The Sun.
London, England, 1851-06-05 00:00:00

; . .
,
, -)
- i- mo"_, 4,e,e=e-'(/‘''-‘--/'
/ -,-----.
~A-1e: . 7"
//:
rt:te,ovii;_z______
/ •
,44
,4, .. r-.... 4111111111111\"
• r
, , 4,44:, -01 P s
. r•-. ,-, - .":"':.
''l'.
'4':'.. ,e,4.
~5, ..„7t :7-cryv _,-€.>‘,„...e.,1_
i
..4. . I.t.
....... 4,9(G...„,..,ft, ,•5 /ft --••• . 4.4,__.,..,. , ---.,
41, -.0.0 r.
f „..,_ . ,h, ~:... 7, .;; • s , F--1--,.,5e " ;,-.-:- - -,.-
..' ..,,,,..
.. ~,, m v.,,-., - - 40. 1 c2,i_,A ~ ~..- -:-:,* _.. - -r. , -5.7.,..--„,
~ .... ,„. _-- i;', --, ...•:-,- : 4,, -... 1,, - v.,.,-., -,,,,zi*/.: • ,t- ~ ..q: 11 ' •
, ~,, --,.•
.„ . •J, •-f. 4 - 1 . ......
."2,,,
. . '-•
,'L.1..";,.,; -"lt,p,i,
.''. .r** 'r,' ' ••`, . ~0%„ '' ' ..; .--' . ,-, .4, - 7'/' -.'''''''''' :''. :4, ' ... ~ - --.-• - 940 ~. ''.4- Iti4il.', - ' t
4., 1e0g.,..:',:-.- __L.., •i---i-- 0k,„4„/ ,s 4. 5 ‘,.t . ..,-Aillk..,l‹ H.,t.. . ~..
, ..
„
' '-", •••
_. :,-....
~.-9?-:-.00-0-04. --. '',4iiiiio,DlFAT'..h*.-.", ll' i ,:'F ~;,,, "ti°,4 ,-1)21. 0 Tt'' ''
\.) ' ,' -'
1 ''
r ...1.
7.N.
~,,,

DUCHY COURT OF LANCASTER.

any two or three of whom might have been called before
his Lordship? The only way in which his assertions
could be met was by calling these people; butt it was
quite against the rules of evidence that such stutemente
should be mado by third parties. The Learned Ser-
gee.nt then cross-examined the witness, who, in reply to
his interrogatories, denied that he ever gave legal ad-
vice, and stated that ho was paid in proportion to the
amount which he recovered. If nothing was recovered,
be got nothing, but if he brought an action for 101., and
got a verdict for SL, he received his full amount.
He admitted that he had attended before Mr. James,
and had been repremanded by him. By Mr. James,
he had been accused of extortion, but not by Mr.
Ramshay; nor had Mr. Ramshay ever prohibited him
from practising in the court. As regarded the clerk's
bringing the ledger and day-book, the attempt was to
show by woom the orders were given; and M. Ram-
shay's objection was to their admission as evE ence of
any such thing. The name of the clerk whom the judge
called a " stupid, mumbling old blockhead," wit :less did
not know. The principals in the several cases he cited
were not present. Mr. Stone, the High Bailiff (pointed
out to him) witness knew, and after some healt ation he
admitted that on one occasion he and Mr. Stati tam had
complained openly in court of his extortion.
In answer to Mr. WHITMORE, witness atteminted at
some length to explain away this charge, which t he ad-
mitted had been made, but which he asserted had origi-
nated in a misunderstanding, rendered the more easy by
the fact that one of the under clerks, who communicated
the fact to Mr. Stone, " was not altogether on the most
friendly terms" with witness. The charge before Mr.
James he explained as the act of "an illiterate woman,
who kept her accounts in chalk." .
Mr. M'Connel, draper, of Lord Nelson-street, Liver-
pool, was the next witness called—Abort this time last
year he had brought an action in the Count y Court
against a person named Wright, the mate of a e hip, foe
goods sold and delivered. Amongst these goods was
a muslin dress. He proved the sale and delivery
to Mrs. Wright, wife of the defendant; but the judge
said it was very imprudent in witness to sell
a muslin dress to a mute's wife. " A 'dress or
3s. 6d. was quite good enough for her to
buckle up her sleeves and scrub the floors in." On this
ground, her being a mate's wife, and for no other reason
that he knew, the claim was reduce:l from 14s. to 4s. by
Mr. Ramshay, who thought the more expensive article
should not have been supplied to a person in h er sphere.
On other occasions witness had attended the (rosin, and
heard the judge use very uncourteous language to
suitors, both plaintiffs and defendants. He had heard
him call them '` stupid fools," " moidering," and " mum-
bling fools," and ask " what were they grinning at?"
At the same period as that of the first case, to which he
had referred, Richard Martin was suing his employer,
who said he had turned him away for being drunk.
Martin said he was not, and could not he drunk-, having
been is the open air many hours, and having had only
one glass of brandy. The judge then took up the case,
and said to the defendant that plaintiff cou'id not be
drunk, having only had one glass of brandy, for he (the
judge) had had three himself. [This statement Mr.
Ramshay appeared utterly to deny—conversationally,
however, as he was not being examined.] He nonsuited
the plaintiff, and gave judgment for the defendant.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant Wiemeta--Witness
said he knew nobody present who could corroborate his
statement about the brandy.
By Mr. WHATELEY—Hr. Ramshay was Apparently
labouring under great irritability, whether of health or
temper he knew not. He had heard him threaten to
commit a man if he did not give his evidence, as he (the
judge) thought fit. His manner was very violent. He
sometimes sat up, and then just in the raiddle of a
statement would fall back, shut his eyes, and seem un-
conscious of all that was going on. ‘itnehs had seen
him get up and ask what they were talking a bout.
Mr. Henry Moss gave evidence to the same. effect, and
said that he had been told by Mr. Ramshay that his cases
were got up in a shameful manner, and that lie had sub-
sequently withdrawn everything from the court.
On cross-examination he admitted that, though sines'
Mr. Ramshay's illness Mr. James and Mr. Lowndes had
sat for somo time, he had not gone before the m with his
causes; and his explanation of this was, that it was al-
ways uncertain whether they or Mr. Ramshay would sit.
To the Learned Sergeant's next question, why, with
this uncertainty in his mind, he had not hesitated to
sign—as he had signed—the memorial, which /stated that
during the sittings of those other gentlemen the busi-
ness had increased, the witness gave no answer.
Alexander M'Cay examined by Mr. WHATELEY, said
he was a coal agent living at Paddington, Edghill, Li-
verpool. In December last he appeared for some par-
ties in some cases at the County Court—ono against a
person of the name of Fairclough, for coals supplied by
Robert and William Ford. This ease had been brought
forward twice, once in June, once in December. The
first time it came before Mr. Ramshay, the carter was
called, and proved the delivery of the coal. He stated
that a man was present who called himself Mr. Fair-
clough. To that the judge said, " How do you know
that he was Mr. Fairclough?" The plaintiff was non-
suited. Before it was so, witness proposed .himself to
give evidence, and stated to the judge that hs knew
Mr. Fairclough quite well. That ho had received
the first order from him personally, and that Mr. Fair-
dough had come to the office with the second or third.
Then the carter proved delivery to a person calling him-
self by that name. But the judge said there was no
proof at all; the whole evidence Was no evidence at
all. The witness cited another case of nonsuit
on the ground of insufficient proof of the identity of
the party to whom the goods were delivered. The carter
had previously delivered a load at the same place, so he
knew the person very well. This was after an adjourn-
ment, and the judge—who nonsuited him—appeared to
be labouring under the accumulation of bodily
disorders, having such an effect upon his mind
as to unfit him for presiding; and further to
be confused in his own mind as to what he was about;
it appeared too as though he was acting under the
influence of wine. All these things together rendered
him absolutely unfit to deal with any matters of the
kind. When he came into court—carried by two or
was when witness noticed
three men, as he generally
him—and supported by a hair cushion in front, he sat
almost unable to speak for somo thee, except in a whis-
per to Mr. Stone, who sat at his left.

