The Sun.
London, England, 1837-01-19 00:00:00

TO ADVERTISERS,

s•—'-;

BENTLEY'S MISCELLANY—No. 11.
Advertisements, Bills, &c., intended for insertion in the
Second Number of this New Periodical Work, are requested to be
forwarded, on or before the 23d inst.' to Mr. Bentley, New Bur-
lington-street.
(*„" 5,000 Bills requ,red in the first instance.)

11AMBURGH, JAN. 10, 1837.
ALL those who may have to write to us are re-
quested to direct

HEINE BROTHERS in HAMBURGH,
which is perfectly sufficient for the address, and letters directed in
that way will reach us just as well as if directed, HEINE
BROTHERS, BANKERS, in HAMBURG. Neither the deno-
mination of BANKERS, or any other, is required, and letters
directed,

HEINE BROTHERS in HAMBURGII.
will do without any further remark or description. We further request
to observe, that a letter with one inclosure doubles the Postage
only, but several inclosures would by far increase the same. Thus
101., 201., or 301., for instance, if remitted in One Bank of Eng-
land Note would only cause double Postage, but 101. remitted in
two notes, would be liable to a much higher charge. It is there-
fore most advisable, for any Person having to remit Money to Ham-
burgh, to forwarl the amount in One Note, or one Bank Post
Bill or Cheque; or having to receive Money from Hamturgh, to
receive the same in the same way, whenever possible. As to re-
mittances from Hamburgh to England for large Sums, amounting
tckmany THOUSANDS, of course they may rather be remitted in
Bills of Exchange. All those giving orders for any Branch of our
multifariousßusiness, that must be exacuted before FEBRUARY,
are advised to lose no time in forwarding the same.
HEINE BROTHERS in HAMBURG.

The publication of Ms SUN NEWSPAPER commenced this day
at 10 minutes past Three o' Clock.

N,Sete. ,
7
- •

r
1.11 ,r•

LONDON,
THURSDAY EVENING, JANUARY 19, 1837.

'

‘.

out," cries one of the hacks of the Tory press.
" There is no backing out of this," brays ano-
ther kindred spirit, " Sir ROBERT has nailed his
colours to the mast." These miserable creatures
are constrained to sink their own misgivings as to the
speaker's mental reservation, for the sake of the effect
likely to be produced by propagating a belief in his
sincerity. _

It is impossible to cast even a glance at the late
speech of Sir ROBERT PEEL without at once recog-
nising the prominent traits of the Right Hon. Baro-
net's character. An ostentatious affectation of can-
dour is resorted to, in order to conceal the insincerity
that lurks beneath. There appears on the surface an
off-hand frankness, admirably calculated to throw the
unwary off their guard, and to make those who
do not know Sir ROBERT believe that he is the
very soul of honesty, while, in fact, he is entirely
made up of insincerity. Having no fixed prin-
ciples to guide him—nothing within to direct him,
his sole endeavour is so to adapt himself to external
circumstances as to turn them most effectually to his
own advantage. This has been his conduct since his
first entrance into public life, and the natural conse-
quence of it is, that he has acquired a character for
hypocrisy and vacillation which will stick to him to
the latest hour of his life. His own party distrust
and have abused him fully as much as that to which
he has been opposed. But they cannot do without
him, and both they and he know that right well. He
is the only man they have capable, as a leader, of
keeping their ricketty concern together. They are
therefore compelled to take him on his own terms, and
it is their interest to appear to be satisfied with, and
to praise, every thing he says and does, however much
against the grain it may be so to do.
As an example of this, we may instance the loud
acclamations with which their public organs have
hailed the speech delivered at Glasgow, more particu-
larly that portion of it in which the Right Honoura-
ble Baronet is supposed to have stated the course he
means t`o pursue during the ensuing session. Sir
ROBERT'S well-weighed words are these—" I mean
to support the national establishments that connect
Protestantism with the State in these three kingdoms."
This is lauded t.o the skies as one of the most straight-
forward, manly, and explicit declarations that ever issued
from the mouth of a public man. " This is speaking

