The Sun.
London, England, 1835-01-23 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, JANUARY 23, 1835.

of parochial revenues, and sometimes, under the title of
pluralitids,:a shameful accumulation in few hands,
and to the .dvantage of none but those who hold it,
of an inordinate proportion of that wealth which was
designed for fair and equitable distribution amongst
the teachers of the people, and the active ministers
of the Church. On this subject of abuses in the
parochial department of the Church, a pamphlet has
been published by one who signs himself " A Curate,"
and who exhibits in a striking, but not unexpected
light; the unmerited sufferings to which that order of
ministers of the gospel are subjected under the laws
and usages which now prevail, and are, if not di-
Tectiv sanctioned, at least tolerated by the Bishops.
With reference to a course of interrogatories which
has lately been circulated, by the Right Rev. Bench,
the author asks with etbrnestness, and with great pro-
priety,why questions t'Juching the condition ofthe curates
should in all cases, be addressed to the rectors, and not
to the curates 'theinseles, who are thus debarred from
speaking upon their own affairs, or from suggesting an
improver.ient in their own oppressed circumstances ?
Again, he blames the framers of those interrogatories
for confining their inquiry upon the conduct and situa-
tion of the rectors to the individuals implicated, mak-
ing them witnesses in their own cause, and witnesses,
moreover, if it shall so please them, against the inte-
rests of their curates. We quote some passages from
this little tract, which deserve the reader's attention.
The form of tho pamphlet is that of a letter to the
Archbishop of Canterbury, which prelate, be it re-
membered, has not hitherto been successful in his
attempts to reform " the Church, though we readily
give him credit for a sincere disposition to do what is
right:—

I beg, in the first place, respectfully to approach your
Grace with an inquiry, ivhy you have confined your questions
exclusively to incumbents, when half of those inquiries ap-
pertain to curates, and why the curates should not be allowed
to answer for themselves ?

