The Sun.
London, England, 1841-03-13 00:00:00

WITH A

BEAUTIFUL. PORTRAIT OF
H.Eil, MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
eft u be gent by post fee to all parts of the Em-
pire. Price SIXPENCE.
Sea Office, 112, Strand, London.

MR. HORACE &AVM'S NEW NOVEL.
Nov ready at all the Libraries, in 3 vols.,
lIE MONEYED MAN;
Or, THE LESSON OF A LIFE.
By 110 RACE SMITH,
Esq.,
Antion " Brambletye House," &c.
" The lor.ieyetl Van 'is incomparably the mast thorght-
tel, spirited, and entertaining work that has yet appeared from
the pen of Mr. Horace Smith. It is the best novel that the
year has produced."—Fun.
-Henry Colburn, Publisher, 13, Great Marlberough-street.

WIIS MAJESTY the EMPEROR of
AUSTRIA having -AUTHORISED and GUA-
RANTEED several DISTRIBUTIONS of MONEY
14!"VIDENDg, which (though they are NO LOTTERIES)
e'er alarvipoasibilities of obtaining
LARGE FORTUNES,
HEINE BROTHERS, at HAMBURGH,
Are now SELLING BONDS for the said DIST 11.1 13U TIONS.
Persons desirous to purchase fur one of the nei Distributions
nay re:rive, PREVIOUS to giving any orders, the PROS-
PECTUS tad PARTICULARS, upon addressing, WlTH-
'our DELAY, a line to
IJEINE, BROTHERS, at HA 111BURGII.
I he NEXT DISTRIBUTION contains FIFTEEN H UN-
D'RED DIVIDENDS, 4-taunting to £137,592,
Too Dividends being
AMMO Jeeoo £2OO £9O
b,OOB 000 150 80
2,tX90 500 120 70
I,too 300 110 64
1.00 250 100 62

THEATRE ROYAL, COVENT GARDEN.
DE.it the MANAGEMENT of MADAME VESTRIS.

Itlls EVENING, MARCH 13,
Will be repeated the New Comedy, in Five Acts, entitled
LONDON ASSURANCE.
Sir Harcourt Courtly, Bart., Mr. W. Farren ; Max Hark-
away, Mr. Bartley ; -Mr. Charles Courtly, Mr. Anderson ;
Ms. Adolphus Spanker, Mr. Keeley; Mr. Dazzle, Mr. C.
Illthetto ; Mark Mt difle, Mr, Harley ; Grace Harkaway,
Madame Vestris ; Lady Gay Spanker, Mrs. Nisbett ; Mrs.
reiw,. Mrs. Ilinnbt.
After which, the Nov Farce, in One Act, entitled
BROTHER BEN.
Commodore Ce.tlass, Mr. Bartley ; Benjamin Bowles, Mr.
inlarles Mathews; Mr. Shuffieton, Mr. Harley; Dorothy.
C. Jones.
On 31eadpy, London ASeurance, with the New Pantomime.
to erened at halt-past Six—the performance; te
eirs7necira at Seve-: o'Clock.
taeless Ilexes 75. ; Seem& Price, 3s. 61; First and Second
r.,0,1415, ss. ; ::econd Price, tie. 6d. ; Pit, 35.; Second Price.
W.; Clallery 11.
Tiskeik an.l plat es for the Boit ; to be taken of Mr. Grogan.
att the Bun-mice, from Ten till Four, where Season Tickets
Way so had upon appliation.
Private Rost • to behad of Mr. And. ins, bookseller,
:67, New Bond-street.

ROYAL SURREY THEATRE.
?ries-spent success of "Poor Jack," equal to." My Pell and
mj Partner Joe." Mr. T. P. Cooke in Two Pieces. Ex-
Icaordiostry attraction-, and crowded houses.
THIS EVENING, MARCH 13.
Will be aord a Naulical Drama in Four Parts, called
POOR JACK : OR THE WIFE OF A SAILOR.
Ja 7,‘Lie,Mr. T. P. Cooke, and the entire strength of the
Company, will perform.
After which,
ROBERT MACAIRE.
Robert Macaire uy Mr. T. P. Cooke.
To conclwitli
11111 RIEVOR'S RAN-Mil; OR, GILDEROY.

