The Sun.
London, England, 1827-10-02 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The Third Report of the Emigration Com-
mittee. has just been published, and some idea
may he formed of, the zeal' and labour which it
exercised on the part of those who framed it,
from the fact of this final report, with the evi-
dence and appendix, constituting a folio volume
of between 600 and 70D pages. Sufficient is
known of the general proceedings of the Com-
mittee, and of the opinions of its most effective
members, to let the- public already understand
that there exists in the minds of those gentlemen
a strong persuasion of the necessity of removing
gradually, by systematic means, a portion of the
pauper inhabitants of the United Kingdom to
some of our Colonial possessions. To recom-
mend such a project, certain facts must be as-
sumed as 'demonstrable :-Ist, That there does
actually exist in Great' Britain and Ireland .a
large'class of'able-bodied men, with their fami-
lies, for whom, generally speaking, no profitable
employment can be found. 2d, That there can-
not be procured at home any unoccupied land,
on the produce of which these idle paupers could
be subsisted by their own industry, more amply
than by transporting them across the sea. 3d,
That the expellee of transporting and of settling
them would not be equal to that of supporting
them at home, whether by poor-rates or front
private charity. And, 4th, That the paupers
themselves, wretched as is their present condi-
tion, would not be *exposed to the chances of a
life still more preCarious and miserable, by the
change which is now suggested. ' We have often
expressed a conscientious distrust of the sound-
ness of the emigrationiproject, as applied to the
relief of the British and Irish poor ; or, speaking
more correctly, as resorted to for a remedy to
the evils afflicting the community at large, from
their presence,. their wretchedness, and their ap-
parently progressive increase. But it is in the
very calmest and most dispassionate temper, that
a subject of such infinite importance ought to be
approached ; and we are far from insisting that
the Committee have made no case in relation to
the four requisites above enumerated, or that no
evidence and no reasonings are contained. in their
voluminous work now published, of a nature to de-
mand the deepest consideration from all humane
and reflecting minds. There is a question,
however, which seems to have escaped the Com-
mittee, and which, though introduced in this
notice but as supplementary•to other views of
the scheine, must be looked upon as bearing
most directly and powerfully on its claims to
ultimate adoption,—namely, whether, i£ the
object be to open fresh views of subsistence for
the poor, and to diminish the cost of maintaining
them, it would not be a more economical and
less uncertain plan, to avail ourselves of the
fertile soils, the redundant produce, and the
cheaper markets of European countries con-
tiguous to our door, the corn. of which is now
withheld by an atrocious law from the mouths of
a population confessed officially to be staroing,
before we try the more adventurous and doubtful,
though in the end perhaps unavoidable, experi-
ment of a wholesale freightage of the hungry mul-
titudes to' North America, the Cape, or New
South Wales. This inuendo we suggest re-
spectfully to Mr. Wilmot Horton, as one which
may not be altogether unworthy his attention,
seeing that here the necessary consequence of a
reduced price of bread would be an extension of
labour ; an enlarged employment of the idle and
destitute being the very thing which he requires.
It by no means follows that a cheap atquisition
of corn from the continent, or a plantation of
some of the fat bogs of Ireland, now said to be
waste and unproductive, will finally exempt the
Legislature from the obligation of executing the
project which forms the chief subject of this
report ; but it may be fair to try first the easier
and the simpler method, that if tha bolster and
more complex should hereafter fail, no 'party
concerned in preparing it may be liable to just
animadversion. The mind of the country cannot
at once be made up upon the details of this pro-
posed measure. So-far as we can judge, they
have been well considered; and of the principle
of emigration nothing more can be said, than
that the removal of the people, being that of the
heart's blood of a community, is, and ought to be
considered, a pis aller. Mere shall insert in to-
morrow's paper some able and interesting pasiages
from the report ; and, if opportunity permits,
may afterwards add portions of the evidence,.
Times.

