The Sun.
London, England, 1831-06-29 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

A w titer in a Sunday Paper has the modest assurance I
to address what he is- pleased to eall " Half a dozen I
words to the King," but which,- in fact, consist of a
whole column of sermonising cant uppn this notable text,
viz. " the extreme difficulty" which his Majesty must
have in giving the Roy'al assent to the Reform Bill, " as
respects the Csironatihn Oath." And to what part of the
Coronation Oath do such of our readers as may not have
seen this precious farrago imagine that the writer al-
ludes? To that in which the Sovereign undertakes "t
preset ye unto the Bishops and Clergy of this realm, and
to the churches committed to their charge, all such rights
and privileges as by law do appertain to them." It re•
quires no ordinary stretch of invention and of imagina-
tion, we should think, to discover either how religion in
the abstract, or our Church Establishment in particular,
is likely to be affected by the measure now in progress.
The sly rogue, however, who thus sees in the downfall of
boroughmongerism the ruin of the Church, is probably
either one of those clerical Mayors, Aldermen, or Bur.
gesses which, to the disgrace of our Church Establish-
ment, are found to exist, or else one of those many as-
pirants to Church preferment—and that of the highest
rank—to whom the road of Parliamentary interest is too
tempting to be turned away from without a sigh. We
apprehend, however, that the real friends of the
Church Establishment, whether lay or clerical, can
have nothing to fear, but much to hope, from the
consequences of Parliamentary Reform. Nothing in
the whole range of our public institutions (not except-
ing even the House of Commons itself) calls more hiudl)
for reformation than the Church—not in its principles
and doctrines—not in its ability or design to answer the
important purposes of its Divine Founder—but principally
from the mode in which those purposes are defeated, by
the singular fact, that the drones of the establishment con-
sume the honey, while the active bees scarcely partake, in
too many instances, of enough to sustain existence; and
which, with other abuses, it would not be at all difficult
to trace to the very same source which has now united so
large a majority of the people in calling for Parliamentary
Reform. Fortunately the present heads of the Church
(some of them at least), unlike the silly writer we allude
to, have the wisdom to see the necessity of Church Re-
form, and the impropriety, if not the danger, to which
the Establishment wou'd be exposed, of that Reform com-
ing upon it from without, if not in time looked to within :
the. Archbishop of Canterbury, himself the Lord John
Russell of the Church, having with his own band brought
in a Bill, or Bids, which in all probability will have the
eifi-ct of taking away some of those "rights and privi-
leges" of abuse which the sapient writer in question would
have us believe are guarded and sanctified by his Majesty's
Coronation Oath. That Reform, whether in Church or
State, should be hateful in the eyes of those who have
hitherto been fattening on abuses and corruptions, both
in one and in the other, cannot surprise any one ; but,
happily, the time is past when those who have the means
of remedying those abuses can be deterred from so doing
by the interested clamours of those who, like the image-
makers of the great Goddess Diana of old, think only of
the profits of their craft. —.Morning Herald.

A smart discussion took place last night, on the pre-
sentation of petitions for the removal of restrictions on the
liberty of the Press. Captain Gordon (Member for Dun-
dalk) read extracts from several publications, the Poor
Man's Guardian, the Republican, comparing the pre-
sent King and his Government to Charles the Tenth and
his Polignac Administration, &c. " This," said the Hon.
Member, " is a specimen of the knowledge, the wide cir-
culation of which is so much desired, and a specimen too
of the light in which the petitioners viewed what they
called the liberty of the Press." The argument of the
Hon. Member is the argument of tyrants and persecutors
of every country and every age. A free agent may do
evil as well as good ; freedom of speech may be abused to
the uttering of error and calumny; freedom of the Press
may be abused to the publishing of dangerous doctrines ,
and incentives to crime. But we must not, therefore,
deprive a man of free agency, freedom of speech, and
freedom to publish through the Press. Because the
Poor Man's Guardian and the Republican are ob-
jectionable, we must not, therefore, exclude poor
men from all access to what is published. When
a free agent abuses his liberty to do what is wrong,
he ought to be punished ; when a man invites, by
speech or writing, to the commission of crime, he might
be punished also. But then let us not take the present
libel law as our ground in determining what is or what is
not wrong. The invitation to crime should he as invita-
tion to do that which is a crime by the law of the country.
Mr. C. W. Wynne observed, " that publications which
men to crime should be nunished yla criminal."
self of the confusion of We.s of some of his hearers to
class under this proposition particulars which do not fairly
come under it. What he calls instigations to crime, are
opinions, which may or may not be dangerous in their ten-
dency, hut which are certainly instigations to crime. "He
(Mr. Wynne) thought that the extracts which the House
hid heard read, containing such sentences as Down with

