The Sun.
London, England, 1840-08-01 00:00:00

VENING_EDITIONI.

Viscount. DUNCANNON objected to the amend-
ment. He did not see why the Recorder of Dublin
should not. he pieced under the seine restrictions as
the Recorders in other parts of Ireland. He should
certainly take the sense of the House against the
amendment.
The Earl of HADDINGTON said the object of
the clause vas merely to exclude the Recorder from
Par:innent ; and if it was thought advisable to do so;
in Heaven's name let them brine; in a Bill to that eficet
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE bore testimony to
the able and excellent manner in which the Hon. Ile-
corder of Dublin discharged his duties when he was
presiding at his Court ; but he thought, when a large
salary was paid to that gentleman, his services should
be given to the people of Dublin as often as they were
required. The objection to the clause was, that it was
likely to debar the opposite party of the services of a
great leader, and be would ask them were they pre-
pared to go before the public with such a decision as
that.—(Cheers.) He would refer their Lordships to the
state of the prisons of Dublin, where there were not leaa
I ban .212 persons for trial, of whom 90 were -:eroales.
Was that quite right 'a Was that what the Noble arid
Learned Lord pointed out as a fitting state fur the
administration of justice in the city cf Dublin rf he
resolution to which the Noble and Learned Lord oh,
jected had been agreed to unanimously in the Com•
inittae. Although justice to Ireland was a much abused
word, there never was a case in' which justice to the
population of one great city of that country was more
deeply invo;vcd than that which they were nose engaged
in Council upon.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said it had at last
been discovered, after several years, that an active and
zealous officer, against whom there was no complaint
whatever, should not be allowed to sit in Parliament
because his course was not exactly satisfactory to cer-
tain Persons. Let them come forward fairly with a
clause in the Bill, and say that the Right Hon. Mr.
Shaw should not have a scat in Parliament.—
(Cheers.) Let them do that, and they would see what
Parliament would say to it, but let them not throw
it upon the Lord-Lieutenant to exclude that gentleman.
He for one would vote against the proposition, consider-
ing that it was an unjust and party proposition for
the purpose of gratifying the disinclination—be would
rot use a harsher phrase—of one particular party
against the Right Hon. Gentleman. He thought such
exclusion undeserved and unmerited, and he declared
his firm belief that no public officer in the service of the
State had performed his duty in a more zealous and
meritorious manner.—(Cheers.)
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE explained—Th:3
was not the first time that such a provision had been intro-
duced in the Bill, for it had been introduced into every
Bill brought before the House but one. Tile complaint
was that the prisons in Dublin were not delivered.
Lord LYN D H URST—Whare- is the complaint
• The Marquis of LANSDOWNE—I make it—it is
contained iu those papers, and it has ben. made else-
where.

The Marquis of NORMANBY said, with respect
to the question of where is the complaint ?—it had. been
made in 1837, on the occasion of the Recorder hying
presented to the Lord Mayor of Dublin.
Lord LYNDHURST—What Lord Mayor?
Toe Marquis of NORMAN BY—Mr. Perrin,_.
(Cries of " Hear, hear, hear.") The Judge called
his attention to it ; he instituted inquiries in conse-
quence ; and the result was that he was convinced it
would be for the advantage of the city of Dublin that
there thould be more frequent gaol deliveries. Judge
Perrin, who had made the complaint, was a gentleman
who had perhaps paid more attention to the subject of
the state of the prisons than any other person, and was
the most competent person to form an opinion on the
subject. The Recorder of Dublin having more to do
than the Recorder of Cork, was a reason why he
should be more attentive to his duties.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that the present Re-
corder had established monthly sittings, whereas before
they had only been held every six weeks, and he could
not see why they should be held oftener in Dublin
than in London.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said, if this
provision were rejected, it would be entirely from party-
motives, to suit the convenience of Mr. Shaw. je
was sorry that anything in that House relating to Ire-
land was done from party and personal motives ; for-
merly everything was refused or granted because it did
please or did not please Mr. O'Connell, and How this
turned upon the merits of Mr. Shaw, as if Mr. Shaw was
tote imntortal,and to be forever Recorder of Dublin. Ex-
perience showed that the gaols of Dublin were crowded
in a most inconvenient manner, and, therefore, the
question was, whether they should be more frcqueetly
delivered. It ought not to be discussed as a question re-
lating merely to Mr. Shaw. To say that the sta-
bility or convenience of the Government was connected
with the fact of Mr. Shaw being a Member of Parlia-
ment, was a proposition to which, with all his respect
for Mr. Shaw's abilities, lie could not assent.
The Earl of HADDINGTON explained.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and their
L :rdchips divided, when their appeared--
For Lord Lyndhurit's amendment
Against it
Majority in favour of the amendment
Several verbal amendments were then prope.,sed and
agreed to.

