The Sun.
London, England, 1838-01-22 00:00:00

' 'JJ
~f

~ ~/

Yesterday morning, between twelve and one o'clock,
as police-constable Simmonds, D 65, who was on duty in
High-street, Marylebone, was passing the house of Mr. Miers,
linen-eraper, called Victoria House, and is situated at the
corner of Weymouth-street and High-street, he was called irk
by the servant girl, who stated that she was directed by her
master to request his assistance for the purpose of putting out
a fire, which had then commenced in the house. Simmonds
went into the shop and was provided with some pails of water,
but he soon found that his efforts would not be attended with
success. He sprang his rattle and alarmed the neighbours,
and Johnson, D 108, went to the King-street, Baker-street,
station-house for the Loudon fire brigade engine, which was
the first to arrive. By this time the fire was raging in almost
all parts. The next engine was that from Marylebone-lane,
which was followed by the Wells-street, and King-street, and;
County, the latter being warned by the reflection of the flames_
There was a plentiful supply of water, with which, by the
exertions of the firemen and others, the progress of the de-
structive element was speedily checked, but not before the
house of Mr. Miers was completely gutted, and the next,
No. 29, in the occupation of Mr. Bucknal, tailor, had received
considerable injury. About half-past one o'clock the wall of
the house of Mr. Miers, in Weymouth-street, and part of it
in High-street, came down with a frightful crash, fortunately
without occasioning personal injury to anyone. How the fire,
originated is unknown, though there is a variety of rumours in
the neighbourhood upon the subject. The police were very
active in assisting the inhabitants to remove their goods.
Mit.BuLwErt's "ERNEST MALTRAVERS"—Yne
new edition of Mr. Bulwer's popular novel, " Ernest Nlal,tra-
vers" will be published on Wednesday next. In this work
Mr. Bulwer has placed himself more prominently before his
readers than in any of his previous productions. l is this
which will always give to " Ernest Maltravers," a peculiar in-
terest for the thousands who are the admirers of the author's)
writings, aud who have felt delighted with his "Pelham," (3.
lingered with him over the ruins of " Pompeii" The charac-
ter of Alice proves how thoroughly Mr. Bulwer has studie
life, and how accurately he can paint it. This is a spler.d id
production, bearing the impress of genius stamped en eve ry
page. It is not possible but that it must become a stande.rd
work.—Mornisy Chronicle.

TREATMENT OF MIDSHIPMEN.—" To Neh-Qn,
the midshipmen in particular were indebted for raising them:
into that scale of society which attached them to the service,
and induced the application of all their energies, prompted by-
the best feeling—a love of country—in the discharge of their
duties. One Nelson makes a thousand brave and excitit]ent
officers. "_Naval Keepsake for 1838, containing a New,
of Nelson, by the Old Sailor.

