The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-03 00:00:00

SMOKE PREVENTION BILL.

On the reading of the Order of the Day for the Com.
mittee on this Bill,
Mr. MACKINNON wished to know from her Ma-
jesty's Government whether be should proceed with this
Bill or not ?

Mi;. MANNERS SUTTON said, that since the Bill
waa introduced it had been his business to make some
inquiries on the subject of the parties interested in the
Bill, and the result was eo very unsatisfactory that he
felt the greatest difficulty in pronouncing any decided
opinion upon it ; and as he did not think the House was
then in a condition to come to a decision upon that im-
portant measure, he hoped the further consideration of it
would be adjourned.
Mr. AIACKIPION moved that the Speaker should
leave the Chair.

Mr. WARD moved as an amendment that the Speaker
should leave the Chair that day three months.
After a brief conversation, in which Mr. Brotherton
Lord F. Egerton, Mr. Hawes, Mr. Borthwick, Mr. M.
Philips, Mr. Parker, Mr. Ricardo, Sir John Easthope
Mr. Protheroe, Sir R. Peel, and Mr. Muntz took part,
Mr. Mackinnon withdrew his motion for going into Colvi-
n Wee, and also withdrew his Bill, with the intention of
b:inging it forward again at an early period of the next
session.
The Courts of Common Law Process Bill, and the
Customs Duties (Isle of Man) Bill severally went
through Committee, and were ordered to be reported
to- morrow.
The Linen Manufacturers (Ireland) Bill was read a
third time and passed.
' BRITISH CUSTOM-HOUSE IN CHINA.
Dr.)BOWRING, according to notice, begged to ask
the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Govern-
ment, whether the Government had given its sanction to
the introduction of oaths in Custom-house matters in
China, as directed by tile British Consul at Ningpo.
Sir R. PEEL said that the administration of oaths was
without the sanction of the Government, and he had
taken measures to introduce the English practice in
China.

Mr. Sergeant MURPHY moved that this House will,
upon Tuesday next, resolve itself into a Committee, to
take into consideration the Act 17 and 18 Car. 2, c. 7,
intituled " An Act for provision of Ministers in Cities
and corporate Towns, and making the Church of St.
Andrew s, in the suburbs of the City of Dublin, presen-
tative for ever," with a view to the repeal of so much

thereof as relates to the payment of Ministers in corpo-
rate towns in Ireland. He said that the Act was passed for
the purpose of providing religious instruction for Pro-
testant immigrants from this country and the Continent
into Ireland. It was no longer necessary; and although it
produced no more than 15,0001. a year, it was at once
oppressive and offensive to the Roman Catholic population.
He knew many Protestant clergymen who derived a
portion of their stipend from this peculiar source, who
would feel grateful to the Government if it would devise
means for relieving them from getting their revenues
in such an unpleasant manner. He had read a statement
from a Protestant clergyman in Cork on this subject.
It was stated that the late Dr. Warren had distrained on
a portion of his parishioners for ministers' money. A
deputation waited on him and requested him to give back
the goods which he had distrained. His reply
was, that he wished to God some other mode of re-
munerating him could be devised by the Government,
but that he owed it as a duty to his successor to
maintain his rights, and he was justified in saying so.
—(Hear, hear.) They had replied to him that he had
many rich Protestants among his parishioners, and that
he. should look to them. He replied that those who
made the observation knew little of Protestants, for they
were the worst paymasters he had. He trusted the
Ilinise would do him the justice to believe that he was
actuated by no sectarian motives in bringing fora arc]
this subject, as all he wanted was to induce the
Government to provide a revenue for the clergy, with.
out having recourse to these charges. The Act had
established a valuation of all existing house, but it had
fixed certain limits, by enacting that no house should
be valued as being worth more than 601. a year. The con-
sequence was, that the houses of the rich, which were
perhaps worth 2001., were assessed to the ministers'
money only at 601. a year, while the houses of the poor
were assessed at their lull rental, and if the assessmen
was not paid the goods were at once distrained, and there
was no appeal against the distraint. Tho Hon. and
Learned Gentleman concluded by formally proposing his
motion.

