The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-04 00:00:00

JOURNALS

SPIRIT of th

(From the Globe.)
The Canterbury and Walsall elections have resulted
in the defeat of the Liberal candidates. We will not
affect .inditTerence when we feel regret. We do sincerely
regret the issue ; although, with a knowledge of the
powerful influences brought to bear against the Liberal
aundidate at Canterbury, and of the unfavourable
circumstances under which the Liberal candidate at
Walsall was introduced to the field, we a-e not disap-
pointed. At Canterbury the Liberals Ia 1 to contend
with everything which is acitagonistical to the principles
they profess. The immense power of the hierarchy, in
its chief seat of power, is in constant active operation,
to crush whoever and whatever is opposed to its demi.
nation. Its mighty power, derived from its immense
wealth, is exercised in all the modes and through all
the channels by which it is capable of acting—especially
in the way of intimidation to the Liberal, and of re-
ward to his Tory rival in trade. The tradesmen who
are guilty of the unpardonable sin of voting for
a candidate other than the one on whom the Church has
pronounced its benediction, and for whose success its
energies are employed, are marked as contumacious :
their shops are shunned by the wives and daughters of
the dignitaries of the Cathedral, from those of the Dean
and Prebends, rejoicing in the reception of their annual
thousands, down to those of the Minor Canons and Six
Preachers, fatted to subsist on as many hundreds.
'mous the whole of the immense wealth and influence
derived from the enormous Cathedral establishment of
Canterbury is consecrated to the cause of bigotry. The
interval between trio election contest and the next is
spent in judiciously dispensing " favours" among the
tradesmen who " voted as they ought," and dismissing,
with expressive intimations of the reason which has led
to the withdrawal of custom, those who have refused
to profit by the surrender of principle. When the
number, rank, and wealth of the Cathedral clergy are
taken into the account—the station they occupy in what
is called " good society"—the deference paid to their
opinions and wishes in the circles in which they and
their families move—a deference inspired by their
functions in some, and by their wealth and fashion in
more—it will easily be seen the fearful extent to which
such a body, wielding such an influence over their
equals, and communicating to their wishes the rem's of
law upon the multitude of their immediate dependents,
must have upon the retail tradesmen of the town in
which they are residents.
• (From the Standard.)
There was evidence of concert between Mr. O'Connell
and the Ministers at the very threshold of last night's de-
bate upon Lord Stanley's Bill, al:bough the latter were,
by the necessity of their position, compelled to
vote against their master's motion. Ministers, hoe-
ever, were, by their own acts, precluded from
dividing with their tyrant, either upon his first
proposition to refuse leave to bring in the Bill, or
upon his modified suggestion to postpone the de-
bate : that is, to postpone the leave to bring in the Bill
until it lA. gilt slit Lord Morpeth's convenience and
fse pleaau-e of the House that another Bill should be
presented. They (the Ministers)had themselves brought
in /brew bills upon the sane subject, thus affirming, in the
most unequivocal manner, that it was a proper sub-
ject for legislation : indeed, their promise of a fourth
Bid was another affirmati in to the same purpose. They,
therefore, could not deny that it was proper to bring in a
Registration Bill, and any objection they could offer must
be personal to Lord Stanley, or founded upon a claim of
the exclusive initiative by the Executive. Personal
objection, however, cannot be recognised by the law
of any impartial deliberative body, and the Parlia-
montary Constitution refuses to the Crown any exclu-
sive initiative, except in particular cases—such as grants
of public money, or laws differently affecting the Sove-
reign and the Royal Family. This much may be fit to
explain the turn taken in point of form by the de-
bate, and to explain also why Lords John Russell and
Morpcth dared to vote against Mr. O'Connell and
his immediate party. The Ministers were, in fact,
compelled to vote as they did vote, by their own
proceedings, and by the law of Parliament ; but they
gave sufficient proof that they did not oppose Mr.
O'Connell without pain and reluctance. The debate
was on the whole temperate, as must generally happen
when men have exhausted
all their arguments and pas-
sions upon a thrice winnowed question.
(From the Courier.)
The two elections of Canterbury and Walsall have
terminated as every good citizen and honest man would
desire. The triumph of the Hon. Mr. Smythe in the
former ancient city was the more signal, as the extent o
we f
sp of , as
accepted
his inajor;fy took his warmest friends on the
have reason to know, by surprise. It may be
as satisfactory eiidence of the extraotoliniry impression
produced
on the minds of the electors, even onncces.
sarily so short an acquaintance, by the eloqinnt ad
dresses and upright demeanour of that high-minile.l and
accomplished gentleman. On brit fly acknowlrdeing his
obligations to his supporters, after the final declaration
of the poll, he refrained with becoming taste and dig-
nity of character from any strained and vaunting pro-
fessions of future conduct and future performance of
duties contracted towards them and the country.
" Again," he concluded, " he thanked them, and be-
fore long he hoped to have an opportunity of showing
by his conduct as their representative in the Commons
HwHe. Qf Parliament, how much he felt the obligations
they had conferred upon him while he was merely
the ao'izitor of their suffrages."—((;heers.) Sure we are
that he will be found to fulfil every promise of future
excellence and eminence which the friends who have
longest kooffp have most largely conceived of him, and j

