The Sun.
London, England, 1842-05-09 00:00:00

point to their own wretched condition—they point to
the starving millions—they point to their own dis-
content, as proofs of the injurious consequences of
not securing their property. The passage we have
quoted from Mr. MACAULAY shows clearly enough
that the Government has nothing of its own to give to
any class of the people. All that it does, therefore.
and all that it can do is, to take from one class to give
to some other class. The Legislature produces
nothing—it only alters the distribution of wealth. It
creates no new values. The people say, with ADAM
SMITH, that all the wealth of the world is produced
by labour, but that, owing to unjust legislation, la-
bour has the smallest share of its own produce. The
Legislature, or Government, takes away from them
such an immense sum for the priesthood, for tithes
are a tax—such an immense sum for the fundholders—
such an immense sum for the army, the navy, and for the
Court—for pensioners and Comissioners, that nothing
is left for them. They say that the Legislature, by
various kinds of monopolies, by its enormous tax-
ation, fleeces them bare, and leaves them nothing to
subsist on. In their own emphatic language, the
taxing rulers riot in luxury, and the ruled are
in a state of starvation. They assert that in this
general result lies a decided proof that their property
is not secure, and they ask for a share of represen-
tation to ensure themselves that justice which the
Legislature, as now constituted, has systematically,
perseveringly, and stubbornly denied them. The
broad general fact, that industry starves while idleness,
or the unproductive classes, abound in wealth, amply
justifies the complaints of the people, and refutes
the implied statement of ➢fir. MACAULAY that under
our present system property is secure.

Mr. ROEBUCK'S conduct on Friday had the merit of
being eminently impartial. He spared neither To-
ries, Whigs, nor Radicals ; and the exposure he made,
so far as it went, was complete. The public, how-
ever, regard it more as an index to the general condi-
tion of the House of Commons than the work itself.
Almost every day announcements are made in the
Votes, or in the Reports, that Mr. So-and-so has
withdrawn his petition against the election return of
which he had complained.' The number of petitions
so set aside is much greater than the number brought
to trial. It is said of Sir DENIS LE MARCHANT
that he announced personally to the SPEAKER that
he did not mean to prosecute his petition against
the return for Harwich ; and it is also announced that
the Tories, without being at the trouble of naming a
committee, have agreed to throw Major BERESFORD
overboard, and give Sir DENIS a seat for that Borough.
Such details as these, combined with the great num-
ber of disputed returns, and the existence throughout
the country of notorious bribery, make the people
suspect that the bulk of the House of Commons
has been elected by corrupt means.
We hear that said, and we hear it also said that
this suspicion explains the extraordinary subserviency
of the House of Commons to Sir R. PEEL. No incon-
siderable number of the Members, for the sake of sup-
porting him, have falsified all the hopes their conduct
excited, and have forfeited all the pledges they pub-
licly gave upon the hustings. The majority of these
men, it is said, were at great expense to obtain
their seats. They parted even with more than money.
They used up their character in bribing, intimidating,
coaxing, and coercing the electors ; and having
given both money and reputation for their seats,
they wish to get back an equivalent. They gave
a great price for the patronage and power
they expect to enjoy under PEEL, and they will not
oppose him, do what he may, lest they should lose the
expected rewards. They might break up the Govern-
ment and endanger their dearly-bought seats. From
their corruption and the general corruption of the
constituencies, therefore, the interest of the nation is
wholly disregarded. The tenure on which many of
the Members hold their seats, to which the few facts
brought forward by Mr. ROEBUCK are an index, ex-
plains why the iniquitous and tyrannical Income-
tax meets with little opposition from those who ought
to be the guardians of the people's rights.

We are inclined to suppose that there are few, or
none, of the occupations of the labouring classes
which do not seem painful, disgusting, and dan-
gerous to the upper and idle classes. But, as so-
ciety cannot be sustained without labour, it is not
judicious to make their views of necessary oc-
cupation the rules of life. So terrible an opinion
have they of labour that they have unwisely used it
as a punishment, and have caused great injury to the
working classes, by associating labour with ig-
nomy. While we deprecate on the one hand, there-
fore, their interference with the labour of the peo-
ple, we think it our duty, on the other, not to join
too eagerly some of our Contemporaries in des-
cribing necessary occupations as hopelesslydisgusting
and hideous.

