Current:

Northern Star (1837-1852), 1st March 1845, Edition 4 of 4, Page 4, THE MINERS' MAGAZINE.

Page 4
Page 4
4 of 8

On this page

  • Departments (2)
    • THE MINERS' MAGAZINE.
    • THE NORTHERN STAR SATU1UUT, If ARCH 1, 1843.
  • Text (7)
  • Transcript

    • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

      Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

      M'Do-Aix. Mac Thirsting For Fame, But St...

      POST OFFICE _ESPIONAGE . GREAT PUBLIC MEETING OF THE ELECTORS AND INHABITANTS OF FINSBURY . On Wednesday night last , a meeting of the elec-Uns and inhabitants of the borough of Finsbury convened by requisition , was held at the \\ nite Conduit House Tavern , Pentouville , relative to tne opening of letters at the Post _^ ftee , addressed to Mr . T . S . Duncombe , the representative of the borough . The spacious hall was densely crowded On thl platform were T . Wakley , fcsq . M . l „ Sir C 'Namer M P and R , J- Blewitt , Esq ., M . P ., _snVportedbva _' _kke number of influential electors _ofSl shades of pontics . Richard Taylor , Esq common councilman ofthe City of London , was called to the chair _i _t ? t

      . _.,,,.-, _r . r - _. The _Chuiuiax said that the borough of Finsbury had done itself great credit by the choice of its present representatives ; they were both gentlemen of ~ < _rreai _abillfj * , perseverance , and courage . Li proportion as a public man was courageous he became an object of suspicion to the Government . The power of opening letters in the Post-office might be a most dangerous weapon in the hands of a tyrannical Government . He ( Mr . Taylor ) recollected that during the time of the Sidmouth Administration , when it-was deemed necessary to get up sham p lots , tlie lettere of Mr . Coke , of Norfolk , the late Earl of Leicester , were opened in order to o btain materials on whieh to ground a charge against him of hostility tothe _Govei-nnient- of the day . Hut sueh conduct

      would be tolerated no longer , for tlie people would not submit to such a monstrous violation of that confidence which ought to subsist between the members and their constituents . The electors of Finsbnrj ; were bound to call upon xhe Government io wipe olr tile stigma which it had aitemnted to east on tlie character of Mr . Duncombe . If they did not , they would be unworthy of ihat reputation for pubhc spirit whieh tliev had hitherto maintained . Mr . LixTOxhi _' moving tlie first resolution , observed that three d ' _lTStincfechai _^ cs had been made against the Government—one was , that lettere had been illegally opened and detained at the Post-office ; the next , toconceal that

      that seals had been counterfeited _^ examination -and the third was , that it had been done to serve the interests of certain despotic Governments . Mr . Dimeonibe had called for explanation , but- he had obtained no answer . By Sir J . Graham he was metwiihdo £ ged silence ; by Lord Aberdeen with subterfuge and false assertions ; aud by Sir R . Peel with shuffling and evasion . The only answer given to Mi * . Duncombe was coniained in the reports of two committees whieh did not agree with each other . Mr . Duncombe ' s character had been most foully stigmatised , and it was the duty of his constituents to demand a full vindication from the Government . The resolution was as follows : —

      That this meeting learns with mortification and disgust that there exists at the General Post-office a secret spy system under which letters are hroken open , seals counterfeited , and pest-marks _falsely imposed , in order to deceive the persons to -wliom such letters are directed * , and to whom they are afterwards forwarded , while tlie information thus obtained has in some cases heen used to promote despotic interests of foreign Governments ; that this meeting _strongly _denounces the existence of such disgraceful tram-action ? , and , refusing to be satisfied wiih the report of the eoiawittec published at the close of ihe last session , deems it essentially necessary for the honour of tins country , and also for public satisfaction and secur ity , that a strict , searching , and open inquiry should be instituted into all the circumstances referred to in certain petitions presented to Parliament on this subject , in order that by such inquiry the manner in which such illegal and unconstitutional practices have been carried on , may be clearly exposed andhrought to public shame .

      Mr . Hodckix seconded the motion . The question was between Sir J . Graham and ilr . Duneombe , the one a renegade to his former party , the latter a straight-forward gentleman who had stood fast by his principles , and was at all times the zealous and independent advocate of popular rights . The motion was earned by acclamation . Mr , Walker moved the next resolution : — That this meeting have read with indignation the statemeat made hy iwr representative , 3 Ir . Thomas Buncombe , in his place in Parliament , that hi = correspondence has heen clandestinely intercepted and secretly

      opened , tinder _Government authority , at the Post-office : thatin the opinion pf this meeting the only excuse forthe exercise of such power towards Mr . Duncombe , would be -that the Gorerament had good reason to deem Mm capable of conduct which , if true , would , in our opinion , render bim totally unfit to continue the representative of a free and independent constituency ; that we , therefore , _feelit _dne to ourselves , as wen as to ilr . Duncombe , to demand from the House of Commons such an investigation into the proceedings towards him as shall either -justify the implied suspicions of the Government , or fully establish the innocence of our long- tried and _faithfulrepresen-¦ tative _. *

      The Secretary thep read the following letter from Mr . Duncombe : — Tothe Sectors of _Tinsi / _vrv la _Fsbl' ic _JItetmy assembled . 9 v . r _» tlemcn . —1 have the honour to aehnowlcdgo the re-? ta * _t of _jc-ur letter of invitation , and to express to you my " •¦ - « . > --. - ;' . at _Mctnt events in . Parliament have rendered it imps _; ,-rive on the borough of Finsbury to meet on my a ? --c-c . it—the Suit , _lioweser , rests not with me , "but . with her l £ ajcsty * s Ministers . 1 need not now assure you how happy I am , at all times , to meet those whom it is my pride to represent , when questions affecting public interests are nuder their consideration , as upon such occasions you trill do me the j _* cstice to admit I have never shrunk from doing that which 1 felt to be my duty .

      ' Ent , gcnt _' einen , the question which you are convened ¦ to discuss appears to me to he of so peculiar and of so purely a personal character , that I think it woidd be most indelicate on my part to be present upon the occasion . In declining ; however , tlie honour that you have proposed to me , I hope I may be permitted to state that all tliat I 3 have asked ofthe House of Commons is tliat wliich I thin ; - Ihave a right to demand , viz ., an opportunity of removing those hiss suspicions implied by the fact of the Government having violated the sanctity of my corresixmileuce . The expression of your independent opinion , 1 hope , will assist me in obtaining that satisfaction without -jifcicb , 1 am convinced , yon will agree with me , I cannot continue a member of the present House of Commons trfth either advantage to you or credit to myself . I have tlie honour to be , gentlemen , Tour obedient and faithful servant , _-Albanv , Feb . 2 a . Thosus S . Dcxcombe .

