The Sun.
London, England, 1831-08-13 00:00:00

LONDON, SAitßi';'Air gVENiNG, AUG-UST 1.3, 1821

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The motion of Mr. Croker, announced in so im-
posing e. tsfennee cn Tl:ereder7 nights turned out a
very sorry piece of birsitieSL':. He he'd one or two
small points to deal with—the letter of the Ist of
August addressed to the conference, which Lord
Palmerston received on the Wednesday, and did not
open till the meeting of the conference on Thursday;
the letter of the 2d AUgust, which had been read in
a hurried manner by the Dutch Minister, and which
had produced so little impression on his Lordship
that he could not recollect whether was read on
the Friday or Saturday ;—the inability to compree
bend the meaning of the words nio!ens militaires ;
—and the injury done to the Dutch nation in repre-
senting them as perfidious, in sending a negociator
to the conference armed with full powers, without
saying a word of the military movements which had
been ordered. The Right Hon. Gentleman overlaid
his subject by his mode of treating it. Identifying
Ministers with a series of articles in a Morning con-
temporary (the Times), he wished it to be inferred
that, from ignorance or design, they had given a false
representation of the conduct of the King of the
Netherlands, in consequence of which he was one
day held up as perfidious, and the next as the victim
of their calumny. The fact of the case may be com-
prised in a nut-shell. While the former Ministry
were in office, on the 17th November, an armistice,
or a suspension of arms, was agreed upon, which
has been broken by the Dutch Government. On
Tuesday, the 2d August, the Dutch King renewed
hostilities, and on the Wednesday following the first
notice of this was communicated in a letter, which
was not opened till next day. If Lord Palmerston
had immediately summoned the conference, and laid
before them the letter of the Ist August, and if
there had not been the slightest difficulty in assign-
ing a precise meaning to the expressions, still the
fact remained, that one day before the letter was re-
ceived the Dutch army was in motion, and that the
c inference could not have prevented the effusion
of blood. The conference were certainly not pre-
pared for this unceremonious mode of proceeding
of the Dutch King ; and without pretending to say
whether he has or has not been fairly treated by the
conference, there can be little doubt that his warlike
movements preceded his announcement of them. It is
pretty clear that the Dutch King wished to steal a
march on the conference. That he did not sends nego-
ciator as a blind may be very true, for the rnoyens
nrilitaires indicated pretty clearly an appeal to arms;
but having commenced his military operations be-
fore his notice of them could reach the conference,
if the sending a negotiator was not perfidy, it was
at least a mockery. The material point was not
neglected by Ministers, though the letter of the Ist
of August received on Wednesday was not opened
till Thursday; for having received on Wednesday
evening a letter from Lard C. Bagot, announcing
the march of the Dutch troops, that very evening
an express was sent to the fleet under Sir E. Co-
drington, ordering it to the Downs, that it might be
ready to act as circumstances should require. And
as to the King of Holland, no time has been lost
in compelling him to renounce his mad attempt.—
Whether•that attempt shall have the effect of kind-
ling a general war in Eutope remains to be seen;
but if it fails in thie, the fault will not be that of his
Dutch Majesty. Even those who are most disposed
to make allowance for him, must be glad to fluid him
stopped in his military career.—Morning Ch? °nide.
The discussion on the Reform Bill last night pre-
sents no very remarkable feature : we therefore
recur to the painful subject of the previous night's
debate. There is one test by which the merits of
the " nomination-district" clause in the Reform Bill
may now be judged, but which we had not the I
means of applying to it when the article on the sub-
ject in the Times of yesterday was written,—viz.,
the lists of 'Members who, by their votes or
speeches supported and opposed that fatal clause,
On looking at the report of names and speeches.
much presents itself of a puzzling nature to those
who are not behind the curtain. When we see, for
instance, among the supporters of Ministers, with
reference to the clause in question, a considerable
number of Tory partisans, the hottest and most
furious opponents of the Bill in these of its features
which offered any concession to the people, the sus-
picion of every man of the least shrewdness must
be excited, that the county-division principle isnot in
accordance with the professed spirit of the Bill. Who
were the most decided champions of that el ruse in the
Committee on Thursday everting ? Will the reader
credit it ? After Lords Althorp and J.Russell,the most
conspicuous ofsuch advocates, were Mr. Wpm, Mr.
enemies
Goulburn, and Sir Robert Peel ! Ay, these de-
ipvrielactaetvoerrs owfasalilibßeform,bitter—adthese
popuiarin the whole
to
measure, avowing as their ground for such a course,
too
°o
themsuyusi!
curtailedthat
pboywers
cuttingort hoeutolitgbrenicrohyttevttiiopuladrtbse o
tem,—these same oligarchs went out of their way
to make speeches in favour of this county-crushing
project! What, then, must the nation think of it ?
Nor was it an impulse or peculiar crotchet of these
three sticklers for the divine right of boroughs
there was not a skull in the whole Tory party thick
enough to resist the palpable expediency of support-
ing a clause so replete with anti-reform spirit. Look,
moreover, at those who followed in the wake of the
Peels and Wyens, and Goulburns, and (we almost
blush for Ministers) voted on their side—" Apsley,
Arbuthnot, two Ashleys, Cholmondeley, Dugdale,
Eastnor, Eliot, Lowther! Mahon, Praed, Warren-
der, Lord Villiers, Colonel Wood." We wish Lord
Althorp joy of his company; but when the country
has its attention turned to this matter, and begins to
put circumstances together, and to weigh, like Pan-
gloss, causes and effects, we certainly shall not be in
the least surprised to hear that the assertions of the
Tories for some weeks past have had the merit of
anticipating at least what was to happen ;and that the
people of England are pretty heartily cooled both
towards the Bill and its authors. So of those Members,
English as well as It ish, who had supported Ministers
in former divisions, front a consciousness that they
were maintaining the true interests of the public
cause, twelve Irishmen, the most assiduous in their
Parliamentary duty, and the most resolute and libe-
ral in their politics, who had on every previous occa-
sion voted with Ministers in defence of Reform, now
rejected their mischievous clause ; while no less than
35 English Members, and among them some of the
worthiest and most-honourable men in Parliament,
with Lord Startler, the Irish Secretary's father, at
their head, pursued the same honest and consistent
course, and voted against the Government. If facts
so remarkable do not serve to enlighten the country
upon the intrinsic heinousness of this provision of
the Bill, we, for our parts, despair of doing so by
any recurrence to the obvious reasoning on the sub-
ject, some of the more prominent of which we
brought yesterday under public notice. The re-
sumption of the House,—the bringing up of the
report,—and finally, the third reading of the Bill,
may afford opportunities for re-arguing the clause in
the House of Commons. From the i olds, en such
a point, we unfortunately have no hope. We steal
take another opportunity of discussing the principle,
on which the clause, to which we object, was de-
fended. We shall only, at present, stop to remark,
that the arguments of Lord Althorp, in its sal port,
appeared to us, if possible, more objectionable awl
alarming than the clause itself.--?lanes.

