The Sun.
London, England, 1833-12-18 00:00:00

ARRIVALS.

Mr. and Mrs.Prothcroe, and Mr. Brewer, at the Union Hotel,
Cockspur.street, from Bristol ; Carden Terry, Esq.; at ditto, from
Ireland; Thomas Bridges, Esq., at ditto, from Errisdon ; Charles
Priestle, Esq., at ditto, from Cheltenham ; Major Gregory, 9Sth
regiment; at ditto, from Devonport ; Capt. P. Gardiner, at ditto,
from Henley ; G. Hodgson, Esq., at ditto, from Cambridge ;
Wm. Kendrick, Esq., at ditto, from ditto; Messrs. Hore and
Glasscotc, at ditto, from Dublin ; Wm. Moore, Esq., at ditto,
from Ireland ; H. Hessing, Esq., at ditto, from Scotland ;
Cuthbert Holder, Esq., at ditto, from Clifton ; William Thorpe,
Esq., 30th regiment, at ditto, from Cheltenham; Rev. J. Ray.
mond, at ditto, from Chichester.

NAVAL ARCHITECTURE and the GREAT

SCHOOL.

[The following letter touches so ably on the subject of Naval
Architecture—an article on which we copied from the
Metropolitan Magazine a few weeks ago, that we are sure
our naval readers will be happy to sec it in The Sun] :
To the EDITOR of the DEVONPORT TELEGRAPH and
PLYMOUTH CHRONICLE.
SlR,—Allow me to have a bit of a brush again with
M., through the medium of your Journal. Hew does M.
relish personalities ? It is not " Hew we apples swim."
He must be " sub-surveyor," and so on—but rather, " How
we School of Naval Architecture feel the lash of F. M.—
How we together smart—How my hopes are blasted in
becoming Surveyor?" F. M. has undoubtedly been se-
vere in castigating the writers of this famous pamphlet the
" Apology for Ship-building," but I conceive perfectly
retifiable on rational grounds, for if individuals complain
of Covet nment s,rl tries of lOW., 2501., and 1801. per
annum, being too insignificant for their very arduous and
studious occupations, (with a gt utuitous boon of education
too !) whilst the less fortunate lieutenant of his Majesty's
navy, after twenty or thirty years hard servitude, injured
constitution from climate, and hearing many an honourable
scar, is obliged to be content with 901. per annum on half
ply; or even in foil pay, with five hundred times a greater
charge upon his shoulders than any of the gentlemen of
the School of Naval Architecture ever had or are likely to
have, with the enormous sum of one hundred and fifty
pounds per annum, and probably supporting two tables
and a family—and I may also add, the military officer's
half pay, 751. per annum ! both of whom must appear as
gentlemen—pro pudor ! Then I say reformation on this
point is alone necessary, and as M., in your last Journal
intimates that F. M. is a " reformer," the pruning kni'e
could not be better applied. Besides, it was necessary for
F. M. to advance what he (lid, which is deemed so per-
sonal, and sets M.'s " back up again" " most confoundedly
about pedigree," that the disappointed, misled, and
treated individuals of the School of Naval Architecture
should not gull the public with their claims, abilities, and
nonsense.
My object, Sir, on the present occasion, however, is to
take a short retrospective view of the defunct naval admi-
nistration, and compare their deeds of glorious n +vat pro-
duction, in justification of which they so arrogantly claim
honour and reward, with what is now transpiring before
our eyes in the present administration. I shall not ante-
date further than the establishment of this illustrious
" School of Navel Architecture" 22 years ago, although,
lamentable to be said, 40 or 50 years previously, the
naval administration was in a most degraded state ; and
although this school was formed for the express purpose of
improvement in Naval Architecture, so inherent were
the follies of the former era, that nothing but " the most
damnable proof" (using the high language of M. in a
former correspondence) of ignorance, imbecility, and pre-
judice,
existed throughout. I say prejudice, Sir, for
here was the root of evil—jumping from earlier dates
than now alluded to, where the " Apology" admits of
greater beam to vessels being given, and that of course
correctly—into that period when Sir R. Seppings took
office, who to avenge himself on builders in private yards
(which I believe I know something about, and if my cor-
roboration should not be sufficient, Pitcher's, Ingram's, and
other yards on the Thames, as well as Bing'-, Ross's, and
another yard on the Medway will attest) decreed that his
Majesty's ships of war required less beam, as meeting when
so constructed, with less resistance through the fluids ; and
the sequel, Sir that there would be economy ! ! for ton-
nage would not so accumulate, and the builders would not
gain so much by it !! ! They made too much money !! ! !
So Sir, to be avenged on the poor builders, as some of them
ventured to dictate to Sir It on certain points, the whole
British Navy was sacrificed at the shrine of caprice; for,
mark you, it would have been too glaring to have built
74's and frigates in his Majesty's yards of the same lengths
on deck as in private yards, and widi an increase of beam !
No ! this would nut have done at all! On a push, forty
74's were built, denominated the " forty thieve s," under
prescribed regulations, in imitation of the Repulse—many
by private builders. They proved afterwards to be deficient
in every quality ; several of diem can be identified by the
writer in the Tamar, having had thorough repairs, re-
maining as floating monuments of the grossest folly in
Naval construction that ever existed. It is true there were
some imitations made of French bottoms, indeed entire
