The Sun.
London, England, 1822-03-26 00:00:00

TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 1822.'

LOYDON JOURNALS.

EXTRACTS FROM THE D AMY MORNING PAPERS,
March 26, 1822.

[MORNIWG CHRONICLE.]
The observations on the conduct of Sir Tho-
mas Maitland, in the Chronicle of Saturday last,
have drawn upon us the animadversiono of a Cor-
respondent. We had said, 46 we will not do
Ministers the injustice to suppose that theysare
actually deceived, though they are obliged to
conceal their real sentiments." Our Correspon-
dent observes, why are Ministers " obliged to
conceal their real sentinents ?" We have a short
answer. They are obliged on many occasions to
conceal their sentiments, and we take this to be
one of them, to keep their places. " Under
what constitutional necessity," adds our Corres-
pondent, " are they obliged to connive at the al-
leged misconduct of tit* servant ? If you can
shew such necessity thtriiill stand acquitted, no
doubt, and their servant alone will deserve to be
punished ; but if you cannot shew it, I really do
not see why such Ministers as the present are to be
exculpated before hand, either for their ignorance
in the case you do not suppose, or for their corrupt
connivance in the one which you do." This would
be very admirable reasoning, if such a thing asMi-
nisterial responsibility really existed. But we can-
not believe this, without believing at the same time,
that all those who since Parliamentary Reform
was first agitated have told us that Ministerial
responsibility has no existence, and that without
a Reform, no honest man can remain long Minis-
ter of the country, have been uttering what has
no foundation in truth. We all know that there
is an influence in the Governmentof this country,,i
possessed by certain powerful individuals, to
which, whoever is Minister, must pay deference.
To this necessity, the present Ministers must
either yield or turn out. We say nothing as to
the morality of remaining in office on such terms.
It is, however, nearly as well known as any thing
can be known, that the patronage both at home
and in the Colonies must be distributed in such
a manner as may be most acceptable to the pos-
sessors of influence. Now, in supposing that
Ministers were not actually deceived by Sir
Thomas Maitland, we by no means wished to say,
either that they were innocent, or that they
were on that account the less deserving of punish-
ment, but merely that we gave them credit for
possessing more discernment than honesty. We
are as willing to punish them as our correspon-
dent can be ; and if he possesses the secret how
it is possible to punish them, we can only say
that he possesses more than we do.—Those who
have paid any attention to the observations we
have lately made on the subject of the Colonies,
must have noticed that we have all along attempted
to shew that nothing could be more arbitrary than
the power with which Governors were vested.—
It is we conceive an impossibility for the people
of the Colonies either to make their wrongs known
here, or to obtain redress for them. The hap-
piness of the Colonists therefore depends very
much on the character of the Governor. In some
of the Colonies there is a popular controul, more
or less effective; but in the framing of the lonian
Constitution, special care was taken that the
people should have no such controul. We do
no exculpate Ministerd when we say that it de-
pended on Sir Thomas Maitland, in a great mea-
sure, whether a real or fictitious Constitution
should be given to them ; and, from all that we
can learn, we believe the fact to be so. It is,
generally understood, that no Goverdor was ever
vested with more absolute powers than Sir T.
Maitland has been. It was, we believe, the boast
of his friends in the Islands, that he had received
from Lord Bathurst a carte blanche. Our object
has been, and will be, to place the real facts of
the case before the people of England. With
respect to responsibility or punishment, in the
case or either Ministers or Sir T. Maitland, every
reflecting person must understand what it means.

[MORNING POST.]
The little that is suffered to transpire of the
proceedings of the Agricultural Committee are
far from satisfactory to the public. We confess
we see with feelings somewhat allied to contempt
great Statesmen and Legislators debating from
day to day what is to be done with 950,000
quarters of corn, with which it accidentally hap-
pens that one warehouses are incumbered. Upon
principle we are not friendly to the interference
of Government, but extraordinary occasions re-
quire extraordinary remedies. If 950,000 quar-
ters of corn stand in the way of an important Le-
gislative measure, why do not Government ap-
propriate part of the four millions with which
nobody knows what to do in its purchase ?
They may keep it, or sell it, as the state of the
market may hereafter render expedient. It
may be bought cheap enough if a maximum be
fixed ; and at all events it will no longer inter-
rupt more important discussions. The last Agri-
cultural Committee recommended reductions in
the expenditure of Government, as a measure of
-relief. Whether this came from Mr. Huskisson
or Mr. Ricardo, we will not say; but we have
the authority of Lord Liverpool and Lord Hol-
land for a contrary doctrine. They say the war
created an unnatural market for the farmer, and
peace deprived him of it, and that this in a main
degree discloses the cause of the distress in this
country and in Europe. To assert that war
created a market, and that it ceased in peace, is
nothing more than to say war required soldiers
and sailors, and peace dismissed them. Would
not the present Agricultural Committee be do-
ing a vast service if they enabled the Public to
judge between the former Committee and the

