The Sun.
London, England, 1835-09-14 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDO

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

We have quite as exalted an idea of the objects and
duties of a daily journal as the Standard can have ;
but it appears to us that the point in dispute between
us is simply this : A plan for an improved system of
local police is submitted to a parish vestry elected by
the inhabitants—it receives their cordial assent ; but it
is also necessary that it should receive the assent of
another body, consisting of a few families, who have,
"from time immemorial," acquired a " prescriptive"
right of interfering in all parish affairs. After boggling; '
for a long time, this " hereditary" branch of the pa-
rish legislature send it back to the vestry, but in such
a mutilated state, and with many of its best provisions
so perverted, that the vestry cannot conceive how a
body having the same object in view as themselves,
i e., the good government and effective administration
of the police of the parish, can have submitted so de-
fective a scheme for their approbation. The thing ex-
cites attention. People begin to inquire who are these
" hereditary" officers, and what are their own private in-
terests and connexions ; and by-and-by it comes out
that a majority of them either belong themselves to,
or are very intimately connected with, the honourable
and ancient fraternity of receivers of stolen goods.
Now when this is known, an- opinion, and not a very
unreasonable one, takes possession of the parish, that
no good plan of police is very likely to receive the
willing consent of " prescriptive" authorities like
these ; and that, before the parish can be well go-
verned, there must be a reform in the Constitution of
the " Upper House." But when the question begins
to be mooted, the organs of the " receivers" (for they
are a wealthy set, and keep their daily and weekly
journals to flourish about venerable institutions and
rights of parish robbery, which have existed before
the memory of man), the said well-supported organs
finding these delicate subjects_ beginning to be freely
discussed, would fain draw the minds of their readers
from the points at issue, and mystify them by long
disquisitions upon the merits and demerits of respon-
sible and irresponsible powers, and confound them
with citations from authorities of all ages, upon the
first principles and objects of a Government. "In
considering the propriety of a Reform in the
hereditary branch of the Parish Parliament—(say
they)—let us, in the first place, erase from our
minds all ideas connected with the " receiving"
• part of the question. Such narrow notions as
those of supposed interests in abuses, let us
leave entirely out of the question ; let us go into dis-
cussion in a large and philosophical manner, embracing
the grand question of responsibility and irresponsibility,
of election and hereditary succession. Let us see what
Montesquieu, and Sydney, and Locke have said upon
organic changes in the Legislature, and the conflicting
claims of existing privilege and popular rights ; but for
God's sake let us leave out of view all those miserable
details about sinister interests and petty larceny par-
tialities, which, in fact, it is manifestly factious and
selfish minutely to inquire into." But by your leave,
gentlemen, these are the very points which necessitate
the application of the pruning knife of Reform. it is
your connection and those of your friends and patrons
with abuses of all kinds, and the many collateral and
sinister interests thereby engendered, that render them
in the eyes of the people unfit and unlikely instruments
of carrying out that course of sincere Reform policy
which the country requires. To discuss the Reform of
the Lords, and leave 'Toryism out of the question, would
be but another version of the reherdeal of Hamlet, "the
part of Hamlet being left out by particular desire." The
people believe you are not 'disinterested, gentlemen.
