The Sun.
London, England, 1836-05-06 00:00:00

TILE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY. MAY 6, i;.436

for each term for which the voter (Patrick Biltori) being
the sole occupier, was liable, and both sums appearing
to have been due rt the time of the election, the vote must be
struck off the poll.
Mr. Hutton said there was another objection to striking► off
this vote, but the Committee decided that it could not then be
entertained.

Mr. WRA NMI they objected to the vote of Matthew CMS-
hie, on the ground of an arrear of wide-street cess. This vote
was struck off the poll by consent.

The next vote impeached by the petitioners was that of
Henry Fox, of Taaffe's-row.

After a great deal of discussion among the councel, the
Committee decided, " That at the time of the election, the
wide-street cess for Easter and Michaelmas Terms, 1834, was
due by the occupier of the premises, 1, Taaffe's-row."
By this decision the parties were placed in an equality upon
the pull.
Mr. Balfour announced, with the concurrence of the other
members of the Committee, that they would content them-
selves with reading the evidence rs to the remaining eases tif
bribery, without hearing any arguments from counsel-
The result of this day's proceedings is unfavourable to the
sitting member, three of whose voters were removed from the
poll. The chance of the petitioners' ultimate success is there-
fore somewhat increased. -

DUBLIN and DROGHEDA RAILWAY.
(COAST LINE.)

•
The Committee met yesterday at twelve o'clock.
Mr. O'CONNELL in the Chair.

Mr. MORE O'FERRALL begged, before the proceedings com-
menced, to state that he was interested in the case before the
the Committee, being opposed to the Bill.
Mr. R. PLUNKETT said he was also interested, haring taken
shares in the Coast Line Railway.
Mr. O'CONNELL suggested that both gentlemen might re-
main on the Committee, and abstain from voting in case of a
division.

Mr. Joy, Counsel for Robert Sheppard, and other peti-
tioners against the Bill, urged a preliminary objection, that
the Standing Orders had not been complied with, inasmuch
as there was a variance betwee❑ the names attached to the
contracts, and those in the original list furnished on the
presentation of the petition.
The objection was overruled.
Mr. °TANLox took another objection to the form of the
contracts, which was also overruled.

Mr. HattatsoN then opened the case for the supporters of
the Bill, and enumerated the great advantages which the coast
line possessed over any inland project. There were a
number of small towns, from which communications
could be made, and it would be found that the
population along the line (which was considered by Parlia-
ment a matter of the greatest consequence) was considerably
greater than on the inland line. The quantity of agricul-
tural produce for public conveyance was also greater on
this line ; and what was also a matter of no small
consequence, fish caught along the coast could in a short space
of time be transmitted to the markets of the Irish metropolis.
In the case of the Eastern Counties and the South Eastern,
the Committee attached great importance to this circumstance.
It was intended to make a branch line to Armagh, which would
connect the important town of Belfast with the city of Dublin.
The turning of the line was in the very heart of the City of
Dublin. The Learned Counsel then read a letter addressed by
Mr. Thomas Brodigan to Lord Killeen, in order to show
that the parties connected with the coast-line proposed' to
submit to the arbitration of the Board of Works in Ireland
the question which of the two lines was more likely to benefit
the public. He also read the answer of the Noble Lord,
which expressed his approval of the proposition ; but that
the parties connected with the inland line refused to accede to it.
Some deviations had been made from the original plan which
were specified in the map, and the consent of the landholders
through whose lands these deviations were to pass had been
obtained. At the conclusion of the Learned Gentleman's
address,

COUNSEL on the same side called upon the promoters of
the inland line to deliver in a map of their plan.
Mr. O'HANLON declined to comply, as he was not bound
to do so by the standing order.
Mr. O'CONNELL thought in fairness the map should be fur-
nished.

Mr. O'HANLON hoped the Committee would avow them
till to-morrow to consider of their answer.

