The Sun.
London, England, 1845-08-28 00:00:00

TEE SUN,

in the slave trade on the coast of Africa to the north of
the Equator ; and by the same treaty his Britannic
Majesty, on his part, agreed to remit, from the data at
which the ratification of the treaty should be promul-
gated, such further payments as might then remain due
and pay able upon the loan of 600.0001, made in London
for the service of Portugal, in consequence of the con-
vention between Great Britain and Portugal of the 21st
of April, 1809, which convention was declared to be void
and of no effect.

The treaty of January 22, 1815, was ratified and pro-
mulgated at Rio de Janeiro, July 1, 1815 ; from which
date, therefore, Portugal was released from the engage-
ments which she contracted under the treaty of 1809, for
the payment of the interest and sinking fund, and liqui-
dation of the principal, of the loan of 600,0001., raised
under that treaty ; and those engagements were trans-
ferred to Great Britain.
If the liberation of Portugal from this burden was not,
in reality, the cancelment of a debt due by her to Great
Britain, neither were the payments consequent thereupon,
strictly speaking, sums paid to a foreign Government ;
but the item will most appropriately be included under
the head of payments.
Assuming this to be the case, there will be to be
added to the sums paid by Great Britain on account of
the Portuguese loan of 1809—the sum of 300,0004, with
interest thereupon, paid to Portugal, under the conven-
tion of the 21st of January, 1815, and additional con-
vention of 28th July, 1817, in discharge of claims for
Portuguese slave vessels captured previous to the Ist of
June, 1814, by British cruisers; and the amount also
paid as indemnification, under the additional convention
of the 28th of July, 1817, for Portuguese slave vessels
captured between the Ist of June, 1814, and the ink tal-
lation of the mixed commissions under the convention,
viz., 265,137! ss. I Id.

LONnON,

great grievance--the Established Church. Sir James
Graham, himself, admitted that the grant would save
that Church from the danger and oppositi ,T 1 to which it
was exp sed.—(Hear, hear.) The Ival object of the
grant, which was but the beginning of a series of similar
measures, was, to detach the priests from the petiole,
and make the latter take the side of the oppressors
against the oppressed.—(Cheers.)2,'He was against all
forms of religious endowment whatever, as tending to
subvert the liberties of the people. It was said that
another candidate, who was earlier in the field
than himself, (Sir Wm. Molesworth,) entertained
similar opinions ou this subject. In proving this he
liked something better than mere abstract theory—
he liked practice. Lord John Russell had uttered, in
the House of Commons, some of the finest sentiments
ever delivered in favour of civil and religious liberty,
yet no man had done things more c;lculated to do injury
to the practical adaptation of those principles than the
same Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) Some better test
must be given of the value of a Member than fine say-
ings. Let them put the question to the other candidate,
if he would, in the event of being elected, vote for the
abolition, not only of the Irish Church Establishment,
but the withdrawal of all ecclesiastical endowments, and
the application of the funds so regained to secular pur-
poses.—(Loud cheers.) This would be the way to try
him.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Miall), at least, was
prepared to go that length ; and in the event of his
election he would pledge himself to make a motion to
that effect.—(Loud cheers.) The Honourable Candi-
date having stated his views at length on this
subject, went into the question of the suffrage,
declaring himself is favour of universal suffrage, with
the usual limitations. He had, he said, been charged
with dividing the Liberal interest. He called on those
who talked about the Liberal interest so much, to define
what that interest really was, and wherein it differed from
Conservatism. For the last few years. for his own part,
he saw little to choose between Lord John Russell and
Sir Robert Peel. Nearly every bad measure which the
latter had proposed to subjugate the liberties of the
people, the former had supported. He saw no necessity for
any alarm about dividing that interest ; therefore he was
for no compromise ; and would be no party to any ar-
rangement involving a sacrifice of principle. He
came forward as a candidate, to afford a rallying point
for the liberal portion of the liberal electors, and to
enable the Dissenters to act consistently with their
professions. He differed with Sir William Molesworth
not in degree, but in principle, and was willing to meet
that gentleman face to face in discussion, and to maintain
what he had just advanced. Mr. Miall concluded amidst
great applause.

Mr. MILLER, an elector of Bermondsey, moved the
usual resolution, that Mr. Miall was an efficient person
to represent the borough in Parliament.
The Rev. Mr. BENSON seconded the resolution. As a
Dissenter, he could not conscientiously support any of
the candidates but Mr. Miall. Sir William Moles-
worth's views on the Maynooth grant and the new poor-
law were such as he entirely differed from. How, then,
could he consistently vote for such a man?
Mr. JOHN GARRAT supported the resolution, in a
speech condemnatory of the centralising policy of the
Whigs.

Mr. VOUSLEY made some observations, regretting the
division which at present existed in the borough. lie
was sorry now to be separated from the friends with
whom he had formerly acted, but he was so from the
impression that he was pursuing the wiser course to
serve the Liberal interest. Sir William Molesworth was
the best man that, under existing circumstances, could
be brought forward. He was a tried man, and one who
had always acted honestly and consistently when in
Parliament.—(Cries of " No, no," and cheers.)
Mr. WEBB made a reply at some length to the re-
marks of the previous speaker. He declared himself fa-
vourable to the views of Complete Suffrage advocated
by Mr. Miall, though not long ago his opinions had ma-
terially differed on this question.
Several other speakers having addressed the meeting,
the resolution was carried with but two dissentients.
A vote of thanks was then given to the Chairman,
when, after a few parting words frem Mr. Mial , the
meeting dispersed.