The Earl of HADDINGTON propc,4ca a clause,
reserving to the Lord Mayor Elect of I:inblin the right
of succeeding to the office of. Presider, of the Court of
Conscience, on his ceasing to be LAN! Mayor, and em
powering him to hold that ofice for one year. He
nsLonulodfiti
jaisveoffitocgeooftoLcoorndsill.vlderary,.or, and was fairly entitled'ole expence in the execu-
to succeed to this office which was the only way of' re-
munerating him for the expense he
would have to incur.
The salary of ',lac Lord Mayor was exceedingly small.
The Ma:quis of NORMANDY said the gentleman
in que;,cion had been elected out of his turn, and he
wils aware the Bill was before Parliament before he
accepted the office ; therefore he had no claim whatever.
He should oppose the clause.
The Earl of HADDINGTON said that although
the Bill was before Parliament, it was by no means
clear that at the time this gentleman accepted the
office, it would pass into a law, an 3, at all events, even
if it should pass into a law, the Lord Mayor Elect
would have to serve a portion of his time.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and o.leir
Lordships divided, when there appeared—
For the Earl of Haddington's amendment...
Against it
39
Majority for the amendment
The Bishop of EXETER moved an, amendment
which perhaps might be considered as raising a ques-
tion of privilege in the other House. It was an amend-
ment relatir, to the advowsons of the Protestant
Church in. Ireland. He did not know how this could
be construed into a money clause, but if it was so con-
/ stracd, it appeared to him that it was spreading a net
very widely, and in such a manner as to cramp their
Lordships' legislation. If he should be told that it
would certainly create a collision 'with the other House,
he should not certainly persevere in it, but ii there was
the least doubt on the subject, it was a matter of such
importance, that he should feel bound to press it
upon the attention of their Lordships.—(Hear, hear.)
He considered the Bill as it stood had the effect of giv-
ing the livings of the Church to a body that were against
the Church, for under the Bill almost all the corpora-
tions would be composed of Roman Catholics, and the
livings would be placed in their gift. The Right Rev.
Prelate then moved his amendment, the effect of which
was to transfer the livings in the gift of the corporations
to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners..

The Duke of WELLINGTON objected to the
amendment on the ground that it would interfere with
the privileges of the House of Commons.

The Bishop of EXETER withdrew his etnendmr.nt.
Lord DUNCANN ON then moved that the lila do
pass.
The Bishop of EXETER could not allow that motion
to be put without expressing his strong objettions to
the measure. If the Bill passed it would be. Destruction
to the Protestant Church.

The Bill then passed.
RATING STOCK-IN-TRADF. BILL.
The Marquis of NORMANBY moved the: second
reading of the Rating of Stock-in-trade Bill.
The Earl tlf HARDWICKE deprecated the provi-
sions of the Bill, and stated it to be his intention to op-
pose it on the motion for its going into Committee.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE supported the Bill.
After a few observations from Lord ASHBUR-
TON, the Bill was read a second. time, and ordered to
be committed on Tuesday.
COUNTY CONSTABULARY BILL.
On the motion of the Marquis of NORMANBY,
the Report on the County Constabulary Bill was further
considered. The Report was received, and the Bill was
ordered to be read a third time on Monday.
On the motion of the Marquis of NORMANBY,
the House resolved itself into a Committee on the
Chimney Sweepers' Bill, for the purpose of consideriA
the amendments of the Select Committee.
The Earl of HARDWICKE thought there would
be a great difficulty and expense in altering the 11.aes of
the Houses, so as to enable them to be swept by a ma-
chine He proposed a clause to the effect that the
proprietor
of houses be authorized to emptoy a climb-
ing boy in his house as a private domestic.--(Laughter.)
Marquis of NORMAN BY doubted wWdzer
such a proposition could be carried into effe,A, He
should certainly oppose it.
The clause was negatived without a div;,sion.
fewHADDING-
IIw
jwsoeArlessufmi-oemd
;tlalendEtahrelo
Bill, as amended,
‘TyaOAs Nr:prothra
teed to the House.

no Grammar Schools Bill .ivcnit through a Com-
mittee.
The Sale of J3i.-: er Bill was .. ported.
.7.otland) Bill was read a
"Plo'nbcd trin.lYes,taenr dFoisrhdeerrie" 6
, t(.s:hc committed on Monday. The House then :low. ned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, ALF 31.
NOTICE OF ELECTIONS WILL.
On the motion of Mr. FOX MALII,E the Notice

ti:lections 8.11 was road a third time, and certain ver-
':- amendments made in it. The Bill was then passed.
POPULATION (IRELAND) BILL.
The Population (Ireland) Bill was read a third time,
:Ind passed.

DUBLIN POLICE BILL.

On the motio❑ of Lord Morpetb, the DubFn Police
Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be Corn-
!:-::tted to-morrow.
BANK OF IRELAND BILL.

