The Sun.
London, England, 1839-12-21 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 21, 1889

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

FROISI THE DAILY PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.)
(From the Courier.)
All the papers and advices received from Spanish Ame-
rica for some time past teem witharticles of the most bitter
vituperation on the perfidy and aggressions of Prance in
the whole course of its relations with the States of the New
World. At Potosi as at Lima, at Bogota as at Mexico, at
Quito as at Buenos Ayres, at Santiago de Chili as at
Rio Janeiro, the feeling and the exasperation is one and the
same, both in the States which are victimized and in
those which have yet escaped, but who read in present
and passing events the forewarning of their own
contingent doom. Nor are the injurious effects of this
just expression of universal reprobation visited upon
France, the guilty party, alone, for they are retaliated
upon the whole of Europe, and upon Great Britain
above all, because of the greater stake of her com-
mercial interests in those extensive regions far trans-
cending in importance those of the whole of Europe
taken together. With some of those States we have
special and amicable treaties of commerce and alliance,
wherein peculiar privileges are granted in grateful
return for kind service in the hour of utmost need,
and for that acknowledgment of independence
In the face of hostile Cabinets and the Holy
Alliance which raised them to the dignity of
Sovereign Powers, and crushed for a time those grasp-
ing projects and ambitious aspirations developed at the
Congress of Vienna by M . de Chateaubriand in his
celebrated declaration, that the Spanish American States
" were republics in their own despite, for every thing in
America was opposed to the system which had been esta-
blished, and on that account it was necessary France
should apply herself to establish thrones to be filled by
the dynasty of the Bourbons." With such of the new
republics as have not yet cemented the ties of friendship
with us so closely as those first " raised into existence"
by Canning, but which otherwise might have been hoped
from time and a continued succession of good offices, this
prejudice against European interests artfully fomented
and inflamed by French aggression, is now acting to close
tile door against friendly alliance. The State of Ecuador,
for example, has passed a decree placing this country
in the exceptional case of those vtl►ich are not to be
entitled to the privileges of the most favoured nation ;
whilst, singularly enough, the United States, which, so
far from having been the friends and disinterested allies
of Spanish America, have been first and foremost to
sow dissension amongst them, and in the consciousness
of superior strength to plunder them mercilessly, as in
the case of the Mexican frontiers and the rebellion of
Texas, arc to be ranked in the Ecuador on the same
footing as the new States amongst themselves interna•
tionally.
(From the Globe.)
When Sir Robert Peel gave his well-meant aid to
the Wetherells, and Eldons, and Wellingtons—(it is in
compliment to the Duke that we place his name last in
the roll of bigots) to trip up Canning on the threshold of
power. what was the pretext ? That he ct,uld not act un-
der a Prime Minister favourable to the Catholic claims.
Within two years Sir R. Peel contrived to obey the word
of command of a military Premier,and bring forwardthose
very claims in Parliament. In 1827, therefore, Sir
Robert Peel studied to raise himself on the ruins of
the Canning school, in ultra-company. In 1829 he
cut adrift his unwieldy convoy, and went, with full sail,
before the wind of Whig opinion, and Irish impulse.
Where do we find him, and where his Ultras, ten years
afterwards ?

