The Sun.
London, England, 1840-02-12 00:00:00

,

TO CORRESPONDENTS.

We regret that we cannot please all our Readers and Sub-
scribers, as we regret that it rains when we wish for fine
weather ; but our Correspondent, " Not to be trifled with,"
will see from our announcements that the " doting old
women" he speaks of are much more numerous than he

wots of. When the majority of the community are as wise
as our Correspondent, neither The Sun, nor any other
Journal, will give him his present cause of complaint.
Mr. Dahlmann's Letter seems to us an advertisement. We,
therefore, decline inserting it.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE TO-MORROW.
Morning D3 minutes after 10 I Evening 3 minutes after 11.

LONDON:
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 1840.

Lord MELBOURNE, in the House of Lords last
night, gave notice that he should, on Fr'.day, move an
Address of Congratulation to her Majesty on her
Marr:sge,_

Lord MoNTE.Aor,E, on presenting petitions from
LarnLeth for an inquiry into Socialism, took the oppor-
tunity to defend himself against one of the charges made
Ly Bish )p of EXETER in his absence, when he showed
that tl e reluction of the Scamp Duty had effectually
rut an end to the en:Were 1 1 üblLations, and in:3o

..il

:int been found iweeti .± to institute n

to a question by tilt! Bishop of EXETER,
the NI arsras of NORMANBY awed that Mr. PARE
bad resigned his situation ; in fact, however, he was
hunted from it by his persecutors.
The Bishop of EXETER admitted that a Social-
ist at Liverpool had contradicted an arcount which the
Bishop formerly gave of a murder committed at that
place, but he asserted that his account was correct,
though he also admitted that no inquest was held, and
no person was committed for the murder. We must,
on that authority, say that the Social:sts ware unjustly
calumniated by the Bishop. Bat when the Bishop
would fine, or whip, or imprison them, to calumniate
them must seem a venial offence.
Lord REDESDALE called the atteation of Ministers to
the taxes levied on parochial buildinis, and as it was
admitted that it was a hardship to tax them, there is a
possibility that relief may be afforded.
The House sat only a short lIIII3.and did no business
of importance.
The Commons received a number of petitions, bt.t
none of any note.
On the motion of Mr. BARNEBY, a resolution which
he moved to prescribe the minimum width of tunnels,
bridges, &c., of railroads, was referred to the Select
Committee on Railroads.
Sir EDWARD SUGDEN informed the House that he
was shut in on Friday night and was told with the ma-
jority, when he intended to vote with the minority.
Mr. HORSMAN, we are glad to see, announced that
be would, on the motion of Sir ROBERT INGLIS, move
as an amendment, for a Committee to inquire
whether the defect of religious - arises
from inadequacy of the means or from their m;sap-
plication. In that inquiry we hope the vast revenues
possessed by the Universities, and intended to promote
education, will not be lost sight of.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON postponed his motion for
the release of the Sheriffs till Friday.
On that day Lord JOIIN RUSSELL is to move an
address of congrAulation to her Majcsty on ber
marriage.
Several subjects were mooted by qu.lstions, which
are as shortly reported in the debate as we could state
them.
Mr. T. DUXCOMBE moved for leave to bring in a
Bill to exempt from the palrnent of Church-rates those
who dissent from the Church. The Hon. Member
founded his motion on the case of Tstottouoon, into
which he entered at considerable length.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL opposed the motion, and, as he
is bound to uphold the laws, spoke against Mr. THotto-
GOOD for not obeying them. He thought the Church
founded on good principles, though he admitted Church-
rates to be a most unnecessary and vexatious cause of
dissension. He referred to the attempts which had
been made to settle the question, and ascribed the
failure to the jealousy which exists between the Church
and the Dissenters. Heproposedno new means of settling
the question, but opposed Mr. DUNCOMBE'S motion. All

