The Sun.
London, England, 1836-01-15 00:00:00

•
SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

The Standard of last night, hard pressed for ru-
mours, announces, in its firstleading- article, the " re-
,:oirtion of Sir John Cainpbell," from a "source"
It so
on which it places " the greatest confidence."
hp4pens, notwithstanding this great confidence, .rin
tlha:
every part of the statement is Untrue. In a secm:dcoanrb-
tide, written before the other, the solitary c
journal of the Tories arrives at the whimsical
elusion" that the
.Ministry is condemned_ to destruc-
tion, and "that the present arrangements are the pre-
parative of a breaking up." • This conclusion is drawn
froth the resignation of Sir John Campbell ; but the
premises of our inventive contemporary being false,
the conclusion is unfounded. Sir John Campell has -
not resigned, and is . Attorney-General. Whatever
difficulties there may have been in the judicial appoint-
ments just concluded—and There were some of a very
embarrassing nature—they have all been overcome
in a manner honourable to Ministers and satisfac,
tory to the parties. We are at a loss to imagine what
satisfaction the Tories can derive from the appoint-
ments in question, though we tan understand how
they will
great
satisfaction to the public. An
give
excellent and experienced Equity lawyer is trans-
lated from the Rolls to the Seals, and a liberal and
consistent politician, who would have disdained to
ekehange his political principles for office; in imitation
of his. piedecessors, Sir John Leach, and Lord Lynd-
hurst, and Lord Abinger, is added to the Cabinet.
Mr. Bickersteth, whose qualification for any judicial
office none dare doubt, is promoted to the Rolls. The
personal and professional character of Mr. Bickersteth
is held in universal respect. He has risen to his pre-
sent eminence by no party.subserviency—by no in-
trigues—by no sale of his integrity. His legal ac-
quirements and great talents will, without doubt, be
devoted to the preparation of a measure for effecting a
complete separation of the political from the judicial
functions of the Chancellorship, and he will be an in-
valuable accession to the House of Lords, as an
upright and able adVocate of Law Reform. The
Standard gives an opinion, that the " long-babbled-
about project of separating. the political from the ju-
dicial duties -of the Lord- Chancellor" is a project
which " will never be carried into effect during the
life of the youngest man now living." - Our contem-
porary has hazarded with equal confidence many pre-
dictions which have not been justified by events. He
was not less certain that Catholic Emancipation would
not take place in 1829-Lthat the Reform Bills would -
not pass in 1832—t0 say nothing of his predictions
with regard to the Municipal Bill. The House of
Lords may, it is true, reject all measures of Reform de-
manded by the nation, but it is not always safe to set
public opinion at defiance ; and there are persons who
think that the Lords will be playing the game of their
enemies in the coming Session if they reject, as pre-
dicted by their Conservative organs, an Irish Corpo-
ration Bill—an Irish Tithe Bill for the third time—
an extended and improved Municipal measure—Bill
for the entire relief of the. Dissenters from their
grievances—a Bill for improving the Equity , and
Appellate jurisdictions—and some other measures
to .which great importance is attached by the
nation. It is not for us to say what may be the
result of their Lordship's deliberations during the
recess ; they may deem it wise to produce in the
public mind a rooted conviction of the hostility of
their Lordships to all salutary reform. Of this, how-
ever, we are certain, that whatever the decision of
their Lordships may be, it will be of more importance
to themselves than the nation ; for reforms cannot be
prevented ; and if they cannot be obtained in one way
they will be obtained in another. The Standard
knows, from sad experience, that the Tories cannot
stay the march of even " organic reforms." They
are on the eve of " a breaking up." We shall see
hoiv they will contrive to. hold an opposition together..
The O'Connell vituperation has lived out its day. The: •
Tories themselves now laugh in their sleeves at the
attempt to mystify the nation by the on-slaught on
O'Connell. 'We suppose, as the Tories allege
'Mr. O'Connell has such power over the Ceibi-
net, they will pretend that Sir Charles Pepys's Venom
of office is uncertain, as he •may lay his accour,awith
