The Sun.
London, England, 1831-10-12 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Should we rejoice at any conduct on the part of the Bishops
which is in its nature of a tendency injurious to the Church of
England ? We flatter ourselves that no such criminal exulta-
tion can be imputed to us. Had it been our scheme of dark
and murky mischief to " trip up" the Reve/end Lords, as some-
body has insinuated that it was their plant a " trip up his Ma.
jesty's Ministers" by their mode of proceeding on the Reform
Bill,—we should have scrupulously forborne to trouble them
with our apprehensions, our warnings, or advice. But it was,
in truth, our honest and conscientious solicitude for even the
temporal well-being of the Church (which at the same time we
beg leave to disclaim all notion of confounding with its spiri-
tual welfare),—it was that habitual anxiety which led us on
more than one occasion, before the second reading,—before,
indeed, the introduction of the Reform Bill into the House of
Lords,—which led us to address the Right Reverend Bench in
accents of deep alarm for the consequences of its not unfore-
seen indiscretion. The very case which has happened, the
identical case, was most distinctly, and we might add curi-
ously, presupposed by this journal, as a circumstance fraught
with calamity,—we mean the circumstance of the Bill be-
ing thrown out by the Bishops. Yea, it has happened in
the very form and to the precise extent which we prophesied ;
for the fact of the Bishops being friendly or adverse to the Bill,
has just made the difference between its being sent to a Com-
mittee or at once rejected. The effect, too, which we foretold
as that which would inevitably follow the indiscretion of these
Prelates, hasbeen too completely verified. The people every
where regard the Bench of Bishops as enemies to the civil
rights of Englishmen, and no man opens his mouth upon the
fate of the Reform Bill without asking, " Why are the Bishops
suffered to meddle in any manner with legislation ?" In short,
whatever support the political privileges of the Right Reverend
Bishops may have derived from custom, or from traditionary
policy,—from the presumed connection between " Church and
King," and so forth,—that support is hourly falling from under
it. But it is not merely the vote of the Bishops, and its hosti-
lity to Reform, that has of itself been the means of alienating
men's minds from their order. A pretty extensive suspicion
and imputation exist that there was something not far re_
mote from a mixture of Machiavelism in the proceedings
of certain individuals of their body. In priVate conver.
sation it is alleged that many of them had expressed opi-
nions favourable to the Bill. Is it not true, it has been
confidently asserted, that the learned Prelates of Lincoln, Bath
and Wells, and Llandaff, had absolutely promised to vote with
Ministers, while he of the pamphlets--the quondam nOrthern
Archdeacon—had hinted the probability of his supporting the
measure, on the familiar score (to him very familiar) of expe-
diency ? One Archbishop was openly an approver of Reform ;
another disapproved of the opposition to it. Thus the Minis-
ters had actually, and in sober fact, their heels tripped up " by
the confidence into which the wary bench had lulled them."
They did not recommend to his Majesty to create Peers, be-
cause they reckoned on at least the neutrality of the Reverend
Bishops. Had they declared their hostile purposes, the King's
Government would have known what to do ; but on the very
evening of the debate the Bench was as serene and smiling, and
as full of agthnens towards his Majesty's Ministers, as ever ;
nor, had a ghost ascended from the vaults below, could
astonishment have been more excited than by the appearance
of the Archbishop of Canterbury on the floor—like the
evil genius of the patriotic Roman at Philippi, announcing
to him that the battle would be lost. That the majority
of the Bench were all the while pledged to the Opposition, and
had determined to retard their blow until it would be too late
for Government to meet it by calling up a reinforcement from
any quarter, is the conclusion to which many persons have been
driven by the events of that inauspicious morning. Nor can
the tactics of time-serving men be much wondered at, by those
who were themselves not satisfied as to the intrinsic strength of
the King's Government. Things had taken place, and had not
taken place ; from which it was, perhaps naturally, inferred,
that due respect had not been shown to the advice of Ministers
in an elevated quarter. Lord Howe, for instance, at the head
of a particular household, and enjoying, as was incidental to his
station, the countenance and indulgence of a Royal personage,
had taken no pains to conceal his animosity to the Bill. Yet
Lord Howe was permitted, as Queen's Lord Chamberlain, to
busy himself with manoeuvres against the Bill ; and, still un-
molested in his office, gave a bitter vote against the advisers of
his Royal master. Hence, perhaps, the apprehension that Lord
Grey's was a feeble Government. Hence, perhaps,—for we
pronounce nothing,—the idea, that Bishops who were so
inclined might beard the sick lion with impunity. That
material of error has since been removed, and Lord Howe,
as we have elsewhere stated, dismissed from office. But
what a temper has since been displayed, by one, at least,
of these mild Christian potentates ! Was there ever
such an exhibition of lamb-like charity and placidity as by
Dr. Phillpotts of Exeter, in the House last night towards Lord
Grey ? Was this from pure disappointment at the non-arrival
of the change of Ministers, in the expectation of which, it may
be conceived by a few, that certain individuals may have voted?
—or was it another illustration of that fate which leads some
men, by an unhappy sort of gravitation, into follies, whence
they seldom escape without discomfiture " The Phillpotts"
will not again, we should conjecture, run headlong into a col.
lision with Lord Grey ; though it is not easy to answer for a
