The Sun.
London, England, 1839-06-17 00:00:00

we demand;" We hope,-admit that-
_
we are right in congratulating the country that the
House of Comiii6ns. ha-6' n;'.it, by refusing to
receive the petition or to give Mr. AT rwomr
hearing, (as tio&r the influf•nee of the
of whom tire Sir Somc:iiiilz--not
is one), it would live dote, n-
creased the difference ex.ists between
Legislature and the lowet ciasst:s, and not added
to the general irritation. Wishing to see the.great
changes which inevitably still before t!:e country
effected in pelve and h:Arinot.y, fej:7,ice very much
that the House of Continni3 received the National
Petition, demanding the rights of the r.ople, in an
honourable and distinguished mintur.

The language used by Lord STANLEY and Lord
ASHLEY 011 Friday night is well caictilatcd to make
the moderate men of their own party rt. flcct on the
point whither those Noble Loris would conduct
them. Lord STANLEY said :
" But it was impossible nut to ask House--not to
ask the country—whether tie2re wore not points 'ot doctrine
and of faith on which cooseientic.aslyttifferent sects tr:gtit be I
divided, but which were intimitelv connected with the
Christian system, and involved the Christian conduct, upon
Christian motives, which the great body of the people pos-
sessed, which could not be blinked, which could nut be com-
plimented away, to further the education of those who d;s-
sented from the Church.—( Loud cheering.) It
was impossible to fritter away such doctrines as the
great scheme of redemption—justifica,lon by faith—the
fficacy of infant baptism—the solemn mystery of the
Holy Eucharist—( Hear, hear)—yet frittered away they
would be, by the Government scheme of instructing.
together Churchmen, Baptists, Socinians, Jews, Catho-
lics, and all other religious persuasions, who differed upon
so essential points.—( Hear, hear.) Believing these not to
be abstract, speculative, unimportant, and such as might
properly be given up for Charity's sake. but believing
them to be the very foundation of the Christian system—
(Cheers)—he could not consent to put them in the back-
ground—to set them aside for any fancied scheme' of con-
ciliation."
And Lord ASHLEY said:—
" He knew he should expose himself to the charge of
bigotry, intolerance, and illiberality ; he bad fully counted
the cost of what he was d&ng, and he would not consent to
the alteration of one single expression of his opinion.
He had no objection to the consideration of any
plan which might be proposed for the moral advantage
of the people of this country, but he never would
consent to sever secular from religious instruction; by re-
ligious instruction he meant instruction in those doctrines
which were essential to salvation. He had no objec-
tion to carry secular instruction to any amount, but the
poor had little leisure, and he thought it would be more
fit to devote their time to religious instruction ; but he
,could never consent, come what may, to sever secular
instruction from religious. He would run any hazard—
he would expose himself to any contempt and obloquy—
he would put into jeopardy any single thing in this king-
dom, rather than depart from the truths of the Gospel, or
support any system of religion inculcating the worship of
the Saints, or denying the divinity of the Saviour."
Thus theie two Noble Lords insist on having
religious instruction connected with secular instruc-
tion, and they insist on the most recondite
and abstruse doctrines, such as the Trinity, the
great scheme of redemption, justification by faith,
the efficacy of infant baptism, the solemn mysteries
of the Holy Eucharist, being taught to little boys
and girls. In this country children are obliged to go
very early to labour, and these solemn mysteries
are to be made, according to these Noble Lords,
the basis of infant education, and of education for
children who at twelve years of age have to quit
school and begin to earn their daily bread. This
would be the essence of folly if we all admitted

