The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-25 00:00:00

MM=S Ma6rape¢
No. 16,180. LONDON, TUESDAY EVENNG JUNE 25, 1844.

PRICE sd.

THE SUN is Publishel EVERY MORNING at Elm O'CLOCK, in Time for the EARLY TRAINS and TOWN • DELi yERy ; a SECOND EDITION (Evening Sun) is Published in Time for the AFTERNOON TRAINS
and a THIRD EDITION at SEVEN O'CLOCK, for POST, containing PARLIAMENTARI and all other NEWS in LONDON up to that flour.

ADVERTISEMENTS INSERTED in ALL THE THREE PAPERS, Morning Noon, and Night, thereby insuring a TOWN and COUNTRY CIRCULATION, at'ONE CHARGE.

MIDSUMMER HOLIDAYS.
ROYAL POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTION,
LONGBOTTOM'S PHYSIOSCOPE exhibits the human face
with its varied expressions, on a gigantic scale, curiously contrasted
with the living man. The OPAQUE MICROSCOPE magnifies ef-
fectively a succession of WORKS of the FINE ARTS ; also casts of
ANCIENT INSCRIPTIONS, 'taken by Miss Wilson from the WALLS
of the TOWER of LONDON, cut by Lord Guilford Dudley and other
State Prisoners. The DAILY POPULAR LECTURES abound in in-
teresting experiments. ARMSTRONG'S HYDRO-ELECTRIC MA-
CHINE. DIVING BELL and DIVER. NEW DISSOLVING
VIEWS, &c. &c. The Music is conducted by T. Wallis, Mus. Dec.

OYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS, TRAFAL-
GAR. SQUARE.
The EXHIBITION of the ROYAL ACADEMY is now OPEN.
Admission (from Eight o Clock till Sevea) One Shilling. Catalogue
One Shilling.
HENRY HOWARD, R.A., Sec.

FAMPLOYMENT.—Persons having a little time
to spare are apprised that Agents continue to be appointed in
London, and country towns, by the EAST INDIA TEA COMPANY,
for the sale of their celebrated teas.
Offices, No: 9, Great St. Helen's-churchyard, Bishopsgate-street.
They are packed in showy leaden canisters, from one ounce to a
pound, with the price and weight marked on each packet, and but
little trouble is occasioned by the sale, The license is only I Is. per
annum, and many during the last nineteen years have realised con-
siderable incomes by the agency without ene shilling let or loss.
Application to be made (If by letter post-paid) as above.
_ _

POLICE NOTICE.—FIFTY POUNDS REWARD.
1.
.OST, or STOLEN, from the person of a Gentle-
man, between Spring-gardens and St Ann's-square, between
two and three this afternoon; A BILL CASE, containing BANK-
NOTES to the amount of 3451.: viz., Four 501. Notes, dated 18th
February, 1843, and Numbered 35,670, 35,529, 4. 3,8 3 8 , and 36,875 ;
One ditto, for 1001., dated February 22, 1844, Y-X, Number 67,'24;
One ditto, for 30/., dated February 21, 1843, V-J, Number 30,703 ;
Ono 10/. ditto, and one Si. ditto, dated February 24, 1843, No. 48,316 ;
also Two Cheques, one for 121/. 45., by Castelli and Guistiniani and
Co., and one for 28/. 18s., by Sehwabo and Gobert, on Messrs. Jones,
Lloyd, and Co.

Payment of the above is stopped.
Bankers, Shopkeepers, and others, are requested to detain any
person offering the above in payment, and give immediate Informa-
tion to Mr. Richard Beswick, Chief Superintendent of Police, De-
tective Department, Town-hall, King-street, Manchester.
If Found, the above Reward will be paid on Recovery : and If
Stolen, in proportion to the Amount Recovered.
June 22, 1844.

