The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-30 00:00:00

orUnto ~~

LONDON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 30, 1844.

The speech of Mr. SHELL in defence of Mr. JOHN
O'CoNNELL—or rather in defence of all the tra-
versers—is one of the most eloquent, forcible, and
convincing displays of forensic oratory we have pe-
rused for many a long year. It made a strong im-
pression on all who had the good fortune to hear it
—it will make an equally strong impression on all
who read it. The Right Hon. Gentleman left the
Attorney-General literally not a leg to stand on. lie
commented, in cutting and energetic language, on the
miserable policy that had dictated the State prosecu-
tions, and the still more miserable logic by which they
were attempted to he supported ; and, alluding to the
Attorney-General's marked expressions of indigna-
tion at the mischievous designs of the Repeal agita-
tors, said, " if, gentlemen of the jury, his anger was
not simulated ; if his rage was not merely official ;
if he spoke as he felt, how comes it to pass that no
single step was ever taken by him for the purpose of
arresting the progress of an evil represented by him to
be so calamitous ? He told you that the country
was traversed by incendiaries, who set fire to the
passions of the people ; the whole fabric of society,
according to him, has been in a blaze for the last nine
months ; wherefore, then, did he stand with folded
arms to gaze at the conflagration ?" This is one of
those hits between wind and water which cannot fail
to tell with crushing effect against him at
whom it is aimed. Why did not the At-
torney-General, the instant he saw the blaze
beginning to spread, use his utmost efforts to put it
out ? Why wait till it had spread from county to
county with the rapidity of wild-fire, and, according
to his own account, was daily becoming more de-
structive ? Foreseeing the danger, was it not his duty
to have striven to avert it at once ? Surely, by
allowing it to increase, he made himself in some de-
gree responsible for the consequences ; and, so far from
prosecuting the incendiaries—as he terms them—he
should be tried at the same bar with them, for having
aided and abetted them by his long supineness !
What would be thought of a man who, seeing a hou e
beginning to take fire, and having the means of ex-
tinguishing it, should stand coolly looking on, to all
appearance calm and unmoved, until the flames had
spread throughout the whole building, and then, for
the first time, should send for the fire-engines ?
Would he not be considered culpably negligent—or,
what is more likely, incurably mad ? Yet this is the
line of conduct that the Attorney-General has pur•
sued throughout the repeal agitation. Instead of
checking this agitation in its infancy—which he was
bound to do, holding the views he does of its danger- '
ous character—he allows it to progress day by day,
week by week, month by month, without the slightest
attempt at opposition or reprobation ; and only inter- •
feres to put it down at the very period when it has
effected all the mischief it is now likely to effect !
If the Attorney-General has the power of interference ,
now, it is fairly to be presumed that he had a similar
power months since ; and we repeat, therefore, our
conviction that he himself is responsible for much of
the agitation which he could, but would not, check.
We dwell on this point because we think it one which
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman will find it difficult,
if not impossible, to answer satisfactorily ; and be-
cause also we think it will produce a marked, and
we hope triumphant, impression in the proper
quarter. Mr. SIIEIL'S inference from this long
lethargy on the part of the newly-aroused Attorney-
General, is one which can scarcely fail to suggest itself
to the mind of every intelligent and unbiassed man in
the community. " Is there not," observed the Right
Hon. Gentleman, " too much reason to think that a
project was formed, or rather that a plot was concocted,
to decoy and ensnare the traversers, and that a con-
nivance, amounting almost to sanction, was delibe-
rately adopted as a part of the policy of Government
in order to betray the traversers into indiscretions, of
which advantage was in due time to be taken ? The
public prosecutor who gives an indirect encourage-
ment to agitation, in order that he may afterwards
more effectually fall upon it, bears some moral affinity
to the informer, who provokes the crime from whose
denunciation his ignominious livelihood is derived."
This, too, is hard hitting, but who shall say that it is
undeserved ? The conduct of the Government,
throughout these injudicious State prosecutions, has
been marked alternately by virulence and feebleness
in a most eminent degree ; and, let them terminate
which way they will—either in a triumphant acquit-
tal of O'CoNNELL, or his consignment to a Kilmain-
ham or Dublin prison—either way, the result will be
equally injurious to the stability of the Administra-
tion. As for stopping the progress of the repeal
agitation, neither one nor a hundred State prosecutions
will be able to do this ; the check must be given in the
House of Commons, by the public, deliberate an-
nouncement of Sir ROREET PEEL, to concede, without
further delay, such measures as Ireland is justified in
demanding, and ha, a right to receive.

