The Sun.
London, England, 1836-08-10 00:00:00

SPTIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

;The Lords' " Amendments" to the Municipal Cor-
porations Act Amendment Bill were last night re-
jected by the Commons. Lord John Russell, on in-
troducing the subject to the House, stated that there
were two or three of the amendments made by the
Lords—two especially—to the principle of which he
could by no means agree. One had reference to the
manner in which the chairman was to be chosen to
preside at the election of the Mayor and Council of a
Corporation when there was an equality of votes ; the
other had reference to the administration of charitable
trusts ; and it was with respect to these two amend-
ments particularly that he was desirous to call the at-
tention of the House to the situation in which the
Lords had placed them by the course that House
had thought proper to adopt. With regard to
the first of these amendments, which prescribed the
choosing a chairman by lot in case of equality of
votes, instead of recurring to the suffrages of the
burgesses at large or any popular body, he con-
sidered it a violation of the principle of popular
election on which the Municipal Act itself was
founded. Still had that amendment stood alone
he might have consented to concede it. But, with
respect to the amendment relative to the manner of
appointing charitable trustees, his Lordship hoped
that he should have the concurrence of the House on
his motion for rejecting it. It was allowed on all
sides that nothing could be more desirable than to put
an end to the abuses which resulted from the manner
in which the old trustees discharged their functions.
It was distinctly stated in various reports on their table
that in many places it had been the custom of trus-
tees of charitable funds to pay them away to indivi-
duals of one political party, to the exclusion of all
others; and the House would be countenancing the
abuses in question were they to agree to an amend-
ment which continued them for another year. Some
temporary inconvenience might be sustained from
the loss of the Bill ; but he would much rather
that the power now enjoyed by the trustees
Should. remain for a time in abeyance, and that
the Lord Chancellor should make such orders
as the circumstances of each case might require,
than adopt the amendment of the Lords, which would
continue to a set of men the power of distributing
large sums of money under the pretext of charitable
Purposes, while, in fact, they were bestowing them on
persons belonging to their own party. Lord Lyndhurst
will thus be defeated in his crafty design of continuing
the corrupt ex-corporators a second year as the trus-
tees of the charitable estates of Corporations. The
Clause which would have perpetuated this iniquity was
°llly a cover for the rejection of the Ministerial Bill for
the election of charitable k trustees thrown out last week
by the Lords, at the bidding of Lord Lyndhurst.
when, however, the motion for disagreeing with
the amendments, had been agreed to, Lord John
itnssell stated that, as these amendments involved
the only material points of difference between
the two Houses, as far as the present Bill was
Concerned, he should think it his duty to ask a
Conference with the House of Lords, for the pur-
pose of stating to them the reasons which had
Induced the Commons to disagree with the amend-
Merits, and which would lead them to prefer the loss of
the Bill altogether rather than assent to it with such
Provisions as had been inserted into it since it origin-
ally, left their House. Their Lordships would thus,
Ile said, have an opportunity for declaring whether
they were determined to adhere to those amendments
Or not. The motion of his Lordship was agreed to,
and a free conference with the Lords is appointed for
te-morrow. The ex-corporators, who have long so
notoriously abused their trusts for party purposes, may
In the meanwhile ruminate over their loss of power.
It was not to be endured that the electioneering de-
hvices of the Tory Peers should prevail over a reformed
ouse of Commons. If Ministers had surrendered
this point the Session would literally have ended in
` nothing." To-morrow we shall demonstrate the
great value of the subject-matter of the free conference
to the Reformers.—Morning Chronicle.
The more closely the conduct of our wretched Mi-
nisters in the affair of the Newspaper Stamp Duties
li
till is considered, the more disgraceful, we are satis-
