The Sun.
London, England, 1840-07-18 00:00:00

THE stiN, LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 18, 1840.

LONDON:
SATURDAY, JULY 18, 1840.

The Earl of ABERDEEN presented last night in the
Lords the petition of the Spanish Bondholders, of
which he had given notice the day before. The Noble
Earl explained that in 1828, parties having claims on
Spain for property seized, agreed to accept 900,000/.
in lieu of all demands, 600,000/. of which was paid in
money, and 300,0001. in bonds. Since 1836 the inte-
rest on these bonds had not been paid, and now six
dividends were due. The Government was bound to
enforce the payment, and by not doing so, bad neglected
its duty.

Viscount MELBOURNE assured their Lordships that
these claims had been strongly urged on the Spanish
Government, but the civil war in which Spain had been
plunged, had prevented the Government from satisfying
them. He had no doubt that the Government would,
as soeyt as possible, set about satisfying these just claims.
The Earl of WICKLOW wished to have Sir F. HEAD'S
despatches laid before Parliament, but on Lord MEL-
souRNE saying that it would give him pain to produce
them, the Noble Lord made no motion, and the subject
was dropped.
The Law Evidence of Scotland Bill, after some ob-
jections made by the Earl of ABERDEEN, and the Sale
of Beer Bill, after some remarks by the Duke of RICH-
MOND, were read a second time. The latter was or-
dered to be referred to a Select Committee. Their
Lordships then adjourned.
A very considerable povtioa of the evening was
occupied in the House of Commons by the Farnham
Rectory Bill. The Report was brought up, and on
certain amendments being moved, Mr. HumE objected
to the property of the Church, which is public pro-
perty, being regulated by a private Bill.
Mr. AGLIONBY moved that the further consideration
of the matter be postponed, with a view of referring the
evidence to a Select Committee.

On this motion, after some discussion, the House di-
vided, and it was lost by 110 to 73.
Subsequently a long discussion ensued on motions
of adjournment, and it was at length decided by the
SPEAKER'S casting vote that the debate should be ad-
journed till Monday.
Several questions were asked, chiefly as to the busi-
ness of the House, for which we refer to the Report.
A new writ was issued for West Surrey.
Another portion, the largest half of the evening,
was occupied by a motion of Mr. FIELDEN, for a Com-
mittee to inquire into the fact that certain Factory
Commissioners had been employed as political spies.
An interesting debate ensued, in which all parties
condemned the employment of spies, and justified the
procuring of all sorts of information. On a division,
Mr. FIELDEN'S motion was lost by 113 to 11.
The Committer of Supply was postponed.
The debate on the Poor-law Commission Bill was
put off till Tuesday, at twelve o'clock, after the exhibi-
tion of a resolute opposition to proceeding with it at
that late hour.

The House adjourned at Ten minutes before Two.

At the meeting of the Royal Agricultural So-
ciety of England on Wednesday, Sir ROBERT
PEEL renewed his homage to manufactures and
commerce in these words :
It was not unnatural that he, the son of manufactures
and commerce, who felt the deepest obligation to these
for worldly prosperity, and owed to them all the interest
be had in the land, should rejoice in the prospect of
seeing the commercial interests brought face to face with
the agricultural. He was convinced that such a meeting
would confirm the natural and almost unanimous opinion
which prevailed, that a relation subsisted between them
so close that they could not be disunited ; that it was im
possible that manufactures shouldflourish without shedding
a kindly influence on agriculture; or, on the other hand,
that agriculture could decline without involving manu-
factures in its decay.—( Applause.) There was yet an-
other reason for which he rejoiced that the standard should
planted on the coast of England, at the point which
admitted the greatest facilities for intercourse with Ire-
land and Scotland. From this fact also he looked for
great social results. By this choice they invited Scot-
land to witaess how they had followed her example and
called upon Ireland to follow theirs; and tempted be no
narrow or exclusive spirit, asked Ireland and Scotland to
communicate their improvements, that they might parti •
pate in those of this country.

