The Statesman.
London, England, 1822-03-04 00:00:00

TIM. STAI ; MAAN.

TWO LET I EKS
TO TUE

EARL OF' LIVERPOOL.
IN REPLY TO HIS MPERCH or TUESDAY, sec 46tH

OF FEB. 18112.
BY MIL COBBETT.

Ltrrra i.

Kensington, March 1, 19.11.
My Loati-1 have read with great attention the report
of your very elaborate speech of the 26th of last month.
That speech, which was an (mercer to me, rather than to ,
any body else, was not, and, indeed, could not be, an-
swered by the Magnuson of LANSDOWNE, because he
holds, as to the main point of all, opinions equally erro-
neous with those of your lordship; sml, if those opinions
coninne to be acted upon for only a little while longer,
the landlords of England must inevitably fall before the
Mainmon of the Stock-Exchange.
The chief object of your speech was, to prove, that
exeessice taxation is not the cause of the •' distress of
agriculture," as it is called. There was some important
collateral matter. which I shall notice as I proceed; but
this was the maim olject that you had in view. Your
speech was, in fact, an attempt to answer my rustic
harangues. and especially those at litrativdon, at
Epsom, and at Chichester, which, as you well knew, had
made a deep impressiou on the minds of the whole coun-
try. In ortter to effect this object, your lordship assigns
iovtlier caose for the distress; because it would have
born monstrous indeed to deny the existence of the dig-
' tresa, at the very moment that you were proposing to
i -toe (at the risk of thriving the gold out of the country)
Aar millions of exchequer bills to lie lent to the parishes
on an assignment of the poor-rates. This other cease
brought forward by your lordship is, "orer-productiox,"
too great an abundance of food produced ; and, now let
vs see the way in which you go to work to establish
this monstrous proposition, at the same time that you
assert the population to have increased from tea to
j:wrteen miilious during the last twenty years!
There is something so unnatural, so contrary to all
expe:ience, in the idea, that the owners and occupiers
of land should be iliaresird by abundant crops, that
the mind iiivoluntarily starts back from it. Is the thing
possible Clearly it is not ; for, if the farmer grows in
good yeses 100 hushels of wheat upon a given piece of
land, and it then sell at ss. a bushel, and if, in had veers,
he grow 50 bildiels and sell at Ills. a bushel, du'es he
lose by the good crop, and gain by the bad one? Is it
rot, as far as price toes, the same thing to him? How,
then, can abundant crops have produced the distress,
that is to say, the inatility to pay rent, in the farmer?
Bat, I shall have occasion to return to this topic, after
I have examined your arguments in support of the as-
*echo that taxes do not cause the distress.
Your lordship save, that, as a proof. that it is not es-
c.ssire taxation which has produced the distress, the
save distress exists a!! orer Entope and in America.
Hy distress yon here mean low price; and, was it not
clearly shown, in my third Letter to Laadlords, that
the drain of gold from those countries, which drain had
been occasioned by Peel's Bill, ha I produced the Jill of
price in those countries • while all the taxes, there as
o tit as here, remained ;hat they were before that drain
of gold took place? You produce the evidence of a
Mr. J•COB to allele, that the agriculture of the continent
is in a state of distress. If we believe all he asserts, what
does it prove? Only that the landlords and fanners in other
loudly taxed nations have been plunged into a state of
diatreas by the fall of prices ; and, in what way is this
to.prosice in our minds a conviction, that, with the
prices of 1790, the laud of England is able to pay the
taxes of 1922 How does that tend to show, that, with

