The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-25 00:00:00

ROYAL SURREY THEATRE.

Entire Change.—Greater att ration than ever.—Engagcment
of Mr. Collins. Second time these Four Years of " Paul
Clifford, with the splendid Romance of " The Tower of
London ;" the most powerful attraction that can be offered.
THIS EVENING, FEB. 23.
Will be acted the Operatic Drama of
PAUL CLIFFORD.
Paul Clifford (with all the Original Songs), Mr. Collins.
After which the Domestic Drama of
MARTHA WILLIS, THE MAID SERVANT.
To conclude with the Grand Historical Romance, founded on

and entitled
THE TOWER OF LONDON.

NEW STRAND THEATRE.

Increasing l'opularity=liaptures of Applause—Gratified
Audiences.

OPEN EVERY EVENING DURING THE WEEK.
The celebrated Mr. JACOBS, the Royal Ventriloquist,
Modern Magician, and English Improvisatore, continues to
at, ract very large and highly respectable audiences, who nightly
testify their approbation in the most marked anti decided man-
ner. The Press has unanimously pronounced him the best
Ventriloquist since the days of Monsieur Alexandre. Tha
Tricks surpass all that have been introduced by the Wizards or
Magicians who have preceded him ; and the Exsernporaneous
Song, on subjects proposed by the audience, elicits thunders of
applairse.
Boxes, 2s. 6d. ; Pit, ls. 6d. ; Gallery, ls.

. _
. ,
Doors open at Seven o'clock, and commence at Half-past.
Second price at a Quarter to Nine o'clock—Boxes, Is. Gd. ;
Pit, Is. ; Gallery, 6d.
Carriages to U. in waiting twenty minutes past Ten.
Mr. Seguin, 12, Regent-street, Pall Mall, is appointed sole
Agent for disposal of the Private Boxes.
.......—..,

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE THIS i)AX. :
Morning...... 5 minutes after 4. Evening ......22 minutes after 4

LONDON:
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1841.

The Peers adjourned over yesterday.
The Commons met as usual. A considerable
number of petitions was presented, chieflr on
the Irish Bills, and against Lord STANLEY'S :Bill.
In answer to Sir E. WILMOT, the ATTOR
rsy-
GENERAL stated, that he should recommend that
a Bill be introduced to remove all doubts a s to
the right of the Corporation of Manchester r, to
appoint quarter sessions, and to put an end to the
disputes at present existing between such co. To-
rate towns as Birmingham and the counties.
Mr. HUTT gave notice of a motion on the
Sound Dues for March 9.

not accept the offer, every one of those Members
has been won from the cause of Repeal, and
now strengthen the Government. But the To-
ries, contrary to Lord BROUGHAM, regard the •
agitation for Repeal as a crime, and they cheered
the list vociferously, as if it were no merit to
convert an opponent to a friend. The Right
Hon. Baronet dwelt at some.length, too, on the
relative respectability of the electors in the two
kingdoms, and pointed out the greater wealth
of those of England. He forgot, however, that
it is the boast of his party that the county elec-
tors of England are the very serfs of the landlords,
while the reason urged by Lord STANLEY and
others for his Bill is, that the poor cottars and ten
pound tenants in Ireland refused to submit tothat
degradation ; they are tobe disfranchised because
they had a will of their own, and yet Sir JAMES
objects to a poor constituency, that it will be de-
pendent. Sir JAMES GRAHAM'S speech was
powerful and impressive, when he referred to
Mr. MARSHALL'S letter to Earl FITZWILLIAM, to
the progress of democracy, and to the
avowed necessity of keeping-it down. They will
put down the aristocracy. He declared
for the former, and the Tories; being landlords,
cheered him. We were not sorry to hear such
language. It will make an impression on the
country—it will awaken reflection ; but it will
tell more against than for the race of the bread-
taxers.
Mr. SHIEL followed Sir JAMES GRAHAM, and
concluded the debate. The speech of the Right
Hon. Gentleman was rich in sarcasm; and in
turn Sir JAMES GRAHAM, Lord STANLEY, and
Sir WM. FOLLETT winced under his burning
words. In reminding Sir JAMES GRAHAM that
he had called Sir JAMES SCARLETT a re-
negade Whig, he (Mr. SHIEL) observed that the
Right Hon. Baronet now felt in his own person
all the bitterness of that reproach. The young
Whig Lord (STANLEY), the advocate of the peo7
pie's rights in 1829, who then objected to the
solvent tenant clause, and engrafted his ob-
jection on his Reform Bill for Ireland in.
1831, appeared to no advantage under the re-
miniscence. Neither did the Noble Lord like
a proof which Mr. SHIEL brought of his dis-
ingenuousness in adopting the whole of Sir M.
O'LoGnLiN's Bill, leaving out, and telling the
House nothing about the omission, the qualifica-
tion clause. But we have not time nor space to

