The Sun.
London, England, 1836-09-05 00:00:00

from leaving the Lords in their present position. When-
ever the Times wishes to pourtray the revolting and
terrific, it appears to take the conduct and constitution
of the Lords as its model. Next comes the crimes of
the present House of Commons, presented by the
Times in frightful and hideous array :—First, the re-
jection of the Speaker of the rotten borough Parlia- ,
ment—the Tory nominee, Mr. Manners Sutton—
from the Speakership of the Reformed House of
Commo n
as t ; second, the punishment of bribery and
perjury Ipswich, and the not punishing the
agent of an election at Carlow ; and third, the
attempt to educate the people of Ireland with the
surplus revenues of a Church which in Ireland is for
the greatest part useless unless as a medium of pro-
viding for its idle minister at the expense of the
people ! ! Such is the sum total of the offences
alleged against the present House of Commons by the
Times, and for these the people of England are called
upon to renounce representative government, and sur-
render the whole legislative power into the hands of
three or four hundred Lords, and all the sages and
fools—honest men and knaves—patriots and tyrants,
whom they may beget, or who may be begot for them,
throughout all future generations. Will the people
of England thus renounce their inheritance—we em-
phatically ask, will they ? Wherever we cast our
eye throughout Europe, from the circumference to the
centre, from the horizon to the zenith, we perceive
the masses, like clouds surcharged with electricity,
ready to burst into an explosion. If England be wise
she will prepare for the thunder-storm, and by passing
a conductor through the House of Lords protect the
State from the impending fury of the elements.--.-

Morning Advertiser.
Mr. O'Connell has addressed a long letter to the
editor of a Sunday Radical journal, which seems to
have been foolish enough to contradict his assertion
that " the majority of the English nation are indiffe-
rent or, worse, hostile to the claim of the people of
Ireland to justice," for the apparently unnecessary pur-
pose of proving the correctness of his own statement.
Daniel in this instance is right beyond all question.
Facts of almost daily occurrence attest the accuracy of
his opinion. The majority of the English people are
hostile to what Mr. O'Connell intends when he speaks
of justice to Ireland. They wish for real and substan-
tial justice to the people of Ireland, and not for the ag-
gravated tyranny of despotic Priests, nor the bound-
less rapacity of a mendicant demagogue. Justice to
Ireland, in the English sense of the expression, cer
tainly includes the disgrace and punishment of him who
cheats, agitates, and plunders, the poorest and most
ignorant portion of her people. And to this kind Of
justice the English nation, with the slight exception
of Lord Melbourne's Government and its interested
or infatuated supporters, are neither hostile nor in-
different. Mr. O'Connell appeals to the result of the
Newcastle election in proof of his proposition. No
example could have been better chosen. A very short
time before the election the Irish mendicant agitator
had shown himself to the people of that important
English town. This was enough. The exhibition
cured the inhabitants of the Radicalism by which they
had previously been distinguished. The helots of
Sparta were exhibited in a state of intoxication in order
to guard the sons of freemen from the disgusting vice
of drunkenness. Mr. O'Connell was at Newcastle, as
he has always been wherever he presented himself in
England, a Lacedeinonian teacher ; and a most suc-
cessful one. We wish we could persuade him to have
a public entry and a dinner at every town in Great
Britain between this and the next general election. A
more decided majority than even the present would
then, we are persuaded, he hostile to the O'Connell
sort of " justice to Ireland."—Morning Post.
