The Sun.
London, England, 1840-07-31 00:00:00

EVENING- EDVIION.

per annum,:or thereabouts. When it is recollected that this
bank lost very nearly one quarter of its paid-up capital, and
in consequence declinad last half-year to divide, it wcuid
surely have been more prudent for the Directors to have
held on without making a dividend until the lost capital of
the Company should he recovered. The principle of de.
Glaring a dividend in such a position is vicious in the ex-
treme ; and it is to be regretted that a body of gentlemen,
such as the Directors of this Bank are, should act in a man-
ner so much at variance with the experience and opinion of
sound business-men.

HERALD.—There was a meeting yesterday of the
shareholders of the United Mexican Mine Association, at
which that very clever and well-known Member of the
Stock Exchange, Mr. J. Easthope, now M.P., presided.
The returns from the mine of Reyes, the only one in
work by the Company, have been rather falling off, it ap-
pears, of late, and the lease of the mine itself is not far
from the term of its expiration. Ncgctiations arc on
foot for its renewal, but as the Marquis de las Reyes is
heavily in debt to the Association, as well as the mine
i❑ respect of outlay over proceeds, it will perhaps be
difficult to conclude a bargain for renewal upon ad-
vantageous conditions. Assuming the possible case
of failure in corning to terms the 1,01A,000 dollars of
debt so overlaying the mine would, it is said by the
stock jobbing ministerial print, this morning, be a
" subsisting claim, and s'and as such in the position
of a first mortgage, so that the amount would, under
any circumstances, be paid out of the future profits."
The " future profits" are assumed therefore with as much
ignorance, and impudence, if not intentional deception, as
the surplus revenue of two millions sterling of Spain,
where, however, if Finance Ministers may be believed, the
excess of expenditure is in the ratio of more than 50 per
cent. advance upon the whole income. If the Company
are so indiscreet as to rest their faith on the mining laws
of Mexico for the security of any debt or mortgage, the
chance of its redemption is not a much more probable con-
tingeacy than that of Portuguese Pedroite loans, which
Mr. Easthope may have heard were in the origin a perfect
bonanza of a Rayas mine to the projectors and first jobbers,
but arc now never mentioned but with wry faces and load
laments, not by the contractors and primary agents in
their concoction, for the rogues slipped their cable, that is,
their stock, and got clean out of the turmoil with all their
unrighteous profits, but by the luckless dupes of pre-
sent holders who were cunningly sacked of their money
and left with the paper bonds. Hitherto the shareholders
have had no particular benefit out of their mining specula-
tions, although Mr. Easthope and the directors may have
been more fortunate. Notwithstanding the heavy debts
addled upon the concern, no sooner did a favourable turn
in the products and progress of the mine furnish the moans
fur a trifling repayment and reduction of the debt than Mr.
Easthope himself proposed and carried a motion for shar-
ing among the Directors for their services the magnificent
sum of 10,000/. From which it would appear that, like
some other economical patriots of the day, that person has
two rules of action, and whilst the Director is peculiarly
prodigal when filling his own pockets is the matter in hand,
the Member of Parliament on the contrary is a perfect
niggard when voting supplies for hardworking servants of
the public.

SUN.--The English funds closed heavily again.
Consols for money 90i -a, and for account, 904 ; Ex-
chequer Bills, 25 prem., and India Bonds, 1 discount.
The Reduced Three-and-a-Half per Cents. fell to 991,
and the New Three-and-a-Half per Cents. to 98i1
The Foreign Stocks have all been lower, in the ab-
sence of any extensive transactions. Spanish Active
Bonds have receded from 261 to 2.54 for present de-
livery, and have been marked 254 to 26 for the August
Account. Portuguese New Five per Cents. have
been very heavy at 338 to and the Three per Cents.
at 23 to 224. Colombian Bonds have further declined
to-day, in consequence of the proceedings at the meet-
ing of yesterday, and the delay which must arise in ob-
taining better terms from Venezuela. They have
ranged to-day from 25.1 to 258. Mexican Stock has
also been lower, viz., at 30 to 294. Brazilian Bonds
have been nominally 79g. From Amsterdam we learn
that the excitement on the Paris Bourse had led to a
serious re-action in the Dutch Funds, the Two-and-
Half per Cents. having fallen to 51 13-16 ; and the
Five per Cents. to to 1008.
The Riilway Shares were better to-day, and left off
as follows :--London and Birmingham, 90 ; ditto Quar-
ter Shares, 23 ; Great Western, New, 16J ; South
Western, 18if ; and Blackwall, 11 premium ; Brighton,
71 ; and Northern and Eastern, 78 discount.