- - •,
HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE 'IO-MOIIRO W.
unnuton utter 5 1 Evening ......I7 minute. attar 5.

no Publication of the Eveniag E•:itipn •f LIE Sox corn-
otesaced at 10 mit:otos after Three.
••■

....
LONDON:
sATURDAY, MARCH 13, 1841.

Amongst the Mitions.presented last night to
Ole House of Lords;'. was one from a Mr. CARR,
complaining of having' been dismissed from' a
.iFudgeshlp in Canada, the !tnswer to which was
that he had appropriated mon,ZY which did not
belong to him, and had never accounted for it.
The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL gave no,jee that
after Easter, ho- would move for a Committeft to
'inquire into the cause of duelling.
A brief, but a somewhat personal, conversation
took place between the Bishop of EXETER and
the Marquis of NORMANDY, about laying on the
table the opinion of Chief Justice 5.:4wA RT, when
Ataoraey-General of Canada, relative to San
Ziulpiee, which the Noble Marquis declined to do,
as rt was c9ititirary to etiquette to lay the opinions of
the law officers of the Crown before Parliament.
The Earl of GLENGA LL moved for the attend-
ance of more persons connected with the admin-
istration of the Poor-law in Ireland, which the
_Marquis of NORMA NaY undertook to procure.
Their Lordships did no business of importance.
in the Commons, the Middlesex• Sessions Bill
was read a second time; and the Severn Naviga-
tion Dill was referred to the Private Business
Comn.i Kee.
The cciisistency of Sir 11-INaus was illus-
trated by his presehting a petition for securing
protection to the Christians of the Levant, and
the Protestants and Jews 'of Syria, the prayer of
which the Hon. BarOnet :supp,-)rted. He would
shower favours on the Jews in the East, and he
-would deny justice to the Jews at home.

In reply to the lion. Baronet,
Lord PALMER-
scoij assured him that the Government had in-
terfersed wieh the Porte in favour both of the
Christians and the Jews of Syria, and if the 1
scheritf which had been issued on the subject
could be enforced, thewishes of the lion. Baronet
would be accomplished.
In reply W Lewd F..EGERTON, Lord PALMER-
STOX stated that he had:received a copy of a fir_
Lu .74ElimET ALI the Govern-
DAD. conferring
ment of Egypt, with hereditary succession, on
t
certain conditions, but_ he could not say whether
are.:-
it was t/t same as that which had appe
'the papers. Till some question arose concerning
this firman amongzt- •the Allied Powers, it was a
matter"betweea the SuLTAN and his vassal.
Sir ILOBERT PEEL.; not satisfied with this exe
-
patimr, demanded -whether that part of th
lim
&Man which reserved to the Porofthe right of
determining which of the sons MEHEMET
Ara should succeed him, was consistent with the
cola druple Treaty, and whether the Four Powers
crew parties to it. •
Lord PALMERSTON- said it was impossible for
limn to say what the Four Powers might think
Olt this particular point. -He admitted that the
PAct.t.t had remonstrated against the finnan, but
he was not aware of the SuLTAN's answer. The
intention qt the Four Powers was that the SUL-
TAN shotild grant a Load- fide hereditary succes
~
Sion to MEH EMT A cr. - S.nne further conversa-
iOn took place on this new interesting question,
kr which we refer to our report.
1. KtLLY announced that he would not go
into Committee with the Punishment of Death
Bill ti.ll after Easter.
In a Committee on the Customs Duties of the
West liolier and North American colonies Mr.
LAB° 11.31E1;, explained the present anomalous
andinjiuious nature of those duties, and gave a
brief history Of their origin, and of .the progress
made in iMprocing them. The Right Hon. Gen_
timnan moved a series of resolutions on which he
asked nn opinion, but merely laid them on the
%We for consideratiOn. After a few brief re-
Anarks rrom j.' PALMER and Mr. EWART, the
Wolse resumed, and the debate on th© subject
was adjourned. We shall wait to see the Right
Hon. Gentleman's resolutions before we offer
uy
remarks on them or on
than to say that the Right the speech, further
lion. Gentleman has
otttered a right pith, though he goes in it only
a wry sink'. distance.

