The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-08 00:00:00

41.
' betityn

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 1844.

The Marquis of NORMANBY, in the House of Lords
last evening, made some remarks about the recal of
Lord BixicinououGu, and faintly called for docu-
ments which he evidently knew would not be granted.
He, at the same time, defended the course pursued by
the Indian Board of Directors, and contended that
until the correspondence on the subject was produced,
the House and the country could not entertain a
shadow of suspicion as to their motives.
The Earl of RIPON declined to produce the corres-
po.ndence, or enter on the matters adverted to by the
:Noble Marquis.
;.ord BROUGHAM, after adverting to the recal of
Lord EJ,LENBOROUGH, expressed his satisfaction at
the app
,intment of Sir HENRY lIARDINGE and
inferred i!rOm
this, that the Policy which Lord
ELLENBORO.I4;II had pursued, and which had been so
successful, WOLIM be continued by his successor.
The Duke of
'WELLINGTON disclaimed any inten-
tion of interfering Nrith the privileges of the East
India Directors in
the remarks which he had made
•
on a former evening; but, at tide same time, he must
*repeat that he did not consider they had exercised
their privileges with discretion.
Several other Lords spoke, and thus the discussion
ended.
The Rollie adjourned at Half-past Seven o'clock.
In the House of Commons Mr. MACKINNON moved
that the report on the Leeds and Bradford Railway
Bill .be considered that day six months, and on a
division the amendment was lost by a majority of 66.
Sir R. PEEL contradicted the statements that had
_ „,appeared in some newspapers to the effect that Cap-
in DRUMWOND had refused to afford protection to
Ceionel BON'ET, the leader of the insurgents at Ali-
°ante. Colo' tel BONET had never applied for , pro-
tee tion.

Mr. HUMB moved for all copies of correspondence
.between the 1 ;curt of Directors of the East India

Company and the Government, respecting the recal
of Lord ELLENBOROUGH.

Sir R. PEEL opposed the motion. Sir H. HAR-
BINGE, he said, would proceed to India by th next
packet, and nothing should induce him to send out at
the same time a correspondence that might fetter his
administration. From the remarks made by Sir
ROBERT PEEL in his speech, and from remarks made
in the Lords, the public may infer that Sir HENRY
HARDINGB will pursue the policy of his predecessor.
A number of other Members spoke. Mr. MA..
CAULAY hoped Mr. Hunaz would not press his mo-
tion. Lord JOHN RussELL concurred. Mr. HUME
persisted in his motion, and, on a division, he was
supported by 21 Members, and opposed by 197.
The House adjourned at Half-past Eight.

Sir ROBERT PEEL last evening, gave a direct
contradiction to the accusation made against Capt.
DRUMMOND, commanding the Scout, off Alicant, for
not protecting Colonel BONET when he applied to
him to save his life. Captain DRUMMOND, in a
letter addressed to the Secretary of the Admiralty,
states, that at the request of the British Consul, he
had an interview with Colonel BONET, whose object
in visiting the ship was to offer any assistance in his
power to Capt. DRUMMOND during his stay at Alicante,
to which the English officer made a suitable reply.
Colonel BONET then left the ship, and never after-
wards made any application for protection. This is
at utter variance with statements which have appeared
both in Whig and Tory journals. The Madrid cor-
respondent of the Morning Post gives the following
melancholy account of the interview :—" I am glad
to see that Capt. DRUMMOND'S refusal to give a re-
fuge on board his ship to the rebel BONET, at Alicante,
has been brought before the House of Commons.
The Morning Post was the first to mention this ex-
traordinary occurrence, which has since been severely
commented upon by several foreign journals. It is
quite true BONET was shot through the back, without
trial, because Captain DRUMMOND denied him an
asylum on board the Scout. The insurgent leader
went on deck, accompanied by Mr. WEARING, our
Consul at Alicante; and an eye-witness of the scene
says, in writing to me, that he will never forget
BONET'S look of utter despair, as he went over the
vessel's side, and entered the boat which rowed him
on shore to certain death." Now, this is an atrocious
accusation against a British officer, and, therefore,
should not have been made but on the best authority.
It turns out the charge is utterly false, and the Eng-
glish navy and the English nation, too, are thus ex-
posed to the most cruel obloquy by foreigners, for
acts which never were committed.

