The Sun.
London, England, 1837-05-25 00:00:00

day, has any thing to do ivith the Christian ordinance
for keeping holy the eighth day. On that point
the great majority of the Christian Reform Churches
throughout Europe is decidedly .against them. The
Romish Church is apainetethcea; and all.ChriWan
an-
tiquity agei'list them. But let us adMit; efOte.th'e.
sake of argument, that the Christian Sab-
bath was intended to '.'s:'4l.;titt:ited for the Jewish
seventh-da.y Sable, they would gain nothing by
the. 'tt.ditiission. The prohibition of the Jewish Sab-
bath was directed against household work. How
do the Sabbathtarian ascetice see-14 walk this
prohibition ? Let, t,hteil pi.eiant the enipldynient it
the foretttyal 'mitt the hoiheanaida, the edtiks and the
tradesmen of the rich classes iiay, When they
have done that, we 41-lit that their vexatious inter-
meddlieteii, ybe conscientiously religious. Till then
shall consider it to be a mischievous imposture.
According to Sir Andrew's view, the noel' !nee is not.
to travel on the only dey t‘qtel-1 lie can travel by the
cheap and eevits.t '''''''''''''' of the railway. This is
reeve legislation against poverty. Why do not the
Agnewitcs interfere with the travelling of the rich on
a Sunday ? Why do they not prevent the mail-corkehee
from travelling on a Sunday ? Why do they hot pre-
vent the throng of carriages which cities the Parks on
the Sabbath day, and blocks up the access to the
Zoologieal Gardens ? There would be some equity
in this interference—sufficient in sonic degree to pal-
liate and cloke its litigious, vexatious, and mischievous
character. When they have prevented the rich from
making the eighth day a day of restlessness instead of
rest, we will "applaud unto the very echo, which shall
applaud again." But till they have stopped the con-
titual rattle of the dice in the West-end gambling-
houses on a Sunday—till they have silenced the inces-
sant wheels of the splendid equipages which crowd the
parks on that day—till they have, put a stop to Sunday
dinner parties, Sunday card parties, and Sunday con-
certs—till they have imposed rest on all the menial
servants of the Aristocracy, and all the trading minis-
ters to their luxuries, we shall persist in opposing the
measures of these fanatics, as measures directed against
the poor, and tending to the immoral purpose of pu-
nishing poverty as the only crime. We shall oppose
them, as we have done, " with all our soul and with
all our strength." Let them make war on Sunday
champagne and turbot, Sundae 100, and Sunday park
assignations, as well as on Sunday tea-gardens and
Sunday steane-toaches ! Meanwhile, to their vir-
tuous me...ignation against Sunday shaving and Sunday
heel dinners, we shall reply in the words of Sir Toby
to Sir Andrew Agucdteek :—" Dost thou think that
because thou art virtuous there shall be no more cakes
and ale ? Aye, by the rood, but there, shall, and gin-
ger shall be hot in the mouth too."—Morn. Advertiser.
The dolorous tone of the Ministerial journals, in
referenet to the " glorious majority" of five in favour
of the Church-spoliation measure forms an amusing
contrast. to the boastful flourishes of anticipated
triumph with which the same journals formerly an-
nounced that grand project of the Whig-Radical Ad-
ministration for divesting the Protestant Establishment
of ice national character, and robbing it of its national
resources. All is not blank despair, however, with the
Ministerial Journals. In the midst of their grief they
endeavour•to extract a ray of consolation from consi-
dering that, if many who have not voted with the NE-
nisters had voted with them, the majority would not
have been as small as it was. To the logic of this
mode of argumentation we can offer no objection. It
seems to us to be equally unanswerable and ridiculous.
One of the Ministerial organs gravely affirms that it
could 't name nearly a score of liberals that were ate
sent without pairs, -although their avowed sentiments
are in favour of the motion of the Chancellor of the
Exehequer." Delinquent Liberals ! Content to re-
main in a state of political celibacy in the " pairing
season," and choosing to remain out of the House pre-
cisely at the time when they ought to be in it ! There
were the Ministerial leaders of the movement against
the Church at their post. There were those banner•
bearers in the camp of agitation. Mr. Spring Rice
and Lord John Russell, ready to pour an over-
whelming force through the breach upon the citadel of
the Protestant faith, and could have done it but for
one reason. What was that ? Their men stayed away !
