The Sun.
London, England, 1847-02-23 00:00:00

Rolls, with the exception of the short period during
which Mr. PIGOT attended after his acceptance of the
Chief Barony, and yet the presence of one of these
functionaries is almost essentially necessary. With-
out pretending to any extraordinary power of
vaticination we venture to prophecy that
few more useful or more popular members
have ever been added to the Legislature
than Mr. MONAHAN will very speedily become. His
return, therefore, may be regarded as a fitting sub-
ject for congratulation to the Cabinet, but there is
another reason why it should be peculiarly so beyond
any we have yet alluded to. It affords the strongest
evidence that their gigantic exertions on behalf of
Ireland generally, are known and appreciated ; that
their good intentions and anxious desire for her
amelioration and elevation in the social scale are
acknowledged, and that many who have hitherto
advocated a separation of the Legislatures and a do-
mestic Irish Parliament, have been won over to a con-
tinuance of the union between the kingdoms by their
sense and knowledge thereof.

It will be in the recollection of our readers that a
contest was not ventured on in Dungarvan when its
representation became vacant on Mr. SIIBIL'S accept-
ance of office, because there was not a certainty of
success. We may, therefore, fairly assume that it
would not have been undertaken in Galway, unless a
victory was looked upon as almost certain; indeed the
former elections would naturally lead to such an opi-
nion. At the last general election two repealers
walked over the course, and when previously a con-
test was ventured on the Whig candidates were de-
feated by large numerical majorities. The present
triumph may, therefore, be regarded as most desirable
in every point of view.

On Friday evening, in the House of Lords, Lord
STANLEY and his chosen band tried their strength
with the Government. His Lordship divided the
House upon an amendment that the Bills for per-
mitting the use of sugar in breweries and distilleries
be referred to a Select Committee. The division was
favourable to the Ministers, and there can be no
doubt that these measures will soon rank among the
laws of the land, clothed with the character which, in
justice to the colonies, and a due regard to the com-
mercial interests of the mother country, they ought
to bear—that of being permanent. Notwithstanding
the adroitness in debate for which the Protectionist
leader in the Upper House is renowned, Lord
STANLEY'S recent speech was a miserable failure;
and, looking to the part which his Lordship took
with reference to the Canadian Corn Bill, when a
member of the late Government—a part to which we
have on former occasions, whilst advocating the ap-
plication of free-trade principles in relation to sugar,
drawn the attention of our readers, and of which Lord
CLARENDON did not fail very aptly to remind Lord
STANLEY on Friday night—we must say that a
covert opposition to the Bills in question could have
come from no quarter with a worse grace than froth
his Lordship. The principles of the Canadian Corn
Bill and the pending sugar measures, as well as the
circumstances under which the former was pressed,
and the latter are urged upon the attention of Parlia-
ment, are as identical and parallel as could well be
conceived. Thus Lord STANLEY'S conduct is
palpably inconsistent. If his Lordship was right
on Friday, he was clearly wrong in 1845, when, in
opposition to the Protectionists of that year, he suc-
ceeded in carrying through the House of Commons,
and in accordance with an implied pledge as solemn
as any pledge of such a nature could be made by the
Legislature, the Bill which favoured the importation
of Canadian corn into this country. Nobody at that
time enlarged with greater force than did Lord
STANLEY upon the expediency, not to say necessity,
of a strict adherence on the part of the British Par
liament to the fulfilment of that pledge. In the
case before us we have precisely the same facts.
Last year we exposed West India sugar to
competition with foreign produce of the like nature.
The late period of the session prevented the Govern-
ment from benefiting the West India colonies by
granting them an equitable quid pro quo, by
a removal of the prohibitions against the use
of sugar for the purposes of brewing and
distillation; but it was distinctly intimated that
all fiscal regulations prejudicial to their interests
should be abandoned as early as possible. This
assurance was given to them not only by
the present, but also by the late Chancellor
of the Exchequer; and yet the statesman
who would now treat with levity the faith thus im-
parted to the colonists by two successive Ministries,
is the very man who, not two years since, repudiated
such a proceeding in terms of eloquent indignation.
Nothing, therefore, we repeat, could be more devoid
of grace than Lord STANLEY'S late party mar ceuvre.
As an act of eommon justice we should have been
bound to pass the present Sugar Bills, if Irish distress
had not intervened, as, unhappily, it has, to render
their enactment all the more desirable. Hence, simply
to associate them with their bearings in midge-
don of the sufferings of our famine-stricken
fellow-subjects, in order to build up an argument in
favour of making them temporary, in the place of
being permanent in their operation, is a selfish, dis-
honourable, and vicious pretext. All these questions
are now handled in a proper spirit; they are disposed
of solely with reference to considerations of re-
venue. The argument of protection, synonymous
with monopoly, is exploded for ever. It is gratify-
ing to glean from Earl CLARENDON'S able and lucid
speech, that whilst we are acting justly towards
the West Indians, the revenue will become
improved by the substitution of sugar for malt in our
breweries. On the other hand, the agriculturists
have no just grounds for alarm, seeing that too free
a use of sugar in the Manufacture of beer would serve
to deteriorate its quality. Altogether, we regard the
proceedings in the House of Peers on Friday evening
with great satisfaction.

