The Sun.
London, England, 1842-06-24 00:00:00

the papers, and had acted wisely in deprecating discus-
sion on the policy involved. The Hon. Member for
Shrewsbury had accused the late Government of supine-
ness in conducting the foreign affairs of the nation, and
their following it up with terrible energy. He certainly
might accuse the Hon. Member of much supineness during
the last three years, though he could not charge him with
having followed it up with any terrible degree of energy.
—(Laughter.) In their silence at the time of suceess, and
their attack at the time of disaster, unconnected with
the policy, there was a great want of moral courage. It
was evident from their refraining at that period, they did
not expect they could carry the opinion of Parliament,
with them. There was nothing in the success to pre-
vent their bringing the policy under the consideration of
the House ; and as to the distance of the operations, that
did not prevent the Rignt Hon. Baronet opposite from
bringing forward his motion on the war with China.
He would admit that the statement of the RusLian Go-
vernment was correct, and that the agents had exceeded
their instructions, yet still their case stood on good
grounds. Great stress was laid'on the opinions of per-
sons who were supposed to be able to form a correct
judgment on the subject, and Sir A. Burnes and Sir H.
Fane had been quoted. Bnt there never was a case in
which the current of authority was more one-sided than
in the present. The Home Government and the Gover-
nor-General of India came to the same conclusion, with-
out any previous concert with regard to the measure
which ought to be adopted for the defence of the Indian
possessions. He said of their Indian possessions, be-
cause he denied that it was for any European pur-
poses. If they had not an empire in India, it
would matter little to them whether the Persians
conquered the Affghans or the Affghans the Persians.
In the year 1836, Mr. Ellice, who was well versed in
Indian affairs, and who was in Persia and India, said it
would be fraught with the utmost danger if the influence
of the Shah were permitted to extend over Affghanistan.
Mr. M`Neil told the same thing, and several distin-
guished men in India were of the same opinion. The
opinion of Sir A. Burnes, as appeared from the public
papers, went in the same direction. But it was said that
in his private letters to his friends, be expressed opinions
adverse to the war. Now, he (Lord Palmerston)
had two letters in his possession from Sir Alex-
ander Burnes, dated the 4th and 26th of August,
In the first letter he says, " I have great hopes that our
army will march from Candahar to Herat, and that the
Ameer will evacute Caubul, which will enable us to do
this." In the letter of the 26th, he says, "We shall
send Mahomed Khan to the Shah, to assist us in secur-
ing Candahar, but he will not be listened to in his ob-
jections to Soojah-001-Moolk, as they are untenable. I
have seen such papers since I arrived here, that I know
how critical is this course. Act we must, and if it
only concerned the Peruxes, or the Sadducas, we
must hesitate in rejecting the former." These
were the opinions of Sir Alexander Burnes.
All the authorities connected with India, that were in
possession of knowledge on which a sound opinion could
be formed, were of opinion that active and immediate
measures were necessary to secure' Affghanistan.—
(Hear.) This country had, for a great number of
years, recognised Persia as a sort of protection for its
Indian possessions ; but since the accession of the pre-
sent. Shah, Persia had acted in a very different manner.
Since that time she had been desirous of extending her
possessions. and what was the result ? Why, whn it
was seen that Persia was taking steps detrimental to this
country, vigorous steps were immediately taken. It
was thought by many that that was a bad step to take,
but what had been the consequence of it ? Why, for
three years no disasters had taken place. It was true
that disasters had taken place since, but they had nothing
to do with the original policy of the measure ; and such
being the case, it was no proof that the policy pursued
was not sound and judicious.—(Hear.) He agreed with
the Right Hon. Baronet that the disasters that had taken
place were no reason for imagining that they had not es-
tablished their affairs in the same position in India as
they were before. He was convinced that the measures
the Indian Government were taking would have the
effect of placing this country in the same position with
respect to Affghanistan as they were before.—(Hear.
hear.) He should be sorry to see the British
army laying Affghanistan waste, but still there was
something to be done to keep up appearances.