the prices of a time when the taxes amounted to thirteen
millions a year. the land can pay its share of taxes
smonnting to fifty.three millions a year? Supposing;
ail Mr. JACOll'd facts to be tree (and that is supposing
a great deal) what. do they prove more than this : that
the agriculture of the continent is in distress from the
faltof prices with an undiminished taxation r
Your lordship inchstled America; but, you. cited no
reideace. And, why was it, that no evidence was pro-
duced before the Committee, relative to America?
Plenty of witnesses, ready to be called ! And vet, none
called ! That was the country to appeal to. that was
the argument of age:le:ace in support of your mon-
strous proposition, that heavy taxes do not produce the
distress ; and here you content yourself with assertion,
tare assertion ; without a fragment of evidence. Now,
what are the facts as to America? Whv, that there are
so tares worth speaking of; and that, though farm-pro-
duce has fallen full two-thirds since 1317, there is no
distress. The very day after the last Epsous Meeting,
I sem an English Men:limit, who left New York in De-
cember; and from his month made these notes : " Bank
" paper reduced to a small quantity.—Growing less and
" less.—All paper payable in gold or silver.—No
coin-
'' mercial fat lures.—State of things sound and good.—
" Freights goo.l.—Shipping increasing; as a proof of
tt which a second line of Packet-ships had just been
"'tartest, to sail between New York and Liverpool, by
• Ityrnes, Trimhe End Co.—Manufactures, especially in
" Cotton, making great progress, and yielding great
• pr.slit.—The woollen saanufactures were also doing very
well.—Wages of day-labourer at New York, a dollar
" a they. In the cotton factories from eight to nine
" dollar: a week.-111 the woolen from nine to ten (lot-
" lays.—Price of beef in New York market 3d. (English)
" a ponnd."
This, my Lord, is the state of America, where there
are so tires to pay. Where there are no taxes things
aeon "find their tree." You will say, "I don't believe
your facts." Why, then, am I to believe pare Call
witnesses, then! But, do you see, in any of the Ameri-
can news-papers, any complaints of distress! Do you
hear of any distressed people petitioning the Congress
How soon should we have such petitions before us, if
such existed. Your post-office gets mail-loads of Ameri-
can newspapers. Hunt them through, my lord ; and, if
you can held a single proofof the truth ofyour lion,
let us have it. But, the absence of all evidence as to
America, while you produce such masses of evidence as
to other countries, is conclusive. It can leave a doubt
in the mind of no rational man, that, upon this point,
you have nothing but bare assertion, which, in such a
use, Is not worth a straw ; and can only be regarded
as having been made for the purpose of propping up
your fallacious argument.
An I told my Lord Etlenborongh. at Epsom, the case
of America destroys your whole mass of matter. There
prices have fallen more than they have here; there, there
wall a temporary derattgemeat upon the disappearance
of the paper-mosey ; but, there, the taxes being really
next to nothing, and no tax at all upon tray necessary of '
lire, things found their level in a veryshurt time; and all
became steady, sound and prosperous. litre, the evil
grows more and more frightful ; the distress is swelled
by time, just as 1 so often said it would be. Those in
America, who, when Peel's Bill was passed, bad mort-
gaged their land,or were deeply in debt, lost their land,
or became insolvent. Hut, there the evil ended. There
are no leases of land in America. The fernier who lost
Isis land, was soon up again. or. became a labourer, and
in that state was nearly as well off as before. So that
the distress was not of a-year's duration, and was never
but merely ;sari al, and wholly confined to wiortgagers
and debtors. but so here; fur here almost all is lease.
sav teisagesset of dome sort; and here the government has
Widow apoo everything. Hare the soldier, the sailor,