      The reading of this letter _produced vehement cheering . Mr . George Rogers said , he had often addressed them on the _mal-practice 9 of both "Whigs and Tories ; but never did he feel so indignant as on the present occasion . He had often thought and said the House of Commons was grossly immoral , and that its members should be sent about their business , that we might hare the chance of selecting better men . ( Hiar hear . ) But never before did he flunk them so immeasurably base ( hear , hear ) as they had now proved themselves by their sanction of the petty larceny

      villauies ofthe Home Secretary . ( Tremendous cheering . ) The electors of this borough had a duty to perform ; Finsbury was at the head of the democratic tree , ( loud cheers ) , and that position must be maintained . He took upon himself to say that no other 658 men , except inthe lowest refuse of society , would have refused Mr . Duncombe's just request ! ( Great cheering . ) Mr . Dnneombe was a high-spirited and faithful champion of the people , and in justice to him and themselves , they were bound to obtain such an Inquiry as would either acquit Mr . Duncombe , or place them in a position to obtain another representative . ( Cheers . )

      _SirCiunxEs 2 » a _* piEK came forward to support the resolution and in presenting himself was received with loud cheers . He said that whatever excuse might exist as to opening the letters of foreigners suspected of plotting against their country , the Government had no right to violate the sanctity ot correspondence between a representative of the people and his constituents . Mr . Duncombe had put to Sir James Graham a plain ample question— " Did you open my letters , or did you not V He could get no answer . The matter was referred to two committees , bnt tiie reports were silent with respect to Mr .

      Duncombe ; upon that part ofthe case they made no report whatever . The question for the electors of _PinBbmry to decide was this—he had been suspected of carrying on a treasonable correspondence with some persons in this -country . Was Mr . Duncombe capable of high treason ? ( Cheers , and cries of No , no . ) Well , then , you must believe either that Mr . Bunoombe was plotting against the Government , or that Sir J . Graham was plotting against Mr . Duncombe . Under these circumstances tho electors of Finsbury had done right to demaud a fidl inquiry into the - subject .

      The resolution was carried unanimously . Mr . Cooper moved the third resolution as _foll ows : — Tbzt a _pstiaon , _erabcdyiag the _Jorcgoln-J resolutions , and praying the House of Commons to adopt such measures aB will effectually prevent the recurrence of the abases complained oi ; be signed on behalf of this meeting try the chairman and tie committee , and presented hy T . -VfaWey , Esq ., our worthy representative . Dr . Epps , in an eloquent speech , seconded the resolution , which was earned unanimously . The secretary then read the petition , which was an echo ofthe resolutions , and moved its adoption . It . i . _BtEwnr , M . P ., seconded the motion , and said he attended there to tcstifv liis lifcli admiration

      and esteem for the man they had chosen to represent them ; and his great detestation of the spy system adopted by the Home Secretary . His own opinion waB , that Mr . Duncombe ' s letters had been opened without a warrant . The petition tliey were about to adopt -should have his most cordial support , and further , so long as a motion could be formed , and so long as Sir James Graham remained obstinate , so _longwould he support Mr . Duncombe . ( Loud cheere . ) ¦ " - _^ 'he-petition was unanimously adopted . Mr . WarieyI M . V ., r . ovc rose amidst _sjravt _appk-us _* , _w-f suit they had ahoitc-d him a . duty _whir-h he _shouldpiriorm with great _plf-wirc , and " he honed lo their saustactinn . lie stood ih _.-w in the double capacity ot a « khen elector of FimSrary to ' DTOt > st

      M'Do-Aix. Mac Thirsting For Fame, But St...

      against the disgraceful spy system , and aBa representative to obey his constituents' commands . Thomas Slingsby Duncombe was as bold , as honest , as faithful a representative of the people as could possibly be found or conceived of : —( loud cheers)—a man who never dissembled—in whom there was no deception . When Mr . Duncombe first mooted the question , some _ofthe'Hon . Gentlemen turned np their very aristocratic noses , and said pooh , pooh . But that answer would not do for Mr . Duncombe . Well , at length a committee was appointed , but Mr . Duncombe was not allowed to be on it . No , he knew too much about it , and was too independent to report in favour of the Government , ( Cheers . ) Well , the committee got so deep in the love of

      antiquity that one of its members well nigh lost himself . ( Loud laughter . ) it was said that men in Parliament were " so virtuous , and so moral , ( laughter , ) that a declaration made there , was deemed better than an oath out of it . " Wefl , Mr . Duncombe made the declaration that his letters had been opened , and of course the charge was investigated by the Committee . No such thing . He had turned the folios of the report over and over , very carefully , and bethought he had lost his eye-sight , for not a word did he find in that report relative to his Hon . Colleague . The report was unsatisfactory to Mr . Duncombe ( an extraordinary man he would have been if it had not ) . The electors of Pinsbury had done themselves immortal honour by

      meeting as they had done that evening to defend their representative . If it had been a little girl , or an old maid , with an exuberance of curiosity that had been prying into their letters , it might have been excused , but- a Government controiing the destinies of millions being guilty of such baseness , was disgusting and abhorrent . ( Loud cheers . ) Mr . Wakley , in the course of his speech , illustrated his argument by a reference to the case of the expatriated patriot , " John Frost , at the mention of whose name , the meeting rose en masse , and cheered and cheered again ; and , continued the Hon . Member , I contended then , and have always contended , that , had justice been done , that much injured man and his compatriots would have been instantly liberated . ( Renewed cheering . ) But , returning tothe immediate ease of Mr . Duncombe , his colleague said to Sir J . Graham , "You opened my letters . " The only answer he gets is : " What Ihave done , I have done

      on mv own responsibility . " _J « ow he ( Mr . Wakley ) , should like to know how to make the Home Secretary really responsible . ( Hear , hear . ) The insinuation conveyed by opening the lettere of his Hon . Colleague was a serious imputation on his character ; and in justice to Mr . Duncombe ' sconstituents Sir James Graham ought to have stated the fact ? . That Government was ft base one who employed Spies , but now we had a Government who were themselves Spies . ( Cheers ) . Mr . Duncombe in his letter read that evening , had intimated that unless an inquiry- was granted whereby he might clear himself of the imputation cast on his character he must resign his seat ; ( loud shouts of no , no , no ) , that was the purport of the note . But should that be the case , it would be their pleasing duty to send him back again . ( Loud cheering ) . Mr . Wakley concluded by saying that he should present the petition , and would do all in liis power to give effect to their views . The Hon . Gentleman resumed his

      seat amid loud and long-continued cheers . Mi ' . Elt moved a vote of thanks to the chairman , which was seconded by Mr . William Balls , and carried by acclamation . Three cheers were then given for Mr . Duncombe ; three cheers for Mr . Wakley , and three groans for Sir James Graham ; and this great and unanimous meeting dispersed .

      -. 4 ' Th-Ef ¦N ^B^H-E-Irn' Star " ' ......

      -. 4 ' _TH-Ef ¦ N _^ B _^ _H-E-iRN' STAR " ' _.....,...- _t _^ _-Mm _^^ u _^^ . _^

      The Miners' Magazine.

      THE MINERS' MAGAZINE .

      Editedly W. P. Hobcrts, Esq. The Sixth N...