" Admitting that your Grace never gathered a famishing
ILi istence for yourself, wife, and children, from the hands of
an affluent and imperious rector, who paid your pittance, not
because he merited it, but because law restricted he dared not
withold it ; yet your Lordship's known kindness, age, and
discernment, must, upon reflection, point out to you, that the
rector is the last man in the world who would render a faith-
ful account of his pecuniary arrangements with his curate.
It is, my Lord, his interest, however it may not be his incli-
nation, to throw dust in your Lordship's eyes. For exam-
ple, may not, and does not a rector, frequently, in his nomi-
nation, allow a curate 801, per annum, and subsequently take
back a considerable portion in the rent of the rectory-house ?
" Moreover, while 801. shall be represented as the net
amount of the curate's income, has he necessarily that salary ?
On the contrary, he is compelled, as the shepherd of the
flock, to discharge to the sick and indigent, out of his
bard-earned wages, the obligations of the non-resident.
Is -it not likewise frequently entered in a nomina-
tion, that the rectory is an unincumbered residence ?
Whereas its taxes, poor-rates, highway-rates, &c., reduce
the salary below the wages of an hedger and ditcher.
These things, my Lord, do exist, and yet the paro-
chial returns, penned by the rector, and credited by yourself,
will doubtless represent the curate's income according to the
full amount contained in his nomination. Under these cir-
cumstances, my Lord, would it have been derogatory to the
moderation of the bench of bishops, to have been of opinion,
that in matters pertaining to their own receipts, a little con-
descension might be granted to the curates, so far as to accre-
dit them with the ability to explain and answer for themselves?
An ex parte statement would be admittedin no ordinary court
of law ; it cannot, therefore, be allowed in an extraordinary
court, presumed to be spiritual.
" If curates were not men of cOueation, if in many instances
they were not most holy
.snen, and, ' though poor, making
many rich,' they might; deservedly have been alienated from
courtesy and coneide.ratioe, and treated as servile, puerile, and
contemptible, But the 'acrid estimates their abilities, while it
deplores their sufferings ; any measure of reform, therefore,
originering in a document which lacerates the feelings of so
large a portion of the clergy, will meet with no concurrence
from the people, nor approbation from God.
" In the next place, I would modestly submit to your Grace,
that in requiring a statement of a rector's income from him-
self, you adopt a ccurse calculated to lead him into misrepre-
sentations, and to defeat yeer own purpose. In many instances,
they arc so indolcet, and men of such unbusiness-like habits,
as to keep no accounts, or, what is worse, had ones. From
such persons, therefore, who are morally incapable, how can
your Grace expect a fair statement?
" Moreover, where the small tithe is taken. 'tailless in sin-
gular instances of punctuelity and conscieaiioasness, an esti-
mate must be pursly arbitrary. • In crows of the great tithe,
likewise, is it not proverbial that some livings, estimated at
a low rate a few years since, have become, through the con-
version of pastille into erahle land, double, treble, and even
quadruple, their original ealue ? And yet, my Lord, in the
parochial returns, these matters may be represented as suits
the incumbent for the present ; and if at any future period they
require investigatic e, the facility of escape from detection is pal-
pable. The great law of charity may influence your Grace to
hope that others would act as yourself under similar circumstan-
ces; but where, in candour and impartiality, you direct your at-
tention to a certain portion of the clergy, you will perceive that
such an eapectation must be nugatory. It is a source of deep re-
gret amr.ng the well- wis.bers of the establishment that, as in a
private family, so in the case of that divine institution, 'the
greatest enemies of a man arc those of his own household."
There are many rich ineumbents who have assumed the
garb of shepherds merely because their friends were possessed
of clerical property. It is not therefore reasonable to believe,
that such shepherds as have made the ministry a matter of spe-
