The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-20 00:00:00

o'ibititillS !',11,1t.

LONDON, THURSDAY, MARCH 20, 1845.

The House of Lords did not sit last night.

The House of Commons met at Twelve.
The I,lailway Clauses Consolidation Bill was read
a third time ,and passed.
The Land a
auses Consolidation Bill was read a
third time and passed.
The report on the litzilway Clauses Consolidation
(Scotland) Bill was brougi,!-.up.
The third reading of the Land Clauses Consolid,;tion
(Scotland) Bill was postponed.

In the course of the discussion on these Bills,
Mr. HAWES protested against these morning sittings
so early in the session.
Colonel SIBTHORP also expressed his objections to
them. Bills of the greatest importance were hurrieJ
through at these sittings, when only 15 or 20 Mem-
bers were present.
Mr. LABOUCHERE admitting that, in the case of
these Bills, the Government had only a choice of
evils, thought that on the whole it was inexpedient
for the House to sit at that early hour. In the long
run, they would not get through more business than
if they sat at the usual hour in the evening.

Lord G. SOMERSET admitted the inconvenience of
morning sittings, and regretted the necessity that had
existed for having recourse to such a procedure.
The House adjourned at half-past One o'clock, and
re-assembled at Five.

Mr. PAKINGTON brought up the report of the Dart-
mouth Election Committee, declaring JOSEPH SOMES,
Esq., duly elected.
After the transaction of private business,

Mr. C. B ULLER moved that the petition of the mer-
chants of London, on the subject of New Zealand, be
printed, which was agreed to.
In answer to Sir R. INGLIs, it was stated by Sir R.
PEEL, that the intention of the Government was to
proceed by way of Bill in proposing the increased
grant to Maynooth and the grant for the establish-
ment of academical institutions in Ireland, as he
thought great advantage would be derived from doing
away with the annual discussion on this subject. The
Right Hon. Baronet further stated that he had no
objection to make the Regium Donum, and the grant
to the Presbyterian Church of Scotland also per-
manent.

Mr. ALDAM, in reference to President Tyr.Ea's re-
cent Message, put a question on the subject of the
state of the liberated negroes in the West Indies.
Sir It. PEEL said they were perfectly free there.
There was no apprenticeship—they were not com-
pelled to labour, and were in the state of free men—
and if the United States chose to appoint a Commis-
sion to investigate their state, every facility should
be afforded to that Commission for ascertaining the
facts of the case. With respect to the allegation that
both the subjects of the United States and those of
this country were concerned in carrying on the slave
trade, that was a subject for serious consideration.
He was not prepared to deny the fact. He hoped
that if the law did not reach this application of Bri-
tish capital, the Legislature would be prepared to
apply a remedy.
In answer to a question by Sir D. NORIIEYS,

Sir J. GRAHAM said it was not the intention of
the Government to propose any measure with regard
to Medical Charities in Ireland, nor to propose any
measure with regard to the railway system
in Ireland.

In answer to a series of questions from Mr. B.
DENNISON and Lord HOWICK,

Sir G. CLynnt denied that any negotiations had
taken place between the Board of Trade and the
promoters of the Direct Northern and the Cambridge
and Lincoln Railway Comiznies, or with the Newark
and Sleaford Railway Compat,;', or that the Board
had given any intimation to to tht,::e companies to
form a coalition ; and that no facilities given to
those companies to make communications to the
Board, which were not equally given to the London
and York Direct Railway Company.
In answer to Mr. SOMES, Lord INGESTRE stated
that he did not intend to bring the subject of Captain
WARNER'S invention again before the House; but
that Capt%in WARNER would abide by his offer to
destroy a line- of battle ship at five miles distance at
his own expense.

Sir C. Yuma hoped that the Right Hon. Baronet
would permit Captain WARNER to try this experi-
ment, at his own expense, behind the Goodwin Sands.
Sir R. PEEL had no doubt but that, if Captain
WARNER did intend to make the experiment at his
own expense, he would get permission to do so from
the Board of Ordnance.

Lord JOCELYN, in answer to Mr. HORSMAN, said
that a communication had been received from India
stating that the Governor-General in Council had
taken into consideration the recommendation of the
Home Government, to devise measures for placing
Penang sugar on the same footing as Indian sugar,
and had referred the subject to the Governor of
Penang.
The House then went into Committee on the
Customs' Act.

