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

_
~uceurage scientific institutions for the work-
ingcl.- pledgingthe House Commons
iee7Tof to
oreed his mots eillaafkeisnse4
p...nbpyense. The Hon. Member
refering to what had been
the
it
• at Edinbr.
Ha Irstructir,,n rgh and other places to promote
:o of the people. • He thought Par-
m2llubim icld
byu much better discharge its duty to
eYncouraging such institutions than
t the party warfare which had brought its meet-
auto contempt. It expended great sums to re-
is7Bs and punish crime, and it wouldbe wise to ern-
;V some morKty to prevent them, by instructing
ti,ne People, Their benevolence extended across
1:10e Atl.antie,
when it ought to be employed at
eit:lll=3 where it would make the people better
zens.and better men.
FIASTIE seconded the motion.
LAEOUCHERE, while he responded to the
views of Mr. GILLON, had the
Worded. He disliked comparisons of what was
°lle for different classes. Government had already
Ztttablished schools of design, the pupils of which
(t Much increased 'within three years. Great
elementary
was also given to .central schools, and
works on the different arts and ma-
tractures were now publishing and distributing
rough the country. The Right Honourable
t Gentleman also thought that much might
Pr" uone by providing models. He admitted that
was the duty of Parlianient to promote the im-
vement of the working classes, but he ob-
ey to the means recommended by Mr. GIL-
• as unnecessary and superfluous.
Sir Ile PEEL referred to a letter he lad 'received
atomMr• HOPE, Dean of Faculty, recommending
thg,,rai%lt for the School of Arts in Edinburgh, but
pe- Fight Hon. Baronet thought the opulent
th°llle of dinburgh might supply the cash
trenlf,sefives• The Right Hon. Baronet spoke
fort4tY favour of providing mental food
to the People, and expressed his readiness
v°temoney for places for the recreation of the
PopulationMr'
of large towns. He seemed to have
kr. " CATHOLICUS." in view when he declared,
tas)llPosition to the 'Faith paky, that in encou-
tiaing knowledge they were promoting \ Chris-
ti: religion, as well as morality. The Right
Baronet made, altogether, a liberal speech,
claceill that he insisted on education being con-
land a 011 the principles of the Church of Eng-
to wilthat is, in the principles of the Faith men,
te °Ill) in fact, he is opposed.
Rt us take the opportunity of saying that Sir
ig PEEL even with this stretch of liberality,
daeit-': as the representative of Toryism, like the
likenegged drummer, to which it was once
14er:fed by the Times, in the rear of the regi-
th4i" lie did not think in 1824, 182:5, and 1826,
Non t° encourage science and knowledge
theicgst the people was the best way to make
the /floral /floral and religious, or he surely would
eertlave used the influence he possessed as Home
44d etarY to aid such men as Dr. BIRKBECK
illst, °l'd BROUGHAM in establishing Mechanics'
laacfates and Schools of Art throughout the
Ile thinks so now, when the instruction is
'l4. ',lnt given. More than twelve years ago, to
Illeat:°wiedge, the fact that both the Govern-
°l' Prance and the Netherlands were pro-
hs the scientific education of, the people,
t•e r,f4lght under the notice of the public, and,
Of Tuttle, the then Government. The King
,41eritt,:le NETHERLANDS . did not disdain to
„d'a the subject in a speech from the Throne ;
the ;4ever did the Tory Ministry, of which
berg Hon. Baronet was a leading mem-
-4410 e'gn to notice or encourage in any way the
3r,ear Ills but humble exertions of those who for
11 ths,au°llred to promote amongst the people,
AO*: gleans of the Press, scientific knowledge.
th
rreWhen he and the Church party cannot stop
,
he
.Pe SS of knowledge, they come forward,
15 their to promote, but to pervert, education
b,,,,°`"11 purposes. They are too late—they
el/144TM the march of events—the people have
IVe4r teki Pa t ed themselves, and never again
chains of priestcraft and Tory state-craft.
4„114 v; '',yvAILT thought that if schools of design
they v:41(8 of art were provided for the people
Were capable of rivaling any nation.
4444,711..1.1101s was gratified by the liberal