Now, was there ever any thing more vaguely ex-
pressed than this vaunted colour-nailing determination ?
What is it but an unmeaning generality, wrapped up
in language of most oracular ambiguity ? To not one
single point of policy does this explicit (I) declaration
pin the Right Honourable Baronet down. To not an
individual measure does it say aye or no. There is, in
fact, nothing in it, in the least inconsistent with a cor-
dial support of his Majesty's Ministers, whose uniform
object has been, in all their measures which touched
our Protestant institutions, to support and invigorate
these institutions, by removing from them those abuses
and corruptions which not only obstruct their salutary
influence, but even endanger their very existence.
But as a man's actions are the best interpreters of
his words, let us try Sir ROBERT by this test, and
see what support he may, with a safe conscience, give
to the MELBOURNE Administration,.after the Glasgow
declaration. We have before our mind's eye a map of the
Right Hon. Baronet's political course, and by tracing
that course, we may perhaps find something like a
clue to guide us in our speculations as to the future.
We shall not go very far back.
Sir ROBERT would not thank us, were we to say
that this is the first time that he has declared him-
self a supporter of our Protestant institutions. We ad-
mit that the support of Protestantism has been his boast
during the whole of his public career, and we unreluc-
tautly concede to him all the advantage which he can
derive from the admission. Now, in 1828 Sir
ROBERT, being then Secretary of State for the Home
Department, and Leader of the Government party in
the House of Commons, took up and carried a Bil
repealing the Test and Corporation Acts, which had
for a century and a half been regarded by the party
with whom he acted as one of the safe-guards--in fact
the principal outwork, of Protestantism. Sir ROBERT
thought otherwise, and thought justly.
The Right Hon. Baronet followed up this successful
debut, as a true supporter of Protestantism, by repeal-
ing in 1829 all the then remaining Catholic dis-
abilities. The Tories were loud and bitter in their
denunciations of this great measure. They did not
scruple to say that Sir ROBERT by granting Catholic
Emancipation, had swept away the very rampart of
Protestantism ; but be was convinced that he thereby
strengthened its foundations, while he at the
same time paid due " homage" to its purity and
truth, by fairly pitting it against its antagonist.
And here we may remark, as a circumstance highly
honourable to Sir ROBERT PEEL, that for giving
this enlightened support to the Protestant cause
he incurred the grievnus displeasure of the
Oxford bigots, who, incapable of appreciating his
merits, actually ousted him from the representation of
the University.
In 1832, Sir ROBERT PEEL gate his sanction to
Mr. (now Lord) STANLEY'S Irish Temporalities
Bill, and away went ten stout pillars of Protestantism,
in the shape of so many plump Irish bishops. In
1835, during the very brief space that he was at the head
of the clap-trap Administration, he brought in, or
caused to be brought in, various Bills for supporting
the Protestant institutions of the country, every one
of which Bills deprived them of some emolument or
privilege. Thus, Sir H. HARDINGE'S Irish Tithe
Bill docked the clergy in that country of full a fourth
Of their incomes, and the Bill for the relief of the Dis-
senters was intended to put them on an equal footing
with the members of the Church, in the important
particular of the celebration of marriage, hitherto mo-
nopolized by the established clergy. In 1836 we find
Sir ROBERT voting for the English Tithe Bill,
which not only cut off at a slash a fourth or more of
the tithe now payable to the clergy, but also cut them
off for ever from all the advantages derivable
from ally future increase in the productiveness of the
soil to which in law they had an incontrovertible title.
He also agreed to the diminution—much too trifling a
diminution, we confess—of the Bishop's stipends ;
and though last not least, voted for the Marriage and
Registration Bills, which, conceived in a truly Chris-
tian spirit, have relieved the Church from the degrading
servitude of being the civil officer of the State—thus
severing a main link of that unnatural connection
which added no real strength either to the Church or
to the State.

Now, do we blame Sir ROBERT PEEL for doing all
these things ? GOD forbid. So far from it, we look
upon them as the most meritorious actions of his pub-
lic life. We merely allude to them for the purpose
of showing what may be comprehended within the range
of a declaration which binds a man to a support of the
Protestant institutions of the three kingdoms ; and we
think we have proved that in making that declara-
tion, the Right Honourable Baronet has neither
made any very important disclosure, nor bound him-
self in very tight fetters. After what he has done
while supporting Protestant institutions, it must
be evident to every one that it would be the
silliest affectation to bolt at relieving the Dissenters
from the humiliation of washing the surplices of the
Clergy. As to Irish Municipal Reform, that has no-
thing to do with the question—that point Sir ROBERT
never once mooted in his speech. That question has
been excluded from the catalogue of Protestant ones, both
by him and by the Peers. He voted for a modified
corporation system, and they, by sweeping the cor-
porations of Ireland actually away, declared in the
strongest language that these institutions could not
possibly be among the ‘, institutions that connected
Protestantism with the State."