      Editedly W . P . Hobcrts , Esq . THE Sixth Number will he puhlished on . the fith oi March inst . Price Four-pence . The Lancashire Miners are requested to receive their numbers through iheir Delegates , who will be at the County Delegate Meeting on the 9 th of March . The MAGAZINE and all the back numbers may be obtained from the agents , Mr . Cleave , of London , or Mr . Heywood , 3 fanchester ; or direct from Mr . Roberts' Offices , 2 , Rooert-street , Adelphi , London ; 11 , Royal Arcade , Newcastle ; and 8 , Princess-Btreet , Manchester .

      The Northern Star Satu1uut, If Arch 1, 1843.

      THE NORTHERN STAR SATU 1 UUT , If ARCH 1 , 1843 .

      Lord Devon's Commission. The Peculiar An...

      LORD DEVON'S COMMISSION . The peculiar and delicate circumstances connected with the above commission led us to anticipate a very _different document than the report with which the country has been favoured . The constitution of the tribunal was calculated to inspire us with jealousy and suspicion ; while the objects to which attention should be directed were likely to be altogether merged in the necessity of vindicating that class to which the commissioners belonged' fi-om the accumulated load of odium tha ttime and neglect have heaped upon their backs . Independently of these particular objections we had the more general feeling of contempt , arising from the fact , that all inquiries into the condition of the poorer classes have been confined to th «

      very parties of whose misdeeds they have complained . Under these circumstances , while we were prepared for the very natural vindication of the landlords of Ireland , wc confess that their true picture presented in every line of the report has taken ns by surprise . Before wc offer a passing comment on the several heads under which the commissioners have presented their report , we may lie permitted to observe that the wholesale apology offered for the Irish landlords comports most strangely with the extensive representation of the people ' s sufferings . After

      commenting npon the reports of a select committee or two , the commissioners , Beginning at the wrong end , with a holy reverence for their order , state as follows : — " Upon a review of the whole subject we feel bound to express our opinion , that there has been much of exaggeration and mis-statement in the sweeping charges which have been directed against the Irish landlords . " With great respect for the commission , we are of opinion that the apology should have followed / . rather than have preceded , the "sweeping charges " established by the report against the Irish andlords .

      Now let ns comparethe following description of the condition of the people with the foregoing glowing apology : — "We regret , however , to be obliged to add , in most parts of Ireland there seems to be by no means a corresponding advance in the condition and comforts of the labouring classes . A reference to the evidence of most of the witnesses will show that the agricultural labourer of Ireland continues to suffer the greatest privations and hardships ; that he continues to depend upon casual and precarious employment for subsistence ; that he is still badly housed , badly fed , badly clothed , and badly paid for his labour . Our _pei-sonal experience and observations during our inquiry have afforded us a melancholy confirmation of these statements ; and we cannot forbear expressing our strong sense ofthe patient endurance which the labouring classes have generally exhibited under sufferings , _greate--, we believe , than the people of any other country in Europe have

      to sustain . Again , under the head "Labourers" we find the following extracts ;—In adverting to the condition of the different classes of occupiers in lrelaud , we noticed , with deep regret , the state of the cottiers and labourers in most paits of the country , from * the want of certain employment . It-would be impossible to describe adequately the privations which they and their families habitually and patiently endure . It will be seen in the evidence that in many districts their only food is the potato , their only beverage water , that their cabins are seldom a protection against the weather , that a bed or a blanket is a rare luxury , and that n _» arly in all , their pig and manure heap constitute their only property .

      Wheu we consider this state of tilings , and the large proportion of the population which comes under the designation of agricultural labourers , we have to repeat that the patient endurance which they exhibit is deserving of high commendation , and entitles them to the best attention of Government and of Parliament . Their condition has engaged our most anxious consideration . Up to this period any improvement that mayhave taken place is attributable almost entirely to the habits of temperance in which they have so generally persevered , and not , we grieve to say , to any increased demand for their labour . We deeply deplore the- difficulty whieh exists in suggesting any direct means for ameliorating tbeir condition .

      Here again we find a repetition of the sufferings of the poor which cannot be ascribed to the mis-statements or exaggerations of the commissioners ; and then we very naturally inquire as to the source from whence those grievances spring , whether from laws made by landlords , or _fi-oin the illegal and uncivilised practices of those gentlemen . Upon this subject the report shall speak for itself , and from which we select the following unequivocal condemnation of the landlords of Ireland . The report says—In common with the committee of 1832 , whose language we have quoted , we feel the impossibility of providing any direct remedy by _le-ral enactment for the suffering described hi the _' preeeding extracts .

      The evil arises from the _abuM <> f a right , of which tlie existence _ie essential to the maintenance of property ; but although we cannot recommend any interference by law with tiie right , it dues not follow that we should hesitate to expose the abuse , or to point out the means which , iu our opinion , may and ought to fce adopted to mitigate the evils resul & _ia from it .

      Lord Devon's Commission. The Peculiar An...

      Now then , taking the above extracts as a fair representation of the sufferings of one class , and the conduct of . the other class , what do we discover ? Why , that even the increased morality of the people arising from increased temperance , has not in the slightest degree tended towards their improvement : and this " arises from the abuse op a hight , _' ' the existence of which _** ' is essential to the _MAISTENANCE OF PROPERTY * _, " an " abUSC , " _lUOl'eover , for tlie correction of which the commissioners cannot suggest ov recommend any legal remedy . Are we not entitled to ask to what end , then , all this fuss and bother I when wc discover

      that the existence of these / ' abuses" are essential to the maintenance of property . Suppose we say that the abuse " arises" from the middle system—from t he clearance system—from bad tenure—want of improvements—consolidation of flirms—recovery of rent —agency—sale of estates—want of agricultural instruction—imperfect system of emigration—want of cultivation of waste lands—total dependence of the labourers : the several heads under which the commission has reported ; anil will the commissioners inform us over which of these the landlords have not a power—the abuse of which has led to the necessity of this very commission , unwilling to suggest legal remedies for the abuses existing ?

      Before we offer a few suggestions on this report , wc shall first state our preference for it over all documents of a similar nature that have been laid before the House of Commons . Wc should attach but very trifling importance to the report in question , if placed in the hands of a jobbing Whig Ministry , well knowing that it would be dismissed with a becoming lamentation for the grievances complained of , and a regret of the inapplicability of legal enactments for their correction—a tear for the sufferers , and a respect for the recommendations of the commissioners . Our trust , however , is , as wc before intimated , that Sir Robert Peel will see in this report sueh a justification—nay , demand—for interference , as will enable him to base the right of Irish property upon some better title than the existence of an acknowledged " abuse . "

      Those readers who have learned the state of Ireland from tho Northern Star arc already in possession of every single grievance set forth in the report ; while the corrections proposed are similar iu character to what we have so frequently recommended ; and the result produced by the present system is precisely what we have oftentimes stated it to be . Uncertainty of tenure we have described as the greatest evil against which Irish farmers have to contend : and , -curious enough , the _reportmakes a striking difference between want of tenure and uncertainty of tenure . We shall select a few extracts .