being soon superceded by Mr. 0 Connell, s. /hi' is
about as likely as the restoration to office of Lord
Lyndhurst. If •we are to credit the reported private
commentaries on. Sir. Robert Peel by Om Ex-Ex- -
Chancellor, the Ex-Premier on his next ;turn would
be as likely to select the "• Irish Agitator" as to con-
nect himself with that Noble and "Learneal Lord.—
Mornbig Chronicle.
At length we see some glimmering of hope that law
in Ireland will at once put down the force of passive
rebellion, and punish the insidious arid cowardly con-
trivances of a Government whose existence is a libel
upon the British nation. Instructions for withholding
all assistance by the civil or miUtary power, -whether
police or soldiers, from clergym.en seeking the recovery
of their tithe, have, it is know, been for a consider-
able period in operation throughout Ireland. These
instructions emanated from the wise Government of
which the nominal chiefs, Lords Mulgrave and Mor-
peth, have been delegated by O'Connell to carry his
beneficent designs towards Church and. State into full
and effective execution. Well, we know what has
happened. The clergy have been in consequence
robbed and starved, and the tithe defaulters have fat-
tened on their sufferings. How ever, after much
des.pondency and long endurance, 'the Court of Ex-
chequer has been resorted to for redress on the part of
the unhappy ministers of the Church; and that re-
dress has been afforded in the forms prescribed by
law. However, in the 'enforcement of such forms, the
Same demon of disorder which left the poor clergy to
their own unaided efforts, when attempting to apply the
remedy by civil bill, has not failed tn.obstruct, in a de-
gree the most alarming, the proofs from th.e Court- of
Exchequer. All assistance to serve fm'tipcenas and
writs, and to secure the parties arreste.d under them,
was denied by police magistrates and +l..eir subaltern
officers, and we now present the country with reports
of two tithe cases in the Court of Exc. hequer, being
applications to-the Court-for penal proceedings against
those public functionaries intrusted with the manage-
ment of the police and military power, who had refused
to aid the King's sabjects in executing the decrees of
one of his superior Courts, and had ants far manifested
.a contempt for the administration of liastice. One of
those cases was an application against a respectable and
very popular gentlemen, Mr. Otway Cave, M.P. for
the county of Tipperary, during. whose absence in
England outrages were committed upon persons
who had been engaged in serving processes issued
against him from the Count of Exchequer for
tithe composition at the suit. of the ReV. Thomas
Knox, and of the Rev. R. Berkeley Greene. In
another suit., " The Venerable Edward D. Knox
Malone.," the servers of writs, and i captors of
defaWitere, under authority of the .Court of Ex-
chequer, had been likewise refused assistance ; and it
v.ppears. that the object of the application now reported
was to ascertain whether " Major Miller, a police
magistrate, was to superseda the jurisdiction of the
Court ;" or if the Major cauld show that he acted by
superior orders, and tires shift the blame upon other
shoulders, whether cartain personages of vastly high
pretension should net be visited with the displeasure
of their Lordship, and the majesty of the law
e • of
vindicated at the cost and to the severe mortification
those who had degraded the majesty of King
Chief e hßaron
'
and helped to endanger his Crown. '1 •
ice
directed an order to eo in the first instal against
• blame upea an_
Major Miller—and if he can shift t
other, we will grant an fittachment against that per-
son." How do you hike that, my Lord Viscount
Morpeth ?
.Suchis always the end of political
quackery, and of the laws of a free realm
making the
subservient t o the jobs o th
ese
proceedings, We trust
'
proceedings., will be. carefully read.---Times.
Two. IleW law appointments and one non-appoint-
t have
titles to the Peerage-roll of
threethe
isso new
islort a time since the Irish
uoivtery. a.ddelat
Ministerial " Missionary" was sent forth to preach
down the House of Lords, that we were rather sur-
prised on hearing yesterday that Ministers had altered
their plan as to pulling down the House, and,instead
of abating that order of society which O' Connell had
begrimed with his foulest epithets, and described as an
intolerable nuisance, have resolved to increase
" Great news, entirely," says a friend of the Ministry,

