The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-31 00:00:00

TEE SUN,sIAONDON, MONDA Y. MAY 31, 1811.

vantage to commerce, or extension of civiliza-
tion, and the preservation of national peace,
tholigh all these be in our favour.
The awakening perception throughout the
community that such is the real nature of the
Corn-law—that it withholds food from the peo-
ple, and dooms a great number to death, is the
main cause why the question is now taken up by
the ministers of religion, and is now argued as a
most important moral and religious question.
The public feel, and in particular the ministers of
"religion feel, thatso great an injustice—so heinous
an offence, never can be expedient, and they
have a deep conviction that the continuance
of such a crime must draw down upon the nation
the punishment of the ALMIGHTY. In fact they
,see it already overtaking us in public distress
land public strife—they see it in future aggra-
lvated and embittered by more violent quarrels,
Ibv convulsion and bloodshed.

What can those doomed to starvation care
for a Constitution? What is it to them
that our ams triumph abroad and that
'certain artsretteouraged by wealth, flourish at
(home? The sacred principle of self-preservation
commands them to resist the starvation law, and,
if they can, to overturn the Constitution which
isanctions it. The authors of such laws, there-
fore, enlist against all authority the strongest
passions of human nature, and foster anarchy,if
they may not be said to decree it. The Rev.
Mr. BURNETT observed at the Lambeth meeting—
' ng—
It was said that the aristocracy considered the Corn-
Ilaws necessary to their existence andwould defend them
las part of themselves. He could scarcely believe that
!they would be so foolish. He did not think the Corn-
'laws necessary to the aristocracy, but if they were so,
!then he would say have at the aristocracy itself.
Not only must they have at the, aristocracy,
they must, for their own safety, if the Corn-law
be continued, subdue the aristocracy—they must
annihilate it. They dare not tolerate, much less
!submit to, an organized system of murder. They
may be told of the sanctity of property, but
they will be told in vain, as long as property is
the produce of a tax on their bread. What
*is it to them whether the land is to be-
, long to a person called RICHARD PLANTAGENET
TEMPLE CHANDOS Duke of BUCKINGHAM, or to
some money-lender called Jon GURNEY or
MOSES ROTHSCHILD? What care they who are
, the recipients of the bread-tax ?—they only care
ito avoid the tax. The people will not
maintain a law which starves them in

order to keep the estates of the aristocracy
from passing out of their families. On the con-
trary, they have a strong motive, from being
taxed to prevent mortgagees from foreclosing,
to hasten the foreclosure, and substitute the rich
money-lender, who has no claim on their purses,
for the poor Duke. Those men, then, risk
the safety of property who confound it with
taxation, and assign to it no more sacred origin
than a Custom-house or Excise law. We are
not sure that the right of property can be
suffered to stand in the way of a starving
people. We are sure that in their pre-
sence it is not safe, and that a right of
property founded on taxing them will not
be long endured. The safety of the aristocracy,
the safety of the Constitution, and the security
of property are all put to hazard by that wicked
law, which was passed, and is maintained, to in-
crease tl e wealth of idle owners of rent at the ex-
pense of the comfort, health, and lives of the in-
dustrious classes.

Mr. MAcAULAY, in his able speech on Thurs-
day evening, laid down a principle which we
refer to, because it is undoubtedly correct, and
because it is apart of the Tory usurpations to
overlook it, greatly we think to the public disad-
vantage. He was understood to say, in allusion
to the defeats of Ministers on certain pro-
posed measures of legislation, that it was the
first duty of the Ministers of the Crown to admi-
nister the existing law ; whence it is to be inferred
that the making or proposing new laws is only a
secondary part of their duty. On this distinction
the Right Hon. Gentleman justly concluded that
it was no proof that the House of ;Commons had
no confidence in Ministers if it withheld its as-
sent to any new legislative measure proposed by
them) or refused, when asked by them, to sanction
the alteration of an old law. The Right Hon.
Gentleman illustrated the distinction by several
examples of Ministers who, having failed to
carry the legislative alterations they proposed,
never, on that account, thought for one moment
of resigning the Goverikrnent, of which it was
their chief duty to administer the existing laws.