The Committee decided in favour of the application:
Mr. Kinnepeek, Assistant-Secretary to the Compwry, was
then examined, who stated that the shares in the Company
amounted to 6,0001. total capital, 600,0001. Of this 3-14,000/.
was subscribed by-persons having property on the line; 360 in
number; 272,0001. was subscribed by Merchan's resident in
Manchester, who were connected with the trade of both Dublin
and Drogheda. The Committee, which was composed of 27
persons, had taken shares to the amount of 82,000/. A deposit
of 2/. 10s. a sharo had been paid, which amounted to 14,575/.
The witness was cross-examined by Mr. o'l-IANLori, after
which the Committee adjourned.

NEW POOR LAWS.—The parish of Urchfont pre-
sents an e:cellent proof of the beneficial effects of the New
Poor Law. Urchfont was considered by Colonel A'Court to
be one of the very few parishes that possessed a redundant po-
pulation; and at this season of the year, it was not uncommon
for 80 or 100 persons to be entirely dependent on the parish
for support : there are now not more than 12 or 14 partaking
of parish relief. A great change has also taken place in the
social cendition of the labourers; they are already better ser-
vants and better men—more contented and more happy. Since
the working of the New Poor Law, a large number have left
the parish, most of whom hate obtained regular employ. A
family consisting of ten persons, about a fortnight since emi-
grated to Yorkshire, where, through the assistance of the Poor
Law Commissioners, they are engaged at double the wages
procured at Urchfont. Another family is about to follow.
On Tuesday last, four families, consisting of 17 persons, pro-
ceeded to Bristol, where they are to embark for Canada.
Wherever the New Poor Law system has been brought into
operation, the general opinion is, that it works well both for
the labourer and the farmer. In the same paper (the Devizes
Gazette) the following paragraph, illustrative of partial evil
connected with the New Poor Law, appears :—" On Sunday
last, a shoemaker of Salisbury, named Adams, drowned himself
at Stratford. The unfortumate man was a few months ago
bereaved of his wife and left with four small children. He had
been an out patient of the Salisbury Infirmary ; and a day or
two previous to his decease he went to his parish to obtain re-
lief, but was refused, unless he went into the poor house, with
his family. This he would not eonscnt to do. Distress,
therefore urged him to the commission of the rash act." The
Kent Herald describes the satisfaction of the poor there as being
pretty general. A petition from the labourers of Eastry, a
place in that county, was recently presented to the House, in
which the petitioners complain of the operation of the New
Poor Laws. No measure which human wisdom can devise
will excuse individual hardship.
One day in the berrinning of last week, some of the
workmen employed in the erection of the new buildings, on
Weensland-haugh, in the course of their operations, came upon
a live trout enclosed in the solid rock. It was of the par kind,
and measured about seven inches long. The writer of this
paragraph saw it in less than an hour after it was discovered, in
the possession of Walter Wilson, Esq. Its spine was unluckily
broken a little above the great dorsal in the process of exlapi-
dation, and it lived only a few seconds afterwards. It had much
the appearance of trout of the same species to whiell the writer
thinks it belonged. If there was any peculiarity, it seemed to
him to be in its great transparency. —Kelso Chronicle.
WEDDING MISTAKE.—The following embarras-
ing state of things occurred a few days since to a young couple
about to be united at the altar of one of the Marylebone
churches in the New-road :—At the appointed hour the bride
and her friends arrived in one or more carriages at Marylebone
Church. Considerably more than an hour elapsed of breath-
less expectation, but no gentleman appeared. At length the
lady exclaimed, " Why, this is Trinity Church, Marylebone,
is it not ?" which was immediately replied to in the negative ;
11 hen she found to her dismay that the coachman had driven to
the wrong church. Away the party immediately drove to the
right one, where they found the bridegroom in a not less ago-
nising state of suspense. Happily there was still time to
" tic the happy knot."