The various articles in the tariff were gone
through, and, after same discussion, were agreed to.
The House then went into Committee of Supply ;
and, after voting the Ordnance Estimates, adjourned
at Five Minutes past One o'clock.

What is Sir ROBERT PEEL about? Does he under-
stand the position which he is compelled to maintain?
Is his occupation of it his own voluntary, spontaneous
act, or the effect of circumstances which he cannot con-
trol? Does he retain office as the head of a party, or of
a principle? If of a paity, what is it? Between him-
self and the Whigs there is nothing in common, but the
reciprocity of mutual repudiation. True,—he talks of
his intimate relations with the Conservative community
of the empire, and the identity of his views with those of
the Conservative section of the House. But the com-
munity in question disavow his political doctrines, as
being too liberal for the scope of their own opinions and
wishes. The section reject him, as having compromised
their interests, and falsified his pledges to them, by the
line of policy which he has adopted since he last resumed
the reins of power. Neither the Duke of BUCKING-
HAM, nor his Grace of RICHMOND, nor even Mr. W.
MILES, hesitates to remind him that the landed interest,
which each of them conceives himself to represent,
placed the Premier in his present position; or forbears
to hint that they can, at any time, displace him when
they shall be so minded. It is not with their party,
therefore, that he is identified. What, then, is the
principle of which he is the exponent? Of the pro-
tective monopoly-class-legislation system? Why, it is
very true that ho has avowed himself over and over
again the champion of the corn-law monopoly ; and,
until lately, of agricultural protection. It is also cer-
tain that, by an unfortunate inconsistency, he has greatly
marred the effect of his relief to commercial enterprise
and trading industry, and to the pocket of the home
consumer, by an ill judged positive increase of protec-
tion to our West Indian colonist, although it is accom-
panied by a reduction of the duty on foreign sugar, the
growth of free labour. But, on the other hand, the
author of the tariff of 1842-43, and of the financial pro-
ject of February, 1845—the one largely reducing the
rate of duties on articles of extensive consumption (corn
always excepted)—the other striking off; altogether, at
one erasure, the duties on 430 articles, and contemplating
the virtual extinction of all export duties whatever ;
this man cannot be said to embody the principle of pro-
tection. Sir ROBERT PEEL, then, is a ministerial ano-
maly, an official nondescript. His influence and his suc-
cess aro not the less palpable facts. The strength which
supports him is in the inverse ratio of the basis on which
it apparently reposes. It consistency in a public man be
strength, the Premier's public position should be weak.
If inconsistency be a principle of weakness, it works—
in Sir ROBERT PEEL'S case—to the consolidation of his
strength. Many previous Ministers have been upheld

by the superior force of their own party to that of the
party opposed to them. None before him, to the best
of our knowledge, hare made their fortune by securing
the opposition both of their followers and their adver-
saries. Let it not be said that if they maintained their
authority in virtue of party support, Sir ROBERT holds
his in despite of it ; for no man was ever more indebted
than he is to the assistance of party. It is his habit
practically to recognise this fact. He throws him-
self, as the occasion may demand, and without
hesitation, out of his own ranks and into those
of the opposition ; or he defies opposition,
whilst making a sentimental appeal to the
sympathies of the treasury benches. The attrac-
tion which, one should suppose, would draw him out
of his Premier's seat, is counteracted by an equivalent
force operating to retain him in it. Like the fabled
coffin of Mahomet, he is equipoised between two mag-
netic principles. Whatever the shock of parties, or his
own oscillations, the result always leaves him in un-
disturbed suspension between them.
In this whimsical, undefinable, capricious interpolation
between two extremes, there may be something very
astonishing, veryartificial, very clever. We doubt whether
it is very becoming in a statesman at the head of the
councils of a great country. Is it a fair or a generous
return for that confidence which a great people has
shown itself disposed to place in him, notwithstanding
its dissent from some of the more prominent measures
adopted by his Government in past years, and its dis-
satisfaction with many details connected with his present
Administration? Why should he be any longer unjust
to his own reputation, and the demands of his own sta-
tion, by declining to adopt some more prominent and
decided rule of action? Why hesitate between a broad
and ;,;:flligible vindication of the sound principles of
free trade, an halting, unsatisfactory compromise
with the obsolete errors .7.'d importunate demands of
monopoly-protections and class se:.°.:hness? Surely the
Premier is now strong enough to feel his 0;:'!1- ground;,
to use his own feet; to throw away his " sliding-zca,e
c;, etches; to abandon his shifty supplements, his ricketty
exps.Jients. Does he imagine that, in that case, he will
not find ,:upporters enough in the House? Let him throw
himself upoii the support of those without ! Such a pro-
ceeding would supply a summary means of realising
that victory over interested opposition, which the very
fact of daring thus honestly and openly to encounter it
would assure to him beforehand. It is clear, then, that
he can gain nothing further by remaining within his
present entrenchments. How much he may lose, he
may have inferred from the spirited but serious de-
monstration of the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury, of a
mutiny in the camp behind him, which already reckons
able heads, stout hearts, and prompt hands, araol:g its
leaders. How much he has yet to gain by heading, in-
stead of following, the movement of liberal principles,
and of a truly patriotic policy, to which the whole em-
pire is looking forward with the most intense solicitude,
he can only surmise, by imagining himself already what,
in that case, he would inevitably become—the most po-
pular Minister who had ever directed the affairs of the
noblest empire which a statesman can aspire to serve.