ships, built in the King's yards, but whether there was a
film over the " retina" of the ex-Surveyor and his able
assistants, a matter of two hundred tons was considered
nothing in the dimensions. Let us come, however, to
a later date, in which M. and his aspiring associates,
no doubt, were as busily employed in algebraic solu-
tions, philosophical discussions, and mathematical prob-
lems, for giving lines for various noble ships, as he is
in writing at the present moment under the cognomens
of M—N—A Civil Engineer—(" How many more
names will he assume" before he appears real, since "the
Naval School has nothing to fear") defending their poor
weakened cause, and reviewing his own articles. I refer
in particular to the construction of forty 38 gun frigates
(then rated) of 1,000 tons each, a subject which the late
Admiral Sir J. Penrose, ably controverted; whilst Ame-
rica was scouring the seas with their 1,500 ton frigates,
and taking our ships as easily as a dancing master can
mike a bow. 0! it was impossible to build larger
frigates, because the " Apology" says it would not accord
with "Economy !"—there was such a dearth of timber ! !
—none large enough! ! !—yet 71's were building in his
Majesty's yards, and hundreds lying and rotting in the
rivers, which might have been converted into frigates at a
moderate expense. But no—it was cheaper to build
frigates of 1,000 tons, equip them, and send them to sea,
etch costing the country about 50,0001., and let the
Americans take, sink, and destroy them, with a few
hundred of "Blue Jackets." Besides a crimsoned deck
was an honour, if beaten after all ! Would Sir Robert
and his proteges have fancied being in the bloody
.strife?
No, but "let them fight it out !"
Again, on the subject of beam—Does M. recollect the
doubling of a certain three decker at Sheerness, soon after
she was launched? Is he not aware that a ship constantly
floating before his eyes—a Royal ship, and a Queen Ade-
laide to, was doubled from the wales to the floor heads,
whilst on the stocks, the men on the upper stages driving
2ft. Gin. treenails? What could this be for? Only a
trifling error in beam I she would be hardly stiff enough !
Does not 111. also recollect the famous sloops of war of 444
tons, and 26 guns, built in 1813, on purpose to fight the
American sloops of 600 tons? At the same period were in
construction, corvettes of 454 tons, arel 29ft. Gin. beam,
whilst France and America were building corvettes large
enough to take ours in on the deck as mere jolly boats.
Look again at the 10-gun brigs ; only 40 of them con-
structed to send to " Davy Jones's Locker," where five of
them, as packets, have certainly gone within these five or
six years. What became of the corvettes? One was lost
off North America, all hands perishing ; another or two
off Africa ; and some Brother Jonathan claimed as " his
oven share," and a specimen of English ship building.
What became of that beautiful corvette, the Acorn, a
peculiar plan of Sir R. Seppings, with a shifting keel,
&c. Fee., built at Chatham, and sent to sea in four months
from the period her keel was laid down? Lost, and
every soul perished ! Yet in one portion of /11.'8 letters,
in reflecting upon Capt. Symonds' principles of construc-
tion, as regards sailing without ballast, (a thing perfectly
feasible) is this •climax, (perhaps little dreaming of the
retaliation)—" The public may possibly be led by this
assertion to recollect that many an orphan may be
living to deplore experiments that have been made on
fancy models." They have deplored it in Sir Robert's
and the School of Naval Architecture's time. There
was indeed a constant succession of weeping and moan-
ing of the widow and the orphan from rash experiments,
such as have been detailed in newspapers, during their
predominancy.
Can the like lamentation be traced since
Capt. Symonds took office ? No.
This, Sir, is a cursory outline of what has been effected
during the establishment of the Emporium of Naval Ar-
chitecture ; and I will defy M. to controvert a single iota
of what I have asserted. On this basis I would ask—has
the country a right to be satisfied with the result of the
Mathematical, Algebraical, or Philosophical acquirements
made by the late school, together with the French (and
dancing, fiddling, and horsemanship,
for aught I know), as
commensurate with the expenses lavished, for gratuitous
education, the disgrace incurred, and the losses to be de-
plored ?
How was it possible moving "in limitations"
as to beam and tonnage, to produce anything like a ship,
possessing the qualities which were desired ? France,
America, and even Russia, were constructing vessel', truly
scientific, and of extraordinary dimensions. Why not
have imitated them ? Was it the expense ? Most cer-
tainly ! What became of the President, American fri-
gate—the Florida ,
regular clipper. a beautiful American corvette, sound
throughout, and a
What became of the
Chesapeake? The lines of which, obtained in Ame-
rica, I had by me some time since, feeling interested
in a comparison with those of the Shannon,
which ship
Was built by parties I am very particularly
acquainted with.
What became of the several small class of
vessels as noted sailers—and which we now and then
manager! to capture by stratagem? They were all either
broken up or
sold, and no further notice taken Qf them.
These lines would have produced a most exquisite sensa-
tion in the Academy ; for, I assure you, Sir, those of the
Chesapeake differ as much from the Shannon as the
collier does from a cutter; approximating in many points