v!d, it will be pronounced by all but the scurviest and
vVt follows ne most spanie
hungering hat the
then attempted in this case is almost nothing
nen compared with the manner and the motive of the
Pgroceeding ; and though their paltry arts have been
tefeated in this experiment, still it deeply concerns the
f°Trlmunity at large to be made sensible of, and there-
:fre to be put upon their guard against, the utter want
wi,Principle and of probity with which these Whigs
411' go the whole hog in any dirty work of party, no
41a go
whether they be set upon injuring the pro-
nellY or the persons of their political opponents. The
Lewapaper proprietors are safe. The House of Lords
4aelB shielded them. What class of capitalists may
Iht be selected to be damaged or destroyed by
therefore
of a clause in a Money none can tell, and
it behoves all, in common prudence, to be
till3en their guard. A tax has been proposed for
Lae owners of large newspapers, because they
th PPened to be Conservative ; who will guarantee
41e. large fundholders from a similar visitation, if the
oalerity of them prove to be opposed in politics to the
4,°,vernment ? The Times, the Herald, the Post,
the Standard are Conservative papers, and Mr.
preee's inch-knowledge rule was invented for the ex-
heas purpose of crippling their means, and reducing
tto lit to a level with the Government prints. Is it
lj°Bsible that the Board of Trade may follow the
et:1111131e of the Treasury, and endeavour to apply a
live levelling scheme within its department ? Let it
Ile er be forgotten that the Prime Minister, flattering
elf and falsifying all history, has told the Parlia-
trlt that the Government can be carried on in spite
of majority of the wealth, of the intelligence, and
of4"le rank of the country. Lord .Melbourne's wish
Ivtit no doubt father to his thought ; and there is
be. One way of realizing that wish. Will it be at-
ANted ? We know not ; but, from what has been
hie, we have a right to infer what may be the subject
eperiment. The Ministers have brought in a
touttsure for
,giving " a heavy blow and great dis-
Riviagement to Protestantism ;" another measure for
the rilhg " a heavy blow and great discouragement to
teln%''ess;" and why should we be surprised if they
Wholforward next session with the complement of their
Rrea e-hoggism—a Bill for giving " a heavy blow and
howt discouragement to property?" The same power,
Of jet*, which, under Providence, has warded off two
eou'oese blows, may be safely trusted to protect the
prolltrY from the third. The House of Lords have
decreed that they are neither to be circumvented by the
hteditable artifice of "tacking" on the sly and un-
viend, nor intimidated by violent threats, however
forerlY and coarsely expressed. Let Mr. Rice there-
tr
it ii,Y his skill in thimble-riggery somewhere else-
111eibt riot do in the House of Lords ; and let Lord
What cvurne "go show his clerks how choleric he is:"
are the Peers of England for his passion ? But
pw,,. We feel that we, in common with the rest of the
Ptoltce, have perfect security for our liberties and our
rertie
1.4 fir sin the protection afforded by the integrity,
inness, and the independence of the House of
tiler 8) still we are quite aware how much of disgrace
t° the i 8
in the nation being submitted even nominally
e
Iv 6ule
In of so contemptible a set of political traders.
thay nominally, and the figure they have made
Ptitt 16 very business of the registration of the pro-
i)ro ors of
newspapers is an apt illustration of the
Ilft;Pteitlrieehtiryaos_ct)_f!orthtyat qualification. The security which,
years, has been
. required from news-
gero„e, prietors, was most vigorously and most cla-
h\''llo ,ZllYo°PPosed, on its introduction, by the Whigs,
etty
of
..unced it as an insidious attack upon the li-
:e_sebact!,h! Press. Nevertheless the Whigs riot only
tlseiutt It Without a word of apology, but added, be-
tne Radicals commanded them, the registration
the the Proprietors of newspapers, of their shares,
trah4f any Proprietors of these shares, and of the sale or
Nttetiert of them or of any part of them. They ad-
-41, ti,at
(IttY' at'd that did not think those provisions neces-
, ced th_ at they themselves would not have intro-
L'N or, ein ; but, as Lord Lyndhurst well put it, they
vist,"lllPelled to submit,in
order to prop their tottering
Lltla:llee,:o.the. dictation of their masters—the Radi-
-14e": believe that what enormity the Whigs
44 attempt, in violation of their past pledges

