The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-27 00:00:00

PRIVY COUNCIL BILL.

The House resolved itself into Committee on this
Bill. Clauses Ito 8 were agreed to.
Mr. ELPHINSTONE moved the following clause :
" And be it enacted, that in all cases of appeal to her
Majesty in Council from ecclesiastical courts, and from
admiralty or vice-admiralty courts, which have been,
now are, or may hereafter be depending, in which any
person duly monished, or cited, or requested to comply
with any lawful order or decree of her Majesty in Coun-
cil, or of the'Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, or
their surrogates, made before or after the passing of this
Act, shall have neglected or refused, or shall neglect or
refuse, to pay obedience to such lawful order or decree,
or shall have committed or shall commit any contempt
of the process under the seal of her Majesty in ecclesias-
tical and maritime causes, it shall be lawful for the said
Judicial Committee or their surrogates to pronounce
such person to be contumacious and in con-
tempt, and after he shall have been so pro-
nounced contumacious and in contempt, to cause pro-
cess of sequestration to issue under the said seal of
her Majesty against the real and personal estate, goods,
chattels, and effects, wheresoever lying, within the domi-
nions of her Majesty, of the person against or upon whom
such order or decree shall have been made, in order to
enforce obedience to the same, and payment of the ex-
penses attending such sequestration, and all proceedings
consequent thereon, and to make such further order in
respect of, or consequent on, such sequestration, and in
respect to such real and personal estate, goods, chattels,
and effects sequestrated thereby, as may be necessary, or
for payment of money arising from the same to the per-
son to whom the same may be due, or into the registry
of the High Court of Admiralty and Appeals, for the
benefit of those who may be ultimately entitled thereto."
Sir J. GRAHAM said that lie had great doubts whe-
ther the Committee could pass the clause without the
consent of the Crown, as it would interfere with the pre-
rogative of the Crown.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that he should
oppose the clause.
Mr. AGLIONBY supported the clause. He appre-
hended that the consent of the Crown was not necessary,
and if it were, it might be obtained through the Govern-
ment. He suggested, however, that the clause should
be withdrawn, and brought up again on the report.
The clause was then postponed.
The Chairman reported progress, the House re-
sumed, and the report was ordered to be brought up on
Monday next.
The House then adjourned at a Quarter-past Nine.