We take it the new rural associations, founded for
the support of agricultural protection, will prove
themselves most valuable auxiliaries to the very
cause their present patrons design them to overturn.
The prospects of free trade, we are quite convinced.
stand in not the slightest danger from the skirmishing
which the associations in question have a tendency
to compel. On the contrary, they seem to us to
afford an element which has hitherto been a desidera-
tum, and without which, probably, the progress of
truth would have been considerably retarded. The
public, we think, have long enough found out that
the League were in no want of capacity for meeting
their opponents in fair debate, either in the Legislature,
on the hustings, or through the press. The misfortune for
them and their cause was, that they were too strong.
There appeared so fearful a contrast between their
power and their enemies' weakness, that there was
no means of bringing about an encounter. They
were like the giant who marches unimpeded through
the ranks of pigmies, defying opposition, but meeting
no sufficient foe. if in the House they raised a de-
bate, the Ministerial whipper-in was instructed to
contrive that the Members should be counted out
before the question was brought to an issue. If they

challenged an inquiry into the existence of those
special burdens on land, which the Minister affirmed
rendered the obnoxious law necessary, some flimsy
pretext or other was put forth to elude it So
things were going on within the walls of the
House of Commons. The same sort of manceuvring
was being carried on, but with less difficulty in the other
Chamber. The county gentlemen, though generally
a choleric race, and indisposed to sit placidly under
unjust imputations, when they have anything to say
in reply, still they suffered the emissaries of the
League to visit their parishes and hamlets, discourse
on the evils of the corn-laws, and circulate pamphlets
without let or hindrance. Now and then, perhaps,
some bluff and argumentative squire ventured to act
differently from his order, and essay a speech in de-
fence of the landlords' law. But poor Sir JOHN
TYRRELL, at Colchester, was found to be a very in-
adequate controversialist when RICHARD COBDEN
met him face to face. But this was because Sir JOHN
was out of training.
Now, thanks to the plain, straightforward Eng-
lish character, which is not yet, we are glad to find,
quite extinct amongst us, this Peelish reserve cannot
be maintained any longer by the fine old race of
country gentlemen; and hence, at length, they have
started forth in the character of Anti-Leaguers, and
are making their speeches and contributing their
cash. Now all this, we say, is as it should be. We
are happy to find the unnatural tyranny of the Trea-
sury benches giving way. It ought not to be that'
because Sir R. PEEL, Sir J. GRAHAM, and Mr. W. E•
GLADSTONE find some difficulty in squaring their
practice with their theory, and are content to remain,
with Mr. BARING, " free-traders in the abstract,"
it ought not., we say, therefore, to follow that the
farmers' friends should for ever remain tongue-tied,
and for ever withhold from the world their wise,
patriotic, and generous sentiments, which have been
so long bottled up.
The tenant farmers, some of them at least, have
turned their hand to oratory. Mr. BAKER-, of Writ-
tle, has made some figure in Essex. The other day
this gentleman was at Romford. " For twelve years,"
says Mr. BAKER, "before the passing of the existing
law in 1842, the average price of wheat was 575., and
the average duty paid ss. 6d., which is only eleven
per cent. for that period. Therefore protection to
agriculture has never been more than eleven per cent.
under the old Corn Bill." Here, we say directly, is
the benefit of Mr. COBDEN'S tour through Essex last
autumn. He set forth with the view of proving to
the tenant farmers of that agricultural county that
they had not benefited after all by the so-called pro-
tection to home agriculture. The course of Mr.
COBDEN'S arguments was to show that, so far from
deriving advantage from the intricate sliding scale,
they had been tricked and cheated out of everything
deserving the name. Mr. COBDEN has in Mr. BAKER,
of Writtle, a promising pupil ; and we dare say Mr.
BAKER will extend still further the benefit of his
instructor's lessons.

