The Sun.
London, England, 1825-03-16 00:00:00

[MORNING 11E11.1T.D.11

In the ComtTions, last night, several of the new
Companies and scln again occupied the house.'.
On some petitions being presented against the
" Metropolitan Fish Company," Mr. Calcraft
corrected what he had formerly said about 1
" blowing one of the Fish Companies out to sea."
He had made some error as to the Company ; the
one against which he had spoken said nothing
about the Dutch fisheries ; but he added, he was
still altogether against these Fish Companies.
He declared that they would make fish dear ; an
opinion in which he was supported by Mr. Al-
derman Wood, the latter asking, how it could
be otherwise when one individual would be arm-
ed with thousands of pounds to go into the
market and buy up all the fish ? Sir J. Yorke
opposed the Bill as calculated to interfere, by
powerful combinations, with the occupations of
sundry fishermen all round our coasts—occupa-
tions, he said, that were at once " honourable
and ancient, as the Apostles could testify." This
remark occasioned an amazing deal of merriment
in the house. Mr. J. Smith was favourable to
the Company, thinking that it would operate to
produce a reduction of prices. Colonel Trench's
plan for making quays along a portion of one bank
of the Thames, was opposed by Mr. Croker, who
contended that leave ought not to be granted for
the introduction of the Bill. To resist it in
Committee would be most expensive. He gave
as another reason for resisting the measure
thus early, that an important experiment
was now about to be tried on the River
Thames—namely, the removal of the old, andl
the erection of a new London-bridge ; that many
engineers had given it as their opinion, that the
effect of removing the old Bridge would affect the
fall of the tide as much as five feet ; that the con-
sequences of such removal it was impossible to
foresee ; and that he was therefore against any
other schemes being tried now, that might in any
way affect the current of the River, till they knew
what would be the results of removing old Lon-
don-bridge, and replacing it by a new one. The
postponement of Colonel 'French's plan could do
no harm. Mr. Secretary Peel was also against
the Bill ; but Lord Palmerston supported Co-
lonel Trench, and thought it was a most
extraordinary proceeding to resist the bring-
ing in of the Bill, the parties having, as was
acknowledg,rd, complied with all the forms
of the House. To exclude them in such stage
of the business would be contrary to the usual
practice of the House. As to waiting for the re-
moval of one and the building of another bridge,
his Lordship contended that it was not necessary,
for the proposed Quays on those banks which
Col. Trench had called a " disgrace" to the Me-,
tropolis, would not interfere widi the current of
the river. The motion for bringing in the Bill
was afterwards carried, on a division, by a majo-
rity of 40—the Ayes being 85, and the Noes 45.
The Gallery 'was crowded, during the early part
of the evening, by persons interested in these
measures, and that of the " Pasco Peruvian
Minit:g Company." Sir G. Hill moved for
leave to bring in a Bill to limit some of
the restrictions on the establishment of Country
Banks in Ireland. At present, what may be
termed the Irish National Bank, Mr. Dawson
(the under Secretary) represented as enjoying
exclusive privileges; and he added that such
Bank ❑ever came forward to render pecuniary
accommodation to the public, even after the
enormous failures in the South of Ireland. Mr.
S. Rice observed that the measure would be of
the greatest use, not only in introducing English
capital, but in forwarding to the provincial parts
of Ireland the English system of banking, and the
English precision of transacting business.

LTUE PUBLIC LEDGER.]
If a statement, given in a Paris Paper of Sun-
day, prove correct, we may venture to say, that
in the foreign policy of France there is nothing
that ought to excite the distrust of this country,
or give uneasiness to any other. On the con-
trary, it might in this case be affirmed
with great propriety, that the views of that
Power were just, temperate, and conciliatory.
In the paragraph to which we allude, it
Kexpressly stated that the French troops will
be wholly withdrawn from Spain in the course
of the next month ; and as it appears in a
Ministerial Paper, its accuracy, we think, can-
tut be disputed. Besides the intrinsic import-
'Bice of such a measure, which would be of the
highest order in more than one point of view, it
would have an adventitious value, by skewing
that the very best understanding subsists at this
time between the French and our own Govern-
ment. No one could doubt but that so great a
concession to just principles, was made with
the express view of ccn►ciliating the British Ca-
binet; who could not see, without dissatisfaction,
Spain, tAough nominally free, reduced virtually
to the form of a French province. Whether

