The Sun.
London, England, 1833-05-09 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The proceedings of last night, in the House
of Commons, furnish a curious contrast in the
way of dealing with the public money. On the
presentation of a petition from the watermen of
Gravesend, against the Gravesend Pier Bill, Sir
Edward Codrington alluded to the hard case of
sailors who had been impressed, and passed the
best part of their lives in the navy, many of
them being disabled, and dismissed without
pensions. " One man (said Sir Edward),
having come home with him (Sir E. C.) after
the battle of Navarin, with the loss of an eye,
applied to him for remuneratien ; but, on his ap-
plying to the Admiralty, he was told that the man
who had lost but one eye was not disabled from
service, although he had always understood that
the loss of an eye entitled a man to compensation
as much as the loss of a limb. After that the man
lost the other eye, having also had six wounds ;
and the only reward he could obtain for the poor
fellow was 6d. a day. If that was the way the
Admiralty remunerated disabled seamen, he
thought it was time to inquire into all other
classes of pensions.—(Hear, hear.) If the
country was so poor that it could not afford to
reward such men, let the same course be adopted
with regard to all other persons, and he (Sir E.
Codrington) would, for one, if necessary, serve
is country for nothing." An inquiry of the
kind wished for by Sir Edward Codrington oc-
curred in the course of the evening. Mr. Hume
brought before the House the case of a father
anti on, each of them pensioned by the Govern-
Went. Alexander, Earl of Home, the father,
Lord Lieutenant of the county of Berwick, has,
since the year 1792, been in the receipt of
2761. for no services known to any one. He
is uncle, we believe, of the Duke of Buccleuch,
who has the merit of possessing the largest estate
in land in the island, an estate' yielding consi-
derably upwards of 200,0001. a year, free from
all incumbrances. The son of Earl Home,
Lord Dunglass, did serve the country for the
brief period of a year or two under the Duke
of Wellington's Administration as an Under
Foreign Secretary. He so far differs from his
flither, that he has drawn a year's salary, and
subscribed his name to a few papers, whereas
his father is guiltless of any services whatever.
" Happening (said Mr. Hume), in a Com-
tnittee up stairs, to make an inquiry as to the
disbursements paid out of the Scotch Exche-
quer, he found out what struck him exceed-
ingly. It was the sum of 3001. paid to Lord Dun-
glass as Chamberlain of Ettrick Forest. This
sinecure was dated from before the Union, and
was originally 81. 10s. Scotch money (14s. 2d.
sterling). In a Committee of Inquiry on Sine-
cures and Pensions, held in the year 1810, a
resolution was passed relative to this identical
pension. Now what he complained of was, that
after that resolution the sinecure should be re-
newed." The Lord Advocate declared it as his
opinion that the grant was illegal, and thought it
certainly extraordinary that a salary of 3001.
should be given for collecting rents amounting
to 2301. This is an improvement on the prac-
tice of the Catholic church. The clergy origi-
nally received money front their flocks only in
the character of collectors for the poor. By de-
grees, however, they began, like the collectors,
to take a per tentage, and it is remained by a
distinguished ecclesiastical historian, that the ex-
pense of collections was, ere long, raised to 95 per
cent. But the Scotch Lord's fees as collec-
tor is 1301. per cent. But then how could
the son of a Lord Lieutenant, the near re-
lative of the Duke of Buccleuch, conde-
scend to receive a smaller sum than 300/. ?
If the aristocracy of this country wish to retain
their influence, they must abandon the disgrace-
ful modes of pocketing the public money. The
poor blind sailor, with six wounds, can only
obtain 6d. a day ; but a Lord and his son can,
between them, obtain 6001. a year for nothing.
Can we wonder that the poor householder, ha-
rassed to death with surcharges, and whose bed
is taken from under him for assessed taxes,
should feel incensed at exposures like these ?
It is remarked by Niebuhr, the historian of
Rome, that the aristocracy of Berne, during
the long period of upwards of three hundred
years, never made their power subservient to the
enriching of themselves. At the commencement
of the French Revolution the people were un-
taxed, and the Government had saved a large
sum of money, which was in the English funds.
He remarks, that the moment an aristocracy
anew selfishness to obtain an ascendancy over
them —the moment they avail themselves of
their power to invade the property of the people,
their power is undermined. What a contrast
between the Berne and the British aristocracy
Political power in this country seems only to
have been valued as it enabled the possessors to
obtain pelf. Everything was sacrificed for
money ; and are we to wonder that in England
the rage for acquisition should not be always
content with legitimate means ? When the
lower orders. see Lords pocketing the public
money without performing any services for it, is
not the example calculated to shake their prin-
ciples ? The clergy tell us, that the example
of the great operates powerfully on their infe-
riors ; and their example in money matters is as
likely to be followed as in other cases. Mr.
Hume was at pains to show, by examples, the
heavy load which sinecures and pensions brought
on the Country in the course of years. His
examples were these :