tcl4-;nts of the Right Hon. Baronet, but re-
',, ~,
sl4lellf_ded that 1,000/. should be advanced to
''" schools of art in Manchester, Glasgow,
Atr.arand Norwich.
'l4l s 7 AKLEY put in his claim for Finsbury,
Dror4:4'd that the people wanted money, not
415tiihses: Re recommended, however, that the
Sir rueuld be withdrawn.
1111 Q - PEEL, considering. his own wealth and
qla..• o"elless of his contribution to the Tamworth
koa4Y, while the Whigs contributed to the
ith
,° Mechanics' Institution fifteen years ago,
1111,iitlusually bad taste for him, recommended
t1"1111;),,e,ral- Members to. put their hands in their
AlrQomule lllvit reminded him that he had re-
sq% reigned the motion to be withdrawn ; but
the Government that it would be
I)QODi 'tter to employ 70,00 b/. in educating the
e "
b than In building stables.
43, ii`itti.oN withdrew the motion. We must
clat we look with no great partiality
;11 to „-se schemes to educate all the people
d .1110,n standard. They seem to be borrowed
I'ller, fact) that some individuals have been
tal'ere nit° an ideal .perfection. It does not,
arl°lre; follow that it would be advisable to
i'44 it tile People up to that standard, any more
e won
aram ld be advisable to make them all as
tlittiks distinguish bil''ssibic, and wise as Bishop PHILLPOTS. It is
'Virges `"' t() make some dogs dance, and some
letters, but no person
Nry iithat it would be advantageous to make
llolar°und a dancing dog, or every horse a
et) Neither should all the people be made
'.4t7science. We would rather, for our part,
the the
BtLegislature and the Executive allowed
e to educate themselves—for self-in-
'4l 41 is
Iled. always the most useful and most
, b
71
labourers h
MiteßitoroN rising to move for a Se-
-4 Cod
h, nn•
Ittee to ascertain the expediency of
4 lag 1a •
at into the colonies, the House
alf-Past Seven, counted out.h
s e 21/0, itlitg
Post yesterday presented us with
tr of that obliquity of mind which dis-
ifl L
• i
" es 1,
14n. e Tories. They whine over some
.•
oatli~voters lation from verbal rectitude in Irish
I'vbsieiililar to a breach of a custom-house
ntl t tld t were long renowned for -uphold-
-440r he hey ,
J are ready to trample. toleration
~,1114d. 4-'1 and throw the empire into flames to
igt‘:sitittila the Post has heard, unmoved, of
food,
vegiasi,ass_,£ the people. dying. for want of
IQ4e ".n. unnoticed accusations, as heavy and
' tit bread
4 el brea.., Pen can make them, of the advocates
r(),,4Ne ef.`istax, but it is touched to the quick by
(ItleigtieN un-English and idolatrouS of
te i'elasiTv.i:,`Of all charges in the world," it said,
nur ieh hetitai
cyst
we should have thought appliCable
a writing is a preference for Conti-
-4e4 in 3 to that which has become natu-
° nglalni." Yet the Post did, on Tues-
-4(luldf, Wtoe Showed by quoting its own words,
Pt 0 admiration the restrictive systems.
frome Continent. There the production
re'nstry ; beet-root is encouraged, as native
11,1;e1/4% s the import of foreign hardware, and
4uited Pun he
and foreign bred cattle is pro-
Sy t,egtliatelAel.:e every species of trade is licensed,
s!letuof uY ukases and ordinances ; and this
41,1111%1 by 411,cOurag,ement and protection was de-
glad, ),_'fle Post as wise and patriotic. We
01:11enees'-'o`,.vever, that it is ashamed of the con-
-I,ti and `y its its own doctrine, when pointed
1,, ,e9,4aliy s are) therefore, not without hope, if it
qi?°ts, that ?,,nsitive, and equally candid, on other
beec,4 " will revise its opinions, and spee-
de, le a convert to the doctrine of free
e differ •
• lit
t°t° froni the Post. It wishes to
4% L"e luter
cif. tatesinen ,sts' of trade under the guarantee
it bnself, bei_ Ire are for letting trade take care
ore'ru'sntief:i. iss ature is
tit
~e
eiyisitre that the protection given to
" like that the oak gives
.paws the ,t him from the shower, but
bolt from
on his head." The
waist
1.4,, the capital of the
' of to " guard against such an employ-
,,:,:lnent of tore' nation in the encou-
kiile Pe°Ple, or aign industry, as will leave our
ietilk°43'owlnenz:tob:ytniethe'thri.!etti
en) 00,,,n, portion of them, without profit-
wo::lar d
encouragement.aga inst that
adngdu
thing as the capital of the na-

