The Sun.
London, England, 1840-04-01 00:00:00

favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws. They lately
held a meeting on the subject in the Tower Hamlets,
and resolutions in favour of repeal were unanimously
carried. They had accordingly sent a petition, with a
prayer to that effect, to their Member, Mr. Clay, which
was to be presented that evening. It was signed by 43,767
persons, most of them agricultural labourers.—( Cheers, )
Mr. PRENTICE thought that no exertions should be
spared in agitating the country, and that anti-Corn-law
lecturers should be sent to the various places which
elected Members for Parliament. Ho trusted that
the deputies who could not afford to put down
their 1001. a year would go away with the deterrnina•
tion of giving 100/. worth of labour, if they could not give
it in money. For himself in North Cheshire he would
pledge himself that not a single labourer in that great dis-
trict should be without information and knowledge of the
bearing of the Corn-laws.—(Cheers.) As he went forth
as an unpaid labourer, he might say something with respect
to what Mr. Baring had said. He had said that
there was no chance of a repeal of the Corn-laws. Now
he was an unpaid labourer when it was said, as Mr.
O'Connell observed on Saturday, that the machinery of
the House of Commons required to be improved. In-
stead of endeavouring to repress such feelings, he would
wish them success.
Mr. L. HAYWARD bad received a letter that day from
the Brougham Institution, stating that they were preparing
a petition, which they would send up to him next week.
He thought that perhaps more good was done by lectures
than giving money. He trusted every one would use their
utmost endeavours to make converts to their cause.
Mr. BEAN, one of the deputation from Nottingham,
stated that he would put down his name for 100/.--
( Cheers.) With respect to what Lord Ashburton had stated
respecting two plentiful years, that was true enough ; but he
believed there were times when he and his friends were
placed in the same position as those who now advocated
a repeal of the Corn-laws.--( Cheers.) There was a time
when he and two or three hundred of his friends were
saved while millions were allowed to starve.—( Cheers.)
Mr. JOIiNSON, of Derby, had come up in consequence
of the statements that had been made to Lord Melbourne
when the deputation waited upon him, for after those
statements the Anti-Corn Law Association there would
not rest satisfied until his Reverend Colleague and
himself left for London to inform the League of
how matters were going on at Derby, and its im-
mediate neighbourhood. Last year there was a pe-
tition got up at Helper, and also in Derby. In the
latter place there were 2,800 persons signed the petition,
but in the present year no less than 4,798 persons had
signed it. The public mind there, with very few excep-
tions, was in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws ; and, for
his own part, he was convinced that the people would
never be satisfied until they had obtained justice—( Cheers)
—and he was sure if they did not obtain it from the House
of Commons as at present constituted, they would be in
favour of a further organic change. Such was the dis-
tress of the people in Derby and its neighbourhood, that
there there were between 1,100 and 1,200 persons desti-
tute of the means of obtaining food, unless through the
medium of public charity, and this was all caused by the
obnoxious Corn-laws.—(Cheers.) Such was the feeling
with respect to the Corn-laws, that in the village of Mel-
bourne, the principal tenant of that Noble Lord had be-
come a total repealer—(Cheers)—and that gentleman
had actually invited himself and his reverend colleague to
go over there and explain the bad effects of the Corn-laws.
They did go there, and the result was, that a petition
against their continuance was got up, which was
signed by 467 persons, seven-eighths of the whole
population of the place, and such was the progress that
had been made there, that they had got up an anti-Corn-law
Association.—(Cheers.) At another village, which was
the property of Mr. Evans, the Member, every farmer with
only one exception, was in faveur of the Corn-laws.—
(Cheers.) He had a list of petitions coming from diffe-
rent parts of Derby and its neighbourhood containing
altogether signatures to the number of 8,733
( Loud cheers.) He thought, therefore, the observa-
tions of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that
day were not borne out by the fact that the people of the
of the agricultural districts had not a knowledge on this
subject.—(Cheers.) At another village called Weston,
an attempt was made to get up a petition in favour of
the Corn-laws, but it was given up as the parties inter-
ested in getting it up were informed by the people there,
when asked to sign them, that they would not do so, that
they were unjust in principle, and therefore they declined
signing a petition in their favour. One man, when asked
to sign said, that a petition of that sort would not do, as
the poor man liked to get a large loaf.—(Cheers.) He
believed that such was the feeling now throughout the
country, that no person could carry on the Government
upon th4rinciple of supportingthe Corn-laws.---( Cheers.)