he is prepared to do is to transfer from the Ecclesiasti-
cal to the Civil Courts the power of enforcing the pay-
ment of Church-rates, and that the remedy should be
against the goods. not against the person.
Mr. 11 umE, Mr. BAINES, Mr. HAWES, and Mr.
W. &us, supported the motion.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS and Mr. MILDMAr opposed the
motion, the former dwelling on the duty of submssion
to the law, Which we say, with a condition that the law
be just. To say it is a duty to submit to injustice, is con-
trary to the whole stream of human nature.
The motion, we regret to say, was- lost by 117 to
62. There is no relief for the Dissenters, except they
may fied it in mare Church.
Mr. WALLACE succeedezl, aftr,r- some opposition and
some taunts by Sir ltorEnT PEEL, in obtaining the
appointment of a Committee to inquire into
the administration of the law in the Supreme Courts
in Scotland. The lion. Member, however, is not to
have the guidance of the Committee, which the Govern-
ment takes into its own hands. Nor did he succeed
without a thr;sion. After a considerable debate, 128
voted for, and 117 against the motion. The Government
supported it, and the Loan ADVOCATE spoke in its
favour.

Mr. EIVAET moved for returns of the number of
Br;tish subjects settled in India, since the last rmewal
of the Charter. Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE willingly con-
ceded all the information the Hon. Gentleman required,
and the motion, as a matter of course, W.,1 agreed to.
Mr. LIDDELL, after a- multitude of profes:iioas of
kindness and regard for Lord MONTEAGLE, moved for
papers connected with the appointmmt of that Noble
Lord to be Comptroller of the Exchequer, and with
the pension granted to Sir JOHN NEWPORT. The Hen.
Member went into all the circumstances of the appoint-
ment, with which the public were surfeited, after the
close of the last Session.

The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER explained the
circumstances under which the pension was granted.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT solicited the retirement on ac-
count of his growing infirmities, and was granted
the pension on account of his necessities. It was
not a voluntary and offered grant on the part of
the Ministers. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHE-
QUER also described the numerous services which
gave Sir JOHN a claim on the country, and gave a
sketch of hiS Parliamentary history. He finally, how-
ever, rested his justification of the penion on an appeal
to the benevolence of the country, which in the case of
such an old servant, 84 years of age, is not likely to be
refused. He made no objection to the production of
the papers.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said unlessit could be shown that the
pension would have been given to Sir JOHS NEWPORT
without Lord MONTEAGLE'S claim having arisen, he

should describe the pension as the most scandalous
waste of the public money he had ever heard of,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL defended the conduct of the
Government at some length. The papers were ordered
to be laid before the House.

Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL brought the case of Mr.
Sheriff WHEELTON under the notice of the House, who
is suffering under illness. His surgeon was called to the
Bar, and there deposed that were the Sheriff much
longer confined it might endanger his life. After this
testimony, and a short conversation, Mr. Sheriff WHEEL-
TON was ordered to be discharged.
On the motion of Mr. LABoucllutE, and after some
opposition from Mr. HUME, all Divorce Bills brought
into the House this Session, were ordered to be referred
aCounmittee of nine persons.

The House adjourned at a Quarter past Oue.

We are rather glad to see that the Times has
fallen foul of Viscount MELBOURNE and the
Marquis of NORMANBY, because they entertain
opinions, on some abstract questions which -the
doughty Thunderer holds to be criminal. This was
in fact to be expected. The persons who would
erucifv Mr. OWEN for not believing as they be-
lieve, would be cravens were they to shrink from
attacking the Ministers, on the same account.
If they be consistent, too, as well as courageous,
they will not stop short at the Ministers, and as
they have already cast their doubts on the faith
both of Prince ALBERT and her MAJESTY, they
will proceed to condemn both for entertaining some
shade of opinion different from the orthotlog. stan-
dard which is set up by the _Times and Dr.
PIIILPOTTS. -The belief and the thoughts
of each man are peculiarly his own, like
his limbs or his Latures, and we cannot
imagine a more prolific source of contention
and strife than this new power, claimed by poli-
tical writers, to answer a base party purpose, of
judging and condemning men for opinions not
agreeing with their own on some doubtful points of
religion or morality. If, however, such a system is
to be acted on, it is desirable that it should be
applied, in the first instance, to persons in the
highest places ; and the Socialists may look for im-
punity or protection when their assailants also seem
inclined to charge the QUEEN with infidelity, and
accuse the Prime Minister of Atheism.

