The Sun.
London, England, 1835-11-27 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

ple, the main duties of St. Bride's devolving on a
Curate. Sir Robert Peel considered that he had an
unquestionable right to the nomination to this living,
was responsible for the exercise of that right, and was
determined to exercise it in such a manner as might
be most for the advantage of the parish of St. Bride.
It is utterly untrue that the nomination to the living
was transferred from one party to another with the
view of defeating the claims or expectations of Mr.
Rowlatt. When Sir Robert Peel requested the Bishop
of Londom to name to him a successor to Dr. Allen,
his right of nomination, as First Lord of the Trea-
sury, was unquestioned, and, as we have already
shown, he did not know that Mr. Rowlatt had had
the slightest expectations given to him with regard to
the living. From the correspondence which Mr.
Rowlatt has published, it would appear that his pros-
pect of being appointed to St. Bride's depended mainly
upon that living being in the gift of -tire Lord Chan-
cellor, for Mr. Le Marchant, so Ate as the sth of
November, 1834, writes a letter Mr. Rowlatt to the

We have already alluded to three Lieutenancies for
Gloucester, Monmouth, and Brecon, vacant by the

. .
death of the Duke of Beaufort. The country has a

right to require from the Premier the selection of de-
cided friends of the Liberal cause. We are now in the

seventh year, with a short interregnum, of Reform
Administration 4.-: A dreary period of Tory domina-
tion, extending throughout the long reign of George
the Third and that of George the Fourth, excluded
nearly all enlightened members of the Aristocracy from
power and authority. The Lord Lieutenancies of Eng-
land and Wales—the Magistracies and Municipal
Authorities in England, Scotland, and Ireland,
have been " Conservatives" for upwards of half a
century ; and they constitute a standing army of anti-
Reformers, opposed to all liberal measures, and dis-
posed to oppress the independent portion of the con-
stituencies. The Lord Lieutenancics of England
and Wales are little German principalities. One
man—generally a nobleman of large landed posses-
sions and powerful local connections—is the supreme
and irresponsible creator of the whole Magistracy of the
county over which he rules. Custom, and the former
dependency of the Crown on the boroughmongers and
grasping aristocracy, contributed to despoil the Sove-
reign of his ancient prerogative (through the Great
Seal) of appointing the County Magistracy. The
people formerly elected their own Magistrates. The
Sovereign usurped their ancient privilege. The Aris-
tocracy usurped the regal power. The Crown still
has the right. but not the use. Thus we have
seen Whig Ministers and their zealous partizans
throughout the kingdom annually insulted by the
majority of the Lord Lieutenants promoting to the
magistracy the most bitter opponents of liberal prin-
ciples, systematically excluding all Reformers—what-
ever their character, property, or fitness—from the
commission. Can we wonder at the disgust and
loud dissatisfaction which this grievance has occa-
sioned ; the Lord Lieutenant not merely appoints jus-
tices of the peace—he appoints deputy-lieutenants, and
has, besides, much of the militia and yeomanry pa-
tronage ; to him, numerous parsons and public func-
tionaries pay humble court at all times. Again, the
extent of inferior patronage belonging to the magis-
tracy is without limit. - We may say that the whole
civil and criminal jurisdiction of the country is vested
in these local despots, thrust between the Crown and
the people. A local taxation of enormous amount,
with a rank and file of stipendiary officers, form also no
mean portion of the power of the Lieutenancy.
-We shall hereafter give some details of this
standing army of public functionaries, and of
their influence in elections. The nuisance of this
Tory monopoly has become intolerable to the
people. Already we discern in the country Press
growing symptoms of the dissatisfaction in the pro-
vinces. The great principles of self-government and
of municipal representation co-extensive with taxation,
recently and gloriously obtained by the Corporate Ci-
