The Sun.
London, England, 1831-04-01 00:00:00

to give a more consonant and less precarious opera-
tio❑ to that indirect influence of the more aecient
and elevated erdets of the State, which has alone
enabled them to withstand the torrent of democracy,
and which at this moment is the only vestige that
remains of their Constitutional power ? It is la-
mentable to say that the proposed change is of a
nature entirely the reverse of that which the
antecedent changes produced by time must have
plainly dictated to any Statesmen desirous
of renovating and preserving the British Con-
stitution. Has the political power of the
Crown and the Aristocrat y been impaired? It
is to be impaired still further. Have these or-
ders of the State sought and found protection and
security in the day of their weakness by the esta-
blishment of an influence in the Huse of Com-
mons, to which the varied structure and the multi-
farious inlets of that omnipotent assembly afforded
them the means ? From this their last refuge they
are to be abruptly driven. Has the House of Com-
mons gradual), monopolized all the essential powers
of the State ? By the rigorous exclusion from that
body of every other influence than that of the de-
mocracy, the character of the British Government
is henceforth to be rendered, without mitigation or
alloy, republican. That England will he essen-
tially a republic from the moment the Reform Bill
shall hare received the Royal Assent, no man who
is not so far entangled in forms as entirely to over-
look the substance of things, can for a moment
doubt. England will from that moment be subject
to a republican government of the worst and most
pernicious kind—to a republican government, from
which the influence of property, of talents, and of
character will he nearly excluded—to a republican
;dig:achy, in which the delegates of shopkeepers
and small traders will possess the supreme and un-
dentroulable power.—Morning Post.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

G UILDHALL.

A Mr. John Iliggons attended yesterday, upon an
information charging him with delivering two chal-
drons and a half of coals, which were found to be
deficient. It stated that every one of the thirty-two
sacks was found to contain less than the proper
quantity, and the whole taken together showed a
deficiency of 1.5 i bushels. A written order had been
taken on the 14th instant to Mr. Devey's wharf,
Whitefriars, for the delivery of five chaldrons of coals
at the ward watch-house, in Queen's-head-passage,
Newgate-street. They were sent in on the morning
of the 16th of March, in two waggons. The con-
tents of the first waggon were delivered without
being measured, except as to the last two sacks,
which were found to be deficient each half a bushel.
When the second waggon arrived, the regular no-
tices for a re-measurement were served,and Vaughan,
a meter, came.

On the part of the defendant it was seated that
he was a sort of middle ran, between the wholesale
dealer and the consumer. On this occasion, having
received the order for the coals, he went to Devey's
wharf and purchased a room of coals, which he
marked with the first let ter of his name. He gave a
notice to the ward beadle, who had ordered the coals,
to attend at. the wharf on the 15th, to see them taken
from the barge, but he did not go. The defendant
attended himself, but as the work was impeded by
the rain, Mr. Devey told him, that if he went away,
he (Mr. Devey) would see the work done as well a!

if he stayed him-self. These facts were deposed to
by Mr. Devey's clerk. Mr. Devev said, that the
had measure had arisen from his receiving bad mea-
sure from the ship.

Mr_ Alderman ATKINS should inflict the highest
penalty he could, 191. 45., being 12s. per sack ; and
he asked what would become of us when the present
checks to fraud were abolished.

Mr. Bodkin (who attended for the defendant),
turning to Mr. Devey, hoped he would forthwith
give a cheque for the fine, but Mr. Devey declined
doing so, and the parties retired.

Q UEEN-S UA RE.
Henry Nine, a private in the Ist regiment of Gre-
nadier Guards, was brought up for final examination,
charged with robbing Thomas Griffin, a private of
the same regiment, of five sovereigns, arid also with
unlawfully pawning his watch. The parties had
quarrelled at a public-house in St. Ann's-lane, West-
mir ster, and the prosecutor left his watch for the
payment of some glass which was broken. After
they left the house, the prisoner knocked the prose-
cutor down, took the five sovereigns out of hi*
pocket, and afterwards went back to the public-
house and redeemed the watch, which he pledged
for 11. 17s. He was fully committed for the rob-
bery, and was fined .5/. for unlawfully pawning the

A young man, named Harman, was brought up
by the parish officers of St. George's, Southwark,
for refusing to maintain his wife.
The defendant stated, that the ground of his re-
fusal was, that his wife had another husband living.
That husband's name was Denby, and he having
about three years ago been convicted of bigamy, and
sentenced, he (the defendant) married Mrs. Denby,
conceiving that he might legally do so. He should
not have abandoned her, had it not been for the vio-
lence of her temper.
Mr. CHAMBERS could not legally decide that the
defendant was bound to maintain the complainant,
she having a former husband alive.

THAMES POLICE.
Mr. Frederick Bowry, formerly in business as an
oil and colourman in Old Gravel-lane, was charged
with an assault on Mr. Chapman, of Sutton•street,
Commercial-toad, and with firing a pistol at him.
It appeared from the evidence of Mr. Chapman,
that the prisoner and himself had been on intimate
terms for many years, and Mr. Bowry had taken up
his residence in his house. On Wednesday night
an aittreation arose between them, and Mr. Bowry
called him a liar. Witness retorted, and was imme-
diately struck by the prisoner: he returned the
blow, and several hits were exchanged. At length
he gave the prisoner a very severe blow in the eye,
which knocked him down. On rising, he went up
stairs to his bed-room and brought down a large
horse-pistol, which he presented at witness, but it

the eetual situatioleof the monarchy, in consequence.l
of the changes produced by the silent working of
time. And what is the situation of the Aristocracy,
the Constitutional support of the Throne, the body
by whom the Monarch might expect assistance in
resisting any unconstitutional encroachment of the
Democracy ? Would it have the power of resisting
any measure proposed by the House of Commons,
and enforced by means of popular excitement ?
It is quite certain that it would possess no such
power. A measure proposed by the Comment',
however obnoxions to the Monarchy or Aristocracy,
would be blended, whenever any persevering and
effective resistance was expected, with some Bill of
Supply, of a nature absolutely indispensable to the
imme►►iate safety of the State, and thus the power
of resistance would be disarmed by the visible pre-
sence of urgent and pressing danger. This is so
clear that nobody even affects to doubt it. For
more than half a century the power of the House
of Commons to enforce its resolutions, in opposi-
tion to the united authority of the two other
branches of the Legistature, has been unquestion-
able and unquestioned. What then is the Ig:h.:a-
-tive change now proposed, in order, as it is pre-
tended, to preserve the principles of our mixed
Constitution from the innovating and detei iorating
operation of time? Is it to throw some new
powers or some augmentation of influence into the
hands of the Monarch and the Aristocracy, in or-
der thus to compensate for their Constitutional
power and influence, which the tide of time and cir-
cumstances has swept away ? Is it to ratify and
confirm that intermixture of the influence of both
with that of the Democracy, which has gradually
taken place in the House of Commons itself during
the period in which their separate and independent
authority has been in a state of progressive and
rapid decay, and in which the House of Commons
has risen to supreme and irresistible power ? Is
. •