to Captain Symonds' views of construction. Yet, in times
past, this school was considered the theatre of art,
the mother of science, the nurse of naval construction,
the Fountainhead of all. Ilad the " Apology" been
written at the period of their zenith, would the head-
ing of the work included " that we are not to look to the
n ivy for construction ?" No, no, no,—that would not
have done ; but now all bands are ousted, (and high
time that they were) every scheme is invented—every
machination is raked up to oppose the experimental doc-
trine of Naval Architecture. propagated by the present
surveyor, because he is a sailor ! ! ! What in the name 01
goodness has been the use of composing and writing the
Eight Articles of War, contained in the Apology ? A
Surveyor must he this—and a Surveyor must be that—
and this thing must not be done—and that must not be
done. Is the helm of naval affairs to he hard.a-lee ? Are
Navy and all hands to go to the Devil, because there are
certain duties for a surveyor to go through before 1 e can
he perfect, and which are only attained when he is about
being stowed away under the tut f—(for we don't live to
the age of Methusalah now)—and so on in succession til!
the acme is never realized ? No. Captain Symonds is
to be congratulated in his situation ; and the Admiralty
on his appointmen,, as being an instrument (whether
possessing an " intuitive knowledge," or acquired mathe-
matical and philosophical knowledge), to save Old Eng-
land from a disgrace that was rapidly covering her, and
in which, like mighty Rome, she must have eternally sunk.
The questions naturally are—what has Captain Symonds
done? What are his qualifications? What are his pecu-
liar views of construction ? And what are the results,
as deserving the country's confidence?
On these points I reserve myself to a future opportu-
nity, having already, I fear, exceeded your columns. In
the interim,

am, Sir, your obedient bervant,
Devonport, Dec: 3, 1833. A LANDSMAN.

COURT CIRCULAR.

Viscount Althorp left town yesterday, for his meat,Wise-
ton Hall, Nottinghamshire.
Mr. Bur.,e, the agent for JArmaica ; Mr. Coltphoun, the
agent for St. Vincent, and Mr. D'Epinay, of the Alauritius,
transacted business yesterday at the office of the Secretary
of State for the Colonial Department.
The meeting of the Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council, appointed to take place this day, has been post-
poned.

Per C(trit • ---

SPIRIT OF THE MAGIC. Jot TRN AL3.
The illorningPost Of- Tsterd-kti
to amuse its readers 4tr.1414iil
against the Municipal ComlTikseet,sl7lAZi:g
Fqu ib , is clever enough, but as a gpeilKien of
reasoning is not quite so clever. We allude to
the article in which the Commissioners are
h ailed over the coals, and described as " a set
of mountebanks acting upon a spurious ant ho.
ritv." The King's Commission a spurious au-
-I)ority I Well done Toryism—well done
Conservatism ! There was once a time when
the same journal would have stigmatized such
language as little short of treason ; but all men
and all parties become Destructives when they
are sorely vexed, and we take this `eery levity of
our contemporary, to call it by no wolle name,
as a proof of the fright and horror with whir.ll 3
certain junta regard the investigation now quietly
going forward in the city of London. We never
remember to have heard the prerogative so
described by that party when it was exercised
against the people ; but now that it is exercised
for the people, and for the discovery of abuses
which affect their welfare, it is a spurious