We read in a letter from Lucerne of the 12th--
" The trial of the persons accused of being concerned in the
assassination of M. Lea took place on the 10th, before the
Criminal Tribunal, in the presence of a crowded auditory;
and yesterday the Tribunal delivered judgment. Michael
Achermann was condemned to death; Rosa Felix, mother of
Muller, to 18 years' imprisonment ; A. Muller, brother of F.
Muller, to the pillory and to bard labour in irons ; Corrag-
gionio, Huster, Lorentz, and Schmikt were acquitted, but
the last two were condemned to ten months' imprisonment
for having taken part in the expeditions of the free corps;
M. Bichler was acquitted of complicity in the murder, but not
appearing, was condemned to death for having been con-
cerned in the free corps expeditions; a similar sentence was
passed apon Lieut. Brunner; Zoreichen was acquitted;
renanz Reiners was sentenced to two months' hard labour;
and Troller was acquitted. M. Corraggioai, though declared
not guilty, had remained sixteen months in prison."
Madrid papers to the 13th have arrived.

The Goodis publishes the following as the reply of the
QUEEN to the Address of the Senate :—" I have heard
with the greatest pleasure the noble sentiments which
you have manifested in the name of the Senate, and I
rely on your loyal cu-operation for assuring the welfare
of our country."

It will be recollected that in the Chamber of Deputies,
before the commencement of the debate on the Address,
Senor SAGASTI put certain questions to the Ministers,
as to their willingness to lay before the Chamber a copy
of the will of FERDINAND VII., to which Senor BRAVO
MURILLO, speaking on the part of the Ministry, declined
to give a positive answer. On this question the Clamor
I'ublico says—

"The present Ministry seems disposed to refuse to submit
to the Cortes the marriage contracts of the Queen and the
Infanta. The nation has the right to know what has become
of the patrimonial fortune left by Ferdinand VII. to his au-
gust daughters. It is in vain that it is pretended that a con-
tidential character should be attributed to the successor of
Ferdinand VII., and to the, marriage contracts of his two
children. It is generally admitted among nations constitu-
i y.
iieoritially governed that monarchs cannot possess personal pro-
; There exists in Spain a 141 i moral reason, which
itrongly recommends the measure proposed by M. Sagasti :
For reasons perhaps unfounded public opinion makes many
comments on the destination given to the great property of
Ferdinand VII.; it speaks of mysteries, of losses, of opera-
tions, on which it is important light should be thrown in the
interest, and for the honour of the persons compromised ;
and therefore it is that a profound examination ought to be
made into the succession, heretofore too mysterious, of Fer-
dinand VII. It is almost impossible that in the marriage
contracts of a Queen, and an heiress presumptive of the
Throne, there should not be some stipulations affecting the
interests of the nation, which are so closely united with
those of the reigning dynasty. The enemies of the present
order of things suppose that the ten millieus just ordered
to be paid to the Queen's household, are destined to
cover a part of the sum that the Duke de Montpensier
should have received on account of the fortune of our
Infanta, and also to cover a part of the sum ad-
vanced, nobody knows by whom, to the famous General
Flores. A thousand comments are made on this
subject. People do not understand how it is that in
moments of embarrassment, and without any apparent
necessity, ten millions should be drawn from the public
treasury, or what is worse, be borrowed at 5i per c
interest, whilst no aid is given to the widows of those whoeiit
.
have fallen on the field of battle. At the very moment at
which the ten millions were carried to the Palace there was
at the doors of the Treasury au innumerable crowd of un-
happy wretches, wiclovri and orphans, who were igkillg for