that Mr. Rsmshay had said, " Yoa agents, without any
knowledge of the law, are ten times more expensivo
to suitors than solicitors would be." Their seals of
charges was, it appeared, 3s. 6d. for every case in which
they recovered, and, besides, 10 per cent. on sums under
per cent from 5L to 101., and 5 per cent. above
101. They did not charge anything when they did not
recover.

Before the Right Hon. the Earl of CARLISLE, Chancel-
lor, atttnded by Mr. ELLIS, Q.C., Attorney-General

of the Duchy.)
This Court sat yesterday for the hearing of statements
in support of a memorial presented to the Chancellor of
the Duchy, praying for the removal of Mr. Ramshsy,
Judge of the County Court at Liverpool, from the office
which he now holds. _

Mr. Sergeant WILKINS —" No cure, no pay?"—Ex-
aotly so.
Mr. John Macfarlane, by Mr. WHITMORE, deposed
inter alia, that the judge, in the course of examination,
had told him he was " a stupid, drunken fellow, only fit
to be a lumper about the docks."
In cross-examination by Mr. Sergeant lirmurts the)
witness added nothing to the information he had giren,
but explained some of his own antecedents.

The following is a copy of the memorial, upon which
the hearing was granted :
" To the Right Hon. the Earl of Carlisle, Chancellor of
the Duchy of Lancaster.

"The humble Memorial of the Members of the
Liverpool Guardian Society for the Protection
of Trade, and of the Inhabitants of Liverpool
generally,
" Showeth,—That your memorialists are greatly in-
terested in the due administration of the laws affecting
debtor and creditor, particularly those passed for the
more speedy recovery of debts under the system of
county courts, recently introduced in this country.
"That your memorialists had hoped to partake of the
general advantage thus conferred upon the country;
they considered it was a boon to them, which offered
increased facilities for the recovery of debts by less ex-
pensive remedies than had theretofore been provided;
but in this your memorialists have been grievously dis-
appointed, by' reason of the appointment of a judge of
whose conduct they are constrained to make serious re-
presentations to your Lordship.
" Your memorialists would beg most respectfully to
submit that no system, however excellent or perfect in
itself, can work beneficially or advantageously to the
public, unless presided over ,by an individual properly
qualified for the office.
" That a judge of a county court should not only pos-
sess sound legal knowledge, but also a cool, calm, and
courteous demeanour and temper; and bo willing to bear
with, and assist the poor, but unskilful and inexperienced
plaintiff or defendant in the management and conduct
of his claim or defence. That in this respect, the judges
of the superior courts have less to contend with, inas-
much as they are uniformly approached by a bar of
learned and competent advocates, whereas the judge of
the county court has the case presented to him by the
parties themselves, who are often ignorant of the rules
of evidence and the mode of conducting a cause.
" That Mr. Ramshay, the Judge of the Liverpool
County Court, lacks the latter qualifications above al-
luded to to a lamentable degree. That he appears to be
labouring under some painful and wearying bodily ma-
lady, which renders him physically unfit to discharge the
laborious duties of a judge. That he is almost carried
to and from the bench, being totally unable to support
himself erect. That he is not able to put the questions
to the parties and their witnesses, which office is conse-
quently performed by the High Bailiff or some assistant.
That he cannot take any notes or memoranda of the evi-
dence adduced, so as to assist his memory, and ade-
quately discharge his responsible duties. That his men-
tal powers cannot fail to partake, to some extent, of the
infirmities of his body. That his temper and disposition
seem so soured by these or other infirmities as to render
sim rude, uncourteons, and positively insulting to the
suitors who appear before him, and very many persons
will not hazard taking proceedings in his court icr leer
of personal insult.
" That respectable tradesmen, and others, are fre-
quently subjected to gross and unmerited abuse by him;
that they are called fools, idiots, described as brainless
and senseless, and are, otherwise, the objects of offen-
sive and disagreeable observations, when they happen
not to be stating their case, or giving their evidence, in
accordance with the taste or whim of the judge. That
scenes of this painful nature were almost daily to be ob-
served in the court whilst he presided in it. That in con-
sequence of such conduct the business was greatly dimi-
nished. That whilst a deputy afterwards presided, in-
stead of the judge, the business immediately increased
to a very great extent, the deputy having given univer-
sal satisfaction. That your memorialists cannot calculate
with any certainty on an efficient deputy being con-
tinued, and are kept in constant apprehension of a return
to the unsatisfactory state of things they have before de-
scribed ; and, as the remedy is in your Lordship's
hands, they appeal with confidence to your wisdom and
justice to relieve them from this state of doubt and un-
certainty.
" Your memorialists, therefore, humbly pray that your
Lordship will be pleased to remove Mr. Ramshay from
the office of judge, and appoint a gentleman in his stead
possessing the necessary qualifications to discharge the
responsible duties devolving on a judge in this important
community."
Mr. Whateley and Mr. Whitmore appeared for the
Liverpool Guardian Society, and Mr. Sergeant Wilkins
for Mr. Ramshay.
Mr. 'WHATELEY begged in the outset to be permitted
to assure his Lordship that he appeared in this case
with the greatest pain it had ever been his lot to feel in
the discharge of any professional duty. He had had for
several years a professional acquaintance with the gen-
tleman whose conduct was now impugned, and from that
experience should have said that his acquirements would
have qualified him well to fulfil the task imposed upon
him as judge of the County Court of Liverpool. Having
said thus much it became necessary that he should offer
evidence in support of the memorial just read, a docu-
ment which had been signed by 3,525 persons of un-
doubted respectability and character, and which proved,
what it was impossible to deny, that a great and a very
widely extended feeling prevailed against the conduct of
the judge therein mentioned, since the date of his ap-
pointment in May, 1850. He (Mr. Whateley) was in-
formed that then, or soon afterwards, Mr. Ramshay was
afflicted with a severe bodily illness, to which a good deal
might be attributed; but whether it was to be at-
tributed to natural infirmity of temper, or whether
the temper had been acted upon by the disorders of the
body, it would, he feared, be too clear that that
gentleman had not conducted himself in the way to
obtain, or even to preserve, the respect of the suitors in
his court. Witnesses, however, should be called, and
from them his Lordship would best learn the ex-
pressions and behaviour of which the people of Liver-
pool complained—complained so much that tradesmen
having a variety of causes which they wished to bring
forward often declined to do so in consequence of their
uncertainty of the judge. There were other cases, not
so numerous but more important, in which Mr. Ram-
shay, where, as he thought, parties had not brought for-
ward sufficient evidence, had ordered verdicts to be given
for the defendant, instead of merely nonsuiting the
plaintiff. So that the latter, instead of being able to
bring his case forward in a more efficient state, has, in
consequence of the temper of the moment, been barred
for ever of his claim. Of the witnesses to be called some
would be parties who had failed in their suits; some,
parties who had succeeded; ethers, reporters who were
present. Of the first section it would be said they had
motives; but this would not, at least, apply to the re-
porters, and to those who had succeeded, and whom he
was- about to examine. The matter was one which in-
dividuals could not settle; it was in the aggregate these
things were important; and the question came simply to
this, whether the, general demeanour of the judge hod
not been such as to render the court actually less effi-
cient than it ought to be, and under other circumstances
would have been.

