The Sun.
London, England, 1836-11-04 00:00:00

S'r'IRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The accounts of Municipal elections received yes-
terday are of the same character as those received on
Wednesday. In Bath, in which the Tories boasted
that there was a strong reaction in their favour, seven
Reformers have been added to the existing liberal ma-
jority. In Northampton, four out of the six council-
lors elected are Reformers. In all the wards the Libe-
eels were at the head of the poll. In Carmarthen the
six councillors elected were all Reformers. In Har-
wich three out of four of the councillors elected are
Reformers. Mr. Herries may look out for another
seat. In Kiddern:inster, which last year returned a great
majority of To:-ies, there were ten vacancies to be filled
lir, and ten staunch Reformers have been elected. In
13aiibury the five councillors elected are all Reformers.
In San'tkvich three cf the four councillors elected are
Ralph als, and the fourth a moderate Conservative. The
town council now consist of twelve Liberals and two
Conservatives. In Wallingford the four retiring
councillors were re-elected, two being Reformers
and two Tories. In Coventry, eight Liberals
and four Tories have been returned. The Tory
journals have published accounts from certain bo-
roughs. It is stated by them that in Poole the
six vacancies have been filled up by three Tories
and three Radicals. In Newark, where the Mar-
quis of Exeter is Lord of the Ascendant, four
Couservatives retired, and two Radicals and five Con-
. seevatives have been returned, and one Radical. In
Yen!: the Tories have returned eight, and the Radicals
six. In St. Alban's four Conservatives have been re-
tureed. In Ipswich the ten vacancies have been filled
•up by six Tories and four Reformers. In Lymington
four Conservatives have been returned. In Guildford
four Conservatives have been returned. In Dover
five Conservatives have been returned. In Colchester
eeix Conservatives have been returned. In Tewkes-
ry four Tories have been returned, so that Tories and
Reformers arc now equal in the council. It thus ap-
pears that in all the great towns the Reformers have
been victorious. In Liverpool, Leeds, Bristol, Bath, Co-
ventry, Oxford, Leicester, Devizes, Chichester, North-
ampton, Carmarthen, Harwich, Kidderminster, Banbury
and Sandwich, the Reformers have been victorious.
In Wallingford and Poole mattors remain in statu quo.
In Newark, York, St. Albans's, Ipswich, Lymington,
Gaildford, Dover and Colchester, the Tories have
,been victorious. The result, then, is that in fifteen
p;eces the Reformers have been victorious, and the
To.-ios in eight places, and that two remain in statu
quo. But then, contrast the great cities of Liverpool,
Leeds, Bristol, Bath, Coventry, Oxford, and Leices-
ter, with the petty places in which the Tories have
been partially successful. In Liverpool, where the
Tories have been suffered to gain eight out of the seven-
teen, the large town-council was before composed al-
most exclusively of Reformers, so that during some
seasons there could be no one present in the town-
council to represent the feelings and views of the To-
ries. May the Tories always have such reactions to
. boast of !—Morning Chronicle.
