The Sun.
London, England, 1835-04-07 00:00:00

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.

IMPORTANT CASE.—Thomas Keeling, an attorney, was
opposed by Mr. Cresswell, on the part of a Mr. Edward
Bamford.

In this case a question of considerable importance was
raised. The insolvent had been sued by Mr. Bamford for
penalties under the statute of Anne, for usury. The case
was tried at Westminster before the late Lord Tenterden,
in the sittings after Easter Term, 1832, when a verdict
was given for the plaintiff, damages 8861. Is., on which he
had been taken in execution. Some of his furniture had
been seized, and the attorney for Mr. Bamford had received
1901. He said the action was a qui tans one, but he had
not paid any portion to the Crown. Had he recovered the
whole he should have paid half to the Treasury.
Mr. CRESSWELL contended that the debt was owing to
the Crown, and the Court had no power to discharge the
insolvent.

Mr. COOKE argued that it was not a Crown debt. He
said the question was one of importance, and he wished the
case to come before a full Court.

Mr. Commissioner HARRIS assented, and the matter
stood adjourned until the return of the other Commissioners
from their respective Circuits.
The Chief Clerk had had a communication with the So-
licitor of the Treasury in this case, and he had informed
him that there was nothing on the schedule to prove that
the insolvent was indebted to the Crown.

At Dunchurch fair, on Monday, the sheared sheep
sold at 4d. per lb. ; Wool Sheep sd. ; Beef 4id_ to sid. per
lb. There was a good supply, but sales were rather dull.
Rugby fair, on Tuesday, was about the same.--Warwick Ad.
maser.