The proceedings of the meeting convened at Exeter-
hall, on Tuesday last, for the purpose of petitioning
against the anticipated endowm2nt, and the enlarged
grant proposed to be made to the Roman Catholic Col-
lege at Maynooth, afforded a melancholy exemplification
of the pertinacious bigotry with which certain very
worthy persons will persist in treating all questions that
are connected with religious education. It is lament-
able to observe a gentleman of Mr. PLUMPTRE'S respect-
ability and goodness, lending himself to the sanction of
such a one-sided and pharisaical demonstration of at-
tachment to the principles—not of the Established
Church, but of Protestantism in general, and of hatred
and denunciation of the Roman Catholic Church. Tlw
llon. Member for Kent felt the invidious character of
the position he had assumed, together with the chair of
the meeting, and therefore repeatedly disclaimed all
idea of harbouring any other sentiments but those of
brotherly love, and hearty good-will for his Roman
Catholic brethren of Ireland ; but the harsh things he
had to say of the religion professed by them, and
of the hopeless and eternally-doomed error of
their faith, he was compelled to utter, because,
forsooth, it was a question of "principle." In
this view of the subject consists the whole fallacy
of the impressions under which Mr. PLUMPTRE, and the
whole Anti-Maynooth Synod of Exeter-hall labour, in
treating the Maynooth grant. It is net a question of
principle—it is a question of domestic policy. What are
the facts ? A certain Church, or religious profession, is
recognised by law as " the Established" Church of the
United Kingdom. The United Kingdom is composed of
three elements, England and Wales—Scotland and Ire-
land. The Established Church, with its doctrines and
forms, is that of the great majority of the people in the
first of these integers ; the doctrine, without the forms
(Presbyterianism), is that of the second ; but the third
repudiates both the doctrines and the forms of the
other two, and stands inflexibly on its own more
ancient traditions, and its own succession and
stream of hierarchical ordination. Whatever be
the aggregate numbers of those who dissent from the
forms and ritual of the Established Church in England
and Wales, and Scotland, there can be no doubt that its
doctrine is that of the great majority of a population
mustering at least fifteen millions of souls. But in Ire-
'-nd the doctrine, the forms, and the ritual of a perhaps
t gr,:ter majority of a population of between seven
still
eight minL.7ns' are those of its ancient church, the
Church of Rome—no: the Protestant Established Church
of England. If the AMOUR: or proportion of the majo-
rity determines the intensity of lie attachment in the
one case, it must do so in the other. It fact that in
all England and Wales and Scotland, six-sevenths-2f the

population are devoted to the cause of the Reformed or
Protestant Church, under whatever denominations—
if this be a proof of that genuine regard
for one species of doctrine, the same sort
of attachment on the part of somewhat more than six-
sevenths of the population of Ireland being with equal
sincerity attached to the doctrine and communion of the
Church of Rome, is to be as necessarily inferred. Now
the highest and most sacred authority acknowledged by
either Church, has declared that the Sabbath was made
for men, not men for the Sabbath. Religion has been
thus devised for the tenefit of man ; but man was not
made fir the benefit of any particular form of religion.
Would Mr. PLUMPTRE and the Rev. Mr. BAPTIST NOEL
have six-sevenths of the Irish people surrender their
hereditary faith, their honest convictions, too, to the
authority and at the bidding of some proportion of their
brethren of Great Britain? Surely this is too preposterous.
Even the Honourable Member, and the Honourable
and Reverend Chaplain to her MAJESTY, do not
go the length of supporting any such preposterous pre-
tension. For what reason, then, arc the Irish people
not to have the means granted by the Imperial Le-
gislature, for the careful and liberal education of

