The Sun.
London, England, 1833-11-14 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF IHE 'PUBLIC JOURNALS,

We have had frequent opportunities, within
the last two months, of recording the courage.
zeal, and efficiency, with which the municipal
commissioners have plunged their sickle into
the harvest of corporate abuses, and prepared
materials for corporate reform. The crop was,
indeed, rich, and required only industry and
and honesty to collect its chief stores; but
though these are now reaped in most parts of
England, the gleanings, which are in propor-
tion to the original rankness of the produce, de-
serve notice when thrown into a common stock.
We despair, it is true, of finding anything so
splendid. over the whole range of borough mal-
vemation as the admitted corruption and contu-
macious resistance of Leicester; but we cannot
on that account pass over the facts which the
country papers have more recently communicated
respecting Tiverton, Cambridge, and Warwick.
The Western Times, the Cambridge Inde-
pendent Press, and the Leamington Spa Cou-
rier, of recent dates, contain, in their accounts
of the proceedings of the commissioners in those
places, matter enough to have justified the ap-
pointment of a commission, though the boroughs
which they celebrate could not have boasted of
so many partners or rivals in corporate abuses.
Tht great evil in all the cases where enormous
violations of law, justice, and freedom have been
proved against these municipal bodies, has had
its origin in Parliamentary corruption, or in the
perversion of aristocratic influence to annihilate
electoral rights—to destroy the control of the
people over their (miscalled) representatives, and
to invest an oligarchical faction with all the
powers, places, honours, and emoluments of the
state. It was because the voice, which should
'have issued from the majority of the property,
intelligence, and numbers of the nation was not
heard in the Senate, and because the nominees
of obscure villages, or of limited juntas, occupied
the place of the national representatives, that the
ancient deposi!aries of municipal privileges
abused their trusts, mismanaged the funds
placed, for the benefit of the inhabitants, at
their disposal, tyrannized over their fellow-
citizens, and perverted the course of justice.
It was because they could influence the des-
tinies of the nation, through their electoral
votes, that they were alternately courted or
oppressed by the great. It was because
they were " part and parcel" of that lucra-
tive machinery which disposed of promotions
it, the army and navy—which engrossed the
patronage of the Church, and all the appoint-
ments, civil or political, of the State—that a
commerce of corruption was carried on between
them and the aristocracy of rank or wealth. It
was because they could manufacture legislators
or rulers for a great nation, that we find haughty
peers or great landowners mixing in their petty
squabbles,—fomenting their factious discords,—
adninisterirg to their intemperate feasts,—
accepting of their disgraceful livery,—serving
their magisterial offices,—in short, making them
presents of places or of wine, of commissiot;s
or of venison, and condescending to become
their stewards, their recorders, or their mayors.
Most of this evil system would, of course, have
ultimately ceased of its own accord after the
passing of the Reform Bill, and the extension
of the elective franchise to the body of tl‘e inha-

bitants ; but the inquides of the Municipa;
Commission cannot fail to he of extensive henefil.
in recording its misdeeds, in hastening its dissolu-
tion, anti ih cleansing the nation front its pollution.
The borough of Tivertoo is a case in point. Fees
persons ho head at the time, or who have
s:nce read the eel( braicd speech of Lord Har•
• ruwby against the second leading of the Reform
Bill, can have forgotten the eloquent, impressive,
and even pathetic account which his Lordship
gave of his own connection, and of the con-
nection of his family, with ghat borough. The
attachment was, indeed, romantic in its origin
and more than romantic in i s ardour and con-
stancy. It began without interest on either
side, and was continued without any barter of
support for patronage. The family of the
Ryders and the corporation of Tiverton, uni;er
like two fond lovers, had never even suffered
any of those drawbacks on their ardent attach-
ments which are enumerated by the comic write;
in the accidents to which fond love is exposed—

" Injurite,
Suspii ion«s, inimicitir, indueise,

Baum, adz rut sum."---
Their intercourse was marked by a generous de-
votedness, by an unvarying confidence. and an
undiminished fondness ; and his Lordship pro-
mised himself, and assured the House, that no
Nabob's gold, no intriguer's arts, could ever step
in to sever the connexion so fondly cherished.
But what has happened since that glowing
speech was delivered ? Why, out of the two
members returned by his Lordship's influence
under the reign of the corporation, he has not
been able to return one for the town, and seeing
the dawn of corporation reform above the ho-
rizon last summer, he has himself thought pro-
per to resign his corporation honours But we
even find in the evidence given before the Mu-
nicipal Commissioners, that the connexion be-
tween his Lordship's family and the corporation
was not so disinterested or so innocent as he had
represented it. Mr. Patch and Mr. Wood, the
present and the late Town Clerk for the borough,
give a less romantic account of the affair than
that given in the House of Lords. Lord liar-
rowby, though not a resident in the borough, and
therefore against the terms of the charter, which
requires residence in order to secure the voluntary
influence of the corporation in his favour, con-
sented to become Mayor. " Under this old
system," said Mr. Patch, " we had no contests
for Members of Parliament. About a century
ago there had been a contest, when 12 divided
against 13." Happy borough, when 13 cor-
porators, with a Noble Lord at their head,
bound by his honour not to interfere with the
elections of the Commons, could return two
Members to St. Stephen's ! In his character
of mayor or of patron, or in some other unde-
fined capacity, his Lordship, besides, was in
the habit of giving the corporation annually a
pipe of wine. The following testimony on this
bulject may be as amusing though not so ro-
manuc as the statement in the House of

