The Sun.
London, England, 1844-09-12 00:00:00

birbf Ebttton

THE FUNDS-(CLOSING PRICES.)
BRITISH FUNDS.
Bank Stock — 1 Indian Stock
3 per Cent. Red 'Ditto Bonds .............. 9; pm
3 per Cent. Cons.
..... „ 99% Ditto Old Annuities ...
Ditto New Annuities ...
New 3% per Cent. .Ex. Bills, 1,0001. 1%d... 74 pin.
New 5 per Cent, Ditto 5001
Long Annuities to expire Ditto Small 75 pm
Jan lteio Bank Stock for Acct....
Oct, 1S
,Consols for Act. 991
Jan. 18(.0.........

FOREIGN FUNDS.
Austrian, 5 per Cent iPortuguese, 5 per Cent —
Belgian, 5 per Cent.......... Ditto, New Ditto
Brazilian Bonds ..... ...... 87 !Prussian, 5 per Cent —
Buenos Ayres, 6 per 'd.ent.. •—• 1.4 Russian, 5 per Cent.,...„
Chllian, 6 per Cent 35" Ditto Metallic ...... ..... .....
,
Colombian, 6 per Cent
Ditto, 1824 ............... ..... Ditto, 3 per Cent ........
Cuba Bonds, 6 per Cent — Ditto, Deferred,..........., ....
Danish, 3 per Cent
Greek, 18.5, 5 per Cent — Exchange ..... . . .......... —f. —c.
Mexican, 5 per Cent
Ditto, 6 per Cent., 1837 — Dutch, 2% per Cent...... 6214
Peruvian, 1825, 6 per Cent — Ditto, 5 per Cent ....JOON
SHARES.
Birmingham and Gloucester (100 paid) 1105!
Chester and Holyhead ( 5 paid)
Caledonian, 5 paid
Dublin and Cashel, 2 % paid
Eastern Counties (23 paid) .... ..... - ...... 11%
Great Western (75 paid)
Ditto Half Shares, 50 paid BB%
Ditto Fifths, 12 paid
Hull and Selby, 50 paid 6B
London and Birmingham (Stock)
Ditto, New Thirds, : paid
Lon Jon and Brighton (50 paid)
London and G".eenwich (12E. If's. 4d. paid) 97i
Ditto, FrP:.erence or Priv,lege, £:8 17s ...c1 paid 233/a
London s*--,cl Croydon (Trunk) 16%
Midi,:od Counties (100 paid) IO7X
inorwich and Braude 6 paid.

_.... -:randon, -
South Devon, 5 paid
South Eastern and Dover (33 2s Id paid) ....
Ditto New Shares 4 paid
Trcnt Valley, '2 paid 8,,,i
Yarmouth and Norwich (18 paid)
York and North Midland (50 paid) 167
Orleans, Tours, and Bourdeaux, I paid
Paris and Orleans (20 paid)
Paris and Rouen. 20 paid

