The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-19 00:00:00

WM&

LONDON, MONDAY, JULY 19, 1847.

air ROBMIRT PEEL has constituted himself a great
Leader of the English People by proving himself a
Patriotic Statesman. His retirement from the first
office in the government of these realms can never be
forgotten: it was invested with the dignity of an
historic event by the enthusiasm of the
whole nation for V a falling but triumphant
I iniater. Since that Memorable occasion the
late Premier has lived in comparative retire-
inent ; comparative, we say, merely in reference to
the prominent position occupied by him in the House
of the representative Legislature during the five
sears precedtbg. Sir
ROBERT has at length emerged
from this partial privacy by
his constituency at Tamworth.
That
an Address to
to
th
atAddress, how-
•ver, belongs not exclusively
ielhieelekcitnogrdsomof,
Tamworth ; it is the property of the w
it is for the perusal of every enfranchised citizen in
the empire.
Same declaration of opinion, some definite an-
nouncement of principle, some explanatory allusions
to the past, some assurances and auguries as to the
Future, were expected from Sir ROBERT PEEL imme-
diately upon the dissolution of the Long Parliament,
during the existence of which he had loft the
obedience of a Great Party, and gained the gratitude
and affections of a Great People. Sir ROBERT PEEL
ha fulfilled all these expectations by his comprehen-
sive letter to his constituents.
Formerly the electioneering manifestoes of the
Might Hon. Baronet the representative of Tamworth
ere libtte better than political puzzles. The Ad-
dress before us—every word and numeral of which
:Vre have 5
t"dief,l with the attention dernani!ed by a
Zocument of such
significance and importance-
-15 etn:inuttly bhe reverse of its predecessors. It i 3
imaginable; yenned in the homeliest style . but that
wry characteristic of homelinessb both in manner and
guiguage, imparts an extraordinary forcefulness to
the composition. Nothing could
bemore straight-
Sorward, more manly, more independent,mi
vo
er
ne
candid, more conclusive than the explanation g
by the ex:-Prime Minister of his conduct throughout
tile period of his Administration. Nothing could be
wore singularly indicative of the soundness of his

position before the country than the solicitation of
the suffrages of the Tamworth electors by which
that explanation is accompanied—a solicitation so
graceful in utterance, and yet so uncompromising in
dignity. The Address, indeed, will be doubly wel-
come to the community at large ; it will be welcome
as an explicit retrospect of a policy which has been
productive of incalculable benefits to the million ;
and, above all, it will be welcome as a token that the
inaugurator of that policy is staunch in his adherence
to the cause of progression and improvement. Sir R.
PEEL is fully committed to the popular move-
ment. Liberalism is his political creed. The greatest
good to the greatest number is the end of all his as-
pirations as a politician; and—seeing that his obser-
vations upon the Maynooth grant, upon the penal
enactments, and upon the extension to all religious
classes of the blessings of national education, imply the
most catholic tolerance—we are justified in regarding
as his favourite motto, " Civil and Relizious Li-
berty." The retrospect taken by Sir ROBERT PEEL
is, as we have already intimated, most satisfactory ;
but how could it be otherwise ? The Right
Hon. Baronet can only look back with exultation
upon the closing achievements and predominant ten-
dency of his Administration. Referring to the state
of our foreign relations at that period, he can only
remember the honourable compromise effected with
regard to Oregon, whereby continued jealousies and
probable warfare, between Great Britain and the
United States, were prevented; he can only remember
the triumphal progress of our arms in the defence
and development of our Oriental possessions ; he can
only remember the prolonged and continuous peace
preserved between ourselves and the other kingdoms
of Christendom. Referring to the measures adopted
by himself and his colleagues for the development and
preservation of the Established Church, he recalls to
mind the fact of their having afforded facilities for
religious instruction to no less than 764,000 souls
hitherto excluded from that instruction by the paucity
of the churches when compared with the general
population. And, referring to the financial and com-
mercial innovations effected under his especial
guidance, he enumerates a series of such marvellous
and beneficent changes (faits accompli), as it has
never before fallen to the lot of any statesman to
catalogue.
A profound interest is attached to this portion of
Sir R. PEEL'S manifesto. The details, it is true, are
no more than a recapitulation of the speeches deli-
vered in the House of Commons by the Right Hon.
Baronet on proposing the total, but gradual, abolition
of the laws obstructing the importation of foreign
grain—the recapitulation, however, is more concise,
and, if possible, more convincing and unanswerable
than the orations it echoes. Again, does the ex-
Premier aver that his conversion from the doctrines
of Protection to those of Free-trade was not as abrupt
as his present antagonists asseverate. He proves that
in his instance there was no sudden " jumping to con-
clusions ;" that, on the contrary, his financial policy
tended, from 1842 inclusively, to the ultimate reali-
sation of freedom to commerce. Nevertheless, he is
not ashamed to acknowledge, as he nobly acknow-
ledged on retiring from authority, that his confidence
in the so-called protective system was materially
weakened " by the conflict of argument on the prin-
ciple of a restrictive policy," meaning thereby the
peaceful agitation of the Anti-Corn-law League, and
the logical eloquence of its illustrious chieftain, Mr.
COBDEN. To the awful deficiency of provisions,
moreover, caused by the mysterious destruction of
the potato crops in 1845, he attributes in a particular
manner his final determination to demand the abro-
gation of the corn-laws. Famine was indeed to him
what the Sibyl was to the Prince of Viamn—atonce a
warning and a guide. Famine warned him from an
obstinate persistence in the obsolete blunder of pro-
tection, while it led him on to the golden glories of
free trade ; it pointed not from the luco to the antro,
not from the grove to the cavern, but from the dark-
ness and confinement of old laws to the light and
liberty of new ones.
" Procul 0, procul este, profani,
Conclamat vates, totoque absistite luco.
Tuque invade viam, vaginaque eripe ferrum;
Nunc animis opus, AlE:ea, nunc pectore firmo.
Tantiim effata, furens antro se immisit aperto:
Ille ducem baud timidis vadentem passibus asquat."
Famine threatened; experience conquered a moiety
of prejudices ; reason and argument overcame the
remainder. Sir ROBERT proclaimed to his colleagues
the necessity of opening the ports and of blotting the
restrictive laws upon corn from the statute-book :
the Conservative party was thereby deprived of its
creator, and he himself was expelled from:office, though
he was accompanied in his retirement by the accla-
mations of his fellow-countrymen.

