The Sun.
London, England, 1839-02-14 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the SUNDAY JOURNALS:

UPENING OF PARMA NIENT.—WC sometimes think
that if posterity should be deprived of our Parliamentary
Mirror and debates—but should suddenly discover A
collection of Royal speeches addressed to the I_2egi'Sla-
ture during the present centurg,nss-a great field of specu-
lation would be opened to-historiansof the Sceptic School.
Justly might the fiature Niehbuhr exclaim,--" We have
lien told dint in the winter of 1839 the price of wheat
was 80s,o—that great excitement against the then ex-
isting Corn-laws prevailed—that the manufacturing
Owens sent their delegates to the metropolis—and that
petitions from every corner of the kingdom for a repeal
ofthose laws--hailed the commencement of the session:
Alas ! to what length will the credulity or the inventions
of fabulists extend. Sufficient refutation of these absurd
figments will be found in the simple fact that the Speech
from the Throne, dated February sth, 1839, though com-
posed by the able and eminent statesmen forming
the Ministry of that day, does not contain the re-
motest allusion to this great Anti-Corn Law agita-
tion ! Yet in that speech, so minute is the attention
shown to the affairs of the empire, that every disturb-
' Once in its remotest regions, receives specific notice and
I remark ; ray, every new variation in the features of the
external commerce of the country ; and yet not a single
syllable is said,—not the most distant allusion is made,—
to this supposed increase in the price of human food ;
this alleged agitation throughout the country, upon a
subject involving the very existence of British com-
merce ;—this imaginary assemblage of phantom dele-
gates, congregated but a few yards distant from the very
spot where the speech was delivered. And this is the
way in which the English history has been written !"
It eettainly is a singular characteristic of Royal
speeches, that whatever most agitates the country is
always most certain not to be touched on. In
the Lords the address was moved by the Earl of
Lovelace, a nobleman of considerable attainments, the
son-irolaw of Lord 'Byron, and heir to the name and ho-
nours of the Lord King, whose bold and uncompromising
invectives so often stirred the pious gall of the Prelacy.
It was seconded with ability and promise by Lord Ver-
non. The succeeding debate was not, however, very
animated, in spite of the quidquid ainari of Lord
Brougham's speech, which had evidently been got up in
concert with the Tories, whose prepared ground of at-
tack is shifted from Ireland to India. Lord Brougham
is fond of distant warfare, and provided he can shoot
with the long bow, it seems that he cares little where
the shaft may lodge. In order to sustain his alliance
Kith the Tories, Lord Brougham patriotically consents
to s lerifiee one of the nearest relations of his wife, in the
person of a very able and enlightened man, Lord Auck-
land. It was, by the way, an amusing episode in the
discussion to observe the affectionate zeal with which
Lord Brougham gratuitously sprung up to vindicate the
anxiety of his noble friend (!) the Earl of Durham for
fie speedy production of the Report on Canada. Lord
Brougham seems to Bold that friendship, like charity,
begins at I ome ; for, Heaven knows, he showed little
en ,ugh of that amiable affection when his "noble friend"
was abroad ! Mr. O'Connell came hi for a share
of the Learned Lord's discursive denunciations ;
but, in comparing the agitation of Mr. O'Connell
with that of Mr. O'Connor, he forgot that the
one preaches peace in order to ameliorate
the law, and the other incites to arms in order to get rid
of the law altogether.* The tone of the Duke of
Wellington was not that of a man prepared for an
early assault on the citadel of the Government ; he seemed
contest to skirmish on the outworks, and to indicate
that the same Fabian mode of hostility which so
greatly displeased his more ardent followers in the
last session will constitute the strategy of the present.
Lord Melbourne's speech was chiefly remarkable for
the definition he gave of the relative confidence be-
tween the Government and Mr. O'Connell, and for
his declaration that a change in the Corn-laws was
to continue an open quest.ion,—and nothing more.
In the Conitnons, the debate (not upon the whole
equal to the occasion) was, so far as our domestic
policy is concerned, rodoced to two topics—the Corn-
laws and Parliamcr:cary Reform. With regard to the
first, the advocates for Repeal encountered a most dis-
agreeable surprise in the speech of the Member for
Kenial. ''..ecording to that gentleman (the Chair-
man of the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester) no-
tione can be more fallacious than the statements of
conimerciol decline, upon which the most popular and
striking arguments for repeal have been founded.
There was something at once painful and ludicrous in
tha effect which this part of Mr. Wood's speech pro-
duced. The astonishment of the advocates of free-trade
in the House—the nervous anxiety of the Delegates
under the gallery—the whispered assurances of the-
sagacious, that " Wood was a deep fellow, and would
wind it all round before he sat down"—the respectful at-
tention of Sir Robert Peel—the startled applause of the
ceuntry gentlemen—and the unconscious, earnest, and
solemn complacency with which the orator himself con-
tinued, brick by brick, to demolish the foundations of
the. castle Le was commissioned to garrisd
whit play-writers call " a situation" that would e
have
been irresistibly droll if the House of Commons
were the Adelphi Theatre, and the Corn-laws a