Lord Glenelg.is likely to serve the cause of O'Con-
nell and Lord Melbourne just as well by his speech to
the Radicals of Inverness, which we reported yester-
day, as he ever has done by that long, though not un-
troubled, slumber, which in complimentary language
is termed the Noble Lord's " Colonial Administra-
tion." We have but brief space for touching on the
potatory rhetoric of the Noble Secretary, and it gives
us the less regret, inasmuch as there is not a thought
or syllable to be found, from first to last of his oration,
which has not been put forth with far greater force and
effect by every paragraph writer, in every Radical
newspaper, since the day that the " appropriation
clause" and its collateral huinbugs became the watch-
words of the rump Cabinet, and the warrants by
virtue of which Whig and nondescript placemen like
Lord Glenelg entitled themselves to their salaries each
quarter-day. The proceedings commenced with an
allusion by the Chairman, a Mr. George Macpherson
Grant, which we must add was rather unkind, not
to say offensive, towards his kinsman-guest—an
allusion to the Noble Lord's Administration, as
Secretary for Ireland under Lord Talbot, some
sixteen years ago. For, if not the most disas-
trous to the empire (though pretty well for that),
the page of Irish history, thus re-opened for public
inspection, so far as concerned the chief personage
therein recorded—to wit, the present Colonial Secre-
tar7—was beyond dispute at once the most laughable
and the most humiliating that ever met the eye of an
Englishman, or festered in his memory for the last 100
years. Why, it was the common complaint through-
out society that Mr. Secretary Grant never raised his
head from the pillow before two o'clock in the after-
noon, except to read a novel—nor opened his mouth,
but to swallow port wine ; that to quell an insurrection
of the five Munster provinces, he diligently fortified
the Castle of Dublin ; and, to prevent the receipt of
disagreeable intelligence, left behind him 1,400 offi-
cial letters from all parts of Ireland, with the seals
unbroken ! Yes, it was undoubtedly an administra-
tion worthy of all praise from a Radical namesake of
the Noble Secretary ; and well does it become his
Lordship to boast of the tranquillity which has now
been produced throughout Ireland by a Government,
which, allowing for 16 years' improvement in the science
of treason, successfully emulates his own. Mr. Secre-
tary Grant made an awkward attempt or affectation
of liberality towards the Irish Papists, who rewarded
him by attacking the King's forces in the field.
Lord Secretary Moeneth gives away the whole pa-
tronage at his dispossa; to Roman Catholic retainers
of Mr. Daniel O'Conne:.l, discountenances the Pro-
testant clergy, tries to st.'rve them, promises the
Papists that they shall have the Corporations to them-
selves, and the only gratitude or protection he meets
with, is an outcry for the abolition of the House of
Peers, and for a repeal of the Union. The insurrection
of Mr. Grant's day was confined to fair-fighting in
the open country. That of Lord Glenelg's day, and
under his colleague, Lord Morpeth, is more detailed
and skilful in its methods, and infinitely more exten-
sive in its sphere of action. It is a wholesome attack
upon Church and State, upon property, law, the
British Crown, and the Constitution of the empire ; yet
Lord Glenelg, after the fashion of all Irish orators of
the insurgent school, ventures in such a condition of
things as this to boast that Ireland " has been tran-
quillized !" Ireland tranquillized ! because the func-
tionaries of the State have taken part with the public
enemy, because loyalty lets fall her arms, and hides her
head, while the breakers of the law are not merely
unpunished, hut cherished, by those who are sworn to
administer and enforce it. The Imperial colours are
now every where drooped in the presence of that
pompous rebellion which struts through the land, and
flares before the astonished eyes of -the King's true
subjects—our brethren in blood and in religion. If
there be in Ireland an outward and fictitious semblance
of religion, it is because the monarchy has capitulated,
and all resistance to the assailants had already ceased.
Those who boast of their eternal hostility to the Bri-
tish empire, march where they please—act how they
please—dictate what they please—and trample on all
whom they select as victims—the sordid and pusillani-
mous servants of the Crown of England kneel and wor-
s.hip : and this, my Lord Glenelg, who is one of them,,
calls the restoration of " tranquillity." But he also de-
signates as the basis of the Government of which he
is no unbecoming Member, the maintenance of the
blessing of " civil and religious liberty." This, too,
in Scotland, where it is now thoroughly understood !
that the unbridled predominance of " civil and religious
Piper!'" has been the real purpose of those who rule
the Melbourne Whigs. The Colonial Secretary
will soon be taught, if we mistake not, that his northern
.eoEntrymen are no longer to be imposed upon by
•Arnes, and that the cause against which their fathers
foe gilt is not that for which the present generation of
Scoechmen will suffer any faction of combined Whigs
and Papists to sacrifice them with impunity. We can-
nct now do justice to that powerful exposition of the
preeeiples and policy cf our Conservative Statesmen,
which was laid before the great Halifax meeting by
Lord Wharncliffe and his son, but chiefly, conspicu-
ously, and most manfully, by the noble &iron. It is
unnecessary to give the sentiments or reasonings of
that Noble Lord the adventitious benefit of a contrast
wi, b the inflated and unsubstantial vaunts of the Co-
lonic' Secretary. It would, moreover, be a gross dis-
respect to the former nobleman, every sentence of
whose impressive speech contained an argument of

which no enlightened Englishman could fail to adrait
the force ; or an avowal of principle which every
licnest man would recognise as a bond of sympa-
thy between himself and the constitutional spea'Aer.
