The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-26 00:00:00

14

BOWDON, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1844.

other, keep him in a constant state of uneasiness and

vacillation—he cannot offer a single authoritative
opinion on the subject of the religious disputes that
now distract the country, for the Puseyites and the
Anti-Puseyites, and other rebellious sectaries, hold
him in such complete thraldom among them,
that he dare not side with one party, lest he
should array against him the influence of the other.
And yet the man who acts in this tame, halting,
equivocal spirit who is neither Monopolist
nor Free-trader, neither Orangeman nor Libe-
ral, neither Puseyite nor Low-Churchman—this
man is the Prime Minister of Great Britain ! Is
he not burlesqueing the high office he holds—an
office which was once
.held by a CHATHAM, a PITT,
a CANNING, a WELLINGTON, and a GREY—by such
abject, truckling timidity ? Should not an English
Premier lead, rather than follow, public opinion—put
himself boldly in the van of a movement, instead of
sneaking ingloriously in the rear ? For what pur-
pose is he placed at the helm, but that he may steer
the State-vessel steadily and safely into port? If he
is to fall asleep at his post, and trust to the
winds and waves to waft the ship into a secure haven,
we may just as well have no pilot at all. And indeed
to all intents and purposes we have none, for though
Sir ROBERT PEEL is nominally at the helm, yet it
is the ship's crew that are doing his work among

The report of that "hedging" Bill, entitled the
" Horse-racing Penalties Bill," comes on for further
consideration this evening. If we had ever doubted
the inherent tendencies of such an assembly as the
House of Commons to the vice of class-legislation,
the frivolous and selfish debate on this question
last week would have effectually dispelled any
such scepticism. But believing always that such
tendencies are absolutely inseparable from the ele-
mentary constitution of a Chamber, which, even since
the passing of the Reform Bill, still continues
rather the representative of the two aristocracies of
rank and money than of the people and popular prin-
ciples, we are disposed to look upon the discussion in
question as the most characteristic which has taken
place, within the same walls, for some time past. The
Bill was introduAl into the House of Lords by the
Duke of RICHMOND, with the candid admission that
its object was—what ? To put down the frightful
practice of gaming ? To withhold or deter the rich
from setting a demoralising example to the poor, in
staking sums of money on the event of races to be
run between certain horses ? To impress upon the
ill-paid agricultural labourer, the small tradesman,
the plodding artisan or operative, the profligacy of
their reckless conduct in perilling the support of their
families, and the maintenance of their homes, on
wagers as to the tincertain issue of matches at any
rural or local sports ? To encourage the abstinence
of small farmers and their servants, of humble tenants
and humbler husbandmen, of provincial shopkeepers
and working men, from habitual betting and games of
hazard, by the disinterested promulgation of penal
Acts against such practices, at the special instance of
noble or opulent landlords, merchants, manufacturers,
awl mill-owners ? No—nothing like this was the
avowed object of his Grace's Bill, as stated by Mr.
lirosrumr, who has charge of it in the Commons. It
was simply to protect some noble and other patrons
of the turf from qui tam actions which have been
brought against them by parties prepared to prove
the well-known facts of their having won and lost,
paid or received, large stakes at races, and other sports,
and hoping to realise, by such actions, penalties to
an ezirmr,lous amount under the statute of Queen
ANNE. We need not recur to the recent deliberations
of the tels,upon this measure, or to the amendment
by which the operation of the Act of ANNE was su-
perseded for a limited period. It N our purpose to
look at the roziitiple of the Bill, as it has been
brought into the Ilouse of Commons.

them, while he looks lazily and contentedly on, com-
forting himself with the reflection—so dear to
some men, who regard the show rather than the
substance of power—that, in name at least, he is a
pilot. There never yet lived an English Minister who,
while apparently he did so much, in reality did so
little as the Right lion. Baronet. Not one single
bold opinion does he dare to promulgate of his own
accord. Not one single manly conviction does he
presume to entertain. Even the slightest fragment
of a declaration must be wrung from him. It is not
he that governs England, but the two great an-
tagonist parties of the Leaguers and the protectionists !
It is not he that governs IrlSnd, but