she was not sent for as a witness, but came up of her own
accord to see after her niece. A person of the name of John-
son asked her if she had any wish to come up to town ? She
borrowed the money for the journey; but she intended to
pay it back to the parties who lent it, and whose names were
down in a list. She could not say Irhether it had been raised
by subscription.
In answer to a juror the Witness said her niece was always-
kind to her when Mr. Belaney was not present.
Mr. George Hobson, of No. 8, Crombey's-ruw, Commercial-
road, bookseller, knew the prisoner six years ago, and had
received from him .half a dozen copies of the " Steeple
Chase." The prisoner then resided at Cannon. street-road.
The witness then proceeded to state the renewal of his ac-
quaintance with Mr. Belaney and his introduction to that
gentleman's wife after their arrival in town on Tuesday; the
4th instant, and his evidence was similar to that given by
Captain Clark.
Mr. BAKER said, that as other witnesses were expected up
from the country, he would postpone the inquiry untiliThurs-
,
day next.
Sergeant M'Cardell said there were two ladies in attend-
ance who had lived in the neighbourhood of Mr. and Mrs.

Belaney down in the north, and whOcould speak to the pri-
soner's ill.treatinent of his wife up to December last.
The witnesses, however, were not canal, and the inquest
was adjourned until two o'clock on Thursday.

THE POST-OFFICE.

HER MAJESTY'S THEATRE.
VIE NEW BALLET.

We have gathered froin the rehearsal of yesterday the
principal points of the outline of the now ballet, which may
serve to convey a. general notion to our readers, and to serve
as a guide to the spectators. Such sketches are always
perfect, and of all subjects the mythological ani the most
insipid in description. But the grouping, the scenery, and
the dancing in this ballet are in the highest degree effective.
To their merits must be added the music, which is full of
admirable melodies, alternatelv plaintive and sprightly, and
throughout perfectly deserlpdve .and characteristic. The
music Is by Pugni, the plot and action by 'Perrot. There is
one circumstance in Perrot's conduct, during the rehearsals,
which contributes to explain the surpassing success of all his
ballets. As long as any member of his troupe is imperfect
in his part, he accompanies each step by an extempore
dialogue of his own invention, explaining the feeling the
performer is to express. Perrot has likewise introduced an- .
other feature in ballets—every portion of the action is danced,
which avoids the tedious gesticulations and mimickry
between the pas, which the public had formerly to endure,
and avoids those sudden transitions which mar the illusion.
Our present ballet master is of opinion that this portion of
a ballet should bear the same relation to the grand feats of
dancing, which the recttatifii do to the bravuras in an opera.
The title of the ballet is Zella, ou la Nymph de Diane,
divided into four tableaux. The principal dramatis persona
are Diane, Copere ; L'Amour, Plunkett Zelia, Cerito ;
Arnyntas, St. Leon ; Fauna, Perrot. In the first tableau,
you see on one side a temple and a statue of Diana; on the
other, a bower of flowers, which conceal a statue of Love,
and which is the hiding-place of L'Amour himself. In the
first scene, Love is seen reclining and asleep. He awakes at
the sound of the horns, which announce the approach of
Diana and her nymphs. The thought of his chaste enemy
excites his anger; and he swears to be revenged for the con-
tempt of her votaries by seducing one of her nymphs from
her allegiance. As he retires Diana and her nymphs arrive ;
she teaches the fair sportswomen the use of the bow; they