We mentioned yesterday, that we could dis-
cover no authority for the statement in an even-
ksaisdsoronh, aadsbteoenthreepceonlitclyy coofnwsuitihteddrahjinMg
triteripursi:
even-
ing paper of Saturday,- that an English Ambas-
sador
enjoyed " by English merchants resident
in foreign countries." The Ambassador here
alluded to is Sir William A'Court, our Minister
at Lisbon, and the " foreign countries" mean,
of course, only Portugal. Our commercial treaty
in force
with that Power, by which the privileges of Ettg-
lishmen were constituted, or rather continued,
was concluded at Rio de Janeiro in 1810; and
,—an arrauge-
although it was to be perpetual as a bond of
friendship and alliance- between the countries,
its stipulations were, by an article of the treaty
itself, liable to revision and alteration on the ex..
pressed wish of the contracting parties at the end
pmraonvyisiaolitlesrarteimoialsin
of 15 years. These 15 years expired. in Feb.,
wthiell
1825, and the Portuguese Government then gave
notice, that it was desirous to take advantage of
itnheen abovein th e clause,framtion
framing
revise thewhich
e h
British
sltt:
till anew arrangement is made
,--an mpranbabtilmy time all
itsas (particu-
larly with respect to the oppressive
of the monopoly
and usurped privileges Oporto
Wine Com-
pany). as may balance those expected by the most
sanguine Portuguese Statesmen. But this is not
the time to think of
resettling or altering our rela-re
lions with Portugal. For the last 12 or 14
Months the Ministers of that unfortunate country
have had other business to attend to; and at the
present moment it can scarcely be said to have a
Government, or at least it has no Government
with which any permanent or systematic arrange-
ment can • be made. With whom, for instance,
could . Sir William A'Court hare entered into
any negotiation ?—with General Saldanh, '
44,
who (though a good officer) probably ',ever
read a treaty in his life-time—with his nephew,
Count da Ponte, the Captain of Dragoons, who,
besides manoeuvring his troop and managing the
Princess, held two portfolios, without knowing
any thing of either ; or with the present pos-
sessor of office, whose reign may be ended be-
fore the arrival of next packet ? And *f i no
negotiation for permanent objects can now be
carried on, why would Mr. Husk.
isson request
our Ambassador to harass the merchants of Lis-
bon with questions of privileges on which their
opinion could not for an instant be doubted ?
Respecting these privileges, as established by
previous conventions and renewed the in treaty
of 1810, some of our contemporaries, who spe-
c/11w pi the aubject -

misappreherision..„ We have no
.“ factories" or
corporations of traders now iu Portugal. Such
corporations are expressly abolished or prohibited
by an article in the above-mentioned treaty.
--With the exception of a toleration for our reli-
gion (a concession which might be regarded as
exclusive in 1810, but which by the Charter
has been extended to other foreigners), the chief
privilege- enjoyed by former treaties, and re-
newedby the last, was
.that extorted by Crom-
well, of having difl'erences and disputes, between
our merchants and. natives decided by a Judge
Conservator, elected by the merchants them-
selves. A.Portuguese trader in this country does
not require, and has never demanded, any other
tribunal than that
.to which thenative inhabitants
resort ; but in the present state of the admini-,
stration of justice in Portugal, British interests
would not be safe without the special protection
of the Magistrate above-mentioned. . If this,
therefore, was one of the privileges respecting
which the English merchants were consulted, it
is not to be presumed that they would willingly
yield, or that Government, in opposition: to
their remonstrances, would cause them to sur-
render the point.—lbid.
The Report of the Committee of the House
of Commons upon the subject of Emigration, of
which we this day publish a second portion, is a
doctiment which will not fail to command that
high degree of attention from the country to
which it is unquestionably entitled. The subject
is, indeed, one of the deepest interest, whether
we consider it in its relation to the internal
condition of England, or to the growth and
prosperity of her Colonies. The two main pro-
positions asserted and established by, the Report,
are—First, that the population of England, Ire-
land, and Scotland, is redundant, as compared
with the permanent means. of employment ; and,
secondly, that there exists in several of the Bii-
tish Colonies, large tracts of uncultivated land of
such fertility that it would greatly augment the
capital, and amply reward the toil expended upon
its cultivation. We are not aware, indeed, that
these propositions hive recently been disputed ;
yet there was, nevertheless, au evident propriety
in embodying in a Report of this nature the-
evidence upon which the Committee
.felt itself
bound to adopt them. The advantages of a
system of Emigration, sufficiently extensive to
afford a sensible relief to Great Britain on the
one hand from the evil of superfluous numbers,
and its necessary consequences of misery, pau-
perism, and vice ; and to bestow upon the Colo-
nies on the other hand that rapid increase of
population which is alone required to urge
them forward in the career of prosperity, -can
hardly be doubted by any who embrace,
and there are few, we imagine, who will be
bold enough to reject, the two. proposi-
tions above stated. Yet the Committee has
wisely refused to trust, even in this stage of
the investigation, to the conclusions:. of general
reasoning. It has here appealed triumphantly to
facts and experience, and has collected testimony
the most unequivocal to show that the emigrants
whom Government have already sent to the Co-"
lollies with a view to experiment, are actually in
a state not merely of comfort but of
_affluence,
compared to their former condition ; that the
districts in which they are-settled are greatly im-
proved by their presence ; and that the parishes
in Great Britain which they have quitted are
greatly benefitted by their absence. .The only
question which remained was, as to the practica-•
bility of an emigration upon so extensive a scale
as to afford the hope of sensible and permanent
effects. Upon this, the only really difficult or
doubtful question -which the Committee had to
decide, it has justly bestowed the largest share of
-its attention ; and, after the fullest inquiry acid

