The Sun.
London, England, 1839-12-24 00:00:00

LONDON :
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 24, 1539.

It is quite plain that the politicians of the Tories
are alarmed at the success of the bigots of their
party. For upwards of two years their mission-
aries have been going about the country raising a
No Popery cry. They have demanded the repeal
of the Emancipation Act, and have declared that it
was necessary to reconquer Ireland. On the prin-
ciple of preserving Protestant Ascendancy, they have
required that the Whigs should be turned out of
office and the Tories installed in their stead. Ac-
cording to their own organs, they are on the eve of
taking the Treasury by storm. In one, or at most
two short months, the Tories are to seize the helm
and turn away the Whigs with disgrace
and contumely. The indignation of England is to
he expressed by the House of Commons, and the
Whigs are to run from office, like a trespassing
and pelted dog. Alas ! just at this moment, the
Tories shrink back alarmed from their own victory.
They are as desirous of office as ever, but they
repudiate its consequences. They are ready enough,
they still say, to turn out the Whigs, but all their
Journals strenuously deny any wish or any intention
to repeal the Catholic Emancipation Act, or to
make war on Ireland. They already, therefore,
disavow the policy on which their success so far has
been founded, and shrink back with terror from
the position in which the bigots of their party have
placed them.

Having always said that the No Popery policy
was impracticable, that the repeal of the Emanci-
pation Act was impossible, without causing ten times
as mach mischief as Sir R. PEEL would dare to
encounter, we readily believe the disclaimers of the
Tory Press. Sir R. PEEL would not repeal the
Catholic Emancipation Act. What then is to be
his policy, and by what party is he to be supported ?
Who are the men, and what is their purpose,
who at this critical time propose to break
up the Administration, to dissolve the Parlia-
ment, and incur the immense risk of adding unnec-
cessarily to the existing agitation ? The scribblers
in Daily Journals seem to think that the com-
munity is in an ordinary situation ; that Sir ROBERT
PEEL and Viscount MELBOURNE may change
places with as much ease as two pieces on
a chess board ; that there would be no fur-
ther consequences from changing the whole
Administration than changing the Ladies of
the Bed-chamber ; but the community is at pre
sent stirred to its deepest depths ; it is alive and
heaving in every part, and a change in the A dminis-

Itration, the precursor of a change in the policy of
t the Government, would involve risks which Tory
) statesmen will be less ready to encounter than Tory
1 scribblers are to discuss.

First, we want to know, as the Standard, Times,
and Post have, in the name of the Tories, cast off
the bigots of their party, and now disclaim the
repeal of the Emancipation Act and the re-esta-
blishment of Protestant Ascendancy, what is to be
the policy of Sir ROBERT PEEL. How is he to
steer between repealing the Act of Emancipation,

and carrying it into execution ? Are the Tories to

suspend the law of their own authority ? If he do
not propose to repeal it he will brand all his own

party who have been bawling for the repeal,
' and who have kindled strife and discord
that will never be assuaged during this
generation, as mischievous agitators ; as men who
have been exciting religious contention without any
sincere, any religious, or any practical object. If
he do not carry the Act into execution—if he refuse
every place of profit and trust to the Catholics, be-
cause they arc Catholics—if he employ all the in-
fluence of Government to oppose and thwart every
individual who is a Catholic, he will excite against
him in the end as determined and as just an hos-
tility from the Catholics as if he were to repeal
the Act.

A course, however, was laid down for him the
other day at a meeting of the Conservatives
at Birmingham, Sir EARDLEY WILMOT
then told his friends that he could not find
any fault with Ailinisters for appointing Catholics
to office, they only carried the law into execution ;
but he found fault with them on account of the
sort of Catholics whom they appointed. The Duke
of NoRFOLL and Lord StraltXY are objectionable,
because they are W hilts ;, while Mr. O'CONNELL,
Mr. SHIEL, and 'AI r. NN YSE are not elegible, be-
cause they have played a conspicuous part in the
confidence of
drama of Reform, and possess the
the Catholic population. Sir EARDLEY iLmoT
would carry the law into execution, by appointing
to offices Tories who are Catholics. Where are
they to be found? There are one or two country
gentlemen, buried amongst their woods in Lanca-
shire ; but all the Catholics who are men of busi-
ness, who have any claim to public
isitua-
tions, are Whigs and Liberals. This s not
an accident, it is the necessary consequence
of founding the Tory policy on the Protes-
tant Ascendancy principle, which has made
the great bulk of the Catholics, whatever else
they may be, thoroughly and completely anti-