The Oxford Tories, wishing not to be behind their
neighbours, have been for some time past labouring
hard to get up what they call " a Conservative Ma-
nifestation." The affair came off on Tuesday, and, if
we may judge from the account given of it in the
Tory journals, will not do much to strengthen the in-
fluence of the party, the object which no doubt it
was intended to accomplish. Oxford, it is well
known, is the head-quarters of bigotry, intolerance, and
"all uncharitableness," both in religion and politics ;
it was therefore to be expected, as a matter of course,
that a considerable number of persons would attend a
meeting, the end and aim of which were to oppose the
march of improvement, and to perpetuate the reign of
abuse and corruption. But it might also have been
expected that a University which arrogates to itself the
palm of superiority in learning would have, on an oc-
casion like this, turned out a literary giant or two, were
it only as specimens to show the public that there was
some sort of foundation for the claim set up. Yet we
find none but pigmies pushed forward on the stage.
The person chosen to represent the University at this
dinner, was one Dr. MAusHAm, a vain, pert, dull,
foul-mouthed bigot, and, therefore, in so far, we
allow, not ill-qualified for the task assigned him.
This sage, self-important personage, delivered him-
self of a long-winded and evidently premeditated
effusion, into which he has contrived to stuff a greater
quantity of malignant misrepresentation, than we ever
recollect to have seen crammed into a speech. It may
be truly designated an olio of malevolence, an omnium
gatherum to which every evil passion,is made to contri-
bute its share. The Rev. Doctor's chief attack is di-
rected against Ireland. Ireland, and the Irish, because
they differ from, him in religious belief, are the objects of

THE SUN #, LONDON, THURSDAY, JANUARY 19, 1837.

his most vindictive hostility. The odium theologtcum,
as becomes the cloth to which the speaker belongs, is
here allowed full play, and is exhibited in its most en-
venomed and disgusting form. In his eagerness to vitu-
perate at all hazards, the worthy Warden of Merton Col-
lege sometimes stumbles upon an awkward two-edged
truth. " Justice," says he, " the meaning of which is
so well understood with us, means in Ireland, the tak-
ing from one class of men that which belongs to it,
and giving it to another, who has neither claim nor title
to it." There never, we will venture to say, was given
a more correct description of that justice which the
Irish people have experienced from England. We
need only ask how the Protestant Church and the Pro-
testant laity of Ireland came by their possessions, but
by that which belonged to one class having been taken
from it, and given to another, without claim or title ?

month of a Statesman. It betrays an inherent love of
tyranny which can only exist in minds essentially mean
and contemptible. Has M. GUIZOT forgotten all his
rhetorical flourishes about the sympathy of France for
the triumph of freedom in all parts of the world ? Has
he forgotten his boasts about French generosity and
French honour, wherever the voice of suffering huma-
nity was heard imploring assistance ? Is it to en-
lighten mankind still more, that the Minister of Public
Instruction thus comes forward to puff into thin air
the frothy lectures of the philosopher ? The
rights of mankind ; the faith of treaties ; and
a respect for public opinion, are, according to M.
GUIZOT, of no moment in the estimation of the Go-
vernment of which he is a Member. What in sub-
stance says this official mouthpiece of the President
of the " best of all Republics ?" Talk not to us of
treaties. They exist, but they mean nothing. If
you can prove they have a meaning condemnatory of
the policy which we adopt, we will merely stop to ob-
serve that we won't change it. You ask why ? You
shall he answered. We would pocket nothing by the
change, and we risk nothing by remaining as we are.
As for honour, and consistency, and generosity, and
philanthropy, we are powerful enough to dispense with
them. They form, in fact, no part of our system.
Enough : we are the Government—we are the KING—
we are France !

