The Sun.
London, England, 1828-09-09 00:00:00

ceived the benefit (though as yet not sufficiently)
of European skill and capital. At the present
time,, indigo is not to, be found in the list of
American exports to this country. The India
commodity has almost alone been received and
used by four-fifths of Europe, Asia, and
America. A property worth above two millions
sterling per annum has been created by the skill,
capital, and enterprize of British born subjects now
living in India merely upon sqfferance. What
we have stated as to indigo is an answer to the

objected inferiority of Lila cotton. The one
article may be carried to the same degree of per-
fection as the other, if its culture be equally at-
tended to. It will then not only compete with,
but thrust out the produce of Georgia and
Carolina. But so long as East India cotton is
left to the rude and slovenly industry of the na-
tive inhabitants—so long, as no attempt is made
to improve it—it must remain, like the indigo
just referred to, in its coarse, rude, and imper-
fect condition. Let British-born subjects be
engaged in the culture Of cotton, as they have
hitherto been in that of indigo, and we shall
soon have but little necessity for the raw produce.
of Brother Jonathan.—Morning Post.

It is instructive to witness, in the case of ex-
tensive swindling that has been in a course of in-
vestigation, at Bow-street, for some days past,
the readiness of various individuals to devolve
on each other the duty of prosecution, and to
complain of the want of public spirit manifested
in the general reluctance to undertake this duty.
On Saturday, " Sir Richard Birnie • inquired if
Mr. Foss, the Secretary to the Society for Prose-
cuting Swindlers, in Essex-street, Strand, was in
.attendance, as he had expected that gentleman
would have come forward to prosecute this gang of
swindlers, against whose artifices no tradesman was
safe. . . .

I am afraid, Captain Pettinghall, that through the.
slovenliness of Mr. Foss this case will fall to the
ground. We, the Magistrates, have done our duty,
and you, Captain, have done yours.
" Capt. 1):—I think, Sir Richard Birnie, it is a
very hard case indeed, after the great exertion that
I have made to rout out this infamous nest of rogues,
and which I did solely for the good of the trades-
people who had been defrauded, that they should
evipce such supineness, and be so insensible to their
own interests, as to suffer the gang to escape. It
cannot be expected that I should stand alone in this
business., and take the responsibility of the prosecu-
tion on myself.

" Sir Richard Birnie.--These people, who are so
vehement to come forward and prosecute, are the
Very first who are ready to cast blame upon the
Police.

" Captain P.—They cannot complain of being
defrauded, if, when they have evidence to convict
such a gang of conspirators, they refuse to prosecute
them, merely because they each would incur a
trifling expence. Such a want of public spirit gives en-
couragement and impunity to other wretches who
may be carrying on similar practices."
Yesterday " Sir Richard Birnie said that he had
received a communication from Mr. Foss, the Secre-
tary to the Society for the .Protection of Tiede
against Swindlers and .`sharpers, who had informed
him, that it was against the rules of the Society to
prosecute in a case in which no Member of the So-
ciety had been defrauded.
" Captain Pettinghall said, that one of the Mem-
bers of the Society had been defrauded, and men-
tioned the name of Mr. Whitfield, a grocer, iii
Sloane-street.

" Sir B. Birnic—Yes, Captain, but he refuses to
come forward and prosecute."
With all deference to Ch. Richard Birnie and
Captain Pettinghall, these complaints of the
want of public spirit are very idle, to say the
least of them. It is an old observation, that
what is every body's business is 'nobody's busi-
ness; and the fault iii the present case is not
• that individuals are deficient in public spirit, but
. that the means necessary to ensure the safety and
, protection of the public are not duly provided
for. Sir R. Birnie has a definite duty to dis•
charge ;it is not public spirit which induces him
to sit at Bow-street, any more titan it is public
spirit which induces the Trish watchman to be-
stow his services on the public. There is a re-
sponsibility in both cases; and where the duty
undertaken is not discharged, the parties are in
fault. But the man who pays the taxes, public
and local,.cannot be blamed if he do not perform
works of supererogation for the public good. Nay
more, the individuals who have incurred losses by
the swindlers at Bow-street, are on that very
account less called on to incur the expense of
prosecuting the swindlers than any other indivi-
duals of the community. Where men incur the
amp of prosecuting criminals, we suspect the
motive is less a regard for the public good than
a vindictive feeling. What is wanted in Eng-
land is, that a definite provision should be made
for the prosecuting of offences of this descrip-
tion, in which cases the responsibility would be
thrown on individuals, who would be bound by
a positive duty, and not by the vague considera-
tion of public good, which, of course, will
almost always be disregarded. Where there is
a public prosecutor, ho would be bound to coin-
pi the attendance of all such witnesses as might
be necessary for the furtherance of the ends of
justice. The law would enable him to compel
attendance under a pen4lty, and to remunerate
them for the loss of time. In the present
state of.things, a witness who is not only not
remunerated, but obliged to incur an expense,
will, of course, avoid coming forward, if he can.
We are not living in Sparta, but in England, a
country in which we map always count upon a
good deal of cant at a very cheap rate, as witness
the gxhibition in the present case, but in which
we cannot cpunt too little upon devotion or sa-
crifices for the sake of the country. When we
say that Sir Richard Birnie and the other Ma-
gistrates incur a debt of responsibility to the
public, we do not mean to say that they, are
chargeable with all the, deficiencies of the police.
In this ease we have an exemplification of the in-
justice of so doing. Sir Richard has ()illy a
very limited power of compelling a prosecution,
from the state of the law. They, then, whose
duty is to superintend the working of the law,
are
.to blame. In a well-ordered community,
nothing ought to be left to chalice which can be
assigned to distract individuals. What should
we say if one GOrernitletit were to declare war
against another, and instead of levying monev,
and engaging troops, were to leave it to the pill).
lie spirit of individuals to carry on the hostilities
against the enemy ? This was the
practice in
the middle agg and what was the result ? At
Sias attended to—at
one time the sumtriOn4
.another it was not. We have 4hiP)doned.the
feNdal mode of carrying on war; but we retaiii
the feudal mode of administering justice. And
pretty work we 112.44 of it.----1110rning Chronicle.
There is, it seems, at tIV F 34 end of the
Town, a Court called the Tower Sessions, tivlmiph,
judging from 44 proceedings, is of about as much
use and importance 453 the celebrated Pie
Pondre Court at Bartholomew Fair. At this
Court, the other day, the only
.case which is
said to have stood for trial, was an indictment
against a man for the heinous offence of beating I
carpets in the King's highwaY. The prosecutor,
ashamed probably of appearing a Web a cue,
. • •