« 이전계속 »
that all danger of the peace of Europe being illstarbed on account of Belgian affairs la at an end. Hence the rise in the funds of which we have apoken.
. In Foreign Securities, those of Europe have claimed the preference for investments ; but business in them, on the whole, has been extremely limited. The Sonth American Secnrities continue wholly neglected. Brazilian Bonds, which had long formed an exception to the general discredit in which the Sonth American Stocks had fallen, have latterly begun to share their fate. The price of those bonds has greatly declined.
Money has been rather abundant in the City, and good bills were easily discounted at 3 and a half per cent.
The following arc the closing prices of English
and foreign fands on the 24th of last December :—
Three per Cent. Consols, shut.— Three per Cent. Consols for the Account, 10th January, 84 half, five eighths.—Three per Cent. Reduced, 83 quarter.—Three and a Half per Cent. Reduced, so
three-eighths, half.—New Three and a Half per Cent, shut.—Four per Cent. (1820,) 99 fivc
eighths, seven eighths.—India Slock, shut. Bank
Slock, 192, 193.—Exchequer Bills, Cs. to 7s. pre
ininm.—India Bonds, 2s. to 3s. discount. Long
Annuities, 16 eleven-sixteenths.
Brazilian Five per Cent. 44 half, 45.—Chilian Six per Cent. 17, 19.—Colombian 1824, Six per Cent. 12,13.— Danish Three per Cent. 80,116 half.— Dntch Two and a Half per Cent. 42 quarter, threequarters. — French Five per Cent. 97, 97 half.
French Three per Cent. b», 09 half.—Greek Five per Cent. 23, 25.—Mexican Six per Cent. 35 threequarters, 30 quarter.—Portuguese Five per Cent. 48 half, 49 half.—Russian Five per Cent. 99 quari ter, three quarters.—Spanish Five per Cent. 14 quarter, half.
Sharks. Anglo-Mexican Mines, 14, 15 United Mexican, 5, 5 half—Del Monte, 11, 12. Braail Imperial, 45.—Bolanos, 140, 150.
MONTHLY METEOROLOGICAL JOURNAL,
FROM NOV. 23 TO DEC. 22, 1831.
Mean temperature of the Month, 43 deg. Mean atmospheric pressure, "20.70 deg. Highest tempciaturc, 58. Stormy wind on the 7th and on the 12th. P.M.
From Nov. 18, To Dec. 9, 1831, Inclusive.
Nov. 18. S. SKELTON, Kine-street. Holborn. jeweller J. PRENDERGRASS, Lloyd'a coffee-house, underwriter. F. BALAAM, Nottingham-terence, Newroad, baardine house keeper. J. CHRISTIE, South Sea-cbambere, Thread needle-street, coal merchant. C. LAWRENCE, Osnaburgh •treat. Regent's park, oilmen. C. R. BUKFOKD, Upper Charlotte-street, ritimvaquare, paper banger. A. C. JACKSON, Abiugdonetreet, W\»tmin»ter, bill broker. J. WILLIS, V'auxballroad, Pimlico, draper. I). N SMITH, FnHey-fttrael, warehouseman. J. POTTS ami A. BELOE, Lad-Ian*, ailk warehousemen. A. LEE, Reeem'i-quaHrmt, muiie Mller. II. GRAVES and W. S. GOODING, St raud, tailor*. II. BANNER and F. G. BANNER, Cripplegate buildings, plumbers. M. F- M»I',RS, Sloaue-atrtet, Chelsea, milliner. 8. SHEPHERD, Strand, silveramitb. J. RYLEV, Nantwich, Cheshire, mercer. J. LINSELL, Wotton Basset, Wiltshire, linen draper. II VINCETT, Gloaceatcr-plec*, Hrwuthe) melon, grocer. W. FERNLEY and T. BUCKLEY, Stockport, Cheshire, cotton spinners W. CROWE, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk, cutler. J. J. PARKER, Manchester, rotton Runner. M. GOODRICH, North Frndingham, Yorkshire, grocer. B. RO>F., Sh-ffielH, Yorkshire, grocer. J. HUGHES. Birmingham, crown
El ass dealer- VV. GRAC1E, Sunderlait'l near the See, lurbam, printer. J- PHILLIPS, Dudley, Worrester