pamphleteer, who first exposed himself to one class of sus-
picions by his little, scrupulous attacks upon the Catholics, and
then to another class,—we fear not much more creditable,—by
writing up measures which he had so recently written down, and
with such relentless virulence. Verily, from the last night's
specimen of this Anti-Reform champion, there are
who will allege that his mitre is but gilded foolscap.
Under such circumstauces, we cannot help feeling some
forbearance towards those who think that the Bishop
ought to be bowed out of the House of Lords, with as much
respect and courtesy as was possible. For their own sakes,
and for that of religion, it would be infinitely better. If the
clergy are thrown into the temptation of politics, they are sure,
like Dr. Phillpotts, to misconduct themselves. Because, as
even Lord Clarendon, to whom they owe (at the restoration)
their seats in the House of Lords, says of them, " There are
no class of men who take so erroneous a view of human offairs
as churchmen." But there are traits of character which belong
to all times. Lord Clarendon, against all the other Ministers
of Charles 11., insisted on restoring the Bishops to the House of
Lords. What was the result ? When the Court turned against
Lord Clarendon, and a Bill was brought in for exiling him,
every Bishop voted for it, which made John Holies, Earl of
Clare, as he passed by them in the House of Lords, say to them
" You have all voted one way this day, my Lords, and yet you
shall not all be Bishops of Canterbury."—Tunes.
We insert letters from all people and from all quarters at
this fearful crisis. We think it necessary to insert them, be-
cause they convey local feelings as well as local information,
which ought to be known at the seat of Government. But we
must be understood as not always pledging ourselves exactly to
the views and opinions of our correspondents. We would,
however, recommend particular attention to the letter signed
" A Friend of the Administration." It frankly conveys a
friend's advice. We shall not here detail the various accounts
which reach us of the spirit which agitates the realm into its
most retired nooks and corners,—we must refer our readers for
these to the body of the journal,—but we say that this whide
country is in commotion from one extremity to another. And
why is it in commotion? Because the Bill is thrown out?
Because the Bill is lost ? No, not because the Bill is thrown
out,—not because the Bill is lost; but this commotion,
this fearful commotion is—only because the Bill is de-
layed : for had the Bill been absolutely lost, this com-
motion, terrible as it is, would have been a mere
child's whistle corrwared to the soul-awakening clang with
which all England would have rung, from side to side. The
Bill has been delayed by the decision of the House of Lords,
and from that delay—that delay merely—have sprung up those
troubles of the populace, which alarm districts, overturn the
peace of societies, destroy human life, and render property,
with all the other blessings of it, insecure. We must hope,
therefore, that there will be no more delay. Lord Howe, it ap-
pears, is at last dismissed; and in that our patriotic King has
given a decided proof of his confidence in the Ministry. But
—he has been dismissed at last, has he? Why was not he
dismissed at first ? Why was he, a servant of the Crown, suf-
fered to give his vote, and chaunt out his proxies with decided
emphasis against the Ministers of the Crown ? The mischief
consequent upon this act of Lord Howe exceeds all calcula-
tion. But it affects chiefly the House of Lords; for had he
been dismissed in time, it is doubtful to what extent the majo.
rity would have been reduced,—whether any delay (the cause
of our present, we hope temporary, evils) would have
occurred,—and whether, of course, any accession to that body
by which the progress of the Bill has been impeded would have
been found necessary. As to the runaway Bishop, that was an
act of direct treachery, by which the most honourable and most
confiding are most likely to be deceived. Ministers, therefore,
were not to blame. But for interposing much farther delay
between the nation's hopes and the consummation of them, we
should think them much to blame. Let the country know its
fate, that it may be prepared to meet it. Delay, too, must be
most injurious to that body of the Legislature in which it has
originated ; for it allows time to the people to brood over the
injustice done them, and feed on revengeful thoughts. An
immediate reparation of the wrong, and a quick obligation of
it, are the objects of our sincerest wishes. The resolutions
which were to have been proposed by Lord Wharncliffe on
Monday failed of making their appearance in the House of Lords
in consequence of the cause which we suggested,—the die*
union of these mighty members of the Opposition, Lord
Wharncliffe himself is said to have been in the minority at a
meeting which took place at his own house in the morning.
The prorogation, it is supposed, will take place on Friday. We
hope that it will be a short one ; and that Ministers, at its ex-
piration, will be able to effect their object a coup sur. We se-
lect from the Parliamentary History a few out of several short
Prorogations From Oct. 20, 1673, to Oct. 27, 1673; from
May 13, 1678, to May 23, 1678 ; from July 13, 1678, to Aug. 1,
1678 ; from March 13, 1678, to March 15, 1678 (only two days) ;
from Oct. 21, 1689, to Oct. 23, 1689 (also two days)." Hatsell
makes the following observation on this last prorogation—the pre-
cedent is a parallel to the present crisis :—" I guess the reasons
for this prorogation, and which made it necessary were, that
the Bill for declaring the rights and liberties of 6he subject, and
settling the succession of the Crown, which had passed the House
of Commons, was, by disagreement between the two Houses,
lost; and all parties being desirous to pass a Bill a that pot
importance, a new Session was necessary, to entitle it, in point
of form, to be brought in again."—Hatsell's Precedents, vol. 2,
Page 223 (2d edition).—Times.