Now, how grossly partial, how palpably exclusive
this principle is—how clearly invoked, pro h&c vice,
as it were—to serve the turn, to meet the case of the
Lord GsOIIGE or the Sir JOHN, or the sporting Peer,
or the titled Commoner, whom the dreaded qui lain
" Ogres" were about to pounce upon, and tear to
pieces, like the Mr. BOND (who has, indeed, escaped
from their clutches, but with only a rat-like extrica-
tion, minus its tail)—enough, perhaps, has been already
premised to show. But the hypocrisy of the prin-
ciple, and the defectiveness of the scope of this Bill,
may be much more strongly illustrated. Why
was not the protection of the Bill to be thrown
around the copper or shilling " collection," " top-
plug 101.," contributed by the sturdy cham-
pions of the village green, as well as the " sub-
scription horses " and gold cups, the splendid plates
and magnificent sweepstakes, provided by the patri-
cian subscribers to the betting-rooms,---" the " Dii

majores" of the Grand Stands,—the elite of Tatter-
' sail's ? But is this invidious distinction, thus sought
to be established against the poor, who may be dis-
posed to follow their native English bent for " sport-
ing," in common with their wealthier compatriots, an
imaginary grievance ? There is very little of mere
abstract, inferential reasoning,—of purely sentimental
hypothesis in the practical illustration supplied by
Atr. WAILLET

the Repealers and the Orangemen ! All the
momentous public questions of the day are agitated
and helped forward by private—that is to say, by
non-official—individuals, without the slightest de-
ference to his authority, without even the show of
respect for his sentiments. Mr. COBDEN cares not
two straws for his opinions—the Duke of Ricu-
MOND scarcely conceals his contempt for him—Mr.
O'CONNELL, " convicted conspirator" as he is,
throws down the gauntlet at his feet, and
dares him to take it up. Nay, even in the
Principality, his power, or his reluctance—call it
what you will—to act with decision is so apparent,
that the Times quietly takes the duties of Govern-
ment on its own shoulders, and tranquillises the sen-
sitive " Rebecca and her Daughters," by directing
public attention to, and suggesting remedial
measures for, the grievances under which they labour.
So far as we can see, we might just as well
have the Guildhall giant Gog or his brother Magog
for our Prime Minister, as Sir ROBERT PEEL. They
would be quite as useful, and they could not well
be more inactive. In other and better times the
country used to look to the opinions of their Pre-
mier as a soft of barometer, which indicated the
success or failure of the political schemes of t e day ;
but no one thinks of doing so now If we wish to know
what chances we have of getting Commercial Re rm
we consult the League, not the Prime Minister. If we
wish to know what hope there is for Ireland, O'CoN-
NELL, not PEEL, is the individual to whom we turn
for infomeation. In like manner, the Monopolists—
treating with utter indifference the distrusted decla-
rations of the Premier—read the speeches of the
Dukes of RICHMOND or BUCKINGHAM, in order
to ascertain what prospect they have of suc-
cess. All parties, Free-traders and Anti-Free-
traders, Orangemen and Repealers, however they
may differ in other points, yet agree in this one
—namely, that the opinions of the Prime Minister
of Great Britain—the dispenser ofoffice,
ht the favours vour s
should
bo
ef
the Crown—he who, by virtue of his
the most influential person in the three kingdoms

"A number of little boys were in the habit of amusing
themselves by playing at pitch and toss—which some
,persons constdered a highly immoral and injurious
1A.1.1:1 practice, while others regarded it as innocent and one
~; to which no punishment ought to be attached; but he
regretted to say that there were magistrates in this
town—stipendiary magistrates—who were in the habit
of sending littldboys to prison and to the treadmill for
indulging in, t practice. In the course of the present
014 • :4449 days ago, three boys were committed
1%4. S

—all parties, we say, agree in thinking that the
opinions of this illustrious individual are not worth
a moment's serious consideration ; for all know
that he is the veriest slave of circumstances—the

for having been guilty, as was stated in the warrants, of
the enormous crime of playing at ' pitch and toss.' "

There are few country gentlemen who have had
more experience of the business of quarter sessions,
and of the sort of cases which come before county
magistrates to be summarily disposed of, than Lord
WHARNCLIFFB or the Duke of RICHMOND. There
have been few keener patrons of the turf and the
betting room than the Duke of RICHIdOND and Lord
WHARNCLIFFE. Is either of these Noble Peers pre-
pared to bring in a Bill to rescue the infant patrons
of that most ancient of all games of chance, " pitch
and toss," from the avenging naltimuses of the magis-
tracy—unpaid or stipendiary ? Such a course may
be thought very incompatible with the dignity of a
present Lord President, or an ex-Postmaster-General
—but it would be conduct much more consistent
than the support of either to a " Goodwood" Bill of
this kind.

