The Sun.
London, England, 1840-01-24 00:00:00

FROM THE DAILY PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.

(From the Globe.)
Sir Robert Peel's declaration of Monday was an hu-
miliating acknowledgment of the distrust of his fol-
lowers. The existence of that distrust has long been
matter of notoriety ; but it has never been yet so
clearly shown to the country as by the present pre-
caution against its operation for a single week. It
is now clear that the party distrust Sir Robert so much,
that it is necessary for him to commit himself to its
policy a week before he can show his course by vote or
speech in the regular course of debate. Sir John Bul-
ler's notice appeared so much at variance with the usual
course of Sir Robert Peel, and the caution of his cha-
racter, that it very naturally gave rise at first to suspicions
that the worthy Baronet was acting on his own head,
and without concert with his leader. But the cha-
racter of that gentleman convinced all who knew any-
thing of him that such could not be the case. He
is really one of the most moderate of the Conservative
party ; and during his Parliamentary career he has
been generally considered as Sir Robert's particular
country-gentleman. We are therefore quite ready
to believe that the step has been taken with the full
consent of Sir Robert : that it was not taken without
the fullest consideration and deliberate concurrence of
the leaders of the party ; and that Sir Robert, finding
the motion must be made, placed it in Sir John's
hands as the fittest person to make it.
(From the Standard.)
Another night has been wasted upon the deplorable
case of privilege. Upon a motion by Mr. Thomas
Duncombe, the warrants for the late committals were
ordered to be laid before the House, after a short re-
sistance by Lord John Russell. The motive for this
resistance will appear when it is known that the Attor-
ney-General boasted to have so framed the warrants
as to conceal the particular offence for which
the parties were committed, lest the Court
of Justice should take cognizance of it. Let us
understand' this proceeding. Either the offence pu-
nished is known or it is not known. If it is known
the Courts of Justice must take cognizance of it
upon application, whatever the terms of the war-
rant, for complete notoriety is judicial knowledge, as
the text writers on the Roman law, and on our
own law, admit. If it is not known, what is the use of the
punishment inflicted ? The effect of example is the only
justification for punishment ; but the penalty inflicted
without known offence affords no example ; it appears,
and it is, but a barren act of capricious cruelty. How,
indeed, is any one to know that Messrs. Evans and
Wheelton are not the victims of such an act ? There
is an order of the House of Commons forbidding to tell
of what these Gentlemen are accused, and the Attorney-
General boasts to have craftily contrived the warrant so
as to preserve the secret. This is to maintain the dig
;illy! of the House of Commons.
(From the Courier.)
We can have no sympathy with such a person as
Stockdale, between whom and Mr. Daniel O'Con-

cell there would however appear, in some respects,
such a conformity of tastes and pursuits, that the bitter
,ind personal rancour of the " beggarman" against the
other " pauperised person," as in his own acknowledged
letter the former styles himself, can only be accounted
tor on the vulgar adage that " two of a trade can
never agree." But, as in the similar case of Wilkes,
it may be said that from evil may arise good, and
whatever the true motives of Stockdale, con-
ceding for the argument that they were as worthless
,ind mercenary, as freely represented in the House of
Commons, we must still hold that, wittingly or not, his
prosecution of those honourable and really guiltless
tradesmen, the Hansards, will result in signal benefit
to the nation. The more the extent and consequences
of the uncontrolled privileges assumed and now battled
for by the House are investigated, the more subversive
will they be found of the rights of the subject, and the
peace and good order of society.

COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.

(Continued from our Paper of yesterday. )
Mr. Alderman WntrE—He maintained that had Lord John

Russell pursued a different course to what ho had done, he
would have been a traitor to his historical name and the prin-
ciples he professed. He believed there was now a confederacy
against popular rights ; and he was afraid the Judges had
allowed their political opinions to influence their judgments.
Although he would trust the Judges with his person and pro-
perty, yet he would not trust them with the meanest of his po-
litical rights any more than he would the Bench of Bishops.—
( Oh, oh.)
Mr. liAvisox rose to order. He would ask whether it
was fit and proper that the conduct of the Judges, who
merely administered the law, should be thus animadverted
upon ?—( Hear, hear. )
Mr. Alderman WHITE—The Judges and their decisions were
in collision with the House of Commons, and therefore were
in collision with the people. It became necessary, then, to in-
quire into their powersay, and their principles; and he
would ask what were their political predilections? How many
of them (he knew there were some) were members of the Carl-
ton Club ?—(Cries of " Oh, oh !" and " Order, order.")
The LORD MAy on must call the lion. Alember to order.
He hoped his good sense would induce him to refrain from such
observations.

TAvLoa--Anything that is said against the Judges
will only lead every body to admire them the more.—(Hear,
hear.)
Mr. Alderman WHITE —I have said nothing against the
Judges.--( Great laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh, oh.")
ltr. Alderman HARMER—That only shows my Hon. Friend
does not know what he has been saying.—(Laughter. )
Mr. Alderman WHITE concluded by saying that the Judges
were men with passions like themselves, and that might be
some excuse for their conduct.—( Herr, hear.) He thanked
them for the attention with which they had listened to him, and
he should not have occupied so much of their time, had he not
been interrupted.
Mr. PEWTRESS thought, that if the opinion of the Judges
were to be acquiesced in, the doors of the House of Commons
as well as the door of that Court might be as well closed.—
(Hear, hear.) He very much esteemed their worthy Sheriffs,
and he regretted that the House of Commons had not brought
itself in conflict with the real parties. —( Hear, hear. )
Sir PETER LAURIE would make but a few observations. Ile
thought the House of Commons was not worth petitioning.—
The House of Commons that passed the Penny Post Act was
. .