the plamonan, the pensioner, and fundholder, are all
.firettaird upon the land, and demand the same MN from
it as they did when wheat wasfiftcers shillings(' bushel!
Prices are now what they were in 1790. and now tar
parties just mentioned demand more thee fisur times ssi
much from the land as they did in the year 1790. In
America priers are now what they were in 1790 • but. as
the tar-gatherer demanded nothing then, and 'lemon&
nothing now, the state of the farmer is just as good now
as it was then. This is the staters( the two countries;
and is it not. after this, scandalous to pretend, Mel tar•
ation doss not produce the present distress).
lint, your lordship give,' some reasons, drawn from
facts at Lome, why legation should not be the cause of
the distress. One of these is, that agriculture was pros-
perous up to the last
.year offeror; and that, since that
time, eighteen millions of taxes have been taken of.
Aware that, after the answer that I have en often
given to this, the fact would not avail you withnnt
something further, yon go on to say, that it has
been contended, that this nominal reduction of taxation
was nothing when compared with its real augmentation
by the rise in Me calve of money. Precisely so! Pre-
cisely thus it has been contended; and how do yon
answer this propnaition? Why thus, that the paper-
money never was depreciated more than itfiterth ; that,
therefore, the money can have been mugged no more than
onefortrth in valor; that, theriyOrc, as the taxes were
reduced one;fourth in amount, the taxes could not noir
press more heavily than they did in the last year of the
War, when agriculture prospered and that, then:Arc,
the taxes cannot be the cease V' the present distress.
This argument rests entirely upon the original sin of
Peel's Bill; namely, the most mooatrous idea, that
price* ofprodsce would fall OIVIf in the degree that the
gold was, at the time of paoing the Will.disher in value
than the paper This original:sin has tainted all the
proceeding's of the Parliament, as to this subject, from
that slay to this. It was engetolered in the head of Mr.
Rie tens' and has since (mind its way even iato that
of Sir Fitaxeis fit:sorry, who " cannot see how Peel's
Bill ran have lowered prices of produce a h misdeed per
" cent, when it has the value of !limey only pier
" mid a bath per cent." Can he " see," and ran he tell.
me, what the market price of gold had, or has, to do
with the matter? Does he not know, that gold as
merchandise and gold as carreary are two things very
widely different? Does he not know, that, as slung as
paper and gold circulate together, and especially when
the paper is (as it yet is here to a certain extent) a legal
tender; does he not know, that, when this is the ease,
the paper •• palls Alwyn Me rotd," as PAINE so well ex-
presses It ? Does he not know, that to put paper out of
circulation, you must draw gobl.f.-con abroad, lessen the
quantity there, and lower prir•iw there, awl that your
own prices must, besides the fall caused by the diminu-
tion of the paper at house, take a farther Altus per-
seat of the /breign prices? toes her not know, that to.
take an nuisre of gold, or 775. 104. out of circulation
is quite another thing than to take an ounce of gold ant
of the 'market? No: hr appears to know nothing at
all of the matter, any more than your law :ship; and to
this blunder it is, that tve owe all, or the greater part, at
any rate,„sf the pertinacity with which the Parliament
clings to• the. measures, which have ruined so many
thousand upon thousand,' of persons engaged in com-
merce, trade, manufactures and agriculture.
la different parts of the Register 1 have explainedihis
matter already, over and over again. So long ago as
1905, that is to sae, 17 years ago. under the title of
" Jacobi,' Guineas," 1 explained how it was, that the
gold was really depreciated by the potter of the paper.
This article will be found in the Parliamentary port of
" Paper against biold." As soon as I heard, to Awe
rica, of the passing of Peel's Bill, I said in the Registers
then written, that the Parliament was deceived in ex-
pecting that prices of produce sbould fall only in the
degree of the then difference between the value of gold
and that of paper. But. as this is the great stumbling
I block; as this error is the main basis of all the false
hh:Cthat your Lordship aad your colleagues are now
aytt forth to the landlords and the farmers, I will
'bete, for, pirhaps, the twentieth time, madhsalour tit root
this error oat of your minds.
The erroneous position is this: that the market price
of gold is the standard whereby to arca:ore prices of
every thing. even in a case where paper is a legal tender.
Look, my Lord, at Letters, to Landlords, Letter V.
paragraph 170, and then beliemathis position if you can,
though it be still adhered to by, and %%blued out in the
dying Mikes of the EDINNURGII RIMER'S, by DR•XXV
MCG/IFTT, by Mr. Iticaeoo, and mow. at last, by Sir
FRANCIS BCROZTr. The notion is, that, became* bls.
in paper would buy (in 1919) 775. 10'11. in gall'. leaving
a different., of about 41 per cent., the causing of the
Bank to pay in gold on demand could not possibly lower
prices of produce more than 41 per cent. Bat, the fact
is, that the gohl in the market had been, and then was,
and still is, kept down in price by the paper.
The value of gold, as compared with that of commo-
dities, must, like that of other things. dePend on the de-
mand for it ; and must it not, then, disk in value, when
it ceases to be called for, or, which is the seine in effect,
when its circulation is virtually prohibited in any parti- ,
enlar country, as is the case when there is a legal tender
of paper? It most, as one of my Correspondents well
observes, not only sink in the country where ant+ pro-
hibition exists ; bat, as it emigrates fur want of employ-
sect, it sinks in raise (in comparison with commodities)
in other countries, because, by each emigration, it adds
to the quantity of money there.
This is the way in which we are to account for the
difference in the depreciation of our paper when coin-
pared with gold, and when compared with this value of
the produce of Me land. Bad the use of gold, as com-
mon currency, never ceased, this difference/ never would
have been heard of. Bat, when it ceased to act in that
capacity, it was no longer a standard of value. It sig.
rides not a straw, whether the use of gold, as currency,
cease in consequence of positive law, or in consequence
of other caner% The effect is the same. In America,
fur instance, where there was no late of legal tender,
coin had, in 1817, been nearly banished from circulation.
There was no dijfertnce, in any money transactions, be-
tween the value of paper and the. of Spanish dollars.
Yet, as soon as the paper began to disappear in the sum-
mer of 1919, prices of fares produce fbll one-haft; and,
in the fall of that year.• fat hogs, which had, only the
year in•fure, sold at 12 dollars a hundred pounds, sold at
5 or 6 dollars. Nothing can skew more deafly than
this the power of paper-money to oink the raise of gold
and siirer compared with that of eoniosodities. Bet.
even aitllaul any argument of experience, what indeed
can be more clear? Suppose there to be a tenth part
only of the enrrency of a country consisting of paper;,
suppose no law of legal tender; suppose the paper to ha
at par with the gold ; and, then suppose souse circum-
stances to take out of circulation a half of the paper ;
will you contend that prices of produce will not fall at
all, because the paper was, before this circumstance took
place, upon a par with :obit Yet, this, if you be coo-
sistent. you must contend if you persist in contending.
that the prices of produce can have been lowered by
Peel's Bill only in proportion to the dtlferenee,between
the value of pver and that of golds the time whys the
Bill was passed. Why. my Lard, was must paper gene-
rally on a par wills gold in this country up to the year'
1797 ? And yet, will you conteod, that the paper did
not assist, in proportion to its quantity, to same prices
from the fatal hour that the Bank was invented up to
the year 5797? Do you not see prices rise at
emission of smaller Bank notes, daring the Whole of this
period; and yet paper kept. all the while. at a par wills
gold. and gold and paper circulated side by side! What
mere do you want to prove, that paper-money pal s

