The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-06 00:00:00

Times. And, we believe, we are safe in saying,
that the negotiations have not, in fact, advanced
so far. The course which undoubtedly the Govern-
ment would wish to be taken, because the safest, per-
haps the only safe course for India, would be for the
Directors to rescind their late " indiscreet " resolution,
and spare our Indian empire the risk of a violent and
abrupt interference with the Executive Government,
leaving other matters for future arrangement. The
guess of the Times is not, however, a bad one, supposing
it a guess, though it seems to us to be certainly
premature. Sir Henry' Hardinge is a man, whose
experience and talents—we may call talents like his,
marked by such intuitive promptitude, even by the
higher name of genius—would ensure the good go-
vernment of any country committed to his charge,
and besides this he has in an eminent degree en-
joyed the instruction and possessed the confidence
of the highest of all authorities upon questions of
Indian Government, and a very high authority, too,
upon all questions of civil and military government—
the Duke of Wellington. When the time for naming a
successor to Lord Ellenborough shall have arrived, we
know of no one more like than Sir Henry Hardinge to
be selected ; but we must still hold to the hope, that
the matter has not yet proceeded so far, and that there
is still left to the Directors a locus of re-considering
" the recal."

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
GLOBE.—The Doke of Richmond, as head of the
Agricultural Protectionists, has taken the field against
the Chancellor of the Exchequer. His Grace had
placed on the notice-book of the House of Lords, a
motion against the proposed repeal of the duty on
foreign wool, which form a part of the financial
scheme of the year, as explained by the Chancellor
of the Exchequer on Monday evening. The motion
of the Noble Duke was to have been brought on
last evening ' • but, in consequence of the indis-
position of Lord Ripon, it was first postponed
to Tuesday, and last evening was further post-
Polled to Thursday, next. The determined hostility
manifested by the agricultural monopolists to the pro-
posed repeal of the' wool duties, is as impolitic as it is
unjust. The Chancellor of the Exchequer accompanies
his proposed relief to the manufacturer with a posi-
tive boon to the English wool-grower. The former
would be relieved by the abolition of the duty of one
penny per lb. on the importation of foreign wool ;
the latter by the removal of one shilling per cwt.
on British wool exported. The aggregate annual
amount of the proposed reduction, as estimated
by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, is 100,0001. The
prospect of an early attainment of an object for which
the woollen manufacturers have earnestly pleaded with
successive Governments, and have looked forward with
earnest hope, is again beclouded with fear of disappoint-
ment. The House of Lords is the stronghold of mono-
poly. The House of Commons, as at present consti-
tuted, is also avowedly opposed to any legislative con-
cessions to the manufacturers, in matters which seem to
trench upon the principle of protection to the landed in-
terests. The Duke of Richmond's threatened resistance is
therefore regarded by the interests which the repeal of
the wool duty would largely benefit, as an ill omen.
They fear that the old Adam of corruption in the
two Houses will prove too strong for the newly-formed
pur,pose of the Government to take a step in commercial
policy in conformity with right principles. The York-
shire manufacturers are on the alert,—alarmed by a
oommon sense of danger, and encouraged by hope
that a combined and general demonstration will keep
the Government firm to the purpose it has an-
nounced of an " immediate and total repeal" of the
wool duties. Leeds, Huddersfield, Bradford, Halifax,
and other large towns in the western division of York-
shire, have taken the lead ; public meetings have been
held, and earnest representations have been made both
to individual Peers, and also to Ministers, on the subject.
The postponement of the Duke of Richmond's motion
will afford time for more effective and extensive prepara-
tions for strengthening the hands of Ministers, and thus
enable them to resist the threatened attack upon the best
feature in their financial scheme for the coming year.