in a strong Hibernian accent, to a little coterie in the
vicinity of the Law Courts, "it's all as good as settled
any how. Sir John Campbell, who was as fierce as a
lion yestetilky, and terribly frightened Lord Mel-
bourne and Spring Rice, lest he'd cut the painter, is
to-day as quiet as a mouse. And why should'nt he ?
If he has'nt got promotion, sure his Lady has.
There's Pepys made a Peer—and Bickersteth made
a Peer, and Lady .Campbell called up to the
House of Lords." So spoke the honest Hi-
bernian, forgetting that the proposition for a female
Parliament, which had been suggested by some
Court Ladies in Queen Elizabeth's time, has not
yet been realized, rand consequently that the Lady
who has been made a Peeress, does not become a
hereditary legislator by virtue of her patent of nobility.
To treat this subject in a more serious mood, we may
ask why is it that Sir John Campbell has twice allowed
his claims as Attorney-General to be superseded ? and
the same question may be asked of Sir R. Rolfe, the
Solicitor-General, who had the next right to the offer
of any piece of preferment declined by Sir J. Campbell.
The chief value which hitherto attached to the offices
of Attorney and Solicipr-General consisted in their
conferring upon their possessors prior claims to pro-
motion over those of all other competitors, which claims
the Administration for the time being was bound to
recognise. We believe that Sir John Campbell is the
first Attorney-General whose claims have been passed
over not once, but twice, by the Ministry under whom
he accepted that office. And, indeed, in accepting
the office, Sir John Campbell conferred a favour upon
Ministers, rather than received one ; for, setting politics
aside, his abilities, learning, and general attainments
qualify him for a far more honourable post than that
of first law-officer of the most incapable Administra-
tion that England has almost ever seen. The
Standard describes Sir John Campbell rightly, when
it describes him as a sound and able lawyer ; he
is, indeed, one of the soundest and ablest lawyers of
tae present day. Though, for so eminent a barrister,
his politics have latterly savoured too strongly of the
Whig-Radical flavour, and though the election for
Stafford make it an awkward thing for him to declaim
against corruption in other boroughs, yet his personal
character as a member of an honourable profession is
above stain or reproach, and, to use the words of our
respected contemporary, he " has borne his faculties
in an invidious office most meekly." We believe no
Attorney-General has had less to do with political
prosecutions, either against the Press or in any other
way, which is all the better for his fame, and affords
the strongest possible evidence of the good sense and
discretion with which he exercises his official powers.
We have admitted that the practice of placing Com-
mon Law lawyers at the head of Equity Courts is a
bad one as a general rule, though' it must be allowed
that Lord Lyndhurst is a recent and splendid instance
of a Common Law lawyer becoming, in a very short
time, a high authority in Equity. Such instances,
however, of extraordinary aptitude for both Common
Law and Equity are not to be calculated upon. But
we do not believe this was the reason why
Ministers did not appoint Sir John Campbell either
to the office of Lord Chancellor or the Mastership of
the Rolls. The fact is his abilities and reputation as
a lawyer are so necessary to them in his present office
that they feared his promotion would be another step
towards hastening their downfall : so they readily sacri-
ficed his claims to their own political interests. Sir
John Campbell, no doubt; felt it so when he intimated
to them his intention to resign—a resignation which
was only prevented by the offer and acceptance of a
Peerage for Lady Campbell. We must confess it is
our opinion that Sir John Campbell would have con-
sulted better for his own dignity and that of the office
which he holds, if he did not allow any such " sop" to
prevent him from carrying his intended resignation into
effect. Admitting that Sir C. Pepys was the best inan
that the Whigs could have selected of their own party
to make Lord Chancellor, and that the Mastership of
the Rolls ought to be filled by an Equity lawyer, why
vas not the Solicitor-General: appointed to that office?
Sir R. Rolfe is an Equity lawyer, has never been any
thing else than an Equity lawyer—why, we ask, was he
passed over as well as the Attorney-General for the
vacant seat in the Rolls' Court ? Was it the dread
of a Conservative succeeding him in his Parliamentary
seat, and thereby giving another proof before the
meeting of Parliament of the re-action in public opi-
nion against the Melbourne-O'Connell Ministry ?
We know not what the reason was; we only know that.
the reason given by the Ministerial Journals for not
appointing the Attorney-General to the Rolls' Court
does not apply to the case of the Solicitor-General,
whose claims have been set aside to make way for a
non-official personage. It is not for an instant to be
supposed that Sir C. Rolfe disdains the Rolls' Court,
and the coronet which Sir John Campbell would not
have refused, and which Mr. Bickersteth receives.
The whole of those arrangements—especially the
three Peerages, and the circumstance of one of them
being extorted from Government through dread of a
resignation—tend among other things to show that the
Administration is in a most insecure and ricketty con-
dition, while its efforts to conceal its feebleness only
reveal the infirmities that precede its dissolution.—
Morning Herald.

