The Sun.
London, England, 1822-03-04 00:00:00

AVERAGE PRICE OF CORN IN ENGLAND AND WALES.

Wheat, 475. 74. ; Barley, 198. a' • Oats, 156. 4d. ; Rye,
235. 3d._; Beans, 225. 3d..; Peas, 235. lid.

The Average Price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar, computed
from the Returns made in the Week ending the 27th day of Fe-
bruary, 1822, is 325. 4N. per cwt.

SMITHFIELD MARKET, MARCH 4.

The supply of Cattle at market this morning was greater than
for tome time past, amongst which there was a great quantity
of small meat; the prieekmay be quoted much less than last
market day.—The price °May remains the same.
Beef 2s tkl to 3s 10d I Veal
Mutton Bd to 3s 10d Pork 2s 2d to 4s 2cl

CORMERCIA 141 E P OR T,
FIO3I THE 25TH OF FED. TO THE IST OF MARCH, 1822.
Businesithroughout the week has assumed a different cha.
ratter to what it has lately done. No descriptions of produce
have advanced, and but few have maintained the value attached
to them at the date of our last exposition.

TILE LONDON JOURNALS.

EVIR kLTS FROM THE I) I I I,lr MORNING PAPERS,

March 4, 1822.

rMORNING HERALD.]
In the year 1813, the population of England,
Wales, and Scotland, was about ten millions,
and the annual taxation, was about seventy mil-
lions; in that year, therefore, the taxation for
each person, man, woman, and child, amounted
to the sum of seven pounds. In the year 1821,
the population was about fourteen millions, and
the taxation was about fifty-four millions. The
taxation, therefore, in the year 1821, did not
amount to more than four pounds each person,
while the taxation for 1813 amounted to seven
pnunfls each person. This is rather a singular
fact, after the assertions which have been made
at all the Agricultural Meetings, as to the op-
pressive effect of the taxation for the last year.

[BRITISH PRESS.]
The signal defeat of the Ministers on Friday
night, upon Sir M. W. Ridley's motion for the
reduction of two Lords of the Admiralty, offers no
slight cause for public congratulation. The di-
minution in the public expenditure proceeding
from this reduction alone does not exceed 2,0001.
a year ; but, although this sum may appear in it-
self trifling and of little importance, it is not
even for its amount to be despised as a saving, in
this time of public distress. The value of the
vote of the House of Commons, however, is by
no means confined to this ; so large a majority
against the Ministers as one of 54 in a House of
no less than 314 members, argues the existence
in the House of some feeling of sympathy for the
distresses of the country, and an intention of com-
pelling the Ministers, w hether they will it or not,
to fulfil the promise of economy and retrenchment
hichwas graciously held forth toParliament in the
King's Speech at the commencement of the Ses-
sion. Much advantage must likewise result
from this vote, by shewing the possibility of the
Ministers being defeated in the Home of Com-
mons. It certainly will furnish an argument
against the advocates of a radical reform in the
constitution of that assembly; but it cannot, of
course, affect the expediency of correcting such
particular abuses or absurdities in the representa-
tion of the people as may be submitted occasionally
to the wisdom of the Legislature. This defeat of the
Ministers acquires additional importance from
coming so quickly after their virtual defeat on the
preceding night upon the question of repealing
the salt duties, and united with that event must
prove to them, if not to the country, that the
majority of the House of Commons feel that they
have confided sufficiently long in the promises
and representations of the Ministers, and that
something more effectual for the relief of ,the
country will henceforth be expected than empty
professions, which are made without sincerity, to
meet a momentary emergency, and forgotten
without shame when the exigency is passed.

[MORNING CHRONICLE.]
The great pressure of Parliamentary matter
has prevented our adverting lately to Irish
affairs. We have now only leisure to acquaint
our readers, that one of the most important re-
presentations received by the Marquess of Wel-
lesley, and by him communicated in the dis-
patches, has been altogether disproved. We
i!lade to the statement by the High Sheriff of
the County of Down, that a considerable increase
in the sale of arms had arisen in Belfast, and
that the circumstance had given birth to a great
sensation of alarm, lest the Associations of the
South should display themselves in the North.'
—The Sovereign of Belfast, much to his ho-
nour, caused returns to be made by all the ven-
ders 6f arms in that town, which completely
shew that the fact is not as stated to Lord Wel-
lesley. In the Irish prints some other most import-
ant information upon the subject of the dispatches
has appeared, from which there can be no diffi-
culty in inferring that it is very unsafe to rely
on the accounts of various transactions given in
those documents. Such of our readers as are
more immediately interested about Ireland will
find ample matter for observation in the Irish
Papers, particularly The Dublin Evening Post.
—Every eye is now turned on the Marquis of
Wellesley, in expectation of some measures for
ameliorating the condition of the unfortunate
country he governs. We have entire reliance in,
the disposition and zeal of his Lordship, but we
confess that we cannot place much hope in
a Cabinet so constituted as is the Irish.—
Mr. Goulburn, however upright and honour-
able, is yet a strong enemy of Catholic Eman-
cipation ; we cannot at all understand the
reason of associating two individuals in the
conduct of the affairs of a country who differ in
the most important and critical measure regard-
ing'it ; but, difficult as it is to understand Mr.
Goulburn's appointment, far more incomprehen-
sible and strange is Lord Manners's continuance
in Chancery—his Lordship does not merely differ
from the Noble Marquess in the great constitu-
tional question referred to, but participates in
all the feelings of that wretched cabal whose do-
rninationLord Wellesley was destined, we thought,
to supersede. But Sir G. F. Hill and Colonel
Blacker are still at the Irish Treasury—Lord
Manners is Chancellor—Mr. Saurin attends the
Council4—and the Orange faction need not yet be
dispirited.