Mr. BRADLEY, the Delegate from Nottingham, was one
of those who thought that even if wages -were high, and
the country was in a state of prosperity, that the Corn-laws
were iniquitous.—( Hear, hear.) Distress existed in Not- II
tingham to an extent that he could not pourtray to the
meeting. The homes of the poor in Nottingham were
daily becoming more wretched, and he had that day asked
one of the Members for Nottingham how they were to eon.
tend with the unemployed population, and he had just re.
ceived intelligence that he had been appointed overseer of
the poor.—( A laugh.) He should very much like Lord
Melbourne to tell him how he was to administer the Poor-
law. He did not pretend to say whether the present Poor-
laws by themselves were good or bad, but of this he was
quite sure, that as connected with: the Corn-laws they
were cruel—( Cries of " Hear, hear")—and he had found
that the poor would suffer any privations rather than sub-
mit to the rigid provisions of the Poor-law.—( Hear,
hear.) For that reason not one 1-10th of the miseries
said privations of the poor came before the Poor-law Guar-
' dians. Many poor persons were compelled to remain in
their miserable houses on Sundays with their children, be-
cause neither children nor parents had shoes to walk to
Church in. He believed the country was fast verging to
a state of desperation, but he was one of those who would
wish to see that day put off to as remote a period as possi-
ble.—( Hear, hear.) If the principles of free trade were
adopted he believed the horrors of war would never be
known again. He was a member of a Peace So-
ciety, but he had repeatedly told his friends,
that, unless they became the advocates of free
trade all their efforts for the accomplishment of universal
peace would be vain.—( Hear, hear.) He sincerely trusted
that the strength of the agitation now afloat would be such
as to show their rulers the repeal of the Corn-laws could
no longer be withheld.--( Cheers.)
The CHAIRMAN hoped that Delegates would not leave
London with the notion that the debate in the House of
Commons upon Mr. Villiers' motion would close on Fri-
day night. It was impossible to say how long it might be
kept up.
Mr. SIDNEY SMITH observed that they were deter-
mined the question should not be burked in the House
of Commons. —( Hear, hear.) He hoped that the mo-
tion of Mr. Villiers would not be the only one
that would be brought before the House this year. If the
subject were constantly brought before Parliament, the
public attention would be kept alive, and the most impor-
tant facts in support of their cause would be disseminated
from one end of the kingdom to the other. Agitation was
going forward, and if every one would go home with the
impression on his mind that all were to work, they
could not fail, for they had the best side of the cause, and
they must conquer. They must convince their neighbours
and the country that they were in earnest—success would
then be certain.
The Rev. Mr. BREWSTER had contributed something to
maintain order and law in Scotland, and he could assnre
the Delegates that nothing was better calculated to con
tribute to that great end, than a continued agitation under
the influence and control of that great, enlightened, and
patriotic body.—Adjourned.

taond:\TEl
Ladyohnli etvagDE3llloolknitpeoauEgasuseneLlna
Monday
lihnee(eiirial
yesaesfaarsotzoDefasi
tvstil.,3niatunioc:feialrackifu;,
postmark
returnedldti:3n,yislcaktors
df
a letter are sometimes the most important features of it, where
they have afterwards to be inspected in a court of justice, and
points of evidence turn on either the one or the other, such for
instance as notice of the dishonour of a bill of exchange, sent by
letter posted a (lay too late, and not addressed inside as well as
out, so that evidence of the address is lost, by the destruction
of the envelope, as well as proof of the time when the letter
would be received in the ordinary course of post. Again it
frequently happens, that to serve a particular purpose, a letter
is dated from one place and posted at another, evidence of
which would be lost by destruction of the envelope. These
points may be worth the consideration of the public. Where
envelopes are used they should be preserved with the enclosure.
THE LATE MURDER AT CLYDEY.—The horrid
murder of Shadrack Lewis, in the parish of Clydey, in the comity
of Pembroke, has, as would naturally he supposed, created the
most intense interest in the neighbourhood where this most
dreadful crime was committed. We arc happy to state
that, through the indefatigable exertions of D. S. Davies,
Esq.. of Pentre, the Chairman of the Cardiganshire Quarter
Sessions, and the other Magistratesacptienrgsonssvihthavehbitenwe,. to-
to-
gether with the assistance rendered them by Mr. Dozing,
one of the metropolitan police, and Mr. Pugh, the chief
officer of police in Carmarthen, three
ap-
prehended ; and from the evidence there is little doubt of
their being the actual murderers. We learn that a great
btleefm.oreent,haendfact,
hisw hhoal,:ad conspired together to get rid of the
many more will, ere long, be taken into custody as accessories
Unhappy victim, in consequence of his being emrloyed to pro-
for cutting and stealingintgimgbiC:relf—e'C'
engine
-room.
