The Sun.
London, England, 1840-06-06 00:00:00

Commons that Mr. CRAWFORD, an inspector of pri-
sons, has been sent to York to inquire into all the cir-
cumstances of the case. _ .._.

In answer to Lord ASHBURTON, Earl FITZWILLIAM
said it was certainly his intention to bring the Corn-
law question before their Lordships on Thursday, when
the first-named Noble Lord will be afforded an excel-
cellent opportunity to disprove Mr. BARING'S asser-
tion that the Corn-laws cut down the population.
Lord BROUGHAM, on presenting a petition against
the importation of Hill Coolies, said he viewed with
feelings of alarm he could not describe, the attempt to
revive a most detestable traffic ; and moved for copies
of all orders, &c., on the subject. His Lordship will
be found a formidable opponent, we apprehend, to Lord
JOHN RUSSELL'S Bill, which was discussed the evening
before last in the House of Commons. The Lords ad•
journed at an early hour, to meet this day.
Mr. HORSMAN took his scat for Cockermouth.
Amongst the petitions presented was one from J.
COGSWELL, whose case will be found in another part of
The Sun ; and we are sure, from the petition presented
from the wife of Mr. ROBERTS, complaining of harsh
treatment, that many such cruelties are hidden in the
recesses of our gaols, not to the honour of the Magistrates.
After the presentation of numerous petitions, Mr.
MituLE brought in his Prison Discipline (Scotland)
Bill, which the Hon. Member was prevented from
bringing in the night before by Mr. MACKENZIE count-
ing out the House.
Mr. EWART gave notice of a motion on the sugar and
coffee duties for June 23.
In reply to Mr. DIVETT, the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER said he proposed to have the Danish claims
accurately looked into in detail, with a view of bringing
the subject before Parliament next Session.
In reply to Mr. AGLIONBY,the ATTORNEY-GENERAL
said that the most positive instructions had been sent
down to York to relax the rules of the prison in the
case of Mr. O'CoNNOR.
In reply to Sir JAMES GRAHAM, Mr. PIGOT said
that he could not undertake to bring in the Bill for
settling the question of the beneficial interest in pro-
perty, which is to entitle a man to vote, till after he
recess.
At the request of Sir JAMES GRAHAM, and on re-
ceiving the information that the Tories had understood
the Canada Clergy Reserves Bill was not to come on
last night, Lord J. RUSSELL postponed that measure till
next Thursday or Friday.
The Customs Duties' Bill, after a few observations
from Mr. B. WOOD and Captain PECHELL touching
the hardship of increasing the tax on windows, was read
a third time.
In consequence of Lord PALMERSTON being unable
to attend through indisposition, the vote for the postage
expense of the Foreign Department, on which the
Noble Lord was to give some explanation,; was
postponed.
In a Committee of Ways and Means, the
CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained his inten-
tions as to the timber duties, the whole amount of
which is 1,602,0001. He proposes to " levy an addi-
tional duty of 15. 6d. per load on all timber imported,
whether from Canada or the Baltic, and, taking that as
a principle, he should adopt it to the different relations
of timber imported." He proposes "an additional duty
of is. 6d. upon battens, and upon batten ends an addi-
tional duty of 35., and an additional duty upon deals of
the first class, 10s. 6d.," and he placed resolutions in the
hands of the Chairman to carry these propositions into
effect.

-------
Mr. Ald. THOMSON objected to the scheme.
Mr. LABOUCHEJtE, Mr. WARBURTON, and Mr.
H ALL approved of it.
Mr. VILLIERS announced his intention of bringing
the whole subject of the timber duties under the con-
sideration of the House before the close of the Session.
The resolutions were agreed to, and ordered to be re-
ported to-morrow.
The Irish estimates were voted in the absence, and
to the chagrin, of some Irish Members who wished to
oppose them.
The House adjourned at a Quarter past Eight
till this day.

