The Sun.
London, England, 1837-09-23 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

We stated, and stated truly, on Wednesday last that
the Catholics, being now within the pale of the law,
had no longer a motive for rebelling against the law.
" We are mighty glad to hear it," exclaims the Times.
" Whence the insolent requisition to have unheard-of
changes wrought in the law as it exists?" Nothing
more easy than to satisfy the Times. In fact it might
have found the answer to its question in the article on
which it comments. " The law of 1829," we ob-
served, " for the first time gave all Irishmen an interest
in the support of order. That law will enable the Irish
to work out their final admission to an equality with
Englishmen and Scotchmcn in all the remaining advan-
tages in the way of privilege which the latter still pos-
sess." Who ever supposed that satisfaction with the
law, in its general sense, meant a determination to be
satisfied with every particular law ? Why do people
wlsh to possess a constitutional Legislature, but to be
enabled to repeal those laws which are found to be in-
jurious or no longer efficient, and to obtain others,
when the interests of the country or the altered cir-
cumstances of the times demand them ? The Tinzes
m .rely indulges in a quibble when it infers that a satis-
fa-lion with law in general implies a determination to
abide by every particular law. When the privilege of
effecting alterations in the law by constitutional means
is withheld from a people, they have no alternative but
submission or revolution, which, when unsuccessful, is
termed rebellion. The Irish Catholics were tied hand
and foot by the penal laws, and the Constitution ex-
isted not for them. They are now within the pale of
the Constitution, and have shown at the late elec-
tions the importance they attach to the privilege it has
conferred on them. The people of England and Scotland,
'when dissatisfied with the abuses in the representation,
were not dissatisfied with the law, for they conceived
the possibility of effecting a reform in the repreEenta-
tion by legal and constitutional means. When the
people become thoroughly convinced that further re-
forms are necessary to enable them to realize the be-
nefits they expected from the Reform Bill, we do not
doubt that they will also obtain those reforms, with-
out revolution, by legal and constitutional means.
The Irish will not be driven by the Tories into any
proceedings of an unconstitutional description. They
repose confidence in the law and its impartial admi-
nistration. They know that an honest and impartial
execution of the law must ere long annihilate faction.
Governing by means of an ascendancy is no longer
practicable in Ireland ; and the Tories, by leaguing
themselves with furious Orangemen, who live in the
past, and dream of the recovery of a power which is
gone for ever, only thereby proclaim themselves ut-
ter:), unfit to assume the government of these king-
doms.—Morning Chronicle.

Many reforms may still be wanting in this country,
fur aught we know, who profess ourselves to be sound
and true Reformers ; but, whatever difference of sen-
timent may arise upon other questions, sure we are
Cum mankind will agree as to the first and most radical
of all reforms being a reform of the English la:mnage.
Yz's, every Englishman who has eyes to be mane sore
by strange readings, or ears to be confused by decep-
tive noises, or judgment to be mystified by treacherous
propesitions, framed in crude and simple forms, but
resulting in nought, save disappointment to the un-
wary, from the sinister consequences to which they de-
signe lead, will and must agree with us that the
vocabulary stands in greater need of some immt.diate,
and at the same time final amendment, than any
other branch of our national cs:ablishments or institu-
tions. Indeed, wherever abuse exists in reality, the
most tormenting of all abuses is the abuse of words.
It is impossible to comprehend creeds of any kind, rr
to deterinine any man's merits—to guess what men
arc, or what their actions are likely to be, without having
previously brought their tongues or yens to the test of
some accurate and inevitable standard. We will ask,
ai one illustration of the difficulties and grievances
above referred to, what means the phrase " Union
among Reformers ?" And this requires a preliminary
settlement of the question, 'Who is " a Reformer ?"