The conduct of the Bench of Bishops in opposing them-
selves to the nation, on so momentous a question as Parll47
mentary Refortg, has sealed their doom, There is but one
opinion with regard to them in all quarters. The French do
not look with more horror upon any of the Generals who de-
serted the national ,standard for that of the allies, than the

English on the Bishops who voted in the famous majority of
199. That vote will neither be forgotten nor forgiven. Even
in the House of Lords itself, the descendants of the Apostles
are spoken of its terms, which, if any Englishman had heard for
the first time on his return to this country, after a year or two's
absence, he would have almost disbelieved the evidence of his
senses. Lord King, on presenting two petitions from the owners
and occupiers of land in Suffolk, and from a place in Ireland,
complaining of being continually harrassed with suits for tithes,
after an exemption for centuries, observed, that "this disturb-
ance of the ancient order of things then came from the Clergy,
who professed to be averse to all changes, and to be desirous
that every thing should remain unchanged, but who, when
their own interests were concerned, became the arch disturbers."
Lord Ellenborough having complained of these constant at-
tacks on the Clergy, Lord Suffield confessed that he had fre-
quently suggested to Lord King to abstain from these attacks ;
but though his attachment to the Established Church remained
as strong as ever, what had taken place within these few
days had caused some change in his opinion respecting the
general body of the Prelates. "He had always (he said) con-
sidered the existence of the Right Rev. Prelates in this House
as liable to one objection, as they always threw almost the whole
weight of their body in the scale of Governments.—(Hear,
hear, from the Opposition benches.) He would presently show
how he meant to apply that observation. The Right Rev. Pre:
kites, in a firm and close phalanx, lent their weight to the Go-
vernment, and thus led him to observe, that the Right Rev.
Prelates always did so when the Government was arbitrary and
oppressive; but that the instant that a liberal Government
came into power, and proposed liberal and beneficial measures,
the Right Rev. Prelates voted against them." This from a de-
voted friend of the Church was candid. A question of order
having arisen out of this charge, the Lord Chancellor was led
to interpose. The Noble and Learned Lord, it will be seen, in
his peculiar manner, did justice both to his Noble Friend and
the Right Rev. Prelates :—" He did not hear," he said, " that
his Noble Friend imputed any sinister or bad motives to the
Right Rev. Prelates in voting as they did, but merely stated the
fact, and his opinion that this might prove injurious to the
Church Establishment, of which he was a firm and steadfast
friend. It was in that view that his Noble Friend made obser-
vations on the conduct of the Right Rev. Prelates, and neither
they nor any Noble Lords were exempt from observation both
here and in another place. The Right Rev. Prelates did
not want to be exempted from observation. They courted
observation. The Right Rev. Prelates had no doubt acted with
the greatest disinterestedness.—(Hear, hear.) Good God! to
impute to the Right Rev. Prelates that they acted from selfish
and interested motives ! No, they had with the utmost disin—
terestedness acted against the present Government."—(Loud
cries of " Hear, hear.") They thought of tripping up the pre-
sent Government—(Hear, hear)—they had a right to do so—
(Hear)—and it could not be imputed to them that they were ac-
tuated by selfish motives when they acted against the present
Government, and attempted to trip it up, and probably thought
that they had tripped it up.—(Hear, hear.)" Disinterested
with a vengeance ! With two distinguished exceptions, all the
Bishops (except the few who did not vote) were against the Bill
—were against a large majority of the House of Commons—
against the whole nation (for the exceptions to unanimity are
too few to affect any general calculation). Now, how is this ?
How does it happen, that while a majority of the ancient Peers
wish to put an end to the vile system by which, through the
agency of fraud, and bribery, and corruption, the people of Eng-
land are unmercifully pillaged and oppressed, the Bishops
almost to a man support the cause of fraud, of bribery, and cor-
ruption, abet injustice and unrighteousness ? Why is it that
their sympathy should be so much more strong than that of
the Lay Lords, with what Burke so significantly termed
the shameful parts of the Constitution ? Is this acci.
dent ? What ! accidental, that in a manner respecting
which the nation is on one side, a great majority of the
representatives of the nation on the same side, and (ex-
cluding the Prelates) also a majority even of the Peers, the
Right Reverend Fathers in God should cling to corruption
almost to a man ! No, no; there is more than accident in
this. The Prelates know, that of those even who love the
Church, there are few who love its corruptions, and in this re.
spect the Prelates differ from the people ; for the corrup-
tions of the Church are the only part of it of which they are
enamoured. To set their house in order, might render it more
popular with the country; but that intimation, which was most
acceptable to the people, was wormwood to the Prelates. Men
are much led by analogies. It is not to be supposed that with
purity in the State, the impurity in the Church could be tole-
rated. Hence the eagerness of the Prelates to trip up a Re-
forming Ministry; and hence the Prelates will, till a Reform
takes place in the Church, naturally oppose themselves to all
improvements in the State, and support whatever tends to add
to the misery and privations of the people. The wolf loves not
the careful shepherd. The wonder with us is, how two men
could be found under so corrupt a system, in whom the love of
piety and justice still survived. These testimonies to the merits
of the Prelates had the effect, if we may use a familiar phrase,
of setting their backs Alp. The Bishop of London said he him.
self had given neither opinion nor vote on the subject of the im-
portant measure lately before the House, but he disclaimed on
the part of his brethren all desire of tripping up the Govern-
ment. They had had no reason to complain of the present Go-
vernment. No, but the people had reason to complain of the
conduct of the Government towards them. When the Lord
Chancellor was endeavouring to tame them down, by all manner
of civil sayings (more civil, indeed, than true), we knew that he
would be unsuccessful. To coax an old Bishop (whose opposi.
tion to all that is liberal procured for him the mitre) into any-
thing like liberality, is a miracle beyond even the powers of
management of his Lordship. The Bishops did not wish to trip
up the Government, but they were obliged to do what they
thought would trip them up :
" Much did he grieve, when making Frenchmen die,
To any inconvenience to put 'em :
• It quite distress'd his feelings,' he would cry,
' That he must cut their throats,'—and then he cut 'em."