itaientnic,reiaagn:.tinst several patties
tectltutl the
siNiTyd
"o,efeCko;lonel Colby, of Fynone, and other gen-
rhampion setercaernivetantgo
the body of the fireman obstructing its operation, the end of
e the
engine
the beam striking and crushing his head at every stroke. He
7vileoan twitch it7ba,Y whichft:o Yio:r‘Wk' atis(l) ttlhCye so
ens ioned by
Ile was a stranger, temporarily employed, about
thirty years of ace—even his name was not known. He was in
liquor at the time. —Sheffield Mercury.—[This is only one Of
quite dead, his brains being smashed about the
the innumerable cases of loss of life from drunkenness tha
occur daily.]
The Marseilles and Paris Journals before us con-
tain accounts tending to show that the feeling of the Emperor
of Morocco was hostile to France, but nothisig to prove that
he contemplated an actual declaration of war.
A MOST SINGULAR CIRCUMSTANCE.
Twelve months since the lady of a General Officer came to
London to have a cancer cut from her breast, which operation
would no doubt have cost her her life. By mere chance she
tried Holloway's Ointment and his External Disease l'ill,
which in a few months completely cured her. These wonder-
ful Medicines ought always to be used tolgether in all cases of
s
abnudi dt egesr, er
n,s at db viceey will
I 2th Lancers
Cancer, Bad Breasts, Bad Legs, and al dangerous Wounds
sill never fail to cure. They are sold
by all respectable Medicine Vendors throughout the Kingdom ;
or, at the Establishment of the Proprietor, 13, Broad-street-
On Monday last agi,t.er,oogrpatiei s
the
arrived in Chepstow from Monmouth, to remain (luring the
present Assizes. It is expected they will be removed altogether
from Monmouth in the ensuing month Merlin.
OVERLOOK ER'SCRUELTY.--- On Monday week,
at the Magistrates' Office in Halifax, a young lad, attended by
his parents, complained of the cruel treatment of an over-
looker, named Balmforth, at Crossley's mill, Lilley-lane, for
having ill-treated him by beating him, &c. A boy who was in
Court was called on, who had witnessed the assault, and, after
being sworn, testified to the facts, eter which the Magistrates
deemed him 1:),. to pay. Mr. llalph gave him a reprimand
afterwards, and told him they should neither allots him or any
one else to use boys in that W.

M URD E

State for the Foreign Department, ard it was clot true
Ft that negotiation had been broken off.
Mr. HUME wished to ask when the returns respect:g
ing the commercial treaty with Austria might he expected,
as they had been moved for and ordered some time ago ?
Mr. LABOUCHERE was not able to answer that
question without first consulting the Noble Lord the
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
Mr. HUME gave notice that he should to-morrow
make a motion on this subject, as the course now adopted
was really frightful. —( Laughter.)
Sir E. KN AT CHBU LL wished to ask the Hon. Mem-
ber for Bridport if lie could inform the House, whether it
was the intention of the Hon. Member for Wolverhamp-
ton to bring forward hit motion on the subject of the Corn-
laws, or not?
Mr. WARBURTON said that the Hon. Member for
Wolverhampton regretted excecdirgly that, owing to in-
disposition, he had been prevented from bringing forward
the motion that night, but it was his intention certainly to
bring it on to morrow night.
CHINA.
Lord SANDON said that he should withdraw a notice
of motion with respect to China, upon the assurance of her
Majesty's Ministers that a Committee should be appointed
on the snhjeet. The notice for the appointment of that
Committee had been standing on the paper from day to
day for weeks past, and yet the Committee had not been
named. He wished, therefore, to know when the Govern-
ment intended to name that Committee ?
Sir JOHN HOB HOUSE understood that the Com-
mittee was to be appointed to-morrow. He begged,
however, to remind the Noble Lord that the proposition

d not originate with the Govcrument, but with the lion

Member for London.
THE KING OF HANOVER.
Mr. HO RSMAN seeing the Hon. and Gallant
Member for Slto what he had
in his place, wished to put a question
to him relative been represented to have said
the other night. It had been stated that an application had
been made to the Kin°. of Hanover to give up that part of St.
James's Palace which he had occupied previous to be-
coming King of Hanover, and to that application an
answer had been sent refusing to givo up the apartments.