No vacancy which has occurred since the general
election—not even that of the City of London—is so
important to the friends of free trade as that of
South Lancashire. The League would have only
rendered itself ridiculous by attempting to wrest un-
fortunate Woodstock from the Duke of MARLBO-
ROUGH, or Launceston from his Grace of NORTHUM-
BERLAND; these agricultural boroughs are valued by
the nation at their proper worth, and a contest in
them would scarcely excite more attention than a
squabble in a servants'-hall—but the southern division
of Lancashire, the great seat of those manufactures
which have suffered most severely under the curse
and blight of monopoly, is a constituency which, at
the present crisis, holds the destinies of futurity and
the fate of England's industrial prosperity. If the
manufacturers allow themselves to be mis-represented
by a monopolist—if they aid or assent to the
return of an enemy of their class and order,
with what face can they hereafter ask the Eng-
lish people to help them to burst chains
which they have themselves forged—to break
fetters which they have themselves riveted ?
Under such circumstances, it is the duty of all free-
traders in South Lancashire, to be up and doing; the
crisis has come upon them suddenly and unexpec-
tedly, but the supporters of a good cause can never be
wholly unprepared, for truth is an inexhaustible ar-
moury and sincerity is a ready weapon.
We know not whether the free-traders have yet
fixed upon a candidate, and in fact the man in this
case is of infinitely less importance than the principle.
The great question placed in issue, and perhaps to
some extent staked on the result of this election, has
but a very remote connection with family interests or
even mere political parties ; it is simply the question
between " good trade" and " bad trade "—between
" open markets" and " closed markets"—between
" remote payments" and immediate returns ;" and
under such circumstances a man should select his
candidate, as he choses his clerk, irrespective of all
considerations but his aptitude for the task entrusted
to his charge.
We have heard several persons named as likely to
be put in nomination, and we may add, that not
one of those mentioned could fail to be a useful repre-
sentative; but in all constituencies, there are local
elements of strength, not easily discoverable by stran-
gers, of which advantage ought to be taken in so
close a struggle as that which is impending. Pre-
judices must be conciliated, hereditary prepossessions
respected, and old topics of irritation avoided. To
court opposition is to invite defeat; it is the policy
of the League to win by persuasion rather than to
conquer by force.

No political party that ever existed in this country
has had so simple and intelligible a creed as the
League ; it is comprised in two words, FREE TRADE.
To increase the articles of this faith would greatly
diminish the chances of proselytism, and, at the pre-
sent moment, any addition to the avowed objects of
the League would be equally wrong and impolitic.
No man when selling his goods asks whether the
purchaser is a Whig or a Tory ; the question would
be just as absurd if asked respecting those who bring
customers to his shop. No matter what the creed or
party of a monopolist may be, he is the man who
drives away purchasers from the manufacturers'
warehouse, by telling them that the only payment
they can offer shall not be received ;—no matter by
what conventional designation a free-trader may be
known, he is the man who opens the world's markets
to the manufacturer's productions, and brings him
ready payment from all the ends of the earth.
To prefer the monopolist, because he is baptised
with some name hallowed by unmeaning prejudice,
would be worse than the folly of the Byzantines
who chose their leaders from the colours they wore in
the chariot-races of the circus ; to reject a free-trader
because he had received some nick-name not in ac-
cordance with irrational prejudice, would be to imi-
tate the folly of the Republican patient in CROMWELL'S
days, who refused to be healed because the physician
prescribed a sovereign remedy; or the worthy alder-
man of our own days, whose stomach revolted against
a radical cure.

The men of Lancashire, and particularly of its
southern division, have taken the lead in appealing to
the people of England against the restrictions by
which the industry of the nation is crippled, and
rendered unproductive. They have thus voluntarily
incurred a responsibility which they are now called
upon to fulfil. On them the eyes of the nation will
be fixed for the next fortnight, and their example will

either point the way to speedy victory, or furnish an
excuse for the retardation of a cause, the ultimate
success of which is certain, but every delay of which
is fraught with serious peril to the general community.