On the Order of the Day for the third reading of the
j ~,nk of Ireland Bill being read, . ,

Mr. FINCH said he wished to draw the attention of
the Chancellor of the Exchequer to an item of 4,0001.
fear, which was charged by the Bank of Ireland on
account, as it was said, of the expenses incurred in the
7.;yment of the dividends.
The CLIANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
;A:d the attorXion of the Government had been called
the point, but he should leave it for consideration,
when he should be able to deal with the Bank of Ire-
hild upon the same principle as the Bank of England.
Tao 411 was then read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Mr. P. SC ROPE the Parochial
Assessment Bill was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Mr. FOX MAULE the Report
ou the Population Bill was received, and the Bill was
ordered to be read a third time to-morrow.
JOINT-STOCK BANKING COMPANIES.

On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER, the Joint-stock Banking Companies
Bill was read a third time and passed.

INFANT FELONS.

Lord J. RUS§ELL moved the Order of the Day
for ping iotetZpannittet on this Bills
Lord GR. VILLE SOMERSET said the Bill
had seen introduced without any explanation,
and no discussion had hitherto taken place upon it.
He was, theffore, anxious to state his opinion with
respect to the-Bill. The intention of the promoters of
the Bill were so doubt very benevolent and humane,
but it incliteled net any of the children of the poorer
classes, but tts4 children of the higher classes; and he
was; sure that,, the latter respect, no gentleman pre-
sent would approvt of it. The object of the Bill was
to eaable any person who would undertake to provide
for a child who had committed a felony, after under-
going the punishment, to apply to the Lord Chancellor
for that purpose, and. if the Lord Chancellor thought
fit, he could assign the future maintenance, care, and
protection of that child, until he attained twenty-one,
to the care of that person. such an extraordinary
principle bad never before been introduced into any
Bill. He could imagine a case in which a father might
have a son who, notwithstanding the religious and
moral precepts he had been taught, might be viciously
inclined, and might commit a felony, and the parents of
the child would not like to go publicly before the Lord
Chancellor, or, at all events, they would do so with
great pain, to resist such an application. Again, he
thought nothing was less likely to tand to the comfort
or a family than that the child, after it had suffered
the punishment of the law, should be removed to the
custody of a stranger. He contended that the prin-
ciple of the Bill was most vicious, as it broke through
the best feelings of human nature. He moved that it
he committed that day three months.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the Bill had been intro-
ou:.;ed without discussion, because it had been consi-
dered in the other House of Parliament, where it had
the concurrence of all the parties who were best ac-
quainted with the proceediw of Chancery. The evil
which this Bill was intendtd to remedy had been one
of considerable standing, and which had of late years
considerably increased. It was the practice of many
-vicious parents sot to expose themselves by committing
acts of pilfering, but to employ their young children
of seven, eight, or nine years of age to commit these
crimes, and to tell them that by picking pockets and
stealing from shops they were doing their duty by act-
ing in obedience to their parents. These children were
objects of pity, and certain benevolent societies had
undertaken, during the time they were in prison, to
sow the seeds of morality and religion in their minds,
and they had in many instances succeeded, bat the
misfortune was, that as soon as their term of imprison-
ment was over the parents claimed the children,
svhich they had a legal right to do, took them
away, destroyed the seeds of virtue which had
been implanted in their minds, and again forced them
to enter into the career of crime, and these were the
parents to whose care the Noble Lord would confide the
care of those children. In order to remedy this evil,
Judges and Magistrates at Quarter Sessions had been
compelled to adopt the course of sentencing these young
children to transportation for seven years, in order to
`place it in the power of the Government to rescue them
from the contamination of their parents. This
exposed the poor children to a great deal of unneces-
sary hardship. It was proposed by the present Bill
to give any person or society willing to take charge of
the child, after his discharge from prison, power to apply
to the Court of Chancery for that purpose, and the
Clurt, if it thought it would be for the benefit of the in-
faut, had power to make an order accordingly. This
seeould remedy the evil which the Noble Lord supposed
reigist arise, because in the cases which he had put, it
was extremely improbable that the Court would think
such a course wold be for the benefit of the infant.
Under the law as it now stood, the Lord Chancellor
had the power of taking the guardianship of his children
from any parent who had promulgated tidy immoral or
irreligious doctrine.—(Cheers.) The observations of
the Noble Lord applied to the present state of the law,
and not to the present Bill. If, therefore, he wished
his suggestions to be carried into effect, he must alter'
the law. He hoped the House would consent to going
into Committee on the Bill, because he thought all
parties must look with alarm at the great number of
youug children who were committed for crimes, the
peepettation of which had been caused by the manner in
which they had been brought up. He thought, if the
State took upon itself the guardianship of such children,
instead of their being confined in a gaol, they might be
suede honest and virtuous members of society.
Dr. NICHOL trusted that his Noble Friend'
eould not persist in his opposition to the Bill going
into Committee, as he thought with the Noble Lord op-
posite ( Lord J. Russell) it might be made of great be-
nefit, with some few alterations.
Mr. WAKLEY observed that the Bill was of a
peculiar description. By the Bill, additional duties
would be imposed on the Lord Chancellor, who it was
said had already too much work to perform. A Bit
les, been introduced to afford the Lord Chancellor aid
:Ind assistance, but that Bill had been withdrawn, and
as sufficient information to enable the House to form
an opinion upon the Bill before the House. which was
certainly of an extraordinary nature, had not been laid
before it, he hoped the Noble Lord would also post-
pone it until the next session. It was well known that
rti.noy "ought the jurisdiction of the Lord Chancellor
tit's respect to parents and children, was already too
eetensive, and cases had recently occurred in which the
eights of parents had been interfered with, on the
ground that the religious opinions of the parents would
be injurious to the future interests of the child ; but by
this Bill the Lord Chancellor was to interfere, upon
the application of any person who pretended that it
was for the benefit of the infant it should not be re-
stored to its parents. He hoped the Bill would not
be pressed this Session.
Mr. PRYME said that his chief objection to the
Bill was, that it did not define an expeditious and chief
remedy.
Ms. WARBURTON supported the Bill.

