The Sun.
London, England, 1841-03-12 00:00:00

Z-r-4.
-

LONDON:
FRIDAY, MARCH 12, 1841..

ill the House of Lords, last night, the records
hof the Poor-law Commissioners, relating to the
olt°4B of Clonmel, Naas, &c., were, on the mo-
lai," °f the Duke of WELLINGTON, ordered to be
,ibefore the House.
Marquis of NORMANBY, in assenting to
admitte4 some irregularity, but de-_,
0- that there had been any deception.
4,1 his motion, Mr. STANLEY, the gentleman
Ino2!leated who is connected with the adminis-
n of the Poor-law in Ireland, was ordered
oex attend their Lordships on Tuesday next, to
i)jalu the matter.
80,4 the motion of the Marquis of NORMANBY
tits" further papers connected with Canada and
e affair of St. Sul ice were ordered to be laid
on
111 the table, including a despatch of the Earl of
kl.:°N) dated ten years ago, and letters patent,
ko„nt"(1 by Lord BATHURST, in 1824 to the Ro-
c," Catholic - Seminary of St. Nicolay, in
Tit
e motion gave rise to a little conversation
()ut the), motion of the Bishop of EXETER,
\,,b
Itoole„h dhl stand for this day, Lord ELLEN-
CaCijGH and the Earl of RIPON both depre-
we:4 bringing it on so soon after these papers
of submitted to their Lordships. The Bishop
e P'c'rEit himself seemed to admit that there
u'id be time to examine them, but he was sub-
Nvll4ed to a trial at Exeter. He had to go to
Couldester on business, and he was afraid he
Are" 404 put off his motion. The. Right Rev.
toet.ate) post ultimately gave way, and his
WI" was pponed from this day till Monday.
lost e are inclined to infer from what transpired
toehilight, that the more.rational of the Tories,
1111, aS Lord ELLENBOROUGH and the Earl of
the °_,;‘, are not inclined to go all lengths with
dcos L'isliop of EXETER. We hope such is the
e f" "we believe with Lord SYDENHAM, whose
oreatelk publish, that the disallowance of the
lorilnance would be most disastrous, particu-
hi4 fitNrere caused by the motion of a Protestant
'lP's incited by•an avowed hatred of the re-
Coin, of the great majority of the people, of
Iv:, The small minority in which the bigots
daye 'eft in the House of Commons on Wednes-
tiP eVelliUg, ought to be a lesson to the Lay
Ats

uee over Spiritual Peers, who. are deaf to pi

Of fa 7 deaf to reason, and act 2+frona the Ugh,
but 1... th alone, it can have-;-*-9.-:' influence ;
in, LaY Peers may learn **, it how
-all. •
the, Is the support they will recZiie,in following
bask of the Bishop of EXET-ER. =Under the
a'ld name of religion the*44*.goefi; to
-4nit what, when applied tOk,..thetnieives,„the
thilglican Priests call sacrilege. eYwant tOob
e Catholic pri esthoc d inCanada
e Priesthood; and the CounteY, let 'us inform.
the h-uke of W ELLINCITON;I3 not ready to back
DienA-gots in executing the scheme of sacriligiOus
I•theilier at the expense of involving a colony in
Th ") and the empire in confusion.
Tithe Composition,. and the Court of Ex-
ihit (Ireland) Bills went through a Com-
Their Lordships then adjourned till Monday.
th 11 the Commons, Mr. ESTCOURT moved to dis-
charge the order for referring the Severn NaVi-
rpn Bill to the Committee of Selection, which
• ;le' l'ePorted that to examine the Bill was be-
n 04.11.4 its Power; and Lord G. SOMERSET gavg
ill not de
, he would move to refer the Bill to
',,orrimittee on Private Business. The order
luisehared and the Bill is as it was.
MrAnßuarort moved that the minutes of
huernceedings of the Committee on the Stafford
and ilughY Railway Bill be laid on the table
Printed, but withdrew the motion at the
thngestion of Mr. LAROUCHERE.
i,%lldi°llg n.
Member,
According to
ember, the deposits required.by the
Orders had been paid in this case by
• h.r6'wed money, and he wished that the House
tght understand the Working of the Standing
orders.
Several notices were given, which are briefly
Mated in our Report.
4., Lord STANLEY postponed his Irish Registra-
'lon Bill from March 04th to April 28th, in full
Z3ulidence, as he said, that on April 24th the
t°vernment will proceed with the discussion of
hehr Parliamentary Voters' Bill in Committee.
she Noble Lord's Bill is therefore completely
L'e,lved till after the Ministerial Bill is disposed of.
t r• GILLox moved an address to her MAJESTY
O °lleourage scientific institutions for the work-
lug classes, pledging the House of Commons to
make good all the expense. The Hon. Member
'tithreed his motion by refering to what had been
"Lone at Eainburgh aid other places to promote