At a ball and supper given to Lord ELLENBOROUGII
at Calcutta, his Lordship disburthened himself of a
speech—in reply to the President, who had proposed
his health—which is not less remarkable for its
matter than its manner. " Most people," observed
the Noble Lord—we quote from the Calcutta Star—
come to this country to make their fortunes, but I
came here to do my duty. I have met with oppo-
sition, but I have put down all opposition that may
arise. I have done my duty. I have never abused
pfatronage. I am ready to sacrifice fortune—my life,
inecessary. / do not care for any man living.
Whoever best serves the State, is my friend.
Hitherto, my measures have all been' triumphant and
nsulacycecsesfnutlinue/stuakcceenssofur
Hdietafvoern only knowsthat. How far
; at allfarthey
events it will not be my fault. I deserve success—
that's a fact! /am come amongst you, like an Eng-
lish gentleman among his tenants. If you receive
we politely, well and good ; if not, it is your fault,
not mine." The Report concludes by observing that
his Lordship " tossed off a bumper of Btirgnndy
amidst rapturous applause."
eHtihseLnoredsnheipb,umwpee sruso-t.
have brought himself
Bp eucrtg,
umnudsyt hbaevfeo
rteo s she
ed oeffo ma
lodr
inspiration of
every sentence. Mark, for instance, the i in
anto pinerzetnreaeteftarhe
stronger
erremthaarnks;vatlehreis manifest
ndiscreet—

the insufferable egotism, faintly disguised under a show
of modesty, which is exhibited in the eternal repetition
of that imposing monosyllable "I." It was "I" did this
—"I" did that ! But "I" take no credit for what "I"
did ! God forbid, "I" am naturally a modest man ;
but this "I" may say with perfect truth—namely,
that if "my " measures do not continue successful, it
will not be "my " fault, for "I" deserve success !
Not a word, in praise of the gallant soldiers who acted
under his command! Not a word in praise of the
triumphant NAPIER, who gained a victory unparalleled
in Indian annals. From his Lordship's speech it might
be inferred that his only was the head that
conceived the plan, and the hand that achieved the
triumphs on the banks of the Indus—that he acted,
on the occasion, in the two-fold capacity of statesman
and soldier—in a word, that it was he himself, and
none other, that accomplished everything ! Was
ever such a superlative instance of double-dis-
tilled bashfulness yet exhibited by an individual
holding the august and dignified post of Governor-
General of India! Then, observe the exquisite super-
ciliousness of the remark, "most people come to this
country to make their fortunes, but / came here to
do my duty"—an impressive confession, which at
once sets the speaker, in point of public virtue and
disinterestedness, at an immeasurable distance above
all other Anglo-Indian officials. They came to make
their fortunes—" I," to do my duty Glorious and
unapproachable Unit ! How grateful ought we not
to be, that in the person of Lord ELLENBOROUGH we
have at least one important public servant who, come
what may, is resolved at all risks, sternly to do his
duty ! The concluding sentence of his Lordship's
speech is worthy of its imposing commencement.
If the Calcutta folks do not receive him
politely, "the fault," he coolly and cavalierly tells
them, "will be yours, not mine." It is utterly im-
possible that he should be the sufferer by their in-
civility. They will be the sole victims. He moves,
like the sun, along his course in solitary and splendid
majesty, at a height so far above their mark, that
any attempt to influence or annoy him by their
opinions, their prejudices, their discourtesy, or their
downright opposition, is as hopeless a task as
it would be to fill the sieve of the Da-
naides ! On a calm consideration of his
Lordship's most unaccountable speech, we have
come to the conclusion that it was intended—to quote
the words of the Duke of WELLINGTON—" as a
song of triumph," similar to that which he chautted
on the glorious occasion of his levanting with the
gates of Somnauth. Viewed in this light all that
is perplexing in it ceases at once to be
a marvel and a mystery, and we recognise in
it a fine poetical Ossianic rhapsody, whose
very egotism and hyperbole are the strongest possi-
ble recommendations in its favour. But to be serious
—if it be possible to be serious on such a theme—we
can scarcely bring ourselves to believe that the pas-
sage on which we have been commenting, was
really and truly spoken by Lord ELLENBOROUGH.
We always knew him to be a vain and somewhat
indiscreet man, who, when he once took up a crotchet,
stuck to it with the tenacity of a horse-leech ; but we
knew him also to be shrewd, intelligent, energetic,
and enterprising; and these are qualities incompatible
with that sickly, purblind, inflated vanity and egotism
which pervades every sentence, and is ingrained into
the very texture, of his Calcutta speech.

