The Sun.
London, England, 1842-01-28 00:00:00

Olt

LONDON!
FRIDAY, JANUARY 28, 1842.

The Reverend JONAS DENNIS, " Prebendary,
Bachelor of Civil Law, and owner of the
moiety of the beneficiary interest in a
lease for a certain term of years of the
rectorial tithes of the parish of Saint
David's, in the county of Exeter, and of the
Manor of Rooksdon, in the county of Devon,"
has written, and duly published, a protest
against the Commutation of Tithes Act, which
the said Rev. JONAS DENNIS denounces as illegal
and unconstitutional. We reprint the Rev.
Prebendary's protest for the amusement and
edification of our readers.
The Rev. Gentleman obviously belongs to the
militant and cursing portion of the Church, for
he proudly revolts against the authority of the
State, aad revives the practice of excommunica-
tion. He professes to be a member of the Pro-
testant and State-made Church, but he assumes
the worst powers of the Papal priesthood. He
is not, we believe, a Puseyite, he would pro-
bably scorn all communion with Rome,
but he is determined to act on the principles
of Rome. How the people of Exeter can strug-
gle on with PHILPOTTS for Bishop, and DENNIS
for Prebendary, we cannot tell; in peace it is
impossible they should live, unless they have no
such thing as conscience. To obey both the Law
and the Gospel, as expounded by the published

writings and speeches of the Diocesan and his

Prebendary, will be a harder task than to make
bricks without straw. Commute your tithes,
says the Law; you are, ipso facto, excommuni-
nicated, if you obey the law, says Prebendary
DENNIS ; and the poor inhabitants of the diocese
of Exeter must be quite bewildered by now fol-
lowing the Law, and anon following the Church.
No other Diocese, we sincerely hope, can have
two such men as PHILPOTTS for Bishop, and
DENNIS for Prebendary.
The first reason assigned by the Rev. Pre-
bendary for the illegality and unconstitutional
nature of the Tithe Commutation Act, is, it " did
not obtain the previous consent of the respective

Convocations of the Bishops and Clergy of each
province." According to Prebendary DENNIS,
therefore, the assent of the Bishops in the House
of Lords to the Act, goes for nothing. It does
not bind the clergy. The Prince Bishops
must sit in Parliament by virtue of their own
inherent or divine right to speak for themselves.
Besides a vote in Parliament, they have a
vote in Convocation, and must there be consulted
before the two Houses can make a law affecting
the Church. The priesthood are resolved, there-
fore, at least Prebendary DENNIS is, to give per-
petuity to the wealth of the clergy. They will
accept all they can extort from the State, they
have no objection even to filch a little from the
poor, but they declare, by the mouth of Pre-
bendary DENNts, that there is no power in the
State to interfere with what they possess.
The worthy Prebendary states several other
reasons besides the main one, that the Convoca-
tions were not consulted—why the Tithe Act is

illegal and unconstitutional. It violates Magna
Charta ; it is contrary to a statute of HENRY

111., which denounces a sentence of excommuni-
cation against all who infringe liberties and
rights, according to which the Parliament of
1836 is, ipso facto, excommunicated. It was
excommunicated in the reign of HENRY 111.
We can fancy that such obtuse people, on the
subject of Church property, as the Earl of
SPENCER and Lord J. RUSSELL will not hasten
to confess, and procure absolution, by promising
to repeal the unconstitutional law ; but Sir R.
INGLIS, Sir A. AGNEW, the Earls of WiNcrm.
SEA and MOCNTCASHEL, Sir R. PEEL, Lord
STANLEY, Sir J. GRAHAM, and several other
priest-fearing men, if not already grey from age,
will turn grey from grief, to learn that they
have actually been excommunicated, cursed by
the Church, banned from fire and from water,
cursed in their loins and their joints, for the
long space of five years.

Moreover, the Act is illegal and unconsti-
tutional, says the Prebendary, because it is con-
trary to the Coronation oath, which the State
priesthood impose on the Sovereign. Whether
she do justice between man and man is of no
consequence ; the cardinal principle of all is,
that she preserve to the priesthood all their rights
and privileges. Without that, society will tumble
headlong to ruin—with that, Prebendary DENNIS
implies all will be well—men will be happy here,
and saved hereafter.

Before we conclude, we must remind Preben-
dary DENNIS that there is a class of persons
called tithe-payers, who pay tithes unwillingly,
and have much more respect for the secular than
the ecclesiastical power. Unless the former
made them pay tithes, it is to be feared that the
excommunication of the priesthood would be
as much disregarded as their blessing, and no
tithes would be paid.