authority, forsooth—it is a usurpation which
good citizens are called upon to resist, and good
subjects to ridicule, by a comparison with the
lowest species of juggling and buffoonery.
Might we, in a serious moment, request our
contemporary to consider the obvious tendency
of his remarks, and how far the general adop-
tion of such sentiments would he compatible
with good government, or with any Government
at all ? Surely his respect for the constituted
authorities must hang rather loosely when it can
be shaken off in a fit of party spleen, or to an-
swer a party purpose. But to return to the ar-
:Me in question ; our contemporary seems to
make it a charge against the mountebanks, as he
calls them, that they omitted going round with
the hat. This is a more consistent accusation
than the first ; for the Tories, to do them jus-
tice, never omitted the interesting ceremony of
sending the hat round. They never eat in the
juggler's chair, nor stood on the mountebank's
stage, without contriving to get their fingoo
into our pockets. It is true that the
Whigs have often showed a disposition of
the same kind ; but all we request is, that
for the sake of a third party, too commonly
overlooked by both, the neglect of the hat in
the present instance, or in any future instance,
by either party, should not be too severely stig-
matised. Our contemporary is in raptures with
certain corporators who refused to be sworn, and
then he is wroth with the Chief Commissioner
for consenting not to swear them. This com-
pliment to the corporation, too, if to consider
them incapable of telling falsehoods can be
taken in that light, was a deadly offence. But
then it brought comfort with it as a failure
the authority of the Commission. As it is pov
sible, however, that truth may be elicited with-
out oaths, we, and those who think with us
that the success of this procedure is of great
importance to the best interests of the commu-
nity, are content with the appearance which
matters have already assumed in the city and
elsewhere under the authority of the King's
Commission, nor will we easily let go the hope
that the screaming of the birds of prey is only
ominous of the near extinction of corrupt pa-
tronage in some of its most inveterate h01d5....."
Morning Herald.
The anticipated fall of Turkey threatens to
embroil Europe. It is understood that the
Russian Ambassador began to assume a very
unbecoming tone, when remonstrated with on
the subject of the preparations of his Govern-
ment. The demonstrations, however, of Eng-
land and France, will no doubt have their proper
effect. Russia alone could not take European
Turkey. Austria, as is well known, long evinced
an honest inclination to support Turkey. But
it is more than probable that when Austria be-
comes satisfied that Turkey must fall, she will
repeat her game in the case of Poland, and take
her share. The question will then be, whether
Austria, prudent as she unquestionably is, will
hazard the consequences of an European war
(for such a war it must become), and make
common cause with Russia. Strong suspicions
are entertained that Metternich has made up his
mind to venture on the bold policy. The
consequence of an European war cannot
be contemplated coolly by any man who
has ever reflected on such subjects. The
existing generation throughout Europe must he
exposed to great calamity. At the same time we
have no doubt as to the result. In the present
state of Europe the population may choose to
' prefer submission to many things of which they
disapprove, rather than risk the consequences of
any attempt to remedy them by violence. But,
assuredly, if the Sovereigns themselves put the
masses in motion, they will find to their cost,
that the people of Europe will not suffer them-
selves to be made the blind instruments for the
furtherance of their ambitious designs. We
have no doubt that the termination of the war
would be the universal overthrow of absolute
monarchies in Europe. It has been demon-
strated that absolute governments are an evil
which all nations have the same interest in put-
ting down, that the peaceable cultivators have
in the destruction of wolves. It is the interest
of the nations that they shall be prosperous ; for
one country benefits by the prosperity of every
other country. Again, it is not for the interest
of any people that it should make extensive
conquests, because this is merely taxing itself to
keep its neighbours miserable. Were repre-
sonetanht
iteoar
sv ea
bnGedno:fi'le)
tartnving n
byt s g
no
tehniene rt
interest
this
eosstp principle
e tycoofn of
conquest,
each
,
would afford a guarbantee for the duration of peace.
oiitad,if,motee:raieltrsiybsotites
be When
undertaken.there
change
„for
thewar,
ll
Government—make the Sovereign awr
theaacr twe
master,
instead it of tehoret,
instead of the First Magistrate of the nation—
and you have instantly a motive for extension
of boundaries, that his grandeur may be in-
creased. Absolute Princes are, therefore, anti-
social existences. They have a constant motive
for disturbing their neighbours. The people of
Saxony, for instance, are far happier—far more
prosperous than the people of Russia or Austria.
rchies
dsyr. frkppler rep,.stetnit'ltfiel
there-
tore, exchangepeople aricyw,iil ietcmcil
aiskol
it.crile King of Saxony ?
If
But would the Emperor of Russia, or the Emperor
in
By no means. But, on the other hand, what
Saxon
This
at exchangeonce ws'ilt)ho
was Rhuos,svi a nm ou rc Aus-
trianmuch
tthe
general wish in Europe to
the mind of an absolute Sovereign ; and nothing
or the revolu-
tionary therid dorfeaadbsoofiute
Sovereigns,
opasio,iitoilgs aggrandizemente
dragged into war, though the present
gkerlation may suffer, future generations will
orofit. One of the first results will be the inde-
pendence of Poland and the independence and