The main points to which the attention of that
intelli-
gent and important audience, of 500 Yorkshire, Con-
servatives of the West Riding, was called by the Noble
Lord and Mr. Wortley, appear to have been the
Church of Ireland, and the pretended Reform, but
actual extinction, of the Legislative Peerage. But we
cannot dismiss an appeal so rational, so earnest, and
inspiriting, with this meagre and scanty notice. The
questions referred to are vital ones. They are ques-
tions of high and awful policy, though the pernicious
rabble of mob-agitators in both countries have dared
to seize them with an unskilful and sacrilegious hand.
An emphasis far too exclusive has been laid upon the
elements of the Constitution in their distinct and sepa-
rate action. It is time that the people should consider
them more carefully in their relations of cohesiveness
and reciprocal dependence. An " organic" change, as
it is termed, in any one of our fundamental institutions,
whether in the Church, the Executive, or either branch
of the Legislative Power, annihilates the British Mo-
narchy.—Times.
Yet another Conservative feed I It came off on
Monday, at Halifax. The usual quantum of nonsense
about attachment to the King and Constitution—the
Church and the State—was spouted as a matter of
course. The speakers were all red-hot in their
Toryism, and the hearers were most exemplary in the
exercise of their Stentorian capabilities. The Hon. J.
S. Wortley, to whom the dinner was given, was lengthy
and foolish enough in his harangue. But the speech
of his father, Lord Wharncliffe, has the chief claim on
o'ir attention, as his Lordship undertook the somewhat
Quixotic task of defending the House of Peers. It is
amusing to witness the perfect coolness with which the
Noble Lord, while accusing the Attorney-General
of calumniating the House of Lords, heaps his ca-
lumnies on the present Government. He says, that
such is the character of the Melbourne Government,
that but for the interposition of the House of Lords,
the country could not exist. What a pity that
Lord Wharncliffe cannot convince the country of this !
There would then exist no ground for those fears
which haunt and disturb his mind about the safety
of the hereditary House. Had he said, that with
the House of Peers, constituted as that body is at
present, the institutions of the country cannot long
exist, he would have been somewhat nearer the truth.
The people, at any rate, would have concurred with
him in the opinion. The Noble Lord, after a good
deal of flourish about various other matters, came at last
to an attempted vindication of the House of Peers, in
relation to their conduct on the Irish Tithes Bill. He
says they were actuated by the purest motives in re-
, jetting that measure. Nobody will be surprised at his
saying so. Of course he, or any other Noble Tory
Peer, would claim credit for the same integrity and
benevolence of motive in rejecting any other measure.
The question is, will the country believe them ? Next
session will enlighten their Lordships on that point.
' But the most important thing in the Noble Baron's
speech, is the declaration that the Tory Peers have
' taken their stand on the non-appropriation principle,
and will abide by that principle—nay, if necessary, fall
it. This is no doubt very valorous ; it certainly is very
plain ; and so far we thank him for it. Let us be equally
plain N'vith his Lordship—he is entitled to this in return.
Well, then, we tell him that if the hereditary House.
be, as lie says, determined to abide by the lion-appro-
priation principle, they will fall by it. Can the Noble
Lord he weak enough to suppose that the people or the
Government, being equally pledged to the appropria-
tion principle, will abandon it ?—They never will.
