick and Leamington.
GEORGE COWELL, hatter, Great Russell-street, Covent-
garden, Oct. 4 and Nov. 8, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy.
Verulam-huildings, Gray's-inn ; Clark, official assignee,
St. Swithin's-lane, Lombard-street.
MYLES PRIEST, nurseryman, Reading, Berkshire, Oct. 4,
at eleven, and Nov. 3, at ten, at the Court of Bankruptcy.
Graham, Basinghall-street, official assignee ; Taylor, Turner,
Sharpe, and Field, Bedford-row, London.
SUSAN SHEPHERD, dress-maker, Richmond, Oct. 4, and
Nov. 8, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Lackington, Basing-
hall-street, official assignee ; Ifelder, Clement's Inn, Strand.
ABRAHAM OXLEY, WILLIAM OXLEY, and JOHN
OXLEY, iron-founders, Sheffield, Oct. 7, and Nov. 8, at ten, at
the Town Hall, Sheffield. Rodgers, Devonshire-square, Bishops-
gate-street ; Ryalls, Sheffield.
WI LLIAM FOSTER, manufacturer, Hollinwood, Oldhara,
Lancashire, Oct. 18, and Nov. 8, at two, at the Commissioners'
Rooms, Manchester. Bower, Chancery-lane; Clegg, Oldham.

DIVIDENDS,
At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street.
J. Wilson, upholsterer, Liverpool-street, Bishopsgate, Oct. 19,
at twelve.

In the Country.
S. and F. Burstall, merchants, Kingeston-npon-Hall, Oct. 24, at
twelve, at the George Inn, .Kingston-upon-Hull—F. H. Worth,
coachbuilder, Shrewsbury, Oct. 18, at three, at the Temporary
Shire Hall, Shrewsbury.
painter,
CEitTIFICATES, OCT. 18.
S. King, woollen draper, St. Paul's Churchyard—J. Bailey,
ironmonger, llorncastle, Lincolnsbiro—R. Fairclough,
Liverpool—S. Jacob, clothes dealer, Sheffield—R. Totld, builder,
Cheltenham—R. Beach, flour dealer, Box Trees, Warwickshire
G. Heywood, chemist, St. 3lartia's-lane—G. Brown, ironmonger,
Marlborough, Wiltshire.
Horsleydow PARTNEFtSHIPS DISSOLVED.
n—T. Main and J.
E. and J. M. Miller, lightcrmen,
G. Bird, Liverpool—J. 6cholfteld and A. Johnson, wine mer-
chants, Liverpool—J. Tomlin and S. Wade, fa.
Park Farm, Hertfordshire—A. Abraliarns and Di farmers Boreham
D. J. Davis, ca-
binet makers, St. John's-square, Clerkenv .
sell—H Danby and W.
M‘Gehrge, lace dealers, St. Paul's Church • I •
and N. Aioore, brokers, Liverpool—J. Atherton —I. Hadwen, jun.,
ston, machine makors, Preston, Lan • and H. Huddle-
L. Bunn, silversmiths, Salisbury-court, _ Lancashire-IV. Theobalds and
. y court Fleet t t T Honk and
W. Greer, surgeons, Pteston, L , .-s ree .
corn chandlers, Barbican-..._W, Lancashire—J. and E. Beckett,
Bris-
tol—J, Heaton, sen., and co WilliamsV and Co., stationers, Brie-
Moors—S. and .1. Swonn I ~ letter press printers, Bolton-le-
and F. Lade, linen el, coffee dealers, Rood-lane—G.
drapers,Will-
son
and E. Atkin Westminster Bridge-road—J. Dale,
hoe makers, Nott'in drYsalters, Manchester—T. Parnham and Co,
Tgham—G. Thomas and Co., eheesefactors,
Birmingham—,, Miller and J. E. Coates, veterinary surgeons,
Salford, Lancashire.

EASTERN ---
CEMETERY.—A plot of ground of
about three acres of land situate in the Hamlet of Mile-cnd,
Old-town, has lately been purchased by Mr. Barber Beaumont,
who is now erecting a chapel, surrounding it with a high wall,
it being his intention to have the land consecrated as a public
cemetery, similar to the Kcnsall-green cemetery ; broad
gravel- walks are now in progress, and an immense number of
young trees are about to he planted, and the whole will be
tastefully laid out.

