The Sun.
London, England, 1829-09-02 00:00:00

consequence of the same change ; or that tile
two effects have been concurrent. Take, for

instance, any given branch of industry.
was substituted for a prohibition in the case of
silk. French silks bad formerly been c4nufz-

.41 dot \

Bled into this country, and their safe delivery
insured—for a premium of less than twenty
per cent.—in spite of the positive prohibition.
The British manufacturer, therefore, had to mai!:-
tain a competition with the looms of France,
aided only by an impost, a smuggler's insurance
of 20 per cent. or thereabouts, orr . the .vrought
silk, but burdened likewise by an enormous tak
On the raw material of almost 4s, in the pound,

beyond that which was exacted from his French

rival. What, then, was done by the British go-
vernment ? It imposed a duty of more than
30 per cent. on the wrought silks of France,
instead of 20, which hld been levied on
the British consumer, by the smuggler ; and it
took off, or reduced to a trifle not worth namii,,

the oppressive duty on the raw material, hitherto
paid by the English manufacturer, giving hint
his raw silk for the price abroad and transport.
Thus, instead of the raw material being less ac-
cessible to the British loom, and the foreign
wrought fabric more so to the British market,
the reverse has been the obvious consequence cat'
our " free trade" legislation--free only, inasrnttch
as it released the raw silk from fetters, and

'early doubled the weight of those which had
seen borne by the French manufactured article.

But the silk is not yet a staple of Great Britain.
Let us look elsewhere for proofs. What kis
"free trade" done to torment the iron-manufic-
tures ? or the cotton manufactures? or the
woollen ? Has a fresh tax been imposed on
raw cotton imported into England, or a tax
taken off from foreign calicoes or muslins ? Yet
the iron trade and cotton trade are severely de-
pressed, so with the woollens ! The duty on
the foreign raw material there was lowered ; yet
do we find the woollen houses bankrupt, 12 or
13 at once ! Are foreign woollen cloths, then,
imported into England by virtue of free trade re-
gulations? It would be foolish to say so. We
have, then, the silk trade actually extended by
the new system. We have cottons, iron wares,
and woollens, perfectly untouched by. it, except
in so far as raw wool was made cheaper from
abroad ; and yet the incendiaries who are wicked
enough to recommend to the poor a universal
'spoliation of property wherever they can find it,
are so stupid or impudent,as to
,allege that " free
trade" has been the cause of our calamities.—
Oh ! but there is another cause—the one-pound
notes have been called in,—the proper circula-
tion has been diminished ! Read, then, the

history of these same houses in the wool trade,
and learn what paper can qualify its votaries to
achieve. It is ascertained that the establish-
ments which have now crumbled into dust were
huge dealers in paper—in accommodation paper
—and, doubtless, noisy advocates for it ; that
they were enakled, through the prevalence of this
blessed expedient, to make false sales,—to draw
fictitious bills,—to extend from day to day,
during many years, the circle of their fraudulent
transactions—to multiply the number of their
miserable creditors—to aggravate in all its parts
the ruin which they could not prevent, from
finally crushing their own heads, and the inno-
cent thousands who trusted them. Such were
the sweet effects of bank-note facility upon the
business of men who, if they never had enjoyed
it, would long ago have been forced to adopt
more prudent and honest courses,—to refrain
from speculation,—to live within their means, to
leave off in time an unprofitable merchandise,
or to become bankrupt at an earlier date, and,
with less loss to others. The fact is, that there
are causes operating which must be looked. at
boldly, and represented honestly, if we wish to
uphold the state. Our commerce teas on so im-
mense a scale as to embrace the consumption of
the whole world ; but then it required a world's
consumption for its aliment. That was a war
Condition—an unnatural condition. In peace
other countries felt the desire, and saw the pos-
sibility, of ministering to their own Wants ; and
they have been much enabled to supply them-
selves by the transfer of Briti,,h capital to their
dominions. England, therefore, must •sooher
or later be content to let their neighbours share
largely in that foreign commerce which once (and
for years) was exclusively her own. She must
contract her manufacturing theatre, and be-
come less absolutely an instrument of me-
chanical production ; the transition my be try-
ing, but it must and will take place. The taxes,
moreover, must and will force themselves, and
that rudely, upon the minds of statesmen, Eng-
land now, making allowance far the altered cur-
rency, raises more money by taxes than at the
highest period of the war. Of the revenue so
created, a tar larger proportion than at any pe-
riod of the war goes to the mere payment of in-
terest on the public securities ; that is to say, a
far larger positive sum than when the loans were
heaviest, and expences most enormous, Of the
revenue so raised, and the burdens endured, a
much more formidable portion falls on the mid-
dling and lower classes now than when the war
waa raging. While the taxes have not in fact
diminished, the price of labour and the profits
on capital have, beyond a question, been fear-
and the general ability has been
fully redrweJ,
retrograding, as compared with the general
pressure. Such things, we say, must be looked
at manfully. They must be stated frankly ; they
must be provided for as effectually as it is in
human wisdom and virtue to legislate under
grievous difficulties. We do not, like some
persons, encourage the desperate to feed them-
selves by robbery, and to defend their spoil by
murder ; but we admonish the rulers of the
state not to disguise from themselves or others

