The Sun. — London, England, 1837-01-16 00:00:00

SPIRITS OF T - 1-IE PUBLIC JOURNALS even the most gifted Pagan, than by the Lord Rector of the Protestant University of Glasgow on this solemn occasion. We doubt not that the beneficial influences of this Conservative Statesman's presence in Scotland will be both wide and durable. We doubt not that it has al ready tended to inspire the Protestant' Church of Scotland with increased attachment to her English sister, and with, if possible, an increased repegnance to the pretensions and en croachments of that unchristian Popery which abhors them both. For the mere political consequences of this important visit, we unfeignedly think less of them, and feel less anxiety for their manifestation, than for that of those consequences which affect the Protestantism, or, in other words, the true vi tality of the kingdom. At the same time even the political fruits will be well worth gathering; nor will they be slow to ripen. Since the above sentences were written, we have received by express from Glasgow a full report of what took place on that other great occasion, where Sir Robert Peel was again the distinguished actor end the honoured guest—me mean the entertainment provided for the Conservative leader, and the assemblage of 3,500 gentlemen from all parts of Scotland, who left their homes to hail and to hear him, and to seek, in the proceedings of that decisive day, a rule for the direction of their political conduct throughout the emergencies which now threaten to disturb our national peace, and to shake, if not subvert, our institutions. The speech of the Right Hon. Baronet which we have above re ferred to contained a body of solid maxims for the safe and ho nourable guidance of the rising generation, in preparing itself for the general duties of men and citizens hereafter ; it may be averred with truth, that the second discourse, which ad dressed itself to the full-grown manhood of Scotland, might be quoted as an authority not less enlightened and indis- • putable, whereby to determine how these ought to act who are already engaged in the busy scenes of life, who have im mediate and ri g orous obligations imposed upon them, precious I advantages and noble rights to protect, a sacred inheritance to transmit, a holy religion to defend, and a loved posterity to cherish, to train, and to provide for. Both these efforts of ' the intelligence of Sir Robert Peel arc alike illustrative of his personal and public character. They are just, sound, clear, uncompromising, and fraught with high moral feeling. We know not how or where a sna ppi s h int e rloper on the Sunday press of yesterday picked up its wretched sneer at the leader of the Conservatives, as to the presumed "vacillation," "indeci sion," or " insincerity" of his speech to the assembled thou sands at the Glasgow dinner. Our ample and interesting report of this day will enable a body of English readers, ten times the number of his Scottish auditors, to ascertain the piti ful falsehood of such an imputation. Never from Sir R. Peel —never from the lips of any British Statesman, did there proceed an announcement of political principles more i esolute, unqualified, and unbending, than those to which the Right Hon. Baronet pledged himself and the Conservative party in their ensuing conflict with the Whig-Radical revolutionists. Apostrophizing the vast assembly in the midst of which he spoke, the Conservative chieftain thus delivered himself:— " I do not wish to conciliate your confidence or support, by hoisting false colours ; I mean to support the national establish molts, which connect Protestsntism with the State in these three countries." No " indecision" here. No hope for the movement success by intimidating their antagonists—no ten der of compromise—no meetings half way. He will support those Establishments in the three countries, which con nect the Protestant Religion with the State. Sir Ro bert Peel disclaims to tamper with the Popish enemy in Ireland, or with the voluntary principle anywhere. He will everywhere support the Protestant Established Church. Why, this one bold and unflinching declaration is of more solid value to the Conservative cause, and of more auspicious promise to the Monarchy, than would be the present acquisition of fifty votes in the House of Commons, procured by any unseemly truckling to faction, because this acts at once and permanently upon the element and raw material of all political power— upon the national mind and the domestic feelings of the people. " It is right," subjoins Sir Robert Peel, " to pay that homage to Christianity, which is implied in a religious establishment ;" and then the reflecting Statesman goes on to ask, " Is it pos sible to be deluded by the analogies which are drawn from the theories of supply and demand in the articles of consump tion and merchandise ? Is it not perfectly clear that the demand for religious instruction may not only not be in the direct ratio of its necessity, but absolutely may be in the inverse ratio, and that those who stand most in need of religious instruction are not the first but the last who will make a voluntary effort to attain it." The plain sense—the intuitive truth and force of the opinion :implied by the above interrogatories, need not be dwelt upon in a civilized and Christian land. The Ministerial hypocrites may knowingly and wickedly attempt by insidious means to shuffle out of them ; the sciolists of the voluntary principle may, in the desolation of their inward darkness, con tinue blind to the radiance of Heaven itself; but those who feel for the paramount wants of their kind, and who contemplate as the most dreadful of all objects a human soul perishing in hopeless exile from its Creator—such men will stand by the champion of their poor and ignorant fellow-creatures, and with him will rebuke the yearnings of licentiousness, of barbarous infidelity, and sordid fac tion, in the garb of religious " freedom." Let it be laid down as a first principle of social policy—and it is that on which every civilized state but one on earth has acted—that whether a citizen shall be a moral man or not, is a question which concerns not himself alone, but the entire community of which he is a part, and every member of it. It is, we say, the highest interest of the whole commonwealth, that its subjects should all know and act upon the difference be tween right and wrong, and should be cognizant of their duties towards each other. It is no less unquestion able, that all knowledge of moral obligation has for its essential basis a knowledge of the law of God; and that no rectitude of conduct can be relied upon which does not originate in, and is not upheld by, a course of religious instruction. It follows, therefore, that the State has a fair claim to the diffusion of religious truth among its subjects ; and, by necessary consequence, that she is bound to provide an easy access to such truth for those of the people who have no other certain means of approaching it but such as the State secures to them. This argument, to which an answer has never been vouchsafed by the clamourers for the voluntary principle humbug, appears to us at the same time so obvious, that if it were not necessary in these perilous days to put a weapon for self-defence in every hand, however feeble, we ought almost to apologize for adducing it. But the Prostestants of the British empire, whether of the Episcopal Church or the Presbyterian Church, or of those classes of religious, not irreli gious 'Dissenters, the latter of whom make a mere stalking- horse of religion for seditious and unlawful purposes, have now the manly assurance of Sir Robert Peel to rest upon, that Pro testantism in one form or other shall continue to be, what for centuries it has been, part and parcel of the law of this en lightened, prosperous, and exalted nation. Here, for " the present, we pause. The no less firm determination of the Conservative chief to maintain inviolate the authority and powers of the Peerage as an inalienable portion of the Mo narchy, we shall bring before our readers on some early day. Ti mes. - The grand banquet at Glasgow to Sir Robert Peel seems to have been a very magnificent 'affair, and the Right Hon. Baronet deemed it but fair in return to dedicate a considerable potation of his speech to the praises of Glasgow, and his ad nedration of the country and its religious establishment. The burden of the speech was, however, " Support the House of Lords." " I avow to you that I mean to support, in its full integrity, the authority of the House of Lords. I support it as an essential and indispensable condition of the continued existence of the mixed form of Government under which we live—as tantamount to the maintenance of the Banish Consti tution." The Right Hon. Baronet is too skilful a tactician to contend that a House of Lords is justified in placing it se lf in colli s i on w i t h the Commons, merely to bring the Govern silent to a dead lock. On Saturday the Times asked, " What ore good measure have 'Ministers even proposed ? or, much more, what one have they carried through Parliament in the form in which they proposed it ? Has not the Government been at a dead lock ever since they came into alaae?" Sir Robert Peel, on the contrary, appeals to the tirember