Mr. HAWES thought the Bill did not go far
en;mgh. In his opinion they ought to extend its pro-
vi,ions so as to save children from the evils of gaol

cnnt.sgion.
The amendment was negatived without a division,
I the House went into Committee upon the Bill.
()n clause 1 being proposed,
4r. BRISROE moved that the words fourteen
;cars be inserted instead of twenty-one years, as the
p, nod during which the guardianship should continue.
Ir. FOX M AULE opposed the amendment.
Ic n were generally apprenticed until they were
'-one, antl he saw no reason for departing from
ti, t principle. _

13i. NICHOL observed that by a subsequent clause
r, 'et was given to the Lord Chancellor to assign the
~,:rdianship of the child fora shorter period than
t• .-itv-one years if he thought fit.
Tr. BAINES supported the clause, and expressed
,pinion that the Bill would have a highly beneficial
;: ience on society, not only during the present gene-
ration, but for all generations to come.

• ."
sir. Ebl COL; RT did not object to the periodth of
tweatrone years being retained in the clause b u
•object to a child being taken from the custody, efd R 1
its,
p.l4:4nts and assigned to a person who might be humane
or inhumane, interested or disinterested, without
any
fair opportunity being given to the parent to interpose
and prevent the transfer of the child. A poor man at
a great distance from London would not be able to come
tip and state his case to the Lord Chancellor, and if the
Lord Chancellor decided upon an ex parte application
rat injustice would be committed.
Mr. WAKLEY feared that a great deal of mis-
el.ief would be perpetrated under this Bill. There
was no provision in the Bill to prevent the Lord
Chancellor from sending the child to the West Indies,
or any other part of the world.—(" No, no.") He did
zot say that such a thing would be done by the pre-
‘,l-it Lord Chancellor, but then they might not always
4,, ire a Lord Chancellor who would act with such
lual:inity, discretion, and care, as the present Chan-
t!id• The Bill proposed to separate parent and
child, ivitil• as little ceremony as a man would separate
I.:y two anii,lals.
Mr. PRYN:E should vote against the amendmont
for substituting i 4 years, but if that amendment were
negatived he shotzld move the insertion of 18 years in-
stead of 21.

Mr. AGLIOIII3-;?. defended the Bill.
Mr. WAKLEY salrl the provisions of the Bill were
end unprecedented. It ought not to have the
,ction of the House, and he hoped they would re-

it,
m,... EWART said the Hon. Member for Finsbury
mi:cioneeived the provisions of the Bill. He was

sure the purest and best motives had dictated the Bill,
though he roust confess there were some provisions in it
which shocked him at first, and which he was not
yet
prepared to accede to altogether. They shoal I first
decide upon the principle, and if that were approved of,
he thought the Bill should be extended to the State,
for if it were good on private, it were also good on
public grounds. Much harm would not, he thought,
result from the delay of the measure ; and as, where a
principle was involved, they ought to 'deliberate, he
thought they should pause before, at that period of the
Session, they legislated rashly on such a measnre as this.

Sir C. GREY did not think this Bill the introduc-
tion of a new practice. The law gave a father almost
unlimited power over his children, and the object of this
Bill was, after an inhuman parent had abandoned a child,
and it had been protected and fostered by a benevolent
individual, to prevent his claiming it again ; which, in the
case of a female child, it was especially desirable he
should not have the power of doing. He believed that
in 99 cases out of 100 this Bill would effectually pre-
vent it.

The House then divided, and the numbers were,
For the clause
For the amendment
Majority
The clause was then agreed to.
On the reading of the next clause,
Mr. BRISCOE moved an amendment to the effect
that no child be sent out of the United Kingdom un-
der this Bill.

Upon this the Committee divided, when the numbers
were—

For the amendment 7
Against it..