History will tell that those acclamations were well
deserved, that they were deserved because of the in-
troduction of a financial and commercial policy which
has in truth tended "to fortify the established in-
stitutions of this country, to inspire confidence in the
equity and benevolence of the Legislature, to main-
tain the just authority of an hereditary nobility," and
—what is more practically beneficial than all—" to
better the condition of those who labour for their
subsistence." By the establishment of an income-
tax and the removal of imposts from articles of
consumption, whether as food or as the materials of
manufacture, Sir ROBERT PEEL relieved the poorer
classes from the burden of contributing in undue pro-
portions to the national revenue, and removed the re-
sponsibility of the maintenance of the credit of our
exchequer to those more opulent classes among which
he himself is notoriously numbered. This considera-
tion it is which justifies the Right Honourable
Baronet in saying so emphatically, in allu-
sion to his determination, in the November of 1845,
to abolish the restrictions against the introduction of
grain from foreign countries—" 1 am wholly un-
COnSCiOIIB of any single motive of self-interest, personal
or political, which was not calculated to bias my judg-
'neat in favour of an opposite conclusion." Knowing
the accuracy of this assurance, the population of Great
Britain cannot but recognise in the consequent retire-
ment of Sir RonEaT PEEL from authority the sacri-
fice of Place to Patriotism.
What will the electors of Tamworth do ? What
will be the influence of this Address over the
scattered divisions of the Conservative party ? The
answer must be obvious to themselves. Sir ROBERT
shows that he is neither a wavering supporter of
Expediency, nor a sycophantic aspirant for the votes
of any single constituency in the empire. On the
contrary, he evidences that he is an honest convert
and a manly candidate. If, therefore, the enfran-
chised inhabitants of Tamworth are conscientiously
opposed to the course adventured upon by their
distinguished representative, they have had pointed
out to them by that very representative himself the
only path which now remains open to their inde-
pendence. Whatever may be the decision of his
constituents, however, Sir ROBERT PEEL will retain
the affection and admiration of the people, because in
becoming a Reformer of singular audacity, he has
become also a National Benefactor.