of excellent measures which have been carried, as a proof that the House of Lords have not acted factiously or ca priciously. There has been no such thing, according to him, as the Lords availing themselves of their power to arrest the progress of improvement—to prevent the people from deriving from the Reform Bill the results they anticipated from it. " It is said (he observes) that the House of Lords has shown a spirit at variance with the spirit of the people, and that it has obstructed the march of social improvement. I challenge the oponents of the H ouse of Lords to the proof of that assertion p . I ask you calmly to review the changes that have been made in our social system within the period of seven or ten years preceding ? I ask you to show me, in the history of this or any other country, an equal number of changes in our social system—and most extensive changes too _ay, in double the time? Why, so rapid is the advance, if you will, of improvement—for I do not want to take the ad vantage of a word for the purpose of gaining an advantage in argurnent—l say so rapid has been the advance of improvement or change, that we are hardly conscious of the changes that have actually taken place." _ Sir Rob ert t h en goes over the various measures which the Peers have passed. The whole of the commercial policy of the country has been changed —the East India monopoly has been destroyed —the severity of the criminal code has been diminished—the civil disabilities of the Catholics have been removed—the Test and Corporation Acts repealed—the House of Commons has been reformed—slavery has been abolished— the -municipal institutions of Great Britain, Scotland as well as England, have been reformed ; nay, more, contends the Right Hon. Baronet, the march of improvement has never "stopped. In the very last session of Parliament the grievances of the Dissenters with respect to marriages and the registra tion of births have been entirely redressed—tithes have been commuted—the proposition of Ministers with respect to the taking off the taxes on knowledge has been wholly aereed to. Sir Robert did not tell his audience that the Lords, by the confession of members of their own body, greed to the reform of the Commons and the reform of the islanicipal Corporations, not because they approved of them, but because they were afraid of the consequences of refusing them. lie might as well give a rogue credit for the rapidity of his ? movements on the tread-mill. There can be no question that ?when a nation is determined on any particular point, :such as the Reform Bill and Municipal Reform, it can carry it, because all power ultimately rests with the people. But a Constitution ought to work without the necessity of di recting the whole of the national force on any particular part of the machinery. It is unquestionably true that the Lords Tnave assented to many important measures, and that though they evinced every wish to mangle others, yet in the shape in which they passed they still contained much that was valuable. Their Lordships, however, refused many measures which they ought to have passed; and ever since the passing of the Re form Bill have plainly shown that, if they conceded any reform whatever, their will was perfectly guiltless of it. Sir Robert himself can tell how much his return from Tamworth and throwing Lord Lyndhurst overboard, contributed to the passing of the Municipal Reform Bill. That their Lordships will also pass the Irish Municipal Reform Bill will hardly, after what has passed, be deemed a proof of their heartiness in the cause of Reform. But, after all, Sir Robert seems rather dis trustful of this ground of justification of the Peers. He con jures up, the Constituent Assembly and the horrors of the French Revolution ; and he quotes M. de Tocqueville, to prove that even in the most successful example of democracy, the United States, there is no liberty for any man who does not think with the majority. And with respect to the irre sponsibility of the House of Lords, are not the constituencies also irresponsible ? " The House of Commons is responsible clearly to its con stituency —the Ministry is responsible in a different sense to the House of Commons ; but let me ask, to whom is the con atituent body responsible ? You have selected a certain body, and qualified them for the exercise of great powers. I will not say a ward on the subject, as finding fault with the devolu tion of that power. I will not retract what I said of it before the step was taken : it has become the law, and I speak of it with all respect. I state only the fact, that you have invested some 300,000 or 400,000 men out of the whole classes of society with great political privileges; and I ask, to whom are they responsible? They are not selected for any peculiar quality : you can minister no test by which the fitness of men to exercise these powers can be ascertained. The possession of these powers depends partly as hereditury privileges, in the smile way as the House of Lords, and partly because of the possession of property. What other security have you for the faithful discharge of the trust reposed in the constituencies, but that very security which I urged in the case of the House of Lords, that they are responsible to God, to their consciences, and to an enlightened public opinion ?" 'Why should a man take security against himself ? The con tstituencies arc, or ought to be, identified in interest with the whole nation. The property qualification excluded none from the franchise but such as were supposed from their poverty And dependent circumstances to be unable to exercise it with judgment. A nation cannot wrong itself. But the House of Lords has separate interests of its own. We wish to make the Lords responsible in some way to the nation, because it will otherwise seek to promote its own interests at the expense of the nation. A man may be safely trusted with access to his own pocket ; but it might not be so safe to allow him un disturbed access to the pocket of another person. We cannot go farther down than constituencies, becanse they are iden tified with the nation. You may widen the basis, indeed, and make suffrage universal. Sir Robert, however, will hardly contend that this would be an improvement, as it is supposed 'that the existing constituencies include all who can exercise the suffrage with intelligence. We are quite aware that the Re form Bill was not sufficiently extensive in its disfranchise atents ; that it admitted many to the suffrage who ought never to have been allowed to vote, as the tenantry at will, for in stance ; that it left voters without sufficient protection in the exercise of their duty • and it is t o th ese defects that the To lies t rust f or again placing the House of Commons in subjec tion to the House of Lords. The independence of the Peers, for which Sir Robert contends is therefore the dependance of the Hou se o f C ommons . Th e P eers are to be responsible to e"od alone, and the Comm o ns to be res p ons ib le to the Lords. In short the whole efforts of the Tories are directed to render the Reform Bill a dead letter by placing the electors under the con trol of the Oligarchy. It has been demonstrated that there can not be two independent powers in a State, and the Reformers r °Pose to avoid collision by making both branches of the egislature' responsible to the nation. The Tories, on the other hand, wish to destroy the independence of the Commons. . Those who look for anything like a manifesto in the Glasgow speech will he disappointed. It contains no indications of e_o.urse the T or i es are to pursue d ur i ng th e a p proac hi ng session. r Robert went' to the dinner well stored with extracts from P t'each and English writers, and he worked them up into a viadication of the House of Lords, and an attempt to sho w thin democra c y was i ncompat ibl e w i t h a country in the situa tion of England. Hi s speech had more of the character of an ` ss aY than an address at a political banquet. From the ac !mints we have received it was by no means one of his most aneeessful efforts. It was not like the Tamworth addres s , in , e red by the app roac h of office. As to the other speeches maAnt affair went off very he av ily. The bal. - ject was ri c h i n erica re el) y 1 ects but poor' in intellectual.