fire their shafts at a target. Here the attitudes, the graceful
evolutions, and the dexterity of the Amazons are sure to
create a most agreeable surprise. Zelia, Diana's favourite
nymph, wins the prize, which is a rose. After this, Diana,
on the point of leaving her temple for the forests, commits
the guardianship of the fane to Zelia. Diana gone—Zelia
amuses herself in collecting flowers to make a crown, which
she deposits at the feet of the goddess's statue. This she
does whilst she dances, and here occurs the pas de la cou-
ronne. At this moment Amyntas, a, shepherd, in love with
Zelia, arrives endeavours to steal the crown, and
convey it to! the statue of Love, which has ap-
peared on the opposite side of the stage. This
struggle produces another graceful step. Zelia resists all
Amyntas's declarations, and flies away to avoid him. He, in
despair, attempts to kill himself, but Love arrives, consoles him,
and promises him success. The second tableau represents a
moonlight scene—a circular temple of Diana, with the sacred
fire burning on an altar in the centre ; while the statue of
Minerva and other allegorical figures are seen grouped in di-
vers attitudes at the sides ; Diana and her nymphs appear,
and the goddess confides the maintenance of the vestal fire
burning on the altar to Zelia. As soon as the severe goddess
has disappeared, Love.shows himself. By his touch he ani-
mates the marble effigies, who bend towards 'Lelia, and by
their gestures first, and next by their menaces, invite her to
join in the adoration of Cupid. At the moment that Zelia, by
dint of persuasion, consents, Diana returns, and her truant
votary runs away. The third tableau represents a forest
where Zelia has fallen asleep from the fatigue of her flight.
In her uneasy dreams she remembers her disobedience to
Diana. Whilst she slumbers, a fawn appears, and steal a rose
which she holds in her hand, and which Diana gave her as
talisman, and the reward of her dexterity. She awakes, tries
to regain her flower, and here takes place the pas de la rose,
the struggle itself being intended to typify the contest between
wisdom and passion. The rose is lost=—Love L'Amoue
foretells the arrival of Diana, and Zelia is car 7
ried away on the gossamer wings of little Cupids to the
realms of love. The fourth tableau represents a spot con-
secrated to Venus, whose statue occupies the most prominent
spot. The centre of the gay and embroidered scene repre-
sents a sheet of water, filled by rushing cascades. Zelia;
wafted here, is tempted by the coolness of the stream, and
bathes. Whilst bathing, a butterfly, careering in the air,
attracts her notice—she rushes out of the bath—pursues it
in a pas, called the "Pas de Papillon"—at last she catches
.the butterfly, which she presses to her heart. It makes her
heart heat violently—she throws it off, but it is too late—she
has caught the contagion of love ; for the butterfly was the
arch-god disguised. Cupid comes to enjoy his triumph,
bringing with him Amyntas, who now experiences but little
resistance to his suit. The triumph of love is celebrated by
the most fascinating dances, too numerous and varied to be
described in our allotted space. It is impossible to convey
any idea of the beauty of the coup dial', particularly in the
scene of the Temple, where the statues are animated by Love,
and in that of Venus's Bowers, where Zelia bathes in the
stream. As to the ruling idea of the ballet, it is intended,
from beginning. to end, only as an illustration of the well-
known lines of Voltaire, inscribed under a statue of Cupid—
" Qui, que to soi, roici ton maitre,
Il est, le fut, ou le doit etre."