Mr. BAKER plainly asserts precisely what Mr.
COBDEN and the League have been long endeavour-
ing to show, viz., that the tenant farmers, the very
class who are supposed to be mainly benefited by this
absurd piece of legislative legerdemain, are equally,
with the rest of the country, interested in procuring
the abolition of it from the statute hook. Surely,
than, he may wish the new Protection Societies
good speed, and hail them as most valuable adjuncts
of the Anti-Corn-law League, wisely adapted to meet
the scruples of those who at present quarrel with the
name of the parent institution.

Whatever may be the result of the trial for murder
and parricide which must ensue upon the finding of
the Coroner's inquest just terminated at Taunton—
(and GOD forbid that we should prejudge, even in
the most unimportant particular, the issue of that
solemn proceeding; or prejudice, by the weight of the
minutest atom, the case of the parties now in prison
to await it)—we may, without impropriety, direct
attention to one remarkable fact in the case, that may
be noticed without any detriment to individuals, the
question of whose guilt or innocence must be deter-
mined on the proof, or failure of proof, as to their
own personal acts, of a much more grave and direct
character.

The unhappy victim in this case was a labouring
man, of very good reputation ; and although his
family appear to have been on the pauper books of
the Somersetshire Union, within which their place
of residence was comprehended, he had managed to
subscribe, and regularly pay up his contributions, to
one of those benefit clubs, which assure to parties
standing in a given relation to any member or sub-
scriber, a certain sum in the name of funeral ex-
penses, payable on such subscriber's death. On the
decease of the man SEALET, whom the verdict of the
inquest declares to have died by poison feloniously
administered to him, the somewhat considerable sum
of 81. was paid to the eldest daughter for the
expenses contingent on the burial of her father. It
is not necessary to recur here to the point which
came out, however, in evidence—that the money
does not appear to have been so paid to the
" nearest relative," in the eye of the law ; for there
was an eldest son in neighbouring service, who, pro-
bably should have been the individual to receive the
amount. But this is a question which we must
leave to the Society to settle on future occasions,
with persons similarly situated—as to relationship
to a deceased member. Let us hope that there
may be no further features of analogy to the present
in any future case, wherever the burial money may be
claimed of such associations. We have simply to
remark that the unfortunate man, the fact of whose
murder has been affirmed by the finding of the in-
quest on the result of medical and chemical evidence,
tendered with great apparent accuracy and scientific
detail, was a member of such a society ; that the
funeral expences actually incurred in his burial,
&c., were proved by the party to whom they were
paid, to have somewhat exceed( 2/. ; and that his
eldest daughter claimed and received 8/. Now
this is a circumstance calculated to create a primi;
fade case of suspicion against her in the minds of the
jury, who will have to try the capital indictment
against her, before another Court. And if the
wretched prisoner were not, as to the receipt of this
burial money, in the same position, only, as thousands
of the labouring classes innocently are, in the course of
a single year, there might be some reasonable ground for
this sort of presumption of guilt against her. But in
common justice both to her and to her sister (and
fellow prisoner), we would warn those who may be
called upon to discharge the duty of sitting as jurors
on their coming trial, that the claim of the burial
money—even in connexion with the much inferior
charge of the actual funeral—can justify, of it-
self, no such presumption. This is one only
of a class of cases, arising out of a system
vicious and dangerous, undoubtedly, beyond any
terms of reprobation that we can employ. The
inevitable tendencies of such societies to degenerate
from their legitimate and valuable purposes, is as un-
questionable as it is to be deplored. Few objects of
small periodical contributions by respectable la-
bourers, of course of limited means, can be imagined,
at once more natural or more harmless, if not actually
meritorious, than the making timely provision for
the decent interment of themselves or the members
of their families. But it has been clearly shown, by
Mr. CHADWICK, in a valuable portion of his " Sup-
plementary Report on the Practice of Interment in
Towns," devoted to an exposition of the " crimes
produced by payments on the deaths of children,"
1, That individuals, by multiplying their connexions
with societies of this kind in various quarters of
a large district, and paying a small contribution to
each, realise on the death of a child, or a parent, or a
wife, according to the terms of their respective "as-
surances," very large sums, to the great misapplication
of the original design and the great waste of the
funds, of such benefit or assurance clubs or societies.
2. That these means of deriving considerable profits
from such assurances have too often proved fatal
temptations to infanticide and to murder by some
heads of families, the children of which have been
previously " entered in burial clubs," or by parents,
the one of whom was to derive this advantage through
the death of the other ; and even, in some cases, to
the deliberate suicides of fathers who conceived that
there was no other course open to them by which
they could so readily secure a certain sum of money
to their wives or their offspring!