dowa the value of gold compared with the value of com-
modities; though the paper anti the gold may. all the
while, bee! part What ittoreiln you want to convince you,
that yon took a fidae standard when you pas-e.l Peel's
Bill : What more do you want to espose the shallownes.
lof Mr. Horner, the gdinburgli Reviewers, Mr. Iteardo.
Mr. Peel. Sir Francis Borden, and, I must add, of your
Lordship's own-self? What more do we of this great,
troubled and distracted nation want, to convince us. that
" stern-path-of duty" men, dungeon-hill men, anti sit
Acts men, are nut the men calculated fur restoring the
nation to safety and prosperity?
When al.out to pass an act to compel the Bank to pay
in gold, you should have aseertained, if possible, not
any thing about the then relative ratite of paper and
gold, hut, the proportion in which the quantity t!leirest-
halm; medians would be diminished by that set of com-
pulsion. This was the question that demanded (as I
said at the time) all the mind that you had to apply to
that, or to any, matter; and this is precisely what yon
seem to have paid no attention to. Could any man is
his senses believe, that the circulating medium would he
diminished only in the degree of gi per cent? Could
any man suppose, that, when the currency of this coun-
try came to be of the same nature as the co:rency of
other countries, any thing nearly approaching the quan-
tity of 1819 would. be kept afloat; bearing in mind, as
every man of sense must, that the gold drawn from other
conntries must lower prices in those countries, and
that these would, of necessity, pull down our prices after
them?
Thus have I developed this original sits of Peel's II:11;
and, if 1 have succeeded in in skin_ myself understood
by thelandlords, your Lordship will not get them gel-
dip a!olitr, through even the present Xessium of Parlia-
ment; for, they will have a clear view of the gulph
which is open before them. As long as they can he made
to believe, that Peel's Bill can have reduced priers only
in the degree of the ditt,rence between the value of paper
and that of gold in 1819 ; sa long must they confess
that your doctrine, Mut eases do Nut produce distress, is
sound and good. 'fake Sir FRlNeff BrIRDETT at his
word (adopted from Mr. Racanon) ; get the landlords tu
admit, that the market price of gold was the standard of
the depreciation of money compared with produce; and
yon have no difficulty in proving, that taxes are mot Me
eaase of the distress of agriculture, and that theTepeal-
ing of them reshot remorse that distress: because it is
not to he denim!, that agriculture was (as to farmers and
landlords) prosperous in 1813, and that taxes have, since
that time, teen taken off in a tleiteee proportionable to
the difference (in 1813) h--tween the value of the paper
and the gold. But, let the landlords see the thing in
its trite light, let them once reject this groveling. this
Jew-like, view of the matter, and your Lordship will, if
they have the smallest portion of spirit left, find them
extremely difficult to manage.
1 now come to another reason, produced by your Laval.
ship, to thew 'that tares do nut rouse the distress;
namely, that the wealth of the country has greatly its-
creuscil since' the year 1790. You ;teem to have attended.
to " inc rustic harangues," sod to have seen, that it was
necessary to saysomethirtg,in order to shetv, that the coup-
try could hear 53 millions of taxes now as easily as it bore
13 millions in the year 1790. You, therefore tell us,
Bat the country is more-wealthy otaw than it was then.
Now, my Lord, I have, in the Letter to Mr. HATS!, in
that to Mr. Arrwoou. and in that to Mr. Coat proved
that that is all vision which you call increase of wealth ;
and have, indeed, so often proved that your ezportstnd
imports and all year Sipa* o. wealth, are calculated to
deceive only very shallow men, that .1 will not here enter
much into the matter. There is one part of your state-
ment, however, that I cannot avoid noticing. You
bring forward the increase in the conaulaption of various
exciseable articles, such as Tea, Candles, Soup, Brick*,
Leather, and Salt. Ou the latter. indeed, you do not
even pretend that there has been much of an increase.
But, bow come you to have omitted MALT ? This was
the great article of all, as a teat of what you were aiming
at, namely, to make out an "improved coaditios in the
" great body of the people." Aoil, as you quoted so
much evidence from Mr. tacos (uf what tribe may he
be?) respecting the state of the people iu Prussia, Po-
land and llanover, why not quote front the same book. a
word orlwo from Mr. ELLMAS, senior, respecting the
state of the people in Susses! " When you first began
" business (I 5 years ago) were yonr labourers in the
" daily habit of drinking beer ! Yes, all of them. Has
"that practice ceased altogether? It has ceased gene-
" rally where the toasters do not find them beer.
" When I first began farming in the parish where I now
" reside, we had not et Jitmily in Me parish that did mot
" brew their own beer, and enjoy it by their 011,14 re.
" side; there are few who now do that, unless giv::
" them the malt ?"