It was observed, only a few days ago, that the present
crop of Socialists grow from the cut down stalks of
CARLILE and TAYLOR. That Eeems by no
means unlikely. In every age of the world perse-
cution has given currency and force to error.
Nevertheless, party writers, when they have a pur-
pose to serve, cast experience to the winds, and call
out, like the Editor of the Times, to put down
opinions:by the strong arm of the law, as CARLILE
and TAYLOR were put down. It is not true, we
believe, that either TAYLOR or CARLILE was
put down. The latter we have certainly not heard
of for some years ; the former was travelling about
the country, preaching his peculiar doctrines, not
many months ago, and not many weeks since he
began the publication—we know not if it be con-
tinued—of an anti-Christian periodical. More-
over, we are inclined to believe, though we cannot
positively assert it, that the Star in the East, a
newspaper which openly and boldly prodounds doc-
trines hopelessly at variance with all revealed reli-
gion,! which is published in the vicinity of Cam-
bridge, and of which at a a'y meeting of tha ,

THE SUN, LONDON, -WEDNESDAY, FEBRITABY 1840.

Cler7 at that University, the circulation was said
to be very considerable, as it has continued for
some time—Tve are inclined to believe that this
newspaper, which has more influence than any of
Mr. CARLILE'S publications, sprung from the
blows aimed by the strong arra of the law at CAR-
LI LE and TAYLOR. There are not a few newspapers,
too, besides the New Moral World and the
Western Vindicator, which embrace and circulate
opinions by no means favourable to the doctrines of
the clergy. Chartism also, that fierce and into-
lerant political creed, as well as Socialism, is
partly the offspring of the equally fierce and in-
tolerant religious or moral creed which dictated the
blows aimed by the law at CA RULE and TAYLOR.
All these facts, corroborating the voice of almost
universal experience, have no weight with the Editor
of the Times, who bawls out as lustily for persecu-
tion on account of opinions as if the hquisition
were already established, with PHILPOTTS at its
head, and he were the chief Familiar.
There is a good deal of malice, too, in his re-
mark, that unless the Whigs put forth the strong
arm of the law to strike down the Socialists, .they
will be deserving of no credit as professed anti-
Socialists. In truth, they will be stigmatized by
the Times as Socialists, as followers of OWEN,
should they not do as the Tories did, and begin a
crusade against opinions. The violence and the
virulence of our Contemporary have,however, wholly
destroyed its power. No human being now gives any
one of its arguments credit for sincerity, and the
fear of its denunciation will not goad the
Ministers into taking a course. against which
all experience solemnly warns them.
One of the grounds on which the Times calls for
persecution is that the Socialists " profess levelling
notions as to property." But for the Anglican
priesthood, and the scribes in their pay, to describe
such notions criminal, is equally absurd and
wicked. The first Christians, as the case of
ANANIAS shows, had property in common, and
Christianity was founded on levelling notions. The
great Intik of the teachers of Christianity in the
early ages, all the hermits, monks, and missionaries,
made vows of poverty, or had property in common,
and they must be presumed to have better known
the genuine doctrines of Christianity, and been more
imbued with its spirit, than those religionists who
first sprung up in the sixteenth century. The
whole of Christianity, in fact, goes to recommend
poverty, charity, and love, and it is therefore mon-
strous in those who claim our reverence for 'teach-
ing and following Christianity, to call for the perse-
cution of the Socialists on religious grounds, be-
cause., like the first Christians, they have levelling
notions as to property.
For public writers, in fact, to connect the right
of property in any manner with religion, is con-
temptibly. silly. Property is altogether a human
institution, intended solely to promote the earthly
Happiness of man ; its basis, like the basis of all in-
stitutions, is public ntility—and except, as we infer,
'
according_ to PALEY, that to be agreeable to the
will of GOD, which is for the public advantage, the
right of property has no rcl;gioul sanction whatever.
We do not for one moment, or in any tnannor, ad-
mit the Socialists' doctrines to be correct ; we spurn
the idea that society can prosper without the stimu-
lus of private property ; at the same time so many
goad men, at di:Terent periods of the world, have
ascribed such enorLon3 evils to the right of pro-
perty, and such great and even alarming evils are
now connected with it as it exists in this country,
that we cannot hold it to he criminal, though very
erroneous, to entertain levelling notions, or deem
those worthy of persecution who differ from us as
to the utility of the existing right, of property.
If one truth have been made more apparent than
another in modern times, it is this that political insti-
tutions have been salittlasuccessful—have so little an-
swered the purposes of their contrivers, that no
man is entitled to claim infallibility for his. own
opinions, or presume that those who differ from

