The Sun.
London, England, 1831-03-31 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

A conversation sprupg, up in the House of Lords
last night, which presented two or three remarkable
features. A sort of hint (we suppose we must not
call it a threat) VVai thrown out by Lord Farnham,
which we will give in his Lordship's %voids, as con-
tained in our report :

" This measure of Reform was not at all wanted, and
the effect of it would he to send forty or fifty representa-
tiveS from Ireland to Parliament, who would be the mere
nominees of the agitators, and the inevitable result would
be the attainment of the objects which those agitators had
in view,—namely, the repeal of the Union, the destrtu
of the Protestant church, and the establishment of
Catholic ascendancy in Ireland.
If the Protestants of Ireland once saw that their interests
were deserted by the united Parliament, the consequence
would be, that they would unite heart and hand with the
Catholics for the repeal of the Union ; and that if they did,
they would and must carry it. They might talk of force,
but, under such circurnstances, the people of Ireland would
laugh at the threat.. He would tell them, that the united
force of England would not, and could nut, put down a
brave, united, and detertnined people."
This threat circumstantial, but hint direct, was
repelled with great animation and force by the Lord
Chancellor and Earl Grey, the latter of whom in
ose plain sentence put down ull the cant which is
now so rife about the alleged unconstitutionality of
the Reform Bill, by stating wlrat the Constitution
really is,-
4, He contended that the boroughs were not only not a
part of the Constitution,. but that they were derogatory
from the principles of the Constitution—nay, contrary to
the principles of the Constitutior.—(Hear, hear.) The
Constitution was founded upon representation, not on no-
mination."

This plain truth, tittered with simple enet,
the effect of magic, and the Duke of Buckingr,
eagerly started forward to " denounce the disgrace-
ful traffic of sews in Parliament ;"—that traffic
which, as Lord Goderich pertinently and forcibly
remarked, had been eulogized elsewhere,* as one of
the most valuable attributes of the Constitution.
This is a great point gained, for as the soft Dean
never mentioned hell to ears polite, so, in the House
of Commons, a most sacred horror has been felt of
directly using such a phrase as the " sale of bo-
roughs." It has been well remarked by that saga-
cious observer of human nature, Mrs. Slip-Slop, that
some people's ears a:e the most delicate parrs about
them : and we have seen worthy Members who have
dealt in seats all their lives ready to swoon when the
practice was called by irs right name. We are
grateful, therefore, to the Duke of Buckingham, for
speaking out, with straightforward manliness and
indignation, against the base and profligroe conduct
of the buyeis and sellers of seats in Parliament. In
the House of Commons, after some conversation on
the report of the Committee on the salaries of public
officers (not yet published), Lord Palmerston pre-
sented the Cambridge petition : a long and animated
disclis,iun followed, during which Mr. W. Ba•.kes,
" con la boeca dace," seemed to anticipate a morsel
which, however, we prophesy his lips are not destined
to touch. We suspect that his Alnza Mater has no
great sympathy with his longings. But let us pass
from the amusing, trifling of the Member for Marl-
borough to the noble candour of the Attorney-
General. That Learned Member having Leen grus•ly
attacked by Mr. Attwood, for his conduct during the
trial of the late unhappy and ill-used Queen of Eng-
land, replied in the following strait; :

"Personalities, it was true, -had been uttered; but his
most painful duty to his unfortunate and much-injured
client ren:iered such personalities unavoidable. But since
this unhappy subject hail now b:en invidiously obtruded
on the notice of the House, he would not slnink from
declaring, that an illustrious individual, whom it would
he unparliamentary more particularly to allude to, had in
his person given a more signal emarnide of generous mag-
nanimity than history had ever recoMed of any Sovereign
since the time of Henry V., when that high-minded and
chivalrous Monarch presented the sword and balance to
the Chief Justice who had personally offended him"—
(Cheers.)