,~~--

SPIRIT OF TILE PUBLIC SOURNAI.

The Quarterly Review for September, publish;,.:
yesterday, contains a review of the proceedin,gs of the
rim
last session, for which the Reformers are under no
small obligation to that journal. The text of Re-
/iewer is the Mirror of Parliament for 1836, aiwl Lord
Lyndhurst's speech on August LS, which has :low
arrived at a 24th edition—a proof of the diligence ctf
the Carlton Club. Those who have read the speech
may easily dispense with the Reviewer's account of
th,3 pNceedings of the Lords. Our reason for notic-
ing the ariele is not certainly to inflict on our readers
a work of sCnererogation, the Commentary on Lord
Lyndhurst's spetCb, but to avail ourselves of the Re-
viewer's admissions the argument against the Re-
form of the House of Lords with which he commences
the article :

" It cannot be too often repeated," he says, " and
pressed on the recollection and consideration of the public,
that the main objection—that, indeed, of which all others
were but consequences and corollaries—to what was called
Parliamentary Rei:?rm was this, that under the pretence of
clearing the House of Commons from all aristocratical in-
fluence, and restoring it to its natural, as it was called, and
strictly independent state, they Bill was in fact calculated
to transfer to it all the substantni power of the country,
and to render it not merely indepenClent, but predominant,
by introducing into its composition such addition elements
of mere popular and physical influence as could not fail, ex
necessitate rerum, to lead to an usurpation of power on its
part, and the consequent absorption or annihilation of the
two other Estates.
" This objection was strenuously repelled by t,'Ae advo-
cates of the Bill, who insisted that it was a mere vilionary
danger ; that the Commons having re-conquered their own
rights, would be on that very account the more anxious lot
to infringe those of the other branches ; and that the beau
theorem of three distinct and equi-ponderant powers
holding the State in equilibrio would be the certain and
unalterai).& resolt of their experiment ; and we believe that
the vague plausilAty of this vision, and its coincidence
with the doctrine or the balance of constitutional powers
promulgated by De Lolme, and such superficial observers,
seduced to the Reform Bill a vast number of well-inten-
tioned men, who would have resisted, and by their influ-
ence helped to defeat it, if they could have believed that
it was pregnant with a democratic usurpation. They did
not, or would not, see that the aristocratical influence
which had grown up was barely sufficient to counterbalance
the vast accession of democratical power ; and that the
theory of their equiponderant authorities—in no case, per-
haps, possible—was, as applied to the British Constitution,
a verbal delusion * * * * * *
" When the Reformers fancied that they had exposed an
indefensible abuse in the existing praCtice of the Constitu-
tion, by showing that the King and tine House of Lords
possessed by their connections a certain deree of influence
ip the House of Commons, they forgot that the action and
re-action were equal and opposite, and that. the House of
Commons possessed by the very same mean,' an equal, if
not a greater influence over the King and Liu! Lords.
The
reconciling by a previous understanding, by mutual con-
cessions and conciliatory modifications, those distinct and
occasionally discordant authorities was the great and m ost
arduous duty of a Ministry, who were, in fact, rather the
mediaiors between the then powers, than the servants of
one. Nor could we, from the first dawn of the reform
question, nor can we now, when it has been submitted to
a partial experience, imagine any other mode by which a
mired Government, democratical, aristocratical, and mo-
narchical can be conducted for a single session. When in
the reform debates it was urged, with the common place
declamation of the theorists, that the House of Commons
should be independent of the two other branches—it was
on the other hand argued—and at that time not denied—
that the equal independence of the other two branches was a
logical Consequence of that original proposition ; because
th constitutional rights of the Commons were neither in
law or equity; nor in reason, more distinct and absolute
than those of th. King and the Lords respectively ; and
hence it was most truly and rationally deduced that the
attempt to create (under the pretence of restoring what
never had existed) these
three independent and self-respon-
sible authorities, was not oOlir contrary to the real spirit of
the Constitution, but to the Verylaws of society and nature,
which admit of no self-centere,i powers, and could produce
,