ties and Boroughs, cannot long be withheld from the
unincorporated towns, or from the rural districts of the
counties. The people will speedily assert the right to
some voice in the choice of their Magistrates—to some
control over the levy and expenditure of local taxa-
tion. In the meanwhile, we hail the good fortune
which enables Lord Melbourne to bestow the Lieu-
tenancies of three counties on liberal and enlightened
men. It is a mistake to suppose that Commoners
should always be excluded from the Lieutenancy. The
Tories never were nice in their selections. Mr. Wod-
ehouse was the Lord Lieutenant of Norfolk, Mr. Powell
is Lord Lieutenant of Cardiganshire, Sir W.W.Wynne
of Denbigh and Merionethshires, Sir J. Owen of Pem-
broke. In short, the Tories would have made any man a
Lord Lieutenant soo er than see a Whig in the Lieu-
tenancy. In the majority of English and Welsh coun -
ties the Tory Lord Lieutenants have in turn insolently
excluded from the magistracy every liberal country
gentleman opposed to their local influence or
personal politics ; and every -Tory squire, and
every cringing and political parson, distinguished
for his rancorous hostility to every thing libe-
ral, have been thrust into the Commission of the
Peace. We therefore call on Ministers to avail them-
selves of this fortunate opportunity to give liberal heads
to at least three liberated counties. Nor shall we rest
satisfied here. Some legislative means must be de-
vised for generally liberalizing the County Magistracy.
Can Ministers wonder that the counties should return
Conservative representatives, while such permanent
local staffs exist, banded tot-Tether to influence and
coerce the county constituencies ? We would rather
see one Lord Lieutenancy " fall in than twenty Bi-,
shoprics... Without wishing to undervalue the duty of
attending to the spiritual interests of the people, it
will be readily admitted that their temporal concerns—
the protection of their pockets—the securing an impar-
tial magistracy, and the independent exercise of the
elective franchise.are also of some importance. We
shall anxiously watch the Gazette.-- adorning Chron.
The absurd pertinacity of those worst enemies, the
indiscreet friends of the Rev. Mr. Rowlatt, induces
us, though reluctantly, to return to his
_case. The
following statement will, we should think, set the mat-
ter at rest. The parish of St. Bride, Fleet-strect, con-
tains a population of 7,000 persons, and it would he
difficult to name any parish in which the services of a
resident minister, devoting him self to the personal dis-
charge of his duties, could be of greater importance.
The vacancy having occurred in the living by the pro-
motion. of Dr. Allen to the see of Bristol, the right of
presentation belonged to the Crown, and not to the
Lord Chancellor, and it was the duty of the First
Lord of the Treasury to advise the Crown in respect-
to the appointment of an incumbent. The rule
(a rule established by the highest authority, and,
as we believe, uniformly observed in practice) is,
this—That the Lord Chancellor bath a right, and that
by favour only, not enforceable by common law, to pre,•
sent to all the King's livings which are rated under 201;
a year in the King's books ; but this rule does not apply
to vacancies by lapse or promotion, the right of ap-
pointment to which is in the Crown. Sir R. Peel
finding the living of St. Bride's vacant by the promo-
tion of Dr. Allen, and not having any reason for a
doubt that he was entitled to name the successor, re-
quested the Bishop of London to recommend to him,
from the unbeneficed clergy of his diocese, the minister
best qualified by professional and moral character, and
by his abilities as a preacher, for the laborious duties
of a populous and important parish. When Sir Robert
Peel made this communication to the Bishop, he not
only had no doubt that the nomination rested with him,
but he was wholly unapprized that Mr. Rowlatt was a
candidate for the living, or had received any assurances
in respect to it. This appears from the letter written
to Mr. Rowlatt by Sir Robert Peel, which letter, to
the following effect, Mr. Rowlatt has published in his
pamphlet, a copy of which has been sent to us by some
unknown correspondent :