Fine words !—we wish Sir ROBERT'S acts ac-
corded with them—but he upholds the Corn-laws,
which are at this moment inflicting an immense
injury on those manufactures which, he says, can-
not flourish without shedding a genial influence oil
agricultur.. Here is one proof taken from the
American papers which arrived by the Great

Western :
The state of this country generally is at this moment
very singular. In all sections of the country there is a
perfect stagnation of business, while the producing sec-
tions are groaning beneath enormous crops. The south
has delivered a crop of cotton 20 per cent. greater than ever
before. The Western country is filled with grain to over.
flowing, so prodigally has the earth yielded, that to Euro-
peans it must seem incredible. In many parts of Ohio,
the eye of the traveller svi!l perceive last year's crop of
corn remaining stacked upon the fields where it grew,
while wheat has been sown around it, and promises a most
abundant yield. It is the intention of many of the farmers
so situated to reap the wheat and turn the hogs and cattle
in upon the corn, there being no prospect for any market
for it. Flour has fallen so low, and the markets so dull,
united with the impossibility
ofprocuring money, that tLe
11 Jur mills have ceased to work.
At the very moment while there is such an
abundance of coin in America that it is to be
given to the pigs, or allowed to rot on the ground,
the manufacturers of Manchester, Bolton, and
Glasgow are actually starving : the Americans
would most readily and freely give their corn for
cloth ; nay, they are endeavouring to do this by ,
smuggling corn into England through Canada, and j
the fine-spoken Sir R. PEEL is the man who up-
holds
the Corn-laws which impiously forbid this
most useful and beneficial exchange. -
The patience of the starving people of Boltot
Manchester, and Glasgow, if it do not give wal;
under such a tremendous injury, must at least be 1

sorely tried. If, bearing it, they procceed to inquire !
by what right Sir ROBERT PEEL and his friends
inflict this tremendous injury ; if they conclude that I
he and they have no right, and if for that they durse
the lawmaker as the demon of mischief, as the very
incarnation of exil ; and if they resolve by all possi-
ble means to throw off his authority, as they would
get rid of a fever or the cholera, will it be surpris-
ing, or will it be blameable, if in doing so they com-
mit no wrong, such as he commits, starve no infants,
and thrust not the aged and the weak into the
grave ? Fine spun reasoning, long trains of reflec-
tion, are not to be expected from men continually
engaged in hand labour ; they will not, they
cannot balance against the enormous injury im-
mediately inflicted on them the possible and re-
mote advantage of legislation ; and thus the
landlords by using it to serve a personal purpose,
committing this impious wrong on other men, must
weaken, if they do not wholly destroy its authority.
They will disdain our words, but they may per-
haps learn from AI. GUIZOT. In his article in the
Revue Francaise, on Catholicism, Protestantism,
and Philosophy, is the following passage :
What is the evil under which our temporal society
labours? The enervation of authority; I do not 'lvy of
that executive force which makes itself obeyed ; for of
this power there was never more, perhaps, never so much.
But I mean the moral authority of principle and pure right,
which needs not recur to force; of that authority, to which
the heart bends without allowing the mind to become
humiliated, and which speaks boldly with an energy not of
compulsion, yet of necessity.
This is the truest authority. Yet it is not the only
principle of the social state ; it does not suffice for the
government of men. It is, however, so absolutely essen-
tial, that without it all powers are ineffectual whether they
be reason incessantly repeated, interest well understood, or
the physical preponderance of numbers. Where such
authority is wanting, whatever may be the am( unt of force,
obedience is precarious, or dastardly, always approximat-
ing to servility or rebellion.

-The authority which is already weakened our
money-hunting aristocracy will destroy, they have
already " made obedience precarious and dastardly,"
and it always " approximates to servility or rebel-
lion."

Mr. STEPHENSON, the American Minister to
our Court, was present at the meeting, and dis-
coursed eloquently on the " wish of the Americans
to cultivate peace and good-will with England,"
on "there being much to be done by Me Assem-
bly representing the agriculture of the empire, to
strengthen the ties of peace and concord, which
happily existed ;" on " the soldier and the sword no
longer being the security for humane and peaceful
nations ;" and on " the stability of thrones depend-
ing ore the moral force of a virtuous, enlight-
ened, and religious people." Most excellent senti-
ments, but terribly at variance with what is done by
the persons whom he was addressing, in their charac-
ter of legislators. A paragraph, which we will now
quote from the New York Sun, of June 15, will
show how they cultivate the good-will of the
Americans :