Lord ELIOT had certainly promised last session to
take the subject into consideration. The Attorney-
General for Ireland had maturely considered the subject,
but he regretted to state that the Government had been
unable to devise any plan which would be satisfactory to the
persons subject to the payment of the tax, without de-
priving the clergy of that to which the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman himself admitted they were fairly entitled.
Similar charges ekisted in the capitals of England and
Scotland, and it should be remembered that at the time
this Act passed Roman Catholics were incapacitated by
law • from holding houses ; therefore it was a tax im-
posed upon Protestant property exclusively, and Roman
Catholics who had since become possessed of that pro-
perty, had acquired it subject to this tax, and, there-
fore, had purchased it for less than they would other-
wise have giren for it. He could not accede to the mo-
and be hoped the Hon. and Learned Gentleman world
not press it.
__. . . _

Air. BELLEW hoped that before another session the
Government would prepare a measure to get rid of the

grievance.

Lord STANLEY hoped, that before the end of the
next session, something would be done upon this sub •
ject.
Mr. JOHN O'BRIEN, in supporting • the motion, re-
ferred to the anomalous position of the Established
Church in Ireland, which he contended ought to be sup-
ported outtAf the general funds of the country, without
pressing directly upon a dissentient and reluctant
people.
Strangers were suddenly ordered to withdraw, and the
House was counted, but there being more than forty
Members present, the gallery was again opened, and
Mr. O'BRIEN proceeded to argue in favour of the
motion. He was desirous to incorporate Great Britain
and Ireland most closely, but the Protestant Church—
the greatest anarchy in the history of nation°, prevented
the amalgamation. The Irish Pretestant Members
were compelled, however painfully, to legislate
against the temporalities of them. He wished to
rescue the Protestants from their ascendancy, and
the Catholics from their humiliation.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. CURTEIS complained of the want of courtesy
shown by a supporter of the Government in counting
out the House in the middle of the eloquent and im-
portant speech of the Hon. Gentleman who had just
sat down.

Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but the
House did not divide, and the motion was agreed to vtith
out a division, but amidst great laughter and cheering.
Mr. PUSSY then obtained leave to bring in a Bill to
alter and amend an Act passed in the fourth year of her
present Majesty. intituled "An Act to enable the owners
of settled estates to defray the expense of draining the
same by way of mortgage."
The House then adjourned.

STATE OF TRADE.
(From the Manchester Guardian of this day.)
There continues to be a good healthy demand for
yarns for all numbers up to 40's, but more particularly
for the low numbers, which obtain a trifling advance
in price. For goods generally there is also a steady
demand ; iths printing cloths commanding a little
higher :prices. For 40-inch shirtings the market was
heavy, and not much business done ; parties waiting the
daily expected arrival of the Overland Mail. The ac-
count of its arrival in the London Times reached here
later in the day, and the commercial intelligence there
contained was considered to be rather unfavourable as
respects manufactured goods.
ROCHDALE FLANNEL MARKET, MONDAY, JULY
The demand fur flannels continues brisk ; but there is
no change in prices. The wool trade has undergone
little variqtion since last Monday. There is a fair busi-
ness doing, and prices have advanced a shade.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.

