The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-22 00:00:00

iPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY. I
GLOBE.—If parties were to be judged of only
by their outward acts, there might perhaps 1* some
ground for surprise, and in some quarters even for dis-
appointmeut, at there being no more difference than is
shown in debate, betiveen the measures suggested, by
Lord John Russell and those which the present Mi-
nistry seem. willing to adopt. But the same meastire
may have a different meaning and a very different effi-
cacy in different hands ; and this is specially the case
in our dealing with a people alienated fro'tn us, as the.
Irish are by a long course of ill-usage, and who; in
looking at any measure of redress falling short—as all
measures now to be proposed by any party must fall
ihort—of their present demands, will view it in a very
iifferent light, accordingly as it comes from those Nyho
lave ever been more ready to repress than to relieve,
or frorn those who have always done for them as much
.as they were allowed to do—little, perhaps, as the Irish
May -think that to be. It is undoubtedly through
'the hands of the Tories that the injustice of this
country towards Ireland, to use the eloquent expression
of Mr. Sydney Smith, has hitherto passed, with very
'title show of reluctance or regret, to mitigate the tenor
of its severity; and though we may give to the Tories
of the present day, or at any rate to the better
part, of them, full credit for a wish to repair the wrongs
done by their predecessors, yet to employ them in the
work of reconciliation of Ireland, which is at preSent
the great business and the first duty of England, is vary
much as if, in attempting to make up an old quarrel
with a neighbour' we sent to him, as a mediator, one
between whose family and his there had been, felon
But
the. to son, a feud for many generations.
the Tories of the present generation have, as regards
Ireland, something more than the sins of their fathers
to answer for. Disclaim and disguise it, as they
will, it is not the less true, that whatever there is' in
England—and there is much of anti-Catholic and anti-
Irish feeling—we might almost say, whatever there is
in this country of' disaffection towards Ireland, is td be
found in their ranks a chief element, at the same tune,
of their strength as a party, of their weakness and in-
capacity as a Government. The better and wiser ,
yortion among them may regret the existence ; of
such a spirit, may even lament most bitterly the
violence and indiscretion of its occasional outbreaks ;
but there it is in the midst of them, thwarting
their good intentions and tainting all their • coun-
sels
.; and where it cannot mar their purposes in he
conception, raising up between their fulfilment and he
Irish people, the still cherished remembrance of
.t,
4.
oppression. This it is that in so great a degree is
the whole party for the task of mediation • and in is 1
sense it was both fair and pertinent, in Lord J. Russo'', l
to remind the House, as he did in this debate, of the ,
very " untoward" speech of the present Lord Chan-
cellor.
It is all very well to say that the words have
been explained, and that the explanation or apology,
such as it was, has been deemed sufficient, and acce_pted,
we suppose, on behalf of the Irish people, by both ItOuses
.f Parliament. All this may be true enough, and, as re-
gards Lord Lyndhurst himself, it might be unfair, alter
this, to charge him with any peculiar bitterness 'against
any who may differ from him in religion or in nice.
But the question still remains, what is the impres-
sion which the words made, and still make, upon he
Irish
i people? The insulted nation, for it was an in-
sult, s perhaps entitled to recluire some better atonement
than that sort of apology which passes current in Parlia-
ment ' • and the Irish people, in particular, may be ex-
eused for its reluctance to plaoe either its honour or its
interest in the hands, at any rate, of the present Hone
'of Commons. On the same, grounds, even the various '
sallies of Mr. Bradshaw, uttered as they were to the
ears of an applauding constituency, were not altogether
unworthy of notice; for to the Irish such things appear
but as a specimen of the manner in which the suffrages
of Englishmen may be won, and such things, in trath,
blotches as they are.upon the otherwise fair and smoeth
face of Toryism, betray but too surely the existence of
the bad humours within. For all this, it is the present
pleasure of Englishmen that the. Irish as well as them-
selves should be goveruedby Tories, and it remains only
for us to consider in what way they have dealt, and are
likely to deal, with this great difficulty. The present
debate contains their defence up to the present time, and
defend more suicidal defee 'than that put forth by their
great advocate, Sir l,,(raham, we think we never sate.