the hazards which every where surround them,
that they may distinctly see their way, and be
able to follow it with unflinching resolution.—
Times.

There has been no period of our history in
which the intended measures of the Cabinet have
been more studiously kept secret than at- the pre-
sent moment ; and, consequently, at no time
were the rumours of projected innovations to be
received with greater caution. Among these
rumours no one has been more positively insist-
ed on, nor repeated in more various quarters,
than that which states a determination to modify,
in some way not precisely explained, the present
Ecclesiastical Establishment in the ensuing
Session of Parliament. We do not pretend to
know on what foundation this generally received
assertion rests, and are, consequently, ignorant
of the degree of credit to which it is entitled—
but of one fact we are perfectly certain, that at
this moment official inquiries ate going on in
Ireland, to ascertain exactly the annual amount
of income, more particularly of the higher orders
of the Church Preferments. We have heard
that this very salutary inquiry is likely to excite
considerable dissatisfaction, and that various sub-
terfuges will be resorted to for the purpose of
rendering it incomplete and inaccurate ; but we
hope and trust that it will be followed up in a
proper spirit, and that any attempt at mystifica-
tion on the part of an incumbent will be promptly
wid,vigorously met and defeated.—Morn. Chron.

The Borris-o'kane trials must, we should
think, satisfy the most bigotted worshipper of
the mode of conducting judicial proceedings in
this country, that whatever else it may be good
for, it is' not good for the discovery of the truth.
The Solicitor General, Mr. Doherty, had been
solicited by Government to conduct an inquiry
into the affair at Borris-o'kane, in which eight
men were killed and twenty-one wounded. This
inquiry gave Mr. Doherty all that knowledge of
the transactions which on the Continent is pos-
sessed by the Judge of Instruction. Mr. Do-
herty, when the trials came on, knew more than
is usually known by the Counsel for a prosecu-
tion ; he was acquainted with the whole case—
that for the prosecution, and that for the defence.
By the usage of the profession to which he be-
longs, he ought to have so conducted the pro-
secution as to have produced only those wit-
nesses whose evidence he might deem calculated
to bring the men placed on their trial to the gal-
lows, and to. avail himself of every technical
rule, every legal stratagem, to exclude, as much
as possible, ad evidence calculated to place the
conduct of the prisoners in a favourable light.
An English trial has not for object the discovery
of the truth; it is a fight conducted agreeably to
certain rules, in which the Counsel for the prose-
cution seeks to destroy the prisoner ; the Counsel
for the prisoner to save him. When the Counsel
succeeds in obtaining the conviction of an innocent
man, his triumph is very great ; and the young
Counsel who succeeds in rescuing a criminal from
his merited fate is a made man. It is in pro-
portion to the evil he can do to others that a
Counsel can do good to himself, In order to
avoid any inconvenience from a too squeamish
conscience, it is unfortunate for Counsel to be
in the situation of Mr. Doherty. It is obvious
that he would go about the business of preparing
Melt fin- the hangman with more alacrity, by
knowing no more of the case than is conducive
to that end. And even without much conscience,
a Counsel may feel uneasy that it should be
known to others that he was in possession of
evidence which satisfied him of the innocence of
those whom he was striving to convict. He
will go about his business, therefore, more gaily,
if he is let into the knowledge of no more than
he ought to know ; or, at least, if there is no
proof of his knowing more, so that it may be
impossible to reproach him with it. In the
Borris-o'-kane trials, however, Mr- Doherty
produced a witness, whose evidence he knew
would be favourable to the prisoners ; and it
being conceived' that he ought to have endea-
voured with all his heart and with all his soul
to hang the prisoners, this conduct has given
great offence. Let us hear a Correspondent of
the Dublin Evening Post on the subject :
" The recent mistake which was made was in the
production of a Hanoverian Doctor upon the
part of the Crown, when it was known that he
would give evidence for the prisoners, If the pri-
soners were without Counsel, and could not have
resorted to the Doctor unless the Crown had first
produced him, there would have been much reason
for puttiogthe Jury in possession of his view of the
matter. But the Crown, by producing him in
the first instance, destroyed their own case; for
they could not impeach their own witness, anti
they also deprived themselves of the advantage
of cross-examination. I am sure that the Soli-
citor-General was only anxious to do substantial
justice ; but he certainly should have bad a
little more regard for popular opinion, and eon,
stilted those appearances which are followed by
so much practical result. Mr, Doherty laid
down some strange maxims with regard to evi-
dence. He held that it was the duty a the
Crown to produce every witness who could
throw a light on the transaction. Has this rule
been applied to other eases? and is it expedient
to apply it, when it inverts the order 61 examina-
tion, and gives to the prisoner a benefit which is
relinquished by the Crown for his advantage ?
The production of this,Doetor exasperated Mr.
Spain, . the parish priest of Borriskr -kane, and
induced Mr. Lanigan to decline any further in-
terposition. The secession contributed, of course,
to the popular distrust in the sincerity of the
Crown." Whether Mr. Doherty would have
shown the same anxiety to produce every witness
who could throw a light on the transaction, had
his employers been particularly interested. in
itibtaining a contiction, as in this case they
were interested in not exposing men whom they
believed innocent to the chance of a conviction,
it is for those who know Mr. Doherty to say--e
we are willing to presume charitably of him, to
believe that he would not wish to be in any case
accessary to the effusion of innocent blood, But
what is important for our eonsideratien -is the
view which is here given us of an English trial.
Let us suppose, not that Police-men (whom it
is the bounden duty of the Government to Assist
with all possible means of enabling them to prove
their innocence, the first duty of Government!
being the preservation of order, and the preserva-
tion of order depending essentially on the con-
fidence of officers that if innocent they are certain
of protection), but poor friendless men, were
prosecuted at the instance.of a rich and powerful
individual. The Counsel for the prosecution,
though he sees these. men without Counsel, or
knows that their Counsel are not acquainted with
the whole of the case, or that they have not had
means of producing the most essential witnesses
(which last is a common ease), must, neverthe-
less, keep back reluctantly all evidence which