Tories. In a community like ours, where tolera-
tion prevails, to found a party on an exclusive
principle, is to render it unfit to govern. Now Sir
R. PEEL, though he is not to repeal the Eman-
cipation Act, has no other power in the country
but as the representative of the exclusively Pro-
testant party. These writers, at the same time, tell
us that he will not do the bidding of that party, and
it is impossible that he can conciliate the opposite
party. He will not go the whole hog with the
Ultra Protestants, and he cannot make friends with
the Catholics. There is no policy avowed by his
party which lie could safely pursue, and there
is no party by which his uncertain course
would for any length of time be followed.
He may, individually, be a great man ; but to suc-
ceed in administering oftheaffairsandy E
refusing
b ngland, htoe
must be at the head of a party,
repeal the Catholic Emancipation Act, he refuses
the leadership of the Protestant Ascendancy party.
The language of the Tory Journals, admitting the
impossibility of the repeal, admits that the as-
cendancy on which Sir ROBERT PEEL founds his
chieftainship is gone for ever.
To inform us, as the Tory Journals do, that Sir
ROBERT PEEL and his friends will not propose
to repeal the Emancipation Act, is to say that he
abdicates his claim to the Government. The party
in the nation opposed to the Ministers—the party
1 which complains of the appointment of Mr. WYSE,
I is the Protestant Ascendancy party. The Emanci-
pation Act is the legal extinction—in fact it was
extinguished before—of their usurped dominion.
Not to repeal it is for Sir ROBERT PEEL to doom
the Ascendancy men to equality, and to separate
himself from his supporters. Such conduct will
leave him without followers, and doom him to sit
on the cross benches, while GRAHAM and STAN-
LEY aiid INGLIS lead the bigots on to the attack.

To what a melancholy condition England is re-
duced by an unbridled, lawless aristocracy, and a hy-
pocritical, false, rapacious priesthood, the following
picture will show. We copy it from the Times of
yesterday :

MONMOUTH, SATURDAY, DEc.2l..—The inhabitants
were put in the greatest alarm last night, about seven
o'clock, in consequence of hearing the report of several
cannon in the direction of the hills. This having con-
tinued for a quarter of an hour, the Mayor was sent for
by Major Cooke, upon whom, in consequence of the
illness of Colonel Considine, the command of the mili-
tary devolved. It was then determined instantly to call
out the troops, and pickets were sent out on the different
roads to discover from what quarter the firing proceeded.
In a very few minutes the Hussars and 45th were in
the streets, and the artillery were all mounted. It
was then suggested by some persons that the
firing proceeded from Ruperra, the seat of Mr. Morgan,
that it was the birthday of his eldest son, and
that it was the custom on that occasion to fire off some
old cannon. This idea, however, was spurned, as being
too ridicu:ous to be entertained for a moment, and it
was very properly observed that no one could attribute
to Mr. Morgan such a want of thought or of regard for
the feelings of the people of the neighbourhood ; that
be would, of course, recollect that the excitement in the
neighbourhood is so great that a pistol fired on the hills
would create alarm. Some of the military thought it
was a ruse to draw them out, that the Chartists might
come into the town by another road. The streets were
then cleared, and the shops shut, in order to prevent
confusion, in case the artillery should have to march. In
the mean time the Mayor sent off to Sir C. Morgan's,
to ascertain if it was likely any guns would be fired at
Ruperra, and he received the following answer :

" Tredegar, Friday, 8 o'clock.

" Dear Sir —I have just opened your letter, and, in
the absence of my father, who is gone to Ruperra, have
in reply to say, that the birthday of my brother's eldest
son is kept this day, and that Sir Charles and some of
our party are gone over there.
" With regard to the firing, it has been usually the
custom to fire some old carriageless cannon on the oc-
casion, and to make a bonfire; but whether the same cus-
tom has been followed up to-day I cannot positively say,
though I think it very probable, as the keepers may not
have thought that any alarm would have been created.
" I have just seen John Charles from Bassaley, who
heard the firing in his way from Bassaley hither, and
from the sound and direction, as well as from the time,
he believed it to be the firing at Ruperra, and be never
thought it anything else, till he was asked about it
here, and he now thinks it to be that and nothing else.
" They used to fire the guns on a bill near the housa
when Sir Charles' carriage was driving up to the house,
and as from an accident our carriage did not leave here
till six o'clock, the firing would take place about seven,
and continue for some time. Thinking the noise only to
proceed from that circumstance, and hoping that this
will in some way allay the excitement,
" I remain, yours very faithfully,
" OCTAVIUS MORGAN.
" The cannon are still firing, and we think it only the
Ruperra guns."