We are anxious not to be misunderstood as being
the apologists of betting, or of gaming of any kind.
If we cannot go the whole length of Lord HOWICH'S
serious appeal to the Legislature to discourage (by
some new enactment ?) " the practice of betting on
horses ;" if, on the contrary, we plead guilty to a
little secret passion for horse-racing, the excitement
of which, we find, years cannot quite extinguish—
we willingly concur with Mr. WORTLET, Sir JAMES
GRAHAM, and others, in wishing that the " practice
of betting" could be entirely abolished. But since
this is about as futile an expectation—since it is to
suppose about as complete a revulsion of men's
natures, as to look for the Bishop of LONDON'S
petitioning the QUEEN and the Parliament to be al-
lowed to exchange his mitre and his see against the
surplice and " perpetual curacy" of some Rev. OwEN-
AP-MEREDITH, among the mountains of South Wales ;
we must deal with the matter as we find it—an origi-
nal innate propensity of man, as strong in the rudest
state of savage nature, as in this most refined civili-
sation. The Bill before us, then, ought to have in-
corporated the broad principle involved in the amend-
ment moved by Mr. BRIGHT, which would have
crushed at once the pretences and the profits of a race
of men who are the common pest and nuisance of so-
ciety. He moved, " That on the motion for going
into a Committee on the Horse-racing Penalties Bill,
instructions be given to the Committee to extend the
provisions of the Bill to all proceedings of common
informers, under the authority of any penal statute."
The amendment—although supported in an excel-
lent speech from Mr. CHRISTIE (who argued that,
if the House passed the Bill to defeat the objects of
common informers in this particular case, they were
"bound to stop all proceedings of common informers
in every case")—was finally lost. Sir R. PEEL,
whom we shall henceforth be apt to regard as a
trimmer in legislation and public morals as well as
in politics, after deprecating the danger of the prin-
ciple involved in measures of this kind, which went
to intercept the operations of existing laws, made
this characteristic compromise of his constitutional
principle with the conventional expediency which is
ever his besetting sin :—" It was the peculiar circum-
stances of the present case which made him ready to
grant the relief asked for."

Very peculiar circumstances, no doubt ; and among
them not the least is, if we mistake not, the accident
of a namesake of the Right Hon. Baronet being one
of the victims whom qui tam voracity had contem-
plated for its peculiar delectation. The frankness of
Mr. THOMAS DUSCOMBE'S statement is much more
to his credit and to our taste. He described the Bill
as being " essentially a private and personal Bill, to
exempt certain noblemen and gentlemen from penal-
ties to which they had subjected themselves by their
ignorance of the law," and he fairly avowed his sup-
port of the measure on these grounds.

If ever public man was placed in a humiliating
and ridiculous position, that man is Sir ROBERT PEEL.
Though he has a majority in the House of Commons
to back him, and the entire strength of the House of
Lords at his command, he cannot take a single decisive
step of moment—he dare not declare himself unreser-
vedly on the side of the monopolists, nor dare he declare
himself unreservedly against them—he dare not ori-
ginate one solitary bold, remedial measure as regards
Ireland, for he takes fright equally at Orangeman
and Catholic—he has no comprehensive scheme of
national education to propose, for the Dissen-
ters on the one hand, and the Churchmen on the

helpless tool, not the vigorous controller, of events,
who is carried along in the go-cart of expediency,
without presuming to make a movement of his own.
If this teazing, contemptible imbecility and vacillation
on the part of Sir R. PEEL continue much longer, we
do hope Mr. Hums will come forward in Parliament
with a proposal for abolishing the office of Premier,
as well as other sinecures ; for we do not see why the
country should pay six thousand a year for a Prime
Minister, who is no better than a mere cypher.