Nothing can be more manly than this mode of ex-
pressing himself, and most gLidly do we avail our-
selves of this opportunity of adding our tribute of
sincere and respectful admiration fee the genuine and
almost unexampled greatness of mind evinced by the
Royal personage alluded to. From a mind so unaf-
fectedly generous, so unfeignedly noble, nothing
but truth and honour can emanate. With what utter
scorn, then, may we repel the insinuations of those
%A., bastly attempt to throw doubts on that confid-
ing frankness and kindness with which he has uni-
formly treated his Ministers. Never was there a
cicser union between a King and his Ministers than
that subsisting between King William and the Ca-
binet of Earl Grey.—Times.

The lesson of mercy which the French people
❑ve the world in the case of t' :e guilty Ex-Ministers
of the dethroned King has not tended in the least
to humanise the spirit that presides over the political
tribunals of despotism. Their vindictive ci uelty,
profaning the sacred name of justice, takes her stand,
and for real or imaginary offences against power,
asks for blood as tl e only fitting peace-al ring to
despotic wrath, and delights in multiplying sangui-
nary examples. Clemency is never considered a
virtue by a certain description of rulers of mankind
until they are reduced to the necessity of soliciting

This is the technical name by which each House of
Parlilment designates the other.

its interposition on behalf of themselves or the
minions of their tyrannical power. Even the Ex-
King of France, after deluging the streets of Paris
with the blood of his subjects, became an ad-
vocate for the Gad-like attribute of mercy when the
infatuated instruments of his guilty ambition were
the culprits for whom its saving protection was im-
plored. It might have been well then if he could
have pointed to any signal examples of Royal
mercy to persons convicted of treason which either
his own reign or that of his predecessor had
ded. The French people had not forgotten
the fate of Nev and Labedoyere—of Berton and
Bories—and others ; and yet they spared the regal
nraleractors who were convicted of treason against
the nation—of treason attended with mere a2gra-
tvnary
t i gh
as
ee circumstancesorded.
Tthhea than
usurper aty
whichof P o modern
to establish his title to the legittmate
honour of " _Divine right," by equalling aoy thing
that ancient or modern tyrants have done in the way
irt°rgda'.lni seemshis
of vindictive and barbarous cruelty Yet, if tc-
morrow he were hurled, by an act of Divine Hui..
but ion, from the seat cf his demoniac authority, and
were to stand on trial for his crimes at the bar of
oulibc justice, we should hear of every Govirnment
in Europe interceding in his behalf, to save him
from the condign punishment of his enormities, as
in the case of the Ex-Minister, to whom
_France
owes the carnage and the triumph of her revolu-
tion. Is the humanity of Governments only that
one-eyed virtue which watches exclusive's over the
srivation of regal rebels ? Shall Miguel and Fer-
dinand rival Nero and Caligula in the fero-
cious and wholesale 'butchery of cold revenge
under judicial forms ? and shall none of those
Statesmen, who, when the lives of the French Ex-
Ministers were in peril, professed themselves ad-
verse to the shedding of blood for political offences,
interfere to recommend moderation in their vet.,
geance ? The latest exploit which we hear of Fer-
dinand VII. is the putting to death, in one town in
his dominions, 4.5 political offenderi, with as little
compunction as if they were so many dogs. If the
Constitutionalists had succeeded, and committed
such a massacre in cold blood, what an outcry would
have been raised against the " sanguituvy spirit of
democracy !" But we dare say this work of blood
will only be looked at as an instance of energy in the
Sovereign, whcse malignant power broods like a
moral pestilence over degraded Spain. Don Miguel
has also had his human sacrifices, and though nor,
in the present instance, in as great a number as his
relation of the Escurial, y:t the atrocity of the cir-
cumstances may suffice at the present as making
ample amends for the deficiency of victims. Only seven.
of the persons charged with participation in his pre-
tended plot at Lisbon I.rave yet fallen on the ,ceffo!d
but the " energy" of the tyrant %‘ as cannel to the
highest point in this ;—he cared not whether they
were guilty or innocent of any political offence who!.
ever—he had thought proper to accuse them, and
that was sufficient reason why they should perish,
and why any Judge who might dare to art upon
proofs of their innocence should be denounced as a'
Constitutionalist ! Besides, if we look at the style'
in which tire execution was conducted, it speaks
highly for the degree of ferocious perfection to which
the pious Miguel has brought the art of political
butchery. Only think of the dramatic effect of the
executioner, when wearied with the work of stran-
gulation, searing himself on the fatal platform and
coolly smoking a cigar, and then, refreshing himself
for the funkier operations of his disgusting office by
quaffing a bottle of wine ! When regal power fa•
miliarises the public mind with such scenes, need
we ask how a populace comes to be barbarized, and
where they learn those 1(s-ions of revenge which are
sometimes :wally retaliated upon tt:eir rulers
Morning Herald.

