The Sun.
London, England, 1838-06-06 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE 'PUBLIC P:A.RNALS.

The body of Courtenay has been committed to the earth,
tend the proceed':nge arising out of the riot may be said to be
'now suspendesa. We trust the fatal result of this affair will
Ibe a lesson 'to men in elevated stations to beware how they
- practise (en the working classes. One Noble Lord, a great
landowner in Kent, has made use of language, both at public
lineeti•ags and in his place in Parliament, calculated to produce
stile -very worst effects on the minds of these people. Our
readers can hardly have forgotten the extravagant language
used by Earl Stanhope in the House of Lords on the 20th of
efelareda last, when arraigning the new Poor-law. After a
ereat deal of absurd reasoning, to prove that the old Poor-law
• produced the most beneficial results, and that paying men,
rot for the labour performed by them, but according to the
number of their children—a strong young man receiving
3s. or 4s. a week, and a men with a large family, not
etidas to do half as much work, receiving perhaps twenty
,shillings a week—was the very perfection of the social
state, his Lordshies proceeded to show that a rebellion of
the labouring claeses was perfectly justifiable. " Their Lord-
ships all knew," he said, " that allegiance and protection are
inxcparabte; and he would ask their Lordships whether, wi-
der such circumstances as he had described, they could expect
that the labourers of this country wculd feel an attachment to
its laws or institutions, or even feel a respect for property it-
self? On the contrary, whether their Lordships must not be-
Aieve that that discontent which was now known to be so gene-
ral and so just might assume a character that must threaten
disorganization to the state ?" This is pretty well for a com-
mencement. But his Lordship warms as he proceeds. " The
-people," he continues, " might in some parts of the country
appear submissive to this iniquitous law, but the feelings of re-
ssentment and revenge would still rankle in their minds, and
at no distant period might fatally disturb the public peace.
The time might Come when the people might cease to petition
fur relief from the oppression of this cruel enactment. . . .
The people wood next remonstrate and demand; nay, they
might cease even to do the latter, and might possibly attempt
to obtain by force that which they were not able to gain by ar-
gument." We have just seen the issue of one of those at-
tempts to obtain by force what they were not rile to obtain
by argument. Sir William Courtetkay undertook to free them
from eithes and taxes, and to cause rents to be lowered. A
tproelsecy is riot always thrown away. " It behoved their Lord-
:Alps," he continued, " seriously to ask themselves (he would
not venture to propound to them the question) how long they
thought it possible that the people of this country would
squictly submit to this pressure; and if the people did not
ekubreit what were the calamitie-s and convulsions which must
inteitably ensue ? He called upon their Lordships to respect,
as they were bound to do, the rights of the labouring
classes—rights which were founded in the laws of God and
nature—rights which ought always to be held sacred—rights
'which were as dear and as valuable to them as the patents by
which their Lordships enjoyed their Peerages, or the title-
'deeds by which they obtained possession of their estates.
tat there do this, and the rich would enjoy unmolested their
'wealth, and, what was of still more impestance, they would
:repose in tranquillity and content. But if this were not done,
the inevitable result—he stated it with great pain and sorrow,
but with a firm and thorough convictdon of its truth—the ine-
;:vitable result would be a part;:iion of property." Under
-the old law the partition in several parishes had already taken
place, and in the partition the nominal owner came but very
scurvily off. Alluding to the opinion delivered by a Noble
and Gallant Marquie who declared that if their Lordships
passed the New door-law they would not only lose their
estates, but we.ald deserve to lose them, his Lordship pro-
ceeded to desdiare___.
" That ir . their Lordships did not respect, as be most ear_
neatly ce njuted them to do, the rights of the labouring classes
---righ*.s which were allowed to be theirs by the statutes of
Que'sn Elizabeth—they might lay what flattering unctioa to
the it souls they pleased, but they might be assured that a
".:solution was at the very threshold of their doors; a revolution
..of the most formidable and tremendous nature ; a revolution in
which there would be no protection for property or life. It had thug
'boen his painful duty, however feebly he might have done it,.