--IT-'~--- --=A--

THE SUN, LONDON,

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Lord John Russell last night unfolded to the House
of Commons the course which he intends to pursue in
reference to the Resolution it has adopted upon the
subject of ecclesiastical revenues in Ireland. On re-
ferring to the report of last night's proceedings it will
be seen that in the Committee the resolution which
had been previously carried in the House was affirmed
by a majority of twenty-five. The next step is, that
the report of the Committee be received by the House,
which may probably occasion another division. After
this, if the majority should still remain with his Lord-
ship, it is his intention, as we collect from his decla-
ration, to move a further resolution, to the effect that
it is the opinion of the House of Commons that no
measure upon the subject of tithes in Ireland can lead
to a satisfactory and final adjustment which does not
embody the principle of appropriation. And, in the
event of this resolution also being carried, it is, it seems,
the further intention of the Noble Lord to move
an Address to the Crown, conceived in the spirit of
his antecedent resolutions. There is, it must be con-
fessed, considerable cunning in the course which the
leader of the Opposition pursues, regarding him as an
individual to whom it is an important object to displace
the present Administration, and as the nominal leader
of a party, comprehending among its ostensible mem-
bers a considerable number of individuals who are
quite willing to annoy and embarrass the present Ad-
ministration, but have no wish to displace them. Lord
John, with the small cunning which naturally belongs
to minds of his order, leads on his doubtful troops,
step by step, in hope that he may at length involve
them in a position from which retreat will be impossi-
ble. It was not much to obtain from a majority of the
House of Commons a recognition of an abstract prin-
ciple, of which the practical application was to depend
upon the result of future inquiries into doubtful ques-
tions of fact. Such a resolution was agreeable enough
to the men who are careless about any consequences
which may arise to the nation from their votes, so that
it do not necessarily lead to a dissolution of the
Ministry or of the Parliament, and that they may re-
tain undisturbed the privilege of writing M.P. after
their names, of franking letters, and of setting the
danger of arrest for debt at defiance. But this suc-
cess was not only easy—it unfortunately was barren
also. It did not open the way directly and immedi-
ately for Lord John Russell, Mr. O'Connell, and
other expectants of place, in the various parties com-
posing the Opposition, to the delights of quarter-day.
The thing to be accomplished, if possible, was, and
is, to get a majority of the House pledged to a pro-
ceeding which, when considered in conjunction with an
express declaration of the head of his Majesty's Go-
vernment, who is known seldom to speak without con-
sideration, and always to mean absolutely what he
says, may infer a necessity for the retirement of him-
self and his colleagues. And it must be admitted
that the resolution which Lord John Russell has
announced his intention to propose, as soon as the
report of his former resolution shall have been re-
ceived, is not ill calculated to secure the purpose in
view. This resolution we have already described. It
pledges those who vote for it to resist the Irish Tithe
Bill of his Majesty's Government, unless a clause be
inserted in it to which it is manifestly impossible for
his Majesty's present Government to agree ; and it is
intended so to pledge them after, and because, the
head of his Majesty's Government has declared, that
he will regard any obstruction on the part of a majo-
rity of the House to the Irish Tithe Bill as a proof
that the House of Commons wishes him to retire. It
is an excellent resolution for the purposes of the leaders
of the Opposition, but we very much doubt whether it
will suit equally well the purposes of many of their
present followers. One characteristic of this resolution
is, that it places the followers of the Opposition camp
precisely in the situation in which their leaders, for
their own interests, would wish them to be placed ;
that it compels them to follow on, divests them indi-
vidually of their independence, and deprives them
at once and absolutely of all future volition as to
the manner or degree of hostility which they shall
exercise towards his Majesty's Government. But
another, and more striking characteristic of this reso-
lution is, that it does all we have above stated prema-
turely, irregularly, in a manner which is not only un-
parliamentary, but which indicates that the leaders of
the Opposition are actuated by a very ungracious and
suspicious impatience to fetter their followers. Why
should any portion of the House of Commons be called
upon to anticipate the discussion of a measure about
to be submitted in due course to their full examina-
tion ? Why should they be invited to exact from
themselves a condition precedent to the adoption
of a particular measure, the adoption or rejec-
tion of which will be absolutely in their own
power in all the various stages through which it
must necessarily pass, before it can be transmitted
to the other branch of the Legislature ? Is the ques-
tion of Irish tithes so little worthy of a full considera-
tion that the measure which the King's Government
intends deliberately to submit to the Legislature for its
final adjustment may be disposed of by anticipation,
and prematurely condemned in patches ? Is the paci-
fication of Ireland a national interest of such exceed-
ingly small amount, that a measure having that object
in view ought to be thrown down by the House of
Commons, and made the mere stepping-stone to place
and power for a grasping, rapacious, sordid, and un-
principled faction ? Do the British nation, or its re-
presentatives, sympathize so entirely with the eager
desire of the Whigs to return to office that, rather than
defer for a fortnight or three weeks this desirable ob-
ject, they are ready, in defiance of all decency, of all
order, of all parliamentary usage, of all principle, to
dispose of a measure of the greatest practical import-
ance to the country, before it has been regularly brought
before Parliament ? Is it fit that a majority of the
British House of Commons should be so enamoured of
slavery and degradation as to launch their votes against
a measure not yet submitted to their deliberation,
for no higher purpose than to promote the selfish ob-
jects of Lord John Russell, Mr. O'Connell, and some
half dozen of the friends of each ? We put these
questions in the full assurance that whatever answer
they may receive from the House of Commons, from
the country they can receive but one. The people of
Great Britain will not understand the motion of Lord
John Russell to circumvent the Irish Tithe Bill, as
conveying any other meaning than that he is weary of
being out of place ; nor will they approve of resolu-
tions pledging the House of Commons to abstract pro-
positions, incapable of any other practical application
or import than the removal from the service of the
country of a body of able and honest Statesmen, in or-
der to make room for a combination of incapable dri-
vellers and profligate schemers. It would be well for
the House of Commons to remember ,that the time is
probably not distant when its Members will have once
more to appear before their Constituents ; and, having
this contingency in constant recollection, to begin to
regard the confidence and esteem of the country as of
some little value. Many Hon. Gentlemen will, we
apprehend, discover, when it is too late, that this im-
portant consideration has not been sufficiently re-
garded.—Morning Post.

The majority last night against Ministers was, in
proportion to the number of Members in the House,
as great as on Friday morning ; and this evening, we
do not doubt, will terminate their political career.
Never, at any former period in the history of this
country, has an Administration more indecently or
obstinately retained office, in contempt of repeated
majorities of the House of Commons. We can only
attribute this sulky adhesion to office to the know-
ledge of the Tory placemen surrounding Sir Robert
Peel, that it is their last chance of official sweets,
and to a sort of forlorn hope entertained by them that
some accident might intervene to protract for a while
the existence of his Cabinet. Ministers have been
shamefully defeated in the nomination of a Speaker;
they meanly submitted to the degradation of an
Amendment on their A ddress ; they hare not even
once succeeded on any party division ; twice they
have been shamefully defeated on the vital question of
Irish Church Reform ; and yet they linger another
day in office, notwithstanding that on Friday morning
more than half the full complement of the House of
Commons affirmed the great principle of appropriation.
Sir Robert Peel, in his gloomy and desponding answer
to the City of London Addressers, stated that he le-