In the observations which we offered on Friday,
respecting the clause proposed by Mr. G. ALEXANDER,
HAMILTON to be inserted in the Bankruptcy and
Insolvency Bill, we stated that none of the
parties seemed aware of the fact that an Act had
been passed in the year 1841, by which members of
the Irish bar were qualified to be appointed to any of
the offices abolished by the Bill, and generally to
any judicial office, unless specially excluded. On
inquiry we have learned that Mr. IlimiLioN men-
tioned the existence of this provision, although
n the
from
the
House
at the
confusion whichtimeit unfortunately prevailed
from the line of argumentnd adopted by
not
our
unintentional appear t
oeuerrerrs.tood;bnyo
ittsreoppoprotneedn,
opponents
snidt
person
cor-
rectdid
dWe
should
a hasten nsorry
to
orender injustice to any
it the more in the present ''and we
should regret
wholly opposed to Mr. HAMlLiTnostance, as, although
he was at the time endeavouringN int political feeling,
justice for a highly respectable body
obftai.n an act of
his country-
men, and to promote an object whicyh weof
would be highly beneficial to the are satisfied
people of the United
Kingdom generally.
It was considered desirable to obtain a legis-
lative declaration of the rights of the Irish bar,
although no new enactment might be re-
quired to confer that right, and it was with
that view that Lord CAMPBELL introduced the
clause to which we have already alluded, although
Lord LYINDMURST, on its introduction, stated that he
conceived it to be unnecessary, for he never under-

stood when the term " barrister" or "barrister-at-
law" was used in any Act, that it did not include
Irish as well as English barristers—indeed, the Le-
gislature must mean by the term persons who are
competent to practise before its own tribunal, in any
of its branches, in that capacity ; and it is now uni-
versally acknowledged that an Irish barrister is qua-
lified to appear at the bar of either House. But it is
important, not only that the privilege should exist,
but that it should be acted on and carried into prac-
tical effect--not merely that parties should be eligible
to office, but that there should be a reciprocal opening
of the Courts in each country.
There can be no sufficient reason urged against
the admission of the Irish bar to a full participation
in all the rights and privileges conceded to their
brethren and vice versa. The privileges of the bar
are admittedly not for their own benefit, but for that
of the suitors in the several courts, of the clients who
may have occasion to avail themselves of their ser-
vices. The great ob,'ect to be achieved in either
country is clearly to obtain persons of competent
ability and learning, and of unblemished reputation.
The Irish bar will not be found wanting in any of
these respects. Sir EDWARD SUGDEN, a witness
whose authority as to legal endowments will scarcely
be impeached in this country, has borne the strongest
testimony to the merits cf the Irish bar, and stated
that in the depth of their research, the extent of their
attainments, and in the skill, talent, and integrity
with which they applied their knowledge, they were
second to none. A student in Ireland is subjected to
as many tests, before he is admitted to practice, as in
this country ; nay, more, he is compelled to become
a member of one of the Inns of Court in London,
and thus, in addition to the legal education afforded
in Ireland, to go through everything that is required
as a qualification for the English bar. Why, then,
should a system be kept up that perpetuates differences
between the nations that it is in every respect de-
sirable to have abolished? It is not for the benefit of
the suitors. If the Irish bar are so far beneath the
English, as alleged by some, they will speedily find
their proper level, and the English practitioners will
have little reason to shrink from the competition ;
nay, they would be the great gainers by the change,
for an extensive field would be opened to them, in
which they would speedily attain the pre-eminence
due to their superior acquirements.
The opinions of Lord CAMPBELL on this subject
are well known. That distinguished lawyer has long
expressed the greatest anxiety for the abolition of
every distinction. In his evidence before the Com-
mittee on Legal Education he says, in answer to
question 3,869, "My own opinion is, that there
ought to be one bar for England and Ireland, and
that a barrister who practises in England should be
entitled to practice at the Irish bar also." And to
the question (3,874), "Do you think it would be
advisable also that English judges should go the Irish
circuits, and Irish judges the English ?" he says, " I
feel that so strongly, that I have several times pro-
posed in the House of Lords that the system should
be adopted." Lord WELLESLEY was of opinion that
it would tend very much to benefit the United
Kingdom if there were one bar for England
and Ireland ; and that there should be an in-
terchange—" that English barristers should be
appointed as Irish judges and Irish should be
appointed as English judges." And, again
when asked, " whether there was not a considerable
difference in the law, and the practice of the law in
the two countries, and whether that would not inter-
fere with the interchange," replied, " I do not at all
agree in that, the difference between them is quite
trifling. The common law of England and Ireland
is the same, and there is no material difference in the
practice." To this convincing testimony, which must
be conclusive to every unprejudiced mind, we may
add that of Lord BROUGHAM, who states that "he
can see no objection to allow English and Irish bar-
risters to practise reciprocally in each country," and
that it might tend very much to correct the Irish
practises. His Lordship adds, "lam a great friend
to sending over from time to time an English Judge
to preside on the Irish bench, and I should
see no objection whatever to bring over an
Irish Judge occasionally to this country. I
see no objection whatever to that interchange."
Having thus stated the opinion of the two greatest
legal reformers of modern days, we shall quote those
of a sound practical man of lynsineez, a gentleman to
whom we have already alluded in favourable terms,
and whose character and reputation is well known in
both countries. Mr. PEIRCE 111411oNx says—" I hope
I shall live to see the time when English barristers will
be made Irish Judges, and Irish barristers English
Judges; the more the distinctions of country are
broken, the better for the United Kingdom."
It is unnecessary to multiply proofs of the pro-
priety and expediency of the change. In fact, there
is nothing that can be urged in opposition, except the
advantage of preserving a monopoly to a certain class—
a sort of protection to native English industry, which
will not, we are sure, be resorted to by any of the
high-minded or able men that adorn the English bar.
We are sure that they would not interpose such an
objection to the adoption which would be for the
gmeonreer al
deeply e
ifint ben,v oel vv ee
dn
tihf a tnh ec ioruplderps
possibly
sn
scil interestse wc
aesree.

