The Sun.
London, England, 1833-05-30 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The debate on the Ministerial plan for the
abolition of colonial slavery, which comes on in
the House of Commons to-night, will be marked,
we hope, by that moderation of temper and lan-
guage,—by that abstinence from all unnecessary
topics of irritation,—and by those zealous ex-
pressions of a desire to effect an amicable com-
promise between contending claims, which the
direct and permanent interests of the mother
country, of the colonists, of the slaves, and, in
short, of all parties, counsel not less imperatively
than the obvious dangers of unreasonable oppo-
sition or obstinate disunion. The West India
body ought to see that the Government can have
no conceivable interest in plundering the planters
to make vagrants of the slave; and the zealous
abolitionists ought to admit that if compulsory
labour is still to be exacted for several years to
come, consistently with the establishment of all
the other rights of citizens in the coloured la-
bourers, it is only because there seems no other
way of reconciling the effects of past slavery on
the character of the negro with the necessity of
securing his future industry, or of providing for
the continued cultivation of the colonies, by
which the negro race will ultimately profit pro-
bably as much as their present masters. Nothing
is so much to be deprecated as extreme proposi-
tions or demands on either side, as nothing is fur-
ther from the reach of abstract principles than the
present complicated condition of our colonial
society. Had there been merely the serf and
his landlord,—the proprietor of the soil and the
slave who tills it for a portion of its produce, as
in the north of Europe,—the task of emanci-
pation would have been easy and safe. The
master would only have had to resign certain
rights, perhaps useless, perhaps noxious—and
the chief attack would have been upon his power
or his pride. His estate must have been cul-
tivated by the same hands,—the culture must
have been pursued in the same manner, and the
same kind of produce must have been brought to
market after, as before, the emancipation. The
industry of the population would not therefore
have been altered in kind, or endangered in
amount, by the change of tenure in those who
had hitherto reaped its fruits. But the precipi-
tate West India abolitionists ought to consider
that the social apparatus for industry in our
colonies is perfectly different,—and that there
is not the same security for its efficiency under a
change of circumstances. We have transplanted
the sugar-cane from the shores of Asia to the
West Indies, and have ransacked the coast of
Africa for kbourers to prepare the soil for its
reception, or to carry on the manufacture of its
produce for the European market. Nei-
ther the African negro nor the sugar-cane
would have been in such abundance where
we now find them, except by the capital and
enterprise of English planters ; and as the
labour of our colonies has hitherto been stimu-
lated by the cart-whip, the colonists ought to find
some excuse in the eyes of the abolitionists when
they doubt whether the same quantity of labour
can be obtained, and the same quantity of pro-
duce 9f the seine kind prepared, under a system
of free industry as under a state of unmitigated
slavery. In a climate and on a soil where, as
we are told, thirty-five or forty days' exertion in
cultivating a plot of ground is sufficient to main-
tain a family, and where the planters can boast of
their liberal treatment of their bondsmen, if they
advance them, in European manufactures, pro-
visions, or medicines, at the rate of 40s. or 50s.
a-year, it is easy to see that a manumitted negro
'night be able to gratify all his present wants (if
set entirely free before he had acquired habits of
providence, or a desire for additional comforts),
and to secure all his necessary conveniences
without troubling himself by digging cane-holes,
or toiling at the boilers in the sugar-house, to