GLOBE.—The Ecclesiastical Courts Bill was among the
measures which, :to lighten the Ministerial ship, were cast
overboard on Monday night by Sir Robert Peel, in his state-
ment as to the course proposed to be taken by the Govern-
ment with reference to the pending business of the session.
The history and fate of this unfortunate Bill is fraught with
instruction and warning to the present, and to all future
Cabinets. It exhibits the folly and danger of sacrificing
principle to expediency—of committing the preparation and
conduct of a legislative measnre to the individual whose per-
sonal and pecuniary interests are involved in the changes it
proposes to effect, and who must be more or less than
man if he do not avail himself of the opportunity
to improve his own position, personal or relative, by
its means. To this fatuity—for it is nothing less—do we
attribute the successive defeats, involring diminished influence
and damaged fame, the Government has sustained in connec-
tion with theßill which they have now consigned to its fate;
and its equally bad precursor, which was withdrawn from
the consideration of the House of Commons, by the consent
of both sides of the House, in the course of the last session.
The history of modern legislation affords no instance of
the kind so disgraceful to a Ministry. The cumbrous
and expensive proceedings in the Ecclesiastical Courts
had been long and loudly complained of, as injurious to
the suitors and disgraceful to the jurisprudence of the coun-
try. A Commission, issued by the Crown, had inquired into
the state of these Courts; and, in a clear and well-digested
report, had:recommended certain changes by which the ad-
ministration of the laws, with reference to the matters over
which these Courts had jurisdiction, should be assimilated to
the changed circumstances of society in this country. The ma-
terials for legislation were thus provided to their hands. An
opportunity for effecting a valuable alteration in the law, by
removing an acknowledged nuisance—and thus earning for
themselves the gratituoe of the public—was supplied. It
was lost. The evil spirit of patronage—the desire to render
the opportunity, thus offered, subservient to party objects,
deprived the country of the advantages it would have
derived from an honest government. The Bill introduced
by Dr. Nicholl in the last session was " too bad"
to be entertained by the House of Commons.
However well disposed a majority of that House was,
al that time, to gratify the Government in anything reason-
able, that experiment upon its compliance with Ministerial
wishes was too bold to be admitted. Its manifest design to
aggrandise one individual—and he the concoctor of the mea-
sure—at the expense of the public interests, was demon-
strated by the Opposition. After struggling hard to overcome
the objections, Dr. Nichol' withdrew the Bill in its original
shape, and introduced many alterations and modifications.
It was changed, but not mended. The House still showed
so determined a dislike to the measure, that it was with-
drawn. The Lord Chancellor introduced the Bill of the pre-
sent session. It was to have been expected that experience
would have imparted wisdom. The new measure, it might be
safely predicted, would be, if not perfect, at least free from
great errors and defects. A third failure would, at any rate, be
guarded against by a Ministry not wholly indifferent to cha-
racter, nor insensible to the necessity ofpreserving appearances,
in order to maintain themselves in office. This, we say, was to
be expected ; but this expectation was far from being rea-
lised. Even in the House of Lords, although introduced by
the Lord Chancellor, the manifest errors and defects of the
Bill were so forcibly exposed by Lord Cottenham' Lord
Campbell, and other Noble and Learned Lords on the Oppo-
sition benches, that the Lord Chancellor, and the Peers who
are his echoes in that House, were unable to screen it from
merited reproach: they merely apologised for its imperfec-
tions. The Bill came down to the House of Commons with
a character by no means recommendatory; and the debate
which arose, and the diiisiou on its second reading, followed
by the Opposition in Committeeto passing its first clause, in-
dicated too plainly to the Premier the hopelessness of endea
vowing to preserve it from the fate of its predecessor. The
solemn asseveration of Sir Robert Peel, with reference to the
former Bill, "So help me, God, I have no personal interest
in the measure:" was abortive for the purpose for which it
was employed on the former occasion ; to have repeated the
oath would have been an act of prodigality in svrearinz
which would have looked like profligacy. There remained,
then, no alternative but to throw the measure over-
board. And this has been done ; and in a way signi-
ficant of the chagrin which Sir Robert Peel has expe-
rienced by the necessity laid upon him to free himself
from the incumbrance. The history of this signal miscarriage
in legislation is a sad comment on the promise of law reform
with which the present Ministers entered'upon office. What
they would do in this respect was trumpeted forth in the
speech from the throne ; and public expectations wereraised
high as to the measures which were to follow the announce-
ment. What they have done has been seen. Their only
matured measure is their Bankruptcy Act ; and of that, and
their appointments under it, there are scarcely two opinions.
STANDARD.—The debates" in the two houses of Parlia-
ment, last night, were long and interesting. In the House of
Lords the Sugar Bill was discussed pretty fully. The argu-
ments upon this measure are already familiar, but the genius
of Lord Brougham gave to the discussion an attraction of
almost as much force as the charm of novelty. His
Lordship disposed of the suggestion, that in Java, the
Manillas, and China, there may linger a system of
qualified slavery, greater or less, but in all of small amount,
by making the broad distinction between these countries
and countries like Cuba and the Brazils. In the former, if
there is (which is doubtful) slavery, there is certainly
no slave trade ; consequently the taking or refusing
of their produce cannot
to diminish the amount go to augment or
tion is decisive. Slavery °inf. BSlllabvSetrya I e Texhiissts deisvteirnyc--
where—for everywhere the very poor are the slaves of the
very rich, to say nothing of the slaves whom superstition en-
thrals, as in the more ignorant populations domineered over
by the Church of Rome. As long as poverty and ignorance
are inseparable from the condition of humanity, the sub-
stance of slavery must afflict most countries in one
shape or another ; but in well-governed countries this
slavery will be in a constant course of diminution. In couu_
tries, on the other hand, in whiai a slave trade is practised,