[PRICE SD.

sengers was daily increasing? Yet this was the exact
kind of folly that Cobden committed, when he promised
more trade and limited the quantity of money. Peel had
asked, " Why should not money fetch its price in the
market equally with every other commodity ?" The
answer is, because money does not resemble any other
commodity. Legislation puts an arbitrary limit on the
amount of money ; but it does not put any limit on the
production of commodities. When bankers charge a
high rate of interest for money, the charge is not made
for its legitimate mercantile use, but for its artificial
scarcity—a scarcity deliberately caused by an ignorant
and cruel Act of Parliament. It is not money that calls
out trade; but trade that calls out money. The writing
of letters calls out postage stamps; but the creation of
postage stamps does not cause letters to be written.
Suppose Parliament were arbitrarily to limit the number
of postage stamps; then it is clear that the transmis-
sion of letters must be limited, however much
the population might increase, or however mush
the desire or necessity of writing more letters
might increase. In such a case, people might have
to pay sixpence or a shilling tor a single stamp. This
would be a form of usury, just as much as a grinding rate
of interest; and in both cases people would have to pay,
not for the fair use, but for the legislative scarcity of the
instruments they required. Mr. Duncan then explained
the system of money that he recommender; for adoption.
This we reported in the last number of the Standard,
when describing the meeting of the merchants held at the
Cotton Sales-room.—( A gentleman in the audience
asked whether the Americans would take our taxation
money in payment of debts due to them ?) Mr. Dun-
can answered in the negative, and showed that was one
of the greatest advantages of his system; for the evil
now was that foreigners took away our gold coin, which
to them was a merchantable commodity; and when
that happened, the Act of Parliament compelled the
Bank of England to contract the issue of its notes,
on which the rate of interest was raised, discounts
became almost impossible, trade was suspended, the
factories closed, and the operatives dismissed.— (Cheers.)
But if we had a paper money of national character,
having no intrinsic value as a commodity, but deriving
all its conventional value from the authority of the
Crown, such money would never be sent out of the
country, since no gain could be derived from its expor-
tation, but it would permanently remain among us, per-
forming all the legitimate junctions for which it was
issued. This led to an explanation of the theory
of the foreign exchanges. It was contended by Mr.
Duncan that foreigners only dealt with us on the prin-
ciple of barter, and that it was a matter of perfect in-
difference to them what denomination we placed on our
monetary instruments. If our paper pound would only
exchange for 2i dwts. of gold, instead of 5 dusts., its
present value, the foreigner would draw a bill Cu
England for two hundred of our pounds instead of a bill
for cne, hundred of our pounds. What the foreigner iri
this case would require would be 25 ounces of gold, and
provided he got that quantity of metal he would be
satisfied. Now we coin our ounce of gold into four
pounds, so that one hundred pounds represent 25 ounces
of gold; but if we coined an ounce of gold into eight
national pounds, then two hundred pounds would repre-
sent 25 ounces of gold. It is a matter of utter indif-
ference to the foreigner what value we put on our coins
or our paper; he demands a definite weight of gold, and
makes his calculation so as to obtain that definite weight.
He deals with us on the principle of barter values, while
we ought to deal among ourselves on the principle of
taxation values.—(Hear, hear.) But how will this affect
our manufacturers in their export trade? In our pro-
posed paper money wages will rise, and therefore prices
will rise. Will not then this enhanced cost of produc-
tion drive our manufacturers out of the markets of the
world? By no means; for the price will be a nominal
rise expressed in taxation money, which will depreciate
exactly in the proportion that taxes are imposed. Take
a case. Our manufacturers create goods worth
30,0001. in our paper money; but if that paper money
is excised or depreciated by our taxes, it will not
fetch in the markets of the world 7,500 ounces of gold,
but only 5,000 ounces. This is true! but when the ma-
nufacturer brings his 5,000 ounces of gold to this coun-
try, they will purchase 30,0001. of our national money,
so that he can still compete abroad with foreigners, as
he now competes, selling at the cheap barter level. He
is indeed greatly benefited; for under the present sys-
tem he must sell cheap both at home and abroad; but
under the system proposed, he would sell cheap abroad
and dear at home. This would ensure high profits to
the employer, and high wages to the employed.—(Loud
cheers.) Mr. Duncan then explained the difference be-
tween 'VALUE and PRICE. Value expressed simply the
labour condensed or embodied in commodities ; price
denoted any act of government or of society which
added to the cost of production without adding to the
value of the product. Thus, if x represented value and
y;represented taxation, then x + y was the expression
of price. If x denoted four pounds and y denoted two
pounds, then six pounds was the price that the commo-
dity ought to sell for in our market ; for if the pro-
ducer could not raise his price to this level, he could
not recover the tax he had advanced to the Govern-
ment, in the shape of customs and excise ; and if he is
disabled from doing so, then all taxation must rest per-
manently on the labour of the country, while the pro-
pertied classes would be exempt from all fiscal burdens.
Let us apply this principle to free imports. If the
foreigner is wholly untaxed, he can sell for simple va-
lue, that is, for four pounds; what then becomes of our
