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

6Tiitim
.;)tit

LONDON, WEDNESDAY: JULY 3, 1844.

After a brief discussion relative to the League and
the Anti-League, Lord CAMPBELL postponed his
motion for the further consideration of the Libel Bill
till Friday, owing to the absence of Lord DENMAN.
The Earl of DALuousie moved the third reading
of the Sugar Duties Bill. He thought a differential
cbity of 10s. in favour of the West India interest was
quite sufficient, and trusted the House would accede
to the measure. After some discussion the Bill was
read a third time and passed.
In the Commons, Mr. GLADSTONE moved for cer-
tit,:n alterations in the Standing Orders of the House
relative to railways, which were agreed to.
Mr. WALLACE moved for a Committee to inquire
into the conduct of the Judges who presided at the
assizes held at Glasgow in the month of May, and
especially into the circumstances connected with
the trial of ALNKANDER WALKER, charged with com-
mitting a felonious assault on a girl of tender age.
The LORD ADvoaA7, after stating the particulars
of the case, and defending the conduct of the Judges,
opposed the, motion, and on a division, it was rejected'
by a majority of 119.
Sir ROBERT PEEL then addressed the House, and
saf,l as Mr. DUNCOMBE had an important motion to
bring. forward relative to opening letters at the Post-
office, he trusted Hon. Members who had the pre-
cedence would give way. The proposition of the
Eight Hun. Baronet, after some partial resistance,
was agreed to, and Mr. DUNCOMBE moved for the
appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into
the secret depai•tipent of the Post-office. The
Honourable Member gave a brief description of
the Cabinet noir, and Apologised to M. GutzoT
arid the French authorities for charging them
with a practice—a base, mean practice—which
it now appeared was confined to England. In Aus-
tria, and some other countries, the authorities opened
letters, but in place of acting like Sir. JAMES GRA-
HAM, who tried to conceal the degrading operation,
they sent them to their destination with the
had Govbeen
ern-
ment stamp, intimating that the
opened. He would not confine the charge to the
Dome Secretary, he brought it against the whole
Cabinet> who justified his conduct. Some of the
fs.cts detailed by Mr. DUNCOMBE show tho baseness of
the system, and cannot fail to rouse universal in-
dignation. ,
Mr. ROEBUCK seconded the motion, and was about
1,0 address the House, but gave way to Sir JAMES
GstAx.,tm, who seemed at length to think some defe-
rence shauld be paid to public opinion. In adverting
to the remarks of Mr.-DUNCOMBE,_ he repeated some
of his statiements, as Mr. DUNCOMBE thought not

very accurately ; and on the Hon. Member for
Finsbury endeavouring to put himself right, the
Home Secretary twice appealed to the House for pro-
tection, and begged to be permitted to make his de-
fence on such a grave charge without interruption.
After adverting to the attacks made upon him by the
press, and the speeches of Mr. MACAULAY, Lord J.
RUSSELL, Lord Howicx, and several other Members'
he said he was convinced that from that moment the
maintenance of such a power, without inquiry, was
impossible ; and he would be a party, a willing party,
to such an inquiry. This was received with loud
cheers. Mr. DUNCOMBE had carried his point, and
the Right Hon. Baronet, who at first would give no
explanation, showed himself willing to give every ex-
planation in a Committee. He proposed, therefore, to
move as an amendment that the inquiry should take
place before a Secret, not a Select, Committee,
and that it should be composed of four Members
generally supporting the Government—Lord SANDON'
Mr. H. DRUMMOND, Mr. T. BARING, and Sir W.
lIEATHCOTE ; and five Members of the Opposition,
namely, Sir C. LEMON, Mr. WARBURTON, Mr.
STRUTT, the O'Cosrox DON, and Mr. ORD. No
lawyer was to be on the Committee, and Mr. T.
DUNCOMBE, the principal mover in this great and
stirring question was to be excluded.
After some remarks from Mr. SHELL against this
omission, and also from Sir GEORGE GREY, Mr.
RoEnucx, and others, Mr. JAMES moved that Mr.
T. DUNCOMBE be appointed on the Committee.
This was opposed by Sir ROBERT PEEL; and on a
division, there were, for the motion 52, and against
it 128.

This is bad policy on the part of the Government.
They profess to be anxious to make the most search-
ing inquiry, yet reject the services of the very man
best acquainted with the malversations which have
excited such general obloquy. However something
is gained, and though the Committee is to be held
with closed doors, and the public, of course, will
regard its labours with less interest, yet we may
confidently trust that Mr. WARBURTON and the
other Liberal Members appointed on it, will not ne-
glect their duty. There must be something very
bad in the whole system, when the Government are
afraid to let in the light, and appoint a Secret Com-
mittee to examine into facts of the first importance,
and affecting the interests of any individual of the
public community.
No further business of importance was transacted,
and the House adjourned at Twelve o'Clock.