      xtmvx . Underfills head we find the following observations—It frequently happens that large estates in that country are held by the proprietors in _strvit limitation ; and the pecuniary ch'cumstances of the landed proprietors generally , arising in some cases out of family charges , and resulting in others from improvidence or carelessness possibly of former proprietors , disable many , even of the best disposed landlords , from improving their property , or encouraging improvement amongst their tenantry , in the manner which iMuhi conduce at once to their own interest a > id the _pttblte advantage Many ef the evils incident to the occupation of land in Ireland maybe attributed to this cause . Here we have an " abuse" of great magnitude , an hereditary " abuse , " and lot us sec the legal remedy proposed by the commissioners . The report goes on

      thus : — . \ fe are of opinion that , for the permanent improvement of an estate—confining that expression to sueh operations as may properly be considered of an agricultural character— tenants for life , and other persons under legal disability , should be empowered , subject to proper and efficient restrictions , to charge the inheritance , to an amount not exceeding three years' income , for such improvements , being bound to repay the principal by instalments , and to keep down the interest . This is no new principle . Again : —

      It must never be forgotten that an improved cultivation , with the consequent increase of produce from the soil , and of comfort to the occupier , are not matters of private or individual interest only , but are intimately connected with the preservation of public tranquillity and the general prosperity of the whole empire . Again : — We also think it would be desirable that extended leasing powers should be given , under proper and equitable restrictions , to tenants foi- life , and to boards or corporations whose powers are restricted by law , such as incumbents as to their glebe lands , the Provost and Fellows of Trinity CoUege , tho Trustees of Erasmus Smith , the Board of Education , and the Trustees of Sir T . Dunue ' s and Wilson ' s Hospitals . Again : —

      Looking generally through Ireland , we believe tliat the larger proportion ofthe land is occupied by tcnants-at-will There has been of late years , from various causes , an indisposition in many landlords to grant leases ; and it appears from , the evidence that in some cases , where the landlord is willing , the tenants decline to take them out , influenced , to a certain degree , by the high stamp duty . Again : — The uncertainty of tenure is , however , ' constantly ' referred to as a pressing grievance by all classes of tenants . It is said to paralyze all exertion , and to place a fatal impediment in the way of improvement . '

      Irom the above extracts we learn that the uncertainty of tenure places the public tranquillity in jeopardy , paralyses national indnstiy , and limits tliat supply of produce which would otherwise vender lis independent of all foreign aid : and yet the present "abuse" is to be allowed to remain for the maintenance of the existing rights of landlords . ' It is somewhat refreshing , however , thatin the recommendation of tlie commissioners to give extended rights to tenants at will , we recognise a side-blow at the law of primogeniture , the master evil under which the country suffers ; a blow which wc trust will be followed up by the total destruction ofthe system . In speaking of tenure , wc may safely aver that certainty of tenurethat is , a lease for ever at a corn rent , would render all minor considerations unimportant .

      Improvements would then go on ; farm-houses would then be built by the tenants , * the increased value , of land consequent upon the application of increased labour would lead to the destruction of the consolidation system ; the recovery of rent would be a thing achieved without distress or ejectment ; agency could be effected without trouble ; the sale of estates-woulA be of move daily occurrence in consequence of the improved price offered for them by small holders ; agricultural instruction would become a necessary ingredient in national education ; emigration would to a thing not thought of ; waste lands would be improved as if by magic ; the labourers'condition would keep pace witli that improvement ; county cess would be a burden easily borne ; agrarian outrages would cease , and the occupation of the Commissioners of Public Works would be gone .

      The Condition-of-Ireknd question being * involved in the recent inquiry , we prefer waiting for the appendix , whereby we shall be put in possession ofthe evidence of 1 , 100 witnesses , we presume of different classes , to offering a conclusive opinion on the mere skeleton with which wo bave been furnished by the commissioners : therefore , for the present , we shall content ourselves with directing attention to such extracts as we have selected and arranged under then respective heads , which full y confirm that faithful view that we have ever taken of this monster question . May we venture a hope that parties of all shades of polities will join in _rescuing the Irish people from that state of _degi-adation , wretchedness _^ and poverty to which the noii-perfonnance ofthe duties of theiv natural protectors has brought thom ?

      It is a subject to the consideration of which we shall bring our minds without anger or exasperation , in the hope that suggestions and comments may have the greater weight on thos e who will be called on to legislate upon tlie subject . It is impossible , however , to review the whole _queston without feelings of the most intense anxiety and doubt—anxiety for the sufferers ; and doubt lest landlords and _Alaltiiuaians should unite for the maintenance of '' abii 3 es"loiig cherished by the one party as the means of

      maintaining existing rights ; and profitable to the other for the dependency that it entails . In another part of . our paper will be found selections from the different heads under whieh tlie report is presented , and to them we beg to direct the especial attention of the reader—especially to that portion which gives the preference to spade husbandry , and declares the growing desire for agricultural instruction . It 18 tQ the time at which this report is presented , and to the resolution of the Prime . Minister , rather than to its contents , that we attach importance .

      Lord Devon's Commission. The Peculiar An...

      THE LEGALITY OF LETTER-OPENING . The revelations made by Mr . Duxcombe , of the infamies ofthe Post-office , are likely to lead to afar different result to that anticipated by the Government , when the subject was first mooted . The position of " supercilious silence , " at first assumed by the Home Secretary , was evidently dictated by a feeling tliat " the House" would extend the mantle of shelter over the Executive , and screen the officials in the performance of what is termed '' an odious but necessary duty . " In this , however , the Whig renegade " reckoned withouthis host "; forthefact was , that nine-tenths of " the House" itself were una ware of the existence even of

      such an " odious power ; " and the natural surprise and indignation felt at the exposure made by Mr . _Dcscojinr . hurried Hon , Members into a course of procedure which drove the Government from its original intention of setting Mr . Diwcombb and public feeling at defiance . Sir James Graham had to come down from the highpereh of " official responsibility" on to the ground of " inquiry ; " and though he aiid his comrogucs managed that the inquiry should be a secret one , yet the granting of even that much was a virtual defeat—a defeat that is sure to lead ultimately to the entire suppression of tlie " odious" practice . s >

      The inquiry that Sir James Graham was thus obliged to concede to the wounded feeling of "the House , " was not the only one that has resulted from Mr . _Duncomw- _' s labours . The facts tliat he lias detailed before tbe face of the country have set tho " gentlemen ofthe long robe" at work : and their " inquiries" arc somewhat different in nature to those whieh engaged the attention of * the secret committee-men . They heard it alleged and admitted that the practice had existed for a long period of time ; and that it had been in extensive use .

      Their attention , therefore , has been directed to the ascertaining ofthe AUTHORITY for the practice ; _rlietlier there is any legal right for the Home Minister to stop , detain , or open letters ; whether he can legally issue a warrant for any such purpose ; or whether it is not a practice that has existed without authority , and been persevered in to our own times , because unquestioned : and it is more than likely that the inquiries of these gentlemen will lead to the q . mti < ming of tlio assumed power before the Judges op Law and dispensers of Justice .