-111orning Chronicle. ration engthened notice of that great and memorable exhor to the academic uth of Glasgow which filled so many eol la "In s of Saturday's T imes would be difficult and . super unn s• It • eellence is the nature of didactic compositions of high ex . le ss abounding in comprehensive views of life, and in an :olna,of intellectual exercise and moral conduct, to provide .the ofre co mmentary on their own text, and to supersede to edil e e t of the cr i t i c or the eulogist, by exhaust i ng t h ose top i cs Work l of h. eit her w ou ld natura ll y resort for ill ustrat i ons o f t h e exquisi te i3 author. The Right Hon. Baronet has fully and questionsY bro ughte up all the m a te r i a l s a ff o rded by the various Peel's hiswteuich he t reate d o f . H ad any ad di t i on to Si r R . nam e an e r 3' been required, as a source of honour to his d ant l y by tha :istracter, it would have been supplied abun pregnant soh , inaugural address, of which a refined taste and . • trinsin wisd om oiarship were but the flowing drapery, while in= eel, fr ti"lll4vnilCe period of his leaving Oxford, with a repute and eropio a__ d since the days of Canning, has spent his life spe e i" of ti•e_alsis faculties in almost uninterrupted action—in a and to ineigatnefitted beyond all others to quiken the sagacity, reinforce th e the Purpose, least qualified to mature the experience, and to of all others, a rnoo llas with regard to matters of practice ; but, vete the meditatio possibly to expand or ale party been by n , Years bst•h:Yet, harassed as the Right Hon. Baronet party struggle, h ow nparunrelaxed official drudgery or anxious out ! There is in tho Pure an d Young in heart does he come once paternal and unassune of his expressions an authority at clearness ; throughout th m e n 4 ; in his admonitions a truth and and simplicity, and in th e al e i n le of his reasonings a breadth course an unaffected warmihr.t curse which give evidence of a ar: an d motive of his entire dis- I t 'vell as dignity of moral feel prospects which the Constitntiso and uncorrupted mind. The the youth of all classes in both Britain unfolds to which it demands no qualities his:itt° of the island, and great majority of this manly nation, 0:: whieu belong to the realize, were dwelt upon by the Right Hon. Baronet in en e , complete fusion and amalgamation of EnZaging terms. The siritmen and Scotch men was handsomely exemplified by allusion to the success of Sir John Campbelli!ert Peel, in an e(th antagonist .whom he had just defeated at Glasgow) as Fister, and to his own triumph over that learned nS English bar his native soil. But it was in the peroration Hon. Bar t' of the Right one s speech that .the genius of the philos o Statesman • displayed itself in a I' Isubordinatetopical ig only ta wherein he shone as a true and stedfast Christian. Never be fore were the words of Cicero adduced with more consummate or successful skill to attest the superiority • and those mot . • of those sanctions motives which revealed to the humblest religion offers ic humblest follower of' Christ over the dreary hopelessness of We present our readers this day with the most complete report which it is in the power of any Journal to furnish of Sir Robert Peel's speech at the Glasgow dinner on Friday. Knowing the shuffling Jesuitical character of the Right Hon. Baronet, and the vague unmeaning generalities in which be is accustomed to deal, we did not attach much importance to any thing which was likely to fall from him on the occasion ; but still we determined to give the earliest, the most ample, and most accurate report of his speech, which any of our Morning Contemporaries could by possibility give. We received this report yesterday morning, twenty minutes before two o'clock, precisely at the same time as The Sun Newspaper, which published an ample edition of the speeches at the dinner. Our Contemporary is justly entitled to great praise for the extra ordinary expedition with which it has expressed, and re-ex pressed throughout every part of the kingdom, the proceed ings at Glasgow. For our own part, we have simply to say, that we might have accomplished the same matter, had it been our will or to our benefit. We do not state this in dero gation of the merits of our Contemporary, which are too well known to suffer in public estimation from any thing which either this or any othcr Journal could, by possi bility, say, and which did not need this addition to its glory ; but simply in justice to ourselves, we deem it proper to state, that we received our report at the same time, and had we regarded the speech of Sir Robert of sufficient importance we might have expressed it through all parts of the country; but the affair is altogether so vague and general, that we did not think it worth our while to do more than our Contempo raries have done. To expose all the sophistries, inconsisten cies, and contradictions of Sir Robert's Address, would re quire more space than we can at present devote to it; we must, therefore, drag from its complicated involutions a few of the more elaborate casuistries and eloquent fallacies which compose the tissue and embroidery of this ingenious mesh work. In the commencement of his Speech, the Right Honourable Baronet made slight allusion to the congratu lations which he had received from " some" of the work ing classes of the city of Glasgow. Over this topic, how ever—as it was one which would not bear much misre presentation on the spot where the " some" or sum of the congratulating working classes was known to he very few —Sir Robert passed with a slight and delicate allusion, and making some claptrap profession of his sympathy with Scot land, deprecated the idea of men in authority ever being ashamed to support the national Church of Scotland, or to ex ert themselves fur the extension of religious toleration. This, no doubt, sounded well, and would have been an unexception able sentiment, but for the definition which Sir Robert after wards gave of " religious toleration," by which, as he said " I meant to support the national establishments which connect Protestantism with the State in these three countries." This is certainly rather one-sided toleration, which cannot meet the approval of men like the Scotch, who, having maintained with their good broadswords the right of exercising their reli gion uncontrolled save by conscience, are not likely to tarnish their weapons by wielding them in opposition to th e ex t ens i on o f a principle to others whic they have so gloriously achieved for themselves. While boasting of being an advocate for re ligious toleration, Sir Robert denounced the voluntary prin ciple, and said':-- "In my opinicn more weak arguments than those by' which what is called the voluntary sys tem is supported, were never presented to the conside ration of men interested in the prog,ess of a great nation." We must leave to Sir Robert the task of reconciling this con tradiction between religious toleration and the compulsory sys tem. We confess our inability to do so ; but from him, as one skilled in proving black to be white, and vice co-so, we may expect a reason for the faith that is in him. Sir Robert waxed particularly verbose in defence of the Lords, between whose responsibility and that of the electors of the country he had the effrontery to draw a parallel. " The Lords," said he, " aro responsible to God and their conscience, and to whom, or what else are the electors responsible ?" If Sir Robert were to exercise one-half the ingenuity to discover truth that lie does to pervert and mystify it, lie might have Perceived that the great body of the electors are subject to the most influential of all responsibility—self-interest--which THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY, .JANUARY 16. 1837. in this respect is identical with the general interests of the country, whereas the self interest of the Lords is directly op posed to the national welfare. The electors represent the commercial and industrial interests ; what interests, we ask, do the Lords represent ? The interest of those who luxuriate on the exertion; of others. Responsible to God and their conscience! Who would intrust the pro tection or guardianship of their interests to others on such responsibility? In the practice of moral duties the Peers, as a body, have committed as great and as many dere lictions as any other body of men ; yet, in the common affairs of life, would not a man be laughed at, or pitied as an idiot, who would propose to confide his affairs and the affairs of his posterity to the hereditary guardianship of men responsible from genera tion to generation only to God and their conscience ? Sir Ro bert declined judging a democratic government by that of the United States, and preferred to exhurnate the horrors perpe trated by Robespierre, Danton, and Marat, in the French Re volution, and parade them as an example of what should be :tpected from a democratic government in this country. The introduction of any discussion respecting the United States in the present juncture was most injudicious on the part of Sir Robert—as a country with eight hundred millions of debt can l i derive but little cause of congratulation from a comparison with one whose annual revenue is more than double its expen diture. It needs no logic to deduce a conclusion from such premises as these—the most obtuse as well as the most subtle mind must at a glance be impressed with the same convic tion. " Do not suppose," said the sophist, "that Robespierre, ex., were mere lulus naturm, engendered by France alone ; no, they were the creatures of circumstances, and, depend upon it, the same results will follow from the same causes." What, we again ask, were these circumstances and causes? What but the tyrannical exactions and persecutions of a despotic system of Government which goaded the French people to such desperation, that, to themselves at least, they seemed justified in their severest and most relentless retaliations. 