This letter was immediately read by the Mayor in
the Westgate, and bad the effect of allaying the excite-
ment, and the military were ordered to quarters. The
Mayor, however, was not completely satisfied, and he
therefore sent an express .to Ruperra to know for a
certainty whether the firing proceeded from
that estate, and about two in the morning he re-
ceived a very brief reply, stating that the
guns had been fired according to annual cus-
tom. We must say that our astonishment was
extreme upon finding that Mr. Morgan had had so
little regard for the feelings of his neighbours as to
indulge in this foolish custom at such a moment. It is
impossible to describe the alarm that was occasioned in
the town, but I understand it was nothing compared
with that which filled the minds of those who reside some
distance off, as they believed the town was attacked, and
that the firing proceeded from the soldiers. Great
praise is due to the Magistracy, and particularly to the
military, for the promptitude with which the troops were
brought out.
We regret to say, that several of the Magistrates were
at Mr. Morgan's at the time this thoughtless act was
perpetrated.

To show the state of excitement in the town, I may
say that several families have left Newport, considering it
unsafe to remain there any longer.

This representation, we are afraid, will not be
confined to Monmouth. The Chartists exist in
multitudes every where. The whole working po-
pulation nearly are Chartists ; and the alarm which
is now confined to the hills of Wales, may to-
morrow spread through the towns of Lancashire,
the mines of Cornwall, and the vales of Kent.
The terror felt at hearing a gun go off is the off-
spring of consciousness. It is impossible to look
on the condition of our half-starved people and to
remember the Corn-laws, the onerous system of
taxation to which they arc liable, their total dis-
franchisement, and the dominion sought to be
exercised over their minds and pockets by
the Anglican clergy, without being convinced
that Chartism springs from political op-
pression. The upper and middle classes
cannot disguise from themselves that the working
classes are not justly dealt with, and hence their
almost indescribable terror at finding themselves
surrounded by a population ready to resent the ill
treatment they have received. A gun is fired, and
a whole country side trembles. A gentleman only
commemorates, according to ancient custom, the
birth-day of his son, and be terrifies, and, of
course, affronts all his neighbours. The MOR-
GANS will be shut out from society, for having
been so regardless of the feelings of their friends.
Whatever may be the sufferings of Mr. FROST and
his followers, if he wish for vengeance, he is already
revenged in the great and continual sufferings of
his opponents.
Half the evil, too, let us remark, of Mr. FROST'S
conduct, described in the law proceedings as terri-
fying peaceable persons, arises from the state of
their nerves. They are greatly alarmed, and there-
fore lie is guilty. The Jurors, without putting the
feeling into a logical form, will act on it, and FROST
and his accomplices will be condemned, because the
gentry and the clergy are terrified at the bulk of
the people. They are terrified because they are
conscious the people are unjustly treated ; thus the
gallows must have its victims because the people
are oppressed.

A great deal has of late been said on the An-
glican clergy turning politicians, and the Tory
Press has asserted, with great eloquence, that such
is their right and their duty. For our part, though
the clergy generally take the Tory side, we have
never denied their right, and never wished to see

them neglect their duty to their country, so far
as that was compatible with the duty they are paid
to perform. Nor can we deny the extent of their
power. The votes of the House of Commons bear
testimony to their skill and their influence. About
4,000 petitions, bearing nearly 400,000 signatures,
were presented to the House of Commons last ses-
sion, at their instigation, against the Ministerial
plan for improving a little the education of the
people. They are a powerful political party.
Now, there is at present a great public question
exciting the people far more than ever they were
excited on the subject of education ; but on this
the clergy seem inclined to waive their right, and
neglect their duty. But they cannot be allowed.
On a question that agitates the masses, thatthreatens
the landowners, that touches the tithes, they must
speak out. On the Corn-laws, no man can be
neutral.

Are the clergy for starving the people, or are
they not ? Let them come forward, and declare
their creed. The Corn-laws are openly denounced
by the inhabitants of Manchester, Sheffield, Glasgow,
and scores of other places, as an interruption of
the order of nature, and a violation of the
laws of GOD. They are described as sever-
ing the friendly ties of commerce between
nations, as sowing distrust and despair in
the hearts of the people, as dooming many to
misery, and inciting many to crime. Do the Corn-
laws deserve these characteristics or not ? Are they
just or unjust? The priesthood are called on to
say. The question touches not only politics but
religion; and the value of their professions will be
tested by the part they act.
Three or four clergymen of different sects, some
of them belonging to the Church of England, have
joined the Anti-Corn-law men in denouncing the
Corn-laws as a violation of the decrees of GoD, and
the whole hierarchy must take a side. After dis-
playing such activity for Bible education, they must
be equally active in opposing or defending the
Corn-laws. They may depend on it they can-
not shirk this question. Their silence is acquies-
cence in these accusations, and as conclusive of their
truth as if they were all to put their hands to the
Manchester petition. They must come forward
and defend the Corn-laws, or admit that they
starve the people, and are a violation of GOD'S
laws. To remain silent will convict them of a con.
sciousness of the criminality, and show that they
had not the courage to denounce it.