A " Great Conservative Manifestation"—as our
Tory Contemporaries grandiloquently phrase it—was
exhibited yesterday at Maidstone, in the attractive
shape of a good dinner, at which a few ordinary Peers
were present, and divers small Commoners. Viscount
MARSHAM was Chairman, and a better selection could
not have been made ; for his Lordship, by his inordi-
nate dullness and prolixity, effectually kept within
bounds the hilarious feelings of the assembly, and cast
over their proceedings a most decorous and dignified,
not to say characteristic, gloom. One only speech re-
lieved the general insipidity of the evening, and that one
was spoken by Mr. HOARE, a pretty orator enough, if
we except his frequent and startling deviations into sheer
nonsense. This eccentric gentleman out-Wetherelled
WETHERELL himself, in his denunciations of the
Papists, and all things Papistical. He was for repeal-
ing the Catholic Emancipation Act, and subjecting
the professors of that creed to their old state of bon-
dage. " I can see," he said, " the apparition of
Popery stalking before me, with rapid strides. She is
covered with a snow-white mantle, which, however,
does not conceal the foul stench which accompanies
her march, nor hide from view the disgusting features
which compose her horrible person. Her skin is
black ; and instead of hair, serpents and scorpions are
writhing round her brow. Her eyes dart living fire,
and from her mouth proceed poisonous arrows ;
in her right hand she holds the keys of the
Inquisition, and in her left the instruments of torture.
Her feet are red with the blood of martyrs, and yet
soft is her step, and her voice sweet and pleasant to
the ear." And who, does the reader suppose, trots
behind this lovely goblin ? DANIEL O'CONNELL,
Esq. ! Yes, DANIEL, it is, who, on Mr. HOARE'S
showing, officiates as her footman in livery ; while
close behind him walk his MAJESTY'S Ministers, two
and two,—a procession which so paralyses the optics
of the Kentish orator, that he calls on the " men of
Kent" to rush out, and knock each Member of the
Cabinet on the head, beginning of course with
DANIEL ! And this trash, it seems, was received with
acclamations, by its hearers ! A pretty condition they
must have been, when they could have mistaken such
frantic drivel for eloquence and energy ! Sir EDWARD
KNATCHBULL'S speech was better—much better; but
even his, elaborate and premeditated as it evidently
was, was by no means wanting in absurdity; for he
talked of Sir ROBERT PEEL'S Ministry not having
been based " on exclusive principles," when it is noto-
rious that there was not an individual Member of his
Cabinet but what was a decided Anti-Reformer at
heart, whatever he might be on the hustings. We
consider the Kentish Conservative manifestation as not
a whit inferior to its predecessors in dullness and mise-
rable inefficiency.

M. BERRYER, a decided Royalist of the old school,
delivered a powerful speech in the sitting of Tuesday
against the address. Though a zealous supporter of
Don CARLOS, he failed not to denounce in the
strongest terms the shuffling, temporizing policy of
France. Perhaps that policy was never better exposed
to the contempt of Europe than in the following ex-
tract from his speech :
" There are but two things possible to establish in
Spain—Don Carlos or democracy. The present Ministry
dislike both. How can they then intervene ? Opposition
would like democracy in Spain, but cannot intervene for
this. Why, then, everything is impossible—the Ministry
can do nothing—Opposition can do nothing—Spain nothing.
From this springs the equivocal terms, the vagueness of
the address. You speak in the address of executing the
Quadruple Alliance. The Minister tells you he is bound
to nothing by the Quadruple Alliance. It was made to
expel Don Carlos from Portugal, and to let him establish
himself in Spain. Very natural. He was a poor fugitive
in Portugal ; to expel him was easy. But in his own coun-
try, surrounded by his partisans, you dare not execute the
Quadruple Alliance, as far as it regards him. The sublime
of the Treaty—according to M. Mole—was, that it en-
gagea France to nothing. And the great merit of the
illustrious Talleyrand was to have signed this empty
parchment. When Don Carlos did reach Spain, additional
articles to this nothing of a treaty were concluded. And
these were nothing too—nothing more for France than
to keep the police of the frontier. Yet, Gentlemen, you
make a solemn address, telling Ministers to adhere to this
shadow of a treaty, in which the noble task of France is to
play the gend'arme. Ah how degraded is France since
the epoch of 1817. Even this mean task of shutting the
frontier is hurtful as well as disgraceful. You have given
England the noble part of the treaty. She secures her
own interests exclusively in Portugal, and through Portu-
gal in Spain. And the treaty is a permission of activity
to England ; to France a condemnation to shameful self-
abandonment. Yet the address bids the Ministry to per-
severe in adhering to such a treaty. For Heaven's sake, if
you are against intervention, don't vote this. If you are
for it, vote something more. The address contradicts it-
self—it is absurd as the expresssion of any one opinion or
party in this Chamber. You make vows. Vows ! they are
to be made by individuals, but it is disgraceful to a great
nation to utter vows. It is derogatory to the national
dignity."