!....,_ _. ...... ..
analyse one of the most telling and caustic
speeches that ever was heard in Parliament.
Nor was it deficient of the higher and
more searching kinds of eloquence. The appeal
which Mr. SUJEL made to the Tories to observe,
after he had described Lord STANLEY, what
manner of man is now their standard-bearer,
to note the preparation for war abroad,
while Lord STANLEY was exciting insurrection
at home, and to remember the confederacies 1
which have existed in Ireland, were most
powerful and impressive. They made a great
sensation in the House, and will produce a great
effect on the country.
The debate was again adjourned at a Quarter
before One o'Clock.

A writer in the Times, under the signature of
" LCELIUS," on the 12th inst., said—" This, my
Lord, is an aye of recurrence to first principles—
a period unexampled in the annals of the world.
The shackles of ages are falling oft; and the
human intellect is rising up unconscious of its
strength, and likely, in pure ignorance how to
restrain and encourage that strength, to rend
asunder the bones, the muscles, the ligaments,
which are alike its prison and the necessary in-
struments of its energy and activity ; in other
words, to burst through and destroy the whole
framework of (political qy.) society." The
journal in which that sentence appeared is a gua-
rantee that it is no radical or revolutionary ex-
aggeration. We believe that it falls short of the
truth, and that the deep-laid foundations of po-
litical society are now actually removed. They
were laid in the public mind of a past age—
in the customs of our ancestors—in preju-
dices and theories; all of which have passed
or are passing away. The knowledge and intel-
lect of the present time afford them no solid bed;
they cannot be underpinned ar fresh piled; around
them is one mass of mo vi ng, bottomless quicksand,
and, as LCELIUS says, the whole framework of
political society is rent asunder and destroyed
by the activity and energy of the human intel-
lect. We add the epithet political, because so-
ciety, the natural result of the human organiza-
tion, the growth of the division of mankind into
males and females,—the population of the world,
with all its wants, connections, sympathies, at-
tachments, conveniences, science, art, and know-
ledge, constituting natural society,—can never
be destroyed, but is destined by its own laws to
increase, and expand, and absorb political or ar-
tificial society in itself. We add the epithet
political, because there are many writers and
many statesmen who never distinguish between
political and natural society, and are overbear-
ing, reckless, and arrogant, from attributing to
political society, which is weak and changing,
the permanence and the indestructibility of na-
tural society.
My Lord STANLEY is obviously one of those
statesmen who has never looked for his rule of
conduct beyond the statutes at large and the de-
bates of the two Houses. He means to govern
the nation by Parliamentary documents, and
while he finds in them a precedent for folly,
however enormous, he discards as utterly un-
worthy of study the opinions and the affections
of the human beings he is resolved to coerce if
they will not submit. But arrogance naturally
excites resistance, though the arrogance be ex-
hibited by a lawful authority the gorge of man
as certainly and as naturally rises against cruelty,
though it be in a law-maker, as the running
stream rises and bounds over the rock in its
course ; and while men are everywhere recur-
ring to first principles, this HOTSPUR of legisla-
lators arrogantly and cruelly provokes th 9 Irish
to inquire into the very foundation of his claims
to settle the franchise for them. To what do all
his assertions and all his arguments amount?
To this, and nothing more than this :—" We, the
law-makers, the landlords of Ireland and Eng-
land, being Protestants, have no confidence in
the Catholic Irish; they shall have neither
votes nor leases ; we can trust our English
Protestant farmers, and therefore we will give
them votes and leases; but the Catholic Irish