The Corn-laws are now the greatest, and, in truth,
the only obstacle in the way of an immediate revival of a
successful and prosperous trade. They almost eff:ct a
total exclusion of our flour and grain from the English
market. The consequence is, that we cannot pay our
debts, or buy more goods with our surplus produce. The
orders which vs e send for British manufactured goods are
unusually and exceedingly small, because we cannot get
our property into her ports to pay for them. This is a
two-edged sword, which cuts the throat of both nations.
England loses the custom of her most extensive purchaser;
her goods are left on hand, her manufacturers suspend
operations, and throw their labourers out of employ. We
not only are deprived of a market for our flour, but we find
also the demand for our great staple cotton diminished,
and its price fall ng off. Any man of recollection can
can easily trace out in his mind the various and endless
fluctuations in commerce which must be produced by such
a state of things. And all this load of evil is inflicted
upon the world for the exclusive bens fit, with barely an
exception, of a few aristocrats in England.
The Corn-laws weaken all the ties of peace
and concord, and tend to sow discord equally be-
tween the two nations and the several classes of
our own people. To the latter they are a manifold
injury, for they not only deprive them of bread, but
expose them to the misfortunes, privations, and cala-
mities of war.

Sir ROBERT PEEL alluded to Ireland as he al-
luded to our manufactures, and both bear equally
pointed and strong testimony against the Corn-laws.
The manufactures by which agriculture is to flourish
are stagnant or going to decay, and the Irish, whom
the Corn-laws are to benefit, are absolutely starving.
The Royal Agricultural Society is to meet next
year in Lancashire, to be near Ireland and in the
vicinity of the manufacturers, that it may insult the
misery which the landowners cause. What can or
will they do for Ireland but extort more rent—what
for the manufacturers but inflict on them greater
misery ? If, while they ruin the manufacturer they
injure agriculture and drive the people into rebel-
lion, they should not escape unharmed, they will
have only themselves to blame.
We have already told them that the Corn-laws,
if persevered in, will bring about a great, if not a
bloody revolution. They are overthrowing the
power of the Parliament. With that away goes
our artificial right of property, away goes the law-
made Church and the law-made religion, away
go the throne, the priesthood, and the aristo-
cracy. Surely the men must be mad who, relying
on the law to secure their possessions and preserve
their power, take such effectual means as the Corn-
laws to overturn its authority.
To make two ears of corn grow where only one
grew before is most laudable. We shall highly ap-
prove of the exertions of the Royal Agricultural
Society if they effect that, but we should like to
have some testimony to their utility besides their
own assertions. If a great body of weavers or
spinners had congregated round their place of as-
sembly, and had rent the air with shouts of grati-
tude for cheap bread, there would have been a noble
and a lovely testimony to the utility of the Society.
But for Noblemen and Gentlemen to praise them.
selves, and to applaud with great vehemence every
phrase and sentiment that had any relation to pre-
serving the present system of starving the people—to
dilate on the prosperity of agriculture over their
melons, pines, and ice'd champagne, while employ-
ment is very scanty and bread very dear, however
agreeable to the feelings of the members of the
Agricultural Society, is not creditable to the Noble
Lords and Gentlemen present, and will not con
tribute to make the people love and respect them.
If the Society is not quite as ridiculous as the
British Association, it is saved from contempt by
the very mischievous conduct of the landowners.

The Morning Advertiser is a very unfair op-
ponent. We charged our Contemporary with mis-
representing us in stating that he had been " greatly
taken to task" by The Sun for the course which he
had pursued on the Non-Intrusion question, and
we thought ourselves justified in calling upon him
to point out, if he could, any, even the moat remote,
allusion to his course. or to a line that he had writ-
ten on the subject up to the moment when he made
the statement. if he could not do this he was
bound to retract. Instead, however, of doing what
honour dictated, he attempts to wriggle out of his
di lemma by a clumsy and ridiculous subterfuge.
He, tells us that the word " gTeatly" was printed
mistake instead of " gently. Nothing is more
likely. In the burly of a newspaper office much
greater mistakes than this are continually occurring.
But what has it to do with the matter in hand whe-
ther he wrote " greatly" or " gently," when he
knows the fact to be that we never took him to
task, or alluded to him at all ? Why, then did he
had
erred in
making the
notcharge say a t once that he
against us Not that it is a matter
ofany importance
to us what he says or
unsays. Very far from it. We should have
taken no farther notice of the circumstances had it
not been to show the disingenuous and evasive
spirit which our Contemporary can summon to his
aid when he finds himself involved in a difficulty.
The whole of his last article, as indeed were
those that went before it, is marked by the same
slipperyon tvhi which phieritt; Tnohte‘r• ee
venture
e t certaino c come
e toc theimportanttie points
ter, thinking it a safer course encoun-
ter,
and to confine himself' almostpas enotsireeloyvteor
vague and unmeaning generalities, unsupported by
the proof derived from individual facts. Slippery,o I
cannot,he shall n
make him I
however, as our Contemporary ‘
\e
is
escape out of our hands.
speak against his will, neither can We make him
speak truth ; but we shall take especial care that
neither his silence nor his misrepresentations shall
be lost upon the public.
We stated on Wednesday last our belief of the
insincerity of the Non-Intrusion leaders, and that
their real object was to increase the power of the
Church, while their professed one was to extend
the rights of the people.
thin," r-' A4rertiser, "are th‘', proofs on
which The Sun rests its allegations of cunning and con-
summate hypocrisy against the evangelical clergy of Scot-
land? Will it be believed that our Contemporary adduces ;

