The Sun.
London, England, 1829-05-16 00:00:00

SPiRIT OF THE LoNisON JOLTNALS.

The attempt was made by Mr. O'Connell last
night to take his seat in the House of Commons,
and the narrative of the proceeding will be read seith
interest in oar Parliareenzary report. Yet that can
convey but an imperfect idea of the silent, the
almost breathless attention with which he was re-
ceived in the House, advancing to and retiring from
the table. The benches were filled in an unusual
degree with Members, and there is no recollection
of so large a number of Peers brought by curiosity
into the House of Commons. The lion. Gentle-
man was introduced by Lords Dungannon and Eb-
rington. A perfect stillness ensued. By his action
he evidently declined the first oath which was ten-
dered to him,—that of supremacy and aliet7i,tnce,—
and required the oath prescribed by the lee Act.
The explanation by the Speaker to the llonse, of
what had taken place, was clear, his expression of
rot:me:ranee and manner towards the Hoe. Gentle-
men on whom he fixed his regards extremely cour
icons, and his declaration that " he must withdraw"
firm and authoritative. Mr. O'Connell for a mo-
ment looked round as one who had reason to expect
:,iii port, anti this felling, he bowed most respectfully
ren.f withirew. After his departure, Mr. Brougham
s she, but in a somewhat subdued tone; some dis-
cession followed, but the debate on the subject is
t xci for Monday next.—Times.
It is a mistake, whether real or pretended, in the
a I rncates for a continuance of- the East India mo-
nepole, to assume that the great towns of England,
aid the merchants generally, have any desire to wrest
from the Company the sovereignty of its empire in
the East, Upon the face of the suleect we believe
that most prudent men would agree in the probable
clanger to the independence of Parliament which
might threaten us, were the patronage of India, civil,
Inifitery, and mixed, to be transferred from the Corn-
rimy to the King's Ministers. As against the
reentiy, we should, with our present opinions, con-
eider such a change not a little perilous, whatever
eftight he its consequences as a question, like that
of Mr. Fox's India Bill, between the Minister and
the Crown itself. The dissatisfaction, however, at
the operation of the existing Charter, has a totally
different origin. The deputies from Liverpool,
Bristol, Glasgow, Leeds, Calcutta, &c. &c. have
pert r broached an inquiry, or expressed a wish, in
relaticn to the political Government of India.
Their sole purpose is to break up the commercial
monopoly, and to enjoy a free and wholsorne trade,
es well with the Company's—or rather, constitu-
sicmall2; speaking, King's—dominions there, as
hli those of the Emperor of China, from
'hey are, by a monstrous intrusion of
monopolizing jealousy and cupidity, interdicted;
while the citizens of the United States,
the stibjeets of every power on earth,
save England, have an unshackled privilege
of visiting Canton as merchants, and many of
them have for years carried on a prosperous and
growing commerce. Mr. Whitmore's motion on
Thinaday night brought out the sentiments of some
men of great authority in the House of Commons,
avian regard to this commercial question. What the
bias of the House was, and even of the Ministers,
is obvious from the fact that no individual of the
Cabinet—neither Mr. Gotilburn nor Mr. Vesey
Fitzgerald—would discounteaanee the expectation
,that his Majesty's Government intended to afford
relief to the mercantile interest of Great Britain.
Of course it would be impossible that any honest
nrivocate of free trade should resist the proposition
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, for adducing
its most various and ample evidence as a ground
for legislating on a subject of such vast extent. We
Acknowledge further, that when the purpose of the