We recur to the debate of last night in the House
of Commons, on the subject of the violation of sealed
letters at the General Post-office, in order to direct
attention to some of the (hitherto) undisputed allega-
tions of Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE against that esta-
blishment. These certainly give a deeper and more
sombre col our to the malpractices complained of
than that under which they had previously presented
themselves. Such a system as they disclose—prac-
ticed on such a scale, and with correspondence of so
sacred and important a character as the diplomatic
communications of Foreign Powers to their accredited
agents here—is a monster-treachery of which, as ac-
tually existing, we had not, we confess, the remotest
idea. Mr. DUNCOMBE said, " he had not, of course,
obtained a copy of the warrant; but he understood
that, at this moment, the letters of foreign Ministers
were opened, and here examined and read. He be-
lieved that the letters to foreign Ministers were, at
this moment, opened and read by the Right Hon.
Baronet. Were those Ministers aware of the fact ?"
If fact it be, we, for our parts, shall feel every
disposition to follow Mr. DUNCOMBE'S example in his
apology to M. GTJIZOT, by apologizing in our turn to
the whole body of French writers, legislators, and es-
sayists for our depreciation of their incessant declama-
iions against " perfide Albion"—a practice which we
grieve to find Mr. T. DUNCOMBE with so much rea-
son calling " eminently English"—is eminently in
famous. But we rely on the well-earned character
and reputation of our country for its love of honour,
and its constitutional detestation of the employment
and the occupation of spies, for our vindication, by
the world at large, from the charge of sanctioning by
our example that of the Right Hon. Home Secre-
tary, as displayed in his dealings with Irish and with
Post-office questions. And if the moral scandal of
such base and prying letter-burglary or breaking be
thus disgraceful and enormous, the *political conse-
quences that may flow from the just irritation of
offended Cabinets at such insulting dishonesty—such
inexcusable tampering with their confidential dis-
patches are still more palpable. The inexpe-
diency of the thing is as great and as
apparent as its iniquity. It is a social crime
and a political solecism. Away with the flimsy pre•
texts of " justification" under peculiar circumstances,
and tli purport of secret information. No circum-
stance, no informations can excuse such an offence
in the abstract. If there be a great treason, a
mighty movement of hostility to this country, a
threatening imminent peril, such as must over-ride
all ordinary principles and relations, as their concoction
has already outstripped all ordinary protective combi-
nations—let the fact of such an exigency be broadly
and boldly stated, without disclosure of particulars;
and let Parliament be fairly appealed to, whether in
open or in secret sitting, for the excessive powers re-
quired to deal with such an exigency. But nothing
of, the kind is even pretended in this instance. It is
a petty, miserable affair, on Government's own
showing, that has induced them to descend
to this reckless and unprincipled proceeding.
It is said that the letters of Signor MAzzINI
were opened at the instance of the Sardinian Govern-
ment—that in many cases they were copied, and
the copies handed over to the Sardinian Ambas-
sador. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE undertook to prove that
this system of opening and copying letters had been
carrying on for two years " in the most unscrupulous
manner." Why, such malpractices as these in a
State department—such debauching of a Govern-
ment bureau—sink the character of its adminis-
trator in the eyes of all true Englishmen to the level
of JONATHAN WILD'S wholesale fence—for the re-
ception, concealment, discovery, or restoration of
stolen goods, according to the views and interests of
its reputable and very cunning director. But in the
end Mr. WILD's speculation was not more felicitous
than it was honest; and we are mistaken if Sir
JAMES GRAHAM—(we warned him, from the first,
that the case of MAZZINI could not rest where it
was)—will find his Post-office ventures much more
illustrious than JONATHAN'S " fence" dealings—much
more popular than his own confidential instructions
about the meetings at Clonfert and Donnybrook.
The speech, of Mr. DuiwoMßE elicited from Sir
JAMES, after some curious ebullitions of temper at
one or two casual interruptions, not only a consent
to the institution of the desired inquiry into this
affair, but this acknowledgment :—" On a former
occasion the Honourable Gentleman said this was
a question between the people of England and
the Government. Whatever it might have been, he
(Sir JAMES) admitted that it assumed that aspect
now. He regarded this as a question between
the people and the Executive Government." Truly ;
and the English people with reason complain that
their Government have been dishonouring their na-
tional character—disgracing the public good faith by
the practices now to be inquired into. The result of
the debate was characteristic. Sir JAMES, on the
cardinal principle of Sir It. PEEL'S Government, suc-
cumbed to circumstances. He proposed a Secret
Committee of Inquiry ; but from the list he omitted
the .name of Mr. DUNCOMBE himself, to whom the
country is indebted for the whole exposition of this
Ministerial delinquency. This omission was na-
turally reverted to by several independent Mem-
bers in speeches of great force, which rendered
due honour to Mr. DUNCOMBE. But Sir ROBERT
gave these signal evidences, first, of his unbounded re-
liance on the credulity of the House as to any assur-
ances personally given by him secondly, of the ser-
vile influence which binds a majority of such hetero-
geneous material; as any majority of that House must
now be, to a sickening and disgraceful compliance with
his views. Thus, he actually declared, with a gravity
unruffled by a smile or conscious chuckle, " that he
cordially shared in the satisfaction expressed by Hon.
Members that there would be now an opportunity
given of obtaining full information on the subject of
Ow invidious power of opening letters." Satisfaction ?
Credat, its, Then, he opposed the addition of Mr
DUNCOMBR'S name to tho list on the motion of Mr.
JAmEs ; and this ungracious ejection was affirmed by a
majority pf 76. We confess that our hop of the
results, so tar as these are
to evolve a full, fair, and
unflinching report on the made in which this detest-
able power of letter-opening has been exercised both