ahire, currier. W. POPE, Portwood, Cheshire, cotton
■ pinner. I - TIIORNLEY, Hadfield, Derbyshire, cotton •pinner- J. DUCKER, Barnbam, Lincolnshire, cattla
Nor. M- R. ALLEN end E. F MAITLAND, Watford, Hertfordshire, cbcrauis. J. TMOItNE, Shirley common, Surrey,baker. D H. RUCKER, J. A. RUCKER, and II J. RUCKER, Wormwood-meet ami Mnicinglane, Weet Indii merchants. J. FORBES and D RUSSELL, Mark lane, win* merchants. C. ANDREW and W. BA1LES, Compton-atreet, Clerkenwell, iron warehousemen. G. W. HARRIS, of the City-hotel, King street, Cheapside, hotel keeper. J. DITCH MAN. Goldsmith-pi ace, Harkney-roed, builder. ('. CHALLINOR, Liverpool, merchant. T. LOVELL, North Petherinn, Somersetshire. J. TWEEDALE and J-TWEEDALE, Rochdale. Lancashire, cotton spinners. U. HOLT, Chorlton New Mills, Manchester, rotton spinner. T. HELSBY, sen , J. G. HELSBY, and T. HELSBY. jun. Liv.rpi.nl, watch case manufacturert. J. JONES. Liverpool, joiner. J. REFS, Shrewsbury, wfaaifinger. E JONES, Welsh Pool, Montgomeryshire, wine and spirit merchant. J. SIMIS I ER, Oldhtin, Lancashire, cotton spinner. F. RINHF.lt. Kiraull, Yorkshire, butcher. W. Q. MATTHIE. Liverpool, merchant. E. PALMER, Haifa, irnnmonKer. G. THORNTON, Sowerby-brnUr, Yorkshire, common rarrirr. W. HALL, late of Hanlry, Slallordehire, maltster.
Nov. 95. VV. FOX. Compton-etreel, Clerkenwell. millwri«ht. J. LUCAS, Compo Cottage, Cmmer-street, Brunswick square, builder. F UILLMOT. Old Windsor, Berkshire, carpenter- E. NOLO ATE, Mitchellstreet. St. Luke's, carpenter. J. E. EYLES, Canterbury, Kant, hatter W. LAXTON, Holborn, auctioneer. C CROXFORD, Iyer, Bu.-ki-iebam.hire shopkeeper. P MARTIN, Clienpeide, ribbon manufacturer.
W BATTAMS, Ha'riingetooe, Northamptonshire, sheep ,.ile»m»n J. BENNEL1. Kaunington-lene, lodging
bouse keeper. J. ADAMS and A. KETTELTY, Fen
church-street, tailors. II. WARDER, High street,
Nrwington, china and glasa dealer. J. TURNER,
Great Portlaud-etreet, Oxford street, tailor. F. GROS-
shoe maker. J. LOMAX, Robert street, Adelphi,
money acrivener. W. MASON, Margaret-street,
Cavendish-aqua re* nxletree-maker. J. BATEMAN,
Southampton-buildinga, a«ent. W. WHITE, Man
cbeater, livery atable keeper. A. J. C. WRIGHT
and W. H. HUCKMASTER, New London-street, Crutcbed-friata, wine merchants. W. MAYELL, Bteter, jeweller. J JENKINS, ForUea, pork batcher* F. BAW'LER. B«'.h, baker- R. NICHOLLS, Bath, Silversmith W. LEES, Newton Moor, Cheshire, cotton •pinner.
Nov. eg. T. HOMEWOOD, PollanTs-row, H-thnalgreen, brewer. J. WISE, Kiu*'a-road, Chelaea. cow
keep-r. R. FREE, Rotherfaithe, commission agent.
W. PF.IRSE, Bartbolnmew-cloae, wine merchant. H.
HART and J. DAV1ES, King street. Hammersmith, clothea salesmen. F. KENSBTT, Norbiton-common
Kiugitou-upon-Thamea, Surrey, farmer. , G- R. TEM
NEW MONTHLY MAGAZINE.
FEBRUARY 1, 1832.
Great Britain 49
Tie Coli.nil•» , 54
Foreign States 54
Tbe Opera—Standard Novels, No. XI.: The
THE RUSSIAN LOAN.
We cannot allow a division so remarkable at that which took place on Mr. Hemes' motion to pass altogether without observation.
The majorities in favour of the Government were 20 and 24, an almost accidental difference, which, if it had existed on the other side, would have led to a resignation of Lord Grey, the return of a Tory Administration to office, the rejection of the
Reform Bill, and :we do not
attempt to fill up the blank with our worst conjectures.
