The Sun.
London, England, 1838-01-26 00:00:00

auxtc.

%ITN WHICH
" THE TRUE SUN" IS NOW
INCORPORATED.

LONDON :
FRIDAY EVENING, JANUARY 26, 1833.

In the Housa of LORDS last night, the Duchess of KENT'S
Annuity Bill, and a Naturalization Bill (both of sihich have
passed the two Houses), were brought up by Mr. BERNAL.
A petition was presented from the Union of Deepwade in
Norfolk, in favour of rating small tenements on the landlord
instead of the tenant. Their Lordships then adjourned.
In the HorsE of COMMONS, amongst the petitions wag one
presented by Mr. Watuat, for a mitigation of the sentence of
the Glasgow Cotton-spinners. This petition elicited some
discussion ; and wag eventually withdrawn, because the lan-
guage of the petitioners was, by inference, deemed disrespect-
ful to the House of Lords—as if there were not, in reality, a
great as well as a little vulgar—as if England were really free
from the influence of " rabble Lords," or not notoriously in-
ured by a " rabble aristocracy."
Mr. \YAKUT, however, after the rejection of the petition,
gave notice that he should move for a Committee of Inquiry
into the constitution of the Glasgow Cotton-spinners' Associa
tion. If that were negatived, he should move an Address to
the QuarN for a mitigation of the sentence, Lord JouN R us-
undertakirn; to name an early day on which such a motion
cAltd be brought forward.
Lord J. RI:9SELL afterwards moved that the House resolve
its, If into a Committee on the Lower Canada Bill. A debate
gas thereon raised, hich we have alluded to elsewhere. It
will be seen that Sir R. PEEL., having declared his determina-
tion to persevere in his opposition to the Ministerial preamble
of the Bill, Lord Jonai RUSSELL usel the following words re-
garding the particular course he intended to pursue as to the
preamble :—"I beg to say that, at the meeting of the House
te-morrrev. after I shall have consulted with my colleagues in
office, I will state exactly the course I mean to follow."
The Bill went through a Committee pro firma, was ordered
to be rre;-mmitted to-morrow, and the House then Adjourned
at about Twelve o'Clock.

We plainly perceive, from the tone and spirit of
Lord JOHN RUSSELL'S second explanation in the
course of the debate last night on the Canada ques-
tion, that Minister; may be brought to adopt several of
the amendments suggested by the Right Hon. Mem-
bers for Coventry hnd Tam worth, in tile preamble and
provisions of the Canadian Constitution Suspension
all. The parts of the Bill objected to last night were
pre&sely those which we denounced as having a dan-
gerous tendency on Wednesday, and it is really not a
little surprising that among the numerous advocates of
the Milisterial policy in the House, not one rose to
defend the composition of the proposed Colonial Coun-
cil of Advice. For the absurd restrictions which the
Bill placed upon the Earl of DURHAM as Governor-
General, Lord JOHN RUSSELL had no reason to assign ,
except that the Cabinet shrunk from the responsibility
of any act not previously sanctioned by Parliament,
and therefore it ha.l recourse to a legislative ddnition
and limitation of the powers to be entrusted to the
Noble E,trl. Now this, though a safe, is a very nar-
row policy ; and were the mission of the Noble Earl
to fail, though Lord JOHN RUSSELL and his col-
leagues would escape impeachment, they would not on
that account be held less morally responsible to the
country for such a disaster. That we do not misre--
present the sentiments of the Noble Home Secretary is
evident from the following very explicit passage in his
speech, in answer to the suggestion of Mr. EDWARD
ELLICE :—" I consider that in undertaking a set-
tlement of the affairs of Canada, Government has
a most important, a most difficult, and a most rc-

sponlible duty to perform. It requires nothing
less than the agreement of Parliament in the
general line of policy proposed to be pursued
to make it either justifiable in the Government to un-
dertake the settlement, or possibly for the Governor-