'Such scenes can never occur in this country, because the aristocracy have not the power to carry the oppression of the people to the same extent as was done in France previously to the revo lution, and the British people have too just an appreciation of their own power and self-respect to sully their triumph with cruelty and blood. If, however, as Sir Robert alleged, the same results would follow like causes, on whom would the re sponsibility rest, on whom but on those who would have forced the people into the de:irious vindication of outraged rights ? There are other topics in this motley address which deserve more prominent notice than could be given at the conclusion of an article, and therefore we reserve them for future corn mentary.—Korning Advertiser. GRAND BANQUET TO SIR ROBERT PEEL AT GLASGOW FRIDAY, JAN. 13. (From The Sun of yesterday.) The excitement occasioned by the arrival of Sir ROBERT PEEL in the Commercial Metropolis of the North, continues still unabated—and the town is filling rapidly, notwithstanding the severity of the weather, and the very general prevalence of influenza, which, it was at one time appeal:ended, would deter many from leaving their homes. The Right ; Hon. Baronet visited the Royal Exchange yes terday, where a large crowd assembled for the purpose of ob taining a sight of him. He was loudly cheered by his Tory adherents, which had the effect of calling forth a few observa tions, in which he chiefly confined himself to the architectural beauty and splendour of the edifice in which he was, and the venerable University which he had just left--the one famous as a seat of learning, and the other illustrative of the great commercial enterprise and skill of the City of Glasgow. The Right Hon. Baronet left the room amid the renewed cheers of those assembled, who caused considerable destruction among the furniture, gas pipes, and glass globes, by unceremoniously mounting the tables, in their anxiety to obtain a peep at the distinguished stranger. THE DJNNER, _ _ The banquet given to Sir Robert Peel at Glasgow, and the speech delivered on the occasion by the distinguished guest, would in themselves attract more of the public attention than any political event which it has for a long period been our duty to commemorate. But it is still worth while to sharpen the zest with which our readers will peruse oar report of this re markable festival by reminding them of the vaticinations in which the enemies of Sir Robert Peel,hav9 for many weeks been indulging upon . this uncomfortable theme. First, the dinner was to be a failure—poor in numbers, scanty in re spectability, weak in influence. Three thousand five hundred of the most opulent, the most independent, the most in telligent men in Glasgow honnured themselves in honour ing Sir Robert Peel on Friday. Next, the speech was to be a failure ; it was to contain much Latin and little politics, much of academical display, and little of Parliamentary explana tion. The speech is before England, before Europe : for to the remotest corners of Europe will its effect be felt. Can we say more of it than that it was worthy of the occasion —worthy of the audience—worthy of the orator? If elo quence be, as it has been defined, the best thing, said in the best season, in the best place, and in the best way, then we do not know a more deeply or nobly eloquent speech than the address of Sir Robert Peel to his three thousand entertainers at Glasgow. Every part of the magnificent oration of the great statesman would deserve an especial notice from criticism more elaborate and minute than it is within our province or within our power to apply. The " simple and familiar phrases" in which he conveys his sense of a reception that must indeed have awakened feelings which studied and complimentary forms of expression would most inadequately have spoken—the picturesque imagery in which he calls up his old recollections of Caledonian ground, claiming the sympathies of his hearers for one who has " read the map of Scotland on the grand scale of nature, from the summits of Ben Nevis and Lomond," who hes " looked over the country," and who has " climbed the mountain sides with no companion but a Highland shepherd"—the easy and natural transition with which he passes from the blessings enjoyed by the in• habitants of the land thus early endeared to him, to the sources from which those blessings immediately flow—the solemn ear nestness of his claim upon the State " for that homage to Christianity which is rendered to it by our religious establish ment"—the unanswerable completeness of his exposure of the miserable tricksters who arc " ransacking pigeon -holes, and other depositories of that kind, far plans for a reform of the House of Lords"—the clear and instructive lessons which he draws alike from the existing perils of the American Republic, and from the past convulsions of the French Monarchy—and, finally, the impressive enthusiasm of the assurance with which he concludes, that the institutions which we ail love will come. out of the trials which threaten them " more deeply rooted in the convictions, in the feelings, and in the affections of a Pro testant people"—each of these and of other passages will have its particular admirers ; and there is no man, not bitterly jaundiced by the spirit of party, who, regarding the combined effect of the whole, will not pronounce the composi tion a masterpiece alike of the art of the rhetorician and of the wisdom of the statesman. But, after all, the great interest attached to Sir Robert Peel's speech arises from the considera tion of it as a political manifesto. In this respect it has all the characteristics of the letter to the electors of Tamworth. as our readers and the public generally are already aware, took place in a pavilion erected for the express purpose, on the cast side of Buchanan -street, and the following descrip tion, which we copy from the Glasgow Herald of Friday, will afford our readers some idea of the plan upon which it has been arranged :—" Last night we had the pleasure of seeing this magnificent Hall lighted up, the tables being covered and partly victualled for 3,435 persons. We think it may be said with safety, that never before, in this country, has there been seen such a Hall, except perhaps that of Westminster Abbey, at the Coronation of the late King. As a tempo rary building, however, got up in the course of two or three weeks, it is without a parallel in Great Britain—whether we consider it in its dimensions, its classical devices, its elegant and well-proportioned parts, the splendour with which it is illuminated, or its commodiousness for the purpose intended. The quantity of cloth stuff used by these eminent upholsterers, the Messrs. James Whyte and Son, in covering the roof, the tables, seats, &c., is about eight thousand yards of all de scriptions; and the gas lustres (two of them are exceed ingly beautiful), contain upwards of three thousand burners. The gallery, from which by far the finest view of the Hall is got, is supported by fourteen imitation of sienna-marble columns, with Corinthian capitals—the roof beillg upheld by ten columns of a similar description, thirty-two feet in height. The decorative painting has been executed in a very superior manner by Messrs. Michael Bogle and Co., the great west end being divided into three departments of massive Egyptian pil lars, painted in relief. In the centre compartment, behind the Bench where Sir Robert Peel and the most distinguished part of the company are to sit, is an immense rock, on which is founded the British Constitution in a pyramidical form, a little timeworn from the blasts it has stood, and on which the words Briti,h Constitution " are emblazoned in gold letters. On the top of this pyramid is seen the base of an obelisk, bearing the inscription of " King," also in gilded letters. In the right compartment is another pyramid, founded also on a rock, on which is the word " Lords " in emblazoned gold letters. The left compartment contains a similar pyramid, with " Com mons." The whole, from its great magnitude, has a very grand and imposing effect. The front of the gallery is painted in panels of crimson and stone-colour styles, which, with the columns in imitation of marble, give the area a chaste and light appearance. The front of the bench is panelled in crim son and yellow mouldings, that stand out in bold relief against the sombre column of the rock behind." About four o'clock the company began to arrive, and not withstanding the vast crouds assembled round the pavilion, the arrangements were such as to afford immediate and easy ingress to all. - Sir Robert Peel entered the room about a quarter past five, and the vast multitude within the building instantly rose, and received him with loud cheers, clapping of hands, and waving of handkerchiefs, the band striking up, " See the conquering hero comes," There were a few hisses 'from a remote corner of the gallery, but they were drowned in the louder and more general shout of acclamation with which the Right Hon. Baronet was greeted on his entrance. Among the distinguished individuals who were stated to be present were the Duke of Buccleugh, Marquises Twee dale and Lothian, Earls Haddington, Rosslyn, Hardwick, Morton, Eglington, Leven, and Melville ; Lords John Scott, M. P„ Forbes, John Campbell, Elcho, Loughborough, Ram say ; Viscounts Melville, Stourmont, M. P., Kelburn; Sirs G. Clerk, M.P., H. P. H. Campbell, M. P., A. Campbell, John M‘Kenzie, J. S. Forbes ; John Campbell, Bart., W. J. Hooker, William