The Sun.
London, England, 1852-07-29 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FIAMI THrl HORNING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.
TIMES.—Side by side in oar report of yesterday
will be found the election histories of two men who
have filled during the last two years no insignificant
space in the public eye. Sir George Grey, after
having been defeated by a combination of territorial
influence which it appeared from the first next to im-
possible to counteract, takes leave of friends and ene-
mies, supporters and opponents, with dignity, ur-
banity, and good temper. So little does he appear
cast down by his defeat, that he is hardly conscious it
is a defeat at all, and, while dwelling on the kind and
warm-hearted support of the minority, forgets the
existence of the majority. He is the very Horace
Skimpole of electioneering ; his mind is fixed on all
that is bright, lively, and agreeable, and the more
repulsive features of the contest are either quite for-
gotten or sedulously concealed ; so well does defeat
become him, that one is almost consoled for his not
obtaining the victory. In the ovation ar Sir James
Graham at Carlisle we trace none of that even and
tranquil temperament equal to either fortune
which in Sir George Grey's case lends a grace to
disaster, and gilds even the harsh features of dis-
appointment. Sir James is a man of another mood.
He has none of the stoicism of his brother Ba-
ronet in Northumberland. Considering who he is
and what he has done, the exub'erant and boisterous
delight with which Sir James hails his election
for the second-rate borough of Carlisle is absolutely
preposterous and unreasonable. For a young gen,
tleman just entering public life, who views in his re-
turn to Parliament the realization of his early dreams
and the means of making that burning eloquence so
often admired by his mother and sisters the theme of
admiration to the British public, such ecstasies might
be well enough ; but for a veteran'of thirty Parlia-
mentary campaigns, the colleague of Lord Grey and
Sir Robert Peel, and long in Opposition, the friend
and intimate confidant of Lord Derby, such exults-
tation appears strange and unaccountable. What
would this man have done in defeat, who is thus trans-
ported by victory ? But Sir James did better things
than exult in his small success, and, if he did not
shine as a stoic, we must admit that he made ample
amends by his admirable qualifications as a cynic.
With considerable tact, and without exposing himself
to the charge of prejudging the case against Mejer
Beresford, Sir James contrived in the pleasantest
way in the world to convey to his audience, and
through them to the country, the fact that Major
Beresford's correspondent, Mr. Frail, is a notorious
agent of electioneering corruption, and not only frail
in himself, but the cause of frailty in others. This,
taken in connexion with the authenticity of the letter
found upon him, which the Major does not attempt
to deny, makes, as Sir James undoubtedly intended
it should, a very pretty case against the Secretary at
War, and goes a long way to anticipate the decision
of the House of Commons. That very fluctuating
quantity, Sir James Graham's dread of democracy,
—which was small at the time of the Reform Bill,
gradually increased up to 1841, remained stationary
till 1846, and then rapidly diminished till the pre-
sent year,—has been greatly reduced by the result of
the election for Carlisle. The ballot he does not look
upon with disfavour. But Lord Derby's plan of a
militia franchise, and of consulting the people as to
the policy to be adopted, he indignantly repudiates.
With biting irony he exposes the Babel of contra-
dictory professions which have been put forth by a
Ministry, no two of whom speak the same language.
The fun reached its climax when be assured his au-
dience that the only thing he could see looming in
the future was the quart bottle into which a conjuror
was to jump. Having made this undeniable and un-
mistakeable hit, Sir James, according to the advice
ando
f Lordsat
down Chesterfield,
amid
tae mp ted
whirlwindfortuneof cheers and
laughter. Whatever be Sir James's other merits,
it cannot be denied that he has contributed more good
jokes than any other man, Mr. Bernal Osborne not
excepted, to thefacetio of the present election. The
" screw" and the " artful dodger" Disraeli, and the
quart bottle, are productions of no ordinary merit, and
show a happy versatility of mind in one of the most
ponderous and argumentative debaters in the House.
Still—shall we confess it?—there is something pain-
ful in these brilliant exhibitions which all the charms
of whit, humour, and. eloquence, cannot make us wholly
forget. In whatever direction Sir James Graham
strikes he cannot avoid hitting a quondam friend. It
has been the infelicity of his lite to act with and repu-
diate every party in turn. When we hear all these good
things said of others, we cannot but remember what
excellent sallies might be made on the career, past and
present, of the author of so much merriment. The
advocate of reform in Parliament, the opposer of it in
municipal boroughs,: the opposer of an eight-shilling
corn duty, and the supporter of the sliding scale, now
the opponent of any duty whatever—these are spec-
tacles of human inconsistency which exhibit that
conflict in the conduct of a single man which strikes
him as so singular in a whole party.