the same extent as at present. Hence, the abo-
litionists ought to reconcile their minds to the
idea of some intermediate probation between the
degradation of absolute slavery and the enjoy-
ment of unconditional freedom. It must be per-
fectly evident to all, that the experiment, though
it is inevitable—though it is desirable—and
though we hope that it %ill be ultimately successful,
is not entirely free from doubt or embarrassment to
tome of our colonial interests, as at present under-
stood. The same quantity of sugar, of rum, or of
coffee, might not be prepared fur the European mar-
ket—the same quantity of European goods
might not be consumed in the colonios, or the
same quantity of shipping might not be employed
in carrying on the trade between them after
emancipation, as at present, though a negro free
peasantry might grow up in our West India
islands happier and more comfortable than the
gangs now on our West India plantations. To
that amount the abolitionists ought either to
concede the right of compensation, or to show
that time planters would derive no disadvantage
from the change. On the other hand, the
West Indians must abandon their usual topics of
declamation and excitement, and come to posi-
tive terms of reasonable compromise. As
against the poor slaves whom they have hitherto
kept under the lash, more for our benefit, they
allege, than for their own, they admit that they
have no claim. They therefore must allow that
freedom is their natural right, as they now de-
clare that only the compulsion of the British

Government, .or the force of British Acts of Par-

liarnent, would have induced them to become
fie owners of such " property." Their only
recourse, therefore, is to British justice for
compensation, should they be able to esta-
blish the fact of a specific injury from the
emancipation, under proper restrictions, of their
slaves, or, in their own language, from a legisla-
lative interference with their rights of " property
in their fellow-men." Some of the partisans of
the late meeting at the City of London Tavern, we
are told, have taken it into their heads that we
yesterday denied their right of property in slaves
because we did not consider that right to be pre-
cisely on the same footing as the right of the
hindholder to his dividend at the Bank, and be-
cause we expressed no apprehension that all the
titles to land, houses, or funds in this country
would be endangered or nullified by a decree
restoring to 800,000 of our fellow-creatures a
p in of those 'privileges of which it was a mon-
strous crime to deprive them. They have even
sent us a list of the statutes or Acts of Parlia-
ment recognising negro slavery, or encouraging
the slave trade. They need nut have put them-
selves to that trouble, as we were perfectly aware
of the fact, and hate in all our retnarks steadily
kept it in view ; but they ought to recollect that
there are different kinds of right, and that the
State deals differently with different sorts of pro-
perty. The slave trade, which was at no remote
period encouraged by our laws, is now declared
by the same laws a capital offence, and property
in slaves which is recognised e't of the Atlantic,
is totally abrogated on reachiog the shores of
England. Nay, in dealing with the relation
of master and slave we have interfered in a
manner totally different from the regulation of

any other kind of property. We have ordered
registries of slaves to be kept, we have prevented
the transportation of slaves from one island to
another, we have appointed slave protectors,
independent of the planters, or compelled the
planters themselves to establish the mockery of
rotecting councils, we have directed the time
of slave working, the reception of slave evidence,
and, in short, have interfered with the rights of
this kind of " property" in a way that we never
did with the English estates and funds to which
Mr. Palmer alluded, and for the apprehended
danger of which he evinced such a theatrical
horror. Notwithstanding these considerations,

and many others to which we cannot at present
advert, we are not so unreasonable as to pro-
pose to satisfy the ju,tice and humanity, or to
expiate the guilt, of the nation at the expense
of any individual party who, in becoming an
accomplice in its crimes, acted under the autho-
rity of its laws. If, therefore, the West India
planters can show that, by co-operating in this
great national expiation, they suffer individual
loss, no reasonable abolitionist would object to
a proper indemnity. All the schemes of eman-
cipation which we have seen proceed on this
idea, though most of them presume, with us,
that if the masters would cordially join the
Government, instead of opposing it, in the
present glorious work, the extent. of loss, and
consequently the necessity for compensation,
would be reduced within very narrow limits, if
it required any consideration at all. We may
pursue this subject, and advert to the plan of
Lord Howick, publi,hed as an appendix to his
speech, to-morrow, if we have room.—Times.

it will be seen that a writ of certiorari has
been moved for by the Solicitor-General to
remove the inquisition on the body of Cully,
the police-officer slain at the Calthorpe•street
meeting, into the Court of King's Bench. This
is, no doubt, in strict accordance with the law of
the land, the Court of King's Bench being not
only principal Coroner, but also empowered to
revise and qmash any proceedings connected with
the criminal jurisdiction which have taken place
before inferior Courts. The finding of the
.Jury was, as we have intimated, a very singular
one, contradicting the evidence by its conclu-
sions. The Solicitor-General, with great respect
for the motives of the Jury, sets forth, though
briefly, yet strongly, the illegality of the verdict.
—Times.