Statesmen we have named ? Should they not
call for accounts of the numbers discharged, and
ascertain the effect they and their wives and fami-
lies have had on the existing population ? Would
it not be wise to inquire what an agricultural la-
bourer now expends, and what he expended in
181'2 and 1813 ? If by so doing a diminished
consumption be established, would it not go far
towards tracing the source of the agricultural,
nay, even of the West India distress ? it can-
not be too often impressed on the public atten-
tion, that to deteriorate the condition of the
labourer by reducing the army, navy, &c., must
injure the agriculturists and those who provided
the articles consumed by them, however it might
benefit other classes of society.

[THE TIMES.]
The case, of Captain Romeo is, we believe,'
not unknown to the public. It was last night
brought before the llouse of. Commons in a peti-
tion presented-and enforced by Lord-Johrt-it
sell. Of the. services rendered to the British
army, at the time when its destruction was
plotted by the late Queen of Naples, ample tes-
timony was borne by our commanders ; and the
remuneration afforded him was only an annuity
of 501., though he has lost his all in consequence
of his attachment to us. Of the personal cha-
racter of this individual, we know nothing :
but if this is the general way in which the Crown
is made to reward faithful services and heavy
sufferings, there need not be so' much anxiety
to supply it with ample funds in the shape
of useless places, sinecures, and pensions at plea-
sure. It seems hard, blso, that the man may not
have a passport to go to that country. in which
his presence was once of such advantage to us.
But that for which we chiefly notice the subject
is, to point attention to the vindictive and tyran-
nical proceedings'which, under the name of law,
are carried on against certain individuals in
Italy, who are suspected of being friendly to the
constitutional system.

[NEW Tams.]
By the French Papers of Friday, we find affairs
proceeding with our neighbours mud' the same as
they do with us; that is to say, that within the
walls of the Legislature a great outcry is made
against the necessary expenses of Government,
whilst on the Exchange public credit presents a
most favourable aspect, and Stocks continue at
an unprecedented elevation. The closing price
of the Rentes on Thursday last was 89, 65. ; and
this leads us to make some reflections on the fluc-
tuating prices of this Stock, from its first institu-
tion till the present time. It first received its
present name and constitution by the law of 1802,
being founded on the Tiers Consolide' of the Di-
rectory. The price first quoted under the title
of Ong pour cent. was on the 30th of May, 1802,
when it was at 55. 60. From that time it con•
tinued to rise until May 13, 1808, when it at-
tained the rate of 88.5. including the Dividend. It
is remarkable, that this " most palmy state " of
credit under Buonaparte immediately preceded
his unprincipled attack on Spain, in the month
of June, 1808. From that moment, notwith-
standing all his subsequent victories, credit had
received a fatal blow.--The price of rentes in-
deed did not decline rapidly. It remained for
several years at about 80; and at the opening of
the Russian campaign in July 1812, had actually
reached 82. Even the horrible retreat from Mos-
cow did not occasion a very marked depression; for
at the beginning of the year 1813, the price was
78. 50 ; but the battle of Leipsig and the advance
of the Allies to the Rhine produced a very dif-
ferent effect : the year 1814 opened at 51.; and
the day before the Allies first entered Paris
(March 30) the quoted price (though probably
there was little or no real business) was 45. The
abdication of Buonaparte soon raised the rentes
again, and on the 2d of May 1814, the day before
the King's arrival in his capital, they were at 62.
70. They continued rapidly to advance during
the first Restoration, and on the 4th of March,
1815, before the news of Buonaparte's escape
from Elba had reached Paris, they closed for the
payment at 81. 40. including the dividend.