CEIARAC TER OF TIIE SPANIARDS.-The Spa-
niards still possess many of the qualities for which their ances-
tors were so highly distinguished. Of the upper classes it may
be observed that, grave and dignified in their deportment, and
usually entertaing the most elevated notions of honour, they
seldom fail in commanding respect. Of the lower orders I
regret to speak in an unfavourable manner; but it is acknow-
ledged that they are generally noted for malice and depravity,
which vices must, however, in a great measure, be attributed
to the wretched education they have received. These remarks
ag ply rhiefly to those who reside in cities and towns ; for among
the peasantry numerous instances of the most exalted probity
may be met with. The Spaniards have ever been eminent for
bravery, and their noble defence of the liberties of their country
against the unjust attacks of the French, entitles them to the
esteem and admiration of every patriotic mind. It must, how-
ever, be confessed that their bravery has too frequently been
tinctured with a degree of ferocity at which humanity shudders.
The Spaniards, excepting the Valencians; Catalonians, and
Galicians, have been represented as a most indolent nation, but
this defect is more to be ascribed to the heat of their climate
than to natural laziness. " See," says a British officer, " the
descendants of the industrious Englishman at Madras or
Jamaica; or of the more industrious Dutchman, at Batavia or
Surinam, and tell me whether they are more inclined to active
exertions than the Spaniards." The people of Valencia differ
in many respects from the inhabitants of other provinces of
Spain. Favoured with an extremely mild climate, they are
remarkable for their industrious habits, and the cleanliness of
their houses and neatness of attire arc no less conspicuous.
Notwithstanding the defects in the character of the Spaniards,
they are religious, loyal, hospitable, patient in adversity, and
by no means devoid of wit. They have been much admired by
foreigners for their courteous manners and noble frankness of
disposition, and, generally speaking, may be characterised as
one of the most abstemious of nations.—(From a M. S. on
Spain, by the Marquis Champernon de Hawkins.)
THE EXILED BOURBONS,.-...'
he German. Journal
of Frankfort contains the following from Prague of the 21st
ult. :—" It is not yet known whether Charles X. will con-
tinue to reside in Bohemia ; his stay there is still the subject
of negotiation. . The Royal Family is to go to Scheel ibrunn
in the month of May. Part of the suite of the Duchess cf
Berry has already arrived at Brandeip, and the Princess herself
is shortly expected." According to the Quotidienne's advices
from Prague, Charles the Tenth and his family are to proceed
in the course of the present month to Schcenbrunn. The
Auasburg Gozette, on the authority of a letter from Vienna,
contradicts the report of Charles lii. having purchasers the
domain of Papa, in Hungary.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The Irish Corrtabulary Bill is to come again under
the notice of the House of Peers to-night. Mly we
hope their Lordships will not—for the sake of a
.mise-
rable consistency, or through an unworthy fueling of.
hostility towards his Majesty's Ministers, or in order
to please such politicians as the Lords Londonderry
and Roden—resist those changes which we pointed at
yesterday as essential to the well-working of themea-
sure, when it becomes a portion of our statute law ?
There are, we know, evil-minded men, who care not a
jot for decency or common sense, to whom there is
no pastime so agreeable as mischief-making ; and
there are also journals base enough to halloo these
enemies of peace and good order in their mad career.
Will the House of Lords disgrace itself, by following
the suicidal advice of such monitors ? And deeply
disgraced it will be, should a measure framed for
public benefit, and not obnoxious to the charge of fa-
vouring party objects, be ruined by a pertinacious ad-
herence to an ill-judged and mischievous resolution.
While upon this subject, it may not be amiss to
point out another instance of the infamy in which the
Times rolls itself in order to begrime the Adminis-
tration. In a short paragraph that journal has con-
trived to insert a batch of falsehoods, which it attempts
to sustain by a parade of figures. We shall quote the
passage, and contrast it with the wording of the ori-
ginal Bill, to demonstrate the liberal mendacity of the
writer.

" The Bill gave power to tho Lord-lieutenant to
appoint 42 county inspectors, who might have had
salaries of 5001. each £21,000
The amendment creates four only such officers

Gavin,. -£19,000

42 paymasters at salaries of 1001. each £4,200
The amendment creates ten such officers • 1,000

Saving £3,200
In these two heads saving 22,2001."

