The Sun.
London, England, 1836-07-27 00:00:00

and in that sense it was received with cheers by the
Opposition Peers—but out of doors there is not a single
man of moderate discrimination who will not make a
different application, and hold Lord Lyndhurst him-
self, and his supporters in the Lords, as the party re-
sponsible for the prevention of an equitable settlement
of the question, and for the consequences, direful as
they may be, both to the people of Ireland and the
Church establishment, of keeping alive between them a
cause of mutual hostility. It is on the heads of this
party that will fall a nation's execration, and that too
not idly or ineffectually, but with a power adequate to
the justice of the condemnation, and sufficient to give
effect to the spirit of the anathema. Lord Lyndhurst
shamelessly asserted that the appropriation resolution
was founded on misrepresentation of the real state of the
Church ; that there was no surplus, and consequently
that the difference was now only on a matter of mere
" punctilio." If so, then we ask, what must be thought
of that man who affects a righteous indignation at those
who are the cause of preventing a settlement of the
question—admits that the delay is a sacrifice of the
best interests of the country, and yet betrays the de-
pravity of his own motives by describing the disputed
point as a mere " punctilio ?" Such is the self-con-
victing declaration of Lord Lyndhurst ! We refer to
his speech, and challenge a refutation of the truth of
this exposi• of its contents. The speech of Lord Mel-
bourne is equally creditable to himself—consistent
with the principles of his Administration, and con-
firmatory of the confidence which the country is dis-
posed to place in his Government. He stated that
the rejection of the appropriation clause would be fatal
to the efficiency of the Bill. He told their Lordships
that "he and his colleagues stood on that principle--
they stood on the principle on which they had received
the support of a majority of the other House—they
stood on that to which they were pledged ; and if
they were not longer supported in the maintenance of
that principle, they were immedintely ready to resign
the office they held; but they would not resign while
they believed that they were supported by a majority
of the other House of Parliament—and by a majority
of the country." In this sentence of the Noble Pre-
mier, to which too much importance cannot be at-
tached, is comprised the whole duty of the Ministry,
and of the people—a graphic portraiture of the
necessities of the times, and the course to be pur-
sued in this collision of the elective and hereditary
principles. It must be gratifying to the country to
perceive that at the very moment when Ministers in
the House of Commons were pursuing a dubious course
in respect to the English Church, and receiving the
support of men whose opposition would have been more
appropriate, and ought to be more acceptable, that the
head of the Administration responded to the expecta-
tions of the country. Lord Melbourne said, that "be
would admit that the bulk of the gentry were opposed
to them, that the bulk of the clergy were decidedly
opposed to the Administration, but that he would not
go into any calculation as to the amount in number on
each side ; but, supposing this to be the case, he re-
quested the Noble and Learned Lord not to rely too
much on that circumstance, because, in fact, on looking
back to the history of this country, it would appear
that the bulk of the nobility and gentry had never
opposed themselves to the general feeling and opinion
of the country, but that they had been beaten in the
long run. This was what he meant to state, and
what he said with perfect sincerity, and from his
anxiety to preserve the Constitution, and to promote
the welfare of the country." The question now rests
with the people—meetings should be convened, peti-
tions should be prepared, an active organization of po-
pular power should be immediately set on foot, and by
one means or other the Lords should be forced into

the conviction that a Ministry representing the wishes
of a, people is not to be sacrificed to despotic autho-
rity. The Ministry have reiterated their pledge to the
appropriation principle. Lord Melbourne said that,
in his opinion, " the resolution in question was not in-
discreet—he was of opinion that the resolution was
not rash and violent, but that it was calculated to set
the question at rest, on grounds which would be really
satisfactory to the country. Therefore, not only in
point of honour, but in point of feeling, in point of
every regard which they could consider binding on
themselves as public men, he and his colleagues felt
bound to adhere to the principle and to ,the letter of
the resolution."—Morning Advertiser.