no circumstance or fact whatever in substantiation of the I I
Charge? He contents hirMelf tkitti .following tip thb
a le-
gation.by the rethark that 'the whole tenour of their con-
duct, froth the moment when the Non-Intrusion deception
was first launched on the stage in 1834. in the shape of the
Veto Act, to the publication of Dr. Chalmers's last letter
in the Witness, amply bears out this charge.' This is
nothing but assertion, and it has not even the merit of as-
serting a definite fact. Surely The Sun, before preferring
an accusation of so serious a nature against the character
lof any body of men, ought to have been able to point to
' something specific in support of it.
" But our Contemporary is too wise in his generation to
descend to particulars in justification of the allegation he
prefers against the Non-Intrusion clergy. Do our readers
know the reason? Just this, and no other—that he could
not be specific—he had no particulars to descend to—hc
had no definite facts—no overt acts to which he could refer
in justification of his charge."
This is as fine a specimen of the way in which
our Contemporary carries on a controversy as we
could wish to select. Whenever it suits his pur-
pose to pervert or suppress the truth, or to state a
downright falsehood, he never hesitates a moment.
Let us now bring him to book. In the article from
which he has taken the above quotation, these
words immediately follow :
"And how does the Advertiser meet it?—What are
the counterproofs which he brings forward to rebut it ?
Docs be venture to explain how it happened that the As-
sembly's Aet of 1834. while it gave to the so-called
people' the right of vetoing the patron's presentee,
positively prohibited them from vetoing the presentee of
the Presbytery ? By that Act, when the 'people' had
thrice exercised their veto, the patronage devolved upon
the Presbytery ; but then there was to be no more veto-
ing. The Presbytery's presentation was to be absolute
and final ? Had.,not this a touch of intrusion in it ? Does
it not look something like a hankering after power on the
part of the Church? It must be admitted, on all hands,
that it has that appearance, and must be understood in
that sense until it is satisfactorily explained."
We ask our Contemporary, is this a specific
charge or not ? is it a definite fact or not ? Could
he wish for a more overt act than an Act of the
General Assembly ? How then he dare to as-
sert that which is directly the reverse of the truth,
and with the evidence of the truth before his eyes ?
If he cannot defend such damning facts as these,
let him hold his tongue, but let him not add un-
truth to imbecility, by affirming that we have not
brought them forward.
Another fact was stated by us at the same time,
as an index of the intentions of the Non-Intrusion
leaders, in the following terms :
.

" The delicate subject of the restriction the veto qua-
lification, a point of vi al importance in estimating the real
designs of the Non- Intrusion men, is one on which our
Contemporary might have bestowed a word or two, were
it only to remove a preju lice naturally arising against a
system which enables the minister of a parish to limit the
number of his people' to ten or twelve persons out of a
population of ten or twelve hundred. Our Contemporary
will perhaps scold us for our want of courtesy' if we say
th,4 it is a gross imposture to give the name of the
people' to so minute a fraction of a congregation; yet
either it is so, or one good large kirk would contain all the
people of Scotland."
Not a syllable can we extract from our Contem-
porary on this subject, although we have repeatedly
pressed it upon him.
We also instanced the limitation of the " prin-
ciple" of the Non-Inttusionists to the mere nega-
tive right of objection granted to the " people,"
instead of giving the unmutilated privilege—to
which they are entitled, if they are entitled to any-
thing—of freely electing and dismissing their reli-
gious instructors. This is a " particular" which
appears to tell against that exclusive devotion to the
rights of the " people," which the Non-Intrusion
agitators profess, and therefore it was easter to say
that it was not stated, than to explain it.
Dr. CHALmEtts's shuffling and double dealing
on the Veto, we also adduced as a proof of the in-
sincerity of the pretensions put forth by the Non-
Intrusion leaders. We quoted the following state-
ment—it cannot be too often repeatedof the
Reverend Doctor, from a letter of his own, printed
in the Witness, and severely commented on in the
Banner, a Non-Intrusion publication :—" I felt
little or no disappointment at the relinquishment
either of the Veto or of the Call, compared with the
disappointment I felt at the limitation set by Lord
Aberdeen's Bill on the competency of the Presby-
, tery to judge, from all the circumstances of the
case, on what they deemed best for the edification
of the people."
Here we find the great leader of the Non-Intru-
sionists deliberately throwing overboard the Veto,
the Call, and every principle which the public and
those of his followers who were honest enough to
be deluded, had been taught to believe he and his
coadjutors had been conter.ding for at the hazard
of their stipends, and every thing else that was dear
to them. We cannot allow our Contemporary to
throw the Rev. Doctor after the Veto and the Call,
as he seems inclined to do. His sole argument in
favour of the sincerity and honesty of the Non-In-
trusion leaders is their rejection of Lord ABER-
DEEN'S Bill; that Bill, as he maintains, actually
pouring the whole patronage of the Church into the
laps of the clergy. We have a high opinion of ec-
clesiastical disinterestedness, but nevertheless we
think his argument not worth a straw when op-
posed, as we have shown it to be, to the declaration
of Dr. CHALMERS.