Rae, A. Edmonston, Chas. Hastings, D. Erskine, R. Arbuthnot; Messrs. E. Tennant, M. P., Cummin Bruce, M. P, W. Forbes, M. P. Hope Johnstone,M. P.; Pringle, M P., Gordon,lll. P., W. E. Gladstone,M. P., Gen. Arbuthnot, M. P., The Chisholm, M. P., Professors Jeffrey, Meikleham, Ramsay, Burns, Cheape, Femieg, Badharn, Cowper, and Buchanan. The Dean Convener, the Dean of Guild, the Master of Grey, the Master of Rolls, the Hon. Capt. Cath cart, Baillie Bain, &c., &c., &c. The Chair was taken by HENRY MONTEITII, of Carstairs, Esq., and on his right sat the distinguished guest of the evening. It is plain, energetic, uncompromising. But it is so in a yet greater degree than the Tamworth address. In 134 parties were hardly in conflict upon any particular question ; Lord John Russell had not moved the appropriation clause; Sir John Campbell had not denounced the H, use of Lords; Lord Melbourne had not been accused of a predilection for the bal lot. In 1834, therefore, the address of Sir Robert Peel to the electors of Tamworth contained little more than an exposition—a most clear and satisfactory one—of the ge neral tenor of his opinions. In 1837 parties are en gaged in the closest strife upon the most important prin ciples ! the abrogation of the hereditary privileges of the House of Lords—•the annihilation of the revenues 'and the dignities of the Established Church. In 1837, therefore, the speech of Sir Robect Peel to the mer chants of Glasgow contains a distinct, manly, intelligible avowal of his purpose on all those vital questions. With ad mirable judgment, and with a good taste which combines a perfect indulgence for his opponent's opinion with a con scientious adherence to his own, he calls on the many Re formers whom he sees assembled around him to forget past dissensions, if upon present dangers they are ageeed ; and to prove, by the cordiality of their future Conserva tism, that in their support of the Reform of 1831, • they de signed, with their gracious Sovereign, " to give additional security to the settled institutions of the State." He then proceeds to declare, in emphatic terms, his determination upon the mighty topics on which the fate of this nation de pends. " I mean," says Sir Robert Peel, "to support the National Establishments which connect Protestant ism with the State in these three countries:" Here then is a question. on which Sir Robert Peel proelaims that there can be no approach to an agreement between him and the supporters of the Government. Again, " I mean," says Sir Robert Peel, " to support in its full integrity the authority of the House of Lords. I mean to consider every plan that may be proposed, as introduced—not directly and openly, but co vertly—with the view of undermining that branch of the Le gislature. I mean, I repeat, to consider every such proposi tion, not on its abstract isolated merits, but as tending ulti mately to sap the foundations of the House of Lords, and thereby to destroy the British Constitution." Here, then, is another question upon which the difference between Sir Robert Peel and the supporters of the Government is irreconcilable. We speak of the supporters of the the Government; for the Government itself liss no voice, no vitality, upon these momentoui themes. The Home Secretary may be content to take but a surplus front the Established Church—the Attorney-General may be willing to wait a while for a moderate Peerage Reform. But there is the issue which is to be tried. Are you for an Established Church, or a volun• tary system? Are you for a mixed Government, or for a pure Democracy? Are you, in short, with Sir Robert Peel, or with Mr. O'Connell? We trust this splendid oration will be circu lated in every form in which the Press can clothe it through every town and hamlet in the kingdom. It should be in the castle of every peer ; it should be in the cottage of every pea sant : for peer and peasant are alike interested in the mainte nance of the political and the religious institutions it so admir ably defends. —Morning Post. Dorchester House is to undergo some embellishment previous to the return of the Marquis of Hertford from Italy. Sir F. PoNsoNBY.—It is with feelings of the deep est regret that we announce the death of Major-General Sir Frederick Cavendish Ponsonby. He died suddenly at Merwell-green, near Basingstoke, on Thum:lay night, when on his way to London. Sir Frederick Ponsonby was the second son of the Earl of Besborough, and brother of Viscount Duncannon, and was in the 54th year of his age. THE DUKE OF SUSSEX.—On Sunday afternoon (the Bth inst.) his Royal Highness the Duke or Sussex was subjected to an alarming accident on his way to Colonel Wildman's, at Newstead Abbey ; the carriage was either drawn off the road, or was driven on a post, at Pelham, near Newark, and was overturned, the panel driven in, and his Royal Highness severely stunned by the shock. The axle was forced out, so that three of the horses were set at liberty. We sincerely hope no ill effects will result from the serious danger. Sir Thomas Cartwright, Minister to the Diet at Frankfort, arrived in Dover-street ou Saturday from Brighton. Lord Cranstoun arrived at the Clarendon on Satur day from Sandrh Park, Devonshire. Colonel Fox has left town to join Lady Mary at Paris. The Speaker of the House of Commons and his Lady are expected to arrive on Friday next from Stubbing Court, near Chesterfield. The Right Honourable Gentle man will again occupy Mr. Clifton's house on Carlton terrace. The Duke of Palmella gave a sumptuous dinner on Saturday evening, at the Clarendon, to the Baron Mon corvo and a distinguished party of sixteen. The Earl and Countess de Grey and Captain and Lady Mary Vyner have arrived at St. James's-square from West Park for the season. When the cloth was removed, the Chairman rose and said, he should give them, with all the feelings of loyalty, " The King." Nine times nine. Air—God save the King. The CHAlRMAN—Gentlemen, I give you the highest lady in the land—not higher in rank than she is in virtue.--(Enthu siastic cheers.) " The Queen." Air—" My ain kind dearie, 0,7 " The Princess Victoria, and the rest of the Royal Family." (Nine times nine.) Air--" My love she's but a lassie yet." The CHAIRMAN would now give them, " The British Con stitution, King, Lords, and Commons.—( Applause.) Un der that Constitution they had enjoyed peace, happiness, and prosperity, and its emblem was behind them, built upon a rock.—( Loud cheering.) He hoped that they should leave it to future generations to enjoy it as it had been framed ; and whatever people might say, he trusted that Constitution would be preserved and not destroyed.—( Vehement cheering.) " The Army," under whose banners, and by whose achieve ments, the liberties of the country have been preserved and protected against her enemies. Air—" British Grenadiers." Lord FORBES—Being the senior military officer present, the duty of acknowledging this toast has devolved upon me. I therefore thank you in the name of the British Army for the honour you have done us. I believe I may add, that the British army are never more happy than when they have reason to con clude that their conduct either in the field or in quarters, has been such as to render them acceptable to their King and their country. —( Loud cheers.) The CHAHIMAN —Gentlemen, the next toast I have to pro pose, to which I am sure you will do all honour—it is those under whose banner we hare achieved great things—( Cheers) —" The Navy of Great Britain, the wooden walls of Old England."-- z ( Great cheering.) Lord FIaIDWICK rose to return thanks, amid much cheer ing. Not being the senior officer present, I rise, Sir, to re turn thanks for this toast, the two senior officers sitting at the other end of the table, and I wish I had a spy-glass to see them—( Laughter)—complaining of being unwell, have struck work, and are now on the doctor's list.—( Cheers.) I therefore, the third in rank, am entrusted with the pleasant office of returning thanks for the profession to which I belong. The navy has nbver been considered a political body; and I trust, as long as we have meetings of this description, so numerously attended, it will be needless to consider them in any other capacity than a useful body to protect the inte rests of the country against a foreign enemy.—( Great cheer ing.)—l beg most sincerely to return thanks for the honour you have done us. We are attached to the Constitution and the Crown.—(Continued cheers.) Individually and personally we are attached to the person of our King.— ( Great cheering. )—Again, gentlemen, I be; to say, on behalf of the Navy, that we return you our most 'hearty thanks for the great honour you have done us—the greatest honour` the British Navy could receive. —(Great cheering.) The CHAIRMAN then said—My lords and gentlemen, I now rise to propose to you what may with propriety be called the toast of the day.—(Cheers.)—l am sure I am unequal to the task which has been imposed on me, but which I am proud I have been required to perform.—( !fear. )—As regards in accuracy, my mind is relieved, when I consider the subject of the toast I have to propose to you, and that it does not require a lone. harangue to recommend it to your warm reception. —(Loud cheers.)