LONDON :
FRIDAY, JULY 31, 1840.

In the Lords, amongst a mul.titude of huiness which
was transacted, we mils( yttytien..that 7th!.. ,Metropolis
Improvement all (NO. 1)
.was read a second time, Es
was the Municipal Districts (Ireland) Bill, after the
Rsbop of ExETEtt had .explained to their Lordships
that it affected the Protestant interest.

A little sparring took place between the Bishop of
LONDON and some lay Lords, touching the Rating of
Stock Bill, against which some clergymen petitioned,
while Lords WHARNCLIFFE and PORTMAN declared
the clergy had nothing to complain of.
- In reply to the Marquis of LONDONDERRY, Viscount
MELBOURNE said all the papers connected with the ar-
rangements for the Anglo-Spanish Legioa should be laid
on the. table.

Lord STRANGFORD inquired whether it was true that
an arrangement relative to Egypt had been made, to
which France was.not a consenting party ? . What fo!.
lowed we must copy.
" Viscount MELBOURNE said that it vas certainly
true that negotiations had been carried on between
Greatßritain, Austria, Russia, Prussia, and the Sublime
Porte, to pacify matters in the Levant. These negotia-
tions had been carried on, and were considerably ad-
vanced ; but matters of .that kind could not be consi-
dered as settled until ratified. It was quite certain,
however, that these negotiations had made considerable

progress.
" Lord BROUGHAM asked whether it was true or not
as reported, that no communication whatever had been
made to France, or its Representative, on the subject
of these negotiations, until after the period of the clam-
pfetion of the treey.
_ _ _

't Lord 11.1E1.BotinriE said it certainly was their wish
to concur wiih France on this subject ; but it was also
certainly true that France was not a party to this at.;
rangentent,_

" Lord BaoLGHam said, all he could then do was to
express as strongly as he could, and he could not express
too strongly, his deep regret on the subject."
On the Order of the Day for going into Committee on
the Ecclesiastical Revenues Bill, the Bishop of EXETER
made a speech against the Bill, excusing himself for
not having done that on the second reading by the
lateness of the hour to which the debate was pro-
tracted. The Right Rev. Prelate made an onslaught
on the Primate, the diffe►cnce amongst the Right Rev.
and Most Reverend Gentlemen being one of the most
gratifying circumstances which has of late fallen under
our notice, and of far more importance than the Bill
which has caused it. We recommend the whole speech
of the Right Rev. Prelate, particularly his rebuke of
the Prime Minister for a speech in Parliament, and his
allusion to taking away the property of a certain Mar-
quis to relieve the distress at Glasgow, and his hint that
Noble Lords should be called on to disgorge- Church
property, to the attentive perusal of the reader.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY gave a brief ex-
planation of his conduct on a former occasion.
The Duke of WELLINGTON again delivered his opi-
nions at some length on the subject of providing for
spiritual destitution, and firmly said that It ought to be
done in the first instance out of the property of the
Church

EiThe. Bishop of LONDON advocated a distribution of
Church property, out of fear,—not of those who cried
"Down with the Church"—but lest be as oneof the rulers
of the Church should be wanting in his duty. Report
says, that he has-oaken good. care of Number 0.3 e.
Alter the. Right Rev. Prelate had pummelled his
brf,thcr of EXETER sufficiently as he thought, the
Bill went into Committee, and several amendments were
read pro forma, in order that they might be printed,
and di--cuti9ed on Monday next.