When you stand up for freemen, they think it is not
because you are " friends to the poor," but because
you " you carry the bag," and having robbed them in
the first place to fill it, intend to employ its contents in
bribing them to give up their rights, and minister to
tour further aggrandisement. When you stand up for
Aldermen and Town-clerks, and the like, they look
upon these people to be your creatures and tools, and
the whole system which you would fain have supported
as a branch of that great tree of corrupt and oligarchic
influence which have thriven and flourished so long
upon the proceeds of a nation's spoil. Talk of dis-
cussing the merits of the House of Lords, and leaving
Toryism out of the question ! Why, what but the
Toryism of that House led it so constantly to with,
.stand the beneficent and popular • measures that have
passed of late years—from the Test and Corporation
Repeal Act to Parliamentary and Corporation Re-
form ?—measures which, whether in or out of
office, it is only justice to the. Whig aristo-
cracy to say that they have as constantly sup-
ported. But, in• fact, Toryism is essentially op-
posed to liberal Government and popular rights ;
and its professors, whether spiritual or lay, arc
always to be found banded together in opposition to
measures tending to promote fair and equal Go-
vernment. " Aristocratic privilege," " Church As-
cendancy "—in other words, the humiliation and rob-
bery of the many for the gratification of the few—
these are the watch-words and symbols which make
Toryism odious to all those who desire government
conducted upon fair and impartial principles. The
Tory Lords and Bishops, by all their sympathies with
the old corrupt Corporations, have proved their inti-
mate connection with the fraternity of " receivers."
By resisting reforms in every shape and on every-oppor-
tunity, they have shown how utterly incompatible the
existence of an essentially Tory House of Lords is with
the advancement of popular interests—and if the Whig
Aristocracy have with more patriotism, or, if you will,
with a morefar-seeingprudence, arranged themselves on
the side of the people, are we to be told that in taking
the Toryism of the House of Lords into consideration as
an essential element of any plan of reform,- we are ac-
tuated by views of party triumph? The people, gentle-
men, are not a faction, and it would be an insult to
the understanding of the people to waste their time in
discussions on the House of Lords, " leaving To-
ryism out of the question." We should like to know
whether, when Pitt and Liverpool created half its
Members, their " Toryism" was " out of the ques-
tion ?" The liberal Members of the Aristocracy are
arrayed on the side of the people. They would be
dishonnured for ever, and annihilated as a party of
ridiculous sympathies and prejudices, if caste were to
lead them to desert those in whose attachment and
support their real power consists. But Toryism is a
monster which, believed to have been mortally wound-
ed by the Reform Bill, has revived under careful '
nursing and able management—which has again en-
dangered the liberties of the country, and obtruded its
loathsome presence into the seats of power : and which,
if we are ever to enjoy the blessings of liberal govern-
ment, Reformers of all shades must now unite to root
out and destroy.—Morning Chronicle.
Some of our Ministerial contemporaries are in rap-
tures with the Reports of the Committees on the York
and Yarmouth Election petitions. How much of
reality there can be in the delight they express may be
estimated by the fact, that in speaking of these Re-
ports they grossly misrepresent and falsify their con-
tents. Believing these writers, it would follow, that
what bribery has been, or is supposed to have been,
committed, was practised by the " Conservatives,"
only, and upon the "freemen" only. We have pub-
gished both these Reports, and anybody who has read or
may read them will find, that so far from this being the
truth, the Reports state that the money expended was
received by ten-pound householders as well as freemen,
and paid by " Liberal" as well as by " Conservative"
candidates. It may he objected that the " Liberals"
did not give as much as the " Conservatives," hut in
the first place that fact is not apparent, and in the next
place, if the fact could be substantiated, we do not see
how it would mend the case of the " Liberals," unless
one accepts for orthodox the morality of the unmarried
lady, who excused herself for adding to the number of
the community by protesting " that the child was
a very little one." If both classes of candidates
really bribed, as the reports say they did, we should be
inclined to think that the return of the " Conservatives"
is to be attributed to the circumstance that the ma-
jority of the constituent bodies, though they might have
been rogues, were not fools also. If they lacked
principle so lamentably as to be easily brought to ac-
cept
the proffered bribe, they were at least not so des-
titute of common sense as to vote for a Radical,"
when, ceteris paribus, they could return a ' Conser-
vative." We are surprised this view of the case should
have escaped the liberal scribblers, because it strongly
fortifies a favourite and exceedingly moral argument of

theirs in support of the ballot,—namely,/that although 1
with the ballot electors may receive bribes from all
parties still under the protection- of that elective thim-
ble-riggery, they will be sure to give their votes to
the candidate they think the fittest. Having set
these matters of fact—namely, that supposing the re-
ports to be worth more than the paper they are printed
upon, it results that the " Liberal" party, as well as the
" Conservative," bribed, and that 101., householders as
well as freemen received bribes, we beg to declare that the
opinion we expressed upon the appointment of these
committees remains unchanged, and that the committees
who report, and the witnesses who have led or misled
them in framing their reports, being both UNSWORN,
we are not inclined to place any reliance upon either
" without confirmation." It has constantly happened
that witnesses in such cases cannot be brought to swear
elsewhere a quarter that they will say before a commit-
tee of the House of Commons. They know very well
that they can be indicted for perjury in the one case,
while in the other they may put forward the falsest and
the most malicious allegations, not only with impunity,
but even profitably in a pecuniary sense, for their ex-
penses are paid them by the public. It appears too,
that in the conduct of cases of this description the
agents are also to be paid by the public. It was only
the other day we published the amount of the bill of
costs of Mr. Joseph Parkes, delivered by him to the
Treasury in his capacity of agent in the Warwick case.
