The Sun.
London, England, 1833-01-04 00:00:00

been discussed with great ability, both in
the Congress and by the press of Ame-
rica, within the last two years, as applied to
two separate sets of states with different inter-
ests in the same confederation; but the principles
which they have established apply equally to the
conflicting claims of different bodies of citizens
in all countries. Substitute different classes of
labourers and artisans in the same community
for different states, with certain predominant
interests in the same confederation, and all the
admitted principles on which the American
tariff is about to be changed or repealed would
support a similar change in our corn laws,
and a gradual abolition of protecting duties
in all our branches of industry. A Go-
vernment or Legislature presiding over more
homogenous or more mixed interests than those
of the great Republic which comprises the 24
States of North America would have (if it well
understood its duty) as little ground to interfere,.
by projecting imposts, Frith the regular course of
industry, as the Congress of Washington will
soon admit respecting the different members of
the same Union. Duties for revenue, so long
as it is thought advisable to raise a revenue by
Custom-house regulations, are always defen-
sible,—duties for the prohibition of certain
foreign articles, or the protection of their home-
made and home-grown substitutes, are always
either a compensation for an imprudent outlay
of capital, an indemnification for a political
error or accident, or a premium upon a misap-
plication of industry. The French, when, by the
Buonaparte system, they were cut off from the
supply of sugar from the West Indies, applied
themselves to beet-root plantations an immense
loss. Their iron they manufactured at the same
enormous disadvantage. The North Americans
during the war with England prohibited the im-
portation of English goods : they were therefore
obliged, for their internal supply of mann fac-
tures, to establish at a great loss cotton, woollen,
andiron manufactories of their own. These
were losing trades which the respective Govern-
ments of those countries have for some time
perpetuated, but which they are now taking
measures to correct. The southern states of the
American Union bore the burden for some time,
but have expressed their determination to bear it
no longer. In America, the interest of the
northern or manufacturing states has hitherto
been predominant, and has imposed duties on
foreign fabrics for its own protection, while in
England, by the landed aristocracy in Parlia-
ment, the corn monopolists, or exclusionists,
have imposed prohibitions on the introduction
of human food. All these partial enactments
will soon cease on both sides of the Atlantic,
and human industry will be allowed to select its
most profitable course without interruption or
restriction from impolitic enactments. In the
mean time a prudent Legislature will endeavour
to make the change gradual, and to render it as
little injurious to private investments of capital,
or established habits of industry, as is consistent
with the public welfare or an ultimate return to
a better system.—Times.
In our paper of the 27th ult. we briefly noticed
the corn r encement of the session of the Legis-
lative Chambers of Hesse Darmstadt. The last
arrivals from the continent have brought further
accounts of the proceedings of the Second
Chamber, which is animated by a spirit decidedly
favourable to the progress of liberal opinions
and useful reforms in Germany. The debates
are, however, either altogether suppressed or very
imperfectly given in the German Papers, and it
is difficult to judge of the real state of parties
from garbled and probably perverted representa-
tions of what passes in such an assembly. Ne-
vertheless, the accounts which have reached us of
the results of the proceedings, so far as they
have yet gone, leave no doubt that the opposi•
tion to the wishes of the Government and the
arbitrary designs of the German Diet is unre-
served and powerful. The Members who thus
boldly come forward to offer resistance, not
only to the views of their own petty Court,
but of all the surrounding despotisms of which
the Germanic League is composed, must be
presumed to feel confident in the support of
the great body of the nation. On the 18th
ult. the address of the Second Chamber
was presented by a deputation to the Grand
Duke, who expressed some dissatisfaction at
certain passages which it contained. One of the
most prominent referred to the ordinances or
proclamations which had been issued by the
Government, in pursuance of the decree of the
German Diet against popular meetings and
newspapers. The address said—" Publications
threatening our constitutional rights have given
rise to painful doubts in the breasts of the great
majority of your faithful Hessians." This pas-
sage, it seems, gave much offence to the Court
party, and it was partieularly noticed in the
Grand Ducal answer. After a brief preamble,
his Royal Highness stated that he would not
make many remarks on those passages in the
address " on the spirit or substance of which it
would not be agreeable to dwell." Afterwards,
in referring to the allusion made in the address
to the decree of the German Diet, he is said to
have observed—" That he knew nothing of any
publication which could be regarded as menacing
to Hessian constitutional rights ; and that with a
little more confidence in his intentions,the doubts
said to exist never would have found admission
into theChamher."During the interview the Grand
Duke seemed vexed and embarrassed, and ap-
peared glad to get rid of the deputation as
speedily as possible. When the deputation re-
ported the Grand Duke's answer, a warm debate
took place, of which we do not find any trace in
the German papers, but which terminated in
referring the answer to a committee, with instruc-
tions to draw up a reply, which it was proposed
should be called an explanatory address. On
the 19th, the report of this committee was
brought up by the deputy Von Gagern. It is
said to have been listened to with intense
interest by the people in the gallery, and
by the foreign Diplomatists who were present.
It stated that dissatisfaction had been expressed
by his Royal Highness respecting two descrip-
tions of passages,—first, those in which the
Chamber had expressed views on political affairs
different from the views entertained by the Go-
vernment ; 2dly, those which had been mis-
understood. With respect to the former, no
explanation could be entered into, and it
would be improper to pass them over if
the latter were to be noticed. Such a silenr
justification would not befit the dignity of the
Chamber, which certainly would not in any way
appear to retract the political views embodied in
the address. The committee therefore recotn-
mend that no address whatever should he pre-
sented to the Grand Duke, but that the obser-
vations made on on his answer by the committee
should be adopted as a resolution of the Cham-
ber. The report then went over the Grand
Duke's answer, sentence by sentence, and jus-
tified or explained the address as the case re-