[NEW TustEs.l
This day it will be seen what degree of confi-
dence is entertained by the Fundholders in a
Government, which, for so long a succession of
years, has watched over and protected their in-
terests. The Books which are opened for an
expression of dissent from the conversion of the
Five per Cents. will, we trust, remain nearly
blank. 'We speak with a view not only to the
general benefit of the country, hut of the Fund-
holders themselves. If, from a selfish desire
to secure to themselves, a little longer, the
enjoyment of a higher dividend, they threw
obstacles in the way of an equitable arrange-
ment_; they may, indeed, injure the public
credit of the country, but they must, at last,
be the greatest sufferers themselves.—Various
:statements have been made in different Papers,

of the mode which Government means to adopt
in -paying off the Dissentients, if any should
inscribe their name for that purpose. These
statements are all purely imaginary. Govern-
ment will take no decision as to the mode of
payment, until they see what amount they will
have to provide for. When that is grace ascer-
tained, it will then be time enough to determine
whether they shall pay off the holders wholly,
or by instalments—whether they will take them
numerically, alphabetically, by lot, or in any
other way. A very ridiculous objection is started
in a Sunday Paper. It is said that the Five per
Cents. are a joint stock, and therefore they must
be paid off at once, or not at all. There is not
the slightest shadow of a ground for this state-
ment. It is absolutely in the power of Govern-
ment to pay off the Stock as it pleases ; and any
body who dissents from a measure so clearly
equitable is entitled to no favour of any sort.—
To grant them any benefit or ailvantage what-
ev•er, would be a robbery on the public, for whose
interest the Government acts in this measure.—
We believe that few persons will place them-
selves in a situation to provoke 'any measure of
severity towards them ; but if they do, little pity
will be shewn by the public at large to their dis-
appointed selfishness and rapacity. What we say
to the Fundholders, we also say to the Land-
holders ; neither class of persons, at a crisis
like the present, should push their separate in-
terest against that of -the nation at large. The
Government seems disposed so to modify the
Corn Laws as eventually to raise the price of
corn in favour of the British grower. But even
this is done with a view) on the other hand, to
maintain inviolate the faith of the nation toward
the public creditor. lie is fairly entitled to the
aid of an efficient Sinking Fund; the amount of
which "ought certainly not to be less than five
millions. The most liberal and enlighted Land-
holders candidly admit the truth of this posi-
tion ; and therefore they have given their support
to the Salt Tax (a tax not bearing peculiarly
hard on agriculture), well knowing that with-
out an efficient taxation there can be no efficient
Sinking Fund.

[THE TIMES.]
We compared the continuance of the salt du-
ties for one year longer, to the loss of a great
battle by the nation. The dismissal of two use-
less Lords of the Admiralty may be considered
as the gaining of a small skirmish. So that, in
this view of the subject, we are not yet 44 quits"
with the enemy. However, the last advantage.,
though trifling in its amount, was yet carried i❑
so decisive a manner, as to have thrown great
confusion into the ranks of the opposing army,
from which they are not yet recovered ; and their
future attacks will be made with less confidence.
We must again allude to the novelty in our his-
tory of an Administration which, even with a
House of Commons constituted like the present,
is unable to carry some measures which it
professes to think useful to the country ; and
carries others, which it declares to be essential,
with so much difficulty, that it cannot have anti-
cipated success. A majority of only four would,
with any other Ministry, have been considered as
a shameful defeat. With respect to the division
upon the Lay-Lords, the worst consequence
which Lord Londonderry seemed to apprehend
from that affair was the diminution of the influ-
ence of the Crown in the House of Commons.—
His Lordship protested against " that mode of
" reforming, the House of Commons piecemeal.—
" Had they been fairly told that the influence
" of the Crown in Parliament was excessive, the
44 question must have been met upon a broad
" principle." This " broad principle" is some-
thing like the 44 fundamental argument " of old,
spo,ken of by his Lordship. The weight is,
unfortunately, hung all on one side, and mightily
retards the progress of the State to affluence.—
How great that change is which has gradually
taken place in the constitution of the House of
Commons is evinced by the corresponding' change
which has taken place in men's manner of think-
ing and reasoning upon the subject. Ancientlj,
whatever weight the Crown might possess in
the House, whatever dominion it might ex-
ercise over its members, the fact was never allowed
in argument—it was never assumed as an ac-
knowledged truth—it was winked at ; but now
the influence of the Crown over the popular
branch of the Constitution is avowed in fact, and
justified upon principle. It is asserted that the
influence is and ought to be great ; it is only
maintained that it is not too great. Good God !
In a division of a tolerably full House, in which
the numbers are 169 and 165, there are found
sixty-one Servants of the Crown who, of course,
have voted all on one side !