Nor can we allow him to depreciate the Doctor's
testimony as to the effects of the Bill. When the
Worthy Doctor says—" I care not a pinch of snuff
for the Veto or the Call in comparison with the fet-
ters which Lord ABERDEEN has bound upon the
hands of the Presbytery," we must believe that he
speaks the sense of the Non-Intrusion leaders.
He was their representative in their commu-
nications with Lord ABERDEEN ; and although
he has committed himself more unguardedly than
they have done, our Contemporary will find
that his brother trumpeters of Non-Intrusion,
Messrs. CUNNINGHAM arid CANDLISH, indig-
nantly denounced the Bill the first moment it
reached them, as putting a restraint upon the Pres-
bytery, which was not for a moment to be tolerated.
If he has any doubt of the fact, we will furnish
him with their words ; and if he will refer to
the speeches delivered on the subject, by the same
party in the last Assembly, he will find the same
effect attributed to the Bill.

We may add, though perhaps others may not
think it very high authority, that his two-culuinn,
large-type Correspondent in the Advertiser of yester-
day, begins his lengthy lucubration with a doleful
lament that Lord ABERDEEN'S Bill converts " the
Church of Scotland into a mere tool in the hands
of patrons, very many of whom are not members
of that Church." If then our Contemporary
has nothing else to advance to prove the disinter-
estedness and single-heartedness of the Non-Intru-
sion agitators than their rejection of such a mea-
sure, both his case and their character are in a most
unenviable position.
There is only one other point remaining to be
noticed in this last and silliest of all our Contem.
porary's articles on the Non-Intrusion question.
He had, in a former article, adduced as a proof of
the popularity of the Non-Intrusion principle in
Scotland, the great number of signatures at-
tached to the petitions got up by that
party, compared to the numbers affixed
to the petitions of the opposite party. IVe ob-
jected to this criterion because undue means, such
as procuring the signatures of children in nurseries,
had been used to swell the numbers, and likewise
because the great mass of the people wished for
no change in the law, and had, therefore,
no such inducement to petition as their oppo-
nents the Non-Intrusion agitators. We proposed a
better criterion—not the only one, as our Con-
temporary, with his natural turn for misrepresenta-
tion, states—in the part taken by the newspaper
press, which is almost wholly opposed to Non-In-
trusion.

What can be a fairer reflection of the public
mind of Scotland titan the newspper press on
a question which our Contemporary, in the
very article on Which we are comment-
ing, asserts, is " now convulsing the whole
of the country ?" " What ! " exclaims the Ad-
vertiser, " Consult the political press on a re-
ligious question ! Who would ever dream of such a
thing ? Certainly not we." Considering that our
Contemporary seems to be continually dreaming,.
there was a hare chance that something like
common sense might have visited his brain.
But in this we were mistaken. He accordingly
dreams that this is a religious question, and will not
fancy any publications entidtd to he consulted upon
pitapbeurtsroelir
gliimmiltd c
se "eic sri enumerates two or three news-
illation, as many obscure ma-
gazines, and then glorifies himself on the happy
result of his dream !
Now we must let him know, that a question on
which the priests preach rebellion, and the Church
arrays itself against the State--the very essence of
whichil is a struggle for supremacy between the
Civil and the Ecclesiastical powers—has, in the
app.tel.e..,ion ui aii ratio.-.al uctswis, iuliy as much
a civil, or political,
as a religious bearing. If the
popular mind is
deeply interested in it, as