Sir John Campbell moved yesterday, in the
Court of King's Bench, for a certiorari to bring
into that Court the inquisition before the Co-
roner, on the body of Robert Cully. The in-
quisition, he contended, was bad in law, and
ought to be quashed. The facts in this case, so
far from justifying the verdict of justifiable ho-
micide, made it imperative on the Jury to return
a verdict of wilful murder. The writ was

granted, so that we shall soon have the question
of the legality of the verdict discussed in the
Court of King's Bench. We observe that at
the dinner of the Westminster electors yester-
day, Mr. O'Connell defended the verdict of the
Coroner's Jury, and declared that he would
stake his professional reputation on the point,
that it was the only verdict the July could give
conscientiously, after the evidence they had
heard. We are, we confess, not a little asto-
nished that Mr. O'Connell should deliver such
an opinion. if ever there was a verdict unsup-
ported by evidence, it was the one in question.
To say nothing of the illegality of the meeting,
the ground on which the Jury found that the
slaughter of Cully was justifiable assumes the
fact (of which there wa4 no evidence) that the
murderer of Cully killed him in self-defence.
For anything the Jury knew, Cully might have
been passive, and killed by one who had a pri-
vate grudge against him, and determined to take
that opportunity of executing his purpose in
order to escape in the crowd. The Jury dis-
believed the only witness who spoke to the
manner in which Cully came by his death, of
which they were in perfect ignorance.—Morning
Chronicle.

We are glad to perceive that the Grand Jury
at the Surrey Sessions are determined to persist
in their right to examine the whole interior and
management of the county prisons. The Chair-
man and Magistrates appear to have no reason
to give for their refusal, or, at least, like Falstaff',
they are determined to give none " upon com-
pulsion." There is a solemn trifling in all this
quite unworthy of a judicial body. The ques-
tion is not a new one, and surely should not be
met by ignorance or eva,ion. Very learned per-
sons, sometimes taken on the sudden and off

their guard, are not always prepared to answer
every point which comes before them, and it is
common in such cases, in technical language,
"to reserve the point." But here is .no such
excuse. The Chairman's duty has been to have
informed himself upon the subject, at least since
the time of the last application, and to say,
" Yes" or " No" to the Grand Jury, %ith some
valid reasons for the negative or affirmative,
whichever he might adopt. To our apprehen-
sion, the' reasons (as we stated when before ad-
verting to the subject) are all one way ; and even
were there no law, which there is, making it im-
perative upon Grand Juries to inspect gaols, and
present any necessity there may be for their al-
teration or rebuilding, every one, we think, must
be convinced of the policy and good sense of
those who have the management of them con-
cealing nothing from such a body as the Grand
Jury, provided there is nothing to conceal. If
there is, then the greater the necessity of its being
made known and remedied.—Morning Herald.
It will be seen, from the report of the pro-
ceedings in the Court of King's Bench, yester-
day, that the Solicitor-General moved the Court

for the purpose of having the verdict of the
jury which sat on the body of Cully, the
' policeman, set aside, and that the Court granted
the application. On this extraordinary pro-
ceeding we have no room to make any other
observation at present, than that, if the judges
set aside the verdict of the jury, there can be
no use, in future, of holding coroners' inquests.
—Morning Advertiser.
The meeting of the Political Union of New-
castle on Monday last, some report of which
appears in our first page, is but one among
many similar evidences of the deep dissatisfac-
tion felt by that class which was mainly instru-
mental in bringing the present Ministers into
power ; and of the odium naturally attaching to
a set of men who, for their own purposes, raised
hopes which they well knew they would never
he able to fulfil. But these and such like meet-
ings are far more important in another point of
view, They show conclusively, if any demon-
stration short of actual violence can show it,
the hatred borne towards the upper classes by
these unions of " Reformers," whose extensive
numbers and organization can leave no doubt on
any rational mind that, should the present sys-
tem of Government endure much longer, they
will give practical efficiency to the outrageous
denunciations they are continually putting forth.