shall have none, or only a mockery, while
we will take care not to allow them any. power,
and will hold in our hands all the organized mi-
litary means of the empire, ready to trample
them into nothingness if they stir to claim their
rights or resist our will." Such, translated into
the language of common sense, rejecting all the
verbiage with which every passionate man can
gloze over and hide even from himself his crimi-
nal or foolish motives and objects, is the sum of
Lord STANLEY'S arguments, and he is fool enough
to expect, in this age of the world, that the Ca-
tholic Irish will bend their necks to his intoler-
able legislative yoke. Not to misrepresent the
Noble Lord, let us quote a passage or two from
his speech :
It is the pride and satisfaction of a landlord in England to
believe that, in the main, his tenants will be guided by his
wishes.—( Hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches.) We
do not seek to disguise or to deny it, and every gentleman
knows perfectly well, in a contested county election, though ho
would condemn an extravagant and oppressive exercise of au-
thority, he may calculate upon the result of the election by
the number of landed proprietors and the party to which they
respectively belong.—(lronical cheers from the Liberal ,1
benches.) No English landlord would think it proper to in-
terfere, if upon his estate he found that one, two, or three,
or half his tenants were, in the exercise of their
own independent judgment, differing with him in his poli-
tical views, and taking a course wholly independent of and
adverse to his; but if an English landlord found that there was
upon his estate a systematic influence habitually exercised over
obtain control,
over
not,e
r
r
y, all his tenants, to prevail upon them as a body in every in-
stance to put themselves in opposition to him, and that that
influence was one which he could avertneither
tenants
u would I
ask, what would be the natural course for an English
land-
lord,ihiok aintdveinrysuucnhnactiurrcaulmifsthanecpsso,utgohttatkoe
whom that influence was not exerted. In this country, where
there is less of hardship than there is in Ireland, in ge ge
rid of one tenant and substituting another, I do not think 11.4
great animadversion would be poured upon the landlord who
should say, 4, I must have tenants who will not be habitually
subject to an interest and influence which they exercise
contented
against me." • * .....
I ask if in England that would not. be considered a kind, and a
mild, and a liberal course ?—(lro.ncal
.cheers Limn the Liberal
benches.) Would not any la.m.dlord. be, inc_the opinion of HMI.
twoileihber
einceof my prope y_.t. g
.e., I will be
ustiEe_d sayingtt,
influence and poll icat righ. t which I
o Gentlemenntneutralise
entth sacrifice
the
n opposite,anyfl o
co
posseessoifon
mofypprroEilerteyty, bhu4litwuiallllynotturosubed-
against mysel ,
from
tt.nhifeuehe
ments in the hands of others forp
f and I will not of
themy ozefrseeeewf
eilfflepetlacinge
tihnasttru.,,-
min iaty t o derivehi r
That is the whole secret o
conduct. The landowners of Ireland Protes-
tant,aSreTAilLEY's
f t
the tenantry. are Catholic, and the end and
aim of the. opposition to Lord MORPETH'S Bill
is covertly, but really, to re-enact the exclusive
utting
laws, and put down the influence of. theitCdaothwoo
lics in the elections. Of course, p-
iLnegithselactuonrestaitoudenineitehs,e wGoouvledrnpmutenitt
of down in the
the
coun-
try.
owheis supporteddes
who Hence
haveeacveed a re topbryocraurbiedth Pe
repealarso ns
of the Emancipation Act, and have called meet-
ings of Protestant operatives to petition against
Lord MORPETH'S Bill; and hence he is supported
by all the Orangemen who have put their names
by hundreds to papers to encourage their new
Grand Master. Passing over the temporary effect
which this may have on the Government, let
us look for a moment at the possible effect of
such conduct, in this age " of recurrence to first
principles," on the Catholics.
What if they should ask- Lord STASLEY " by