The impression intended to be produced upon the
reader's mind by this paragraph is, that the Consta-
bulary Bill imperatively enacted the appointment of
of 42 county inspectors, at an annual aggregate sa-
,lary of 21,0001. What said the sth clause of the
Bill—that which authorized the appointment of county
inspectors ? It said that the Lord Lieutenant of
Ireland might appoint two county inspectors for each
of the counties of Cork, Galway, and Tipperary—
these being very large and populous districts—and one
county inspector for each of the other counties and
counties of cities and towns in Ireland, the city of
Dublin excepted:—" Provided always (we pray at-
tention to the proviso) that the same person or per-
sons may be appointed such county inspector or in-
spectorsfor any county at large, and for any county
of a city or county of a town locally situate within
the same or adjoining thereto." That this proviso
was deliberately introduced for a particular purpose—
[or the purpose, in truth, of enabling the Viceroy of
Ireland to limit the number of county inspectors to
thirty-five—will appear by a glance at the subse-
quent clauses, authorizing the appointment of paymas-
ters and sub-inspectors for counties at large, and
counties of cities and towns, from which this proviso
is omitted. The Times was well aware of the existence
of. the proviso in the fifth clause, and of its absence
from clauses six and seven—it was not so stupid as to
overlook its import ; and with full cognizance of the
exact state of the case, that journal calumniated Mi-
nisters, and insulted its own readers, if they possess an
atom of honour in their composition, by that meanest
of all processes—the suggestio falsi ; in fact, false-
hood is suggested, and the truth suppressed, in the
extract we have quoted. Instead of 21,0001. a year,
as alleged by the Times, the contemplated ex-
penses of county inspectors, as provided for by the
original Bill, would amount to only 17,5001. There
will be six such inspectors at 3,0001. a year. The
saving to the country will, therefore, be 14,5001. a
year, or 6,5001. a year less than has been stated by
the Times. In the other item that journal has been
more correct ; but we have no doubt that the amended
clauses, which refer to the paymasters, will be so
improved still, as to lop off from the savings specu-
lated upon in Printing-house-square the 3,201. about
which the immaculate journal published there has been
making a clatter.—Morning Chronicle.

We have hitherto taken no part in the war which a
few of our Contemporaries have been for some time
waging with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on ac-
count of double sheets. That the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman was induced to fix a maximum for the dimen-
sions of a newspaper, and to impose a tax on any sup-
plementary sheet, with a view to favour the Morning
Chronicle, no unprejudiced man will for a moment
believe. It appears to us that when it was deemed
advisable to substitute for postage a small stamp duty
on newspapers, nothing could be fairer than to im-
pose a slight addition for every supplemental sheet.
The same reason which justifies a stamp duty in lieu
of postage on one sheet, justifies an additional duty
on a double sheet. The Chancellor of the Exche-
quer has shown no niggardliness with regard to the
maximum for a single sheet ; but if the stamp is a
substitute for postage, there must be limits to
what can be covered by a single duty, and
having once fixed the maximum, nothing can he
more just than that when the limits are exceeded,
an addition should be made to the duty. The Times,
which tells us that it " publishes more double sheets
than any other paper," and which is consequently more
interested than any other paper in obtaining an ex-
emption from the duty on the supplimental sheet, has,
day after day, been raising a loud outcry against the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, as if his proposal, when
carried into effect, would be felt as a calamity by the
' whole United Kingdom. But what is the fact? The
double sheet is not only undesirable, but unquestionably
injurious, to advertisers. Who need be told that the
general practice of reader;, is to separate the sheet con-
taining the advertisements from that containing the
news ? Is it not equally obvious that a person who
wishes to discover any particular advertisement must
often be wearied by wading through such a mass as is
contained, for instance, as in a double sheet of the
Times ? Many persons send their advertisements
to a newspaper in the hope that they may find
their way into a single sheet number ; and the
Times knows that many persons also refuse to ad-
vertise except on the condition that their advertise-
ments shall not be inserted in a double sheet.
It would not be so easy to collect the opinions of
miscellaneous advertisers ; but we call on the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, if he have any doubts on this
subject, to consult particular classes of advertisers, and
he will find them unanimous in condemning double
sheets. Let him consult auctioneers, for instance, or
booksellers, classes of men jealous of each other, and
he will find them on this subject unanimous. They
feel, and frequently declare, that they might nearly as
well throw their money into the Thames as bestow it
for advertisements which appear in a double sheet. The
public, therefore, have no interest in the continuance
of a double sheet, and the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer would actually benefit them by a supplemental
duty. We trust, therefore, the Right Honourable
Gentleman will not be deterred, by the silly jests
of the Times, from adhering to his plan, when
no other grounds of opposition to it can be found
than such as have been advanced by that journal.
We are convinced that the object of the Times
is to embarrass the Chancellor of the Ex-
ceequer, and really to drive him into an aban-
donment of his projected reduction of duty ; but being
unable to effect that object directly, it seeks to accom-
plish it by low abuse and ribaldry. The Times knew
well when it charged the Right Hon. Gentleman with
favouring the Morning Chronicle, that the charge
was utterly unfounded ; but it conjectured that the im-
putation of interested motives might in some way for-
ward its views. We trust that he will show himself as
unwilling to be deterred by low abuse from adhering to
a determination founded on a principle of justice to-
wards the public, as he was incapable of deviating
from his duty to favour a journal supporting his politi-
cal principles. The Right Hon. Gentleman has had
some experience of the world, and he must know that
weakness is shown as much in departing from what is
just, because political adherents may thereby be bene-
fit:ld, as in being influenced by political adherents to
promote their objects at the expense of opponents.
We trust that he will not be influenced either by
fear or favour—that he will consult only the public in-