In all situations, where youthiof both sexes are
thrown together, much of that vice will arise which
the Reports of the Commissioners on Mines describe.
As far as our experience extends, there is not more
correctness amongst the agricultural population than
amongst the population of collieries- and mines ;—we
do not believe that the hay-field or the hop-
garden, the farmer's kitchen or his barn, is a
better school of morality than the mine. The Re-
ports of the Poor-law Commissioners gave a lament-
able account of the chastity of females in the
agricultural districts, and believing' that the females
in the collieries and mines are not worse than those in
the agricultural districts, we will not imitate some of
our Contemporaries, by quoting the rather offensive
accounts which the Sub-Commissioners have given
of the behaviour of both sexes. Whoever chooses to
pry closely into the details of society will find similar
scenes in almost every part of it.
It is of more consequence, we think, to observe,
that females have naturally no taste for labour in the.
mines. They love to dress and adorn their per-
sons ; and where such a taste is encouraged,
as it is with us, 'the women, as the rule,
are prone to finery and indulgence, and dreadfully
averse to drudgery. We feel quite confident, there-
fore, as the rule, that women do not work in the col-
lieries and mines except from dire necessity ; and if
they could live like ladies above ground, no power on
earth could convert them into " getters," " trappers,"
" hurriers," &c. &c., in the bowels of the earth. We
are not surprised, therefore, to find in the evidence
such statements as these :

Mary Barnett says—l do not like working in pit, but
I am obliged to get a living.
Patience Hershaw says—l wear a belt and chain at
the workings to get the coves out. I would rather work
' in the mill than in the coal pit.
Ruth Barnett says—l come down into pits in linings
of old trousers, which I take otf. I wear an old waist-
coat and shift. Ido not like working in pit. I would not
do it if I could help it.
Another quotation :
Betty Harris, aged thirty-seven, drawer in a coal-pit,
Little Bolton, Lancashire, says—"l have a belt round
my waist, and a chain passing between my legs, and I
go on my hands and feet. The road is very steep, and
we have to hold by a rope, and when there is no rope,
by anything we can catch hold of There are six women
and about bix boys and girls iu the pit I work in :
it is very hard work for a woman. The pit is very wet
where I work, and the water comes over our clog-tops
always, and I have seen it up to my thighs. lam not
so strong as I was, and I cannot stand my work so
well as I used to do. I have drawn till I have the skin
off me ; the belt and chain is worse when we are in the
family-way. My feller [husbandl has beaten me many
a time for not being ready. I have known, many a man
beat his drawer."

Here is abundant evidence, then, that the women do
not like the work, and it is, therefore, clear that they
would not engage in it if they could help it. We
have so much confidence, too, in their mother's love,
that we can assert that they would never consent to
their children going and engaging in such severe work
at the early age of five or six, if they were not driven
to do it by their poverty. Assuredly they would
keep their daughters out of the coal-pits if they could
subsist without driving them to such labour. The source,
therefore, of all the terrible evils which belong to the
coal-pits lies in the poverty of the people which legisla-
tion causes and cannot lessen. Whatever may be Lord
ASHLEY'S plan, his law will have this, in common with
all the factory Acts, the appointment of a number of
Comthissioners and Inspectors to carry it into execution,
who must be paid out of the produce of labour, and
will add either to the toils or to the poverty of the
people. The true way to keep women from working
in coal-pits is to make such labour wholly unneces-
sary, in order to provide for the comfortable sub-
sistence of themselves and their families. That this
is within the power of legislation we do not believe ;
that it Would not be their happier lot did legislation
not 'interfere with labour, and withhold from it its
die reward we - still not. positively assert ; but
we are quite sure, ou that priucipje) we
-•- •

have borrowed in another article from Mr. 1
MACAULAY, that the Legislature can do nothing so
beneficial for these people, as to cease from plunder-
ing them. By the law that the Legislature has just
passed, these poor toiling infant girls and mothers
are at this moment, and every day of their lives,
obliged, before they can eat a morsel of bread or a
piece of potatoe, to pay a tax to the rich land and
mine owner of 13s. per quarter on wheat.
The coal-owners, who are the parties that most
profit by the employment of children and women in
mines, should imitate the Duke of BUCCLEUCH, who
has refused to allow them to work in his mines with
the happiest effects. Of course, he raises the wages of
the men, and gives them work in proportion. If other
coal-owners will do the same, and not be quite so rapa-
cious as they now are, there will be no occasion to en-
cumber the statute-book with an additional penal law.