The Leeds Mercury of to day furnishes, in a tabular
form, a. statement of facts, derived from official re-
turns, of the injurious effects of the duty of 6d. per
pound on foreign wool, imposed in 1819, and repealed
in 1824. These injurious effects were not confined to
the manufacturers. The wool-growers of England and 1
Scotland, for whose special advantage the duty was im-
posed, participated largely in the injurious influences of
the " protection" thus furnished. The reduction of the
impost greatly relieved these interests from the incubus.
The British wool-growers felt the folly of their former
eiamour for protection against the foreign grower; for
the .price of their produce was reduced by the influence
of protection more than one-half. The Duke of Rich-
mond, it seems, was impervious to instruction, though en-
forced by experience, that most powerful of teachers. He
actually endeavoured in 1828 to obtain a re-imposition of
the duty of Gd. per lb. on wool of foreign growth ! The
Government of that day had sufficient discernment to
see the folly of the effort, and refused to retrace their
steps for his gratification. The Duke of Richmond, and
those who coincide with him in this attempt to scare the
Government from its purpose with reference to the removal
of the wool duties, seem to be blinded by selfishness. They
are provoking a reaction, against which, strong as they
may deem their entrenchments, they will find them.
selves unable to stand. Had the Duke of Richmond,
observes our Contemporary, " wished to relieve the agri-
culturists of a tax, his conduct would have admitted of
defence; but to insist on fastening a tax upon trade be-
cause he ignorantly thinks that it does or may tell in
favour of the agriculturists, is outrageous." Does the
Noble Duke deem the present a favourable opportunity
for carrying out his threat against Sir Robert
Peel? Is this repeal of ld. per lb. on foreign wool—
accompanied as it is by the removal of Is. per cwt. on
the exportation of British wool—regarded as so serious
an innovation on the principle of protection to British
agriculture, as to call for the immediate fulfilment of his
Grace's memorable warning to Sir Robert Peel from his
place in the House of Lords:—" Let him mind what he is
about: the landed interests placed him where he is; and
they oan undo that which they have done!"
GLOBE.—Another of those instances in which party
politics are permitted to interfere with the removal of
acknowledged existing evils was afforded last night in the
Rouse of Lords. Lord Campbell some 'time since intro-
duced a Bill for their Lordships' consideration, the
object of which was to allow persons convicted of felony
or misdemeanor, who appealed from the decision of
the Court by which they had been tried, on errors
assigned on the record, to the House of Lords as the court
of final appeal, to remain at large on bail until the question
as to the legality of the conviction should be finally decided.
The necessity of such a measure was not denied. The
Lord Chancellor himself, who succeeded in inducing
(heir Lordships to • reject the Bill, admitted the
grievance which the existing state of the law inflicts
,on such parties. It ought to be removed; but not just
yet. Is the reason asked? It is at hand. O'Connell,
And his co-defendants in the proceedings now pending in
the Court of Queen's Bench, Dublin, might be preserved
from imprisonment, pending the argument on a writ
of error, if the Bill should be allowed to pass. The law
is to remain in a ridiculous, absurd, and inequitable
state, in order that a political opponent may be subjected
to imprisonment on a conviction which may be declared
illegal. This Lord Lyndhurst was compelled to admit
was the real ground of his opposition to the Bill. Yet this
reason a majority of the House of Lords deemed sufficient ;
And acting, as usual in such matters, under the advice of the
:Noble Lords on the Woolsack, they threw out the
Nil. The Marquis of Clanricarde " repeated that
the Noble and Learned Lord's opposition to the Bill
was founded on the circumstance that, if the Bill passed,
they would not be able wrongfully to imprison certain
parties now under trial in Ireland. He would leave
their Lordships to judge whether this was a proper spirit with
which to view Acts of Parliament relating to affairs in Ire-
land. The Noble and Learned Lord could not deny that
the effect of the Bill was, as far as it went, to improve the
law, and if injustice was done under the existing law, were
they to reject this Bill, which amended that law, because
it might lead to some particular result in an individual case ?"