The East India Ruin Bill went through a

Committee, after a considerable discussion, but
without any imPortant amendments.
On the motion to read the County Courts Bill
a second time, Sir F. PoLLocs made a speech
against the Bill, against the power of creating
fifty officers given by the Bill to Government,
against the power of imprisoning given by the
Bill, which was liable to abuse, and he declared
he would not assent to any measure of the sort.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL explained the 6rigin
of the Bill, and complained of the unnecessary
attack his Learned Friend had made on the
Government.
Sir EDWARD SUGDEN defended Sir F. POL-
LOCK. The Bill, he said, was in favour of the
middle classes, and against the humblest classes
of society. There was one piece of folly in it—
a Court of Reconcilement—but, on the whole,
the. Bill was less partial than some former Bills.
After a somewhat protracted debate, the Bill
was read a second time. Some routine matters
were passed, and at a Quarter past One the
House adjourned.

The postponement of the San Sulpice discussion
in the House of Peers till 'Monday, has given time
to lay more information on the question before
Parliament, entrapped into a false belief by the
Bishop of EXETER'S carefully prepared state-
ment; and that information will lead to the re-
jection of the Right Rev. Prelate's motion. The
subject was renewed last night in the House of
Peers, and the Bishop's querulous remarks were
indicative of failure. His faithful ally, too, in
mischievous bigotry, the Standard, anticipates
the result with alarm. "We trust," it said last
night—and the passage is worth remembering, as
a picture of the bulk of the Conservatives—" we
trust that the Protestants of the empire will keep
their eyes steadily fixed upon the motion; we own
that we are not without a distrust of some of those
who call themselves, and are sillily called by others,
Conservatives, merely because, forsooth, they
would save their own titles, estates, sinecures, pen-
sions, and influence, though they would freely
pay away all that is dear or valuable to the Con-
servative people, as an insurance upon the things
precious to themselves."
The distrust and alarm of the Standard are
well founded. No statesman of any character
in the House of Peers, except his faculties be
impaired by age, will be found to support the
Bishop
.of EXETER'S motion. At least, all those
best acquainted with colonial subjects, from the
offices they have held—the Earl of RIPON, the
Earl of ABERDEEN, Lord ELLEN BOROUGH-Will,
we are assured, discountenance the bigoted at-
tempt to represent the House of Lords as the
determined enemies of all the Catholics of the
empire.

So great, indeed, are the distrust and alarm
of the Standard, that even that truly Conserva-
tive Nobleman, the late Earl of BATHURST—the
last wearer, except the late Lord ARDEN, of a
pig-tail--who, in the course of his official duties,
appears to have incorporated by letters patent
the Romish Seminary of San Nicholai, has in-
curred the wrath and contempt of the Standard.
" He did," that Journal avers, though he was in
office with the Tories, " many foolish and many
mischievous things as Colonial Minister." But
it happens that these foolish and mischievous
things are, precedents which completely rebut
the Bishop of EXETER'S wild assertion that to
incorporate a Romish seminary is a thin.- un-
heard of—the first violent blow at the Reforma-
tion, and such a blow as JAMES 11. never dared
to strike, and Father PETER never dared to de-
mand ; and therefore the Standard very coolly
and very contemptuously proposes to set them
wholly aside as foolish and mischievous.