the most mature deliberation, it has adopted the
conclusion that the difficulties, though great arid
obvious, are not insurmountable. The suggei
tions of the Committee upon this intricate add
important branch of the subject, require a more
detailed and deliberate consideration than we On
now bestow upon them. They proceeded updn
the estimate that the sum of 601. will suffice for
the transfer from England and the location in
Canada of a .family • consisting of a man,
woman, and: three children, and upon: the as-
sumption that parishes will deem it their true
interest to unburden-themselves from . their pre-
sent load of pauperism, by temporary advances ,
at this rate ; it having been proved by incon-
testible evidence that such advances need be only
temporary, inasmuch as
_the emigrants would be
fully enabled, at the end . of four years, to enter
upon a gradual course of re-payment. We can-
not, however, leave the subject even for a inf-
ment without adverting to au objection which
has been strenuously urged- to .any scheme of
emigration under the superintendence . and
pa-
tronage of Government.•• The objection is, that
there is plenty of waste land at home, in the
cultivation of which those whom it is proposed
to send to:the Colonies might be more advan-
• tageously employed. We meet this object*
by simply denying. the fact upon which it rests.
Where, we ask, is this waste land which could
be profitably cultivated, and to what silly br
sluggish proprietors .doss it belong ? That there
is nauch. waste land in England, Ireland, and
Scotland, we admit.. That: tliere, is 'midi
which could be profitably cultivated, we can-
not believe, until we are convinced that
landed proprietors are less willing than other 1
men to derive a reasonable income from their
own possessions, or that fertile land inlay be ex-
posed to the daily gaze and tread of a race of
skilful and eager farmers, without any
.of them
detecting its natural fertility, and rousing the
drowsy landlord, by an unexpected bidding
rente—Monting Post.
We learn from' a Correspondence which has
just been published between Dr: Harrison and
the Censors of the College of Physicians, that tile
former has resolved to question the right of the
College to examine him, or in any way interfere
with his right to practise his profession. Should
the College have the, courage (which many pqr-
sons, better acquainted with the merits of the
question than we profess to be, very much
doubt), the world may expect to witness a cti-
rious and interesting discussion, upon a point
which very much concerns the community, and
though often threatened to be brought
to a deciajon, has been virtually kept in abeyance.
• All monopolies are in the abstract odious ; but
the least objectionable of all would be those se-
cured to places of scientific attainments, pip-
- viided they in their trio) secured to the public a
'we supply of persons quatifwl to exercise the
learned professions.. It may, howev9r, be fairly
doubted, whether the College of Physicians, •as
110 W constituted, is of that description.;- and
whether it takes the only due means support-
ing
itsl"ll°P6lY---Vi. by taking care that they
A. Who teach wisdom • hd
This deficiency, if it* do etxheismtuli:*ittwslosekMuch
the fault of the College itself, 'as of those other
Colleges from which exclusively it draws its
members. The College, as it interprets its

charter, says " no man can be a fellow of our
body who has not been educated at Oxford or
Cambridge ;" while at Oxford and Cambridge,
it is well known, very little indeed is taught
which can qualify a man to treat disease success-
fully, still less to teach and examine others. No
better proofs, probably, can be given of the in-
efficiency of our two Universities for the purpose
they thus assume, than the superiority of the
Surgeons or the present day over .the Physicians ;
and the undeniable fact that some, at least, of
the most eminent medical men have studied in a
far .different school than those receptacles of vice,
indolence, and extravagance present. Friends
as we are to " free trade," yet we do not
deny the propriety of some test existing by
which the fitness of persons may be ascertained
who undertake so serious a charge as that of the
lives of his .Majesty's subjects ; but unless that
test be duly constituted, and the learning, the ex-
perience, and independence of the teachers and
examiners be first secured, such a test becomes
worse than a nullity, and much the same as
sending forth people into the world for any other
purpose with forged certificates. There can be
no question but that, of the persons who present
themselves, or are expected to present themselves,
for examination before the Censors of the Col-
lege, many are as wise, if no better professionally
informed, than their examiners ; and to say no-
thing of the professional courtesy which on such
occasions too often takes the place of wisdom, a
word need not be said of the inutility of a semi-
nary where the scholar can learn nothing from
the master. But this medical monopoly, if va-
luable at all, should be universal ; though,strange
to say, it is only claimed to extend over the me-
tropolis, and within seven miles of it; as if, for-
sooth, the health of the King's subjects became
of less value when their persons were without the
range of the two-penny post ! Such an -idea is
absurd in the highest degree—tho Ugh 'not. more
absurd than true, as the matter now stands. In
short, it becomes a question whether such a test
as the College now offers, and thus circumscribed
in its effect, i 4 worth preserving at any rate ; and
whether the public are not quite as safe in having
recourse, as they always naturally will do, to
_such_ medical aid as has proved its value by its
experienee and success, as by any certificate it
can receive from th'e College of Physicians,
whose officers, if they perform their duty no
better in examining candidates for the profes-
sion than others seem to have done in examining
Lunatic Asylums in and about the metropolis,
do not hold out any great inducements to man-
kind to look upon the modern temple of
Esculapius as the receptacle of absolute wis-
dom.—Morning Herald.

