The Sun.
London, England, 1833-05-16 00:00:00

the great body of the people,—dear by its
including a greater quantity of labour than that
for which it could be purchased by a fair ex-
change of the products of our industry with
other nations,—dear by the necessity of obtaining
the supply from our more unpropitious soils,
—dear, in short, in the sense in which Bur-
gundy or claret would be dear if made from
grapes grown in English hot-houses, in-
stead of being obtained from the vineyards
or the wine-growers of France. By our present
most absurd system of laws for regulating the
trade of corn, we even lose the benefit of a tax
which, while it afforded to the agriculturists their
darling protection, would bring a considerable
revenue into the T►easury. Notw ithstan ding
the high price to which grain must rise before it
can find its way into the English market, such
large importations have of late taken place as to
convince some reasoners that the corn laws are
actually devised, or at least calculated, to injure
the English landlord and farmer ; yet, strange
to say, little or no advantage is taken of the dif-
ference between prices abroad and at home to
relieve the English tax-payer of a part of his
burdens. It appears from the returns laid be-
fore Parliament, and embodied in one of Earl
Fitzwilliam's resolutions, that within the last four
years 4,795,746 quarters of foreign wheat have
been entered for home consumption, and that
nearly 3,000,000 of that quantity has paid a duty
of about ls. 6d. a quarter! The sum total of the
graduated duty paid for nearly 5,000,000 quarters
was only 1,601,190/. Now, none of those who are
most opposed to the existence of the corn mono-
poly ever proposed, in the first instance, to abolish
every remnant of protecting duties, and many
are willing to allow a duty of 7s. Ss., or 10s., a
quarter, diminishing every year as contracts are
renewed, or as the agriculturists are prepared for
the change. Had either of these scales of duty
been adopted, the farmer would have been re-
lieved from some of the great fluctuations of
price to which he has been exposed, and the Ex-
chequer would have been enriched in a sum that
would have enabled us to dispense with some of
our most obnoxious taxes. But the ground on
which any protecting duty can be demanded or
justified will, we hope, soon be removed from
under the feet of the advocates of the corn laws.
They demanded a peculiar protection for their
manufacture in the home market, because they
alleged that they were subjected to the peculiar
burden of tithes and rates. The tithes, by their
proposed commutation, will become hencefor-
ward a rent-charge on the land, and not an ob-
struction to its improvement ; and, in the next
consideration of the corn laws, we shall be ena-
bled to demand either the entire abolition of a
protecting duty, or at least so small an impost
as will not tend in any material degree to raise
the prices of our foreign importations. When
the House of Commons shall take up this sub-
ject, we shall expect a kind of discussion and de-
cision different from that which took Place in the
Peers on Tuesday.—Times.
We give a report of the proceedings at the
inquest held yesterday, on the body of the
policeman, Robert Cully. The inquiry is ad-
journed to five o'clock this afternoon. The
evidence hitherto does not seem to point with
any thing like certainty to the individual who
deprived the policeman of his life. Thomas
Bluck, a policeman, describes two individuals
by one of whom it is probable that he was
killed :—" I was near the deceased," he said,
" at the time he cried out that he was stabbed.
It was at the right-hand side of Calthorpe-
street. I was five or six yards behind him at
the time ; I saw him come from a door-way
where there is a porch over the door ; be
said he was stabbed. There were two men
attacking me and another constable at that
moment. * The men
who assailed us were armed with sharp instru-
ments, but what they were I cannot say ; the
mob generally were armed with bludgeons ; the
men who attacked us came from the same di-
rection as that in which Cully received his
wound." Bluck then proceeds to describe the
appearance and dress of the two men. The evi-
dence as to the mode of dispersing the mob is
contradictory. The police state that they were
assailed in a furious manner by the mob. The
other witnesses seem generally to think that un-
necessary hastiness was used in dispersing the
crowds. Charles Everard, surgeon, says, "that
standing at the door of No. 5, in Gough-street
North, I observed the police with uplifted staves,
breaking the heads of all around." Some of
the witnesses share a mistake, which is, indeed,
very generally entertained, that till the Riot Act
be read, a mob cannot be dispersed. An ille-
gal assemblage, which this was confessedly, if'
ever there was one, can he dispersed by any of
the King's subjects, without any delay whatever.
The Home-office, which was evidently in full
possession of the designs of those by whom the
meeting was called, took the utmost pains to
warn well-disposed people not to attend the
meeting. The banners carried by the ring-
leaders were of the most seditious character.
The authorities of the country would have been
guilty of a gross neglect of duty, had they suf-
fered an assemblage, so convened, and of so se-
ditious a character, to remain one moment with-
out attempting its summary dispersion. We
should, indeed, be in a singular predicament if'
a mob must be suffered to proceed without in-
terruption till the Riot Act is read. The Riot
Act has for object to subject all who do not
disperse without delay to certain penal conse-
quences. It is a signal which no one is at
liberty to neglect. But both before the passing
of the Riot Act, and since, it was never
doubted that an illegal assemblage could be
dispersed without a moment's delay. We by
no means advocate the employment of un-
necessary violence in the dispersing of an
illegal assembly; because the tendency of such
conduct is to generate vindictive feelings, which
survive the occasion. We trust, however, it will
turn out that the police did not act with unne-
cessary severity. It is quite clear that all those
who came armed with pointed weapons to the
meeting contemplated a conflict with the police ;
and it is not to be supposed that the police
would look quietly on while the mob were stab-
bing some of their body. They would naturally,
even for their own security, wish to put a speedy
end to the business. There is an immense dif-
ference between meetings of the people called
for lawful and proper objects, and a meeting of
persons called for an unlawful purpose. It is
not necessary for us to argue that a meeting for
the adoption of preliminary measures for the
calling together of a National Convention is
an unlawful meeting ; and that, even if the Home
Secretary had not issued any proclamation, the
taking pint in such a meeting would have been
an unlawful proceeding. A National Conven-
tion supposes the destruction of the existing
Government ; and every Government, while it
exists, must be supposed to possess the power of
punishing attempts to overturn it. The meeting
at ,i.lancliester was for a lawful object—Reform .