producers, who require six pounds, since they have paid
two pounds of taxation? If they continuo to compete,
they must lose two pounds on all they sell, and to per-
severe in this would make them bankrupts; but if they
ceased to compete, then they must abandon business,
and cease to give employment to oar labourers. If it
be objected that the foreigner does pay some tax to his
own Government, the answer is, if he pays two pounds
on a commodity whose condensed value is four pounds
then he will not compete in our market, in which case
free trade and free import becomes a nullity; but if ho
pay a less tax than two pounds, then he has an advan-
tage over more heavily taxed producers, and his advan-
tage is our loss.—(Hear, hear.) Why does Govern-
ment punish a smuggler? Because if he can sell with-
out paying the tax, he injures the fair trader who does
pay the tax; and Government affixes pains and penalties
to smuggling that this unjust competition may not in-
jure the honest tradesman; yet in utter violation of the
moral principles here involved, the ports are thrown
open to the untaxed foreigner, who is actually invited,
nay encouraged, to ruin our fair traders who contri-
bute to the burdens of the State; while the British
muggier, when detected, is severely pu-
nished. This free-trade cheapness makes the
incomes of the idle rich go further, for as prices fall, the
purchasing power of fixed incomes rises. Thus our
present legislation appreciates wealth, and depreciates
labour ; it augments the dividends of the fundholdors,
and reduces the wages of industry.—(Cheers.) Mr.
Duncan then pointed out several of the contradictions
and absurdities of what is called " Free Trade." Tb us,
the duty was taken off raw cotton, because it was the
raw material of manufacture, but when the refuse or
sweepings of the cotton-mills is converted into paper,
the paper is liable to a tax of 300 per cent.. Our gra-
ziers are not allowed to extract the saccharine proper..
ties of barley by any malting process to enable them to
fatten their cattle, but they are compelled to compete
with the foreign grazier who may malt his barley. We
tax soap 100 per cent., and spend vast sums to promote
sanitary reform, withholding from the poor the means of
cleansing their bodies. We profess a desire to promote
trade, and put a tax on advertisements which are the
best means of attracting trade. We pretend to be
anxious for popular education, and tax the paper on
which books are printed. In a word, our pr:tf_eusi.ons:
and our practice are directly opposed.—(Enthusias-
tic The
tic applause.) The lecturer then
question of direct taxation, which he contendedexa was al-
together impracticable. With the cost of collection, we
present property
require a revenue at 60 millions: the. f.
and income-tax at three per cent. yields five millions;
therefore to raise 60 millions, the tax must be raised to
36 per cent. But if trades and professions,erom realised
are exempted,
and the whole revenue were r_alsea I
pro-
perty, the tax mast be raise d l(Hear, hear.) Mr.o 70 per cent., which
would amount to confiscation.
Duncan then pointed out the e danger to the fundholder
from the present commer policy.c It was ruining our
colonies, our agriculture_, our mart 'me supremacy, our
general commerce; and when our productive classes
were brought down to a bare subsistence by cheap wages,
and
classes reduced to a bare profit, the
means the employing
of paying the dividends would vanish; and the
fundholder, now profiting by the general distress of in-
dustry, would be punished for his shortsighted selfish-
ness by the advent of a national bankruptcy.—(Efear,
hear, and applause.) He concluded by repeating that
the whole controversy hinged on the doctrine of employ-
ment, and the problem to be solved was this :—Can trade
be expanded, while money is always limited, and perio-
dically withdrawn, by Act of Parliament? Can free im-
ports give more employment to our working classes than
a protected labour market? Mr. Duncan resumed his
seat amidst the long-continued applause of the meeting.
At the conclusion of each lecture, a vote of thanks was
enthusiastically carried to the eloquent lecturer for his
able lecture; and so effectually had he anticipated all tho
objections to his system, that no question was asked by
any of the several parties present who evidently did not
coincide with some of Mr. Duncan's views.

William Edwards, a cart-owner, examined—Had been
reprimanded for apparent though unintentional disre-
spectful demeanour towards Mr. Ramshay, and was
given into custody, where he wai kept from one till half-
past six o'clock, and then pardoned on an apology.
Cross-examined—The witness admitted that, after
having bean told to stand up and change his deportment,
on the occasion in question (when he was giving evi-
dence), he was walking away, and saying, " I came
hero to speak the truth, and if you won't hear me I
shall go away." He had kept a public-house. He had
fought when ho was put out. He could not say how
often he bad fought. He was getting a great age. Was
forty-seven years old. Had been married since 1829.
The Earl of CARLISLE—Have not you fought since you
were married? Witness—No, my Lord.
John Jones, clerk to Watson and Webster, Liverpool,
offered some evidence similar in character to that which
preceded it, and of which it was remarked by Sergeant
Wilkins that, if taken at all, the parties themselves
should have been called to prove it.
_ _

Messrs. Charles Aldred, Moore, and Baker, Liverpool.
reporters, were examined as to the truth and animus
of various reports by them, which appeared from time to
time in the Lzverpool Mercury and Journal. These they
verified, and asserted to be free from bias.

At the request of Sergeant Wilkins, an adjournmen`
was then granted. The Learned Sergeant not being
prepared to defend this week, and the Noble Earl having
to be out of town next, the hearing was postponed til
Tuesday, the 17th inst.

FREE TRADE-CURRENCY-PRO-

TECTION.
(From the Liverpool Standard.)