Tithes are not property—they are a tax.,
They are not the produce of the tithe-owners
labour, but the produce of other mens' la-
bour. They belong naturally and neces-
sarily to the tiller of the ground, and are
gilen to the tithe-owner because the law
says he shall have them. Th placing himself
above the law, Mr. Prebendary DENNIS, there-
fore, also tramples under his feet his own right
to exact tithes. When there is no other autho-
rity for exacting and paying them than the
claims of the tithe-owners, whether secular or
ecclesiastical, it may be doubted whether they
will be paid for a single day.
We respectfully counsel Prebendary DENNIS,
therefore, and all the tithe-owners, who must be
aware that the terrors of excommunication will
not enforce payment, to put their protests against
the legality of the Tithe Act into the fire as
speedily as possible. If they teach the commu-
nity that the Legislature cannot commute tithes,
it will go hard but the tithe-payers will mend
the lesson, and refuse to pay the unauthorised
and arrogant demands of a sectarian priesthood.

A meeting of the merchants, manufacturers
and others of Birmingham, and of deputies from
several neighbouring manufacturing towns, was
held at Birmingham on Wednesday. Similar
testimony was borne by all present to that
which has been borne at all the other recent
meetings held in the manufacturing districts, of
decaying trade, falling wages, and expatriating
artisans.

To give examples : Mr. BOULTBEE quoted the
case of a manufacturer whose trade with Ame-
rica has fallen off from 1,0001. to 601., and the
reason assigned for this is, the Americans are
manufacturing for themselves. They cannot buy
our goods, because we will not take what they
have to give us; and, therefore, ~hey are driven
to supply their own wants themselves 2 which we

could supply, greatly to the advantage of both
countries, better than they can.
Mr. SCOTT, the Member for Walsall, quoted
cases from Stourbridge of the fall of wages,
in various trades, from thirty to fifty per
' cent. between 1888 and 1842. Mr. JOSHUA,
SCHOLEFIELD stated that manufacturers in Shef-
field and various parts of Lancashire and Bir-
mingham, are preparing to remove their capital
and labourers to Germany and the United States.
To refute the notion that the employment of ma-
chinery was the cause of the distress, Mr.
WALKER, of Wolverhampton, read a list of
twenty iron articles, in the manufacture of which
machinery was not used, but of which the prices
had fallen, between 1836 and 1841, nearly cent.
per cent., from the want of a market, All the
persons present bore testimony to the great dis-
tress and suffering of the people. Strong resolu-
tions against the Corn and Provision-laws were
unanimously adopted, and the meeting declared
that they would use all peaceful and lawful
means to procure the total and immediate aboli-
tion of these laws.
Such meetings will not, can not, and dare not

be disregarded by the Legislature. They warn
the landlords, very emphatically, that they are
ruining. that trade by which their rent is created,
And so impoverishing the other classes, that
poor-rates, highway rates, and all other public
expenses, will soon fall, almost exclusively, on
rent.

While we mourn over the increasing dis-
tress of the people, we rejoice to kn ow that a
bolder, and a better, and a more kindly spirit is
inspiring the middle classes. A leading topic
at the Birmingham meeting was the necessity of
extending the suffrage, and the impossibility of
?uarding against unjust class legislation, as long
as a small section of the community only is re-
presented in the House of Commons. That alone
was wanted, we believe, to reconcile the different
':lasses, and, once re-united, they will soon sub-
lue their common oppressor.
We must, however, remind the advocates of
he
.Charter exclusively, that unlesss they can
;et food cheap and abundant, the Suffrage will
come too late. The people are starved out of
ipirit, before they are quite starved out of ex-
istence. Men, like other animals, are humbled
by hunger, and can be enslaved by those who
possess the power to feed them. If we cannot
speedily procure a larger allowance for all, we
shall all be at the mercy of the food owners.

Labour, in the great majority of cases, is ex-
changed for food, which is the first and greatest
want. When food is scarce, nothing else is or
can be thought of but how to get food ; when
food is abundant, man can turn his thoughts to
other things, can cultivate his taste, improve his
understanding, enlarge his sphere of enjoyment,
and have time to devote to political duties. Let
us try first, then, to make food cheap and
abundant.