" Whitehall, January 23, 1835.
" Sir,—l regret that the duties in which I have been
incessantly engaged have prevented me hitherto from send-
ing an earlier reply to your letter of the 29th December.
" The living of St. Bride's was in the gift (according to
uniform usage), from the circumstances under which it be-
came vacant, of the Treasury, and not of the Great Seal.
Your letter of the 29th of December was the first intima-
tion I received, direct or indirect, that you were even a can-
didate for the living. I had, previously to its date, signified
my determination to make an appointment to this living,
exclusively with a view to the most efficient personal di:-
charge of the spiritual duties of the appointment by some
Minister of the Church who would devote his whole time
to them.
" The Gentlemen I have selected was wholly unknown to
me, and the nomination to it was unsolicited and unexpected
by him. However satisfactory in every other respect his
appointment has been, I regret that it should have been the,
means of disappointing expectations which you have been
led to entertain ; but I must add, that I could not have
deemed it advisable to make any nomination to a living, cir-
cumstanced like St. Bride's, which would not have insured
the constant personal discharge of the duties by the in-
cumbent. " I have, &c.

i, ROBERT PEEL."

If
.the spiritual interests of the parish of St. Bride
are to have any we.%h t in determining the question of
the 4elpction of a Minister, there can, we apprehend,
be litile'dciubt that the appointment of Mr. Dale to be
the resident Minister of the parish, personally dis-
charging the duties of the cure, was preferable to the
giving of the living to Mr. Rowlatt, to be held by
him in conjunction with his preachership at the Tem-

alliance with Spain, of their adherence to the principles
therein laid down. A cordial notice is taken of the
amicable disposition demonstrated towards Spain by the
three liberal powers, England, France, and Portugal,
and of the relations of union and friendship expressed
towards the Spanish Constitutio*GOvernrnent by all
the States, throughout the world, in which the blessings
of constitutional liberty are recognised or enjoyed. Bra-
zil, Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, and Greece, constitute
the catalogue of these free States. A collaterally gra-
tifying inference may be drawn from this enumeration
of free and friendly States disposed to sympathise, if
not to act, with the Government of Spain in its struggle
for substantial liberty. It seems to reveal the desi-
derated materials of a league of free States, which
may be called for sooner than is at present imagined,
for the purpose of erecting a barrier against the
aggressions of northern barbarism, supported by the
absolute Courts which concur with it in spirit, and
sympathise with it in interest, if not in design. To-
wards these Courts, viz., Russia, Austria, and
' Prussia the speech maintains a dignified silence. It
is I . ,
neitner captious, however, nor obtrusive on the sub-
ject. The Queen's Government could take no other
tone towards those Powers which have not hitherto
thought fit to recognise it by avowed envoys, and
which by that act show, not only their unwilling-
ness to befriend it,. but their willingness to de-
clare against it, provided a safe and eligible oppor-
tunity for so doing should occur. The Speech, there-
fore, in a manly avoidance of those diplomatic cour-
tesies which too often violate truth, preserves a tran-
quil, and, as we have said, - a dignified silence on the
subject. The attitude of Spain embodied in it, may be
said to speak a tacit language to those absolute Powers
to the following effect :—" We do not wish to provoke
you to war ; we are careless respecting either your
friendship or your enmity. Your disapprobation of
the new forms of freedom which we have amalgamated
with our fundamental free institutions, or built upon
the wreck of tyrannical abuses by which those insti-
tutions were corrupted, are nothing to us : we do not
expect you to set the seal of your sanction to princi-
ples, which are inherently at war with your actual in-
stitutions, and, possibly, with your ultimate existence.
We do not call upon you to renounce your dislike to
them in our favour, nor do we wish rashly to blow the
embers of a war of opinion between us. Our attitude
is one, not ofaggression, but self-defence. We are in-
. different. to your friendship; but we shall be ready and
able .tatlerend ourselves against your hostilit3tk" Such
is the elevated and appropriate tone which the present
energetic and sagacious Prime Minister has put into the
mouth of the Queen Governess of Spain. The tone
which he takes with regard to the South American re-
publics is imbued with the same sagacious recognition of
times and seasons, and with the same disinterested devo-
tion to the principles of liberty. He avows that friendly
negotiations are entered into with those States, for the
purpose of sanctioning their independent separation
from the mother country. The speech among other
points, naturally exhibits the anxiety which the Go-
vernment must feel on the subject of an adequate de-
velopernent of the nation's financial resources. Some
schemes are stated to be in prospect for this purpose,
and a complete system of financial administration is to
be proposed to the Cortes. Foi our own part, we
have no fear, while the Queen's Government proceeds
as it does, that it will find adequate financial means.
The public opinion of Spain, and of all free Europe,
• will rally round it, and all the ample resources of credit
• will inevitably follow in its train. T. this result the ex-
cellent measures meditated by M. IVlendizabal, of which
a coup devil is given in the speech,—and that,
whether they are measures of fiscal improvement, of
commercial encouragement, or of political rege-
neration, or all three combined,—will powerfully
contribute. The measures of political regenera-
tion indeed announced—more especially those which
embrace extension of the ' electoral suffrage—free-
dom of the Press—and Ministerial responsibility
—are in themselves such as are calculated to give
solidity and permanence to the Spanish Government.
They ale not calculated to give alarm by the annun-
ciation of any extreme principles of liberty ; while
they are, at the same time, calculated to win the con-
fidence of all the powerful free States throughout the
world, and to secure not less the moral sympathy of
those States, than, if necessary, their physical co- ope-
ration. The Spanish Government confesses in a frank
and veracious ..manner the difficulties under which the
Government labours for want of an adequate military
force in putting down the rebellion of Don Carlos ;
but it gives good hopes, at the same time, that by
vigorous and skilful measures the ollject may be
effected without the very hazardous aid of foreign
interposition. We are assured that under the pru-
dent and vigilant auspices of Mendizabal, the Queen's
Government will go on daily increasing in strength,
not only with reference to the disposal of all the physical
means of Spain, but with reference to the moral corrobora-
tion afforded by the union of public opinion in its favour.
We see in the Madrid Gazette something like a semi-
official reference to the entry of a large body of French
troops into Spain. 'We trust that no such design will
be thought of by the Spanish Government, or if thought
of, will not be retained. It has never happened in the
history of nations that any ultimate advantage, in the
bona-fide establishment of independence and liberty,
has been reaped by the State which has been compelled
to lean on foreign support for protection, instead of
trusting to its own energy and spirit. In many cases,
the temporary protector has been ultimately converted
into a permanent dictator. According to the fable,
the horse, which called in the man to hunt down its
enemy, the stag, ended the hunt by becoming the slave
of its potent, but • interested, ally. Well did Lord
Byron say, referring to the struggle of the Greeks for
independence,—
" By your own arms the battle must be won;
Who would be free, himself must strike the blow."
—Morning Advertiser.

