The Sun.
London, England, 1836-01-04 00:00:00

,PIRIT OF T

JOURNALS.

Marmontel, in one of his troubles, say's of his dear
friend Madame Geoffrin, that as she was really
afflicted at his misfortunes, it seemed necessary to her
consolation that she should pick a quarrel with him
about the matter, which she did with great vivacity
and success. After her reproaches were exhausted,
Marmontel observed to Madame, " Every one has a
way of loving, and you show your affection by scold-
ing your friends for their misfortunes, as tender mo-
thers whip their children for tumbling." The Times
love the Tories in this motherly fashion. Like Ma-
dame Geoffrin, deeply concerned at the troubles of its
friends, it consoles itself by picking a quarrel with
them. It plays the tender parent to perfection, in the
single particular of whipping its children for tum-
bling. In addition to the drubbing just given to
the Tories by the country, they have to bear the
snubbing of the Times. This is hard ; and we are
almost touched with pity for our crest-fallen adversa-
ries, who having run the gauntlet through the land,
and borne as many stripes almost as there are towns,
have their bleeding wounds now pickled by the
nines. In a very remarkable article in the Times of
Saturday, a lecture is addressed to " the recreant
Conservative Members who, during three-fourths of
the last Session, effeminately and shamefully be-
trayed their trust, by absenting themselves from their
duty in Parliament." In the same strain the writer
observes—.
" The able champion of Conservatism in the House of
Commons forbore to shame the unprofiluble servants of
their country, or to reflect upon the good cause which they
deserted, the shame which it might have incurred through
their indecent dereliction of their duty."
The Tories are then told that the Conservative
minority dwindled down to one hundred Members,
because—
" The boyish impatience and fretfulness of many who
call themselves Conservatives, and who were certainly not
less so at the end of the session than at its opening,
would not brook the quiet labour of watching the nightly
course of the proceedings, or of assisting the zealous and
energetic chieftains, under whom they had bound them-
selves to act, by the declaration of their sentiments, or even
by their silent votes."
The jobation, rising in severity to truth, proceeds—,
" Such men, we tell them fairly, are not fit to be
hers of Parliament in times like these. If they be too
muck absorbed by the habit of frivolous or criminal indul-
g,ences to devote to their country a moderate portion of
that time and industry of which she is entitled to the
whole, from those who canvassed for her confidence, and
who obtained her suffrages on that sole condition--if they
will prefer foxhunting at one season, or dinners, balls, and
other gaieties at all seasons, or idleness in any and every
form, while in London, to the work of studying and com-
prehending those questions which involve the dearest inte-
rests of the realm—if they will forego power for the sake
of pleasure, and honest distinction for personal insignifi-
cance,except in so far as they entail upon themselves a nc
lice exclusively reproachful—if they will descend to profit
by a disgraceful fraud, and usurp the name of represents-
tives of the people, while they abjure the functions implied
by that name, we do tell them flatly that they are contemp-
tible pretenders—that they are burdens, instead of supports
to the public cause—that they betray the Church, the
Crown, and the Constitution—that they are blots and
plague-spots upon the Aristocracy, to which they boast of
appertaining—and tbs.t, like the weal: and wretched" crea-
tures who bore the eesignation of Frmeh noblesse in the
early stages of the French Revolutio ), they are guilty of
delivering over their country in chains to her and their
own destroyers."
kis clear to us that the Times must have thought
the Tory petty dead and
_gone, when it pronounced
this just estimate of the habits and morals °fits mem-
bers, which reminds us most strongly of the scene in
Moliere's Malade imaginaire between Toinette and
Belinc, the wife of the supposed defunct. The foriner
having announced the melancholy event with the ex-
pressions of grief supposed to be expected, Reline, in
the precise style and spirit of the Times, expresses her-
self as follows, having remarked that there was no oc-
casion for lamentation. " Va, va, cela n'en vaut pas
la peine I Quelle perte est-ee, que la sitame et de quoi
servoit-il sur la terre? Un homrne incOmniode-a tout
le monde, mal propre, degautant, sans cesse sin lave-
mcnt on une medicine dans is ventre, mouchant, tons-