A discussion took place last night on Mr—Duncombe's mo-
tion fora Committee of Inquiry respecting the statues which
empower a Minister of State to open letters passing through
the General Post-office. The interest which the House took

COURT CIRCULAR.

in the matter is not confined to the walls of Parliament ; it
is looked lipori as one of personal application, as well as of
public importance—as involving considerations of, private
• comfort and security, not less than of national character and
constitutional privileges ; and those who took part in the dis-
cussion of kW, night seemed to be fully aware of the atten-
tion with which it is likely to be regarded by the constituent
bodies of the kingdom. For our own parts, we have already
expressed our opinion with tolerable candour upon the • con-
duct which has provoked complaints and petitions. That
opinion remains unaltered. We believe that State necessity
alone waryants the occasional exercise of a power which
habitual toleration would make arbitrary, vexatious, and op-
pressive: The privilege of opening private letters—in other
words, of violating confidence—is one which it would require
some eloquence, and more sophistry, to reconcile to English-
notions and English habits. It is, perhaps, the most odious
privilege with which a British Minister could be entrusted. It
offends the pride of individuals ; it does more, it rouses a jealousy-
for the libeity of the subject. It is one which should be
used very seldom ; and then only with extreme caution and
the most tender moderation. But still, even under a consti-
tutional Government, and among a people keenly alive to
the slightest infringement of their civil rights, it is not un-
wisely reserved as a defensive instrument against the
machinations of intrigue and the plots of sedition. In every
state Owe are times when danger may be apprehended from
sudden tumults arid secret conspiracies ; and often where
alarm is not felt for outbreaks at home there.may be reason
to suspect the residence of foreign conspirators and designing
exiles--men who make the land of their adoption the point
from which they may best assail the land of their birth and
their former crimes. In the first of these cases domestic
policy; iii the second the unwritten compact of international
obligations, necessitates the adoption of measures which
nothing but: emergency could 'justify.- In both of them,
however, the vigour which is beyond the constitution may
be the best upholder of the constitution. It is far better that
one or two dozen letters should be opened than that the
nation should be shocked and its character sullied by
seine madbrained tumult or some monstrous outrage
on the per Sons of distinguished foreigners visiting
in the character, and entitled to the immunities of
guests. So far, then, we differ from those who de-
claim against• the existence of such .a power. But we
agree with them when, as in this instance, they say that not
only might, it to be exercised with discretion, but also that
the cause of its exercise ought to be fully explained and
justified. The constitution of this realm wisely challenges
examination and discussion for every other act of Ministerial
authority. Why should the most unusual and the most ob-
noxious he permitted to pass unscrutinized and unexplained?
Yet this is the striking feature in the present case. Mr.
Mazzini's letters—no fewer than seventy—have been de-
tained and examined at the Post-office before they reached
his hands. Of Mr. Mazzini we know nothing. Mr. Carlyle
informs us that he has " a martyr-soul," and a great many
other properties, perhaps more indicative of an heroic person-
age than a quiet citizen. He may be a restless, enthusiastic,
and, in the minds of certain Ministers, a dangerous man.
But this is no reason why he should be treated worse than
the inmate of a felon's dungeon. His political vagaries and
his political zeal cannot palliate conduct at which Peachum
would have blushed, and Lockit have cried "Shame!" If
he was suspected of carrying on a treasonable or seditious
correspondence with foreigners in this country, or foreigners
abroad, it might surely have been left for Lord Lowther or
Lord Aberdeen to intimate to him that his movements were
watched, and his letters would be examined. This mode of
proceeding would have been strong and severe ; but it would
also have been honest, manly, open; and, on explanation,
might have teen justified by the emergency of the case.
But, instead of such a proceeding, in steps Sir James Gra-
ham and takes the whole management of the matter into

his hands; simply. we suppose, because it required to be
treated with the greatest delitacy, the most consummate
moderation, and by one who enjoyed fully the confidence of
all men and all parties. Sir J. Graham—with the " great
Mott case" staring him in the face—Sir J. Graham, who
was taunted with having opened the letters of several Mem-
bers of the House—Sir J. Graham, who, whatever he had to
do, was sure to dolt in the most offensive and arbitray way
—why, if there had been the strongest a priori reasons in
the world fur opening Mr. Mazzini's letters, they would all
have been neutralized by the official interference of the
Home Secretary. Had Lord Aberdeen, on the remonstrance
of some friendly power, felt it his duty to examine a sus-
pected correspondence, some people might have murmured
at the arbitrariness of the act; none would have censured
the motives of the agent. Lord Aberdeen's public character
is known ; it is, therefore, respected, and his actions would
be construed fairly and favourably. Sir J. Graham's public
character is equally well known, but we cannot append the
same inference of opinion to any action in which he is mixed
up. But the best commentary on the conduct of Sir J.
Graham is supplied by the division of last night. 162 Mem-
bers voted fur the Committee of Inquiry, 206 against it;
thus giving the Home Secretary a majority of only 44 on a
question which really went to determine his fitness for con-
tinuing to .hold the seals of his department one day longer.
We wish him joy of his majority ; and we trust that Minis-
ters will learn from this division how dangerous a thing it is
to intrust extraordinary powers to a colleague whose acts
and whose character, instead of inspiring confidence in the
goodnes4 of Lis intentions, never fail to excite suspicion,
Jealousy, and alaim.—Times.
. .

The Queen and Prince Albert walked yesterday
morning in the Royal Gardens. Her .Majesty and his
Royal Highness took an airing in a carriage in the after-
noon attended by the Equerries in Waiting, Colonel
Arbuthnot, and Major-General Sir EdWard Bowater.
His Royal Highness Prince Albert, attended by Sir
Edward Bowater, went yesterday morning to the Old
Chapel in the Savoy, near the Strand. After inspecting
the sacred edifice, the Prince took his departure and re-
turned to Buckingham Palace at two o'clock.
Their Royal highnesses the Prince of Wales, the
Princess Royal, and the Princess Alice were taken an
airing in the.. Parks yesterday in an open carriage and,

Four.