/ slavery must, from the nature of things, grow . with their
growth and strengthen with their strength ; d whoever :
adds to the resources of such countries, either b: y enlarging
their commerce, or otherwise, is in effect as much. a slave trader
as he who exchanges muskets and gi mj awder for
human beings on the African coast. 11( re is one
passage of Lord Brougham's speech reflecting:l tonour upon
his Lordship, because, it says, far better than w e could say
it, what we have a thousand times laboured to if iculeate, not
only with reference to the slave trade, but to It e new poor-
law and the factory question, namely, that ev. y system of
political economy. which does not take for its b af. is the moral
law and the spirit of Christianity, is unsound, a) id must lead
to disappointnient.

TIIE OLD BAILEY B.& R.
(From the Sunday

In the course of the allusions-which iCse .33 ade a short
time since to the case of the wills forgerisv we stated
that our object was not so much to tree; s that case
through its circumstances, which was the pro, since of the
jury, as to make it the foundation of a gene rs 1 call upon
the public to consider, and, if possible, to corro 'lt, through
these representations, the evils which have grown out
of the the license indulged in by counsel in :the defence
'of guilty men. It would scarcely be possibl 3 to select a
better case to illustrate these evils than the t of Barber.
defended as it was in the full tone of the Old : Bailey ver-
nacular, by Mr. Wilkins. His client was th, a most in-
jured man in the'world ; nothing could surpass; his wrongs
evcept his virtues. The purity required by t msar in his
wife, was a moderate qualification compare I with the
purity ascribed by Mr. Wilkins to his elk nt. Cesar,
indeed, was guilty of a moral cowardice w! is n he could
think of repudiating his wife merely beta so she, was
slandered. But Mr. Wilkins betrayed no, such pusil-
lanimity. On the contrary, he seemed to. consider it
a feather in his client's cap to be tried for fr and by the
justice of his country. It was an honour to b employed
by him—quite a moral distinction to touch. a fee from
such a hand. Neither the verdict of a jury .n or the sen-
tence of the judge could disturb the impliciz confidence
of the advocate in the rectitude of his die a t's conduct.
Juries were fallible, judges were fallible—in- s !sort, every-
thing on earth was fallible but Mr. Wii3 :ins's pene-
tration and Mr. Barber's virtue. As for prosecutors
and witnesses, they were not only : ,flible, but
congregated and combined, like evil s p irits in a
league for the overthrow of innocence. Btr t, to speak
seriously upon a matter which is, after all,• of very se-
rious importance, it is, as we have said, in • vain to look
to the judges for the protection of proseciet ors or wit-
nesses ; they seldom or never interfere. E hey did not
interfere with the case of which we have lr •cen speak-
ing, when Mr. Wilkins thought it not I s eneath him
to attack the character of such a mat I as Mr.
Freshfield, the Bank solicitor, in the ho; se that sonic
ignorant person on the jury might be lie rsuaded to
consider his conduct oppressive rued unjust . It is net
for Mr. Freshfield's sake that we regret ti e indiffer-
ence manifested by the judge on this oceA axon. His
character stood too high to be affected by a a ything that
Mr. Wilkins could say or do ; but if judo s will not
sympathise with such men as Mr. Freshfieli I, how can
they be expected to sympathise in more dm ibtful cases
with men who are not so well known, and eso nsequently
not so well protected from misrepresentatio a ? It is,
therefore, a delusion not to supeose that: prosecutor
—or witnesses, and especially the latter,- -find pro-
tection from the judge, and, there fc re, it is
the more necessary that something shou Id be done,
now that the evil is on the increase, to • protect the
public by other means. The gentlemen of t) se bar call
such a case as that of the will forgers, in the, Old Bailey
slang, " a good sporting case," that is, a c s se in which
prosecutors and witnesses are to be run down and every-
' thing, and, amongst the rest, that ills fat at l personage