There, my Lord, that is time sort of crideace that can-
dour towards the country would have called on you to
qnote. Here is a change ; here is the proof of all proofs
of a deelise is the condition of the great mass of time peo•
pie. What is your soap and candles compared to this?
1 What is your tea? Here, in the malt, was the article to
he cited ; and this article you take special care to leave
out of sight. Talk of wealth! What is become of the
brewing utensils of two millions of families? What is
become of their household goods, formerly so rood and
now so beggarly ? What is become of the goods of 2410
thousand small farm-houses, whose inhabitants are now
become mere labourers? What is become of the decent
dresses of five or six millions of people, which the base
paper-system has turned into fullers,"
Hut, as far as the present question is concerned, what
has *otiose! wealth, in the broad sense of the word, to do
with the matter ? The question is, whether the present
farmer mast sot lose his capital and the present landlord
his estate, unless the taxes be greatly reduced. The
prices are what they were in the year 1790; and the
taxes areffurer times as great in amount. Now, if the
farmer o the year 1790 only got a living and fair profit
on his stock, what is the present former to do, even if
his rent be reduced to what it was in the year 1790? This
redaction would totally ruin a great part of the land-
lords. This would be enough for them. Bur, pray ob-
serve, that all the additional taxes; that is to say, three-4
/berths that have been put on since 1790, have new to
come out of a price no Ailther than Me prier q 11790.—
These taxes are on allexciseable articles ronsmaused in the
farmer's own family, in the families of all his labourers.
in the families of the smith, wheelwright, collar-maker,
bricklayer and carpenter, ie ahaterer proportion he has
to pay these tradesmen. Upon a farm where them are
ten labourers with families, they must have (included-in
their wages) about 12 pounds a year for salt tax; and,
in the whole, in the course of the year, for taxes. shout
1341 pounds. For, observe, Illell casino( .lo work Witholli
a sufficiency of food ; and, if they cannot hare a suffi-
ciency of food for work, they must have half a sod-
ficieney as paupers; and even then there is the tax.—
The tax on consumption in a farm-house, on a farm
which has ten married labourers, is not less, on an aver-
age, than 60 or 70 pounds a year. My malt-tax used to
amount to 40 pounds a year, and may salt-tar to about
15 pounds. Then there comes the share of the taxes of
the smith and other tradesmen, and of various other per-•
son Put all these parcels of tax together, and you will
find them amount to pretty nearly 3:sopouttmlsa year; that
Is to say, to :163 poem's more thee they mliml in the year
17911; and, if the farmer's crop sell for 44 rnorc than it
dial imm the year 17110, how is he to pay his rent r• And,
what nonsense to think of ansindog him and his landlord'
with the enlightened Mr. Jogrea's tr.srels and with you,
Lordship's visions about the surprising inereaw of " arm-
emus/ wealth"; travels. that seem to lm Ire Mon perform.
sd for the express psrpose of &lying countenance to those
sublime visions!