regeneration of Italy. It would he blasphemy to
doubt the result.—Morning Chronicle.
T. 2, Paris Court of Assizes is again engaged
in one of those interminable trials for an al-
leged plot against the Government, the variety
of which has given so peculiar a character to
the short reign of Louis Philip since the re-
volution of July, 1830. Tumult has, indeed,
for the last 18 months ceased to excite alarm in
the streets of the capital, and quiet people are
not now called from their beds or their business
" to see the revolution pass beneath their win-
dows ;'' but the party which arrogates to itself
the merit of having changed the dynasty, and of
havink established the new order of things on
th'erainciple of " insurrection," are less satisfied
'than ever with their present position, and not
more disposed to endure the existing system of
government, though they have confined their
operations to the advocacy of republican institu-
tions in the journals, or to the extension of the
means of realizing their projects in the secret
societies. The present prosecution seems
rather to have been founded on an indict-
ment against one of these societies (that of
" The Rights of Man and of the Citizen")
than to be directed against the members of a
treasonable conspiracy; which, whatever were
its criminal purposes, had not certainly com-
menced its active operations s' hen the conspira-
tors were arrested. It has brought to the bar of
the accused 27 persons, one of whom was a
woman, and the great majority of whom are
young men, with no enjoyment of wealth or
rank, and no pretensions to superior capacity or
knowledge. The only individual amongst them
in the least distinguished from the mass, is M.
Raspail, who, having at first acquired a repu-
tation for chymical science, has latterly earned
a better title to the confidence of his republican
friends by two years of imprisonment for sedi-
tious libels. The rest consist of lads who had
attained the cross of July, of disciples of the
Polyteciu is school, of members of the school
of law, and of needy Paris tradesmen. The
charge against them is, that, belonging all to the
republican society of " The Friends of the
Rights of Man," they had entered into a plot to
overthrow the Government on the 28th of July
last, by taking advantage of the presumed hos-
tility of the Parisians to " the detached forts"
ordered to be built around the capital. The
28th of July was the anniversary of one of
" the glorious days" of the revolution of 1830.
It was the day in which the National Guards
and the troops of the line were called out to a
grand review, and, as the former were presumed
to be hostile to " the detached forts," it was
supposed that, in permitting or joining in their
demolition, this civic force would furnish an
opportunity for overturning the throne which
they were assembled to protect. The conspira-
tors are alleged to have arranged their plans for
the insurrection—to have distributed their
forces for the tumult—to have appointed
their posts—to have prepared arms—to have
made ball-cartridges, and to have drawn out
treasonable proclamations. The arms, cartridges,
and proclamations, were found on their persons,
or in their houses, by the police, and a body of
nearly 150 witnesses has been summoned to
support the charge. The trial commenced
on Wednesday last, and we have only
seen the proceedings down to Friday, in-
serted in the Saturday's journals ; but it
is evident from even the short specimen
of the examination of the prisoners, anti
from the depositions of the witnesses, which
have reached this country, that the indictment
cannot be sustained, and that the Government
cannot expect a verdict. In citing some of the
documents connected with the political society
to which we have alluded, the public prosecutor
has left out, by design or inadvertence, phrases
or announcements, the omission of which en-
tirely perverts their meaning. This has excited
great indignation among the members of the
bar, and the contagious feeling is likely to ex-
tend to the jury box. Again, the witnesses
are persons too well known in other political
prosecutions to be trusted in this, and several of
them are discredited beforehand by the infamous
character of police spies. The President of the
Court, too, has shown at first too evident a
bias against the prisoners to allow the jury to
repose any confidence in his future impar-
tiality, while the republican advocates for the de-
fence, strong in their popularity with the audience
and the journals, are too powerful for the King's
Advocate. At the same time the crowds which
assemble round the tribunal are too decidedly for
an acquittal to allow the jury, though so in-
clined, to return a verdict of guilty. It would
seem, therefore, pretty evident that this prosecu-
tion must be as unsuccessful as some other
recent attempts of the Government to suppress
Republican associations, or to overawe adverse
political opinions. The crime with which the
27 persons now on their trial are charged, is
nothing short of high treason; but both the
public prosecutor and the President of the Court
have declared that capital punishment is not to
be dreaded in the sentence founded on a verdict
for the Crown. This restriction of penalty
announced at the commencement of the pro-
ceedings, instead of being reserved for Royal
clemency after conviction, affords another evi-
dence that the sympathy of the public is consi-
dered against the prosecution,—that they desire
by anticipation to relieve the conscience of the
jury from blood, in order to get their assent to
a more limited punishment, or that they doubt
of the extent of the guilt on which they wish to
call down the justice of the country. The con-
tinuance of such prosecutions is extremely to be
condemned if they can be avoided, and to be la-
mented if they are absolutely indispensable. They
give the Government, both at home and abroad, a
character of timidity or despotism, which must
be extremely injurious to the stability of the
new dynasty and of the liberal institutions
which spring from the revolution of the barri-
cades, Neither France itself nor the rest of
Europe will believe that the Government of
Louis Philip is strong, stable, and durable,
till it can afford to despise petty political plots,
and even to pardon great political offences—till
" the glorious. days of July," 1830, have no
memorial but in the enjoyment of the benefits
which they have conferred, or the insurrectionary
days of June, 1832, but in the recollection of
the evils which they averted,—in short, till the
Castle of Ham is thrown open for the liberation
of the guilty Ministers who attempted to over-
throw the existing constitution in favour of
arbitrary power, and die lonely, fortress of St.
Michel, on the coast of Normandy, for the
escape of the republican insurgents who at-
tempted to restore the tyranny or anarchy of the
Convention. Then, and not till then, can we
consider the Revolution of July, 1830, as con-
summated and consolidated in all its glory and
security. It has hitherto shed no blood on the
scaffold, and it has promised on the present
occasion to shed none, Let it likewise cease to