culation, and temporal advantage, will treat your Lordship's
inquiries as arbitrary arid inquisitorial ; and never having re-
garded their charge as one of spiritual obligation, present your
Grace with what merchants term a salt-water invoice ? While
you confide exclusively in a rector's representation, I take the
liberty to suggess that there may be abuses to which you are a
stranger. If, for instance, the following question had been
introduced among your interrogatories, it might have alarmed
some of your Lordship's ancient shepherds—' Do you hold the
living of which you are the Rector for the private benefit of
any other parties besides yourself ?' Your Grace's elevated
station in society must have convinced you, that so powerful is
the interest of certain individuals among the great, they may
obtain, for asking, whatever preferment they please ; and the
consequence is, that in cases where they occupy as many plu-
ralities as the utmost stretch of the law will allow them, still
ravenous, they fix on some poor creature, whose poverty and
not his will consenting,' enables them, at the expense of his
conscience, to gratify their uncontrollable rapacity.
4 a a
" My Lord, the wealth of church dignitaries never was
their own. Therefore it is that the people weep, because
they have made it their own. It is written in the law of God,
• Thou shalt not steal,' and he who takes that gift which was
deposited in his charge for the good of his neighbour, and
appropriates it to his own use, is as great a robber as he who
waylays the unwary traveller on the highway. 'Wobe to the
shepherds that do feed themselves. Should not the shepherds
feed the flocks? Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the
wool, but ye feed not the flock.' Much must be conceded, by
every discreet mind, to the nature of the times, and much to
the necessary expenses of office, added to those suitable and
appropriate conveniences becoming the rank and condition of
every individual. It is a mistake to imagine that the feelings
of the rich are not to be consulted upon the subject of appear-
ances, as well as of the poor ; and it is reasonable to believe,
that had it pleased the Supreme Being to throw the fates of
the first twelve Bishops among Kings, Princes, and Nobles,
as a standing order, he would have provided them with that
mode of life which would have enabled them to be offensive to
none. But, my Lord, on the other hand, excess, the result of
pride, is as bad as defect, the result of fanaticism. While the
feelings of the rich and great are consulted, that is no reason
why their appetites should be pampered. To all that is be-
coming, decent, and appropriate, your order has a right, but
beyond this, nothing.
To reason by analogy, have we not had many members of Par-
liament, of high birth, and even Prime Ministers, of very
limited means, who have, nevertheless, discharged the duties
of their situation with becoming dignity ? Surely, therefore,
if the dignity of so elevated a civil officer requires but a mode-
rate income to uphold it, how is it that such immense ecclesi-
astical endowments as were provided by the Deity for the good
of tho people have been appropriated exclusively to support
the dignity of a spiritual officer ? Dignity, my Lord ! Why
should a Bishop seek for dignity ? The very name of Bishop
bears with it essential dignity. To encircle the Lord's anointed
with superfluous purple, and gold and erw.ine, is to offend the
dignity of the witness of Jehovah, with the pomp, and Marc,
and heat of a Turkish harem. My Lords, the hare?-s, and head,
and feet of a bishop, are dignified. But ole .! how undefiled—
how clear as crystal--how spiritually bight—when, like St.
Peter's, they are washed from the stains of the world ! Is it
not written How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet
of those who publish glad tidings.' Use, universal use, the
highest order of use, adds a dignity to the mitre which ' So-
lomon in all his glory was not arrayed with.' In short, Bi-
shops would have been the angels of God upon earth, had they
accounted their spiritual duties their own, their wealth the
people's !"—Times.
The " Marmion" of the Tory 'Cabinet, the doughty
Sir Robert, who has, at least, some of the " addi-
tions" of his prototype who fell at the field of
Flodden,