of
may
of Uij
semq
all Cl
lawfu
sons

rliament. A meeting for a lawful object
still be unlawful, if it be called in defiance
provisions of any law, or if the people as-
ied conduct themselves illegally. But, under
rcumstances, a meeting called for an un-
-11 object is necessarily unlawful. The per-
who are instrumental in getting up the
ing at Coldbath.fields must not be con-
led with the people of the metropolis. They
handful of desperadoes, who entertain the
most dangerous notions with respect to property,
and who avow purposes which no Government
in the world would sanction or tolerate. These
persons must not be suffered to keep the rest of
the community in fear and apprehension. The
well-disposed ought not to approach even such
meetings as that at Coldbath-fields, nor to allow
those over whom they have authority to approach
them. People must be taught that they ought
not to trifle with such matters as meetings for
National Conventions, called by men armed with
mortal weapons, to enable them to resist the
authority of the laws. They ought to take warn-
ing from what happened on Monday, that they
may involve themselves in the most serious con-
sequences by the indulgence of an idle curiosity.
—Morning Chronicle.
When Lord Lyndhurst a few days ago stated
in the House of Lords, that crime had increased
from one extremity of the island to the other,
we observed that we had no doubt that though
this might be true with respect to England, it
would not be found true with respect to the
agricultural districts of Scotland. There was
yesterday distributed a Parliamentary paper
which places this matter beyond a doubt. For
the first time we have a return from Scotland,
made out in such a manner as to allow of a
comparison between the two divisions of the
island. The whole number of persons com-
mitted in Scotland for 1832 was 1,898 males,
and 533 females—together 2,431, Of these
were liberated without trial and without finding
bail to stand trial, that is, after a preliminary in-
quiry, termed a precognition, 437 males and
102 females—together 539. The whole num-
ber of persons tried was 1,324 males and 434
females—together 1,758. Of these were con-
victed 1,194 males and 383 females—together
1,577. There were outlawed 22, found insane
3, and acquitted 114 males arid 50 females—to-
gether 164. The first point of comparison with
England should be the proportion of the acquit-
tals to the convictions. In England, the con-
victions in 1832 were 16,367, the acquittals 5,327,
and the no bills found and not prosecuted 2,870.
If we take the acquittals and no bills, we find
them a little more than one-half of the convic-
tions, i. e., we find that one-half of the persons
committed were either improperly committed, or
improperly acquitted. In Scotland, on the other
hand, we find the convictions to be to the ac-
quittals as 9.6 to 1. There is an enormous
difference between one-half and one-tenth, and
that difference argues a far greater care on the
part of the Scotch functionamies than on the
part of the English. Another point of compa-
rison is the certainty of punishment. In Eng-
land, the number sentenced to death in 1832 was
1,140, of whom were executed 99; i. e. the
number convicted to the number executed, was
10-i to 1. In Scotland, the number sentenced
to death was 6. The number executed was 2,
the number whose sentence was commuted 2,
and 2 remain to be disposed of. The sentence
is therefore carried into strict execution in one-
third of the cases. If the two undisposed of
should be executed, the proportion would be
two-thirds of the cases. The Scotch Returns,
however, included assaults as well as crimes.
Of the 1,750 persons tried, 320 males and 35
females were for assaults. That they were
trifling, may be inferred from the circumstance
of 236 being tried by sheriffs, burgh magis-
trates, and justices of peace without a jury; 75
by sheriffs, with a jury ; and only 39 by the
High Court of Justiciary and Assizes. Deduct-
ing the assaults, the crimes for Scotland would
be 1,395. The number of commitments for Lan-
caster is 2,624, for York 1,537. But while crime
is pretty equally diffused over England, it
is in Scotland confined to a few great towns.
Thus, for instance, of the great crimes against
property—theft and burglary—the total tried for
the former in Scotland were, for theft, 529 males
and 250 females ; together, 779. Lanarkshire
(Glasgow) had of these 188, Edinburgh 147,
Forfar (Dundee) 65, Perth 49, Renfrew (Pais-
ley) 35; that is, of the burglaries, in all 179,
Edinburgh has 66, Lanark 36, Renfrew 25.
Mr. Hume lately allowed himself to be so far
carried away by the declamations of Dr.
Chalmers, as to believe that the south-eastern
district of Scotland, in which there are assess-
ments to the poor, were demoralized. So far
from this being the case, it appears that the
counties of Haddington, Berwick, Roxburgh,
and Selkirk, the counties alluded to, which
are purely agricultural, have only thirty-four
Thefts and seven burglaries. In the counties of
Berwick and Selkirk there are no burglaries, and
between them only eight thefts. So much for
the crimes of England and Scotland, and the
administration of the criminal law of the two
countries. Scotland enjoys inestimable advan-
tages, in its having local judges and public pro-
secutors. The whole system of England seems
calculated to encourage the growth of crime.
The criminal law is barbarous, and its admini-
stration is still more barbarous. —Morning
Chronicle.

