The Sun.
London, England, 1828-01-21 00:00:00

FOREIGN SECRETARIES.
Canning Di4Ley Dudley Dudley

COLONIAL SECRETARIES.
Goderich Huskisson Huskisson

Bath urst

CHANCELLORS OF TkiE F.XCHECHIF:R.
Robinson Canning Herries Goulburn

ADMIRALTY.
Melville Clarence Clarence Clarence

ORDNANCF.
Wellington Anglesea Anglesea

PRESIDENTS OF THE BOARD OF CONTROUL.
Wynn Wynn Wynn Melville

CHANCELLORS OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER.
Bexley Bexley Bexley Aberdeen

PRESIDENTS OF THE BOARD OF TRADE.
Huskisson Huskisson C, Grant C. Grant

MASTERS OF THE MINT.

Tierney Tierney Herries
The Master of the Mint, previously to the appoint-
ment of Mr. Tierney, had no seat in the Cabinet ;
whether his present successor is to have a seat
there, or whether the rule observed in the case of
Mr. Wallace is to be observed in that of Mr. Her-
ries, is not yet ascertained. The War Secretary-
ship, which has been in the hands of Lord Palmer-
ston during all the above changes, and which will
probably remain there, has never entitled its holder
to a seat in the Cabinet. Of the thirteen Members
who formed Lord Liverpool's Cabinet, five conti-
nued to sit in that of Mr, Canning. The death of
that Right Hon. Gentleman brought down the
number to four, and the recent changes have re-
stored the original number of five, though not in the
persons of the same individuals. The Catholicity
of the 1121,7 Cabinet is reduced to nearly the same
state as in the Administration of Lord Liverpool.
We do not intend, at present, to enter into the
causes of the Ministerial changes. They have
been stated in one quarter to wise out of a difference of
opinion between Mr. Huskisson s.nd Mr. Herries ;
in another, eut of the grasping ambition of Mr.
Tierney. We have some doubts whether either
would have been sufficient to produce such an effect
although there may be some truth in both asser-
tions. The great cause which has led to the remo-
val of the Whigs, and the re-introduction of their
political rivals, was, no doubt, the death of Mr.
Canning, whose master-mind alone could gombine
and controul the discordant elements of which h;:z
Cabinet was composed, and to whose superior
talents, however distrustful and jealous of one ano-
ther, every Member was content to bow. With him
the key-stone may be said to have dropped from the
arch. It is true that his place was supplied by
Lord Goderich, but their strength was unequal..-„...
ThelMentbers of the late Cabinet were quite content
to act along with the Noble Lord, and all of them
had the highest esteem and affection towards his
person, but they did not trust his powers and firmness
sufficiently to induce them to act with confidence and
union under him. The difference of Mr.Huskisson and
Mr. Herries, if any such existed,and the eagerness of
Mr. Tierney to introduce himself into the Exchequer,
were, to use the language of the physicians, sympto-
matic, not idiopathic—they were indicative of the
disease, not the disease itself. On the Cabinet, as
at present formed, many opinions have already been
expressed by the Weekly Press, and it will naturally
be expected that we should also offer ours. Of the
mi-
litary talents of the Noble Duke at tire head of it

there is but one opinion in. Europe—in the world.
His fame has gone forth to the uttermost parts of the
sea, and visited all lands. Of his talents as a States,-
Man he is said to have given the most convincing
proof during his command in Portugal. Of the first
qualification for an English Minister, however, his
Grace is almost destitute—he is no orator. Of his
capacity as a councillor we have no doubt, though it
has been but little tried, unless in the affair of last
year's Corn Bill. The great advantage attached
to his Grace's station at the head of the Ministry,
is the security which it gives to the Protestant
Establishment ; for, when guarded by a Welling-
ton, how can the Church again feel herself in dan-
ger ? Lord Ellenborough, who is, probably destined
to take the lead in the Lords, is a young Nobleman
of considerable talents. There is mixed up in his
mind, with some affectation, a large portion of the
elements of sound thinking. He speaks well with-
out preparation, and makes more points .than any
Member of the Upper House. He proved himself
last Session a very powerful and puzzling opponent.
Whether he will be as useful as a friend, as he was
formidable as an enemy, a very short time will show.
He is the only Whig added to the present Ministry.
Mr. Goulburn has not, to the knowledge of the pub-
lic, ever distinguished himself as a financier. He is,
however, a clever, sound-headed man,—On the re-
turn of Mr. Peel to the Home Office we most sin-
cerely congratulate the country. We have on every
occasion expressed our regret that the public should
be deprived of his services. We do' liOt deny to the
Marquis of Lansdowne the praise which is fairly
due to him when we rejoice at the substitu-
tion of Mr. Peel. The efforts of the Noble
Marquis to amend the police, though sneered
at by some, are highly laudable, and they will
be remembered, and the value of them felt, when
many improvements, seemingly more important in
their character, are forgotten. The part of the Mi-
nisterial arrangements which appears the most ex-
traordinary, is the junction of Mr. Huskisson with
the present Premier. How are they to manage the
landed interest ? The Duke of Wellington, it is no-
torious, did not only differ from his Right Hon.
Friend on the protecting price, as it has been called,
which was at most but a matter of detail, but on
the principle of the late Corn Bill—the warehous-
ing part of it—and• it was because the Duke's
amendment was fatal to the Bill, in principle, that
Lord Goderich allowed it to drop. We know no-
thing about the private sentiments or professions of
the parties, but from all that ever we have heard of
the Noble Duke, we cannot bring ourselves to be-
lieve that he has changed his mind, much less made
concessions to Mr. Huskisson on that. or on any.
point. There is but one way, therefore, of recon-
ciling their present union, and that is by supposing
that Mr. Huskisson has conceded his principles to
the Duke, and that he has given them up after
holding out against all the petitions, remonstrances,
and memorials from individuals and public bodies,
out of deference to a judgment which, from
his language last Session, he certainly appear-
ed to hold very cheap 'on questions of political
economy. Of the Ministry, as a whole, we should
say, that it is recomposed as nearly. as possible in
the spirit of Lord Liverpool's, and it consists of
men who, with a few. exceptions, have been long
known, tried, and found worthy. On any.change
of measures it will be time enough to comment
when it takes place. Of the strength of the Ministry
it is not easy to speak decidedly. It will soon be
tried. If they can maintain a decent majority in the
Commons—they calculate on a hundred—it is said
they will go on with the present House. If they
cannot there will be an instant dissolution. In the
Lords, it is supposed, they will have nothing to fear.
But why was not Mr. Herries continued as Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer ? Why was he, whom we
,have boon accustomed to look on .as one of the most
able and efficient calculators in the House, relegated
to the Mint, while Mr. Goulburn received, to his
special keeping, the national accounts ? —Was it to
spite Mr. Tierney or to please Mr.lluskision,, or'
both ? We,think Mr. Herries, to say the least,
,has
been but cavalierly used in the recent arrangements.
—New Times.