', 7,

the instruction of the people. He thought Par-
liament would much better discharge its duty to
the public by encouraging such institutions than
by the party warfare which had brought its meet-
ings into contempt. It expended great sums to re-
press and punish crime, and it would be wise to em-
ploy 'some money to prevent them, by instructing
the people. Their benevolence extended across
the Atlantic, when it ought to be employed at
home, where it would make the people better
citizens and better men.

Mr. HASTIE seconded the motion.
Mr. LAEOUCHERE, while he responded to the
benevolent views of Mr. Gil.LoN, had the
strongest objection to the motion as it was
worded. He disliked- comparisons of what was
done for different classes. Government hadalready
established schools of design, the pupils of which
had much increased within three years. Great
assistance was also given to central schools, and
elementary works on the different arts and ma-
nufactures were now publishing and distributing
through the country. The Right Honourable
Gentleman also thought that much might
be done by providing models. He admitted that
it was the duty of Parliament to promote the im-
provement of the working classes, but he ob-
jected to the means recommended by Mr. Gm-
Lox as unnecessary and superfluous. Sir R.
PELL referred to a letter he had received from
Mr. HOPE, Dean of Faculty, recommending a
grant for the School of Arts in Edinburgh, but
the Right Hon. Baronet thought the opulent
people of Edinburgh might supply the cash
themselves. The Right Hon. Baronet spoke
strongly in favour of providing mental food
for the people, and expressed his readiness
to vote money for places for fi:" recreation of the
population of large towns. Ile. seemed to have
Mr. " CATHOLICUS " in view when he declared,
in opposition to the Faith party, that in encou-
raging knowledge they were promoting Chris-
tian religion, as well as morality. The Right
Hon. Baronet made, altogether, a liberal speech,
except that he insisted on education being con-
ducted on the principles of the Church of Eng-
land, that is, in the principles of the Faith men,
to whom, in fact, he is opposed.
Let us take the opportunity of saying that Sir
ROBERT PEEL even with this stretch of liberality,
is still, as the representative of Toryism, like the
duck-legged drummer, to which it was once
likened by the Times, in the rear of the regi-
ment. He did not think in 1824, 1825, and 1826,
that to encourage science and knowledge
amongst the people was the best way to make
them moral and religious, or he surely would
then have used the influence he possessed as Home
Secretary to aid such men as Dr. BIRRBECK
and Lord BROUGHAM in establishing Mechanics'
Institutes and Schools of Design throughout the
land. He thinks so now, when the instruction is
in part given. More than twelve years ago, to
our knowledge, the fact that both the Govern-
ments of France and the Netherlands were pro-
moting the scientific education of the people,
was brought under the notice of the public, and,
we posume, the then Government. The King
of the NETHERLANDS did not disdain to
Mention the subject in a speech from the Throne ;
but never did the Tory Ministry, of which
the Right Hon. Baronet was a leading mem-
ber, deign to notice or encourage in any way the
zealous but humble exertions of those who for
years laboured to promote amongst the people,
by the means of the people, scientific knowledge.
No*, when he and the Church party cannot stop
the progress of knowledge, they come forward,
not really to promote, but to pervert, education
to their own purposes. They are too late—they
are behind the march of events—the people have
emancipated themselves, and will never again
wear the chains of priestcraft and Tory state-craft.
Mr. EWART thought that if schools of design
and works of art were provided for the people
they were capable of rivaling any nation.
Mr. WILLIAMS was gratified by the liberal
sentiments of the Right Hon. Baronet, but re-
commended that 1,0001. should be advanced to
establish schools of art in Manchester, Glasgow,
Coventry, and Norwich.
Mr. WAKLEY put in his claim for Finsbury,
and said that thd people wanted money, not
promises. He recommended, however,' that the
motion should be withdrawn.
Sir R. PEEL, considering his own wealth and
the lateness of his contribution to the Tamworth
library, while the Whigs contributed to the
London Mechanics' Institution fifteen years ago,
with unusually bad taste for him, recommended
the Liberal Members to put their hands in their
own pockets.
Mr. HUME reminded him that he had re-
commended the motion to be withdrawn ; but
also reminded the Government that it would be
much better to employ 70,000/. in educating the
people than in building stables.
Mr. GuLoN withdrew the motion. We must
say, that we look with no great partiality
on these schemes to educate all the people
up to one standard. They seem to be borrowed
from the fact, that some individuals have been
drilled into an ideal perfection. It does not,
therefore, follow that it would be advisable to
drill all the people up to that standard, any more
than it would be advisable to make them all as
learned and wise as -Bishop PHILLPOTS. It is
possible to make some dogs dance, and some
horses distinguish letters, but no . person
thinks that it would be advantageous to make
every hound a dancing dog, or every horse a
scholar. Neither should all the people be made
men of seienae,.._ We would rather, for our part,
that the Legisfature and the Executive allowed
the people to educate theinselves—for self-in-
§truction is alivtiyS the most useful and most