Majority against the amendment —26
On the re-admission of the reporters we found,
Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET moving a pro-
viso, the effect of which was to compel persons apply-
ing for the infants, who were the objects of this Bill,
to do se with proper caution, and with legal authority
to claim the guardianship. The proviso would also
give costs in favour of those who resisted such applica-
tion, in the event of the Lord Chancellor deciding that
the application was unfounded.
Mr. W ARBURTON suggested a verbal amend-
ment, for the purpose of making it more clear that
costs should only be awarded against the applicant
when the application was proved to be unfounded.
Mr. \VAKLEY said he should be glad to see a Bill
brought in, wisely and carefully considered, for the pur-
pose of preserving those children from further contami-
nation, and to provide for reclaiming them. Hon.
Gentlemen on the other side of the House, with whom
he generally acted, and who professed to be the friends
of the people, seemed to regard the working classes as
incapable of taking care of their own children. In
fact, those petitioners did not care a straw for their
children.
Mr. FOX 11AULE said that the Hon. Member
himself did not seem to care a farthing for the chlidren,
if an opinion could be formed from the course which he
had followed throughout the discussion.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the Hon. Mem-
ber (Mr. Wakley) was really calumniating the work-
ing classes when he proposed to defend them.—( Hear.)
The clause only applied to those children who were
brought up to thieving, the parents receiving the profits.
On the other hand the clause gave every facility to
the honest parent, whose child had been inadvertently
led into dishonest courses, to reclaim and reform the
child.—(Hear.) . _

After 'a few words from Lord G. SOMERSET and
Mr. MUNTZ, it was agreed that the proviso should be
pro forma added to the Bill, and printed for further
consideration.

Mr. WAKLEY then said, before the question upon
the clause, as amended, was put to the vote, he
had made allusion to the working classes, because he said
that their interests were not attended to in that House,
and he was determined to support them as long as
he had the honour of a seat there. He
had been taunted with not attending to the
Bill in the earlier part of the day, but the fact was that
he was the whole morning engaged industriously in pre-
venting a job to rob the Church of 40,0001. a-year ;
to which job he feared the Noble Lord (Lord John
Russell) had given his concurrence.—( Hear, and a laugh.)
The Clause as amended was agreed to, and the
Chairman reported progress.
The Report on the Administration of Justice Bill
(Birmingham) was brought up.
Mr. PHILLIPS asked why Manchester and Bol-
ton had not been included in the Bill, they being in the
same position as Birmingham ?
Mr. F. MAULE answered that the cause of the
omission was the late period of the Session.
The Report was received and ordered to be taken
into further consideration to-morrow (this day.)
The Ecclesiastical Courts Bill (No. 2.) was also
read a second time, and ordered to be committed to-
morrow (this day.)
The Bribery Prevention Bill was deferred till to-
morrow, and the Committee of Ways and Means till
Monday.

The Lords' Amendments to the Friendly Societies'
Bill were then agreed to.
Mr. B. WALL then rose to move for the produc-
tion of the plans which had been adopted by the
Woods and Forests for any proposed alterations in the
Green Park. He was entirely opposed to any encroach-
ment upon that park, which might be called the
people's play-ground. Nor did he think that the reason
given for the proposed encroachment—namely, the in-
convenience suffered by the inhabitants of the houses
in Cleveland-row from the too near approaching of im-
proper persons to their houses at night. That was a
matter which a more regular employment of police on
the spot would sufficiently remedy—if, iedeed, a good
row of lamps was not a sufficient police. The inhabi-
tants of Cleveland-row and the adjacent houses were,
in this respect, subject to no greater inconvenience
than the inhabitants of the squares, who were, how-
ever, contented with the protection of their own square-
keepers and watchmen.
Mr. E. J. STANLEY said the plans could not be
laid on the table. He could only repeat what he had
before said, that the Commissioners of Woods and
Forests had no intention of either making gardens in,
or excluding the public from, any part of the Green
~
Park. He would take care to repeat to the Noble
Lord at the head of the Commission the suggestions of
the Hon. Member, and he could assure him that the
Noble Lord was most anxious to give all the accom-
mod,ition possible to the public.
The motion was then withdrawn.

Mr. FINCH, in the absence of Mr. Hawes, moved
for a return of the Rentes Perpetuelles received from
France, under the conventions of the 20th day of No-
vember, 1813, and the 25th day of April, 1818, for the
benefit of the claimants under the convention No. 7 of
the said convention of 1813 ; also, of the amount of any
portion of such Rentes ?erpctuolles, at any time or
times sold out of the vrench and vested in the English
funds, with all dividen<is paid thereon in France and
England to the 26th day of July, 1826 ; and of the
profits arising, if any, from the investment of dividends
in the French and English funds, with the dates of all
investments ; also, a return of the different sums paid up
to the 26tH day of July, 1826, to the various claimants
under those conventions, and paid out of those funds for
any other purpose, together with an alphabetical
list of the names of such claimants, with their
residences, as specified on the presentation of
their claims, distinguishing by separate lists
those claims which were registered in the register
closed and signed by the Commissioners of the Mixed
Commission at Paris, on the 21st day of February,
181(3, from those admitted between that day and thu
signing of the convention of the 25th day of April,
1818, stating the date of the presenting of such
claims ; also, a similar list of the claimants whole
claims were rejected, and the amount of each of such
claims ; and a general debtor and creditor account,
showing the balance remaining on the 26th day of July,
18'26.