Kings, Lords, Priests!' were of as mischievous a tendency
as those which had instigated the peasantry in Kent and
Sussex during the late outrages.—(Hear.) Whenever
such doctrines were inculcated in a tone of moderation,
they were defended on the ground of discussion ; but when
the, writer assumed a bo'der tone as in the papers read by
the Honourable Gentleman opposite, then Lis language
was said to be too absuid to deserve notice." The Right
Hon. Gantleman, with most Englishmen, thinks that a
State cannot exist without Kings, Lords, and Priests ; but
it is not surely a crime, though it may be a folly in any
man to express the opinion, that Kings, Lords, and Priest-
are not essential to the well-being of a State. The Quakers,
for instance, have no Priests, and think that Christhood
lees not warrant a Priesthood. But the Right Honourable
Gentleman, because be thinks this opinion mischievous in
its tendency, would punish the expression of it. This
is what he calls " down with Priests," inculcated in a
tone of moderation. There are many books recently
publist ed in this country, and in the United States,
inquiring into the comparative advantages of a State with,
end without a King and privileged classes. The Right
Hon. Gentleman would prosecute the writers, if they
gave the preference to States without Kings and privileged
classes. In shirt, the Right Hon. Gentleman considers
all opinions which lie does not himself entertain mis-
citfievous, and lie would consequently punish all opinions as
being mischievous which he does not himself entertain.
He does not see that the same reasons which prevailed on
him to think highly of Kings, Lords, and Priests, may
also prevail on others. In a very popular school book in
Germany, A General Introduction to Geography," by
Gaspari, of which we have the Weimar edition, 11414,
the following passage occurs (p. 504) :—" The Monarchi-
cal Rulers are very costly to State'', on this account, that
they requ're a great deal for the maintenance of themselves
and their families, as it is assumed that this is demanded
for the splendour of the Crown and the dignity of the
State. The town Palaces, the Palaces for the sake of the
chase and for pleasure, the gardens, the studs, the tables,
the Body Guards, a numerous retinue of attendants called
the Court, pleasures, especially theatres and operas, court
music in chapels, hunting establishment+, the Privy Purse
of the Ruler, and the appanage-a of the other branches of
the family, consisting sometimes in estates, sometimes in
pensions—consume altogether large mums." This de-
scription :of one of the features of a Monarchy,
written with all the innocence in the world, would
be deemed a fit subject for prosecution by Mr.
C. Wynne, because to say that Moriarehy is expen-
sive, is to say that which tends to lower it in the estima-
tion of the people. The moment we depart from the prin-
ciple, that all opinions may be freely expressed, we lay
down the doctrine of persecution. An invitation to do
that which is criminal ought alone to be punished. If we
say that only mischievous opinions ought to be punished,
we arrogate to ourselves infallibility, and the Pope and the
Inquisition have the advantage over us in point of con-
sistency. In the case of 'the poor people, our business is
not to retain them in ignorance, because bad publications
ruay be addressed to them, but to remove all obstacles to
t_.he iueulcatiwi among them of the antidote as well as the
disease. Sir Robert Peel, while he thought the prosecu-
tions recommended by Mr. Gordon would do mischief
rather than good, tauntedd the Ministry with a disposition
it
no departoffi ce fro,m,
litebedioctrines which they maintained when
reivlihope (lie said) his Majesty's Go-
vernment would
upon less information than opinion
they
formerly main-
tainedin
offictehan they might now be sup-
posed to possess, being
with .thielekhoped then, with their
present information, and
must possess of the efforts which, innote wledge which they
being made to undermine the morals, ?Tent day, were
loyalty of the country, they would neot'gir faith, and
reconsidering the opinions maintained by them in
from
and if, from their experience in office, they saw anyin 1519
;
to alter those sentiments, there was nu man so unworthy reason
as to taunt them with inconsistency." We trust th j
Ministers will be governed by very different principles.—
We take it for granted that no man wilfully embraces error
in preference to truth, and that the lower orders would
prefer the truth to error, if they could distinguish between
the truth and error. We take it also for granted, that
when truth anti errorare presented to our minds with equal
advantages, we generally embrace the truth in preference
to error. Let us instruct the poor as We ought, and faci-

litatis their access to good publications, and the same result
will be observed in their case which is observed in the case
of their more wealthy neighbours, the truth will generally
prevail with them. We know of no means of securing
the morals and the loyalty of the poor, in a state of society
like ours, by repressive laws. Men like Sir Robert Peel
do more to poison the minds of the poor than all the in-
flammatory writers who address them. By talking as
they do of the necessity of protecting the morals, religions
'with, and loyalty of the people, they persuade the people
that the rich have one rule for themselves and another for
th,t poor, and, they thereby influence their desires to part-Ike
of the forbidden fruit. We must be fair and candid
towards the poor—we must meet their errors, reason them
out of them, become their teachers ; hut not hold ourselves
back, and when others press forward, call out crucify,
crucify ! In The Scotsman, received yesterday, there is
a sensible article on this subject, from which we give
the concluding observations, as applicable to the present
discussion : _ . _