STANDARD.—The trial of the Irish prosecuti ns
in the House of Commons bids fair to rival in tedio -
ness the procesk:which is the subject 'of scrutiny. 1-
ready six nights have been consumed without, ap • -
rently, the slightest progress towards an en ;
but with this consolation, that the Wig
speeches become steadily more shallow and
more stupid, and therefore less mischievous ;as
' they proceed. We doubt whether (to borrow the
Greek phrase) even "the brazen bowels" of a Tipperary
fanatic could secrete all the poison diffused through
the capita mortua of Mr. Benjamin Hawes and Sir
Thomas Wilde's drowsy labours of last night. Mr.
Hawes is very angry with her Majesty's Ministers
for having done nothing for Ireland in two years
and a half that they have been in office ; but men
with more knowledge and better memories than Mr.
Hawes, will be of opinion that her Majesty's Ministers
have done a great - deal for Ireland within their
period of office, short as it has been. First, they
have obviated the rebellion threatened by Mr. Hawes
and his friends, as the inevitable consequence of
the dismissal of the late Government, and which,
to, say truth, the late Government had done its
best to prepare for whatever Administration should
follow it. Now this is surely doing something for
Ireland • a rebellion is no jesting matter, and therefore,
as far Ireland is concerned, Ministers have done much.
But in this affair they have done a good deal for Eng-
land and Scotland, as well as Ireland, for they have
shown. that the fear of an Irish rebellion, by which, it
was attempted to rivet a mischievous and odious Ad-
ministration upon the empire, is a vain' bugbear.
But, cry the philosophers of the Hawes school, smile-
thing ought to have been done for Ireland. Now, the
answer to this trash is that—besides, that the state
in which the late Government left Ireland, by their
own confession, ripe for rebellion, is not that in, which
measures of any kind can be tried with - the best
, prospect of success—lreland, like England and Scot-
land, has been doing something for herself, '
and doing it very effectually, for the social condition of
the country is improving with a rapidity perfectly as-
tonishing. The fewer somethings from without by
which that process of improvement shall be inter-
rupted, the better for the country. The political
tinkers, who always make twe holes while they badly
stop one, have been hitherto the curse of the
country, and the highest praise to any Irish
government will be, that it abstains from tinkering.
Nobody has for centuries said that something must be
done for England or for Scotland ; or, if any one has
sold so, he has been laughed at, and therefore England
and Scotland have done very well for themselves ; -dom-
.pelled to submit to the law, when disposed to be restive,
and therefore in the end reconciled to it, and even fond of
- it. So it will be with Ireland, if only the something-
mongers be put to silence or disregarded, as there'•is
good hope they soon may be. The Irish Government
has, however, done something more than obviate the
present rebellion threatened—it has extinguished the
seeds of future agitation and of ultimate rebellion, by
' extirpating the Repeal Association, for extirpated it is,
-though the name survives.

LAW INTELLIGENCE..
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Feb. 20.
(Sittings at Nisi Prins, at Guildhall, before Lord Chief, Jas.
tice TINDAL and a Special Jury.)
FRASER V. I3AOLEY.—CRIM. CON.

AL • V • •
The examination of Elizabeth Barrow (continued from our
Afternoon Edition Of yesterday) :—Mrs. Fraser was in bed when
be called. He asked how Mrs. Fraser was ; I answered she
was going on very well, and asked him up to the drawing-
room. I went and told Mrs. Fraser that Mr. Bagley was
come to inquire for her, and I asked her if she wished to see
him.. She said she would be glad to see him. He went up
stairs; none of the children were there then. In a short time
I went up again with a message; some of the children were
in the room then. In a short time he came down, and said
that Mrs. Fraser was very nervous and feverish. Dr. Car-
lisle came to see her about four or five days after this; he
same to see Mrs. Fraser, and remained a short time with her,.