There were various rumours in circulation up to a
late hour last night respecting a fresh hitch in the new
legal arrangements. It was affirmed in many quarters
that Sir John Campbell had really resigned, disgusted
at the ingratitude of the Melbourne Cabinet in over-
looking his pretensions after his ultra speeches at
Edinburgh in support of Whig-Radical principles.
We doubt, however, the truth of this intelligence, as
Sir John, with the proverbial shrewdness of his coun-
trymen, would be too cautious to throw away a good
thing because he had not obtained the Chancellor-
ship, the darling object of his ambition, and the office
for which he would be most unfit. We incline to
think, therefore, that Sir John Campbell is still Attor-
ney-General. The Globe says that " the further ar-
rangements in view will include Sir John Campbell
in a manner befitting his high claims." We confess
that we should not have comprehended this enigma-
tical announcement, had not The Sun thrown some
light on the subject in a pithy paragraph, from which
we learn that " Lady Campbell is to be created a
Peeress."—Morning Post.

A Ministerial Contemporary asks, " Why did the
Tories throw out in 1834 a. Bill for the settlement
of the tithes in Ireland, on the very principle of the
Bill introduced by Sir Henry Hardinge ?" It might
with as much fairness he asked, Why did the
Tories allow, only seven hours of daylight on the
twenty-first of last March ?"• No such Bill as that
described was ever presented to the Tories in 1834.
The Bill thrown out in 1834 was to take the pro-
perty of the Church away, and in lieu thereof to
give the Church a charge upon the Consolidated
Fund—a Government pension, in short, which the
House of Commons, whenever it pleased, might re-
fuse the Government the means of paying. Was
there anything like this " principle" (what a vile pros-
titution of the word) in Sir H. Hardinge's Bill ? Cer-
tainly there was nothing of the kind ; and yet quarterly,
monthly, weekly, daily, in every place and in every way
that falsehood can be palmed upon the public instead of
truth, is it audaciously pretended that the Whig
Bill in 1834 was essentially the same as the Con-
servative Bill of 1835. It is impossible to believe
that any one capable of thinking at all can be so ob-
tuse as not to see the difference between the two Bills.
The one was, as we have stated, for confiscating a
charge upon all cultivated lands—a property so ancient,
that, in the legal phrase, the memory of man runneth
not to the contrary--for confiscating this, and for giv-
ing in exchange a Government pension, which must,
from the nature of the fund on which it was leviable,
depend upon the will of a democratic assembly—an
assembly which, thank God, is not yet either the So-
vereign or the Legislature of this realm. The other
was for giving a landed property in lieu of the certain
tenth of an uncertain produce, or, in lieu of some tem-
porary composition for that tenth. Where is the icier'
City, or similarity of " principle," between these two
eases ? the violent and extravagant answer, which
ee
our/ contemporary itself supplies to the
gOstipri it a:s4...4sufficiently shows that no inter-
ende of truth, reason, or moderation prevented the
eestion or the answer from being of the worst type of
coargi'Radicaligrr.„ The Tories, we are told, did not
pass- the Whig,Bil.l4f 1834, " because they wished to