tion i we know ti iat individuals possess capital
that the bebt capi: cal, and properly considered the
only capital, js tin skill and labour of its people
—and so far f:ont
asking legislative encourage-
ment and protect.'on. against foreign competition
for that, we court c,:,mpeetion as the best mcaas
of perfecting skill. AN e agree with Dr. SMlTH—
would to GOD that we ck.‘uld revive amongst us
some love of his wisdom, And impress on the
minds of our legislators and public, writers what he
says—that the Legislature is a totals:v 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) which
his capital can employ, and of which the produce is likely to
be of the greatest value, every indiiidual, it is evident, can, in
his local situation, judge much better than ally statesman or
lawgiver can do for him. The statesman who ,7hould attempt to
direct private people in what manner they ought to employ
their capital, would not only load himself with most unneces-
sary attention, but assume an ruthority which couk safely be
trusted not only to no single person but to no council car senate
whatever, and which would no where be so dangerous as io the
hands of a man who had folly and presumption enough to fancy I
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
is an advocate, though it is ashamed of its ex-
treme. 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 thtir 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 i mportance 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,
48,000,000/. sterling; it,' of course, concludes
that to produce the 48,000,000/. sterling, to con-
vey it abroad, and bring home 48,000,0001. or
50,000,000/. 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 fbreign
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 48,000,0001. 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-
tion 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, the Kare
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 wier 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 , woollens, constructing 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
number 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 extinguished. 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-
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
manufacturers. The real market for our manu-
facturers, that for which they exchange their
produce, is the produce of agricultural labour,
and not the gross produce, for much of that is
necessarily consumed by those who grow it, but
the nett produce, or the amount which
remains over and above the expense of cultiva-
tion, including the consumption of the cultivators.
How the gross produce is increased, or can be
increased, by the Corn-law no man has yet shown.
At the same time, it is palpable that the nett
produce cannot possibly be increased by it. The
very intention of the law is to force cultivation,
to make men break up ground and keep it under
the plough, which, but for the law, would not
yield enough to pay for the cultivation, and
consequently cannot possibly yield any nett
p:oduce to Wire in exchange for the produce of
manufactures.. It is a misdirection of the capitals
of ind.ividuals. The real home market, then, we
repeat, for our Arnanufactures, the articles which
actually pay thenr for their produce—for they are
not paid for by bank.l checks or promissory notes—
are the nett produc e of agricultural labour, and
neither that nor th e gross produce is increased,
but decreased, by t.he Corn-laws.
The Post, with i the other Corn-law advocates,
would frighten the manufacturers from demand•-
in; justice, by- threatening them with the loss of
the home mari:et. If the Corn-laws were to be
totally repeahld to-morrow, not a grain less of
produce would. be grown for the next eighteen
months, if even then ; and consequently the
home market vs -ould not be lessened to the ex-
tent of a single gri.in. . The landlords might
not buy so much . sill'i, but the labourers would
buy more fustia, is. Supposing the produce
were lessened, it could only be to the small
extent of putting- out of cultivation those
lands which, but for the Corn-law, would
not yield a suffici' nit produce to repay the ex-
pense of cultivation., and leave a nett profit. At
most that is not orie-t wentieth of the whole, and
the other nineteen parts of the home market
would. remain, while the manufacturers would
have, in addition, an extensive market in all the
foreign agricultural produce which the Corn-
law will not now allow them to purchase. The
Post writes as if not the twentieth part, but
the whole of the home trade, which we have
shown to be very dependent on foreign trade,
would be annihilated by the total and immediate
abolition of the Corn-law.
In concluding, 'we must observe that we have
rather endeavo ured. to expound the principles of
the great question on which we differ from the
Post, than controvert its verbal statements.
Our object, as wo trust is apparent, has been
to establish what -we conceive to be the truth,
not to indulge in .controversy or endeavour to
achieve a triumph.