In reply to Mr-HAMILTON, Lord J. RUSSELL
stated, that the power to examine person s on
oath was given by the Act to the Poor-law
Assistant-Commisssoners, but he declined to
state whether it were expedient or not to exer-
cise that power in any particular case.
Lord. STANLEY'S Bill was postponed till Fri-
day, and Lord J. RUSSELL announced that he
should on Friday proceed with Lord KEA.NE'S
Annuity Bill.
The adjourned debate on Lord MORPETH'S Bill
for settling the registration and franchise in Ire-
land was resumed by Mr. BROTHERTON, who
supported the Bill, and in doing so said he ex-
pressed the sentiments of his constituents.
Mr. - M. MILNES opposed the measure, chiefly
because he chose to mistrust and misrepresent
the motives of those who introduced the Bill.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE supported it, and dwelt
emphatically and effectively on the vast mischief
which had been already caused by the language
used in that House concerning the Catholics, to
which the debate would add, and which Lord
STANLEY'S success would. consummate. The Hon.
Baronet made,
usual., a sensible and conside-
ratespeech , giving
Ins zealous support to the
.as
Government Bill.
Mr. Sergeant JA.cxsori exposed Mr. MACAU-
and entered into
LAY'S ignorance and of law,
would supply a
nume-
rous details to show the poverty
that the Bill of Lord MORPETII
constituency of
ence of the Romish priesthood.paupers placed under the intiu-
Mr. SLANEY supported the second reading
as
the Bill, but recommended a w
prudential considerations required that- it should
be passed.
Mr. THESIGER followed Mr. Sergeant JACK-
sox in attacking Mr. MACAULAY'S law. He de-
nied that the poor-rate test would afford a proper
qualification, and entered into many details to
show that employing the 5/. test would lead to
many frauds.
Mr. CHARLES BULLER picked some large holes
in the coats of MeSsrs. THESIGER and JACKSON,
and made an able speech in favour of the Bill.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM was more bitter than ef-
fective against it. He declared his own lofty de-
termination to oppose it to the last. His strong-
est points were personal hits and adjura-
tions. He described the Government as going
down the hill of concession, and called on
Lord JOHN RUSSELL, who hadi declared in his
Letter to the Electors of Stroud, that he
would not lift the anchors of the Monarchy when
he saw a storm in the horizon, to say at once
openly what he meant to do and where he
meant to stop. The Right Honourable
Baronet made a great hit for his party,
when he drew forth out of his pocket a
list of the division on Repeal, and pointed. out,
one after another, concluding with Mr. O'Cozi_
NELL, who affirmed in the House that he had been
offered the Chief Baronship, which he would not
accept because there should be no suspicion
that justice was polluted in his person,. some
seven or eight persons who had voted in that
minority, and since received appointments under
the Crown. The Right Hon. Baronet thought
that was truckling to Repeal, while in fact ex-
cept i 4
the case of Mr. O'CtiturELL, who would