" We regard the newspaper 'press as a moral engine of very
great value. During the late incendiary proceedings in the
English counties, was there one among the four hundred papers
in the empire which did not deprecate the insurrectionary spirit
producing them—which did not warn the people of the conse-
quences of their madness and guilt—which did not exert itself
to restore habits of peace and subordination ? It was found that
about two-thirds of the unhappy wretches concerned in these
outrages could not read. We will venture to affirm that news-
papers were seen only by a very small proportion of the other
third, and not regularly seen by one in thirty of the whole of
these misguided men ! Surely the question is an important one
how we shall prevent the renewal of such crimes in future ?
Doubtless, by lessening misery, improving and extending educa-
tion, and various other means ; but we say boldly that by no
single measure could so much be done toprevent tumult and out-
rage, and tranquillise the country, as by enabling every man
down to the poorest labourer to have a newspaper. We hold the
lessons of the school, the thunders of the pulpit, and the terrors
of the law, to be all feeble compared with the moral agency of
the press.—Morning Chronicle.
It is very certain that the clause of which we spoke
last night, in the Reform Bill, requiring that the rent
shall he paid not less frequently than by the half year, in
order to give a tenant the elective franchise in boroughs,
does exist in the schedule of the Bill now published, and
has occasioned very general eurprise: we presume that it
was inserted in some degree to appease the apprehensions
of those who dreaded the admission of too great a num-
ber of voters ; and next, probably, it might be thought
that a rent payable quarterly would he liable to admit, by
chicane, weekly tenants also. The number of leases and
other agreements between landlord and tenant, for even
valuable tenements, in which a quarterly payment of rent
is exacted, might not have been suspected ; for, though a
legislator ought to know a great deal, he cannot be, or
rather could not have been, a third party present upon
every contract between landlord and tenant. The most
rational and easy way of getting rid of the clause is, to
say nothing about the periods of payment ; but, as in the
case of votes for counties under the old law, to require a
year's occupancy before the tenant shall he entitled to a
vote. There is an explanation also necessary on the relation
between this and another clause, the 26th. In this,
the 26th, it is said that Commissioners shall annex con-
tiguous districts to boroughs containing fewer than 300
houses rated at 10/. annually ; but this must mean rated
at 101. and also liable to the condition of the other clause,
that of paying the rents by nothing less than half-yearly
payments; ; and if this he what is meant, how few
borough-houses are liable to half-yearly payments of rent
only ? There is something in clause sixteen of the sche-
dule which we do not clearly understand. Copyholders,
of 101. and upwards, are to have votes for counties; lease-
holders, of 10/. annual rent on leases, of sixty years; and
leaseholders of seven. years, and 507. .rent; hut what
means the following paragraph in the clause ?—" Pro-
vided always, that such persons so seized or holding shall
be in the acteial posseasion of each lands or tenements, or
in the receipt, for his own use, of the rents and profits
thereof from the person occupying the same." This pro-
viso would seem to 'lima the whole clause, so far as
affect, leaseholders, to the tenants of corporate bodiem
holding beneficial leases upon fine and reserved rent,whose
soh-lessees cannot vote, whatever be the value of their
occupancy. Is this what.he necuna?— Times.

It will be reeolio.ted that Lord John Thariell, in- bring-
ing nivivattrunr-Reform Bill the other -nightv.,:alluded to

sppromatiaNkAis plan of Par_
Reform whichwigivateti with-.the- celebrated Long Kar-
lionrent, lust.whibh, having been carried into exerutiun
Cromwell, has usually been attributeti, A* AAA, There ill,
heiwever, a 'pooh later authority in footle of chat plan of
Parliamentary Reform, and, indeed, of-rarlituneutarY Re-
form generally. The.'authority to which we allude is that
of no less a person than ...a Speaker, of the House of Com-
mons. It is contained in nots of Nfr. Speaker Onslow,.
to a passage ,in the lata,adition of ..144.rnet's history of
las Time. Buroot• had written—
.g It is held a maxim, that in framing a dOveinnient, a pro.
portion ought trot* observed between the share iar the legistature
140.1 Mil! ;4.0 Speaker Untaow hat .tae senowmg
note:
" In the first establishment or renewal ; for variations after'
wards must happen in trading countries, especially by the in-
crease and decrease in the riches and value of different places, j
and alterations upon such changes in property may be dangerous.
and will be endless. Upon great emergencies and resolutions, it
may, perhaps' by a great spirit of government, be done with
safety. The Long Parliament of If4l formed a plan for it in
part. It was suggested to them in one of the representations to
the Parliament (a scheme, very likely, of Ireton's), and Crom-
well carried it into execution ; but he lost his Parliament by it,
and his son Richard returned to the old method of representation
for England. What I mean was, the taking away elections from
the small decayed boroughs, and enlarging the number of Re-
presentatives for counties and city of London ; but even this was
unequally done. It was hoverer, a Constitution I heartily wish
had been continued. This would be the most effectual cure of