terest, despising low abuse and paltry insinuations,
and throwing himself boldly on the country. " Do
justice, and fear not," is the maxim which a Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer ought constantly to have pre-
sent to his mind. The policy based on this maxim
will be found the safest in the long run. The public
are seldom long disposed to bestow their approbation
on the factitious candour which seeks to conciliate op •
position by abandoning what is just and honourable.
We conjure all those who have really at heart a reduc-
tion of the Newspaper Stamp-duties to abandon minor
differences and frivolous objections, and carefully to
abstain from co-operating with the Times in its vexa-
tious opposition to the measure of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, by which it is manifest that it seeks
covertly to defeat the reduction.—Morning Chronicle.
We return to the subject of the debate on Lord
Brudenell's appointment, or rather to that for which
the name of Lord Brudenell served as a text and
motto. Had the real object and character of Sir W.
Molesworth's motion been confined, as was die origi-
nal notice of the Hon. Baronet, to the individual case
or merits of that Noble officer, we might have felt it
necessary to re-enter upon the history of the Court-
martial upon Captain Wathen, and upon the incidental
and extrajudicial opinion of the Court, with regard to
the evidence which bore against one portion of the pro-
secutor's (Lord Brudenell's) regimental proceedings.
We shoUld in that case have had no scruple about re-
asserting so much of our former sentiments as might
have been applicable to the proposition raised by the
Honourable Baronet—nor, on the other hand, should
we have shriink from modifying them, so far as
justice would have warranted, upon a full conside-
ration of those facts and circumstances which were
communicated in the course of Tuesday night,
and which must have conspired with the recol-
lection of the punishment already incurred by the
Noble Lord to swell that enormous and overwhelming
majority,which condemned alike an unnecessary recur-
rence to the professional position of Lord Brudenell,
and an oblique and unfair involution with it of a far
more comprehensive question. But the motion of the
Hon. Baronet, as Mr. Joseph Hume acknowledged,
was meant for nothing more than a peg whereon to
hang an attack upon the conduct of the Commander-
in-Chief—a censure upon his military administration—
an extinction or suspension of his important office—
and an absorption of all its powers and functions by
some Whig jobbers in the Cabinet, or who hope to be.
there. Mr. Joseph Hume's " undertaking" was to prove
before the Committee—should such a fulcrum for his
machinery be granted to him—" other instances of
gross partiality and oppression on the part of the Com-
mander-in-Chief." Coupled with this threat, there was,
on the part of Joseph, an allegation that "we ought
not to have a Commander-in-Chief whom nobody
knows" (!) and "that the Secretary at War (Lord
Howick) ought to be responsible to the House for
appointments like the present." Here, then, we have
plainly traced out for us the foundation of a scheme
which has long been meditated by two descriptions of
persons calling themselves Reformers. What Mr.
Joseph flume was the first to broach against the ex-
isting constitution of the Military Department, soon
afterwards received the sanction of that unsullied per-
sonage, Mr. Edward Ellice—contrary to the wish or
challenge of Lord Howick, who had invited a direct
motion upon the general subject of the army. His
Lordship's conscientious, and cautious relative depre-
cated any such occurrence. He thought it much better
to "leave the subject in the hands of Government,
whose duty it was to see it fairly adjusted," and ac-
cordingly, he " entreated the House to deal with it
as tenderly as possible." He told the House that a
Committee had for a long time been sitting to consoli-
date as far as possible the several military " depart-
ments under one head, and that the whole army
was suffering from the want of the protection of the
high authority of his Majesty's Councils ! !" Now,
what is the meaning of all this verbose lamentation ?
We will, at no great length, but in intelligible terms,
explain. That Mr. Joseph Hume should desire to break
down the army, and every other establishment instituted
for the defence of the State, is neither surprising nor
new, nor in any manner interesting. He is a gentleman
whose taste for fractions rarely tempts him to revolu-