Lords :
Did either Mr. Ryder or Lord llarrowhy contribute
gh 7—Sows of money
any sums of money to the borou
rs;,,,
certainly ; no„,„ Yvu beard yehterday that the
to n•clerk told you that v hail given latterly a pip,
of wine?—Yes. Annually they did tu,t give uz,
many. Mr. Barnes--Please to understand that they h
had
e use of our e cellar and used it gratuitously,
goy an a
d many ()theta who are doing all they can against u.,
but n ver again."
The whole disclosures made on the constitu-
tion of this borough—on its mode of electing,
eorporators,—on the qualifications of its Re-
corder, who is not to be learned in the law--
the selection of persons for Ma) ors, wno were
sometimes clergymen, sometimes noblemen, and
who were often non-resident, though bound to
residenee,—on its mode of administering justice

in the Court of Record,—on its management of
charitable property, and on some of the sources
of its funds, are extremely curious. Connected
with the latter point are two disgraceful transac-
tions, in which the Corporation exerted their
patronage—derived, no doubt, from their Par-
liamentary influence—to procure situations un-
der Government for a Sir John Duntze and a
Mr. Hamilton), on condition of their contributing
respectively 801. and 741. annually to their
revenue. We have not room to detail the cir-
cumstances of this corrupt contract, and must,
for the same reason, postpone to another oppor-
tunity our intended notice of the proceedings of
the Commissioners at Cambridge and Warwick.
—Times.

Our Correspondent 0. P. Q. has, in a second
letter, combatted some of the notions of the
combinations of workmen in France and Ger-
many—such as that no workman should work
more than ten hours a day, nor receive less than
five francs. In this country the Trades'
Unions go more skilfully to work. Combina-
tions in trades there always have been and
always will be ; but they can never embrace
the whole system of labour of a country, and
henever they attempt to do this, they must
break down. In trades in which much skill
is demanded, it may be possible by limit-
ing the number of apprentices, and by other
means, to keep up wages ; but in general the
attempt to keep up a rate of wages in any place
much higher than the average, can only have the
effect of driving the trade to other towns. In
Ireland there is a disposable fund of labour, suf-
ficient to swamp the labourers in any branch of
industry in England, in which great skill is not
required. Mr. John M'Mahon, a surveyor of
lands and farms, intimately acquainted with the
counties of Cork, Clare, Limerick, and Kerry,
examined by the Agricultural Committee, states
that in the large tracts of country on the Shan-
non, in which the growing of wheat is rapidly
spreading, and in which there is every facility
for exporting wheat to the English markets, yet
that in these fine countries the condition of the
labourers is almost hopeless.
"In ' what respect is the condition of the labourer
worse ?—ln not having employment.
"Is his food more scanty than it was?—Many have
told me that they would be the happiest people that there
could be in the world if they could have employment six
months in the year at eightpence a day.
" What is the rate of wages now in your neighbour-
hood for an able-bodied man ?—Eightpenee a-day is all
we give now ; but they get their breakfast and dinner
from some : but all will not give it them.
" Have all tho'e labourers little patches of land of their
own ?—Yes.
" How much?—Generally an acre.

" What do they pay ?--A fortunate man will have to
pay from 51. to 81. for it and the cabin, and will have to
veil his pig to pay his rent?
" Tlen the conition of the labourer is this—he occu-
pies his cabin and about an acre of ground, for which he
pays from Si. to 81. an acre ; and when he can get work,
he gets about Sit. a day for it ?—Yes.
" How many months in the year may he have work ?
—V,ry few , some may employ him four months in the
year ; it depends upon the farmer, and tvht ther he has
suns who are expert to manage the horses."
With a country alongside of us, swarming
with wretches in this condition, who in a few
hours can pass by steam-boats to our sh3res,
all attempts on the part of the labourers in Bri-
tain to keep up wages, must be hopeless. The
flor laws are the only security of the English
labourers. Without the minimum guaranteed
to them under the poor laws, they would soon
he as effectually destroyed by the Irish, as the
English rats have been destroyed by the Nor-
way rats.—Morning Chronicle.

