The Sun.
London, England, 1838-03-01 00:00:00

_ WT*
..,_,,,,....,-,;.
,
i,.4.:-..:22,,:,,, „,-:...•
'st \• rnee'.7l.;
IA e •
,--‘ . . -1
11 the world ever dream Of te mode of iteestigatid .14.-4v`VO: —. T
~--i,
it could be " proved" that hundreds of men o
.',.4l2:rt'erf i___
,s-,s 5:.,.s
station, and character, had, in a nittititude` o inaPteaVeee- ----'
been guilty of " foul and wilful eerjury ?”—f6rieldltclS.‘reo,l
is O'C neell's meaning, or he is shamming with empty
sounds instead of realities—who can " prove" the per-
jury, which consists of' an opinion, since the report of a
Committee is no more than an aggregate of the opinions
formed by its members ? The whole proposal ia, as we hate
hinted, want of sense, alternating with h: pocrisy, which is
Want of common honesty, in this rnaligner of British gentle,
men. As for the punishment to him of am• re public. re,
primand, we care nothing whether he feels it, or is cal'otte
to it. The real value of the proceeding in 'alerted by Lord
Maidstone is the proof afforded by Monday last and Tueedityi
that the Conservative power in Parliament is too strong for a ro
.volutionary Government, when fighting under the banners d
an unprincipled and odious disturber of the nation's peaeQ. The,
reprimand may be laughed at by Mr. D. O'Connell; the abus9 be
.the British Aristocracy may be doggedly Persisted in ; hilt we
can tell what will not be laughed at by Mr. Daniel O'Crete
flell, or by the people of Enelant4 viz., four bealillPit suelateie..3 'by the I,lureell and O'Connell ;confederacy in two short ni0416.„
1 y mejoriilea ittereleinet front 9 t.i 29; lit tray enthist try tle,4
. o leas signal ;11:fcat in the telee of Valid tittleise.-I,eeritos's
' otion. ''Phe truth i!se this Ministers R.r.L zoo,' in public!
ion. The,e 6 nm party throusilitittt the whole elaepire at.
ached to them. Pic n;i110' the Conservatives hP's kept them
in office for the last tteclyeinontli, and kept them, as we think.
00 long. O'Connell's motion for the motion of 21 this nier'et
will end in smoke, like all his other machinations—the
rent
lone excepted, and that. just at present, is said to l',e some-
iwhat smoky likewise. 'Tittles.
Well ! Mr. O'Connell Vec; reprimanded last night, but
0h a t of that ? fie repeateal in reply to the reprimand the sub-
`Ostance of his forraer allegation, and called for the appoint-
s' oat of a Committee, before whom ho pledged himself to
erove the truth of his statement. Never was there a proceed.
-•'eding, from beginning to end, more calculated la; bring
e e house of Commons into contempt than this 'disgraceful'
d despicable manifestation of impotent parts malevolence.-
' reprimand from the House of Commons is e. iciest only iu so
,e as it is supported by general opinion ; Vat in a ease like the
,resent instance, when public sympathy ):'S altogether opposed to
ie spirit of the reprimand, it net 'Only falls harmless on the
rson receiving it, but bring. the authority bestowing it into.
ter disrepute. The repriseedid itself is couched in general ter ms
pressive of the neetestity of preserving the dignity and
c end influence of 'the House ; but it does not attempt to deny
c 0 truth of 11r. O'Connell's accusation; on the contrary, it
rtially admits it by the statement that measures Were in pro-
ess far the removal of the evil which he complained of. 'hat feeling but ridicule and disgust can be excited by a re-
inland given under such circumstances ? The Speaker had
• e resolutions read, but he expressed no coincidence of gen-
ent with them, nor could lie have done so without being- a
rty to en bat he did not believe to be true ; for he must have
• own, as is known by the wholellouse, that Election Com-
ittees, though sworn to try petitions by their merits, aro
varialely irialuenced by the bias of party. And what is this
:t perjury? Disguise it as they may,call it party feeling, or
tachreent, or whatever other milder term may solace the
~rs of Teryism—it et ill not alter the fact that to swear to de-
,' e by the merits of a case, and afterwards- decide only by
•e influence of- party, is nothing but downright and atrocious
i 'jury. • The vote of the House of Commons has only made
c matter worse, for they have dared to pronounce, in the
cc ef the echoic country, that to be " false and scandalous"
tich the whole country knows to be true. Is this the way to
eserve its moral influence ? Certain Members are ac-
. Sod of violating their oaths, and it is admitted that,
ey are influenced by party feelings, where they 'swear
be itnprrtial ; but in the teeth of this admission—
rtually equivalent to aa acknowledgment of the truth
' the aceteation—the charge is voted to be " false sad
.. scandilous." The charge of peijury is endeavoured to be
-removed by thepromulgatien of a deliberative falsehood in the
form of' a resolution. Mr. O'Connell coecludell his reply, by
giving notice that he will this night move for the appointment
of a Committee to investigate the subject of his charge, and
,le pledged himself to prove, to the satisfaction of any impar-
t tribunal, that his Allegation was founded in truth. 'lbis
on-induce cannot in decency be refused, and what then
'II be thought of. the reprimand of the House of Commons ?