The Royal dinner party at Buckingham Palace, yes-
terday evening, included the Duke and Duchess of
Buccleuch, the Duke and Duchess of Buckingham the
Earl of Ripon, Lord Brougham, Lord and Lady Colville,
and Mr.

The band of the Royal Horse Guards was in attend-
ance at the Palace during dinner. •
His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, attended
by Baron linesebeck, honoured the Marquis of Lon-
derry with his company yesterday evening, at Holder-
nesse House. Her Royal Highness the Duchess of
Cambridge honoured the Marchioness of Londonderry
with her company in the evening, at the grand ball
given by her Ladyship.
A Cabinet Council was held at two o'clock yesterday
afternoon, at the Foreign. office. It was attended by Sir
Robert Peel, the Lord Chancellor, Lord Wharnliffe,
the Duke of Buccleuch, Earl of Aberdeen, Lord Stanley,
Sir James Graham, the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
Earl of Haddington, Earl of Ripon, Mr. Gladstone, Sir.
Edward Knatchbull, and Lord Granville Somerset.

The Council srt two hours.
Baron Brunnow, the Russian Minister, transacted
business yesterday, at the Foreign-office.
Mr. Brickwood had an interview with the Chancellor
of the Exchequer yesterday.

...,- --0 . . . . ._
• ,•,•050k,...w........mq0.0Rm...,..t............... . -..—.......... •,..,:opmer...-- •cr.•--•'--..'r'r- --17 ii--- 7 • 7.._7_-,wfg*sseoi#iyi,.--,r4-ij0,.... _ -._ _7 -• -7-7 - ___ ~ ,„
.- -•-• .- - - r- 7.---..--77,-,-g,iviarimaigimmionopioner.-. ~,
___ ~,
.'
..., . , , . , - _
._ \
•
'4OOllO,
- ' V ''' .• . 0
~.:
1/4..,..,.: .
..trC:;::;:::
~ .
_ . . ..
• • , -,..... ,
-..:;•,:er;:•;r:%!',57V,10",;,• . .
• •
_,..,...., ~. 4 6 • .---
. , „., , •-;"
.1 .O.V I • 2)z. . -: , _ ,
..",.!•`i:',471,•,-!,'.,,i,,,,.._. - ,
_
I 4
i
it t : * 10
...4.. a - - „...,. • !...., .
...;.-----''''V ‘.-53.. \ .• 8' .F.; V. ..... Id' ife . , ,
--:.'--,k. .. • .
ii f ~,,,,, , , -.. -...--A ~, 44. • ,:_ - v., ,ct. ' • ~ .
N 4.
4. --s:. • ~,A ;* , 44-, tf -,",, ,S Vi'vra •-, ...A'VV-. '
7------ . , 1
-,,, 0,-,. v ~,, ‘....
-E.,, ~,, ,*. 1
i''' •
V n
''' 1 .
It
';'.
!kr 1 .1,4 4 . N.A etl - P ------.7.
'''l ! 1.. i ...""
eii..r. • ••'' ~ ,
•-- , •, . / i
•".-. n=l4 tglitt 10 -lA. a --, ,
--
' A-
\ - ' )1 . •
\' ' -44°.M / ' t • i'
*ti7'''''' 4 -Zr--%••• '''''•'S.;;-•,:•-..---•••;,-- -i ‘
,•_.*::'-' ' ''.
..„—•-•.1 ,i. 4ti• „ ST- 11; •.,.; • ,
0?,/,_,efi• .//,76_, • . -"..4......,1 11::.,,;7•Z .-.' -2' ~ , /,-••40 .C.. =!,.; 73 b
.._
-•----- 2\• '/ir, • Tyr -•-, •-.. -....,-57•7.....4414.2, • • - -
...... -,,,•,...., . , . k-4,) yT , •:, te, ••._-".---1••--7,,, 7--,--i.' - -
•,!' 7:.•:,',.i,e„:-,,,x ;..4.,,,
. •••••.. r •-•... •
•••.. -ti.. / } :--", •
-.. • - ,
-
~..... r.,-,3.. 4 .1.. ~...4........vt0 -.en ma,..,.,......z -,44...-1,..---ncarus—,-.^,-......-,r-at-Za., ,-.. •_ , - • ~.: -..-,,,„ ..,