An observation made by Lord Melbourne in the de-
bate of Monday night, relative to the Newspaper pro-
prietors, has revived a train of thought in us which,
though not consecutive on the subject then under dis-
cussion, is closely connected with the independence and
fair character of the Press, and on which we have been
often inclined to express our sentiments. Whether the
registry of proprietors be practicable or impracticable,
or whether it would give the public any further secu-
rity than that it has at present, against the license of
Newspapers, is not our intention to discuss at present ;
but we think there is one point in which many of our
Contemporaries too often trespass, that may with great
advantage to them be reformed. We allude to the
gross terms used towards each other in political ar-
ticles, and in the replies and rejoinders which those
articles engender. How any persons, claiming to be-
long to a respectable class of society, and by neces-
sity of their employments, men of education, can in-
dulge in such scurrility, is inconceivable. We find the
words "false," " liar, " knave," bandied about in
their angry moments, and a general desire to lower the
character of each other in their minor quarrels, as if
the application.of these injurious epithets did not dis-
honour more the source from whence they spring than
the persons to whom they are applied—as if the ge-
neral lowering of the Press did not touch the indi-
vidual who claims distinction for himself, while he
classes his opponent as " a scribe," " an animal," " a
hireling," or by some equally discreditable term. Surely
we are all employed in debating principles, not in at-
tacking persons. The great political questions which
occupy the public mind are not to be advanced by
casting injurious epithets on those who differ in opi-
nion from us. Why is it that the French news-
paper press ranks nominally higher than the Eng-
lish ?—simply from the absence of that personality
which so much disfigures ours. In Paris it is an
honour to be a public writer—men in the highest
classes are ambitious to be thought so. Go to the
Tuileries, the Academie, or the Opera, you are
pointed out the various editors as men of proud no-
toriety. In London few of the writers are known,
and there is perhaps but one conductor of an esta-
blished journal who is a member of a club. There is
a shrinking from public notice—often arising from
the noblest motives ; but the conseqnence of it is,
that persons of vulgar mind take advantage of the
same incognito to scatter foul words on those who
expose their errors either of style or intelligence.
There is not a capital in Europe where the leading
political writers are not sought after, except in
London. Why should men so highly gifted as some
of our co-labourers are, wish to shun the light ? A.
comparison is sometimes set up between the London
and Paris periodical Press, to the advantage of the
latter ; but nothing can be more erroneous than that
judgment. Whether we take the contents of the co-
lumns of news, or those of the editorial articles, the
London papers are incomparably superior. One
translating office distributes to all the Paris offices the
foreign news, at 10 sous per line ; while we and our
enterprising rivals establish our own correspondence in
every capital in Europe, at an expense enormous be-
yond idea. There are no accounts of Law Courts or
police in the Paris Papers, while the London Papers
not only give all that may occur before these tribunals,
but, on important occasions, offer such reports as even
the compilers of cases may with slight alterations adopt.
The leading articles of the Paris Press are unquestion-
ably well done, and several men have attained distinc-
tion from being their acknowledged authors ; but for
strong and profound thinking, for political or learned
research, our daily and weekly Papers can well afford
a competition. We have seen articles in our Contem-
poraries worthy of the pen of Junius or of Swift ;
and if their French rivals are sometimes more spe-
cious, the English have the nobler ground to take of
being more useful and more true. In order that these
advantages should be fully seen, the London Press
has only to remedy the defect which we began this
article by pointing out. We, ourselves, have borne
much in that regard, but found the advantage of not
retorting in the same style by the increased respect
the offender has shown us on subsequent occasions.
Let us therefore take the liberty of suggesting to our
able and respectable Contemporaries that mutual for-
bearance will produce the same good effect to them,
and they will find how quickly the public respect will
follow such discretion. We have invariably observed,
when the character of the Press has been before either
House of Parliament, that men distinguished for their
talents or experience have borne testimony to the
value of its labours, and that it has been only such
minor wits as fail in all other topics, who fly to the
condemnation of newspapers, as one which admits of
much declamation, and on which they are rendered
safe by their privileges from being effectually an-
swered. Let these young gentlemen shoot their point-
less arrows at men whose thoughts are directed to the
noble object of advancing the public good, while we
and our honourable rivals lose no opportunity of ele-
vating the character of the public Press and of making
it worthy to be the organ of a great people.—Morning
Herald.