We learn from Liverpool that at the great
meeting, which we yesterday noticed, every IL-
solution was either moved or seconded by a Tory.
We have already mentioned that all the resolu-
tions were carried unanimously, and we are in-
formed by those who have local knowledge that
such a display of unanimity amongst • Whigs,
Tories, and Radicals, never took place in Liver-
pool before. That is a profound homage to the
truth and excellence of the principles of free
trade, which, like the genuine spirit of patriotism,
can hush all party differences, and make men,
otherwise ready to combat one another, unite to
obtain a peaceful and a righteous end.
We yesterday referred to one of the resolu-
tions, which denounces all laws as demoralizing
which limit the field of employment. We have
since learnt that the second resolution, which
appears with the rest in another part of
The Sun, was expressly meant .to embrace
and denounce all protection, whether manu-
facturing, agricultural, or colonial. With
such a sweeping condemnation we can find no
fault, and we can only regret that the explana-
tions which, offered at the moment, satisfied
Mr. DUFFEY, were not made public with the rest
of the proceedings, so that the whole community
might have been as convinced as he was, that
the merchants of Liverpool took some interest
in the sufferings of the working classes, and were
not exclusively occupied with considering their
own profit.

Mr. CANDLISH to the new chair of Biblical
Criticism.

The Edinburgh Advertiser of Tuesday has the
following paragraph :—" We understand that
Mr. CANDLISH announced to his Session on
Sunday, the circumstance of his having been
appointed by Royal Commission to the newly-
instituted Professorship of Biblical Criticism in
our University. A report was in circulation
yesterday, however, and confidently repeated,
that private letters have been received in town,
stating that Lord MELBOURNE had suspended
the appointment in the meantime. We give this
rumour as we have received it, without vouching
for its accuracy."
We have no doubt at all of its accuracy, nor
have we any doubt that the appointment would
have been speedily consummated but for the
timely notice taken of the disgraceful transaction
by two or three independent journals. The
Globe of Wednesday, in fact, defends the appoint-
ment, and comments on it thus—" If obedience
to ecclesiastical tribunals by clergymen who
have vowed_ obedience to them is to be made a
ground of exclusion from ecclesiastical appoint•
ments, it follows that they are punished for
taking vows they are compelled to take, and
keeping vows which they are bound to keep, by
both the ecclesiastical and the civil law. No
Govornment could act on any such rule." But
Lord MELBOURNE'S Government does act on
such a rule, for Lord NORMANDY on Tuesday
evening admitted that her Majesty's Government
had been disposed to give Mr. CANDLISII the ap-
pointment, " but the moment they had heard he
had placed himself in opposition to the law, they
immediately put an end to all communication
with him on the subject." How did Lord NOR-
RANBy hear this? Not from the Lord Advocate
or Mr. Fox MAULE, or the Globe, but from the
Scotsman, The Sun, and the Morning Post, which
gave the Home Secretary timely warning, and
enabled him to annul this injudicious appoint-
ment. The Morning Chronicle, too, defends the
non-intrusionists, and sneers at Lord ABERDEEN
in these words, "after all his tremendous flourish
of trumpets and machinery of preparation, he
received the brief and consolatory information
that no such appointment had been made." Can
these journals, which support the law-breakers,
say, after Lord NORMANDY'S admission, that it
was not intended, or deny, for aught they had
done, that in a few days it would have been con-
firmed, and that the case of Mr. CANDLISH would
have been held up as an encouragement to others
of the same class to set the House of Lords, and
the Court of Session, at defiance ? The decision
of Lord NORMANDY was praiseworthy, and we
give him and Lord MELBOURNE all due
credit for upholding the law, but we can-
not acquit them, and especially the Home
Secretary, of negligence, in allowing the LORD
ADVOCATE and Mr. Fox MAULE to recommend
a person of this description to the patronage
of her MAJESTY, because he is an active agent
in promoting their wild notions about Non-in-
trusion, and in encouraging the people to
put the law of the land at defiance to gratify the
personal interests of ambitious- and encroaching
priests.. It the object of CHALMERS, CANDLISH,
and Co. wore really the spiritual welfare of the
Church, we could sympathize with them, how-
ever mistaken in their views but when we are
thoroughly convinced that they think only of
aggrandizing themselves at the -expense of the
ChriStian people of Scotland, and know from
sad experience that, through their incendiary
means, the religious feelings of every parish
where there is a disputed settlement, aredrowned
in party animosities, we should be guilty of a
great dereliction of duty if
we failed to de-
nounce them, and the representatives of the
Government in Scotland, who abet their rebellious
acts. The Dissenters, the Tories, the Liberal
Whigs, and all but the purblind Non-intrusion-
ists, led, bound hand and foot, by these meddling
priests, will rejoice that Scotland has escaped
such a disgrace as the appointment of the Rev.