If the people and the Ministry, united, are to fall—
our readers will pardon us for putting the thing even
hypotheticelly for one little moment—if we say they
are to fall, it will be in the assertion of the appropriation
principle. We thank the Noble Lord for the plain-
ness of his declarition as to the determinations of the
Tory Peers. We are no longer in doubt as to the
course they mean to pursue next Session. We have
' it from the mouth of one of their leaders, that we are
' to be treated to a repetition of the same factious con-
' duct as they exhibited in the Session which lately closed.
The lessons of experience, it seems, are altogether lost
on them. They are incorrigible. The indulgence with
which the country treated their recent freaks appears
only to have made them more bold and infatuated.
Well, then they must be suffered to take their own way
of it. They have already been sufficiently warned of
the inevitable consequences of pertinaciously opposing
themselves to the popular will and the people's inte-
rests. To reason and remonstrate with them, or ad-
dress them in the language of admonition, must no
longer be the employment of the nation. We must
now prepare to defeat their proclaimed intention of
frustrating all great measures of Reform, by that vigo-
rous course of action which the occasion demands.
Who can any longer doubt—if any one up to this
moment has doubted—the urgent necessity of Peer-
age Reform ? With the declaration in question, as
to the intended course of policy by the Upper House,
ringing in our ears, will the people remain any longer
silent and inactive ? Will they not now be up ana
doing ? Public meetings must be, and at no great
distance of time, held in all parts of the country to de-
cide the question, " What is to be done with the
Lords?"—Morning Advertiser.
In commenting the other day upon the working of
the Prisoners' Counsel Bill, with which subject was
naturally connected an allusion to the prejudices at-
tempted to be excited against the Bill at the Courts of
the Old Bailey, we made some observations touching
the reported sentiments of a Learned Advocate in de-
fending a prisoner, and we are now glad to find that
the report of the speech in defence, in regard to the
points that called forth our animadversion, was, as we
then expressed our belief, in error. We are informed,
on the authority of two Barristers who were present,
that although the prisoner's Counsel did say that in
tLat particular case the prisoner, had he defended
himself, might probably have suggested something
in explanation to the Jury, which he, as his Coun-
sel, might nut so well be able to do, yet he did
not follow that up by telling the Jury that lie
was satisfied the evidence had fully established the
charge against the accused, nor did he in any other
terms admit his client's guilt. Indeed, it would have
been as extraordinary as unprecedented, that a Counsel
defending a prisoner, and that, too, a Counsel who
had earned the reputation of an able and zealous ad-
vocate, should so far forget the duty which he under-
took when lie accepted his client's brief, as to turn
round upon him and deliberately assist in his convic-
tion. Such a statement, we thought, must have ori-
ginated in mistake, and we are glad to have the means
of giving it a positive contradiction. There is nothing
for which British advocates have been more distin-
guished than for fidelity to the interests of their clients;
and when that ceases to be a characteristic of the
English Bar, the confidence of the public will he with-
drawn for ever. As to the Prisoners' Council Bill,
we see no reason to alter the opinions which we have
expressed, and we will take every fair opportunity to
disabuse the public mind on that subject, when we
perceive, in any quarter, systematic attempts made to
lead it astray.—Morning Herald.
Lord Glenelg has made a magniloquent speech at
Inverness :

" Grande aliquid, quod pulmo anima prmlargus anbelat."
We are almost out of breath from the mere perusal.
The station, however, of his Lordship justifies com-
ment, and demands the effort. Whoso reads the ora-
tion will derive infinite amusement by keeping in mind
the career of the orator. Charles Grant was a Tory.
Remember this—he was a good Tory. Perhaps lie
was asleep then, and (to quote from himself) his
Whig-Radical principles " were stored up, they were
inherent in his constitution, engraven upon it, cast in
his very form and mould; but there they slumbered, till
they were awakened, like the music that existed in the
celebrated statue of old, which was silent till the
beams of the sun called it into action." It really
would seetn that he had slept during his whole
existence, until he enjoyed the washing of Earl
Grey's favour. From that time only he has lived.
And, because he can now see a greatness in the
British empire which in his Tory torpor he could
not see, he is modestly pleased to consider himself
and that greatness in the light of cause and effect.
What a dust I raise," said the fly on the coach-