Tedwever ineffectual his humble admonitions migeet have been..
it yet had been his painful duty thus to ware_ their Lordsbipese,
3Dierilnly to warn them of the consecreences of their tontleet
—to warn them of the dangers seit:ii Which they Weee threat-
.encel, in order that they might., 'before it was too late, avert
them—conseduences and (it
e.egers whith would level to the
ground all the existing itSstitutions of the country, and intro-
duce in their stead a--tarchy and ruin. He had received in-
lerneeon from varisess parts of the country respecting the dis-
Feadeion of the ersople and the feelings of the labourers, such
as he did not, think it prudent to promulgate or discuss in their
-Isordsleips' House ; but this he would venture to say, in despite
of all adreonitiona, that if their Lordships did not remove the
,grievances which the new Poor-law inflicted on the people,
exert- serious consequences would inevitably ensue. Ha. would
2,,Y0? 'oon c 1 t,l e his address to their Lordships in the very im-
opressive language and in the spirit in which a Judge addressed
lit if to a culprit at the bar---e May C 0 D send you a good
eldllveranc I' "
Language like this may only excite asmile in Parlianie- ii.t
~
:'but it has a tendency to produce very different rcsulte on the;
' labouring classes. The words rights and lilteeties have al
ensagical effect. Our correspondent was -;,loan, at a very
:short dietance from the church-yard in which Courtenay was
lihuried, a large wooden building ceveed the Parsonage-house,
eion which was a writing painted -by a brush dipped in lime,
Zaial to have been by 'etiths,
one of Courtcnay's followers,
concluding with the we ds
" Our rights and liberties we will
dbave." These Pe'esie have been told by unprincipled Tory
•candidates, for election purposes, that the new Poor-law was
.an unjust, 'tinchristian law, and they have been believed. We
tertnsteb-at what has taken place will bc a warning—not to Earl
feltr'tope, for we should never think of reasoning with him—
Er.t to those unprincipled politicians who, for unworthy pur.
loses, laboured to delude the lower classes into a belief that
they shared their prejudices against the new Poor-law,
'that it is much easier to rouse the prejudices of the
people than to allay them. We know of nothing_
<half so disgraceful in the history of the countr
tas the conduct of the Tories at the late elections with reger
to the New Poor Law. Our evening contemporary, th
;4.??andard, will have it that Ceertenay was a Dissenting
ee,cher. "If (says our contemporary) these forty were all
'Uneducated persons, it is lee very severe imputation upon the
-county of Kent, which Has a population of half a trillion, that
-out of that half million forty uneducated persons could be
.folsee tte follow a Dissenting teacher like Courtenay, whose
easalewers were imposing, and his doctrines attractive though
tetravagane." If credit can be given to a pamphlet, pub-
lished some time ago at Canterbury, alluded to by our
correspondent, Courtenay came under nn engagement
'to read only the Standard, an engagement which he
kept, so that during his instruction from sttch an ortho-
dox source it is hardly fair in our contemporary to
term him a Dissenting tkacher. He certainly in his review
spoke in a very unorthodox manner respecting Tithes, which
Imo wished to abolish altogether; but if hatred to Tithes be
`taken as a mark of dissent, especially in a county in which,
from the Jew of gavelkiea, the farmer is often the owner of
the land he cultivates, niesny are Dissenters who have no sus-
picion of their being c'eo. We dismiss this subject for the pre-
sect, hoping that elie calamity will be productive of this advan-
tage, that pultVic men will in future be more guarded in their
language se hen characterising laws which they conceive may
lie coceverted into a source of annoyance to political opponents.
It is quite clear that Courtenay would not have spoken to the
people of Kent as he did in his reviews if he had not ascer-
tained that they were dissatisfied with the existing state of
things.—Morning Chronicle. .
For some days past we have abstained from touching a sub-
ject on which most of our contemporaries have been indulging
themselves freely, and in terms of much party warmth. Our
caessest wish has been to procure a little breathing time, and
ta see others enjoy the same advantage, that they and we
might 'return to a discussion, fraught with far deeper interest
'tbaa "..relongs to the mere concerns of faction, in a spirit of so-
briety, calmness, aed truth. The position which has been
t+-Ken up within the last week by Conservatives and Ministers,
,with regard to one or more of the great Irish questions, is one
'which cannot fail to make every honest Englishman anxious
-for the result, and the more anxious because of many grounds
'of confidence which are mingled with those of apprehension.