aplelicants is to work an alteration in an existing
systeni, the onus of demonstrating the grievances
they complain of must rest undoubtedly upon them.
The proof must not be limited to mere first prin-
ciples: it must establish that a positive mischief isin-
dicied on the King's subjects;—that they would
he able to avail themselves of an opening of
the monopoly ;—that the nation would be gainers
with them ; that India would share the benefit, in
civilization arid happiness ; that foreigners,in respect
(Una, are now enjoying the good from which
Englishmen are excluded; and lastly, that the In-
dian empire itself, in its political relations and cepa-
eities, of the importance of which none can feel more
sensibly than we do, could not be a sufferer from
the change in a higher ratio than the trade and
powers of this country would be served by it. We
thus lay upon the shoulders of the anti monopolists
a heavy weight of proof; and our conviction, as at
present instructed, is, that the interest of British
commerce, and of the empire administered by the
Company, will both profit largely by a liberal ad-
mission of all classes of the King's European sub-
jects to the advantages for which Mr. Huskiseon
and Mr. Whitmore, representing such a body of
their wealthy, intelligent, and enterprising country-
men, have contended. One suggestion made by Mr.
Baring, we conceive to be marked by considerable
judgment and good sense. The Hon. Gentleman
recommended that the Company should, if possible,
lie induced to concur in an immediate or speedy
opening of the foreign China trade to British mer-
chants, whereby the latter might be enabled to load
at Canton cargoes of tea for French, American, or
other foreign ports. This being a branch of niter-
chandize already open to foreigners of all nations,
and one moreover in which the Company does not
participate at all, Mr. Baring very truly observed,
that the conduct of the Directors would be that of
the " Dog in the manger," if they threw obstacles
in the way of sash a benefit to the individual com-
merce. The details of the remarkable extension ex-
perienced by the private trade with India siace the
year 181,1, will be found in Mr. Whitmore's speech,
in the memorials and resolutions published by the
provincial deputies, and in the pamphlet of Mr.
Crawfurd, to which we yesterday alluded : we shall
therefore decline to expatiate on them here, If not
refuted by the official documents to be presented to
Parliament, as announced by Mr. Goulburn, they
will have exhibited a series of data deserving the
most serious consideration.—lbid.
An idle rumour is in circulation that there exists
a coolness between his Majesty and the Duke of
Wellington. If his Grace has become the object,
like former Prime Ministers, of low and grovelling
intrigue, the parties, although they may consider;
themselves secure from observation, will, whoever I
they are, soon be made known, and their meanness
and meddling be exposed. The Duke has hitherto
deservedly enjoyed the confidence of his sovereign,
and the esteem of the public; and in the present
situation of our domestic affairs and foreign relit- j
tions, there is no individual in the country so well
qualified as he is, to guide the helm of the State.
His conduct is approved by all the enlightened and
liberal men in the United Kingdom—he is respected
as much abroad as he is at home, and any disorga-
nization of the present Ministry to make room for
the remnant of a superannuated and imbecile party,
would be one of the greatest misfortunes that could
befal the country. If the spirit of intrigue is ac-
tually at work, it will soon vanish before tha firm-
ness of the Duke of Wellington. He has too much
penetration to be imposed upon by the insidious
smiles of pretended friends ; and too strong in his
position to be injured or shaken by the dark artifices
of secret enemies.—Morning Advertiser.

