The Sun.
London, England, 1839-11-19 00:00:00

rank, though without the manners, of gentlemen; was
supported and applauded by many beneficed clergymen of
the Established Church ; was listened to with approbation
by officers of the Queen's army, of various grades ;
cheered to the echo by baronets, and knights, and country
squires in a mass, or rather in a mob.
4. This exhibition is the act of a great party It is not
an isolated fact. It is a fact of a family. The creed and
conduct of the Tory party is thus announced. Here they
are "in flagrante delicto." That which the press of that
odious faction has been for some time past c)vortly insi-
❑uating is now publicly disclosed. Tory treason stands
forth in all its atrocious deformity.
After some more paragraphs, containing the modest
proposal before adverted to, the Precursor continues :
But one thing is absolutely necessary—there must be an
immediate investigation into the conduct of the military at
the two seditious and traitorous meetings. Lord Hill can-
not refrain from investigating the facts ; and if it shall be
proved or admitted that there were officers present at the
treasonable language of the ruffian Bradshaw, at Canter-
bury, then Lord Hill will be guilty of dishonourable
faithlessness to the Queen unless these officers be instantly
cashiered.
So at Ashton—if it be true that Colonel Thomas was
present at the rabid malignity towards the Queen of the
miscreant Roby—especially if it be true that he (Thomas)
was so stupidly wicked as to say that the British army is a
partisan army—that they are partisans against the Queen's
Government, and in support of the statesmen who would
so enslave the Queen as to deprive her of the power of
selecting the ladies of her bedchamber—if Colonel Thomas
was wicked enough to say any thing like what is attributed
to him by the public papers—why, in that case, Lord Hill
would himself be a traitor to the Crown and the country
unless he instantly dismissed Colonel Thomas from a
service of which, in the case supposed, he would be a dis-
grace, and of which in no case is he an ornament.
Exquisitely characteristic conclusion ! Now to the
application. Why all this barking under the windows
of Lord Hill ? Why do Mr. O'Connell, and the few
who somewhat resemble him, pursue the Commander-
in-Chief with these miserable urgencies ? Mr. O'Con-
nell, at least, is a lawyer. Let him answer. Have the
" ruffian Bradshaw" and the " miscreant Roby" com-
mitted treason or not ? Have they, and the gentlemen
who dined with them, held seditious meetings ? The
facts are notorious ; never was proof more easly at-
tainable. As to the words spoken, it is needless to dis-
pute with Mr. O'Connell about the etiquette of the
stews ; but that which was really said may be proved by
a crowd of witnesses. The parties implicated are known
and not beneath notice. If crimes have been committed,
never were crimes more fit for public animadversion.
Why, then, do not her Majesty's servants of the
Home Department at once grapple with these trea-
sons, by enforcing the law against the principals ?
Why does not Mr. O'Connell, from one end to the
other of his epistolary tract, suggest one syllable in fa-
vour of such a course ? If Ministers think of these
matters as Mr. O'Connell writes—nay, if he himself so
thinks of them—they, and not Lord Hill, are guilty
of " dishonourable faithlessness to the Queen" while
such measures are omitted ; they, not the Commander-
in-Chief, are the " traitors to the Crown and the
country." Must an army be sent from Ireland
to suppress treasons and seditions where not even
an individual has been bound over to the Quar-
ter Sessions ? Must Lord Hill exert an odious
summary authority against minor offenders (as-
suming them to be so) when the Queen's
pretended champions dare not face the principal cul-
prits before a Jury ? Lord Hill is a man of sense as
well as honour, and when he sees all these very loyal
personages so cautious of putting their hands to the fire,
he may perhaps question the propriety of allowing his
own high office to be made what would vulgarly be called
their cat's-paw. It is unnecessary to add that Mr.
O'Connell and the rest know perfectly well that there is
no treason or sedition in the case—that there is scarcely
a man in England (perhaps not even the wretched
Chartists themselves) who meditates any wrong to her
Majesty's sacred person, to the purity of her character,
or to the stability of her throne. Individuals may
use intemperate phrases ; but Mr. O'Connell is not
squeamish about that. The true complaint is, that men
have impeached the purity of some Noblemen who are
too much at her Majesty's side, and this is " called lan-
guage almost unfit for the stews ;"they have proclaimed
the inextinguishable hostility of the English nation to
Popery, and this called " assailing the Throne." Let
Mr. O'Connell be assured that, without transporting
any army from Ireland, there is loyalty enough, and
manhood enough, in England to protect the Queen
►gainst all her enemies, even if that body should include
himself and his " 500,000 fighting men."

FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
(From the Globe.)
It is possible for the Tories to rrrest the progress of
sound measures through Parliament—but it is clear that
they cannot arrest the progress of public opinion in the
country. To us it appears that every week of this recess
is of the highest value to the Ministry. Their own judi-
cious administration of the executive, and the violent
ravings of their adversaries, are making their due impres-
sion on the public mind. At the close of the last Ses-
' sion it was undeniable that the divisions in the "...lberal
ranks threatened serious disasters to the party. On
the one hand, timid persons were getting frightened
at the follies of the Chartists, in which they chose to
implicate the Liberals generally, and the Government ;
and on the other hand, some Liberals were becoming
impatient at what they considered the lukewarm libe-
rality of the Ministers, and the non-adoption of either
their favourite leaders or principles. We think that
both of these sections have been greatly conciliated by
the late measures of the Government. The vigorous
steps which they have taken against the Chartists imme-
diately that vigour was called for, prove to the greatest
alarmists that the public peace is in very good keeping ;
and those who some time ago were shocked at the vio-
lence of the most indiscreet of the Liberals, are now
beginning to discover that the Ultra-Tories, who
are the most active and influential section in that
party, are talking, and, moreover, are prepared to
act, with infinitely greater violence.
(From the Courier.)
From accounts which have reached us we find that no
more than from 500 to 600 men joined the Newport rebels
from Merthyr Tydvil, of whom not more than 100
were armed. That town, the grand focus of Chartism,
and, numerically at least, its head quarters, remains
quiet. After the failure of Frost's attempt, some dis-
orderly meetings took place indeed, but the infatuated
people were emphatically bid by their leaders to
" gome home and be quiet ; our friends at New-
port have jumped over the hedge too soon." The
general language of the leaders, it is fair to say, has,
outwardly at least, been dissuasion from open violence,
and confidence in the moral and imposing force of union.
It would not be well, however, to repose faith in evidence
so equivocal of peaceful intent ; the existence of the Char-
tist union itself is the great evil to be struck at and eradi-
cated. At the time of the assault on Newport, and whilst
the people of Cardiff, a few miles distant only, were an-
ticipating and preparing for a similar visitation of the
rebels, a creditable instance of good feeling and prompt,
resolution occurred, which, to the credit of our Ameri-
can brethren, ought to be, although it has not yet been,
recorded. Captain Foulger, with twelve of the crew
of the United States' merchant ship Warsaw, lying in
the port, volunteered their services, and actually took
charge of some light pieces of artillery from the castle
to work them against the insurgents. Of course their
services were fortunately not wanted, but the good will
, was the same.

(From the Standard.)
It has been stated to us, upon authority which we
consider entitled to respect, that Lord Melbourne has,
within the last few days, communicated to a dis-
tinguished Conservative nobleman his determination
to retire from office before the meeting of Parlia-
ment. We have no means of ascertaining whether the
retirement of his Lordship (supposing him to have deter-
mined upon it) is to be single , laavinm the Premiership
vacant for Lord Durham or Lord "Normanby, or to
be accompanied by the resignation of the whole Cabinet.
The solution of this question is, however, in our judg-
ment, of less moment, because, whatever Lord
Melbourne may have said in the supposed
communication, experience of his Lordship's prac-
tice would teach to believe the opposite of it ; and
otherwise there is no reason to expect that Lord
Melbourne or any other of the Ministers will retire
until he is actually turned out. The truth is, they
cannot afford it. There is not one among them, ex-
cept Lord Lansdowne, Sir J. Ilobbouse, and perhaps
the Chancellor, to whom the loss of salary and the
loss of the wages of a wife or sister, quartered upon the
public, would not cause a melancholy difference in his
mode of living--not one, with the exceptions named,
to whom even a quarier's official emolument is not a
vital object. Why, then, should they resign ?