The Sun.
London, England, 1837-10-23 00:00:00

amazement and horror. The whole reduction has taken
place too on an expenditure of twenty-one millions, so that
it is a reduction of one•third. There are twenty-eight
millions of tl.e expenditure of the country which cannot be
reduced without breaking faith with the public creditor
for this sum goes to pay the interest of the immense load
of debt contracted chiefly by Tory administrations,
Tllcy have abolished the East India monopoly, and thrown
(.11:n the trade to (Thine 1 and; (indenter., vou all expert.
once the benefit nf this, as you have your tea from 80 to .1(t)
per cent, cheaper-'you can putt:hate its good tea for 4;4,
dd. a pound as you could fur Os. Od. under the Tory Go-
vevntnent, They have put an end to Metier), in the British
Colonies ; or at least, have pasted a Measure which in the
course of three years will entirely emancipate about
800,000 of our feLow beings from a state of the deepest
degradation and most cruel bondage, and elevate them to
the rank of free-born subjects.—(Great cheering.) And
can any man deny that this is the removal of a load of
guilt from the British nation ? The Reform Ministry,
Gentlemen, have granted liberal municipal institutions of
Scotland, and nearly the same to England, and removed a
number of the irksome, degrading, and iniquitous restric-
tions upon liberty of conscience by which the English Dis-
senters were oppressed ; so that they can now marry and
baptize their children, and bury their dead, in a manner
which accords with ther own views of religious duty. They
have mitigated the severity of the criminal laws to such a
degree, that instead of from 50 to 60 public executions
which took place every year under the domination of the
Tories, so that it was quite a common thing, on passing
New-rbate, to see six or eight human beings hang-
ing by the neck nt the same time—which was
a genuine exhibition of the spirit of Toryism ; it wants
nothing hut power to evince its cruely, and knows of no
means of preventing evil but severity—so great is the im-
provement, that under the present administration the num-
ber of executions in London has been reduced to six, to
four, and sometimes two in a year : and crime, instead of
increasing, has diminished. There has been not a little
Tory vaunting, Gentlemen, about Sir R. Peel's consolida-
tion and improvement of the law ; but all the mercy he in-
troduced into it was to raise a larceny or petty theft, which
involved the punishment of death, from forty shillings to
five pounds. This was the utmost extent of his clemency
as a legislator; five pounds was'the entire value which he
was able to set on the life of a human being. These, Gen-
tlemen, are but a few of the measures of improvement
which have been introduced by the Reforming Ministry in
the course of five or six years ; and of nothing ism I more
certain than that if the Tories had been able to retain their
hold of the reins of government, they would not have done as
much good in five or six hundred years—(Cheers)—nay,
that they would not to the end of the world make one single
concession to the public freedom, and public happiness, and
the rights of conscience, unless it was extorted from them
by the public cry—that is, by the dread of losing their
places.—(Cheers.) But perhaps a Tory may ask, was it
not the Wellington-Peel Ministry that abolished the Test
and Corporation. Acts, and passed the measure of Catholic
Emancipation ? Yes, it was the Wellington-Peel Ministry
which passed these measures ; but how ? was it from choice ?
was it upon principle? was it as measures of justice to the
parties concerned ? When Lord John Russell brought
forward the motion for the repeal of the Test Acts, did
Peel agree to it ?—did he offer to grant the smallest con-
cession ?—did he propose to move one inch on the way to
concession ? No indeed ; the motion was opposed by the
whole strength of the Cabinet ; and it was only when car-
ried by a respectable majority against him that he yielded,
because he could not help it. And in regard to the Catho-
lic Relief Bill, he expressly declared that his opinions were
unchanged—that he was in principle as strongly opposed to
it as ever, but that the state of parties in the country had
arrived at such a crisis that it was impossible for the go-
vernment to go on without the settlement of the question.
It was on the principle of expediency, not of justice, that
he submitted to it ; and even this semblance of concession
to the rights of conscience, instead of raising his popularity,
has nearly wrecked his fame among a host of his followers.