nothing but collisions between ti.'e parts, and confusion and
destruction to the general system:
ou;d soon throw off the
We knew that the Tories w
.1 Constitution was
mask of coybrming. Their Britisi!
boroughmongering, and to restore the rotten boroughs
must be the end and aim of their p011...1Y. Wehave
always said—and we concede to the Quarterly Reviewer
—that three independent authorities or powers was an
absurdity. We always said that those who coxeived
that an unreformed House of Lords could exist wi!li a
reformed House of Commons, laboured under a griev-
ous delusion. The difference between the Quarterly
Reviewer and ourselves is, that he would give the pre-
ponderance to the Oligarchy, and that we would give
the preponderance to the nation. Before the passing
of the Reform Bill there might be actions and re-ac-
tions between the HouseS Of Lords and Commons,
but there could hardly be any collision, because a ma-
jority of the House of Commons consisted of the
nominees of the Lords. The democratic ingredient
in the House of Commons was feeble, compared with
:he oligarchical ; it was useful merely by its re:non-
stra:lces, in reminding the Oligarchy that oppression
has its and that the will of an united people
cannot bt.' resisted. Our Contemporary of Printing-
house.squart: could phrase it, that the Oligarchy
were responsible to the bludgeon and brickbat.
The Reform Bill wr,,sted from the Oligarchy the pre-
ponderance in the He' use of Commons ; and if the
same power which is reprcssented in the House of Com-
mons do not also obtain a p reponderance in the House
of Lords, there will be a coistant collision ; and we
dread to contemplate the pos.sible consequences of
such collision, in times when the public mind is
strongly agitated. The Tory oT Boroughmonger
Constitution, was a skilful piece of achinery, con-
trived to place the whole industry and property of the
inhabitants of these kinzdoms and their dependencies
at the discretion of a privileged class. The Civil Go-
vernment, the Army, the Navy, the Church, the Co-
tonics, were all domains on which the aristocracy were
quartered. The Army was full of sinecure Geverals,
the Navy full of yellow Admirals. The working, of
the system is admirably pourtrayed in the letters of
Lord Collinzwood in his Life. Parliamentary inte-
rest wit; incessantly at work in filling the Navy with
ng men of rank, merely to enable them to
useless yobL
have annuities at the public expense. The Tories
know what they
ni..e about. They know that the sys-
tem of Tuggle
and an honest House of Corn-
mand they are, there-
fore,ns using;cannot
every
to obtain once more an oli-
garchical preponderance in the
to
exertione xist egether,
House of Commons.
They laugh at the idea of thr.`z independent powers,
which has bamboozled so many w:'11-meaning but over-
wise Reformers, and tell us in plain terms that the
Reform Bill, by making the House of Commons inde-
pendent, is their mortal aversion, and that the House
of Lords must again become the masters of the coun-
try. The Reformers will see that the question of
Peerage Reform is a most essential one. They should
take a leaf out of the book of the Tories, who, what-
ever their faults, are less addicted to the practice of
cutting blocks with razors than their opponents.—
Morirtiig Chronicle.
The Times of yesterday detailed many c,:rcum-
stances connected with the late lawless and violent
revolution at Lisbon, which our former hasty and
sketchy announcement of that occurrence had neces-
sarily left untold. It was, what the recent Spanish
revolution has been, an outrage committed by
disciplined and mutinous soldiery t.; purl the supreme
magistrate of the realm—the Sovereign Tilling by and
an un-
through the authority of the laws. There nothing
stated to justify or countenance, as legal, the as7t thus
imposed upon the Regent of Spain, or upon the
Queen of Portugal. There is nothing even hinted
which could give validity to this sudden and irregular
subversion of the acknowledged Constitution of a
civilized country. The charter granted by Don Pedro
to Portugal, on waving his own rights of succession to
the Crown, had been accepted by the nation, and
acted upon in the election, the assemblage,
;tie
oaths and
legislative measures of the Cortesof
the Monarch to the su • b. jects, and reciprocally of
the subjects to the Monarch,
had been registered in the
national archives. The
constitutional monarchy was
in full operation. Under it the Portuguese people held
their civil and
rights, virtue of it, and it alone, the
Queen of Portugal exercised her regal powers. Then
what is the meaning of this new declaration, or de-
cree, or what may be the name of it, signed by
the Queen's hand nod blotted by her tears, and dic-
tated at the point of the sword on pain of death by a