A voice from Derrynane has reached London in the
shape of a dull letter, addressed by the Irish dema-
gogue to one. of the English Radical newspapers. It
is written to prove that the majority of the English
nation are indifferent, or worse—hostile to the claim
of the people of Ireland to " justice ;" and the late
Newcastle election is adduced in support of the,writer's
views. To a certain extent he has herein the adVan-.
tage over the Radical whom he addresses ; for he
shows, that if, as was stated by the Ministerial papers
at the time, Blackett was rejected for not being Radi-
cal enough, the reforming electors must have stultified
themselves by returning Mr. Hodgson, who is not
only no Radical, but an unequivocal Tory. And it
was upon the very question of the Ministerial mea-
sures, with reference to the appropriation clause and
Irish Municipal Reform—the two questions forming
the great political test of the popular feeling—it was
upon these questions that the Reformers of New-
castle—who thought Mr. Blackett did not go far
enough—supported Mr. Hodgson, an avowed op-
ponent of the Government. This is true, as be-
tween O'Connell and his English co-operator, but
we deny that it proves that the English nation
have any wish to withhold justice from the people of
Ireland. As we have over and over again urged, the
only way of considering this matter usefully is first to
acquire a definite idea of what " justice to Ireland
really means, and how far it is identical, or indeed at
all consistent with the venal policy advocated by the
rapacious Radicals on both sides the Channel. It is
our opinion that no greater injustice could be done to
Ireland, nothing more fatal to her peace or to that
prosperity of which peace is the main and most es-
sential element, than the overthrow of the Protestant
church, and the transfer of all pOlitical power in the
sister kingdom into the hands of the O'Connells and
M'Hales. We laboured earnestly, ardently, and suc-
cessfully to impress this truth on the popular mind in
England, and the decision of the Newcastle electors,
on a late occasion, is one of the proofs that we have
not laboured in vain. By the result of that election,
a numerous constituency practically declared that they
would be no party to the infliction of " a heavy blow
on Protestantism in Ireland," or to the exaltation of
Popery in that country. This injustice they, and
the English people generally, will never be prevailed
upon to do, despite of all the alternate cajolery and
bullying of the sordid and slavish dastard who dates
from Derrynane. the letter we allude to contains a
most conclusive proof of this man's miserable meanness.
He has the monstrous ingratitude to deny that English
sympathy secured emancipation for Ireland. The
stupidity of such a statement is no less glaring than its
pitiful thanklessness. Has Mr. O'Connell forgotten
the adulation with which he declared that he looked! to
English sympathy, and to English sympathy alone, for
effecting this measure of emancipation, at a time when
he, indeed, " crooked the pregnant hinges of the knee,
where thrift might follow fawning ?" He now tells us,
speaking of the achievement of religious freedom for
Ireland, " her hereditary bondsmen did it, and here I
am who led them on." Is it not ludicrous to the last
degree, when one remembers the long list of illustrious
names who assisted in preparing the public mind for
this great concession, and who finally accomplished
what nothing but their vast talents and 'untiring energy
could have succeeded in doing—is it not, we say, in-
finitely ludicrous, with a recollection of these great
men fresh in our minds, to find such a person as
O'Connell pointing to himself and his " hereditary
bondsmen" as the sole successful strivers in a cause
which, in point of fact, they and they alone have dis-
honoured and degraded ? If the Agitator be thus com-
placent as to the past, he is no less positive in his com-
mands as to the future in regard to Lord Melbourne.
He says that no Minister ever had so glorious a career
before him. There is nothing, according to him, that
Lord Melbourne may not do ; but then comes a long
list of things which that unhappy Minister must do,
in obedience to his taskmaster. In the very words of
the letter "he must satisfy the rational portion
of the English people." (This looks much like a
mauvaise plaisanterie asking his Lordship to retire.)
" He must content the English and Scotch Dissenters ;
they ask only for justice.' He must become the ad-
vocate of an increased and extended franchise. He must
content to shorten the duration of Parliaments. - He
must not shrink from the ballot. Above all, he must
prepare for the conflict with the Lords." When read-
ing this preposterous nonsense, we know not which to
admire more, whether the bloated vanity of the insane
scribbler, or the unparalleled baseness of the Adminis-
tration which can submit to he so schooled by any man
whatever. In truth, the lazy leader of the Lords, and
the little leader of the Commons, have a very pretty
session's work carved out for them by the burly bigot
who keeps them in their places. Extension of the