tieneral to succeed in his endeavours to accomplish
it." In the soundness of this opinion, we wholly con-
cur; but Lord JOHN RUSSELL forgets, that he does
not think himself safe with a Parliamentary approval
of the " general line of policy" pursued by his col-
leagues. He seeks by his Bill to make the Parliament
responsible for any error which may be committed by
the constitutional adiiiscrs of the Crown. His Lord-
ship would drag Parliament through the mire, with a
view to the u•.terior protection of the Executive. The
speech of Sir ROBERT PEEL in answer to the Noble
Lord, and in reply to a suggestion thrown out by the
Right Hon. Member for Coventry, of the expediency of
a coalition of Whigs and Tories upon this Bill—was
manly and to the purpose. The Right Hon. Baronet re-
pudiated the idea of any coalition upon such a question
—refused to have it supposed that Parliament was un-
animous in opinion respecting a Bill of Pains and
Penalties, when in reality great division existed. After

refusing to make himself responsible, by a coalition
with the policy of the Cabinet, and ridiculing, as we have
repeatedly done, the proposal to summon persons from
Upper Canada, to assist in framing a Constitution for
the Lower Province, the Right Hon. Baronet ob
served, with as much truth as liberality :
" I am not prepared to say that, having suspended the en-
tire Constitution of Lower Canada--and in this sentiment
several Gentlemen opposite who are usually opposed to me
in political opinions concur—l am not prepared to say that,
under these circumstances, ten men chosen by the electors,
and five Members of the Legislative Council, opposed as they
naturalbj will be, can fully, freely, and fairly discuss the cir-
cumstances of the province. Sir, I know of no representation
except that which is sanctioned by law. The Legisll-
tive Assembly is still in existence--it consists of eighty
persons, the true Representatives of the Colony—and
is it possible that their place can be supplied by ten
men, selected from five districts, of which we know
little, and by a constituency of which we are quite ignorant?—
( Hear, hear.) I cannot, under such circumstances, be ever
brought to affirm—in the words of the preamble—that men so
elected are the full, fair, and free representatives of the Ca-
nadian people._( Cheers.) Sir, I will not believe that the
British House of Commons—the guardians of the representa-
tive principle—can consent to such a substitute for the repre-
entative system already existing by the Canadian Constitu-
ic t I will not believe that we can be induced to decide that
ten men, however fairly selected, can be the representatives of
the people.__( Hear, hear.) These, Sir, are the grounds on
which I object to the principles laid down in the preamble."
This is substantially the language held by

us on Wednesday__ la.st,. when discussing the
merits of the IVlinisterial Bill ; and from the
tone of Lord JOHN R USSELL'S subsequent remarks we
are certain that it will lead to a new modification
of that measure. Our readers will remember that we
ridiculed the idea of limiting to twenty-six the Mem-
bers of the Council of Advice—that we repudiated as
equally preposterous and offensive the nomination of
the bodies whose members the Governor-General
would be obliged to call to his councils—and that
we repeatedly dwelt upon the impossibility of
convincing a people in a state of great political
excitement, that they could be represented by twenty-
six
individuals so chosen and appointed. It
may be contended that the Right Hon. Baronet is
more intent upon guarding against an invasion of the
prerogative of the Crown by Parliament, than sincere
in his professions of zeal for the liberties of the Cana-
dians. This may be true, but we do not see in what
way the plain facts of a question can be influenced by
the private sentiments of any Member of the Legisla-
ture. The supremacy of Parliament would be as well
evinced, in leaving the number of Councillors, and the
mode of acquiring information, to the discretion of
Lord DURHAM, as in limiting them to twenty-six, and
pointing out the way in which they ought to ex-
ercise their functions. If Sir ROBERT PEEL'S
suggested amendments be adopted, the whole
character of the Bill will be changed ; and, judg-
ing from what fell from the Right Hoonourable Ba-
ronet last night, the change will be greatly for the
better. This remark is confined solely to the doctrine
propounded in the speech of the Tory leader.
Presuming that the Bill will be amended with the
I consent of Ministers, we cannot sufficiently express our
sympathy for Lord GLENELG, who will thus be put to
the trouble of re-writing his dispatch to the Earl of D Un-
HA Ne. The Noble Colonial Secretary, in taking time by
the forelock, miscalculated the influence of the Tories
and Ultra-Liberals, who seem to take a cruel delight
in disturbing his Lordship's official repose. We told
his Lordship on Wednesday that we suspected he was
for once in too great a hurry—that he was too eager to
convince Parliament of his watchfulness on great
oc-
casions—and we are much mistaken, or he will find our
prediction verified.