It would be a glorious thing were the work-
men of London next week to second the
exertions of their fellows in the manufacturing
towns, and enable the weeping mothers and the
tarving families of Bolton and Paisley to say, "the
men of London have wrought out our deliver-
ance from the bondage of the landlords." It
would be a glorious thing for the men of London
to terrify the sordid and tyrant aristocracy from
their prey by their earnest and solemn voices,
and so achieve a great triumph for humanity,
liberty, and civilization. If they unite with their
countrymen, and demand the abolition of the
bread tax, it is in their power to accomplish that
great object. Scandalous will it be to the men
of London if they do not efficiently aid their suf-
fering and starving countrymen and. country-
women, by acting as proxies for them, and car-
rying respectfully, but earnestly, their prayers
to the ear of the SOVEREIGN.

At the close of a case in the Queen's Bench
on Wednesday, concerning the settlement of a
pauper, the Court is reported to have said,
" Although it felt strongly that serious inconve-
niences might arise from this decision, and that
most probably the Legislature did not contem-
plate the case of lunatics when that section (of
the New Poor-law) passed, still it thought that
the words were too strong to be got over, and that
the decision of the Quarter Sessions must be re-
verseti# This phrase shows that the Court of
Queens Bench is at all times prepared to wrest
the words of a statute, if they be not " too

strong to be got over," to its own vievrs of law.
Instead of interpreting statutes by the ordinary
meaning of words, and fairly carryiiag them
into execution, the Courts of Law strain'. them,
and, when they can, pervert or set them
aside, substituting for them the comuion-law
maxims of the Judges. Without enter-ill-1g into
the difficult question, whether the Coma ion-law
or the Statute-law be most consonant to equity
and justice, we must remark that this statement
makes the fact apparent, that there is in the
country two sources of law, or two bodies of law-
makers, who give contradictory enactments;„ and
who, in some sense, thwart each other. 'The
Judges, under the pretence of carrying the law
into execution, in fact, wrest it to their awn
ideas of what the law ought to be, when the
words of a statute do not strictly bind them. to
one course, and are not susceptible of two mewl-
ings. That, under such circumstances, there
should be conflicting laws, and that the whole
of our legislation, intended to be the rule, of
man's life and actions, should be a jumbled n lass
of incomprehensible and inextricable mystt
can surprise no man. The surprise is to finds in
society a sound principle which enables it to sur-
vive, and thrive under a system only calculated
to engender that confusion which precedes de-
struction.

The importance of the debate in the Vrench
Chamber of Deputies on the Right or Search
question, appears to be overlooked by o ttr Con-
temporaries. The French Government,. in con-
cert with the other great European Powers, hav-
ing guaranteed a right of mutual search, -we may
affect to despise, or denounce as factions, the
opposition made in the Chamber of Depu ties to
the ratification of a treaty to that effect ; but
surely before doing so it would be as well ;to ask
ourselves of what use would be a Treaty with
France opposed to the national prejudiceL; of a

majority of the French people? In an ab.sw.)lute
Monarchy the ratification of a Treaty by- the

Government may preclude all regard for p üblic
Opinion ; but can this be said of a country which
boasts even of such a shadow of a Constitution as
France ? Would the Treaty hold good were! we
foolishly to embroil ourselves in a hostile corrtest
with the United States ? Most certainly, in ;the
present temper of the French Chamber of :De-
puties, it would not. Now this is really the prlac•
tical question to be considered, and not the .B.b-
-stract right on one side or the other. Now
if France, who can employ as many cruisers eon
the coast of Africa as England can, is thus
bons of the exercise of a right of search, what
heart-burnings must it not occasion to Prussinvi,
Austrian, Russian, and Dutch traders ? " But;.,"
say our Contemporaries, " the right of search :is
mutual; the power we claim ourselves we cam-
cede to others." True; but is it not very HA e
a mockery to offer to exchange a concession .f
power with a State whom we know to be inc

pable of exercising it? The naval force of Hanc.-
ver consists of one ship of war employed in
en-
forcing the pillage of merchant ships in the
Elbe; now would it not be a mockery of Ole
present state and dignity of CUMBERLAN D'S lest
Royal Duke, seriously to propose the ratificatAon
of a Treaty for enforcing a mutual right. of
search of all vessels belonging to the two. na-
tions found navigating the coast of Africa ?
Would not such a compact be a revival of the
old one of the giant and the dwarf ? The Itight
of Search question is viewed with jealousy in
France and elsewhere, because one nation as-
sumes the lead in carrying it out. Were it a con-
dition of the Treaty that all the Powers ratifying
it should be represented on ,the African coast by
an equal number of cruisers, the objections Ito it
would very soon disappear before the voic e of
reason and justice. But our Contemporaries len-

tirely overlook this important point, and hence
arise a series of plausible, but very egregiJus
blunders.