Farce,—.instead of a question involving the interests
of millions, and, perhaps, fraught with a fearful
tragedy. Sir Robert Peel did not fail to use " the
facts" of Mr. 'Wood with his usual sinister subtlety.
Mr Villiers replied to them with spirit and acuteness.
It is melancholy to see in the temper of the House on
the Corn-laws a clear indication of the stupendous diffi-
culties with which we have to contend in the present
Parliament. The hopes of the conversion of Sir Ro-
bert Peel, which the celebrated article in the Times
had engendered, are destroyed ; the Tories (with the
exception or a number not calculated at more than seven
or eight) will vote with their leader ; a considerable por-
tion of the Whigs, and those from their property and
local ccnnections, the most secure of their seats (in-
cluding even some of the moderate Radicals like Lord
Worsley), are for no alteration ; and the Government
themselves will do no more than leave the matter pre-
cisely what Lord Melbourne says it always has been,
viz., an open question. If the manufacturers had not
decided to reject the compromise of a moderate
fixed duty, we believe that that intermediate step
would have been attained ; that it would have become
a Cabinet question ; and that_ neither the Com-
mons nor the Lords would have ventured to reject it. '
The amendment of Mr. Duncombe carried the House
into the question of further Constitutioual Reform.
We do not think that the motion' was Well-timed ; for
no great question can 'be discussed thus incidentally
with advantage, unless it involves some imminent peril,
which may seem to force it into instant consideration
out of the customary order of things ; but still, not-
withstanding every disadvantage of time and season—
the result was a very considerable minority, when com-
pared with that which graced the somewhat similar
amendment of Mr. Wakley last Session. One cause
of this distinction was, to be sure, in the milder
and less definite terms of Mr. Duncombe's amend-
ment, but reasons more cogent are to be found in the
dissatisfaction among the Liberal constituencies at the
general opposition given by Lord John Russell to all
further constitutional change, during the last session ;
and' in the speech which the Noble Lord delivered in
the coarse of the night's debate. Many Reformers who
did not sympathise with Mr. Duncombe's acrimonious
and indiscriminate censure of the Government, and still
less with his invidious compliments to the foresight and
consisteney of Sir Robert Peel, had decided to vote
agamst his amendment, till converted by the speech of
Lord John, repeating, though in milder and mote con-
ciliatory terms, the sentiments he had expresssed on the
previous question. Still, when ,we see Reformers
as staunch as Mr. Clay, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Strutt,
ese., voting with the majority, we cannot agree with Mr.
Duncombe, that the division furnished a fair test of
" the finality and non-finality men." An expression
used in the course of the discussion by Mr. O'Con-
nell has given rise to many surmises. In his not
vory lust' explanation of his motives for voting
with Mr. Duncombe, after having voted last session
against Mr. Wakley, the Learned Gentleman observed
with marked emphasis, that " the relations between
the Government and himself were altered." The
Tories caught up the phrase with a sarcastic cheer—
Nr. O'Connell smiled, and took care not to explain
away the impression his words conveyed. We can-
not, however, agree with those who, from this and
other circumstances, have come to the conclusion
that Alr. O'Connell will lend himself to any serious
or systematic hostilities against the Government.
Despite the indiscretions to which his passions fre-
quently urge him, Mr. O'Connell is too experienced a
politician not to see that any change in the Government
—till there are the materials and the basis of support for
a more popular Administration—will be the worse for
Ireland, and we do not think he will rashly hazard the
restitution of Orange ascendancy for a period, that might
possibly last the remainder of his life. Neither has Mr.
O'Connell taken the course which would best have
served his purpose had he meditated any assault on the
Administration. He has separated himself from the
Chartists ; he has been dragged into open war with Lord
Brougham, and his enmity with the enemies of the Go-
vernment would greatly cripple him in any measures
tending to further their objects, though with-
out securing their confidence and co-operation.
lilpen the whole, the position of ministers is much
altered ; the Tories, in concert with Lord Brougham,
have evidently resolved to make their great party
question—their strong division—eheval de bataille—
the state of affairs in India; a sufficient proof of' their
inability to select' more popular and interesting topics
ef quarrel at borne. Upon this we shall reserve our rstnerk till ampler materials of information arc furnish- u

--------- IV i .

which` is singular enough that nearly every occasion in
the Speaker has thought it necessary to rebuke
allusions to Members of the House of Lords has been in
behalf of Lord Brougham, and yet that learned personage
has 'flora than any other Peer complained of the liberties
taken with the Lords in the Representative Assembly.
Sorely, as Mr.
the rec O'Connela observed if it be right to check
rimination, the authority of the Lurd Chancellor, or
the taste of the House of Lords, should forbid the attack.
s i it law
ttlia they who dwell in glass houses should not
c''
7..,,43-tgritlio;t but it generally happens that the jaculation
ti4eA in proportion to the quantity of the glass.