The Sun.
London, England, 1840-10-07 00:00:00

SE

IT I O N.

TilE FUNDS:-(CLO

SING PRICFS)

BRITISH FUNDS.
Bank Stock ........... ... I India Stock ......... ... —245
3 per Cent. Red......... Ditto Bonds
3 per Cent Cons ...... .. Hi Ditto Old Annuities ... --
3 per Cent Red........ 95i Ditto New Annuities —
93i Ex. 8i115,1,000/...2Ad 3pm
INieeswr
53 perte r C
Cent
...
.... : .
Ditto 5001 3pm
Long Annuities to expire Ditto Small 4pm
Jan. 1860
Oct. 1859 — India Stock for Acct...
Jan. 1660 l3 1-16 Consols for Acct ...... ... 87Z

FOREIGN FUNDS.
Austrian, 5 per cent Portuguese, 5 per cent.
Belgian, 5 per cent — Ditto, New Ditto 324
Brazilian Bon's— .. .. Prussian, 5 per cent....
BuenosAyres, 6 per cent Russian, 5 per cent....
Chilian, 6 per cent
Colombian, 6 per cent... Spanish, 5 per cent 22
Ditto, 1824 ••••• 22
Ditto, Deferred ... 10,.i.
Danish, 3 per cent.... , French,s per cent... —f. —c.
Greek, 182.5, 5 percent. Exchange ..
Mexican, 5 per cent.... French, 3 per cent 69F. W..
Ditto, 6 per cent, 1825. Dutch, 21 per cent 483
Peruvian, 1825, 6 per et. Ditto, 5 per cent..... 94
SHARES.
Birmingham and Derby Railway
Bristol and Exeter ... ........... ... .. 26
Great Western Railway
Ditto New Shares
London and Brighton Railway .... ... 28%
London and South Western Railway ... ...... 51i
South Eastern and Dover •• 5%
York and North Midland Railway 65%

SFIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS,

FROM TFIE EVENING PAPERS OF TDI3 DAY.
(From the Globe.)
The Times has this morning an amusingly weak and
disjointed article, the object of which is to prove that
the differences existing among the leaders of the
Tory party are not such as would incapacitate them
for constituting a strong and united Government.
This proposition is made to rest on a fallacy and a
falsehood. The fallacy consists in confining the dif-
ferences to the Tory leaders, to the exclusion of the
considerable number of impracticable ultras, who follow
the Tory leaders as opponents of the existing Govern-
meat, but who would embarrass and oppose those very
leaders were they in office, by urging upon them their own
1•• extreme measures, ecclesiastical and civil, and insisting
upon these forming part of the policy of Government,
as the condition of their adhesion and support. The
' falsehood cons:sts in confining the disagreements among
the leaders to the China and Canada measures, as
though there were no othe.-s ; and in the obviously in-
appropriate designation given to the dissensions among
the Tory leaders in these questions, terming them
" nominal," when they were obviously real and essen-
tial, such as any tyro in politics is sufficiently versed in
the immediate and relative bearings of these questions
to know that they were vital ; that a difference respect-
ing them in any Cabinet must have led to the retire-
ment of the dissidents, or, what was more probable, to
the break-up of the administration, among the
members of which such dissensions were die-
covered to exist concerning measures insepu-
rahly bound up with its foreign and colonial pe.
hey. This laboured attempt to conceal the unseemly
schisms in the long much-vaunted united Conservative
party, will not only fail of its design, but will, by its
having been attempted, show how fatal those schisms
are, in the estimation of the party, to the hopes of
office so long ardently cherished, the attainment of
which has been so perseveringly sought by all the
means which party ingenuity could devise ; and how
anxious they are to sew fig-leaves together, in the hope
of concealing " the shameful parts of their constitution"
(to borrow a phrase from Bishop Phillpotts) from the
pubic eye. Were Sir Robert Peel and the Duke of
Wel i aaton in office, they must either propitiate the
Ul. a Cherc'lmrm, wilts° impracticable demands for ex-
clusion and extension are urged upon the House cf
Commons by Sir R. Inglis, Mr. Sergeant Jackson, and
others of the party, by consenting to their demands ; or
they must oppose their measures. In the former case
t! ey would destroy themselves by disgusting and alarm-
ing every moderate politician in the csuntry ; in the let-
ter they wou:d be deprived of the support without which
their Administration could not hold together six weeks.
The " cross benches" would be occupied by Sir Robe; t
Inglis, and the party which follows him in his efforts
to extend the power of the Church by large forced coh-
tributions from the State ; and " We are fifty," would
be a pretty significant hint as to what Sir Robert Peel
and his colleagues must expect if they declined the
terms on which " the Holy Alliance" would lend its
.upport to the general measures of his Government.
(From the Courier.)

For a long i:.rne the English nation has been re-
proached with exclusve attachment to the aristocra-
tic branches of its society, whenever. it is requisite to
bring into operation any portion of its penal laws. If
a nobleman, having seen or felt too many black‘ boiales
upon tha table, sally out of his mansion ann mock
down some half dozen policemen, besides destroying
the knockers and bell-pulls of the neighbourhood in
which he delights to exhibit his prowess, what does the
magistrate ? He inflicts the usual penalty for drunk-
enness, and if there be a charge for wilful damage.
orders it to be paid. Perhaps, too, the assault on con-
stables, unfortunate women wandering about the streets
at the time of his peregrinations, or poor tradesmen re-
turning to their homes, may be alleged against the
noble offender. One result invariably follows a charge
involving any of these disgraceful outrages—the gen-
tleman of whatever rank he may be is ordered to pay
the legal fine, and to defray the damage which he has
occasioned in a voluntarily incurred ungovernable mo-
ment. This is justice as prescribed by law, but it is
not such justice as is calculated for the good of the
peaceable part of society. The noble or gentle offender
does not care a rotten straw for the pecuniary loss which
his inglorious exploits have occasioned him. He pays
the police clerk, retires, and in a few days afterwards
is produced to answer much the same sort of charges.
Well, the law has it so; but, why in the name of all
that we hold valuable should we deem the transgressions
of a man moving in the higher circles of life of a more
pardonable nature than those of the less affluent ? If
a gentleman, forgetful of the respect due to socif.ty,
pablicly exhibit himself in that state which the law
has stamped as worthy of a pecuniary penalty, why
should inferior per.ons not be allowed to possess
the same indulgence, if it can be so called ? But
when we see a person erring in a legs degree than the
very genteel and highly nc ble per.ons whose adventures
have become items in police reports, allowed to escape
in the manner stated, we are forced to inquire what no-
tions of justice are possessed by the magistracy who re-
fuse to admit the pecu Diary pecaity as a compensation of
a moral injury.

(From the Standard.)