The Sun.
London, England, 1825-07-14 00:00:00

[MORNING POST.]

French Papers to the 12th inst. reached us
last night, by Express. They have brought com-
munications from Milan to the Ist inst., which
state that the Emperor Francis has postponed for
eighteen months the retreat of the Austrian troops
who occupy the kingdom of Naples. his Ma-
jesty had been greatly afflicted, we are told; and
no doebt truly, by the scenes which had taken
place at Pavia, and the blood which had been
spilled. It is contended, however, that the tu-
mult was not wholly the work of the Students,
but that they were merely instruments in the
hands of more crafty individuals, The affair of the
25th of June, which was by far the most serious, is
said to have been the result of a plot contrived the
day before ; nothing having given cause for the
insubordination of the Students. On the con-
trary, they had obtained permission to attend in
a body the funeral of their comrade killed on the
23d, and it is asserted that the Police would
have remained on its own guard, and the troops
would not have charged had not wounds been
previously inflicted upon them. 44 The indulgence
shewn to the Students who were arrested, and
the promptness with which those who had been
taken with arms in their hands were set at
liberty, all proved," the article says, " that
the Magistrates were convinced that those
youths were only misled, and that it was
' not intended to proceed against them." Au
attempt is then made to connect- the
Pavia affair with the disturbances which took
'place at Rome some time since : but there
is evidently no ground whatever for supporting
such a supposition.—Letters of a late. date, from
Zante, announce that the Captain Pacha, after
the defeat which he had suffered near Cape

d'Oro, had retired to Soda, in the Isle of Can-
die, where he was closely watched by Sachtury
and the Greek fleet. No letter mentions his ap-
pearance in the lonian Seas.—A. letter from Ca-
diz states, that the British frigate L'Active was
forbidden by the French Governor to enter the
port without performing quarantine, but that the
Commander refused to obey any other authority
than that of the Spaniards, and was ultimately
admitted without quarantine.

[MORNING HERALD.]
Mr. Peel's new Jury Act is the subject of uni-
versal and unqualified eulogy. The principle
upon which he framed it, is most liberal and
comprehensive—indeed, so radical an innovation
upo❑ " the wisdom of our ancestors," that it
must have broken down at the second stage in
Parliament, under any other auspices than those
of a Minister. Were the late Sir Samuel Ro-
milly still alive, and in his place, and he the
author of this most salutary reform, what a host
of tongues and pens would loose themselves
upon him, who now swell the " concord of sweet
sounds" at the heels of the Secretary. The
merit of Mr. Peel is, however, not the less,
but rather the greater. For it is no common
virtue in a Minister to employ his official au-
thority in aid of what may be called enter-
prises of useful legislation, wholly beyond the
range and obligations of his public character.
It is probable the old qualification was the best
that could be laid down at its origin for insuring
competent Jurors—though no longer efficient or
applicable ; so taking the reason of the Common
Law in preference to its letter, the new Act
introduces another qualification in conformity
with the change of circumstances, which af-
fords the best chance of having Jurors com-
petent from their means of subsistance and si-
tuation in life. This is all very straight forward
and commendable ; but the adoption of the prin-
ciple seems to impose a difficulty upon Mr. Peel
and every in toto opponent of Parliamentary
Reform in either House. But by what show of
reason, by what ingenuity of distinction, can
the man who is held liable and competent to
serve as a Juror, be proved unfit or unworthy to
exercise the privilege of voting at the election of
fit and proper persons to serve in Parliament ?
If the reason of the Common Law is to be
adopted here, as in the former instance, as most
clearly it ought to be, the qualification here too
should be extended so as to include, and even to
insure a class of voters, who may he presumed,
from their social and political condition, of com-
petent intelligence and independence. It is not
easy to conceive how he can escape the dilemma
of abandoning the principle of his own Bill, or
else making the qualification for exercising the
elective franchise commensurate with the exten-
sion introduced in the very Act—not meaning, of
course, a precise analogy with the negative or
disqualifying parts of the new statute—hut sim-
ply, that he who is fit to be a Juror, is also fit to
be a voter—especially where the franchise is
I exercised by those who are held incompetent to
be J u rors.