Mr. BALDWIN said the returns were already on
the table of the House, Laving been given in 1827.

. -
The motion was withdrawn. V
The House then adjourned at a Quarter to Ten
o'Clock.

MORE MILITARY FLOGGING ! ! !

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

Sta,—An humble individual who was, with many
others, most unhappily an eye-witness from his windows
to this debasing and demoralizing punishment inflicted on
two privates in the Wellington barracks this morning,
urgently claims a notice from your powerful and influen-
tial pan respecting the continuance of such appalling and
dreadful scenes in this respectable neighbourhood. Surely,
Sir, a timely word from you would rouse the just indigna-
tion of the parishioners, that they might convene public
meetings in order to obtain a discontinuance, at least in
this locality, of this brutalizing and, alas only EngliA
system of punishment.
I am, Sir, your's respectfully,
AN UNFORTUNATE OVERSEER.

July 30, 1840.
[We trust that our Correspondent's own appeal will
attain the object he wishes. The parishioners of Saint
Martin's should petition the Horse Guards to flog the
men, if they must be flogged, under the Commander-in-
Chief's windows and care ought to be taken to exclude
all civilians.--ED. SuN.J

THE ALDERMANIC GowN OF QUEEN..
HlTHE.—There are, it was yesterday reported, amongst the
members of the Corporation five candidates for the aldermanic
gown of Queenhithe, vacant by the death of Mr. Venables—
viz., Mr. Hughes Hughes, who, it will be recollected, was
Alderman of Portsoken Ward for some time, and wisely with-
drew from a contest the duration of which he foresaw ; Mr.
Tegg, who was the unsuccessful antagonist of Mr. White, in
the contest for Bassishaw Ward ; Mr. Evans, the spirited and
independent Sheriff who resisted the authority of the House
of Commons; Sir James Duke, who, with Alderman
Johnson, accomplished most beneficial alterations in Newgate ;
and Mr. David Salomons, who contested the Aldermanic gown
of Aldgate with Mr. Humphrey, M.P.I
THE HA It VEST.—Reaping will become general
next Monday, at Swindon, Farringdon, and that neighbour-
hood. The Barley looks well, and will produce an average crop.
But about Warminster the Barley and Oats will be more than
an average crop.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC. JOURNALS.

FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF TIIIS:OAT.
(From the Times.)
We asserted months age, when the far-famed tempe-
rance system of Father Mathew was cried up in illustra-
tion of the improved state of Ireland, that the practice of
abstinence from spirituous liquors might not in some cases
proceed from laudable motives. The opinion we pro-
nounced was met by long tirades of got-up and somewhat
silly ridicule, to the effect of "sobriety being made a crime
by the Conservatives," and so forth. Our conjecture was,
that when men were engaged in guilty courses, the die.
cowry of which might be dangerous to themselves and to
their purposes, there was nothing more desirable for them
than to lay themselves under the strictest obligations to se-
crecy, and to adopt amongst other precautions that of so-
briety as a guard against indiscreet disclosures. The cry
was uevertheless encouraged, that we made "sobriety a na-
tional offence," etc., and much edifying jargon was
thereupon spouted forth upon the " new morality of the
Tories." It turns out, however, and will pass amongst
Englishmen for a circumstance of a somewhat awkward as-
pect, that on a recent trial :before Mr. Justice Torrens, at
Tyrone, there were found amidst the papers of a Riband
convict of the name of Morrow copies of the pledges entered
into by the Riband Society, one of which in totidem verbis
was as follows,—" I will not at any of our meetings drink
to intoxication, so as to endanger a disclosure of names,
regulations, or members thereof r' Here then is "morality"
for you 1 Here is pretty intelligible paraphrase upon the
virtuous injunctions of Father Mathew--no recommenda-
tion of temperance for the sake of temperance, but the
virtue becomes valuable only when thus ingrafted on trea-
son I The fact is, that the whole system of training for
the poor of Ireland is one mass of hollow, rotten, and
flagitious humbug. There is no truth in it, nor openness,
nor honesty. The fairest surface is made to cover the
moat iniquitous motive—absolution covers all. But it is
not a little curious to trace the congeniality between the
principle of the Government itself and of the lawless
power by which the people are misled and corrupted. A
notice of motion, calculated to throw light upon this sub-
ject, has been given for Monday next, by Lord Charleville
in the House of Lords ; and so far as we have yet learned
of the case, it is one which appears as if it would draw
heavily on the inventive powers of Lord Normanby for
something in the nature of an excuse or palliation, inas-
much as we apprehend the facts are too strong for the
author of even a whole library stuffed with fictions.
(From the Morning Advertiser.)
In yesterday's Advertiser will be seen a report of more
military floggings, which our readers have doubtless shared
with us in perusing with mingled feelings of disgust and
indignation. Paradoxical as it may seem, however, we are
not sorry (in the midst of the reprehensible apathy of the
Legislature) to witness these repeated outrages to public
feeling and opinion. These things will bring the cruelty
and impolicy of the barbarous custom of flogging in the
army palpably and effectually before the notice of the
public. The custom is characterised by equal proportions
of sanguinary cruelty and self.defcating absurdity. It
excludes all persons of respectability from entering the
ranks of the army, and thereby retains the military de-
fenders of the country at a lower level than the rest of so-
ciety, in point of intelligence and morality. It has been
pleaded that there is no substitute for this barbarian punish-
ment—this relic of feudal ignorance and ferocity. Do
the pleaders mean to say that the English character is so
unpliable and so irreclaimable ?—that it is so much more
so than the average estimate of the manly character in
other nations ? This is a libel upon the country. Ali
men who are trained and treated properly will exhibit the
beneficial fruits cf the training and treatment. That
the punishment is unnecessary is proved by its abolition
in the Austrian, Prussian, and French services. Nor
will any objector to its abolition pretend that the bonds
of discipline in those services are in the slightest degree
relaxed or broken by its non-application. The objectors
urge that if you supersede flogging you must substitute
the more cruel penalty of capital :punishment. We deny
that this alternative is necessary. We appeal to authentic
returns connected with the application of the punish.
ment of death in foreign armies, in proof that the allega-
tion is erroneous.