IMPERIAL i'':Ati.jAlV&Nt.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Auausr 12.
Loan CHANCELLOIL did not take Lis seat op Si),
Woolsael;_ till a Cl,tarter past Five.
The Earl of ELOOTI presented a petition from Lis-
heard, against the Church-building
Mr. BERNAL, and other Members of the liou,,e of Com
mons, brought ttp the Disembodied Militia Bill, together
with two private Bills.
Lord TEYNHAM moved for the nutnlyr of Magistrates
dismissed from the Commission of the Peace in Ireland
within the last four years.
After a few wotds from Lord PLUNKETT the motion
was agreed to.
DUBLIN COMMITTEE.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY, in consequence 6f
the evidence before the House of Commons not being in a
fit state to lay before tht House, withdrew his motion
upon this subject, of which he had given node', for to-day.
The Marquis of SALISBURY wished to knoW from
the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether
he teas prepared, in consequence of the information he had
received, to acquit the High Sheriff of Hertfordshire of any
blame in the case of a convict of the name of Stern, who
having received a reprieve, was not informed of it for
several days.
Viscount MELBOURNE felt surprised at the question
of the Noble ;Marquis, but if the statements he had re-
ceived were correct, he had no hesitation in acquitting him
of ail blame.
The House then went into Committee (Earl Shaftes-
buty in the chair), when the Ecclesiastical Livings' Bill
was committed pro forma.