LAW INTELLIGENCE. •

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JAN. 19.

BIGGS AND ANOTHER V. FELLOWES.

This was an action by the assignees of a bankrupt
named Collier, to recover a sum which had been
paid by him, after the commission of an act 'of bank-
ruptcy, to the defendant, the surviving partner of•the
firm of Tatlock and Fellowes.

Collier, it appeared, had given an accommodation
acceptance for 1501. to the house of Wetton, Payne,
and Co., who endorsed it over to Tatlock and
Fellowes. Messrs. Wetton and Co. having become
bankrupts, Tatlock and Fellowes sued Collier for the
amount, and afterwards took from him a warrant of
attorney, payable by instalments. Subsequently
Collier committed an act of bankruptcy .notwith•
standing which he paid two of the instalments upon
the warrant of attorney, and Messrs. Tatlock and
Fellowes issued an execution against Collier's goods,
which were sold, and the proceeds paid over to them.
To recover the sums thus improperly paid; the
present action was brought.—Verdict accordingly,
for 1541.

COWIE AND ANOTHER V. HARRIS AND ANOTHER.

This was an action of trover, by the assignees
of James Robertson, a bankrupt, to recover the
value of certain articles of jewellery pledged with
the defendants between the 14th of March and the
19th of April, 1825.

. _
The bankrupt Robertson carried on the , businCss
of a wholesale jeweller, in Red Lion-street, Clerken-
well, and was in the habit of raising money.tri meet
his engagements by pledging his goods;- and at the
time of his bankruptcy; goods to the amount of
10,0001., according'. to his valuation, were in pawn.
The articles which fdrmed the subject of the present
action consisted of emeralds, diamonds, pearls,
rubies, &c., the estimated value of which ‘was about
3001. These'had been pledged with the defendants,
who were Jews, carrying on the business of pawn-
brokers, in the Strand, during March or April,lB2s,
subsequently to the period when Robertson had
committed an act of bankruptcy. It was stated that
the defendants,--in order to evade the-provisions of
the Pawnbrokers' Act of the 39th and 40th of Geo.
111., c. 99, and to obtain more than the legal rate of
interest, split the sums lent at one time (which Some-
times amounted to upwards of 400 into sevenil
sums, making each appear on the duplicates to be
under or not above 101., and dated the tickets on
different days, This colourable 'Mode of dealing.
being usurious, the plaintiffs contended_ that they
were entitled to recover in the action, independently
of the pledging after the commission of an act of
bankruptcy.
The evidence to support the case was principally
documentary. The act of bankruptcy was proved
to have been committed on the 26th of February,_
1825. The examination of one of the defendants,
taken before the commissioners under the bank-
ruptcy, was put in arid read, for the purpose of
showing that the greater part of the giiods, in roes;
tion had been pledged within two calendar months
from the date of the commission. In this examina:
Lion it seemed to be admitted, though 'not in express
terms, that the defendants had lent more than 101.
on pledges at one time, though the .duplicates wed
4ated on different days ; in one instance the goods
comprised in fire tickets, dated the 18th, 19th, 21st,
22d, and 2d of March, 1825, were stated to have
come into the defendant's possession on the 18th of
March, 1825 ;. and in answer to an inquiry,of the
commissioners whether they came in on the same
hour of the day, it was stated that they " came in
together," as far as the defendant recollected.
The jury immediately returned a verdict for the
plaintiffs.

The RECORDER of Dublin has in consequence
of continued health, been ordered to Bath by his phy-
sicians, to take the benefit of 'the waters. In his absence,
ROBERT finclicoer, Ben. Esq. has been appointed his
deputy.