On Tuesday and Thursday evening last Mr. Jonathan
Duncan delivered lectures on Free Trade, Currency, and
Protecdon, at the Concert-hall, Lord Nelson-street, whicl)
we never saw filled with more attentive, intelligent, and
respectable audiences. On the first evening, Mr. J. Smith
was in the chair; and although, as a free-trader, guarding
himself against being supposed to agree with the whole
of Mr. Duncan's view, enforced upon the audience the
great importance of the monetary question, which Mr.
Duncan was about to explain. Previously to Mr. Dan •
can's opening the lecture, the audience was briefly ad-
dressed by Mr. Robert Jones, an operative' who declared'
that he, and the working classes generally, had beer,
disappointed in their anticipations of the effects of
free trade; that they had less work, less wages, and had
found themselves less able to procure bread, notwith-
standing its cheapness. He was convinced that the erro-
neous monetary system of the country was the cause.
On Thursday, Mr. Brodribb presided; and at the close
of the lecture expressed himself strongly in favour of
Mr. Duncan's currency. Both lectures were most suc-
cessful, and have created a great sensation amongst the
people of Liverpool.
Mr. DUNCAN commenced by stating that his object in
addressing the merchants, shipowners, tradesmen, and
operatives of Liverpool was to reconcile the antagonism
that now exists between the convicting principles of
Free-trade and Protection; that in his humble judg-
ment both of these rival parties were in error;
and that the error mainly arose from over-
looking the true principles of Money, for it
must be obvious, on the least reflection, that Money
forms one-half of every bargain. Free-trade, as a
principle of commercial action, was partly sound and
partly vicious. It was sound in reference to the several
counties into which Great Britain was divided, since
the inhabitants of Lancashire were under the same
laws and general circumstances as the inhabitants of
Middlesex; but the extension of this principle to inde-
pendent nations, governed by laws peculiar to them-
selves, and whose general circumstances differed from
those of surrounding kingdoms, was vicious.—(Hear,
hear.) There were three special reasons why interna-
tional free trade might prove injurious ; Ist. where
there was a difference of soil and climate ; 2dly, where
there was a difference in the standard of living ;
3dly, where there was a difference of taxation. In regard
to the first of these reasons, it was notorious that the
virgin soils of Russia and America possessed more na-
tural fertility than the soil of England, which had been
worked for centuries; and this difference was admitted
by the Free-traders, who, conscious of the disparity
stated, urged our farmers to study agricultural chemis-
try, and expend large capitals on artificial manure. Now,
a free trade should also be a fair trade; but to be fair,
the competitors ought to be in parity of relation and
circumstances, which is not the case when the
earth, the raw material on which they labour,
is endowed with different degrees of fertility.
In reference to the standard of living, the Rus-
sian'', serf and Polish peasant wore fed on the coarsest
food, meanly clad, and squalidly housed. Therefore
their general subsistence cost their employers very much
less than the farmers of England were in the habit of
paying to their labourers.—(Hear.) Are we then pre-
pared to drag our people down to the low level of Russian
serfs and Polish bondsmen?—(No, no.) Or ought we
not rather as a Christian community to seek to elevate
those oppressed people up to the higher standard
of Englishmen ? In reference to taxation, our na-
tional debt equals in amount the whole national
debt of Europe. There are 220 millions of people
on the continent of Europe; in these islands there are
but 30 millions. The taxation pressure on each of us is
therefore sevenfold as great as it is on each inhabitant of
the continent. Under such circumstances, free-trade
competition is unjust because it is unfair. As, in a race,
any cab-horse in Liverpool could distance the Flying
Dutchman were the latter compelled to carry a ton
weight on his back, so the foreigner, who bears a feather
weight of fiscal burdens, can easily conquer or undersell
the Englishman, whose back is bent to the ground by im-
perial and local imposts. If you insist on free and fair trade,
make the weights equal between the competitors. In the
three cases stated, free trade is the grossest injustice to
our productive classes, and protection becomes the
sacred duty of a paternal government. The prin-
ciple of free trade, thus modified in its practical ac-
tion by the three special circumstances referred
to, leads to this rule :—Admit duty free what we
cannot produce; exclude what we can produce. For
instance, we cannot produce tea, and yet our free trade
legislators impose on its inferior qualities a tax of 300
per cent. ; but oa hats, shoes, gloves, &c., that we can
produce, no duty is levied. If we reversed this policy,
the consumption of tea would be doubled; and,
far from displacing native industry, it would
double employment, in paying for the increased quan-
tity in a proportionate increase of British commodities.
Freights would be doubled, and all the complicated
divisions of industry to carry on this fair and free trade
would be stimulated into productive activity, and re-
ceive a corresponding reward.—(Hear, hear.) But
if you admit articles that we can produce, then fo-
reign industry comes into conflict with native industry,
and deeply aggravates the ruinous competition which
is already grinding labour into the dust. Free-trade
is not a practieal measure, because it does not de-
pond exclusively on the will of the Parliament. We
must secure the assent of foreign Governments, and
these have refused to meet us on terms of reciprocity.
They are eager to sell in oar markets, but they will
not allow us to sell in their markets. The palbable
truth is that we are now mistaking free imports for free
trade. The theory of the Manchester school is to
destroy the plough in England, and the loom in
Europe and the United States. It is proposed that
Cobden and Co. shall become the Moses and Son of the
habitable globe; and for that privelege they offer to
surrender to foreigners our bread and beef markets.
Mr. Dustean quoted some striking passages from
the evidence of Mr. J. D. Hume, in answer to ques-
tions 1,361, 1,364, and 1,393, showing that the object of
the Free-traders was to cut down the wages and reduce
the dietary of the working men of this country to the
continental level; and he also cited from Mr. Mac-
gregor, in answer to question 332, that he would admit
Prussian stockings, " whether that would destroy the
trade of Leicester or Nottingham or not." He then gave
two definitions of cheapness. Much labour for little
money was a form of cheapness, which made the rich
richer, by deprecating wages and necessitating
long hours of toil ; but much money
forfor
little labour was the form of cheapness
which the industrious classes ought to struggle.
It was popularly said that food was
thee neverpri.
pri-
mary object of life, and so it was to the rich.
laboured; but for the great body of the working fw
or classes-
,
the primary object of life was employment,
ment was the mother of wages, withoutpeosstessing which
the working man could neither command food, clothing,
sh o wn that f the
or lodging. Cobbett had long in
quartern loaf were reduced to onsepa '
nny it wouldibe of
e had employment
no advantage to the labourer unless sine
he
by which he could earn the pen
deluded the people by promisingn The League had
them that when free
trade was established, three masters would be running
after one workman.
Experience had practically re-
futed this prediction. But. common sense should have
taught the deluded, that if three masters ran after
ono man, wages must rise, and, with such rise, the
doctrine of cheapness was demolished. For why
are wages paid at all ? Evidently to create
products. But if the products are to bo sold cheap,
how can the employer pay dear for their creation ?
How can he contine to give much money for what
he must sell for little money ? The League had
also promised that free trade would lead to more trade.
But how can you have more trade, unless you have more
monied instruments by which alone more trade can be
carried on? Now Cobden voted with Peel to limit the
amount of money; so that while he promised the end, he
withheld the means. What would be thought of the con-
duct of a body of;railway directors who refused to add to
the number of their carriages, while the number of pas-