—Sir Robert Peel has been so long known to you, that the history of the last twenty years may be said to have defined his character, and displayed him to you as a great statesman, a pure patriot, and an honest man, and to recommend him to you I need say no more than this.— ( Hear and cheers.) History recommends him to you as a statesman, who has devoted his great talents to the service of his country.—( Loud cheers.) I shall say no more then, but that I am sincerely thankful that to me has fallen the honour of proposing to you the health of Sir Robert Peel.—( Loud and continued cheers, which lasted for several minutes.) Sir ROBERT PEEL rose, and the cheering and acclamations were again renewed, and kept up with the greatest enthusiasm for several minutes. He said—Gentlemen, I thank you, I thank you from the bottom of my heart, for the kind and affec tionate reception you have given to my name. Excuse me, if for the purpose of returning thanks, I make use of the most simple and familiar phrases. They arc imperfect expressions of my feelings, but they are better suited to express them, than the trite, studied, and complimentary forms of expression which may be suited for ordinary occasions. What a heart must I have, if I can have witnessed what has passed in Glasgow within the last five days, without deep emotion ? Unconnected with this country by birth, I have been placed in competition with a distinguished Scotchman for a high academic distinction. I have been placed in it by a triumphant majority—by the gene rous, the unsought, the unsolicited confidence of the youth of Scotland.—(Loud cheers.) I have seen that choice con firmed by the deliberate judgment of men of maturer age, ene-aged in the pursuits of business and professional life._ (Cheers. ) This very day have I received the congratulations, on my appointment, from some of the working classes of this great city —( Applause)—couched in language that would do honour to men of the highest education. I have seen those feel ings so wide spreading and so intense, that they disdained to be compressed within the limit of any pre-existing edifice, and they called forth from the ground, as by the stroke of an en chanter's wand, this magnificent and unparalleled fabric.— ( Hear, and cheers.) I have been present here—l have heard its foundations shaken, and its roof almost rent by your en thusiastic applause ; and do you think I can condescend to look out for ingenious forms of expression for the purpose of giving vent to feelings which almost overpower me ?—( Loud and continued cheering.) I said that I was unconnected with forming de novo a neew establishment; the question is, wilt yeti adhere to that which you find established by the law, which has been guaranteed to you by the most solemn national com pact ?—(Cheers.) Then, again, I avow to you that I mean to ' supple, in its full integrity. the authority of the House of Lord;—(Tremendous cheering, which Weed for several ral nutes )—as an essential, indiaperraable condition of contin led existence of the mia ed form of Government under` which we live, as tantamount to the -maintenance of the British Censtitution.—(Great cheering.) I nisan to consider every plausible proposition that may be enrele, not directly assailing that integrity, but covertly to undermine it.—( Hear.) I mean to consider them, not upon their abetract merits, but the ultimate tendency they may have to undermine the Hous! of Lords, and destroy the British Constitution.-- (Great cheering.) Do you concur also with me in that en pression ?—( Great cheers.) If you do, it is a timely declara tion of it.—(Cheers.) The hour has arrived when, if those: are our feelings, we must be prepared to act upon them.— (Tremendous cheers.) Do not let us content ourselves with the vehemence of our enthusiasm.—(Cheers.) We have poli tical privileges given to us, and do not know for what it is we hold them, unless we are determined to exercise them.— , (Cheers.) And if your sense of the daneer is that which apprehend it is from your declaration, and if your union of sentiment with me is that which I think it is, and . which I collect it to be—l say, that having these privileges and rights, if you do not exert them, You will be in the situation of the man who in the face of the common enemy, having a sword, refused to draw it.—( Great cheering.) I speak of the civil sword only.—(Hear, hear.) The exercise of civil privi liges is estimable, as instructing us to maintain and to defend our own opinions. —(Cheers.) But it is time that we should resort to the peaceful exercise of these privileges.--( Hear. ) I possess a privilege—that of addressing you here.—( Cheers.) And I shall now set you an example in the exercise of it.— ( Hear.) Don't think that I came here only to gratify my per sonal vanity, althotigh as far as that vanity is coecerned its eratification has been most complete.—(Herr.) I say that I carte here, believing that by my communion with you I might be able to strengthen the means of defence for the Con stitution, And I forgot the distance—l forgot the winter, for fe e li ng i t ess be right, in the performance of a public duty, I did to.—(Cheers.) —l say, then, 'tis time—thilthne is come for us to stand !orward in the exercise of the privilege to which I have allusled ; for I have read speeches lately which have been delivered by those whose special duty, in my opinion, it is to &fen: the Constitution in all its integrity ; I have read speeches, ho;vever, delivered by them, of such a nature, as makes me unwilling to trust its defence to their exertions.—(Hear and cheers. )--I hove read the speeches of great legal authorities, and I find that they have mat yet made up their minds to the reform of the Horse of Loross.—( Hear and laughter.) I am sorry for it—(Hear) —they say they fear that it is coming, but they have not yet seen the plan of operation.—( Hear and laughter.) They are hard at work, however, ransacking pigeon-holes and depositories, fur plans for a reform of the House of Lords.—(Hear.) The chief objection is, however, that no plan has yet been drawn out right.—(Hear.) Oh ! what miserable trifling.—( Hear, hear.) But they may spare themselves the waste of time—let them take the first of those which have been proposed—let theta substitute for the House of Lords a Council of Ancients, or a Council of Five Hundred—or let them substitute a new body, elected by the Peers, or by the heads of families— (Laughter)—or let 'hem give the House of Lords a suspen sive veto.—(Cheers and laughter.) Let them, in fact, take ono or the other of these, the effect will be the same.— (Checeas) Why, do you believe that you can uproot the oak of the forest, which has seen e thousand generations?— (Loud cheers.) Do you believe you can uproot the noble productions from which the hatchments and the achievements of a thousand illustrious names are st:spended ?—(Cheers.) But rely on it our change won't be to the institutions of the United States. Never believe, although they may be show ering down prosperity and haespiness on the people of that country (and I hope they are), never believe that such will oc cur. Recollect the physical differences that e. xist between them. This is a country of ancient .eeelings and e ssocuttions; and do not believe that you can transfsr to it the }:epublican institutions of America. Do you thinie that we woutel submit without a struggle to the tyranny which :nay ensue ? W t bate the tyranny of a single despot—we hate cligarchical tyranny, but the tyranny of the majority has no gesater recommenda tion. We shall not follow the example .of the minority in the United States.—(Hear, hear, hear.) We are a coun try of old associations—(hear)—every castle and every field will remind us of the institutions under which we lived.. " The days of auld langsync" will dwell upon our memosles—(Tre mendous cheers )—and they would make us most imp.atient and ungovernable subjects of a despotic country.—(Loud cheers.)] If you choose to run the risk of that experiment, he-ye before: your eyes the example of another country. If you wii3 abolish hereditary authority —if you will make a permanent democratic assembly, then prepare yourselves, not for the institutions of the United States, but for that terrible and fiery ordeal through which France has passed.—( Cheers.) If you choose to abolish the 'louse of Lords--do abolish it. If you think that; a second Consulting Chamlx r ought not to oppose itself toe the will of the people, abolish it at once.—( Hear.) Do suit let us have a pretended second chamber; infiaitely baiter will it be to come at once to the teial of having only cnice Chamber, than to destroy its influence And prerogatives, an& leave it the empty name.—(Cheers:) You are told that theses measures arc indispensable—the destruction of the ChurcleEse tablishment as being in its present state inconsistent with the rights of the people, the Reform of the House of Lorris, and the Vote by Ballot.—( Hear, hear, hear, and clieers.)' When you have destroyed the House of Lords what form of Government will you substitute? You have the constituent body, which is responsible at present to nobody but public opinion ; but the proposition now made would have the effect of rendering that body altogether irresponsible, because It. would exere.se its privileges by ballot. I will venture to say that this country will not submit to such a domination.