In 1843 we went t 6 Ittimsgate. Miss Watson was with us
during a part of the time we were there. Mrs. Fraser had
several friends there with whom she associated. I saw Mr.
Bagley there. He came to see us about four days before we
left Ramsgate. Mr. Bagley came up with us. Mr. and Miss
Elvis also came up. Mr. Bagley came to York-buildings;.
he remained far some time and left ; he left Mrs. and • Miss
Etwis there. Mrs. Fraser appeared to be a fond and kind
mother. She was prudent and economical in her'househOl4
habits.

Cross-examined by Mr. TiiEslGan.—Jessy Salter and-Mary
• Cameron were in the service of Mrs. Fraser part of the time
I was there. Mr. Bagley used to visit us frequently during
1841 and 1842. I did not know when Mr. Bagley was
except.when he was to dine there. I -do not -recollect
being desired to get a chicken, or rabbit, or some other deli-
cacy, for Mr. Bagley. Ido not recollect making any obser-
vation to the servants, Salter and Cameron, with regard to
• Mr. Bailey, coming. so often to the house. The.ablieitor for
the plaintiff called upon me at York-buildings. I did not
• answer any questions to him. 14r. Shavi,. the solicitor for
the defendant called upon me; he was not .With.:mejour
hours ; I don't think he was with me two hours. We went
to Brighton in July, 1842. Ido not know when Mrs. Fraser
-and Mr. Bagley went out on the Sunday. do not recollect
that I p dinner for them. Ido not recollect whether
• Mrs. Fraser desired me and Mary Cameron to go out. It
,was about eight o'clock ; it was, not quite dark. I. will not
• swear that it was not nearer ten than nine o'clock. We met;
Jessy Salter on the-Sunday. She made an observation to me
' , about their being all sent out. Mr. Bagley has light
• -hair; it .is sandy; it is not so yea as his whiskers,
the two last children have red hair. I do not recollect calling'
Ulu Isabella Miss Bagley. I 'do not recollect sayiog it in; '
• .. the presence of Ann Kenrew. r never said that Mrs. Fraser
• . must take care of what she did, as Mr. Fraser was-not -there
sow to have any more children fathered upon m - I might
have made a foolish remark with regard o Bagley's so'
often visiting Mrs. Fraser alone.
• • John Carlisle examined—l arn'a phys
ician. became
acquainted with Mr. and Mrs. Fraser at MuniCh., Mr. Fraser
• Used to go out at.night. I heard Mrs. Fraser complain of it.
•,. I saw them when I returned to this country. I went to them
:to dine two or three times. I met Mr. Bagley once. About
May,. 1842, I saw Mr. Fraser at Hampton Court,. with some
• 101eSihis wife was not one of them. I called at Mr. Bag-
'•••la chambers to inquire about Mr. Fraser. ; In consequence
Y j what Mr. Bagley told me, I went to Mm. Fraser a.- It
.
• 'was 'after, her ,continement. ie inquired about her husband ;
told her the last time I saw- him was at Hampton Court, with
some ladies. I did not visit he!. in a professional capacity.
• John Bieker.Caartee.n, a hamster, examined—l linow M.r.
Bagley. ,Voccupy a part-of, h'isichambers. I. recollect a
dinner party at his chambers in 1840. I was one .of the
'party., Mr. Fraser, Mrs: Fraser, Mill a youllg, weere
there.' I did not know- Mrs. Fraser befdie. that time.
Ivy
remained till -eleven. A Mr. Fitz awes came in to tea. e
,aaw the ladies into a coach. This was ~before Christmas,
' • 1840. I never saw Mrs. Fraser at those chambers afterivards.
t`• -I recollect that the lock of one of the doors *its out of order.
.111842. While in that state a person might have come ill.-
e Inner door was in consequence kept locked, hJr..Fraser's
chambers were on the grOund-floor. To go to Mr. Bagley's
*person must pass Mr. Fraser's chambers.