(From the Morning Post.)
The excuse made by Mr. Labouchere the other evening
for the delay that has taken place on his part in bringing
forward the project he has had in contemplation for the
regulation of the coffee duties, reminds one of the old
anecdote of the traveller at Stony Stratford and the fleas.
On being asked by Sir Robert Peel what course he in-
tended to pursue respecting these duties, the Right Hon.
Gentleman replied that when, on a former evening, his
attention had been called to the subject, he had assigned,
as a cause for the procrastination complained of, that he
waited for the conclusion of the pending treaty with
France. He went on to say that this and other things
had " rendered it impossible he should be able to bring
in the Bill before the middle of next week, and that,
therefore, he thought, in fairness to the trade, the
public, and the House, he ought not to press the
measure at a period when it could not receive an
ample discussion ;" the upshot of the affair being
that he had " come to the determination of not proceeding
further with the Bill in question for the present." Now,
what we are at a loss to understand is, how the negotia-
tions with France could in any way interfere with the pro-
gress of a measure which had for its object the reduc-
tion of the three descriptions of coffee duties to a just and
intelligible standard—a standard which, under a proper ar-
rangement, might prove some security to the fair trader
against the manoeuvres of the anti-West India schemes.
The French treaty can surely have had nothing to do with
this. The system now pursued of bringing the slave-
grown coffees of Brazil, and other countries, into British
ports, by the way of the Cape of Good Hope, for con-
sumption as the produce of British possessions, and, of
course, at a lower rate of duty, is a scandal to the Govern-
ment ; and, whatever else was left undone, this matter, at
least, ought not on any consideration to have been post-
poned for another year.

(From the Morning Herald.)
We trust that Madame Tussaud, whose benignant im-
partiality bestows the same enduring renown, the same
waxen immortality, alike on King and culprit—on the
statesman and the cutpurse—the political arithmetician and
the Old Bailey swindler—the Parliamentary patriot and
the stage-mountebank—will not, alive as she is to the de-
licate sympathies and mysterious cravings of the present
generation, fail to attend the solemnity of the next Mid-
dlesex Sessions. The Earl of Waldegraue and Captain
Duff have entered into sureties to take their trial for
having attempted to render a policeman almost as brain-
less as the originators of a new distinguished order of
knighthood—the Knights of the Knocker; and should
the presiding deity of Hiekes's Hall be as deaf to
the tinkling of a title, as of course she will be
blind to the merits of its possessor—should she, wholly
forgetful of the earldom and captaincy in the dock, and
mindful only of the facts of the eve, tical with the prisoners
as though they were Jack Waldegrave, costermonger, and
Bill Duff, dog's-meat-man,—should so stern a moral lesson
be read to that portion of the sanguine British youth, im-
petuous to distinguish themselves on human skulls and
street-door knockers, yet by " chill penury" denied the
means of paying for the luxury,—we earnestly hope that
Madame Tussaud, as a practical moralist, will straightway
enrich her museum with the addition of the image of the
Noble Earl, and that of his gallant and adventurous friend.
There let them stand, immortalised in wax, " as they ap-
peared on their trial !" Lasting examples of the chivalrous
spirit of the age—lively portraits of the Surrey and the
Sydney of our time,—let them take their rightful pest
amidst their distinguished contemporaries.

[MONEY MARKET and CITY NEWS.

(FRIDAY EV:iNING.)