Mr. Sergeant WILKINS, at this point, rose to protest
against a contieuanee of this sort of evidence. My
Learned Friends are here to convince your Lordship
that Mr. Ramshay is unfit to discharge the duties of a
judge. His present appearance here surely sets at
nought all that has been, or can be said, of his infirmity,
and I apprehend that common humanity will make your
Lordship refuse to take these topics into your conside-
ration. They are painful and useless; and, after all, if
they are to be admitted, they go to show that Mr. Ram-
slay, labouring under the indisposition under which he
was said to labour, was yet determined at all sacrifices
to do his duty personally, so far as in him lay. But
capable though they be of this construction, these topics
are of such a character that they ought not to be intro-
duced at all.
The Earl of CARLISLE thought there must be some
inquiry on this point, as one of the allegations involved
it; but he agreed with Mr. Sergeant Wilkins that the
witnesses should confine themselves to answering posi-
tive questions, and not volunteer statements on the
subject.
By Mr. WEATELEY—Mr. Ramshay seemed very fret-
ful and peevish, and rather violent than otherwise.
Mr. Sergeant WILKINS—I labour under this immense
disadvantage. I cannot cross-examine these witnesses,
for I have not been furnished beforehand with the
charges which, ou behalf of Mr. Ramshay, I have to
meet. If we had known what they Were to be we might
have had opposing witnesses (present, and I might have
been ready with topics and points of inquiry.
Mr. WHATELEY—The charges would have been fur-
nished if an application for them had been made.
Cross-examined—The witness said he had not had
very many cases in the court. He had only twice been
before Mr. Ramshay at all. Ho had had six eases non-
suited in all.
Mr. John Greco% a solicitor (of Liverpool), was
next examined, and said he had heard Mr. Ramshay
apply to persons appearing before him such epithets as
" Fool," " You might be a fool," " Your conduct is more
like that :of a lunatic than anything else," and in one
case, " You appear to be a fool for thepurpose of covering
your knavery. Both words were used. He also recol-
lected a man of the name of Price, a collector of debts in
Liverpool, coming into court with six or eight cases.
Price's enunciation was not very distinct, so the judge
said to him, " Don't go on mumbling and jumbling there;
what are you talking about?" " What do you say? You
are a mumbling old fellow; what buaieess have you here?
I suppose you aro a hedge lawyer?" The colloquy pro-
ceeded thus:—" Witness—No, sir, I'm not. Judge—
Have you ever appeared here before? Witness—Yes,
sir, for several years; I have a right Judge—l shall
dispute your right; you are a great nuisance, and it is a
practice I will put a stop to. Witness—l look at the
statutory law, and I find it stated that the plaintiff may
appear, or some person for him. Judge—Who are you
to talk about that? You seem to be eating your tongue.
Witness—l am too honourable to be stupid. Judge—
Walk out of court; bailiff, turn him out.". Two other
cases the witness mentioned; in the first of which he
alleged that the judge, in reference to an insufficiency of
evidence, said, " I smell a rat; I don't believe the de-
fendant or her witness;" whilst in the second witness
stated him to have remarked, in reference to the accent
of an Irishman who appeared, " You are an Irishman; I
don't understand Irish; I must swear in an interpreter."
These were all the remarkable words he used in those in-
stances. He recollected a man, a very respectable trades-
man, and his Honour said to him, among other matters,
" You seem to have no more sense than a child of two
years old." Witness was sorry to say that in temper
the judge had seemed " indomitable, capricious, and self-
willed." Witness had never " had any sparring" with
him, except twice, and then it Passed off with the occa-
sion. Witness considered him an excellent nisi prius
lawyer, with an admirable memory. He had never
known, him lose a point in summing up. He had met
every one, and sifted exceedingly complicated cases in a
most extraordinary manner.
Alfred Jacob, accountant and estate agent, examined
by Mr. Whateley, gave evidence of the same character
as that which had preceded it.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant Wilana...s3 stated

John Holbert Joyce, the first witness called, said he
was a general commission agent and collector of accounts
in Liverpool, and had been in the habit of attending the
county court since the appointment of Mr. Ramsbay.
He had remarked that gentleman, and observed that his
deportment was very uncourteous.
Mr. Sergeant Mums—Give instances; you are not
asked for general observations.
Witness—Had heard him call plaintiffs or their wit-
nesses "fools," " idiots," " stupid blockheads," and say,
" you must be drunk, what are you mumbling about?"
That had been frequent. Not on every occasion. He
had called him (witness) an " impertinent, stupid fel-
low." That was in a case of Quigley v. Scott, of which
witness gave the particulars. The plaintiff first went
into the box to prove the sale and delivery of the goods,
and to him the judge said, "You don't understand your
own book-keeping. You can't satisfy me." Witness
then gave his evidence, and though behaving by no
means disrespectfully, but just as on the present occasion,
was termed " an impertinent, stupid fellow." The
plaintiff was nonsuited. In another action the same
plaintiff was nonsuited again, and after that Quigley
would allow witness to take no more cases into court,
preferring to lose his accounts rather than to issue a sum•
mons. He told witness to call upon parties and try to get
the money, bat not again to summon them to the County
Court. Witness recollected the case of Dodseu v. Ec-
cleston. He attended before the county-court judge
with the plaintiff's brother. It was proved by plain-
tiff's brother that the goods had been delivered to the
servant of the defendant. Witness himself proved hav-
ing called a t the residence of the defendant some two
months before, and his having seen the lady of the house,
who promised payment at a given date. The judge on
this ocasion gave the verdict for defendant. He at first
was about to nonsuit the plaintiff, but then immedi-
ately recalled his words, and ordered the clerk to enter
a verdict for the defendant. The judge said something
of the plaintiff's brother, but witness forgot the words.
In another case cited by witness, Moss v. Hughes, he
had attended at the County Court on behalf of the plain-
tiff and accompanied by plaintiff's clerk, who brought
the day-book and the ledger, first to prove the receiving
of the orders • and secondly, to show that they were
taken from defendant, defendant's wife, or defendant's
servant. Witness proved an admission by defendant
of his liability, and his having made various arrange-
ments to pay by two- instalments, 4/. 9s. Id, being the
whole amount. He having given that evidence, and
plaintiff's brother having given his, the judge nonsuited
them, and called the plaintiff's clerk, an aged man, a
member of the Society of Friends, " a stupid, mumbling,
old blockhead." The defendant did not appear, nor
any person from him; but he called afterwards at plain-
tiff's shop and paid the amount. Witness had since had
many cases from Moss, who had instructed him to exert
himself as much as he could to recover the accounts
without proceedings, but if they were large, and not
otherwise to be obtained, to issue a writ in the Borough
Court. Moss said that witness should not go into the
County Court, for he could not depend upon the decisions
of the judge. The witness was proceeding to give evi-
dence as to similar instructions which, as he alleged, he
had received from various other tradespeople, when
Mr. Sergeant Mums asked whether a man was to
be allowed give evidence for some eight or ten people,