the most contemptible Assembly that ever existed.—( Laugh-
ter, and cries of " Oh.") Was the law of the land to be
usurped by one branch of the Legislature ? The House of
Commons was now in a cleft stick, and he hoped that Court
would not help them out of the difficulty, and would not go
before them with any petition.—( Hear. )
Mr. JONES cordially supporters the resolutions.
Mr. ANDERTON did not consider that this was a question
between the House of Commons and the Sheriffs of London
merely, but that it was a question in which all the Sheriffs of
the United Kingdom were concerned and most deeply in-
terested. He should vote for the resolutions that had been

proposed; but he hoped that, if the Sheriffs were not
liberated in a few days, the people of England would take
the bull by the horns.—( Hear, hear.) He trusted that Court
would set the example, and would petition the Queen to dis-
solve the Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) The great Lord Bin -
leigh had said that if ever England was ruined it would be
through the instrumentality of the House of Commons.
That House was now endeavouring to bring the laws of
the country—which every body venerated—into disre-
pute.—( Cheers. ) They were endeavouring to take from the
Crown the right of issuing processes, and the right of executing
them. He concluded by expressing his approbation of the
resolutions, and if they had even gone further, he would have
supported them.
Mr. Alderman CorEtatin hoped that the petition would be
deferred. If he were the Lord Mayor, and he said it with
all humility, he would let the citizens of London have an op-
portunity, in Common Hall, of expressing their opinion on
this subject—(Hear, hear.) He considered the proceedings
of the House of Commons on this subject had done more to
strike at the root of the independence of the Judges, of
Trial by Jury, and the liberty of the subject, and all that
Englishmen held dear as birthrights, than any act perpetrated
by the most tyrannical power.—(Cheers.) He lamented to
see a Minister of the Crown, backed by the Attorney-General,
retrograde, as Lord John Russell had done, from the bold front
which he assumed on the first night of the Session, when he
stated unequivocally that it was their determination not to punish
one party merely, but that if the House of Commons should
state it was a breach of privilege, to punish all parties impli-
erawinf
fittsl
witnessed,
sw;
do
theu,
asi d
impli-
cated. He (Alderman Copeland) had told the Noble Lord
that he would not dare follow up that statement.—(Cheers.)
htHeelei
Thhhhaoi
sedn
,boLrutoehr
teaehdor
sympathy
ehxynmei
discussedAeJpfuatdthhge
ye
Corporalshe,sh e Nvhuor o;_
on,ruh their
theitdrhat i
f worthySthh ee ryi ffss hadh;
fitirsontslen(Hofearth,e land, they would be delighted with the public
sfpoirritthtahtat
morning
mhineaganri.f)ested itself.—(Hear, hear.) He was de-
cidedly against petitioning, but he would vote for the resolu-
voe. said that when h. appointed the Court
should behecahlmadlyaangdreatteinwpeisrhatetlhya.t
Tthhe, subject
t
must recollect that whatever they did in this matter would go
forth to the whole world. The Sheriffs were well advised, and
if that Court would adopt the same course which the Court of
Aldermen had don not take any steps at present—he thought
they would act wisely. He thought the Members of that
Court had shown that the Sheriffs were placed in a most
unenviable position.—(llear, hear.) He would, of course, be
ready to give every attention to what any Gentleman might
and
dvsgee
ehdts.eot:ows
na(oyHui
n,
edab:druet,ththeoher, a
reet
hf
o.didthe appointment
,hnopoe the discussion would be at once
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON thought, after the opinion he had
heard, that the least prudent course would be to adopt the
members,t
were
of
perseverea
NWvitahtChhiisngprCoopomsimtiiotnteteo,
fetwheorfestohluetons
petition.—(Hear, hear.)
A Ward Committee was then appointed, including all the
apcnuo dtAu andraftt e
or longeaa
rdsreviseeudeletuhonleimm discussioneuisrl.y.mrbetweenre in
reply,a
AldermenfAlpdreersmenetn,.to co-operate with the Committee of the
Mr. WIRE proposed that the foregoing resolutions be signed
by the Town Clerk, and presented to the Sheriffs by the Lord
Mayor, attended by the whole Court.
The RECORDER observed that the place of custoc,ly of the
Sheriffs was a peculiar one—it was one within the pre-
cincts of the Palace, and also within the precincts
of the House of Commons. Now, without wishing to
give any opinion as to what course that Court ought to adopt,
hs i chhe r
i heffs believed
were
confined.— was the
hei
th in would
gnmi
neirnegl y
asdumg
nt
nt them
it
tm
should the difficulty ffihceul ty
refused,they the would
Sheriffs e t
w
being in actual custody. Besides the whole Court could not
getsize into
ttoie alroaopmartemigehnttfeinetsquare,
h'e v
a
(A laugh.)
It was ultimately agreed that
the whole Court, to be selected from the Committee appointed,
should attend the Lord Mayor, and that Mr. Remembrancer
should ascertain from the Sheriffs when it would be convenient
I,v i D e
putation only, instead of
for them to receive the visit.
The Resolutions were ordered to be advertised in the Mora-
inn and Evening Papers,
and the other business having been
disposed of, the Court adjourned.

The Gazette de Francr, Carlist organ, states
that Cabrera had detached a body of troopseompooed of 3,500 in-
fantry and 300 cavalry, to make an irruption into La Mancha ;
which it asserts they have run through unoppo3ed, levying con-
tributions and colleaing large quantities of ammunition and

provisions.