The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-13 00:00:00

.:111t

LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 13. 1844.

In the House of Lords a conversation took place
on gambling at horse-races, in which allusion was
made to the unjustifiable attacks of some young Mem-
bers of the House of Comm Ons, on the parties who
had been most active in bringing forward the Gaming
Bill. The Duke of RICHMOND defended himself
against the charges, evidently with the approbation
of the House.

The Earl of RADNOR gave notice that on Monday
he should move that a petition from Signor MAzzlm,
relating to opening letters at the Post-office, should be
referred to the Secret Committee.
In answer to a question relative to Indian affairs
from the Marquis of CLANRICARDE, who made a
speech on the occasion, the Earl of RIPON said
the report that 80,000 men were collected on the
Sutlej, was entirely without foundation. He knew
of no army in that quarter except the army of Sir C.
NAPIER ; and he could assure the Marquis of CLAN-
MCARDE that neither the authorities in India nor at
home had any wish to obtain an inch of territory in
the Punjaub.
The Noble Earl then moved the order of the day
for going into Committee on the Bank Charter Bill.
It is needless to give a summary of his speech—the
affair was settled in the Commons.
The Bill passed through Committee.
The Sudbury Disfranchisement Bill was read El
second time, and the House adjourned.
In the Commons, Mr. PLUMPTRE presented two
petitions for the better observance of the Lord's Day.
'We believe these are the only petitions of the kind
presented this session. Mr. PLUMPTRE, without Sir
ANDREW AGNEW, is nobody.

Sir G. CLERK gave notice that on Friday next he
'should move the grant for Maynootli College.
In answer to a question from Mr.. M. GIBSON, re-
lative to the new Brazilian tariff, Sir R. PEEL said no

communication had been received at the Foreign-
office on the subject, but possibly on the arrival of
the next mail, he might be able to give a satisfactory

answer.

In answer to a question from Mr. S. WORTLEY,
Sir J. GRAHA➢i said he should be obliged to abandon
the County Courts Bill for this session.

The House then went into Committee on the re-
maining clauses of the Poor-law Amendment Bill.
Clauses up to 34 were gone through, and the
House resumed.

The Actions for Gaming Discontinuance Bill was
read a third time. Leave was given to bring in
several Bills, and, at a Quarter past One, the House

adjourned.

The case of Wimaam BROMLEY, formerly a so'

citor in Gray's Inn, and now a prisoner in some gaol,
is another instance of the reckless, profligate, and un-
feeling conduct of men, who, by some means obtain a
certain standing in society, and use it for the most
wicked purposes. The people of this country very
foolishly boast that they are the most honest people
in the world ; that all our merchants are men of
strict integrity; that our solicitors would not conde-
scend to any dirty act, even for the mines of Peru ;
and that our bankers may be trusted with untold gold :
while every day brings out some new fact to prove
that, as regards honesty, we are far behind the Chi-
nese, and not even on a level with the Turks. With-

out adverting to FAUNTLEROY, and some other egre

gious scamps of bygone days, it may be useful, in
order to correct this national vanity, to state, that in
no country in the world are such enormous rob-
beries committed by respectable men as in England.
Look at the robberies committed by respectable
merchants in passing their goods through the Custom-
house. Possibly the revenue has been defrauded atleast
a million a year for some time by these merchants,
and the well-paid officers, who took a solemn oath to
perform their duty honestly. How many have been
engaged in these nefarious transactions we cannot
tell. A Commission was appointed to ascertain the
number, but unfortunately that Commission sits,
or rather sat, with closed doors, and their object
seems to be rather to screen their friends and the
delinquents than to serve their country. Can the
public, then, be surprised that men like WILLIAM
BROMLEY carry on a small trade of plunder ? SMITH,
who robbed the country of 300,0001., by forging Ex-
chequer bills, was banished, it is true ; but he was
made the scape-goat--he was the only victim caught,
because no means could be found for his escape, all
the rest—all those who neglected their duty, and
those, too, who connived at the most enormous robbe-
ries ever committed, walk about the streets at the
present day, and would be sadly offended if
they were told that they are no better than I
Frenchmen and Italians. This BROMLEY is the latest
character which stands forth to bear these delin-
quents company. He has robbed a few individuals
of at least 92,000/. One of these persons has been
obliged to apply for parish relief, and is now com-
pelled to enter a parish workhouse. Another, who
had trusted him with money to the amount of 8,0001.,
is compelled to sell her furniture to pay house-rent,
and will probably have no other resource than the
same asylum ; yet this respectable solicitor appears
only as an unfortunate bankrupt ! lie has squan-
dered, or we would rather say, hoarded up, this
vast sum in some secure place, and after he
has " passed the Court," to use the legal phrase,
he will be a gentleman at large, while his mi-

serable victims are immured in workhouses,

What will the maligned nations of the Conti-
nent say of England, when they learn that the
most infamous arts are committed by persons in
what are called respectable classes, and that they
escape with little or no punishment, while a poor,
unfortunate peasant, who cannot find bread for his
children, is transported for stealing a penny-loaf.