Though our Contemporary in general is a
great stickler for forms and precedents, now that
he finds them against him, with true Chartist
daring he flings them to the winds, and will not
have " the national archives ransacked for argu-
ments before the Houses of Parliament can come
to a decision." In a glorious fervour of mockery
he says " if this be allowed a reprint of Ryn:er's
Fcedera' may be called for as the preface to
discussion, how plain soever shall be the question
to be discussed." When the Tories thus treat
Tory precedent with contempt it is plain that
they are completely in error, and the mischief
which the Bishop of EXETER would' perpetrate,
wants even the sanction of Tory Ministers of the
worst times of Toryism. _

Since we last adverted to this subject, the House
of Commons has printed and published a despatch
from Lord GODERICH, now Earl of RIPON, to
Lord AYLMER, dated Downing-street, Septem-
ber 13, 1831, which tells so much against all the
abusive arguments of the Bishop of EXETER,
that we are not surprised at the Tories disliking
to have more information laid before Parliament.
From this despatch, it appears that so early at
least as 1827, the subject of settling the claims of
the Seminary of San Sulpice to the seignorial
rights of Montreal, had engaged the attention of
Government, and been made the object,
though unsuccessful, of a bargain. Lord
CODERICH was, however, convinced that "it was
of the highest importance " to emancipate
from the restrictions of the feudal law " the
great commercial city of Montreal," and he de-
scribes the opposition to that measure "as the
selfish clamour of men, whose wharves and ware-
houses needed no enlargement," and who
"found their interest in discouraging competi-
tion." He said, therefore, in 1831, that it would
be highly desirable to do what Lord SYDENHAM
has now done, and the Noble Lord proceeded to
lay down a plan for accomplishing it.
He certainly began by stating that he had no
doubt that the "legal title to the Seigneurie of
Montreal is in the Crown," but in order to pre-
serve all the rights of the Seminary, and
being anxious to " prevent whatever might de-
rogate from its just claims to esteem and
confidence," he instructed the Governor-Ge-
neral to open a friendly negotiation with
the members. He stated that he was aware
of the legal objection to recognise the corporate
character in which they assumed to act ; but he
overruled those objections as " misplaced and
inconclusive." He so far recognised the previous
existence of this Romish Corporation, that he
proposed to " declare in due form of law that it
is extant;" and he wrote that her MAJESTY
" will issue a new charter for their incorporation,
and endow them with revenues equal in amount
to the income of which they have hitherto been
n the receipt." The charter of incorporation
was to be gfanted, too, "in whatever form the
members of the Seminary may think most de-
sirable." That is the tenor of Lord GODERICH'S
despatch; and the Noble Lord has too high a
sense of honour to repudiate a measure

completed on his own principles, because
his attempt was unfortunately not success-
ful. But if he do not repudiate the prin-
ciples of his despatch, he must tell the Bishop
of ExETER on Monday that the Rev. Prelate
entirely
imn
ci s-ons t3aotred at
otnh eo
ffaac tb
oNdv ey
onf
the aRs Qoenriti es
11
Lord SYDENHAM is a unknown
thing
it)hr
priests
thets by
and unheard of.
The monstrous assertion that to incorporate
the Seminary of San Sulpice is a blow at the
Reformation, and a violation of the Constitution,
being blown to the winds, let us look at
the ral merits of the case. For upwards of
possession
0 aorfs
thesethat siSeminaryg.noiia
theasudalbereingh::,
which are very mischievous to Montreal.
the
Nhoe
statesman has dreamed of forcibly ejecting
Seminary, or denying its equitable right,
which
rests on as good a foundation as the Bishop
of EXETER'S claim to the revenue of his
see. As the Seminary is not to be forcibly
ejected, and its rights are mischievous, it is pro-
posed to commute them for a reasonable consi-
deration. The inhabitants of Montreal appear
extremely willing to give the small sum pro-
posed, about one-twentieth of the value of their
property, to get rid of these feudal inflictions.
But how could that be done, unless the
Seminary had a legal existence ? To give it that
legal existence is quite as much for the sake of
those who are to pay their money, as for the sake
of the Seminary which is to be incorporated. At
the same time, a clause of the ordinance which
incorporates it, and enables the inhabitants to
get rid of these feudal claims, limits the whole
sum to be paid to the Seminary to 44,000/. If the
commutation yields more than that, the ordi-

'eS. • Y
4 4 04 44 Sr.'
fie.,lo

Citt