" The two Chief Justices in Eyre, sinecures before the
year 1691, have received, as stated in the returns, 4 5661.
a year every year since that time ; and, by a calculation
made in 1829 (being fur 126 years), the principal sum
and interest amounted to 46 millions within 100,0001.
The calculation was made at 5 per cent. interest on the
half-yearly payments, and he believed it was quite correct.
" The other example was that of Alexander, Earl of
Home, who had, by the Scotch pension list on the table,
276/. 101. since the year 1791, being forty-one years,
which, at five per cent. interest, and payments halt
yearly, the public have paid fir the said Earl Home
36,360/., and it remained to be seen for what service.
lie stated those instances to show the absolute necessity of
putting an end to pensions altogether, as the amount gra-
dually accumulated, and contributed mainly to distress the
country.

" The public are paying, as they have been paying,
interest on their debt, and the pa) went of those, and other
pensions and sinecures, prevents the liquidation of an equal
amount of the debt."
Exposure must shame the aristocracy out of
these disreputable modes of obtaining money.
The times are changed. Reform in Parliament
has put an end to the safe indulgence in such
practices.— Morning Chronicle.
It has always appeared to us most unfortu-
nate that Ministers should have acted the awk-
ward part they have done in relation to Irish
Church reform. We use the word " awkward"
as the best adapted to express the unworkman-
like manner in which they have proceeded,
whether as statesmen, looking to the general
interest, or as leaders of a party, feeling their
own reputation and power to be staked upon the
skilful conduct of their avowed policy. From
the time when it was first declared by a Parlia-
mentary Committee, and confirmed by a Royal

speech, that sotre other means of maintaining
the clergy than the tithe system must be adopted,
it became clear to every man that if the Minis-
ters understood aught about the state of Ireland,
or the sources of their own popularity, the
abolition of tithe and the substitution of a less
obnoxious and more equitable scheme of church
finance must be the most earnest object of their
legislative efforts. But what was their course ?
Mr. Stanley's first Bill in relation to the Church of
Ireland was a Bill prima' facieto perpetuate tithe!
The Right Hon. Gentleman took all the pains in
the world to show that the real purpose of the Go-
vernment, whatever might be its professions, was
to give universality and endurance to the Tithe
Composition Act, an Act of which one well-
known aim was, instead of getting rid of tithe,
to secure and facilitate its collection by the cler-
gyman, and to root the tithe system more deeply
than ever in the soil. What, then, was the next
indication of the designs of Ministers on the
subject of Irish church reform ? It was this :
Lord Althorp last month introduced to the
House of Commons " A Bill to alter and amend
the Laws relating to the Temporalities of the
Church of Ireland." Now, here was a topic
which involved the maintenance or abolition of
the tithe system, if anything ever did ; and here
was a measure which all England would say
ought to be taken as the test of what Ministers
in their hearts projected for or against the insti-
tution of tithe, and the progress or stagnation of
church reform in its most vital characteristic.
Yet read the preamble of that " Alteration and
Amendment Bill." Many things are therein
talked of,—nay, almost everything in the nature
of ecclesiastical grievance or oppression is de-
clared against, save only tithe itself, which is never
so much as glanced at ! The preamble, too, is
carefully and dexterously drawn up—nothing can
be neater. First fruits, vestry cess, Bishops and
Bishops' leases, all the minor, all the subaltern,
all the secondary annoyances attending the church
of Ireland, are to be found in the Althorp cata-
logue, with the exception of that, and that alone,
Which must settle the question of church or no
church, property or no property, in Ireland—of
civil war or civil forbearance between the two
religious powers in that country—except that
single grievance which King, Ministers, and Par-
liament had all pledged themselves, in the most
explicit language, and on occasions almost recent,
to redress. This we do not by any means allege
to be unprincipled ; there is in it no meditation
of dishonesty, no dream of even equivocation.
We firmly believe that Lord Grey's Government
his the most upright and straightforward views,--
that when they say tithe ought to be abolished,
they have an anxious desire to put an end to it.
But if this be the true supposition, if Mini-
sters really mean to annihilate that unlucky
expedient 'for the support of the Irish clergy,
they are certainly, and in the same proportion,
and for that very reason, too, beyond all ques-
tion, the clumsiest or most eccentric artisans that
ever knocked their own brains out against a
building which they had undertaken to renovate.
Why not say, like men of the least prudence,
We are ready to make good our promises,
and to abolish tithe at once ; ' or, like bold men,
avow at once that thly have decided against the
fulfilment of their pledges, and will make tithe
(by Act of Parliament) immortal ? It is melan-
choly for the friends of the Administration to find