I observed, on entering Exeter Hall about four months ago,
large placards exhibited, calling on all good Protestants to
come forward without delay, and sign a petition for the re-
peal of ?he Catholic Emancipation- Bill. And, if lam not
misinformed, there are some in Inverness; who have been
trying to get up similar petitions ; but they may save them-
selves the trouble : for it would be quite as wise, and as
hopeful, and far less malignant, to get up petitions to Par-
liament to pass an Act that the majestic river which flows
through this town should henceforth reverse its course, and
run from the Moray Frith into Loch Ness.—(Great
cheering.) Gentlemen, the Ministry have done much in
promoting the cause of reform, and of civil and religious li-
berty ; and there are some excellent measures which they
have proposed, but which they have not yet been able to
carry into effect. Of this description, in my humble opinion,
is the plan for the abolition of Church-rates in England in-
troduced last session. I really think that it cannot but be
painful to the feelings of every honourable mind connected
with the Establishment to compel Dissenters, who cheer-
fully support their own religion, to pay for the maintenance
of their triodes of worship—for the repair of their churches
and parsonages, for tuning and playing their organs, buy-
ing the bread and wine for their communion, and ever-
greens for adorning their churches at Christmas, and a
variety of similar purposes. And I do not see how it is
possible to reconcile this with the fundamental principle
of Christian morality—" Whatsoever ye would that men
should do unto you, do ye even so to them.". Would a
member of the Church of Englrnd be willing that Dissens,
tors should have the power of assessing him for the support,
of their religion ? Could anything be fairer, or more
likely to give satisfaction to all parties, than the plan pro.,
posed by Government ? The obnoxious impost was to be
entirely abolished, and its place supplied by no new tax,
but by the creation of a fund which does not at present
exist, and can never exist but by an Act of the Legisla-
ture. Such, however, was the opposition raised against the
measure by the Tories, for the purpose of etnbarassing the
Ministry, that the church-rate impost still continues, and
the unavoidable consequence is that the country is filled
with the keenest religious animosities—Vestry meetings
are scenes of fierce contention ; in many instances, by a
large majority they postpone the rate for twelve months ;
in some instances, the' rate is carried by one or two of a
majority ; ani in others, the Church wardens have pro-
ceeded to impose a rate, after the Vestry meeting has re-
fused it, which will lead to expensive and protracted liti-
gation. And is this a statetof things favourable to the
interests of the Established Church, or to the interests of
true religion, or to the peace and prosperity of the com-
munity ? And yet Sir R. Peel boasts of his regard to the
rights of conscience and the principles of civil liberty. In
his speech on the day of the declaration of his success as a
candidate for the representation of Tatnworth, be asserted
that he had used no means of coercion towards any of his
tenants ; end he proved this by asking an individual in
the crowd, " Did I coerce you, Peter ?" Peter replied,
" No, Sir, you did not." And thus Sir Robert holds the
point fully established by the same kind of proof by
which a man was acquitted who was brought before a
Justice of the Peace for stealing a spade. The judge
asked the accuser what evidence he had to produce of the
truth of the charge, who replied, " 'I- have two witnesses
here who will swear that they saw him steal it." He then
demanded of the accused what defence he had to make,
who replied," I can bring twelve men who will swear that
they did not see me steal it." On which the judge pro-
nounced it a very clear case of twelve against two, and dis-
missed the complaint.—(Cheers anti laughter.) Sir Robert
in his speech, at the dinner given to him alter his election,
asserted that feelings connected with religious opinions were
altogether excluded from his electioneering contest, and that
lie could number among his strenuous supporters Dissenters
of every name. He added, moreover, that " whilst he sup-
ported the Established Church, he had no wish to estab-
lish invidious distinctions between any classes of her Ma-
jesty's subjects, or to obtain for the members of the
Established Church any civil superiority over Dissenters."
This is a very fair profession, and, in my opinion, a
very necessary one, for there can be little doubt that
the time has passed away when any portion of the Bri.
tish community will submit to be degraded on account
of their religion—will tamely suffer injustice from their
f; flow men, because they make conscience of their duty to
God. But how, in the name of wonder are we to reconcile
Sir Robert's profession with his practice ? Is not the op-
position which he has hitherto made, antreontinues to make
to the extension of liberal municipal institutions to the
Irish an invidious distinction of one class of her Majesty's
subjects from another- on account of religion ? Is it not a
strenuous endeavour to obtain for the members of the Irish
prelatic church rt high degree of civil superiority over the
dissenters? Whilst such institutions have been granted to
Scotland snd England, is not the very reason which he
assigns for withholding them from Ireland, that the Catho-
lics are more numerous than the Episcopalians, so that the
dices in the cities and towns would fall into the hands
of the Catholics, and be turned to the injury of the Esta-
blished Church ? Is not this putting the Irish establish-
ment in the very tient of the battle? Is not its exist-
ence made the reason why the inhabitants of Ireland
are to be subjected to this degradation and disadvan-
tage,
why they are not fit to participate in the civil privi-
leges of their fellow subjects of Scotland and England?
Can any thing be more likely to endanger the safety of
the Irish Established Chureh ? And hesitate not to
say, that if this ground of opposition to the Govern-
ment measure be valid—if there really be anything in the
ponstitntioll of the Irish flPirch which ;Ando is the way of
civil liberty, in so far it is not a Christian church, but a
Tory institution ; for nothing is more certain than that the
author of Christianity designed his religion to be univerali
and framed his Church so as not to interfere with the civil
priyileges of the inhabitants of any part of the world. It is
the fundamental principle of morality—it is immutable