" Lord of Fontenay,
Of Lilt terworth, and Scrivelby
And Tamworth tower and town,"
has been again labouring to' procure a political eva-
cuation by means of the good people of the latter
place, to whom, for
.obvious reasons, Sir Robert
can say what he could not well say anywhere else,
and what may help him more, will be believed,
when nobody else could be expected to believe
him. Sir Robert, it seems, " spoke a whole
hour by Shrewsbury clock;" and we may well
suppose that the purpose of the Premier in speak-
ing so long to those who are bound to believe
all that he says, and who, therefore, had not the
Smallest neresity for understanding one word of ,

it, went_deeper, or at all events was meant to "go
wider," than Tarnworth. The points are, therefore,
worthy of a little attention. In the first place, he is
convinced that he can carry on the Government of the
country with "the New House of Coniliiiim, on
Conservative principles, and in the spirit of those
Constitutional- Ihjorms on which all reflecting men
ate agreed." " Conservative principles" to be acted
on in the " spirit of Reform !" What in the tiame
of all the contrarieties 'leek tl'ii Mean ? Were not
the men who call themselves " Conservatives" con-

gregated and thus named for the avowed purpose
of opposing by joint-stock wits, joint-stock purses,
and we fear we must add joint-stock tyrannies and
persecutions (which last have been morally fearful
in some of the counties during the present election),
every species and degree of reform that could be
named ? Are they not the men who, in and out of
office, and in and out of both Houses of Parliament,
have been the uniform, the desperate opposers, of
every liberal measure ; and have they any one prin-
ciple, as Conservatives, that can be named, or in any
way made plain to the understanding of any one man,
but the principle (if principle it be) of opposing every
thing that can in any way come under the name of re-
form ? Look at their whole conduct—look at the
list of coadjutors which this weak, but would be wily
Tory has chosen to be with him—look at the candi-
dates to whom they have given their support through-
out the election—look at the character of that support,
and the way in which it has been given, and say whether
there can be in him who is nominally responsible for all
this, any one feeling in common with the spirit of
Reform ? Truly, if the spirit of Reform is in him,
that spirit is dead ; and the clay carcass of " hostility
to all reform," is the only part of the compound which
has life and can have action. Truly, in this case the
living dog will be found too much for the dead lion.
Ay, but it is " Constitutional" Reform ; and Sir Ro-
bert will be a mighty man of valour in that I Non-
sense I there is not, and there cannot be, any Consti-
tutional Reform. The Constitution of England, or of
any other country, is matters just as they stand. No
inatter whether they be good oe bad, they form the
Constitution, just as they stand ; and when any man
saes, that he is a Conservative, or a friend of the Con-
stitution, he just says, in other words, that he will and
must stand up for " things exactly as they are,'
without the slightest alteration either one way or
another. If the system of things for the day
does not form the Constitution and the whole
Constitution, then the word is an unmeaning sound.
Laws and usages which have ceased to be acted on