those among them destined for the priesthood of the
Church to which they belong, in the discipline and
the doctrine of that religious profession in whose ele-
ments it will be their especial function to instruct
the rising laity of Ireland ? What matters it, in this
view of the subject, whether the election of a church
or a creed which the Irish have made be right or
wrong ? That is an affair between, the disciple of
a faith, and the GREAT SEARCHER of all hearts. Do
the brethren of Exeter Hall imagine that they can re
verse this election by a string of cut-and-dried resolu-
tions? Do they hope to roll back the mighty tide of usage,
prepossessions, associations, civil and religious, which
for fourteen centuries has poured on through the same
unaltered channels, without witnessing, as in other
countries, the downfal of its ancient laud-marks—the
undermining of its bases throughout the length and
breadth of the land. On what plea the grant to i\lay-
nooth, in respect of the Roman Catholic community of
Ireland, was to be opposed by those who support the
grants in aid of our Universities, in respect of the Pro-
testant community of Great Britain, we never could de-
vise. Wiser heads than that of Mr. PLUMPTRE—judg-
snouts more dispassionate than that of the Ilon. and
Rev. B. NOEL—have deeply considered, and solemnly
recognised, not only the moral justice and equity, but
the undoubted political expediency, of providing for
and protecting in Ireland, a foundation fur the education
of her native priests in the doctrines of her national
church, in a native seminary. Mr. Pitt, and other en-
lightened statesmen, his contemporaries, readily per-
ceived the growing danger of leaving such a class of men
to find at once a refuge, a home, instruction, and na-
tional attachments in a foreign country, instead of at
home.

It seems unnecessary to push the argument further to
establish, in this instance, the powerful case of political
necessity. But we cannot take leave of the Exeter Hall
affair without acknowledging the amusement afforded to
US by the Rev. Mr. BAPTIST NOEL'S repeated declara-
tions of the extreme reluctance with which he would
have interfered at the meeting, or adopted any other
course that would have had a tendency " to embarrass
her Majesty's Ministers." Had there been any proba-
bility of such a result, he would, on no account,
pave taken a step in anywise calculated to throw-
difficulties in their way, &c., &c. For gentlemen
who stand so 'stiffly on " principle," this is rather a
blinking of " essentials," as they call them, to " cere-
monials." But we find a key to the inconsistency in the
recollection—or in the matter that we recollect—the in-
sertion of this gentleman's name, the other day, in the
list of chaplains, ordinary or extraordinary, to her MA •

JESTY. Court chaplains may not fight First Lords of
the Treasury. Again—we remark two notable instances
of that " fair play and no favour" department in the
august Synod, Which is always dear to Englishmen—
elsewhere. Only two individuals attempted to address
the meeting on the Liberal ride. The first bold intruder
was removed—actually and bodily taken into custody,
and removed by the policemen in attendance, on the
motion of Sir C. EARDLEY SMITH, Bart., and
with " the unanimous consent of this very
fair and impartial meeting." Sir C. EARDLEY
SMITH, and the policemen who acted on his sugges-
tion, we would think it extremely likely will hear again
of this ebullition of enthusiasm. The other intruder,
whom we suspect to be the somewhat notorious Captain
ACKERLEY, was also violently ejected, speech un-
spoken, and by the police. Exeter Hall fanaticism may
be incurable, but the Commissioners of Metropolitan
Police will do well to instruct their rather officious con-
stables better in the rights of English subjects at open
meetings—or meetings not professedly called by previous
advertisement announced to be intended only for
packed audiences,

The intelligence from Zurich is to the 14th inst. The
committee, seem ding to a letter from that place of the
13th, had already met several times, but it is said the
members do not agree on the main points—a very likely
circumstance. Four Radical members propose to draw
up a paper for the expulsion of the Jesuits, and then
those of St. Gall, Bale (city), and Zurich, are to draw up
one inviting Lucerne to deliberata at once on the itl•
structions to be given to its deputies for the ordinary
Diet. The majority, it is said, propose to send to Lu-
cerne federal commissioners to convoke the Grand Conn.
cil of that canton, and to transmit to it the invitation of
the Diet, which is to declare itself. The labours of the
committee were expected to terminate on the 14th. On
the question of the Free Corps, the committee has pro-
posed the adoption of the two first paragraphs of the
Vorort, with some modifications. its to the amnesty,
oz_
agree on the propriety of sending an invitation to all
tthere
fcraentntoLn tearCn'' of the i 22, political offenders to adopt it. A let-
states that several of the
'e
persons who were sent to prison three onths ago on
charges of rebellion, have been set at liberty.