The vast number of murders that have been committed
in the metropolis within the last few years, casts a great
stain on the country, and ought to teach humility to those
who boast of the superior civilisation of England, as
compared with all other nations. While slanders and
calumnies, not twelve months ago, were heaped upon the
Irish people by certain writers in London, charging them
with murders and cruelties—and Spaniards and Italians
in the same spirit of national prejudice have
been stigmatised as assassins—deeds have been
committed here which make the blood run cold. As-
sassinations have become frequent, murders of the
deepest die have been pepetrated, one-third of
the murderers yet remaining undiscovered ; and wha t
shows their great cruelty, many of these atrocious
crimes have been committed against helpless women, by
the persons bound to protect them. This was the case
with GREENAC RE, BLAKESLEY, GOOD, and several
others, showing a depravity and unmanly violence rarely
surpassed. The case of the wretched man COOPER, now
in course of examination, is of a different kind, but it is
almost unexampled for reckless, wanton disregard of
human life. He murdered one fellow-creature on the spot,
seriously, and perhaps fatally, wounded another, and it
was from no want of will on his part that many more
did not fall victims to his savage disposition. These
are certainly ominous symptoms of the present state of
society, and, from whatever cause arising, inflict a great
disgrace on the country. It singularly enough occurs,
too, at a time when more noise is made about Church ex
tension, religious meetings, and Sunday travelling than
at any former period—when Sunday schools are held in
every village, and assemblages collect all over the country
at stated periods for humanizing and converting to the
Christian faith people of every clime. Enormous sums
are sent out of the country yearly for these purposes.
Might they not be better spent at home in encouraging
education, promoting industry, and preventing crime?
Something must be done to abate this great disgrace, or
England will become a reproach and a bye-word among
all nations.

Lord BROUGHAM has brought in a Bill to give pro_
tection to witnesses examined before Committees of the
two Houses of Parliament, respecting bribery at elec-
tions. The Noble and Learned Lord, like every person
who pays any regard to the corrupt state of the
representation of the country, is alarmed at the
frightful extent to which this moral pestilence is
spreading. We have serious doubts, however, as to
the efficacy of his Lordship's Bill as a remedy for the
evil. We doubt whether any laws could be framed
which would check bribery under the present state
of the elective franchise. The incentives are
too great and the facilities too numerous- for
legal hindrance. The best way to check bribery is
to begin by extending the franchise. Household
suffrage, or the adoption of a knowledge qualification,
would inflict a mortal blow upon bribery. The next
best step to be taken, but here Lord BaouortAm does
not agree with us, would be to adopt the Ballot ; and
finally make Parliaments triennial. Without these
there can be no end to bribery. As to Parliamentary
Committees, they are notoriously incompetent to act as
tribunals to decide upon election returns. It matters
little therefore, what protection they can give to wit-
nesses called before them.

We willingly correct a great error in an article on
the sth instant, headed " West India Steam-packets,'
into which we were led by misrepresentation. In
that article it is stated that Lieut. APLIN had been
cashiered for his conduct with respect to the delay of
the mails. Lieut. APLIN informs us that we have
been grossly misinformed, and furnishes a copy of an
official letter from the Admiralty in answer to his re-
quest to be superseded. This proves that the state-
ment furnished to us is wholly untrue, and as it is
calculated to create an unfavourable impression with
regard to the Gallant Officer, we are happy to give it
the most direct contradiction. He was superseded at
his own request, and no imputation, therefore, can
rest upon Lieut. APLIN'S character, either as a gen-
tleman or a naval officer.