He could understand a Government saying that the cha-
racter and standing of the country required that a great
disaster should not be tamely submitted to ; he could
conceive that a great expense might be incurred for the
sake of securing to a nation the commanding station
which it formerly held ; he could conceive a Government
saying that the position from which we had been driven
was such that it was essential to our empire that we
should regain it ; but if they were to regain it, he
thought it sh-)uld not be regained in order that it might,
as recommended by some, be abandoned again. The
Right Hon. Baronet had very properly abstained from
stating what might be the future policy of the Govern-
ment upon the subject of our affairs in India ; but that
Government would indeed be bold which, having charge
of the interests of a great nation, would dare to take a
step that would endanger the empire, and which would
abandon those defences and that barrier which their pre-
decessors had established in the East.—(A laugh.) The
Right Hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, smiled while he thought merely of the expenses of
the expedition, and forgot every other consideration,
Sir It. PEEL—But where is the barrier ?
Lord PALMERSTON—The Right Hon. Baronet
would learn the value of Affghanistan as a frontier to our
Indian empire from the lion. Member for Beverley,
who had set a due value on its importance. The Hon.
Member for Shrewsbury, in the course of his speech, not
content with the wide range which Indian affairs had
offered for his fancy, was pleased to express his condem-
nation of the foreign policy generally ,of the late Admi-
nistration. But that policy had ensured the peace of
Europe, without in any way lowering the character of
England, and that policy had, in most instances, been
eminently successful. He repeated that the manner in
which the late Government had conducted the foreign
affairs of the nation, had given satisfaction to the coun-
try at large ; they had also been enabled to become the
mediators of peace between other countries. Such was
the respect and confidence felt towards the English Go-
vernment, that when the English Consul approached the
coast of New Guiana, his vessel was boarded by contend-
ing deputies, who referred the party disputes they
were unable to settle, to his decision, and that mediation
had been quite successful. As far as the management
of their foreign policy went, the more it was inquired
into the better they should be pleased. Whether the
present Government did or did not follow the same path
as their predecessors, he was sure that the whole country,
that all the other nations of Enrope, and an impartial
posterity, would render them that justice which the
Hon. Member seemed disposed to deny them. He was
prepared to stand by the papers that had been produced,
it would be impossible for any Government to publish in
extenso, all the despatches of its agents; if they did, no
agents would write any despatches worth receiving. He
thought it was rather ungrateful of lion. Gentlemen
to accuse the late Government of a reluctance
to produce papers; he believed they laid more papers
before the House than any Government ever did. He
hoped the present Government would be able to produce
as many papers for all they might do, and all they
would not do, as the late Government had for all they
had done.
Mr. HUME complained that the Noble Lord had ;tot
produced all the documents from which his case might
be judged. He believed that the Government of India had
not been influenced by any desire to add to its territory.
The Ho.. Member then referred to several of the des-
patches ofSir A.Burnes, with a view of showing that there
had been a great aggression on the part of the late Go-
vernment. Although it might be desirable to form a
barrier, was it possible to form one at a distance of 2,000
miles from our own territory with the Punjab between
us and the barrier. At the very time we undertook the
invasion ofAfghanistan, we were receiving the assur-
ances from Russia to which allusion had been made. He
implored the House to obtain that information which
would enable them them to judge of that policy, and to
cast blame on those who were really blameworthy.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL begged to state that as far
as lie and the Members of the late Government were
concerned, he had no objection to the production of the
papers.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman
had given reasons why the papers ought not to be pro-
duced; he (Lord J. Russell) coincided in opinion with
the Right Hon. Gentleman, and for the reasons which
the Right Hon. Gentleman had given he would vote
with him against the production of the papers ; but
he begged it to be distinctly understood, that the mem-
bers of the late Ministry had no objection to the pro-
duction of the papers. The Hon. Gentleman had made
a most singular charge of unfairness and suppression.