.
THE LATE DI'VISIOI4:77-
TO THE EDITOR OF THE MORNINCI CHRONICLE.
Sir,--The votes of certain free-traders who supported the
Government on Monday night last agairat. Mr. Miles's
amendment have been the subject of severe annUadvession in
the columns of your per. There has. been much misre-
presentation, and, I t'st, unintentional sophistry in t hose
comments. The conduct of public men is fair matter for
comment or controversy ; but political polemics need ,not
altogether eschew the maxims of political morality.
" A Thorough Free-Trader" in
_your paper of Saturday,
undertakes in a letter addressed to Mr. Cobders;i6S, vindicate
his principles," from the charge_of. . ".impracticability," which
that gentleman, he says, has for a moment stamped upon
them by his vote on the sugar duties. To vindicate a prin •
ciple from the charge of " impracticability,' would seem to
require some relation between the arguments used, and the
particular mode in which that principle was sought to be ap-
plied. But throughout the lengthy letter of this "Thorough
Free Trader," there is not a single attempt made to
'connect the purpose of the letter with the principle of free
trade. It is, from beginning to end, a tissue of special plead-
ings, irrelevant pietexts, and a most uncandid substitution
of technical forms for practical realities. The fair, and only
question which this " Thorough Free Trader" had to consider,
in reference to that debate, was simply whether or not Mr.
Miles's amendment proposed to give more or less protection to
the West India planters than the measure of the Govern-
ment. That was the question. There was no other before
the House. Not a speech was made on either side, during the
Friday or Monday nights' debate, which did not altogether
proceed upon this assumption. There was no shifting of the
question at issue upon a mere technical form. It was a
direct and acknowledged division, on both occasions, for or
against Mr. Miles's amendment. It will not do to plead the
letter of_a mere form against the spirit of a direct purpose.
To place the issue on any other grounds than the eniness and
avowed conviction of every man who took a part • in the dis-
cussion, is an uncandid paltering with the common sense of
the community, and an attempt to salve sensitive con-
sciences into a quibbling acquiescence with suspected fraud.
The -"character of impracticability," which your corres-
pondent says Mr. Cobden has stamped on the principles of
free trade, requires a little more explanation at the hands of
a " Thorough. Free-Trader" to make his meaning clear. It
is one of those phrases which men sometimes use to reconcile
party purposes with the practical repudiation of recognised
principles. Had Mr. Cobden thought more of displacing a
Government than advancing a great principle--had the free
traders thought less of free trade, and more of the chances
that political anarchy might/'have thrown up for political
speculators—they would not have been charged with stamp-
ing the principles of free trade with " impracticability," but
would have been hailed as the patriots of party, purchasing
political' reputation by repudiating past professions and
avowed principles. A " Thorough Free-Trader"says the vote
on Friday;night was simply as to whether the old sugar duties
should or should not be continued till July the sth. That the
technical forms of the House necessitate such a proposition as
preparatory to the introduction of certain modifications of an,
old law, to be afterwards introduced, is undeniable but can
any man, without a gross preference for subterfuge over
plain dealing, maintain that in that proposition was not con-
tained, or held to be contained by the whole House, the sanction
or rejection of the general scale of duties proposed by the Go-
vernment, in contradistinction to the sanction or rejection of
the duties specifically stated in Mr. Miles's amendment ?
W Was there any doubt in the public mind, or real difference of
opinion in the House, as to the consequences involved in the
division ? Did the almost fanatical cheers that followed the
announcement of the majority against the Government, OH
Friday night, proclaim or not that the amendment of Mr.
Miles had been virtually carried ? Look to the newspapers
of the next day. What was the announcement made by every
one of them, without exception, to the public? Why, that Mr.
Miles's amendment had been carriedrtgainst the Government.
In face of these facts it is an idle attempt to defend
policy against principle, when the mere forms of the
House—in contradistinction to the known consequences which
they involved—are raked up for the purpose of complicating
and mystifying to the simple apprehensions of the public rt
plain question of more or less protection to the West India
monopolists. A "Thorough Free-Trader" goes into some
lengthy animadversions on the conduct of Mr. Cobden, for
not voting on Monday night for the 20s. duty on colonial
produce propssed by Mr. Miles, and then reserving to himself
the right of moving the rejection or modification of the 345.
duty on foreign sugar at some future stage of the proceedings.-
That, he says, was the proposition then really before the
House. Does this " Thorough Free-Trader" honestly believe
this ? Can he believe it ? Had not a distinct vote been
previously taken on the question of differential duties ?
Had not Mr. Ewart, supported by Mr. Cobden
and the free-traders, proposed an equalization of
duty on all sugars, foreign and colonial, and had
not that proposition been negatived by a large ma-
jority? The only question the free-traders conk/ have
originated had been disposed of; an equalization of the duties
had been been rejected; and as no free-trader could consist-
ently originate any motion recognizing the principle of
differential duties, their business, and their sole business, was
to make the nearest possible approximation to their own prin-
ciples, by supporting the measure that gave less protection to
the colonies, in opposition to that which practically proposed
to give them a great deal more. The " Thorough Free-
Trader" agrees with Mr. Cobden " in preferring the measure of
Sir Robert Peel to that of Mr Miles; but then he asserts,