We say that rank and property are in danger,
and we call upon the upper classes to consider
in time the peril which surrounds them. We
ask whether a Government should be suffered to
exist which has called forth, and which still
encourages by its revolutionary policy, a spirit so
threatening and so desperate as that which at
present manifests itself ?—Morning Post.

:SECOND EDITION.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

INQUEST on CULL Y, the POLICEMAN.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, that he bad a motion
to make on the part of the Crown, which was, that the
inquisition taken before Mr. Stirling, one of the Coroners
fir Middlesex, on the body of Robert Cully, might be
splashed.
The LORD CIIIE F JUSTICE—What is your objection,
Mr. Solicitor ?
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL ord, that he objected on the
ground that the jury had found a verdict not only con-
trary to the facts, but totally at variance with the law of
the case. They had found a verdict of Justifiable Ho-
micide, while, upon the very face of the inquisition itself,
signed with their own hands, it was evident that the ver-
dict ought to have been Murder or Manslaughter.
The CHIEF JUSTICE—A difficulty that presses upon the
Court is upon whom the rule ought to by, served. It might
be served upon the Coroner, certainly not upon the Jury.
The SOLICITOR- GENERAL—Certainly upon the Coroner.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—What is the object of your
motion, Mr. Solicitor ?
The SOLICITOR. GENERA L—That the Inquisition taken
upon the hody of the policeman, which was contrary to
law, could be entirely quashed ; the jury, from the best
of motives, had come to a wrong conclusion, one unsup-
ported by any thing which they had stated upon the face
of their inquisition, and his motion was for the purpose
of quashing it, in order that it might not remain as a re-
cord in any of his Majesty's Courts.
Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE inquired what object the
Crown could have in view by the motion ?
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said the Coroner's Inquisi-
tion was evidence fur various purposes, and he believed
it was the prerogative of the Crown to call upon that
Court to exercise its undoubted jurisdiction to set aside
any thing in an inferior Court that was contrary to law.
There were many cave where such proceedings had been
quashed, and he apprehended that there was cause enough
in the case to show that that Court ought to be called
upon to exercise its supreme authority.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE had ❑ever known any ap-
plication of that kind, except on the part of some indi-
vidual.
The SOLICITOR- GENERAL said th it the inquisition might
be given in evidence at the trial of any persons against
whom the Crown might proceed ; but he apprehended
th it, even puttiru that aside, if an inquisition was had,
either in point of fict or law, it was the duty of the Crown,
as the guardian of public justice, to bring it forward for
the consideration of that Court. The Learned Solicitor.
General then read the inquisition and verdict, which are
already before the public, and said there could be no doubt
that the facts were as there stated, that Cully, while in the
execution of his duty—while acting as a constable in the
discharge of his duty—w‘s by some person, unknown to
the Jury, stabbed in the left side of his breast, which
caned his death, thereby constituting either a man-
slaughter or a murder.
Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE—It does not appear upon the
inquisition that it was either a murder, or i❑ fact any
felony at ail.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—No ; it simply stated the
facts he had given ; that the man was acting as a con-
stable, and in the discharge of his duty when he received
the wound which c,u-toi his death. The jury then went
on to state why it was they found the verdict of justifiable
homicide. It was not because the who was stabbed
had Oven any prove ition in the first invance, hut because
the Riot Act had not been read, and that the Government
had not taken any steps to prevent the meeting, and that
the police had acted with brutrity These were the facts
upon w ich they sated they tad found their verdict.
The CHIEF JUSIICIC—There is not a word in the verdict
about the man Cully, or how be came t•y his death.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL said there was not a word
to show low lie came by his death, but, on the contrary,
the jury gave their reasons fir coming to such a con-
clusion,
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—They in effect say that
one man might be killed, because another bad acted im-
properly : there is not a single word on the face of the
inquisition to show that Cully had in any way given pro-
vocation for the assault upon him.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL said, that he only applit
for a rule to show cause, in the first iostance, why the
inquisition should not he qu fished.
Mr. Justice J. PARKS observed, that upon the pre-
mises set birth in the inquisition, a verdict of Excusable
Homicide could not even be maintained.
Mr. Justice PATTERSON said there was a case in
Strange, where an inquest was quashed, and it did not ap
pear that on that occasion any rule to show cause had been
applied for. It was made absolute in the first instance.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE-.--NO ; there never is. It
can never be, fur where the Crown applies, as in this case,
there is no other party concerned. 1 was not here yester.
day when the certiorari was moved, and I think there
would be some difficulty in the case without some one was
before us ; but, as on the fire of the if quisition, there is no
finding, and, acting upon generakprinciple, considering the
Crown to have au interest in the general dispensrion of
justice, I am of opinion that the inquest is not valid, and
ought to be set aside.
Mr, Justice LITTLEDALE considered there was no vali-
dity whatever in the inquisition. On the face of it, it
was stated that a person unknown to the Jury wounded
the man, of which wound be died, and yet the July had
found a verdict of justifiable homicide, because Govern-
ment had taken no care to prevent the meeting. That
did not justify tee verdict. To make it a good finding it
must be shown that Cully had first offered provocation.
The inquisition, in his opinion, was altogether a nullity,
and must be set aside.
Mr. Justice J. PARKE was of opinion that the inqui-
sition was bad, because the Jury had found Justifiable
Homicide upon premises which would nor, as it appeared
to him, justify a verdict of even Excusable Homicide.
Mr. Justice PATTESON wall entirely of the same opi•
nion; nothing was shown by the inquisition to justify such
a verdict as hail been found. There was nothing to show
teat Cully had been guilty of any provocation whatever.
The inquest was then ordered to lie quashed.