We agree with a Morning Contemporary that Earl
Powis has acted feebly and indiscreetly in with-
drawing his Bill for the repeal of the union between
the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor. In justification
of this proceeding, his Lordship observed that he had
thought it right, having the report of the Committee
before him, to ascertain from the Duke of WELLING-
TON whether it were likely that the authority of the
Crown would be given to the Bill in question, and
being informed that it would not be given, he felt
that he had but one of three courses open to him—
either to withdraw the Bill, to press it forward, or to
run the risk of being beaten upon it. Under these
circumstances, he thought it right to avail himself of
the favourable situation in which he was placed; and
having it now before the country, with the approba-
tion of the House in its favour, he was satisfied that
the measure could not remain where it was. This is
but a lame excuse for withdrawing a Bill, without so
much as a whisper of remonstranee, that is so clearly
founded in justice as to have been opposed by only
thirty-seven Noble Lords, notwithstanding the known
hostility of Ministers to it. Having himself volun-
teered to bring it forward, and obtained on the dis-
cussion the support of a majority of the House, Earl
Powis should have persevered in his task. He should
have saii, as Doctor JOHNSON once observed, when
engaged in an affair of no ordinary difficulty, " I will
be conquered, not capitulate," and have moved an
address to the Crown, if only to show that he was no
party to the (rick—for trick it is, by which the measure
has been defeated. This was the more especially in-
cumbent on him, singe he himself, by his own account,
is strongly impressed with a conviction of the unpre-
cedented character of the Ministerial subterfuge.
Here is his own language on the subject :—" He be-
lieved he could say," remarked the Noble Earl, " that
during the whole period the House of Hanover was
on the throne, there was no precedent to be found for
such a course as had been adopted in this case. There
was no measure that Parliament had expressed a wish
further to consider, in which the Crown had inter-
posed its authority to prevent that further considera-
tion of the matter." And .yet, notwithstanding his
withdrawal of a Bill defeated in such an unprece-
dented manner, which has been sanctioned by the de-
liberate approbation of a majority of the House of
Lords, and which, moreover, has excited the strongest
possible feeling throughout the Principality ;—not-
withstanding all this, the Noble Earl has the coolness
to boast of the "favourable situation in which he is
placed!" Yes, in the very moment of an inglorious
defeat, he actually congratulates himself on his good
fortune ! Now, as we observed in the " untoward"
case of Lord ASHLEY and the Factory Bill, Earl
Powis should never have undertaken the management
of the St. Asaph and Bangor Bishoprics Bill, if he
had not been prepared to persevere with it, and con-
test the battle to the last. He should not have quitted
the field till it was clearly demonstrated that not a
chance remained of his retrieving the fortunes of the
day. It was not compulsory on him to put himself in
the van. He was under no inexorable necessity to
bring forward the Bill, but having brought it for-
ward—the act being a purely voluntary one on his
part—he was bound to persist in it to the last ex-
tremity, no matter what might be the odds against
him. As regards the Ministerial expedient of in-
terposing the royal prerogative in order to defeat
a measure which had been already carried against
the Government, we can look on it in no other
light than as a mere tricky subterfuge, every way
characteristic of our petty manoeuvring PEEL
Cabinet. It may be a constitutional expedient
,enough—though even this, perhaps, may admit of
-a doubt—but, assuredly it has been resorted to in
no straightforward or equitable spirit. Why was it
not brought forward at once, at the commence-
ment of the proceedings ? Why reserved to the
eleventh hour The Duke of WELLINGTON at-
tempted some sort of answer to these questions,
but it was a very unsatisfactory one, amounting
to no more than this—namely, that he had stated
last session that it would be necessary to have the
consent of the Crown to the discussion of the Bill
in Parliament, but he did not mention it until the
measure had proceeded through some of its stages,
The Marquis of CLAHRICARDE explained, we suspect,
the whole mystery of 643 Ministerial manoeuvre,
when hp observed, that " the all*gation of - the
QuEEes interest being affected had merely been
made use of id meet tke @oPYenience of Govern-
ment, who knew that !! thliii Went into the
House of Commons, it would be gl:pnorted by two
Members of the Cabinet, the President of the

Board of Trade, and the Chancellor of the Exche-

quer, who were both strongly in favour of the mea•

sure." The whole affair is an exceedingly curio4s
and edifying one, as furnishing us with an Ad-
ditional clue to the means by which Ministers