The Sun.
London, England, 1825-02-08 00:00:00

sale of all shares of any Joint Stock Company for
profit, before such Company had been incorporated
by Royal Charter, or by Act of Parliament, ille-
gal, and subjecting the persons so selling shares
to punishment." Lord Lauderdale objected to
this course, as there was a law now in existence
for punishing such proceedings ; but the Lord
Chancellor observed, that from the severity of
the existing law, it could not be execut-
ed, and he thought that by proposing a law
with milder punishments, there would he a
greater probability of correcting the evil. There
can be no question, that the traffic in shares
leads to very great abuses. During the late fe-
ver, we have had abundant proof of this, and the
worst of the matter is yet to come. The virtue
must be somewhat more heroic than that which
generally falls to the share of citizens of this
metropolis, which when money may be had for
the picking up, as it were, would refuse to coun-
tenance any delusion, however barefaced. Hence
the avidity which has been displayed by all ranks
and descriptions of men, to avail themselves of all
manner of schemes for obtaining money from the
public. One of the worst consequences of this is,
that numbers of men cease to be any longer under
the restraint of shame, from being conscious of

their general participation in unwarrantable ar-
tifices. A notorious ruffian, of the name of
Ralph Wilson, who turned King's evidence
against a gang of thieves to which he be-
longed, in 1722, stated very naively, that,
" one night in August, 1720, when all man-
kind had turned thieves, we robbed a coach

in Chancery-lane, another in Lincoln's Inn-
fields, and in going off' we stumbled upon Lord
Westmorland, who had three footmen behind
his coach, and we had some difficulty in robbing
his Lordship." This language is extremely na-
tural, for to the popular apprehension it seems as
if the stock of the Scciety were again to be dis-

tributed, and as if every man might avail himself
of fraud or force to obtain his fair share. At the
same time the views taken by the Lord Chan-
cellor are by no means without their difficulties.
First—the House of Lords declare, by a stand-
ing order, that they will allow of no Charter of
Incorporation, except in certain specified cases,
where the greatest part of the capital has not
been deposited. Now, in the case of many projects
of great public utility, a call for the deposit of
the greater portion of the subscriptions would
amount to an absolute interdict. Say, then, that
there is an association, without a charter or act
of incorporation. Suppose an undertaking com-
menced without a charter or act of incorporation,
by shares, shall an individual, who has made ad-
vances on his share, be denied the privilege of
transferring it to another, when it is no longer
convenient for him to retain it ? This sounds
oddly in a commercial country. We have our
doubts whether the Bill of the Lord Chancellor
will pass in the house of Commons, in any thing
like the shape that his Lordship contemplates
giving to it. Something, however, should be
done to prevent such excesses as those with which
the country has been cursed.