him are criminal. The great end and aim of our
legislation for many years, almost- during the
whole period since the Revolution, was to preserve
the power of the aristocracy and of the Anglican
Church. This end has not been attained. y The
aristocracy is losing its power, and the Church is
falling into disrepute. \Yuen such a lesson is every
day read to arrogant writers and arrogant priests,
their presumption in still calling for penalties and per-
secutions, which in past times may have gratified their
evil pass: ins, but failed to answer the public purpose
intended, is quite unpardonable.. But wlaile the highest
authority tells us that we can only know and '' see
as through a glass darkly," our arrogant priest;
and our arrogant scribes assume that they know
perfectly ; that they see infinitely better and clearer
than the Apostle ; and with that terrible presump-
tion, of which it is truly said, 4 that fools rush in
where angels fecr to tread," they declare their own
sight to be perfect ; and with that terrible cruelty
which better becomes the character of savages than
of civilized ;:en, they demand that other men shall
be punished for not seeing like them. To contra-
dict and, if possible, beat down all such persecuting
doctrines, from whatever quarter they come, and
whatever object they are intended to serve, is now
the duty of those who write for the public press.

Mr. WALLACE will have great difficulty in turning
the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the Ad-
ministration of the Law in the Supreme Courts of
Scotland, with a view to ascertain whether the number
of Judges may not be diminished, to profitable account.
Had the Hon. Gentleman confined himself to the ap-
pointment of a Committee of Inquiry into the Adminis-
tration of the Law of Scotland in the Supreme Courts,
without stating any ulterior object, we are decidedly
of opinion that the result would have better answered
his expectations. The main fact to be established to the
satisfaction of the country is not the disproportion be-
tween the relative numbers of Scotch and English
judges—is not the relative number of hours respectively
occupied by them in listening to pleadings and deciding
causes ; but how are such pleadings conducted, and
what facilities are afforded for a cheap, speedy, and final
administration of the law. A committee in the hands
of the Government, whose leanings may be supposed to
be in fsvour of the Judicial Bench of Scotland, can
have little difficulty in making it appear that the
number of Judges rather requires augmentation
than diminution, and thus stop reform at the very
throshbold. And this from the present absurd consti-
tution of the Scotch courts, and the •form of written
pleadings, is actually the case. A conscientious Scotch
judge, though he may not sit in his court more than
six months in the year, must be as much over-worked
as the lion. Member for Greenock is himself during
the session of Parliament. Such a Judge must find
every moment he can spare from sleep too short to
peruse the mass of papers daily filed before him, con-
sisting of rigmo:ficotlheep.flietandeirasnonslyeneaqtuoirtilwedhiciini length
occupied
Scotch Judges, Parlia-
ment must begin by reforming. the Constitution of the
Supreme Courts, and substituting viva voce for written
pleadings. Assimilate the Courts of Scotland, as nearly
thet
rlo 203Ptateiisihninishthetitileelni‘u'ear
of
as the genius of the two countries will admit, to those
of England, and the appointment of a relative co-
equality of Judges will follow as a matter of course.
Tee question of the existence of a Judge more or less,
es regards what ought to be, the real object of the
present Parliamentary inquiry, is one of minor im-
portance.
Bat we suspsct that we are hardly doing justice
to the practical discretion of Mr. WALLACE, whose
views in reality. are quite as extended as our own,
but who is often constrained to go an indirect way
to work, in order to realize them. Compelled, in the
furtherance of his reform measures, to avail himself of
at,y support within his reach, he must, of necessity,
adopt the principle of instalments. lie must take
what he can get as an earnest of something better ; and
to get anything lie must model his demands so as to
suit time temper of the majority of an audience always
difficult to please when the obliquities of law courts are
glanced at.
S'nce the tt!nove was written, our attention Las
been called to tl.e foliowing extract from a Petition on
the question of Scotch Law Reform from Paisley,
piloted among the votes and proceedings of the House
of Commons, the statements contained in which are
deserving of grave attention. It appears from it, that
we have ands-rated the importance of the question of
the uuml er of Sc Aar Judges. We wish here partieu-
lady Nto obs eve tleit, to the printed Petition en!),
fou'r n es ame affixed, wl ereas to the manuscript
cn py of tl.at petition, forwarded to us, we
find the Tama Of the Provost of Pais!e,-,