He supposed the Hon. Gentleman would not wish to
have large volumes of documents published which
no one would read; but he had complained that not
only was Captain Burnes' despatch omitted, but that
Sir W. Macnaghten's answer to it was suppressed
also. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that Captain
Burnes' letter was most important ; and that the argu-
ments in it were most cogent ; at the same time
he considered Sir William Macnaghten's reply
as of little consequence. That was the Hon-
ourable Gentleman's opinion, but other gentlemen might
be of a different opinion. At all events, having omitted
both, the late Government could hardly be charged with
unfairness. Capt. Burnes might, at one time, have stated
that a union with Dost Mahomed would be the best'
alliance, but the correspondence showed—indeed Capt.
Burnes had himself shown—that it was impossible to
come to any arrangement with Dost Mahomed, for he
was always seeking what advantage he could gain from
our friendship and alliance. Dost Mahomed asked cer-
tain terms, which, when he thought that Russia and
Persia were advancing
,ho seemed disposed to raise.
The Hon. Member then read a short passage from
a despatch of Captain Burnes, and certainly, if ever
there had been a garbled extract that was one. The
extract stated that Dost Mahomed was willing to agree
to terms for our alliance, and that all that he asked was
that we should use our good offices for him with the
Maharaja, and the Hon. Gentleman had not gone on to
read the answer, leaving it to be understood that we had
refused to accede to those terms, whereas it the Hon.
Gentleman had gone on he would have found that our
Aucklandthat
it
was_ himself, Envoy's reply was that, with respect to our good offices,
there could be no objection to use them with the Maharaja.
Lord
ecl Maynllalliance
1118,3 t
with
stated
imnostelfd;
e n a
desirable minute
to l
make
Dust Mahomed. At one time it was impossible to
make an alliance with Dost Mahomed. Would any one,
then, maintain that this wa,4 unreasonable ? Did the
indated
Hon. Gentleman who made that motion himself think
that it would be desirable to lend the British power to
Dust Mahomed in order to make war against Runjeet
Sing? The Hon. Director who spoke in the course of
that debate objected to this policy. It might bo
bad, or it might be good policy : he would not
discuss that question ; but it showed what a differ-
ence of opinion existed with respect to this proceeding.
He ti}ought the Secret Committee of the Beard of
Directors, which was especially appointed to watch the
foreign policy of India, were the best judges of the policy
a the war, end they entirely agreed with the_Atte.

those explanations were frankly given by, the Govern-
ment of Russia. They were contained in the papers
which had been laid upon the table. In those papers,
whatever might have been the conduct of the Russian
agent, however suspicious it might have been—and he
admitted at once that it did warrant suspicion, and even
required explanation—yet still there was, on the part of
Russia, a distinct and unequivocal disavowal of that con-
duct, the recal of one of the agents of that Go-
vernment, and a positive assurance, on the • part
of the Emperor of Russia, first, that he had no
wish whatever to disturb British supremacy in India ;
secondly, that he had an earnest desire to act
with respect to the affairs of Persia upon a per-
fectly good understanding with this country. Those
assurances were encouraged by Count Nesselrode, and
Coat Pozzo di Borgo, then Minister of Russia in this
country, in the most unequivocal and decided manner to
the late Government. The Noble Lord, in the course
of that correspondence, had expressed himself satisfied
with the assurances which had been given by Russia.—
(Hear, hear, from Lord Palmerston.) But the Noble
Lord went further than merely expressing satisfaction.
In his note to the Russian Ambassador, dated
December 20, 1838, the Noble Lord said, alluding
to the explanations of Count Nesselrode with respect
to the conduct of the Russian agents in Persia and
in Caubul , " The despatches from Count Nesselrode,
hich your Excellency has communicated to me, contain
on those points assurances the most full and complete.