The Madrid mail of the 12th had not reached Paris
when the post left on Saturday.

We have received the Paris papers of Friday and
Saturday.

On Saturday the Court of Peers pronounced
judgment in the case of General CUBIERES and his
co accused. They are all found guilty of corruption.
TESTE is sentenced to three years' imprisonment, to
deprivation of civil rights, and to pay a fine of
94,0001., besides refunding the 95,000 f. he had re-
ceived as a bribe, and which sum is confiscated for
the benefit of the hospitals. CUBIERES is deprived
of his civil rights and condemned to pay a fine of
10,000 f.; and PARMENTIER has had passed on him a
similar sentence, with the addition of being mulcted
in all the costs of the trial. M. PELLAPRA was
expected to arrive in Paris on Sunday in order to
surrender and take his trial.

The Reform Banquet at the Chateau Rouge still
continues to be the great subject of comment in all
the Paris papers. Had the Minister who inspires the
Journal des Debuts been wise he would have adhered
to his first resolution, and have made no allusion
whatever to the matter. In the exuberance of his
dynastic loyalty, however, he could not resist com-
menting on the omission to drink the health of Louis
PHILIPPE, and stigmatising that meeting, in
consequence, as one compromising public order.
This attack has brought forth the following crushing
reply from the National:—

" All is lost. Public order is compromised. Anarchy
is raising its hideous head. We are rolling from abyss
to abyss to the follies of communism. The question be-
fore us relates to the ruin of society! It is the Journal
des Debats which this morning utters this cry of alarm
—not apropos of
,complaint—not with respect to the
scandalous trial—not with regard to the ignoble pro-
ceedings of the Government. No; those are great, pure,
and glorious! But the Reformist banquet of the Chateau-
Rouge, that is the destruction society! That is the
nmstinhsmete:ei
larnLgeeceoaomnit
leemana tgabuoi
efensvt4hiluhei
banquet at
vbeaoyt sdbswi
been
ei
henincAhgluNuatri
the
Duvergier l
rteyeifn andgth,King's
heiengadth.
lae lttmhy y. u
wfia
avo
se-f
crua,
aof
not proposed! Can you figure to yourself a similar
horror? The King, the living and incarnate law! At
that impious meeting it was preferred to toast the
sovereignty~sishaets
abomination!
tho the reform
rthee f
ocpme pohltee. a
guestsanl
legislation
itshl
aedt rorenevdowl
tuhotiicoh.n utterhpuoafsa
jgr
ad: 1.
ivel
ntt!
Whus 225 satisfied Deputies, comprising m
What oblivion of every morality! They went fugrthieer.
—they spoke of the rights of those excluded from
political power, of the sufferings and the merits of all
those citizens whose political laws pay labour by ingra-
titude. They appealed to the justice and the solicitude
of public opinion against those odious iniquities of social
organization in opposition to the most numerous and ill-
treated classes. In that assembly of privileges, in the
name of the census, all sentiments were in accord to
proclaim the necessity for modifying the political instru-
mentwaenred
ninectrseuaffisecsieanllt
meeting, those present
disorders.
characterise
h a whichr:eAr
snesdu, ptaphsoairtft se'
infernal
filtehrEsaeal gfaateets
carried their audacity so far as to propose a toast to the
press!—and they did not drink to the King! Our feel-
ings become excited when we think of that ignominy!
How could M. Duvergier dine without drinking the
King's health ? Are not Deputies bound under the
penalty of outlawry to commence by a monarchical
benedicite? As soon as they happen to meet, in an
official assembly or not, they are obliged to renew
their oath of fidelity and homage to his Majesty,
even should they expose that Majesty to receive
the worst compliment ! The elect of the legal
na
associate
are,
tconsequently, s regardedelect
()f t
13
ea as
electors
flocketor s
of
ff func-
tionaries! They are cowards or poltroons because they
who, leaving Paris,
, wish to occupy themselves