valued. • ,- , .
On Mr. MACKINNON rising to move for a Se-
lect Committee to ascertain the expediency of
admitting labouferkinto the colonies, the House
was, at Half-paSt Seven,. counted out.

The Morning pall- yesterday presented us with
a specimen of that obliquity of mind which dis-
tinguishes the Tories.' They whine over, some
trifling deViation from verbal rectitude in Irish
Voters, similar to a breach of a custom-house
oath, which they were long renowned for uphold-
ing, and they are ready to trample toleration
under foot, and throw the empire into flames to
amend it. So the Post has heard, unmoved, of
multitudes of the people dying for want of food,
it has passed unnoticed accusations, as heavy and
vehement as pen can makd them, of the4dvocates
of the bread-tax, but it is touched to the quick by
a charge of being un-English and idolatrous cif
foreigners. "Of altcharges in thewOrldP it said,
"the lastivhich we should have thought applicable
to "our political writing is a preference for Conti-
nental systems, to that which has become natu-
ralized in England." Yet the Post did, on Tues-
day, as we showed by quoting. its own words,
hold up to admiration the restrictive systems
adopted On the Continent. There the production
of sugar from beet-root is encouraged, as native
industry-; the import of foreign hardware, and
foreign spun twist, and foreign bred cattle is pro:-
hibited—there every species of trade is licensed,
or regulated by ukases and ordinances; and this
system of encouragement and protection was de-
scribed by the Post as wise and patriotic. We
are glad, however, that it is ashamed 'of the con-
sequences of its own doctrine, when pointed
out; and we are, therefore, not without hope, if it
be equally sensitive, and equally candid, on other
points, that it will revise its opinions, and spee-
dily become a convert to the doctrine' of free
trade.
We differ in toto from the Post. It wishes to
place the interests of trade under the guarantee
of statesmen. We are for letting trade take care
of itself, being sure that the protection given to
it by the Legislature is " like that the oak gives
the rustic, it shields him from the shower, but
draws the bolt of Heaven on his head." The
Post wants to " guard against such an employ-
ment of the capital of the nation in the encou-
ragement of foreign industry, as will leave our
own people, or a portion of them, without profit-
able employment." It would guard against that
, employment by restrictions and encouragement.
We know no such thing as the capital of the na-
tion ; we know that individuals possess capital—
that the best capital, and properly considered the
only capital, is the skill and labour of its people
—and so far from asking legislative encourage-
ment and protection against foreign competition