The anxiety manifested by the Ministerial journals
to mystify the subject, induces us to bestow a few more
words upon the clause in the Stamp Duties Bill which
required the registration at the Stamp-office of all the
proprietors of a newspaper. The matter, fortunately,
is too clear and simple for the most experienced adepts
in the art of mystification to involve it even for a mo-
ment in obscurity or confusion. It is evidently, and
beyond the possibility of contradiction or of doubt, a
case in which a glaring absurdity and a flagrant wrong,
would have been committed by one House of "Parlia-
ment, under the guidance of his Majesty's Ministers,
had not that branch of the Legislature been effectually
controlled by the superior intelligence and equity of
another branch which, fortunately for the country, will
submit to no such blundering and vicious guidance.
We agree with the apologists of Government that it is

of the highest importance to the public to secure " a
due sense of responsibility in the parties who con-
duct the preSs," and " a cheap and easy mode of
transmission for newspapers to all parts of the coun-
try ;" but we cannot discover the slightest connection
between these objects, and that liberal Ministerial
enactment, which would at once have annihilated
a large proportion of the market value of the
copyright of all existing Journals, by imposing
restrictions upon its transfer, which would have pre-
cluded large classes of men, and all women, without
exception, from becoming or remaining the holders of
this particular description of property, and which would
have proclaimed to the world that, in the deliberate
estimation of the British Legislature, property em-
barked in newspapers ought to be less respected than
property of any other kind. Whatever Mr. Charles
Buller, and Mr. Spring Rice, and Lord Lansdowne,
and Lord Melbourne may think of the matter, we ven-
ture confidently to assure them that robbery and insult
are not the means which would have suggested them-
selves to honest and enlightened Ministers as the best
calculated to inspire men having important duties to
discharge with " a due sense of responsibility." That
the clause of the Stamp Duties Bill suggested by Mr.
C. Buller, and adopted by Ministers, would at once
have diminished the value of existing newspapers, and
impeded the establishment of new ones, is evident on
the slightest examination of the manner in which it must
have affected the interests and the feelings of individuals
possessing orintending to acquire such property. A man
shall have laid out the greater part of his fortune for
the purpose of making a journal an effective political
engine, and at the same time a good property in respect
to income and marketable value. He may desire to
leave at his decease the property thus created as a pro-
vision for his widow or daughters. This he would
have a good right to contemplate and to effect in the
existing state of the law. But these silly or unprin-
cipled meddlers, Mr. C. Buller and Mr. S. Rice, arro-
gantly step in, and say, " Stop, my good Sir. Are your
wife and daughters willing to be registered at the
Stamp-office ? Are they ready to become defendants
in their proper names and persons whenever the matter
contained in your journal may chance to offend a
tyrannical Minister or a litigious individual in private
life ? If not, it is useless to think of leaving any por-
tion of your newspaper property to them. If you still
choose to do so they must of necessity sell, and we have
taken good care to spoil their market, by attaching vexa-
tious, harassing, and revolting conditions to the posses-
sion of this kind of property." Such is, in effect, what
his Majesty's Ministers, following the suggestion of
the wise Mr. C. Buller, have said and have desired
Parliament to ratify. It is what Parliament would ,
have ratified had the House of Lords been as indif-
ferent to all considerations of justice, as hostile to the
character and influence of the press, as eager to deprive
the community of the protection and enjoyment which
respectable, well-conducted, and independent journals
are enabled to confer, as the House of Commons.
Fortunately, however, the House of Lords consists
chiefly of men who possess the requisite degree of in-
telligence and public spirit to correct and controul a
besotted and unprincipled Administration, and the
feeble and worthless majority in the House of Com-
mons who lend it their support. It is said, and we
believe it, that Ministers have determined to propose
to the House of Commons to accept the Stamp
Bill, a Revenue Bill though it be, with the just
and important amendments which the Lords have
made in the measure. The pill, no doubt, is a
bitter one, but they perceive the necessity of swal-
lowing it. At least so we are told, and we re-
joice to hear it. What will be said now of the Mims-
terial crotchet in virtue of which it was pretended that
the House of Commons should have rejected the Lords'
amendments of the Irish Tithe Bill without conde-
scending to discuss their merits ? The latter was not
a Bill of Supply, which the Stamp Duties Bill, both
in form and in substance, unquestionably is. The
kind of efficiency displayed by the present Ministers of
the Crown is calculated to reconcile the community in
some degree to their continuance in office. They and
their adherents assail, and would overthrow, the Church
of England and the House of Lords, both of which
gather an accession of strength from every renewed
attack. They and their adherents manifest an inordi-
nate zeal to support and extend the privileges, whether
legitimate or pretended, of the House of Commons,
and the result of their efforts is another and an equa
triumph to their ability, vigour, and discretion.—Morn•
ing Post.

FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE.

At the Court at St. James's, the 3d day of August, 183 G,
PRESENT,
The King's Most Excellent Majesty in Council.
This day the Right Hon. Lord John Elphinstone was, by his
Majesty's command, sworn of his Majesty's Most Honourable Privy
Council, and his Lordship took his place at the Board accordingly.

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1836.

saying to myself--well, till the day comes in which there
shall be no more anniversaries—the day on which my eyes
shall be closed never more to be opened, I shall never re-
ceive a more flattering invitation. It could not increase
my affection for my native country, for that defies augmenta-
tion ; but it well harmonises with the joy which I have felt
on revisiting my native land—a joy which makes
i the Scot-
tish accents of the very children on your streets s music to
my ears. When I forget thee, Scotland, may my right
hand forget its cunning.—(lllr. Campbell here sat down
amidst tremendous cheering.)
Mr. CAMPBELL again rose to propose the health of the
Lord Provost and Magistracy of Edinburgh.
Bailie MACFARLAN returned thanks, and concluded by
presenting the diploma of freedom of the city of Edin-
burgh to Mr. Campbell, as agreed to at the. meeting of the
Town-Council on the preceding Tuesday.
Mr. CAMPBELL briefly returned thanks.
Mr. CAMPBELL, in a highly complimentary address, pro-
posed the health of Lord Jeffrey, and afterwards that of
the Chairman, Professor Wilson. In proposing the latter
toast, he took occasion to mention the following anecdote,
connected with Professor Wilson, to the effect that, John
Wilson (the ornithologist), who went to America, was mis-
taken for the poet, and landed on the shore of that country
amidst the clapping of hands all over new Orleans, and
was walked into the interior of the country in great state.
But the Americans, on being told by the said John Wilson
that he was not the great John Wilson, turned round upon
him with indignation, and were going to tar and feather him.
(Great laughter and cheering.)
Mr. R. W. JAMESON gave at considerable length "the
Memory of Burns ;" and immediately afterwards followed
it up by the health of Mr. Ainslie, W.S., the well-known
friend and correspondent of Burns, who was present in the
room. Mr. Ainslie replied to the honour done him, and
related the story of Burns crossing the Tweed with him,
and kneeling down on the English side of the river, and
apostrophising his native land in the words of the last stanza
of the Cottar's Saturday Night.
Alderman HowITT, of Nottingham, then rose and gave
the healths of Wordsworth, Southey, and Moore. He
remarked, that there was one thing which seemed hitherto
to have escaped the public mind, namely, that the best way
to do honour to poets, was to do them justice ; and he
urged upon the Meeting the necessity of procuring an Act
of Parliament to secure the copyright of authors.
The CHAIRMAN gave "Joanna Bailie and the Living
Poetesses, among whom he named Mrs. Grant, of Laggan,
Mary Howitt (who was in the music gallery, and was
greatly applauded), Miss Mitford, and Miss Landon.--
(Great cheering.)
Mr. FERRIER, Advocate, gave the health of " Sheridan
Knowles, and the Drama."--(Cheers.)
Mr. D. M. Mont gave " the memory of the Ettrick
Shepherd," which was drank in solemn silence.
The toasts on the list being now exhausted, Professor
Wilson drank " good night ;" and the company broke up
about half-past eleven o'clock.