_Thee- hod eev otorrreack for Liao Goa.- They had the
fear of Westminster before their eves—they had the
fate of Leader fresh in their recollection ; they knew
that the chivalrous Burdett had thrown down the
gauntlet for the Constitutional Monarchy and Church of
England in the very centre and chosen region of me-
tropolitan liberalism, and there followed up his proud
defiance by achieving a signal victory. The " score of
Liberals," bearing all this in mind, allowed the Minis-
ters to run their foolish heads against a wall without
their assistance. Their heads are thick enough, we
know ; but, thick as they are, they cannot come in
contact with the rock upon which the Church is built,
without finding that they are not quite impenetrable.
If we may believe one of our morning Contemporaries,
the Gallant Colonel Thompson preferred a comforable
dinner with the Mayor of Hull to a supperless
night with the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the
House of Commons. What a preposterous taste f "Are
there," says that Ministerial mouthpiece emphatically,
" are there any Dissenters in Hull? We wish Colo-
nel Thompson joy of the reception he will meet with
from them ! That gallant gentleman set off last night
to be present at a dinner, where he was to sit upon the
Mayor's right hand—the Mayor of Hull's right hand !
We Venture to say that that worthy civic caw would
rather have had his right hand cut off than find the
gallant Colonel sitting upon it when a question involv-
ing the conscientious scruples of so large a body of his
fellow-countrymen and fellow-reformers was at issue in
the House to which he (the gallant Colonel) had been
sent as a man of sense and discernment, able to see
that when there was an idle dinner to eat, and an im-
portant vote, the last was the serious and necessary
duty, not the first." Only think of Colonel Thomp-
son s scenting an " idle dinner" at some 150 miles
distance, mid preferring the " good things" served
out at the Mayor of Hull's right hand to the " good
things" which the speeches of such irresistible wags
as Mr. Spring Rice and Mr. C. Buller always con-
tain. It it quite clear that it was not at the " pump
and ladle" Colonel Thompson chose to regale him-
self—lie had " sense and discernment" enough to
avoid foraging in that direction, for he is an old cam-
paigner—" such cold refection suits not generous
souls. DLit why did the patriotic Mayor of Hull,
who, it appears, would rather thrust his right hand in
the kitchen fire and burn it off, like another Mutius
Sceevola, sooner than Colonel Thompson should " sit
Upon it" fylitli he ought to be sittin upon one of the
back Treasury benches waiting tor the division ;—why,
we ask, did that patriotic iVlayor of Hull throw an
" idle dinner" in the way of so keen a earnpaigner, just
at the moment when lie ought to have fasted for the
goed of his country ? We fear that, if Colonel
Thotripiti he farina Ohl as a principal offender in
this business, the riglashanded Mayor of Hull must
be convicted of being an rteceesety before the fact
to this dinner-eating delinqiiency 1 for: e cannot
suppose the gallant Colonel was his uninvited guest.
But a still more extraordieary reason is assigned in the
same quarter for the smallness of the Ministerial majo-
rity. " Some gentlemen," we are told, " who had their
yeomanry uniforms just fresh from their tailors, thought
that nothing could be so essential to the welfare
of the nation as the aforesaid uniforms' display."
What this exactly means we do not pretend to
know. We must refer for an explanation to the
political tailor at Charing-cross, or the " three tailors
of Tooley-street." Why Whig-Radicals, being dis-
posed to military manamvres, could not attack the
Church in yeomanry uniforms, we cannot say. Surely
the display of their uniforms need not have prevented
the exhibition of their principles, unless they thought
that any other campaign would be much less hazardous
than one against the Protestant Establishment. It
was only a few nights ago that Ministers succeeded,
with great efforts, and by the aid of fifteen Whig
placemen, in obtaining a majority of one against the
proposition of limiting the punishment of death to
cases of murder only. It is quite right that they who
are the blind and obstinate conservators of a barbarous
and unchristian code should be eager to destroy the
national Establishment of the Christian faith. This
last -unhallowed project has now been sanctioned by a
nuLjority of five. Taking away the fifteen. Whig
pla,,eemen and the thirty-five " joints of the tail,
wh rase oath ought to have prevented them from voting