corruption in elections. e
It is a sad mark of Courts or times, when corruption is deemed
necessaryfor Government. lbw glorious and popular would
a Prince be who should suppress it : every thing would bejust and

great!"•

Here we find a Speaker of the House of Commons ad-
mitting—with fear and great trembling, it is true, but
still admitting—the propriety of a Reform in Parliament;
and his apprehensions arise only from a douht—a very na-
tural doubt, by the way, in his time--whether this country
would ever be blessed with a Government spirited
.-nough to do their duty, and with a Prince who would be
wise and great enough to pursue the surest path to glory
and popularity. England, however, has ❑ow the good
fortune to enjoy such a Government and such a Prince as
it is obvious the Speaker at once yearned tor, but despaired
of.—Times.

Now that the anti-Reforni faction have lost all hope of
defeating the Reform Bill in the House of Commons, they
are straining every nerve to persuade the public tint The
Bill has been greatly amended since its last presentation
to Parliament, and that it does not partake of the same
popular, or, as they are pleased to term it, revolutionary,
character, which belonged to it in its original state. We

confess ourselves to be of a very contrary opinion on this
pint ; but there is at the same time, in the new Bill, of
which-we gave an abstract yesterday, a clause respecting
the franchise of ten-pound householders, which, we have
no doubt, from an impropriety in the wording, and a
desire to prevent those from exercising the elective fran-
chise who are only " birds of passage," and not annual or
leasehold tenmts, gives a strong colour of truth to their
statements. The following are the words of the clause :
" Provided always, That no tenant so occupying such pre-
mises as aforesaid at a yearly rent of not less than ten pounds,
shall by reason thereof acquire a vote in the election for any
city or borough, if such rent shall be payable more frequently
Man once in every half-year, or if by any agreement or con-
trivance, or by virtue of any local Act of Parliament or other-
wise, the landlord shall be liable to the payment of the rates for
the relief of the poor in respect of such premises : Provided,
nevertheless, that where by virtue of any local Act of Parlia-
ment the landlord shall be liable to the payment of such rates, it
shall be lawful for any such tenant to claim to pay such rates,
and upon his actually paving the same to acquire the right of
voting as if his landlord had not been so liable for such rates."
This clause is altogether so different in spirit from that
of the Reform Bill, that we cannot for a moment imagine
that it ever emanated from his Majesty's Ministers. There
must be a mistake in the printing ; for what connection,
in the name of Heaven, is there between the payment of a
ten-pound rent annually and a vote for a Member of Par-
liament as the price of it, and the payment of a ten-pound
rent quarterly, and a total disqualification? The object of
Government, we have no doubt, both from the si:eechee
of Lord John Russell, and from the context of the
clause, was to prevent those from exercising the riglit of
voting for a representative in Parliament who had no per-
manent place of residence,—who hired houses by the week,
month, or quarter, and paid rent for them accordingly, and
not to exclude those who rented houses by the year, but paid
the amount quarterly. The clause, however, is so foolishly
worded, that no one, whatever might be the amount of his
liabilities in point of rent, would be entitled under it to the
necessary qualification, unless it happened to be stipulated
in his lease or agreement, that his rent should be paid
only half-yearly or annually ! Under almost all leases
rents are made payable quarterly, whether they he or be
not so paid ; and the consequence of such a clause passing
into a law would be, on the one hand, to disfranchise all
who are at present possessed of leases, and, on the other
hand, to enfranchise all who may have stipulated, or may
in future stipulate, for half-yearly payments. An instant
contradiction ought to be given to this absurdity.—Morn-
log Advertiser.

The clause of the New Reform Bill restricting the fran-
chise in towns to tenants of 101. a year, not paying their
rents more frequently than once in every half-year, has
been animadverted on with much severity, as indicative of
an attempt at wholesale disfranckisement. If we thought
for a moment that this restriction had its origin in any
other cause than ignorance, we should, of course, charge
' Burnet's " History of his own Time," with the su ppressNi
passages and notes, by the Earls of Dartmouth, Ilardwieke,
Speaker Omlow, and Dean Swift, Oxford, It,JU—vol y, p. ;471.