The affair between the Recorder of London
and Mr. Sheriff Farebrother was on Saturday
agitated in the Court of Aldermen. Mr. Sheriff
Farebrother wished to rescue a young man,
named William Crane, sentenced to be impri-
soned six months and whipped,for having stolen
a piece of meat in Newgate-market, from the
severe part of the sentence ; and a petition, re-
presenting the respectability of the prisoner's con-
nexions and whatever else appeared likely to
operate in his favour, having .been put into the
hands of the Sheriff, with a view to his obtaining
the recommendation of the Judge who tried the
prisoner to the Secretary of State, he proceeded
with it to the Old Bailey, and handed it to the
Recorder, requesting his signature. The Re-
corder, who, whether or not fortiter in re, was
never certainly much distinguished for the sua-
viter in 2nodo, seems to have felt on the occasion
somewhat as a dog feels
:when an attempt is
Made to deprive him of a rich bone- He in-
stantly wrote on the back of the petition, " Scan-
dalous." Adorned with this epithet, the petition
was hardly in a state for presentation to Mr.
Secretary Peel, but another petition having been
got up and signed, the flogging was remitted,
and the prisorter has been since liberated. Note
this application of scandalous to so high an of-
ficer as the Sheriff of London, for any thing
done by him connected with his official duty, is
certainly without a precedence since the times of
the Recorder Jefferies. That the Sheriff should
have felt indignant at having had such an epithet
applied to him is hardly to be wondered at, and
that the Court of Aldermen should sympathise
With him is equally in the order of things. The
,Recorder, in justification, urged yesterday, that
the Sheriff was.a Ministerial Officer, whereas he
himself was a Judge ; and that he having, after
a full consideration of the crime and character of
the prisoner, passed the sentence, it was the duty
of the Sheriff to carry that sentence into execu-
tion, and not to interfere with the judicial part
of the business. But with all deference to Mr.
Recorder, whose judicial merits, especially with
reference to his knowledge of the Law of Evi-
dence, are pretty well understood by most of our
readers, it is no unusual thing for Sheriffs, and
even humbler men than Sheriffs, in a country
like this—where men are both acquitted and con-
victed in a very odd sort of way, and where, if a
second trial of the convicted did not frequently
take place, the most shocking injustice would,
in many instances, be perpetrated—to collect
such evidence as, either from the poverty, or the
stupidity of a prisoner, or the want of Counsel,
was not produced on the trial, in order to obtain
a mitigation or a total remission of the sentence ;
and, therefore, as Mr. Sheriff Farebrother could
have no particular revelation of the omniscience
and infallibility of the Recorder, the mere fact of
his interference could hardly in fairness be termed
scandalous. The Recorder urged moreover,
that the offence was one of frequent occurrence,
and it had become necessary to add to the se-
verity of the punishment. Human nature is in-
genious in finding arguments for punishing others
for our own faults, Lord ltedesdale.lals,,,
an Irish peasant allows his son to run wind tiff
the age of 15, and commences his lessons by
felling him with. a plough-shaft. If, in the
course of your progress through any of the lanes
and alleys of this metropolis, your ears are as-
sailed by a noise to be equalled only in Pande-
monium, occasioned by the frantic rage of a fa-
ther vented on a child, it is ten to one but you
would find, on inquiry, that the child has been
suffered, by the neglect of the parent, to run
wild ; and that, if due care had been displayed,
the offence would not have been committed. Mr.
Recorder's notions of justice have evidently been
borrowed from the Irish peasant and Saffron-hill.
James, and John, and Andrew, and Peter, and
many others, have taken pieces of meat from
Newgate-market with impunity, and, encouraged
by this indulgence, William ventures to turn. to
take a piece, when lo the Recorder awakes, as
it were, from a dream, and, in his wrath, makes
William suffer, not only for his own offences,
but the offences of James, and John, and An-
drew, and Peter. This is English justice, lin
which the Recorder is certainly an sujept,.tifJe
must make an example of William, because lye
neglected our duty in the case of those who coin,'
mitted the same offence before him. But this
principle of allowing a Judge to punish an in-