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FROM TUB EVENING -PAPERS OF TIIIS DAT.
GLOBE.—From assailing the majority of the law
Lords, by whose decision the writ of error was
affirmed, the impugners of that decision turn to level-
ling objections to the house of Lords as a court of
appeal in such cases. The court, it is alleged, was
inadequate for what it performed. What 1 the so-
lemn judgment of the Irish Court of Queen's Bench,
with all its long train of previous, concomitant, and
subsequent circumstances, reversed in a moment
by a triumvirate of Peers, acting for the nonce,
in the capacity of judgei ; and the four folio
volumes of evidence, so carefully prepared, and
so beautifully arranged, reduced in an instant to so
much waste paper ? True : this has been the case.
But, then, if the Court be inadequate for the perform-
ance of its functions, blame not the Court, but the
law, which constituted the Court. Let the law be
changed, if it require alteration. In the meantime,
it is the Court which has been appointed, and has
been accustomed, to decide such questions. It has
violated no rules. It has observed its prescribed
forms. And, if the lay Lords thought fit to waive
as they have been wont to do, their undoubted right of
voting on a question respecting NA hich they could have
no knowledge, it is only what they have done on for-
mer occasions. It would be very hard if a rule which
they have laid down to themselves, and long acted
upon, as most consonant with justice and decency,
should then only be departed from when the punish-
ment of a political antagonist was to be secured by
its violation. It is only those who would trans-
form the lay Lords into fit associates for Jeffries;
caring not for justice, but thirsting for revenge ; who
have ';entured to blame the lay Lords for not esta•
blishing a precedent which, however it might gratify
the evil passions of a particular party, would have
covered the House of Lords with disgrace, and for ever
ruined its character and influence with the country.
Another objection is, that the Writ of Error was al-
lowed, and the judgment passed on the defendants re-
versed, contrary to the opinions expressed by a ma-
jority of the judges, whose advice had been sought.
But to this may be replied, what is the end and de-
sign of a court of appeal, if it is not to possess this
liberty of thought and act ? l‘Thy was the House of
Lords constituted a court of appeal by our ancestors,
if it is to be restricted in the way assumed by those
who urge this objection ? If it is merely to have the
privilege of confirming, and not reversing the judg-
ment of the inferior courts, it might as well not exist.
Surely, it is not intended to be affirmed of the
judges that infallibility pertains to their deci-
sions. The records of their judgments attest the
contrary. The celebrated privilege case of Ashby
v. White is a proof to the contrary. In that case
Lord Chief Justice Holt stood alone against the other
eleven judges, with the Lord Chancellor into the bar-
gain. But, in the end, his judgment proved to be
right, and was eventually affirmed. On the great
Regency question the judges were also notoriously in
the wrong. Besides, what has our legal constitution
established ? From a judgment in the Queen's
Bench, confirmed by the justices of the Common
Pleas, and the Barons of the Exchequer, an ap-
peal lies to the House of Lords ; the dernier re-
sort, as Blackstone calls it, for the ultimate de-
cision of every civil action. Does not this show
that on the very nicest points of law the
House of Lords—constituted, as we know it to
be, and imperfect as we may think it for the office—
may reverse the decision of every judge in the land ?
And are we to suppose that this has never been done ?
There was a time when the privilege, strange as it
may seem, was of infinite value. Such times may
come again. That it admits of abuse, is true. In
the meantime the principal inconvenience attaching
to the House of Lords wisely gets over, by leav-
ing the decisions on points of law to the law Lords
who may be Members of the House. This is
merely what was done on the late occasion. And
this is what the Tory journals, and the Tory party
generally, have the modesty to complain of.
"Todo a great good"—for such, in their eyes,
would the further imprisonment of O'Connell have
been—" do a little wrong," is the advice they would
have given. Most fortunately, it now appears, that if
given it would not have been followed. The lay
Lords have not been the rogues their friends wiihed
them to be. They have acted, in this instance, as
honest men ; and honesty, in this instance, as in all
others, will prove to be the best policy. In the event-
ful times which are approaching, it is everything
to have justice clearly on our side. This the Tories
themselves will be brought to know and to confess.
In th 3 meantime let them rail. Perhaps railing
may abate their rancour ; which, bottled up, might
explode, and damage if not destroy them, and those
around them. Let them exhaust their vocabulary of
abuse upon the men who by fair and honest means, in
the exercise of their legal right, and in conformity with
established custom, have rescued the victims from their
hands ; and restored them to that liberty which, it is
now proved, they ought never to have been deprived of.
It is to be hoped that their restored liberty will not be
abused, either by the principal of the unjustly-convicted
parties, or by any of the subordinate leaders of the repeal
movement. The irate Tories by all the railing and
ribaldry they employ cannot reverse the decision.
From the decision of the House of Lords there is no
appeal—except to posterity. The names, and the
slanders of those who seek to invalidate that decision,
will pass into oblivion. But on the principles they
have sought to establish—on the monstrous proceed.
ings to which they have lent the aid of their advocacy
—and on the political leaders and their tools on whom
they fawn—the sentence of future generations will be
pronounced in terms of unequivocal condemnation.
STANDARD.— Our attention has been directed
by the Morning Herald to an announcement in a
provincial journal, evidently possessing some peculiar
means of information in regard to Whig tactics, which
derives additional confirmation from sundry signifi-
cant hints in the speech delivered by Mr. O'Connell
at the Conciliation Hall on Monday. It is as follows :
It will be recollected that we announced, some
time back, on high authority, the difference of opi-
nion among the judges, and also that the majority of
the tribunal of final appeal held an opinion favourable
to the traversers. We revert to this, not for the
purpose of vain boasting, but to obtain confidence for
the announcement, which, upon the same autho-
rity, we are now enabled to make. It has
been resolved to form a union of Liberal parties, for
the purpose of driving the present Ministers from
power, and it is intended to propose that one of the
bases of agreement shall be a federal Parliament for
Ireland. We have every reason to
rinformatilony;onant hde source from which we derive our
commend the constituencies of the lsingdomNst'eo be
prepared soon to declare what policy is to be adopted
in the present critical circumstiteces of the State."
Such a tumour has been current for some months
past, and experience has satisfied us there is
not
imaginable baseness to which the Whigs will
descend, that may offer them the remotest chance
of a return to office. That some such scheme as
the one above described has been gravely con-
sidered, even if no very active steps shall have
been taken to carry it into effect, is extremely pro-
bable. After the Lichfield House compact, a con-
spiracy against the best interests of the country more
disgraceful than any previous coalition in the
history of political parties, we can have no reason
to question the readiness of the Whigs to enter
once more into a similar undertaking. In the
present desperate condition of their affairs, in-
deed, the temptation is greater than ever ; and
notwithstanding the five hours' speech by which
Lord Monteagle established the fact that the union
was the greatest blessing ever conferred on Ireland;
the Royal Speeches, in which Lord Melbourne
denounced the very idea of repeal as the direct
prelude to civil war ; and the elaborate declarations
of Lord John Russell and other Whig notables,
that any evil word be preferable to an attempt to
disturb the Act of Union ; nothing is more probable ban that they are ready and willing to combine with
Mr. O'Connell for that purpose if they can foresee