Their. Lonisbips then adjourned.
in the Commons the Consolidated Fund Bill and the
Exchequer Bills Bill, were read a first time, which is
svmptoma!ie of the end of the -Session.: We have
hear,' t'e,tt thef.day fixed for the prorogation is the. Ith.
The Administration of Justice BM was put off for
this 62.?sion, lie7autic Sir E. SIUGDEN- had given notice
of a inoton oppositio., to it, and because Lori J.
rot think it right to pass such a BA at
sue!: a period of the Sessioa, ua:css it be enanimoJsiy
supp.3rtctl.
rt-pf to Lord SAtcuotq, Lord PALmEasToN stated.
thet tiie su!otier monnpoly in Sicily would cease as
so:in as possible after the award which had been given
in P.0i.1 ahould he known at Naples.
Several. Bills,including the Regency Bill, were passed
through ono stare without opposition. The third read-
ing or the itlilways &II was opposd, but the motion
to postpone it was defeated by 83 to '5. It Was, how-
evix, put off ti.i later in the evening.
niter scaie resistance on the part of Mr. WAxerta-
TON, the Linen (Ireland) Bill went into a Committee;
and went through the t:otitnittee with a number of
amon(:lnent. It is to be reported 011 -Monda.
WAattunToN wished to postpone the Church
Discipline Bin, on the ground that the clergy are
either unacquainted with its provisions, or were hostile
moved to put it off for three months, but
was defeated on a division by i!,7 to 13. The 1301 went

into Committee, but did not struggle through
it, as Mr. WARBURTON insisted on dividing on a
clause, when the House being scanty of Members, the
Chairman reported progress.
Before the House adjourned, Lord MORPETH for Lord
J. liussELL, obtained leave and brought in a Bill to
amend the Act for the better regulation of Ecclesiastical
Courts, the single object of which is to enable the
Court which committed JOHN TIIOROGOOD to dis-
I charge him. The House rose at Half-past Ten.

The absurdity of the Bishop of WINCHESTER'S
doctrine, to which we yesterday adverted, though
unworthy of any lengthened refutation, is not unde-
serving of notice, as a specimen of the extreme ar-
rogance of the priesthood. His argument, which
i is embraced by the great bulk of the clergy, was—
" That the State has no right to divert the funds of
Cathedral or other institutions fi om the intentions of
Me original founders or donors." He doubted
whether the State had any right to interfere with
that distribution of property ; but we know, from the
continued practices of the Bishops and their chil-
dren for the last two centuries, that they only
maintain this doctrine against the State and the
people, and that whenever it suits them to divert
these funds, they do so without scruple or remorse.
How else have the Tom LYNS, and the SPA RKES,
and the SUTTONS, been enriched ? The Bishop
of WINCHESTER concluded his speech by conjur-
ing the Peers, as they hoped for mercy at the last
day, not to abolish prebendal stalls and sinecure
canonries. What relation ex'sts between the sal-
vation of the Peers and an improved distribution of
Church property, we must leave the Bishop of
WINCHESTER to explain ; but such denunciations
of unseen and unknown misfortunes are the wea-
pons which the priesthood have brandished in all
ages before the dazzled eyes of their followers, to
subdue them to their own will.

We remember the time when the appointment of
the present Bishop of WINCHESTER to his See
was regarded by all respectable clergymen, and all
right-thinking members of the Establishment, as
a disgrace and scandal to the Church. It would
be libellou4,infthe highest degree for us to repeat
what we'then heaftl several respectable clergymen
say of the source of his appointment, and of his
unfitness for his office ; but we may say, without a
libel, that had the Whigs made such an appointment,
there is not a, clergyman throughout the length anti
breadth of the land, who would not have accused them
of intending to degrade the Church. But what-
ever might have been thought of the appointment
of Dr. SUMNER to be Bishop of Winchester
twelve or fourteen years ago, all the respectable
clergy will now rejoice in it as having raised up in
him a great champion of their extreme claims.
They will perhaps remember that some of the most
powerful chemical agents, such as nitric acid, are
obtained from the most impure objects, and they
%Nig think it almost miraculous that a similar result
should take place in the moral as in the physical
world.

