The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-29 00:00:00

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 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. Cli ADWIC/e8 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 be transported for life, but the
mother was acquitted. In the other case, where the 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 upon
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 11., and the allowance from the
club is 31."

With this practical corroboration of the evils which
may be theoretically predicated of the societies re-
ferred 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 month, 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 261 at 60 days ; and the Five per
Cents. at 191 at 60 days.

The universal subject of conversation in Paris on
Saturday was the terrible tempest (tempete epou-
rentable) 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 BORDEAU.X. The first speaker
against it was M. BECHARD, who had not been at
Beigrave-square, but, nevertheless, defended the con-
duct of the pilgrims, and vindicated their attach-
ment to the descendant of so many Kings.
M. DE GI VRE 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 tlie visit of the Legitimatists to
London, with the journey of M. GUIZOT 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 adversity, and to tell a prince that France
must be left in peace." This again called up M.
GUIZOT, 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 Ga►d." 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 formerlysuffered 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
struck their desks—in short, the storm raged in all
its fury. Vous pouvez epuiser vos forces,' (you
may exhaust your strength), replied M. GUIZOT,
whose voice for a moment commanded the uproar,
Vous n'epuiserez pas mon courage !' (You will not
exhaust my courage !) The undaunted firmness with
which he stood their' violence seemed to exas-
perate themmore and more ; he repeatedly commenced
again his Oui, j'ai ete a Gand,' but was invariably
overwhelmed by the furious vociferations of the Op-
position. Vous etes un traitre !' (You are a trai-
tor) exclaimed M. ERNEST DE GIRARDIN, when the
Gauche responded in chorus, Oui, oui !" Does
the Member who interrupts me wish to speak after
me ?' ob4erved M. GUIZOT, with much calmness.
Non ;' replied he, mais je vous dirai de ma place
que vous avez trahi le pays, que vous avez passe 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 !
C'est hunteux r M. ODILLON 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. Manx 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 obtainingsome hearing, and concluded

again by exhorting the Chamber to-vote the para-
graph, the discussion on the ensemble of which we