The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-24 00:00:00

rbirb Vatittion

SUN OFFICE, Semi 0'00(4.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(TRIS DAY.)
THE BARON DE BODE r. THE QITFEN, ON A PETITION OF RIGHT
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
The jury returned a verdict in favour of the Baron de
Bode's claim to the full amount-364,2661., with interest.

TATTERSALL'S.-THIS EVENING.
QUARTER TO SI% O'CLOCK.
NORTHUMBRRLAND PLATE.
. to 1 agst Parthian
3 to 1 agst Poassin
5 to 1 agst Bay Moran,
10 to 1 agst Whistle Binkie
10 to 1 agst Pompey
GOODWOOD STAKE*
10 to 1 agst Red Deer
18 to 1 agst Lucy Banks
25 to 1 agst Franchise
GOODWOOD CUP.

to 1 agq The Squire
THE LATE DERBY.

2 to 1 on Orlando

ST. LEGBR.

12 to 1 agst Red Deer

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

FROM THE. EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.
GLOBE.—The Bill for provoking commercial war-
fare, and promoting commercial perjury, comes on this
evening for a third reading. The House of Commons
, has one more opportunity, if it sees proper, of rescind-
ing its past votes. Of course we have no expectation
of so salutary a repetition of that recent process. It is
. not the less our duty, even at this, the eleventh hour,
to repeat our protest against the passing of such a
measure as this Sugar Bill. We protest against it on
the plainest grounds of international policy—grounds
which, if admitted, must be held paramount to any an-
ticipated temporary benefit or relief. Admitted they
are, it seems, by an able weekly organ of that party,
whom Mr. Hume on Thursday described as " the free
traders par excellence, to whom the Right Honourable
Baronet was indebted for his majority." That
organ affirms that the only difference between free
and slave labour produce—hut admitting both on the
aurae terms—is, that " We shall by this measure
give just cause of offence and estrangement to
many of the largest and best cu,tomers we have, and
provoke measures of a retaliatory kind." Is it not an
ominous sign of the times, that clear-headed men should
begin by describing a measure in these terms, and end by
applauding their friends for voting forit ?—for maintaining
by their vote Ministers guilty of a measure meriting the
shove description! A measures which gives just cause of
offence must be a measure which infringes justice. The
measure in question is confessedly one of unprecedented
corn mercial innovation. It is, according to the above autlu
rily, one of injustice as well as innovation. It is, never-
theless, to be voted for. Why?—Answer : Forty thou-
sand tons of sugar. It is a measure, as Lord Palmerston
observed, authorising
i Government to " take to them-
selves the power of investigating and judging the in-
ternal institutions of all the different colonies and
tropical countries, and under the pretence of maintaining
the protection of West India produce, they were to be
allowed to open the market to the produce of any country
the institutions of which they should determine to be suflis
ciently tinged with freedom."—What can justify the con_
gent of Parliament to such an unheard-of international
inquisition ?—Atiswer : Forty thousand tuns of sugar •
it is a measure, as Mr. Labouchere observed, in effic
amounting to " a proclamation of commercial war with
Brall and Cuba, which called on the people of this
Country to make great sacrifices for no practicabls
or intelligible object, to exhibit themselves in the eyes
of.
.world ai a people who were unable to carry
their own principles into effect, introducing a systeal
of extensive fraud in the commercial world without iti
any degree benefiting the negro population held in sla-
very in fereign countries." What can blunt the edge o:
independent opposition to such a measure ? Answer—
Ferry thousand tons of sugar. It is a measure, as
Mr. Hawes observed, imposing on British Consuls
dodos of a novel and objectionable nature :—" The
Consul was not only
,to receive the foreign declara-
tion as to the origin of the sugars about to be
shipped for consumption in England, but he was to make
a declaration upon that declaration—that he believed it
to be true. Now, this was not a duty which ought to be
imposed on a British Consul ; it was a totally sew and
an unprecedentedly onerous duty, and, moreover, it
would, he apprehended, give rise to much fraud, or at
all events create a vast temptation to persons to lend
their sanction to fraudulent shipments of sugar." What
can justify a measure imposing these odious, one-
rous, and it was shown useless functions? Answer—
Forty thousand tons of sugar. Now, we do
not pretend to any extraordinary pitch of
heroic virtue. IV e have never denied ourselves a lump
of sugar, from childhood up, on the African argument,
or any other. But had the alternative been offered ns—
will you mortify your sweet tooth till this day twelve•
month—will you abjure all part and lot in these forty
thousand tons, which, it seems, outweigh, in the minds
of some parties, every higher, every moral and inter-
national consideration of policy—s ill you bear your
share, or double or quadruple your share, in whatever
burthen such temporary obstruction of this particular
import might have entailed, as a matter of revenue—
would you risk such, or tenfold such consequences—
accept your own share, or tenfold your share in them—
or will you make yourself an actor in this solemn faree?
—will you aid in dragging down this majestic England
to the level of this miserable cabal—this wretched hud-
dle of hypocrites and their dupes ?—we affect no sublime
public spirit ; but we think we know our answer. And
we think it would not, be—Forty thousand tons of sugar.
There is short-sightedness in this materialism.
STANDARD.—Fourteen or fifteen years ago the