There are two circumstances which most particularly strike us in regard to this division: the one, that the extraordinary conseqoences which would have followed a division against the present Ministry, were sufficient to justify Members for voting with them, who, under all ordinary circumstances, would have voted differently. The other, that these very extraordinary consequences, which the Ministry must see are coupled with their fall, render every error
rib.—Vol. xxxri. No. cxxxiv.
endangering their power, peculiarly unjustifiable.
No one at all acquainted with the honest nature of Lord Althorp's mind, as well as the liberal tendency of his principles, can doubt the thorough conviction he felt as to the propriety of the course pursued, as well as the total absence, on his part, in pursuing that course, of any inclination to avoid the judgment or abridge the prerogative of Parliament. But we are aware that this apology has very narrow limits. The question divides itself into two parts;—the general spirit of the treaty by which the Government conceived us to be bound, and the propriety or impropriety—supposing that treaty to be such in spirit as they (the Government) understood it—of proceeding to act up to its spirit, in defiance of its letter, without express legislative sanction.
In regard to the first, there can be no doubt, that when the treaty was entered into, Holland and England had two separate objects, which it was their intention by this treaty to attain. Holland desired to
secure the permanent support of Russia in keeping Belgium a part of her dominions; England desired the same support in keeping Belgium from becoming annexed to France.
This was the spirit on which the two parties acted. The terms in which that spirit was set forth, though not as definite as might have been wished, seemed, at the moment, likely to answer the views of each. But the Revolution broke out in Belgium. The object for which Holland had entered into this compact was lost, and she refused to abide by it. The object which England had in view was maintained, and she, therefore, looking, as it were, into her conscience for the motives of her original conduct, and not to the mere words in which those motives were expressed, considered that nothing had happened which could warrant the non-ful61ment of the agreement. She reasoned, in short, in the spirit of a man of honour, rather than of a man of business. But it was also necessary to reason in the spirit of a statesman, on the policy of doing aught that might still farther dissatisfy Kussia with the separation of the northern and southern provinces of the Netherlands, at the moment when it was considered necessary for the general peace to place that separation on the solid basis of a universal consent among the great powers of Europe.
We must confess, under all these circumstances, no doubt would have rested on our own mind, as to the propriety of the line adopted, if Parliament had not been sitting, and the question for the Government to decide upon had been—whether the share of the Russian loan, which had been previously paid by England, should continue to be paid, or should be withheld.
But Parliament was tilting; and with those feelings of doubt, from which the administration could not have been free, for, (granting them all they claim,) the terms of the treaty had become contrary from peculiar circumstances to the spirit with which that treaty had been originally framed; with those sentiments of doubt then natural to this their situation, it does seem extraordinary that they should have preferred acting on their own responsibility to asking the advice and obtaining the vote which would have easily been given to them.
Their excuse was in the difficult nature of the political affairs they were engaged in, and the fear of bringing on a long and embarrassing discussion, which could hardly have been avoided, at a time when such a discussion would have been peculiarly inconvenient.
That which renders this excuse difficult of reception is the perilous nature of the precedent they were creating.
And indeed to judge impartially of their conduct, we should have to balance the immediate danger of the course they avoided with the distant danger of the one that they pursued. The subject was altogether one of peculiar difficulty to decide upon, and every conscientious supporter of Ministers must have regretted the difficult position in which we cannot but think they had somewhat incautiously placed him. Still it is our opinion that those who, weighing the nice circumstances of the immediate case, threw also into the scale all the certain and consequent evils which must have followed a censure of the existing Administration, could not, and ought not, to have felt any scruple in supporting that Administration at this critical moment.
As to the sudden love of the Tories for the authority of Parliament, and the economy of the public money, it gives us a new reason for congratulating the country on a retreat from office, which has given them so much leisure for political improvement.
There is one question we should like to ask—were there any private articles (as is usually the case,) relating to this part of the treaty, which might have explained or justified the conduct of Government? and if so—was Sir R. Peel or Mi. Hemes acquainted with such private articles 1*
BOUSE OP LOltDS.
Jan. 17. The House met pursuant to adjournment.
