The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-13 00:00:00

Olviening

LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 13, 1844.

In the House of Lords a conversation took place
orr . gambling at horse-races, in which allusion was
made to the unjustifiable attacks of some young Mem-
bers, Of the House of Commons, on the parties who
ba4 been- .rnost active in bringing forward the Gaming
Bill. Tile Dahe of RICHMOND defended himself
against the ciatrg:e3, evidently with the approbation
of the House.

The Earl of ItAnN.olt gave notice that on Monday
he should' move that a petition from Signor MAZZINI,
relating to opening letters at the Post-office, should be
referred to the Secret Comtnittee.
ir.n answer to a' question relative to Indian affairs
from ' the Marquis of CLAI!IRICARDE, who made a
speech on the occasion, the Earl of ;.Itiport said
the retort that 80,000 men were collected on the
Sutlej, y,•u4 entirely without foundation. He knew
of no army,' in that quarter except the army of Sir C.
NAPIER ; ar dhe could assure the Marquis of CLAN-
nrcAnDE that neit.'ler the authorities in India nor at
home hod any wish to obia.in an inch of territory in
the Pun jau b.
The Noble Marl thev moved the orler of the day
for going into Committee on the Bank Charter Bill.
It is needless to give a summary of his speech—the
affair was seabed in the Commons.

The Bill passed through Committee.
The Sudbury Disfranchisement Bill was read a
FA 'cond time, aDd the house adjourned.
,In the C ommons, Mr. PLUMPTEE presented two
petLtions for ,`,he better observance of the Lord's Day.
We believe tl iese are the only petitions of the kind
presented, this. session. Mr. PLUMPTRE, without Sir
ANDREW AC il'ql 7.1 V, is nobody.
Sir G. CL, nti gave notice that on Friday next he
should move tile grant for Maynootis College.

In answer lx a question from Mr. M. GIBSON, re-
lative to the act\w Brazilian tariff, Sir R. PEEL said no

answer.

serable victims are immured in workhouses.
What will the maligned nations of the Conti-
nent say of England, when they learn that the
most infamous arts are committed by persons in
hat are called respectable classes, and that they
escape with little or no punishment, while a poor,
unfortunate peasant, who cannot find bread for his
children, is transported for stealing a penny-loaf.

We agree with a Morning Contemporary that Earl
Powys has acted feebly and indiscreetly in with-
drawing his Bill for the repeal of the union between
the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor. In justification
of this proceeding, his Lordship observed that he had
thought it right, having the report of the Committee
before him, to ascertain from the Duke of WELLING-
TON whether it were likely that the authority of the
Crown would be given to the Bill in question, and
being informed that it would not be given, he felt
that he had but one of three courses open to him—
either to withdraw the Bill, to press it forward, or to
run the risk of being beaten upon it. Under these
circumstances, he thought it right to avail himself of
the favourable situation in which he was placed; and
having it now before the country, with the approba-
tion of the House in its favour, he was satisfied that
the measure could not remain where it was. This is
hut a lame excuse for withdrawing a Bill, without so
much as a whisper of remonstrance, that is so clearly
founded in justice as to have Leen opposed by only
thirty-seven Noble Lords, notwithstanding the known
hostility of Ministers to it. Having himself volun-
teered to bring it forward, and obtained on the dis-
cussion the support of a majority of the House, Earl
Powys should have persevered in his task. He should
have sai3, as Doctor Jourrsom once observed, when
engaged in an affair of no ordinary difficulty, " I will
be conquered, not capitulate," and have moved an
address to the Crown, if only to show that he was no
party to the trick—for trick it is, by which the measure
has been defeated. This was the more especially in-
cumbent on him, since he himself, by his own account,
is strongly impressed with a conviction of the unpre-
cedented character of the Ministerial subterfuge.
Here is his own language on the subject :—" lde be-
lieved he could say," remarked the Noble Earl, "that
during the whole period the House of Hanover was
on the throne, there was no precedent to be found for
such a course as had been adopted in this case. There
was no measure that Parliament had expressed a wish

further to consider, in which the Crown had inter-
posed its authority to prevent that further considera-
tion of the matter." And yet, notwithstanding his
withdrawal of a Bill defeated in such an unprece-
dented manner, which has been sanctioned by the de-
liberate approbation of a majority of the House of
Lords, and which, moreover, has excited the strongest
possible feeling throughout the Principality ;—not-
withstanding all this, the Noble Earl has the coolness
to boast of the " favourable situation in which he is

placed!" Yes, in the very moment of an inglorious
defeat, he actually congratulates himself on his good
fortUne ! Now, as we observed in the " untoward"
case of Lord ASHLEY and the Factory Bill, Earl
Powis should never have undertaken the management
of the St. Asaph and Bangor Bishoprics Bill, if he
had not been prepared to persevere with it, and con-
test the battle to the last. He should not have quitted
the field till it was clearly demonstrated that not a
chance remained of his retrieving the fortunes of the
day. It was not compulsory on him to put himself in