We return to the debate on Lord Wharneliffe's
motion in the House of Lords, last Monday, which
equalled, if it did not far exceed, in point of interest,
the best of those which had preceded it on the Re--
form Bill in the other House of Parliament. It
brought out the great strength and flower of the
Government, in the persons of Lord Grey, Lord
Brougham, and Lord Plunkett, as it did the most
conspicuous weakness of the Anti-Reform party, in
that of the Duke of Wellington. His terrace ap-
pears to pride himself on being consistent. . Alas!
he is, on Reform at least, not merely " the un-'
taught" but " the untesehable."' It is, at the same
time, but justice to draw a line between the fralk
and manly declarations of the Duke of Wellington,'
-who throws away the scabbard and leaves himself
Jut a single ally or adherent in the empire, by
,•ing in his open enmity to all roantier of Re-
, ..,—and certain shufilers, who are in tlie'r hesrts
no less devoted to boroughmongering from sordid
motives, than his Grace confesses himself to be from
public ones, but who admit the necessity of some
(however vague and indescribable) alteration in the
demerits of the House of Commons,—just so far es
the concession may liable them to catch a few timid
and faltering votes in opposition to the present mea-
sure. The ground of the Doke of Wellingtoe's dislike
to the Bill, as explained by him on Monday even-
ing, is t.ullieiently broad and eharacterisric,—such ae
110 man could be bold enough to occupy, who was
net utterly, arid even instinctively, blind to the real
uses of a tepresentative Constitutton. his Grace's '
objections resolve themselves into these two:-
1. That the elective body will be principally com-
posed of shopkeepers ; 2. That the body eleeicd by
them will he no longer obliged to vote as the Mini-
ster of the day may diceee. Both objections, as It
seems to us, may be disposed of without difficulty.
If Hampshire be so situated as to contain a number
of populous towns unrepteseeted, but with a large
p ()portion of their inhabitants possessing those qua-
ofieeiions as to property which will entitie them to
vote fur Knights of the Shire, it must be obvious,
even to the prejudiced mind of the Duke of Wel-
lington, that such inhabitants of the towns of Hamp-
shire must have a stake aid interest in the country,
independent of their several shops ; and that voting
—not in their character of shopkeepers, but in that
of 101. copvholders, or of leaseholders to the amount
of 501. per annum—they must act more or le s
under sympathies which bind them to the landed
interest, and to a certain degree enlarge the narrow-
ness of the counter, or deaden its partialities
with them, When we look, moreover, et the im-
mense accession to the numbers of the real country
constituency—the yeomen and farmers, who have
no connection with any trade but that in beef or
corn—which is secured to the kingdom by this Bill,
it would seem that the Duke of Wellington must
have done considerable violence to the coolness and
vigour of his own intrepid spirit, when he exercised
so much ingenuity in hunting out causes for :drum.
The nonresident voters for most boroughs or
counties" in England, consist pretty generally of the
class of men who, when they embark in any course
of trade, can do so no otherwise than as shopkeepers,
that order of people are usually found either in
London or in the larger provincial towns, and voting
for representatives of the place which they inhabit;
they are debarred from any privilege as to counties..
We have heard it often said that the trading inte-
rests are likely to be losers by this Bill, in so far tee
the opportunity of purchasing seats may be ex-
tinguished—a loss abundantly indeed made up to
them by the direct enfranchisement of so many
considerable towns. But indisputably we have
never understood from any respectable quarter,
except the Duke of Wellington, that the shop-
keeping inteeest was to be favoured in pre-
ference, and in detriment to the land. lf, nes er-
tireless, the shopkeepers of Great Britain do gain—
and gain considerably at the 'expellee of age-
culturists—to us it will be no occasion of A:grit-
The middle classes of English traders, forming it, a
great measure the body in question, contain amonget
them, as a whole, the most intelligent and List.:
portion, perhaps, of the community,
_lsee
vcionignmaZn- •
understanding. the general interest
Resg.-etai
t,
tierifss
tsc,o mirretrieied
e ratio otturnr.:(9,l,odr;let.
to o% rank
eoirbe:a
g" fr
:Britise
the revolting member ofm, h
House of Commons of
because it would ere. ttaion of the Reform Bill,
st.eech twits leis condevre