At Ashton-under Line, the Liberals have had a
dinner to convince the public that all the inhabit-
tants do not, share IVIr. Rosy's sentiments.
Several Members of Parliament were present, and
that paramount subject of interest, the Corn-laws
occupied several of the speakers. Mr. GISBORNE
made some excellent observations, as he always
does, to which Mr. BROTHERTON was content to
say ditto. 'Whatever necessity there may be for
moderation in the proceedings of the abolitionists►
it hardly becomes their own friends to recommend,
at the outset, that they should demand less than
justice. When the Corn-law men have seen the
necessity of treating, terms may be talkeu of, but at
present they resolutely stand out, and claim the
Corn-law as their right. We have held this lan-
guage from the first ; we are for going the whole
hog in our demands, and if any class, whether
farmers or landlords, or any individuals, can show
that they suffer any injustice by the abolition of the
Corn-laws, we will consider their case ; but we will
not for one moment concede the principle, that
because the landlords have plundered and starved
the people for a great many years, they are to be
allowed to plunder and starve them, to a somewhat
less extent, a few years longer. We prefer Mr.
GISBORNE'S views, therefore, to Mr. HINDLEY'S,
though we cheerfully concede to the latter gentle-
man that his recommendation not to go for
too much was dictated by the purest motives. The
majority of the abolitionists are decidedly in favour
of a complete abolition, and it is therefore the duty,
we think, of individuals to give up their own mode-
rate views, and carry, as Mr. GISBORNE said, the
enthusiasm of the people with them, by demanding
a great deal. We agree too with that gentleman,
that there are traitors in ourl camp, when so
many commercial and manufacturing places stand
idle, and do not take a part in this noble
work. What is London about ? What are all
the metropolitan boroughs and parishes about, that
they take no part in this life and death struggle ?
It does not become the metropolis to have no
opinion on such a question. If many of the in-
habitants are favourable to continue the Corn-laws,
let them get up public meetings and express that
opinion, so that we may know our friends from our
foes. To have no voice on such a momentous
question is a disgrace to London.

It will be seen by our Mansion House report,
that an interesting dialogue took place yesterday
between the LORD MAYOR, Alderman PIRIE,
and a sturdy Nonconformist, on the subject of
Church-rates. Mr. BURGON, who cannot re-
concile it to his conscience to give his money
to the support of a system of religion which
he believes to be utterly at variance with
the Holy Scriptures, was told by his Lordship that
a believer " can have no rational objection to pay
what is a legal demand." Was it any wonder,
after such a remark, that Mr. BURGON should be
tempted tq say that people were apt to think
that because they went to Church they were
religious? The LORD MAYOR is a legal re-
ligionist, an Act-of-Parliament Christian, and can
form no conception of a conscience which refuses
to be bound by the statute. Alderman PIRIE has
a juster notion of these things. He put the ques-
tion on its right footing. "We are obliged," he
observed, " by the law of the land to call upon you
to pay the late." The law of the land, however,
is in this respect not binding on the recusant. It
leaves him the alternative of having his goods
seized, and this alternative Mr. BURGON, much to
his honour, adopted. Were all the opponents of
the " nefarous exaction" to act with equal consis-
tency, there would soon be an end of it.

Malta Papers to the 28th ult. have been re-
ceived, bringing some intelligence respecting the
position of the British fleet in the 'Mediterranean,
which will be found in another column. They
likewise bring the details of what our war-loving
Contemporary, the Morning Post, calls a " new
insult to the British flag," by two French war-
steamers, and for which, of course, the Post is
for demanding, sword in hand, an immediate apo-
logy. "It would appear," says our indignant
Tory Contemporary, " as if our Ministers had
succeeded in convincing the French that any dis-
grace might be flnng upon the standard of
England with impunity." To prove that this ap-
pearance is not at all fanciful, the Post quotes the
following paragraph from a Malta Paper, which,
in fairness to our Contemporary, we shall extract
from his columns. Here it is—

NEW INSULT TO THE BRITISH FLAG.
The Blazer steamer left Marseiles for Malta on the
10th, with the London mails brought by the Post-office
messenger, Mr. Wittenoom, and despatches for Canton,
conveyed by Mr. Moore, a Queen's messenger, who ar-
rived at Marseilles four hours after Mr. Wittenoom
(which, together with the India mails, were despatched
to Alexandria by the Hermes on the evening of the
15th.) A short time before the Blazer got under way
from Marseilles, two French steamers of war (which
had arrived on the 9th from Algiers—one of them
bringing his Royal Highness the Duke of Orleans) took
their departure for Toulon, and, as the Blazer beat them
in speed, she endeavoured, there being ample way, to
pass between them, when they intentionally closed upon
her, and carried away her fore-yard and gunnel, and
stove in the toi e part of her paddle-box: butT hbeeiFngrenvecrhy-
men likewise sustained some damage