The Tories deny that there is any schism in
their party, although the Herald abuses Sir RO-
BERT PEEL, and a large squad of Ultras voted

against him on that vital question to pure Toryism,
the Reform of the Irish Corporations. Not to in-
crease their irritation, and to spare them the misery
and the guilt of renewing false assertions, we will
abstain from insisting on the palpable fact. But if
there be not a schism amongst them,—and so far as
they are all steadily resolved to turn out the Minis-
ters and get office by any means, however foul, we
admit that they are a most united and homogeneous
party,—there is a complete schism betwixt their pre-
sent professions and their past conduct. Their lan-
guage and their policy are divorced from each other,
like those of an imaginative poet, who recommends
beautiful morality by his writings and is disgust-
ingly vicious in his behaviour.
For example, the Tories have always been great
sticklers for prerogative, and have objected to make
the Crown accountable to the people. The Times
of yesterday, however, had a long article, exposing
the folly of allowing the powers of the Crown, even
in matters of negotiation, to he exercised, except
under the control of the Commons. For see, said
the Tory scribe, because the foreign Secretary
happens to be a Whig—
For see what a monstrous power of public mischief is
lodged in the hands of a Foreign Secretary, who can se-
cretly play with the honour and interests of a nation, and
is never called upon to submit his work while in progress
to the scrutiny of those whose most sacred rights and en-
during welfare are staked upon the result of it, until
he emerges from his obscurity with a parchment in his
hand, containing we know not what conditions or engage-
ments—what concessions, immediate or remote—what
transfers of territory—what encroachments upon commerce
—what means of influence, and military or naval aggres-
sion, established against ourselves—what claims admitted
or abandoned. In fine, this parchment is a treaty signed,
executed, ratified, which may be ruinous—which is at all
events final and utterly irretrievable.
Never before did any Tory Journal expound the
principle that the House of Commons is bound to
examine all negotiations in progress, and not allow
the Secretary for Foreign Affairs to take any step
without its sanction. The limes enforces this
view by quoting some presumed instances of the sa-
crifice of national rights when the Tories were in
office, and insists with much of its wonted vigor on
the propriety of the popular assembly controlling the
Executive on this most important point. The To-
ries in Parliament have not yet adopted the practice
recommended by the Times, because it is directly
opposite to their former policy. Sticklers for the
prerogative, living in the hope of exercising it, they
dare not in Parliament call for papers of which the
Executive says the production wouldinjure the public
service. But the rule now laid down by the Tory
Times will be a guide for the Radicals when the
Tories are in power, and they will not be
able to carry on the Government for a month, with
a Radical Opposition acting on the principle that
every negotiation in progress is to he submitted to
the discussion and decision of the House of Com-
mons. Such an article in the leading organ of the
Tories, shows how completely, at present, their
writers are at variance with all the former principles
and practice of the Tories.
e should scarcely advert to this example, could
we not fortify it by others, for the poor Times is
obviously most piteously at a loss for subjects.
When it went boldly on with the tide of public
feeling, it would not have wasted half a column
on Cracow, had the insignificant and almost un-
known republic been engulphed by an earthquake ;
but, yesterday, merely the avowed usurpation of its
Government, by those who had. long in fact con-
troika it, employed a large portion of a column:
What it says, therefore, about dragging all nego-
tiations before the bar of the House of Commons
while they are in progress, may by some persons be
regarded more as a sort of editorial exercise, than
the expression of any honest conviction.
In another Tory Journal of the day before
yesterday, we find another proof of the same depar-
ture from Tory principles. The Post took some
pains to make the world believe that the inattention
of the House of Commons to Mr. O'BRIEN's
motion was the consequence of his personal insie.-
nifieence, not of its disregard of the interests of the
people. It lamented over the wickedness of agita-
tors, who would be sure to find in the empty
benches of the House on that evening a strong
corrobotation of their assertion; that the House of
Commons, however eager for party fights, cares not
a single straw for the welfare of the people. The
Post is now most anxious, therefore, to make the
people believe that the Tories" look on them like
children—that they are most kind and affectionate
parents, and this in the very teeth of the refusal of
the House even to take the prayers or 1,500,000
petitioners into consideration. he 'Cory prin-
ciple was, and the Tory policy was in accor-
dance with it, that the people are a mere
rabble, a canaille, to be ruled, coerced, crushed, but
never heeded. Now they are to be soothed with
professed kiLdness, their opinions are to be con-
sulted, they are to be persuaded that the Tories
have no other object in view but their happiness,
and so they are, if possible, as some foolish R •
enk and Chartists have already been seduced, to