no weapon but bubble words to fight against the
definite and recorded actions of their principals.
Their enemies take the natural advantage of all
qiis, and represent them to the country as bi-
goted to the church, and no better, in fact, than
go many Tories, in all that relates to the spirit
and substance of ecclesiastical reform. We have
received letters which prove the fact, viz., that
Ministers have furnished a sword against their
own bosoms, far sharper and more fatal than any
in the armoury of their declared antagonists,
by thus putting off, we need not say the exe-
cution, but so much as the development
Of their long protracted measures for the
final abolition of tithes. Mr. Mills, who has
already corresponded with this journal, sends us a
letter addressed to Earl Grey, with the taunting
challenge which we have noticed above, calling
upon the Noble Earl to point out a single line
of the Act before Parliament for adjusting the
" temporalities" of the Irish church, wherein
the slightest allusion is made to the termination
of tithe, or even to its existence. And is there
veritably nothing more in preparation ? If
otherwise, why not speak the important word,
and quiet the whole anti-tithe, though not anti•
church, community ? We publish Mr. Mills's
letter, as likewise one from another correspon-
dent, expatiating on an abuse well known to
Members of Parliament—namely, the irrespon-
sible power of the Speaker in first selecting for
chaplain to the House of Commons any clergy-
man who may hit his fancy, without the least re-
ference to professional merits ; and then, in
every instance, availing himself of the prescrip-
tive courtesy of the House, to get the said chap-
lain provided for, as if he had been a minister
of the highest claims to reward. This, we think,
demands, on the part of the Speaker or of the
House, a little more circumspection.—Times.
The fact which was stated by Sir Edward
Codrington in the House of Commons yester-
day, connected with the ticklish subject of pen-
sions, and the inference which he drew from it,
cannot fail to make some impression on the
public mind. It is true that the public feel
pretty sensibly already the abuses of the pension
list, but the illustration of Sir E. Codrington
i still worth something, though it formed a
sort of accidental and irregular episode to the
Main subject of the Gravesend Pier Bill. We
tike the fact and the comment from our report
Of this day, which runs as follows :—" One
Man, after coming with him (Sir E. Cocking-
am) from the battle of Navarin, with the loss
of an eye, applied to him for remuneration ;
but on his applying to the Admiralty, he was
told that the man who had lost but an eye was
riot disabled from service. After that the man
lost the other eye, having also had six wounds,
Tid the only reward he could obtain for the

poor fellow, was sixpence a day. If that was
the way the Admiralty remunerated disabled
seamen, he thought it was time to inquire into
all other classes of pensions." How the same
Ministers, who felt it their duty to refuse more
than sixpence a day to a man who had
lost his sight, and received half a dozen
wounds, could reconcile it to their minds to
continue naval and military sinecures, and
the disgraceful burden of the pension list,
it is not easy to conceive. The inconsis-
tency of such conduct must have occurred to
them ; but they do not seem to have appreciated
the importance of avoiding that inconsistency.
It is their persistence in errors of this kind,
their unblushing defence of some of the worst
teatures of Tory mis-government, which they
once deprecated as loudly as they defend them
now, and not the mere tardiness of their ad-
vance towards an improved system, that has
affected their popularity, and even threatened