mee
foun
are

When a Member of Parliament gives to the
world his reasons for voting in a particular way
upon any question, he must expect those reasons
to be canvassed ; and if they are not sufficient
to prevent his conduct being condemned in the
public mind, he cannot object to the compe-
tency of that tribunal of opinion which passes
judgment upon him, because lie has already
appealed to its jurisdiction. The man who
would wrap himself up in the new-fashioned
doctrine of the irresponsibility of the represen-
tative characteroughtnot to descend from the
" stern dignity" of his position by giving any
reasons whatever for his conduct, or by appealing
to public opinion at all. Dr. Lushington,
though claiming an exemption boundless as that
claimed by some of the most lofty patriots of a
reformed House of Commons from the incon-
venient surveillance of a reformed constituency,
has condescended to enter into an explanation of
his vote relative to the motion on the assessed
taxes, in a letter addressed by him to an
individual who, we presume, is one of the
electors of the metropolitan diitrict which the
Learned Doctor represents. Everybody knows
that this distinguished civilian voted against
Sir John Key's motion, and in favour of
the tricky proposition of the Chancellor
of die Exchequer, but everybody did not
know his reasons for so voting, until he thought
fit to publish them in the above-mentioned
letter. They are three ; and they are founded
upon the three consequences which he says
would have resulted from carrying the motion to
repeal the house and window taxes ; the first