We think Mr. MACAULAY'S doctrine sound,
but it is rather in opposition to the modern prac-
tice introduced by the Tories, and extended by
the Whigs, of monopolising all legislation by
the Ministers. Government has its own days
for its own business; it has, in fact, so much
control over the whole formal proceedings of the
House, that it can prevent any individual Mem-
ber from carrying any measure to a successful
conclusion. It has become, therefore, responsible,
as it were, for the whole proceedings of Parlia-
ment, and now to oppose it on a question of le-
gislation may be considered as tantamount to
saying, that it is by the Parliament no longer
thought fit to conduct the business of Parliament.
We conceive this monopoly of legislation to
be a modern innovation, which lays on the Mi-
nisters of the Crown the burden of, initiating all
necessary changes in the law, and imposes on
them, perhaps, a higher duty than that of merely
executing the existing law. Ministerial ambi-
tion thus tends, as much as anything we know,
to extend the onerous duties and responsibility of
Ministers, and to make it almost impossible to
carry on the QUEEN'S Government.
Within, our political experience, most of the
great disputes which have either broken up or
tended to break up a Ministry, referred more to
the alterations in the existing law, or to making
new laws, than to any neglect on the part of the
Ministers in performing their chief duty, that of
executing the law. The abolition of the Test
Acts, the emancipation of the Catholics, the
Committee on the Civil List, the Reform of
Parliament, the little improvement made in the
Irish Church, the Irish tithe question, &c.
&c., were all questions of legislation;
and the modern practice of the House, some-
what contrary to Mr. MACAULAY'S just theory,
made the passing or rejecting such measures the
test of the confidence placed by Parliament in
the Ministers.

It is more easy to account for the origin of the
franchise than to defend it. Under the borough-
mongers a union of a few aristocratic families,
for whose especial advantage the laws were both
made and administered, sufficed to turn out or
keep in a Minister. The same parties were, in
point of fact, the law-makers and the law-ad-
ministerers, and it was for their convenience that
no laws should be made which they did not like
to carry into execution. Hence they
usurped, and placed in the hands of
the Executive Government, -- which since
the Revolution has been carried on for their
benefit--the power of making as well as admi-
nistering the laws. The Ministers were the
servants of a dominant party of the aristocracy,
who employed the same hands to conduct legis-
lation, as well as the Executive Government,
for the advantage of the aristocracy.
Now that we have weakened this aristocratic
domination, and have got, in a Reformed Parlia-
ment, something like a popular representation,
the strict union of these two functions in the
hands of Ministers is no longer either convenient
or necessary. Hence we conclude that Mr.
MACAULAY'S theory is more correct than the
modern practices of the House of Commons. We
conclude, too, that it will be for the advantage
of the Executive Government to abandon
a large part of its usurped control over
the House of Commons, and leave re-
forms and alterations of the law, much
more than at present, to individual Mem-
bers of the House of Commons. There are
many cases, such as the Corn-laws, and most of
our taxes, in which it is necessary for the Execu-

tive to take the initiative; but there are others,
such as bribery at elections, registration of voters,
which they may with propriety leave to such
Members as choose to propose alterations in them.
Mr. MACAULAY also expounded a just theory,
when he stated, in opposition to Sir R. PEEL,
that it was highly inexpedient to affirm a state of
things to be contrary to the spirit of the Consti-
tution, which might be inevitable. He gave, as
ant illustration of his theory, the present balanced
state of parties in the House of Commons, and
the scale being turned now to one party and now
to another by a few independent gentlemen
would, by first defeating one party and then the
other, render all government impossible if
the resolution of Sir R. PEEL were adopted. Mr.
MACAULAY by this remark, gave a practical illus-
tration of our statement a few days ago, in refe-
rence to the dissolution, that now, as at
first, circumstances domineered over laws and
constitutions, and that whatever circumstances
command is fully justified though opposed to
constitutional practices. But into circumstances
the Tories will not look ; they look only at pr,:-
cedents ; for them the House of Commons is the
whole world, and its former deeds the only pos-
sible wisdom. So Sir ROBERT PEEL, far from
examining if the conduct of Ministers be justified
by the new circumstances of society and of go-
vernment, growing partly out of the Reform Act
and other Acts of modern legislation, but chiefly
out of the natural progress of society, consults
only the votes of the House of Commons and the
speeches of former Members. But if circum-
stances, as Mr. MACAULAY and we say, are to
overrule constitutions and laws, it is a valet kind
of policy to take advice and instructions or, ty
from the latter, and never inquire what the
former command. Second-hand or valet policy
is, however, the highest ambition of the Tories.