Surely the pleasure is as great
Of being cheated, as to cheat !
We find the Ultras again looking to Peel to undo Eman-
cipation ; and we find Peel (presumably) again looking
to the Ultras for aid in tripping up the party in power
on the very pretexts used against Canning! Is not this
precisely the truth ? Is there any sort of definable diffe-
rence, in point of principle, between tripping a Ministry
up for favouring Emancipation, and turning one
out for acting in pursuance of that measure ? And
can there be a more direct and logical consequence of
the Act of Emancipation than the appointment (in
fair proportion) of Catholics ? And is not, this the
grand Ministerial crime dwelt on throughout the re-
cess ? Can Sir Robert Peel expect to play his poli-
tical thimble-rig all over again ? To rise, as in
1827, on Ultra shoulders, and kick them down,
as in 1829 ? Is this what his present sup-
porters expect of him ? Is this what be destines for
them ? We wish to speak of Sir Robert Peel, as of any
one personally, with perfect candour. We do not think
him chargeable with the crimes, or capable of the merits,
which have sometimes marked acts of decided energetic
apostacy. For apostacy may be a crime or a merit,
according to its motives and circumstances. But Sir
Robert Peel has always kept his principles carefully
loose about him. He has always seemed intent to pro-
vide that be never should need exactly to apostatise.
(From the Standard.)
The last card in the hands of the Ministerial
writers is a threat, that the ultra Protestant
class of Conservatives are determined to force Sir
Robert Peel to rescind the Act of 1829 upon his
accession to the Government. This threat,
we own, provokes some jealousy on our part ;
we have been accustomed to hear ourselves
called Orange = bigots—ultras of the most extravagant
degree—and we have laboured to deserve these titles,
which,— considering the company in which we have
received' them, we have ever regarded as titles of
honour. Now, however, we are assured that
there is a class of Conservatives more Orange
—more bigotted—more Protestant—more ultra
than ourselves. We wonder where this class hid
itself in 1829, when the chief palm was by com-
mon consent awarded to the Standard, and to the
exalted individuals whose opinions it was our pride
to reflect. It was in 1829 that the question was tried,
and then that violent body, from which so much is
now predicted, could nowhere be found—as we have
said, there was no one more violent than ourselves.
In recurring to our own conduct, and what we con-
sider our present wrongs, we of course act in part
from a selfish motive as far as reclaiming our position
in the van of " Orange bigotry ;" but we have another
motive, and that is to bring under public attention the
fact that the question now is not that which agi-
tated the public mind ten years ago—a question
as to the equalisation of civil capacities—but an en-
couragement of Romanist Propagandism, with the hu-
miliation of the Established Protestant Churches on the
one side, and a defence of the Protestant religion and
of the Protestant Churches on the other. This altered
state of the question will satisfactorily explain why
many who favoured the Bill of 1829, or stood in-
different when that measure was under discussion,
may resist Popish aggression as earnestly as the oppo-
nents of that unfortunate change, and resist it with a
degree of resentment proportioned to their sense of the
fraudulent professions of which they were the dupes. It
by no means follows, however, that their resentment
goes the length of wishing to place Roman Catholics in
the position in which they were eleven years ago.

SUICIDE CAUSED BY DREAD OF DESTITU-
TION.—An inquest was held on Thursday morning at
the Lord Clive's Head, Duke-street, Manchester-
square, on the body of Ann England, a poor woman,
aged 59, who hung herself on Wednesday morning last.
It was stated in evidence that deceased had been for-
merly well off, but that latterly being obliged to have
recourse to shoe-binding to support herself, she became
excessively low spirited, and frequently expressed her
fears that she should be reduced to seek an asylum for
the remainder of her days in a workhouse, or have re-
course to the terrible alternative of suicide. On Wed-
nesday morning last a lodger, who was going to take her
some boiling water to prepare her breakfast with, found
her hanging behind her bed-room door, suspended by
means of a piece of clothes-line from a crook in the
door. A surgeon, who was called in, proved that she
had been dead several hours. Verdict—" Temporary
in sanity."
KING OF NEW ZEALAND.—We have accounts
from New Zealand which are of some interest at the
present moment, inasmuch as they infer that the settle-
ment of the British emigrants to that quarter may not
be without opposition. It seems that the Baron de
Thierry continues to assert the sovereignty of New Zea-
land, where he now resides with his family. The Baron is
" Sovereign Chief, King of Rahabeva," and acts in the
name and on the behalf of the aborigines of the island. He
has recently issued a decree from Mount Isabel, in the
province of Hokianga, dated March 1839, announcing
that the tribes may continue to liveon the landswhich they
occupy ; that he will dispose of lands every three months
at auction, the minimum price to be one dollarper acre ;
that 25 per cent. shall de devoted to local improve-
ment, and 25 per cent. to the benefit of the aborigines.
He will not oppose the settlement of the English in his
empire, and their purchase of lands with the condition
that his royal rights be acknowledged. In the year 1837
her Majesty's ship Beagle, Capt. Fitzroy, visited New
Zealand. A controversy arose between the Baron and
Capt. Fitzroy, on account of the refusal by the latter to
recognise his sovereignty. In a protest, addressed to
Capt. Fitzroy by the Baron, he presented a history
of his life and the claims which he preferred to the
sovereignty of New Zealand and Nuabeva. He
states in this protest that he was born in England of
noble parentage, his father being an emigrant of the
French revolution. Educated at Oxford, he there
married the daughter of a Prelate, who now shares
with him the honours of his royalty. He was at one
time an attache of the French Legation in London, and
always had the protection of the Royal French exiles.
He is personally known to the present King of the
French, Louis Philippe. and to his late Majesty King
William, to both of whom he intended to send his pro-
test against the conduct of Captain Fitzroy. During
the Baron de Thierry passed same
11)0 residence of Mr.. Vaughan at Washington, as
British Minister,
months there. In society he was admired for his social
qualities, and particularly for his musical talents.
Tie two brothers of the Lord Bishop of Salis-
bury and John Evelyn Denison, Esq , of Nottingham-
shire, viz., Henry Denison, Esq., of All Souls College,
and Alfred Denison, Esq., of Christchurch, are on the
eve of quitting this country to settle in South Australia.
...Derby Reporter.