The Sun.
London, England, 1839-07-25 00:00:00

t hes s t
—fen s nave often sighed for cross benches in the one I
House, as there are in the other, t have acted from prin-
ciple alone in this as in preceding Parliaments. No one
will venter° to assert that every Tory is a Conservative,
any more than that every Whig is a Radical. Nicknamce
are misapplied. In both parties men ere eenstantly voting
together who in reelit:7 ereerely differ upon the most essen-
tial point.. there is often more difference between two
bnieet
eoefa t eh
sseam
we
hpoa
belongrty in
ttheo adverse House oof a
es s Commons,ir R
Robert
Peel and the Editor of the Standard nominally profess
the same political faith ; Lord Melbourne and Mr. Hume
belong to the same party ; and yet these men are more at
variance upon groat questions one with the ether, than
are many of those who sit upon opposite sides of the
House. Indeed, it may be predicated of us that we
are all in a false position. Parties need to be re-mo-
delled, for when was our position more anomalous or dis-
tressing ? On the ene hand we have the Minister of the
day governing without the confidence of many who
support him ; while some who sit behind Sir Robert
Peel, entertain feelings and opinions at variance with
those of that distinguished statesman. My notion is, that
parties were never intended to be marshalled after the
passing of the Reform Bill as they were before; but
whatever gradations of reform we pass througb, human
nature remains the same, and the description Bolingbroke
gives of a popular assembly in his times, is just as appli-
cable now, as it was then. " You know," he says, " the
nature of that assembly, they grow like hounds fond of
the man who shows them game, and by whose halloo they
are used to be encouraged." .
What is called political consistency has in fact no exist-
ence ; for what party—nay, I might almost say, what
public man in this country, has not changed his opinion
upon politics more than once within the last 20 years ?
Away then with the conventional nonsense of a man being
a traitor to his party—at whom the finger of scorn MI ay be
pointed when ho gives an independent vete, and dares to
think boldly for himself,
Afterwards, speaking of the conduct of his own
friends, he says :—.
I must frankly own to you that I think an- -unhappy
selection has been made of the subjects upon which party
divisions have been taken in this and the preceding Ses-
sions. lam ready, when either side of the House pro-
poses a gentleman for the situation of Speaker, to rote as
those with whom I have been politically connected may
dictate. I see no mischief that can accrue to the State
from the Chair being filled by Mr. Goulburn or Mr.
Shaw Lefevrr. Elect which you please, you can do no
wrong. It was a fair and legitimate struggle between two
honourable and well conditioned men. But I cannot un-
derstand how any independent Member of Parliament can
reconcile to his conscience the principle of damaging an
Administration which he is not prepared to turn out,—to
shake all confidence in its appointments and its measures,
in distant countries too, where there is necessarily much
of exaggeration, and where the springs of action that in-
fluence us in the House of Commons are less understood.
The leading principle of my politics has always been this :
If you are not able to turn a Government out, do not em-
barrass it. I have invariably asked myself this question, in
voting upon our foreign or colonial policy—Will it or will it
not increase the difficulties in the way of the settlement of
this or that measure? Some have, I think, set an example,
in their treatment of colonial matters, which they may live
to repent of. Masses of men do not understand nice dis-
tinctions. There ought, on such subjects, to be broad and
intelligible grounds of opposition, not magnified for party
purposes. It should not be that you object to this or that
appointment, dislike personally this or that Governor ; nor
is the question whether, if the last years of your colonial
legislation could be recalled, a better system might not be
introduced. You are in the midst of things, and while
I doubt whether, if there were any change of adminis-
tration, any material change of policy would ensue, either
with respect to Canada or Jamaica—l do not doubt, if
it did, that it would be the worst thing that could happen
to us or our colonies. I would rather forego the adoption
of what may possibly have been amendments, than hazard
unanimity. I cannot give a half confidence—l cannot
share with a Government the responsibility, without being
in its secrets.
I did not vote for Lord Stanley's motion, to rescind the
Order of the Committee of Privy Council on the subject
of Education, objecting to it upon the ground that, if car-
ried, it would have brought into collision the Queen and
the Parliament. At the same time lam not prepared to
state that the plan proposed by Government was one I
entirely approved of. We are at present only upon the
threshold of the question. The subject is comparatively
new to us. Before the present Session, when it has been
debated in Parliament, it has attracted but little attention.
Nothing is so little understood as the science of educa-
tion,—its details are undeveloped,—we want more of
statistical information, to ascertain what the Church is
willing and able to do, and what system will be generally
acceptable to the great body who dissent from it. It
takes a long time in this country, with such a slow, dis-
passionate, thinking, phlegmatic people as ourselves, to
bring any important question to maturity.
I entirely disapprove of the tone and temper in which
the measure was opposed. I think it was " neither con-
trary to revealed religion," nor " to the principles of the
Constitution ;" but delay seemed to me desirable, as afford-
ing more time for inquiry, and no good can ever result
from forcing on a measure of this nature, against the feel-
ings and opinions of the public. I believe that the diffu-
sion of sound and useful knowledge is our best and only
chance. Dispute not about catechisms and creeds when
the Chartists are at your doors. Give cheap, rational, and
universal education to the people. Who ever thought on
his death-bed, which of the 39 articles he had believed
or disbelieved in? The musings and aspirations of the
dying soul (whether it belong to Luther or to Rome),
are of a far more awful and sublime nature. It is dead
to the wisdom of the schools—the science of controversy
—the divinity of man ;—it dreams only of " temperance,
righteousness, and the judgment to come."
We greatly approve both of the course adopted
by Mr. B. WALL, and the spirited manner in
which he defends his conduct. The country would
soon cease to be the prey of a host of charlatan in-
triguers, speculative schemers, and routine red-ta-
piats, hunting after place and power, if other gen-
tlemen, like Mr. WALL and Mr. GIBSON, would
think it a duty to keep a Conscience, and not be the
blind instruments of a knot of ambitious politicians.
We may probably return to the pamphlet—we
shall now leave it, adding one quotation, which is,
we believe, a tolerably correct description of Lord
MELBOURNE and his policy, and saying that it has
raised Mr. B. WALL very much in our estimation :
The situation of the Tory party was materially changed
upon the demise of the Crown. Formerly it felt that it
came, by its opposition to the Government of the day, to
the rescue of the King,—that he kept terms with his Mi-
nisters merely in deference to his Parliament and his
people, and was to a certain extent, in a state of bondage,
not &ring to "do what he liked with his own" preroga-
tive. But the case is now altered,—the Queen at least has
her own way—her Ministers are her own choice,—and
all the Tory party have to do is to watch their proceedings,
and see that they work no harm. This at least is Tory
doctrine, if it be not mine. Nor was the position of the
Court with regard to its Ministers during the late reign,
without a material effect upon the state of parties.
It kept the discordant materials, of which the Govern-
ment party was composed, together. Many persons
(it is human nature) were pleased with the idea of an
Administration being carried on which was repugnant
to the feelings of the King. The difficulties it had
to contend with were overrated—more of indulgence was
granted to its errors than would have been the case under
other circumstances. There was a feeling abroad, that
to a certain extent its measures were thwarted, and its
proceedings crippled by Court influence; and this, I
believe, more than any other circumstance, kept the
great movement party in this country in good humour
with it. Under such circumstances, the Ministerial
adherents were contented to exist rather than to govern.
But when the scene changed, and a Whig Princess suc-
ceeded to a Tory Monarch, the hopes of the Whig party
were naturally excited, and the surprise was indeed great,
to find that the Minister rather than the Sovereign was the
obstacle to further reform. Much of the discontent and
dissatisfaction that has arisen among the Mountaineers
may, I believe, be traced to the circumstances I have thus
cursorily alluded to.