Her Majesty's Government accept those assurancta as
entirely satisfactory." The Noble Lord then went on to
state his conviction that Russia did not harbour any de-
signs hostile to British supremacy in India, and the des-
patch then alluded to the instructions which had been
given by Russia to her agent in Persia to co-operate
with the British agent in that country in persuading the
Shah not to undertake any more expeditions similar to
the one he had undertaken against Herat. From the
Noble Lord's declaration that he accepted those declara-
tions as satisfactory, he (Sir. R. Peel) inferred that the
Noble Lord placed confidence in them—(Hear, hear.
from Lord Palmerston,`—and for himself, he (Sir R. Peel)
felt bound to state, that there had been, to his knowledge,
no act done by Russia, in respect to her relations with
Persia, and more especially in relation to Affghanistan,
subsequent to our late disasters, but was in
precise and exact conformity with that declaration.—
(Loud cheers.) He begged at the same time to say, that
whatever might be the conduct of Russia, the British
Government in India was powerful enough to protect
itself--(Cheers)—that it did not depend on the co-
operation or good faith of Russia, or of any other Power;
but he felt it to be his duty publicly to declare in the
face of Europe, that it was impossible for any Power to
have acted, not only with stricter good faith, but to have
exhibited a more friendly feeling towards this country
than Russia had done with regard to England, both in
Persia and 'Affghanistan—(Cheers)—and that at the
moment of our disasters, in the latter country Russia
had exhibited the most unequivocal proofs of friendly
feeling—(Loud cheers)—and of a desire not to interfere
with the British supremacy in our Eastern dominions.—
(Continued cheering.) That being the case, how
could he reconcile it to his sense of duty to
produce papers relating to a different state of
things ?—(Cheers.) Would it be wise to disturb the
amicable relations at present existing between the coun-
tries by producing documents which had been 'Written
under different feelings?—(Cheers.) On the same ground
he must refuse to enter into any discussion on our In-
dian policy. He stood in a different position to that
occupied either by the Hon. Gentlemen who had proposed
and seconded this motion, or by the Right Hon. Gentle-
man opposite who had been called upon to vindicate the
policy which had been pursued in India. He (Sir R.
Peel) was charged with a great responsibility, and he
thought it would tend more to the public interest if he
were to abstain from entering into discussion on the
subject at present.—(Hen, bear, hear.) We knew
of the misfortunes of Caubul—we were uncertain
of the fate of the garrison of Ghuznee—an effort
had been made to relieve Candahar,' with the
result of which we were, as yet, unacquainted—and he
did not think that the present was a time to enter into
any discussion on such subjects. He could not, how-
ever, quite coincide in the observations of the Right
Hon. Gentleman on the subject of Indian finance.
Whatever elasticity the Indian finances might have ex-
hibited at former periods, he could not consider the
present state satisfactory. He (Sir Robert Peel) had
made no exaggerated statements of the financial diffi-
culties of India. If the Right Hon. Gentleman would
refer to the papers, he would finds that in 18:"5-36,
there was in India a surplus of revenue over expendi-
ture of 1,556,0001. ; in 1836-37 it was 1,100,0001. ; in
1837.38 it was 650,0001. ; in 1838-39 it was 280,000/. ;
in 1839-40, instead of a surplus, there was a deficiency
of 2,414,000/. ; and in 1840-41, there was a deficiency
of 2,334,0001. The expenditure of the Indian Go-
vernment, in 1835-36, was 15,766,000/. ; in 1839-40
it was 11,615,000/. ; and in 1840.41, it was
19,330,0001.—(Hear, hear.) Now, under these cir-
cumstances, he certainly thought it desirable that en-
deavours should be made to equalise the revenue and
the expenditure. They should recollect that in India
they had no Income-tstx, that the collection of the re-
venue must press hardly upon the cultivators of the soil,
and must produce a bad effect, in their opinion, of our
Government. Ile agreed with the remarks of the Hon.
Gentleman, on the inevitable tendency of our Indian
empire to extend itself ; and he feared that, wherever a
civilised nation came in contact with one less civilised,
such must ever be the case ; but that general tendency
could not be taken as a sufficient justification of any par-
ticular expedition ; and he hardly thought the Right
Hon. Gentleman himself would consider that tendency
as an argument sufficient to justify a march upon Persia,
or the occupation of Bokhara, under present circum-
stances. The Right Hon. Gentleman had expressed a hope
that the policy of Lord Auckland would not be departed
from. He (Sir R Peel) thought that, considering the
great distance we were from the scene of action, and our un-
certainty with regard to what had occurred, that it would
be premature in him to pledge himself to the adoption
of any particular line of policy, but whatever line of
policy he might think it expedient to adopt, he would
never forget the paramount necessity there was for up-
holding the honour of the British arms.—(Loud cheers.)