make victims of imprisonment, and dare to open
its dungeons, and our opinion will be exalted at
once of its security and of its clemency.—Tinges.
The important announcement which we made
yesterday, of the determination of our Govern-
ment not to permit the Autocrat of Russia to
carry his encroachments any farther upon what
may be justly termed the rights and liberties of
Europe, has very naturally formed a special topic
of discussion in the columns of most of our
evening contemporaries ; and we are happy in
being able to state, that with only one exception,
all of them recommend, or at all events do not
disapprove of, the course of policy which, for
months past, we have recommended, and which
the Government, at the eleventh hour, we regret
to say it, has determined to pursue. The
exception to which we refer is worthy of the
journal in which it appears, and is as devoid of
sound argument as it is of regard for the
national honour. From a source, however,
which has been• polluted by the defence of
every Aministration which has reigned in this
country during the last forty years, what could
be expected hut a defence of a power which
has rendered itself obnoxious to all civilized
Europe by its oppression and its cruelties, and
which would now, were it permitted, not
only exclude its neighbours from a lucrative
commerce which they have long enjoyed, but
by appropriating to itself the possession of a
mighty empire, seize also upon the trade of the
East ? " The apparent, indeed almost avowed
object of the Emperor of Russia," as is justly re-
marked in The Sun," is to obtain exclusive pos-
session of the Dardanelles ; without that his
fleet in the Black Sea would be of little avail:
but were he once permitted to possess the
right of excluding the ships of other na•
tions from the Dardanelles, there would be
nothing to prevent his taking possession
of the entire coast, and by an offensive and
defensive treaty with the Pacha of Egypt,
putting an end to British commerce with the
Mediterranean ;" and it might have been added
with a large portion of our Eastern dominions.
The whole of this important national stake is,
however, deemed by the contemporary to whom
we have alluded to be subordinate, first, to the
natural temptation afforded to Russia by her
relative strength, and the comparative weakness
of her neighbours—secondly, to the fact of her
having been allowed, without any decided oppo-
sition from France and England, to extinguish
the liberties and independence of Poland—and,
thirdly, to the equally notorious fact, that this
country is labouring under considerable difficul-
ties, and ought not to go to war with any Power,
except for the most pressing reasons. To what
extent these reasons will operate upon the minds
of Englishmen remains to be seen ; but, to our
mind, no stronger justification of the arma-
ment which is now fitting out can be urged
than the reasons adduced by our contemporary.
That Russia is aggrandising herself at the
expense of her neighbours--that " the policy
of all its successive rulers for a hill century
has been constantly directed to extend their
dominion on every side ; at one time coming
down the Baltic, at another spreading to the
Black Sea ; again reaching its arms out to the
very capital of Persia, then fixing its standard
in Finland, and finally taking to itself the
frontier kingdom of Germany—that now it is
about to follow out a long concocted scheme,
and make Constantinople the capital of one of
its kingdoms,—and, finally, that the Govern-
ment of Russia is undoubtedly systematically
ambitious," is freely confessed by our contem-
porary ; but yet, what is the conclusion at
which he arrives? That the ambition of
Russia should be curbed—that means should
be taken to limit her aggressions—that
the civilized powers of Europe should
unite to check the progress of a barbarian
rule, which threatens death to everything bearing
the hallowed names of light, and right, and
freedom ? By no means !—but, on the con-
trary, that there " is a feasible cause for the
ambition of Russia, and a reason to doub

whether the mere increase of power and domi-
nion, which is the result, is any justification for
making war upon her !" With regard to the
second point, we shall leave it, equally with the
preceding, to the sober judgment of our readers,
whether the barbarities permitted by the civilized
powers of Europe to be committed upon " the
gallant and chivalrous Poles," form a proper
justification for the sacrifice of Turkey, or for
the destruction of their own existence, in
their turn, as independent States. "It was
not thought right " and it was unwisely
as well as most disgracefully done —" to
take any part in the contest," while it was
pending, between Poland and Russia; but our