It amounted to 7691. 12s. 10d. He was agent also in
the Liverpool case, and he is agent in one or both of
the two cases now before us—Yarmouth and York. Of
course we do not mean to insinuate that Mr.. Joseph
Parkes is not a most conscientious concoctor of such
cases, nor will we suffer ourselves to harbour the slightest
suspicion that he is moved to afford his valuable ser-
vices on occasions like these by anything but an abo-
mination of bribery and corruption. Such a man
must have a soul above bills of costs. But are all
provincial attornies as pure and perfect political Jo-
sephs ? Have they all had the advantage of gradua-
ting at Birmingham ? Alas for the credit of the pro-
fession T. No. Is it, then, very extravagant to sup-
pose that these large bills of costs may tempt country
practitioners to trade in the line in which Mr. Joseph
Parkes, led only by a stern sense of public duty, has
found that " virtue is its own reward ?" We think
not. On the contrary, we are convinced that the en-
couragement thus held out by the House of Commons
will revive in matters relative to elections an offence
against which some of our earliest statutes are directed.
We mean maintenance or barretry—" the stirring up
of suits and quarrels—or "an officious intermeddling
in a suit that no way belongs to one, by maintaining
or assisting either party to prosecute or defend it."
Old Cowell thus defines a barretor :—" Barrator or
Barretor (Barrectator, French Barreteur, a deceiver)
is a common mover or maintainer of suits, quarrels, or
parts, either in courts or elsewhere in the country,
and is himself never quiet but at a brawl with one or
other, &c." Let the House of Commons cherish ap-
plications like these from York and Yarmouth, and
sanction enormous bills of costs, and we will venture
to say that a host of barrators will spring into life and
action in every town that returns members to Parlia-
ment throughout the King's dominions.—Times.