Madrid journals of the 12th have been received. The
new Electoral Bill, an outline of which we gave yester-
day, appears in the Gazttle, but it does not appear to ex-
cite any interest, and will, of course, be passed. In the
Chamber of Deputies the Minister of the Interior an-
nounced that it was the anxious wish of the Govern-
ment to calm the public mind relative to the Church
lands, and a negotiation had been entered into with the
POPE on the subj,ct, the object of which was to get the
sai;:_tion of his holiness to the sales already made,
which wouitl increase the value of the property, and
quiet the consciences of the purchasers. It was under-
stood that the session would be closed about the end of
April.
The Three per Cents. closed at 35-i at 00 days; the
Five per Cents. at 261; the Coupons at 28-a; and the
Debt without Interest at 8 at 60 days.

A discussion has been carried on in the French
Chamber of Deputies for some days on the motion for
abolishing vote by ballot, which posesses cont:iiclerable
intere,t, as the question is one applicable to all consti-
tutional governments. At the last sitting it assumed
more than usual interest, from the remarks which it led
to on the overthrow of the BOURDON dynasty, and from
one of these brief, sententious, and cutting speeches
which M. DuNN only can make. The Bill, as is usual
in France, had been referred to a Select Committee,
consisting of nine members ; of these, four had voted for
the total abolition of secret voting, and the other five
thought it ought to be retained, but only in certain in•
stances. M. BERRYER, who was one of the Committee,
said the members were unanimous in allowing that
it was most awkward, when the Chamber had voted
by assis and /eve (one party sitting and the other
standing), and the vote appeared doubtful, it was
necessary to have recourse to a secret vote, which
too frequently had the effect of giving a broad contra.
diction to the decision of the Secretaries. Another
member said the ballot was an utter delusion—it no
longer existed. Some of the journals had published
lists of the PRITCHARD Deputies, and had announced
that they would have theta placarded in the 4-1,060 com-
munes of France. The practice of secret voting had
only one result—to favour a permanent system of
calumny against all the Deputies who :served or sup •
ported the Government, by furnishing a pretext for
doubting of the sincerity of their opinions and of their
courage. M. DE TRACY declared himself a convert to
the ballot. At one time, before he had the honour of
being a juryman, he had thought that " nothing was
more desirable for an honourable man than to
give his verdict openly, but experience bad en-
lightened him, for when he felt the anxieties and doubts
—the moral torture, in fact—incidental to the delibe-
rations of the jury, whenever the vote was public, he felt
Idedh.foLreetthtleie Clalsitamnbeerverieumti7n.berEtvheeryadodnreesswaosf
it a happiness that by a secret vote such tortures could
bt
the ea v2o2i
aware what an influence it had exercised on the fate of
France, yet it was notorious that amongst those who
had then voted there were some who did not desire to
acknowledge that they' had done so. It might be re-
.iscabe
r
might
w
membered that at that period it was proposed to per-
petuate the event by a medal. But the medal could not
be distributed, for 221 Deputies could Lot be found
w sl lh il)gt
do
o to
° avowreceive
what
t pleased—it would not be able to change
ote(They_ las.edlia N.ottiend,. )but T theyh eC h did
m not
h
v
human nature. All had their weaknesses and their
had drawn
byaupfears."the
address signori
ut the assembly would
D theuPl 2N2'l. who e
demanded
maderemarks
Lamle. M. DE LA ROCHEJAQUELEIN wished
first to Fit,
only one word, 1,
fromcalls
not hear him, and ta,
,: all parts
these
Chamber
on
were for M. DuPIN.
the great event which placed Lot.,; PHILIPPE on the
throne, not forgetting to put forward his frietal..7,- the
Jesuits, as the prime actors in the mad schemes of
CHARLES X. :--