In its original and abstract sense it would convey no-
thing to the mind but " one ‘‘ho reconstructs." Now
a reconstructed thing, it is manifest, may be much
better, or a great deal worse, than the thing which it
has superseded. But novelty so often arrogates to
itself a superiority over that which is old, and the party
bent on " reconstruction" finds so ready an excuse in
the confidence of improving upon that which he demo-
lishes, that the credit demanded by lovers of change
has, through the good-natured indulgence of society, been
awarded to them : a conventional signification of the
word " reform" has taken place of its etymological
and more correct one, and a political Reformer is now
loosely and absurdly allowed to be an ameliorator of
public institutions. Upon this point we must make
the obvious remark, that the advocates of universal suf-
frage, and of the ballot, and of the " voluntary prin-
ciple," in lieu of an established worship, and of Popish
sovereignty over Ireland, to the subversion of Protes-
tantism, and of an elective House of Lords, to the
abolition of one which is hereditary, have each and all
of them profited largely by the conventional use of the
word " Reformer," when they set themselves up
pharisaically above the shoulders of those who on such
questions are opposed to change. Sir Robert Peel has
furnished a key to the application of the term far more
accurate and useful, and worthy of adoption, than the
vulgar one, when he challenges the innovators to
" prove their grievance," and he will vie with them in
the work of " Refbrin." But again ; if " Reformers"
he lovers of change, and if, by a still more licentious
abuse of language, those who would run all lengths
in democratic change, assert their right to the most
elevated rank among " Reformers," what, let us ask,
is the proper signification of a phrase to which our
ears have of late been disciplined—viz., " union
among Reformers ?" If here, once more, we ascend
to first principles, we arrive at a meaning from
which it is to be apprehended that those who have
had the most eager recourse to the injunction,
and have betrayed the deepest interest in the suc-
cess of it, will be the foremost to recoil. Accord-
ing to the current phraseolegy of the time, the most
"''Liberal" or Radical Reformers are the most perfect
in their calling ; that is to say, the best Reformers are
those who would leave the fewest of our laws and insti-
tuitions unchanged. Such, we appeal to the reading,
talking, and recollecting world—such is the understood
hierarchy of Reformers in their mutual relations. It
follows, then, that if the cause of " Reform" (as un-
derstood conventionally) he that to which Reformers
ought in chief and above all others to devote them-
selves, " union among Reformers"—that is, united
action—must be in furtherance of the measures proposed
by those Reformers who meditate the most extensive
change. Stich union among men of different opinions
being attainable no otherwise than by a sacrifice of
impulse on one side, or of scruple on the other ; and it
being assumed that the man of impulse is the best
Reformer, and he who would act most beneficially
on behalf of Reform, or in other words " carry it out"
most vigorously, it follows beyond a question that the
m:n of scruple (or so called moderation) is he who
ought, from a sense of the general reform interest, to
give way, or the cause itself, upon the principles and
showing of its advocates, is betrayed, and some nar-
rower, that is more selfish object, preferred to the
" cause of Reform." Let us see, however, in what
sense and with what motive this high-sounding Shib-
boleth of " union among Reformers" has been pro-
claimed and hallowed by its authors. Those authors
ale not the most extensive or thoroughgoing of the
Reform tribe. They are not the Ballotmongers,
Peer destroyers, &c., but the contrary ; the au-
thors of the " Union" counsel are those from whom,
iu lZeform dialect, the great cause has the smallest
possible portion of benefit to look for. They are
not the spurs of Reform, but the drags upon it.
They are the men in office, the Ministers, whose
recognised business is (being Ministers, enjoying pa.
tronage, and receiving salaries every quarter), to
admit no one particle of alteration into the existing
state of things, neither in principle nor in practice, by
w:.ich power can be shared or salary jeopardised, or a
status quo so favourable to themselves in the slightest
deTree affected. Nothing-, therefore, can be more na-
tural (we grant, to save trouble, the impudence of it,
but) nothing can be more natural than that advice pro-
ceeding from such a source should have regard to the
peculiar exigencies of its authors, rather than to those
of the common cause of Reform. Accordingly, their

cry is this—Reform is very good in itself, but, then,
what becomes of the " Reform Ministry ?" "If the
feelings of the high and vigorous Reformers be con-
sulted, and their views adopted by the whole majority
of the House of Commons, it may doubtless much
advance and promote the cause of Radicalism (that
is, of perfect Reform) throughout the country. But
then what become of us, for in the mean time we
must trundle out of office ? Therefore, above all
things, whatever becomes of Reform principles, for
God's sake take care of us." Now, this is the
construction put upon " union among Reformers," by
those who have themselves circulated the watchword.
Hence it follows upon the face of the thing, that the
effect contemplated from an " union of Reformers" is
not that the worst Reformers should be postponed to
the best, but that the best should be sacrificed to the
most reluctant—that " union" means the defeat of
those who have no selfish object to promote, and the
triumph of those who have none but selfish objects—
in the same manner as Mr. Daniel O'Connell's theory
of a union between Great Britain and Ireland is, that
it should be made subservient to the sordid purposes
of him who has declared himself its enemy, and thus,
that the master-piece of all reform policy, at the com-
mencement of Queen Victoria's reign, is effectually
to stop the whole course and progress of reform, for
the avowed purpose, and the exclusive one, of stop-
ping likewise every change which might affect this
dozen persons composing the Cabinet, or the single
person who so wields the patronage of Ireland, as to
facilitate her separation from Great Britain. Mr. Shar-
man Crawford's fifth letter to Mr. Daniel O'Connell,
which was published in the Times of yesterday, admi-
nistered such a dissection to the base hypocricy and
hungry and ignominious profligacy of that universal
swindler, as must eventually contribute a powerful aid
to the self-destroying efforts of O'Connell himself
against the hollow fabric of his own power, based as
it ever has been on a confidence in the overweening,
though not altogether irretrievable, credulity of his
countrymen.— Times.