contemporary is egregiously mistaken if he ima-
gines for a moment that " the remembrance of
Russian atrocities will not warm the hearts and
nerve the arms of Frenchmen and Englishmen,"
in any contest that may be undertaken. There

never was a war in which all England would
join more heartily, than in a war upon Russia,
whatever might be its cause, whatever its pre-
text. She is thoroughly hated, and deserves to
be hated. Her ambition is boundless, her

atrocities never to be forgotten. A war
against her is felt to be a common cause
by every liberal mind in Europe; and if
the British Government, however reluctant,
be compelled to unsheath the sword, it
need not fear any lack of aid. Finally,
with regard to the difficulties of the country.
They arc of some magnitude unquestionably,
and are a fit subject for consideration ; but will
the aggressions of Russia remove them ? Will

the curbing of her power, while it is still pos,i-
ble to curb it, not tend to diminish them ? Will

she not be more at liberty to pursue a course of
internal improvement and amelioration, when
freed from the dread which at present she cannot
but entertain of the consequences of the grow-
ing power of Russia, than when agitated and
alarmed by the progress of its continued increase?
But it is useless to bandy words and reasons
with those who will not listen to reason. We

give this passing notice of our Contemporary's
thoughts o❑ Russian affairs for once and for all
—in future we shall look to his columns for
Russian edicts and decrees—in all which mat-

tors he will, no doubt, enjoy a priority of in-
Formation—but assuredly for nothing
Morning Advertiser.

The Prerogative Commissioners pursued
their inquiries yesterday, at Guildhall, into the
state of the Corporation of the city of London ;
that is to say, they took down in writing the
information afforded them by a Mr. Wood and
Mr. Alderman Venables as to the mode in which
the Aldermen of the City are elected—informa-
tion such as every apprentice boy in the City of
London has at his fingers' ends. If the Com-
_

missioners intend to waste the time for which
the public is to pay them very handsomely in
collecting rubbish of this description they will
acquire for themselves and confer upon those

who appointed them a character worse than that
of quacks and mountebanks, to which they have
always been entitled, the character, namely, of
plunderers of the community, not supplying even
amusement in return for their pay.—Morning
Post.

ROLLS' COURT, DEC. 17.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. THE CORDWAINERS'

COMPANY.

In this case a testator of the name of Fisher, by
his will, which was made in 1547, bequeathed the
Falcon Inn, and two other messuages, situate in
Fleet-street, opposite St. Dunstan's Church, to the
master, wardens, and fellowship of the craft or
mystery of the Cordwainers, " for the only intent,
use, and performation" of his last will and testament.
The premises in question at the date of this bequest
produced only the sum of 121. 6s. Bd.; and as to
the application of it, the testator directed that the
annuity of 6/. should be paid to his brother during
his life; that 51. should be distributed per annum
among poor householders of the neighbourhood;
and 63. Bd. among what he called random poor,
besides several other small payments to establish
a dirge or mass to be said or sung for the good of
his soul in the parish church, and to remunerate the
master, wardens,&c., for superintending the services
and the distribution of the money from time to time,
the whole thus disposed of amounting to within a
few shillings of the entire rents of the property be.
queathed to the Company I,y the will. The value
of the premises had now increased to a very consi-
derable amount, and produced annually no less a sum
than 3581. The object of this information was to
have it declared that the defendants were trustees of
the rents and profi's of the premises in question, to
be applied in augmentation of the charitable objects
mentioned in the will of the testator, and to have
the usual accounts taken, and a scheme settled by
the master for the future administration of the pro-
perty.
Mr. BICKERSTETII and Mr. ANDERDON appeared
in support of the information.
Mr. PEMBERTON (with whom was Mr. WAKE-
FIELD) appeared for the defendants, and reprobated
such proceedings being instituted after the Com-
missioners for Charitable Purposes had on the fullest
investigation declared themselves perfectly satisfied
with the manner in which this charity had been
administered for nearly 300 years. This was a case
got up on the report of the Commissioners by some
litigious individuals for the purpose of involving the
Company in all the expenses of a Chancery suit,
without the least shadow of a foundation in justice
or equity for the declaration which was prayed.
The Learned Counsel went on to contend that the
devise here was not generally in trust for charitable
purposes. In order to prove that the whole rents
of the estate were subject to charity, it was neces-
sary to show that by the will it was wholly given
to charitable purposes, specifically named, or, on
the other hand, that the rents at the date of the
will were completely absorbed by charitable uses.
Neither of these positions, however, could be main-
tained in the present case ; in fact, the first decla-
ration in the will had no connexion whatever with
charity, and referred to the payment of an annuity
of 61. to the testator's brother, on whose death
40s. was to be paid to his widow, which sums
afterwards were wholly undisposed of, and, there-
fore, went beneficially to the general purposes of
the corporation.