following effect
" Dear Sir,—The Chancellor Jose been, and still is, in
communication with Lord MelbOitine, about St. Bride's.
Every thing promises a favourable issue to the Chancellor's
claim, and consequently to your application."
It is perfectly true that Sir Robert Peel confirmed
the appointment of Mr. Eden to the living of Batter-
sea, which, in respect to the right of nomination, was
similarly circumstanced to St. Bride's ; but Mr. Eden
intended to resign, and did resign, his other preferment
in the Church, and took upon himself the personal
discharge of the duties of the living. The difference
between the two cases is this—that no better appoint-
ment to the living of Battersea could have been made
than that of Mr. Eden, and that a much better, ap-
pointment to the living of St. Bride's could be made
than that of Mr. Rowlatt, to hold it in conjunction
with the Readership of the Temple. As for the in-
sinuation of Mr. Rowlatt and his advocates, that Mr.
Eden owed the confirmation of his appointment to his
near connexion with Sir Robert Peel, the best answer
is, that Mr. Eden is brother to Lord Auckland, the
late First Lord of the Admiralty, and the Nobleman
who superseded Lord Heytesbury in the government
of India, subsequently to Lord Heytesbury's actual
appointment by the Couit of Directors, and the formal
sanction of that appointment by the Crown. The
nearness of Mr. Eden's connexion with Sir Robert
Peel consists in this—that he is cousin to . Sir Robert
- Peers brother-in-law, Lord Henley ; but it would ap-
pear from the letter which Mr. Eden has-himself ad-,
dressed to the Times, and which appeared in the paper
on Monday last, that he has never seen Lord Henley
since Lord Henley's marriage, and that he is personally
wholly unknown to Sir Robert Peel. We repeat for
the twentieth time, that we entertain no individual
feeling towards Mr. Rowlatt, but one of kindness ;
and that we should be glad to see him appointed to
some charge for which he is duly fitted ; but we can-
not consent to sacrifice our sense of truth and justice
to mere personal considerations.—Times.
Mr. H. L. Bulwer, the Member for Marylebone, it
will have been seen, has been appointed Secretary of
Legation at Brussels, in the place of Sir George Ha-
milton. That this is such an appointment as vacates
the scat of the Hon. Member we do not assert ; but
• without alluding to the fact of its being a lucrative
office, and on that account calling for a surrender of
the trusts reposed in the Hon. Member into the hands
of his constituents, we feel confident that all reason-
able persons will agree with us that any foreign ap-
pointment is totally incompatible with the due dis-
charge of the duties of a Member of Parliament ; and
without, therefore, relying on the point so ably discussed
by the Marquis of Northampton and others, whether
constituents have or have not a right upon any change
taking place in the situation of their representative to
call upon him to resign, in order that they may decide
whether he may be still deserving of their confidence, we
take our stand on this, that no constituency, in times
like the present, can or ought to remain unrepresented
from any private feeling towards an indivi dual. We
do not pretend to know what Mr. Bulwers intentions
may be, but our suspicions have been excited by
some remarks in the Globe and Courier of last night,
the one, after mentioning the appointment and the
probability of Mr. Bulwer's being able to return to
his Parliamentary duties, adds, " we need not observe
that diplomatic appointments abroad do not of them-
selves vacate a seat." No one ever suspected it—and
the people of Canterbury know that a representative
being removed some thousands of miles from this coun-
try is not considered by some pthesons a sufficient cause
for resigning into other hands duties which it is not
within the range of human powers to discharge. Our
other Evening Contemporary, without alluding to the
appointment as being probably only of a temporary
duration, states that Mr. Bulwer is not likely to re-
sign his seat at present. If the appointment he one
of only a few months' duration, all very well ; but if
it should be of a more permanent nature, we suspect
that the electors of Marylebone will not feel disposed
to look upon the situation of their representative as a
mere honorary sinecure, the duties of which may be as
well dischareed in the drawing-rooms. of Brussels, as
on the benches of St. Stephen's—at all events, with-
out at all meaning to derogate from the dignity and
independence of any Member of Parliament, we can-
not but think that, upon the accepting an appoint-
' ment of this description, it is his duty to take the
opinion of his constituents on the subject of retaining
his seat.—Morning Herald.
The constant tenor of the conduct of both Houses
of Parliament shows that the greatest jealousy has
always prevailed with respect to an improper exercise
of the influence which Members derive from their situa-
tion. • Whenever that influence has been applied to
eoupressive or sordid purposes, the offenders have ge-
nerally been punished. The practice of a Member of
the House of Commons in exacting what is called the
Rent" from his poor fellow-subjects, and in a recent
instance receiving 2,0001. for using his influence in
the electioa of an Irish county Member, will doubtless
occupy the attention of that branch of the Legisla-
ture to which he is attached. If money is given to
a man to be disposed of in bribes, the giver, under
the statute 2d Geo. 11., can recover it back in an
action, consequently the Ex-Sheriff of London has
a remedy at law ; but the reproach which falls on a
Reformed Parliament by such transactions is too
obvious. Many precedents of Parliamentary pro-
ceedings opposed to sordid acts on the part of in-
dividual Members are found upon the Journals. In
order to make it notorious that neither the conditions
of a Representative of the people, nor the influence he
might have in Parliament, would excuse any departure
from justice, the House of Commons has occasionally
passed the most severe censures they could inflict. In
one instance that censure applied to their Speaker him-
self. Sir John Trevor, Speaker of the House of Com-
mons, in the sixth year of King William, received one
thousand guineas from the City of London, as a gra-
tuity for the trouble he had taken in passing the Orphan
Bill. For that misconduct he was voted guilty of high
crime and misdemeanour, and expelled the House.
" Even," says an able writer on the Constitution of Eng-
land, "the inconsiderable sum of twentyguineas, which
Mr. Hungerford, another Member, had been weak
enough to accept on the same score, was looked upon as
deserving the notice of the House, and he was like-
wise expelled." Other examples might be produced
of the attention paid by the House of Commons
to sordid misconduct. In the reign of James I. Sir
Giles Mompesson, a Member of the House of Com-
mons, having been guilty of monopolies and other
acts of oppression on the people, was not only ex-
pelled but impeached, prosecuted by the House, and
condemned to be degraded from his rank of a Knight,
and imprisoned for life. In the same reign Sir John
Bennett, a Member of the House, having been guilty
of taking exorbitant fees, was expelled the House. In
1641, Mr. Henry Benson, a Member for Knaresbo-
rough, having been detected in selling protections, ex-
perienced likewise the indignation of the House, and
was expelled. It was reserved for a modern Re-
formed House of Commons to permit one of its
Members to exact contributions from nearly the whole
Roman Catholic population of Ireland,--Morn. Post.
There are several points iri the speech of the Queen
Governess of Spain, which seem to call for some re-
marks, in addition to those which it drew from us yes-
terday. The speech refers to the repeated proofs given
by the Sovereigns who signed the treaty of quadruple