In the House of Lords, on Friday night, the Bishop
of EXETER took occasion,—after presenting petitions
from the clergy of Powderham, in Devon, and Pen-
ryn, in Cornwall, praying their Lordships to: cause
effectual means to be adopted with a view to provide
spiritual instruction for the inmates of the different
workhouses in the several unions of the country ;—to
submit a motion for the appointment of a Select Com-
mittee on the same subject. But the keen-sighted
Prelate took care to incorporate into the terms of his
motion a gloss, to the effect that this spiritual instruc-
tion should be administered by chaplains of the Esta-

blished Church, one of whom he would have nominated
to every principal poor-house. This was the point
which the Bishop chiefly laboured throughout
his very long and statistics-crowded speech. The
gravamen of his complaint—we shall use his own words
—was, that, in the union of St. Austell, as in others,
" the Church was thrust out from her place as the
instructress of the people." The remedy he proposed
for this state of things was the nomination of chap-
lains, as we have already stated. To corroborate
his statements, and to enforce the deduction he thus
drew from them, the Right Reverend Prelate read a
vast number of communications which he had re-

ceived from numerous districts, both within and
beyond his own very extensive diocese,—from the
north, as well as from the west and the south,—
all more or less illustrative of the condition
of spiritual destitution in which the pauper in-
mates of poor-houses were left, in the loeali-

ties specified, by the defective provisions of the
Poor-law Commissioners at the original crea-
tion of the particular union, or of the board of guar-
dians of the parish or district, on first entering upon
their duties under the administration of the amended
poor-law. Liskeard, St. Austell, Bodmin, St. Co-
lumb, St. Germain's, Penzance, and Redruth, all
came in, by turns, for a share of his Lordship's cen-
sure, touching their management of these matter'.
He reflected pretty severely on the illiberality and
unorthodox indifference manifested by the Cornwall
boards of guardians especially, and by the Cornubian

public, in general. Then his Lordship moved on,
like a thunder-cloud, and passing over the county of
Devon, fulminated against Axminster and Axbridge,
Tavistock and Tiverton. Anon, as if caught in a sudden
flaw of wind, he veered away with surprising velo
city to discharge the remainder of his bolts over
" devoted York and Lancaster ;" from the city of the
Minster, to the town of guilds and pageants. Finally,
leaving York and Preston, he rolled over Cheshire,
he re-appeared in the counties of Durham, North-
umberland, and Westmoreland, and expended his
last wrath upon the monotony of Cambridgeshire.
Thus, after muttering in the North Riding of York-
shire, his ominous denunciation became furious at Mac-
clesfield ; terrible throughout the proud Palatinates of
his spiritual brothers of Durham and Chester ; and
finally sank hissing—as a red-hot Oxford man will
ever do in such a locality—amidst the sedges of
the sluggish " Cam." In sober truth, the whole
effect of this declamatory address was not so much
to bring under the eyes of their Lordships the un-
questionable evils of deficient spiritual instruction
among large bodies of the community—segregated
as the inmates of poor-houses are, from that active
communication with other classes of society, which
might, in some sort, supply this essential want—as to
show that those evils could only be grappled with
through the instrumentality of chaplains of the
Establishment.
To say that the debate, throughout, was only one
long, but involuntary exposition of the interested
championship of a High Church Prelate on the one
hand,—or of a heartless, sordid, calculating indif-
ference to the spiritual consolation of the poor, on the
part of the framers of the new poor law, and of its more
responsible functionaries, on the other,—would neither
be correct in fact, nor fair in construction. We can
easily believe, objecting as we have ever done to much