substituting the errors of a bad poor-law for the principles of a
ood one, by mixing up a Goon poor-law for the poor, with the
Lord John Russell-Nicholls Bill against the poor; and then
lashing them with your sarcasm both together fancy yourself
triumphant. Your arguments are good against the Lord
John Russell Poor-law; they are good for nothing against a
good poor-law :it will not do, Mr. O'Connell ; your exhi-
i ition of the Bill produced by Lord John Russell and Mr.
Nicholls will not overthrow the principles adopted by such
men as Burleigh, Bacon, Cobbett, Doyle, and Kennedy.
They are your masters on this subject, and against such rocks
both your sophistry and your rent will be shipwrecked ! Con-
sult your own glory ; take the lead in framing a good posr-
law for Ireland; neither Lord John nor Mr. Nichol's are
men to stand before you, and in this manner it is
Ijust possible that, however late, you may yet overthrow
the " Landlords' Bill:" you will, then, do your duty
to Ireland against the mischief that these men are ignorantly
concocting ; in so doing, you will honestly earn your " rent."
But if you pursue your hitherto vacillating course with regard
to the Poor-laws, you will add one more proof to the truth of
the assertion, that " Ireland never yet confided, without being
deceived !" The paragraph in the latter part of your letter, to
which I have said that I cannot accede, is that in which you
class the leading English Redicals with the Spottissvoode con-
spirators, and with this mischievous Poor-law Bill. You place
our leaders, Sir, at the head of evils inflicted by England upon
Ireland I In what way have the English Radicals, and more
especially the leading English Radicals, failed in their duty
towards their countrymen in Ireland ? Have they not, on every
occasion, advocated the interests of Ireland in the most open
and fearless manner ? Did they not denounce this very Poor-
law, when you, O'Connell, voted with the Whig Ministers in
favour of it? What was the difference between their coaduet
and yours? Why, this, that while you (with a short-sighted
or treacherous policy, maintained that the " lucky accident"
of Lord Mulgrave being Lord Lieutenant, was a certain cure
for Ireland's wrongs), supported the mischievous Whig Govern..
ment, which is injurious to the whole empire, and therefore
to Ireland, in spite of Lord Mulgrave's excellent but tempo-
rary Administration : while you did this, the English Radicals
denounced the Whig Government—they saw that it could give
no security for justice to Ireland, while it was doing positive
injustice to England ; while it was supporting the House of
Lords against all organic change in that House, without
which, as you have justly said, " Ireland can never get jus-
tice"—while it was ignorantly producing rebellion in Canada—
while it was refusing the Ballot and extension of the Suffrage—.
and, finally, while it was, as I have already said, framing this
ruinous Poor-law Bill for Ireland, which, you justly say, "caps
the climax of mischief"—such has been the conduct of the
English Radicals—open, manly, sound, and really advantageous
to Ireland ; whereas your own was temporizing, shuffling,
and feeble. Sir, your accusation against the leading English
Radicals is wholly without foundation. I can give a strong
instance of this, by referring you to the excellent leading arti-
cle of the True Sun of May Ist, 1837, in consequence of your
speech on this very Irish Poor-law. " Mr. O'Connell pro-
fesses to yield to necessity. He will if necessary, support the
Bill which he disapproves, in order to ascertain by experiment,
whether his conviction is a mistaken one. This is very un-
statesmanlike. There can rarely, if ever, be occasion for ex-
perimental legislation. All his arguments, his expedients, his
propositions prove, that he ought to apply himself to the
amendment and extension of the measure before the House.
Instead of agreeing with the opposition to the Ministerial Bill
and voting in its favour, let him aim at improving it in the
mode suggested by his own views. Why does he not advocate
for both countries a law in the just and generous, the wise and
Christian spirit of the original Poor-law, which recognises every
man's right to live, and enforces every man's duty to labour ?"
Such was the statesmanlike advice given you by Mr. D. W.
Harvey ; an advice full of advantage to Ireland, at the moment
when you supported this accursed " experiment," which you
now correctly term " EMPHATICALLY A LANLORD'S BILL ;"
an " experiment" which now, as you pretend, frightens you,
and which now you justly call upon your countrymen to oppose !
Seeing the mischief which this Bill must inevitably pro-
duce, it was, nevertheless tolerated by you at the very time
when the English Radicals denounced it boldly, and with un-
qualified censure ; and yet, you now turn upon them, and place
them in your list of enemies to Ireland 1
Again in my brother's speech at the Bath dinner you will
find these words :
" Now; I am not one of those who look upon Ireland as
something separate and distinct from the rest of the empire, nor
upon the Irish people as outcasts, upon whom Whigs and To-
ries may practise (" their EXPERIMENTS !!!") to ascertain how far
oppression may be carried with impunity. I hold the Irish people
to be part and parcel of the great British family ; and I be-
lieve they will obtain justice when the whole people obtain it,
not before. That is, when we obtain Ministers so enlight-
ened, that in passing a great measure they will not stop to
consider whether the persons to be affected by it are Catholics
or Protestants, Churchmen or Dissenters, Englishmen, Irish-
men or Canadians ; but whether the measure itself be ono
founded on the eternal, tile immutable principles of justice."
Are these the words of an enemy to Ireland ? and uttered,
too, when you were supporting Whig "experiments" in gene-
ral, and this experiment in particular Sir, I repeat that
there is no foundation for your accusation against the leading
English Radicals; and I can only attribute the accusation to
their denunciation of your unstatesman-like truckling to the
Whig Government.
I had proceeded thus far wheu your second letter upon the
present Poor-law for Ireland appeared. It contains nothing
new, nothing that has not already been said by others, espe-
cially by " the leading English Radicals :" but it is excel-
lently well compiled, and with the sanction of your name will
be of the greatest utility. No man can read your second let-
ter without being convinced of the truth of all you assert,
unless perhaps that man be Lord John Russell or Mr.
Nicholls, and unfortunately for England and Ireland these are
the men who have power to inflict this curse upon the
country. There seems to be no hope of security but in your
influence and genius. In neither of these (you will excuse
my frankness) have I any confidence : your assistance in the
eleventh hour is too suspicious ; and, as I have before said,
you denounce the Whig Poor-law, while you offer no substi-
tute. I believe, Sir, that your object in not calling upon
Ireland to appeal against the present Poor-law, till
it has been prepared and ready for promulgation
by the Whig Government, has arisen from a secret
desire to see it inflicted upon your unhappy country, as an
excellent fulcrum for "agitation" and the raising of the " rent ;"
else why was not this appeal published (as Captain Kennedy's
" Analysis" was), the instant the danger appeared ?—that is
to say nearly a year ago, when Lord John Russell first made
his intentions known. Why did you then shuffle between
Whiggery and Radicalism ? Sir, I believe your object is not
to have a Goon Poor-law for Ireland, but to leave her the
choice between the illegal Poor law, which unfortunate cir-
cumstances, and the charitable disposition of the Irish la-
bourers, have long established to her great distress, and the
mischievous, the insupportable, the murder-creating Poor-law
which Lord John Russell proposes to inflict upon that country.
However, whether your motives be good or bad, your second
letter is an excellent compilation, and I sincerely hope may be
effectual : if not, you, Mr. O'Connell, are the man who has
saddled the " Landlord's-bill" upon Ireland. Yon assisted in
hatching the monster when you could have destroyed it.
Upon your head, therefore, in conjunction with Lord John
Russell and Mr. Nicholls, be all the evils it may produce.
Yet, you pretend to taunt the leaders of the English Ra-
dicals with abandoning the interests of Ireland ! You pretend
to say that their lukewarmness has driven you to seek a repeal
of the Union. What ! has Roebuck, has Leader, has Moles-
worth, has IlUme, has Grote ?—have these men been luke-
warm about Ireland ? Assuredly not. The whole British
public knows that they have not. If you seek to make them
serve the purpose of a " scape-goat" for your own tergiversa-
tion, Mr. O'Connell, you deceive yourself : you cannot long
thus delude the people by such sophistry.
To conclude : you have lately boasted of your benevolent
feelings towards all men. Truly, Sir, I find no sample of
either benevolence, or justice, or political honesty in your ac-
cusation of the English Radicals, as disloyal to Ireland.- But
I am willing to admit that there is plenty of talent and incon-
trovertible argument against the Irish Poor-law Bill in your
two letters on that subject. Had your opposition to this Bill
been contemporary with that of Captain Kennedy, I should
have bad the honour of signing myself, with great respect,
Your obedient humble Servant,
C. J. NAPIER, Major-General.