There are two classes of tradesmen, both numerous
and important in their avocations, who have within
the last twenty years, as well in the metropolis as in
many of the larger provincial towns, risen highly in in-
dependence and respectability. We mean bakers and
publicans. The first, till within the period we speak
of, and long antecedent to it, were almost entirely in
the hands of the millers and the mealmen, who so
contrived to make the main profit their own, and cir-
cumscribe that of the retailer, by supplying him from
hand to mouth, that scarcely any but needy persons
were found to embark in a business where even com-
petition and capital were excluded by an overwhelm-
ing monopoly. The thraldom of the publican was
still more universal and grinding. By the connivance,
and, in some instances, participation of the Magis-
trates (as proved by evidence taken before Commit-
tees of the House of Commons) the great mass of
the publicans, both in the Metropolis and else-
where, though sometimes called, the tenants, were
in fact little better than the nominees, or rather
slaves of the brewers answerable, it is true,
for. all breaches of the rigorous laws by which
their trade was governed, and compelled to vend
whatever villanous compounds . their hard task-
masters were pleased to furnish them with, who
generally took care, in the shape of mortgagees or
judgment creditors, to have the victim constantly within
their toils. One lia.rge brewery was shown to have
nearly a million of money embarked in public houses ;
and whenever such a " rara axis" as a " free house"
found its way into the market, it was instantly snatched
up and added to the mass. Happily this state of things,
especially in the metropolis, is greatly altered for the
better. The baker has broken through his thraldom
altogether ; a great proportion of publicans have been
able to do the same. Most of the great London
brewers have found it their interest to withdraw their
capital by degrees from this illegitimate source of in-
vestment ; while the publicity given to the past picca-
dilloes of the licensing Magistrates have put their suc-
cessors more upon their guard ; and the consequence
is, that we see a class of persons now forming the
majority of this trade scarcely to be excelled in opu-
lence and respectability by any. From all we hear, we
doubt whether this change has taken place to any thing
like the same extent in the country, especially in borough
towns. In many, if not most of these, the brewers'
monopoly and the evils of the licensing system exist in
full force. Not unfrequently the lord of the mash-
tub is himself the Mayor or Bailiff ; at all events, he
scarcely ever fails to be a person of great influence, and
invariably the owner or mortgagee of nearly all the
public houses in the town and neighbourhood ; and
though he is nominally prohibited by law from inter-
fering in licensing, an obliging town clerk, and friendly
associates, generally manage that his interests shall be
as safe in their hands as in his own. With the know-
ledge of these facts, which a majority of the Members
of both Houses of Parliament must have possessed,
we were, we confess, surprised to see so warm a stand
made, during the debates on the Corporation Bill, for
retaining this power of licensing public houses in
hands by which it has been, and is, so notoriously
abused. It has long been a question with many per-
sons best acquainted with the subject, whether it would
not be desirable to take away the licensing from ma-
gistrates altogether, leaving it to them only to regulate
and enforce the law for the good government of places
which are of necessity liable to be the scenes of so
much irregularity and disorder. As regards the local
government of provincial towns, we apprehend there
can be no question about it ; for taking the case we
have stated (and which is a very general' one), who
are so little likely either to attend impartially to
licensing or the enforcing of good order, as the persons
who are personally benefited by the contrary ?
Morning Herald.
The long-protracted Session of Parliament for 1835
is now over--and it affords a most painful retrospect
to any one who looks back on the events of the last
eight months, to perceive that nearly every opportunity
of doing good, or effecting improvements in the state of
the country, has been sacrificed in a mere struggle for
place and power. How little has been effected for
England ! how much less for Ireland ! and, above all,
what progress has been made in the settlement of that
question, without the settlement of which there can be
neither peace nor happiness for Ireland, nor security
for England. We need scarcely say we allude to the
question of the Irish Church. Instead of asking what
progress had been made towards the settlement of this
question, might we not have stated, and most truly,
that the prospect of a fair settlement being arrived is
much more distant, and that there has been raised an
apparently insurmountable obstailit to its settlement, in
the shape of the unfortunate andm
-judged resolution of
the Commons with respect to the appropriation clause.
The lamentable effects of that most improvident and ill-
judged step must be now but too apparent to every one
who can look with an unprejudiced eye at the real state
of political parties in this kingdom. Its effects are, not
only to defer for an indefinite period the settlement of
this question, of such vital importance to the very
existence of a Church Establishment in Ireland, and
affecting materially the Church of England, but also to
deprive the country of the services and talents of some
of its most able politicians. We say, to an indefinite

period, for the question must now be at a stana-sv,..