might throw light on the transactions, if that
light he favourable to the prisoners. His busi-
ness is to endeavour to hang them—to earn
his blood-money. He %di° prpduces a witness
cannot cross-examine him, or do anything to
discredit his own witness ; and though a Coun-
sel may know that his witness is perjuring him-
self—though he may know that he is under some
hallucination, he must not set him right by
any question calculated to favour a prisoner,
though the prisoner may be without the means
of either cross-examining the witness effectually
or contradicting him. No one in an English
trial is responsible for the furtherance of the ends
of justice. The committing Magistrate has only
to see that there is cause for putting a prisoner on
his trial. The getting up the prosecution is sub-
ject to no responsibility. A prosecutor, who
has been bought over, can do exactly as he
pleases. The defence is in like matter an acci-
dental affair. The prisoner may be rich or poor,
powerful or friendless, clever or stupid. The
Judge and Jury know nothing of the jobbing of
the prosecutor, or the situation of the prisoner
—they know only how the judicial game is con-
ducted when the parties are before them. The
Judge has the advantage of the depositions be-
fore the Magistrate ; but how much or how
little of the case is before the Court is known to
no one but the parties. All this is favourable
to rogues, as it favours escape,—it is favourable
to Counsel, because their importance rises with
the evil they can do. But it gives a very singu-
lar idea of the provisions for the furtherance of
justice. Only think what a breast that man
must have who knows that he was in possession
of evidence which, for technical reasons, he with-
held, and by the withholding of which innocent
men were led to the scaffold or the gallows !
Mr. Doherty, on the trial of four men for as-
saulting a constable, observed—

" When they were told that the prisoners were
put upon trial for an assault of such weight and
atrocity, as will be exhibited in this case, they would
admit that a more deplorable picture of the state of
society in this country could not well be conceived,
in which those ordinances that have been established
with such wisdom by the Legislature are over-
turned—those laws which have been enacted for
the benefit of society rendered nugatory. When
such atrocities as he should state were perpetrated,
might he not say that the impious excesses, so often
committed in this county, were calculated to divert
from it the blessings of God, with which it was so
richly favoured ? This he said with as much affec-
tion for the county, with as much respect as was
entertained for it by any one who heard him. I say,
said the Solicitor-General, that the present state of
this county is a disgrace to the age we live in.
Good God ! how is it that in this fertile country,
a country enjoying the blessings of an administra-
tion of laws boasted of in all other countries, and
• found elsewhere sufficient for the protection of life
and property, no man can be considered as living in
any sort of peaceful security ? For though he may
hold his life or property with a semblance of se-
curity, if he be himself a peaceable man—if he
chance to escape tie hand of the assassin by the
mercy of God, it is alone to the interposition of
Providence that he owes it, if it be not in some
way or other implicated in the turbulent transactions
and scenes of bloodshed that disgrace this country.
His Lordship, observed the Solicitor-General, from
always being engaged in the civil business of this
county, was not aware how many innocent- men
have been brought to an untimc+y end by transac-
tions similar to that with which the prisoners are
charged. It was calculated to raise grave and
solemn inquiry how it is that it seems as if the