Truth, sacrificed to the worthy character lie the dock.
According to this interpretation of the wor 3. sport, Mr.
Wilkins is certainly a keen sportsman ; lIR cares no-
thing for himself, he rides, as beggars are 8 lid to ride,
straight onward to a certain destination. Thee re is no dif-
ficulty, however formidable, that can ars ei it his pro-
gress, or turn him from the one great object of
sacrificing everything to the interest of his client. So
confident were the conductors of the pro: a ecution that
brow-beating would be resorted to in the ca s e of Barber,
that they felt it necessary to subpoena the Ks ord Mayor,
arid Mr. Goodman, the chief clerk at the Mr al .sion-house,
and to keep them in attendance day after day, as a check
upon the imaginative faculty of Mr. Wil Islas. Even
after all the precautions that could be adopt oil, the Bank,
the Bank solicitor, the magistrate, the p.eisss, the wit-
nesses for the prosecution, nay, the very judge him-
self, were, all of them, in one shape • other, ex-
posed to the animadversions or insinuati ons of the
prisoner's counsel. But this out-and—out -mode
of defence, although it is certainly calculate( 1 to attract
the notice and admiration of the great rnres s of indivi-
duals charged with offences, has never failed to obtain
for him who uses it the scorn of those who think that
society is likely to be endergered by the escape of an
ingenious villain, defended by a dextrous lawyer, whose
sense of right and wrong, however perfect: in itself, is
never permitted to interfere with what he ,ealls his duty
to his client. One would think, from thus exaggerated
language of lawyers respecting this duty, tlemt there was
something in the connection of counsel and client which
exempts parties from the ordinary obligations of truth and
justice. No barrister will pretend that he would be
justified in imputing falsehood directly or indirectly to a
person who, he knew in his heart, had told the truth.
No man of common honesty would dare to make such an
assertion. Wherein, then, consists the magic of that
extraordinary and mysterious compact iarplied in the
phrase " duty to his clic nt," which justifies. or is sup-
posed to justify, him in doing for another what he dares
not do fur himself—to obtain the acquittal of a guilty
person, and the ill-treatment of one or mire innocent
persons by the misrepresentation of their motives, their
characters, and their conduct ? What is there, then, we
would ask, in the connexion between counsel and client
—what is there in the sense of duty arising out of such
a connexion, that should exonerate either of them from
the universal obligations of morality, and the ordinary
rules of right and wrong ? Is it in virtue of any
mystic influence communicated from palm to palm by
the transmission of a fee, that the lawyer becomes
not merely invested with the privilege, but charged with
the duty, of sacrificing every principle to the one
paramount object of vindicating his client, re
fax aut nefas, at the expense of every consi-
deration, human and divine ? If so, we should
like to hear some account of the process from those who
are familiar with the operation. It was stated some
time ago by the Attorney-General, in the House of
Commons, on contending in favour of this extravagant
privilege, that he supported it for the sake of the suitors
themselves. Now, what we want to know is wherein
the advantage to suitors consists ? We think it will be
readily granted that it is no advantage to prosecutors to be
vilified and traduced,nor to witnesses to be treated in the
same manner. The accused party, whether he be a swin-
dler, a robber, or a murderer, may certainly derive an ad-
vantage from the obloquy which he is permitted to cast,
through his counsel, on those who..are endeavouring to
bring him to justice. In fact, the only person to whom
this monstrous privilege can be of use is the guilty person,
who can only be saved from merited punishment by
the adoption of such execrable means. What then, let
us ask is the real effect of this privilege, or license, or
whatever it may be called, upon the administration of
justice itself ? We will not mince matters. The effect is