The Right Rev. Prelate seemed also to think that the inte-
grity and sincerity of the Bishops, in the vote on Reform, were
more certain than their wisdom. Yes, yes, integrity—the inte-
grity of the heap! Integrity in the prelatic dictionary has a mean-
ing of its tam The Bishop of London was in rather an awkward
predicament. It was no easy matter to please Ministers and please
his brother Prelates at the same time. The latter were fairly
exasperated. The Bishop of Llandaff said, " As to the impu.
tation insinuated, if not expressed, that they had voted from
interested and selfish motives, he regarded them as idle sounds
—as mere echoes of the discordant noises with which they had
been assailed on their entrance into that House." The Bishop
of Exeter improved upon the Bishop of Llandatf:—" They
were meeting (he said) to brave the censure of the mob,
even when urged and instigated by those whose duty it was to
restrain these ebullitions of the mob—those who ought to
uphold and maintain all the institutions of the country.
He defied any of the accusers of the Bishops to show a
single instance in which they had voted from interested and
selfish motives, although they had been outrageously insulted
by a person holding the highest station in office ! A trum-
pery petition was presented (petitions against the Church must,
of course, be trumpery), and that occasion was taken to hold
out that the Clergy, who professed to be averse to all change,
were the greatest disturbers of existing rights and institutions,
a
spoken of with sarcasm and insult, as being interested
and
and engaged in a conspiracy against liberty." It
i d
sl'esh'
merelys
lelfire an accidental coincidence that the votes of the Bishops
except in the one case of restoring to the people their rights,
have always been in favour of those who had the distribution
of the loaves and fishes. Corruption, as Lord Lyndhurst, an
impartial Judge, observed in the discussion on the Bankruptcy
Court Bill, must not be presumed. As the boroughmongers
have all along contended—let proof of guilt precede disfran-
chisement. Men may uniformly act as if actuated by a corrupt
motive, and yet not be corrupt. Do not let us, therefore, be
condemned
on appearances, however awkward they may be. The
indignation of the Bishop of Exeter, however, called up Earl
Grey, who read the Right Rev. Father in God a lecture on evil
speaking. The Right Rev. Prelate had said, that aperson in the
highest station in office had insulted and vilified the Church.
" Now he was in what was generally considered as the highest
station in office, and he asked the Right Reverend Prelate
whether he alluded to him or to his Noble and Learned Friend
on the Woolsack? But to whichever of them the Right Rev.
Prelate alluded, sure he was that to neither of them could the
accusation be applied with justice or truth.—(Loud cheers.) But
not content with this, the Right Rev. Prelate, with a warmth
which little became the garb that he wore, would not have been
so grossly unjust as to accuse them of being exciters and insti-
gators of a mob to vilify and insult the Right Rev. Prelates.—
(Hear, hear.) To that he could only reply, that be repelled
the imputation with the utmost contempt and indignation.
There was a not a syllable true in it—(Hear, hear, hear)—and
he would describe it in no other terms than as the foulest
calumny." What is he who utters a foul calumny? His
Lordship added, that " he called therefore on the Right Rev.
Prelate to state the evidence on which he rested so foul an im-
putation. In all his observations he had shewn the greatest
respect for the Right Rev. Prelates, and was a firm friend to the
Established Church of England ; and he still respected the Right
Rev. Prelates as a body, notwithstanding the most improper
speech and foul aspersions of the Right Rev. Prelate who
spoke last.—(Loud cheering.)" This was rather an awkward
call on the Right Rev, Prelate; and being so called on, he
answered it by referring to Earl Grey's speech on the first
night of the debate, " when he warned the Bishops seriously to
consider what would be their condition in the estimation of the
country
d in case they voted against the measure. The Noble
Carl
put this in such a way as if it had a tendency to excite
ha
the people against the Bench of Bishops. The Noble Earl had
called upon them under a threat to vote for the measure, and
he had assumed the character of a prophet, aujcalied upon
them to set their houses in order.
The meaning was clear that Ogstructien tQ the House was
threatened." Let u. reason a moment with the Right Rev.
Prelate in the way of his own order. If he were to warn one
of his flock against transgression, and point out to him that the
sinner who dies in sins is in danger of damnation, would that
be causing him to suffer the punishment? If Earl Grey believed
that the cause which he called on the Bisnopi to support was
the cause of.tustice sind honesty, Was he not right in warning
the Prelates not to expose themselyes to the consequences of
opposing themselves to that cause? But this evasion would
not do. Earl Grey is too practised a debat?; to be baffled
in this way.
" The ROt iilevevena Prelate's proof
corresnoto
•-•e4 but very little with his assertions, for
the Right Reverend Prelate had said that Ministers had
encouraged and instigated the mob to annoy." And after an
attempt to back out, as the phrase is, Earl Grey again turned
on the Prelate, and gave him most edifying chaitliement.—
The conclusion pf this discussion was as singular as its com-
mencement. The Marquis of Londonderry and the Duke of
Newcastle complained of having been ill-used on their way to
Parliament, and the former said he tnui 1141
his remaining
windows broken.
himself, if should
announced a determination to protect
d net 4e protected by Government, But

what we wish more particularly to notice is the declaration of
Lord Wharncliffe, that had it not been for the Press, the
people would have been quite delighted with the manner in
which he and the remaining 159 did their duty. Ile was,
indeed, surprised at the peaceable behaviour of the people.—
This is inimitable. We understan I that the Bench of Bishops
give out that they are still persuacbd the people care nothing
for Reform. The people, it seems, do not know their own
minds. Lord Ellenborough, too, that sapient Legislator, did
not attribute the excitement of the people to their Lordships'
decision, but to the Press—O, the Press, the vile Press : The
people have a strange predilection for reading newspapers, of
the sentiments of which they disapprove. Nothing less than
a miracle will satisfy Lord Wharncliffe that the people and him-
self are not agreed on the question of Reform.-2lforn.Chronicle.