CH RONIC L E.—Everything has been flat to-day inithe
City, occasioned by the acerbity displayed in the Journal
des Debuts towards England and the Eastern question.
This paper, being supposed to represent the personal po-
licy of Lcuis Philippe, its fierce, though slow, adhesion to
the anti-Anglo French party has increased the previous
feelings of apprehension. The allusion there made to re-
peal in Ireland, as a cause of national weakness to this
country, has been followed up by reference to the boundary
question with the State of Maine—the probability that if
embroiled with France, America would seize the oppor-
tunity to insist for her own terms in that affair ; and the
threat held out of increasing the effective force of the French
army to 500,000 men, and of adding 10 sail of the line to
their naval strength, is held up as conclusive proof that
the French Cabinet will again persist in rushing hi...) a
war single-handed against Europe. War, it is said, is
always popular in France, and would unite the whole
population of that country in pursuit of national glory.
Others think that Louis Philippe has merely allowed the
fiery language of the Journal des Debuts to remove any
ostensible appearance of a diversity of opinion between the
Court and the Cabinet—that he is too tar-seeing and cau-
tious a politician to risk the consequences of a serious col-
lision with the four Powers—and that both he and Thiers
are sensible that they really have no sufficient ground for
pressing matters to such extremity, unless, under an
avowed love for the Pachs, they cherish a secret passion
towards our empire in Hindostan. Ireland, they sly, would
be the first to rally round the Throne to preserve the Porte
from the hands of Russia, and to rescue Syria from the
yoke of Mehemet Ali ; and the people of the United States
are too sensible of the advantages of their alliance with
this country, too keenly alive to their self-interest as a mer-
cantile nation, and too far advanced in intellect and civili-
zation, to allow a question of territorial boundary to shut
up the English ports against their produce, or to disturb
the peaceful relations subsisting between them and Great
Britain.

They say it is true, generally speaking, that war is po-
pular in France, that the national vanity is easily excited
and difficult to subdue, but it has found sufficient outlet in
Africa for some time past, and that the spirit of the nation
could not be maintained without some popular principle to
support and foster it. A war, for instance, to restore the
nationality of Poland or to advance the cause of constitu-
tional liberty, they say, might bring forth the physical and
moral energies of la jeune France, and the recollection of
its origin would give strength and consistency of endur-
ance to lead it on to victory. But in this Eastern question
the case, they seem to think, would be reversed. The
minister of peace in that case, the friend and champion of
liberty, who had risen to eminence by the " march of in.
tellect" and the admission of the principle that "know-
ledge is power," would find himself engaged in a struggle
to rivet the chains of a tyrant on a people struggling to be
free, and instead of acting according to the " spirit of the
age," would find that if success were attainable for his
objects, it would throw Europe back thirty years in its
progress towards good government, and deluge the world
once more in bloodshed.
in
Bearsions
and the Bulls—on
the entertainedresent
by the City
Such are thde
speculators an
politicians—theleadingopinions
t posture of public affairs, and we have given
p both sides of the question, we believe, very near the truth.
Which of the two classes of speculators has found the key
not to say, but we sincerely trust
that the time for settling national differences by the sword
to futurity we presume
is p st.
will be made, and still successfully made, by the Govern-
A rupture between France and England is an event
deeply to be deplored, and every possible effort, we hope,

meats of both countries to avert it. Exclusive of the
false position in which it would place the two Govern-
ments, which should be closely united as the bulwark cf
social liberty and civilization, a war between France and
England would undo much of the good that has been
achieved in advancing to sounder commercial principles,
and in enabling our merchants to buy at the cheapest, and
to sell their goods at the dearest market, Restriction
and retaliation would again be in the ascendant, and the
principles of free trade and reciprocity being imprac-
ticable on an extensive scale, would sink back into com-
parative oblivion.
The Funds haw • been in an excited state throughout the
day. Consols for the Account opened at 911 buyers, but
large amounts of stock having been pressed on the
market at succeeding intervals, a decline took place to
90:„1 to 1, which was maintained for a short time, but
shortly before the close of business a fresh fall was ex-
perienced, the market receding to 90, and ultimately
closing at 90;1,-.

TIM E S.—The statement of Lord Melbourne last night,
that France was no party to the treaty for the pacification
of the Levant, together with the excitement of the markets
in France and Holland, has caused a further depression of
prices in every department of the Stock Exchange. Con-
sols, which opened at sq to Y for the Account, fell to-
wards the latter part of the day to 90, and closed at 904
(buyers).

P 0 ST.—The highly important matter connected with
the affairs of the East, to which the Morning Post was
enabled to give currency this day week, seems to have led
to extensive preparations for war on the part of France.
The Paris papers received this morning mention that the
army, according to general report, was forthwith to be in-
creased to 500,000 men. Our Funds opened, however,
with less heaviness than was, under the circumstances, to
have been expected. Consols were first quoted 902 to
90i for Money, or a fraction only lower than at the close
of business yesterday. But rumours having been preva-
lent during the afternoon that warlike demonstrations were
making on this side of the Channel as well, a rapid fall of
no less tkan per cent. occurred, the final quotations
being 89k to 90 for Money, and 90 to 90i for the Ac-
count. On 'Change it was confidently stated that Lord
Palmerston had given in his resignation, and, further, that
a message would be sent down to Parliament this evening
calling for an increase of our navy to the extent of 10,000
men. It is necessary to notice, also, that a heavy decline
has taken place in the value of the public securities at
Paris.