solely with the institutions of the country! Truly we
were aware that the pride of upstarts was great, but we
did not imagine that it reached so high ! It ie a principle
say they. A prineiple! But we reply, with the charter
in our hand, that the sole principle of government is the
sovereignty of the people. The national will is at once
the origin and the term of all governments. It alone
creates them, according to its necessities, as it pleases;
and anybody must have a short memory to have for-
gotten already how that sovereign will destroys forms
which are contrary to its expansion, and casts into soli-
tude those ancient royal races when they pretend to
oppose their worn-out privileges to the eternal right of
the people. That Charles X. succeeding to his brother
Louis XVIII., who maintained that he had reigned 20
years when a foreign steam-boat cast him on our coast in
the year 1814—that those persons should have assumed
to be principles might have passed without ridicule. And,
nevertheless, when a meeting was held at the Vendanges
de Bourgogne without drinking the, King's health, no-
body then thought of groaning and lamenting the con-
duct of Deputies who had at that period a dynastic
surface. And you wish and require that Deputies should
at present drink the King's health! Not only Deputies,
but the electors of Paris—but the press of Paris, and
that in the month of July, when the burning sun heats
the pavement, when from the heights wnich command
the capital we perceive the Louvre, where the people
were victorious, and the Tuileries, where they levelled
a throne, and the dust of the Carrousel, where the pe-
destrians trampled under their feet the flours delis
broken to pieces! But your adoration becomes ridicu-
lous by force of impertinence. You now style the King
the living, incarnate law! Good people, you mistake
yourselves for Louis XIV. In what article of the
charter have you found that the King was the law?
The law rules the King as well as the humblest of
citizens. He contributes one-third to it—he executes it
—he is bound to obey it—or, rather, as he acts not
without his Ministers, in constitutional language we
must thus explain your splendid phrase:—The
living and incarnate law is M. Jayr, M. Dumon,
M. Cunin, Gridaine, father, at Sedan! A fine incar-
nation, well worthy of adoration ! In truth, one is sur
prised to find to what a point the spirit of the Court, the
miserable spirit of subserviency, is perpetuated in this
country, notwithstanding the terrible lessons of history.
It might be said that the residence of the Monarch was
closed against the external air—that the movement of
generations, and the permanent progress of ideas had not
been felt there. It appears to it that an intelligent,
active, powerful, and energetic nation like ours should
halt because a system has described its parabole—that
the immovability of the upper part ought to paralyse
the entire social boey—that all France should be con-
demned to drag its limbs like a decrepit old man, because
it pleases all those who lead it to be from 70 to 81 years
of age ! Those are the men of the Left and the Left
Centre, to whom they do the honour to attribute
some good sense. They perceive that the pre-
sent policy degrades and corrupts all parties. They
contend at the Chamber—their efforts are destroyed by
a majority of satisfied members. They propose an
electoral and Parliamentary reform—they are ride
culed, and tuld that the country is laughing
at them. They then address themselves to the
electors—she latter reply and appeal to men of every party
attached to the revolution of July who desire a modi-
fication of the existing system. A common feeling
unites different sections of the same party. Each brings
his followers and maintains his flag. A cry of anathema
is immediately raised because the national sovereignty
and the Revolution of July have been invoked in place
of the King! The Marseillaise was chaunted with en-
thusiasm, but Vice Henry IV. was neither played nor
sung, and Deputies were present! What a scandal !
And it is expected that this extraordinary manifestation,
of which the echo has been heard in London and in
Germany, shall be imitated in France! What an im-
prudent expectation! Ah! we are well aware of what
grieves you. It is because no disturbances interfered to
derange this sincere and powerful expression of the
Parisian electors. It is because in that assembly of
1,200 persons the heat and excitement diminished in no
respect the dignified demeanour of the guests. Itis because
that amongst the 5,000 or 6,000 persons who responded
outside to the applause of the company, and to
the music of the Marseillaise, your police found
no opportunity to interfere to repress the slightest
confusion. This consciousness of right, which is gra-
dually penetrating everywhere, and which fortifies those
amongst whom it penetrates, afflicts you because it me-
naces your existence, and it becomes the more alarming
to you as it is consolitary to society in general. You
invite by your provocation agitation and riot. You
would have cried less loudly if an opportunity had been
afforded you to disperse the meeting as illegal. You
would not perhaps regret, crouched as you are in your
filthy den, that some violence should have assisted you
in creating alarm. Do not place any reliance on vio-
lence—that must come from you. We have waited pa
tiently for your system to produce its fruit. The coun-
try has seen and has tasted the poison. You are edu-
cating the naticn. You are enlightening the most blind
by the light of your policy. Parties have learned that
bad Governments are not destroyed by their efforts.
Bad Governments commit suicide, and you will not fail
to succeed in consequence of the care with which you
charge your weapons. Our part will henceforth be go-
verned by yours. You may act, we shall wait."
The Ministers, if they are wise, will henceforth
taboo this subject of the banquet of the Chateau
Rouge. The dynasty has nothing to gain by reviving
recollections of 1830.
Some short time since the Semaine hinted at some
mnfeie prees;sese ;Ts she granting of a mining conees.
sion to the Talabot Company in Algeria.. The
National, of Friday, takes up the subject, and
is more explicit in its accusations of unfair play. It
says that on November 9, 1845, four-and-twenty
hours before Marshal SOIWT gave up his place as
Minister of War, four royal ordonnances were issued
conceding for 99 years certain mines at Belchita, in
Algeria, to the Marquis DE Bessarro, M. TALABOT,
and others. Since then the Marquis DE BASSANO,
the story goes, received a formal promise from Gen.
ST. YON to be accorded a concession of the copper
mines of Ain-Barber, but in spite of that engage-
ment the concession has been since granted by Gen.
TREzEL,I,the present Minister of War, to:M. TAT.T.Bor.
The National demands, if it be true or not, that on
May 3, the representative of the Bassano Company
sent in a very energetic protest against the formal
and obligatory violation of the promise of his prede-
cessor. It adds—
" Is it true, that the letter from the Bassano Com.
pany contained very grave accusations against the em-
ployis of the public works in Algeria, of which proof
was offered to be given ?
" Is it true, that the matter in dispute was referred to
the Council of State, which declared itself incom•
petent, in consequence of the nature of the facts alleged?
" Is it true, that M. Talabot summoned a number of
persons to join him in making up a company ; and that
tboefae any
Lj—unio, one of the number, it was stated that,
n could be effected it would be necessary
o r A
first of all to set aside 4,000 shares, representing a
capital of 2,000,000 francs, to provide for contingencies
(besoins accidentels) ?
" Is it true, that these
"were designated by the cabalis-
tical name of ;,..1 shares