From the statements it appeared that the Han. and Gal-
lant Member stated that he was instructed positively to
deny the statement. Now he wished is know whether
such were the fact ?
Col. PE RC E VAL said that be did not on that occasion
state that any such application had been made to the King
of Hanover. What he stated was, that no application had
been made by the Duchess of Kent, and upon the Noble
Lord the Secretary for the Colonies stating that it was
new to him, he (Colonel Perce v al) when the Noble
Lord sat down, read the authority to the House on
which he made that statement.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.")
The Gallant Colonel here begged leave to read the follow-
ing passage from the letter of Sir F. Watson which he had
received last Friday—" It has been erroneously conceived
that the King of Hanover's apartments at St. James's have
been required by the Duchess of Kent ; but in fact, her
Royal Highness did not cnly not express a wish for them,
but even observed that they would not suit her ; and further,
her Royal Highness is notpleased with the manner in which
her name has been used upon the subject." The Gallant
Colonel then continued—" I may be permitted to state that
the assertion I made was not that no application had beenmade
to the King of Hanover, hut that none had been made by
the Duchess of 'ent.—(lronical cries of " Hear, hear.'')
The very conclusion of the letter I read shows that some
application had been made, or her Royal Highness would
not have been displeased. The Hon. Member seems to
think that I have received since Friday some fresh infor-
mation. That I consider at least as part of his question.
And I am prepared to say that I have heard front a Mem-
ber of the Government that an application was made to the.
King of Hanover, by the First Commissioner of Woods an
°
Forests, for the use of the apartments in St. James's, on be-
half of her Majesty, and that it was refused.—( Hear, beer'
hear)—and that another application was made to the same
effect by Lord Melbourne—which was also refused.--•
( Hear, hear.) I stated that no application had
Hbr,
een
made by the Duchess of Kent.—(lronical cries of " ea
hear," and " Oh, oh.") I do not understand the,
triumphant tone of Hon. Gentlemen.—( Hear, bee"
The letter itself, I repeat, intimated that some application
had been made."

PRIVILEGE.
The Order of the Day for the consideration of this
subject having been read,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he understood
the Sergeant-at-Arms had a statement to make as to the
action of trespass. He moved that he be called in and

heard.
The Sergeant-at-Arms being called to the bar, said the
Assistant- Sergeant and four messengers had been served
with notice of declaration in actions commenced by T. 13.
Howard : and he produced the declaration.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved that it beret°
by the Clerk.
The declaration was then read, which stated that it wal
an action of trespass, brought by Thomas Burton H 0 and
against Edward Allen Gossett, William Bellamy, aa
others, for entering the plaintiff's house, and creating at
noise and disturbance therein. The damages were laict
1,0001.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that in the elr
sence of his Noble Friend it became his duty to Prej.
pose a motion to the House upon this aubjeca
From the verbiage of the document which he,
just been read, it was difficult to discover either what teas,
the exact form of the action to be brought, or what it tat
of which the plaintiff complained. It did not appear tfity
he questioned the privileges of the House, or the Ice
an
of the warrant, but what he said was, that there of
excess of violence on the part of the officers °it; „
House in the execution of that warrant. The
ourable and Learned Member for Ripon, vo"°—
he did not then see in his place, bad, he believed, re-
ceived a letter from Mr. Howard on that subject, and he
himself had received one purporting to come from Mr.
Laurie, Mr. Howard's solicitor, in which he stated that
the complaint was of excess of violence on the part of the
officers of that House. The question was, what course ought
the House to adopt ? WlleFe there was an absolute breach
of the privileges of the House, it was not only right but
the House was called upon to interfere in a suns narY
manner, but in this case the action was brought, not to op
pose the orders of the House, but to complain of
what
E
the officers had done in the execution 'of their duty. r.ehno
in this case the House had a right to interfere. If
in f
Court of Chancery a complaint was made against seY °f
the officers of the Court for any excess in the execution
be
their duty the Court would not allow an action to
brought, as it was considered that such an action vvould
a breach of the privileges of the Court. The Court di•
rected an inquiry to be made, and if the complaint were
well-founded they punished their officer, and directed eoa,l_,
pensation to be made to the person complaining. No don
the House might do the same if they thought fit ; ndoubt $
they might ir.quire and award compensation. Such
power undoubtedly belongeel to the House ; but under ge
present circumstances the question was whether the We-
ought to exercise this power. He believed that as no eo°_„'.