,whose voles no 'Minister could be secure ! This
!;view of the duties and merits of a Parliament is both
''svicious in itself and a proof that the Duke of Wel-
lington is ignorant of the people. If Reform be bad,
because it tends to make the whole legislature, more
independent of the Crowta—that is to say, less
amenable to intimidation or-corruption by the Mi-
nister,—why then the best sort of Parliament is
that over which the people have the least controul,
and the Minister of the day the greatest.
Then why have a Parliament at all ? If the
Duke of Wellington be a consistent Statesman,
he must approve a law for increasing the num-
ber of close boroughs ; or if, being an eco-
nom'sr, his Grace objects to the extension of
bribe, y, why not plainly recommend a despotic
Government, and substitute coercion at once for the
prodieelity of pensions and sinecures ? If the Duke
of Wellington supposes that a Parliament more
directly representing the opinions and tendencies of
the people of England, would be representatives of
jacobinism—of disaffection—of a spirit of wanton
and unjustifiable jealously of their Government—
of enmity, or even apathy, towards the welfare of
the church—towards the honour of the state—to-
%verde a becoming and prudent provision for the
foreign or dorneetic interests of the empire,—then
we pronounce his Grace to be as deplorably unen-
lightened with regard to the genuine char.tcter of
Englishmen, as he has proved himself to be upon
the principles and workings of a free Constitution.
The difference between the operation of Reform
arid no Reform on the measures of the English
Government would be, that in the former case an
honest Minister would have a sure support in the
people, and would have nothing to fear from any
selfish faction ; while in the latter case, as for the
last fifty years, the people and Minister—aye, and
King, combined—are forced to buy the acquies-
cence of a chartered oligarchy in the best measures,
or to adopt the worst at its bidding.—Tinter.
In the House of Lords, last night, Lord Farn-
ham threatened us with a repeal of the Union, if
the Rerorm Bill should be carried. The Catholics
would coerce the Protestants to send Catholic no-
minees to Parliament, the Catholic nominees in
Parliament would, by acting as a body, so hamper
the Government, that •it would be obliged to de-
stroy the Irish Church Establishment ; the Irish
Protestants would then join the Catholics, and a
brave ani united nation would laugh at the attempts
of England to maintain the connection. All these
consequences would, of course, flow from each other,
as inevitably as day follows night. But we will
allow the Noble Lord to speak fur himself :—" The
&ass of householders paying 101. a year rent, would
depend on popular opinion for their existence.—
Thete was an attempt, during the heat of the agita-
tion on the Catholic question, to ruin that descrip-
tion of people in case they did not support the mea-
sure which was called emancipation, and many of
them had been ruined. The s.tme means of coercion
might be used to compel them to support the re-
peal of the Union, and it might be taken for a cer-
tainty that thee use of it would be made. The
consequence would be, that thirty or forty of their
nominees would be returned to Parliament, and
they all knew that thirty or forty agitators in the
House of Commons, acting as one united body for
a particular purpose, might be so troublesome as to
prevent the public business being carried on by the
Government.—(Hear, hear.) They all knew that
the Catholics of Ireland wished the destruction of
the Protestant Church Establishment in that country,
and so many Members leagued and united for that
purpose would be too much for any Government.
Now, he affirmed that the grand stake which this
country held in Ireland for the preservation of the
Union was the Protestant Church Establishment;
arid if the Protestants saw that their interests were
abandoned and sacrificed, they would 'join the Ca-
tholics in calling fur a repeal of the Union, and then
no Government could resist a brave, determined, and
united people, who would laugh at any efforts that
might be made against them." There are a few as-