tionize by halves ; and when he " undertakes" to
prove a string of accusations against Lord Hill, he
means no more than that he will persist in them, as he
did in his foul charges against a Middlesex magistrate,
"until forced to retract them—as in the instance of Sir J.
Gibbons he has done within these three or four days.
So enough for him who will ere long be ex-Member
for the County of Middlesex. Next as to Mr. Ellice.
He wishes not to break down the army, any further than
may be requisite for making it a source of Whig-Minis-
terial influence—a field of corrupt patronage—a normal
school of multifarious and immeasurable jobbing. We
tell you, Mr. Edward Ellice, that your public charac-
ter is too well known—that your crooked, manoeuvring,
intriguing habits, make whatever proposal or even
whatever intimation falls from you, suspected of some
sinister purpose. We state this broadly, without eva-
sion or circumlocution—and add that there is nothing
more imprudent than for such persons as we have just
described, to lend themselves with any appearance of
zeal or impetuosity to schemes for the success of which
they are really anxious. They betray every thing—
the cloven foot is taken for granted, be it ever so dili-
gently concealed. When the Member for Coventry,
therefore, moralizes about the King's Ministers, as-
suming the " protection of the whole army," there is
not an apprentice in 'Change-alley who does not dis-
sect the humbug, and parody the plausibility of the
Coventry cabinet-maker, as follows :—" Lord Hill
gives Ministers no votes in the House of Com-
mons ; Lord Hill is not a politician, and certainly
not a Whig politician—the army under his admi-
nistration is fairly and healthfully governed ; there
are Ensigncies to give away every year—yet they
bring no grist to our mill : we will, therefore,
turn out this plain-dealing veteran soldier ; and I,
Edward Ellice, am ready any day in the week, as Se-
cretary at War, or any other Secretary, to dispose of
commissions, instead of him." Well, the plot ripens,
the Commander-in-Chief is sent about his business,
Ellice and Co. take possession of the Horse Guards.
They give away everything—no, not quite Rive—but
they fill up all vacancies with the meritorious objects
of their well-weighed choice ; and then they " pro-
tect" the army, which they have themselves created,
consisting in every sense of their own creatures. Does
any Englishmen, then, flatter himself that an army in
the hands of a sordid and insidious faction would be
ruled or administered with reference to any other inte-.
rests than those of the same factiorf? Does any one
suppose that the greedy and selfish supporters of the
Minister in the House of Commons would, or could,
be refused their respective jobs, however profligate or
disgraceful ? What was the condition of the British
army from the close of the American war to the open-
ing of that against France ? Why, it was brave indeed,
because it was British; but it was also an ill-composed,
untrained, demoralized, unserviceable body. For
many years after the great struggle of the French re-
volutionary war began, the army of England was the
laughing-stock of Europe? And why ?—because it was
one filled partly by dependents on the Minister, partly
by those on whose patrons the Minister depended. It
was an army over which the Secretary at War was
lord paramount. There was no Commander-in-
Chief. We are told the present Commander-ill-Chief
is " not responsible." What ? Cannot Lord Hill be
impeached for corrupt practices ? And would lie not
in a moment, on the slightest real provocation ? What
party has he in the House of Commons to protect
him ? Was not the Duke of York, the King's
favourite son, responsible ; ay, and punished for im-
puted faults in the administration of his office. But
what sort of responsibility affects a Minister of the
Crown, with a factious or corrupt majority to support
him ? He is charged, and on full nroof of the fact,
'with having perpetrated some palpable and flagitious
jobs. He has put Whig or Radical nondescripts, on
the urgent solicitation of Whig or Radical Members,
over the heads of officers of known ability and distin-
guished service. The charge is brought forward in a
Parliament of which the greater number are Radicals
and Whigs. Then tell us, can any pretence be more
absurd arid ludicrous than that such a Minister is re-
sponsible to the Legislature for abuse of patronage or
any other mal-administration ? No, Mr. Edward Ellice,
we have damped your powder for you. This infernal
machine of yours will miss fire, at least for the pre-