dividual not according to a scale fixed after a
fair considerationf of what, were the law fairly
executed in all cases, would he sufficient to de-
ter from the commission of particular offences,
`but with a severity proportioned to the frequency
of the commission of the offence caused by former
remissness, is atrocious in the highest degree, and
cannot be too much stigmatised. If there is
to be no proportion between the offence and
the punishment; but the Judge is to be guided
by such considerations as those urged by Mr.
Recorder, acquitting an individual, or punishing
him with two or three days' imprisonment, for
what, on another day, half a year's imprison-
ment, and a severe flogging, is deemed too little,
where are the limits of judicial discretion to be
fixed ?—Hanging would be still a more striking
`example than half a year's imprisonment and
floggingif the -proportion between the offence
and the punishment is to be disregarded, why
not allow Mr. Recorder to order one wretch to
be hanged, for what another wretch shall do with
impunity ? This would be the perfection of
English justice. Away with such monstrous
doctrines, which would enable any old Judge,
when his digestion went on kindly, to let all
manner of vagabonds loose on society, that, on
another day, when suffering from the gout or an
overflow of bile, he might indulge himself to his
heart's content with flogging: But it seems the
prisoner had been convicted three times on former
charges. We should like to know the respective
sentences for the first, second, and third times.
IWe are mistaken if ample proof of the justice of
these observations would not be found in the
course pursued with regard to this identical
William Crane. The Recorder denied the right
of the,Court of Aldermen to question his con-
,
duct in the discharge of his duties as a Judge.
Here we suspect the Recorder is in the right.
The conduct of a Judge may be animadverted on
by the Members of the Court of Aldermen, as
by all other individuals ; for the conduct of every
Public Functionary; in a free State, ought to be
open to discussion ; but it would be dangerous
to allow the Court of Aldermen to call the
Chief Judge of the City to account to their
for his judicial conduct. If he err, a proper
Tribunal for the cognizance of the conduct of
Judges ought to be applied to ; but it does not
follow that, because the City of London choose
him and pay him, they may treat him as a mast
ter treats the servant who eats his bread. So
much for the Recorder and Mr. Sheriff Fare.
brother. We observe that the Lord Mayor
threw in one of his characteristic touches. He
".strongly condemned the conduct of the Re-
corder, who was the paid servant of that Court,
and yet had used language to one of the Mem,
hers of it which could not be tolerated. The
Sheriff was not paid for the important
duties which he performed ; on the contrary, his
office was extremely expensive." The being
paid and unpaid enter as very important ele-
ments into the judgment of his Lordship ; but
the offence of a paid man towards a man not
only unpaid, but able to fill an extremely ex-
pensive office, is the very ne plus ultra of delin-
quency. If the individual insulted by the Re..
corder had been a 'paid man, no matter how
uprightly he might have discharged the duties of
his office, and how acute his feelings, the offence
would have been of a very.different complexion.
Is it possible for a Lord Mayor to have one
thought into which mammon does not enter
The people of this country are so corrupted by
the everlasting incense offered up to wealth, that
in order to exhibit the absurdity of what fell
from the Lord Mayor we must take an extreme
case. The Lord Chancellor is a paid servant of
the public ; would the Lord Mayor' have
thought of taking the distinction in his case, and
that of a Sheriff? 0 t., but the Lord Chan-
cellor is paid so very much—that alters the case.
Who would not bow the knee to a paid servant
of the public, in the receipt of 20,0001. a year ?
—Morning Chronicle.
There are two objections . urged against the
proposal of relieving the distresS of the country
by Emigration, which require to be noticed at
greater length than we were able to do in our
analysis of the report yesterday:. Of one of these
we stated that we• should not discuss it on the
principles of the political economists;. but rather
reply to it as the'reporChas done, by citing the'
testimony of Mr. Malthus. This • objection,
namely, that no funds'ought to be advanced by
Government, or otherwise, to carry labourers
out of the country, while there remained any
waste lands.at-home, was brought forward by the
Morning Herald yesterday ; and it is certainly
not unamusing to listen to that enlightened au-
thority, while condemning, with easy assurance,
plans which have received the sanction of such
men as the Author of the Essay on Population,
and the Bishop of Chester. That there are many
fine wastes in England, and many more in Scot-
land and Ireland, is true. But did the cause of
their existence never strike our contemporary ?
To us it appears extremely obvious—they will
not pay the cost of cultivation. To attempt to
reclaim them a ould only add another waste to
the number—a waste of capital. Can any man
seriously suppose, that had the uncultivated land
in the United Empire been worth improving, it
would not have been improved ? Is it at all probable
that money would have been lavishly sunk on infe-
rior soils while superior soils were allowed to lie in
the condition in which the flood had left them ?
What, then, 'would be the consequence of an at-
tempt to convert bogs into bean fields, but that
instead of bettering the poor it would impoverish
lan what it could be
the rich ? No doubt wheat might be grown
present ; but if the
iwn.hoedruecwtiloineaot
fish iciootstgmroowriel
tait
sold for, he must have very curious notions of
fitness and unfitness who could seriously recom-
mend such a crop. If ever . the wastes of Great
Britain and Ireland are enclosed and made to
yield a reluctant return, such an event must be
preceded by a great and permanent rise in the
price
.of agricultural produce, which at present is,
we believe, desired by few and anticipated by
none. If the lands which the emigrants will be
called,on to cultivate abroad were of the same
description as the wastes at home, there might
be some force in the objection; but not only is
that not the case, but, on the contrary, the lands
on which the emigrants will be located are su-
.erior, for the most, not to the worst, but to the
best lands in England, with the additional ad-
vantage of a climate much more uniform than a
large portion of England is favoured with. The
other objection requires a little more consider-
ation. The attempt to give relief to the ex-
isting distress by Emigration has been
ridi-
euled, because no Emigration can be cal-
-1 temPlated of a sufficiently extensive nature to
afford it effectually.. The population of the
country, it is said, is twenty. millions—suppos-
ing a million removed, what would that effect ?
Yet the removal of a million of individuals would
cost twenty-four millions sterling, the calculation
of the Committee, we may notice, by the by, is
only twelve pounds a-head ; but it would have