He considered the disaster at Caubul as a great military
loss, but by no means as a disaster of such a nature as to
affect our dominion over our Indian possessions. It was
impossible to see the examples of fortitude, fidelity, and
valour, which that disaster had called forth—(Cheers)
—without feeling satisfied on that head.—(Loud cheers.)
How could they look to the patient endurance, to the
persevering valour, of Sir Robert Sale—(lmmense cheer-
ing)—or witness the heroism of that Lady—(lmmense
and continued cheering which drowned the conclusion of
the sentence.) He thought that those efforts and examples
ought not to permit them to be cast down or dispirited.
These were not greater reverses than had occurred be-
fore, and he bad the utmost confidence that by the valour
and fortitude of the British arms these disasters would
at least be so far repaired that they would not in the
slightest degree shake the confidence of the people of
England in the supremacy of the British arms. As he
said before, he would not say a word more on the subject,
as he purposely avoided discussion, and he avoided the
expression of any opinion, under the present circum-
stance, of the policy of the Gavernment ; but he could
not quite acquiesce in the fairness of the quotation which
the Right Hon. Gentleman made from his (Sir R. Peel's)
speech on a former occasion. The Right Hon Gentle-
man, referring to the declaration in the Queen's speech
in the year 1839, observed that all he (Sir R. Peel) had
said on that occasion was, that he viewed the prospects
of India with great anxiety. Now he did not think
any public man, speaking on such a declaration—of
course the subsequent events were unknown—he
did not think that any public man could do so
without same forebodings. He was afraid that
be did not limit himself to the mere expression of
anxiety on that point. The words he made use of were
these, that " I will now advert to a subject"—he
merely quoted the expression he made use of in his own
vindication ; in 1839 these were the words he used :—" I
will now advert to a subject of far deeper interest than
the question before the House, a question not relating to
matters of domestic nature, for it refers to the state of the
British empire and interests in India ; for I consider it
most important to divert the attention of the inhabitants
of India from war, and teaching them the habits and oc-
cupations of peaceful industry. When I contemplate
the evil consequences of a great financial expenditure im-
posing the necessity of additional taxation on the sub-
jects of this empire, I am bound to say that I cannot
look to India without the deepest anxiety." He also re-
ferred to that part of the declaration of the Governor-
General, in which he stated that his Majesty Shah Soojah
entered Affghanistan surrounded with troops, and that
his possession of the empire would be supported. What
he said upon this was, " that is to say, this country has
entered into an engagement to this extent that the
tyrant and enemy of Caubul would be supported. Now,
Sir, I shall require some explanation on that point. The
Shah who was deposed in 1809, deposed from all authority,
marched with 20,000 men into the country, and the new
Governor-General gives a guarantee that he shall be
placed
possession
tomet
rup.
a ton t
of
f the
t
that
e principle
thronehron
andllmbl tledg equally
uat
an his continuance
dapapl
slalso.
ilft
England
leaanirnds
was to attempt to place Charles the Tenth, if he were still
alive, on the throne of France, with this single difference
that the Shah has been deposed 30 years." This was
what he said in 1839, and he could hardly be charged
with having expressed perfect satisfaction. He did not
wish to say more than that in 1839 their disasters were
unknown. The Right Hun. Gentleman had referred to
the motion respecting Sir John Keane. Certainly
nothing could be more expressly stated than his (Sir R.