the van. lie was under no inexorable necessity to
bring forward the Bill, but having brought it for-
ward—the act being a purely voluntary one on his
part—he was bound to persist in it to the last ex-
tremity, no matter what might be the odds against
him. As regards the Ministerial expedient of in-
terposing the royal prerogative in order to defeat
a measure which had been already carried against
the Government, we can look on it in no other

light than as a mere tricky subterfuge, every way
characteristic. of our petty manoeuvring PEEL
Cabinet. It may be a constitutional expedient
enough—though even this, perhaps, may admit of
a doubt—but, assuredly it has been resorted to in
no straightforward or equitable spirit. Why was it
not brought forward at once, at the commence-
ment of the proceedings ? Why reserved to the
eleventh hour ? The Duke of WTELLIISGTON at-

tempted some sort of answer to these questions,
but it was a very unsatisfactory one, amounting
to no more than this—namely, that he had stated
last session that it would be necessary to have the

consent of the Crown to the discussion of the Bill

in .parliament, but he did not mention it until the
measure had proceeded through some of its stages.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE explained, we suspect,
the whole mystery of the Ministerial manoeuvre,

when he observed, that " the allegation of the

QUEEN'S interest being affected had merely been
made use of to meet the convenience of Govern-

ment, who knew that if the Bill went into the
House of Commons, it would be supported by two
Members of the Cabinet, the President of the

Board of Trade, and the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, who were both strongly in favour of the mea-
sure."
The whole affair is an exceedingly curious
and edifying one, as furnishing us with an ad-
ditional clue to the means by which Ministers

communication had been received at the Forpign-,
office on the subject, but possibly on the arrival of
the next mail, he might be able to give a satisfactory

In answer to a question from Mr. S. WORTLEY,
Sir J. GRAHAM said he should be obliged to abandon
the County Courts Bill for this session.

The House then went into Committee on the re-
maining clauses of the Poor-law Amendment Bill.
Clauses up to 34 were gone through, and the
House resumed.

The Actions for Gaming Discontinuance Bill was
read a third time. Leave was given to bring in
several Bills, and, at a Quarter past One, the House
adjourned. _

The case of WILLIAM BROMLEY, formerly a soli-
citor in Gray's Inn, and now a prisoner in some gaol,
is another instance of the reckless, profligate, and un-
feeling conduct of men, who, by sotne means obtain a
certain standing in society, and use it for the most
wicked purposes. The people of this country very
foolishly boast that they are the most honest people
in the world ; that all our merchants are men of
strict integrity ; that our solicitors would not conde-
scend to any dirty act, even for the mines of Peru;
and that our bankers may be trusted with untold gold :
while every day brings out some new fact to prove
that, as regards honesty, we are far behind the Chi-
nese, and not even on a level with the Turks. With-
out adverting to FAUNTLEROY, and some other egre-
gious scamps of bygone days, it may be useful, in
order to correct this national vanity, to state, that in
no country in the world are such enormous rob-
beries committed by respectable men as in England.
Look at the robberies committed by respectable
merchants in passing their goods through the Custom-
house. Possibly the revenue has been defrauded at least
a million a year for some time by these merchants,
and the well-paid officers, who took a solemn oath to
perform their duty honestly. How many have been
engaged in these nefarious transactions we cannot
tell. A Commission was appointed to ascertain the
number, but unfortunately that Commission sits,
or rather sat, with closed doors, and their object
seems to be rather to screen their friends and the
delinquents than to serve their country. Can the
public, then, be surprised that men like WILLIAM
BROMLEY carry on a small trade of plunder ? Slap!,
who robbed the country of 300,0001., by forging Ex-
chequer bills, was banished, it is true ; but he was
made the scape-goat—he was the only victim caught,
because no means could be found for his escape, all
the rest—all those who neglected their duty, and
those, too, who connived at the most enormous.robbe-
ries ever committed, walk about the streets at the
present day, and would be sadly offended if
they were told that they are no better than
Frenchmen and Italians. This BROMLEY is the latest
character which stands forth to bear these delin-
quents company. He has robbed a few individuals
of at least 92,000/. One of these persons has been
obliged to apply for parish relief, and is now com-
pelled to enter a parish workhouse. Another, who
had trusted him with money to the amount of 8,0001.,
is compelled to sell her furniture to pay house-rent,
and will probably have no other resource than the
same asylum ; yet this respectable solicitor appears
only as an unfortunate bankrupt ! He has squan-
dered, or we would rather say, hoarded up, this
vast sum in some secure place, and after he
has " passed the Court," to use the legal phrase,
he will be a gentleman at large, while his m