been hors des regles to take the. facts as .they are
stated. It is not very easy to say, Lwhat.super-
fluity of lab Our actually exists in the country.
That there is a superfluity is obvious to every
one ; but the degree does .not admit of such in-
tuitive proof. When a merchant has more webs
in his warehouse than the demand of the market
can immediately absorb, lie may do two things :
he may submit to a reduCtion, or he may .hold
his goods until the demand grows brisker. Al-
though, therefore, a fall of prices in manufactured
goods is .a pretty sure proof of excessive supply,
it does not exactly follow that excessive supply
must be immediately succeeded by a fall of prices ;
but when there is more labour in the market
than the market requires,. the fall must be nearly
instantaneous. Labour cannot .be warehoused ;
the poor man cannot shut up his appetite under
lock and key. until better times render .the grati-
fication of it more ac,cessible.; hunger, thirst, and
cold, cannot wait for redress until the demand for
cottons and woollensgets brisker. There is another
distinction which must be attended to. A fall.in
the- price of manufactured goods produces,
for the most part,' a reaction on_ the market.
The demand abroad, and among
.a nume-
rous class at home, increases as the price
diminishes, Were the price of shoes to be re-
duced one half, it 'is probable that the demand
for shoes would be doubled. This tendency of
increased supply to produce increased demand,
checks the fall of the market very materially.
Let us see how an excess of labour acts. We
shall not put the case of an excess of five per
cent, but of.. one per cent. If there be 100
labourers where 99 only are required, the conse-
quence must be that each of the 100 will receive
ninety-7nine.parts of wages instead of a hundred.
Were, they ,to res( content. under, the privation
consequent on this reduction, and to :labour no
more than they had done before it tools place,
supposing no diminution
.of demand, the evil
would stop. But this is not in human nature
to practice, and accordingly' each workman' will
now labour an hundredth part more than be
formerly did, in order to enjoy the same rate of
wages. The manufacturer who had means of
paying only' 99 workmen will thus find that he
is still called on to pay 100, and that his stock is
at the same time accumulating in the ratio of
one in a hundred beyond his means of disposing
of it. He must, therefore, again reduce the
wages of his workmen one per cent. This new
reduction will, in its turn, call forth fresh exer-
tions from the workmen, to be checked by another
reduction, which will produce similar effects,
until the labour periormed by the workman
is at a maximum, when the farther fall of
wages must be accompanied with a retrenchment
of the labourers' purchases, and thus another
cause of a sinking market be introduced to ag-
gravate the effect of those previously in .opera-
tion. By this reciprocating process it is evident
that even so small an excess as one in a hundred,
beyond the fair demand of the market, may sink
the wages, of labour not 1 per cent. but' 50 per
cent. It is by no means accurate; therefore, to
say that the removal of one in a hundred of the
labouring poor would do no good, or even one
in two 'hundred, which, according to the plan of
the Emigration Committee, would be removed
in the space of three years. But it is said, that
even on the admission that emigration should
carry off the superfluity at present in the market
the vacuum which it creates will be immediately
filled up—that another and another drain must
be had recourse to, and' the never-ending, still
beginning, task will remain unaccomplished.—
It requires no great wit to find out, that if the
causes which have led to. the disease be not re-
moved, the proposed specific will operate only
as a palliative. But from what part of the
Committee's Report
.are the opponents of
Emigration entitled to conclude that no at-
tempt to remove them will be made ? Ois
the contrary, we should say, that not only will
it be made, but it will be made previous
to the application of the remedy. At this mo-
ment the- destruction in Ireland of the baneful
practice of splitting farms intn'Aelds, and -fields
into paddocks, cannot be accomplished, beeatise
there is no means, as we yesterday observed, of
absorbing the labour, which the return to a sane
and sound system must disengage. When those
means are presented by, an Emigration Board,
we may reasonably expect that landlords will pro-
ceed, not in a body, nor at once, but by degrees,
to collect the scattered particles, of their estates,
and thus introduce decent and substantial farmers,
instead of_ half-starved, ,half clothed, miserable
cottiers. Let us suppose that this conversion of
potatoe grounds into farms takes place the first
year in a district of forty or fifty thOusand souls,
there is- no reason to conclude that the difference
in the two modes of agriculture would east idle
snore than the Emigration plan could take up.
Now, in' such a district the cure would be per-
fected. Nothing in the condition of the .rest
would reintroduce the cottier system there, unless
we suppose. the proprietors of the soil something
worse than insane. We repeat that it is very
difficult to ascertain the real excess of labour,
whether it be a hundredth part or a twentieth
part : but whatever the excess be, Emigration
holds out fairer hopes of cure than any plan yet
suggested.—New Times.