On Monday night Sir R. PEEL submitted his eleven
resolutions, connected with the conditions on which he
will propose to Parliament, at a future day, the re-
newal of the charter of the Bank of England. The
Premier expressed a strong desire that Members
would not, then, enter into any discussion of
them, but take time carefully to deliberate upon and
digest them. Some of our Contemporaries, we per-
ceive, have taken this hint upon its literal expression,
by abstaining for the present from any detailed exa-
mination of the purport and effect of these "resolu-
tions." If we were sufficiently alive to the
honour of having our opinions confirmed by
Ministerial authority, we should have sufficient
grace to follow the example of those brother
journalists. We perceive that Sir ROBERT took
the same view of the universal pervading
importance of this question of the Bank Charter,
which we hazarded in a leading article on Mon-
day. He considers it as " entering into every
transaction of which money forms a part." He al-
lows, as we have argued, " that there is no contract,
public or private—no engagement, national or indi-
vidual, which is unaffected by it." That "the en
terprises of commerce, the profits of trade, the arrange-
ments to be made in all the domestic relations of so-
ciety, the wages of labour, the transactions of the
highest amount and of the lowest, the payment of the
national debt," &c., &c., are all affected by it.
But if we follow the course thus set us, and the
Premier's recommendation to Hon. Members, we
cannot abstain, in the meantime, from remarking that it
is, too evidently, the"purpose of her MAJESTY'S Govern-
ment to give to the Bank a greater, because a more im-
mediate, control than ever over the currency of the coun-
try, and to extend and aggravate the pernicious princi-
ples and influence of the disastrous Bill of 1819. It is
Sir ROBERT PEEL'S clear desire and intention to
enhance the evil which he has the unenviable distinc-
tion of having already inflicted upon our national
prosperity, by enactments which can have no other
operation than to make money dear. If he have
abandoned his original purpose of constituting the
Bank of England the sole bank of issue, he has pro-
posed that there shall be no new joint-stock banks (of
issue) authorised hereafter. But we purposely re-
frain from going at present into the examination of
his plan in detail.
The Right Hon. Baronet laboured, with most
pains-taking but not very felicitous application, to
bring a few jokes to bear on the impugners of his
Currency Bill, and of the sagacity of the Bullionist,
but his "great guns" were harmless. A speech more
illogical in its attempts at " reasoning down " (as
this process is called in Parliamentary parlance) his
opponents we have never perused. He talked in re-
ference to the gold standard, "of the principles which
determine the price of that of which paper is
merely the representative." From whence we infer
that Sir ROBERT really would have us believe that
money must necessarily be metallic, or that value can
be expressed only in money. He must recant such
paradoxes as these, before he next attacks the
writings of the " Gemini," and Birmingham in
general, albeit, Birmingham will always be redolent
of distasteful associations to the non-reforming Mi-
nister of 1829. But if Sir ROBERT was unfortunate
in his exposition of principles, he was not less at
fault in his illustration of a pound. "What is a
pound," said the gleesome Baronet, "and what is an
engagement to pay a pound ?" . . . " The whole
foundation of my measure rests upon the assumption that
according to practice, according to law, according to
the ancient monetary polity of this country, the mean-
ing of a pound' is neither more nor less than a
CERTAIN definite quantity of gold, with a mark upon
it to determine its weight and fineness ; and that the
engagement to pay a pound' means nothing, and
can mean nothing else, but the promise to pay to the
holder on detnand, when he demands it, a definite
quantity of the precious metals." Now, how does the
reader suppose that this close reasoner—this acute
and ironical scourge of the TAYLORS, and LEATHAMS,
and ATTWOODS—illustrates his own definitions by the
" practice," the " law," and the " ancient monetary
system of the country ?" To begin, first, with the
last, he thus re-states and answers his own question :
" What is the meaning of the pound, according to
the ancient monetary polity of this country ? In the

reign of WILLIAM the CONQUEROR a pound of silver

was the pound of account. The pound represented
both the weight of metal and the denomination of

money." Why, then, a pound (of 12 ounces, Troy) was,

by our " ancient monetary polity," NOT " neither

more nor less than a CERTAIN definite quantity of
gold,"—to wit, one ounce of such weight and stan-
dard as to be equivalent to the Mint value of
Si. 17s. 104 d. "By subsequent debasements of the

currency, a great alteration took place—not in the
name, but in the intrinsic value of the pound ster-
ling." How ? Then the pound, in all that subse-
quent period, was NOT, either in " practice," " law,"
or " our ancient monetary polity, a certain definite
quantity of the precious metals." But it was an in-
dpfinite quantity. "It was not until a late period of
the reign Of Queen ELIZABETH that SILVER, being
TITER the standard' of value"—(good bye, " ancient
monetary system," and "polity," and " standard" of
GOLD !)—" received that determinate weight which
it retained without variation, with constant refusals
to alter it, until the year 1716, when gold was prao-