To no man, except to Lord Derby himself, in this
present day has it been granted to undergo so many
transformations as Sir James Graham. This, how-
ever, is to be said in favour of the Baronet over the
Earl. Both began life with liberal aspirations, both
deserted the cause of progress and reform, but Sir
James Graham has returned to his original predilec-
tions, while Lord Derby has removed himself as far
as possible from the brightest associations of his early
years, and seems anxious to forget that he was one of
the principal instruments in carrying out the great
social and political revolution of 1832. Yet, while
g
even we, whose sentiments Sir James Graham is ex-
pressing, and whose opinions be is so admirably ad-
vocating, cannot repress a feeling of diffidence and a
doubt of the stability of a man whose career has been
chequered with so many changes, Lord Derby is
visited by no such compunction, but, after Navin been
false to Reform and to Protection, to Whigs and to
Conservatives, to the party he left and the party he
adopted, hides his policy in impenetrable obscurity,
swords to
and requires to be trusted and supported merely
on the strength of
.his chivalrous character and
undeviating consistency. Chivalry, according to this
definition, consists in adopting all opinions in turn,
and adhering to none of them, and is the attribute
his zeal in
ever
ryer of the Condottieri, who sell their
knows
never no
wavers. change,
cause, than of the true knight or devout Cru-
sader,al
eand whose
The abolisher
gia
ne whosetn h
is faithcause
of the Irish Establishment.
support The advocate
of ten Irish bishoprics now relies on
of the Reform Bill bids us rally round him as the
consistent opponent of Democracy. The
emancipator
of the West Indies claims credit for his devotion to
the colonial interest—the champion of Protection, for
his intention to do justice to all classes alike—the
author of the present system of Irish education,
for
his efforts to place the schoolmaster under the
authority of the clergyman—the
mover of the address
condemnatory of Orange Lodges Beaks to enlist the
furious zeal of Orangemen in his cause.
consistency, Surely, this
is not chivalry, is not ca" scarcely be
honesty. The change may possibly be conscientious
but it has been too violent to give the changeling
, acy-
right to claim that we should take his measures
trust from the steadiness of his character or th 3
uniformity of his principles.
ADVERTISER.—The speech of Sir James 8 Gra-
ham, at Carlisle, on Monday, is one of the raciest
and happiest which the Right Hon. Baronet ever de-
livered from the hustings, or in the House of n
eiona,
mons, or on any festive occasion. It was, too
remarkable for the variety of topics on which • '
touched. From the absolute horror which Loil
Derby entertains, according to the Noble Lord's
()
account, of the progress of democracy, down to
the
bribing capabilities of Mr. Frail, the Shrew h,„.
barber, whom Major Beresford's notable Shrew,
barber,
touching the necessity of finding a"good and saf'
man," has brought into such general notor'
there was hardly a mooted point to which Sir lety--
did not refer. With regard to Mr. Frail, the Shrews.j
bury shaver, the Right Honourable Baronet i,
nicated some new information, which the Secretaryee--"'
at War would doubtless have r f
p e errd b •
kept from the public. But as the wh eing
the Derby affair is to be brought before° of
House of Commons, as soon as the nee,the
ment assembles, we are content for thePr e
scot to
arli
let matters remain as they are, with, however this
single observation—that Major Beresford, with
all hi
bombast and bluster, has not yet been bold erica bs
to deny that the letter to which we have
r
8° often -g-
-ferred, was in his handwriting. To assert, in genere°ill
terms, as the Major has done, that he has
not been
a
party to any case of bribery in connexion with the
late election at Derby, is nothing. Major Beres
ford's affirmations, even were they accompanied h
w.t_
a profusion of those oaths and cursings with which
he is in the habit of so freely interspersing his
private
conversation, would not, with those who kno the
Secretary-at-War, go for much. But in this iae
stance they will not go for anything at all. W
re-
assert, speaking from the personal assurances of those
who knew the handwriting of the Hon. and Gallant
Gentleman, and who have seen the epistle in question,
that it is in his handwriting. What construction he
will put on the letter, is another matter. Possibly he
may adopt, when compelled to admit that the hand-
writing is his, the very ingenious theory of the
Standard, and aver that he never dreamt, When
penning the note in question, of countenancing a re-
sort to bribery, but was simply anxious to retain
the services of a competent poll-clerk. Whether the
Gallant Officer will or will not be able to convince a
Committee of the House of Commons of this, is not
for us to say. That remains to be seen. e must
exercise the virtue of patience until we see what
transpires in connexion with the ugly-looking
affair on the meeting of Parliament. Sir James
Graham points out, with more than his wonted
force and felicity, the strange medley of opinions
on every conceivable subject, which exists in the
Derby Cabinet. There is not a principle, from the
purest absolutism down to the most levelling demo-
,