PERIA Li'A LIAMENI

THIS EVENING.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

The Leeds Oil GAR Company Bill was rt al a third time.
The Earl of 51ALMESBURY presented a petition for
the abolition of the milt duty.
Lord DUNDAS presented a petition against the assessed
taxes.

Lord CLONCURRY presented petitions for the repeal
of the punishment of death, in our criminal code.
The Duke of RICHMOND brought up the report of
the Savings Rinks Annuities 13111, wi,hout amendment.
Lord SUFFIELD presented petitions fur the abolition
of slavery from places in Ireland.

The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition
from Bristol against the Ministerial plan tor the abolition
et slavery. Also a petition from the slave owners and
inhabitants of the island of Dominica, praying for protec-
tion. The whole of the inhabitants stated that they
were wilin ; to sell their estates in the island of Dodd-
nica, so that his Majesty's Government might try such
i
expetimen.s in t as th. y should think fit, without
injuring the property of others.
Lord SUFFIELD had no doubt that a man who had
bought a stolen horse would be glad to get the money
hack again.—(A I mgb.)
Lord BERESFORD said, that the Noble Biron must
first prove that the horse was stolen.
The Duke of WELLINGTON begged to refer the
Noble Lord to the repeated acts and resolutions of
Parliament upon the subject, athi he would ere that
slaves were acknowledged to be property. No English-
man could be deprived of his property except by the law
of the land, and no Englishman could be deprived of his
property, even by Act of Parliament, without proper
compensation.
Lord SUFFIELD was quite delighted with what bad
linen from the Noble Duke. lie had stated that no man
could be deprived of his property but by Act of Parlia-
ment, but he (Lord S.) would say that no mm could be
deprived of his natural right, liberty, even by an Act of Par-
liament; and that he should be prepared to prove when the
proposed
measure was bet tee their Lordsiiips' House.—
(Hear.) lie pledged himself to prove the impossibility of
m
an having a property in man. The Noble Lord then pre-
sented two petitions against slavery.
Earl GREY laid upon the table a copy of the treaty
or convention entered into between the King of the French,

the King of the Netherlands, and his Majesty. The
Noble Earl then presented ten peti►tions against slavery.
Loral WHARNCLIFFE presented a petition from York
against the Local Jurisdiction Bill.