not to benefit suitors, but to drive them out of Court by
the mere force of the Old Bailey philosophy. We would
appeal to Mr. Clark, the clerk of the arraigns, and to
Mr. Goodman, whose experience in the same office
renders his testimony invaluable—we would appeal to
these gentlemen, whose characters, as private indivi-
duals and as public officers, give the highest authority to
their statements, whether it is not a common case to hear
prosecutors express their regret at having prosecuted, and
not only express their regret but declare that they would
rather submit to the loss of their property, and allow
the thief to escape, than expose themselves or any mem-
bers of their families to the observations with which
they had been unjustly assailed by the prisoner's counsel.
The effect of this privilege, therefore, is tq obstruct the
administration of justice in limbic', by driving people
away from the Court, and inducing them rather to
submit to their losses than apply for redress, or even
accept of redress, with its invariable accompaniment
of abuse and detraction. Lord Brougham was as-
suredly carried away by professional enthusiasm,
or by that love of wrangling which is, perhaps, in-
separab'e from a great advocate and debater, when lie
could think of referring to the progress of a trial as
affording a favourable instance of the display of human
talent. However interesting such proceedings as are daily
exhibited in our courts may be to the Noble Lord, and to
those who think with him, we can conceive nething more re-
pulsive to a benevolent mind than that scene of noisy decla-
mation and gross humbug, and virulent invective and brutal
demeanour, which combine to make up what is called an
important trial, or a good sporting case, at the Old Bailey.
His Lordship's own description of the process, though
evidently coloured so as to favour his views, will scarcely
inspire such a man as we have described with any violent
inclination to he present at the performance.
" The jury," observes his Lorship, " see the witness ;
they have the opportunity of watching his demeanour
while giving his evidence, and then they see him
submitted to a cross-examination ; after which comes
his counsel, comforting and restoring, as it were,
the poor man, after the flagellation he has under-
gone, and setting up the broken credit of the
witness, damaged by the cross examination. Af-
ter the cross-examination of the adverse counsel,
which has impaired the credit of the witness for a mo-
ment, then comes the skilful counsel, who restores and
comforts the poor man, and gives a better opportunity of
explaining the case and setting himself right with the
jury, until at last the conflict being over on both sides,
the evidence of the witness is fairly before the Court."
But how often does it happen that the evidence of the
witness is never fairly before the Court ? Suppose the
case of a poor nervous man, or of a delicate and timid
woman, how difficult would it be to restore and com-
fort either of them after flagellation, so as to enable
them to become collected and appear in their proper
characters of truth and honesty ! But let any one who
suspects us of exaggeration go to the Old Bailey and
judge for himself—let him observe the conduct of coun-
sel to female witnesses on the opposite side, and if he
do not feel his heart throb with indignation and shame,
we can only say that he is fit for the place to which we
have sent him. But, as it is possible that we may revert
to this subject again, we shall say no more for the pre-
sent than express an ardent hope that something will be
done to correct an evil which, so far from showing any
disposition to cure itself, is evidently on the increase,
and the effect of which is most injurious to the ends of
justice and the reputation of a great country.

THE ENGLISH SPY SYSTEM.
The people of this country have been accustomed, for
many years, to boast loudly of the open and straight-
forward character of all authoritative proceedings, and
to look down with contempt on the continental nations,
for their tame submission to the abominable system of
espionage in which their governments so generally in-
dulge. It would appear, however, that we have less