SPIRIT Gf the -PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
GLOBE.—There is no defeat of the present Government
which we have witnessed with more E atisfaction than that of
the " holier than thou" Mr. Gladstone, in the matter
of Sunday third-class railway trains. Trains ought either
to be permitted to run at all on Sundays—or they ought not.
If there should be no Sunday trains, we need not an Oxford
logician to tell us there should be no third-class ones. But,
if first and second-class trains should run on Sundays, a
fortiori should third-class trains. We shall endeavour to
show this to the satisfaction of a student of Aldrich (who
would do well to study Wheatly). Those who are truly at-
tached (among whom we beg to rank ourselves) to Lord's-
day observance, admit—such of them as admit the pro-
priety of sanctioning Sunday trains—that there are cases
in which Sunday travelling may be a work of necessity
it mercy. How can that plea be less applicable to third
1 to first or second-class travellers? Nay, how can it
ilto be applicable more frequently to the former than the
atter—first, in proportion to the larger constituency of whom
hey are representatives—and secondly, in the ratio of their
more frequent and urgent occasions? And why, when some
errand of necessity, or mercy, occurs to the poor man,
should he be supposed abler to pay a second-class fare
than at other times ? Nay, how should he be sup
posed otherwise than less able for extra expenditure ?
It will be observed that we have taken the narrowest
ground in favour of the decision of the House against Mr.
Gladstone. We have adapted our argument to the scruples
of the most scrupulous Sabbath observers. Perhaps a larger
necessity and a larger mercy might have been pleaded for
the case of pent artisans and their families in the town
labyrinths of daily toil. However, we have no occasion to
argue that question at present. The running of Sunday rail-
way trains was already a foregone conclusion. The sole point in
dispute was, whether their accommodation should extend to the
poorer classes. That point the House of Commons, creditably
to itself, carried against the Government. We have no disposi-
tion to ascribe oppressive motives to Mr. Gladstone or his col-
leagues. We regard him as the smooth shopman, who dis-
plays his assortment in the church-line to the beet advan-
tage. Neither do we charge him with insincerity in his recom-
mendations of it. Recent police reports have brought to light
a practice existing in the drapery line of what is called shaving
the ladies, and receiving a per tentage from employers for so
doing That Mr. Gladstone " shaves the ladies," and the
lady-like portion of the public, from any other than the most
orthodox motives, we do not for one moment believe. That
wicked wit, Sydney Smith, is said to have once accused
him of " rather a retail manner." But we entirely ac-
quit him of retail practices. We believe he repre-
sents with good faith official religion—or what is left of
it. Believing Mr. Gladstone honest in his scruples,
we believe him feeble and vacillating in his mind. What a
point, to be sure, to court defeat upon, for the orthodox organ
of a strong Government ! Mr. Gladstone thinks that work-
ing men would rather travel on Saturday than break into
Sunday. We dare say they would, if they could afford to
lose the time, and to lose the pence. We have already said,
however, that we will not enter into the general question of
Sunday travelling. We only denounce the inconsistency
(of which the House showed its sense by its vote) of treating
first and second-class trains as good, and denouncing on third-
class Anathema Maranatha.
STANDARD.—The narrative of the progress made to-
wards the suppression of the slave-trade, last night, given
by the Earl of Aberdeen with so much clearness and
so little pretension, will highly gratify the people of
this country and the Christian community throughout
the world. The average annual importation of slaves
from Africa to Cuba and the Brazils has been
reduced from nearly 100,000, in the years between
1835 and 1840, to 28,000 in the last three years ;
and this latter average would have been much lower, (the
number imported in 1842 being, in fact, but 17,000) but for
the violent changes in the Government of Spain, and the
substitution in the government of Cuba, for the humane
and intelligent Valdez, of a person of a different stamp,
O'Donnell. It was, however, stated by Lord Aber-
deen. that the British Government had succeeded in
wringing from the Government of Spain, though
not until after a long delay and a stubborn re-
sistance, a law forbidding Spanish subjects to embark in
the slave trade. The effect of this law must be promptly to
extinguish the abominable traffic, for, as the Noble Secre-
tary for Foreign Affairs explains, the Governments of France
and of the United States are disposed to co-operate cordially
with Great Britain in her noble purpose. This need surprise
no one. As far as the Government of France is concerned, we
may confidently anticipate from the wise and good King of
the French, and from the prudent and benevolent statesmen
who happily fill his council, whatever is just, and humane,
and generous, and France, as well as the American Common-
wealth, have even a nearer and more immediate interest than
we have in the suppression of the slave-trade, for this very
reason, that they have hitherto found it difficult, if not im-
possible, to exclude slavery from the dependencies of the
one, and from territory of the other. As between states
cultivating the same produce in a tropical climate, we
have unfortunate proof that the use of slavery gives some ad-
evlahnntaatgeess, ;
thebutpractice a s we
hstatesve..t r
ausing i
gives incomparably
in such
greater advantages. If, therefore, it is reproached to Great
Britain that, upon commercial grounds, she wishes an end
put to slavery every where (she gave noble proof twelve
bet
of theen s
years ago of a higher motive)—it may be said—not in the way
id reproach, but as a reason for trusting their sincerity—that
all States which still use slave labour, but do not soil their
hands with a slave trade, must upon commercial grounds de-
sire an end put to the execrable traffic in human beings, be-
cause the slave buyers and slave butchers can always undersell
them, as the slave butchers of Cuba and the Brazils do,
in fact, undersell the United States planters and the
French colonists, as well as the British colonists,
Thus there is a gradation of interest happily enforcing the
common duty, and tending to its ultimate accomplishment.
The free-labour countries are deeply interested to put
an end to slavery; the intermediate countries, which
admit slave labour, have a still deeper interest in
extinguishing the slave trade. When we see the
first commercial nation on the face of the earth at the
head of the series, and the next in-order of wealth, in-
telligence, and commercial importance, occupying the inter-
mediate station, we cannot doubt of the result, even could
we doubt of the benignant purposes of Providence. For our
own part we have never been able to understand why Spain,
Portugal, and the Brazils, have not been compelled to termi-
nate the slave trade—compelled not by a desultory war of
cruisers, but by bold language, boldly spoken in their capitals,
enforced, if necessary, by the voice of artillery in their
ports. We are no friends to interference with indepen-
dent States; but for interference in this matter, we have
the justification of successive treaties all shamefully
violated, and the authority of numerous precedents—Algiers
in 1816, Greece in 1828, the Netherlands in 1831, and
Spain and Portugal themselves from 1830 to 1838. Ques-
tionless it is more satisfactory to obtain the desired end as
Lord Aberdeen is likely to obtain it, by mild and peaceful
negotiation ; but it may be as well if all parties arc reminded
of the robust right which the humane and enlightened nations
still have in reserve should negotiation fail.