being the resignation of at least a large part of
the Ministry ; the second the repeal of the whole
or a large part of the malt tax; the third, the
imposition of a property or income tax. There
is a story told of a worthy Dutch burgomaster,
who, apologizing to a Prince of Orange for not
firing a royal salute on his honouring the town
over which he presided with a visit, began by
stating that he had nineteen reasons for omitting
that ceremony—the first being that there was
not a single piece of artillery in the town.
The Prince dispensed with the enumera-
tion of the other eighteen reasons, consi-
dering the first sufficient. Of the three
reasons given by the Learned Doctor for
voting against the repeal of the assessed
taxes, we suspect that the first was the all-
powerful one ; for when a Member of Parlia-
ment is more anxious about the preservation of
the power of a Ministry than solicitous to pro-
tect the interests of the people, the desire to
keep that Ministry in place is always a sufficient
motive for his conduct. When Dr. Lushington
moved a not very temperate resolution against
the assessed taxes at the Crow❑ and Anchor,
the Ministers had not threatened to resign, and
perhaps at that time he thought, like many other
persons, that those taxes might be reduced with-
out putting the Government to any greater in-
convenience than the carrying into effect the sa-
lutary principle of retrenchment farther than it
had yet gone. He knew, however, that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had declared that,
when he should have completed his " tile
and taxed-cart" plan of fiscal relief, there
would be a surplus of only half a million of
income above expenditure. Now, as the house
and window tax amounts to something about
two millions, we ask, in what way did the Doctor
think it possible, when he moved his resolution
at the Crown and Anchor, that the Chancellor
of the Exchequer could be compelled to give up
this two million of taxes, and yet be enabled to
go on with the affairs of the Government ? He
must have been aware that his resolution at the
Crown and Anchor, which followed the Chan-
cellor's final expose, would have the effect, if
realized, not only of sweeping away the half
million surplus, but of causing a deficiency to
the amount of a million and a half. How was
so great a deficiency to be supplied, leaving the
malt tax altogether out of the question, only by
retrenchment or by a property tax ? Of the
possibility of relieving the country from any por-
tion of taxation by retrenchment, Dr. Lushing-
ton says nothing in his letter—and as to a pro-
perty tax, he dreads the very idea of it. But
why did the repeal of half the malt tax alarm the
Doctor ? He says comparatively little benefit
would be reaped from it by his constituents, and
great benefit by the landlords. Thus he admits
that both classes would be benefitted, only one
in a greater proportion than the other ; yet he
considered the repeal of the tax a great evil.
Well, but Ministers had resolved that the vote
for the repeal of half that tax should be re-
scinded, as it was rescinded, by the subservient
Reformers," who are more zealous to pre-
serve the Ministers in power than to alleviate
the burdens of the people. As it was resolved
at all hazards to rescind that vote, why was Dr.
Lushington alarmed at the repeal of the assessed
taxes any more than when he stood up and de-
nounced them in a public meeting a few days
before ? He was willing, he says, to sacrifice
his popularity, but he says nothing of his hopes
of preferment. If Ministers are to be main-
tained in power because they refuse to do what
is right, we imagine they will always be entitled
to his support, and to that of others who reason
like him.—Morning Herald.
It will be seen that an inquest is proceeding
to investigate the circumstances of the death of
Cully, the unfortunate policeman, who lost his
life in the late affray at Coldbath-fields. There
is evidently a good deal of excitement on the
subject. It would be premature to offer an
opinion at present, but we are bound to say,
that so far as the examination has yet gone, it is
not favourable to the conduct of the police. Mr.
Hume alluded to the transaction, i❑ the House
of Commons, the same evening, and complained
that the Sheriff of Middlesex was not called
upon by the Government. Mr. Lamb, how-
ever, defended both the Government and the
police, the latter of whom he had no doubt
would prove to have acted with great forbearance.
We must know more of the evidence before we
can come to the same conclusion—Morning
Herald.

The Ministerial papers, in a tone of disap-
pointment, inform the public that Sir Stratford
Canning is on his return from Madrid, having
failed in his negotiations regarding Portugal ;
but, as a kind of set-off, reveal the secret " that
Solignac will soon march out of Oporto, and a
decisive struggle take place." How Lord
Palmerston and NI. de Talleyrand ever expected
that Sir Stratford could succeed in such a mis-
sion as that which took him to Madrid no one
can imagine, unless it had been first ascertained
that Spain was prepared to commit a suicidal
act that would eventually end in her own ruin.
The two countries have the same enemies, and

these are the Revolutionists and Propagandists
of Europe, who would gladly have made Oporto
or Lisbon a stepping-stone into both. Their
expeditions are immediately directed against
Portugal ; but Spain is equally included in their
aim. The spoils of the former would not
suffice to repay their exertions and satisfy
their expectations ; they would, therefore,
have to draw lustily upon the resources
of the latter. Could Sir Stratford, then, imagine
that Spain would become a party to her own
destruction ? Could it be thought that she
►would consent to be bound hand and foot in
order to be tamely delivered up as a victim to
her sworn enemies—those who for the last seve-
ral years have harassed her on the side of the
Pyrenees, on the shores of the Mediterranean,
and by constant endeavours to excite rebellion
wherever their emissaries or incendiary papers
could penetrate ? A Ministerial paper, speak-
ing, last evening, of Sir Stratford's return, says
that he comes away " without having made any
satisfactory impression upon the Spanish Cabi-
net, which not only declines attention to any
proposed course of proceeding for the settlement
of the Portuguese dispute, but even to unite its
voice in proposition for an armistice to stop the
effusion of blood, with a view to an ultimate
arrangement." What our contemporary con-
siders a aatisfiictory impression the Spa-
niards would hold to be quite the reverse,
and hence, doubtless, have very justly con-
cluded that any assent on their part to Sir
Stratford's propositions would be precisely the
same as sealing their own doom. Matters have
gone too far for Spain to blink the question.
She is no longer in a situation to raise artificial
difficulties in the way of settlement, for as re-
gards an adjustment we have long deemed it
utterly impossible ; nor was it the season to
create ambiguities susceptible of any determina-
tion which interested parties might wish to give