Mintaters with a complete dev;ation from the principle of
the Bill. But that it is owing to sheer ignorance is ob •
vious from this, that it would operate as a complete
disfranchisement in the metropolis, and every other
part of England, where, though rents are, in fact,
often paid every year, and seldom paid quarterly, yet
they are almost always made payable quarterly.
He who pays 1,000/. a year of rent, stipulates to pay it
quarterly as much as he who pays 101., and it never could
he in contemplation to exclude all tenants. The truth is,
public men in this country are taken from a class neces-
sarily with the details of business. Ws
question if any Member of the Cabinet, except the Chan-
cellor, ever read a lease in his life. The wonder is, how
chose who have been entrusted with the framing of the
clause, could have fallen into the error. The error betrays
such gross ignorance, that if drawn up by a man of busi-
ness, we should suspect treachery. We know that the
public offices are filled with men appointed by the prede-
cessors of Ministers, many of them are by no means well
affected towards their heads ; and it is possible that
this clause has been framed with a view to expose Ministers
to a charge of ignorance of business, Ministers are far
too honourable to have intended what the clause would
effect. An example or two, we fear, is wanted to keep
the inferiors honest.—Morning Chronicle.

Whatever may be the prevalent ideas upon the subject
of Reform, it is easy to foresee that the nation will woon
be unanimously of our opinion as to the honesty and con-
sistency of the Ministers, who, by means of that question
alone, have hitherto been enabled to maintain themselves
in office, alter the proofs of incapacity more than suffi-
cient to discredit and destroy ten successive Administra-
tions. The Ministers, who adopted for the electioneering
war•cry of themselves and their partisans, " The Bill,
the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill"—the Ministers,
whose friends and supporters in the House of Commons
have to a man obtained their seats in the House of Com-
mons by means of a pledge to vote fur " The Bill, the
whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill"—the Ministers,
who have said, and almost sworn, in endless repetition,
that they would stand or fall by that measure, and never
deviate in the slightest degree from any of its leading prin-
ciples—now, at this moment, stand openly confessed be-
fore the people of England in the character we have always
assigned to them. They have laid upon the table of the House
of Commons a Bill upon the subject of Reform, essentially
different from that to which they have solemnly bound them-
selves to adhere--essentially inimical to the democratic prin-
ciples, by proclaiming which they excited a popular ferment,
which gained them many an electioneering triumph, calcu-
lated evidently and impudently for the single end of increas-
ing permanently in the House of Commons the aristocratical
power of the Whigs. The change to which we allude is
that which withholds the franchise in cities and boroughs
from those householders whose rent is payable more fre-
quently than once in every half-year—a change which
does not of necessity narrow the constituency, or improve
the materials of which it is to be composed, but which
does of necessity place the whole constituency of every
city and borough completely in the power of the pro-
prietors of houses. It was pretended, we recollect, that the
original Reform Bill was not framed upon the principle of
favouring the borough influence of the Whigs at the ex-
pense of the Tories (although the arbitrary line, which
separated the boroughs to be disfranchised from those to
be preserved, took the precise direction which was hest
calculated to excite and justify such a suspicion), because
the power of the Whig proprietors was to be super-
seded by that of the inhabitants at large. What, we beg to
ask, becomes of that pretence now that no man is to have a
vote but in virtue of an express agreement, and in ninety-
nine cases out of a hundred a new and unusual agree-
ment, with his landlord—an agreement which, when
made, the landlord, except in the comparatively few casts
in which he has granted a lease, will at all times have
the power to revoke ? Will the new Bill of Lord John
Russell destroy the political authority of the Duke of Bed-
ford in the borough of Tavistock, or that of Earl Fitz-
William in his boroughs, or that of many other great
Whigs who in various cities and towers is England are the
owners of a large proportion of the hottees? We must
isoirttge in a hearty laugh at the expense of the simple-
tons who have been trusting these selfish and artful
Whigs. Who can fail to perceive that instead of losing
t Tavistock the Duke of Bedford will gain another family
Nocough, returning two Members, in the Bloomsbury dis-
tricta the metropolis, besides a considerable accession to
his influence over the curtailed constituency of the city
of Westminster ? A very remarkable circumstance is the
facility with which this important change in the whole
spirit and operation of the Bill is affected. It has required
no morn than the introduction of a few words to con-
vert a measure most wildly and extravagantly democratic
into a measure which must render the House of Commons
ments awl place it permanently in the power of the
Whig Aristocracy. Can better evidence be required that
the Bill was framed from the beginning with a view
to this change, and that the democratic spirit which it
seemed to evince was a mere fraudulent manifestation,
a hollow electioneering pretence ? The present Ministers
have yet to learn, and the lesson, or we greatly mistake,
will be speedily and vigorously administered, that the Bri-
tish nation is not to be thus insulted and derided with im-
punity. One of the partisans of Ministers, foreseeing the
storm of public indignation by which they are about to be
overwhelmed, kindly suggests to them the expediency of
abandoning the fatal clause in their Flew Bill, and pretend-
ing chat it is all a verbal mistake. This is very ingenious
no doubt, but it kill not do. The Bill is upon the table
of the House of Commons. The words are written. They
will remain. There can have been no mistake as to their
operation. There shall be no mistake as to their import.
The intentions with which the rkeW Bill has been framed
are past all doubt; but these, plain and distinct as they
are, are still scarcely so conspicuous as the utter want of
talent or prudence in the mode of carrying them into effect.
Was it not possible to secure the power of the Whig Lords
in their preserved boroughs, without at the same time
making each little proprietor of a single freehold house in
every city and borough in England, a sort of legislator or
constitution-manufacturer for himself? Is it possible to
imagine anything more absurd than the power evidently
bestowed by this Bill upon every such proprietor of choos-
ing from time to time, and according to circumstances,
whether his little freehold shall entitle his tenant to vote
fur the city or town, or himself to vote for the county?
What a delightful little epitome of King, Lords, and Com-
mons will be every such freeholder giving himself a vote
for the county this year by contracting to take his rent
q tarterly, and his tenant a vote fur the borough in which
Isis 101. house happens to stand the next year, by agree-
ing to take his rent in two payments instead of four !
Morning Post.