The proper work of the Whig-Radicals is destruc-
tion. They can pull down, but they cannot build up ;
they can destroy, but they cannot construct ; they are
in the political world what the Vandals of old were in
the world of art and science—blind, fierce, and insati-
able destroyers. Not only do they raven for the op-
portunity to root up from its foundations our ancient
Constitution, admired as it has been by the greatest
and wisest of men of all nations as the noblest work of
civil polity that human wisdom ever constructed—not
only do the raven, we say, for the opportunity to pull
down and utterly subvert this unrivalled work, which a
generous patriotism raised and dedicated to enlightened
liberty, but they actually demand the abolition of that
specimen of Whig statesmanship which they used to
call the second Magna Charta of England—we mean
the Reform Act. The Whig-Radicals would rather
destroy the work of their own hands than not be en-
gaged in destruction of some sort. We recollect
when we gave great offence to the Whig-Radicals
by saying that we thought the Bill of Rights, or
perhaps even the Habeas Corpus Act, was more de-
serving of being called the second great Charter of
England tle:m the Reform Act. But that was at the
time of the senseless outcry of those very Whiff-Radi-
cals " the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the
Bill." We also incurred the displeasure of the ad-
rr irers of the " absolute perfection" of that Act, by
describing its machinery as complicated, eitunsy, and
ill-contrived, which we did repeatedly, while supportiw4
the pri;icipie of the Bill as far as it went to restore to
the country a real representation, the conduct of the
boronlimongers, both Tory and 'Whig, in the mea-
sure of uequalified Roman Catholic Emancipation,
having, beyond everything else, proved the necessity of
Parnamentary Reform, in order that the sentiments of
the people should have due consideration in the people's
House, and that their petitions should not be treated
with semi and ridicule, as the Protestant petitions were
treated by the nominees of the borouglimongers on that
occasion. If the Whig-radicals only wanted an amendment
of the complicated, absurd, and most inefficient registra-
tion-machinery of the Act, so as to prevent electors being
' harassed, as they now are, by persons objecting to any
number of voters, or to whole lists, on the speculation
that some cannot or will not lie present to support their
franchise—if it was also their desire to obviate the fa-
cilities which exist under the Act for fictitious persona-
tion of voters dead or abroad—if they were anxious
that a provision should be introduced to give represen-
tation to the great mass of property which still. remains
unrepresented—if they wished to substitute some more
rational and efficient mode of ascertaining and recording
the claims of bona fide electors than the present regis-
tration courts, with their conflicting decisions, and the
contention and turmoil of their annual excitement—in
these, and some other points of detail, we could go along
with them, notwithstanding they were indignant when
we ridiculed the silly cry of " the Bill, the whole Bill,
and nothing but the Bill." But when we consider the
immense price at which the country has purchased the
Reform Act—when we consider that it cost nearly a re-
volution to carry, and that we have scarcely yet recovered
from the effects of the disturbance which it caused to
the industry and regular pursuits of the people of this
manufacturing and commercial country, we cannot, to
please the Whig Radicals, or any other party, consent
to throw away all that was purchased at that great
cost by assisting them to repeal the Reform Act, ac-
cording to the prediction of Sir Robert Peel, or to pass
such measures affecting the representative system as
would be tantamount to the repeal. We would even
go the length of co-operating with them to cut away
those ten or a dozen snug nomination boroughs which
the " Reform Ministers preserved for themselves or
connections out of the general wreck of the proprietary
system ; but, beyond this, we advise them to make up
their minds to be content with their second Magna
Charta for a long time to come. The industrious
people of this country cannot afford a revolutionary
movement every seven years to test the practical value
of Whig-Radical experiments upon the best Constitu-
tion in the world.—Morning Herald.
A spirit of determined opposition to the payment of
Church-rates is rapidly spreading through the width
and breadth of the land. The Patriot of Thursday
specifies no fewer than four instances, all of which have
occurred within the last few days, in which at public
meetings called for the purpose of raising a church-
rate, such rate has been refused by large majorities.
It must have been long clear to every person who
looks below the surface of things, that to this com-
plexion matters must have come at last. A passive
assent to the principle that a man is bound to pay for
the support of an ecclesiastical system to which he en-
tertains very strong objections, is incompatible with the
progress of intelligence in the present day. Such a
principle lays the axe at the root of all equitable go-
vernment. It is an outrage on men's conscience, to
which no government ought, under any circumstances,
to be a party. In the case of religion, a legislative en-
actment to compel men to abet a system against
which his judgment rebels, is a crowning act of ini-
quity. The time has at length arrived when this great
truth will be generally perceived and acted on. The
Dissenters, who are, by inheritance, as well as by
adoption, identified in a manner peculiar to them-
selves, with the principles of civil and religious. liberty,
have been the first to make a decided and noble stand
against the outrage on men's consciences, which has
been for ages committed by the Church of Enaland-
And as they were the first to beard the monster of a
religious establishment in his den, we trust they will
continue to grapple with him until he is fairly strangled.
The Dissenters have the means of a speedy and
decisive triumph in their own hands. If true to them-
selves and their principles, they will, at no distant
period, prove more than a match for that hierarchy
which has for generations added insult to oppression,
while rolling in the wealth which it had exacted from
their pockets. Let the Dissenters be but united as
one man, and persevere in the righteous course they
have so well begun, and they will not only achieve
their own exemption from the compulsory payment of
Church-rates, but they will eventually succeed in
rescuing Christianity from the unholy grasp of the
State. Need we say that such a triumph were worthy
of all the efforts which the Dissenters can make, and
of all the sacrifices which may be required from them
in the struggle. To dissever the unhallowed asso-
ciation which for fifteen hundred years has existed
between the Church and State, would be to restore
the religion of the New Testament to its pristine