The Earl of RODEN presented petitions from several
parishes in Cork against the Church Reform (Ireland)
Bill. He considered that the measure was nothing but
direct spoliation, and would contravene the Coronation
oath.

The BISHOP of BRISTOL presented a petition from
Calk, I imenting the diminution in the number of the
Irish Bishops, and depreea ing the Bill altogether. It was
one of the most alarming and dangerous measures he
(the Right Rev. Prelate) in the course of his long life had
ever heard of.—(Hear, heir.) He could not conceive
how it cold be thought necessary to reduce the
number of the Bishops in Ireland, when there were no
Archdeacons and Chapters to assist them, and how how
it could be imagined the business could be got through.
The Earl of ST. VINCENT presented a petition,
praying for the abolition of slavery without compensation.
On the motion of Lord AfEtnotyaNt, the House went
into Committee upon the Police Offices (London) Conti-
nuation Bill.

Lord MELBOURNF said, that among the alterations
the Bill proposed, that constables should have the power
of apprehending persons in coffee-houses and beer-shops
suspected of intending to commit felony and other offences,
the present Act allowing them to be apprehended on
suspicion of committing felony.
Lord WYNFORD suggested various amendments, some
of which were agreed to.
Some Private Bills were brought up from the Common,
and the House adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The H. was resumed at five o'clock.

Mr. HARLAND presented a petition from c,r►ain
Wesleya❑ slethodists of the county of Durham, for the
abolition of .lavery.
Mr. MACAULAY presented similar petitions from
Leeds (signed by 17,000 persons), and from several other
places.

Colonel HAY postponed to the llth of June his motion
for the appointment of a select committee to inquire into
the existing excise laws in Scotland, particularly the excise
restrictions on the manufacture of malt for private use.
Mr. FITZGERALD moved for leave to bring in
a Bill for the better transmission of property in cer-
tain cases in Ireland by enabling persons there, where
the assets did not exceed 2001., to take out probate of
wills before the assivant barristers of the respective
coun'ies in that kingdom.

After a few words from Lord ALTHORP, which were
inaudible, the motion was agreed to.

COLONIAL SLAVERY.

Mr. STANLEY moved the order of the day for going
into a Committee on Colonial Slavery.
Sr ROBERT PEEL asked the Noble Lord (Al-
thorp) wh,t er, if the debate on that sulij,ct be ad-
j,oirned to night, it would he resumed to.morrow night,
when the subject of the Bank Charter was to be brought
forward, or wli-ther it would he adjourned until Monday?
Lord ALTEIORP considered it highly important to a
fair understanding of the subject of the Bank Charter ti a
he should make his statement to-morrow night, when be
should propose certain resolutions in the Committee ; be
should then propose that the chairman report progress. and
that die subject should stand over for a few days previous
to the discussion of the resolutions. His statement t e had
reason to believe would not take up any great length of
time, and therefore if the debate to-night be adjourned, it
would take the chance of being resumed after his state-
ment on the Bank charter to morrow night.

To a question from Mr. GOIJLBURN, which wit not
heard in the Gail-ry,
Lord ALTHORI' said he was anxious to press on the
Irish Church Bali on Monchiy.
LAW OF IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL gave notice that on
Wednesday nit he would move for leave to bring in a
13111 ti abolish the law of impriounnent for debt, and for
the nsore effectually enabling—(Loud cheers, which pre-
vented the rest of the notice fri.dn being t earl in the
gallery.)