either the present House of Commons is dissolved, -or
the Peers see reason to change their. minds. Of the
latter alternative we see no prospect, and we hope that
such an event is not likely, while on the former event
happening, we have not a doubt as to what the answer of
the people would be on being appealed to on the ques-
tion of converting the revenues of the Protestant
Chnrch to the propagation and support of Roman
Catholicism. But what, we would ask, can palliate
the conduct of any man, or any set of men, who
knowingly and wilfully have placed the country in this
situation ? That Ministers were fully aware of what
would be the fate of this measure we stated some
months back, and their most ardent supporters now
admit that their only hope now exists in intimi-
dating the Lords to pass this measure by threats
of destruction to their House, or by holding up
the utter destitution of the Irish clergy, and the ruin
of the establishment, as the consequence of their con-
tinued refusal. But can Lord Melbourne, or even
any of his more imprudent and short-sighted colleagues
suppose that the country is not now most fully aware
of the fact, that the course which they have adopted,
in direct violation, be it remembered, of all their pre-
vious votes and opinions, is the result of that resolu-
tion which was come to wholly for the purposes of
faction—solely to drive from office Sir Robert Peel,
who would, had he remained Prime Minister of the
Crown, have by this time carried nearly every measure
of saltitary reform required by the country ? The ob-
jections of the hungry Whigs and of the Radicals to
the Right Hon. Baronet doing this are almost too
clear to require pointing out. By it the one would
have been deprived of place and salary for ages, while.
the other would have lost all power of exercising a
tyrannical control over his Majesty's Ministers.
Can any one doubt that the settlement of the Irish
tithe question by any practicable means should have
been the first step of any honest Minister ? The ap-
propriation clause, could it have been defended on its
own merits, might have formed a separate Bill. But
can anything justify the conduct of the Whig Minis-
ters in adopting the course which they have, when
they were well acquainted with the opinions of a large
majority of the House of Lords upon this question, to
say,-.nothing of that of another branch of the Legisla-
ture, to whom it would not be respectful, or in accor-
dance with established rules, more particularly to al-
lude. But what is to be the result of all this ? We
can see no hope of any compromise. Can it be ex-
pected, or even wished, that the Lords should deliver
up to the Papist Agitators the property of that Church
which they are sworn to defend ? Can they consci-
entiously appropriate the revenues of the Protestant
Establishment towards the propagation of a faith
which they have declared to be erroneous ? What
then, will Ministers do ? Some state that they will
dissolve Pailiament, and take the opinion of the peo-
ple on the question. We give it confidently as our
opinion that they will dare to do no such thing. They
know the value of their places too well. No, not even
the most favourable reports of the ensuing registration
will induce them to adopt such a course. Should they,
however, do so, of the result we cannot entertain the
shadow of a doubt.—Morning Herald.
The public, now that the important office of First
Lord of the Admiralty is vacant, are naturally anxious
•to know who is to have the appointment. Whigappoint-
ments generally follow the rule of " the least fit,"and
it is therefore natural enough that the report of the ap-
pro....ching appointment of Lord Minto should very
generally be credited. The British Navy must of
course feel highly honoured by the appointment to
the head of the Admiralty Board of Lord Minto,
whose qualifications for the office are summed up
when we say lie has a brother, of the rank of Captain
in the Navy, already, we believe, one of the Junior
Lords. Other recommendation of Lord. Minto than
this we have never heard. It is said, however, that lie
bows often and low in Downing-street, from which bow-
ing his fitness for the office of First Lord of the Admi-
rality is, we suppose, to be inferred. It is, we know,
a very obsolete kind of blindness of ours, but we can-
not say we exactly see the advantage of making the
Board of Admiralty a family uarty—we mean, of
course, generally. In the case of Lord Minto we
are quite willing to allow an exception. If he is to
be First Lord, nothing, we admit, can be more pro-
per than that there should be one of his own family,
who knows something of naval matters, at the Board,
to take care of his Lordship.—Morning Post.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HOUSE.

THE BATTLE OF THE PAPER CADGERS.—A hawker of
Morning Chronicles appeared before the LORD MAYOR, to
answer the complaint of a hawker of Morning, Posts. Se-
veral persons from the steam-wharfs in Thames-street at-
tended, the ground of accusation having excited some cu-
riosity.