by Sir JAMES GRAHAM and his predecessors, and the
facts attending its use in the particular cases brought
forward by Mr. DUNCOMBE, are as little sanguine
(after the quibbles resorted to by Ministers to avoid
giving greater extent and precision to the terms of
the instruction to the Committee), as our respect is
little " cordial" for the majority of 76, which would
not admit into the tribunal the manly and spirited
Member for Finsbury, by whose stirring appeals it
was extorted from the fears of the Government.

The usual weekly meeting of the Anti-Corn-law
League will take place this evening at Covent-garden
Theatre, when we trust that such a manifestation of
spirit and energy will be made, as shall convince the
free traders throughout the country that the recent
decision in the House of Commons against the
corn-laws, has, so far from damping the energy
of the League, only served to give it an ad-
ditional stimulus. It is not one, nor a dozen
such decisions—when we know the selfish mo-
tives that were at work in the House of Commons
to bring it about—that should strike dismay to the
hearts of the Leaguers. Their cause being a just
one, and supported by all the right-thinking people
in the community, their eventual triumph—and that
at no distant date—is certain, if they only persevere
with the same unflagging zeal with which they have
hitherto carried on the struggle. There is no cause for
discouragement, but there is every cause for perse-
verance; and should the late majority against
the corn-laws have the effect of rousing the
League to additional exertion, it will have been
productive of good rather than harm to the
great national cause of free trade. No political
triumph was ever yet achieved without a desperate
struggle—without being exposed to a thousand
disadvantages—subjected to a thousand discourage-
ments, from the lukewarmness of some, and the abject
despondency of others—but perseverance, in the long
run, rarely fails to carry all before it, and this is
what the League should itself practice, and stre-
nuously and incessantly recommend to its myriad
supporters throughout the country.

Madrid journals of the 25th have been received,
and bring no facts of importance but plenty of
rumours respecting the plans of the Government.
According to some the Cortes is to be dissolved, and
a new Cortes to be convoked forthwith. Others
state that the Ministerial consultation at Barcelona
had suddenly come to a close; that there was a divi-
sion in the Ministry ; that Senhor Mori had left for
Madrid; and Senhor DE VILUMA had resigned.
The Three per Cents. were done at 27 for cash,
and 271 at 60 days; and the Five per Cents. at 201
at 59 days, with premium.

The article in the Monitcur of Sunday, urging the
necessity of making a State provision for the younger
sons and daughters of LOUIS PHILIPPE, has caused a
great sensation in Paris and most of the journals
comment on it with much severity. It may be inte-
resting, therefore, to our readers to give a brief out-
line of their comments on this extraordinary docu-
ment. The Journal des Debats publishes it without
any remarks. The Globe, a journal supposed to be
the organ of the Court, says good men will appre-
ciate the clearness with which the paper is drawn up,
but declines to enter upon the question at present, as
" facts must be first known." The paper of M.
THIERS, who of course is anxious not to give offence
at Court, throws all the blame on Ministers, and ob-
serves that " the article of the Moniteur will be read
with astonishment, not only in France, but by all
Europe ; and that everybody will be struck with the
infatuation of the Ministers who have advised and
promoted such a publication." The Courrier Fran-
cais says, " every one has remarked that the kind
of petition presented by the Moniteur in favour of
the dotation of the Duke DE NEMOURS coincided
with the distribution of the railroads amongst
the different parts of the territory and of the Chamber.
The Chamber has its share and the Ministry demands
a dotation for the Princes. If France be contented,
the dynasty must also be satisfied. Such conduct is
not dignified, but it is adroit perhaps : donnant, don-
nant." The Commerce censures the Ministry for
yielding on the dotation question to the desire of the
Crown, and regards the publication as an official
pledge to bring the question before the Chamber at
the commencement of the next session. The Quoti-
dienne thus adverts to it :—" We will not reply to
this note ; that is the affair of M. DE CORMENIN ; we
will merely say that if it be, as we suppose, the an-
nouncement of a Dotation Bill for the future Regent,
it is very maladroit to recal to mind that the first
Regent of the name of ORLEANS would never dip
into the coffers of the State, for everybody will na •
turally be tempted to say that his great-great-grand-
son would do well to follow his example." The
France, which places at the head of its article on
the Moniteur, the word " Lamentations " in
capital letters, and an engraving representing
tears in sign of distress, says :—" The dota-
tion affair enlarges itself. All the younger sons,
and the daughters of Louis PHILIPPE are now to be
provided for. At the opening of the session the
Cabinet must, by means of its friends, have sent some
very severe admonitions to the Tuileries to have had
any respite. Now that the session is nearly over the
attempt is renewed, and it is the Moniteur that is
made the organ of the dynastic distress crying for
relief." " The Moniteur," says the Siecle," contains
an article of which the gravity could not escape the
attention of our readers. Bringing forward the
question of dotation, whieh was believed to have been
abandoned, the official journal applies itself to the
demonstration of two principal propositions—first,
that the KING'S sons cannot exist without a dotation ;
and secondly, that the KING'S private domain not
being sufficient to provide them with one, it is the
budget of the State which must provide the funds.
This article wal the text on Sunday of every conver-
sation in Paris. It affords matter for a thousand
conjectures."