Surely this is a hideous defect in the working of a
system of association, in so many other respects in-
valuable and entitled to every praise, for which the
Legislature cannot too early apply itself to devise

some remedy. Let it not be supposed that we are
speaking of imaginary consequences, or merely pro-
bable results. We blush to record that the clerk of
the Stockport union was, about two years ago, com-
pelled to prosecute in two such cases, the parties
receiving such moneys on the death of their children
for murder. We make, also, the following quotation
from Mr. CHADWICK'S Report, without a single remark.
It is, itself, too impressive not to illustrate strikingly
what we have advanced on the subject. In section
62, he observes, of another case—

" In one case, where three children had been poisoned with
arsenic, the father was tried, with the mother, and convicted
at Chester, and sentenced to he transported for life, but the
mother was acquitted. In the other case, where he judge
summed up for a conviction, the accused, the father, was, to
the astonishment of every one acquitted. In this case the
body was exhumed after interment, and arsenic was detected
in the stomach. In consequence of the suspicion raised npon
the death, on which the accusation was made in the first
case, the bodies of two other children were taken up and ex-
amined, when arsenic was found in the stomach. In all these
cases payments on the deaths of the children were insured
from the burial clubs. The cost of the coffin and burial dues
would not be more than about 1/., and the allowance from the
club is 31."

With this practical corroboration of the evils which
may be theoretically predicated of the societies re-
'erred to, we shall for the present conclude the re-
marks so irresistibly suggested to us by the recent
appalling averments made before the Coroner at
Taunton.

Madrid journals of the 21st have been received, but
they bring no news. A private letter states that the
Minister of Finances has succeeded in procuring, in
the course of a mouth, a sum of 48,000,000 reals for
the army, &c. ; and that he was thinking of entering
into a contract respecting the tobacco revenue. The
contractor, or contractors, were to manage it for ten
years, to advance to the Government 50,000,000 reals
in three months, and to pay in, moreover, 72,000,000
a year. Half of the net produce, after deducting the
above, was to belong to the contractors, and the other
half to the Government. The former were, in addi-
tion, to subscribe obligations to the amount of
150,000,000, in order to supply, if need were, the
wants of the Government. The Archbishops of
SEVILLE and SANTIAGO, who had long resided in
Madrid under a sort of surveillance, had been autho-
rised to return to their dioceses.

On the 20th, the Three per Cents. were done at
25i for cash, and 26f at 60 days ; and the Five per
Cents. at 19i at 60 days.