plaint was made of the power, but only of the excess
d
the part of the servants, that the best course they c°'d's„
pursue would be not to order the Attorney-General to
but
fend the action on behalf of the House of Commons, t
that means should be given to the defendants to al,Pea,r to
°
the action, and he did not doubt but they would be ah`e6
show that they had done nothing but what the circ,uh-:t
stances of the case demanded. It would be shown '0:
they bad entered the house with the consent of the inraaco
of it ; that there had been an exchange of civilities bet
y
the officers and the inmates of the house during the time whey
remained there that they had not entered the house a-be
Mr. Howard had for a long time evaded the orders of t,
House for his attendance ; and upon such evidence bert
given he had no doubt the verdict would be for the dac`tatee
dants.—(Cheers,) This he thought would be a b
course to pursue than letting judgment go by default, sink,
fering the execution of a writ of inquiry, and then sor„i.•
an order on the Sheriff not to execute the writ a
,facial. Under all the circumstances of the casc'fale
thought the more dignified course for the House to Pu—,.
would be to let their servants appear to the actioo•
(Cheers.) He should therefore move that leave be gilt: r
to Edward Allen Gossett, William -Bellamy, and the °l-e
defendants, to appear to the action.
The question having been put, n of
Lori! HOW IC K said he should not occupy the tit at
the House by entering into any lengthened Argu--„cy-
against the course which the Learned Att(,)r-nia
General had thought it proper to recommend the Ileiact
to pursue, because he was perfectly sure, after whart,,,o-
occurred, that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's
ld
sition would be carried by a large majority. But he
nce.
not let such a step as this be taken in entire Bile
:s it,
co
(Cheers.) Hecould not, without protesting 143,,95ating
let the House make a concession even more htlowiThere
than any which the House had ever yet taken• of
th
could be no doubt that if their officers had been e
Igu'..o'„er
excess in executing the orders of that Home. "bso
course for those who had been agrieved would Ivic,"tot of
to apply to the House itself fors edress. The '(:.i'ouel
Chancery would not permit its processes to be quip, an.
in a Court of Law.—( Hear, hear.) The 11°11"joubt
Learned Attorney-General had said that he had a° oecroti
the Court of Law would decide that their °
had only done that which 411 S required frirly: an
in the proper exercise of their duty. The 'ld.' oh*
Learned Attorney-General had said he was e"n"-e0 'l'
that, but he (Lord Howick) was conifi'dc.a.t of e°l3:uneb
thing, after the decision of the Court of Quee"'a,e eetbr
in Stockdale v. Hansard, a decision directly in."7,,rtly 9'
of every previous decision of that Court, partictl.-eoce
the case of King and Wright. fie had no on
ccot
whatever in the judgment of that Court. 10 the roes
case the whole argument against the House of C°frtieen'a
was, that they had submitted to the Court of '414 asi
Bench, and that when the judgment of that C!'flia
pronounced against them, they had no right to the
But the situation in which they were placed Was O",Lk, 00
natural consequence of the course which the H brought
a former evening, in allowing that Bill- to be bear.)
which was then before the other House.--(1"r:ore t°°
The exercise of their privleges and their rights' 'of 1.814'
important to be at the discretion of the Court 3 lotion
the row
For the consequ..,,ices that might result from
that had been made by the Hon. and LeaairldnettleAretrore be
General, he would not be respon;ible,
would give hi, negative to the motion. id salt 9 a
Mr. O'CONNELL protested against any tilejoto ha
ing from the assertion of their rights. The neck.",
decided by an overwhelming majority upon t',.! ad be":
sity and importance of this privilege. It war
decided that the Sergeant might,in
of the House, break into premises. Bet sinea
question being opened how long the officers relu
_ll5, tlio
the house, the jury might held that two minutesd"so
under theehere the
proper time, and that five minutes was excess, wile og,
Jury might have the damages left to them byt nur,e 0-15!
arid might fine for 1,0001. ; the Sergeant of e° it, 1311'
not pay that sum, and the House would have to Pai 'to the
was not the House in all this virtually leaving •Iviicges.
Courts of Law to adjudicate on the extent of its pr‘_,,cb the
—( Hear, bear.) This was a tlegrada•ion to w°l_..broit.
Court of Chancery, or Queen's Bench, would not,.rs`_`o the
—( Hem, hear.) The whole mischief had ariseu t_cti:slott
I bowie having shrunk, in the first instanc:a 1....t...‘ti10r.)
shrinking, from the bold assertion of its privilege. eily for a
He might be told that there ought to be a rem