— ( Applause.) Here is a body of four or five hundred thousand men, selected for no other qualification than property exer cising those privileges in a secret irresponsible manner; and IL ask, is it possible to suppose that the people of this country would ever tolerate such an exercise of perfectly irresponsible power, when you have proved that perfectly independent body, the constituent assembly, what security will you have for the proper exercise of its powers any more than France ? Do you hope to sec its deliberations conducted by better or wiser men than they had in France ? I hare quoted from the United States, and I shall now quote from another country. Thcset are grave subjects, and it is better to treat them in a serious , manner.—(hear, hear, hear.) It is better to discuss than - attack a political antagonist behind his back, or reciprocate the vulgar abuse which in my absence has been showered upon me.—(Loud cries of hear.) Gentlemen, since I set out on my travels from Staffordshire to this place, liming brought with me some French newspapers, I lately read an address from one of the present Ministers of the King of the French, a man who is called from his retirement be fill a high office in the Councils of his Majesty. It was an addecss delivered when he was receiving the reward of literature, being appointed a member of the French Academy. I mean M. Guizot, member of Public Instruction in France, and this is the account he gives of the results of the meeting of the Con stituent Assembly of France—a purely democratic body com posed of most enlightened men, and men desirous of every reform. The Right Hon. Baronet here read the address of M. Guizot of the 27th December last, and proceeded :—Are you quite sure that if you constitute an unchecked democratic assembly, above all responsibility, that they will exercise it with prudence and moderation ? Men who have actually received advice to call for one candidate outside the hustings, but to give their vote in the balloting box for another ?—(Cheers.) Are you sure that you have any guarantee that those results that followed in France will not follow here? The inference is that they will. This new government will meet with a re sistance ; we will not be content to submit, and then will come the dreadful reaction. Don't believe that such mis creants as Robespierre, Mcrat and Denton were mere lusus naturce engendered in France alone. No—they were the creatures of circumstances arising frpm the subversion of all the institutions which have been long established, and the prescriptive authorities which had been so long obeyed. De pend upon it, that with the same causes the same results will inevitably follow. You will have power to correspond from the proper authorities—you will have in every village a miscreant establishing the most cruel and grinding tyranny, by calling himself the people.—(Great cheering.) Now, gentlemen, I have given you a testimony to the French, and to the American Constitutions, and I must need bring no tes timony to the beauty and results of the British Constitution' . Cheers.) Your own experience—your own affections supply them ; but that a link shall not be wanting, I shall supply you with a testimony to the British Constitution—from whence shall I draw it?—lf from any ancient institutions, you might justly sky the time has gone by when opinions like hose availed. If I draw it from any living authority, and main taining Conservative opinions, not you, but others, 'night scout it.—( Hear.) But I shall give you the opinions of one of our present Ministers, who is high in the councils of his Sovereign, and you can contrast with M. Guizoes picture of France the picture of England, drawn by a Reformer, and a Minister of the King of England. You will at once admit that this is a disinterested authority, indisputable and unpreju diced. These sentiments were uuered, not in the beat of de bate, but a deliberate publication, by do less.an authority than Lord John Russell.—(The Right Hon. Baronet then read au extract from a publication of Lord John Russell, in which the blessings and beauties of the British Consitution were expatiated on in a highly eulogistic manner. The reci tal was received with loud an long continued cheering.) I will tell you those gentlemen have no objections to the pri vileges of the monarchy, as long as they can be made useful instruments in the hands of the democracy.—(Cheers.) The House of Peers, it is said, are not responsible. I hare heard this before. I replied that certainly the Peers were not res ponsible in the sense in which the House of Commons is res ponsible, but that I did think that in their responsibility to GO, to their own consciences, and to enlightened public opi nion, that the people had a guarantee for the faithful perform ance of their duty.__( Loud cheers.) But what I said in my place met with a different reception from that which it has met from you.—(Cheers.) Now, Gentlemen, if that be the fatal objection to the House of Lords, that they are not res ponsible to the whole mass of the people, let me ask if there is no other body invested with: privileges who arc in the same sense irresponsible also? The House Of Commons is respon sible clearly to their constituents—the Ministry is responsible in different sense from the House of Peers—but let me ask to , whom is the constituent body responsible ?—( Loud cheers.) You have selected a certain body as qualified for the exercise of great power. I will not say a word on the subject of this power. There has been a settlement, the effect of which has been to invest some 300,000 or 400,000 men out of the whole classes of secicty, with great political privileges ; and I ask of whom are these responsible ? They arc not selected—it was impossible to select them—they exercise the elective franchise partly as an hereditary right, and partly because of the pos session of property.—( Hear, hear.) What other security , Scotland by birth—l hope I did not say that I was a stranger. No—l am not a stranger.—(Loud applause.) If the long exercise of power in Scotland, if the administration of justice, if intercourse with her civil and religious institutions, and above all, if love for her name, and admiration for her charac ter; and cordial interest in her welfare, ettitle a man to repudiate the name of stranger, then lam not a stranger in Glasgow. --. (Cheers.) No, gentlemen, when my education was completed, I burned with a wish to see Scot land. I came here to this city, and I confess to you, that although the interval is short in the history of nations, I could not have conceived it possible that in that interval such progress could have been made in the population, in the wealth, and in the prosperity of this magni ficent city—(Great cheering)—pouring, as it does, into the revenue, in one branch alone, greater treasures than continen tal nations possess for the whole of their expenditure. I came here--I wished to see something of Scotland which I could not have seen from hasty . glimpses from the windows of a luxurious post coach. I wanted to see your attitudes and man ners of life, apart from the magnificent and hospitable castles of your Nobility and Gentry.—(Cheers.) Yes, in Glasgow I hired a faithful steed, and I traversed on horseback, or on foot, almost the whole of the country from this to Inverness.— (Cheers.) Gentleinen, bear with me, excuse me if I indulge in honest exultation---(Cheers)—excuse me if I say in this society of Scotchmen, Liat I think I have seen more of your native country than some of those whom I am now address ing. —(Cheers.) I have read the map of Scotland in the scale of nature from the summits of Ben Nevis and Ben Lo mond.—(Loud cheers.) I visited that island from which sa vage clans and roving barbarians derived the benefits of know ledge and the blessings of religion.—( Loud cheers.) Yes, amid the ruins of lona, I abjured that frigid philosophy that would conduct us unmoved over any ground, however dignified by wisdom, bravery, or virtue—l stood on the shores of Stan —I have seen the temple not built with human hands--I have seen the mighty swellings of the ocean—the pulsations of the great Atlantic. I have explored its Inmost recesses, and I have heard those swellings, nobler than any that ever pealed from human organs. I have lived on the banks of the Spey two autumns, and I want no guide in the mountains and shores of Badenoch—( Great cheers)—l could find my way from Corriarich to Loch Logan.—(Cheers.) I have climbed your mountain sides with no companion but a Highland shepherd. Many an hour have I passed listening to Isis simple annals, and artless views of human life. I have learned to admire, by per sonal intercourse, a proud and independent spirit, chastened by a natural courtesy.—( Cheers.) I have seen him with intel ligence apparently above his condition, but with no intelligence but that which taught him patience under his privations—con fidence in his exertions—and submission to the law—loyalty to the King.