Too great caution cannot be exercised at the
present season in the use of unripe potatoes, which the
experience of former years proves to have been too often
the source of severe and dangerous maladies. As yet they
are scare, but in the course of a short time they will be
retailed in every victualling shop, and may induce fatal
disease. Early ripe potatoes are not those usually sold,
the shops being supplied with late kinds, which, from being
larger, and better looking, take the market sooner than the
early ones ; they are, however, generally unwholesome at
the beginning of the digging season, because unripe, and
ought to be eaten with the greatest caution.—Glaspow
Chronicle.

On Wednesday last the Court of King's
Bench, in Dublin, granted a rule Nisi for a criminal in-
formation against PATRICK LAVELLE, Esq., proprietor
of the Freeman's Journal, for publishing an alleged libel
on JOHN ROBINSON, Esq., the land-agent of Lady Ross,
in which he was charged with persecuting some tenants
on her Ladyship's estates, on account of their religion.
MARSHAL DIEBITSCH AND GEN. TOLL.—
From a letter dated the " Russian Head-quarters, June
11," written in a very pompous style, we extract the fol-
lowing particulars respecting the late Russian commander
and his successor :—" We had been about a week in Pul-
tusk. Since the battle of Ostrolenka the weather had been
dreidful. Not a day passed without rain, the atmosphere
was full of vapour, and the clouds seemed to press close
upon the earth. The Field-Marshal, who had hitherto
enjoyed perfect hea'th, complained, or. the 9th, in the
evening, of heaviness and lassitude, but bleeding relieved
him. Early in the morning of the 10th he was very
well, but by noon he was a corpse. A stroke of apoplexy
terminated his life. The impression which the news of
this event produced on the army is indescribable. Until
the Eater:Rotes decision he known, General Count Tor.r.,
the Chief of the Staff, has taken the command of the
army. Amidst universal regret, this affords a consolation.
Having been the confidant of the deceased Field-Marshal
in all his views and plans, be will be able to bring to a
successful termination what his friend had commenced.
Rut what is more important, he is himself a great com-
mander, and has only wanted opportunities, not talents,
to give proofs of his ability to the world. He is a pupil
of Su warutow and KUTUSOW, and distinguished himself
in all the campaigns against NAPOLEON. When Count
DIEBITSCH obtained the command of the army against the
Turks, he took Count TOLL with him, and since then he
has constantly been the chief of the Field-Marshal's Staff.
The most perfect harmony always subsisted between
them, and death only could tear asunder the bonds of their
friendship."

f

FROM THE GAZETTE OF LAST NIGHT.