We are told, that faun fall upon the counter/ am.
of rouse, that those who consume faren.produe,inoi
pay all the taxes attached to the raisine of it. Noir,this
is very true, generally speaking ; but, forzet not, that ,11,
farmer and his family are consumers: forget no that, n
the first place. In the next place, taxes donut fall apps
the consumer, in case of a sin Ling of capital in pr,,si,,„
iar the article taxed. If the farmer cermet gets prig
aolficient to pay hies for the use of his stock aed sena,
Isle hint to pay hit rent, the tel which he pays is railipi,
the crop fells on bins and his laadlonl, and not os th",
consumer. And this is precisely the rase at present
.lnil, why cannot he get the price sitiSeient to pay his.
self and his landlord ? Because his price must depend,
nut on his wants and desires, but on the vaunt) of
money in circulation ; and, that quantity of money Ds,
heaps his prices so low, that, after paying the other out.
goings, augmented u they sow are by the taxes, it IQ
not suffer bins to have any thing left for prlfit or for
rent. But, take off the Vanes, diminish his out.giar,
in this way, and you !eau him something, for these tee
purposes. And yet your lordship and yoar colleallei,
with Mr. Ricardo at your back, would fain main, As
landlords believe, that the taking off of taxes could Ara
them no relief!
Bat, the landlordis a emssamser too ! When he gets
his rent, the taxlatberer watches it pretty unruly..
Out of 1,000/. look well after them, and you will 6id
' that a large perdu goes away is taxes. Would abed.
lord have so relief in taking aII Me lazes f Caalw,.". i 4
the same rent (if it were ponsible for him to get it
as well off as he was is 1790, if he have fear Nana '
mach to pay its taxes as he had then ? I 1 you tell oe, '
that it was the fault of the landlords that the juggle g
contracting the debt was carried on. If you tell me, -
that the present distress is the resalt, and the jut malt.
of their roily and baseness. If you tell me, that, if eke •
had possessed, any portion of jnstice, they never aselii
hare suffered the labouring classes to lie plead/red of
their goods, and to be half.starved by the workiageaf
the paper-tu•iney. If you tell me, that they rheekledat
the pessing of the Dungeon Bill apd Six Acts. Ryon
tell me, that they approved of Sldusouth's Circulate( ,
Nil; that they laughed when the Magistrate' ef
Cheshire sent Jens Swans to jail for jour yam mela •
hay; two years and a half of which are yet to cue;
that they applauded the conduct of the Mischa*
gistrates and Yeomanry oaths lirestAngset i dist the
Oldham !septet was peculiarly loth/ft If lea '
tell use this, I agree with your Lordship; hat, to WIN;
that, to take off three hundred pounds out of eteey fier
hundred that a landlord has to pay in tax, tr,eld Ant
him no reliefs! Slap; it is not lac that yoetea 1
this ; you tell it them : and, therefore, your Lordship is
perfectly right':
There remain to henoticed, your Lordship's ormolus il
endeavours to maintain the monstrous doctrine, that ilie ~
distress has arisen from srperaorndas! crops ; yearns
sertion, that commtvare and manufactures hays feriff4
and are i• a prosperous state; Its- pr.,je or for leodiagte ,
the parishesfnar millions in Esrlietpi-r dills; the hope I
yell hold out of relief to the land from the effects of the I
ginffing-funa : and, lastly, per, assertion, that the 1
e. piddle cred.t" and " national faith", as you call thin, 1
must be maintained, and that to main tits them is nets. '
sari, even to Az safely of the lutlhoidele. Bat. these
1
topics mast be the sukie.t of A Second Leiter.
I am, nay Used,
'four Lordship's mast obedient.
And most builds. servant,
WM. comm.
. •
loroir B. The Second Li4er will appear in this hire
to