and a great number of the local IVl.l,;istraey, and other
most reepectab!e and influ,:intial persons eentiecteA with
the administration of the law of &Aland. The sub-
stance of t.lic petition is as follows :
That the population of Sectland does not much exceed that
of Yorkshire ; nevertheless, there are at present in Scotland
twelve Judges in the Prerogative Court in Edinburgh, besides
a vacancy by the resignation of Lord Glenlee.
There are also in Scotland thirty Stipendiary Puisne
Judges, called Sheriffe Depute, all also resident in Edinburgh,
each of whom, be it remarked, sets as a Costa of Review only.
In addition to the forty. two Judges enumerated above, and
all resident in Edinburgh, each of the thirty Puisne Judges,
called Sheriffs, appoints one or more substitutes to perform the
duty of his Court; these also are Stipendiary Magistrates,
called Sheriff Substitutes; they amount to Eft v-one in number,
making in whole, in the Supreme and Sheriffs' Courts, the
monstrous number of ninety-four Judges, paid out of the Ex-
chequer, for a population little exceedieg that of Yorkshire,
which population daily more dread the law, from fatal expe-
rience of its consequences, and their provorleial caution as
people inducing them to resort very little to Courts admitted
almost universally to be the very reverse of Courts of Justice
in the proper sense of the word.
Under these circumstance:, your petitioners humbly submit
to your Honourable Honse, whether it can be possible properly
to employ so many Judges in satisfying the legal wants of an
intelligent people?
-
And, fuether, whether it would not be a great improvement
to alter and amend the present obnoxious system of adminis-
tecing the laws, so as to bring counsel, or parties and witnesses,
into immediate contact with the Judges, and which from ex-
perience and practice has of late years unequivocally been
shown to work so well in the Small Debt Courts ; whilst every
other Court in Scotland is the terror of all honest men, by
reason of the delayrandi expenses inevitably, incurred un ler the
rules and forms of these Courts ?

Mr. Dr COMAE is cr.titled to the tvivracst thanks of the
assenting community for the deep interest he has taken,
and the powerful sand he his made, in the cause-of re-
ligious liberty. The speech with which he prefaced his
motion for relieving Dissentients from the State-endowed
religion, of the grievous burden of Church-rates,
is highly creditable to his talents, and emi-
nently consistent with the principles which he has
professed during the whole course of his political career.
That the motion was not successful was ecrainly no fault
of his. He showed, in a way that. must convince all rea-
sonable minds, both the oppressive injustice of the exac-
tion, and the perfect equity and practicability of the re-
medy which he proposed. The subqaece of this plan is
simply that every one making a declaration before a Ma-
gietrate that he conscientiuus,ly dissents from the State
Church shall be exempted from the payment of Church-rates.
Now, what was the objection to this plan, and by whom
was the objection started? Too objection was, that too
great a temptation would be held out to persons wishing to
escape from the payment of the impost, to be checked by
a declaration—and this was stated by Lord Jolts RUSSELL,
the very man, if we are not mistaken, :rho proposed
a:" declaration" for a similar purpose to be intro-
duced into the Bill fur repealing the Test
and Corporation Acts. But see on what a sandy
foundation the Noble Lord hes built his objection !
" A man," argues Lord JOHN RUSSELL, " may be tempted
to make a false declaration before a Magistrate, that he is,
on conscientious principles, a Dissenter from the Church
of England, because he thereby gains a certain benefit,
viz.—that of saving a f.w shillings, and acquires by this
saving a privilege over those who, not being Dissenters, are
obliged to pay for the support of their own form of worship.
But the man who makes a declaration' fcr the purpose of
being admitted to a mere equality with his fellow citizens
in civil rights (though the rights to which he is thus to
be admitted are of the most important nature, and his ex-
clusion has been a brand of disgrace) is not under an
equal temptation to declare that which is not the truth."
Of all the specimens of hair.splitting logic which it has been
our fortune to meet with, we recollect none richer than
this. But we have not the heart to proceed with the remarks
which the speech of the Noble L.rd suggests. We shall
only say that we are deeply grieved both at the sentiments
to which he gave utterance, and at the tone in which they as
expressed. _ _ _