That his Majesty entertains a strong objection to the cre-
ation of such a number of new Peers as would be necessary to
neutralise the majority on the Reform Bill we have reason to
believe ; and we also believe that there exists, or has existed
until very recently, a difference of opinion in the Cabinet upon
the same important question. It is not unlikely that these
matters may be denied in certain quarters, but we shall make
no account of any denial which is not supported by better au-
thority than mere assertion. In the mean time the statement
as to the objection on the mind of his Majesty receives some.
thing like confimation, from an announcement made with an
air of authority in the Courier of last evening. That Journal,
after stating that the prorogation of Parliament is to take place
on Saturday, if possible, but certainly not later than Tuesday,
goes on to say, " Upon the re-assembling of Parliament the
course will probably be to bring forward the Reform Bill,
slightly modified, but by no means changed in principle, or in
any of its important clauses. It is presumed, we imagine, and
with good reason, that the Peers will not, after the declaration
of the wishes of the King and his people, again reject the Bill,
or, if they should reject it, that it will be by so small a majority
as will enable the King, without inconvenience, to create new
Peers." This announcement, which is no doubt afeeler put
forth, not by official authority, but at official suggestion, to
ascertain how the public would tolerate the idea of a mo-
riffled Bill of Reform, is entitled to an observation or two—but
first let us say a few words as to the creation of new Peers.—
Being sincerely attached to a Constitutional Monarchy, as the
form of Government best adapted to the growth, development,
and duration of rational liberty, and the protection and diffu-
sion of all the social blessings that depend upon it, we wish to
see every part of which it is composed preserved in its integrity.
It is therefore that we advocate an efficient but not an intem-
perate Reform. But while we believe that the integrity of the
House of Commons has been broken in upon by the Members
of the House of Lords usurping the nomination of Members
to seats in the Lower House, and while we endeavour, by such
reasons as the case supplies, to have the pure representation of
the Commons restored, we by no means desire to see the House
of Lords degraded in its composition, or prostrated in its spirit
at the feet of the Minister of the Crown. Deeply do we re.
gret that the House of Lords should, with regard to the Re-
form Bill, have so decidedly opposed, not the Minister of the
Crown, but the earnest wishes and authentic will of the na.
tion, expressed and recorded in the petitions which crowded
the tables of both Houses, praying for nothing more than
that the representative theory of the Constitution might
be realised in practice. But it is not a sound principle to act
upon, either in morals or politics, that a permanent evil should
be committed to secure the acquisition of a present good.
Statesmen, as well as moralists, should look not merely to the
immediate result, but to the probable consequences of actions,
or their conduct would be always in error. It appears a good
thing to pass the Reform Bill by any means short of violence;
but it is right to bear in mind that, if it be effected by the crea-
tion of 50 or 60 new Peers—nearly 30 having been created by
the present Ministry already—the dignity of the Peerage will
not only be lowered, and the independence of the House of
Lords destroyed, but a most dangerous precedent will have
been thereby established, of which a corrupt and ambitious
Minister may hereafter take ample advantage in promotion of
the worst designs; for an abuse of the prerogative in a good
cause to-day may be pleaded to-morrow in defence of proceed.
ings of a totally opposite tendency. The prerogative of the
Crown in creating Peers is only properly exercised when it is
limited to the supplying the vacancies produced by time, and
to the raising persons whose public merits and eminent services
sntitle them to that honour. We know that this prerogative
has been sometimes used before for political purposes, though
never to the extent which some contend for now. It was thought
a great abuse in the reign of Queen Anne, when, to give Mi-
nisters a majority, twelve new Peers were created at once.
With such contempt were the twelve treated, that, on the day
of their taking their seats in the Upper House, on the question
of adjournment being put, the Earl of Wharton asked them
" Whether they voted by theirforeman P" King William 111.
degraded the Peerage, to ingratiate himself with great families,
by raising eight Earls to Dukedoms, and creating eighteen
Earls, three Viscounts, and nine Barons. But what is this to
what is now proposed ? Besides, the Peers createdfor the oc-
casion are generally the mere tools of every administration,
who never vote against the Minister, unless when the Minister
happens to act with the people. Witness Mr. Pitt's Peers in
the present instance, whose names are to be found in the ranks
of the majority against the Reform Bill, although most of them
perhaps, never voted against the Crown before. Among
them is the name of Lord Carrington, the ennobled banker
and professed Whig ; but it was better, in his opinion, that
the rights and liberties of the people should be sacrificed
than the rotten borough of Wendover should be extin.
guished. In the celebrated case of Ashby and White the
House of Lords made a noble and successful stand in defence of
the popular liberties, against the despotic usurpation attempted
by the House of Commons. There have been other occasions,
too, where they have been on the side of freedom when the
Commons arrogated an authority subversive of the rights of
their own constituents; but they were not occasional Peers who
acted so. We would, therefore, rather see the House of Lords
abolished at once, than so degraded as to reflect but the servile
image of the will of the Minister of the Crown. Now, as to the
announcement which the Courier puts forth as a feeler, we
ask—are the people prepared for a modified Bill of Reform—
that is, let it be disguised as it may, a changed, an altered Bill—
a something that is not the " whole Bill, and nothing but the
Bill ?" We should like, at all events, to know what the in-
tended modifications are, and then we could say whether they
infringe upon the principle or not. As to ourselves, we have
never joined in the cry from the beginning for " the whole Bill;"
on the contrary, we have pointed out several defects which we
should be glad to see removed. In the mean time, what need
of mystery, if the thing be honest ? It is easy to govern the
people of England by reason—not by deception.—Morn. Her.
The cause of Reform can now only be injured by an abuse of
that strength, which, directed by reason, must be sure to make
it triumphant. This is not a time when the popular fl.eling
requires to be excited by the stimulating furor of the Press.
The danger is lest the excitement already abroad may break
over the mounds which protect the Constitution, and become
a furious torrent in which the vessel of Reform shall be wrecked,
instead of flowing on in its legitimate channel, with that full
but calm tide which would bear it securely and majestically to
the haven of its proper destination. We have already told the
people that " the emissaries of the Anti-Reformers are abroad,
instigating to acts of a dangerous and unlawild nature with the
hope of crushing Reform itself." We have told this to the
people whose cause we have supported with such force of sea.
son and arguments as we could command, when some Jour.
nals, that are now administering the intoxicating draughts
of that cup of madness which already " kindles in its circu.
lation," were equally zealous in supporting and applauding
every act and sentiment of the determined enemies of all
Reform. That the emissaries of the Anti-Reformers are abroad
is sufficiently evidenced by the anonymous placards which have
been fixed up in various quarters, with the obvious intention
of breaking down the legitimate force of a reasoning people N 1
this question, by substituting for that constitutional power the
lawless and destructive fury of a mob. The ITV% 44, and
malignant contrivers of disorder anti YiPlence, no doubt,
calculate upon the mind of the Siavereign himself being alie-
nated from Reform, by that causo being mixed up and con.
founded with disgraceful riots and rebellious outrage. They
also calculate upon the military being called out to massapre the
deluded people. They would like to see the scene, et Newtown_
barry and Merthyr Tydvill—scenes of disgusting military execs!.
tion—renewed even in this metropolis. That they may be disap-
pointed is the wish of every good citizen, but in order to disap-
point them it is necessary to put the people on their guard against '
their machinations. There is another class of persons enkleavaur-
i ing to get up disorder in London—those desperA4 CbaraCters that
abound in every great and luxurio,nk cAtI, who expect that
their predatory " patriotitinl" NOI he enriched with a rich
harvest of spoil, acnikl scenes of tumult and commotion. But,
indeed, the mere reading of the seditious placards by crncht
simple people, who, in looking after their political, rights, some.
times forget that others are looking after th.iir pockets, afford
to gentry of this sort no small owortunity to pursue with sue.
cess their honest avocation. As a specimen of the public indi.
cation of the se.ntirnents of the people of England, a Aforshpsc
Paper publishes a placard which had been poatg up at Can,
terbury, and which, after a hypocritictil expression of respect
for the King, and calling upon the poolle to wad meetings to
declare their loyalty; ?PA Op t i Ray, " At these meetings, to
express your opiplon mere decidedly on the politics of this
momentous crisis, you can resolve to pay no more t.ole 46.
in the event of an Anti-Reforming Ministry bAsig•
ed. You can resolve, in consideration of lie part taken
by the Bishops and the clergy astaino the people, that
you will pay no more ti4es. anti ronamber, fellow-citizens,
that a r,,111,q wv'etitta ill other times—and that meeting
was th-e 4eslgliS4 Nonuse of Commons—resolved that ' The 31) s.
of Lords was a nuisance I' How far your opinion conilock., in
this respect remains to be seen." The inil,4ei thia placard
is not quite so willing to get into a `.t§,uTape-4 himself as to bring
~I\o:ualtaynce_ato
others into it—for he moi;istly..c:ineeals his name, and plays his
heroic part unAsr the signature, as weft :as under the inm
tllndlii.thi?a*; also, be it re-
" a Leforiner." It is easy to determink.what sort (-It,. ©Fine.
people to follow the example of t,
;TS. •nll9crAkie assembly that
the
membero4, 4in to the block. Are we not, there-
fore, justigeif in saying that the " emissaries of R
Anti,
are abroad ?" Let the people recollect the S •
PeelA csMaiaii4iOns,
aks
and the military executions that have talitpn 'lslam, even under
vhoetedis, twhehiHleouhseesol*f (lief
our Whig Government. But if
vi a %hay Ss
fbrget those things,
and listen to violent and '
treacherous d • sers, we shall be
guiltless cif-the afflicting consequences.—Morning Herald.
The debate of Monday night in the House pf Commons,
when that House assembled to sit in jumment upon the de-
cision of the other Housp
Parliament, was distinguished by
many circulnstatu,es deserving attentive consideration. In the
first place it is worth while to consider as a remarkable sign of
the times, the circumstances of a House of Commons meeting
to discuss, under the auspices of the Ministers of the Crown,
a Resolution directly in tv teeth of a decision come to by a