Madrid
,journals of the 3rd inst. have reached
us. The question of the Regency is likely to
occupy the early attention of the Cortes. On
all bides great indisposition is evinced to the en-
trusting ESPARTERO with the sole Regency—the
now darling object of all his ambition. The
Treasury is empty and the Ministry at logger-
heads. On the Bourse the Fives were on the 3d
at 284- for cash.

We have received the whole of the Paris
Journals of Wednesday. In the Chamber of
Peers on Tuesday the Prince of MOSKOWA, son
of Marshal NEY, made some severe remarks
upon the observations of Count MOLE relative to
the execution of his father in 1815. It was cer-
tainly most unwise on the part of Count MOLE to
have called the attention of the Chamber to such
a subject. That Marshal NEY was basely and
cruelly murdered, is now universally admitted
by the ablest jurisconsults of-Europe. Now as
Count MOLE was one of the judges wh*presided
at the mock trial of the gallant Marshal, it is as
indecent as it is impolitic to find him checking
the current of the filial piety of the noble de-
scendant of the illustrious victim of BOURBON
vindictiveness. That Count MOLE was influenced,
by honest and conscientious individual convic-
tions in pronouncing sentence of death upon
Marshal NEY, we do not dispute for an instant;
but surely time enough has elapsed to correct
this fatal error of judgment. From the high
personal character of Count MOLE, we expected
that he would have been one of the first Mem-
bers of the Peerage to express deep sorrow for
an event which France has never ceased to de-
plore, and that any motion for reversing the Sen-
tence pronounced upon the illustrious Marshal
would have had. his hearty concurrence. - This
would have been some reparation for the judicial
murder of one of the bravest soldiers to whom
France ever gave birth.

The Firman of the SULTAN conferring upon
MEHEMET ALT the hereditary Pachalie of
Egypt, has not excited so lively an interest as
we expected in the political circles of Paris. The
following article from the Quotidienne is the most
pointed of any written upon the subject :
_