bonds of society were unloosed—as if some un-
called-for warfare between man and man, when there
existed such a contempt for everything like con-
stituted authority, but that authority must be
trampled upon, brute force must be opposed to the
execution of those laws that have been enacted fee
the benefit of society, and without which it is im-
possible for one moment to maintain the frame of it."
What a picture we have here ! This state of
things is indeed a disgrace to the age we live in!
It is not by palliatives that such a district is to
be made orderly. It is obvious that the whole
frame of society is disordered. The protection
of the people by law must go hand in hand
with the punishment of crime, if we wish to
make any progress in the cure.—lbid.
There prevails a practice at the. assizes in Ire-
land, which seriously compromises the dignity of
the Bench and the interests of justice. We
allude to the custom of allowing a culprit, on
trial for a certain offence, to settle the affair by a
inarriage with the prosecutrix in the dock. This
is a dangerous and indecent practice, which
ought not to be permitted to continue. It is
indecent, because it throws an air of ridicule on
the solemnities of justice ; and it is dangerous,
because it affords encouragement to false accusa-
tions affecting the life of man. The prisoner
who is given in charge to a Jury on tin indict-
ment alleging so grave and penal an offence, as
the last outrage to a female, should not leave the
dock, hut to expiate his crime upon the scaffold
or to enjoy the full benefit of an acquittal. We
know of scarcely any crime more deserving of
death—we know of no criminal charge which
makes a false accuser more odious or detestible.
If the prisoner be guilty, public justice, and the
interests of speiety, demand that his life shall be
given up to the offended laws both as an atone-
ment and an example. If he he innocent, justice
,to the prisoner himself requires that he should
not be Peed, under the duress of the law, to
take to his bosom, as his wife, the woman, who,
by perjury and mal;cc, has pursued him to the very
brink of an ignominious graze, It may be said in-
4eed, that the man is a voluntary agent, and need not
marry she woman if lie would rather abide by the
issue ofthetriel; but an innocent man in jeopardy of
his life, will hardly hesitate to prefer the noose
which the Priest tics, even in the most awkward
manner, to. the risk of that which the executioner
fastetil, The halter dangling before his fright-
ened fancy hay wonderful efficacy in deciding
him in favour of the iwatrimonial alternative—
more especially if that alternative come enforced
by a recommendation from the Bench. MO
generally, in,f4ped, the Bench only connives at
this extraordinary issAceeding. But in a case
which we reported the other ;141, from the Tralee
Assize, our readers must 'have str.;,4» that the
Judge himself geted as the Internuncio of Cupid,
and male the rnatrimanigl proposal to the party.
The courtship was sudden, but no novel writer
could tying it to a happier termination the» the
learned Itheihnianthus who on this occasion pre-
sided over the united empire of law and love.—
To do justice to the scene we must reprint that
part pf the report which best illuwates our ob-
servations, 4fier the young woman had given
a detail of the violence of which she was the vic-
tim, the report proceeded ac fellows :*
Chief Baron O'GRADY—Young women,. would
you
r• the* marry the prisoner or hang lerstc'ss:-.1
• ' would like to give him the benefit of the law, your
Lordship.
A pretty benefit, indeed ! Is your Parish Priest
in wan don't know, your Honour.
Is your father in town ?—He is, my
,Lord.
The father was called on the table.
CHIEF BAttos—Would you rather see that man
hanged, or married to your daughter ?-9b, then, I