~ 1

A

,

~_~

pretended Minister, equally forced upon her Majesty,
being deputed :snd backed by a licentious rabble of
armed men, without the shadow of approbation or
concurrence from the two Chambers, or from any
other est ablished, though inferior, authorities of the
o' nki a lom,? On the part of Lurniares, Sade Ban-
deira, tc., it is plainly high treason—on the part of
the Queen, her signature to the overthrow of the Coll,
StltUtiOn by virtue of which she reigned, was a nullity
(even had it. otherwise been valid), as being executed
j lifestly under severe duress. As for the popular
rc
blacter assumed for this transaction by its partisans,
it is a downright fraud. The people of Portugal have
nothing to do with it or them. The, people were
not consulted any more than the Fortes, who, like
the inagistracy and the nobility vs,ithin reach, were not
consulted. The Queen, as Ire have already said, was
not consulted, but forced. Then what attribute or
feature of a lawful act, demanding obedience from thP..
native Portuguese, recognition from foreign Powers,
belongs to this criminal convulsion ? So with regard
to Spain. We cannot yet find that the slightest
colour of legitimacy or authority has spread itself over
-the dethronement of Isabella from the Royal station
assigned to her by the Estatuto Real. The signature
of the Queen-Regent, fixed to that proceeding, was
confessed to be comPulaory, and is, therefore, from the
first, invalid. Nan; of the constituted authorities of
the realm suPpeirted it—none shared it. The agents
were, as at LiTsbon, a bayonet-wielding and threatening
mob. The instigators have not avowed themselves,
except in, so far as the new Ministers, acting in the
name of the Queen, may be considered to have taken
upon themselves the responsibility of all the violence
offered to their repugnant mistress. But what has
been the conduct of those Spaniards whose names and
Itistory carry with them the respectful suffrages of the
body of mankind, as being the true representatives
of Spanish honour, integrity, and legitimacy, to
all great public purposes ? The wisest, most re-
putable, and most unblemished subjects of the Spa-
nish Crown have refused to sanction this mock
" Reform" of their Government. Many noble and
distinguished men from Bayonne to Paris have
shrunk from the mockery of swearing to a Constitution
brought about by depraved and treasonable violence.
Alava, a true Castilian of the highest water, has
thrown up his mission as Ambassador, and withdrawn
into private life. The Ministers of the Queen, or
Tether of the mutineers of the Granja, are, with one
exception, men whom none but advocates of the wildest
and most extreme democracy can rely upon. M. Men-
dizabal has accepted office. He did so before under
the Estatuto Real. If he does so now, we must, for
the sake of our former sood opinion of him, trust that
he does so for the sake of the public service. But the
present circumstances of Spain are far different from,
and more discouraging than, those in which she stood
when M. Mendizabal formerly administered the Finan-
cial Department. The kingdom is torn to pieces by
adverse passions, and by a military conflict, which from
Navarre and Biscay has overspread the plains of Va-
lencia and the two Castiles, carrying defeat and terror to
-the gates of Madrid. The credit of the ciovernment
holding possession of the capital seems to be irretrievably
gone. The forces of the Pretender are •multiplying
where, and have latterly been almost every
whereeve vic-
ry
torious. The party domineering in the Queen's name
have made the mere act of seeking safety by flight
from that den of ruffianism in which the brave Que-
sada was wantonly and barbarously butchered—they
have made it, we say, a crime against their state, and
have punished the villainous individuals thus guilty of
the offence of saving their own lives from massacre, by
a sweeping confiscation of their property, personal and
real ! If from the complex miseries surrounding a (so
called) Government like that of Queen Christina's ty-
rants, M. Mendizabal succeeds in fairly extricating
himself and them, we are bound to say that a large
proportion of the miracles ascribed to Popish saints
will appear to us less incredible than we have hitherto
regarded them. There are, in fact, among those who
arrogate to themselves the laudatory appellation of Spa-
nish Radicals, few, if any (we fear not any), men of
the least pretencrs to ability, whom an active or clever
Minister could, call upon to assist him in his labours.
It would seem quite fabulous to posterity, that a nation
of 12,000,000 of souls should have been engaged for
nearly '.30 years in a series of political arid military