Mr. O'Connell entered the House last night, and
was conducted to the Table by Lords Ebrington
and Duncannon. He had previously, as he announced
he would in his second letter to the Members of the
House of Commons, dated 9th inst., taken the oath
provided for Catholic Members by the Relief Bill
lately passed, according to the provisions of the
20th section of the Relief Bill, in the Court of
King's Bench. The Speaker, after having been
informed by Mr. Ley, the Clerk, of what had passed
hetween him and Mr. O'Connell, with respect to
the oaths, observed, " I understand the Hon. Gen-
tleman to propose to take the oaths directed to be
imposed on persons professing the Catholic religion,
and entering this House by the authority of the Act of
Parliament recently passed. There are but two

points in the coarse to be purstied iii the taking of
sats by Members of this House. The first relates
to the repeal of the declaration against Transubstan-
tiation. 'The other is the part of the Act appoint-
ing the oaths to be taken by each Member of the
House professing the Roman Catholic creed, in lieu
of the Oaths of Allegiance, Supremacy, and Abju-
ration. This substituted oath, as I imagine, is only
to be 'taken by such Members as shall be returned to
sit in this House subsequently to the commencement
of the Act." As Mr. O'Connell was elected pre-
viously to the passing of the Act, he informed him,
that before he took his seat,- he must take the
Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, before the Lord
Steward or his Commissioners, and the Oatlss of
Allegiance, Supremacy, and Abjuration, at the table
of the House; and in order to maintain the dignity
and privileges of the House, he ordered him imme-
diately to withdraw—an order which Mr. O'Connell
respectfully complied with. The preamble and first
clause of the Act lately passed run as follows :
" Whereas by various Acts of Parliament, certain re-
straints and disabilities pre imposed on the Roman Catho-
lic subjects of his Majesty, to which other subjects of his
Majesty are not liable And whereas it is expedient that
sacs restraints and disabilities shall be from henceforth dis-
continued : And whereas, by various Acts, certain Oaths,
and certain Declarations, commonly called the Declaration
against Transubstantiation, and the Declaration against
Transubstantiation and the Invocation of Saints, and the
Sacrifice of the Mass, as practised in the Church of [tome,
are or may be required to be taken, made, and subscribed
by the subjects of his Majesty, as qualifications for sitting
and voting in Parliament, and for the enjoyment of cer-
tain offices, franchises, and civil rights : Be it enacted by
the King's most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice
and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Com-
mons in this present Parliament assembled, and by the au-
thority of the same, that from and after the commence-
ment of this Act, all such parts of the said Acts as require
the said Declarations, or either of them, to be made or sub-
scribed by any of his Majesty's subjects as a qualification fur
sitting and voting in Parliament, or for the exercise or en-
joyment of any office, franchise, or civil right, be, and the
same are (save as hereinafter provided and excepted) hereby
repealed."
The fourth Clause enacts, that no Peer professing
the Roman Catholic Religion, and no person pro—
fessing the Roman Catholic Religion, who shall be
returned a Member of the House of Commons, after
the commencement of this Act, shall be capable of
sitting or voting in either House of Parliament re-
spectively, unless he shall first take and subscribe
the Oath appointed to be taken in place of the Oaths
and Declarations above alluded to. Here, then, we
have an Act declaring that the restraints and disa-
bilities imposed on the Roman Catholic subjects of
his Majesty to which other subjects of his Ma-
jesty are not liable, shall k from henceforth
discontinued; and on the quibble (for we ca ,t qualify
it by no other term) that Mr. O'Connell was re-
turned before the passing of the Act, the House of
Commons are called on to violate the broad principle
of the Act, by declaring, in the teeth of it, that the
restraints and disabilities imposed on his Majesty's
ttoman Catholic subjects, to which other subjects of
his Majesty are not liable, shall not be from. hence-
forth discontinued. Mr. O'Connell is one' of his
Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects ; and being one
of that class, he is freed from all the restraints and
disabilities to which other subjects of his Majesty
are not liable. Because a particular Oath is appointed
to be taken by all Catholic Members returned since
the passing of a: Act, it would be a strange infe-
rence, that a Catholic Member, returned before the
passing of the Act, should be subject:to the restraints
and disabilities which the Act declares to be disconti-
nued from the. passing of the Act. A child must see
the absurdity of such a mode of construing statutes.
The only question that can arise is, not whether the
restraints and disabilities, declared to be at an end,
should be peyived, but whether, as a certain oath is
prescribed to be taken by the Member returned after
the commencement qf the Act, and nothing is said as
to any Catholic Member returned before the com-
mencement of the Act, Mr. O'Connell can sit with-
out taking that oath. The Act is inaccurately
drawn up, for it ought to have comprehended Ca-
tholic Members returned before the commencement
of this Act as well as after the commencement of
the Act. But the declared object of the Act being
the discontinuance of restraints and disabilities from
and after the commencement of the Act; the failure
to provide an oath for those returned before the
commencement of the Act, which is merely a matter
of minor regulation, cannot revive the restraints
which are repealed, which would be defeating the
object of the Act. All Roman Catholics from the
commencement of the Act are in the exact condi-
tion of other subjects of his Majesty, except in so
far as the new law has provided otherwise. But
there is no provision in the Act declaring that those
returned before the commencement of the Act shall
not be entitled to the privileges granted to Catholics
in general; and it would be a most whimsical ins
ference, that the omission to provide an oath for
them should be deemed an exclusion from the com-
mon privilege of Catholics. How such a construc-
tion as that indicated by the Speaker should have
entered his head, is to us astonishing. The Con-
stitution is older than the various oaths prescribed;
but the Speaker deems the Constitution subsidiary
to the spathe, Because, forsooth, there is not an
oath in his Treasury precisely suited, as he thinks,
for Mr. O'Connell, he at once sets aside the Con-
s'itution, and sets aside an election which has been
deemed good by a Committee of the House of
Commons.,—lllorning Chronicle.