RESOLUTIONS AGREED ON BY THE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON CONTROVERTED
ELECTIONS.

1. That the Speaker of the House of Commons do, at the
commencement of every session, nominate three barristers, of
not less than seven years' standing, to fill the office of assessors
to election Committees; such nomination being subject to the
confirmation of the House.
2. That one of these shall asssist at the deliberations of
every Election Committee, presiding as Chairman, but without
power to vote.
3. That in all cases in which there shall be a difference of
opinion in the Committee, the assessor shall remain with the
Committee, while strangers are excluded : that he shall, before
any division, state the question at issue to the Committee,
together with his opinion thereon ; that he pronounce the deci-
sions of the Committee, declaring his own assent or dissent ;
and that such assent or dissent shall be recorded in the minutes
of the Committee.
4. That the assessors decide, under the sanction of the
Speaker, which of their number shall preside over each Com-
mittee.
5. That if, at the commencement of a Parliament, it shall
appear -to the Speaker that the number of election petitions
presented is so great that the three assessors will be unable to
preside at the respective trials of such petitions, without caus-
ing considerable inconvenience, it shall, in such case, be law-
ful for the Speaker, within three weeks from the meeting of
Parliament, to nominate, subject to the confirmation of the
House, one or more barristers of not less than seven years'
standing, who shall officiate as assistant assessors; and that
in case, on the arrival of any day, on which an election peti-
tions shall be appointed to be tried, none of the three assessors
shall be disengaged, it shall be lawful for the assessors, or
any of them, to appoint, under the sanction of the Speaker,
any one of the assistant-assessors to act as assessor and chair-
man, with all the duties and powers thereof for the trial of !ha
petition.

- G. That the assessors and assistant-assessors be not Mem-
bers of the House, and hold no office of profit under the
Crown, except that of recorder.
7. That the remuneration of the assessors be by an annual
salary ; and that the assistant-assessors be paid in proportion to
their respective services.
8. That every Election Committee consist of five Members,
to be chosen by ballot.
9. That within ten days after the commencement of every
session, the names of all the Members of the 'louse be formed
into one general Committee list by public ballot, for the pur-
pose of fixing the order in which they are to stand on the list;
that such list be printed and :circulated with the votes ; that
within one week thereafter, the names of Members excused al-
together from serving on any Election Committees, as well
as of those petitioning or petitioned against, and of those hold-
ing certain specified official situations, be expunged therefrom.
JO. That the general list so reduced be then divided into
separate lists, or pannels, consisting of no less than sixty
Members each.
11. That, if the cause for expunging any such name shall,
at any subsequent period, cease to operate, the Speaker shall
state the fact to the House, and the name of such Member shall
be added by ballot to some one of the pannels from which
Committees shall not have yet been struck.
12. That each pannel be numbered ; and that, whenever a
day shall be fixed for taking into consideration one or more
election petitions, one such pannel be taken by ballot, from
from which the required Committee or Committees shall be
struck.