The copy of a very extraordinary document is
handed about among the principal, foreign mer-
chants of the city, and has produced a great sen-
sation. We understand it purports to be the
copy of a letter addressed by Mr. Huskisson to
an English Ambassador, for his opinion respect-
ing the withdrawing of all privileges from Eng-
lishmen resident in foreign countries. The Am-
bassador submitted the letter to the principal
merchants, who exclaimed against the proposed
change, and have sent the outlines of the docu-
ment to London. It has made some noise on
the Continent, and the tendency of the change,
they 'say, will be, that Englishmen will be in-
duced to become citizens of the countries in
which they reside.—Evening
have made inquiries, and cannot learn on what
found-ation the above statement rests.]—Times.
BOURBON GRATITUDE.—Lady Faulkner s
first husband, M. Assiotti, did some services to
the Duke d'Angouleme, when that prince was
an exile in Scotland ; and his Royal Highness,
as a token of his gratitude, presented. M. Assiotti
with a seal, inscribed with the donor's name,
saying—" If ever the hour arrives that my family
are reinstated, present this seal, and you shall
then know that we are not insensible of the at-
tentions you have paid to, us."—Sir Arthur and
Lady Faulkner being lately in Paris, and wishing,
to obtain facilities of access to inspect some in-
stitutions, her Ladyship addressed a letter'to the
Duke d'Angouleme, reminding him of the cir-
cumstance abovementioned—stating that she was
now the possessor of the seal—and requesting
the honour of an interview,. to present it. To
this letter no answer was returned.--Examiner.
Sir Jonah
which theßarri gratitudengtonrecords
in-
stances
emi-
grants was displayed in a similarof Royal lab
manner.

COURT OF ALDERMEN, SEPT. 29.

SHERIFF FAREBROTHER AND I'HE • RECORDER.I
After the routine business of the Court was trans,
acted it Saturday, all the officers of the Court were
ordered to withdraw, it being considered necessary
to conduct, so delicate. an affair as that between
Sheriff Farebrother and the Recorder as privately
as possible under all the circumstances.

The SHERIFF rose to state his ground of complaint
against the Recorder, which, as well as we could
collect,, was' nearly to the following effect :—The
Sheriff had, in the course of his officiarinvestigation;
found that a young man, named William Crane,
who had been sentenced to be imprisoned six
months and whipped; for, having stolen a piece of
meat in Newgate-market, was considered to be an
object for the merciful consideration. of Government,
and was determined to exercise his influence in order
to procure a remission, of the most liewiy part of the
sentence. A petition was drawn up representing
the respectability of the
.prisoner's connections, and
whatever else appeared to be matter for justifying
the abatement of the more 'rigorous punishment, and
it was handed to the Sheriff, with a view
to obtaining the recommendation of the Judge
who tried' the prisoner, to the Secretary of State.
The Sheriff proceeded to the Old Bailey, where the
Courts were sitting at the time, and handed the
petition to.the Recorder, requesting his signature.
The Recorder, upon reading the petition, took a
pen, but instead of subscribing his name to the
paper, wrote upon the back of it the word " scan-
dalous." This word the Sheriff considered an in-
sult to himself, and he addressed the Recorder in a
private
room, near the Old Court, upon the sub-
ject, in the presence of one, of the Judges. The
terms in which this address was made, on a topic
calculated to excite so much heat, were not, we
are informed; very measured; and the observations
of the Recorder were not just such as to conci-
liate an offended officer of so much importance in
the city of London and the county of Middlesex.
The Recorder.stated, that if the Sheriff' did not. put
the sentence, of the Court into- execution, a. fine
should be inflicted upon him,,, The Judge said not
one word upon the sujject, but witnessed the cri-
mination and recrimination with all the coign gravity
for which he is distinguished. The angry diseus-
sion at an end, the Sheriff, not diverted from his in-
tention of obtaining the liberation of the prisoner as
soon as possible, represented to those who had sign-
ed. the petition the necessity of getting up another,
the writing of the Recorder upon the one of which
he was in possession, being an obstacle to the pre-
senting of it to the Secretary of State. This course
was adopted, and the Sheriff applied with the new
petition to the then Secretary of State (Mr. Peel),
and obtained the. desired remission of the sentence,
and the prisoner has been since liberated.