Nothing, probably, will have astonished the gene-
rality of people, who attend to such things, more
than to have seen, on one and the same night, Lord
Lyndhurst eulogising the mode of administering the
Bankrupt Laws, and Mr. Peel rejoicing that no
change is likely to take place in the constitution or
the practice of the EccleSiastical Courts. That
" Whatever is, is best," is a very trite and conve-
nient maxim, and possesses every recommendation
except a total absence of truth. There is another
maxim, too, quite as old and us homely, and some-
what more true, which is this—that " Lookers on
see more of the game than the players ;" and this
last, we believe, is peculiarly applicable to legal
abuses of all kinds, and in all Courts. Let the
mass of creditors, who suffer by the present opera.
tion of the Bankrupt Laws, the Chancellor
what they think of their operation; and let tile
suitors, who fall into the pit of Doctors' Commons,
tell Mr. Peel how they like the slow justice they
get there, and the large amount of the Proctors' and
the Doctors' Charges, and then let the Learned Lord
and the Right Gentleman repeatr their eulogies
" With what appetite they may. It is quite a
beautiful specimen of official gratittlde and harmony
for those to "praise the bridge that carries them
over;" but the tired pedestrian, who finds the road
so deep aid miry, and the tolls so high, that after
all he is obliged to wade through the stream with
no small chance of drowning, looks upon the bridge
as of no benefit to him, and wiahas to see even the
old ferry in its place. The truth is tii4t there are
no parts of our pdicial system which stand more in
need of reform than the Bankrupt Laws and the
Ecclesiastical Courts; and to see them, therefore,
singled out as peculiar topics for eulogy 4y those
from whom their reform might be reasonably expect-
ed, holds out but a sorry prospect to the country of
any such reform being likely to take place.—Morn.
ing Berald.

It will be seen by our Parliamentary Report, that
Mr. O'Connell actually made the attempt yesterday
to take a seat in the House of Commons, as one of
the Representatives for the county of Clare. He
was with great formality introduced by the liberal
Lords Duncannon and Ehrington, who most pomp-
ously accompanied him to the table, for the purpose
of taking the necessary oaths, which he had previ-
ously deterrniacd not to take, and which they knew
he could not take, ae a determined and inflexible
Ron-an Catholic. The discreditable subterfuge was
that he was ready to take the oaths prescribed by
the late Act, totally regardless of the letter and
spirit of that law, which provides that no Roman
Catholic is eligible to sit,- whose return has not taken
place subsequently to the passing of that Act. Upon
this most essential and all-imperative point the
a

