The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-18 00:00:00

Uøruinii nu'.

LONDON, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1844.

On Wednesday last a public meeting took place in
the Town-hall, Bridport, at which Mr. B. Cocn-
RANI was present, and addressed his Constituents in
an eloquent and animated speech, in which, while
we find much to approve, we find much more to con-
demn. The Hon. Gentleman is one of the few Con-
servatives in Parliament, of whom it may be said with
truth that he has preserved his consistency and inde-
pendence under circumstances peculiarly trying to
men of less force and determination of character.
The awful frowns of Sir ROBERT PEEL have had no
terrors for him, and he has been equally, proof
against the seduction of his smiles. Rising
superior to mere party prejudices he has
maintained a straightforward course, and spoke and
voted according to the unbiassed conviction of
his understanding. Such a man deserves—and will
be sure to gain—the respect even of those who most
differ from him in politics; and it is:with no slight re-
gret that we feel ourselves called upon to protest
most strenuously against those portions of his address
to his Constituents which referred to the corn-laws
His remarks on this branch of his subject were not
simply illogical, but they were puerile to the lasi
degree. Observe, for instance, the exceeding childish.
ness of this passage I have said in the House of
Commons, and I repeat it here, that I consider a total
repeal of the corn-laws the forerunner of a revo-
lution; and why do I entertain such an opinion
Because I have not read history wholly with-
out deducing some experience ; because I know
full well that the cry of No Corn-law will,
when that law is once swept away, be too
soon converted into the cry of No-Monarchy ; and
therefore it is that I would give my adversary no
vantage-ground by retreating from the outworks into
the citadel, however strong that citadel might be.'
Was there ever such absurd, incoherent, inconclusive
reasoning as this—if reasoning, indeed, it may be
called, and not, rather, logic run mad ? The abolition
of the corn•laws place the monarchy in peril ! What
earthly connexion is there between the two things;
or )low can the system of free-trade act injuriously
on
the Monarchical system ? Is it when a monster-
grievance is removed, and the people are beginning to
reap the benefit of that removal in
inereaFedcommer-
eial activity, in more employment for the poor and
rnore roaonrees for those
them; when
the. field of enterprise is enlarg:letno'ploy'sinfinite extent,
and a fair day's wages for a fair d:'
longer an advantage to be desired, but Navnorakd'v"ai.ta;oe

If public taxation be considered a grievance, local
tyranny may well be pronounced a curse. And if
anything could add to the heart-burning of petty-
robbery over which one has no legitimate control, it is
the barefaced impertinence with which JACKS in
office contrive to shield themselves under the proci-
sions of the law. It has been our lot, on too many
occasions, to show up the mirror of public delinquents
till they have actually become ashamed of their own
misdoings, and have sought refuge in following the
example of those whom the world delighted to honour.
So far our admonitions have been of service ; but
there are people so perverse that no hint or warning
can touch their sensibility. They are quite beyond
the reach of good intentions. And yet all their overt
acts are for the public good. What their private
motives may be, is of course best known to themselves.
But what would a bystander say, if he were
asked a simple question such as this—" Would
I you prefer paying one hundred pounds, or one hundred
and FORTY, for doing a:little bit of job ? Possibly he
might stare for a moment in utter wonderment, and
inquire if the job were " dirty" or "clean." Now
this is a poser that would startle authorities as heroic
as I3AGun himself, notwithstanding the purity of his
motives. And yet such has been the mode, and such
will continue to be the mode, of doing the business of
all the parishes now under the infliction of the West-
minster Court of Sewers, if we may judge by their
past transactions for a long period of unaccountable
years.

Our columns, to-day, present another strange corn-
- rnentary on the practices of that anomalous body de-
nominated the Court of Sewers—a Court, to which the
Augean stables of antiquity were but a sorry parallel.
No ! if your moderns have improved in nothing else,
they have certainly outdone the ancients in the
questionable arts of legerdemain, by proving that
what is good for one is good for another also, when he
can obtain the benefit.
Such has been_ the practice in the Court of
Sewers for many a long period—a Court whose doings
are pencilled forth in such shadowy modesty as if ap-
prehensive that some of the water-rats had take:,
charge of the books !
And yet this is the Court that levies such excessive
rates on the populous parishes of Westminster!
Under what sanction ? The irresponsib!e assumption
of self-dictation.
Look at the Holborn division, and see how web
and how cheaply they manage matters. What costs
twenty shillings in Holborn is but badly done in
Westminster at forty shillings ! And wherefore ?
Because Mr., or Professor DONALDSON, thinks it un-
becoming or derogatory to pay a man the price
he has agreed or contracted for doing the work ! No!
the contractor must be paid for his blunders or mis-
takes ! And who is this Mr. DONALDSON ?—a
secondary person, suggesting hints for the benefit of
his ignorant friends ?—Not so ; but the learned and
controlling functionary of the Court !
But there is yet hope for the poor, when we see in
the proceedings of Friday such men as Mr. BARRY
BALDWIN, the excellent Member for Totness, Mr.
LESLIE, and the Hon. Mr. BYNG, stepping forward so
manfully and challenging the other worthy Com-
missioners to say if right was wrong, or the contrary ?
And, as might have been apprehended from people
who had been brought up in the muddy vale of
sewers, the echo was " All right !'',
Who are these people that compose the Court of
Sewers ? Are they gentlemen wholly, or tradesmen,
or contractors, or jobbers, or the patrons of jobbers ?
for if they be none of these, and assuredly they ough
not to be some of such designations—nor can we ho•

