The Sun.
London, England, 1837-04-03 00:00:00

LONDON,
MONDAY EVENING, APRIL 3, 1837.

Scme of the Tory scribes, as might have been ex-
pected, have raised an outcry against Mr. O'CONNELL
fOr calling on the people of Ireland to sign an address
t° the Princess VICTORIA on her approaching birth-
day No one can wonder at this, for while Orange-
Inen and the more violent of the Tory party claim the
, "°flour of being exclusively loyal, they cannot con-
ceal the fact that during the present reign they have
given repeated instances to the contrary, and have
lhown that they consider obedience to the SOVEREIGN
Drily due so long as he promotes measures calculated
to serve their selfish and corrupt purposes. Their
Frantic conduct during the agitation of the Reform Bill
'3 not forgotten ; and the speech of Mr. O'CONNELL
()11PleS with the address another subject equally
galltng to their feelings, because a timely discovery
frustrated their treasonable scheme, and exposed to the
world the nefarious design of tampering with the army
for the purpose, if not of setting aside the succession,
tt all events, of establishing a system of pure despotism.
the most favourable construction of the plan can lead to
10 other conclusion. The leaders of the party of course
%avowed any such designs ; but while they professed
Ile purest loyalty to the SOVEREIGN, and declared
'heir only object to be the maintenance of the reformed
eligion, the worthless agents they employed were bent
>it designs of a very different character. The attempts
nade to gain over the. servants of the Royal Establish-
nent at Kensington—to enlist the common soldiers in
heir ranks—to form secret and illegal societies in every
?art of the kingdom, and their other plans disclosed
)efore the Orange Lodge Committee, considering who
v,as their Chief, can leave no doubt of the disloyalty of
heir intentions. It must have been a 'discovery of no
Irdinary importance which could make a society
constituted and so bent on their purpose dis-
''ilvl/4= itself
' by common consent, and they natu-
41Y feel wroth with the leader of the Irish
Catholics for refreshinc, their memory on the subject,
knd calling an his countrymf-.11 to testify their affection
IV devotion to the rightful heir to the throne. Mr.
"NELL's conduct on this occasion deserves great
rrrale, and his appeal will be cordially and universally
inesPonded to. Such an address will exhibit a gratify-
t° contrast to the feeling displayed in Ireland for cen-
;les, and be a proof what a beneficial change can be
p:dneed by good government and kind treatment on a
toit'Ple so long trampled on, and hitherto forced by
Itless acts of oppression, to regard the Kings
p and and the British nation as their bitterest
Th- •

--oe third letter of " a Churchman," which we have
jtqc: jet' from a Morning Paper, will be found in another
There is no doubt that were the property
co
h,
has been severed from the Church by the fraudu-
n,ae.' c"oivance, and for the personal profit, of Church-
fitetin: guardians for the time being of that property,
;rf anything more would be required as a sub-
:vtitt!to
for Church-rates. But we are afraid that
a lat has been sanctioned by Acts of Parliament of
"g standing could not now be disturbed. Lord
rtilon-roN, and other grantees similarly si-
aCeu, 'would immediately exclaim against the danger
towdell as the injustice of depriving them of property,
1101,1--bY them by the same tenure that lay impropriators
their tithes, and the other owners of what was
no " monastic property hold their possessions. a
vaitie
d teas received—at least no adequate value—
t_l",,i, n„°t new be sustained as a valid reason for makingf
(..sgome
bParliament. 6 by the sticklers for the omnipotence
would
The great difficulty, we apprehend,
t(e),:t this distance of time, to bring home the fraud
tio'"e Parties implicated. It would be said such alienah-
‘vin3 were believed to be advantageous to the Church
the theY took place ; and under this pretext, an
e shield of that which covers all defects of title—an
pct of Parliament--the delinquents would escape,
gee investigation and exposure of such cases, bow-
eflhoot fail to do good, and we consider the
'much i eindebted to those who, like " a Church-
fact, take the trouble to prove, by indisputable
,2", that the greatest spoliators of ecclesiastical pro-
'. y are ecclesiastics themselves.
A. n 1
s
1.,411 Pamphlet has just been published by Ridg
t_4-
Y. and Sons, entitled, " Will you have your Church
.
which we strongly recommend to pub
tahttentiOn.in lt states, in a very short compass, and
of e Plainest Possible manner, the nature and objects
theltat Ministerial measure for the abolition of Church
the and the improvement of the land revenue of
ae,„,l4lreh of England. The author is thoroughly
to liainted with the subject, and has addressed himself
4bs 'e discussion of it with a calmness of temper and
Nel'" of political bias, which cannot fail to give
st jl.t to his reasonings with all men of sober under-
at
em-linn•
who are in doubt, and really wish to arrive
itg ertahity on a question that now agitates society to
ticalere• The writer commences with a brief histo-
tofor`4e,tail of the mode in which provision has here-
tin e been made for the repair of the Churches, quo-
gth ecclesiastics principally as his authorities. He
slid Proceeds to consider the present state of things,
its probable consequences if continued, together