The Courrier Francais of Saturday publishes the
whole of the deed of the society for the working of
the mines, with a capital of ten millions of francs, and
by which it appears that a fusion of concessionnaires
was established in order to render competition im-
possible. The first paragraph of the deed commences
with the usual words, Entre,les soussigne,s, and a
blank for their names, the reason of which the
Courrier says it will give hereafter. At the end of
this deed the Courrier says :
" Suppose a simple and honest man to have discovered
a mine in Algeria. He has devoted his time and his
money to trials and researches. He demands a conces-
sion for his discoveries, and immediately the society of
monopolists launches against him one of its members as
a competitor. This person is naturally supported, pro-
tected, and represented near the Government by its
managing director, L. Talabot. M. Talabot is the son-
in-law of M. Cunin-Gridaine, and Marshal Soult is his
partner. The competitor of the company carries the
day, and the concession falls to the lot of the company.
How can the unfortunate industrial hope to succeed
against the influence which is at the command of his
competitors? It is the same for a grant of land. The
Society Talabot puts forward a competitor and obtains
it. Is not this an organized monopoly? This is the
reason why the Compagnie
Bassano, after having re-
ceived a positive promise that the concession of the cop-
per mines of Ain-Barbar should be made to them, saw
the Minister of War at the moment of the
change of the last Ministry hasten to give to M.
Talabot a permission to work those mines. This is
the reason why, on the 3d of May last, the represen
thta-
tive of the Compagnie Bassano addressed to e
present Minister of War lively remonstrances
against the violation of a formal and binding engage-
ment given by his predecessor. This is why the letter
of the Compagnie Bassano contained grave accusations
against employes in the public works of Aler ia, and
offered to bring forward proofs in support of the accusa-
tions. We could cite the names of several other victims.
How many persons applying for concess:ons have been
repulsed by the permanent coalition of the SociCA6 Tala-
bot! This society is an army of competitors, and it is
always victorious. Why ? We say
present company, again we will become
more explicit if no answer be given to us. We will ex-
amine to-morrow this mysterious clause of the company's
deed of settlement.—` Other shares have this day been
subscribed for by Messrs. Jules and Leon Talabot, who
may transfer them to different friends wishing to join this
their labours and endeavou'rs.' Who are these friends to
whom Messrs. Talabot may transfer these other shares?
bringina• into it the concurrence of
What are their names? What is the number of shares?
e Messrs.
part,) cannotd e failm a n
d t oi
tg
Why this reserve, when in the deed all the other share-
holders, whatever they may have brought into the com-
leliree,
t
h our P:tny, are named and described, and the number of their
shareshas
inserted? This is a point upon which the public
Talabot
formally
a right to demand a categorical and full explanation.
sure that they will not refuse it from the moment when
we say
that this stipulation resembles very much the
clause
which was the leading point in the affair of
Gouhenans." joyfe them.it th e
mlsireelve ares.
quite