strusgies, without developing in any of her sons one
spark of intelligence above the meanest mediocrity, or
producing a single individual whose memory would sur-
vive him for a twelvemonth aster his decease. The
assertion of such a fact, we say, would appear an open
affront to human nature, laad we not to fall hack upon
an adequate and obvious. cause in the arbitrary rule and
benumbing influence of Popery—of that sort of Popery
which enters into and meddles with the affairs, interests,
and actions, of private life, to a degree beyond what
has been experienced by the people of any country on
earth but the patrimony of St. Peter, and the pro-
vinces of Munster and Connaught. The nobility of '
Spain were, with scarcely an exception until witlsin
the last few years, so harassed and terrified by the In-
quisition, that they all became its sworn ins:truments
and vassals. Education in such a coilntry, where the
real despotism of the inquisitor d;..rected and aggra-
vated the ostensible tyranny of One Court—education
was a pure humbug, and the tr.;
ind of the upper classes
of society became a noxious desert ; yet it is on be-
half of a trumpery farce litre this, which has just been
played at Madrid, and by its low comedians nick-
named a "political '..-evolution," that the wretched
Lord Palmerston, fit prompter and partaker of such
a scene, would bu:dy the great power of France into
marching her a"..rnies, under pretext of fulfilling the
obligations of an alliance, the objects professed by
which have (me and all ceased to be attainable. Even
the papers connected with the Melbourne Government,
and rewaial.ed for their servility by a gross abuse of the
Royal patronage, begin to teach Lord Palmerston a
more 'knowing lesson. We quote a passage from one
af Chose prints, published a few evenings ago, where
it will be seen that the Quadruple Alliance is at length
cliven up as a forlorn hope, and that England
and
France, jointly and severally, are released in formal
:terms from any further trouble or interference ! although
the threatened cessation of that interference by Louis
Philippe, on the very ground selected by the Ministerial
print for his justification, has been made the text
within this fortnight of sundry querulous, peevish, and
abusive articles in no less than two other of the Whig-
Radical newspapers, hott from the Foreign-office !
Verily ye be a well-rego:iated and prosperous crew, and
proper laughing-stoe'As for the people of England
The completely imbecile character of nearly all her
Statesmen and nt.ditary chiefs has rendered vain all the cal-
culations and expectations of the Statesmen both of France
and England, and has prevented them from fully accom-
plishing their benevolent intention of aiding a Reform, and
preventing a revolution in Spain. Now, however, that the
parties have come to a conflict on political principles, and it
has been made quite plain that the benevolent wishes of
the two Powers cannot be fulfilled, it becomes a question
whether it be any longer prudent or even proper for France
Under such cies
and England to support either party.
cumstrmees, it appears to us, though
what
Pretad not to
conkcture even, much less to know,
.
ovbrnment
of England and France may now resole. on, that they will
r,ot be deserving of blame, should sney leave the parties jai Spain, without the slightest fv.:..ther interference, to settle
the contest as they best nip_,„
Now, with respect to Portugal, we should like much
to have the question fairly answered—whether Lord
Palmerston
not receive some weeks ago from the
King of Belgium, or persons in his service, the
strongest assurances and warnings that a plot against
the Queen's Government was actually ripe for explo-
sion at Lisbon, Ciat all was hollow and rotten there,
and that a revolution was inevitable ? Was not infor-
mation to that effect conveyed repeatedly to Lord
Palmerston through the same channel, and by him re-
peatedly scouted as unworthy of credit? Did not the
Xing of the Belgians I'lmself state the same facts, and
Utter the same prex •
..netions, to Lord Palmerston person-
ally, before 4.lneevening of Thursday, the lath inst. ?
Did not the Foreign Secretaryof
England even then
pert that the intelligence was utterly, alse ? and did
ilbt the account of the actual accomplishment of the
'revolution appear in the Times express of the follow-
ing Saturday, the 17th ? What was Lord IToward
tie Walden doing all this while ? What warning of
a convulsion so fatal to the Government to which he
was accredited did this Whig functionary send home
to his discerning patron ? And for what is Lord
How zrd de Walden paid 8,000/. per annum . % These