Mr. BICKERSTETH, in reply, insisted. that as the
rents had greatly increased, there should at least be
a proportionate augmentation to the extent in which
they were originally dedicated to charitable pur-
poses.

His HONOUR said the first question was, whether
it was intended that the Corporation should be
mere trustees, or whether a beneficial interest was
given to them; and the next consideration was,
whether, if they were trustees, they were intended
to be trustees for charitable purposes. It did
not appear to him that the words of this devise
constituted the corporation mere trustees. The
estate was absolutely given to them, not on trust,
but " for the use, intent, and performation of this my
will." It was rather a gift upon condition than a
gift upon trust. They were to take the estate
so devised to them on condition of their performing
the duties which in the terms of the %% ill were
imposed on them. Those duties were not for mere
charitable purposes; the half of the income disposed
of by the testator was not for a charitable purpose, but
by way of annuity to his brother of 61. for life and 40s.
for his widow, which on their failure was altogether
undisposed of. It was plain that a beneficial inte-
rest had been intended for the Corporation, because,
if they failed in the duty of paying, the brother was
to be entitled to enter into possession and defeat
the estate so given to them. Had it been on trust,
in respect of which there was no intended benefit,
how could such a condition have been imposed ?
The testator clearly intended that they should have
a beneficial interest on the terms of complying with
the directions in his will. There was no trust either
expressed or implied with respect to charity, other
than to the extent of the specifically imposed
charges; and therefore, according to all the princi-
ples applicable to such cases, this information should
be dismissed. It was to be regretted that the name
of the Attorney-General had been used in such a
case, because, if his attention had been sufficiently
called to the nature of it, he never would have given
his sanction to such a proceeding. The Court,
however, must presume that he had not been made
aware of all the circumstances, and, considering the
real merits of the case, or rather its demerits, the
information should be dismissed with costs.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DEC. 17.

PERJURY.---THE KING V. CLENVER.

Mr. J. WILLIAMS stated this to be an indictment
for perjury, alleged to have been committed by the de-
. fendant Dorothy Clewer. It arose out of an answer
put in by her to a bill filed by the prosecutor in this
case, who was the executor of a person named Jo.
seph Eltham. The testator Eltham was related to
the defendant. He was a man advanced in life, and
in possession of 2001. stock in the 31 per Cents.
A short time before his death the defendant and a
person named Young invited him to live in their
house, and he accordingly went to reside with them.
Shortly after the 200/. in the funds was transferred
to those parties, and, according to the case for the
prosecution, the transfer was no sooner made than
the conduct of the defendant was changed towards
the poor old man. The prosecutor being apprised
of the wretched condition of his father, and the
state in which he was suffering in the house of
Young, went to ascertain the real state of the
case. He found him in a miserable plight, and
with the assistance of four or five men re-
moved him by his own desire to his (prose-
cutor's) house. On the death of the old man,
which happened soon after, a bill was filed by
the prosecutor, acting as executor of his father, arid
the object was to compel the defendant to transfer
the stock to his use, and also that the Bank should
be restrained by injunction from paying it to the
defendants. To this the defendant and Young, who
was prosecuted in another indictment, put in their
answer, and it was in that answer the perjury was
assigned. They said that the complainant (the
prosecutor) and five others came to the house of
Mary Young in her absence, and removed the said
Joseph Eltham to the house of Matthew Eltham
by force and violence, and contrary to the manner
stared by the said Matthew Eltham. That was the
perjury assigned.
The statement of Counsel having been made out
by the evidence.
Mr. PLATT, for the defendant, called witnesses
to prove that Clewer, in her answer, had spoken no
more than truth.

The Jury found the defendant Not Guilty.
The other indictment against Mary Young was
not tried.

The cause continued until near nine o'clock.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DEC. 17

LEVOY V. PARKER.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff to
recover the value of certain goods.
Defendant is a wharfinger and carrier by water,
and the plaintiff sent furniture to the amount of
3001. by the defendant's fly-boats to Gloucester, for
the purpose of being sold by auction. After much
delay in London they were forwarded : and, on
their arrival, a sum of 601. was demanded, which
the plaintiff having refused to pay, the goods were
detained by the defendant. The present action was
brought for the loss occasioned by such detainer.
There were a great number of witnesses exa-
mined on both sides.

The CHIEF JUSTICE summed up the evidence,
when the Jury found a verdict for plaintiff—Da-
mages 300/., to be reduced on re-delivery of the
goods to such sum as Mr. Justice should allow for
their depreciated value, 20/. being paid for freight.