scarcity did not so much arise from high import
duties as from their imperfect knowledge of
agriculture, and the bad system which prevailed
in the rearing and management of cattle. So
because French farmers do not know how to
rear cattle, the people of Paris are to go without
animal food ! Foreign cattle are to be excluded
from French markets, because the French do
not understand the art of rearing any them-
selves! What a convincing and conclusive argu-
ment from the mouth of a Minister of State !
In excluding foreign beef from the French
market in a season of unusual scarcity and
dearth, ordinary persons would have expected
that the Government would have attempted to
show that the home supply was fully equal to
the demand. The Finance Minister knew this to
be impossiblo in the face of the eating-house
keepers' eagerness to obtain even horse-flesh for
their customers, and therefore with cool effron-
tery attributed the scarcity to French ignorance
of the art of cattle-rearing—just as if that were
not the strongest argument that could be em-
ployed against the imposition of any import duty
whatever. Were it an easy matter to mantle
the brow of a Minister with a blush, the mouth-

piece of the French Cabinet ought to have looked
scarlet on offering such an insult to the common
sense and long-suffering of the starving popula-
tion of Paris. But something is to be done next
year. " Live horse, and you will get oats," is
an old proverb which few Governments fail to
turn to account whenever starvation makes the
millions clamorous.

The reported pledges made by the July Go-
vernment to abandon the conquests of France in
Africa, were brought under the notice of the
Chamber on Thursday. As the subject is one of
some interest, we quote a summary of the pro-

ceedings :
In the course of the discussion on Algiers, M. Guizot, the
Minister of Foreign Affairs, rose and declared most formally.,
that the Government of the King, since 1830, had not pledged
itself in any manner to the Foreign Powers to abandon iii-
giers, or any portion of the French possessions on the African
coast. "If the letters containing such a falsehood," added M.
Guizot, " had been produced at the tribune, I should have
stigmatised them as they deserved. But no one has had that
courage.. The session beire, about to close, I have deemed it
my duty to give those calumnies the most formal denial.
Every thing that has been done in Africa since 1830 clearly
proves that we have no intention of relinquishing our conquest,
and all assertion to the contrary is a calumny."
The Duke de Valmy—The Royalist Deputy then rose and
said, " I thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs for giving me
this opportunity of defending here what I lately published in a
pamphlet to the ;;Itamber."
A Voice—Who cares about your pamphlet?
Another Voice—Now is the time to produce the letters.
The Duke de Valmy—'Twas because I thought the pam•
phlet was alluded to that I considered it incumbent on me
to reply to the Minister._-(" No, no," " Yes, yes.") • 1
thought it was of national interest to demonstrate that the
diplomacy of France never contracted similar engagements
with any of the Foreign Powers, and, I learn with satisfac-
tion, that none have been contracted
,by the, existing Go-
vernment. The English Cabinet has excited the Restoration
to abandon Algiers. I conclude from that that such importu-
nities had been made use of under the present Government. I
have nothing to retract. (Bravos from the right, laughing
from all the other benches.)
M. Guizot again rose and said that he had not denied the
right of any one, and he had not accused any Government
which was contrary to his taste and custom, and not in the
sphere of his duty. What he said, and repeated, was that since
1830 the interests of France had been defended without hesi-
tation. He had been told that reports were in circulation to
the contrary, and from the tribune, therefore, he gave them a
formal denial.
Here the matter dropped, and the consideration of the bud-
get was proceeded with.
A new subject of annoyance to the Court be-
gins to occupy public attention. The Govern-
ment having authorized the prosecution of a Gre-
noble Journal for some remarks relative to the
Grenoble conspiracy of 1816, SIMON DIDIER,
son of the principal leader of the insurgents who
was executed by command of Louis XVIII., has
addressed a letter to that Journal, stating that
he is prepared to rescue from infamy his father's
memory, and hinting, in pretty broad terms, that
the rebellion was organized by the t'ien Duke
of ORLEANS, now King of the FRENCH. It is
said, too, that letters exist written by the Duke
of ORLEANS to the elder DIDIER, which leave no
doubt-of his being at the bottom of this attempt
to dethrone the Bourbons. The whole affair is
likely to give rise to much scandal.
The trial of DARMES and his accomplices was
expected to conclude early on Friday. The con-
demnation of DARMES to lose his head was con-,
sidered certain, but not less so that the KING
would commute the punishment for imprison-
ment for life.