CHANCERY COURT-THURSDAY.

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 1835.

suffered a severe contusion. He remained an in-door pa-
tient of the hospital for five months, and since that time, and
up to the present moment, he attends as an out-door patient,
and so severe have been his injuries, that he is still unable
to walk.
Mr. Sergeant ANDItEWS, for the defendant, contended
that it was Threwitt's omnibus, and not the defendant's
which ran over the plaintiff.
Verdict for the plaintiff-841.

EXCHEQUER COURT.-THURSDAY.

ROUT V. BLACKWELL.
The defendant was acceptor of a bill of exchange for 181.,
made in December, 1831, and due in February, 1832. The
bill had never been presented for payment, nor had the de-
fendant heard of it until February, 1835, when he received
an attorney's letter demanding payment. The pleadings
having been opened,
Mr. KELLY, for the defendant, stated that the bill was
given for the accommodation of a Mrs. Robertson, who,
with her son, carried on the business of a tailor, in South-
ampton-buildings, Holborn. The bill was discounted for
her by the plaintiff ; but before it became due she made
over her business to the plaintiff, who agreed to take the
debts and credits upori himself, and the bill which was now
made the subject of an action was to be quashed.
The Jury, without hearinc, the summing up of the Judge,
returned a verdict for the defendant.
Mr. Baron GURNEY admonished the Jury upon the haste
with which they had delivered their verdict. He thought
they had come to a right decision, but a little more delibe-
ration qpon their part would have been more satisfactory.
The COURT proceeded with several undefended causes.