      In the course of the debate on Friday night last Mr . W , H .. W . VT 80 S , Member for Kinsale , said * . — When the question was first agitated , he ( Mr . Watson ) called upon the Government to say on what law they rested their claim to search letters passing through the Post-office , they being the carriers of those letters ; but he received no information upon the subject . The Right Hon . Gentleman , the Home Secretary , referred io the statute of Queen Anne and that of her present Majesty : but , according - to the report of the Lords' Committee , the Secretary of State could not from this source make out that he derived any right upon the subject . The latter statute he ( Mr . Watson ) had beforo him , and the Act ( 1 Victoria , c . 30 ) merely stated , that whoever should open or wilfully detain a letter in the Post-ofhYe should be Kuiltv of a misdemeanour , adi'mg a proviso that this

      should not extend to the opening or detaining a letter in obedience to a warrant from the Secretary of State . But , according to tlie Lords' report , the right of the Secretary of State to issue sueh a warrant depended entirely upon the common law , and there was no right whatever given by thi 6 statute . Now , he ( Mr . Watson ) had taken ' some pahis to examine the authorities , and look into the law upon thesubject , but he could find no authority in any law-book whatever for the right ofa Secretary of State to open a letter at the Post-office ; in no text-book , and in no reports whatever , could he discover anything of the sort . What was the rig ht claimed and exercised ? It was not merely to seize and detain letters , but to open those letters , seal them up again , and then send them on to the . pai'ties ; not to take the bold measure of seizing and keeping an individual ' s papers for public

      reasons , but to read his letters and take copies of them , and copies of the seals , in their passage to him . ( Hear . ) Tliis was a great constitutional question . ( Cheers . ) To talk of investigating the subject without inquiring into the law under which they lived was really entering into no inquiry at all , the subject beiHg the right of the Secretary of State by law to examine in the Post-office the letters of the public at large , and letters addressed to Members of the House . Ho ( Mr . Watson ) said that there was no such right ; and thatwas a question which must ultimately be determined . ( Hear , hear . ) The Hon . Member for Bute ( Hie Hon . James Stuart Wortley ) had been pleased to ask on the previous night why was not information laid before the House , and evidence adduced , by those who complained ? Why , where was the evidence to be obtained ? What letters had heen opened was known only to the

      Scoretary of State and his subordinates . How could evidence be produced by the Hon . Member for Finsbury , except that he had heard certain things , and thought them probable and believed them ? The Government and its subordinates alone had tlie information . . ( Hear , hear . ) His Hon . Friend the Member for Weymouth ( Mr . G . W . Hope ) had said that this question ought not to be discussed in the House , but in the Queen ' s Bench , or in some other court ; and some other Hon . Members appeared to hold the same view . lie ( Mr . Watson ) must state , in the face of the House , that if the inquiry did not take place in Parliament it could take place no-where . How could it take place in the Queen ' s Bench ? Howeoulditbeprovedthatletters had been opened ? Were the subordinates of the Post-office to be called 1 No one could prove the fact ; the mouth of the Secretary of State himself' was closed . According to the decision

      of Lord Tcntevdcn , no officer could be examined m matters relating to the public affairs . How , then , was any individual to go into a court of law to try the question of right ? ( Hear , _heai-J ) It was possible , if the Government would admit what letters were opened , hut not otherwise ; aud if they really desired to have the question determined , they had only to avow that a particular officer opened a letter belonging to the Hon . Member for Finsbury , and let him take proceedings at law against that person , and then j- stify under tliis pretended right . { Hear , hear . ) But until he ( Mr , ITateon ) heard some _authority cited , ho would maintain that the whole system of opening letters at the rost-oifico was illegal . ( Hear , hear . ) This subject was very closely connected with what was at one time a ' great constitutional question—the right of tlie Secretary of State to issue General Warrants to seize papers : and these ,

      which were declared to be illegal in the case of Wilkes , had existed in the time of Elizabeth , in the period of the Commonwealth , and under the second Charles , and from the revolution downwards . That claim was very analogous to the present . ( Hear , hear . ) There were two cases to which he would ' particularly call the attention ofthe House . One was the case of the editor and printer of the North Briton . The Secretary of State issued a warrant to seize all his papers ; the validity of that warrant was tried , and the jury gave very large damages against the persons concerned in issuing the warrant . And what did the Chief Justice- say upon that Occasion ? He spoke as follows : — " A will-rant was granted by Lord Halifax , the Secretary of State , directing a messenger to apprehend aiid seize the printer and publisher of a paper called the North Briton , without any information or charge

      laid beforo the Secretary of State previous to his granting tho warrant ; " whereas every lawyer knew that no warrant to arrest a person and examine his house was good without information duly laid , and the warrant itself stating the offence upon the face of it . " The Chief Justice then proceeded to state that the small injury done to the plaintiff ; or the iucon-Biderableness of his station , were not material to the question of right ; of course the same arbitrary power could have been claimed over all the King ' s subjects , violating Magna Charta , and destroying the liberties of the people . The King ' s counsel of that day and the solicitor of the Treasury endeavoured to maintain the legality of that warrant ; but his lordship said , — " To enter a liouse by a nameless warrant , in order to seize there , is worse tliau the Spanish Inquisition . " That was not the speech of a

      political partisan in that house , or on the hustings , but the judicial opinion of a * Chief Justice . And he added , — " It woum be a law _unilcr which no Englishman would wish to live an hour . It was a most during public attack made upon the liberty of the subject . " ( Cheers . ) IteaUy there seemed to be very little difference between issuing a warrant to seize the papers of "the editor and printer of the North Briton" and issuing a warrant to examine , read , and copy letters . ( Hear . ) But ' Mr . Entick ' s case in the State Trials , vol . 19 , came still nearer to the present . A special verdict was found iu that case , in reference to the warrant issued against Mr . Entiek , and the ease was very elaborately argued ; tho judgment of the Chief Justice affected the present case considerably . His lordship was pressed by a variety of arguments , and amom ? others hy this , that it had been a . usage continued for a

      long period . " It began at the Revolution , " said his lordship , " and is too modern to be law . The common law docs not begin with the _Involution . " " The warrant , " he added , " was an execution in the first instance , without previous information , or hearing of the plaintiff—a power claimed by no other magistrate whatsoever , Chief Justice Scroggs excepted . " ( Cheers . ) " It was argued that if the Secretary of State had power to commit iu treason , he hath it in lesser crimes . This I deny . " Justice Hokeby said : " He is only a conservator of the peace . There is no law , and less justice , to justify the defendants in what they have done * , if there was it would destroy all comfort in society , for papers are often the dearest property that a man can have . " ( Cheers . ) If such a right-as was claimed in tliis case really existed , to examine and copy letters passing through the Post-office , would not some instance of it , in some period , be found in the law books *? It was impossible to suppose that it was law if it could be found sanctioned by no authority . ( Hear , hear . ) There was nothing but the from the _Involution