nestly suppose such to be possible—yet how is it
that they do sanction such apparently nefa-
rious jobs ? Why should they pay PETER forty
shillings for what the Holborn division can
get PAUL—aye, and sometimes even PETER him-
self, to do for twenty shillings ? Is there any charm
in the locality to warrant such a wide measure of jus-
tice ? And, if there be not some unexplained cause,
how can honourable Commissioners stand forth before
people as honourable as themselves, and say by their
votes that the parishes under their care should pay
twice as much as those who are unhappily excluded
from their protection ?

We wonder if Sir JAMES GRAHAM has ever heard
of a Court of Sewers in Westminster above public
control ? If he has not, we think he will do well, in
his new Drainage Bill, to include the majority of that
dirty Court in the preamble, for it will he the best job
he has ever yet done for the people of Westminster.
In the meantime, we warn all the parishes of West-
minster to look out for the next Sewers-rate, and
ask the Commissioners how they intend to spend the
money—if by public or private contract, and for
hlse benefit

Intelligence from Madrid to the Bth inst. has been
received, and it is some relief to find that amidst the
general apathy of the people one member of the
Cortes and one journal advert with just indignation
to the present system of despotism. "The prisons,"
says the Clamor Publico, "are gorged with miserable
prisoners—Spanish blood is spilt on the scaffold—nu-
merous victims fall under the murderous and liberty-
killing shots of assassins—desolation and mourning
reign everywhere—misery is destroying the people.
Fraud, persecution, and immorality are the order of
the day, and all the horrors of the dissolution of
society accompany the discussion of the reform of the
code of 1837, and enable us to presage the fate which
wilt,be ours on the day when that Constitution is de-
stroyed."
In the discussion on the address, Senor ORENZE
moved as an amendment on one of the paragraphs,
that " The Congress should examine the budget each
session, and demand it of the Government if it should
neglect to present it." lie contended that it was ab-
solutely necessary for the credit of the country and
good government, that the budget should be an-
nually laid before the representatives of the people ;
he called attention to the insecurity of life and liberty,
complained that many innocent persons were thrown
into prigon and retained without the shadow of a
charge being brought against them ; and that many
had been even shot without trial or certain proof of
their guilt.
The speech was cheered, but the .amendment, like

gained ;—is it under favourable circumstances like
these that the monarchy is most in danger ? On the
contrary, is it not then most secure? But Mr. COCH-,
RAND refers us to history for proofs of the soundness
of his hypothesis. Strange, that he should have so
completely misinterpreted the warning lessons which
it teaches, and which are diametrically opposed to the
spirit of his remarks ! For all historical records, whe-
ther of ancient or modern times, tend directly to prove
that the peril of rulers is in exact proportion to the
burdens to which the ruled are subjected. Athriying
people is rarely ifever a disloyal one—rarely, if ever, dis-
posed to criticise too severely the system of government
under which they live. It is distress that makes them
censors, and sets them on the task of keen investiga-
tion and inquiry. What occasioned the first insur-
rectionary outbreak in the reign of the first CHARLES ?
What, but the increasing financial burdens of the peo-
ple, and more especially the summary imposition of a
tax unjust in its essence, and most oppressive in its
tendency ? What compelled Louts the SIXTERNTH to
summon the States General ? Again, the financial
difficulties of the nation, and the operation of a series
of intolerablei and iniquitous imposts. If Royalty
is ever to be endangered—and the supposition is not
ours, but Mr. COCHRANE'S-it is far more likely to be
so by the continuance, than by the removal, of such
a notoriously unjust tax as the corn-laws. Once
abolish this vexatious impost, and give fair play to
the industrial energies of the people, and demagogues
may declaim from morn to midnight against Royalty,
and find none to listen to their inflammatory
harangues. A well-filled national belly is your best
and truest Conservative ; and national prosperity, the
mainstay of monarchy in all countries. As it is
with :a manufacturer, so is it with a people.
As long as things go on smoothly, he rests
content with the working of his establishment,
and institutes no minute, searching inquiries ;
but the instant his trade flags, and his returns
fall short of his just expectations, he begins to look
closely into matters—to consider the expediency of
retrenching here and retrenching there—of dismissing
this operative, and compelling that to work at re-
duced wages till the advent of better times. The
people, like the manufacturer with his establishment
never look closely into the workings of the monarchica
system, until goaded to the investigation by the pres.
sure of intolerable distress, and its necessary conse•
quences, distrust and dissatisfaction.