MIR

large majority of the Home of Lords not rainy hours bef.sce,
and that too at a moment when a desperate excitement of the
mob against the House of Lords was known to exist, Th.-
friendly feeling towards the Upper House of Legislature ma.
nifested by the Servants of the Crown on this occasion is
sullisiently obvious. In the next place it should be obsery ed,
as a most marked and striking instance of their fidelity t o
the conservative principles which form the bond of union
of their party, that the Opposition, whose cause had just met
with so signal a triumph in the other House of Parliament,
while they were yet as it were in the very moment of victory,
came forward calmly and seriously to advocate the question be-
fore them, and, without one word of boasting, which it might
have been at least excusable to have indulged in at such a time,
met the proposition emanating from the friends of a defeatel
Ministry with sober and deliberate argument. The public peace
was at stake, and ticy did not hesitate to sacrifice to every
strongfeeling which they might have shewn, and to forbear every
triumphant sarcasm which the tone and temper of the Minis-
terial Members were so much calculated to provoke. How dif-
ferent was the conduct of the Ministerialists! Did they ender-
vDoiudrotoeyetneacocuh hratgee
to the law ? No ! With the exception of the speech of the
peace? Did
e thatt duty was submission
inculcate forbearance ?
mover of the resolution and Lord Althorp's at the conclusion,
all that was intended to encourage the Ministry appeared to be
intended to inflame the multitude. We do not wonder that
some of them should have been so ; the old and hackneyed
traders in disturbance from Ireland rejoice in such an oppor-
tunity, and have no sound English feeling to restrain them.
The bigotted stupidity of the Member for Middlesex produced
its natural result ; but we certainly are surprised that at
such a crisis as this a man with Mr. Macaulay's natural and
acquired gifts, with his fine imagination and redundant stores
of memory, should soforget what was due to himself and his
country at such a time, and lend his aid to the excitement of
the rabble. Is it possible that he can believe that we shall
be borne along to the sacred temple of rational liberty upon
the impetuous torrent of brute force ? Does he really believe
that by pointing out to the people the way in which they may
exercise their resistance to the laws with least danger to them-
selves and most injury to established institutions, he does wisely
and well ? We shall not insult his understanding by supposing
any such thing. But what then is his motive? Why, Leeds;
for his chance of the representation of that town he is content
to use his high abilities on the side of the mob, to flatter those
he despises, and to affect an association of mind with all that his
mind must really recoil from with scorn and loathing. Such
motives of selfish ambition are generally found to be the haste
and groundwork of Whig patriotism, and were we to analyse the
motives of those who crowd the Ministerial majorities in the
House of Commons, we could soon show how little real love of
the people actuate those whom the deluded rabble most delight
to honour.—Aforaing Post.