      practice ; and what was the value of tliat 1 It was only a continuance of illegal acts it was only so many Secretaries of State , from year to year , issuing warrants which were illegal ; and a continuance of illegal acts would not constitute a legal right . In Money ' s ease , the argument from usage ivas urged in vain . In reference to General Warrants , Mr . Justice Yates said- " If you shew me a usage from the foundation of Kome , it will not legalise sueh a practice as this " ( Hear , hear . ) A usage from the creation of the world for Seeretane _g ot State to open letters in the Post-office would not make the practice legal . ( Cheers . ) And what sort of warrants were these ? Warrants must be founded on information , aud the _offww , svatai mi the face of them Where was the information ? How did the Secretarv of State take it ? Was be able to adinuilstw « _xx oath to ? £ 1 _If _i / _2 _?/ i , he _- V s tn , e tIu _? weve ¦ _'Cfen-eil to in those Acts of Parliament ; but was it intended by the Acts to confer . upon the Secretary of State the _ri-Ii ' t to issue tliem ? Certainly , wt . They meraW _^ _K S ™

      oii . ee authont es trom penalties in acting under his warrants to detain letter ., , hut conferred no right tor " , letters-though the former was nearh- as bad as the Hn ' v ( Ilea ,-, hear . ) Upon a great _question like _i _, t _fwatof the deepest importance to the country to know _whatw-u the Htnte . tff Uic law ; nnd hoinvited the \ ZLIZ „ lrd to state , m tlie face of the . iU « Sft _, mUi the _£ _ratrV _™ Vx _£ what authority aud what grounds of law lio iiistiJio » l H , n Secretary of- State in examining letters t the _"t- _JiiJe it was notof the sli ghtest avail to refer i . _» _uw _£ _" . for if there was really no legal authority for the practW n , " thing was utterl y and entirely illegal . ( Cheers . ) '

      Lord Devon's Commission. The Peculiar An...

      Here , then , the whole practice is calleil in question ; and called in question , too , in a manner that must secure for the practice a legal answer , if it is to be preserved . The reasoning of Mr . Watson seems to us to be exceedingly strong . The point he puts , as to the inability of tlio Secretary of State to administer an oath , and consequently to receive an information on which to ground a warrant , and the consequent inability to issue such wan-ant , seems to us to be conclusive . If tlie reasoning of Mr . Watson be sound , it turns out that the practice , though so long in vogue , and so extensively used , is utterly and entirely illegal ! To us such seems to be the only conclusion to which the legal gentlemen can come ; unless , indeed , a far better answer can be given to Mr . Watson than the Somcitob-Genebal vouchsafed on Friday night last . Tlie reader wiE have seen that Mr . Watson * "invited" the _SowciroR-GE-vKiui ,

      to the contest ; and having been so hardly pressed "in the face of tlie House and the country , " he could not but attempt to reply , which he did in manner following : — The Hon . and Learned -Member lor Khisale said this warlike the case of general warrants , and his Hon . and Learned Friend had carefully searched the authorities , and come down armed witli the opinions of judges on the question of general warrants ; and he said those opinions wove conclusive , and that this kind of warrant can no more stand good than general warrants . Did his Hon . and Learned Friend know the history of general warrants 1 He ( the Solicitor-general ) thought not ; for if liis Hon . and Learned Friend had known that' history , he would have felt bound to tell the liouse that general warrants existed

      by Act of Parliament till the _vcarlliOl ; tliat in 1694 the Act , on which their legality was ' t ' oimded , expired , and that consequently after that year there was no statute to empower tlie Secretaries of State to issue them ; but that . nevertheless , they were issued by successive Secretaries of State , till the year 1703 , when in ' the case which the industry of his Hon . and Learned Friend had discovered general warrants were pronounced illegal . This was an instance how easy it was for an ingenious lawyer to produce the opinion ol * judges , and declare confidently what was the law , so as to persuade the House that he had made out a triumphant case . His Hon . and Learned Friend said , that tlie committee of the House of Lords had stated , in their report , that this power was not conferred by any statute . It certainly was so stated in that report ; but that was not all

      that was ' _said . ( Hear . ) His Hon . and Learned Friend selected a passage from the report , and read that , and omitted the reasoning on which it was founded . It was true thatthe report said that the act of Anne gave no power to the Secretary of State to detain or open letters , but if his Hon . and Learned Friend had looked to the two lines before that passage , he would have found tliis statemeat . —" ' ' The terms on whieh the provisions of the 9 th Anne , cap . 10 , upon this subject , are enacted , can only be explained upon the supposition that this power was , at tlie time , fully recognised " ( hear , hear ); and then tbe sentence went on , "for that Act gives no power to the Secretary of State to detain or open letters , but prohibits others from doing so , except by an express warrant and writing under the hand of tlie Principal Secretary , for every such

      opening or detaining . " Therefore , his Hon . and Leanied Priend had suppressed these two lines , and thereby induced the House to believe tliat the Committee ol the House of Lords had made a general declaration that the power of detaining and opening letters was not authorized by statute at all . Then his Hon . and Learned Friend said tliat tliere were no authorities in the books sanctioning this practice . S ow _, ho ( tlie Solieitov-Geueral ) wondered that it had not occurred to his Hon . and Learned Friend that as the power was exercised in secret , it was not very likely tliat there should be any authority respecting it on tlie books . If that had occurred to his Hon . and Learned Friend , it would have saved much valuable time , wliich lie might have devoted to more important objects . Hut his Hon . and Learned Friend

      said . that this was an illegal power , that there was neither statute nor common law for it , and that , give him usage since tlie foundation of the world for it , nothing should convince him that the power was legal , or ought to subsist . Now , it was impossible to argue with a person who spoke in that way ; but he ( the Solicitor-General ) _W-luld hope that there were others in . the House who would take a calmer view of tlie matter , and would agree with liim , although he could not go back to the foundation of Home , or of the world , in thinking that the researches ofthe committee , and the industry ofthe Hon . Memher . for Kendal ( Mr . Warburtoh ) had clearly made out , that this power was , from early times , a part of the prerogative of tlie Crown ; that the . Crown was enabled thereby to detain and open suspicious letters ; that tliu power had been ex .

      ercised from early times ; that it was exercised under the Commonwealth in 1 G 56 ; that one reason for the establishment of the post by Cromwell's Parliament was the facility which it was expected to give of detaining treasonable correspondence ; and in fact that the power was proved to have existed in -good times —( hear ); and that in the 9 th of Anne it was most distinctly recognised as residing in the _jwiiicipal Secretary of State , no would for one moment refer to tlie statute of Anne . In the 40 th section they would find it enacted , " And whereas , abuses may be committed by wilfully opening , detaining , and delaying of letters or packets , to the great discouragement of trade , commerce , and correspondence ' , for prevention thereof , he it enacted , by the authorities aforesaid , that from and after the 1 st day of