Now, let the reader take this doCtrine of the
Bishop of WINCHESTER, which is in general
that of the clergy, which tabbooes, as it were,
all their possessions against the claims of all
living men, and which denies the right of the State
to alter, so far as regards their property, the testa-
mentary disposition of EDGAR ATHELING and
EDMOND IRoNslDEs,—let the reader take this
instructive doctrine in connexion with another
which is laid down by Sir H. OAK LLY, the Very
Reverend Dean and Rector of Bocking, in an ad-
dress to his parishioners, which is now lying before
us. They have for some time objected to make
a Church-rate, and the Reverend Baronet, in his
address, lays it down that the parishioners are bound
to maintain the fabric of the Church, and that the
Spiritual Courts will make them. The State
must not even alter the appropriation df that part
of our annual produce claimed by the clergy, but
the clergy may declare that certain churches want
repairs, may call on the Churchwardens to make
them, and may consign a whole parish of JOHN
THOROGOoDs to gaol, if such be found, by a pro-
cess in an Ecclesiastical Court.

What they class as church repairs, and make
other men pay for, is shown by the aiticle from
Chelmsford published in yesterday's Sun. Organ-
ists, washing surplices, keeping THoriocoon in
gaol, are some of the items for which the Rev. Ba-
ronet claims a Church-rate, and claims a power in
Ecclesiastical Courts of consigning men to a dun-
geon if they refuse to pay.
We remarked, concerning the late debate on
THOROGOOD'S case, that as there was no power to
release him, he must have been punished by a power
independent of the Crown. The Protestant Ec-
clesiastical Courts, in fact, claim a jurisdiction
derived from Rome above the law of the Protestant
State. Thus the priesthood enforce by Papal
Courts of their own their claims to tax the people,
while they strenuously deny that the State has
the power or the right to touch any of their
property. Now when we combine these two
claims together, and see them made on the ,
pretext of providing for the salvation of
the people hereafter, as well as their present mora-
lity, the conclusion is irresistible that the clergy as-
sume a juggling supremacy over the law, and insist
on using it,. and on using religion, to enrich them-
selves at other people's expense.
We can only expose these pretensions and resist
them by Our pen. The parishioners of Bocking,
however, we are happy to see, are taking active
measures to defeat the demands of the Rev. Dean.
Oa the 24th instant, the friends of civil and religious
liberty met in that parish, and have published a
spirited reply to the appeal of the Dean, in which
the concealed assumptions are dragged to light, and
exposed in all their fallacious hideousness. The
priesthood failed at Barking, and now they are to
try .if they can succeed better in the neigh-
bouring parish of Bocking. The Reverend
Dean, who is also the Rector and a man
of title, accompanies his persuasion to vote a
rate by a threat of enforcing a rate by the help
of the Ecclesiastical. Courts. If the rate be once
voted by the Vestry it will be irresistible, and Dis-
senters will have to pay for prosecuting themselves
or their brethren—for such is the use to which
Church-rates are put—who, for conscience sake,
object to such a disgraceful and degrading impost.
Traced from its source to its conclusion, from a
mandate of a Dean to the imprisonment of an
honest recusant—a Church-rate, for all Dissenters,
is sheer persecution, a degrading badge of the in-
feriority of their religion, and of their rank in so-
ciety. They are at once sectarians and slaves.

Our Correspondent, " A Whig in politics," whose
letter appears in another column, hardly needed to
have told us that he penned his remarks in a hum.
Had he taken a little time for reflection he would
have made them a little more accurate as well as
more to the point. We do not know whether he
intends to prevaricate when he says that " the pre-
sentees of the patron and of the Presbytery are
alike subject to the refusal of the people." He
could not be ignorant that we were speaking of the
Veto Act in its original form, in which form it con-
tained no provision for the people's refusal of the
Presbytery's presentee. Any future modification
of it may show the accommodating nature of the
Non-Intrusion " principle," but it. leaves the inten-
tion of the Vetoists of 1834, as far as it can be de-
duced from their Act, exactly where it was left by
us. That Act increased the power of the clergy at
the expense of the patrons, and we are warranted in
supposing that such was the intention of its framers.
We arc glad to find that our Correspondent cor-
roborates our argument, that the effect of Lord
ABERDEEN'S Bill was not to transfer the pa-
tronage of the Church to the Clergy, but
to limit the power of the Presbytery.
He is not so happy, however, in vindicating Dr.
ett ALM FR§ from the charge of " making a Jonah"
of the Veto and Call. It is clear enough from
his own showing,
fact, that the Revere enrde
Dthere
tninir
eow
aaosit.ol
prree
sr
ta.epi
ndy r
toi of
filling
of the
to make an excambion o
commo-
" competency."'
(fides for presbyterial
pointment no doubt was great when he found tUat
Lord ABERDEEN would not be a party to this
exchange, involving as it did a shameless d'erelic-
tion of the principle from which the champion of
Non-Intrusion had publicly and solen inly declared
he would not retreat a "hair's-breadth." We
mar, however, venture to affirm, that great as was
the Doctor's disappointment, it was- not treater
than that of a large portion of his party, iat his
declaration of it.
_ _ _