will be among the first questions asked after the meet-
ing of Parliament.—Tinges.
It is said by the wisest of men that theta is a time
for every thing, The same authority, applying his
general position to individual cases, mentions, among
others) that there is a time to be silent. It were ev:‘,lL
for the Tories if they acted more fp:l,omq itsaccot,
,lance
.with this enlight,:;,en maxim, Wear,
imagine what ',mist be the horror altovvittik which.
the Peers regard the constant eulogies which the Tory
journals lavish on their ceestitution mitt their .conduct.
They would willingly) ore these peint.se pnithoe the
silence of their friends of the Press tit "any price. The
Quarterly Revieze,..pnbiMen yesterday, has an article
on " The late S.ee‘Sion of Parliament,' in which, in
an intended i.-ilidication of the recent conduct of the
Peerel I.s.n injury is done them of no ordinary magni-
tude. The writer takes essentially the same ground' as
Lord LyndhurSt did in his closing speech,. He re-
views the conduct of the hereditary Legislators during
the past Session, and bestows the most inflated eu-
logiums on it. Nothing t ould be more injudicious,.
Nothing could do more damage to the body tile re-
viewer intended to serve. We are -eitich mistaken if
this bo riot the opinion of every intelligent Tory in
the kingdom. Nay, we grievously err, indeed, if Lord
Lyndhurst himself do not regret the unfortunate
course the reviewer has taken as deeply
as any Con-
servative in the country. If the surmises of thd:sc
who have a pretty good opportunity of " gssing,"
as an American would say) the state of feeling in cer-
tain quarters, may be depended on, his Lordship now
most bitterly laments the delivery of the speech in
question, do not refer to the unpleasant dis-
cussions affecting himself individually, to which that
sreeech has given rise,—we allude to his sense of the
serious injury that oration has done to the cause of
Conservatism. He and his friends would give all the
money in the coffers of the Carlton Club, that they
could neutralise the effects of that speech. It is the
source of infinite dismay to them that they cannot.
Were the thing to do over again, his Lordship would
not deliver the same speech for any reward whieh could
be offered him. His ill-starred disciplo in the Quarterly
doubtless thought that he was doing well in following
in the footsteps of his " very noble and approved good
master." He will soon find out his mistake—if, in-
deed, a hint to that effect have not already been given
him from head-quarters. Nothing can possibly pro-
mote so rapidly and effectually a reform of the Upper
House, as the keeping constantly before the public
eye the misdeeds of the Tory Lords last Session. The
more their friends try to justify that conduct, the more
do they expose its unredeemed enormity. They might
just as soon, arid with as great hopes of success, try
to wash out the ebony From the skin of a Hottentot,
as to vindicate, to the satisfaction of any 9:le but
themselves, tl:e course which the Peer pursued last
Session.
We doubt, indeed, whether they have suc-
ceereed in vindicating it to their own satisfaction. The
Peers themselves, if we are not misinformed, are by
no means satisfied with that course. If they are they
will, doubtless, repeat it. next Session. Will they ?
We are no prophets if they do.—Morning Advertiser.
Not being yet sufficiently informed of the precise
nature of the projected improvements in the otty of
London, we must defer pronouncing any opinion upon
them until we know exactly what they are. But in
the mean time we trust we are not presumptuous in
expressing a hope that the pulling down of churches
does not, as upon a former and memorable occasion,
constitute any part of what the projectors of the Cor-
poration designate as improvement. When we stood
forward to oppose the demolition, at " one fell swoop,"
of more then 20 city churches, most of them beautiful
specimens of the architectural genius of Sir Chistopher
Wren—all of them necessary for affording the means
of religious accommodation in their several districts,
and not one of them standing in the way of any Judie
dicious plan for enlarging and improving the
principal thoroughfares of the City--when, we
say, we stood forward to oppose that wholesale
demolition of Christian temples in the centre of
the capital of this Chaistian empire, we had a
more difficult task to perform, in consequence of the
then prevalence of revolutionary and destructive opi-
nions, than we should now have, if called forth once
more to denounce and resist any project which, under
the name of improvement, raised the pick-axe of Van-