- -
of avowing the part they had taken. I
" I drew up the address of the 221 ; and, on the part of
the 221 was one of destruction. When a
those with whom I then voted, I cannot admit the reproach
of their having in a measure denied their vote, and shrunk
rt fromehNa:ol,lthe deny
address
ution had t
aokfe n
place,
when it had been lawful and
useful to the country, care ought to be taken not to allow
its principles to be misrepresented or its origin falsi •
tied. The actuating motive of the 221 had been fidelity
to the Crown and attachment to the institutions of
the country. They only wished to lay at the foot of the
Throne a constitutional warning, which it was their right
and duty to give. When the Crown, abused and worked
on by evil counsels, allowed itself to be persuaded to
guard at the head of public affairs a Government hostile to
the opinions of the majority :of the Chambers, the duty of
the Chamber was to respectfully offer its advice. Could the
document containing such advice be termed an address to
subvertlare d
to
things
ciuern existing? Certainly not. Tat that period de-
M. clared that the Crown had a right
e
to dissolve the Chamber. The Crown used that right; and
what caused the overthrow of the dynasty then reigning was
that, after that solemn appeal to the country, after a disso-
lution which was to give a contradiction to the majority of
241, or confirm the advice which they had constitutionally
given, another Chamber came which held precisely their
opinion. The Government dared not meet the new Chamber,
and the ordonnances were issued. Yes, the ordonnances
were then published by the suggestions of detestable ad-
visers—of a certain Jesuit congregation which then existed;
and which would again do the same at present, if they were
only permitted to act as they pleased.—(Loud cries of Hear,
hear.') The Government declared war with the people, and
from it resulted the revolution of 1830. The address of the
221 was one of those friendly warnings which were never
listened to by Princes in times of danger. The Chamber
gave useful advice, which was neglected, and the people
replied by a revolution. But those who gave the best advice
were the least listened to.—(Cheers. )"
This closed the general discussion on the principles of
the Bill, and the Chamber rose at six o'clock. On the
same day the Minister of Public Works gave an outline
of the proposed conditions of the two Railway Bills from
Paris to L)ons, and from Lyons to Avignon. It autho-
rises the Minister to adjudicate the line by public com-
petition. He is to declare in a sealed paper the maximum
of the duration of the lease that can be granted. This
period in no ease to exceed forty-five years for the part
from Paris to Lyons, and fifty years for that from Lyons
to Avignon. No person is to be allowed to compete for
the line unless previously approved of by the Minister,
and unless there have been deposited in the Caisse des
D6pOts et Consignations twenty-five millions for the
part from Paris to Lyons, and eight millions for that
from Lyons to Avignon. The same Bill also opens to
the Minister of Public Works a credit of five millions fur
the works on the line from Dijon to Chalon. The station
at Paris is near the situ of the Bastile, and the line
proceeds along the right bank of the Seine to Melun,
thence passing through the forest of Fontainbleau, along
the valley of Changy and Loing, along the left bank a;
far as Aisy, a distance of 147 miles. It thence proceeds
by Dijon, Chalons,
and Macon to Lyons, the distance
from Paris to that town being about 320 miles. Time
cost is estimated at 7,210,000 f. ; the revenue is calculated
at 1,030,000 f. ; the net proceeds 566,000 f., or about 7
par cent. The line from Lyons to Avignon proceeds
along the left bank of the Rhone, by Vienna, Monteli-
mart, and Mornas, and the cost is estimated at 3,200,000 f.
and the revenue at 225,0001'., or better than 61 per cent,
The Univers publishes the following letter from the
Archbishop of LYONS to Ile Minister of Justice and
Public Worship, but it is evidently directed against M.
DUPIN:—

" use of Ile ,
If I had co mPosed a nutnuel of legal, commercial, or ad-
--• -
nistrative rights for the s-ieurs lea Procureurs-
Generaux and Procureurs-iu-Itoi, and for the instruction Pf
ad-
ministrative
young advocates, and had in this elementary work, bearing

the impress of my ignorance in jurisprudence, attacked the
rights of the nation, of the K or of the Chambers, placed
Privilege above cornmell iaiv, and confounded ordonnauces
with servitude, and if this book had
the magistrates and condemned by them,
my- duty would have been to recognise the justice of the sen-
bweieti been
laws, and liber
tenee, and adept in silent respect the double brand of ridi-
cule and of the tribunals. But when I remain within the
limits of the spiritual power, and, seated upon my pontifical
seat, cite before me doctrines opposed to the Catholic doctrine,
in order to judge them, I do not acknowledge upon earth any
Power that can revise my judgment except the Roman
ontiff and the councils. The Council of State has not been
made my judge in these matters by Jesus Christ."
THE BOURSE—TUELS AM, MARCH 18.