In commenting on these constant exposures of the
system, the Union Monarchique says—
" Ministerial corruption is a system applied to all
Parts of the State. Administrative justice is everywhere

rendered subordinate to electoral and Parliamentary cal-
culations. Ministers not supporting themselves on a
basis of eniblic equity, or right, or virtue, seek strength
in the an ardent cupidity. In all the
regions of power they surround and envelop themselves
with creatures prompt to serve them. It is not merit
which gives title to favour—it is slavishness. The
Ministers have re-established serfdom in France, an
odious bondage, in which a man gives himself in ex-
change for a possession which ought to be the price
of honour and liberty 1 We are obliged to confine
ourselves to general terms, for what crowns this orga-
nisztion of servitude is, that independence is a crime.
But who, henceforth, can hide from himself the fact
of trafficings which dishonour the country ? Who can
deceive himself as to the cause of so many for-
tunes, so many elevations, so many prodigalities of
power ? Does favour go to virtue ? Opulence VI
modesty ? Power to merit? Who is not alarmed at the
monstrous caprices which displace poverty and wealth, or
which sacrifice
,honesty and services? On all this spec-
tacle no mistake can be committed by the conscience to
France. And if it be thus, if such be the conviction of
the country, how can we be astonished that when Minis-
ters buy the consciences of men, men in their turn have
the idea of purchasing the consciences of Ministers? Is
that not a natural exchange of corruption and venality?
And why should it be more criminal to tempt the cupidity
of a Minister than that of an elector? Before human
morality where is the difference? This simple question
is very grave, and we ask it of honest people. Ho-
nest people, take care! To prosecute and strike cor-
ruption in an isolated act is not to crush corruption, is
not to save France. France perishes because the prin-
ciple of corruption is at the bottom of politics; and as long
as that principle lives, it necessarily produces its conse-
quences. Ministers have need of this principle ; they
have often said that themselves, under the ambiguity of
their apologies. What is corruption they call influence,
action, exercise of the right of the State. That is, be-
cause their policy, having no strength in justice, they
cannot allow liberty to conscience! They mutt make an
invasion in the private domain of man; that is all their
moral power. And then you have heard their irony ;
after having done violence to the freo will of the citizens,
they cried, 'Do you feel yourselves corrupted?' All no!
the corrupted do not feel themselves corrupt, precisely
because they aro so. It is the virtuous who feel that
corruptors are the enemies, the plagues of the liberty
and dignity of the people ! Honest people, quit your
security! France is perishing by Ministerial corruption.
Take care that impassibility does not resemble a sort of
complicity in this systematic conspiracy of depravation.
Call to yourselves, for it is time, all men who have at
heart the grandeur of the country. Protest petition!
speak! write! Let there be a league against the Minis-
terial system, which carries in itself the germ of public
degradation. The drama of the Luxembourg will not
be lost, if it be an occasion for honest people of all
parties to forget their quarrels in order to attempt to
save France."