PRICE OF STOCKS TIIIB DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK.
Rant Stock lndia Stack.
I per Cent. WA .Shat Dino Roods Os. Ms. 441 a. pa
!per Ct. Con.. 704131 Etcatit Fee Stock
S per Clan • 94 Serih Sca OM too
4 per Cent 5............ %hat ELMS Id lOW 01.1 s. is.pa
5 per Cts. Nary ... as. lc pm
2 Falliicat. pm
Lana Aim. • .9bet Coe. for As:et • 3iii
Imp. 3 per Coot ...... .73 loJia ;or ditto
WO 6 eer Omit.., Lott. 'rickets.. ... ti,.
SIGN II ATZIII

Morning 14 a. it
•; The &rend Lett4
TAT Si

111111.0:4•11[1111411 TO•111011111411W.
it —Evilminit 43 wi. 4fler I!.

r of Mr. Coaperrr ten appear ia
rArra.vAAr to-morrow.
- _

ebt soutcoman.
" Tlit 11111111111 S STATltiplle. Is INCOUPIIIItaIt, WITS
.

ILONDON:
MONDAY r•teNtNn, LAIC!' 4. IS!2. ; :r
STOCK E XeIIANG.E TWELVE O'CLOCK.
The Consols iat present ate 791 for the Acme,
and 7h for Money s the 5 per Cent. 102 H. There
have been se-eral peplums tii,s morning signing their •
dissent to the 5 per Cents. at what is called Abraham
Newland's Office. mad one person close, it is said.
his signed fur 201t,000/. The private letters from
Holland this toorsitt,4 bring the Spanish Fonds 3 per
Cent. higher than in London r. which is owing to the •
favourable opinion entertained there of Spanish affairs.
New Spanish 4 ettl
Old
Danish.
Premise .....
Neapolitan . . •••a......•
ON to 10
NALINPAST ONE O'CLOCK.
Up to this hunt Jthe Feeds remain steady at PI. •
A number of persons save vieitesl Mankato Newnan's
Office, to obtain the letters !if form which are hissed
but not Slied up them!. The number of permits orbs #
have signed the 5 pet Cent,. are nut yet ascertained.
There is no news on !PChang e.
• . --moo --
The Irish paper" r meired la.dam, bring an wont
of :he execntion of t to three tien who were comlemard
for the smack on tide police. at Churchmen. Few
spectators could be inure° to trimeas the
ful scene, and of the lei , the principal parl
were women. The same night, the house
Mr. WHITE. at Castle• Mat on, with its Ore.
and all the property, was burnt by a party of Main.
boys, and the feinal is and children of the family were
with difficulty rescued from the II danrq by • detach-
ment of the 42al regiment. lithe, houses bare bees
also burnt, aid other outrages t•untinne to be commit.
led. We are happy. however. to lear i that some if
the horrible accounts previonstl• received are 11.. w cOc-
trodieted. Oa the abject of 11. e alleged rape of aim
women, wives of sottlien of ISo Rifle Bilged.. the
Limerick Advertiser •Beys—eo We are erviiibly rs
formed, that the outrage stated to have bees con'
min 4 d on nine women, that wives of soldiers,
Newcastle, is walk,- sofogaded, ?Nei ties