,constitution of the House of Commons, how conveniently
.soever it worked for Ministers and parties had become
intolerable to the people. The Reform Bill was intro-
duced with a bad design, and with many gross defects;
but the people eagerly snatched at anything which
would relieve them Prom the system that placed
them under the necessity of' choosing between
one of two great parties of the aristocracia
.and left them (as in 1929) absolutely watt-
out the slightest power to remonstrate upon any occa-
aion, when these two great parties might happen, to agree.
"The Reform Bill, pruned of some of its defects, but not
of all, Was carried ; and the Duke of Wellington, fore-
. seeing consequences which occurred to the minds of very
few among its opponents or supporters, asked the signi-
ficant question, "How, under the new law, the King's
Government was to be carried on ?" The question was
.understood, and perhaps with reason, as an interrogative
esrgunient.against the Bill ; but, however understood, it
involved this very just assumption, that the Government
Imust be carried on in some manner very different from
ithat manner of which the country had experience. Be'
t4re the passing of the Bill in question, a large amottra
of CorOugh influence—in the hands of' Tory and Whig
noblemen respectively—formed the nucleus of two great
psrtiem, and possessedsufficient power to render impossible
the formation of a third. The utmost that the inde-
:pendent representatives of the people could acconi
was, to adjust the balance of these two parties,
or, as public opinion prevailed, give preponderance
. Is, the elle or the other. This arrangement won-
desciilly facilitated and simplified the conduct of
the Government. A minister remained in office
his party numbered a majority, and whi'e
in office he was sure of the support of that
majority. Divisions or mutinies on either side
of the House were rarely heard of, fur this obvious
- reason. that it was impossible to damage the Minister.
-or party leader, without, in a greater degree, damaging
:the party to which the mutineer or malcontent belonged.
:The Retbrut Bill totally changed this- state. Interests
opinions out of doors became the rallying points of
partles, which of course became as numerous and Inge-
rogemeous as these interests and opinions ; and in order
to ;Arrange the simply two-fold division in the House of
Conk vons, it became necessary to marshal on the
two s:ties of the House respectively such parties as
won o early approached each other, in interest and
apieian,
.'without too rigorously exacting what it was
impossible to obtain. Thus, all who wished to maintain
all the institutions of the country, or any one of them,
though ''erent to the fate of • the rest, constituted the
4`onservativo•Rarty, while all that sought violent changes
in any insiltat ton (if indifferent as to others), or in all,
fell into . the opposite, ranks. This was, unquestion-
ably, . for the
_people, a better division than that of
the Tory and. Whig days ; but it is one greatly
more difficult for a Minister to deal with. In such a
division. the Minister or party leader has absolutely no
• power .of his own—nothing but the opinion of his parti-
. suna to support him, and no means of influencing their
conduct, .exce-pt by plainly announcing his purpose to
abdicate, •,if lie do not receive a confiding and a cordial
support. It is most unjust to treat such announce-
- went as -a athreat—it is the declaration which every
honest mart., makes in parallel circumstances in
the • s
mostinstra ots dinary transactions of life. If the
lawyer'
-lions are not attended to he throws
.
up his brief ; if it he Physician's
prescriptions are over-
ruled he takes lea. 7 of his patient. If the pilot is pushed
be I, !ails boat,
or party leader, must either
from the helm, and bids good bye. In
the same way the inister,
ors or he must retire. Since the
have confiding
wrorm Bill, lie must ,be a bona fide leader of
, a
his party,
or he Must be its implicit slave. Reform The Bill
which has thus seriously diminished the.' power of
Minister over his party, reducing him from the absolute
'master that he once was, to a director upon sufferanea.
.has immeasurably increased the amount and difficulty or
the work to be done by him with this diminished power.
11e has not only to reconcile conflicting interests and ad-
v -,'se opinions in his own ranks—of which there will be
a ph:lutv, let the party agree never so well on a general
prine.'vles—he has to satisfy that large portion of the
public, w,:-10 think that the great constitutioual change of
me is eisat to be absolutely barren of practical results.
Until w, Vein the last 12 or 15 years the domestic govern-
went of t ivc country was a business almost of routine,
but now it 4thas become, whether for good or for evil, a
great task Of reconstruction, from which no Minister can
• withhold h in hand. There is not a party or section of a
• party in the ycoontry which will dispute this as a general
necessity, 47iough each has, no doubt, a cherished
something, which, in its opinion, ought not to be
ruched. hush is the precarious and arduous position
or a niinistA tr since the Reform Bill, and such it, to some
e'crent, taus it -remain, thought its difficulties will no doubt
diminish, w hen, if ever, the work of reconstruction shall
be cornplet 4. The authors of the Reform Bill Cried
to evade, Ministers, the terrible embarrassments
hieit they had provided for themselves and their
successors, ?oh), yielding in turn to the most un-
reasonable and mischievous suggestions of their
supporters, -until they had thoroughly disgraced them-
,
• se vets, and *disgusted the country. Sir R. Peel takes a
• different cc !arse. He does not yield to his supporters,
but places ;his continuance in office at their dispoesd.