" Alas for the independence of the Press, and the
character of the self-called organs of Reform !"—many
will exclaim who read the leading article of this Mor,n-
ing's Chronicle. A few days, or rather a few hours,
ago, our Contemporary was thundering its philippics
against Sir ROBERT PEEL'S devoted head, for giving
notice of a motion to omit the clause in the Canada
Bill ter authorising the Government to restore a po-
pular Constitution to the Canadians, and cease to rule
by despotic power before the expiration of the Act.
This was then said to be the very genius and charac-
ter of Toryism, and many " thunders'. were launched
at the party, and its mouth-piece in consequence. Last
night in the House of Commons, it appears that for
the sake of "unanimity," as Mr. ELL ICE says,Govern-
ment are about to give way, and adopt the Tory
Leaders' Amendment. No sooner does this appear,
than out comes our Contemporary this morning,
ready to eat every word he had previously uttered,
and to discover that he " had attached mare impor-
tance to the objections than after more mature
consideration he is now disposed to do." Indeed !
And, what is more, the difference is "apparent" rather
than "real," only an aeriel windmill for our Contem-
porary to fight against ! How pitiful—how lament-
able is this exhibition how truly disgusting :
Pistol eating the leek was nothing to it. There was
a time when the Morning Chronicle would not have
stooped to be the mere special pleader of any Ministry.
There was a time when it would not have blown
" hot and cold" within a few hours for any " consi-
deration." There was, and we believe there still is, a
" stalwart Wight" who had " a stout heart for every
stae brae" that impeded the path of public liberty ! But
these times are passed, and whenever it suits
an Administration to yield to its opponetlts, our Con-
temporary is able to exercise " a more mature consi-
deration", and discover that the motion it had recently
denounced, as exhibiting the very genius and character
of Toryism, was " apparent rather than real !" Our.
Contemporary, however,-inust not be suffered to de-
lude the public in degrading himself. The difference
is real,"—and not only real, but important in the
highest degree.

We hare hitherto been prevented, by a press of
matter respecting the all-engrossing question of Ca-
nada, from laying before our readers a report of the
important meeting which was held in Dublin on Sa-
turday last. To-day we are enabled to supply this
deficiency, as our readers will find by referring to an-
other part of our paper. The report there inserted is
taken from the Evening Mail. In perusing it, it is
necessary to bear in mind that the class of society
called in England workmen are in Ireland called
tradesmen.

The tumultuous proceedings which took place at
this meetinz cannot fail to do serious injury to the
interests of the working classes iii general. We say
nothing of the grossness of the insult offered to Mr.
O'CONNELL, to whom Ireland owes so much, and who
in the course which he has taken in regard to the com-
bination system, hasproved himself the best friend of the
infatuated men who have let loose their fury
.against
him—we put this part of the business entirely aside,
and look only to the consequences which must result
to the workmen themselves, from the fatal course
which they hare adopted, and shown themselves but,
too much inclined to continue. The accusation
brought against the Dublin operatives by Mr.
O'CONNELL is, that they have entered into a com-
bination, which is both criminal in itself, and hurtful
to their own interests. The first part of the
charge has been proved by the evidence of some of
their own body—indeed it is not denied. It is not
denied that the workmen have combined together for
the purpose of limiting the number of apprentices
taken by their employers, and for preventing any of
their brother workmen from disposing of their labour,
except on such terms as they, the combinators, choose
to dictate ; and further, that this latter part of the
plan has been attempted to be carried into effect by
personal violence, for the perpetration of which
a pecuniary assessment is regularly levied upon
the members of the Union. Are any of these
charges denied ? Not one. They are all admitted,
and the worst of the whole—that which gives so
fearful a complexion to the case—is, that instead of
relinquishing objects so unjustifiable, the moment their
illegality—not to mention their enormity—was pointed
out, the parties concerned in them evince a deter-
mination to persevere in the dangerous path they
have chosen for themselves, and direct their vengeance
against those faithful friends who warn them of the
evils to which they are exposing themselves.
It is really astonishing that men of so much intel-
ligence as the operatives of Dublin, or of any other
city or town within the limits of the three kingdoms,
should be so blind to their real interests, as not to see
the ruinous consequences which the success of their
plans would inevitably entail upon themselves. We shall
suppose that they ere able to dictate their own rate
of wages, and to fix their own restrictions on the em-
ployment of the capital invested in trade or
manufactures. How long could this continue ?
How is the Dublin capitalist to enter the
field of competition with his brother capitalist in ano-
ther quarter, whose proceedings are free and unfet-