of the unnecessary hardships and stringency of the

amended poor-law, and to its want of flexibility
and adaptation to perpetually occurring combina-
tions of circumstances, which no anticipatory legis-
lation can meet even in the mass, but with which this
law affects to deal, categorically, even in their minutest
details ; we can easily believe, that its enactments had
their origin in a spirit of the most unaffected and
comprehensive charity. In like manner, we can do
justice to the sincerity of the Bishop of EXETER'S zeal
on behalf of the Church, in whose hierarchy he wears
a mitre, albeit that, on coming into contact with the
temporalities and influence attaching to expanded
patronage, he is apt to become a little purblind to the
connexion—so visible to all the world beside—be-
tween his own orthodox affection to the " loving
mother," and the present advantages, and lively hopes
of benefits to come, by which she excites and main-
tains that affection. This infirmity of the
Reverend Prelate's is occasional only, so
occasional—and, truly, so convenient too,—that it
reminds us of the " night blindness" of European and
Asiatic soldiers in hot climates, and bad quarters.
Their disease is never so aggravated, so disabling, or
so epidemical, as when they fancy they are about
to march from an indifferent station to a worse one,
or to exchange a good for a bad one. If it were day
time they could, literally, " see their way." It is
but charity to suppose that the Bishop's solicitude,
touching the nomination of chaplains of the Es-
tablishment to poor union-houses, is net at
all affected by the mere accident of the pa-
.

ronage that would attach to such appointments.

We dare wager that he has not the sight of half an eye
for any such valuable results from the consummation he
so desires! Only, we could wish that he had not
laid so much stress on the Liskeard Dissenters hav-

ing communicated to every board of guardians in the
kingdom, the fact of their having defeated the proposed
nomination of a Church of England clergyman to the
chaplaincy of their union. Again, when the Bishop
complains that a Dissenting minister officiates twice
every Sunday at St. Austell's poor-house, in the room
set apart for a chapel, though not specially sent for by
any of the inmates,—does it not occur to him that
herein consists the truest praise of the Christian
teacher's voluntary devotion to the spiritual wants of
the poor ? or, that it may suggest an unfavourable
comparison with other parties who do not go to such
abodes, nor among such forlorn ones, until they are
sent for, and then not voluntarily? And what are
the Bishop's notions of the moral guilt of what we
must call the " ecclesiastical" apostacy of which he
speaks, in the case of an individual who had cast off
the office he once held in our Church, and whose
subsequent delinquencies the Bishop conducts, in this
extraordinary manner, to what he obviously assumes
to be their climax :-1. That this "apostate" attached

himself to a lady who was the daughter of a rigid
Dissenter, a banker in Penzance ; 2d, that he
went so far as to attend her chapel, and
have his children baptized there ; 3d, that
he took away the prefix of " Reverend " from his
name ;" and 4th, that he actually (prop pudor),
" went so far as to appear in a blue coat, and other
coloured unmentionables?" Let us finally ask the
Bishop how he can suppose the public will sympathise
with his indignation, that at Redruth the Dissenters
were not willing that the chaplain appointed should
perform the two services; and so the consequence
was that one of the two services was performed by a
Dissenting minister ? Very good, say we. Just as
it should be. The members of the Established
Church had the advantage of one service in
conformity with their own opinions ; the mem-
bers of the Dissenting denomination heard
another service, in conformity with their opinions.
If the same arrangement could only be carried out
universally, we should hear of no more complaints of
deficient spiritual instruction for the inhabitants of
poor-houses.

We are, however, glad to perceive that this defi-
ciency of instruction will be attended to in the pro-
gress of the pending Bill through the House of Com-
mons. What the Bishop stated of the voluntary
offers of clergymen to officiate gratuitously in
several cases being rejected, on account of a trum-
pery, ill-considered, and brutal enactment of
the present poor-law, which requires that the

officiating chaplain must be an officer of
the union, and paid for his services, is enough
to make one blush for modern legislation,
and its utter forgetfulness, or something worse, of the
moral welfare of those whom it affects to protect.
The spiritual destitution of the poor, especially
youth and children, in the union-houses of Kings-
bridge, Tavistock, and Preston, does appear, from
the Bishop's account, to be appalling; the desecra-
tion of the Church services, in these and other such
houses, almost incredible from its indecorum. And
this last instance of the scandalous neglect even of
social and moral discipline, to say 'nothing of spiri-
tual instruction, we quote, adding only this acknow-
ledgment, which it undoubtedly extorts from us, that
it confirms the case laid by the Bishop for the neces-
sity of a Parliamentary inquiry. His Lordship's
motion for the present, however, has been rejected
by the Lords :

" The Right Rev. Prelate here read the evidence of Mr.
Tufnell on this part of the question, iu which the inferiority
of the instruction given, and, in some instances, the cruelties
practised by the schoolmasters towards the children were
detailed at considerable length, the master, in one case,
having been detected by the chaplain—herein showing the
value, again, of the appointment of such an officer—in
attempts to seduce some of the elder girls in the union."

