The Sun.
London, England, 1839-07-20 00:00:00

LONDON:
SATURDAY, JULY 20, 1839.

The only subject of any importance mentioned in the
House of Lords last night was Ireland, concerning
which the Marquis of DOWNSHIRE, an opponent of
Ministers, expressed his satisfaction that the wishes of
the LORD LIEUTENANT for no processions on
the Uth of July had been attended to, and that
there had been no necessity to send troops to the
North. Subsequently the Report of Lord RODEN'S
Committee was presented, which chiefly recommended
the evidence to consideraton. Lord BROUGHAM im-
mediately gave notice that on the 30th he should call
the attention of their Lordships to that part of the
evidence relating to the administration of justice. He
is to move a prospective resolution, and not a resolu-
tion criminatory of the Marquis of NOR3IANEY. Some
observations were made to the effect that their Lord-
ships would not be ready to discuss the question at the
period mentioned by the Noble Lord, but he persisted
in his intention of bringing the subject forward on that
day.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL, we are happy to see, last night
gave up the Collection of Rates Bill, which has deservedly
excited opposition in every part of the country. He is
to bring in another Bill without the objectionable
clauses.

The Inland Warehousing or Bonding Bill went
through a Committee, after some opposition. Lord
SANDON led the attack, and was supported by some
other Members for the sea ports. The motion for a Com-
mittee was carried against them by 102 to 69.
The Ecclesiastical and Cathedral Preferments Bill
was read a third time and pass Pd.
The Metropolitan Police Courts Bill occupied the
House for a considerable time in Committee, after Mr.
LAw's motion to put it off for six months had been
withdrawn. 'The house meets tc•day to discuss it
further in Committee. Several mea.ures were carried
forward a stage, and at One o'Ciock the House
adjourned.

We never witnessed faction more regardless of
'all the usual hypocritical decencies with which it
masks its conduct than on Thursday night. On a
petition being presented in the House of Lords,
which grew out of the events of Birmingham, Vis-
count MELBOURNE took the opportunity of giving
their Lordships come information which the Go-
vernment had received from Birmingham, and for
which the Peers had the evening before pressingly
asked. It had been previously stated in the other
House of Parliament, and was repeated by Lord
MELBOURNE, that Government iutended imme-
diately to institute an inquiry into the subject,
and it had been put to Parliament in both Houses
not to agitate the question, and weaken the
authority of the Magistrates, by untimely discussion.
A compliance with that might have been expected
front the Conservative Peers. Front the Newspapers
which have to bring such subjects lady before the
public as a matter of business, no mall can expect
it, but the Newspapers have been more cautious
and less factious than the Peers.

The Duke of WELLINGTON (why are we com-
pelled to couple so illustrious a name with such an
unseemly proceeding ?) took the opportunity to at-
tack the Birmingham Magistrates—to attack the
Town Clerk—and to attack the Ministers, who had
appointed the Magistrates—on subjects which had
no relation to the riots, and which should have been
separately discussed, after some notice that they
were to be brought forward. The bad example
of so illustrious a man found immediate imitators.
Lord LYNDHURST ripped up a number of by-
gone transactions in which the 'Ministers were
concerned, and which have a much better de-
fined relation to the continued exclusion of the
Tories from office than to the Birmingham
riots. If intemperate speeches on the part of the
Ministers may on such occasions be brought for-
ward as having been a stimulus to outrage, how
much more deserving of the consideration of their
Lordships would be their fiscal and trade laws,
which cause that permanent ill health in society of
which the outrage at Birmingham was only one of
the symptoms ? Instead of confining himself to
the petition which was before the House, Lord
LYNDHURST wandered into a host of accusa-
tions against the Ministers, founded on dif-
ferent parts of their career, and did what he
could, had others imitated his provoking ex-
ample, to raise up a fierce debate on the character
of Whigs and Tories, and on the influences of the
conduct of the Legislature, and of the executive
Government, over the genius, disposition, character,
and feelings of the working population. The
Ministers did not imitate the bad example, and
contented themselves with merely rebutting the un-
called-for accusation. If Lord JOHN RUSSELL,
as Lord LYNDHURST stated, have acted so as to
stimulate the people to outrage, his conduct
should not be noticed incidentally, but be made the
subject of a solemn inquiry. He should be im-
peached ; and to make such accusations inciden-
tally, without following them up, is much more
like faction than the dignified conduct of Legis-
lators.

Lord LYNDHUFIST having imitated the Duke,
found an imitator in the Earl of RIPON. There
was a lower deep than the one into which the
Learned Lord sank, and Lord RIPON found it.
He went into the questions that were agitated be-
fore the Privy Council in granting the charter to
Birmingham, compared the number of signa-
tures to the petition for the Charter to the number
against it, the amount of rates the subscribers to
each petition pail!, the inquiries that had been made
on the spot, and entered at large into all the circum-
stances attending granting the charter, in order,
like Lord LYNDHURST, to make out a case against
the Ministers. If they had behaved improperly
and unworthily, as Lord RIPON said, in grant-
ing that charter, why did he allow the whole of
the Session to go by without bringing the ques-
tion before Parliament and the country ? Why
did he, when an outrage had occurred, and in the
teeth of Lord MELBOURNE'S recommenda-
tion, bring forward a number of charges which
went to depreciate the 'Magistrates and the
Ministers ? It was, at least, ungenerous to
bring such charges at such a time, but party
spirit seems to have none of the kindliness and cha-
rities of ordinary life. Lord RIPON having allowed
what he described as gross misconduct in the Nli-
nisters to be unnoticed for a whole
Session, took
the opportunity of a riot occurring to blame that
grant of a charter with which the riot had no more
connection than with the 'Administration of which
the Noble Lord was for a few weeks at the head.
All this, in our judgment—when so many eyes
are watching their LorChhips, when so. many ears
are ready to drink in any one word which can be said
to their disparagement—for their Lordships' sake,
is very much to be deplored. For the sake of the
people, who probably can do without the Peers,
we should be hypocrites if we said it is to be re-
gretted. Whatever places the conduct and charac-