"that neither of those series of modifications was under discus-
sion." What was under discussion ? Why, he says, the 20e.
duty on colonial sugar proposed by Mr. Miles; and he
professes honestly to believe, that no other con-
sequences were involved in that vote than the
simple diminution of the duty on West India sugar from
245. to 20s. the cwt. Now, is this afair or candid statement ?
It was open, he says, to Mr. Cobden to have moved any
amendment he pleased when the 345. differential duty came
under discussion. That such a course was open to Mr. Cob-
den, or any other free-trader, is unquestionable; but what
was the real poktion of affairs in the House at that time?
Mr. Ewart had already movedfor an equalisatioh of the duties
on all sugars. That motion had been rejected by a large
majority. Who composed that majority ? The monopolists
of every section, whether Whig or Tory. What peculiar
grounds, then, for confidence, had the free-trade party, under
such circumstances, in the representatives of the late Go-
vernment? They had previously voted with the monopolists to
reject Mr. Ewart's motion, and they were at that very mo-
ment in strict alliance with the most bigoted and extreme
section of the protectionists, to uphold a measure which "the
Thorough Free-Trader" himself admits was worse than that
of the Government.. What would have been the position of
the free-traders, had they voted with the Whigs? One of
two consequences must have ensued. Either the Govern-
ment would have surrendered their measure, or they would
have retired As= office. In either case, the present prohi-
bitory duty on foreign sugar would have remained precisely,
as it is, without modification or amendment. Had Sir Ro-
bert Peel resigned, does any man believe that any possible
combination of parties could have re-constructed a Governs
ment on a more liberal basis, either economically or politically,
than that which had been overthrown? Would 'the Whig
party have attempted to form a Government? If they had,
what would have been the fate or policy of such an administra-
tion ? Would a dissolution of Parliament, at the present
moment, have given them any additional strength? Possibly
same accession to the numbers of the "thorough free-
traders" might have resulted from such an experiment; but •
the Whigs, as a party, would probably have found them-
selves as powerless as before. Under such circumstances.
what hope could the free-traders have entertained of comas,
tently advancing their principles by any wild and. objectless
renunciation of the practical advantages that were before
them ? There was little in that debate to inspire confidence in
the party leaders on either side. Nothing to Austify the
free-traders in promoting a transference of official power,
by voting against their own principles. Throughout
that debate the sole object of the so-called leaders of the
Liberal party had appeared to be, to bid for monoporistsup.
port—by proclaiming themselves better monopolists thee
their opponents. Both Mr. Labouchere and the late Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Baring) distinctly avowed that
their policy, when in power, had been to give more protection
to the West India planters than that proposed by the I'eel
Ministry. It was the to quoque argument altogether--
" Codlin s the friend—not Short.' What have you gained.
asked Mr. Baring on Friday night, pointing to the discon-
solate planters and Cornservatives behind the Ministry—
what have you gained by rejecting us and accepting Peel?
We promised you 12s. difiereutial duty—.and a final
measure. Your pet Minister gives you 10s, and transition ?"
That cry was the main bearing of the debate. There was no
great principle at issue between any of the real combatants in
the strife. It is a hollow and unveiled sophism to assume
that any other consequences were involved in the issue than
the retention of a little more or less protection to the mono-
polists. The hot rancour of party has been stirred by the
failure of close chances in what, at the best, can be regarded
only as an aimless struggle for a fruitless and ,momentary
triumph. But calm and reasoning men will look only to
the plain and palpable merits of both sides of the teal ques.
tion—and I, for one rejoice that the principles of free trade
have suffered no contamination in this contest, by any com-
promise of honest conviction with the self-seeking plausibills
ties of political expediency.
One word more as to the political consequences Said to be
involved in this division. Your correspondent terminates his
letter to Mr. Cobden by asserting "that the free-tiaders hare
saved from annihilation a Government which tramples. freedom
under its feet in Ireland. eland. The instant," he says, a rumour
reached Ireland of its destruction, there was almost a uni-
versal jubilee. O'Connell released, the wishes of the Irish
considered, justice obtained for Ireland, the termination of
the Orange rule and of packed juries, instantly rose as visions
fell of hope to the Irish."
Surely the " Thorough:Free-Trader " himself must have
been dreaming when he penned the above passage, for a
mere visionary disregard of plain and sober fact was never
exhibited in waking hours. Let him turn from the
division on Friday night to the state of parties
upon Irish questions, only forty-eight hours before, as evi-
denced on the Wednesday night previous, on Mr. Ward's
motion for a Committee to inquire into the state of the Irish
Church, and he will find a clear majority of 95 in favour of
the Government. And this has been about the working mes
jority of Ministers on all questions of Irish policy during the
present Parliament. What there was in the heterogenomm
combination of extreme protedlaasis and Liberals on Fri-
day or Monday night to reverse this majority*, the vision of
your correspondent does not seem to have disclosed. Such
monstrous and most unfair attempts, however, to create in
the sensitive minds of the Irish people an impression that the
free-traders have been instrumental in retarding the recogni-
tion of their claims to justice must fail from its utter and
transparent absurdity.—l am, Sir, yours respectfully,
June 22, 1844. A. W. PAULTON.