for that, we_court competition , as-the best means
of perfecting skill. We agree with Dr. SMlTll—
would:to Gob that we could revive amongst us
some love of his wisdom, and impress on tile
min 6 of our legislators and public writers what he
says—that the Legislature is a totally unfit body
to give any direction to the employment of the
capital of individuals. He observes in his chap-
ter,, " Restraints on Importation"—
What is the species of domestic industry (and making cloth
at Manchester for a foreign market is domestic industry) whiols
his capital can employ, and of which the produce is likely to
be of the greatest value, every individual, it is evident, can, in
his local situation, judge much better than any statesman or
lawyer can do for him. The statesman who should attempt to
direct private people in what mariner they ought to employ
their capital, would not only load himself with most unneces-
sary attention, but assume an authority which could safely be
trusted not only to no single person but to no council or senate
whatever, and which would no where be so dangerous as in the
hands of a man who had folly and presumption enough to fancy
himself fit to exercise it.
But that species of folly is implied in every
law which attempts to influence the employment
of capital in agriculture in preference to manu-
facture ; 'and of that folly, in a degree, the Post
s an advocate, though it is ashamed of its ex-
it demands protection, and protection
to some -extent ; and we differ in toto from the
Post,- by denying the utility of any and every
such protection and prohibition, and by-denying
the fitness of the Legislature to direct in any
manner how individuals shall employ their capi-
tal. So differing from the Post, we shall endea-
vour to .show, by some details, the unsoundness
of the principles adopted by that Journal..
The Post says, "We have not attempted to
deny the importance of foreign trade.' On the con-
trary we have avowed it. But we say it is not
so important as home trade, still less is it so
important as home trade and agriculture put to-
gether." What is meant by importance, is, we
presume, magnitude. The Post measures our
foreign trade exclusively by 'our exports,
48,000,0001. sterling; it, of course, concludes
that to produce the 48,000,0001. sterling, to con-
vey it abroad, and bring home 48,000,0001. or
50,000,0001. in exchange for it, employs - much
fewer persons, and is of much less value, than
all the exchanges made within the realm, and
all the rest of the wealth produced by the skill
and labour of our people. But that is taking a
very narrow and a very erroneous view of foreign
trade, the importance of which can by no means
be measured merely by the value of the exports
and imports.
If that were the proper measure we should
still contend, that for a statesman—and the Post
and ourselves are considering the matter, not
as natural historians or as statisticians, but as
statesmen, with a view to legislation the
48,000,0001. ought to be as important as all the
rest of the national wealth, supposing it to be a
thousand times 48,000,000/. The legislator exists,
he holds political power, in order to protect all
the people. He is not to injure or to rob, or to
oppress a part of the lieges because they are
weak or poor. On the contrary, it is because
they are poor and weak that he is to protect
them against the strong and the rich. Whatever
may be the practice, the theory is that the crust
of the poor man is to receive equal protection
with the venison of the noble, and the foreign
trader, therefore, and foreign trade, however
poor or insignificant may be his and its contribu-

reme.