are surely not parts of the Constitution ; and surely it
will not be said that laws which arc not yet enacted,
and usages which are not yet observed—but
neither of which are so much as thought of—are parts
of the Constitution ? From this definition of the
Constitution, and it is the only one that can have
meaning, there cannot in the nature of things be a
Constitutional Reform, and, therefore, when the Pre-
mier speaks of that, he merely does what greater men
have done when they have a purpose to serve—speaks
nonsense with all the solemnity of a wise man.
Sir Robert's second " fetch " was a sneer at
the accounts of the majority, which arc against
his party, notwithstanding all the immmoral means to
which they have had recourse ; and, again, he
woos the ".Constitutional Whigs," as 'the wolf woos
the kid, or rather as the boa-constrictor woos the :ante-
lope. Need we tell him, after what we have already
said, that there can be no " Constitutional" Wl-'
sig
any more than there can be a " ConsOtri':onal" Re
form. The Constitution is that is, without any
alteration, however nece-s7,ary ; the principle of the
Whig is that tc,.l;tc,), in the judgment of reason,
ought to Lc. This is a most important distinction,
and tine which we thank Sir Robert for giving us the
opportunity of explaining at some length. Sir Robert's
" Constitutional Whigs" arc, therefore, nothing else
than Ultra-" Tories ; men chained to corruption in
thought and in act, just as his " Constitutional Re-
forms" mean the conservation of every political
abuse and abomination at present existing.—
Well may Sir Robert Peel say that there is a
" dark gulf" between his " Conservatives" and
" Constitutional Whigs," and Liberals of any
description. Sir Robert will find that not only the
majority of the people, but that of the Commons is
one side- the gulf ; that there are only the anti-
quated Conservatives of abuse on his side of it ; and
that the " honest and liberal Whigs" who are re-
turned to Parliament will treat him as he was treated
by Lord Stanley and Sir James Graham. His call
to them was—

" Charge, Graham, charge !--On, Stanley, on !"
and the most likely result of their refusal (for it
speaks a language not to be misunderstood), will be,
that in a
.few weeks Stanley will be " on ;" and then
some of the Tories, if they have breath enough left,
will turn from him with the same indifference as
others turned from his prototype.

" Good night to Niarrnion."

—Morning Advertiser.
The contest for South Lancashire has gloriously
concluded, after a most spirited contest, in favour of
the two Conservative candidates, Lord Francis Eger-
ton and the Hon. Mr. Wilbraham. The defeated Ra-
dicals, Lord Molyneux and Mr. Wood, kept their sta-
tion at the bottom of the poll until the conclusion.
This defeat will strike the Destructives with dismay.
The value of the triumph may be estimated when it is
considered that the southern division of the county of
Lancaster has a dense population, as well as being the
seat of immense manufacture, and that the olective
franchise is extended to upwards of 11,000 electors,
whose intelligence may be pronounced to be equal, if
not to exceed, that of any part of the United Kingdom.
The numbers polled on this occasion, and on the
former struggle in 1832, present the same remarkable
proofs of re-action which we have signalised in other
counties. We subjoin the returns of the two years
LANCASAIRE, SOUTHERN DIVISION.
1832. I 1835.