their political existence with extinction. We
see, however, what rigid economists they can
prove upon occasion. If the Gallant Admiral
who has put the public in possession of the fact
to which we have been alluding, will set about
overhauling the pensions and sinecures, and the
claims of those who possess them, we can pro-
mise him that he will not be without support.
The public are indignant at the profuse, yet
partial distribution of their funds, created, it
may be, by former Governments, but con-
tinued by the present under circumstances
which increase their responsibility. A re-
formed Parliament has, at all events, deli-
vered Ministers from the inept* of the borough
patrons, who were the patrons of every thing ex-
travagant and corrupt. Ministers have therefore
the power, and are wanting only in the will, to
introduce a real, not a mock economy—not an
economy which would save in one place, for
the purpose of spending in another, and that
other the very place to which saving ought to
be most scrupulously applied. But, however
Sir E. Codrington may determine, we are confi-
dent that the public will not lose sight of the
subject. It would be rather a romantic specu-
lation to expect that our great pensioners and
sinecurists would blush to receive their incomes
for doing and deserving nothing, when they are
told how little can be afforded for the loss of
sight, and the reception of accumulated wounds.
But it may be hoped that their knowledge of
that circumstance, and of the parsimony to which
the country is driven, will reconcile them more
easily to that visit of reform which no Ministry
can long protect them against. Surely if we
cannot afford our poor disabled seamen more
than 6d. a day to keep them from starving, we
cannot afford thousands and tens of thousands a
year to noblemen and gentlemen, and ladies (who
have done as much as either), to enable them to
ride over us in the streets.—Morning Herald.
There were three meetings, we believe, held
last night for the purpose of whitewashing Sir
John Cam Hobhouse ; and at all of which he
was present, to declare that his retirement from
office was final and definitive ; but what is the
use of this after-repentance ? Did he not pledge
himself to abide 'by his constituents, and did he
not desert them ? However, Westminster has
long been a rotten borough, and however its
decision against him, at present, might
count for something, its decision in his favour
will go for nothing, either in behalf of the Go-
vernment or with the country. Twenty years
ago Sir John Cam Hobhouse spoke a very dif-
ferent language from that to which he now gives
utterance ; but then he had not been in office ;
he had not tasted its sweets ; 'and what is more,
the times are altered ! Heigh oh, Sir John
!
Morning Advertiser.
One of the largest meetings of the committee
of West India planters and merchants which
ever took place was yesterday assembled at the
Thatched House, their own committee-room
not being large enough for the numerous attend-
ance of members. It was convened to hear the
communication of the proposed measures of
Government on the West India question. To
the extreme dissatisfaction and surprise of all
who were present they were informed by the de-
putation that the Government had not yet pro-
duced its scheme, and that they had nothing to
communicate ; that they had expected to receive
it on Friday, and had called a meeting for last
Saturday, but they were disappointed ; that, ex-
pecting to receive it on Tuesday, they had
adjourned the meeting till yesterday ; that they
entertained this expectation until they received a
letter late on Tuesday night acquainting them that
the plan was not then ready ; finally, that Mr.
Stanley wished to see the deputation on Thurs-
day, and suggested the adjournment of the
meeting until Saturday. A very long discus-
sion took place, in which Lord Harewood, Sir
A. Grant, Mr. Burge, Mr. Carrington, Mr.
Irving, and others engaged. Several resolutions
were adopted, one of which was that an appli-
cation should be made by the Chairman,
Viscount St. Vincent, to Mr. Stanley, for the
postponement of his motion on the West India
question, which is at present fixed for Tuesday
next, that the West India body may know and
have the means of considering his plan. It is
quite impossible such an application can be re-
sisted. To this hour, we are informed, the West

India body are entirely unacquainted with the
nature of the plan, no communication having
been made to any of them. The deputation was
appointed with the limited authority to receive
any communication, but it was precluded from
doing any thing which could bind the West
Indian body. The latter refused to delegate
to it any such power as that of concluding
any thing on behalf of the West Indian
proprietors resident in England ; and still
less was it empowered to determine any
question on behalf of the proprietors re-
sident in the colonies, or of the local Legis-
latures by whom they are represented. The
measure, therefore, whenever it may be com-
municated by the Government, has, according
to the clear understanding of all parties, to un-
dergo the examination and discussion of the
proprietors here, as well as of the agents of
those who are resident in the West Indies, be-
fore it can be submitted to Parliament. The
examination and discussion of such a plan, on
such a subject, involving such interests, between
Saturday and Tuesday, would manifestly be im-
possible. It was not thought expedient to sanc-
tion a longer adjournment of the meeting of the
West India body than until Friday next. We
shall submit to-morrow some observations upon
the extraordinary state in which this important
question is suffered to rest, and upon the mon-
strous duplicity with which the Ministers have
defrauded the West Indian proprietors of the
poor boon which tyranny can so easily afford to
helplessness—a fair hearing.—Morning Post.

A few nights ago a young woman named
BANTAM JoicE, returning from Logbrea to her residence
near New Inn, County of Galway, was met by some
savages, who abused her person and smothered her in a
pool of water scarcely six inches deep.

" There is, at all times, great interest in works
on India. The external features of the country alone,
its magnificent scenery, the strange habits of its people,
~,,,i
~
their singular worship, diversifi d sturne, and the va-
rieties which their imperfect inc rpo tion with Europeans
produce, are full of excitein
ceeds, he accumulates pi ur que sketches in abundance;
ts. A the traveller pro-
his accounts of all that e messes are replete with
grandeur, and relieved b endless changes. We have,
particularly in Major ARCHER'S ' Tours in Upper In-
dia,' just published, gorgeous processions, and luxuries
in lavish profusion; gigantic monuments of ancient splen•
dour, snatches of unt smell nature, combats of wild ani-
mals, tiger shooting, elephant hunting, dancing priests,
singing girls, pilgrims, towns its ruins, and costly palaces
springing up in vast and remote deserts. The grouping
of these highly contrasted materials makes up a picture,
to which no other country can furnish a parallel. But,
interesting as such pictures are at all seasons, they are
still more so at a period when every fraction of informa-
tion concerning India is seized upon with increased avi-
dity, in consequence of the position of importance which
her affairs have assumed. These volumes will be found
to contribute largely to the stock of popular knowledge
on the eubject."~Attlas.