'k,,

produce disunion and bloodshed." Mild, considerate
Whig journalist I We have some curiosity to know,
—but we never can know—whether the writers of
such outrageous stuff as this ever persuade themselves,
by reiterated impudence of assertion, that there is any-
thing like the shadow of a possibility of an acciden-
tal and remote resemblance to truth ever being found in
what they assert. The Conservatives wishing to pro-
duce bloodshed ! .This from the authors of the hor-
rors of Bristol and Nottingham—from the allies or
slaves of O'Connell, who calculates upon assassina-
tion as an essential, or at the least, an important, part
of the policy by which he reigns in Ireland ? It is in-
deed modest—very modest. How depraved must be
the moral sentiment as well as the taste of those who
read such gross and absurd calumnies without indig-
nation !—Morning Post.

It has been announced in a paragraph, which has
made the circuit of the daily papers, that Mr. D. Sa-
lomons is about to offer himself as a candidate for
Marylebone, on the popular interest, in the con-
tingency of Mr. H. L. Bulwer resigning his seat,—
a contingency which, it is understood, will not be
much delayed beyond the opening of the Session.
Even should the vacancy not occur by that means, it
must inevitably occur in a very short period after the
opening of the Session by a dissolution of Parliament
—a measure which the stupidly-avowed determination
of the Obstructives to impede the march of the Go-
vernment, will probably compel the Ministry to resort
to. It is not likely that Lord Melbourne's Cabinet
indeed should consent to run the gauntlet of harassing
opposition from the " agitating" faction of the Tories ;
and at the same time consent to fight the battle with
weapons of the enemy's own selecting, or, in other
words, with a Parliament packed by the Tories them-
selves. Under these circumstances, we are glad to
hear of a popular candidate being already in the field.
We are pleased too that the demonstration is made in
the person of Mr. Salomons, who may be said in
-one respect, whose cause may be said to be identified
,with the great cause of civil and religious liberty—
who has himself ably and boldly fought, we may say,
two battles already in its favour, in the last of which
nothing was lost but the honour of his opponents—
and who has given pledges of his political principles
which ought to rally round him every class of popular
Reformer„ from the Whig to the Whig-Radical,
and from the latter to the extreme Radicals, who con-
stitute a large portion of the constituency of Maryle-
bone. The earliness with which the new Candidate
has entered the field, and thrown himself into
the van of the approaching combat, is an earnest
of that vigilance, sincerity, and vigour of conduct
which he has already demonstrated, and which, if
ever they were necessary on any occasion, are more
emphatically necessary, now, in the approaching elec-
tion for Marylebone. We have laid before our
readers, in a former article, the reasons for this para-
mount necessity—both as regards early activity and un-
usual exertion. We have now to repeat the leading
topic of our former appeal. There is not a minute of
time to be lost by the friends of the popular cause. As
far as Marylebone is concerned, the Obstructives
have followed the advice of their great leader in point
both of agitation and registration, and in both to a
most effectual purpose. We believe, as we stated be-
fore, that a more consummate organization, by means
of central and subordinate Committees, for electioneering
purposes, have never existed than that which the Tories
have been long combining and maturing in the borough
of Marylebone. Every species of influence, direct
and indirect, in which property could be employed, has
been employed at the West-end of the town, to seduce,
to silence, to intimidate, or to corrupt ; and it has been,
we are sorry to say, for the want of a similar alertness
and organization •on the part of the Reformers, too
successful. The Tories are perfectly aware, both
of the perfection to which they have brought this
machinery and of its success ; although they have
had the wisdom to repress their usual tendency to
boast, in order to conceal the- ammunition they have in
store for th@ir opponents, when the tug of war comes,
behind the masked battery or blank rampart of apparent
inactivity. They are aware of it, and it has prompted
their ambition to take a wider range it its grasp than
they at first intended. Already the same manmuvres
at the West have found, by anticipation, a new occu-
pant for the vacated or abdicated seat of Burdett for
Westminster, in the person of Sir Thomas Cochrane ;
and they not only aspire to substitute Lord Teign-
mouth for Mr. H. Bulwer in Marylebone, but they
boast of being able to return another Conservative re-
presentative in the room of Sir Samuel Whalley. Why
do we iterate these things ? Is it to dispirit 'our
friends ? Far from it. It is to incite them and put
them on their guard. Is it to encourage the people's
foes ? Far from it. It is to let them understand that
we know every small wheel of the movements of the ma-
chine, the ingenious and powerful play of which they
have thought with so much crafty secrcsy to conceal.
The avowal of truth, moreover, is always the best
policy—it is always best to know one's danger ;
and to look at the dark side as well as the bright
side of the picture. Nor is there the slightest reason
for despondency. " Throw but a stone, the giant
dies." All that are wanted, as we said before, are
three things—system, union, and immediate action.
Select an independent Reformer at once in the room
of Mr. H. Bulvver—respecting whom all the sec-
tions of the popular party, Ministerial and otherwise,
may join hands, and round whom they may rally with
all their heart and all their strength. Then for " a
long pull, a strong • pull, and a pull altogether,"
and the battle will be won. Does Mr. Sheriff Sa-
lomons answer the terms of our preceding description
of an unexceptionable candidate for Marylebone ?
We think he does ; and we have little doubt
of his success under the provisions we have
stated. But there is not a moment's time to be lost.
An active canvass should be instituted directly—a.
central Committee organized—and subordinate Com-
mittees appointed without delay. The old Committees
of Sir W. Home and Mr. H. Bulwer, both Whig
'Reformers, might now unite operations ; nor is there
any reason why they should not receive an accession
of strength from that of Mr. Young, an independent
Whig, • and from those of the extreme Liberals, who
generally
act with Mr. Murphy. We have all a com-
mon object—improved political institutions. Although
we sometimes advance towards it by different lines of
march, let us on this occasion rally under a common
standard—" Union." Before undertaking that march,
all feuds should be sacrificed, as of old, on a common
altar—" our country." It is not meet that dissentions
should exist among the chieftains of Reform, when the
" Trojans are already in the trench, and Hector is
thundering at the gate."—Morning Advertiser.

