The Sun.
London, England, 1837-03-11 00:00:00

of Spain. These clearly and distinctly are its objects,
and when these objects are pronounced achieved by
-tile high contracting Powers most interested in their
adjustment, there is an end of the Treaty. In admitting
that the Quadruple Treaty is binding upon the Go-
vernment of -this country, the Tories admit that it is
the duty of Ministers to leave no means untried to
crush the. Carlist rebellion in Spain. This fact is so
obvious that it appears to us impossible to miscon-
ceive it. Now the object of Lord MA HON'S motion
of last night, was to censure the Government for im-
perfectly carrying out the articles of the Treaty. It
hiS Lordship had attacked Lord PALMERSTON for
permitting Don C iIRLOS to carry on, for so long a
period, a system of open and organized rebellion
against a Crowned Head, recognized as the friend and
ally of this country, there would be something like
consistency in the Noble Lord's conduct. But what
is the state of the question now ? In one breath the
Tories declare that the quadruple Treaty ought to be
7, I strictly fulfilled, and in the next they cry out against all
hiterference in the affairs of the .Peninsula.

Lord PALMERSTON'S vindication of the foreign
polEcy of the Government was by far the best put
forth by his Lordship since the opening of Parliament.
He left the Tories without a word, for in point of
fact Sir ROBERT PEEL'S speech, from beginning to
end, was a complete begging of the question. His
Lordship well observed that it was the liberality
of his policy that roused the ire of the To-
ries. They had admitted Don MIGUEL to be
an Usurper, and they knew as well as he did that
Don CARLOS was One ; and vet they supported both
because they were despots. His Lordship is right so
far ; but another great object of the Tories is to oust
the Whig Cabinet. They care not what they do to
effect this ; for, in fact, it is our Home rather than
our Foreign policy that they desire to regulate.

It has often been remarked that an injudicious
friend is one of the worst of enemies. If this is true
—if it is true that want of judgment disqualifies a
man for performing the offices of friendship—it will not
be denied that want of sincerity is at least an equal
disqualification. It is from these two classes of friends
—the injudicious and the insincere—that the danger
of the Church of England arises. The former do not
understand her real interests—the latter would readily
sacrifice them to serve the purposes of faction. Were
we called upon to point .out the Representatives of
these two sections of Churchmen, we should name
the present and the ci-devant members for the Uni-
versity of Oxford. The one is a good sample of ig-
norant bigotry, the other a first rate specimen of en-
lightened hypocrisy. Sir ROBERT INGLIS is for
making the law for the payment of Church-rates more
stringent, believing that the interests of a religion
which addresses itself to the reason, the hearts, and
the consciences of men, can be advanced by mo-
ney wrung from their reluctant hands—by a tax
which is repugnant to the reason, oppressive to the
conscience, and repulsive to the feelings of those on
whom it is levied. He therefore on principle stands
up for the continuance of Church-rates, cost what it
may. We respect his honesty, while we lament his
short-sightedness. Of him, however, there may be
some hope—he is not beyond the reach of conviction
—he may be bronght to a right way of thinking.
Very different is the case with respect to Sir ROBERT
PEEL. He is in the situation of the unfaithful servant
who " knoweth his master's will and doeth it not."
He has given sufficient proof that he perfectly under-
stands the true interests of the Church, and no less
convincing evidence that he cares not a straw about
them. The only way in which he looks at the
Church-rate question is as it bears upon his own am-
bitious views. Its party merits alone come home to
his frigid bosom. That he should not see the fu-
tility of the arguments for supporting the Church by
a compulsory rate, it is impossible to believe ; neither
would it be a compliment to his sagacity to suppose
that he does not equally see the danger that impends
over the Church, of which he would fain be considered
the champion, from any delay in settling the
question. Of the Right Hon. Baronet we do not
presume to hope that we can make a convert exter-
nally—internal conversion he needs none ; but we would
earnestly implore those Churchmen who really wish
well to the Establishment, to consider the consequences
of rejecting the present opportunity of terminating the
unhappy differences which exist between it and the
larger portion of the community.

We would in the first place call the attention of
such persons to the results likely to arise from the only
other alternative that remains—namely, the continu-
ance of the present system. Will those who now com-
plain of the grievance of Church-rates, and whose
very first attempt to obtain relief has assumed a
character of such energy and determination, desist from
the pursuit of their object should they be frustrated in
the attainment of it at present ? Is there any shadow
of reason for such a supposition ? Is such a derelic-
tion of what is so strongly felt to be a religious as well
as political duty, in the least consistent with the known
principles of human nature ? No sane person can
say that it is. And let not the opponents of the aboli-
tion flatter themselves that they have to deal only with
Dissenters, though they would find that no enviable or
easy task. Not the least part of the danger in this
case springs from the bosom of the Church herself.
In all the great public meetings, where this subject
has been agitated, Churchmen have taken a leading
part, and throughout the community the same feeling
prevails to a great extent—the feeling that it is un.
righteous to make the Dissenter pay for the support
of the worship of the Church of England. Well, the
just relief prayed for is refused. What is the natural
result? Why, as a matter of course, increased res9nt-
ment against the aggriever, and increased exertions on
the part of the aggrieved. The conflict is only begun, or
. rather beginning. In a single year, should it last so long,
the ranks of the complainants will be swelled by num-
bers who are now looking on perhaps with indifference,
while many of those within the Church, who wish to
see her purged of this iniquity, disgusted with her
anti-Christian spirit, will shake off the dust of their
feet against her, and quit her community for ever. The
unreflecting, thoroughgoing, Church-and-King man maw
imagine that when there is a majority in favour of a con-
, tested Church-rate the Church gains a victory I Never
was there a more mistaken notion. It is really happy
for the Church to be beaten in'tlicse contests, for the
fruits of victory are only the deepening of transient ir-
ritation into permanent, irreconcileable enmity, and an
enlistment of the feelings of the multitude against a
claim which their unsophisticated sense of right and
wrong tells them is unjust, and oppressive.

In another part of The Sun will be found a copy of
a letter from Mr. BENJAMIN HALL, in answer to one
sent to him by Mr. DOUGLAS, On the uhject of the
representation of Marylebone. Mr. HALL'S letter
deserves praise for its frankness, firmness, and modera-
tion of tone. He justly observes that lie comes
forward upon the invitation of a large and respect-
able body of the electors, but adds, at the same
time, that he will not persevere, if l.is perseverance is
at all likely to sow dissensions among the Reformers
in the borough. For our own parts, we strongly re-
commend Mr. HALL to persevere, for whatever a
small knot of busy individuals may say to the con-
trary, there is no question that he is the popular, and,
in the event of a dissolution, will be the successful,
candidate.

The Paris Papers of Thursday arc barren of all interest-
ing intelligence. They speculate, it is true, upon certain