our Goverment has remonstrated, or nOt,
against the occupation of that country} beyond
the period which is said to be fixed for the eva-
cuation, we are not competent, of course, to de-
cide. But as the presence of a French army,
besides other objections, contributed to molest our
afly, the King of Portugal, and subjected him to
the necessity of using precautionary measures, it
strikes us as highly probable that it was in con-
sequence of British application, that this impor-
tant resolution has been adopted. The announce-
ment is too vague, as yet, to enable us to judge
whether the evacuation will be complete, or
merely partial ; though, from the wording of the
paragraph, we are disposed to draw the former
inference. Thus Cadiz would not form an ex-
ception ; and the Spanish Government would be
left to its own resources, to maintain its authority,
and provide for its interests at home and abroad.

[THE TIMES.]
'There is a great deal of originality in the Irish
character—much naivete in the proceedings of
that people, in whatever situation they may be
placed, or whatever may be the part they have
to act ! They have sent us over a Deputation to
manage the concerns of the country on a pressing
emergency, and to pave the way generally for
what is called Emancipation. But no sooner is the
Deputation arrived, and favoured with a prospect
of limited success, than the members begin to
quarrel with each other : one saying, " we may
" be content with so much, and so much ; "
and another, Mr. Lawless, according to the
Irish mode of ratiocination, asserting that
he will have ALL first, and then take part
afterwards. Oh, Mr. Lawless, Mr. Lawless,
those who made you a member of the De-
putation were deeply desirous that no compro-
mise, agreement, or adjustment of Irish affairs,
should take place ; and, us there is no very ac-
commodating spirit in the majority on this side the
water, they may, perhaps, succeed in frustrating
conciliation with Ireland. Yet is Mr. Lawless's
employment but a hacknied one in its nature; for
nothing has been more common in all ages titan for
treacherous and aggrandizing Governments to send
out a deputation to their neighbours with proposi-
tions of peace, but containing one member with se-
cret direction to spoil the agreement. This,in some
instances, is called putting a spoke in the wheel—
in others, curdling the milk-porridge. Mr. Law-
less is placed as the spoke in the wheel—a wheel
but too likely to move slowly without any such
obstruction ; he is the runnet that curdles the
milk.porridge. Would he were turning a
butter-churn in his native country ! Mr.
Lawless, in a letter against the proposed Bill!
of Emancipation, " calls the attention of the
" people of England us well as Ireland to the
" wings (! !), as they are facetiously termed, '
" of this new bird (O'Connell, we suppose) frorn
" the cage of Mr. Plunkett." This is a very odd
metaphor. It must come from Lawless's own
brain ; and then praising, his own wit, he calls it
" facetious." • There are some other specimens
of his ingenuity in the letter before us, on which
it would be needless to remark. Lawless seems
to know more of the contemplated Bill for email-
cipation than its framers. He would have acted
with greater candour if he had waited for the
introduction of the Bill into Parliament ; and
then, if such had been his engagement, he might
have abused it with more effect. And it is, in
truth, even in the present instance, all unpro-
voked and direct charge by Lawless against the
Catholics, that a !Board, constituted of the
members of that religion (which he supposes
will make a part of the Emancipation Bill),
must be a profligate Board—" a source of
" perpetual intrigue, a species of ecclesias-
" tical inquisition." On the subject of rais-
ing the elective franchise in Ireland, we shall
not speak at present—we shall rather wait, as
Mr. Lawless ought to have done, till we
see what is intended. But as he says that
" he • for one'' (and a bright one he is), shall
not be content with this or that species of
Emancipation, we can tell him that Parliaments
legislate for the general good, and not to please
individuals. Were both bodies of the Legislature
in the disposition to grant emancipation, which
we hope, though not sanguinely, may be the
case—the Catholics, as a body, will be too wise
not to accept what is conceded, with feelings pro-
portioned to the magnitude of the boon. But we
must point attention to the frantic absurdity of
the following conduct in some of their body :
They demand full emancipation, as they call it ;
they say it is their right : but at the very moment
while they are demanding this full emancipation,
they say to those of whom they are demanding it
No ; we see you will only grant us so much,
" therefore we will have nothin'e."