The universal subject of conversation in Paris on
Saturday was the terrible tempest (tempete epou-
vantable) which took place in the Chamber of De-
puties on the preceding day. No scene like it has
taken place in any French assembly since the worst
days of the Revolution. The cause of all the uproar
was the tenth paragraph of the Address, which cen-
sures those Legitimatists who came to London on a
visit to the Duke of BORDEAUX. The first speaker
against it was M. BECHARD, who had not been at
Belgrave-square, but, nevertheless, defended the con-
duct of the pilgrims, and vindicated their attach-
ment to the descendant of so many Kings.
M. DE GIVRE followed, and made a violent attack
upon the Royalist party, who, he said, laboured to
abolish oaths, in order to abolish perjury. This
caused loud marks of disapprobation from the Car-
lists, which continued almost without interruption
while this member was in the tribune. M. BERRYER
defended his conduct with moderation, but was fre-
quently interrupted, and concluded by saying that
he should retain his seat in the Chamber so long as
it pleased his constituents. After a number of
other speakers, M. GUIZOT ascended the tribune,
and attacked those who despised oaths, and forgot
their duty as citizens, and in strong language vindi-
cated "public morality." This roused the ire of
M. BERRTER, who rushed to the tribune, and with
great effect contrasted the visit of the Legitimatists to
London, with the journey of M. Guizor to Ghent.
" We have not been," said he, " like those who dare
to accuse us, and wish to affix a brand of infamy on
our brows—we have not been among armed foreign-
ers—we have not been to place our hopes in an im-
mense disaster about to strike our native land. Yes,
you have gloried in it; you went amidst a foreign
army to give political advice to a king. I have been
to salute adversity, and to tell a prince that France
must be left in peace." This again called up M.
Guizor, when the storm commenced in earnest.
" Yes," exclaimed he, "I have been at Ghent."
Near a dozen of times, says a correspondent of the
Post, the organ of the Royalists in this country, did
the Minister of Foreign Affairs repeat the words
" Oui, j'ai ete a Gaud." We have given else-
where an account of the proceedings, but it may be
interesting to our readers to have another brief ver-
sion of it as described by our Contemporary. " On
every occasion," that journal says, "his voice was
drowned in a clamour which shook the hall. It is
an indignity, it is treason, it is an infamy roared the
Gauche. Oui,j'ai ete a Gand,' exclaimed the Minister,
and the same cries of indignation were revived—' On
ne se vante pas de sa honte, on la cache ! vous n'avez
servi que l'etranger. Innumerable invectives mingled
with the clamour. M. GUIZOT, though looking pale,
maintained his composure, and reminded the Chamber
that he had been formerly suffered to explain himself
respecting the same fact before a quiet house ; but
this appeal yielded him but another thundering ex-
plosion. Non ! non !' cried they, ' nous avons
proteste r Nous avons proteste r The confusion
then reached its height, the Opposition rose, many
climbed their benches, all shouted together, numbers
isttsrufcnkry. ,their desks—in short, the storm raged in all
vous
pouvez epuiser vos forces,' (you
may exhaust
h)O replied M. GUIZOT,
whose commanded the uproar,
Vous n'epuiserez pas mon courage!' (You will not
st
voicefor youra
momentrengt
c
exhaust my courage !) The undaunted firmness with
which he stood their violence seemed to exas-
perate them more and more ; he repeatedly commenced
again his ' Oui, ete a Gaud,' but was invariably
overwhelmed by the furious vociferations of the Op-
position. Vous etes un traitre r (You are a trai-
tor) exclaimed M. Eauzsr DE GIRARDIN, when the
Gauche responded in chorus, Oui, oui !" Does
the Member who interrupts me wish to speak after
me ?' observed M. GUIZOT, with much calmness.
Non ;' replied he, mais je vous dirai de ma place
que vous avez trali le pays, que vous avez passé a
l'etranger la veille de Waterloo et cet acte est in-
fame !" (But I will tell you from my place that you
have betrayed your country, that you passed the eve
of the battle of Waterloo with the stranger,' and
that act is infamous). A thousand other apostrophes
were levelled at him, such as C'est abominable !I
C'est honteux r M. °DILLON BARROT disdainfully
cried—' Eh ! bien, laissons-le etaler sa honte et ayons
le courage de l'entendre jusqu'au bout.' (Come, let
him glory in his shame, but let us have the
courage to hear him to the end.) M. DUPIN im-
plored silence, and M. GUIZOT again strove to
address the Chamber, but at every attempt the storm
grew louder and fiercer. At length, nearly exhausted,
he succeeded in obtaining some hearing, and concluded
again by exhorting the Chamber to vote the para-
graph, the dismission on the ensemble of which was
ultimately closed. The sitting commenced at half-
past one, and at near eight, when it ended, the Cham-
ber continued to exhibit the utmost agitation upon
this extraordinary debate." All the journals before us
dwell, and almost everything that we see in their co-
lumns is connected, with its exciting features.
The Chamber met next day, when the calm was
most remarkable. M. CORDIER moved that the
paragraph in which occur the words " culpable
machinations" be left out. Whilst the speaker was
supporting this amendment, above fifty Members
approached the Ministerial bench and shook hands
with M. GUIZOT; M. BEBRTER. himself addressed
him with much courtesy. The Gauche paid little
attention to M. CORDIER'S speech. Meanwhile, M.
TRIERS approached, with a paper in his hand, a
cluster of Deputies, of which M. °DILLON BARROT
was the Centre. M. LEDRU ROLLIN supported
the amendment, and succeeded in imparting some
animation to the discussion, by comparing the
Acts of the Restoration, with what had been
done since 1830. After a speech of M. JOLAIN,
in favour of the Committee's paragraph, M.
DE LAMARTINE addressed the Chamber for the
first time this session, and delivered a conciliatory
speech, in which he declared against the strong lan-
guage adopted in that paragraph, and in favour of one
of the proposed amendments, though he had no ob-
jection to the sanctity of oaths being proclaimed.
M. DANGEVILLE deemed a demonstration against the
Legitimatists necessary, and declared that he should
reject all the amendments. M. BEcuARD required a
definitio of the oath taken by the Members of the