Jan. 19. The Earl of Aberdeen, referring to the speech from the throne at the opening of the present session, observed, that his Majesty informed both Houses that a Convention had been concluded between the Five Powers, and that it should be laid upon the table of the House so soon as ratifications should be exchanged. The Convention was dated the 15th of November, and it was now a matter of the most perfect notoriety, that no ratifications had been, up to thai moment, exchanged: it was also well known that his Majesty's Government had agreed to extend the time for that expected change of ratifications. He should, then, give notice, that on that day week he would submit a motion to their Lordships on the subject.—Lord Strangford referred to a Convention which had been entered into between this country and France for the
• When all the papers were submitted to Sir Herbert Jenner, tbe ablest treaty lawyer in England, (and a furious Tory bythe-by,) his opinion was decidedly with Ministers. The misfortune is, that tbe House of Commons could not see all the papers that Sir Herbert Jenner saw.
abolition of the slave-trade, copies of which were likewise to be laid before the House. He wished, then, to learn from the Noblo Lords opposite, how soon they might expect to have that document, for it was one upon which he was desirous of submitting his views to the House. He would now, however, say thus much, that we ought to pause before we formed new engagements with Franco, while the old ones remained unfulfilled; and he could not butconfess himself one of those who doubted the utility of treaties with France relative to maritime and commercial affairs; and he, for one, founded this doubt upon the non-execution of all the articles and stipulations contained in that which, by a misnomer, was designated the Treaty of Reciprocity, a treaty which, he was sure, would be regarded by the French only so long as their interests required its aid. The Noble Lord gave notice, that he should, on an early day, move for some returns which would direct their Lordships' attention, not to the whole of that momentous subject, but to that portion which wrought, and was likely to work, so much injury, and be productive of so many grievances to the shipping interest in this country.—Lord Ellenborough, in reference to a motion made by him before the holidays, relative to the disputes between the British factory at Canton and the Chinese authorities, respecting which the Noble Lord at the head of his Majesty's Government had promised information, wished to know when they might expect to have the papers laid upon the table of the House ?—The Marquis of Lansdowne, in the absence of his Noble Friend, was not prepared to make any reply; but he believed there was no information on the subject, excepting that which had arrived within the last cight-and-forty hours.—Lord Ellenborough said, that under such circumstances, be should not press the subject farther.
Jan. 20.—Lord Goderich presented, by his Majesty's command, papers relating to the Convention with France connected with the slave-trade. In answer to some observations which were made on this subject on the preceding night, the Noble Lord had to state to the House, that the ratification was not received in this country till the 19th of December, which was three days after their Lordships adjourned.
HOUSB OF COMMONS.
Jan. 17. The House met pursuant to adjournment. Lord Ashley, with reference to a petition which had been presented to the House against his return for Dorsetshire, said, that although he firmly believed his return to be good and valid, lie should offer no opposition to the petition, because it would involve him in expenses which it was
impossible for him to meet. The Land Revenue Bill went through a Committee, after renewed assurances that 75,0001. would complete the building of Buckingham Palace; but that such outlay, of course, was exclusive of fixtures, furniture, &c. Lord Althorp stated, that towards the supply of such matters there were many things "in store."
Jan. 19. Mr. Stanley, in moving for leave to bring in the Irish Reform Bill, stated, that it differed, in some respects, from the Bill of last session. The number of representatives to be given to that country remained the same, and although upon this subject much difference of opinion existed, Ministers had not considered themselves justified in opening the question of the relative proportion of Members, particularly aft»r what had been settled by the Union. With respect to the franchise for counties, following up the principle of the English Bill, as regards leaseholders, it was proposed to give votes to those who had beneficial interests in leases for fourteen years, and where the rent was 201.; that regulation, it was thought, would be equivalent to the 501. leaseholders of England—Ireland, he wished it to be remembered, being without 40s. freeholders. As to the boroughs, it was unnecessary to extend the principle of disfranchisement to (hem, because there was not one of them that had not a population which would present a respectable constituency. It was only requisite to extend the right of voting; for though Belfast, like Bath, had a large population, it was not very satisfactory that eleven or twelve individuals should return the Members. To remedy this defect, it was proposed that all resident 101, householders should have votes; the payment of local taxes to determine the right to vote. It is not proposed, however, as in England, to continue the rights of the freemen beyond existing interests, because to do so would be to continue very objectionable votes, namely, those of an exclusively Protestant character. In lopping off this species of voters, they only applied the principle adopted in the case of the Irish 40s. freeholders. The system of polling, the time, the places, etc., as at present existing in Ireland, not to be touched by this Bill, it being thought that if the experiment succeeded in England, then it might be extended to Ireland. As to the right of voting in counties which are cities, freeholders and householders are to be combined to form the constituency.—Mr. Leader complained of the unsatisfactory and disproportionate character of the proposed Bill; maintained that Ireland ought to have more Members, and that this measure did not present the conservative link so requisite to preserve the interests of and a good understanding between