Speaker justly and forcibly observed, that the Gen-
tleman at the table (Mr. O'Connell), as was well
known to that House, was returned long before the
passing of that Act, and therefore it could not apply
to any ene circumstanced as he was. 'He had only
therefore to revert to the law previous to the pasting
of thesAct to which he had referred ;• and having
done so, he had to state than the law, as understood
in the practices and usages of that Rouse to be the
law of the land, and whose construction had been
repeatedly confirmed by Acts ofParliament,:was, that
every Member should take the Oaths of Allegiance
and Supremacy before the Lord Steward or his De-
puties,and that afterwards he should take the Oaths
of Allegiance, Supremacy, and Abjuration, together
with the Declaration against Transubstantiation, be.
fore that House. To take the Oaths Mr. O'Connell
had therefore objected ; and he felt it his duty at
once to desire the Hon. Gentleman to withdraw.
And he had the less hesitation in expressing his
opinion from a knowledge that if he were wrong
the Hon. Member bad the power to appeal against
it, either by petition or by entrusting any Hon.
Member who had taken his seat, with the case.
Such being his opinion, he felt it his duty to desire
the Honourable Gentleman to x% ithdraw.—Mr.
Brougham immediately rose, but the Speaker very
properly caused Mr. O'Connell to withdraw before
any arguments upon this case could be entered into.
Mr. Brougham, after Mr. O'Connell bad left the
House, proceeded to plead the right of the Hon.
Gentleman to be heard in his place, or as he had
perhaps no place, at the table of the House, without
taking the oaths, in order to state his objection to
taking them, before the House came to any decision
upon the subject. There were (he said) two or
three precedents which appeared to him to be di-
rectly in point. The first two were the cases of
Sir Henry Monson, who was returned on May 13,
1689, and Lord Faushawe. Sir H. Morison on
coming to the table was asked whether he had any
objection to take the oaths prescribed. He replied
that he. had stated that his objections were of a
nature personal to himself, and in no degree calcu-
lated to disturb the King's Government. It ap-
peared by the reports, by the Journals of the House,
and by all the records on the subject, that that per-
son had spoken at the table of the House at least a
few sentences in explanation of his objections to
take the oaths. The House was not satisfied with
the reasons he assigned, and he was directed to
withdraw, and a new writ was issued thereupon.
What, however, he wished to call the attention of
the House to was, the fact that before the new writ
was issued lie was heard at the table of the House.
In the case of Mr. Archdale also, who was returned
some years afterwards, the same course was pursued.
4ech were the precedents he had to adduce, and his
object was that Mr. O'Connell should be recalled.
in order that the House, after hearing him, might
be enabled upon fair grounds to proceed to a deci-
sion upon the question. Mr. Secretary Peel une-
quivocally declared that he had no doubt as to the
definite and decided character of the law; but still
he thought that time was necessary to examine the
precedents mentioned by Mr. Brougham. The
Speaker observed that be knew of no precedent of
any person not having taken his seat being heard,
without the decision of the House to that eilect ;
and after some further conversation, it was agreed to
postpone the further considerition of the question to
Monday next. The Smithfield Market Bill, upon
the question of receiving the Report of the Com,
mittee, was rejected by a majority of 23, the num-
bers being 24 to 31. The Anatomy Regulation Bill
went through the Committee of the whole House
(after a division of 40 to eight), and the report was
ordered to be received on Monday.—Mormng Post.

SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE.

LIVERPOOL.

Tnuttsna-T, MAY 14.—High water 19 minutes past
eight o'clock.—Wind West.—Arrived the Columbia,
Kirkwood, from Calcutta; Herald, Graham, Baltimore;
Hero, Baker, from Africa ; Robert M'William,
from Antigua; United States, Kennedy, from Savannah ;
Torah, —, from Demerara; Shallett, , from
Baltimore ; Meredith, Jones, from Demerara ; Aid,
Abernethy, is4wport.
CLEARED OUTWARDS.-The Earl of Liverpool, Man-
ning, for Valparaiso; John and Mary, Thompson, S'.
John's ; Anfield, for Jamaica ; Telescope, —,
for Oporto ; Keith, Stewart, for Oporto ; Hibernia, for
Charleston.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

BOW-STREET.