he deserts it is; we must;, notwithstanding
his- dreaming cieniurrer, insist that the tic4spaper
press is a better measure of that interest than any
number of petitions manufactured as those of his
party have been. He has taken a lesson from the
Non-Intrusionists. When they wish to evade the
operation of the laws, they always plead that theirs '
is a case of religious, not of civil, jurisdiction.
But this is a privilege which has not yet been con-
ceded to them by the tribunals, and we will not
concede it to him.
Our Contemporary can discourse with a "most
learned spirit," on the merits of a Beer Bill. No
man can give a more " full and particular account"
of a Licensed Victuallers' meeting, but he is no
for him, but he must not travel out of his sphere,
hand at an argument. We have a great respect
and meddle with what he does not understand.
At all events he must not meddle with us. As
long as he sticks to his pint-pots and his tap-tub
he will do. There he is at home, and there he
had better remain, unless lie wishes to make him-
self an object of derision.

The last Number of the Edinburgh Review con•
tains an article on the foreign policy of the Go•
vernment, which vvg have perused with much satis.
faction, and which we are confident will gratify
every Englishman more solicitous to witness the
glory of his country in the acts of her statesmen
than to find materials for replenishing the exhausted
armoury of faction. The article, though neither
eloquent nor profound, is sensible and judicious,
and abounds in those evidences which the present
matter-of-fact generation requires from all reasoners
that seek to produce conviction. lo simplify the
comprehension of the details of a question which the
Reviewer sets out with lamenting is so little at-
tended to by the people of this country, the bearing
of our foreign policy is examined, first, in an inter •
national, and next in a commercial poirlt of view.
We shall confine the few remarks which we propose
making, to the first of these views, as the only one
upon which there can now be two opittionsamong men
in the least degree conversant with public affairs ;
and further, because, when regarded in an enlarged
sense, it includes every other that can suggest it-
self to the politician and the merchant.
We claim for ourselves the merit—if merit be
indeed due to public Journalists for stating truth,
and bestowing unqualified approbatton upon the
patriotic conduct of an able and vigilant Mutister—
of having anticipated all the praise bestowed by the
Heviewer upon the policy of Lord PALM ERSTO N
towards France, Belgium, Portugal, and Spain. He
does riot touch a point with regard to these king-
doms, upon which we have not been before-hand
with him in doing justice to the zeal, the prompitude,
the patience, the firmness, and the sagacity of the
Noble Foreign Secretary. We have constantly
applauded, and to the extent of
humble ability endeavoured still further
promote the good understanding happily existing
between England and France; and if, five years
ago, we felt disgust at the attempts made byLoois-
PHILIPPE, acting under the influence of Russia,
Austria, and Prussia, to limit the auvantages
which a gallant and patriotic people had a right
to expect from a glorious Revolution effected by
themselves, we never for an instant, in giving
expression to that feeling, failed to do justice to
the virtues of the French people, or to conceal the
deep sympathy which we took in all that related to the
extension of their liberties, and the promotion of
their physical happiness. Of the Dutch war of pro-
tocols we were steady supporters—caring little for
the waste of ink, so long as blood was spared.
In Spain only was Lord PALMERSTON too slow
for us ; but even there his Lordship's system
has obtained a signal triumph. In Persia and
Affghanistan the policy of the Noble Foreign
Secretary has had our unqualified approba-
tion ; and if we have suggested more expedition in
the settlement of the North American boundary
line, it was not from a want of acquaintance with
the immense difficulties in the way of a speedy ad-
justment, but to impress upon the Government the
grave fact that such difficulties would acquire in-
calculable augmentation every day the question
continued unsettled.