Chamber, in order that he might make up his mind
as to the propriety of tendering his resignation.
Thereupon loud cries of " Aux voix" arose, and
the amendments were rejected by a majority of 30.
Upon the division taking place, the Marquis Dz..
LAROCHE-JACQUELIIi resigned his seat in the Cham-
ber of Deputies.

THE BOURSE-SATURDAY, JAN. 27.

First Highest Lowest Last
•

Price. Price. Price. Price.
French Five per Cents. ..• 124 45 • • 124 50 .. 124 40 .• 124 50
Three per Cents.• •• • 82 25 • • 82 23 .. 82 10 .. 82 15
Bank of France•—• ..... 3285 ..3295 3282 50 —3282 50
Latlitte Bank, I,ooof. Shareslll2 50 .. 1112 50 —lll2 .50 • • 1112 50
5,000 f. Sliaresso7o ••5070 •.5070 —5070
Belgian Bank
Belgian Fives lO7 •• 107 107 .. 107

-
1840 •••• • • • • 109 • • 109 •• 1081 • . 1081
1842 • ..... • • 110 • • 110 • • 110 .. 110
Spanish Active .... •.•• • • • • 301 • • 30/ • • 301 30t
Passive .•.••. • • • • • 51 . • 5/ • . 51 .. 51
New Deferred ••.• • 121 • • 121 • • In •• 121
Old Deferred• ••• .• • 61 • • 6i •• 61 • • 61
Portuguese Five per Cents.•
.47
.471_ • •
.47 • • 471

106 75 10675 106 50 .. 106'50
Roman

I 111
.10k , Ti
..
' i
Y., \ s'l spis ..•...,t n ak/ , ,
„,..../,1 _„ , • , c... ~ ; .4,011, :.... , ,
,di
....-- ~ , .
1,4 r. mor4
0+ „ . • Dix ..) ...
ik _ -