what right do you Protestant landlords presume .
to make laws for us? We are not your slaves.
Every people and all people have a right to
choose their own governors and law-makers.
You English established that principle at your
own revolution. We honour you for it, and mean
to imitate your noble example. We have not
chosen you. To disobey the laws after they are
made is, we know, rebellion or treason ;
but there is neither treason nor rebellion
in resolving to choose our own lawmakers,
and in declaring that we will not have
your Lord STANLEY and your bigoted Orange
associates for our lawmakers. We will choose
for ourselves, we will not obey you ; we
will determine, too, in what manner we will
choose. We will consult the priests whom we
love, the Catholic gentlemen in whom we have
confidence, and we will organize our own means
of choosing our lawmakers. When ynu talk of
arranging the franchise, we tell you that is our
business, and we will not allow you Protestant
and Orange landlords to dictate to us how we
shall elect our Represent-tines, nor whom we
shall elect. We claim, like all free men, the
right of choosing our lawmakers in the manner
we please and only such as we choose willingly
will we willingly obey."
What will Lord STANLEY and the Orangemen
say to the Catholics if they use that language ?
But in fact, they use language to the same effect.
In a letter dated London, 20th instant, addressed
to Mr. RAY, in Dublin, and read in the Repeal
Association, Mr. O'CONNELL says—
The crisis is at hand. Every man must make up his
mind either to stand for Ireland in the peaceably and strictly
legal struggle, or to counsel disgrace and crouch beneath
Orange-Tory misrule. Shame on the deserters of their fa-
therland I Glory to free and firm spirits whose love of country
will beam only the more brightly the more the sacred flame of
patriotism is trampled by the hoof of Orange despotism !
My mind is full of the coming contest. I anticipate de-
feat. I pass by the struggle, and, standing as it were after it
was over, on the 'vantage ground of recent insult and injury,
I call upon every Irishman to make up his mind at once either
for Ireland or against Ireland. There will immediately be no
medium, no neutral ground. When this blow is once struck,
whoever is not for Ireland is against his native land.
Hurrah for the Repeal 1 I 1
That is a call on the Catholics nut to submit
to Lord STANLEY and the Orangemen, should
they succeed in passing their Bill into a law ;
that is a call to choose their own representatives,
and to throw off submission to the Protestant
landlords. We cannot blame the insulted, in-
jured, maddened Irish. We wonder they have
not before now taken to their hills and bogs,
invoked the aid of their countrymen in the
United States, and the oppressed millions in
England, and bid defiance to the insulting
Protestant—and that we should be obliged to
'add, plundering—landlords, and rapacious Pro-
testant priests, telling them plainly they
would obey no laws except those they had
a voice in making. Such are the thoughts
and deeds of which the ideas rise in the
minds of men at witnessing the unblushing
arrogance with which, by means of sorry
legislation, Lord STANLEY pursues his way,
and drags along his party to an odious and re-
volting tyranny.
He is blinded by passion, and knoWs not what
he does. He is bringing into question the rights
of property, of which he insists on straining the
power and the influence. Men are beginning to
ask, at last, in Ireland, by what tenure the land-
lords hold the soil, and with that claim a right
to annoy, vex, and oppress all other men ? If
they answer, by the sword, they will have to
fight for it. If they answer, by political expe-
P
diency, they will have to prove that the pub-
lic welfare is promoted by degrading and
impoverishing the mass of the people. If they
answer, from GOD, the' Catholics will tell them
they profess a different creed, ,and though they
worship the same GOD, they interpret his oracles
differently from them. If the gentlemen ofEng-
land do not wish to make the intellect of this
age suddenly burst through and destroy the
whole framework of society, let them, as
speedily aS possible, withdraw their confidence
from Lord STANLEY, and send him to drive a
steam-engine. He may possibly govern a loco-
motive ; his attempt to govern the nation, will
speedily blow all up in one vast and terrible
destruction.

owners gain wealth, their object is attained; but
as long as the bulk of the people remain in their
present wretched physical and moral condition
the Government and the Church must be deno-
minated failures.

To the disgrace of the London University, Mr.
WILLIAM Toox x has been re-elected Treasurer by
a majority of nine votes over Mr. TAYLOR. The
Proprietors, therefore, identify themselves with
the man who used his influence as Treasurer to
turn out one or the other of the Members for
Finsbury, who, with all the faults that even the
pious Mr. TOOKE imputed to them, have never
been charged with the crime of backbi ting a friend,
or playing into the hands of the Tories under the
sacred name of religion, while professing contrary
political opinions. We are forced to admit that
this decision creates a very unfavourable im-
pression as regards the present state of the Uni-
versity, and the morality of those who superin-
tend this establishment. It will not afford Lord
BROUGHAM much satisfaction to learn that he
has been elected President by the same men
who reinstated Mr. TOOKE as Treasurer.