Madrid journals, of the lath, have been received,
and, if they are to be credited, no doubt remained
that the means adopted by the Government to put
down the insurgents would speedily be crowned with
success. Accounts from Bayonne, however, state
that risings had taken place at several places ; among
others Teruel and Barcelona. At the latter place
Senor BORELL, a very rich merchant of that city, of
Republican principles, and several other persons, have
been arrested, and domiciliary visits in search
for arms are made daily. A report prevailed at Ma-
drid that BONET had, in retaliation for the execution
of seven officers, by RONCALLs near Alicant, put four-
-teen of his prisoners to death. We fear the report
will prove too well founded.

On the Madrid Bourse the Three per Cents. were
done at 29k for cash; 29 15-16ths for 60 days. The
Fives, for cash, 20; and at 60 days 20j.

Owing to the severity of the weather we have no
accounts from Paris later than those of the 23d, of
which we gave an outline on Saturday. In the
Chamber of Deputies on the 22d a rather sharp dis-
cussion took place, relative to the resignation of
M. DE SALVANDY, late Ambassador at the Sardinian
Court. M. ODILLON BAREOT demanded some expla-
nation on the subject. M. GUIZOT at once replied,
"I will give no answer to questions which have been
or may be proposed on that topic." M. nn SAL-
VANDY in like manner refused to answer any ques-
tions. M. THIERS felt annoyed at this, as he expected
to hearfrom that Deputy some accountof the inter-
between the KING and him ; and then made an
attack, not upon the Foreign Minister, but the
Crown. We may judge from the following part of
his speech, that M. THIERS has met with some slight
or disappointment at the Tuileries:—" Did a Minister
say to M. DE SALVANDY, an Ambassador ought to
be so firmly bound to the Ministry, as never to vote
against it; we pronounce your dismissal ?' Was it,
I ask, a Minister who said this ? If so, we have
constitutionally nothing to say. We may discuss the
question, if this conduct of a Minister was judicious
—and nothing more. But in my opinion it was not
a Minister who so addressed M. DE SALVANDY.—
(Confusion, and cries of Order, order.') M. DE
SALVANDY thought it his duty in such a case to
tender his resignation. He perceived that he ought
to see in all this only the Ministry, but this resigna-
tion was afterwards withdrawn through respect for
the KING, and again offered, because they wanted to
impose a condition on him which amounted to a penal
clause. Such are the facts, and I again repeat that it
was not a Minister who spoke, as I have stated above,
to M. DE SALVANDY.—(Cries of ' Order, order; you
are attacking the KING.') I hear the Minister of the
Interior crying out Order.' There is only one way
of showing that there is good reason for such an ex-
clamation, and that is to prove that what I state is
false. What are we to conclude from all this ? Why,
nothing less than that, under the present Administra-
tion, acts pass which are at variance with the rigour
of constitutional rules."

M. GUIZOT followed, and in firm language pointed
out what he considered constitutional government:—
" My friends, my colleagues, and myself," said he,
" consider the representative government in as se-
rious a light as any one, and it is because we do so
that, after serious reflection, I refused to reply to the
questions addressed to me. I accept the responsibi-
lity on everything, but not the discussion. There
are matters which I allow myself to be fully respon-
sible for, but on which I ought not to speak before
the Chamber. If any of you think the silence of the
Government blameable, let him come forward and
prefer a bill of indictment against me. At no period,
in any constitutional Government, has it been the
practice to force the Ministry to come forward and
state the reasons why a resignation is accepted. You
nve
speak of constitutional rules, and yet you ask us to
infringe them. Silence may he as constitutional as
language,
to maintain and prac-
tice, the constitutional rules,
w
nations. Take from the
lenas w e scrupulously
refuse
and we
Cabinet the majority—overthrow the Ministry—at-
tack it as you best may—such are your constitutional
privileges, and no one contests them. But do not
pretend to dictate to us our duty, or say that we
ought to render an account of all the acts that take
place in the fulfilment of the constitutional preroga-
tives. It is through respect for the constitutional
rules, of which you have spoken, that I descend from
this tribune without having replied to your questions.
_(Approbation from the Centre, and rumours from
tokg
give
a know
x you,hpol
the Left.)" The motion, as we stated on Saturday,
was lost.