~~

FROM THE DAILY PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
(From the Morning Post.)
We have learned, with much concern and some indigna-
tion, that a British steam-ship and her crew are detained
at Havre by the French authorities, under the pretext of
some possible right of civil damage against the owners of
the ship. The circumstances are these :—Some time ago
a steam ship belonging to the port of Havre, called the
Phenix, came into collision, a short distance from the
English coast, with a steam-ship belonging to the
General Steam Navigation Company, called the Bri-
tannia. The Fi each vessel sank, and the English vest
sel was much injured. Subsequently the owners of the
French vessel brought an sew n fcr damages against
the British owners in the local Court of Havre. The
cue has been hard, but the decision has not yet been
given. In the meantime the General Steam Naviga-
tion Company placed another vessel, the James Watt,
upon the line. By virtue of some French process
of law this vessel was seized in the port of Havre as a se-
curity for what:damage might be awarded against the Com-
pany. The Company's agent appealed, and the Judge
decided that no damage being then substantiated, no pro-
perty could be detained. The vessel was, therefore, re-
leased. She came to England, and returned to Havre.
She was then seized again by an order from another Court.
Against this also an appeal was made; but the Judge in
the second case confirmed the detention, and refused the
appeal with costs. The consequence is, that not only is
the property of British subjects detained upon the sup.
posed possibility of damage being awarded by a local tri-
bunal of France against the owners of that property, but
the persons of a considerable number of British sub-
jects are detained, against whom it is impossible
there can be any claim or complaint, fur they are a totally
difTereut crew from that which was on board the Britannia
when she came in collision with the Phenix. We look
upon this as a monstrous wrong, redress of which should
be immediately demanded by the British Government.
We have stated the circumstances with careful abstinence
from exaggeration of any kind. We believe a representa-
tion of ti a circumstances has been made to Government,
but we have not yet he ird of any. such step having been
taken as a Government jealous of the liberty of its sub-
ought to take. Unless redress be speedily aff)rded, we
salppose this affair will be brought under the consideration
of the Ilouse of Commons.
(From the Morning Herald.)
In discussing the copy-right question last Friday, Mr.
Warburton broached a principle, which a Government
" sensible of the importance of economy " would find very
convenient when pushed to make " adequate provision for
the exigencies of the public service." Some American
Sam Slick, it seems, had been guilty of the outlandish
notion that " whatever a man produces by his own hands
and his own mind, is, by a natural right his, and his only.'
" Nonsens,!" says Mr. Warburton. He did not acknow-
ledge such a thing as natural ri; hts. H did not Ile-
knowleeg? the Wet Tyler doctrine that what a man pro-
duces is his own and hie own only. The question was,
what portion of a man's labour he ought to retain, and
w hat portion s'iould be appropriated to the public
good In every case the disposal must be governed
by erpedieney." Mr. Warburton does Vat Tyler
and Jack Cade gross injustice. Whatever ignorant
impetiorea gentlemen of their kidney may have shown
of taxation when applied to themselves, they were ss mu h
alive to the expediency of appropriating the fruit of other
men's labour as the best Liberal of the present day.
The only difference between Jack and Mr. Warburton
iv, that Mr. Warburton is, that Mr. Warburton would
starve the clerk of Chatham for the public good, whereas
Jack thought the public good best consulted by hang-
ing him with his ink-horn about his neck. But ho..‘
would Mr. Warburton like the mutate 'tontine, de to part
of the story ? or, in more homely phrase, how would he
like the goose to be served with the same sauce as
the gander? The question, he says, is, what portion of
a man's labour ought to be retained by himsrlt, and shat
portion should be appropriated to what Minis-ers call
the " exigencies" of the public. He cannot mean that the
exaction should be enforced only upon authors; for, if the
value of a thing is just what it will bring, his doctrine
would be far more valuably applied to Baltic merchants
than to booksellers' fags. What pertion of the fruits
of his labour will be consent to being appro-
priated ? As Colman's timber merchant answcre 1, when
asked how much he would give to relieve the poor match-
makers, " Certainly not a great deal." Mr. Warburton,
by all accounts, has made a large fortune (the larger the
more credit to him), by knowing bow to supply the mar-
ket with Norway oak. What would be his opinion if Mr.
Baring was to say, " My dear Sir, you have no natura4
..right to what your cleverness in the tieubt rerade has ac-
quired; that sort of Brat Tyler nonsense won't do for me ;
the only question with me is, how much of your gains I
should allow you to retain, and how much I should appro-
priate to the public." It is understood that Mr. Baring
means to propose something novel to provide for his " exi-
gencies," as :he public will not stand another per-centage
upon the old taxes and duties. For the fan of the thing
let him but a hisper a tax upon timber_merchants and
authors, and it is Epping Forest to a walking-stick that
Mr. Warburton will find out that authors have natural
sights after all,