Thus far the Reviewer and ourselves are agreed.
We now come to an important question upon
which we wholly disagree with him ; and we have
two others to notice relative to which he says not a
syllable, albeit the public had a right to expect
some explanation from a writer on our foreign
policy, occupying the place which the Re-
viewer is supposed to hold in the councils of
her MAJESTY. The question upon which we
differ from him is the seizure and confiscation by
Russia of the Vixen in the Black Sea, and to
this we shall first address ourselves. He manifestly
regards this affair as of a very secondary considera-
tion. That the public may have a fair opportunity
of doing justice to his reasoning, we quote all that
he condescends to say about it :

We have seetLexperimental voyages undertaken with
the intent of forcing nations into war, and the Ministry
have been censured, when acting wisely upon the advice of
the soundest lawyers, they declined to defend cases which
were indefensible, or to claim reparation where, in point of
justice, there had been no violation of any right. Of this
character was the memorable case of the Vixen, in which,
because Lord Palmerston would not advise his Sovereign
to declare war in order to obtain rep ,ration for a loss sus
tained in an illegal adventure, it was said that the Foreign
t
Secretary degraded Great Britain in the eyes of eastern
nations, by procuring the piratical capture and confiscation
of a British vessel in the Black Sea. As well mght th,
officers of the coast guard be charged with insulting the
K
Dutch smtLgler was seized
in i
condemned by the Court of
Exchequer."
King
ofw the
se Netherlands,nNow, without accusing the Reviewer of a wish
to misrepresent this question, we must be allowed
waters aera r idfs a
to affirm that he has done so in a way, and to an
extent, quite unjustifiable. The right of Russia to
blockade any part of the Circassian coast south of
the Kuban was denied by several eminent German
Jurists, and never, till after the seizure of the
Vixen, assented to by our Government. Besides,
when Mr. BELL addressed a letter to Lord PAL-
MERSTON, to ascertain the existence of the block-
ade previous to the sailing of the vessel, his Lord-
ship at once referred him to the London Gazelle—
well aware that no notification of such a blockade
had appeared there, and thereby giving an implied
official sanction to the Voyage. The allusion
to the case of a Dutch smuggler in our
waters would be ridiculous, if its want of genero-
sity towards the brave Circassians, gloriously fight-
ing for the freedom of their country, did not call
for a severer censure. Were there the sli;2htest
analogy between the guilt of the supposed Dutch
smuggler in our waters and the Vixen's breach of
the blockade of Sudjouk Kale, does the Reviewer
suppose that Lord PALMERSTON would have felt
it to be his duty to consult the Law Officers of the
Crown upon the subject, still less to address a
letter to Lord DURHAM, then Ambassador at the
Court of Russia, for information on the very ques-
tion of the right of Russia to establish such a
blockade ? If the fact of the right of Russia to
blockade the whole coast of Circassia was noto-
rious, on the alleged ground of possessing the
country, how did it happen that Lord PALMER_
sroN appeared to know quite as little about it as
Mr. BELL ? The motive imputed to the Vixen is
likewise as unfounded as it is wicked. Mr. BELL'S
great and or ly object was w demonstrate the fu-
tility of the right or blockade claimed by Russia,
generously imagining that the denial of such a
right on the part of a maritime power like England,
would impart an irresistible moral influence to the
cause of Circassian independence. We do not
attach more blame to Lord PALMERSTON for the
part he acted on this occasion, than we do to the
Law Officers of the Crown, and to the Earl of
Dunn Am. But upon a question so important we
choose to speak plainly. The seizure and
confiscation of the Vixen is the only real
blot upon the Foreign Administration of Lord
PALMERSTON; and it is as ili-judged as it
must be painful to his Lordship to claim for
him credit for the only part of his conduct as a
Minister which his country would wis ► univer-
sally forgotten.
The questions upon which no information is
given, are, the fall of Poland, and the
subsequent
occupation of Cracow by the Protecting, or, more
properly, destroying Powers. It is time that the
veil was raised which shrouds the conduct of the
Government of England towards lun iappy Poland,
during her last sad struggle for independence.
The
honour of Great Britain requires that there should
he much to disclose of wl •nothing which is known be-
yond the threshold of the Cabinets of
London,
Paris, Vienna, and St. Petersburoh

As there is now a fair prospect of a speedy ad-
ju,tuient of [the Easttru question, we are nut
surprised to find the part which France ought to
take in the removal of the remaining difficulties, the