sent. Your Committee, which you tell us has been so
long a sitting, has under it no better than an addled
egg. You may devise the plausible expedient of a
board—a paid but powerless board of General Cacers,
to issue ostensibly the arbitrary orders of the War-
office. The piny*, however, will sea through this anti-
constittitional aria criminal expedient fer tindermining
the foundations of his ilifortei and usurphig the royal
authority. His Majesty will faddlleet tlic prompt te-,
solution with which his venerable filth* defeated the
snare laid for him by a former unprincipled 4kealition,
when one Whig Minister grasped at the whole Pr!,
tronage of India, as another now meditates the appro-
priation of the army, under pretence that it ought to
he wielded by '' responsible' rulers. His Majesty
will further turn back to the period of 1640, and the
subsequent years ; he will there behold, in the forcible
transfer of troops and garrisons to a Parliamontary
majority of '' responsible" rebels, the fate of one who
was not the worst of his predecessors, and the speedy,
though- temporary downfall of the British monarchy.
No, no ; job, if you can, gentlemen, the courts of
law and cquity—job the church of England—job the
corporations—job the magistracy—fill the Treasury
with tricksters, and the House of Commons with ad-
ventures, but leave his Majesty thes word, or wrest from
him at once the sceptre.—Times.
It has ever been the unhappy fate of Ireland, that
while questions of contending parties—mere polemical
disquisitions connected with its state—have received
more than their due share of attention, the matters
which concern the practical condition of the people
have been treated with cold neglect. There can be no
doubt that this is principally the fault of the Irish
themselves, or of those among them who have aspired.
to the rank of public men. Their patriotism has too
often expended itself more in showing off the patriot
than in pursuing any substantial good for the people.
The glory of being a great Agitator has been more
sought after than the less glaring reputation of having
been a useful man. The wrongs of the people have
been used rather as a theme for declamation than an
object for redress, and, while not only Great Britain,
but all Europe, has rung with the discussions of politi-
cal or theological points, which, whether one way or the
other determined, could only affect the ambition or the
public usefulness of a few, the mass of the population has
been left to increase and multiply in circumstances of
the grossest neglect, and in almost hopeless degradation.
Nor has experience made much change for the better
in these discreditable anomalies. Even now we find
almost the whole interest of Irish politicians devoted
to debateable principles, which are held highly im-
portant by the comparatively few who take the lead
on either side, while the misery—the shocking un-
paralleled misery—of the many remains unredressed.
Even now we find a large attendance in the Houses
of Parliament, and powerful speeches delivered, where
the matter in debate is whether an extreme party or
an authority which ought to be independent of party,
shall possess the local government of Irish towns.
But when the question concerns the millions of des-
titute Irish poor, the benches of the House of Com-
mons are deserted. Even Mr. O'Connell, who calls
himself, or allows himself to be called,. the Repre-
sentative of all Ireland does not attend in his place.
We allude to the motion of Mr. P. Scrope, on Wed-
nesday evening, founded upon the report of the Go-
vernment Commission of Inquiry into the state of
the Irish poor. That motion proceeded to resolve
that the Commissioners, having made their final re-
port, and having stated, among other important facts,
the following, viz:-
1. That " a great portion of the labouring population
of Ireland are insufficiently provided with the common ne-
cessaries of life ; that not less than 2,885,000 persons of
that class are in distress, and require relief for 30 weeks in
the year, owing to want of work."
2. That " the wives and children of many are obliged
reluctantly, and with shame, to beg."
3. That " mendicancy is likewise the sole resource of the
aged and impotent of the poorer classes in general; whereby
encouragement is given to idleness, imposture, and general
crime."