sumptions here ok'hich are rather startling. In the first
place, Lord Farnham seems to hold that it would be
for the interest of Protestants and Catholics to effect
a repeal of the Union, were it not for the Protestant
Church Establishment, which gives to tire Protes-
tant a bribe to support that which is contrary to the
common interest. lu the next place, his Lordship
holds out an invitation to tie Catholics to destiov
the Protestant Church Establishment, as the g
obstacle to the junction of the Protestants
them in bringing about the great national advato
of a repeal of the Union. The Union cannot rest
on a conviction of the whole people of Ireland, that
it is for their benefit ; but the Union requ'res a Pre-
testant Church, with Catholics to w:sh it destruc-
tion, arid Protestants to defend it. In order that the
British and Irish may be an united people, the Irish
must be a divided people. Were the Irish in an evil
hour to become all Protestants, they might unite in
deer andirii the repeal of the Union. His Lordship
when pressed somewhat closely by the Lord Chan-
cellor, as to the threat of resistance from "a brave,
determined, and united people, who would laugh at
atiy efforts which might be made against them,"
tried to bark out by an explanation that the prostra-
tion of the Protestant institutions in Ireland would
probably "lead to the union of all parties and
all classes in the call for a repeal of the Union
between the two countries." The Lord Chan-
cellor observed, " he was glad to hear the Noble
Lord did not mean what his words certainly
might imply ; but he had really understood that the
Noble Lord meant to say, that all Ireland would
rise against the Government, and laugh at any ef-
forts to repress a brave, determined, and united
people. There was no bravery in laughing." Eail
Grey believed the Protestant Church of Ireland in
no danger; but his Lordship seemed to be unable
to comprehend how, if the improvement of the in-
stitutions of Ireland should lead to the destruction of
the Protestant Church, this should necessarily lend
to the repeal of the Union. " If asked his opinion
respecting the establishment of the Roman Catholic
Church in Ireland, he should say, as he had said
before, that he should deprecate any such establish-
ment ; but if a misfortune of that kind should befal
the country, he saw no season why the two coun-
tries might not remain united still. Canada and
several States on the Continent distinctle proved
the practicability of such a state of things ; he
meant that in which two countries possessing dif-
ferent religious establishments should still be. united
legislatively." This is meeting the Noble Lord in
a fair and manly mariner. It was remarked by Earl
Gra'y as somewhat unfortunate for his Lordship,
that in the North of Ireland, where the Protestant
interest prevailed, the Bill, so far from being regarded
with jealousy, was hailed with the highest satisfaction.
_Another argument has been pressed by Lotd Farnham
into the service of the Protestant Church, namely,
that the Bill a ould desetoy the close boroughs
which were established in the reign of James the
First, for the purpose of protecting the settlers from
Britain and the Protestant interest. Unfortunately,
the Noble Lord was again met by Earl Grey with a
somewhat troublesome answer. " It happened," he
said, " that at the present moment the mode which
the possessors adopted for the support of the Pro-
testant interest, was to dispose of the boroughs
every year, in the mariner best calculated io promote
their owe pecuniary interest. At the present
moment it happened that those very boroughs were
openly bought and sold—sold to the highest bidder
without the slightest reference to his qualifications,
How then, would the case stand, if those Pro-
,
testant boroughs were sold to Catholics, and when
a better purchaser of that persuasion offered, there
could be no sort of question that the possessor
would as freely sell to hunt as to the warmest sup-
porter of Protestant principles?" Sotnuch for
Protestant principles and the Protestant Church
establishment ! Strange that the champions of the
latter will have it, that the improvement of our
;nstittitions threatens its existence, and that we