Peel's) reservation. In the moment of success he was
ready to give every tribute of applause to military skill;
yet, even in the moment of success, he did net mean to
imply approbation of their general conduct. At the
same time, he was very little disposed, now these dis
asters had happened, nor was that the moment, to make
any positive declaration with respect to that policy. He
trusted that he had fulfilled the assurance which he gave
to the House, that he would discuss this question with
ref( mice to public considerations alone.—(Hear
hear.) Those public considerations had induced
him to think that it was not desirable to produce those
papers, and the same consideration prevented him from
entering into any discussion of a party character, but
strictly confining himself to the question.
Lord PALMERSTON quite agreed with the Right
Hon. Baronet in thinking that it was not expedient to
produce these papers. He agreed with him for the
reasons stated, that it would be inexpedient now, when
for some time past a footing of former good understand-
ing prevailed between Russia and England, because the
transaction bad taken place under difficult circumstances.
He was happy to hear from the Right Hon. Baronet that
good understanding still existed between Russia and
England at the time when they left office.—(Hear.)
He was glad also to hear the Right Hon. Gentleman
state that the Government of Russia had shown,
in regard to the transactions which had taken place
since with respect to Persia tynd Affghanistan, the
suite friendly feeling and good. faith that then existed.
The Right Eon. litronot was peratly -right in refusing

THE. SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY MORNING, JUNE 24, 1842.

Government. Russia having disavowed the acts of her
igents, and approved of the Persian policy, there could
ie no foundation for a European war with her. The
Gentlemen opposite had reserved their attack, like the
vulture, till the moment when the soldier was wounded
4nd fallen, but still he was glad to perceive that their
-,ase was so utterly weak, as he trusted the House would
decide it to be.
Mr. BAILLIE complained .hat the despatches of
Captain Burnes, which had been produced, were those
of the period when he had adopted the policy of the
Governor-General. He should not press the motion.
Mr. HOGG and Mr. D'IsnAELI explained.
Mr. HUME having objected to the motion being
withdrawn, the House divided, when there appeared—.
For the motion 9
Against it
• Majority against the motion
On our return to the gallery
Mr. WALLACE was on his legs, asking whether the
Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir R. Peel) would give him
in opportunity of bringing on his motion on another
vening ?
Sir R. PEEL said that, considering the business that
was yet to be gone through, and the little progress
which was made with respect to the Poor-law Bill, he
could not make any promise to the Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. WA.I.LACE said that, in that case, he would make
the motion on the first supply night ; and, failing that,
he would bring it forward on Thursday, the 7th of July.
On the motion of Mr. HUME, an account was ordered
of all the monies received by the Commissioners ap-
pointed by the Act 6 and 7 Will. IV., c. 77, and subse-
quent Act, to carry into effect, with modifications, the
Fourth Report of the Commissioners of Ecclesiastical
Duties and Revenues, stating the several sums received
by the said Commissioners, and from what sources re-
ceived, in each year, since the passing of the Act; also,
an account of all payments made by the said Com-
missioners in each year, stating to whom paid, and for
what purpose to be applied, in each year, up to the Ist
of January, 1842.
Mr. PROTHEROE mcved for a Return, from the
Keeper of the Public Records, of the names and titles of
tne several works which were partially prepared for
publication, but left unfinished, by the late Record Com-
missioners ; stating the names of the Editors of such
works, and the estimated cost of publishing the same,
either in a complete or incomplete state : together with
an accurate Catalogue of the various MSS. and Copies
of Records made at the public expense, or by order of
'he late Record Commissioners, and not prepared for pub-
lication.—Agreed to.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM obtained leave to bring in
tLe following Bills :—Bill to encourage the establish
meat of District Courts and Prisons ; a Bill to amend
the laws concerning Prisons ; a Bill to continue, until
the Ist of October, 1843, the exemption of inhabitants
of parishes, tow:iships, and villages, from liability to be
rated as such in respect of Stock in Trade, or other pro-
perty to the relief of the Poor ; a Bill to amend and
continue for one year the Acts regulating the Police of
• Manchester, Birmingham, and Bolton.
CUSTOMS BILL.

On the motion of Mr. GLADSTONE this Bill was
re-committed, with the understanding that any discussion
on the clauses should be taken on the bringing up of the
Report on Monday next.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND) BILL.
The Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill was read a
second time.
DRAINAGE (IRELAND) BILL.
The Report on this Bill was received, and the Bill was
ordered to be read a third time to-morrow.
BONDED CORN BILL.

This Bill went through Committee, and was ordered
;o he reported this day.
The House then adjourned at Two o'Clock.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
HOUSE OF LORDS, June 23.
The House sat to-day to hear appeals. The Peers present
were the Lord Chancellor, Lord Cottenham, and Lord Camp-
bell.

COOTE V. LE VOER FRENCH.
Their Lordships were occupied the whole morning with the
arguments in this ease, which came before the House upon
appeal from the judgment of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, June 23.
(Before Vice-Chancellor BaucE.)
EYSTON V. SIMONDS.

This case was heard this morning. The bill prayed spe-
cific performance of a contract.
His HONOUR, in pronouncing judgment, said the
estate in question was purchased by the late Sir
Joan Gallini in the year 1786, who continued in the -
enjoyment of it until 1801. Since that time the parties
interested had claimed under his title. The trustees, desiring to
dispose of the property, put it up to sale, and no blame attached
to them for selling the property, believing, as they did, that
there Was a good title. It appeared, however, that in fact Sir
John Gallini was an alien ; that when he acquired the equitable
title in the first instance, he had not even acquired letters
of denization, and that though he subsequently ac-
quired the legal fee, it was afterwards escheated. The
objection was the subject of considerable negotiation between
the vendor and the purchaser. It was contended in the Master's
office that this was the case of a man selling an estate not his
own without acquiring a new title, and not suppoating the old
one. He could not view it in that light. The title did exist, the
estate was descendable, andthe subject of conveyance. It wasonly
subject to this contingency, that if the Crown thought fit to raise a
claim, the title might be defeated. He thought the present
title was clearly within :the established rule of the Court,
allowing a vendor within certain limitations of time to make '
good his title if he could even while, and in some instances
even after, the case had lett the Master's office. The point
which had struck him most was, that in the abstract,
which was originally delivered, neither the letters of
denization nor the alienage was noticed ; but it
occurred to the purchaser that Sir John Gallini might have
been an alien, and on his asking the question, in April, 1839,
he was told that he was an alien. If the purchaser hall held
his bond, and said that he had been deceived, it was possible
that he could not have been compelled to complete the son-
tract. Instead of this, however, the parties continued in
negotiation upon the subject of the purchase, very
prolonged negotiations took place, and it was not
until the latter part of 184 U, this having occurred
in the spring of 1839, that the matter was finally broken off.
Having regard to what had taken place between the parties he
was of opinion that that point was nut open to the purchaser.
It appeared to him, therefore, that both points must be decided
in favour of the vendor, subject to the obligation of paying the
purchaser dl his mitts at law, and all the costs of this putt up to
the confirmation of the report.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, June 23.

THE CORPORATION OF COVENTRY V. LYTHAM. AND OTHERS.
This is a special cue, in which the question at issue is, whe-
ther certain parishes in the immediate vicinity of Coventry
form part of the city, and are liable to the payment
.of the city
rates, under the Municipal Corporations Act. '1 he defendants
contend that the parishes form part of the county of Warwick,
and not of the adjoining city.
The arguments in the case, which are expected to occupy
the Court for some days, turn upon the interpretation of an-
cient statutes, and present no subject of genera► interest.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL opened the case this morning for
the plaintiffs.

COURT OF COJL(IOIV PLEAS, June 23
(Before Lord Chief Justice TINDAL and a Middlesex Special
Jury.)
MACRE:ADV. V. HA It )IER AND ANOTHER.
The Jury in this case having been called over, only eiglst
Special Jurymen answered to their names, and a tales was
prayed. The Jury, having been sw urn,
Mr. Glass' opened the plsadings.