" And the Commissioners having recommended se-
veral Legislative measures for the cure of these appall-
ing evils,
" This House is of opinion that no time should be lost
in taking such steps as may tend to relieve this large por-
tion of his Majesty's subjects from so calamitous a con-
dition."

A stranger to the modes of procedure in our House of
Commons would naturally suppose that a subject of
such magnitude could not fail to excite the deepest
and most general attention, and that the proposition
that no time should be lost in taking steps which
might tend to remedy such a state of things, could
not meet with a dissentient voice. But it was not
so. The resolution was opposed by the Secre-
tary of State for Ireland, on the ground that Go-
vernment intended to undertake a. measure for the
relief of the Irish poor, upon its own responsibility,
but was not as yet prepared to do anything upon the
subject. It does not exactly appear how this state of
affairs should make the proposed resolution objection-
able or inexpedient. Hitherto the Government has
done nothing-
but cause an inquiry to be made, which,
when made, it has suffered to remain unnoticed. If
Ministers have felt it so extremely difficult to make
up their minds as to what should be proposed, and
considering the magnitude of the subject, we do not
wonder that they should—what can be better than
that they should at least testify their anxiety to do
what is right, by acceding to such a motion as that
proposed to the House of Commons ? It would have
been to their credit had they not waited for such a
proposition on the part of an unofficial Member of the
House, but had themselves come forward to do all that
the circumstances of the case admitted—to have given
hope to the suffering and a prospect of relief, as soon as
the many difficulties attendant upon the subject had re-
ceived the necessary examination. As it is, they can-
not remove the public impression, that they have been
unwillingly forced into a notice of the subject, and that
they are not desirous to enter upon the settlement of it.
We believe that they are not, for it is not a question
upon which Mr. O'Connell urges them. He has
objects in view more pleasing to himself than an at-
tempt .to elevate millions of his fellow-creatures in
Ireland from a state of wretchedness, compared with
which the state of unrelieved paupers in England is
comfort. Such an attempt will neither flatter his
vanity, nor fill his purse. It will have an effect un-
favourable to him, by showing what arc the objects
to which a really honest Irish patriot would have
devoted himself, but which he has always neglected or
shuffled off, that he might more effectually serve him-
self and his party associates. The Government de-
grades itself to his level, by following his example.
It cannot be pretended that the state of the Irish poor
is a new discovery, to which the thoughts of states-
men are now, for the first time, directed. It is true
that the facts have been set forth, by the late Report
of the Commissioners, in all their dreadful enormity,
and with more accuracy of detail than had previously
been arrived at, but the broad and general conclu-
sion of the abject state of an immense body of the
Irish peasantry is no new thing, nor is it a political
discovery of very recent date, that to this state, which
makes the peasant feel he has nothing to lose—this
condition of reckless and despairing distress ought to
be attributed (along with the wicked industry of sel-
fish agitators) the lawless and dangerous condition of
Ireland, which disturbs the peace of the empire and
exhausts the Treasury, in the expenses of keeping mi-
litary possession of the country. His Majesty's Mi-
nisters ought, long ago, to have applied themselves to
this question : and we agree with Mr. William Smith
O'Brien, that if the Hon. and Learned Member for
Dublin had held a different tone upon the subject, they
would have done so. But the selfishness of Irish
landlords in.the Cabinet has made them but too happy
to avail themselves of the respite which Mr. O'Con-
nell's selfishness, as a patriot, allowed them. The reply
of Lord Morpeth to the motion was feeble and trifling
—quite unworthy of so important a subject. He
complained that the observations which had! been
made were not' dictated by a " conciliatory spirit,
as if the manner of bringing forward the subject—
the absence of holyday and lady terms to sweeten the
appeal to justice and humanity, were the proper topics
for animadversion at such a time. What right have
Ministers to expect conciliatory language when they
are called in question for neglect of a duty which,
not only as Statesmen, but as Christians, they ought to
have been eager to discharge ? But Lord Morpeth
seems to think it enough if he admits " the hideous