In this paragraph M. BERRYER has given expres-
sion to the sentiments of nine-tenths of all the people
of this country, who take an interest in the state of
public affairs in France. There is not an individual
here who has read the address, and taken the trouble
to express
.an opinion about it, by whom it is not con-
demned as the absurdest of all conceivable productions.
But how has it happened that all the orators who have
yet opposed the article on Spain have declined to move
an amendment upon it in some shape or other ?
Something more than speeches are wanted to effect a
change in the policy of the Cabinet.
There is no other news of any interest in the Paris
Journals. Letters from Bayonne state that the Chris-
tinos are making preparations for a grand and general
attack upon all the Carlist fortifications in the Basques.
In a few days, we expect to receive accounts of the
commencement of active hostilities.

We regret we cannot find space to-day for the Re-
port of the important discussion which took place yes-
terday at the Middlesex Sessions, on the Appeal of the
Parish of St. George, Hanover-square, against the
County-rate ; and we prefer the delay of one day to
giving an abridged report on a subject which affects
the interests of every householder in the county of
Middlesex, as well as the County-rate payers through-
out the kingdom. We shall insert the Report, with
our observations on it, in to-morrow's Sun.

We have received the whole of the French journals
of Tuesday. During the sitting of the Chamber of
Deputies on Monday, M.GUIZOT, Minister of Public
Instruction, delivered his speech in favour of the ad-
dress, and in opposition to his ex-colleague, M.
TIMERS. GuizoT's speech on this occasion was one
of the very worst he ever delivered : it left every im-
portant point in the oration of the ex-Minister entirely
untouched. In substance it amounted to this :
That French intervention in Spain would necessarily
involve the country in the expense of keeping a large
armed force in the Peninsula during the minority of
ISABELLA 11. That as that could not be contem-
plated, a less comprehensive system of intervention
would be impracticable, and if practicable would be
useless. That were these things not so, France would
still decline to interfere, because she could derive no
advantage from intervention. The Government would
always take care of French trade ; and as for the friend-
ship or the hostility of Spain, under a despotic or a de-
mocratic form of Government, France could well afford
to despise both. When Spain was the ally of Austria
the case was different, but now that she stands iso-
lated and contemned by the other great Powers of
Europe, it is of no moment to France whether she be
honoured with her friendship or her enmity I But we
shall afford the French Minister of Publix Instruction
an opportunity of developing his own views in his own
words. A single extract from his speech will answer
this purpose :
" There were equal reasons in the state of Spain to show
that it was not the interest of France to 'meddle with that
country. Of old, Spain was linked to Au.sitria and the great
European Powers : now it is isolated and powerless to help
or harm us. Another argument alleged was, that in ceasing
to co-operate we lost the English alliance. This would
have immense weight with me, for I believe the English
alliance our prime interest ; and in 1535 we were told not
to interfere, lest we should injure this alliance. He could
not believe that the alliance between two great nations could
be affected by causes such as these, which, change from year
to year, especially such an alliance as that. between England
and France, founded on sympathy, sentin2eint, interest, and
on which the peace of Europe depended. France and its
Government were attached to the English. alliance, but not
subservient. They kept their freedom as England pre-
served hers. But then, it is said, you allow England
to gain exclusive influence in the Peninsula. On this
subject look at the past, at 1823, and still further
back, and you will find that services rendered to Spain have
produced neither advantage nor gratitude. Fear not but
we shall take care of our commercial interests. It is ar-
gued that it is our own cause, that of the Revolution of
July, for which the struggle is going on in Spain. We
admit this. But we have for six years supported our policy
and our system by peace and moderation, and we will con-
tinue it. Europe is no longer under the absolute impulse
that it was. Counter-revolutionary projects have died away,
because in France revolutionary projects have disappeared.
Everything is the reverse of the state of things in 1791.
And the grandeur of the July Revolution 'is to have ac-
complished this. People would force us from this path—
would embark us again in revolution—would place us at
the tail of the insurrection of La Granja, to give it
ear support. There is no similarity between the Revo-
lution of La Granja and that of July. The legitimacy
of this last revolution only -commenced after the ordon-
nance of Charles X. He hoped for the success of the
Constitutional cause in Spain. He would not credit the
success of Don Carlos. But even if he did succeed, and
did reign at Madrid, Ferdinand had reigned there before
him, since the Revolution of July, and the circumstance
had not disturbed or menaced our liberties."

M. GUIZOT braves, insults, and affects to: despise
the Spanish Government. In his speech he speaks of
Spain as " thrice conquered" by France, under Louis
XIV., NAPOLEON, and Louis XVIII. ; and he
taunts the nation with its inability to resent any course
which himself and his Colleagues may think proper to
adopt towards it. Such language is flisgraceful in the