A resolution declaratory of adhesion to the deceased Re-
form Bill and confidence in Ministers was proposed to the
House of Commons on Monday by Lord kbringten, and, as
a matter of course, carried. We say as a matter of course,
for it was to be expected that " the nsiVority," who would
neither argue nor listen to argunient while the Reform Bill
was before them, who would in fact do nothing but vote
for the Bill and so send it up to the Lords, should be ready
to pass a resolution impugning the conduct of those whe,
having thoroughly investigated and discussed the principle of
the Bill, came to the conclusion that it was a worthless, dan,
gerous, and inadmissible project. It is not surprising that " the
majority" should have done this, nor that they should express
confidence in a Ministry who have utterly lost the confidence
and respect of all who are unswayed by party, or who have ca-
pacity to judge and discriminate. We are quite sure that but
for the Reform Bill, for the sake of which they are tolerated
and upheld by a considerable faction, there is but one opinion
throughout the country as to their utter incompetency to direct
the affairs of the nation either at home or abroad.—Morn. Post.

There were several 'Worm meetings on Monday, and various-
stratagems were had recourse to by their promoters to induce
the shopkeepers and other inhabitants to violate their honest
feelings, by forced displays of revolutionary manifestations.
But all clearly and most happily failed ;—the meetings were
quite ridiculous, whilst the conduct of the inhabitants in
all directions was most becoming and exemplary. Thus
have all the efforts of faction proved decidedly abortive,
and the wise decision of the House of Peers in rejecting
the atrocious Bill of revolution may be fairly considered
as having the sanction of all the well-disposed portions of
the community. The nation has happily been undeceived ;
the temporary delusion so artfully practised for a time has
effectually been dispelled, and the cheat and fraud ofour Whig
Rulers completely exposed. All outrageous threats to deter
the Lords from doing their duty have been met with utter
scorn and disdain; and that magnificent pillar, that " Corin-
thian Capital of the State," has immortalized itself by its tzar
noble and manly conduct, in the momentous crisis of our na.
tional fate, in having at once preserved the Constitution and in-
sured the safety of the State. A rational plan of Reform will
speedily be proposed, which we are fully persuaded will satist\ -
every loyal and well-disposed man in the empire; and the people
who have so creditably disappointed the views of the revolLs-
tionists, will find ample cause of satisfaction in the conduct of
the noble, the enlightened, and true friends of the Constitution.
—Morning Post.

To the majority against the Reform Bill must
be added, among the Peers present, Lords Patrbnoe, DE
DUNSTAICVILLE, and GAMBIER, which completes the
number of 150.

We are informed that the coaches which ar-
rived at Stamford with the intelligence of the rejection of
the Reform Bill bore each a black banner, inscribed
" Vengeance to the Lorda P.

Earl MA NSFIELD and family attended Di-
vine Service at St. John's Chapel, Hampstead, on Sundry
morning. After the service, and on his return to his
carriage, his Lordship was much booted and hissed ; there
was a general cry of " Reform ! Reform !" His Lordship
hastened to his carriage, which drove off with great speed.
Lady JERSEY sat in a box crowded with re-
porters during the debate; upon seeing which a Noble
Lord observed, "that though a Tory and an Anti-Re-
former, her Ladyship was evidently not averse to the
liberty of the Press.' Her Ladyship, it is stated in an
Evening Paper, reported the anti-reform speeches for the
Morning Post. Her diligence and attention were most
exemplary.— Times.

After the Reform 'Meeting at Nes‘bury last
Wednesday, there was a dinner at the King's Arms. In
the course of the evening, a gentleman related that in the
glorious days of "Parr and Plunder " he belonged to the
Volunteers, and was unexpectedly called from the ranks
in 1793, by a nobleman then in authority, and appointed
a commissary with a salary of 15s. rer diem. This suns
he actually received for three year a without being called on
to perfarna any service. Ile had inveateel both principal
and interest in the funds, and whenever a reformed Par-
liament called upon the "Tax-eaters" to disgorge, be was
ready to return the whole amount fur the service of the:
State.

There was collected on Monday afternoon about
the two Houses of Parliament, a very considerable crowd,
which displayed their feelings towards the Reform and the
Anti-Refokm Peers in a very significant manner. The
Marquis of CLEVELAND was recognised by the people and
hailed with the most enthusiastic plaudits. By a gentle
force he was taken off his horse and carried on the shoul-
ders of the populace into the House of Peers. A Rev.
Father in God, who, after promising to give his vote ira
favour of the Reform Bill, ratted at the last moment, and
gave, against the Bill, not only his vote, but also a proxy
for the Bill with which Its bad been intrusted, was
brought down in a cabriolet to the House of Lords. On
getting out of it, he offered the driver Is. 6d. fur his fare.
The driver looked at it contemptuously, and then re-
turned the coin to the Rev. wearer of lawn sleeves, saying
that he'd be if he would bring down a Itiphop and
an Anti-Reformer for less than 3s. The Bishop, afraid
lest a worse thing ahmild befall hint, submitted to
the charige., paid the fellow his Si,, and took refuge in.
the House of Lords.— Times.

