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

servativcs—that is to say, in a House com.poed of 527
Members (tellers included) they had a inAjotity, suf
ficiently slender, of 23 votes ; b'et there were on that
occasion 39 pairs, making the gross numbers who took
part on that question, including pairs and tellers, 314
Whig-Papist-Radicals, and of Conservatives 291.
Yesterday morning the Ministers and their Oiler: tt'tis-
tered, including tellers, 289: thc:r ,‘riends of the
Church of England •,2.8k 3 'anteing the anti-Church
majority to the Mpectable modicum of exactly fiJF
votes There must be further taken into acevon't 41
pairs, which swelled the Whi,fr.4.?,t4,l".ai Papists to
310, four short of what 'amounted to on the 15th
of March, while tl.-t(-.l'. T 1 pairs raised the Conservatives
to 305. vac 14 above their former mnber---rod
positive that thrie is no reactipt, favour of the
Church of England'! All 'net', who knew the people
had an inward coascisrejthess that such would be 0!€, I
progress of national feeling in this countrr, I;Lna that
such would, sooner or later, be t!'.e course of action
within the walls of the !-?nnse of Commons. There
is, therefore, as we I'aid in our last paper, an eitni, of
the Church-rate quackery, under the osretiAtko Whig
usurle the Irish Clitimh tohl.)-e4ry Measure ;
there is also an end of Omit base fralnd niclt-named the
Irish Corporation measure, ire o; ht length in the keep-
ing of the House of LoYds—there is a visible mid
disgraceful end. Why, then, the question stares every
man in the faee—what use has the British empire for
such a Ministry ? Why should the practical and
business-doing people of England entlure to be still
plagued with a. band of impostors, who have nothing,
to show for what they wring from the treasury, hut a
tong catalogue of unredeemed pledges, who, spend
the time of Parliament, and exhaust the patience of all
reasonable men, in attempts to mangle every one ti our
institutions ; while they leave no single good thing
undisturbed, no recognized grievance impartially re-
dressed, and no importaut entroversy settled. It was
for xonie time the project of these adventureca to re-
present the House of Lord. as an obstacle to all im-
provement ; and, in the autumn of 1835 they sent
O'Connell through the north of England to feel the
pulse of our countrymen and ascertain whether it
would be sale or feasible to run a muck at that il-
lustrious body, and prevail upon Englishmen to abate
it as a nuisance at the bidding of an Irish traitor, for
the sake of carrying into effect those schemes which
its existence would be sure to frustrate. The experi-
ment led only to defeat and mortification. The people
of England showed plain enough that they preferred
their own hereditary aristocracy to the success of Mr.
Daniel O'Connell's Ministerial puppets. The Peers
themselves have buckled on that armour wherewith the
British Constitution provides them. They have gone
forth to battle bold, and returned conquerors. The
crestfallen and despairing Whigs have, therefore, been
compelled to change their whole system of policy.
No longer daring to wage, war with the House of
Lords, or to push their schemes of mischief against
Church and State in defiance of that great assembly of
hereditary guardians to the monarchy, the Melbourne
Cabinet have confined their views to the mere reten-
tion of the name of Ministers, to the receipt of their
trimensal pay, the distribution of English patronage
among thew own dependents, and the barter of Irish
patronage for the Parliamentary support of O'Connell.
For the country they have done nothing, and pretend
not to do anything. They bring forward sham mea-
sures to amuse the ill temper of their partisans, and stop
the mouth of revolutionary clamour. But that is all.
They know that such measures will not pass ; and as
for any in which the bulk of the nation would take an
interest, they never dream of such un-Whig-like chi-
meras. With regard to this Church-rate question, it
has perhaps been argued so fully as to relieve us from
the obligation of opening it again ; but there are two
or three points and persons touched upon in the course
of Tuesday night's debate, which we may to-morrow
feel it still our duty to advert to. Meanwhile, reader,
be of good cheer.—Times.