Mr. PLATT said this was an action brought by Mr. Macready,
the celebrated actor, and the lessee and manager of Drury-
lane Theatre, to recover damages from the deiendants, trio
were the prop' letois of the Weekly Dispatch newspaper, for
the publication of a libel reflecting on his character, and cal-
culated to do him a serious injury. The libel complained of
was a critique which appeared in the defendant's paper of the
2d January last. The plaintiff's theatre had opened on the
27th December preceding. Previous to the opening of the
theatre, the defendant's paper, in several incidental notices,
had spoken favourably of the plaintiff, and had expressed
a wish for his success, but on the 2d of January this
article appeared, which was not a fair criticism; of that
the plaintiff would not complain, but of a tissue of false and ma-
licious attacks, calculated to inflict serious injury on the plain-
tiff, both as a manager and actor, and as a gentleman. It ap-
peared that the public press claimed a right to have two free
admissions to each theatre. An application was made on the
part of the Dispatch for these admissions to Drury-lane,
which was refused; the Dispatch had neither the ad-
missions nor the advertisements, arid on 2d January, the week
after the refusal, the article complained of appeared. ( The
Learned Counsel then read the article complained of, in which
the writer, speaking of the conduct of Mr. Macready, with re-
gard to excluding persons of improper character front the
Saloon, said that the arrangements at Covent-garden
had already done all that could be done for keep-
ing the pure separate from the impure, but that
Mr. Macready, under the pretence of virtue, made the
matter infinitely worse ; because by collecting all those per EOM
in one part of the theatre, he made them more conspicuous. It
then censured him for enticing'imodest women to frequent the Sa-
loon under the illusion that none but chaste women could enter it,
and how, it asked, did he propose to exclude those who, although
not so degraded as the lowest classes of those who frequented
public places, were yet far from being virtuous and chaste, add-
ing that the mischief ought to have been foreseen, and that Mr.
Macready ought to be ashamed of himself. It then proceeded
to speak in severe tt-Trns of the company, and of Mr.
Macready as an actor, saying, that although he was
great in melodrama, his range was more circumscribed
than that of any actor who had ever attained celebrity.
It was Bruin, always Bruin, nothing but howl and growl—that
his mode of influencing the public press was scandalous—that
thoie who praised him were plentifully supplied with orders,
and had his advertisements, while those who gave honest criti-
cisms had the supplies cut off—that he had formerly attempted
to introduce the French system of claquers, but
that it had failed because those persons had clapped
when they ought to have been silent, and been silent
when he expected the need of their assistance;
that his abilities were " eabin'd, cribbed, confined," and that
his treatment of actors and actresses was ungentlemanly.
and harsh.) These remarks were certainly not fair ernici,m.
It was a personal attack. It was not an attack upon
his mode of conducting the theatre, but it imputed overbearing
and ungentlemanly conduct to him, and that he had delibe-
rately entered upon a system, for the
The mere purposes of base
lucre, by which the pure and the impure were con-
gregated together. defendants had nut attempted
to justify this l:bel, and ;lr. Macready came there
to vindicate his rights as a British subject. He was not
to be assailed because he was the manager of a theatre.
The power of the Press was a frightful engine. 'they
had all heard of Mr. Alderman Harmer. He had felt its
power ; and those who had felt the power of' the public Press
were aware how it could be abused. The defendant actuated
by feelings of petty disappointment, di'played this rancour and
indignity towards the plaintiff in the hopes to crush him. If
they were of opinion that such was the case, the plaintiff would
be en'itled to heavy damages on account of the vast circula-
tion of the paler that contained the libel. The following wit-
nesses were then called :
Mr. John Williams--1 contribute articles to the Dispatch
I usually write theatrical amid, s. I remember the opening of
Drury-lane Theatre on Monday, 27th December last. I went
to the theatre on the Wednesday and the Thursday following.
I did not go to the keeper of he free-list office. lam
not certain whether during that week I made any
application to the keeper of the free list. I did some time or
other make application to him. I asked him what papers were
in the free list. I was told that the Weekly Dispatch was not
in the free list.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant WILDE...-It is usual
for the Press to have free admissions. The Dis-
patch has availod itself of these free admissions. I hive