MOCK AUCTIONB.-Yesterday Mr. Samuel Levi, who
keeps an auction-room in the Strand, opposite Southamp-
ton-street, was summoned before Mr. Mtrisuunc, at the
instance of a lady named Price, to show cause why he de •
tained property which she had purchased at his shop; and
also to answer her charge of having grossly imposed upon
her, by selling her a watch of no value, fur which he ob-
tained 11. 13s.

Mrs. Price, it appeared, had lately arrived from Tun-
bridge Wells, with 10/. in her pocket, and she was lured
into the shop of Mr. Levi, where a number of dressed-up
ladies were assembled as " sweetners," who were praising
the quality and cheapness of the goods. She was induced
to bid for different articles, and amongst them the watch
in question—an article made in imitation of a gold engine-
turned watch—but which was, in reality, nothing but
brass lacquered. Mr. Minshull sent an officer with the
watch to Mr. Young, the watch-maker, of the Strand, to
request that gentleman to state the value of the watch,
and he said that it was not worth five shillings.
Mr. MINSHULL observed, that these mock-auctions
were a public nuisance, and he hoped there would be soon
a legislative enactment to put an end to their existence.
Mr. Levi said the lady bought the article fairly by public
auction, and had an opportunity of judging for herself the
value of it.

Mr. MiNsuur.r. asked Mrs. Price what kind of ladies
they were in the auction•roons who recommended her to
purchase?—She said, that at the time she did not parti-
cularly notice the ladies ; but she had reason to believe
they were Jewesses, who were dressed in a fashionable
manner to appear as customers.
Mr. MiNsuuLL ordered Levi to give up the goods for
which she had paid, and said, that if he wished to recover
for goods which she had refused to pay for on the ground
that she had been unfairly dealt with, he might bring
his action.—He consented to give up the property, and
the affair ended.

We copy the following curious letter from the
New York Morning Chronicle, by the last arrival
Row;.Arsp STEpmEstsosf.—One of the creditors of the
house of RE74INGTON, STEYHENSOIf, and Co. has put into.
our possession the following letter, post smirked Savannah,
16th March. We are disposed to give full credit to the
statement—for obvisus reasons we suppress the names of
the persons supposed to be his present bankers at Sa-
vannah :

Savannah, March 12.

Sir—The fugitive STEPHENSON, whom you will per-
haps ere this reacher you have been honoured with the
sight of, has deposited in the hands of
.o. Mr. ,
merchant of this place, large sums of Exchequer Bills;
in the hands of , merchant, a sum of money in
gold, and in the hands of one Captain .—.., a further
gun of gold ; which money, I know, they are rapidly
converting into our currency. Should you wish to inves-
tigate this matter for the recovery of said money, which I
believe interests you, I will direct you to the examination
and evidence of a man reiiding seventeen miles from the
city, tailing himself Dr. GARBERT, who has confessed to
sundry individuals that STEPHENSON told him that those
persons werejais hankers at Savannah. Whether you can
come at or recover the amount held by each individual iu
trust for STEPHENSON is a matter which you can better
determine. This much is certain that these persons, to-
gether with LLOYD, STEPHENSON'S clerk, are lavishing
large sums to restore STEPHENSON to the soil of Georgia,
from which he is said to

DISHONEST SERVANT.—At the Maryle-
bone of,qce, yesterday, a man, named JAMES OSBORN, was
charged with having robbed his master, Mr. Hicics, of 43,
Gloucester-place, Portman-street, of some wearing appa•
engaged by
rel and other property. The prisoner was
Mr. HICKS, as footman, on the 10th of March. On the
great
clo9atths of
whichhe
hsaadmbeeeranognitvhenhetoatsineotntobdehd;usillilt,dwtehrreeemissed.
in two or three days after he returned; and it having been
discovered that he had stolen some shirts belonging to
another footman, he was taken tint° custody. He then
confessed he had sold the coats for 308. and pawned the
shirts. He was committed for trial.