The protection of France had been promised to the Pacha of
Egypt, and millions had been expended with that view. In
exchange what has Mehemet Ali obtained? In diplomacy
what is the character of sovereignty, and if. we even go back
to feudal rights, what are the relations between the suzerain
and his vassal? These relations are all set aside. The here-
ditary government is granted, and it is not by order of primo-
geniture, and is it not clear that this restriction is directed
against Ibrahim Pacha, the only man of energy in Egypt ?
The Porte reserves to itself the right of choosing the successor,
and why ? Because in a seraglio there is a multitude of heirs,
and an imbecile descendant, an eunuch perhaps, may be
chosen. Lord Palmerston, on the death of the Pacha, will
have a child at the head of the Pachalic of En„o-ypt, as Rus-
sia has a child at Constantinople. Mehemet Ali is compelled
to disinherit Ibrahim, the right arm of his power ; for .in the
monarchies of the desert it is the eldest who is regarded as the
true one amidst a multitude of brothers by different.mothers.
So much for what is called the hereditary government of Egypt.
We will now take a view of the other conditions of the hatti
scheriff. How was the Egyptian monarchy rendered great?
By regular troops trained under French discipline. What says
the hatti scheriff? The forces of Mehemet are limited to
about one-fifth of their present number. What constituted his
power is destroyed ; what might have given influence to France
is annihilated. And further, all those who have travelled
recently in Egypt have spoken of the monopolies of the
Pacha, and of those riches gained by the sweat of the
people, but which nevertheless constituted an essential part of
the strehgth of the Egyptian Government. Empires are some-
times founded by violent means, because despotism with strong
and intelligent minds overcomes obstacles ; but when the des-
potism upon which a rising empire rests disappears, everything
disappears with it. In depriving Mehemet Ali of his revenues,
and causing a fourth of his gold to pass to the Porte, he is de-
prived of the means of organising Egypt. He will no longer
have the son who became great under his sceptre, for, as Eng-
land could not succeed in arming him against his father,
Lord Palmerston disinherits him. This is easily understood.
The Egyptian monarchy existed only by the army, and
the army was half French. Nothing remains, and Mehe-
met Ali will be a Sovereign without money and without sol-
diers. All this shows that England has attained her object. France
had protected the Egyptian monarchy, and England prevents
the commercial development which was to result in favour of
French in'erest. The power of Mehemet Ali is now illusory,
and he sees this so well that he protests even with the foot of
the oppressor upon his neck. But how will he give force to
his protest ? Will he refuse to accept the proffered conditions ?
When he had all his forces he resisted, and what was the result?
If, when he was standing erect in all his power, his enemies
pursued their course, will they stop now that he is half fallen ?
M. Guizot, however, has told us in the Chamber that two
things had been demanded for Mehemet Ali—hereditary go-
vernment, and independence. A pretty independence, indeed,
which consists in having neither an army nor a treasury--a
fine hereditary right, which compels him to surrender the
choice of his heir to the Sultan." •

The Quotidienne does injustice to Lord PAL-
M E RSTON. We are convinced his Lordship never
gave his sanction to the clause hi the Firman,
which'claimed for the Porte the right of regu-
lating according to its pleasure the succession to
the Pachalic. A variety of circumstances lead
us to this conclusion. Lord PALMERSTON never
was the enemy of the Pacha. When the gallant
NAPIER negotiated his Treaty with MEHEMET
ALI, Lord PONSONBY rejected it with insolent
contempt. But what did Lord PALMERSTON ?
Why, lie made it the very basis of the new Treaty,
and entrusted its ratification to the gallant Com-
modore. Lord PALMERSTON must know as well
as we do, that to permit the Porte to nominate
any of MEHEMET Am's children it pleases to
succeed thim, would be to enable the eunuchs of
the Seraglio to kindle at any momenta civil war
in Egypt. MEHEMET ALI'S real enemy is Lord
PONSONBY, whose recall has now become essen-
tial to the maintenance of European tranquillity.
It is very far from the wish of England to press
heavily upon the PA CHA, or to allow the Porte to
treat him with harshness now that lie is defence-
less. England knows how to respect the sanctity
of a weakness which looks for security to the
faith of treaties. The very presence of Commo-
dore NA PIER at Alexandria is to U 3 a guarantee
that MEHEMET ALI shall obtain that justice at
the hands of the SULTAN, the refusal of which
would be- more disgraceful to England than to
the Porte itself.

It was rumoured in Paris that the negotiations
for a new treaty, to include France, had been
broken off, and that by another protocol signed
by the Four Powers, Russia has relinquished the
Treaty of Unkiar Skelessi, and once more recog-
nised the uncontrolled sovereignty of the Sul:
TAN over the Straits of the Bosphorus and the
Dardanelles.