It is too late now to call for a league against a
system which carries in itself the germ of public de-
gradation. Such a league should have been formed
before Paris was fortified. That which has been ac-
quired by fraud, whether in France or Spain, will
be maintained by force ; witness the complaints of
the Ministerial and Palace journals of the attempts of
the Opposition to prolong the session, witness the
fierce denunciations of all those who took part in the
Reform banquet at the Chateau Rouge, witness the
camps of 25,000 men each at Compeigne and Lune-
\rifle, witness the army of 40,000 men to be assembled
at the foot of the Pyrenees, witness the constant com-
munications between the officials of the Palace and
BUGEAUD and NAaVAEZ.
The 15th being the file of St. HENRY, was cele-
brated with great éclat by the Legitimatists.

The Paris Bourse on Saturday was a singularly
cheerful one. Government stock opened at the prices
of the previous day, but closed at an improvement.
Shares were, however, in the ascendant. Northerns
opened at 567 E, and ended, firm, at 575 f., being a rise of
Bf.; Marseilles and Avignon, which fell to 620 f. on EH-
day, rose 171 E; Orleans and Rouens rose respectively
7if.; Bordeaux, which closed at 480 f. on Friday, rose to
490 f. on Saturday.
The Three per Cents. closed on the Paris Bourse on
Saturday at 77f. 75c.; the Five per Cents. at 118 f. 70c.;
the Orleans Railroad Shares, 1,280 f. ; Rouen, 970 f ; Havre,
6421. 50c.; Great Northern, 575 f. ; Avignon, 637 f. 50c.;
Vierzon, 587 f. 50c.; Bordeaux, 4901. • Boulogne, 390 f.;
Troyes and Montereau, 2701.; Basle, 1821. 50c.; Dieppe,
310t1; Paris and Strasburg, 4201. ; Tours awl Nantes,
395 f.; Paris and Lyons, 4301.; Lyons and Avignon, 432 f.
50c.; Bordeaux and Cette, 457 f. 50c. ; Spanish Three per
Cents., 32 A.
BUSINESS DONE IN FOREIGN RAILWAYS AT THE
LONDON STOCK EXCHANGE, JULY 17.

East Indian, h—Luxembourg, ll—Northern of France,
12% ex int.—Orleans and Bordeaux, SA—Paris and Lyons,
43A—West Flanders, 4.

UNION BANK OF AUSTRALIA.
(THIS DAY.) _ _

The annual general meeting of the proprietors of this
company was held to-day at their offices, 38, Old
Broad• street.

JOHN CUMMINS, Esq., Chairman of the Company,
presided, and read the report, which stated that the af-
fairs of the company were in a very prosperous condi-
tion, and no loss of any importance had occurred during
the past year, while the amount of the bad debts had
been acinaideralalst rednead_ The Chairman elms read a
statement of the accounts, from which it appeared
that the liabilities for the past year amounted to
957,066/. ss. id., and the balance of undivided profits
to 37,6771. 10s. 11 d., leaving a reserve fund of
50,008/. 11s. sd.

The report was unanimously agreed to, after which
the Chairman and C. E. Mangles, Esq., were re-elected
as directors.

The meeting then separated.

INSOLVENT COURT-(THIS DAY.

IN RE WILLIAM HAMBER, JUN.
The insolvent, a surveyor, was opposed by two of his
assistants, named Newland and Walker. He was sup-
ported by Mr. Nichols.
It appeared that the insolvent had been engaged in
the Great Leeds and Direct Railway Company, from
whom he now claimed upwards of 8001. He had em-
ployed about 150 men.
Newland, the creditor, stated that he was to have
been paid two guineas a day for his services. He op-
posed as for a debt contracted without reasonable means
of payment.
The insolvent denied that Newland was to have more
than one guinea a day.
The other creditor, Walker, claimed Si.
It further appeared that the insolvent had 1,1001.
owing to him. lie owed about 3,0001., and had a great
many creditors and debtors on the schedule. He had
been connected with several lines, and had employed a
great number of assistants.
The COURT N$ as of opinion that no complaint had been
proved under the Act of Parliament against the insolvent.
The insolvent was discharged.