For the first time since Lord Melbourne's accession to office,
:las there been recognized between the two political parties
any thing like a definite agreement upon common principles, so
far as related to Ireland. For the first time have Ministers
adnounced their lasspe that a Church Bill without an appro-
priation clause would prove a " satisfactory adjustment" of
.the tithe question, For the first time has Sir Robert Peel
declared that hss saw such a prospect of final security to the
Church, as would permit him and those wise acted with him
tto enterteen and examine a proposal for establishing new cor-
peratiesns in Ireland on the basis of popular election. This is
a pe'att of immense importance. There is no longer a dis-
rite upon principles of government ; and we confess, there-
fore, that our own gratification at the removal of a barrier so
impassable has, by the novel prospect. of success which it
'opens, rendered us in proportion more alive to the pain and
fearful consequences of a disappointment. Nothing could be
more widely opposite than the spirit in which this approximation
of sentiment was originally acknowledged between the two
leaders of party, and that which has since appeared to govern
'their professed followers and allies. The speech of Sir R. Peel
and the first speech of Lord J. Russell on Tuesday, the 29th
'of May, left hardly anything to wish for on the part of those
-etroo realty desired an " adjustment" of the Irish Ties-
-Aim:as That the proposals of the Right Hon. Baronet and
illeir general acceptance by the Noble Lord should have:
-proved unpalatable to Mr. O'Connell, is in nowise inconsis-
tent with the above observation ; because upon Mr.`O'Con-
mell's own repeated assurances and boastings, he is not one of
ithOSC who seek an adjustment of such questions, except on
tterms destructive of the Protestant Church, and resulting in
Popish supremacy. To the debate of that evening we shall
ttio further allude than by remarking, that the malignant geniuse
sof O'Connell would have shed its evil influence in vain, had
:not circumstances with which he had no concern provoked
Lord ;John Russell to a second speech, and dragged from him
k(we think reluctantly) a re-assertion, otherwise uncalled for,
'of his individual adherence to the old appropriation prin-
ciple—a confession which gave rise to much acrimonious
commentary on both sides, for two or three days suc-
ceeding. All this, however, was the less dansese-
Toue, because it was confined to the Church question, on
which no difference of opinion was likely to show itself in the
that irovisions of the Bill- The Corporation Bill was
with
zespcct to which more serious difficulties of a practical nature.
-were apprehended than any arising out of the direct " Church
'question." As respected the Corporation Bill, Sir Robert
Peel announced emphatically two deliberate resolutions.
Ist. That whatever amount of qualification 'vat to be fixed
upon for the municipal franchise, " he would insist on its
tkeing a bora fide and not a fictitious franchise"—a condition
'which necessarily included that of instituting some valid

test, whereby the reality of the frasschiae should in each
instance be decided, The evidence of those shameful frauds
and perjuries which had been proved before the Commit.
tee on fictitious votes was glanced at by Sir Robert
Pee), as abundantly justifying and demanding the strictest
precautions for the defence of the rightful constituency
against usurpers of their franchise, and the fact of ratepay-
ing under the Poor Law was then specifically described by
the leader of the Conservatives as the check most wertliv of
approval. 2d. Sir Robert Peel, notwithstanding a widely
prevalent opinion that a 20/. qualification would be most eli-
gible as a requisite for the municipal franchise, avowed his
w i .11 that an uniform standard should be settled both for
burgesses and Parliamentary electors, and since the rate al-
ready established was tha: of la., the Right Hon. Baronet
declared his willingness to accept that lower standard, pro-
vided, as he said before, it should be a bona fide attested
standard, to be recognized and acted on solely in conformity
with the rating. These were the announcements made by
Sir Robert Peel, declaratory of his intentions with regard
to the new Corporation Bill, and we have dwelt
won them the more particularly from finding the
uncandid and dishonest pertinacity with which the
course of the Right Honourable Baronet last Friday
evening has been since misrepresented by the Radical and
Popish press, as if Sir Robert Peel had attempted to with-
draw from, or evade, the promises made by him on his intro-
duction of the subject only three days preceding. It has been
said that the Conservative leader on Friday endeavoured to
render his previous concessions less liberal and effective than
when he had originally held them out. This is utterly false.
He had on Tues 'ay proposed 101. for the amount of qualifica-
tion and a rating under the Poor-law, or, failing the Poor-law,
some equivalent test of real value for its truth. On Friday
he adhered religiously to those conditions; he again insisted
on 101. for the quantum, and on rating of some sort for the
, teat. On Tuesday, after Sir R. Peel had spoken, and Lord
J. Russell had listened attentively to his statements, the Noble
Lord, so far from flying off, or manifestine the slightest hosti-
lity or objection of a general nature to the proposals of the
Right Hon, Baronet, expressed, in tones expressia e of much
satisfaction, and of equal sincerity, his hope and trust that
these Irish questions would be brought to a close during the
present session. He distinctly concurred in the application
of rating as a test, and merely deferred an answer upon the
amount of franchise. It is to be observed, moreover, that on
Friday evening Lord John Russell exerted himself to qualify
the Popish asperity and exacting greediness of Messrs. Cr Con-
nell 4nd Shell, as well as to make known his very different and
far more liberal estimate than that which they had professed to
form of the motives by which Sir Robert Peel was actuated.