dal destruction against the altars of Christian worship.
But the report of a speech in the Common Council,
attributed to Mr. L. It. Jones, induces us to believe
that the future improvements of the city will be di-
' rected in a better spirit than that which we felt it our
duty to hold up to public reprobation. We quite
agree with Mr. Jones, that the ground at the west
end of Cheapside ought not to be let for building, as
originally contemplated. We think that gentleman
took a right view of the subject, when he said, " in-
stead of building at the end of Cheapside, they ought
to level, in order to comply with the spirit ,of
improvement which was now daily increasing. Any
one who should look at the space between St.
Paul's and the Post-office, must see that two more
houses must be pulled down, before that passage
to the Cathedral could be said to be properly
opened." We observe that, in answer to the obser-
vations of Mr. Jones, a Mr. Deputy Westwood said
he would much rather see the city of London pros..
perous than beautiful. He thought that if people
wanted to see St. Paul's, there were places enough
from which it might be viewed with advantage, with-
out any interference with the trade of the City, or
addition to tile already great dangers of life and limb.
So this enlightened Deputy seems to think that narrow
and crowded thoroughfares are less dangerous to life
and limb than open and wide ones I He also thinks
the trade of the City will be improved by building new
shops, although it is generally admitted that London
is already over-shopped, and that if there were fewer
shops there would be a more profitable trade. A city
may be both beautiful and prosperous) and not the
less so because it is well ventilated by open thorough-
fares, which are as conducive to health and traffic, as
to magnificence and prospect.—illornine• Herald.
The 100/. subscription of a Mr. Wentworth Beau-
mont to the justice rent for Ireland, as Mr. O'Con-
nell nicknames a fund which he is to manage, or, in
other words, to appropriate to whatever uses he thinks
best, has produced unusual exultation among the
par-
tisans of the O'Connell Government. It seems to us
that our Whig-Radical contemporaries exhibit upon
this occasion, in its highest perfection, the very con-
venient and agreeable faculty of being easily pleased.
We commend and almost envy the frame of mind which
they seem to possess. Nothing, it is clear, can come
amiss to them when 1001. of Mr. Wentworth Beau-
mont's money, given to Mr. O'Connell, is sufficient to
throw them into an extacy of delight. The acquisi-
tion of this gentleman's testimony thus given, in the
most agreeable and unambiguous form, to the merits
of Mr. Q'i;onnell's government is above all price. Who
shall henceforth venture so much as to hint that it is
possible for Mr. O'Connell's Government to be wrong
when so distinguished a person as Mr. Wentworth Beau-
mont has given a hundred solid proofs that he thinks
it right ? Is not Mr. Wentworth Beaumont Mem-
ber for Northumberland ? Is he not known to Lord
Grey and to every body else in that county as a most
intelligent, sensible, cool-headed, infallible, andimma-
culate individual ? The Hon. Member's testimony to
the great merits of the O'Connell Government is not
merely unimpeachable—it is conclusive ; but what is
still better is, that the testimony is of that kind which
can be renewed every month, or even,.if necessary, every
week, with little inconvenience to the witness, and to the
great advantage and gratification of the party in whose fa-
vour he a 0 eloquently speaks. If the world should be so
inaccessible to reason as to resist the argument of Mr.
Wentworth Beaumont's 1001., Mr. Wentworth Beau-
mont can easily make it two, or three, or four, or five hun-
dred, or whatever larger sum may be sufficient to make
lr, Wentworth
veryßea ukrd il
ot
s testimony irresistible. He
s
witness to suit Mr. O'Con-
nell,,i w
short, e
never feel great anxiety that mankind
V o
implicitshould
credit to the tes-
timonyboef vheisryooremapdyu,rgtoatyoire,ldse long
as the latter is not
unwilling to reinforce his personal authority by the
contents of his purse. Mr. Wentworth Beaumont is,
no doubt, a very great
io is a
acquisition
powtotherful writer--
e O'Connell
Government of Ireland. i
when he affixes his name to a check. His argument
is not to be impugned—when it is offered in the form
of a Bank-note. And, although his distinction as the

Representative of i'il.atlintiibeildrid is tollast
long, that or little iitiportaiiee 14 the case of a man
who can always compensate fpr loss of station by the
augmented amount of his contribution
!la's k justice rent for Trolaild."—Moritii a Poo