call God to witness, I would rather see him married
to my daughter. -
Then you consent to the match ?—I consent to
whatever pleases your Lordship.
CIIIEF BARON-011, you must manage the mat-
ter yourselves, far I am no match-maker.—(A laugh.)
—Now, let us see what your daughter says to the
business; speak to her. _ .

(The father proceeded towards the daughter, and
throwing his arm round her neck, gave her an affec-
tionate whisper.)
CHIEF BARON—WeII, what does she say; will
she marry him ?—She consents, my Lord.
CHIEF BARON—Now, see what the prisoner says.
The gaoler whispered the prisoner, who said he
was satisfied.

CHIEF BARON—But how are they to be married,
as the parish priest is not in town ?
The gaoler suggested that the chaplain of the gaol
would be a fit and proper person to perform the
ceremony. He accordingly took both into his cus-
tody, and instantly repaired to the gaol, where the
capital felony was soon converted into a valid marriage.
—Here is a scene as curious and dramatic as
can be presented to the eye of one who looks
even into a Law Court for instances of the
" burlesque of life." We here see the Judge
laying aside the awful terrors of his office, and
kindly assisting to convert the penal into the
Hymeneal process of the law. Under this pre-
siding influence the indictment is moved from
the Court of Justice into the court of love—the
affectionate glances from the witness-box are re-
ciprocated by glances as intelligible from the
dock. The gaoler is touched by the pathetic
scene. We are not told whether he shed any " iron
tears" on the occasion ; but he, with the greatest
readiness, tendered his offices to assist the pri-
soner out of one noose into another; and helped
to knock off the fetters of the law in order to
rivet the chains of Hymen. The chaplain, who
possibly might have had to preached the " con-
demned sermon," is relieved from that painful
duty—he fastens a knot, somewhat different
from that which another " finisher of the law"
would have tied, and sends the " fond couple"
home with the matrimonial benediction. Now,
however amusing this might be as a farce at a
minor theatre, we confess we do not like it as
an authentic account of proceedings in a
Court of Justice. No one can doubt that it
is a mockery of religion to marry people
under such circumstances, and a grievous
detriment to morality. It instigates and encou-
rages depraved women to make false charges
against men with whom they have been viciously
familiar. It is a practice which has the tone and
character of barbarism about it—it is calculated
to sink the the judicial office, and degrade the
noble attributes of justice in the eyes of the mul-
ti,ude ; and, in a country like Ireland, it must,
in a proportionate degree, assist in checking the
progress of civilization. It is a mistaken notion
that the punishment of crimes is in the nature of
redress for the wrongs of the individual—it is a
debt du to public justwe, which, however for-
giving the sufferer may be, the offender is bound
to pay. Since writing the above, we have met
with another report of one of those farcical trials
for violation, which occurred at the Cork As-
sizes. We here insert it—

Daniel Healy was indicted for assaulting Eleanor
Mullane.

As the witness was about to go on the table,
The prisoner called out Nell, Nell, come over,
and marry you.—(Loud laughter.)—The wit-
ness refused.

Mr. FREEMAN remarked that the prosecutrix had
a child before this transaction by the prisoner, and
his friends would not allow him to marry her.
The CHIEF BARON—Perhaps it would be better