M. Tffrnas' organ, the Constitutionnel, declares that
'much as France is benefited by peace with England
she would prefer war to the ratification of the right of
search treaty. If such be the case the treaty will never
be ratified, for we would rather abandon a thousand
such treaties than go to war about them. But why not
allow the whole question to drop ? The great bulk of
the people of both countries know nothing whatever
about it. The longer discussion of it can only tend to
create a bad feeling between nations whose interest it is
:.to live in the most perfect amity. Besides, why is Eng-
land blamed about this treaty ? The National knows
that France was the first to propose it, that it was drawn
up in conjunction with her, and that she was as
earnest as England in wishing to obtain for
it the sanction of the other Great Powers.
For our own part we speak the more freely
because, from the first, we doubted the policy of such a
treaty. More reflection has increased these doubts.
Right of search treaties never can put down the slave
trade, nor can such search be enforced without inflicting
grievous injuries upon commerce. It is on this ground
alone that we are opposed to the right of search. As
to the nonsense about the insult offered to the flags
of independent States, we dismiss it at once with con-
tempt. Where the right is common there can be no
insult in its exercise by any individual State, though
there may be great inquisitorial wrong. We would a
thousand times prefer seeing the treaty burned by the
hands of the common hangman, than hear of one life lost
in enforcing it.
The following extracts from the French journals in-
clude all that they contain of any interest. Thursday
being the feast of the Ascension was observed as a holi-
day in all Catholic countries. There was therefore no
Bourse. But as there is no holiday for the newspapers,
they, of course, appeared as usual. SOLOMON says that
there is a time and a season for everything under
Heaven, save sin. Had newspapers been in circulation in
the days of the wise Monarch of Israel and Judah, we
have no doubt that he would have added that there was
neither time nor season for editors and printers of
daily papers knowing fatigue, and taking a holiday.
The fierce quarrel between the French Church party
and the University has been re-kindled, by the ad-
dresses to the KlNG—that of the Archbishop of PARIS
especially. The University party quote the KING'S
answer to their address, in which his MAJESTY boasts of
having reared his sons at the common college. To this
the Univers replies as follows :

We were amongst the 400 school-fellows. of the young
Princes, and can tell how equal and common was our lots- The
Princes came in the morning with their preceptor, in their -car-
riages, to the luxuriously furnished private rooms fitted up for
them at the college. There they learned their lessons. I'hey
came down to class five minutes after the other school-boys, and
withdrew five minutes sooner, and always to their private
room. The Princes dined with us, but always on
dishes prepared and reserved exclusively for them.
and which we envied prodigiously. The Princes very
seldom came to the play-ground ; and, if they did, it was
only to take a turn and be gone. And when they did, the
twelve or fifteen boursiers, sent by the King gratuitously to
college, formed a little court around them, and kept off us pro-
fane. As to the common benches, on which M. Villemrin in
his speech places the King's sons, that is a figure of rhetoric.
The Princes were kept u much apart as possible. It was but
the name of public education. As to the Duke of Orleans, be
has avowed, in a well-known letter to Beranger, that his only
lessons in politics when a youth were derived from the poet's
songs.
The Semaphore of Marseilles contains the following from
Naples, April 28: —" The post-office treaty between France and
the Two Sicilies only waits for the King's signature. The
Duke of Montebello will take it in a few days to Paris; the
ratifica• ions will be exchanged in two months, and it will
be in full operation in October 1. The complaints made by
Holland and Belgium relative to the losses experienced by
different capitalists of these two nations in the affair of the
Tavoliere di Puglie, have been submitted to the mediation of
the Holy See. France also interposes, but only as a friend.
There is no doubt that this affair, which at first had a threaten-
ing aspect, will be arranged justly and satisfactorily. The
marriage of the King's sister, the Princess Therese, with the
young Emperor of Brazil, is regarded as concluded. The
Count de Rayneval, ,first secretary of the French embassy at
Rome, has just left fur Sicily. After a tour of a fortnight or
three weeks, he will resume his duties at Rome."
A letter from Constantinople, April 17, in the Sud of Mar-
seilles, says :—" The customs of Constantinople have been put
up to public competition. A friend of Izzet Bey, the Sultan's
present favourite, and the protector of the Grand Vizier, offered
ten millions of piastres more than they yielded last year, under
the farmer-general Tahir Bey, one of the most influential
personages in the empire. Tahir Bey naturally could not
offer more than he had brought to the Treasury for thil
branch of the revenue during the great number of years that-
he has carried' it on. It • would have been owning-_ himself
guilty either of extortion or of bad administration.. The
struggle is still going And no person aan say who will be
the victor ; but Tahir Bey is possessor of immense riches,-V&
it is thought that he will succeed•througlithe influeikoe.of the.*
Sultoa Velide• Riaa Pula pretend, to be iutllliotred, and