to them. In refusing to mediate on the affairs
of Portugal she, therefore, consulted their com-
mon safety; and how she was ever asked by a
British Minister to mediate in such an affair as
that which took Sir Stratford to Madrid will
appear one of the strangest acts of the Grey
Cabinet whenever the truth leaks out. If what
Sir Stratford had to propose comprised any
equitable and efficient measure, respecting
which the Portuguese themselves had a right.
to be heard,, it was not possible for an
agency undertaken and conducted as his
was to produce the result desired ; nor,
after what has happened in the affairs
of Portugal, could it be likely that instructions
emanating from Downing-street could set the
matter at rest. It is, however, to be hoped that
the Madrid mission will not be kept a profound
secret, and that some spirited Member of Parlia-
ment w►ll move for the ungarbled papers relating
to it to be laid on the table of the House. It

is further to be hoped that, when granted, it will
not be a pick-and-choose affair, as it was with
the last Portuguese papers. But, if this cannot
be done, let us know by some other means what
Sir Stratford proposed to the Spaniards. The
best of the joke, however, is, now to hear of an
armistice to stop the effusion of blood ! Let us
ask those engaged in the negotiations who are
the persons now spilling blood in Portugal,
whence did they sail, and under what flag ?
Are they not Englishmen, many of them en-
listed within call of Lord Palmerston's own
office ? Did they not go forth from our own
ports, and in British vessels ? The first
10,000 not having sufficed, is not the same num-
ber of Frenchmen now going out at Solignac's
request, and at the expense of the French Propa•
gandists, with Louis Philip at their head ?
Have not 1,200 of these same Frenchmen been
brought over to England to embark, some of
whom boasted in our coffee-houses that they had
pulled triggers before the walls of Antwerp ?
In a word, are there not detached parts of the
expedition daily sailing from our ports ? With
all these movements going on, publicly and with-
out the slightest interruption, under the eyes of
the British and French Governments, how then

could Sir Stratford expect to succeed in Madrid;
or how is it now that any Ministerial paper can
talk of the effusion of blood as if it were advo-
cating the interests of humanity ? Fortunately,
the Portuguese who are thus compelled to de-
fend their native land, will rejoice whenever So-
lignac performs his pledge to the London and
Paris contractors, by quitting the fortified lines
of Oporto, and commencing his march. They
are fully prepared to receive him, and then it is
that the decisive struggle will take place.
—Morning Post .
The darkness of the plot against the lives of his
Majesty's subjects, on 3londay last, in Coldbath-
fields, thickens—the evidence of the outrages per-
petrated by the police force increases every hour--
the barbarity and needlessness of that outrage be-
come more apparent in proportion as the matter is
more deeply probed ; and it is now clearly a ques-
tion of the utmost moment, in a constitutional point
of view,as well as to the individuals who attacked the
policemen, and slew one of them, whether the re-
sistance made was not justifiable and constitutional.
Upon the first point, the brutal conduct of the police
is confirmed beyond all possibility of doubr. The