for him, for I can inform you for your comfort, that
I and a brother Judge hanged a man under similar
circumstances.

Mr. FREEMAN—Oh ! very well, my Lord, I am
satisfied.

The CHIEF BARON (to Mr. Chatterton, the Clerk
of the Crown)—Get our friend Sullivan (the Priest),
and let him make this woman a bride. I will post-
pone the trial until the ceremony is over.
We shall make no further remark upon this
subject at present than to observe that it is one
so deeply affecting the purity and efficacy of the
administration of justice in Ireland as to demand
the serious attention of Parliament.—Morning
Herald.

In the last number of the Foreign Quarterly
Review there is a concise, but clear and excel-
lent, article on the " Letting of Land," which,
in so far as inferences might be drawn from it
respecting the agriculture of the Continent, and
the quantity of corn which, in case of the trade
being thrown open, might be exported to this
country,—we would fain recommend to the at-
tention of those of our land-owners, who con-
sider a low duty on foreign grain as tantamount
to the loss of their possessions. With those
who entertain such opinions, the fact is held to
be indisputable that the lower price of labour,
and the lower value of land on the Continent,
must enable the foreign agriculturist to undersell
the English farmer ; whereas the truth is, that
these are only trifling ingredients in the price of
gram, and faint excitements to its production,
compared with those enjoyed by the British
farmer. The writer of the article to which we
have referred, very justly lays it down as an in-
disputable truth, that " in order to give perfect
security to the occupiers of land, and conse-
quently to call forth all their energies, leases of a
reasonable endurance must be granted to diem."
Now such is generally the case in this country,
and has been for years past; and to the preva-
lence of this sort of common sense among the
English landowners, does the agriculture
of this country owe all the improvements
of- which it has to boast, and the •- im-
mense quantity of grain, compared with
its superfices, which is annually produced in it.
The farmer derives a security from his lease that
the capital which he may expend upon the soil
will be returned to him, with due interest, be-
fore it expires ; and the consequence is improve-
ment in the modes of agriculture, the inelosure
and cultivation of comparatively barren soils, and
the production of five-fold the quantity of grain
which would be grown were such security with-
held. But such is not only not generally the
case in foreign countries, but in addition to the
discouragement thus thrown in the way of the
cultivators of the soil, the rent of the land oc-
cupied is made payable in a manner which, while
it continues, must effectually prevent any very
eitensiye production of grain. The practice of
letting landz by proportional rents has, unfortu-
nately for the peasantry of the Continent, very
generally obtained a preference over other
modes ; and, as it is very justly remarked in
the article in the Foreign Quarteily, ‘,where-
ever it has been adopted, it has put a stop to all
improvement."
" Previously to the Revolution," says the Re-
view, f' about seven-eighths of the whole surface of
France were occupied by ;netayers—that is, by a
species of tenants paying a certain proportion, gene-
rally a half, and hardly ever less than a third, of the
produce to the landlord; the latter sometimes fur-
nishing the tenants wan the. oxen and other cattle
used in farming, 'and a portion of the seed—and
sometimes not. Even if we were totally unacquaint-