the whole of these doctrines, and there were no more
dispute about them than about the first principles
of EUCLID. It would be a monstrous system of
folly to insist on teaching NEWTON'S " Principia"
to all the boys and girls of the nation, but what are
the mysteries of NEWTON'S " Principia" compared
to the great mystery of the Redemption or of the
Holy Eucharist ?
There is this, too, in addition, that all men agree
about the " Principia," but the wisest and best disagree
on the other questions so flipplantly made the suh-
ject of profane discussion by these Noble Lords,
and at different periods of their lives take them-
selves different views. We can understand the
propriety of making the simple truths of arithmetic
or of geometry, about which all men agree, the
basis of national education, but we cannot under-
stand the plan of making mysteries, about which
men differ, the inseparable and main principles of
all instruction.
To us these Lords seem ignorant of the
nature of Christianity. We will venture to affirm
that no rational being can suppose that mankind
are to be saved by forming correct opinions of
those doctrines about which the most learned differ.
Whether men comprehend the doctrines or not, the
redemption of the human race has keen effected, or
the SON OF GoD haS suffered in vain. The effi-
cacy of Infant Baptism, the Holy Eucharist, the
Trinity, are all doctrines of men ; and belief in
them, however advantageous, cannot ensure salvation.
It comes, and can only come, by the grace of GoD. All
that is necessary, all that is required of us, all that
is asked is, that we should believe in the SON OF
GoD. By faith men are to be saved. Those who
saw and believed not were of little faith. It is
clear from the whole tenor of Scripture that faith, to
be of any value, must be spontaneous ; if it be
bribed or bought by men it cannot be of any ad-
vantage. But to teach such doctrines as the Noble
Lords propose, and to accompany the teaching, as
they insist it shall he accompanied, by denuncia-
tion that these peculiar and favourite doctrines of
theirs must he believed or the children cannot
hope for salvation, is in fact to bribe or terrify the
babes into belief, is to take away all spontaniety
rom their faith, is to deprive them, if they retain
thjs belief in after life, of all merit, and is, on the
principle of these intolerant Lords, to risk the eter-
nal salvation of the people. They refuse se-
cular education, unless it be accompanied by such
enfoecement of abstruse doctrines, as, if the
lie:ief in them be 'essential, detroys all merit in form-
lig It. Such treatment is not giving the infani
;mud fair play ; and such efforts to make cAsain
Clogmas the Creed of the whole people, smacks
much more of Paper), as Mr. HAwEs o!.)erved,
than of Protestateisni.
Before these arrogsnt and self-conceited Lords
insist on imposing their favourite ctscinas on the
minds of youth, they ought to consider what belie.,
is. Their doctrine is that belief in
Ciii IST i:_
necessary' to salvation ; but what clptidren
really believe in is their masters and teachers.
It is obvious that belief in CHRIST terminated
with those who had beheld him, and all who came
afterwards believed not in Cu RisT, but in those
who told or wrote of him. From that tnne to this,
the belief "has been transmitted through many
generations, and each generation has lent the belief
according to its own .habits, manners, thought,
and customs, some peculiarities of its own. Hence
the divergencies of men's faith in different aces,
including the corruption of the Romanists,
the purified faith of the Protestants, and the I
super-purified faith which is now professed
by the PUSEYITES. What these Noble Lords would
deny the people secular education for—what they
would, as we assert, risk the eternal salvation of the
people for, is not a belief or faith in CH RIST, but a
belief in the priests of the Church of England and
in the doctrines which they affirm form Christianity.
Lord ASHLEY, indeed, expressly claimed for the
priesthood of that Chtuch the right of forming the
mind of the community, so that his system of educa-
tion goes to make men ale slaves of the priesthood,
instead of beim-, the servants of righteousness.
Amongst the Tories there must be a great num-
ber who cannot embrace the opinions of these fa-
natical Lords. There must be amongst them men
of charitable feelings and men of kindly hopes—
men who would shudder to follow such nar-
row sectarian leaders, shutting out the great
hulk of mankind from that redemption which
the Sots OF GOD came into the world
to accomplish, and who must also refuse to follow
them in denying secular education to the people
unless their dogmas he made to overrule all other
knowledge. As !hose Noble Lords have taken up
the matter, it becomes a religious question of
averwhelming- importance, and all who have any
charity and love in their nature—all who have en-
larged conceptions of the purpose for which CHRIST
died, must refuse to follow the Noble Lords in denying,
education to the people, unless combined with reli-
gious dogmas which confine salvation to a narrow
and self-elected

-.: --4
.F.,--.• r. ...... • - -
a ,", x.•-:-... ,r ,
..
,-..,-...; ..... .61.:#,=.4 I ' ‘.s-....„
. ~.1 -, •••• i
`-'...1.,,,0p.

~)A' ~~'~l~.~~o

LONDON :
MONDAY, JUNE 17, 1839.

--..,
The public will have read with great satisfaction,
at least we have, the proceedings of the House of
Commons in relation to the National Petition,
presented on Friday night by Mr. ATTWOOD. We
must give the
,Hon. Member, great praise for his
adroitness and skill in procuring such an attentive
hearing from the House. There was no symp-
tom of impatience or irritation as might have
been expected, and the House readily con-
ceded to Mr. ATTWOOD the privilege of
making a considerable number of observations,
though doing so on presenting petitions is contrary
to the usual practice of the House. Only one
Member of the House, a Sir Something SMYTH,
a gentleman who comes from the land of calves, and
represents Colchester, presumed to make any ob-
' jections to Mr. ATTWOOD'S observations, and he
found no countenance from the House. The
SPEAKER, with proper consideration, admitted that
the interrupting Member was right as to the rule
of the House, but he said " when the House con-
sidered the peculiar circumstances under which the
petition was brought forward, (and the House
sharing the Right Hon. Gentleman's feelings
loudly and.properly cheered him,) and the position
in which the Hon. Member stood, it would per-
haps be inclined to grant him some indul-
gence." . The House with the exception of the
Essex Baronet was of the same opinion, and
cheered Mr. ATTWOOD on in his remarks. With
' good taste, the Hon. Member did not indulge in
many, so he was heard with attention to the
end, and the National Petition was received, in what
we must call, looking to the usual practice of the
House and the nature of the petition, a favourable
and even a distinguished manner. We ate extremely
glad of that, because it shows that the House of
Commons has yet some proper considetation for the
people. Its conduct gives a flat contradiction to
those incendiary leaders who have sought to im-
press on the working classes,the impropriety of ap-
pealing to the House of Commons, and of relying
only on their own physical force to obtain redress. Reform in Chancery on right principles seems to
it will go a long way to revive the, hope that be making it way in the public mind. It will de-
the people may get what they demand by peaceable
;pond on those
means—to restore their confidence in and make who suffer from the chicanery of
Solicitors and the cupidity of Barristers, whether it
them rely on the House of Commons. When shall proceed, or whether they are again to" lapse
the reader remembers that this is the petttion into servitude to the lawyers. We have before us
which the National Convention prepared and ! a small pamphlet, pub ished by R InG wAy, and
got signed, that its demands are very sweeping, ' written by a Barrister, entitled, " A Method of dis-
diet it doesnot use the ordinary language of petit ions, nosing of the Arrear of Causes in the Court of
i t hat instead of sa)ieg "we pray your hon. House," 1 Chancery." The author's plan is to appoint, either