—(Cheers.) And when I have seen that, my ear nest prayer has been, that to his children, and his children's children might be preserved, that system of education which founded moral obli g ation upon the revealed will of God. — (Great cheering.) My earnest wish has been that the circum stances of Scotland, with reference to religious dissent, might long enable them to enjoy that proud, and, I believe, pecu liar privilege, of having a system of education enforced by the law, but in connection with the Established Chureln (Cheers. ) And when I joined that man in public worship, and heard the sublime truths, and pure doctrines of our common faith enjoined and enforced, according to different rites, think you I have adverted to distinctions and a point of form ?—( Cheers.) Think you that I have troubled myself with questions of Church discipline, or Church Government Great cheer ing.) No, but with a wish as cordial and hearty as you can entertain.—( Continued cheering.) I have deprecated the arrival of that day, if ever it should arrive, when men in authority should not be ashamed to support the Na tional Church of Scotland—(Great cheering)—to extend its ministration, and to advance its good, but do all they can to extend its religious influence.—( Hear, hear.) Gentlemen, you respond to that statement.—( Loud and continued cheers.) Come then, let us devote ourselves not merely to the purposes of festivity—let us improve the present opportunity to the public advantage.—( Cheers.) Let us see if we are agreed as to the dangers to which the Constitution is exposed ; then let us see, if we can join heart and hand in support of the re solution you have adopted.—(Cheers.) Gentlemen, I have been informed that there are many persons here present who entertain a different opinion from myself with respect to the Reform of the House of Commons.—( Hear.) I sincerely hope that this is the case.—( Cheers.) You may safely think that I am not here going to offend any by reviving battles that have been concluded.—( Cheers.) If we can agree as to pre sent dangers, and unite in principle, I shall not revive the dis sensions that are past, for we might as well in the face of the enemy fight over again the battles of Bannockburn or the Field of Flodden.—( Hear and cheers.) I say I want not to taunt any with reaction or conversion ; but I say this, that if you adhere to the principles which they professed in 1830, this is the place in which they should make their appearance. You consented to the Reform Bill, to which you were ex pressly invited to assent to, in the speech which was delivered by your Sovereign, on condition that you should, in doing so, acknowledge the principles upon which the Constitution was founded. Let there be no mistake on this point.—( Loud cheers.) I see the necessity for widening the foundation on which the defence of the British Constitution, and the religi ous establishment must rest.—( Loud cheers.) I ask, though I have no right to ask, for any confession of error, or even for any change of opinion—all I ask of you is, do adhere to the principles upon which the Reform Bill was advocated; and if you do, then will you combine with me firmly for the defence of the Constitution of the country.—( Continued cheers.) I have now to recommend to you, said his Majesty, the im portant question of Reform to your earnest and most attentive consideration, confident that in any measures you may prepare for its adjustment, you will carefully adhere to the actkowledged principles of the Constitution by which the prerogative of the Crown—the authority of bath Houses of Parliament—( Cheers) and the rights and liberties of the people are maintained. Did his Majesty rest satisfied with that? Did he say adopt Re form—apply Reform to the House of Commons—but apply it only upon the acknowledged principles of the Constitution ? He said that—but he said more. He invited you to consent to Reform for certain objects, and amongst those objects expressly was this :—" In recommending Reform to your consideration, it was my object to give additional se curity to the other institutions of our land."—(Cheers.) Now, Gentlemen, if these were your principles—if you sup ported earnestly and conscientiously Reform in the House of Commons, because you believed that you were resisting an en croachment which had been made upon the very representation of your country-4 Cheers)—if you thought that Reform was in conformity with the acknowledged principles of the Consti tution—if you believed with Lord Grey, that by making the Reform larger and more extensive you would discountenance other extravagant propositians endangering the Constitution, I not only say you may be here without hearing from me one word that could pain your feelings,but I sey upon you and not upon me is it incumbent to vindicate your rights. and not mine—the stigma of being inconsistent with the safety of the British Constitu tion.—( Cheers.) I have endeavoured to extract what wee good—and mitigate as much evil as I could. But, I say, if you adhere to your principles, you ought not to leave to me, arid those who act with me, the defence of the Reform Bill. You naturally say, that although you are determined to resist further changes which endanger the Constitution, yet you adhere to your opinions, that the progress of improvement ought not to be suspended—that abuses ought to be removed. You avow, no doubt, your hostility to corruption, and you have ever disavowed it. Corruption !—Whys what has this meeting to benefit by corruption ? Not one possible thing. This meeting has met for one object—to mark its esteem for me, and to extract a public good from it, by spreading the spirit which animates us.—(Cheers.) I ask what benefit could you —the greater part of you, active and industrious citizens of Glasgow—derive from corruption. Perhaps you think my situation different from yours ; and that, although it would be difficult to prove that it would benefit you, cor ruption to me, as a public man, would be of great ad vantage. I should like, however, to ask what benefit corruption would give me compared with this meeting.— ( Tremendous cheering.) I should like to know if moral in fluence, as a public man, is my object, by which I should bene fit most, by adding 50 Commissions to the Commissions already issued ; or by saying 3,500 men met me in Glasgow. We reconciled, we forget our bygone differences, but we were determined to'unite in defence of our national establish ments and our national religion.—( Long continued cheering.) I don't want that the machine of Government should stand still; and I join with you cordially in wishing to see it pro gressing in the discharge of its important action, beating with healthful and regular pulses, animating industry, encouraging production, rewarding toil, and purifying wherever there is stagnation ; but let me tell you, that in the social, as in the material machine, with which you are so well acquainted, the movements cannot be regular unless the founda tions are stable and secure.—(Tremendous cheering.) If in the case of a steam engine, a man Vfho knows nothing cf its construction—one man may bore a hole in the cylinder, another may tinker the boiler—and another, who sees some horizontal movement which he does not understand—they may call this reform—they may ask for a progressive movement — but will this give it them ?—(Tremendous cheering.) Now, gentlemen, the time I am entitled to trespass upon you is but short—( Loud cries of " No")—I must not trespass too much upon your indulgence.—( Cheers.) Let us come to the main point.—( Loud cheers.) Ido not wish to conciliate your con fidence or support by wearing false colours.—( Loud cheers.) I mean to support the national establishments which connect Protestantism with the State in these three countries.—(Tre mendous cheering, all the company rising.) Nothing could be so unseemly— after the reception I have met with, nothing could be so unseemly—in me, than to say one word of—( We missed the word)—with regard to those who differ from me in their religious opinions.—( Cheers.) I will say, with respect to the chief sect of this country, that the country owes to it great obligations for the efforts they have made in the common cause of promoting sound principles of reli g i on .—( Loud cheers. ) But it is perfectlyb consistent with that respect and these obli gations, if I declare that, in my opinion, more weak arguments than those by which what is called the Voluntary Sys tem is supported, were never presented to the consideration of men interested in the progress of a great nation. Ido feel, and I trust you feel the same, that it is right that the State should pay that homage to Christianity which is implied in a religious establishment. Is it possible that any person could be deluded by the analogies addressed by those who say that the supply of religion will always be equal to the demand? Is it not perfectly clear that the demand for religious instruc tion may not only not be in the direct ratio of its necessity, but absolutely in an inverse ratio ?—( Loud cheers.) Will those who stand most in need of religious instruction be the first, and not the last, to make voluntary efforts? I say that the minister who is to speak with authority—who is to rebuke indifference and try to conciliate towards religion—who is to be the censor over vice—that that man ought not to depend upon the precarious bounty of those whom he is to counsel, to admonish, and to instruct.—( Cheers.) I infer from the declaration of your opinion upon that point ,your mind is made up.—c Cheers.) It is not a question of ,;.x