STANDARD.—Lord Campbell's Bill, in aid of the dilatory
proceedings of the Irish convicted conspirators, was onTh ursday
rejected in the House of Lords without a division. The mo-
that for referring the Bill to Committee (the stage in which it
met its rate) gave rise to a highly interesting debate.
Before referring particularly to that debate, let us offer
a remark upon its general tenor. The supporters of the
Bill relied upon the universal feeling of the country as to the
defective state of the law *with regard to the power of ap-
pealing in criminal cases. The opponents of the measure,
freely admitting the defective state of the law in the particular
;described, objected to the Bill before the House, as
'being subject to suspicion, from being brought in
to meet a special case, and more confidently ob-
jected to it as not supplying the required remedy. This
ground of opposition, ii,' supported in the matter of fact, is
surely sufficient. We may admit an evil, doubtless, without
being bound to accept everything that is offered in the shape
of a remedy, and we are entitled to examine the
nostrum tendered with same jealousy, when we have
reason to suppose, either from the quality of the
remedy itself, or from same other circumstances that
it is offered with a view to private advantage, and not
to the public good. Now, in the case of Lord Campbell's
Bill, the evil to be remedied is not disputed. It is acknow-
ledged on all sides that our criminal jurisprudence is greatly
defective in not providing an appellate jurisdiction, extend
ing to all classes of convictions, and extending to the
, merits as well as to the technicality of the original
'trial and conviction. A writ of error is practically
attainable iii cases of misdemeanor only; but in these cases,
It is, considering Its use as a means of delay, perhaps too
easily attainable (for whatever' be the law, it is in practice
eonsidered due ex debito justitiw). In cases of felony it is
scarcely ever asked for, because there is little hope
- of its being ever granted ; and neither in cases of mis-
demeanor nor felony can the coi\rt of appeal, upon
a writ of error, take into consideration the merits of the case,.
th et is, the justice or injustice of a conviction, or anything
bey Ind a mere technicality. A writ of error is also an ex-
pensive process, and always must remain such; and Lord
Campi.'sell's proposition, if it would not make the process
more e, tpensive, would by another means (the demand, of
heavy flail) limit the benefit of his remedy to the richer
class of kupellants. What we have said of the inadequacy
of the ren'sedy by writ of error, may be applied to the remecry
by motion for new trial. It does not extend to felonies, and ft i
touches thLI merits only in the case where the judge misdirects POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
the jury i?y• miastating law or. evidence, or where the jury
!ngs against the judge's charge—things that, to a. super- (SATURDAY.)
Jowls' observe!, only, will seem to cover every possible MANSION-HOUSE.
case of a false \ verdict. Now, how could this defective state A broker, of the name of Brown, who resides at No.
A' the jaw be ii itproved by a law like that of Lord Cs m obe 95, Long-alley, Thshopsgate, was summoned before the
A law that wouluv merely relieve appellants "in erre-x from
Lord Mayor for having extorted the sum of ss. 6d. from
Jucin
ent• until .t 4 he determination of their appeal, they a poor young woman, named Ellen Myers, who earns a
giving hettrY Dail '' 1 • '
vietions of i s 'lmprimis, the remedy excludes all. con- livelihood by hard application to shoebinding.
secondly,
itfeleo_nz, I‘tow
all appellants
soever the felony may be ; ' The defendant appeared very confident of throwing
appellants but the rich, all who the girl over the bridge.