ed with tire facts of the case, we might confident y
pronounce, a priori, that such a system must have
been ruinous in the extreme. In England, it is not
supposed that the rent paid to the landlords amounts
to more than between a fourth and a fifth part of
the entire produce. What, then, must be the effect
of subjecting the cultivators of a country like France
where the rent of land is naturally lower than in
England, to so excessive a demand as that of a half
or even a third of the produce? Can any one be
surprised to learn that French agriculture, at the
era of the Revolution, was in the most wretched con-
dition, and the occupiers of lands stink in the abyss
of poverty and misery? Nor is this system less in-
jnrious to the interests of the proprietor than to
those of the cultivator. The landlord gets, indeed,
a large portion of the produce raised upon
his estate ; but owing to the degraded con-
dition of agriculture, arid the wretchedness of the
tenants, caused by the exorbitancy of his demands,
the produce raised is comparatively trifling; so that
the half that belongs to the landlord under this
miserable system, is not nearly so large as the share
falling to him would be were the rents moderate
' and fixed, and the tenants allowed to reap all the
advantages arising from whatever skill and talent
they might exert. The tenants having little or no
interest in the proper treatment of the stock fur-
nished by the landlords, the latter are perpetually
losing by its mismanagement or destruction. In
this most detestable of all modes of letting land,'
says Arthur Young, whose Travels in France and
tombardy contain a vast deal of information on this
subject, after running the hazard of such losses,
fatal in many instances, the defrauded landlord re-
ceives a contemptible rent; the farmer is in the
lowest state of poverty; the land is miserably cul-
tivated ; and the nation suffers as severely as the
farmers themselves.' Where the stock is wholly
furnished by the tenants, they are not quite so poor;
but even in this case their condition is decidedly
worse than that of a day-labourer in other countries;
agriculture is at the lowest ebb, and no improve-.
merit is either attempted, or even as much as
thought of." _ _ _ _ _

The Revolution did away with a considerable
part of this system, as it did with many other in-
tolerable abuses ; but according to the article
from which we quote, it is still in pristine vigour
in more than one-half of the whole kingdom of
France, and throughout the greater part of Italy.
In Prussia a better system has obtained, but with-
out, as yet, having produced any material change
in the quantity of produce ; and in Poland and
Russia, the state of the agriculture is too well
known to require a word of observation. We
put it then to the landowners of this country,
whether, under all these circumstances, there
would be any great danger, in case of a more li-
beral system of trade in corn being adopted, of
the country being inundated with foreign grain ?
whether there is any great likelihood of much
land being thrown out of cultivation, or the price
of corn falling materially below its present
average? and whether, under these circum-
stances, it would not contribute more to their
own interests, as well as to the general interests
and satisfaction of the country, that the trade in 1
corn were placed on the same basis as that of
any other importable article ? Our limits will
not now permit us to discuss these questions ;
but we trust the observations which we have
thrown out will meet with due consideration,
and that a more careful examination of the
subject will convince the landowner that there is
about as much dread of being inundated with
foreign grain as with foreign cotton, or foreign
hardware.—Morning Advertiser.