proof of it does not now rest upon what might be
termed mere newspaper authority, but upon evidence
given upon oath by persons in every way entitled to
credit—upon that of a Magistrate, who witnessed
the whole of the transaction, and who declares that
be could have dispersed the meeting with the aid of
only six policemen, instead of the 1,500, who were
called into action against the people I—by a re-
spectable tradesman, who, himself, received several
blows from the semi-military force—and, finally, by
the surgeon who first attended the deceased police-
man, and who has not only sworn that he saw them
" with uplifted staves breaking the heads of all
who were near," and pursuing numbers of people,
who fled for safety, but that " he saw no disposition
on the part of the people to break the peace, and
that he does not believe that there would have
been any tumult if the police had not been there !"
Such irrefragable evidence is not to be lightly
disposed of. A meeting was advertised to take
place in Coldbath-fields, for the purpose of express-
ing certain opinions—the meeting was declared in a
proclamation, signed by " the Secretary of State"
(but what Secretary did not appear) to be illegal—
a certain number of persons, however, did meet, with
flags, banners, &c.; but whether the meeting of
these persons was the meeting proclaimed to be ille-
gal, remains yet to be proved—the meeting was not
only peaceable, but, according to all accounts, com-
mitted no breach of the peace, either in word or
in deed—yet, without any warning given, ex-
cept that of the almost unsigned proclamation de-
claring the meeting to be illegal, a force consis ing
of 1,500 men, is drawn together, leaving all other
parts of the metropolis exposed, and rushes upon
the persons present, making no distinction either
between the innocent and the guilty or between age
and sex—striking down every one 'who comes in
their way, and thereby prompting to violence and
outrage those who had no thoughts of resistance,
of sedition, or of treason ! A correspondent, who
does not give his name, says in a letter to us last
night, " I was in company this day, at a public-
house in the neighbourhood of the Sessions-
house, Clerkenwell, when the meeting of last
Monday, and the death of the policeman, was
the subject of conversation. A policeman present
observed, Somebody would swing for it, for the
Commissioners had offered a reward of 1001., and
promotion in the force, to any one of them who
would swear to the murderer.' Now, as this
may be an inducement to swear to an innocent
person, I beg, through the medium of your respect-
able journal, to suggest that all persons make a
memorandum how they spent their time on the
day alluded to, lest they might be innocently
hanged for murder." The letter may come from a
" right and true man," or it may riot; but the cau.
Lion it conveys is not to be despised, arid furnishes
another argument for the most minute and scrupu-
lous inquiry. As for the evidence either of the
policemen or of the parties actually engaged in
getting up or in supporting the meeting, it is not
worth a rush. The esprit de coips of the
former, if not some worse motive, will induce
them to swear anything which may help to
save the police force from the odium so justly
incurred by its conduct, arid with regard to the
latter, although, upon their examination, they ex-
hibited no favour or partiality, still who would
wonder, under all the circumstances of provocation,
that they should give the account which appeared
to them the most favourable stritheir own side?
But impartial testimony is not to be treated in this
mariner; and all the impartial evidence which has
hitherto been given, goes to prove that the attack of
the police was wholly uncalled for, unnecessary, and
most brutal. Nay, the very policemen engaged in
the fray, which the general body had created,
contradict one another; —, the Superintendent
Baker declaring that he gave no orders to his
men " to rush forward," and that they appeared
to think that " they had a discretionary power to
act as they pleased ;" arid one of the policemen, on
the other hand, declaring that he received his
orders from his superior officer ! Is there not now
,round for inquiry ? Are his Majesty's peaceable
subjects' to be knocked down and to be trampled
under foot, men, women, arid children, and no in-
quiry to ti.ke place—no justice to be rendered ?
And then listen to the language of these peace-
eservers, but really peace-breakers, according to
all authentic accounts I " Ruffians," they say, in
speaking of the people whom they knocked down