G. W. Wood, Esq.
Lord Alolynega
Sir T. D. Hesketh, Bart 3,082 Lord Molvneux
G. W. Wood, Esq ... 4,377
It is with such striking indications as these before
our eyes that we are gravely told there is no re-
action. What will Mr. G. H. Ward, who has been
spouting some rabid trash at a dinner of his consti-
tuents at St. Albans, say to the figures which we have
daily exhibited from the most intelligent and wealthy
counties in the kingdom ? Will he still repeat the
parrot cry of no re...action ? We are informed that the
change in public opinion in South Lancashire owes
much of its origin to certain violent rhapsodies of Lord
Molvneux at Liverpool ; but we believe that the noble
stand in' defence of the Established Church which gave
rise to the celebrated Newton dinner has been the
cipal cause of the rejection of the fe:;,,er members.
This attitude was assumed from the moment that
Mr. G. W. Wood 1"7 -
~i-gnt forward his Bill
for the apPr°"*..-,;tion of the Universities to
purposes. An organization of the
mends of our venerable and- revered institutions
was resolved upon instanter, and the hour of retri-
bution has arrived. Mr. G. W. Wood, at the head
of the poll in 1832, is ignominiously ejected from the
representation of the county in 1835, and he now
figures the " lowest of the low," 243 below his de-
feated colleague, Lord Molyneux, and with a loss of
1,317 of his former supporters. The position of the
Conservative candidate in 1832 Was at the bottom of
the poll, and in 1835 he gains 2,531 votes. We
will not say more, but leave it to the " authoritative
Courier to reconcile these differences. Our contem-
porary, by the way, has long been proved to be no
conjuror, and we will now detnonstrate he is no
prophet. Thus ambles forth our gentle Courier of
last evening :
" Owing to the state of the yowls) :re presume, we were
prevented last night from receiving tho intelligence which we
expected from Manchester. It did' not reach our office till
past midnight. We can now state, although the first day's
poll for South Lancashire is not as we could wish, that there
is no reason to doubt of Lord Molyneux and Mr. Wood's
success. The voters of the country districts had chiefly polled
on the first day; the voters for the town districts were not
more than half polled, and we conldently anticipate that the
result of the second day's poll will reverse the relative posi-
tions of the Reformers and the Tories."
The confident anticipations of the Courier, not-
withstanding it had " no reason to doubt," have not
been realized, and if our contemporary has, by the
propelling dictates of all " Liberals " to be en avant,
already put down in his veritable lists the names of

two " Reformers," we must take the liberty to jog
his memory, in order to prevent a repetition of
the practice, now somewhat stli.lo; feCOrcling
re-
turred appettaining to the Destructive
clique. We have also to record the gratifying state-
ment that Lord Walpole and Mr. Wodehouse
the two Conservatives, have defeated Mr. Windham

and Mr% thTh ey, ifid that Mr. Corbett, the Conserva-
tive, has thrown out Sir W. Ingilbv, of malt tax no-
toriety. Among the circumstances which have occurred
during the general election, one of the most singular
and remarkable is the difference of the situations in
which the various candidates have found themselves.
Where, for instance, a Conservative has been defeated
in nine cases out of ten, it has been by a majority of
two or three. Mr. Lushington at Canterbury was de-
feated by four ; Lord C. Wellesley at Rochester by
one ; W. Denny by four ; Broadwood at Horsham
by three ; R. W. Jackson at Armagh by two ; B.
Smith at Youghal by one ; Knight at Cambridge
by five ; Bailey at Monmouth by four ; and Blake-
more, W. Attwood, Fitzroy, ,A. Hamilton (New-
port), Thomas, and Willoughby Gordon, were each
rejected by a comparatively insignificant majority.
In very few instances have the Ministerialists been
rejected without a very severe struggle. In places
where the electors have returned only a single Conser-
vative it almost invariably has been at the head of the
poll. We will merely enumerate D. Carruthers at
Hull ; Lowther at York ; Sandon at Liverpool ; Tre-
vor, at Durham ; Sibthorpe at Lincoln ; B. East at
Winchester, ; C. Ross at Northampton ; Col. Lygon,
Worcestershire : Sir C. Greville at Coventry ; Alder-
man Thompson at Sunderland ; Quintin Dick at Mal-
don ; J. W. Hogg at Beverley : Ryle at Macclesfield ;
Major Morsland at Stockport; Trench at Scarbo-
rough ; Goodricke at Stafford ; Polhill at Bedford ;
Dowdeswell at Tewkesbury ; Lord Jermyn at Bury ;
Hardy at Bradford ; Bolling at Bolton ; W.
Lewis at Maidstone ; Grove and Price at Sand-
wich ; Sir W. Fact at Exeter ; Sir W. Geary
in West Kent ; Alsager in East Surrey ; Pechell
at Brighton ; Grimston in St. Alban's ; Sir J.
Beckett at Leeds, &c. What arc we to conclude from
this list, and the evidence it affords of the feeling of
the country ? That in case of another dissolution,
whenever it may come, the Conservatives would be
enabled to place two Members where only one now is
found. These circumstances are deserving of especial
remark, and are a sufficient answer to the bare-faced
denials of the Radical organs that no re-action has
taken place. It is no doubt very amusing to sec the
Chronicle and the Courier labouring in their vocation
to mislead the few people who throw away time to pe-
ruse their drivelline. impertinence ; but when we have
fact.: of this kind' to advance, (independently of the
evidence afforded by the result of the elections through-
out the kingdom,) we may leave these gentry to pro-
ceed without molestation in the service of their mas-
ters.—Morning Post.