sant, crachant toujoura; sans esprit, ennuyeux, de
mauvaise humour; fatiguant sans cesse les gens, ct
grondant jur ct nuit."
"- Toinette. Voila tine belle ()raison funebre."
And so say we of the article in the Times.
" Voila sine belle oraison'funebre."
And we must add that our contemporary writes for-
cibly, when, with an intimate understanding of his
subject, he states the truth without reserve. We here
see the members of .the Tory party described to the
life as men unfit for the legislative trust; " absorbed
in the habit of frivolous or criminal indulgences ;"
preferrinc, " idleness in any and every form" to their
duties ; foregoing honest distinction for " personal
insignificance," or a notice " exclusively reproachful ;"
descending to profit by " a disgraceful fraud ;" and,
in a word, " contemptible pretenders," and "blots and
plague spots" on the Aristocracy. The Times knows
its men ; oditque damnalos, we may add. For months
past we have seen the Ministry vilified for an alleged
alliance with a gentleman not always so guarded as lie
should be in is language ; and now we find it
proclaimed that the opposite party is made up
of a set' of men in every respect utterly worth-
less, and despicable ; contemptible triflers; or profli-
gates absorbed by-the habit of criminal indulgences ;
and the Tory party, made of this stuff, according to
its own organ, has the monstrous effrontery to rail
at its adversaries, because they have in their ranks one
most potent and efficient friend of the popular cause,
whose tongue is not always under the nicest regulation.
Compare this fault of the one with the catalogne of all
that is degrading and disgraceful attributed to the
many of the other party. But what does this tirade in
the Times portend, is the question ? Is it shaking
the dust from its feet ? Is it about to renounce the
cause as vitiated by those who embrace it ? Is it about
to plead the impossibility of holding any course with
the debauched and demoralized throng, the Cyrenaic
rout, so forcibly described ? And the men, of whom
such a character is given by their own organ, are pro-
fessedly the religious zealots, the champions of
the Church, and the bitter foes of toleration
To what purpose does the Times pretend to
call these persons to their posts in Parliament ? What
good is to be expected from the men it has painted as
given up wholly to sensual pleasure, and as answering
only to the call of the vices ? Why summon them
from the hell and the stew to the Councils of the na-
tion ? What honest voice, what useful act, what right
disposition can be expected from beings so degraded,
so habitually debauched and demoralised ? Such a set
would be fit for a penitentiary, but not fora Parlia-
ment. -Why seek to tear them from their vices ?—for
to tear them from their private vices would not inspire
them with the public virtues ; and their public dispo-
sitions would have a correspondence in profligacy with
their private habits. We beg it to be observed that,
in making these remarks, we are not playing the part
of the accuser ; we adopt the Times' .description of its
own people, and argue from the statements of the party
organ, which must be supposed rather lenient than
otherwise. All .that we can say is, that these gentle-
men seem to understand each other marvellously well,
and that there appears to be no want of truth in the
reproaches flung on each other.—Morning Chronicle.
In Saturday's Times we took occasion to impress
upon Conservative Members of Parliament, that if
they wish to save the Reformed Church, the Union
with Ireland, the life and property of Protestants in
that country, as well as the Crown, the aristocracy,
and Constitution of England, from immediate ruin,
they must at once make up their minds to discharge
with diligence their Parliamentary duties, and to ad-
journ to some fitter season the frivolous indulgences of
" idle crentlemen," that most despised order of the hu-
man race.
Sir Robert Peel, and those of his political
friends who stood forward last session as the prominent
leaders and champions of the Conservative interest,
being indeed the national interest in the House of
Commons, were on many occasions left shamefully in
the lurch by their professed supporters. While Mi-
nister, and afterwards while head of the Opposition,
Sir Robert Peel was, we say, scandalously treated by
those minions of titled and landed arirtocracy who con-
stituted a large numerical portion of the House of
Commons Conservatives, being not only unable to
divide when a division might have been, as it fre-
quently was, desirable for the public welfare, but
having to bear up against the discouragement of