Nothing was more palpable, and nothing certainly more
pitiable, than the prompt subserviency with which the leader
of the Queen's Government in the House of Commons assumed
in matter, though not in phrase or manner, the hue prescribA
to him by his Roman Catholic preceptors, when the amount of
qualification was disputed. It was not until after Messrs. O'Con-
nell and Sheil had Set up their cry of the Popish interest being
ie danger, and of its being the scheme of Sir R. Peel to " raise
the political...franchise," under cover of that for burgesses,
that Lord John Russell changed his front, and at once attacked
the 101. qualification. The Noble Lord did not indeed repeat
the insulting nonsense put forth by Mr. O'Connell, and since
enlarged upon in each day's newspaper among those journals
in the Popish interest. Lord John Russell did not say that a
test of truth was a restraint upon the exercise of any legiti-
mate power. He did not allege, after Mr. O'Connell, that
the object of a test was to raise the amount of qualification
above its lawful or ostensible value. Lord John Russell had
too keen a tense of the difference between truth and falsehood
to asseverate that the enforcement of an obligation to pay a
rate of 101. was the same thing as raising the qualification to
20/. We cannot minutely follow, and dare not garble, the
masterly argument of Sir William Follett, In proof that the
object of Sir Robeft Peel brae tacit been to raise the existing
qualification beyohd *hat the Act of Patliament enjoins, but
merely to pteetat the prbfligate reduction of the franchise, by
fraud and perjury b'el'ow the scale ptoeltled by Act of Par-
liament, Sir Robert Peel bas no meaning but to call things
by their keni,t'a names, to bring sound into harmony with
1 enhetaten, to substitute reality for fiction, to require that 10/.
I ehefil be paid for that of which it is the lawful price, and that
the work of a 101. qualification shall not be done by half the
number of shillings. Now, if we were not convinced that he
already knows it, we could inform Lord John Russell that the
people of England are, upon this matter of Irish qualification,
completely and heartily with Sir Robert Peel. We could as-
sure the Noble Lord, that if he stands out upon this
f. audulent system of franchise, and at O'Connell's bid-
ding, he will sacrifice better friends, and more formidable,
than the Popish faction. We could satisfy him, if he
wanted proof, that should be form that tine ise and un-
safe determination, it is he, not Sir Robert Peel, who
will be reproached by the people of England for obstructing
(and from unworthy motives) the establishment of salutary
corporate institutions in Ireland. We do tell him, that Sir
Robert Peel will not recede from his avowed resolution on
this vital subject, that the Conservative leader dares not recede
f".om it. That the, Conservative mind is unanimous and unal-
terable not to give up the 101. municipal franchise for Ireland,
as it is to reject the appropriation clause. But we would rather
put it to Lord John Russell, that it is not for his name or
honour to persist, under vile tutelage, in such an attempt—
that he has now, for the first time, a fair opportunity of res-
cuing himself, and the Government of which he is a part,
from that eminently false position in which a series of deplo-
rable occurrences and combinations have placed them, and
that he makes but a sorry exchange in bartering all Eng-
land for a mess of perishable flummery administered to him
by Mr. Daniel O'Connell. —Times.