Madrid papers of the 17th and 18th inst. have
reached us. In the Senate, on those days, the
debates on the project of address in reply to the
REGENT'S speech had commenced. The discus-
sion in the Deputies was to begin on the 20th.
Senor CAMPUZANO opened the debate in the
Senate on the 17th. Senor MARLIANI made
a very long speech, to prove the connection
between Louis PHILIPPE and the Christino in-
surrection, for the purpose of placing one of h's
sons on the Spanish throne. He added that he
was convinced that there were more conspiracies
than ever now going on in Paris. He stated a
curious fact, if true, which Went to establish that
M. PAGEOT, the French Charge d'Affaires, was
aware of the attempt on the Royal Palace, on
the night of October 7, before it was made. Senor
MARLIANI also contended that M. DE SALVANDY
had been sent to Madrid as Ambassador, not by
the appointment of M. GUIZOT, but by the de-
sire of the King of the FRENCH, to answer his
dynastic objects. The speech of Senor MAR.
MANI produced a great sensation.
Senor GONZALES, President of the Council and
Minister for Foreign Affairs, followed Senor
MARLIANI. The Minister argued that the Cortes
would take care that no foreign Prince came
to the Spanish Throne without the legislative
consent, for Queen ISA LELLA could not marry
without that authority. The Madrid Cabinet,
he said, could not enter into what might be
the intentions at the Tuileries, when there were
no facts or documents existing ; but he would
declare, that only the general interests of the
country should be regarded when the question of
the Royal marriage should be brought forward
at its proper period. He declined, for the pre-
sent to accede to Senor MARLIANI'S demand
for the production of the correspondence relative
to the credentials of M. BE SALVANDY. He,
however, would state, in reply to the preceding
orator, that the French Ambassador had declared
to him that be had no private instructions
from his Government, and that France had no
intention to interfere with the internal affairs of
Spain. The situation of affairs arising from
the misunderstanding was grave and delicate,
but no unnecessary alarm ought to be spread on
the subject. Senor HERos next spoke, and took
the same view as Senor MARLIANI in respect to
the conduct of Louis PHILIPPE. The debate
was then adjourned, and resumed on the 18th
by Senor CORDONIN and Senor HERos. The
Senate voted eight paragraphs, without amend-
ments. The debate was adjourned till the 19th,
when it was expected to close.
On the Madrid Bourse, on the 18th, five Ibar-
gains for four millions were done in the Threes,
at 221, and a, with p. for 60 days; twenty-one
bargains for 12,204,000 reals in the Fives, at 32i,
33 for cash, 34 -I, for 60 days.

The Paris Journals of Tuesday, delayed by the
stormy state of the weather, together with the
whole of Wednesday's Journals, have been re-
ceived. Tuesday's Journals differ considerably
upon the character of the vote of the Chamber
of Deputies adopting M. JACQUES LEFEBRE'S
amendment upon the fourth paragraph of
the Address, the text of which is given in
our foreign summary. In order that the
question may be better understood by the
general reader, we may remark that three
amendments upon this paragraph, more or less
censuring the Right of Search Treaty, were
proposed to the Chamber. These appeared too
decided in their tone to please the supporters of
the Government, and M. LEFEBRE then hit upon
a fourth, recommending caution in the execution
of the Treaty, to which all parties assented. The
vote, in point of fact, is a plain demonstration of
the opinion of the Chamber that great prudence
is necessary, and some suspicion warrantable, on
the part of France, as regards the motives which
have induced the British Government to propose
a reciprocation of the right of maritime search in
connection with the proceedings against the slave
trade. M. GUIZOT on Monday made a very able
speech upon this question, in answer to the one
delivered by M. BERRYER. The Royalist De-
puty having said that the ratification of a
right of search treaty would be tantamount
to a declaration of war on the part of Eng-
land against the United States, as the Eng-
lish armed with such a treaty would execute it
by force, M. GuizoT in reply said :—" I wish it
were in my power to induce the United States to
become a party to the Convention, for my suc-
cess would do honour to my country, and render
a great service to humanity. But GOD forbid that
the slightest constraint should be used in order
to compel any nation to become a party to the
treaty. The United States are free and will
remain so. On the day when they shall have
conceded to the Convention they will have per-
fbrmed a noble work, fbr they will then have ac-
complished the abolition of the trade in the
whole world. But do not let it be imagined for
a moment that a freedom of the seas will be in-
volved in this question. That will remain as it was.
The slave-trade has no connection with the
question of the freedom of the seas, for, like pi-
racy, this traffic is excluded from all common
right. It has been assimilated also to the recog-
nised right which exists in the case of the
contraband of war. Are you willing that
the traffic in human flesh should be treated
with the rigour which in the case of the
contraband trade of war is admitted by all the
world? And does this exception to the great
principle of the freedom of the seas affect that
principle ? No, Gentlemen, on the contrary ; the
principle is rendered more sacred by the excep-
tion." M. GutZor then alluded to his duty
to the Crown. He said that, although he did
not regard the ratification of the treaty as a
mere formality, and felt himself bound to pay
respectful attention to the opinions of the Cham-
ber, he must not for a moment leave it to be
imagined that the right of the Crown to ratify,
or not ratify, could be affected by any pro-
ceedings elsewhere. There was nothing, he
said, more serious than for a Government
to say to Powers with which it had friendly
relations—" What we proposed to you three
years ago, we will not ratify now." This was not
only serious as regarded the Government, but
also as regarded the honour of the country. M.
GUIZOT concluded by saying that the rights of
the Crown would remain entire, and that when
the Chamber should have expressed its opinion,
the Government would decide upon its own re-
sponsibility.
The following interesting debate on the Span-
ish etiquette question, on which we shall have
something to say hereafter,
is reported in the
Journals of Wednesday :
CHAMBER OF DEPUTIES, JAN. 25.

