The Sun.
London, England, 1841-06-23 00:00:00

no division, the numbers being equal, and the question for
retaining the words decided in the negative by the forms
of the House. The Chancellor then explained to him that
his object was not yet attained, as Manchester wag only
named in the excrescent compensation clauses, and
that it would be necessary, for his object, by express
words to exclude Manchester from the operation of tho
general clauses. Meanwhile one of the Tories went
away, and the proviso which Lord Wilton moved upon
the Lord Chancellor's suggestion, was negatived by one.
Lord Normanby 'then pointed out, amid the general
laughter of the House, that Lord Wilton had thus con-
trived to leave Manchester within the general scope of
the Bill, but had succeeded in depriving the Lancashire
Coroner of the compensation which the Commons had
already agreed should be paid to him from Manchester.
Lord Normanby added, that as this was obviously not
what had been intended by Lord Wilton, and moreover
would inevitably lose the Bill on its return to the Commons,
he would not object to the restoration of the omitted words
on the third reading ; and with this understanding the
House separated on Friday last. Last night, however,
the Tory Lords mustered in sufficient force to work any
mischief they had a mind to ; and, utterly regardless of
the agreement entered into the night before, relying on
which the Government were wholly unprepared for op-
position, Lord Wilton, instead of offering to re-insert
Manchester in its former place, moved and carried his
rejected proviso of Monday ; and this, of course, as he
had been distinctly warned by. Lord Normanby on
Friday last, necessarily occasioned the loss of the whole
Bill. An examination of the division lists, which we
publish elsewhere, will show Lord Wicklow voting on
this occasion with the Government, which, to do that
Noble Lord justice, generally indicates that his °wit
party have ventured to a point which few honourable
minds can bear. That Lord Warwick's name amid be
on the same side means nothing more, we ';ear, thin that
his own job was secured, and that he -;ins utterly careless
of every other consideration.
GLOBE—Nothing more wo
the result of the great a.y 7.1. et be required to assure
peal which is solemnly made
by. the Sovereign the day
should understala- its to her people, than that all
purport. and act on their under-
standing. rile monopolist interests are in an un-
tlimb."-ed minority. How many of the natural ma-
jority they can detach is another question. But
at least they should not be suffered to have
any sincere supporters ; there should be no mis-
take in the public mind about the real nature of
the Contest. It is quite intelligible that the measures on
which the appeal will be made to the country should be
met with strenuous opposition. What is not intelligible
is affected indifference to thein. There can be no real
indifference here excepting from ignorance. The deci-
sion on the 'appeal now making can be indifferent to
no man in the country. It is perfectly legitimate, in
those who oppose themselves to the measures of Minis-
ters, to demonstrate, if they can, to the country that
those measures are most pernicious, most mischievous,
most dangerous. But it is not legitimate, it is not
honest, to make believe that nothing is proposed !—that
there is really no question at issue between the parties
which divide the country, excepting which of them is to
possess official power—that Whigs are no better than
Tories, and Tones no worse than Whigs, on these ques-
tions of practical, administrative, and fiscal reform.
Surely the question must suggest itself to an enlightened
constituency—lf Tory performance in office is to come
up, at least, to Liberal promise, how does it happen that
Tory proposals in Opposition have given no earnest
of it ? We have had Opposition, for some time past,
wide awake to financial deficiency. We lave had
them making the best use of it, to molest Ministers as
much as possible. How does it happen that we have
never had the least hint of Liberal measures in any de-
partment of 'financial or commercial policy ? How
does it happen that, free from official responsibilities,
they have remained tongue-tied as to any approximation
to free trade for the relief of industry ? We believe
that no one has ever thought of asking this question.
But why not ? If Opposition are what they pretend
themselves, the legitimate successors of Huskisson, and
the zealous partners in all his policy, they ought to
have shone out in the season of approaching embarrass •
ment, and anticipated Ministers in all that is Hushis-
sonian in their policy. If they have not done so, it is
because such policy has never naturally been that of
their party. It is Liberal policy thrust for awhile on
Tory adoption, and thrust out again, with Huskisson
himself, from a Wellington Cabinet.