It will be seen by our last Report of Parliamentary pro-
ceedings that the Imprisonment for Debt Bill went through a
Committee on Friday last, and the amendments being added,
the Report was ordered to be received on Thursday next—
the day after to-morrow. There is, therefore, some prospect
1 of this desirable measure being completed during the present
Session. Our gratification at this result was, however, un-
pleasantly diminished bo seeing a petition presented on the
same evening from the tradesmen of Marylebone against the
passing of the Bill. The ground whieh the petitioners take
is, that the measure will be injurious to credit, both as regards
classes and as regards the nation. We differ on this subject,
toto ccelo, with the petitioners. Credit has been more im-
paired by the present law, both in public and private, that can
bear calculation. Vast sums of money, equal to a fifth of the
' national income, are uselessly wasted in law expences. A large
proportion of the population (12,000 were incarcerated-in one
year) is cut off from the natural exertion of its industry ; and so-
ciety is cut off from that industry's profitable results. Mean-
while the wives and children of the imprisoned debtors come
upon the poor rates; and continue still more to aggravate the
pressure upon industrious exertion. So-far from credit being
injured by the reform proposed by the present Bill—so far
from the reform proposed being liable to the sarcastic
imputation levelled at it that it is for the purpose of protect-
ing dishonest creditors against their honest debtors—its opera-
tion will be directly the reverse : it will protect honest
creditors against dishonest debtors. What is, in fact, the
present operation of the law? Does it tend, by the example
of malignant punishment, to prevent improvident or unprin-
cipled individuals from contracting debts which they have no
prospective means of discharging? Quite the re t
a
ievssi CI
per-
niciouslyurtls
tempts
t raancdt tphr on smepdtsebimtsp;rosvinidceentthoer
turandpersirgai
facile in trusting in proportion to his confidence In
Pnlebecionvremed
the instrument placed in his hands by the present law for ex-
torting through the influence of fear or pain an usurious over-
charge. The charge is usurious, being naturally calculated
according to the risk run. A tradesman's counter by this
process becomes a gambling table. But unfortunately the
mischief is not confined to the victim—even if he pay the
usurious charge ; or to the tredesman, if he do not pay it.
Non-payment is infinitely more likely : inasmuch as a man
who gets into debt with a deliberate intention of never
' paying at all, or being whitewashed by the Insolvent Court,
does net care a single straw whether he is charged one-third
more than the market price, or double the market price. Ho
never intends to pay at all ; and, therefore, it is of no conse-
quence. Unfortunately, the innocent public suffer for all
this usurious absurdity and improvident profligacy—in which
the debtor and the creditor are equally to blame--the one
spreading the net, and the other rushing into it. Prices, in
consequence, are unnaturally raised ; for the real ready-money
price will always approximate, more or less, towards the ficti-
tious credit price. All these various abominaticees of fictitious
credit—the very worst filth of the whole Augean stable of the
law—the present Bill for the abolition of imprisonment for
debt will sweep away. We wish the measure, therefore, full
success—that success we cannot doubt that ultimately it must
have. With the exception of the respectable petitioners and
allies (we do not like to see them coupled with pettifogging
lawyers and bum-bailiffs), there are no patrons of the present
low except some few antiquated Peers, who either deem it
their duty to resist all change, or their province to maintain
the feudal abuses of past times. The great majority of mer-
chants and bankers, of the professional and of the middle
classes, have unmistakingly pronounced their opinions respect-
ing it. They have passed sentence upon it, and it is impos-
sible that its extinction can be much longer delayed.—Morn-
icy Advertiser.
Notwithstanding our gentle demonstration of last week upon
the subject of the Corn-laws, and the Spectator's monomania
thereanent, our contemporary will have it that he is not 'mad
at all, even upon this subject, but speaks forth the words of
truth and soberness. This is the old story—the man in Bed-
lam when asked how he happened to be shut up, answered
coolly that he said the world was mad, and the world said he
was mad, but the world was the stronger party, and so there
he was. We sincerely hope that the world will also remain
the stronger party in the Spectator's case, and be able to
maintain that it is on all accounts more advisable to raise corn
out of our own fields than be dependant for our food upon
purchases from foreigners ; and this, too, notwithstanding that
persons with fixed incomes must give a rather larger share of
those incomes for corn grown at 'home than they would have
to give (under ordinary circumstances) for corn grown abroad.
We beg the Spectator to be persuaded that, however sane and
sagacious upon other subjects, it is absolutely and unequivocally
beside itself upon the Corn-law subject. We have consulted
the most eminent doctors upon the case, and tee have
no more doubt of it than we have that many others who ad-
vocate the repeal of the Corn-laws are not mad at all, but only
, exceedingly mischievous, and desperately selfish. The con-
troversy with these latter is an irritating task, because we feel
they arc not to be argued with, but rebuked. We do not
I want to change their opinion, for if that were honestly de-
clared it would be found with us; but we have to point out to
scorn the grasping selfishness, and total disregard of all in-
terests, save those of petty personal gain, which actuate the
opponents of the landowners and the farmers. We are satis-
fied, however, that the Spectator TrouM not ,-, ~,, : _1 the Corn,
laws or any other laws, save from a beih t teat they did harm
to the country generally. Our Contemporary is a monoma-
niac, but sincere, and as monomania may be cured by calm