or those who had their no`,l/
atinadnotramTphleedpoulnicde7 foot ; but who were the
broken by their staves ? And then, again' dent, i
think of Mr. Thomas, the Superintentwod
calling Mr. Stallwood, a man of propertildrel;
of the highest respectability, " a se br
and telling him " that it was such men traeriip
that encouraged such mobs as the present !" :hoold
the blue bottles tip it in gallant style. We lg!
not wonder to hear of their insulting noo' '
ekto
The march of impudence does not assuredly sla r 0
its pace with them, however slowly it may Prteit
with others. Elsewhere a letter will be foun.
some respects eliminatory of an opinion whicii_inw
gave the other day. We plead guilty to the erd
of a hasty judgment, and we insert the letter of
or
correspondent as an atonement. It will, unquesc
II
ably, attract attention, and we trust Our, °
others, it will attract the attention of the inqu
:el
jury. Why are not the reporters for the newsPa,P,t,
examined ? Are not they a portion
best evidence upon the subject ?—ilforn. AdVer
Earl Fitzwilliam's resolutions were on Monday ne(g.i.i,,
in the House of Lords without a division. His Lordocuaro
indeed, had stated, that " considering that in the sti,
the subject had not been taken into considerstion for Yid o
he should adopt the course which he considered wed
to
most conducive to the interests of the country tot
convenience of their Lordships, and merely 11101 e ffor
their Lordships should enter into the consideratioa ° po
resolutions which he had had the honour of introducledged
a former evening. He was desirous of breaking greurine of
bringing those laws under discussion, for the PurPgrie
having them finally set at rest." The Earl of d
fastened upon an expression of Lord Faze/alien:l'o glt.
tributed a meaning to it which it could hardly be si
fairness to bear. of°
at least ortis'(,
" Before proceeding," he said, "to the consideration ,h 0
,4j le "„,
resolutions—resolutions which he thought it iniP°—
their Lordships could pass—he wished to advert to an
sion made use of by the Noble Earl. That Noble Pr ole•
said, that he was addressing an assembly which did Pr
quately feel the interest of the working people of this Ord' te
" Earl Fitzwilliam said, that he had not said so•
merely said, that that House did not fully appreciate t"'
portance of the subject to the manufacturing classes:
t
11
" The Earl of Ripon thought the sentiment was i"ei-the"
the same; and he (the Earl of R.) would say, that, le
Ot:
Lordships did not fully appreciate the importance °'
,s-bippfr
ject to the manufacturing cLsses, they were not fit Niercio
eiate the proper force of the different conflicting to
which were involved in the subject.—(Hear, hear.) oi)
when the Noble Earl told them of the different cnori!,° ,
he would have pursued if he had continued to be a )I"e•hlive;
the House of Commons, he said that he would then ",endt,
ert
with
un
thefe,h.opoe:
however,t
impenetrable
pt
etnhheeet
rsubject
ao
riskhunoceuhsl
os
i npb
ee
to. t
h;
sleursrtoulanndgtelhidmatwimil
of Lords, and he had not even a glimmering hope sie
could penetrate it.—(Hear, hear.) He (Lord
~itp.lo'
heard such a statement from the Noble Earl with gr"." here;
It was but too much of a piece with opinions stated ellt)Or:
and was calculated to create much mischief; and he nth
such a sentiment expressed by a Member of that 11°11-e ,
much pain.—(Hear.)" tbP
Now all that Earl Fitzwilliam meant to say 04)01
their Lordships were landholders—that the core „fel'
taxed the rest of the community eight millions a ricider°
the benefit of the landholders ; and that the latwiaeof
being but men, with the passions and failing!
could not be supposed to be the most impartial iln,of'
a cause in which they were opposed to the people', 1033'
Fitzwilliam attributed no particular inferiority "'
holders to any of the other classes ; on the contrarl;to
admitted that any other class, if allowed to judg,e,scredi;
their own interests are concerned, would be ego'', "do
to judge in favour of themselves. In the lanes'
Burns,—

" If self the wavering balance holds,
It's rarely right adjusted," e
He (Lord F.) said he had no doubt but that 0. one
holders of England were as good men as the weavers or OOf
sweeps—(A laugh)—or any class ; but this was no reason 00ie
the rest of the community should be taxed, in order
this
010
those lanholders to live finely, and to have seats in 010 o
House." ober,

Corn will always be dearer in this than in au' vete
country of Europe, precisely because our country to 104
with large cities, and we have a large manufae nth
population, who not only supply our own ,- p.O
01
but export manufactures largely. That we '
manufactures, is the reason why we ought
ftoe
Joe
port food, because, if we could employ our clot'more beneficially in cultivating land, than in Man° sore
ing, we should export food and import manufec.oers
There is no way of rendering us independent of forW fot
for food, but by rendering us also independent of tbe°3,,,ife
a market for our manufactures. The landlords de4de
the people of this country of the advantage they wig; ;V
rive from their mechanical improvements, by tfaiOtbil
food they import in return for their manuiactures, ll to
they are literally toiling to extend their markets freterfeti
benefit the landowners. It is not desirable, aswas ebseaffe,
by Earl Fitzwilliam, that we should he independent lige
reigners for food, because in that case we should he' the
to limit our population, so that the manufacturers Oothett
producers of food should be in proportion to each,. 01°
But there can be no doubt that it would be mud" 0
get
beneficial to the country that limits should he seine
the increase of the population, by prohibiting ell)°.rolli
of manufactures, than that we should be 6°ooo
increasing our exports, and increasing, in eoweq
the demand for food, and giving to the landlord tit° fot,
rence between the price at which the tax allows the aid
to he imported, and the price at which it would bei e co°
we cease to export manufactures, and consequent /of
to import food. It is true that the landlords dOl3-/ are
nefit from all that is taken from the people.
consumers, as well producers ; and they pay ban"bo- ate
for what they consume. By pauperising the la cosi°
classes, too, they have everywhere created an ecoo.,‘,
population that must be fed. What the ultirosteo, `';
quences may be, we cannot say ; but in the meat°',,p°
several parishes of the South, the poor are eatiligo-rait"
rents. Short-sighted rapacity often ends in its oet.dbicil
We have had hitherto a landowner government, "d
notwithstanding the prote•tations of Earl Ripon lereeee
Winchilsea, have considered everything with tea, ;V/
chiefly to landowners ; but, fortunately for manki°
who wish to benefit by wrong, give to the Warts°
striking example of falling victims to their own dee'
from justice.—Morning Chronicle.