In our paper of Wednesday we inserted a report o
the proceedings of the annual meeting of the Ship.
owners' Society, held on Tuesday last, at the City
London Tavern ; and although we have not much time
or space to devote to the subject, it is one of such ge-
neral interest, that we cannot pass it over w;!.
;out some
notice. We have always been to pay a just
tribute to the zeal anti
. .
of the Committee ; but
it has been on!: 'Misfortune to-differ from them in the
gc"P".-e', views they entertain of the causes of the de-
pression of the shipping interests, which from their own
statements upon this occasion do not appear attributable
to a want of employment, as, according to the returns
of "the tonnage of ships that have entered the port of
London (no statement of the tonnage for the United
Kingdom is given), it is in evidence that' the navigation
of the River Thames with foreign parts has greatly in-
creased ; nor is it less satisfactory to observe, notwith-
standing what has been alleged at the meeting, that Bri-
tish shipping has fully participated in such increase.
We are content to abide by the documents referred to
by the Hon. Member for 'Sunderland, which show an
increase in the tonnage of loaded ships that entered
the port of London from foreign ports during the last
two years, as compared with 1832, of no less than
166,638 tons, being an augmentation of upwards of
20 per cent. ; of that tonnage, 104,518 tons were Bri-
tish, and the remainder 62,120 tons foreign, the relit-
' tiv2 proportions being as to British 63 per cent., and
as to foreign only 37 per cent. It would be really a
waste of words, therefore, to offer an additional obser-
vation in refutation of the often-told tale of the de-
clining employment of British shipping, and the great
preponderance of foreign. A most undeserved charge
is also brought against the Legislature in the reso-
lution moved by the Honourable Member, amplified
by some observations from other of the speakers
upon that occasion, setting forth that no permanent
improvement can take place until the British ship-
owner, in common with every other interest in the
state, receives from Parliament due protection, and re
proaching the Legislature with having been regardless
of those interests, and having, even in matters of regu-
lation, done them injury. Surely the shipowners can-
not have forgotten what has been done by Parliament
for them during the last ten years ; and if they have
not, what pretext is there for the charge ? Has not
the shipping of this country an exclusive protection in
the coasting trade, the colonialyade, and the fisheries?
Does it not enjoy peculiar protection under the naviga-
, tion laws, which restrict the importation of goods for
home consumption from Asia, Africa, and America
to British ships ? and also, as Neepects the enumerated
articles " submodo" from the ports of Europe. And
are not all these exclusive privileges, amounting to mo-
nopolies granted to the shipowner, at the expense of
the consumer of the commodities, the price of which
is enhanced by the augmentation of freight ? But let
us see whether Parliament really has been inattentive to
the shipping interests. Since the year 1824 a conso-
lidation of the laws of customs, excise, and of navigaw
tion, has taken place. Upwards of 1,300 useless and
obsolete statutes relating to commerce and shipping
have been repealed ; acts have passed to separate the
Customs from the Excise, and to reduce the fiscal re-
gulations
into a simple and compendious form ;
various laws have passed for improving the bonding
system, whilst additional security has been afforded the
shipowner in the means of attaching freight in the
hands of the several dock companies ; the registry
of shipping, pilotage, quarantine, have all under-
gone a laborious revision, and the laws . relating to
smuggling have been ameliorated ; the stamp duties
upon the sale and transfer of' shipping have been re-
pealed, and relief given in those upon marine in-
surances ; the law requiring bonds from. masters and
mates of ships at the time of ciearing outwards has
, been repealed, improved regulations introduced in re-
spect to passengers and ship's clearances, an inordi-
nate fees and charges upon shipping in the colonies
abolished, and consular fees regulated ; the duties upon
the importation of materials used in ship-building and
fitting have been reduced ; shipowners permitted to
supply their vessels in British ports- with foreign pro-
visions and stores without payment of any duty ;
effective protection has been afforded to British ship-
ping against the discriminating duties imposed by
foreign States by the means of commercial treaties, or
retaliatory-measures of a countervailing fiscal character ;
upwards of 60,0001. in light duties, &c. have been
remitted, and several thousands of pounds per annum
saved to shipping by a reduction of the Ramsgate and
Dover harbour dues ; the tonnage duty on shipping
generally has been repealed ; a great reduction effected
in the burdens upon ships by the repeal of nearly the
whole of the Port of London dock dues, amounting to
upwards of 30,0001. per annum ; and the expenditure
of the port establishment greatly diminished. By the
refusal of Parliament to revive the exclusive privileges
of the East India Docks, West India Docks, and Lon-
don Docks, shipping have been relieved from oppressive
dues, and protection established by means of open
competition. Laws have been passed to regulate sea-
men and apprentices, and improve the mode of recovery
of seamen s warns,
the navigation with the Indian seas
by British s;,:;.'s, and the ports of the continent of
Europe, extended,
trade with China thrown open;
, 'eeed under Parliamentary
great amplification i ntroa
~sines of the Cus-
authority in the conduct of tne
toms and Excise, many useless oaths i_
_holished, and
, .ssion for
amongst other measures, an act passed last se. We
the benefit of the merchant-seaman's widow.
could, indeed, swell this catalogue with the recital of
many other acts of the Legislature which have been