The last extract is from the National and is the
most bitter of all. It denies the truth of the state-
ments put forth by the Moniteur, and contends in
these words that the Royal Family are amply pro-
vided for :
"A solemn article of the official lltoniteur, deliberated with-
out doubt in the Council of Ministers, has fallen all of a
sudden in the midst of the railroad discussions, and on the
eve of the budget. This budget is not less than 1,300 mil-
lions? the floating debt is 500 millions, the reserve of the
sinking is absorbed, and the State will require all its re-
sources until 1855 to suffice for these vast works of public
utility which engage the present, and even attack the future.
Well then, whilst the country is busied about these great in-
terests, which are important for its prosperity as for its
power, whilst intelligent financiers are recommending the
Government to spare the forces of the Treasury and of public
credit, in order to turn them to account at thepropermoment,
the Cabinet appears occupied with a sole idea—who would be-
ive it ?—with the dotation of the Princes and Princesses of the
Royal Family! This appears fabulous, unheard of, and yet it is
the truth. And what is there new inwhat is said? What argu-
ment has been invented? What is there that has not been
already said and resold, and torn to pieces with victorious
replies ? By right, the insufficiency of the private property
of tke Crown ought to be proved. But is that done by vague
allegations ? Show your books, and let them be examined
to ascertain the truth. The Civil List is so poor, it would
seem, as to be on the point of pledging its property at the
Mont de Pi6te. That is exceedingly affecting; and to see
this Civil List so cruelly involved, forces tears from our eyes.
However, if in place of petitions thus made, we examine
facts, perfectly well known to every one, we feel ourselves
somewhat less moved. It will be well to briefly state those
facts, for they contain the whole question. Contrary to what
had been up to that time the practice, the Duke of Orleans,
when on the point of ascending the throne, disposed of his
private estates, which ought to have merged in the property
of the Crown. He made the property over to his children,
reserving to himself a life-interest in it. What was the value
of that private domain? That is naturally estimated by
the revenues, and these show that the minimum value of the
private domain is 100 millions. The King reserves 12 mil•
lions a-year in hard cash from the budget, and has, besides,
the revenues arising from the property of the Crown, which
brings the Civil List up to 22 millions a-year."
On:Monday the subject was brought under the no-
tice of the Chamber of Deputies by M. VIIERBETTE,
who asked M. GUIZOT whether the Government ac •
cepted the responsibility of the article in the. Moniteur,
at the same time expressing his amazement that it
should have been published. M. GUIZOT replied in
the affirmative, and said he himself had held nearly
similar language in the Chamber of Peers, when he
declared dotations to be the necessary consequences
of monarchic institutions. M. Durix did not believe
that the article had emanated from the KING, while
he condemned the mode of re-introducing the question
of dotation as unconstitutional.
On Monday the Three per Cents. closed at 81f. 90c.
and the Fives at 122 f. 40e.
THE BOURSE—Monwor, JULY 1.
First Highest Lowest Last
Price. Price. Price. Price.
French Five per Csnts ••• • • • 122 05 • • 122 40 122 05 • • 122 05
Three per Cents.• •• • 82 82 .. 81 15 .• 81 85
Bank of France •.. .3025 • • 2025 3020 • • 3020
La/We Bank, 5
I.ooof Shareslllo 1110 .. 1110 .. 1110
4
40 .
000 f. Shme.s 1044 0
5080 5105401 5080 5100840
neigian 14
1842 .• • .• 1084 .. 1084 .. 1084 • • 1084