KING'S BENCII,THURSDAY.

POWER V. BARHAM.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated that this was an action
to recover a sum of money paid to the defendant for the
purchase of some pictures sold by him as the productions of
Canaletti. These pictures had been described in the dealer's
sale-note as " four pictures, Views in Venice—Canaletti."
The cause was tried before Mr. Justice Coleridge, at the
sittings at Westminster after last Term, and the Learned
Judge left the Jury to say whether the representation did
or did not amount to a warranty. Such a direction ought
not to have been given to the Jury. He, therefore, submit-
ted that there should be a new trial.—Rule refused.

BURKE V. FENN.
The defendant in person applied for a rule for a nnewtrial
in this case. This was an action for an attorney, ? bill, in-
curred by the defendant when contesting the validity of the
election of the old select vestry of St. Martin's-in-the-Fields.
The greatest portion of the money claimed in the action
had become due before action brought, and the defendant
had pleaded the statute of limitations. A very large propor-
tion of the whole bill had been paid. Among the items in
the bill were some for advice and information supplied by
the plaintiff, under the direction of the defendant, to Mr.
Douglas Kinnaird. Within six years before action brought,
the plaintiff had written to demand payment, and the de-
fendant then forwarded a sum of money, sent by Mr. Kin-
naird's executors, to pay for the expense incurred on his
account. That payment was given in evidence by the plain-
tiff, to take the case out of the statute of limitations. The
defendant now contended that he had nothing to do with
that payment, and ought not to be bound by it.--Rule
refused.

The COURT intimated that the special paper would be
taken to-morrow (this day), and the Crown paper on Sa-
turday ; and that next week the new trial paper would be
taken.

The Court sat till nearly six o'clock.

. •
• •
• ,
1