ion to the national wealth, should be as dear
and as important to the statesman as the home
trader and agriculturist.
This would be true, though the foreign trader
contributed little or nothing to the public re-
sources, though by establishing friendly relations
with other countries he did not remove to a great
distance, if he cannot wholly destroy, the chances
of war, and though he brought to the nation no

luxuries or conveniences Which could not be
otherwise obtained. But when we know that
he introduces commodities in which all the other
classes delight, that he knits together countries
politically different into bonds of commercial
amity, and when we know that instead of being
merely not injurious to the rest of the commu-
nity, the commodities which he imports yield
in custom duties nearly half the revenue col-
lected for the service of the State, it is palpably
unjust, and even absurd, in a statesman to speak
of foreign trade as of less importance than home
trade and agriculture. We do not say it is of
more importance. The principles we have just
expounded would make us regard agriculture,
however minute, and home trade, however ped-
dling and retail, as equally important with fo-
reign trade. As we said, on Wednesday, they are
all, like the belly and the members, parts of the
same system, and each contributes to the perfec-
tion and well-being of the whole. The legisla-
tor who seeks to enrich one at the expense of the
other is no Wiser than those barbarians who
flatten their foreheads, expand their nostrils,
and elongate their ears by weights and sticks,
to increase the symmetry and beauty of the hu-

man countenance.
We must, however, satisfy the Post, and the
public, that it takes a narrow and an erroneous
view of foreign trade by measuring its import-
ance merely by the value of the exports. The
whole of our cotton and silk manufacture,
which depend on a foreign product—all our
woollen manufacture, so far as wool is imported,
and so far as the use of indigo, cochineal, and
other dye stuffs are necessary to give it elegance
and. beauty—great portions of ship-building and
carpentry, which are - constructed of foreign
timber, while ships' sails and ropes are made
of foreign hemp—the manufacture of all our
furniture, nearly, which is made of mahogany
the whole of these arts grow from and are
dependent on foreign? trade, , and could not
exist 'Without it. In like manner our grocers
deal principally in teas, sugars, and dried fruits,
all of which are foreign products; while a vast
'quantity ,of what is termed home trade, con-
sists in selling those manufactures which are
made' from foreign-grown materials, or in selling
the produce of foreign countries. , Now, when
it is considered;What an immense mass of our
people,subsist by. working up cotton and silk,
dying' Wdollen4 constrncting dwellings and
ships, and fitting them 'out,—by•making fur-
niture, and dealing in .cottons, silks, and
groceries, including all the seamen em-
ployed in foreign trade, all the miners and
colliers who extract the metals from the
earth, of which our many engines are made,
,:the colliers who supply coals to work them, and
all the engineers who make our stupendous
machinery, even including our railways, by-
which those masses of men and wealth are, circu-
lated,----when it is considered what an immense
,nuniber of arts and persons,—one tithe -of whom
-and which we cannot enumerate,—subsist by fo-
reign trade, or are dependent' on. foreign pro-
ducts, it will be at once conceded, even by the
Post, that to measure the utility of foreign trade
by -the value of our exports, and on that to
conclude that it is of little importance as com-
pared to home trade and agriculture, is, at_least a
narrow not to call it an absurd view. If our
Contemporary concedes that, he will obtain a
conviction, though it may be for him a
dark one, ' that if half our foreign trade were
struck off—as he supposes- it might be without
any other injury than reducing the exports from
forty-eight to twenty-four millions—if half the
supply of cotton, sugar, silk, timber, dye-stuffs,
were at once to be annihilated, half, at least, if
not more than half, of our home trade would also
be eitinguished. We 'wish to invite the candid
consideration of our Contemporary to these
statements, and therefore we will not indulge in
a single sneer; but we must beg our Contempo-
rary to study more the phenomena of the pro-
duction of wealth before he undertakes to ad-
vise the nation how it shall legislate for the em-
P ployment of the capitals of individuals.
Long as our article is, we must refer to one
statement more of the Post before we conclude.
It boasts of the great value of the home market
for our manufacturers, and cautions them against
endangering that by striving to extend the fo.-
reign market. We must therefore remind the
Post, that all the prices of agricultural produce,
on which its statistical tables and reasoning are
based, are enhanced by the Corn-law monopoly,
that the prices of manufactures are lowered, and
that it takes credit in its account for a large
amount of plunder as if it were a fair exchange.
We beg our Contemporary's attention to what
really constitutes the home market for our
manufactures. It is not what the landlords
spend,for part of that is levied- by a tax on_the