The President took the chair at Half-past One.
The Order of the Day was the adjourned discussion on
the address.
M. Gustave de Beaumont proposed the following ad-
ditional paragraph to stand as paragraph 7 :--
" She (France) hopes that the differences which have
unhappily arisen between the Governments I 3 f France
, ,
and Spain will not seriously derange the union of the
two countries and that recalling to mind the great in-
terests which connect them, and the common principle
of their institutions, they will put a speedy end to differ-
ences which are without any deep or national cause,"
M. Gustavede Beaumont began
by expressing his as-
tonishment at the silence maintained by. the speech from
the throne, and the address on the Spanish question, and
said that, whilst he admitted
reserve in all cases where danger and inconvenience
were to be apprehended from - disclosures, he mild
the propriety of diplomatic
not refrain from calling the attention of the Cham-
ber to facts which were no longer a secret to the
world, but with respect to which there was reason
to fear that an incorrect view had been taken by
the Cabinet. He could easily understand that the French
Government was, after what had passed, in bad odour
with that of Spain ; but such as the relations between
the two Governments were, be could see nothing in
themp
position tSiuo nifi coif the °nt gravityßegen
Regent
warrantoof Span,
from
h and the desire of the
a rupturete
ef
t between
the two countries.—(Applause The
Honourable Deputy inquired why, considering the pecu-
liar French Government as to the mode of accrediting an
Ambassador, a simple Charge d'Affaires had not been
sent to Spain. The Government must have known that the
distinction between a Charge d'Affaires and an Ambassa-
dor consisted, in the fact,-that the relations of a Minister
Plenipetentiary are simply with the Government, whereas
an Ambassador has the right of establishing relations
with the Royal
personages at the head of the Govern-