War Office, June 93, 1831.
4th Regiment of Light Dragoons—R. Knox, Gcnt. to be Cor-
net, by purchase, vice M'Donogh, appointed to the 10th Light
Dragoons, dated June 28.
10th Light Dragoons—Cornet Hon. Percy Moreton, to be Lieu-
tenant, by purchase, vice Surman, who retires ; Cornet M.
M'Donogh, from the 4th Light Dragoons, to be Cornet and
Riding-master, vice Moreton, June 93.
9th Regiment of Foot—Captain W. S. Dalton, from the half-
pay, to be Captain, vice P. R. M. Browne, who exchanges re-
ceiving the difference, June 23.
28th Foot—Lieut. F. B. Russell, from the 99th Foot, to be
Lieutenant, vice Griffith, who exchanges, June 28.
38th Foot—Lieut. and Quarter-master C. Wines, from the 50th
Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Ware, appointed Paymaster of the
49th Foot, June 28.
46th Foot—Capt. R. Ellis, from the half-pay, to be Captain,
vice W. Campbell, who exchanges, receiving the difference,
June 28.
47th Foot—Captain P. Dundas to be Major, by purchase, vice
Jenkin, who retires ; Lieut C. Thursby to be Captain, by pur-
chase, vice Dundas ; Ensign R. Allan to be Lieutenant, by pur-
chase vice Thursby • H. Tollemache, Gent., to be Ensign, by
purchase, vice Allan, 28.
49th Foot—Lieut. IL Ware, from the 08th Foot, to be Pay-
master, vice Brook, deceased, June 28.
50th Foot—Lieut. T.. Freer, from half-pay 63d Foot, to be
Quarter-master, vice Willes, appointed to the:33th Foot, June:.
69th Foot—Lieut. W. C. Caldwell, from half-pay 50th Foot, to
be Lieutenant, vice A. H. Hull, who exchanges, June 28.
3.9 th Foot—Lieut. J. Griffith, from the 28th Foot, to be Lieu-
tenant, vice Russell, who exchanges, June 23.

BREVET.
Captain A. Irvine, of the Bengal Engineers, to be Major in
the East Indies only, for distinguished services in the field,
June

Office of Ordnance, June 27.
Royal Regiment of Artillery.
Captain and Brevet Major H. Trelawny to be Lieutenant-
Colon 1, rice Lloyd, deceased ; Second Captain T. Grantham to
be Captain, vice Trelawny ; First Lieut. It. NV. Story to be Se-
cond Captain, vice Grantham; Second Lieut. W. H. Forbes to
be First Lieutenant, vice Story, May 27; Second Captain F.
Haultain to be Captain, vice Evans, retired on half-pay ; First
Lieut. H. Slade to he Second Captain, vice Haultain ; Second
Lieut. D. E. Wood to be First Lieutenant, vice Slade, June 20.

Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Cam-
bridge.
To be Deputy Lieutenants—W. H. Cheere, Y:sq., G. Newton,
Esq., Jan. 25 ; J. Bendyshe, Esq., H. Hawkins, Esq.' R. Hutt-
Weston, Esq., W. W. Nash„Esq., J. Phillips, Esq., J. Northam,
EN., Feb. 16; E. Foster, Esq., R. F. Pate, Esq., J. Wing, Esq.,
Feb. 25.
Cambridgeshire Militia.
W. S. Norton, Esq. to be Captain ; B. Poussin, Gent. to be
Lieutenant, March 25; J. C. Daintree, Gent. to be Ensign,
April 5.
Whittlesea Troop of Yeomanry Cavalry.
C. Smith, Esq. to be Captain ; J. Blunt, Gent. to be Lieu-
tenant,- S. Smith, Gent. to be Cornet, April 12.
Royston and Arrington Troop of Yeomanry Cavalry.
G. Newton, Esq. to be Captain; H. Hawkins, Gent. to be
Lieutenant ; W. H. Cheere, Gent. to be Cornet, April 25.
Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Middlesex.
The most Hon. W. J. C. Bentinck, commonly called the Mar-
quis of Titchfield, to be Deputy Lieutenant, June 18.
Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the Tower Hamlets.
C. B. Stuttield, Esq. to be Deputy Lieutenant.
Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the North Riding of the

County of York.
North York Corps of Yeomanry Cavalry.
C. Wright, Gent. to be Cornet, June 16.

DECLARATIONS OF INSOLVENCY.

FRA NC isitii:Xii; Clifton, Gloucestershire, livery-stable.