cannot give hetwo el.an_
Let us pause here--pause to look at
one effect of 'la",
pis,,, position. No rich man would ever Ellen Myers said, that unfortunately she had con-
receive judgensa,
the a., a case of serious misdemeanor, traeted a debt with her landlord for rent to the amount
without trying
e,hacces of a writ of error. As defendant's ''
' of 4s and Mr. Brown was sent to distrain. Capel, the
a rich man he has
upon conviction he ale 'v
given bail to the trial, but man,
called at nine o'clock and told the com-
to give the s awe bail Plainant that if she could contrive to pay the amount in
to the writ of error, ands ks!?,
merit for a year or two. I insure a respite fn nu judg- twenty minutes no expenses would attach. She imme-
make a provisional tour, in political offender, he may diately ran off to borrow from her friends, and returned
power of some party with
wiltV‘n,dairee on the r, ',turn to within the time specified; but a sum of ss. 6d. addi-
gam, or in the hope of bargairde he
.can make a bar- tional was demanded, and Brown threatened to sell off
_the ?a rty in
office. If a bold man, as well as -.aFp,- 7lteh all her goods if she refused to pay the whole sum of
may remain at home prosecutins hi, .e" cal °M ender, he
i itiou, , while the Os. 6d. With the utmost difficulty she raised the amount,
progress of his writ of error drags itti slow
eefen...es and paid it to Brown, who would not deduct a farthing
session to session. If guilty of any re,Pgth .:1' ing thee
acid
from his demand. Being in great necessity, it occurred
which exclude men from society at home, the to her that the Lord Mayor would interfere to get back
has in his writ of error a passport to the he
ri eh enan
Now
, „alio, I the amount of the unjust demand.
In any case would be his only refuge.
privilege which wealth does not confer in any other". ‘is
is
a ' The LORD MAYOR—Let me have it proved that the
and which it ought not to confer in this. There is a :ovirinotTli ba'ker's man presumed to make any extra demand if
presumption, at the very least, of guilt, in a can i where y01p64 the original sum in twenty minutes.
the ordinary tribunals of the country declare ama a guilty .appliedlodger in the house, to whom the complainant had
after a solemn trial; and in France, and in the nth r coun- 1 t(ld fora
small loan, stated that the complainant
tries in which an appeal to " the Court of Cessation" is pro- . • r that the broker's man had made her the
vided, the appellant is retained in strict custody of t he law promise, and that she had returned within the period
from the time of f his ' specified. The
um o original conviction to the detern iination ,
inept
made. witness, howeyer, did not hear the agree-
of his a
, ppeal. Now apply these considerations to Lord , Camp- '
bell s Bill. The law * The defendant
said
of the country is defective in tl le want .he had given directions to dis-
'Of an appellate jurisdiction,merits hill desire
train, at the of her landlord
,r.. alities. • trying as well as tec -
too late, by nearly five minutes, • , and as she had been
STANDARD,_-The Tinier the expenses.—(Here several it was proper to demand
nou - persons in the
.justi
nces that it is arranged to • to I room expressed their most contemptuous • - ce-
succeed Lord En - send Sir H. Hard Inge
The Complainant—He was not satisfied oua indignation.)
India: ..._ enborough as Governor-Gee oral of I . my Lord, with
we have no I king me pay, but a little while ao he
tainly none to authority to contradict, an d car- 1 making said he would
confirm be even with me,
and do
for me, and I
reader :wish, this announcement. i Ef theam afraid he will.
es for our the broker's man, said he acted entir I
ter, it is this, own opinion upon the "net- Capel,, ey by the
, that direction of his employer.
is what is fa • • the statement of the Time;
shot," a bold familiarly called in The LORD MAYOR—Did you not tell this poor woman
guess upon schools " a i
Found of probabili what appears ' that if she brought the rent to you in twenty minutes
probability but to bees ?
ledge of any kind. A _ wholly without direct k gt
Imi
there should be no expeps
170 W-
after all that has i does not, however, se Ca 1 Certainly I did, but she was three minutes
Weurred within em lib. pe
ays, that the negotiations between
In the last 1- V-4 Y. 1 --(L d expressions of resentment.)
wee.. or to n too ate. ou
Directors and the ions between the solemnly declare that I was back
Government e e Board d , Complainant--I
sufficient maturity to justifycan have ar • • • n • I fit to kill myself.
rived a: t within t e time. ran three
the • 5 ten, ,
ta"--en'' of thi I Ca 1 H landlady showed we that she was
pe er