Another point in which our Col..7respondent
agrees with us is the qualification of ob*jec tors. We
have shown that the Clergy have 'the power of
limiting, and have limited, the right of ob jecting to
a mere fraction of the congregat'ion, and having
done this, have the impudence l
to eXelaita 44 r Be-
.

hold how zealous we are for the rights of the
people What good reason can be given for de-
nying the right to a single individual, male or female,
who belongs to the congregation, and has reached
the years of discretion f'
The restriction of the Non-Intrusion principle to
mere objection on the part of the people, which we
take the liberty of viewing as a great inconsistency
—not to say dishonesty—in the getttrs up of the
Non-Intrusion bubble, finds no advocate in our
Correspondent, though he tries to excuse those
who adopted it. He is for the power of " choos-
ing," but he is still short of the mark. He must,
to be consistent, add to this the power of dismissal,
when 4, edification" no longer waits upon the pas-
tor's ministrations. These are not different rights,
but part and parcel of the same right, and those
who will not give the full right must hold their
tongues about " principle."
To say, as our Correspondent does, that the
Veto Act was the "smallest amount of the people's
consent that could be given," is mere nonsense.
Maxima and minima are legitimate things enough
in physical science, but when they come to be ap-
plied to a religious principle, there is good reason
to suspect that something is wrong. Dr. CHAL-
MERs may oscillate like a pendulum between two
extreme points, and thus exhibit the wonderful
" elasticity" of his sentiments on the Non-Intrusion
question ; but all honest men must feel that a reli-
gious principle, conscientiously entertained, cannot
be compromised and frittered away, but must be
carried out to its fullest extent, whatever be the
hazard to him who holds it.

If we" wanted any proof that we were not far
wrong in taking the public press as the test of the
public feeling in Scotland on the Non-Intrusion
question, our Correspondent, in his eagerness to
confute us, has furnished it. He tells us that the
press is no test of public opinion on this question,
because "it is one in which the distinctions of
party politics are altogether buried." If then these
distinctions are altogether buried,. how comes it
that, in this question, the press is all on one side
—all against the Non-Intrusion humbug?
Our Correspondent talks of the page of ecclesias-
tical history bearing testimony to the zeal of Scotch
Christians for the interests of CHRIST'S Church.
We are not disposed to dispute that point. We
know that the people of Scotland have, in for-
►taer times, stood up manfully for what they
believed •to be CHRIST'S Church. We agree
with him too in trusting—indeed we are pretty stile
—that the blood of these " noble forefathers runs
in the veins of their children." But we would
remind him that all that the forefathers struggled
for so nobly, is perfectly within the reach of the
children without any struggle at all. The old
Covenanters fought not for stipends and glebes.
What they drew their broadswords to defend was
the right to worship God according to their con-
sciences. Does any one deny this right to the
Non-Intrusionists ? What, then, hinders them
from enjoying it ? Mammon. They cannot find
in their hearts to part with their State-provided
stipends, their manses, and their glebes. These are
sore clogs upon " principle.'

The share of public notoriety which the " Distin-
guished Correspondent" of the Post has obtained
by his revelation of Friday last, has so inflated his
vanity, that we begin to suspect he intends devot-
ing the remainder of his life to the inditing of
semi-official paragraphs for the Newspapers.
Should he fail in his laudable endeavour to set two
great nations together by the ears, he may still turn
his attention to the harvest which a nature like his
may reap from sowing dissensions among the mem-
bers of a party, or libelling all statesmen whose
policy transcends his feeble powers of comprehen-
sion. He has not yet raised the veil which shrouds
his " Noble" name from vulgar identification ; and
if he would not provoke the derision or the scorn of
the public, we recommend to him—after his lucu-
bration
in the Post of yesterday, which will he
found in another column--carefully to preserve his
incognito. As an anonymous scribbler only can
he escape being either compellud to prove the
very serious charge which he has preferred against
Lord PALMERSTON of kindling an insurrection
in Syria, or of being looked upon by all honourable
men as a base and malignant libeller, who scrupled
not, as far as in him lay, to sacrifice the fair fame
of his country at the shrine of his miserable vanity.
But in the guise in which he presents hi.nself to
the public we challenge him—nay, we defy him to
prove that the British Government was iii any way
accessory to the Syrian insurrection. He has made
a distinct charge of infamy against the 13ritiA
Cabinet. We call upon him to prove it. We
dare him to do so, at the peril of having his mask
torn from his face, and himself stigmatized as a
shameless libeller, if he refuse.