nation, as well as the logic of facts and experience, by
which he expounds and defends it. Although it
is beside our present purpose to enter for
ourselves upon a currency discussion, yet it is
no more than a fitting mark of respect to Mr.
Duncan, and the shool so presided over, of which he is
no unworthy member, that we should endeavour to
make the public more extensively acquainted with the
tenets of his belief, and of the means or combinations
by which he would practically develope them. We
proceed to state, therefore, that, in the first place, he
entirely repudiates gold as a standard of value, and by
consequence silver also, equally with any other metal
or commodity. In effect he refuses to recognise the
possibility of any standard whatever.
" The popular belief was," said he, " that- we had got
a standard of value, but he would undertake to prove
that this was a perfect fiction. In the first place, it
was important to separate in the mind the idea of
standard from the idea of measure, for these two terms
were constantly confounded by writers on political eco-
nomy, except by those who belonged, as he did, to Mr.
Taylor's school. Re was the first writer who had accu-
rately distinguished between standard and measure.
All standards were fixed in nature, and were eternal as
the God of nature; but all measures were fixed by men,
end they were so arranged as to bring the virtues of
standard most efficiently into service. For instance, the
e r
c diurnaleived
revolution
tile sslightest
toe
a fthfreaceatirotnhalaaroltuenradtioitns. A
axiss,taaniiddairtds
annual revolution round the sun, were true indexes of
time; they were unerring, and astronomers had never
p
must be immutable; if it were not so it ceased to be a
standard; but ho should show in a subsequent portion
of his lecture that our standard of our value of money
was a weathercock which veered round with every
wind."

We presume there can be no question that, so far as
for value, there cen be no real unerring standard disco-
verable by theingenuity of man, for all values, that is,
commodities possessing the quality of intrinsic value, are
necessarily arbitrary and fluctuating in their relations
with each other from day to day, and neither gold nor
silver differ in this respect frum any other commodity.
In linear measure, and measures of capacity and weight,
we may arrive at the solution of a standard appreciable
by any one, but although in connexion with, it is deter-
minate of no fixed or especial rates of value. The bushel
of wheat may obtain only 55. to-day, whilst to-morrow
it might command 103. Mr. Duncan proposes to super.
sede a metallic etandard of value purely of fictitious
pretence, since it has been found to vary from 10 to 20
per cent., by " an instrument iretriasically valueless,', by
which only "we could keep the relative value of all
other commodities in parallel." This instrument is, of
equal
ue
ah
le ur
rates
ewshoaft
pricei is
up
er odcee
course, paper money. We profess not exactly to emu-
value of all other commodities in parallel." Th. e
paper instrument being "intrinsically valueless," is,
of course, not a commodity, strictly to speak, and there-
fore " other" must be taken as a mere verbal escape. If
be told what aro the relative values of commodities to
each other, which opens the wide field for debate of de-
mand and supply, production and consumption. We
infer, however, that with credit or paper money unfet-
tered by capricious standard and bank laws, Mr. Duncan
we have yet to
would merely. contend that the paper-money agent, or
intermediary for
.operating or measuring exchanges,
rising with the legitimate demand, and descending pro-
portionally when not so much called for, but always and
at all times easy of access, upon moderate equitable con-
ditions, to all possessed of the
.nFeessary guarantees,
whether of securities, or the position and character of
parties, would tend to prevent the undue depression of
prices, and in so far to conserve a certain degree of
parity of relationship between the values of all commo-
dities. That such would be the effect of a paper-money
system judiciously founded upon solid property, or. upon
a natiol.3l consideration equivalent, or by a combination
of both, is, we think, far trcm improbable. And this
brings us to the scheme by which Mr. Duncan proposes
to carry out these desirable objects, based, as it will be
seen, upon conditions of undeniable safety and conve-
nience.— understood, 000fdkepingthe" re-
lative

"He proposed that the money of;the State, the na-
tional money, should be issued under the control and by
the advice of Parliament, and that it should be limited to
the annual amount of taxation; whether that tax was 40
50, or 60 millions sterling, such should be the quantity
of national State money—based not only upon the nar-
row margin of gold. that was in this country, but based
upon the 6,000 millions of real property, which statisti-
cians tell us is the aggregate wealth of this country.
Therefore the 60 millions of taxation would have no
insufficiency of security, nor could the money ever de-
precate, since it was an express condition that it should
always be limited to the amount of taxes voted by Par..
liament; nor could it ever depreciate from any other
circumstance, inasmuch as the Crown would be obliged
to take it back at the same price at which it had been
issued.—(Hear, hear.) Then as to the money of com-
merce, he proposed the security of banks which should
be incorporated, the proprietors having given to Govern-
ment a tangible and convertible security in case the bank
should fail."