The SlieniFF, however, thought that the indignity
which had been offered to him by the Recorder, in
applying to his interference the epithet " scanda-
lous," required serious notice, and resolved to 1100 M•
s which appear
convict
ntv oict, be
andfavourable
the
m anne in ,
plain to the Court upon the subject. He had been
performing what he considered a most essential part
of his duty; when he engaged in representing the
circumstances
of e
an unfortunate tanc
in which'he was checked by the Recorder for having
interfered, from an impulse of humanity, was such
as an officer of such rank as he had the honour of
sustaining could not tolerate. Ile had ikp personal
motivelorjriaking this complaint, He felt not the
slightest personal hostility, but he .felt that words
had been used-in reference toltis conduct which cer-
tainly. ought to be retracted: The word " Scanda-
lous" had not not only been written in the petitiOn,
btit the Recorder had, in the conversation which
took place between them, accused him of scandalous
conduct in countenancing' the petition. He should
leave it to the Court to decide upon the merits of
the complaint, and of the excuse or justification' and
was ready to call witnesses to substantiate the facts
he had stated.

The RECORDER said, that the sheriff had impro-
perly interfered with his duty, in refusing to carry
into execution a sentence, which, after a full consi-
deration of the crime and character of the prisoner,
had been passed. The offence of which the prisoner
had been found guilty was one of frequent occur-
rence, and it had become necessary to inflict the
punishment of flogging and severe imprisonment
upon offenders of the kind. . The example of public
flogging was, in such cases, most salutary. But in
the case of the prisoner whom the sheriff had thought
proper to recommend, there was nothing whatever
to justify recommendation; for he had been con-
victed three times upon former charges, and was of
course a person to whOm it could not be very wise
or very charitable to extend the:indulgence of a re-
mitted sentence. .There was evidence of those mn-
victions on the records of the Court, and he (the
Recorder) had supplied himself with copies of theM.
He had refused to sign his name to the petition be-
cause he knew there was no foundation for a,petition
at all ; and he considered the interference of the
Sheriff, who was a servant of that Omit quite un-
justifiable, and such as was calculated to' draw forth
severe animadversion. The petition which had been
sent to the Secretary of : State was not the petition
which had been presented to him for his signature.
That which carried on it the mark of the Judge had
been destroyed. After some further observations
in justification of his conduct in refusing to sanction
the object of the Sheriff, he stated, that the Sheriff's
'argument against the whipping—the indisposition
of the prisoner—was not available, as the indisposi-
tion took place subsequently to the period at which
that punishment should have been inflicted; and he
concluded by denying the right of the Court of Al-
dermen to •question his conduct in discharging the
duties of a Judge.
Some of the Aldermen here proposed that the
Recorder should apologize to the Sheriff for the of-
fensive words which had been used by the former.
The RECORDER, in a firm tone, declared that no-
thing should induce him to apologize. He acted
under his Majesty's commission ; and it would be
an indignity to him .to apologise to the Sheriff for
conduct which in his conscience he approved.
The LORD Mayon strongly condemned the con-
duct of the Recorder, who was the paid servant of
that Court, and yet had used language to one of the
members of it which could not be tolerated. The
Sheriff was not paid for the important duties which
he performed : on-the contrary, his office was ex-
tremely expensive. The offensive words ought at
once to be retracted, otherwise it might. be found
necessary to adopt some .course which would be
likely to prevent a repetition. •
The RECORDER repeated that he would not apo-
logise.
Alderman ATafris thought that the conduct of a
Judge ought not to be interfered with by a Sheriff.
If such a thing were to be endured, the office of
Judge must indeed be very far from independent.
Besides, he did not see how the Sheriff should come
to that Court and act in his double capacity of
Sheriff and Alderman, in bringing forward the
charge. He agreed with the Recorder in denying
the power of the Court to interfere with the duties
of a Judge, however appointed, or by whomsoever
paid.

Sir PETER LAURIE suggested the propriety of
adjourning, and thought that the affair would ter-
minate well in the departure of all the members of
the Court.

The LORD MAYOR objected to adjournment, un-
til the other business of the Court should be gone
through.
Sheriff Farebrother eventually shook hands with
the Recorder, and thus the matter terminated.

Wm. COBIIETT.—Bonn el Thornton, in the
following passage, has pretty nearly hit off the character of
Cobbett :--" If a atron'attachnient to a particular aids-
ject, an almost total ignorance of every other, in eagerneSs
to introduce that subject upon all occasions, and a con-
firmed habit of declaiming upon it without either wit or
discretion, be the Marks of a pedantic character, as they
certainly are, it belongs to the illiterate as well as the learned."