The Paris Journals of Monday have all reached
us. We have pleasure in stating that they con-
firm the account of the disarming published in
The Sun of Tuesday. We quote the article of
the Quotidienne, a Royalist J ournal, on the sub-
ject :
The disarming has commenced. Marshal Soult has made
to the Committee on the Budget a communication, from which
it results that the Budget of the Ministry of War, for 1842, is
to be reduced 23,000,000 f. This is a reduction of 60,000 men
on the general effective of the army. The motive for this
communication of the Marshal is declared to be an error of
calculation. The Marshal says he made a mistake. No. the
Marshal made no mistake. We affirm boldly"that the Govern-
ment is disarming—this is the whole secret. The Govern-
ment disarms, and really as the Treaty of July 15 is acknow-
ledged by the Government to have been neither an insult nor
an act of treachery, but simply a neauvais procede, as the isola-
tion of France has been declared in the Chamber to give
greater freedom of action to France, we -do not see how the
Government could justify its armaments in the eyes of foreign
Powers. The declaration of armed peace was but a delusion
practised by those who are resolved upon not going to war.
the farce of warlike policy has ended by an acknowledgment
that, as Europe would make no concession, it was for France to
give way. The farce of-an armed peace was naturally destined
to terminate by an acknowledgment that, as Europe would not
disarm, it was for France to do so.

We.rejoice tti find that the French Govern-
ment has plucked up spirit enough to avow its
pacific policy, and that it no longer has recourse
to subterfuges to deprecate the wrath of M.
TRIERS and his supporters. The Report of the
Commission on the Secret Service Bill indicates
a determination to assume an offensive rather
than a defensive attitude. This course is at once
the safest and the best. It will inspire Europe
with confidence, and rally round the banners of
the Ministry all that is honest and patriotic in
France.

The Journal des Debctts has a remarkably able
article on the peace and war policy, in which
the conduct of M. TRIERS and his partisans is
very happily denouncel and exposed. The fol-
lowing extract from it cannot fail to gratify our
reflecting readers:—
There are but two kinds of policies in the world—the policy
of mutual concession, and the policy of extermination. The
peace of Europe has been maintained ten years by a system of
mutual concessions. Europe has borne much from France,
and France bas borne much from Europe. Europe has suf-
fered the dismemberment of the kingdom of the Low Countries,
guaranteed by the Treaty of 1615. Europe suffered the siege:
of Antwerp and the surprise of Ancona. England has wit-
nessed the extension of our power in Africa, and our naval
feats in America, without evincing jealousy. The other
Powers have seen France and England support Constitutional
Governments in Spain and Portugal, without interfering. All
and each have sacrificed private interests to the great public
want of peace
Had France wished for war, she did not want for pretexts.
With pain we saw Austria intervene in the Roman legations.
With grief we saw Poland succumb in her heroic struggle.
We protested against the occupation of Cracow. At each
moment the opposition demanded war, but the wisdom of the
country stifled such cries. The country fully comprehended
that if we expected to make our own national point of view,
our wishes and sympathies predominate exclusively, the up-
shot would be, either that we should crush the world, or be
crushed by it. The policy of mutual concession triumphed
over the policy that was exclusive and revolutionary. The
grand interest of European concord and peace triumphed over
secondary interests. his has been the policy of -past Go-
vernments—a policy which M. Thiers has professed and
maintained; but our new apostles of progress denounced
this system as one of cowardice. They know no means
but war and the sword. They affect to despive diplo-
macy, would cut every knot or dissolve it in blood. With
them every stranger is an enemy, every concession a trea-
son. They see no wisdom in the mutual respect and
concert of different Powers, and do not see that the
establishment of a kind of European tribunal for the mainte-
nance of peace is the greatest benefit of modern times. Not
to desire war with fury—not to seek to regenerate nations by
massacre, to adout that other countries have rights as well as
our own, this exposes a person to be stigmatized in the journals
of M. Thiers as a Prussian or a Cossack. M. Thiers sacri-
ficed the great interest of European accord to the secondary in-
terest of French views in Egypt. This is called by his parti-
sans sublime. M. Thiers has isolated France. How patriotic
he is ! France used to have allies; M. Thiers has alienated
them. What an excellent Frenchman I M. Thiers has de-
cided that there shall be no longer European concert or alli-
ances, no more mutual sacrifices between countries, no more
diplomacy, conferences, treaties. Each power will become
isolated, and cannon shall be the final decider. This is the
present policy of M. Thiers, but it was not his policy when he
served under former Cabinets.-