STANDARD.—" The House of Commons, which
has declared itself in favour of new taxes and monopoly,
will this day be prorogued by her Majesty, in order
forthwith to lie sent about its business, and to the hands
of the constituent bodies will be confided the cause of
THE QUEEN AND THE PEOPLE." Thus unceremo-
niously does the ministerial journal, the Morning Chro-
nick, dispatch the Parliament that has for four years
supported its patrons in office. The ingratitude is all of
a piece with the cruelty perpetrated upon Lord Plunket,
but our Contemporary ought not to add injustice to
ingratitude. The dying Parliament never declared in
favour of new taxes except upon that occasion when
it was led to declare for them, arid enact, them too,
by her Majesty's Ministers—we allude to the five per
cent. addition to the taxes imposed by the economy
and retrenchment Government. While we• write we
are unable to Conjecture whether the Royal Address to
be delivered to-day will be conceived in the same
ungracious spirit as the Morning Chronicle's notice—but
we think it not improbable that such will be the
case. And now, as we have mentioned poor Lord
Plunket, let us have a word about that ill-used
nobleman. It appeals from the statement of his
Lordship's friends, that he has had more than one
hint that his place was wanted, and that he
refused to stir until some Liberal Member of
the Irish bar, qualified to take his place as
Chancellor, could be found. This was a great improve-
ment upon the dilatory plea of the first rord N,orbury,
who, when urged to retire, claimed a right to consult a
friend at Calcutta before forming his determination. The
Indian voyage might questionless bb repeated a dozen
times before Lord Plunket's condition could iee satisfied.
Who, in the name of common sensor is the Liberal
member of the Irish bar preferable as a Lord Q han-
cellor ? We are sorry to see that in Ireland this
paltry trick of Lord Plunket, to keep his place
under a pretext of patriotism, is not met with the
scorn it merits. Men speak as if judicial offices
were treated only as professional prizes, and
not for the public good ; but provided that the best
Judge is appointed, in what way can it concern
the public at what bar he has practised ? The
presumption will be in favour, no doubt, of the
Judge who has practised at the bar affording the more
extensive opportunities for acquiring professional
knowledge ; as between England and Ireland, clearly
at the English bar. It is very well for those who
would exclude all persons of English birth from office
in Ireland who are foreigners, and, who, following
up their principles, must refuse allegiance to a
foreign Queen for Queen Victoria is, we are
proud to say, an Englishwoman—it is very well for
such persons to raise an outcry against an English
Chancellor in Ireland ; but surely it is ridiculous for
the members of a profession who know nothing of
that profession except from English writers and
English Judges, to join in the outcry. To be con-
sistent, such persons must make a holocaust of their law
libraries—throw Blackstone upon Coke, and Hardwicke
and Vesey upon both, and reduce all to cinders, prepa-
ratory, we suppose, to the Phoenix hirth of some Irish
system of law and equity, to be compiled by a Liberal
member of the Irish bar.

MONEY MARKET and CITY NEWS.

FROM THE HORNING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.

CHRONICLE.—Ships, colonies, and commerce must
all be gainers—all prosperous under the free-trade
flag. The monopolists have the hardihood to deny this,
and to assert, on the contrary, that the reduction of the
duties on foreign timber would be destructive and cala-
mitous to the shipping interests. They know this to be
a misrepresentation of fact, or, in less polite language,
we must repeat, it is a falsehood, " and they know it."
The fallacy is, indeed, known to all who have read the
valuable evidence given before the Committee on Import
Duties. The monopolists know this also ; and while
they shrink from attempting to combat the truths which
that volume contains, they endeavour to get rid of them
by a mere averment that they are partial, and full of
errors. Were this allegation true, were that volume open
to such attack, it is a natural consequence that those
whose
ose views and whose interests are so much at variance
with its conclusions would expose its,. and
showand for u p itsth e faults.best But they- have done neither,
of all reasons—that. the evi-
dence adduced by the Committee is founded on the.
imperishable rock 'of
deeply rooted in the public mid
truth, and the more it is
sifted the more immovable it has become, and been more
timber, and withdrawing the restrictions ctions
The re
and. conclusive—that by reducin.c,
trade of our colonial possessions,sulafftsecatrinegpltahme
the. duties on foreign
beneficial both to the colonies and drl theth e
m changeot h
mother-country,
r -e wouldouo t
rbye,
while'the revenue would be very
The public would also be
greatly increased, and
the interests of the British shipowners
e a
e t
essentially ameliorated.should keep thesefacts in view, and remember that when they se
class of shipowners opposing the change in the et n
ir t
ha
emr
duties, that these men do so on false pretences
profess to say that the change would injure the
si
.h They
interests, but the fact is that they do so because
pping
it would
interfere with their own profits of monopoy.
noisy clique to whom we allude are chiefly engaged. This
' ln
the Canada timber trade, that is, they enjoy the benefit
of supplying the people of this country with an inferior
article at an exorbitant price, and they oppose an altera-
tion by which the public would be able to purchase
superior timber at a reasonable price.
The opinion of Mr. Hume, of the Board of Trade, is,
that the country would be gainers by buying up the
vessels employed in this monopoly at a valuation, be-
cause the increase to the revenue by the proposed alter-
ation would make up the amount in the first twelve
months. Let this fact also be kept in view, that the in-
terests of the British shipowners generally are quite
separate and distinct ; that they would be materially
improved by the proposed alterations, the tonnage of the
country doubled, and the cost of provisioning and mate-
rials of ships very essentially diminished. Let it also be
borne in mind that the present differential duties compel
ship builders and all others to pay a very high price for
an inferior timber.
Whether the precise changes in the last Budget in
respect of the timber duties are the very best that
could be proposed, we speak not decidedly. Mr.
Al4Gregor proposed 7s. 6d. per load on colonial tim-
ber, and 225. 6d. on foreign timber ; and certainly
we are by no means convinced of the expediency of
adding to the duty on Canada timber ; it is much used in
cottages and by poor people, and, therefore, instead of
increasing the import duties on that article, it seems to
us, and to many intelligent mercantile men, that it
would be sounder policy to take an additionul 10s. per
load off the duty on Baltic timber. This basis of setthne
the differential duty would give_ greater relief, an"' '
the superior article down to a more rep-;
But tbeee are all matters of detail, r-

..... orin;

—unable. Price'
COW:BITh fO3