The hawker of the Post stated that he had been of late
much interrupted in his professional exertions by the defen-
dant and other vendors, who devoted themselves to the bu-
siness of selling the vulgar publications of the day. It hap-
pened that the Morning Post newspaper, which was the
only article he dealt in, contrived to get before the public
at an earlier hour than any other during Parliament, and
he supplied a large demand on board the steamers. The
moment, however, he finished his sale on board, down came
all sorts of cadgers with Morning Chronicles and such like,
and not one would go off excepting, perhaps, an odd Chron
to a set of coalheaving customers in the fore part of the
vessel. This preference set the defendant quite mad, and
ha gathered a crowd about witness by calling him " Orange
Bill," and telling the people that he was employed by the
Duke of Wellington and lawyer Wetherell to make Orange
Lodges on board all the steam-vessels, and to shove the
noses-tf the poor people bang upon the grinding-stone.
Now, he didn't like this sort of fun, and he fetched the de-
fendant a slap across the chops, so that a fight took place,
which would no doubt have ended in witness's favour, if it
didn't happen that there were more ragamuffins than gen-
tlemen in the place. To prevent anything of the kind again,
and to get fair play, he was advised to go before the 'Lord
Mayor.

The Chronicle hawker said that the Post cadger was in
the habit of playing one of the dirty tricks of the party,
whose business he did. The moment he got a quire of
Tory rubbish pulled, he ran down to shoot it into the
steamers, and a worse dish the passengers could not get
with their breakfast. God knew they did not want rough
weather in the voyage to make them sick while they had
such a sevenpenny worth aboad.—(Laughter.) Well, the
cadger was not satisfied with the job, but he'must say that
no other rover would be out for a couple ofhours, so that
the people were obliged to put up with any thing. As for
the charge about being employed by the Duke of Welling-
ton every one knew that his Grace was the editor of that
paper.—(Great laughter.) The fact was, that the trade of
the Chronicle was so great the engine could not get through
its work well sometimes, and then the Post came in frau-
dulentlyfor a share.

The Post hawker declared that, amongst about eight
hundred persons, no more than one Chronicle was taken,
and that one was got by a halfpenny subscription in the
fore-cabin, where the subscribers paid a little boy, who
could read, a penny for reading it.—(Laughter.) He had
served another steamer the day before, and he solemnly de-
clared that while there were plenty of other papers on
board there were but two Chronicles, and one of them was
round a pair of sheep's trotters, while a little boy had a
string tied to the other, and was flying it like a kite over
the stern.—(Laughter.) He spoke of the Margate and
Ramsgate steamers, where gentlemen forked out their
shillirig a piece. He did not pretend to know what the
Chronicle might do on the ninepenny voyages. He was to
be understood to have no enmity to the concern, but he
certainly did not like the tone it had of late taken against
the decent part of society.
The Chronicle hawker declared that he had no objection
to the Post, but he certainly was of opinion that it would be
better for both if they knew a little more of the people they
wrote about.

The LORD MAYOR said that the representative of the
Morning Chronicle ought, for the sake of the establishment
which so strongly advocated the principles of liberty and
equality, to have acted upon those principles, instead of
raising a vulgar cry against a fellow-labourer employed in
serving another establishment. He believed that the two
papers moved in very different circles—indeed, so very dif-
ferent, that it was hardly possible that one could be injured
by the other. His Lordship hoped that, as the Parliamen-
tary contest was over, the difference of those whose feelings
might have been excited would also have a vacation, and he
advised the complainant and defendant to settle the affair
between them in a conference over a pot of beer.—(Laugh-
ter.) It appeared to him, that notwithstanding the threats
about the Orange Lodge, the Post cadger had the best of it.
Two young men were committed to prison, each for a
month, for having offered for sale a penny and a two-penny
newspaper.

The LORD MAYOR regretted that, for the sake of the