Lord JOHN RUSiELL was followed by Mr. HUMS, who
ably supported the motion. and triumphantly refuted
the speech of the Colonial Secretary. He asked why Lord
Jolts had supported Lord Aurnor:r's motion for abolis'iing
church-rates, if be denied teat the law was, as Jolty
TnortoeaoD had designated it, 6. cruel and unjust," tied
whether he thought that half the people of England—for
half the people, were Dissenters.—.would continue to snow
their property to be s&z_d and sold to support the f,,,brie
of a Church already r.mply endowed by the State.
lie observed that, however unworthy of the sym-
pathy of the House, the Noble Lord might
COllSiner JOHN TDOROGO: D, there were millions out
of the House who regarded him 816 the victim of
Ecclesitstical persecution,, and as a matt“ whose suf-
ferings had been the means of bringing before the
House and the country the injustice, the cruelty, and the
oppression
of Church-rates " The blonourable Gentleman
then alluded to the different treatment meted out to the
poor Dissenting shoemaker of Chelmsford, to the
powerrul body of Clergymen who in Scotlar;cfavowod the
same p,ii:ciples with him, and stt at del t!lce the law which
he was held bound to obey with implicit submission.
" Would the remedy the Noble Lord proposed," said Mr,
Husin, " remove Ttioßoooon's olketion that ' the prin-
ciple of a State. Church was repugnant to the Holy Seiip-
tures, and detrimental to the progress of religion ?'
Why, many of the Clardy of the Church of Scutlard
mere now insisting upon the same prineidle, aid at once
defying the Court of Session and the House of Lords,
although a patron had quite as mach right to appoint to a
living there as the clergy here had to get the Church-
rates. • Yet the Noble Lorri would pernitt Titortoooon to
remain in prison, but he sympathised with the clergy of the
Church of Scotland, who had done more, night after night,
to stir up violence and op position to the laws of that
country than Frost had in this."

The' following appeal to the consistency of the Noble
Lord is exceedingly well put, and as an arywnentizm ad
hominem is unanswerable :—" But there was further
ground of complaint agaiwit the N,blia Lord. He had
abolished Church-rates in Ireland, where they bad been
felt as--a grievance by the Roman Catholics, although the
aggregate paid by them di l not exceed 76,0001. a-year ; why,
then, did he refuse a similar act of justice to the dissenters
of England? Wily, there was not an argument advanced
by the Noble Lord in introducing the Bill for abolish-
ing Church-rates in Leland that did not exactly apply in
the present case in behalf of England. Was it that
the Noble Lord waited for a repetition of that compulsion
which urged him to legislate fur Ireland ? The qu2s-
eon for the Noble Lord now to decide was
.—did he mean to carry on the principles for
England upon which he had acted for Irel.nd ? He
must confer a similar act upon the Dissenters of this
ceurlry, or at once abandon the character which he so
long enjoyed of being a friend of religious liberty. How
could the Noble Lord any longer talk about being a friend
of religious liberty, if lie allowed Thorogood to conti-
nue in gaol for having refused to violate his religious sem-
ples.—( Hear, hear.)

_

zhe ann.