The 'Minister of Queen Victoria had other duties to
perform than the Minister of William the Fourth. His
responsibility was increased ten-fold, and my firm convic-
tion is that Lord Melbourne deeply felt it. He had diffi-
culties to contend with in the fears and prejudices of the
late Monarch, which he could never feel under the con-
fiding disposition of the present Sovereign. The Court for
the first time, was entirely and heartily with tho Mi-
nister—no favourite was excluded—no compromise was
to be effected—no private feelings were to be merged
in considerations of State policy—it was entire and unre-
served confidence on the one side and the other. From
the moment however that Lord Melbourne knew he
could do eversthing, he would do nothing. In my under-
standing of the case, his conduct was marked by patriot-
ism and honour. It illustrated, also, in some degree
his natural disposition and turn of mind, which was al.
ways for progressing when the obstacles were many, and
for reflection, when the facilities were great, for the ac-
complishment of any object he had in view. His old and
fevotrfite maxim of 1817, often repeated by him on other
eeaasions, is singularly descriptive of his whole character
and career. Mihi semper in aninso fuit ut in rostris cu-
riam, in senate populum defenderem."
In the whole of his public life, Lord Melbourne has
never ministered to the passions or prejudices of mankind,
and I have great confidence that the man who has always
told the people the truth, will tell it to the Sovereign like-
wise.

Every account from
r.ss
Biramiiironin„ilr.
Thatsince town
the day
of
.the. riot has been e
completely under the power of
Its
f theikplraegsiesn trtasteeesuarnitdy
is gradually returning to order..
is as much provided for as
rapolicie andne
outrage,military
force can..provide for it.
which appearslo.have been participated inboy,ectie
com-
paratively parativelY few persons, and was probably
altogether
the work of thieves, vagabonds, and
idle
boys, the
conclusion is
too hastily adopted that the public
securfietyrcme,ust be provided for by an additional mili-
tary,by
estl4)ybioisrhgianngiai:gneawp-foalsi
and
throughout the land. 'Tilt neiciomnfeoeraisluc3oirre:lnssitiigbiluilTalarnil
be the produce of one temPotary ebullition. On
that single fact they are founded. Thus a
transitory outbreak, which has already passed
away, Is to serve as the basis of a series of
permanent measures. That is much ton insigni-
ficant a foundation for such a large structure.
The terrors indeed of the House of Commons en-
large it to embrace the whole country, and give
them
,lightning speed in erecting their coercive