The "Distinguished Correspondent" of the Post
affects as strong a passion for peace as he avows
a deep personal hatred of Lord PALMERSTON.
But who cannot see in .his taunting allusions to
France his keen eagerness to kindle the flames of an
European war ? He well knoWs that a fancied
slight is more likely to be resenteif 'by our
high-spirited, gallant neighbours on the other
side of the Channel, than a real injury and there-
fore he taunts them with Lord PALMERSTON'S
lofty contempt for their Government, and for their
power as a nation. A little reflection might teach
Frenchmen the falsehood, no less than the malig-
nity, of these sneers. It might be expected that
they would not require to be told, that by no
na-
tion in the world, except China, is France likely
to be contemned. To despise France would argue
a temerity inconsistent with sanity. She ought,
therefore, to be above entertaining any jealousy on
this head ; in truth, it would best become her dig-
nity to smile at such indications of grovelling
wickedness on the part of those envying her alliance
with a generous and equally brave and potent rival
in arts and arms. We know that when such sneers
were applied to England in the French journals in
the course of last year, they only provoked, on our
part, a smile of derisive commiseration. We
knew our own strength, and had the dignity to feel
that France was too great, too civilized, too chival-
rous, and too wise, not to respect it.
The Post's Correspondent made the startling re-
velation on Friday last that Russia, Prussia, Aus-
tria, and England had signed a secret treaty for
settling the Eastern question without the inter-
vention of France. We expressed a doubt of the
correctness of this statement ; and we subsequently
showed that the convention agreed to by the Four
Powers was not only submitted to the French Mi-
nister, but assented to by him, though the engage-
ments of his Government to MEIIEMET ALI pre-
vented him from signing it. We appealed to the
French Government itself, whether there was any
mystery about the proceedings of the Great Powers.
They proposed nothing the basis of which had not
been previously approved of by France, and they
took no step of which she was not officially
and candidly made cognizant. Well, what reply
does the " Distinguislurd Correspondent" of the Post
make to thiS ? Why, that besides the convention
submitted to all the Powers, there was still a
secret treaty between four of them to the exclusion
of France. If so, what does it contain which was
not in the ultimatum which it was proposed the
Five Powers should conjointly present to the
VICEROY? Does it stipulate the restoration of
the fleet ? Well, so (lid the other. Does it in-
sist upon the restoration of Candia to the Porte,
and claim for the SULTAN the Sovereignty of
Syria ? Such were the provisions of the conven-
tion verbally approved of by France. We have
not beard that harder conditions are stipulated in
the alleged secret treaty, and we cannot suppose
Coat such a treaty would be manufactured for no
other purpose than to awaken the jealousy and
provoke the indignation of France.
But while, on the part of the British Govern-
ment, we indignantly fling hack the foul and ca-
lumnious charge that the Ministry collectively, or
the Noble Foreign Secretary individually, had any-
thing to do with the breaking out of the insur-
rection in Syria,
we are quite prepared to admit
that the success of the insurgents would give us
the liveliest satisfaction ; and that it is the interest
of England to afford the Syrians any assistance
le with the preservation of our relations
compatib
as neutrals. Tile success of the Syrians at once
settles the Eastern question in the way proposed
by the Great Powers, without ar.y interference
whatever. If the Syrians succeed in throwing off
the iron yoke of the VICEROY, and placing
themselves under the standard of the legitimate
Sovereign, there is no longer a road by which ME-
HEMET ALI can march his legions upon Con-
stantinople. The pretext. for Russian interference
so strongly urged after the battle of Nezib, will be
entirely removed ; and England and France will