      June , 1711 , ' no person or persons shall _preiume wittingly , willingly , or knowingly , to open , detain , or delay , or cause , procure , permit , or suffer to be opened , ' , etained , or delayed , any letter or letters , packet c , r packets , after the same is ov shall be delivered into the general or other post-office , or into tlie bauds of any person or persons employed for the receiving or conveying post letters , and before delivery to the persons to wh iui they are directed , or for their use , except by an express warrant in writing , under the hand of one of the principal Secretaries of State , fur every such opening ' , detaining , or delaying , " Now , iu the present reign , all the Post-office acts had been repealed and consolidated iuto one act . In sec . 41 of the 9 th of Anne , cap . 10 , the oath which the _Post-Master-General and other officers of the Post-office take , was enacted . The Consolidating Act of the 1 st Victoria , cap . 33 , substituted a declaration in these

      terms : — " I do solemnly and sincerely declare that I will not wittingly or willingly open or delay , or cause or suffer to be opened or delayed , contrary to my duty , any letter or anything sent by the post which shall come into my hands or custody by reason of my employment relating to the Post-office , except by the consent of the persons or persons to whom the same shall be directed , or by an express warrant in writing under the hand of one of the principal Secretaries of State . " This exception , it was to be observed , was copied from the exception in the oath enacted by the statute of Anne . This , then , being the state of the case , lie did not understand the Hon . member for Shrewsbury ( ilr . D'lsraeli ) when he said that no power was conferred on the Secretary of State , by statute , to open letters . The Hon . Gentleman said that the object of the Acts of Parliament was to prevent any clerk or sub-agent of the Post-office , from opening or detaining any letter , but that it was never intended to give

      any power to the -secretary of State to open letters . But , if not , why should the Legislature have introduced any mention of the warrant of the Secretary of State J Because , if the object was to prevent any clerk or subordinate person from opening or detaining letters , it would have been enough to say so . ( Hear , hear . ) Wh y , otherwise , should words of exception be introduced at all ? The fact was , that tlie exception here proved the rule ; and it was effectual to shew that the Secretary of State had that power . What , then , was the result ? Why , this—wliich he humbly tendered to the House , and which he ventured to declare , as his deliberate opinion-that this I ' - 'ing a power which was exercised at common law , and before any of the statutes to wliich reference had been made , those statutes did not confer it , because the power existed when they were passed , but that they recognized it , aiid therefore that the power was a legal power , beiug so rccogniitcd and sanctioned . ( Hear , hear . )

      Aow here the SonciTon _GExcnAh ' shirks the main question . He makes out what at first sight appeal' tobea plausible case for the users of the power ; but what would he be worth , as a lawyer , if he could not do that ? Men whose trade it is to

      " Make the worse appear the better reason , ' and

      " Who , right or wrong , plead still for gold , " are never at a loss for words and _Sophistries to supply the want of reasons and arguments . Such appears to us to be the case with the _Solicitor-Genehai ,. He was" invited" to show how tlio 'Secretary of State could legally issue a warrant for stopping , detaining , , and opening letters ; how he could take the "information" necessary whereon to ground such warrant * how lie could administer an oath to the party tendering . such information—as all " informations" to lie legal , must be on oath : the S _oucitoh-Ge . verai . was " invited" to show how all this could be done ; and he never even glanced at the points lit all He took his stand on the usage ; and from that he argued the legality . * "« The practice , " says he , " has existed ; it does exist ; it has been recognised and sanctioned ; and , therefore ifc it legal . " Such is , in brief the argument of the second law-adviser ofthe Grown .

      Mr . Watson- had . anticipated all this . He had argued that if the practice liad not a legal foundation ; that if there did not exist authority for it that if the Secretary of State could not legally issue his warrant for such a purpose , all the -usage in the world would not justify the act . And so it appears to us . As for the . fact- relied on by the Solicitor -General , that because the practice was exercised in secret , therefore all the law-books were silent on the point ; we opine that it proves too much . Is it to be supposed that if ths power was known to exist , and to be conferred by law , and accordant- with constitutional ¦ principles , that some of tlio law authorities would not have even hinted at it , and " recognised" it , by

      shewing that it existed for wise and good purposes 3 When B & iCKSioxE wrote his Commentaries , and defined tho nature and the number of the different warrants that the officers of State and the Magistrates can issue would he not havo spoken of the power residin" * in the Secretary ol' State to detain and open letters had he been aware that such a power legally existed ? And if none of our great constitutional writers ever ad vert to . such power as one known to tlie constitution , is it not _annawnt that the * « ecre . exercise of it has hitherto prevented its beir . a called in question ' ? It has existed ; it has been " recognised ;" , but so were General ' War-¦ r ants hobb . in ¦ _- u « " _. . wi " recognised " ' from

      Lord Devon's Commission. The Peculiar An...

      94 to 17 _« 3 , until their validity v , t , s contested and the dccisioH of the Judges obtained against them . Usage did not avail in tliat case , _thoush General Wan-ants had once an Act-of-Paviiame existence . ; it would hardly be likely to avail in thip case of letter-opening , where no sucli _Aoniowrv ea » be shewn to _hrive ever existed fop the " odiou _* - " practice , nor anything but wage to j ustify it , ¦ _ij- . i an implied " recognition" in the statute-of Astsk

      The Soi . iciTOR-G _* G 2 f * eKAii did not accept the _n--- ; "invitation" of Mr . Watson ; ho did not profess hh willingness to lay the warrant on the table of "tr « _j House , " that Mr . _DracojinK might take it into the Court of Queen ' s Bench , and there try its validity The SoiACiraR-GENEnAi . did not accept " this _ehallcv-e Why , ware left to infer ; and wo _misuik * _^ the general inference be not , that he . dare mi ' _* , will , however , be Mr . Duncombe ' s business to -v _, him to do it . As Mr . Watso . v < a _\{ \ '' » ¦ ¦ ' is a great constitutional question . It ' J * to be thoroughly tried . If there be no _authomtv ]> .,. ' the " odious" practice , how greatl y _iinloI > l , _;^ _^ j { ' Duncombe , for exposing and resisting tho unjust-an , '

      illegal assumption of power , will Kngligln } E general bo ! What a " service to tiie Stat .- " _;*! not have rendered ! ITc will have _seouiv-. l for _^ self a niche in the temple of fame ! i ] , „ _- •¦¦ | . with Pym and Hampden , and the oilier _glories of th " land , who shine resplendent in history fov ln' _-in ,. resisted arbitrary power . To a full trial Oi' ilie q ; . _^ . _" tion wc invite him , satisfied that to th * _atteruput the people will sustain him . Let liim tat-. « t _!^ c r * isinto tlie Courts , before tho Judges , ik- > a „ n , cnt j f < 1 gets into a position to be able io do so . Convict » h Government there , of having acled _illegally , _^ . successful blow would bo struck at the ' _" ' odiou , '' practice ; a blow from which the _jir . ae . _' . iee couU

      never recover . We understand that Mr . _Diwcoiibi- ' _s motion , foe bringing the Post-office officials to the Bar of " ths House , " is delayed by the forms of the House , h was expected , that , as itaffeete . 1 the privileges 0 f . the Members , it would have taken precedence on 'fucr . day . Ifc turns out , however , that ifc had to abide bv " coal-pit law "— "first come , first _served" jy _, ! Duncombe ' s motion is waiting its " _ti-. m . "

      Ygr Since The Above Was In Type, We Have...