! •
a JPS
THE LATE MEETING ON THECALTA.°
ESTATX. —Some idea may be formed of the very fre,:joS'
which the New Police made of their truncheons olillpart:
dsy, by the fact that a great many surgeons 10 a;,
of the metropolis have patients of all ages and b°l',lY. 0.1
under their care, who received injuries, partirt,3-,0:1;
their heads and arms, from the Police. 00e
gentleman, residing in Southwark, was called 11130'1:
attend five persons, four men and a boy, orli°'e
were cut open by the policemen's truncbeao'be,p°,;
parties wounded were merely led by curiosity t..°1v,03,'
A surgeon and accoucheur who resides in the .01e` P
St. Pancras, was on Monday evening called up°.° j I:
tend a respectable married woman, who was set' chiPo
premature labour, and gave birth to a still-bor°oo
owing to the unmerciful beating she received if
policemen of the C division. —2lfor iiing Advertise' 0r
We understand that it hat been firl3ll/dvidedi
ranged by Government that this county shall be e, on
into two ridings. The two Orinonds, the two ft;r43;133 e•
those baronies adjoining the King's County, cant''reee
Roscrea, will form the north riding of the courl.t),l 13,r
rary, for which an assize will be held in Neva; met
days in each circuit, the other three days in t I'•;9
heretofore. An engineer, deputed by Govern,',3-bnlts
l.
visited Nenagh for the purpose of selecting a i 4131" i 4 s,
to erect a court-house and gaol. The site seleat.....e
joiningtvhcertsniewr.barracks and the Limerick road.
me! rid

Johnson,th e lady 0 of fjaa
m son.es
Ono ttihi
ee 13th12th lust., in
at Etiat :Bo
rife-Risclace, Belgrave-square,— ' 011-
E Bth Royal Inlat:it,ill.
, Sr'. „
Dawn, sq.,
daughter. ace,
of her
At Camberwell, the lady of Edw. Smalley Esq., c' 03(daj'°'-'
' • r
On the 15th inst., at Clapham, Mrs. A. Scriveno ,
ivirr,
MARRIED. to 11'e35611
At Bath, the Hon. Richard Howe 13rowne,!on,.co, cl j
and brother to the present Lord Kilmaine, to Llizau
000
ter of the Hon. Colonel Browne. n IA A
On the 14th inst., at All Saints, Southampton, ~,, 5.0 f)
Rowe Dzuison, Esq., of Park-square, Regent's 1 al,'on, ic ,
second daughter 01 Frederick Hill, Esq., of the l'oqb octifil,
Furzey Hurst, Isle of Wight. the Iles'. ire' ill
On the 15th inst., at Hampstead Church,
Fitzroy
_squs..,.
Samuel Foyster, of Upper Charlotte-street, _.t, f., tl'
13Birhohilanisdisti:ts".tt:ar'eta t Bushey,
Child's-hill, Hampstead.
Sarah, youngest daughter of the late Thomarise'hti.iii, tef,'.
, Pe'
DIED.
' Ludlow, third daughter of the latex,,i
Lady Harriet ,
1 y
.(o),intßttaithreet.ll24tthh i
ninsts.t,.,i Ist
NSte. w
Leßountairidng'st,e,lti_satsrteientg,s,thSeiri.,3;jinetr it,
aEgst)Ooeqdnii,:srt:lttfhil:e(cemild44l ahtisithloauckseheaatth:rliitltl,m(hia.
inßa:c
c 0..,.,,,,.;
B. 13'
Ludlow, and sister to tleiet,pargeesdenstlE. arl.
. 1W
agent 74.

PRINTER ANU PUBLISHED BY MURDO youblo•
SUN OFFICE, 112, STRAND, lANDO:6