The
_Morning Herald of Tuesday introduced a
bitter attack on the factory owners by declaring
that it was desirous to promote good feeling in
all classes. We will not, in endeavouring to set
the mill-owners right, imitate its hypocrisy, for
we boldly avow that our object is to excite, if we
can, animosity and hatred against the landowners,
because they insist on robbing the community.
We do not assert that the mill-owners 'are not
greedy, exclusively desirous of gathering riches,
and getting as much work for as little wages as
they can. That is the principle of their exist-
ence—the end and aim of their being.
Why should a man trouble himself to buy and
sell, to keep accounts, and to haggle with work-
men and with other traders, except for what he
can gain ? But in this the mill-owners resemble
all the rest of mankind, the landowners amongst
them, and are only to be condemned if the am-
bition of rising in the world—the very soul, we
think, of social improvement—is to be extin-
guished as a mere cheating will-o'-the-wisp.
It is in favour of the mill-owners, however,
that their pursuit of wealth is open and undis-
guised, and their practice of getting as much la-
bour as they can tor as little wages as possible,
is avowed, and can deceive only those who wish
to be deceiVed. They may be met and counter-
acted by those who deal with them, and if the
other parties to the bargain suffer from it they
have probably themselves to blame, quite as
much as the mill-owners.
Between the mill-owners and the land-
owners there is one palpable distinction. The
former are struggling to make a fortune—the
latter have made or inherited theirs. The for-
mer are yet contending with the world—the
latter are placed above it for admiration. We
have' no right to expect the same works of
charity and benevolence from those who know
not whether they will from day to day have any-
thing justly to bestow, as from those who are as-
sured of a bountiful income. Nevertheless, it is
not true, in spite of the Herald and Dr. HOL-
LAND, that our mill-owners have contributed
nothing to the comfort of the people. To men-
tion only a single instance, the most splendid
and useful gift of modern times, the public
garden and walk at Derby, was bestowed on the
people by Mr. STRUTT—a mill-owner.
Because the millowners want something them-
selves, they are instrumental in providing for
others. They are the authors and improvers of
many useful inventions. Their exertions have
called into existence the extensive factories by
which the people are employed and fed.. If there
be not employment and food enough, the fault
is more the landowners' than the mill-owners'.
The former prevent the latter from giving em-
ployment and wages to the people. The land-
owners, wanting nothing, are very little instru-
mental either in providing for others, or pro-
moting improvement. They live to enjoy, not to
traffic. They have no settled labour. They are
emphatically the idle classes ; and If not a bur-
den to themselves- they are to others'.- They do
nothing for society, except consume its produce
without any equivalent.
At the same time the owners'ofyient-pretend
to do a great deal for the public. The mill-owners
make no such pretence. They avow that
they study their own interest; the .land-
owners swear they act for the gOod of
the country, whether they convict poachers or
make Corn-laws. They received their estates
originally for the performance of certain duties,
which have all merged in making and adminis-
tering the laws. The monopoly of the soil im-
poses on them the duty of taking care of the
people; no such duty devolves on the
Their workmen must take care of themselves.
The mill-owners do their duty towards them as
masters, when they honestly, and in full, pay
them their wages.
It is the duty of the law-makers to provide for
the welfare of the workmen employed by the
mill-owners, as well as others. They should
make and enforce just laws between masters and
wpaouowirtkeemrcooevnnet,ris.atohr
yethattthet
erhi
aer formeri
he me.
They have
hyh-
aehl ae vhmea
avadeseallciattwteldes
for
-loalcvinnegr the workmen
ley hal
fhreo mo
ought
tfora:cehias and
sefleefr ltudthede
tm.heerclyahonnfrtehres
have doomed the worem eaxno p
excluded
baer llaasmlaelnet,;wthheeyn
as Ins employer. The
wretched condition of the labourers is, then, far
more the fault of the law-making With his bread-tax and his monopoly llya landowner,
or sevpnreer_,
wtnheart,
the mill owner
enlttatni owns,
tthbaen
noofttiletee nd,
does not undertake to provide either for ;he in-
struction or the comfort of the people. lie only
employs them. The Church is their hired and
largely paid instructor; they are made to
ni,ndetlhihelier
sup-
port it. The Government is their endowedpro-
tector; they contribute to its taxes. On the
s t
reflectitut i o
Executive Government and the Established
Church, the debased condition of the pelvic,
because, these institutions have for
r imthmeoirralitdye,
promote the welfare of the multi-
iernoranticieel
their
tslceto'
ill-owners have only to make, money.
tude ; the m
to carry on their private business, each for Mau-
disgrace,it improvidence,
°oVbi eci
their duty to their workmen
self, and they do
honestly pay them. When the mill-
they horteli