We have since received the Paris papers of Satur-
day, but they bring no additional news. The
Journal des Debuts contains a bitter article against
M. THISRS, which leaves no doubt of the fact ad-
verted to above, that a complete rupture has taken
place between him and the Court. The conduct of
Admiral DUFBTIT TUOUARS was the subject of
general conversation, and was viewed with alarm by the
friends of peace in Paris. It was generally believed
that the Government had nothing whatever to do
with the affair, and that he had acted on his own re-
sponsibility.
On Saturday the French Three per Cents. closed at
82f. 50c.; the Fives at 125 f. 80c. ; Orleans Shares,
842 f. 50c. ; Rouen, 830 f.; Havre, 672 f. 50c. ; Avignon,
745 ; Spanish Active, 32i.

RAIL WAY REFORM.
(FROM • CORRESPONDENT.)
An important inquiry into a practical grievance, which,
though felt by all, presses most severely on the poor
and working classes, is about to be submitted to the
House of Commons by Mr. Wallace, the Member for
Greenock, on the 29th inst. We allude to that Gentleman's
motion for the appointment of a Commission of Inquiry into
the entire working of the railway system of this country.
The spirit of the present age is against the existence of all
monopolies—the struggle of the present day is between mono-
poly and free trade ; and we can but wonder that a monopoly
so prejudicial to the best interest of this country, so galling
in its exercise to the poorer classes, and so injurious to the
trading interest, by the heavy charges made on all descrip-
tion of merchandise, as is so clearly demonstrated in
the pamphlet entitled " Railway Reform," should'have been
suffered to exist up to the present time. Should the
system proposed in this pamphlet be adopted, an immense
benefit would be conferred on all classes. So great a reform
could have no more fitting advocate than the man whose in-
domitable perseverance and energetic talent carried into effect
Mr. R. Hill's plan of Post-office Reform. For the achievement
of that great work this country ! s indebted to Mr. Wallace, and
from the well-known charact4 of that Hon. Gentleman no
effort will be wanting on his pat to induce the Legislature to
carry into effect a reform so obviously necessary, and which
is certain to confer on all classeS such great benefit without in-
jury to the interest of those who have embarked their capital
in these undertakings.

SCENE AT A CORONER'S INQUEST.— Late on Tues-
day evening an inquest was held at Newington, before Mr.
Carter, on view of the body of a new-born male child, which
was found in a decomposed state in a basket in Trinity-
gardens, by police constable 64 M, while walking his rounds
at two o'clock on the previous Sunday morning. The body
underwent a post-mortem examination, but the medical men
would not undertake to swear that the child had been born
alive. A verdict of " Found dead " was agreed to. On Mr.
Brooks, the beadle, however, going round to obtain the sig-
natures of the jurymen to the inquisttaor!, he found one of
them (named Ward) fast asleep. After being shaken several
times, he fell on his knees. He was then taken before the
Coroner, and reprimanded for his conduct. In answer to a
question from the Coroner he said he could not tell the precise
time he fell asleep, but he understood that the child had not
been born alive. The circumstance created great laughter.
yirnisrals.—Of all things avoid a vulgar whisker.
This is of various kinds. A short, scrubby, indomitable
red whisker is a vulgar whisker; a weak, fuzzy, white,
moth-eaten, mouldy whisker, is a vulgar whisker; a twist-
ing, twining, serpentine, sentimental, cork-screw of a whis-
ker is a vulgar whisker; a big, black, bluff, brutal-looking
whisker is a vulgar whisker; a mathematical, methodist ical,
master-of-artistieal diagram of a whisker is a vulgar whisker.
Whatever is not any of these—will do.—Dublin University
Magazine.

ONDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 26, 1844.