TO THE EDITOR OF TIIE MORNING CHRONICLE.
Sit,—From comments which have appeared in several of
Cie public papers, an impression has been created that I pur-
pbsely abstained from voting on the last division on ?dr.
hliles's amendment. lam anxious to explain the reason of
my absence from that division.
Not expecting any such important division coming on, I
had made arrangements which required my absence from
town, and was, therefore, unable on the second division to
vote against the proposition of the Member for Bristol. I
may, say, however, that I fUlly coincide in the vie* of the
question taken by those free trade Members who supported
the Government, and regret exceedingly that I was not
able to join them in their protest against giving more pro-
tection to the sugar growers of the colonies.
May I ask the favour of the insertion of this in the columns
of your journal ?—I am, respectfully,
JOHN BRIGHT.

25, Jermyn-street, 6th Mo. 24, 1844.

THE BENCH AND THE BAR IN IRELAND...-In Ire.
land the bar is deplorably servile towards the bench ; for
judges in that country are not subject, as in England, to
the wholesome restraint of public opinion ; and they of-
tentimes put down a barrister in a fashion that would not
be tolerated in Westminster Hall. Nothing can be more
dangerous to a professional man in Ireland than to get
into a contest with a judicial personage and a large
practice has often been put in jeopardy by what actor•
neys would call the " headstrong independence" of its
owner.—hrood's Magazine for June.
The Mermaid steam-ship, Joseph Hearn,' cow.
wander, arrived yesterday afternoon, at two o'clock, Ikon St.
Petersburgh, having left the Thames at Lima on the 4th
inst. This is the quickest voyage yet made with carso be-
tween London and the Busman capital.