CABRERA has addressed a letter to the Minis-
ter of the Interior, praying that' notwithstanding
the amnesty of the Spanish Government, the al-
lowances of pay and rations may be .continued to
the Carlist refugees. It is not to be expected
that such a request can be complied with. If
the refugees will not return to their own country
they must seek support by the labours of their
heads or hands.

The Bill requiring a levy of 80,000 men of the
class 1840 passed the Chamber of Deputies on
Monday, by a majority of 220 against 15 votes.
On Sunday the KING reviewed several regi-
ments of the garrison of Paris, in the Court-yard
of the Tuileries. His MAJESTY was enthusiasti-
cally cheered by the troops.
The Sentinelle des Pyrenees of the 18th, has the following
news :—" M. de Miraflores, formerly Ambassador at Paris,
has arrived at Bayonne on his way to Madrid. General
O'Donnell, who was Captain General of Valencia at the time
of the troubles in September, and Baron de Meer, formerly
Captain General of Catalonia, have left Bayonne, where they
were residing, to go to Paris.
" It seems that General Simon de la Torre, who was lately
appointed Commander -in-Chief in Biscay, has refused the
post offered him by the Government."
A letter from Toulon of the 17th has the following post-
script, which announces a fact which is not unimportgant:—
" The Catholics in French Switzerland who have lately sus-
tained so severe a check, intend to leave their country ; most
of the families desired to emigrate to America, but it has
been represented to them that the expense of the passage
would exhaust their resources, and that when they landed in
America they would have to travel two hundred leagues to reach
the land allotted them ; and it seems that they have been in-
duced to resolve on settling at Algiers. Thus it is veryproba-
ble that the first villages created in the Mitidja (and it is
hoped that the Chamber will vote three millions for this pur-
pose) will be occupied by three or four thousand Swiss, who
are excellent farmers, and have funds to establish themselves in
a suitable manner.—Le Commerce.

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 25, Pill.

perty left by this wealthy miser must be melt-
ing away rapidly. Six trials by Special Juries
are set down for hearing at the ensuing Glou-
cester Assizes, in which the first Counsel are en-
gaged. In the Arches Courts the argu-
ments lasted eight days; probably eight
days more will be occupied in hearing the
same arguments before the Privy Council.
Some six days may be spent .at Gloucester in
hearing the six actions of ejectment; and after
all the enormous fees paid to Counsel, and the
useless waste of time, the lawyers no doubt will
find some fresh argument for starting the game
anew. While all this plunder is going on, and
the vultures are gathered about the carcase, we
are only astonished how the old man's bones can
rest quietly in the grave.

au
41".41+
0 • c''
„ • 4', MOH.. 0
- ,

~~ ~ ~~ ~~s