The preliminary investigation of a charge of
forgery connected with the transfer of stock,
which took place at the Mansion-house on
Tuesday, drew forth some judicious observa-
tions from the new Lord Mayor, who, we are
glad to perceive, does not pursue the mode of
'xamination which was represented as being so
acceptable at the Home Office, although con-
trary to the law of England, and condemned by
ail the Judges of the realm. But what we wish
to point public attention more particularly to
in the present case is what fell from his Lord-
ship in relation to the loose mode of transact•
ing business by the London brokers, which he
very justly described as affording great facilities
to practises of a fraudulent nature. As to the
merits of the case, we abstain from entering into
them, because it is contrary to our notions of
justice to prejudge any person accused of crime,
and to brand him as a convict before his defence
has been fully heard. All Magistrates, and all
who comment upon proceedings in a court of
criminal law, ought to ever bear in mind the im-
portant truth, that it is as much the interest,
and should be the object of justice, to protect
innocence as to punish guilt. But the scales
can never be held even between the public and
the prisoner when passion disturbs the judgment,
or when an intemperate zeal gives itself up to
Rust impressions, for in such cases accusation is
usually held tantamount to proof. In bill tran-
sactions it is well known that a great proportion
of the forgeries committed, when the crime was
punishable with death, and since, might have been
prevented, if it were not for a careless and slo-
venly mode of transacting these matters, by
persons relying on the penalties of the law,
which no man ought to do, but is bound, on the
contrary, to take every possible precaution to
prevent fraud. There are cases, indeed, in
which, from the very nature of the fraud, no
precautions can avail towards preventing it ; in
such cases the party defrauded is, of course,
blameless ; but not so in those instances where
the negligent mode of doing business invites the
commission of the offence, and, perhaps, sug-
gests the guilty idea. In those instances the
party whose rights of property are deceptiously
invaded is an accessary to the frauds upon him-
self. A great deal of crime might be prevented,
at least that species of crime which consists in
circumventing and defrauding others, if only
common prudence were exercised in the daily
transactions of the mercantile world. We do
not ascertain from the report whether the pri-
soner in the case to which we have alluded, who
was cotrustee of the Stock said to be fraudu-
lently transferred, stands charged with having
forged the name of his cotrustee or coexecutor,
to the power of attorney to transfer, or whether
the charge is for having forged the name in the
transfer book at the Bank, though it would seem
as if the signature in the transfer book was written
by another person, who falsely personated the
coexecutor ; but however this may be, the circum-
stances detailed on the part of the prosecution
induced the Lord Mayor to make the observa-
tions which we have stated in reprobation of a
mode of transacting business which made the
perpetration of fraud a work of comparative fa-
cility. The stockbroker's clerk said his business
was done, as all other
resptielecittasb.le stockbrokers"
were in the habit of doing
Nit. The observations of the Chief Magistrate
doubtagistr ofate
were applied, not to the practice of the individual
house, but to the system—a system calculated
to encourage and create crime, by removing those

difficulties which proper scrutiny and precaution 11
would throw in the way of persons contriving the
fraudulent transfer of Stock. The Lord Mayor
stated that he "did not impute to the stock-
broker or his clerk any impropriety of conduct ;
he believed the transaction to be irreproachable
as far as regarded them, but he must repeat that
the practice was a bad one, and gave men of
fraudulent intentions opportunities of defraud-
ing." Prevention is better than punishment..
Morning Herald.
-

A conversation took place in the Lord Chan-
cellor's Court on Tuesday, with regard to the
selection of a day for the hearing of a particular
motion, in which Sir Edward Sugden was en-
gaged. In the course of this conversation that
gentleman expressed a wish that his Lordship,
would fix as early a day as possible, as he in-
tended after a short time to decline the holding
of briefs in his Lordship's Court. We wit-
tressed this little incident when it took place,
and we did not notice it yesterday morning,
locause the determination of an advocate, how-
ever eminent, as to the arrangement of his
practice, did not appear to. us a fair subject for
public criticism, and because there was really
nothing either i-n the' occasion or the manner of
Sir Edward Sugden's announcement, which
could properly expose it to remark. The
Times, however, takes this opportunity to
calumniate one of the first lawyers of his day.
It thinks fit to attribute the secession of
Sir Edward Sugden to a petty spleen against
the Chancellor, and insinuates that the
speedy diminution of his professional in-
come, will make him regret the indul-
gence of this unworthy sentiment. Sir Ed-
ward Sugden, as a gentleman, cannot like
to practise in Lord Brougham's Court, be-
cause Lord Brougham has vituperated him in
language of more than his habitual vulgarity.
Sir Edward Sugden, as a lawyer, cannot like to
practise in Lord Brougham's Court, because
Lord Brougham is the worst Equity Judge
that political necessity ever placed upon the
Woolsack. Nevertheless, Sir Edward Sugden's
retirement is not by his brethren of the Bar
attributed either to resentment at his Lordship's
ribaldry, or to disgust at his Lordship's igno-
rance. The fact is, that the Chancellor now
gets through the business of his Court not only
very badly, but also very slowly. This being
so, and the progress of the Vice-Chancellor
being far more rapid, it is plain to every one who
is acquainted with the course of business in these
Courts, that Sir Edward Sugden incurs pecu-
niary loss, not by leaving the Chancellor's Court,
but by remaining in it. We ought ,to beg Sir
Edward's pardon for suggesting this very obvi-
ous interpretation of a design which, we are well
aware, it is not our business to interpret. A jour-
nalist has no more right to quarrel with a bar-
rister's choice of an arena, for the exertion of
his talents, than with a merchant's selection of a
commodity for the investment of his capital.—
Morning Post.