subject of general discussion in the political clubs
of PariS, We niitibed a few ildys dg9 the dqdr-,
tute of a special messenger for A.lcialidria; Charged
with important secret despatches from M. TRIER
to MEHEMET Am, in answer to a communication
from the VICEROY proposing a conditional surren-
der of the Turkish fleet. In the Paris Journals of
Thursday, the whole of which we have received,
we find a letter from Toulon, giving the following
as the basis of the proposal which M. EUGENE
PERRIER on the part of the French Government,
is authorized to make to MEHEMET ALI:—
" France guarantees security for their persons and pro-
perty to the officers and crews of the Turkish fleet and
the preservation of their rank ; it engages. if the fleet is
sent back without delay, to obtain a treaty by which the
family of Mehemet Alt shall be invested in perpetuity with
the government of Egypt and Syria with their present
territory, the limits of which shall be determined by agents
of the Five great Powers. It must be presumed that M.
Thiers does not act in this manner without depending on
the concurrence of the other powers. It seems that in-
structions to the same effect have been sent to Constanti
nopic by the Coclite steamer."
The latest accounts from Constantinople, which
are of the 28th ult., confirm the statement which
appeared in The Sun of Wednesday, as to the
cold reception which the Viceroy's Private Secre-
tary SAMI BEY experienced when the SULTAN
was informed of the insurrection in Syria. On the
26th the Cyclops steamer arrived at Constantinople
with despatches for Lord PONSONBY, and the news
that the British squadron was at the mouth of the
Dardanelles. It was rumoured that the British
Admiral meditated seizing the Turkish ships sent
by MEHEMET ALI wish troops to the coast of
Syria, and compelling them to return to Constanti-
nople.
Letters from Erzeroum, of the 14th of June, an-
nounce the iapid decline of Russian influence in
Persia consequent upon the news of t'ae failure of
the expedition to Khiva, and the losses sustained
by Russia in Circassia. The SHAH had returned
from Ispahan to Shiraz greatly dispirited by the
consequences of his unjust conduct towards Great
Btitain. We shall have another opportunity of
saying something more upon this subjct.
The following extracts include the little additional
news in the Paris papers :
According to letters from French Certlagne, eLted the
9th of July. the Catalonian -;'hiefs, five numbs r. still
keep the fie!tt with ab,ut 10 000 me-n. G ner.l Carbo is
m irching against them wi h a consideiable
A telegiaphie despatch announe• s that the Oceta bear-
ing the fl tg of Vie,- A tn.iral kosamel, the Trident, tie
Marengo, ind th.. Genereux (ail of the line), `.O
on the 14th : they are gone to Tunis —La Ga.
:ette de France
The ordinance convoking the Chamber of P..ers as a
Coutt of Justice, for the affair between Marshal Grouchy
and General B,.rthezene, was drawn up the day b,fo. e
yesterday in the Council of Ministers, and was to be pre-
sented to the King eeste.rday for his signature. But in
Glared Oat'thcir health weuld not permit them to sit oa
the course of the day it having been stated that fiAy-
three Peers, at the head of whom is M. Pasquier, de-
this cause, the ordinance is witivirawn. It is announced
that Marshal Grouchy is going back to the country. He
might as well have stayed there.—Le Commerce.
M. Cremieux left Paris for Damascus on Wednesday,
he 15th inst.
BOURSE. P AkIS, THURSDAY, JULY 16.

. .
e irst Highest LAwest Last
Price Price. Price, Price
F.e. ch 5 et erit,
4% per Cents 113.. 113 ... 113 ... 113
4 per ..cots ,is so ... ,e. 50 —. IAB 50._ 108 50
3 pert cuts B6 5 . e,6 15 ... 66 5 ... 86 5
.-;;,,k of erance 375j ...37r0 ...3740 _3741;
~: tH;te Baek I,ooot. 611 1125 ...1125 —.1125 _ll's
5,000 f. Sh 5250 —.5250 ...52:,0 ..9250
rslgian Bank
5 per Cents
3i• er Cents 76 t 0 ... 76 80 ... 78 80 ... 76 NI
..ati.:ll Ac tee
Passive 6% .. 6% ... 6% .. 6%
Portuguese 3 per Cents 23% ... 23% ... 274,4 ... 23%
,eapohtan lO5 50 ... 1115 70 ." ." 105 50 1(5 70
_... ...... ..__. __.

:roman
RAILWAI SHARES.
it. (;errnai,,
,'ersailles, R. B 520 ... 523 75 ... 540 527 50
L.B.
Orleans .
,trasburg to Bale

Liberal inter est should strictly examine that his i'f,tlA-
dence and qualification be properly inserted, as they may
tin the neat register, have to record their votes.
Parliamentary electors in cities and boroughs, entitled
tindef the Reform Act, will lose their votes for the next
year, unless they pay on or before the 2:Uth day of July
all the poor's-rates (and windOw tax, if any) payable
from them in respect of their premises previously to the
6th day of April. county
voters must send in their
claims on or before the 20th oh; of July.