      _ygr Since the above was in type , we have _leajiis that it is likely Mr . Duncombe ' s motion will cos * on to-moivow night ( Friday ) , when he ia to mv ; it as an amendment on the propositi on th . it " t ' _^ House resolve itself into a Committee of _Wavg :. at Means . " We shall give the debate in a , ht . _-j edition , in time for Saturday inoniin «' s mr _. _ilg .

      Victed Avid Punished For Offences Commit...

      victed avid punished for offences committed at flic ' _msij . gation of those parties . ( Continued cheers . I _cuaaidc-y the employment of spies not ouly _objectioiiiible , but hj _^ _bir dangerous , and contrary to the spirit of the _constitutioti of a free country . ( Loud cheers . ) But are yon prepared to say—if you determine that letters shall not k ' opened in the _Post-otSce—tliat there shall not again Ik tlie employment of spies ? ( Hear , hear . ) I taK _^ ; i _viw of tc . \ : subject which leads me to think ' that spies ought not to _li employed . ( Cheers . ) And when a person of violent bolitical opinions , a Chartist , who was in the counsel ol those who at the time I refer to were _calied physical for .

      LORD JOHN RUSSELL ON _TIIF . i : _j-JPl , v _* tY . MENT OF SPIES . In the course of the debate on _ilw Foaufey Iniquities , on Friday night last , Lord John _Ruiiseu took occasion to sing his own praises as a _veryr-A . / denying Minister of State . His words were ;—We all linow very well that , a great muny y »( iri ago , when Lord Sidmouth held office , thp . t _statesmsr thought it was a fair and _legitimatemeans of maintain '; -, '' the public peace to employ spies . ( Hear , hear . ) M ; opinion is , that the spies so employed were often th * cati _. ofthe commotions and tumults they were cmplovcd to df . tect . ( Cheers . ) My opinion is , that persons were con .

      Chartists , _offered me his services with the view of detecting thein , I refused at once his offer . ( I . ond cli « rs . ) I believe , sir , that the employment of spies floes not at present exist . But you have no ( sanction K- h . w to 'is _.-, policy ; you have no declaration on the 'wr : of thk _llzua wliich secures you against the employment of spios for « _, «« future . ( Hear , hear . ) That is a subject worthy of consideration . The secret service money is _orapbywl by th * Secretary of . State for that which he believes h the _servis- * of Hie State . And if you determine that thev . ; _sY . sUber . ' . _-. opening of letters in the Post-office , can roa b _* =

      ecur-s—can you rely upon it—that the Right Hon . _-tiitiSlqsctiii : _? of State , anxious for the preservation of tlie public trarquillity , and feeling himself responsible for the _preseyv-i . tion of that tranquillity , will not have recourse to that whieh I think is far more objectionable than the _opoaing of letters in the Post-office , namely , the employment _cspies ? ( Loud cheers . ) The employment oi' spies is s most objectionable proceeding , for the spy _frequent ! . } ' it . stigates his victim to the commission of the crime lie never thought of committing , and for which he _afterwRrdssuJPT ! punishment .

      On the danger and _wicrkdnkss of empioyir _.- ? SPIES , we are not about to difl ' er from fhe Noble Lord . On tliat head we have opinions quite as decide * as his own , und perhaps a _gi-eat deal more so . But while we shall not quarrel with tho late Home . Secretary for his denunciation of the spy-system * hi general , we shall take exception to ihe inference he intended to be drawn from his statement * , that _m had never resorted to the infamous practice . He

      makes a - great merit of having "declined" tbe " offered" services of the " violent Chartist . " We remember that he did so at the time such " oiler " was made : but though he did "decline" such " offer , " he did not " decline '' the services of his oi « i spin who were actively at work at that veiy time i Lord John " declined" the " offer" made < o liim , and boasted of it , and boasts of it again : but he did not decline the services of _IIaukison at Bradford . _" _'i : _' '

      Leeds , the scoundrel who received £ 80 in e- Ss * weeks from the chief-constable of Bradford , for procuring the conviction and punishment of uavties f « offences committed at his instigation ! lord Jon , when he uttered his unseemly boast , liad surely cot heard the statement of Mr . James Stuart _WowLtv _, only the night before , who told "the House" tliat he had drawn the fact , of the amount of money pahf to the SPY from his own mouth in open court ! Loiti John * did not "decline" the services of one of the Mozelets of I , eeds , who was '' instigating" to *• physics ! force outbreaks" at the time that he was in the ?'•) of the Leeds Police , £ 72 having been set apart by tbe Watch Committee for that purpose . Lord JouKdidnot

      decline" the services of . the entrappers of Jobs Frost , who concocted their hellish plans in the back parlour of a certain " moral force" shop in the Strand , and who hurried a quiet and inoffensive man to destruction . Lord _Jon . v did not _" _dec _) _inC _' the services of the instigator of poor IloLiiEKar aw . G _* u \ _-tos at Sheffield , who got his victims " punished " so severely , that death humanely reieaseiUhomfro . fi Lord John ' s prison-torture . ' Lord Johx did not "decline" the services of atrocious miscreants on _tliosc occasions , * and his doing so in the ease where tlie " offer" was made to him , was only because hi had his own spies , perfoi * ming his , own work to hk perfect satisfaction .

      But about this same " offer , " and . the party _« "offering . " We believe the faet to be as stated , ' and have before published it in the Star . At the time that Lord John ' s own spies had "instigated" *<' " physical-force" outbreaks , ancl liad "induced the commission of crimes , " Peter Hour and _Jasr . r _Grabtkke , of Barnsley , were " convicted" _ofhavini attended a meeting in tliat town , at which _fe - . had taken no part whatever . - But for such bare attendance they were . sentenced to two years' unprisonnient each . The sentence was a most savage ami inhuman one . Peter Hoey was , and is , a _respectable quiet , good-disposed subject . He was known to Cap ' tain Woon of Sandal , near Wakefield , who manifesto

      a great- interest in his fate , and used all the _influence lie eould bring to bear to obtain a remission of to * monstrous sentence . Of course the application had to be made on behalf of both parties , Hoey and Ciur > _tuke . - Mr . Gully , then M . F _., waited _pevsowiilyot Lord John , at the Home-office , and enforced tlie _implication on Lord John ' s attention . As his answer . Lord John put into Sir . G cm * ' s hands a letter that y hadjRiCGiviid from _ClUn'tllllE , offering that , Jfrclc . " _- _- ' - _* - ¦ iVoif ) imprisonment , he would " peach , " and teilu . _l !•' knew of tlie intentions of the " physical force" Gh 1 ' lists . God knew that all he had lo toil , 1 . on . fc _& knew well enough before ; for his own _ppit-. s had r _' ' boon idle in INSTIGATING t but the * ¦• _affcr" »' ¦ "

  • Citation
    • Northern Star (1837-1852), March 1, 1845, page 4, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/ns4_01031845/page/4/