Ministers must now pursue a bold and decisive
policy. It is not so much to the House of Commons
as to the country they must look for support in the
crisis which is approaching. In consequence of the
electors of Great Britain not having the protection of
the Ballot, the House of Commons is not a fair re-
presentation of the opininns of evot,
portion of the people, much less of the great body of
those who, excluded from the franchise, have no re-
cognised voice nor position in the legislative proceed-
ings of the State. This is sufficiently demonstrated by
the result of the recent elections in Westminster and
Bridgewater, without looking back for corroboratidh to
Devon, and the numerous other constituencies which,
in the last general election and since, have been either
forced or seduced to vote against their conviction and
their conscience. Never was a time when an Ad-
ministration, based on the principles recognized in
the constitution of the present Government, might
be more powerful and permanent than at the pre-
sent moment. To be thus strong and stable needs
but an energetic adherence to the rule of policy
which has already received the unequivocal sanc-
tion of the nations approbation. This is not only
necessary to the strength, but to the political salvation
of the present Cabinet. There must be no concession
to enemies not to be conciliated but by a perfect sur-
render of all that is worth a struggle. No " letting
I dare not, wait I would." The advances of the
enemy must be boldly met and confronted by similar
advances. If the Lords encroach, and the Commons
waver, the extension of the suffrage, the shortening of
Parliament, and the ballot, must be had recourse to in
order to invigorate the representative principle. No
matter how weak the Ministry may at present be in one
branch of the Legi.slature, and how powerless in another,
while they unflinchingly abide by the people the people
will abide by them ; and if they find it necessary to
fall back upon the country, as is more than probable,
let them appeal to national sentiment on the grounds we
have suggested, and they will find a support which will
enable them to advance in their goodly work of amelio-
rating our institutions, in defiance—aye, in very de-
rision—of a bigoted, despotic, oligarchic opposition.
Morning Advertiser.

Sir Andrew Agnew was in his glory at St. Stephen's
on Tuesday night, on presenting a petition from the
General Assembly of the Church of Scotland i tt pe-
tition from Glasgow, and one from fiemt ether place
in Scotland ; all praying for Ow insertion of a clause
in Scotch Railways Bills, b prohibit travelling on
Sundays. The pertinacity of the Sabbatarian
lators, in restricting or suppressing the liberty of the
subject, is equal to -their wrong,-headedness. The
clause introduced hitt) tht Glasgow and Ayr Railway
Bill, to prevent travellinc, by that conveyance on ,Stin.
days, was carried in the -'first instance by this ultra-
religious party, when the tit:)tion for the consideration
of that P,,it was first brought forward. But on Thurs-
daly this clause was struck out, by a majority of 115
Kl. Not satisfied with this decision, Sir AndreW
brought forward the matter again last night, and
again moved, though he afterwards withdrew, the re-
admission of the clause. Can any thing be more
vexatious than such a proceeding, unleas it bt, the
general interposition of the same party with every
thing that bears the shape of popular amusement
and relaxation ? We arc quite disgusted while re-
adverting to the subject of this useless and mis=
chievous cant. As " Cromwell said of Sir Harry
Vane, the Lord deliver U 3 from Sir Andrew Agnew
and the Sabbatarian Mawworms I" Had they their
way, they would convert Christianity from a religion of
feeling and of the heart, to a cold mockery of external
lip homage and superstitious form. We protest equally
against the profanation of the Sabbath as the Parlia-
mentary Cantwells, but we maintain that their proceed-
ing
would tend to its desecration by defeating its pur-
pose of cheerf, :‘ 'relaxation and repose. Under their
•
straight-waistcoat system it would become a day of
restless espionage, or of vindictive moroseness.• It
would tear up by the roots the brotherly charity which
is the vital essence of Christianity. In every way that
we look at the question, as brought forward by these
political Pharisees, we are equally and totally at va-
riance with them. We are not advocates for theo-
logical discussions in Parliament ; but we must
say, that Mr. Roebuck completely disproved their
Sectarian view ; first, by the express authority of
St. Paul ; next, by the authority of two of the
founders of time English Reform Church. Scriptural
texts are as much against them as common sense
and the daily evidence of facts. Let them prove, first,
that the Mosaic ordinance against work on the seventh.