The Sun.
London, England, 1840-08-14 00:00:00

in neither of the three conditions was their income suffi-
cient to maintain them in vigour and decency : their
most ros ~;.meat, or clothes,us condition did not enable, them to buy
butchers' pp:
bedding, or pay for the
stye they pig in. And yet nine shillings per week are
higher wages than the generality of labourers receive.
What is the conclusion ? That the labourer cannot
live with the pressnt prices of all the necessaries of life?
We know that we shall be met by the assertion that
he does live—that he makes it do—that he does not
starve or go naked. True—he lives, but how ? As a
man working twelve hours a day ought to live? Does
he live as well as our beasts of burden ? Is he so well

fed---s 6 well lodged as the horse and the cow? Let
the Woodburys answer. He does not starve, you say.
Alas I every medica' man will tell us that starvation
does not consist alone in having nothing at all to eat.
A deficiency of nourishing food starves by slow de-
grees—it produces a multitude of diseases which waste
the wretched being out of life, and the death is num-
bered among the ravages of the disease that was the
immediate, not of the starvation that was the remote
cause of it.

But we must pause now, though there is yet much to
say on this subject. It is one of solemn interest, more
important than any party question, and, for the sake of
all of us, it ought to be probed to the bottom. The
condition of the poor has not sufficiently engaged the
attention of the newspapers, because the poor are not
the readers of newspapers, and the theme is painful,
and therefore distasteful, to the other classes ; but we
shou!d be ashamed of ourselves if we permitted per-
sonal interest to interfere with the discharge of a
solemn duty.
[ln borrowing this statement from our able provincial
Contemporary we shall make no remark on it, but
merely remind the reader that the Corn-law is in exist-
ence. Whatever else it may effect, th.►t law does not
secure the poor against cala pities like those sufferel by
the Woodburys.—Eo. SuN.]

STATUES TO LORD DURHAM

AND LORD BYRON.

The following letters on this subject appear in a Morn-
ing Contemporary:—
THE LATE LORD DURHAM.

Sir,—l hope a monument will be erected for the honest
patliot, Lord Durham, who, through life, never deviated
one step from the people's rights, aid as a Member of the
House of Commons his speeches ought to be written in
gold I shall b.: h; ppy to subscribe five or ten guineas to-
wards the above, and, whenever wanted, write me for it.
I remain, your's respectfully,
WM. BACK.
Stratford St. Mary, Suff.llk, Aug. 8, 1840.

LORD BYRON.
TO THE RIGHT HON. SIR JOHN CAM HOIHIOUSE, BART.

Sir,—Some time having elapsed since the refusal of the
Dean and Chapter to allow the statue of the late Lord
Byron to be placed in Westminster Abbey, and no other
place having yet been selected, I would suggest to your-
self and the other Trustees the propriety of presenting it
to the University of Cambridge, to be placed by the autho-
rities of that body either in the Senate-house, -.Museum, or
some other public building calculated to perpetuate the
fame of so splendid a genius, and at the same time do ho-
nour to that University of which he was so distinguished
a member. Your obedient servant,
JOHN WILLIAM MILLS.
Inner Temple, August 10