passed for the imptovernent of commerce and naviga-
tion ; but i'Ve think i-lotigh hag beep refeiled to to
show with what truth Parliament has been blamed for
a want of attention to the shipping interests. Let the
shipowners point out if they can, any other interest
which has during the hist ten years engaged so large a
portion of the attention of the Legislatilre, anti defied
such important advantages from the fostering care of
Parliament. If they wish to deserve a continuance of
it, let them ab3tain from pressing claims which have
no good foundation, and urge matters of improvement
with temper and judgment. The disposition of Parlia-
ment to relieve them from any unnecessary burdens has
been sufficiently proved to offer the best guarantee that
the shipping interests of this country will never lie ne-
glected ; but it is highly important that existing cir-
cumstances, with relation to our commercial policy, as
respects the intercourse with foreign nations, should
be duly weighed, seeing that this country is not in a
condition, as in the time of Cromwell, to dictate to the
world the terms upon which the ocean is to be navi-
gated.—Times.

That the Tories should fear, hate, and vilify Lord
Durham is quite natural, and we accept all their ma-
lignity as a homage to the excellent purposes and high
courage of that nobleman ; but we confess our asto-
nishment and concern - when we find men of liberal
opinions countenancing the calumnies of the enemy,
and wantonly flinging insults upon one of the most
eminent and intrepid champions of the popular cause.
Such cases are rare, for there are few professed Re-
formers who can speak of Lord Durham except in
terms of gratitude and affection—of respect and confi-
dence. Even his candid opponents avow their admiration
of his frankness and his talents, while they dissent from
the principles which he declafes without teseiVe. if
there be a statesman of our time who merits the
description of one " without fear and without re-
proach," it is Lord Durham : to the praise of his
spotless integrity many others, we are proud JO say,
may also lay claim, but few, few indeed, possess his
dauntless moral courage. ibis in the firmness which
we need in aten ! unsteady times, and therefore ever
effort is made by our enemies to overwhelm hint s*ith
a flood of calumny. About those attempts we feel
little concern, knowing that his character soars high
above the fetid tide of Tory slander ; but we own it
moves Us NV h MOW is aimed at trim by one who should
be a friend to him, or if not that, at least an ob-
server of truth. At the Stafford election the Rev.
Thomas Gisborne is reported to have spoken as follows;
I would wish those gentlemen, vciiether eitelori4 6i' not,
and whether present or absent, who think it disrespectful to
his Majesty's prerogative to oppose the present Administration,
to contemplate the reattpr thits =Osc sotereiert may be
e3nsideri.,:d to liaVe Mini, t My late Ministers were going on too
fast and too tar; it was quite requisite to put a stop to their
course, mid to commit the affairs of Government to other and
to safer hands: To oppose these new Ministers, we are told,
is to resist the Royal prerogative. But suppose our Sovereign
had seen the subject in another point of view, Suppose that
he had said, My present Ministers are too slow—they are too
timid—they do not answer my wishes, nor the expectations of
my people. I must change them for men of greater energy.
I will appoint Lord Durham my Prithe Minister.— ( Hear,
hear, hear, and laughter.) I will appoint Mr. Joseph Hume
Chancellor of the Exchequer—( Renewed laughter)—and,
perhaps, Mr. Cobbett, Home Secretary—(Great laughter)___
at any rate, I have Daniel O'Connell Lord Chancellor of
Ireland t and the rest of the Cabinet shall be composed of
men of a similar stamp, of equal determination of character.'
—( Great cheering- and laughter.) I should like to know
whether those who appear to be so jealous as to the Royal
prerogative, under present circumstances, would have sat quiet
under such an AdMinistration ? Would they not have said,
We will not wait one moment 1 These people must be in-
stantly ejected We will not send one Member to the House
or Commons, not pledged to vote for their immediate expul-
sion ?'—( Loud cheering, and laughter. )"
Now, let us ask what Lord Durham has ever said
or done to justify this collocation of him with Mr.
Cobbett ? We say nothing of the other parties al-
luded to, but Mr. Cobbett has peculiar notions on the
subject of the Debt, and consistently with them pro-
poses what he calls equitable adjustment ; and has
Lord Durham's worst open enemy ventured to charge
him with any designs against the rights of property,
or is there a syllable in his speeches, or any passage in
his life, upon which the bare suspicion of immorality
could arise ?Is it just—is it worthy, to sport thus in-
juriously with the characters of public men, and to in-
clude the purest and best in the ridicule which may at-
tach to the most questionable ? Mr Gisborne is a cler-
gyman ; and we ask him to examine his conscience, and
to ask himself whether he has in this instance, either
observed the law of truth, or the maxim to do as he
would be done by? The affront was wholly gratuitous.
We cannot suppose that Lord Durham can have given
his detractor stray provocation ; or, if he had, it was for
Mr. Gisborne, as a minister of truth, to deal with him
as he is, and not to disparage him by classing him as
what he is not. We are not without hopes, however,
that there has been clumsiness, instead of ill nature
and bad faith, in Mr. Gisborne's illustration—that it
was a slip of the tongue—the chance medley of anin-
stance began with one application and carried on with
another ; and if so, he will be glad of the opportunity
this notice will give him of setting himself right with
justice ; if not, he merits a severer rebuke than we will
administer, while there is a doubt of which he can have
the benefit.—Morning Chronicle.

COURT OF CHANCERY.