keeper.
JOHN GOODE, Wilderness-row, St. John-street, Clerken.
well, engineer.
DAVID SHARP, Maldon, Essex, cattle-dealer.
JOHN HUDSON, Norton, Leicestershire, grocer.
BANKRUPTCY ENLARGED.
JOHN WILSON and STEPHEN LYLLEYMAN, Gold-
smith-street, silkmen, from July 1 to August 19, at twelve, at the
Court of Commissioners.
BANKRUPTS.
THOMAS METCALFE MOSES, Stockton-upon-Tees,
Durham, joiner, to surrender July 8, Aug. 2, and 9, at eleven,
at the King's Arms, Durham. Taylor, Clement's Inn ; Marshall,
Durham.
DANIEL BEAUMONT PAYNE, HENRY HOPE, and
GEORGE HULBERT HOPE, Wells, Somersctshire, bankers,
July 9, 12, at nine, and August 9 at two, at the Swan Hotel,
Wells. Dyne, Lincoln's-inn-fields, London ; Brookes, Wells.
JOHN PALMER, Birmingham, scrivener, July 7,8, at twelve,
and Aug. 9, at three, at the Union Inn, Birmingham. Holme,
Frampton, and Loftus, New Inn, London ;Parker, Birmingham.
HARRIET TAPPER, Titch field, innkeeper, July 8, at twelve,
9, at ten, three, and August 9, at at the Bugle Inn, Titchfield.
Holme, Frampton, and Loftus, New Inn, London ; Paddon,
Fareham, Southampton.
JOSEPH PHILLIPS, Brook-street, Holborn, tobacconist,
July I, at twelve, 8, at eleven, and August 9, at twelve, at the
Court of Commissioners. Norton, Jewin-street, Cripplegate.
JOHN LUKE, Mark-lane, wine-merchant, July 1, 12, at ten,
and August 9, at nine, at the Court of Commissioners. Cruick-
shank, King's Arms.yard, Coleman-street.
WILLIAM WILLSHER and GEORGE WILLSHER,
Oxford-street, bakers, July 8, 15, at ten, and August 9, at
nine, at the Court of Commissioners. Young, Mark-lane.
JEREMIAH BROWN, Sheerness, Kent, barge-owner, July
8, IS, and August 9, at ten, at the Court of Commissioners;
Smith, Weir, and Smith, Cooper's-hall, Basingliall-street.
ANN SA\ WELL, Queenborough, Kent, linen-draper, July 8,
15, at one, and August 9, at eleven, at the Court of Commis-
sioners. Aubrey, Hatton-garden London ; Edmeades, Sheerness.
EDWARD WILLIAM BISHOP George-street, South-
ampton-street, Pentonville, surveyor,July 5,8, and August 9,
at eleven, at the Court of Commissioners. Sylvester, Furni-
val's Inn, Holborn.
WILLI AM MOORE and JOHN M'CREIGHT, Liverpool,
corn.merchants July 25, 26, and August 9, at one, at the Cla-
rendon-rooms, Liverpool. Blackstock and Bunce, King's Bench-
walk, Temple, London • Bardswell, Liverpool.
WILLIAM TASKiIR, Oldham, Lancashire, innkeeper,
July 21, and August 9, at one, at the York Hotel, Manches-
ter. Shuttleworth, Rochdale; Smith, Chancery-lane.
THOMAS WEST and AARON En AlV_ 1,,
, ,4:llFrllat St, at
twelve, at Dec's Royal Hotel, Holme, Frampton,
and article, New Inn ; Meredith, Birmingham.
WILLIAM CLARK, Ilford, Essex, victualler, July 5, at
one, 12, and August 9, at two, at the Court of Commissioners.
builder, j O
Woolley, Liverpool-street, Broad-street.
WILLIAM PATTISON, Wetherby, Yorkshire, spirit-mer-
chant, July 8,9, at four, and August 9, at eleven, at the Angel
Wetherby. Battye, Either, and Sudlow, Chancery-lane;
Baillle, Tadcaster.
sHN LO~V
even, at
t
, Leamington ncgetoofn
Mr.Pri sors H
, Warwickshire,
ksh
ire,
Leam-
ington-Priors, 12, and August 9, at twelve, at the Swan Hotel,
Warwick. Sharpe and Field, Old Jewry, London; Haynes,
Warwick.

DIVIDENDS.
W. Burton, Cornhill, auctioneer, July 22 at ten, at the Court
of Commissioners—C. Harsleben and J. ,G. Anthony, Long's-
yard, Lamb's Conduit-street, wholesale confectioners, July 19, at
twelve, at the Court or Commissioners—J. and H. Middleton,
Seven Oaks, Kent, upholders, July 19, at one, at the Court of
Commissioners—M. A. de Freitas and A. da Costa, Tokenhouse-
yard, merchants, July 19, at eleven, at the Court of Commis-
sioners—R. H. Higham, New Bond-street, hatter, July 19, at
nine, at the Court of Commissioners—it. Bristow, Lloyd's Coffee-
house, underwriter, July '.2(3 at ten, at the Court of Commis-
sioners—J. Branthwaite, Manchester, ironmonger, July 23, at
twelve, at the office of Mr. .Booker, solicitor, Liverpool—W.
Duff and T. Browne, Liverpool, merchants, July 22, at one, at
the office of Mr, W. Thompson, solicitor, Liverpool—J. Hard-
wick, Cheltenham, carpenter, July 22, at three, at the Fleece
Inn, Cheltenham.

CERTIFICATES, JULY 19.
J. Martin, jun., Swindon, Wiltshire, currier—W. H. An-
drews, Judd-street, Brunswick-square, ironmonger—J. Lander,
Birmingham, merchant—B. Haines, Royal Hospital-row, Chel-
sea, grocer—H. Browning, Cambridge, innkeeper—D.C.Macnin
Philpot-lane, Fenchurch-street, merchant—J. Petty, Mat,
chester, joiner—G. Shillibeer, Bury-street, Bloomsbury, livery.
stable-keeper.