The Sun.
London, England, 1839-05-21 00:00:00

ansslon.

Was there any reason why these Ladies should
be dismissed ? Have they behaved ill ? Sir
ROBERT PEEL did not dare to insinuate or assert
it, though the calumniating scribes of his party
have not been ashamed to make the most odious
accusations. If he believe those insinuations, why
not place his demand on that ground ? Why not
say to her MAJESTY—" I find your MAJESTY sur-
rounded by Ladies of doubtful prudence and ques-
tionable morality ; their presence at Court scanda-
lizes the moral feelings of your MAJESTY'S
most dutiful and most moral Tory Aris-
tocracy ; and I must humbly crave your
MAJESTY to purify your Court, by dismissing
your Ladies ?" But Sir ROBERT PEEL put his
request on no such ground. He wished to dis-
miss the Ladies because they were connected with
his political enemies ; and he might just as well
have turned out of office every person the Whigs
have ever appointed.
The Tories assert that it is customary for the
Household to retire—they claimed, however, the
power to dismiss it. But how can they assert that,
when there has been no Queen Regnant since
Queen ANNB, and her Ladies did not change with
her Ministers. We believe there are no cases ex-
actly in point, though such precedents as bear on
the case are against Sir ROBERT, for the Ladies
of the Queen Consort have not been changed
with a change in the Ministry. The question, there-
fore has to be decided by analogy, and by usage in
other cases ; and all analogy, all usage, is against
dismissing any servant of the Crown, unless for im-
proper behaviour. In truth, the power claimed by
Sir B. PEEL of dismissing persons from office for
their political opinions is altogether new, and had
her MAJESTY conceded it, as to her Ladies, we
see no reason why it should not have been extended
to the lowest porter of every public office:, A great
constitutional, and, which is of higher value, a great
moral principle was asserted by her MAJESTY'S
resistance to Sir ROBERT PEEL'S demand, and the
Goverment was saved from being made even more
than at present the instrument of a faction by her
refusal to allow Sir ROBERT PEEL to dismiss her
Ladies. For the grasping ambition of the Tories,
amounting almost to madness, and for her MA-
JESTY'S discernment and firmness, we profess our-
selves very grateful. They have rescued us
from Tory misrule, if we now know how
to profit by the folly of our opponents. The
Tories panted for possession of the Government—
they declared that the empire would be ruined unless
they were placed in office; they obtained their de-
sires ; they had an opportunity of establishing their
power, and they gave up all, because they could not
dismiss three or four Bedchamber Ladies. They
are equally grasping and weak. They have fallen
into political dotage ; and it will be the fault of the
people if they ever recover their power.
The Times of this day does full justice to our
remarks. It says—
" It may have been a great object of personal gratifica-
tion to retain the services of a companion so agreeable and
so highly endowed as the lady of the last Lord Lieutenant
of Ireland. We mention her alone, because, as to the
other Ladies of the Household, it is well understood that
their resignations were intended by their Lords to follow
instantly the completion of the new arrangements, and that
therefore, in substance, the whole question turned upon the
removal of one favourite individual."
Sir ROBERT PEEL, then, broke up his Ministry
because he could not instantly dismiss a Lady who
at the same time had tendered her resignation.
His Administration was wrecked. on nothing ex-
ternal, for no obstacle whatever really existed.
The wild, lawless, unaccustomed, and insulting
demand of his party to dismiss a Lady who had re-
signed broke it up. For some purpose not avowed,
he made his own insult to her MAJESTY a pretext
Ifor not forming an Administration.

We call attention to the short speech of the Hon.
Mr. COWPER, at Hertford, yesterday. The great