There is very little general news in the French
Journals of Wednesday. The following extracts
from them include what little they contain of
any interest to an English reader :

We find in the Quotidienne the following passage :
" This is a year of disclosures. A letter which we have re-
ceived from our correspondent in Dauphine announces the ap-
proaching publication of a book which will contain very
piquant and very curious communications respecting a fact in
our contemporary political history, which has hitherto been
very imperfectly known. The book in question is a history of
the conspiracy of Grenoble, in 1816, which cost the unfortu-
nate Didier his life. This work, says our correspondent, pub-
lished from inedited and authentic documents, will cause as
great a sensation as the letter published by the Gazette de
France and the Journal La France.--La Gazette de France.

_
It is said that the President of the Council having received
a copy of the hatti-scheriff, which grants to Mehemet Ali the
hereditary but nominal government of the Pachalic of Egypt,
and being convinced that the Four Powers would not modify
this singular concession, has resolved to ask again from the
Committee the 60,000 men, whom he gave up some time ago,
when he supposed that this question might be settled in a pa-
cific manner.—Le Temps.
The Moniteur has no official part this morning.
The Duke of Aumale sets out to-morrow for Africa.
The National says this morning that there is no foundation
whatever for an assertion of the Univers, that a certain number
of delegates of the Reforming Societies, had come to the office
of the National to require that it should desist from its argu-
ments in favour of the fortification of Paris.—Le Constitu-
tionnel.
Galignani's Messenger announces that the French Govern-
ment has been very disagreeably surprised at receiving from
Constantinople the news that, contrary to the instructions of
the English Government, Lord Ponsonby was endeavouring by
all possible means to embarrass more and more the affairs of
the East by rendering the position of Mehemet Ali insupporta-
is supposed to be in-
sbtl
ren. t
eldt at
od dass,kt haant
expladneati3ionuorgnutehniasYsubject from Lord Pal-
merston.—Le Commerce.
__

THE SUN, LONDON, PRIM Y, MARCH 12, 1811

each, the Six Commissioners 1,500/. each, two
registrars 800/. each, six deputy registrars 600/.
each, one deputy registrar 370/. 13s. 8d„ the Se-
cretary of Bankruptcy (Mr. W. Vizard ) 1,2004.
his first clerk 5001., and the second 3001.; the
compensations amount to 12,9931. 10s. 11d. Of
this the late fifteen Commissioners receive about
2001. each, Chaff Wax (J. Holdship) 5681., Clerk
of Hanaper (Rev. T. Thiirlow) 4841. 16s. 9d., and
Lord Thurlow himself, as patentee of bankrupts,
7,3521.145. 6d.1

THE RELIGIOUS PORTION OF THE BRITISH
PEOPLE IS said by the Standard to be faithfully
represented by Sir Robert Inglis. We are afraid
that our over-zealous Contemporary was not
under the influence of his habitual caution when
he wrote that sentence. If. Sir Robert be the
representative of the religious portion of the
British people, the irreligious portion must be
represented by the opponents of Sir Robert in
Parliament. Now, of the Members who voted
on Wednesday evening on the Jewish Declara-
tion Bill, Sir Robert and his friends constituted
about one-sixth part, and, according to the
Standard, therefore, the religious portion of the
British people are only one-sixth of the whale.
It would be better for the Standard to give up
Sir Robert, and give up the cause he espoused
on Wednesday night, than to restrict the re-
ligious party to so small a proportion. If for
" the religious portion of the British public" we
read "the bigoted portion," we shall be •in
accord with the Standard, and ready to concede
that about one-sixth of the British people ac-
knowledge as their representative the Member
for Oxford.

VICE-CHANCERY-(THIS

His Honour, after disposing of the unopposed petitions and
short causes in his paper, proceeded with the further argu-
ments on the part-heard case of Turner v. Trelawney, the
facts of which we have already given at length. The argu-
ments, which have already occupied two days, were not con-
cluded at the rising of the Court, but appear likely to occupy
several days longer.