ment ; consequently, the appointment of an Ambas-
sador is a mark of respect towards the head of the Go-
vernment. If it was not intended to pay this re-
spect to the Government of Spain, why was an Ambas-
sador appointed in this case ? He did not believe that it
was predetermined to create difficulty and embarassment
on a question of etiquette ; but it was not the less
true that the difficulty had been created. The French
Cabinet ought to have reflected that the first and grand
object was to draw closer the relations between the two
Governments, and he must be permitted to observe that
the way to do this was not to deny the character of the
person who was at the head of affairs in Spain. The
Hon. Deputy repeated that the struggle for dignity,
which had been made in the affair of M. de Salvandy by the
French Government, was wholly founded in error, for
no indignity could have arisen from the presenting of his
letters of credence to the Regent. In vain, said M.
Gustave de Beaumont, in conclusion, would Spain seek
to ally itself with a more disinterested nation than
France ; in vain would France seek for a more safe ally
than Spain.
M. Guizot—l ought, perhaps, to refuse to enter upon
the discussion called for by the Honourable Deputy who
has just spoken, for his observations turn upon a question
which is still pending' and which may from one moment
to another assume a different complexion. But fearing
lest my silence should be made a pretext to deceive, and
lead the Spanish nation into error, I have made up my
mind to speak. The amendment which has been pro-
posed to you appears to me to be full of inconvenience as
regards the French Government, Spain, and the Cham-
ber itself. The Chamber will recal to mind at what pe-
riod the Cabinet of the 29th October entered into relations
with the Spanish Government; it was just after the revo-
lution of September. The Chamber knows that anti-French
movements accompanied this revolution. I could reveal
the causes of them, but I will not do so; I shall confine
myself to the bare fact. The policy of the Government
has been to keep up friendly relations with the Spanish
Government, and to convince Spain of two things; first,
that we would refrain from exercising any influence in
the internal affairs of the country, or mixing ourselves
up in the slightest degree with the Government ; and,
secondly, that we would not regard Spain as an arena
for struggles or rivalry with any other Power, whatever
it might be. We were moderate and patient, and by
degrees we gained some ground ; the relations be-
came more friendly ; the Anti-French feeling result-
ing from the revolution of September gradually
ceased. A Spanish Minister came to-Paris. A circum-
stance which was of importance as to our position with
Spain occurred ; the British Ministry was changed. All
these things were of a nature to induce us to send an
bassador to Spain. At the moment when this decision
had been come to, the insurrection of the frontier took
place in Spain. You will know what accusations hate
been brought against the French Government on this
subject. I affirm to you most positively that these ac-
cusations were totally unfounded, totally undeserved.
We had already and for some time past been giving the
most friendly notice to Spain of what was passing on
her frontiers. We had informed her of our having
discovered expeditions of arms and munitions.
Notice was given of this to the Spanish Con-
sul at Bayonne. We had said to Spain
" Take care ! " The Spanish Minister in Paris
required that the Spanish refugees, who were crowded
on the French frontier, should be sent into the interior.
This application was immediately complied with. He
addressed another application to the French Govern-
ment, which was on the instant and peremptorily refused.
I need not say what that application was.—(Applause.)
Such, Gentlemen, was the conduct of France as regarded
the insurrection in Spain. Everybody knows that there
resulted from this movement an anti-French feeling on
several points of the frontier. Our subjects were threatened,
as were even our ships in the port of Barcelona. From the
moment, when order appeared to be restored in Spain,
it was the duty and interest of France to resume her old
relations with that country, and to dispel the transitory
clouds of dissension which had shown themselves. It
must have been evident to Spain that this was the feel-
ing of the French Government, when an eminent man
was seen to leave France as Ambassador, animated with
feelings of conciliation, and, above all, of respect for
the young Queen, over whom France was anxious to
throw the protection which a great nation could offer to
a friendly country in the existing circumstances of Spain.
Such were the intentions which influenced the Govern-
ment when the Ambassador was appointed—such were
the instructions that he received. When the French
Ambassador to Spain left for Madrid he had been
already appointed• several months. There had been
plenty of time for it to be known in Spain to whom he
was accredited. It was known that he was accredited
to Queen Isabella—no mistake was possible on this head.
When he had arrived in Madrid, in his second, not
his first, interview with the Minister of Foreign
Affairs arose the question of which so much has
been said. On this question France has conducted
herself according to the regulations of the Spanish
Monarchy, and according to the international law of
Europe. An Ambassador was to be sent to the Queen of
Spain ; he could not deliver his letters of credence to an
accredited Minister of that Queen. He could only de-
liver them into her own hands. This is the con-
firmed practice. A recent and striking instance of
this practice may be mentioned. The Regent of
Brazil had set up a pretension to receive per-
sonally the letters of credence addressed to the young
Sovereign. All the States of Europe refused to recognise
this pretension, and he was obliged to give way. The
question is not one of pure etiquette. It is the monar-
chical principle, that in cases of minority all that apper-
tains to honour and etiquette belongs to the person of
the Sovereign; all power and authority belong to the Re-
gent. The minority of a Sovereign is not a total eclipse of
Royalty. It must show itself on all proper occasions, and
in which there is only homage to receive and no power
to be exercised. These are not vain formalities ; it is by
them that monarchical principles are kept up in the
minds of the people ; if there is to be monarchy, there
must also be the observance of these forms.—(Applause.)
In answer to what I have said, the declaration of the
Cortes against the course adopted by the French Go-
vernment may be mentioned. Spain, Gentlemen, has an
undoubted right to interpret the articles of her constitu-
tion in her own way ; but her right is not our right; her
opinion is not our opinion • and I feel it proper to say at
once that we do not think we can with advantage to
Spain and ourselves, have an Ambassador in Spain, on
conditions such as Spain has laid down.
A Deputy, on the left of the Chamber, said, " Then
why did you send one ?'
M. Guizot—l have already said why we sent an Ambas-
sador. We have no reason to suppose that any difference of
the nature of that which has taken place would arise, and
we had no reason to withhold from Spain the service and
friendship of France. Spain has not appreciated the
services which France was willing to render, and this,
be assured, she has been told by her best friends. If the
Speech from the Throne has been silent on this question
it was because the French Government thought that
the greatest service which it could render to Spain,
in existing circumstances, was in not being the first to
talk of it to the world. The question now is whether
the Chamber, whilst in discussion on the Address in
reply to the Speech from the Throne, will really make
its Address an echo of that of the Cortes of Madrid.—
(Applause.) Yes, Gentlemen, you are by the amendment
which is now submitted to you, really called upon to
put into your Address an answer to the paragraph of the
Address of the Spanish Cortes.—(Sensation.) Is that
-vhat you are desirous of doing ?—(Cries of "No, no.")
I hope that as this question is still pending, the Cham-
ber will not substitute one diplomacy for another, and in-
sert in the Address to the King a reply to the Spanish
Cortes.—(Cries of " No, no, and " Aux voix.")
M. Odilon Barrot ascended the tribune, but so great
was the agitation which prevailed in the Chamber, and
the apparent impression produced by the speech of M.
Guizot, that ten minutes elapsed before he could make
himself heard, and several Deputies had already quitted
the Chamber, and proceeded to the Salle des Con-
ferences. He said that he would not seek to embitter
the question, but would imitate the reserve of the Mi-
nister for Foreign Affairs, and, above all, the conduct
of the Spanish Cortes, which had on this occasion main-
tained great reserve. He would merely observe that
the Queen of Spain being a minor, and the Regent ap-
pointed by the country being charged with the exercise
of the Royal 4uthority, he had acted properly in refusing
to cede any of the dignity belonging to his office. The
Ministry sent an Ambassador to Spain ; and although
the preceding Ambassador had delivered his creden-
tials to the Queen Regent, M. de Salvandy had
refused to deliver his letters to the Regent. The sense
of the Constitution on this point had been interpreted
by the Cortes, which had declared their determination
to uphold the pretensions of the Regent. Ministers of
France, said M. Barrot, have the courage to demand a
similar adhesion from this Chamber.—(Applause from
the left.) You will not do so, for you know that the
Chamber will not admit this distinction of a Regent by
right of birth, and of a Regent by right of election. You
wish to preserve silence. I also would be silent if my silence
could aid the solution of this affair, but it would not,