The proceedings in the British Parliament
excite the liveliest interest in Paris. All the
Journals which the Treaty of July provoked to
repudiate a British connection, are delighted
with the futile efforts of Sir ROBERT PEEL to
upset the Cabinet.
For some days past the heat has been constantly increasing.
On Sunday last the centograde thermometer of Mr. Chevallier
marked at its maximum 21 deg. 5 min. On Monday it
was at 26 deg. ; yesterday, at two o'clock in the afternoon, at
29 deg., at midnight 23 deg. 3 min.—Le Constitutionnet
We find the following article in a journal :—" I have this
moment learnt the piece of news which, if it should be con-
firmed, will form a new incident in the famous trial of the
letter published by La France. It is said that the Contem-
poraine, irritated at having been accused by the French Mi-
nistry of forgery, has resolved to bring in France an action for
defamation and calumny, and offers to send the originals
of the letters in question to a person who can be depended
upon, in order to be produced in a judicial and public inquiry."
Letters from Madrid of the 20th, after confirming the
list of the new Ministers, which was announced by the,
telegraph, say that by a decision of the 14th the high office of
General-in- Chief of the Armies, which was held by Espartero,
is abolished.
Serious troubles have taken place at Bilbao. The following
is an extract from a letter dated the 19th, which we have re-
ceived from that city :
" Yesterday, on occasion of the fete of a patron saint, in the
porch of the church of Albia, a violent quarrel took place be-
tween the inhabitants and the military. 'lhe populace, exas-
perated, suddenly assailed the soldiers with showers of stcnes
and dispersed them. A similar scene occurred at the begining
of the night. The authorities succeeded in restoring order by
making the soldiers gradually return to their quarters by back
waifs.'
The Prince of Capua and his family are now at Boulogne,
for the benefit of sea bathing.— Gazette de France.
BOURSE—PARIS, THURSDAY, MAY 27.
first Highest Lowest Last
Price Price. Prick. Price
irerich t per Cents ll4 55 ... 114 0 114 50 ... 114 55
4 per Cents 99 10 ... 99 30 99 30
3 per Cents....." 79 25 ;1) 25 79 20 ..•
9259 20
of e ranee
Lattitte Dant I.( 031.61 aras I
Imo ...I( 60
...5125
5.000 f. Shares 532 51 .4132 50 ...5125
Belgian 5 per Cents. ...... 101% 101% 10.% .. 101%
New Loan 1(4;6 1.1% 101% ... 101%
Active ......... 241, 24% ... 24% ... 24%
Passive 5;4 ... 5% ... 534 ... 5
Portuguese 3 per Cents 20% 20% ... 201/4 ... 20%
NvApOilista lO4 40 IP4 40 ... 194 30 ... 30
.... 101% ... 101% ... 101% ... 101%
BALI-WAY SHARES.
rt. Germain
Versailles. LB „.„. 170 195 ... 171) 194
It. 11 330 ... 315 327 50
'lnnen 4§7 457 50 457 50 ... 457 50
4,7 50 .., 487 20 ... 487 5J 487 '0
itrsiburg to Bale 220 227 50 ”. 220 ... 2e7 LO

We are glad to find that some of our old staunch
Reformers are likely to be returned at the next
general election. Ur, Roebuck has every chance
fbr Bath, and though itt Acme points we differ
from him, we believe there is no man in the
country so much wanted in Parliament, He has
no hypocrisy about him. He attacks the trieks
of Whigs, Tories, and Radicals with equal im-
partiality, and, is, besides, one of the most
eloquent speakers of the present day. The
people of Bath have found out how
much they have suffered by his rejec-
tion at the last election. Colonel Thompson,
too, is in a fair way to recover his former
position in Hull. The- Whig party, and we
may now say the Liberal party, have given in
their adhesion to him, and have promised to sup-
port him on the question for cheap bread, cheap
sugar, and good timber. In many of the
independent boroughs other men of a similar
stamp are coming forward, and if we may judge
from what we have learned from different parts
of the country, Sir Robert Peel,, the Duke of
Buckingham, and the other great monopolists
will have no cause to rejoice on the dissolution of
• Parliament.

The Conservative candidates for the City are Messrs.
Cr, Lyall, J. Mastertuan, Alderman Pirie, and W. Att-
wood, M.P.—Morning Post.
PUNIAMMENT OF DEaTn.—The Bill for taking away
the Punishment of Death in certain cases, as amended
in Committee, lam been ordered by the House of Cam,
mows to be printed. ft exempts from capital punish-
ment the following offence.; ;—Embezzlement by servant
of Bank of England any note, bill, bond, &c., belonging
to the Company, or relating to Irish or other annuities,
transferred to the Bank ; embezzlement by servant of
South Sea Company of similar notes or bonds ' • secretly
using stamps or dies for deeds, or gold and silver plate,
to defraud her Majesty ; and the riotous demolition of
churches. By the Bill the first class of offences is to be
punishable by tranv33°tati9j). for life, or for a term not
less than seven years, or imprisontnOlt for a period not
cxceetlino• three years. For the last, riotous demolition
of churches, the punishment is to be transportation for
seven years, or imprisonment for three years. Rape,
and another eapi tal offence, are also exempted, and are to
to be punished by transportation IOF life. The Act to
commence and take effect on the Ist October, 1841.

A public meeting will be held this evening at the
Eforns Tavern, Kennington-common, for the purpose of ob-
taining a grant of land for a park or public walks on the south
side of the metropolis.