In our last publication, in recommending ad-
drew!, to the KINC, praying him to secure the passing of
the Reform Rill by the creation of Peers, we said that
perhaps ere another week passed over our heads, it might
`be our duty to recommend graver and sterner duties. The
fate of that Bill is still in suspense, hut at any hoer we
may bear of its rejection. Should this be the case, the
first duty that will devolve upon every friend of Reform
will be to ..raositler how he may best assist in the preserva-
tion of the peace. The KING and his Ministers are bound
to stand by a peaceable and orderly people, hut they are.
bound to take part against all who, by acts of intivlsidatica
and violence, endeavour to obtain that which racy be ob-
tained by Icgal, and constitutional means, Should the Rill
be rel-c;Cd, there is still a remedy in the creation of Peeve,
(Irottld that be ineffectual, the )!Casa may issue writs ta
the new and populous boroughs, and nithiltil.l them
from the old MA dircaftd. Such is what may be done if
the Miniatry remain in office. If they go out, the people
have an effectual remedy in allowing Government to levy
ron their goods for payment of tams. If they are true to
themselves; if they avoid 411 acts of violence, nothing cars
prevent Reform ; and the people, we are convinced, will
not pertuj.% violence to take place. Let associations be
famed in every street for' the protection of persons and
i property. Let them instantly suppress every thing that
may lead to disorder or riot, and, while they thus main..
lain the publrte, peace, let them continbe firmly to deniandt
their risglita, 4.et this be considered
stand us ? The cause is a good cause
Manchester Times.
seliVea,, our. cause, and our coontry,
and
must
prevail..—
.
who on
asliiiu:hdoactyantosviittrth:
f Hamlet at Covent-garden, came to
portion the "address to the players" which con-
that portion o
4, Reform," a simultaneous cheer burst fi ons
con-
tains the word
the audience, which prevented the actor for some minutes
from proceeding with his part.
plaj\v‘d7htheencliYairarc.teTf LING'
Monday
night

REFORM -MEETINGS.

ST. MARTIN IN THE FIELDS.

At ten o'clock yesterday a, highly respectable assemblage of
the most influential men in this parish took place in the Vestry.
room in St. Martin's-lane, for the purpose of taking into considera-
tion the necessity of addressingthe King upon the rejection of the
Reform Bill by the Lords. Mr. James Smith, the Senior Church-
warden, presided. Mr. Wylde, Mr. Fenn, and several other re-
spectable inhabitants having addressed the meeting, many resolu.
tions were received and anaddress, to the King, which was read
to the assembly, was agreed to amid loud applause.

CRIPPLE GATE WITHIN.
Yesterday, at eleven o'clock, a meeting of the inhabitants
of this Ward was held at the Baptist Head Tavern, Alderman..
bury, " To take into consideration the propriety of addressing
the King and his Ministers upon the present posture of affairs,
occasioned by the House of Lords rejecting the Bill for Reform.
ing the Representation of the people in the Commons House of
Parliament,"
Mr. Alderman WOOD, in taking the chair, said, that he had
called the meeting thus early, in order that they might express
their sentiments before the prorogation of Parliament. He could
inform them that the previous evening, when Lord Grey returned
from an interview with the King atWindsor, his Lordship appeared
in the highest possible spirits—(Loudcheers)--and from a con-
versation with Lord Althorp in the lobby of the House of Com-
mons, he could assure the meeting the measure was still approved
of by King, and that if the people would remain quiet the
measure was merely postponed.—(Cheers.)
The meeting was addressed by Mr. Knapp, Mr. Jaques, Mr.
Edward Wilson, Mr. Hole, Mr. Wiltshire, •Mr. Richardson, and
other gentlemen. Resolutions expressive of the confidence of
the meeting in the firmness displayed by the King and his Minis-
ters, and praying that all constitutional means be adopted to
ensure the success of the Reform Bill were adopted, as was a
petition to his Majesty founded on them. We regret that a very
great pressure of other important matter precludes us from giving
the excellent speeches of the gentlemen who addressed the
meeting.
Tanks being voted to the Alderman, the meeting broke up.

ST. GILES AND ST. GE BLOOMS

BURY.

A most numerous and highly respectable meeting of the in.
habitants of these two large and important parishes took place
yesterday in Lincoln's-inn.fields (the originally intended place of
meeting, the yard of the Angel Inn, St. Giles's, not being suffi-
ciently capacious), to consider of the best mode of expressing the
opinion entertained by the inhabitants of those two parishes on
the conduct of Lae House of Lords in rejecting the Reform Bill,
and also for devising means of addressing the King for the pur-
pose of entreating his Majesty not to withdraw his support from
his Ministers, who enjoyed the confidence, and were richly en-
titled to the gratitude, of the country.
At one o'clock CHARLES TEMPLE, Esq., a Barrister at the
Chancery Bar, was called to the chair amidst the loud plaudits
of the meeting.
The CHAIRMAN felt proud of the honour that had been done
him, and was most happy to concur in the object of the present
meeting, believing that there never was an occasion so urgently
demanding such modes of expressing the sentiments of the people
of England as the present moment —(Loud cheers.)
Mr. \VAKILEY (editor of the Ballot) then rose to propose
the following resolution:—" That this meeting views with inde-
scribable alarm that the Lords have rejected the Reform Bill—a
proceeding which has completely destroyed the peace and well-
being of society." In doing so, he could assure the meeting with
great truth, that he never stood before a body of men more op.
pressed by feelings of pain and regret, than on the present oc-
casion, but those feelings were somewhat abated on the-reflection
ofthe certain ultimate success of the cause of Reform.—(Cheers.)
Several resolutions were to he moved of a similar 'nature to
those which have been agreed to at the preceding meetings on
this subject. The following, however, is of a different character—
" That this meeting contemplate that it may become necessary
to establish a National Guard, for the protection of property, and
the support of his Maje ty's rights. That this meeting disapprove
of the interference of the Bishops in political affairs."