and there is no inconvenience in allowing the voice of
I France to be heard. And what moment have you chosen
for this pusillanimous silence ? A moment when all our
alliances are at an end. There remained to France
only one fr.:s!ndly Power whose Government was founded
on the same principle as our own, and now for a vain
question of etiquette you have just separated us from
that Government.—(.applause from the left.) See what
progress we have made since the period when we wished
our revolution to extend beyond the Pyrenees, and sent
proclamations and emissaries into Spain. We are now
come to draw distinctions between Regents of birth and
Regents of election. For a national and revolutionary
policy we have substituted a policy of persons and eti-
quette. It is time to put a stop to proceedings so fatal
to liberty and to government,—(Applause from the left.)
M. Mauguin said, that he should regret exceedingly
to indulge in any observations which could widen the
broach between two countries whose interest and honour
it was to draw closer and closer the relations which
existed belmeen them. He could not, however, refrain
from saying that in the course which the French Go-
vernment had ,Ndopted, it had overlooked what was due
to Spain. It was evident that according to the Spanish
Constitution the powers of Royalty were exercised by
if an Ambassador was sent
the Regent, and, ther,.‘ibre,
to Madrid, it was proper that his credentials should be
delivered to the Regent. All nations had a right to
make their own Constitution:;, and Governments which
sought alliance with them coni,:3 not expect to succceed,
if they overlooked the constitutional rights held by the
person at the head of the State.
111. Durand (de Romorantin), am,'4 loud calls for the
cloture, said he had heard it asserted that M. de Sal-
vandy had been driven out of Spain by th,l
influence of
England. He wished M. de Salvandy to state what were
the facts on the subject.—(Loud cries of " No, 110.-")
The amendment was then put to the vote end reje..lte"
Paragraph 7 was then read—
" Faithful to the promises-which she has made, France
demands with perseverance the accomplishment of the
promises which she has recoived. The Chamber reminds