11 r. YORKE said he had no of to withdraw
' his motion, but if he :lid so he should continue to vote
' in the Committee.
Mr. WARBURTON thought it advisable to post-
pone the consideration of the subject.
After a few words from Mr. DENNISON and Mr.
PLISEY,
Mr. HAWES said he thought the general question
should be considered by the House on a future day.
The subject was one of importance and the House
ought to have ample time to discuss it.
Mr. DENISON said, the case at present was this,
the law of Parlianient declared that any gentleman
having a direct private -interest in a question, could
not give a vote upon it in that House. But the ques-
tion here was, could a Member similarly situated,
give a vote in a Committee. It was important that
the question should be decided as soon as possible,
and in the meantime, he presumed the ordinary law
of Parliament must prevail.
The further discussion of the subject was then de-
ferred till Thursday next.
Mr. BAGGE said, that the Committee must be
suspended during the same time while the question
was pending.
The SPEAKER, as we understood said, that the
sittings of the Committee would be suspended by the
decision cf the House till the question was settled.
Sir GEORGE STANTON presented a petition
against the union of the Sees of St. Asaph and Ban- 1
gor..

. Sir JOHN 1-lANAlERp_iiesented a petition from
Hun, against the New poor
General LYGON presenter a- lipeiltlition against the
Bank Charter Bill.
Viscount DUNCAN presented a petition from
Bath, in favour of Art-Unions.Mr. MASTERMAN presented petitions from
London against the corn-laws.
Mr. S. WORTLEY presented petitions from
1 Yorkshire to the same effect. _ _

Mr. COBDEN presented a petition in favour of the
Dissenters' Chapels Bill.
Mr. KEMBLE presented thirteen petitions from
the eastern division of Surrey against the corn-laws.
OPENING OF LETMIS IN THE POST-
OFFICE.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from
Capt. Charles Stalzberg, residing in Somers-town,
formerly a captain in the Polish service, and now
an exile in Great Britain. The petitioner stated that