The security for the issue of the commercial paper
money would consist of the deposit of Consols, or other
State or State-secured stocks, as in the case of the New
York banks ; against which the incorporated
banks should be authorized to issue for three-
fourths of the value. Any proposed increase of
issues subsequently to be preliminary covered in
the same proportion. With this sketch of Mr. Dunoaz's
plan or theory we conclude for the present. At a more
convenient season we may be able to enter more into
detail, and exhibit the mischievous workings of oar pre-
sent currency laws, as he also has forcibly described
them. In the meantime we may observe that it is a
singular anomaly in our legislation, that we have, or
must have, free trade in anything but money or credit.
We haveia fixed price—the only fixture of price existing
—for gold, and we have also restrictive laws for paper-
money. But iniquitous laws carry the seeds of their
own contravention or cure in them. Thus, if we cannot
have a circulating paper-money payable on demand, be-
yond a certain fixed amount, in the shape of bank-notes,
we may, and actually have, a bank-cheque circulation
so payable, and that circulation is on the increase both
in town and country. It amounts to many millions al-
ready; it will reach tens of millions more; it possesses
all the facilities of the bank-note in passing from hand
to hand, is returned no sooner for payment to the banks
upon which drawn, and, in despite of the law , is be.
coming the common form of remittance between places
hundreds of miles apart.

BOOKS, i.c.,
_TO
_CANADA AND TUE

lONIAN ISLANDS.

GENERAL POST-OFFICE, JUNE, 113511—The Lords of
her Majesty's Treasury having authorised by warrant,
the extension to Canada and the lonian Islands of the
reduced rates of postage and the regulations recently
established for books transmitted by the post to the
British Colonies in the West Indies, &c., in future. all
printed books, magazines, reviews, and
pamphlets (whe-
ther British, colonial, or foreign), may be sent by post
between the United Kingdom and Canada or the lonian
Islands, at the following reduced rates of post-
age; viz. :—For a: d.
Each packet not exceeding ilb. in weight 0 6
Ditto exceeding --lb. and not exceeding
Ditto exceeding 11b. and not exceeding
pound or
31b. 3 o
21b.11b. 2
1 c,
o
And so Ditto exceeding
eoditions be
increasingexceeding 2118 b..
foran doynoorty
additional
fraction of a pound.
carefully observed :
1. Every such Provided, however, that the following n
packet must bo sent without a corer,
or in a cover open at the ends or sides.
2. It must contain a single volume only (whether
book, magazine, review, or pamphlet), the
printed ,se-
veral sheets or parts thereof, when there are more than
one, being sewed or bound together.
3. It must not exceed ,two feet is length, breadth,
width, or depth.
4. It must have no writing or marks upon the cover
or its contents, except the name and addraEs .f the per-
son to whom it may be sent.

5. The postage must be prepaid in full by affixing
outside the packet or its cover the proper number of
stamps.
If any of the above conditions be violated the packet
must be charged as a letter, and treated as such in, all
respects.
To prevent any obstacles to the regular transmission
of letters, any officer of the Post-office may delay the
transmission of any such packet for a time not exceeding
twenty-four hours from the time at which the sawn
would otherwise have been forwarded by him.
As no book may be sent by any route which would
entail an expense of transit postage on the department,
these to
these regulations apply, in respect to Cansda,ulvia
books, &c., sent by the British contract packets
Halifax, and in respect to the lonian Islands, only to
books, &c., sent via Southampton.
The above instructions are not to extend to or inter-
fere with the transmission of printed votes and proceed-
ings of Parliament, or of printed papers allosville:f w
to
which
by the post under the newspaper privilege,
tng
regulations.
will continue to be subject to the exis

GREAT ExHLEITION....WATERIPIG THR ELM TRIES.
—lt having been officially determined 011 Tuesday to water
borrowed, its
the elm trees in the north-western department, which were
so sadly drooping for want of moisture, the carriages be-
pbeyrtagublteta fire,
per &ch ca.
leadingengine pip
be-
neath were quicklyd
wheeled on one side, one of
effeewtater. It was worked without
high, were thoroughly satu-
rated w
rveesreyrvfoori
rcisbtlaen
stand
filsmallfilled
es from the
main, and in less than a quarter of an hour every leaf, twig,
raantdbraiae' some
t
any mercy by two of the Fire Brigade, who have shown a
several over
barrels 5 0
great preference for these engines; another guiding its jet
pipe, at the end of a small copper riveted hose from the top
causing much attraction to the visitors
galleries, and at the same time very
orstur step-ladder,rouing
plainly showing there is no danger of a fire spreading to any
very alarming extent there, every part liable to such a ionf athshe
con-
tingency being so easily accessible. In the dead of the night
a single police or fireman can seize one of these engines with
one hand, carry a bucket of water with the other, and with-
out any help get up a stream of water 45 feet high, or to a
distance of GO feet, with unerring aim. ..
[ADVERTISEMENT.]—Holloway's Pills, an effectual
Cure for Dropsy.—Extract of a letter from Mr. W. Tomlin_
son, of Bangor, dated May I. 1851' 1, To Professor Hollo-
way. Sir,--For several years I was severely afflicted with
dropsy; at times my feet and legs were so much swollen that I
was quite unable to walk. I consulted many doctors, and tried
remedy after remedy with hopes of obtaining relief, but I was
disappointed in all until I tried your invaluable pills,
which I gatefully acknowledge have been the sole means of
effecting a cure of ray complaint, and I am now in the enjoy-
ment of excellent health.—Sold by all Druggists, and at Pro-
fessor Holloway's Establishment, 244, Strand, London.
THE EXETER SYNOD.—The Bishop of Exeter has
determined that the representatives of the metropolitan and
provincial
press shall not be admitted to report the pro-
ceedingsthe forthcoming •
of ng diocesan synod in the Cathedral
Church of 'Exeter. An application having been made to
the Eight Rev. Prelate, his Lordship has returned An anaitat
i to that effect.

(From the Morning Herald.)
We learn from the reporting columns of our
able contemporary, the Liverpool Standard, that
Mr. Jonathan Duncan, a gentleman of repute for
his labours on questions of currency, has been
delivering lectures, which have attracted no small
degree of attention, in exposition of his peculiar
views on the same subject, before respectable assem-
blages of the most experienced and enlightened members
of the mercantile community of that great city. When
we say his peculiar views, however, we are underrating
the importance of the school to which avowedly be be-
longs,:and of a class of writers and reasoners throughout
the country who concur on the general principle with
him, and who are establishing a position in public opinion
which is daily adding to the number of their proselytes
and the weight of their influence. The school, as Mr.
Duncan informs us, is that of Mr. John Taylor of this
metropolis—a name well known for his labours in the
especial branch of economical science, and not less re-
spected than known even amongst those who may most
differ with the faith he holds, and the piss of ratiooi-