Europe of the rights of the Polish nation, so positively
stipulated by treaty.
This was adopted without discussion.
Paragraph 8 was then adopted without discussion.
Paragraph 9 was then put to the vote and adopted.
M. Lestiboudois proposed to add the following to pa.
ragraph 9
" Amongst these bills we shall place in the first rank
that which should render perfect the legislation as to
the census of property liable to taxation, and guarantee
all the rights of the public treasury, by securing the re-
gular co-operation of the municipal authorities.
It being now six o'clock, the consideration of this
amendment was postponed, and the Chamber adjourned.

The Second Chamber of the States of Hanover has
rejected a proposition for authorising marriages between
Jews and Christians on condition of the children being
brought up in the Christian religion, or, at least, to de-
clare valid such marriages made in foreign countries
without any intention of evading the laws of Hanover.
The King of Bavaria has authorised the publication
in the Augsburg Gazette of a letter from his Majesty,
expressing his satisfaction at that journal having warmly
advocated the agricultural and manufacturing interests
of Germany against those of foreign countries.
The Belgian Consul at Charlestown has acquainted
the Government that the law of the United States re-
specting the Customs, requires that the invoices of goods
sent from foreign countries shall be signed (visees)
by the Consular agent of the United States in the
port from which they are exported. This formality
is so essential, that goods which arrive without invoices
so certified are sequestrated in the warehouses till the
proprietors produce the necessary certificate (visa) or
give security to produce it within three months.
This is an important fact, which seems to have es-
caped the notice of some Belgian merchants, for the
Consul of Charlestown says, that goods from Antwerp
had arrived in that town, which were not provided with
the papers required by the American laws, and that great
inconvenience had arisen in consequence of this omission.
BOURSE—PARIS, TUESDAY, JAN. 25.

First Highest Lowest Last
Price Price. Price. Price.
French 5 Der Cents llB 15 ... 118 20 ... 118 10 ... 118 10
3 per Cents 79 25 ... 79 25 ... 79 10 ... 79 10
tank of prance
Laffitte Rank 1,0001. Si ares 1025 ...10.!5 ...1025 ...1125
5,0001. Shares 5020 —.5025 —.5020 ...5025
telgian Bank
1811 ... 1125 ... 1025 ... 1025 ... 1025
Belgian 5 per Cents.
5 per Cents., 1840 105% ... 105% ... 105% ... 195%
Spanish Active .........
New Deferred
Portuguese 5 per Cents.
seapolitan
Ronan...
RAILWAY SHARES.
Versailles, R. B 312 %0 ..., 342 50 ... 342 50 ... 342 50
10uen..4% LB 2ll 25 ... 211 25 ... 211 25 ... 211 25
490 ... 490 ~.490 ...490
Orleans .. 537 50 ... 537 50 ... 591 25 .... 531 25
Montpellier to Cette
Strasburg CO Bale 230 ... 231 25 .. 230 ... 230

SELMAN k UNDS—BaussaLs, JAW. 25.
52
Actual Debt, 234 per Cent.
Rothschild's Lean, 5 per Cent .. .
Loan efThirty Millions, 4 per 93
9 per Cent.

Thirty.seven•

_
------
103173%
'1340)
Loan of City, 1232,4 peiCent. ........
Society of Coromerce. 4%per Cent .....
Bank of Belgium, 5 per Cent. ...........
National Society.
Exchange on London (short) —
—Brussels Papers, Jan. 25.
AUSTRIAN FUNDS.—VIENNA, JAN. 18.
Itve per Costs. Aletalliques
Emir per Cents.
Three par Cents
Bank Shares
.....illgentezne Zeituttz. Jan. 24.

THE QUACKERY OF FREE TRADE is a phrase
adopted by the Tories. Will they not soon
speak of the quackery of the free winds of the
atmosphere? Perhaps, too, they will describe
the free course of the planets, and the free
growth of plants, as quackery. It is at least clear
that free intercommunication between bodies of
individuals, politically separated, is as much or-
dained by Nature as the free intercommunication
of bodies of men not:politically separated, and as
the free course of the winds. Nature ordains
free trade; the supposition that fools of states-
men can mend her works, and promote the hap-
piness of mankind by regulating and.restricting
that which Nature has made free, is sorry, not to
say impious, quackery.