reprimand for saeaking the truth ! In what a degraded
Sititire must the Hou4e have appeared when Mr. O'Con-
-11 said, that if it were proved to him that he had
, fide a misstatement, ho would must humbly offer any re-
paration ; but, as it was, lie had nothing to retract—nothing
i
to repent of. The House was thus bearded in defiance of its
resolutions, and its reprimand, and bearded too with impunity,
for it did not even attempt the vindication of its dignity. It
got the " lie to the teeth, as deep as to the lungs," and could
say nothing. It appeared paralyzed by the pressure of its
degradation. And this is what the Tories have gainod by
their affected eagerness to wipe away the imputation which
Mr. O'Connell cast upon the House. The House has lost
more of its moral influence by the proceedings, than it could
have done' by all the calumnies its worst enemies could ever
have uttered against it. Who will regard its reprimand in
future ? Its censure will become a scoff and a derision, in-
jurious to no character but its own.—Morning Advertiser.
The House of Commons was crowded at an early hour last
Light by Members and by strangers, all anxious to witness
the infliction of the punishment which had been awarded to
Mre O'Connell for his " false and slanderous imputations" on
the honour of the House. After some unimportant motioee
had been made, the Speaker called on Mr. O'Connell, who
immediately acknowledged the call by standing up in his
dace. The Speaker then proceeded, with considerable
so-
lemnity, to " reprimand" the Member for Dublin for the
gross outrage of which he had been guilty. When the
Speaker had concluded his Address, Mr. O'Connell observed
in reply, that the sentence which the House had passed on
him, was of little importance, in so far as he, individually,
was concerned—although that sentence was most impor-
tant, in so far as it might bear upon the general inte-
rests of the country. "It was easy," continued the Honour-
able and Learned Member, " for the House to pass votes in
vindication of the purity of its conduct—but these votes
left the truth or falsehood of the charges preferred against the
house unaffected." For his own part, lie begged to reiterate
all that he had previously stated. Ile retracted nothing. He
qualified nothing. He expressed regret for nothing. On the
contrary, he challenged investigation into the truth or false-
hood of his charges. The House permitted this vulgar
bravado to pass unnoticed. It would, doubtless, suit
Daniel's purpose, at this moment, to be able to assume the
semblance of a victim. Daniel is not firm in his seat for
Dublin ; and his popularity in that city is, decidedly, on the
wane. Once unseated, he might not be able to find his way
back to the House, without displacing some member of his own
family. A committal to the Tower might, however, do much
for linsi. Such a sentence, interpreted as it would be throughout
the greater part of Ireland by the priests, might be made to re-
semble the endurance ofpersecution for the sake of Ireland. But
a simple " reprimand" for false and slanderous imputations
presents no such capabilities for the production of electioneer-
ing effects—or for the production of effects upon the pockets
of the public. Daniel, therefore, has been baulked in his ob-
jects. His seat for Dublin is still in danger ;he has not suc-
ceeded in browbeating the Conservative Members. On the
contrary, he has been tried, condemned, and punished for his
gross and unjustifiable attack upon the character of Conser-
vatives—and all, without a chance of being able to reap the
golden harvest of a political martyrdon ! As to Mr. O'Con-
nell's assertion that his charges arc true—that assertion has
been disproved by every speaker on both sides of the House!
No Member on either side pretended to allege that election
Committees, as now constituted, are not open to serious objet-
dons. Sir E. Sugden and Sir R. Peel admitted the existence
of such objections; but both these gentlemen proved that the
delay which has occurred in removing the acknowledged defects
in the constitution of the existing ttibunals, has sprung entirely
from the nature of the Ministerial policy. Lord John Rue--
sell, after carrying the second reading of a Bill, of INlliell the.
professed object was the purification of Election Committene,
permitted the measure to drop. In carrying that measure so
far as he did, however, Lord John received the aid of the
whole Conservative party. That Election Committees are not
regulated as they ought to be—that the members permit them-
selves, unfortunately, to be too much operated upon by their
political predi:e, fo 5 —was conceded on ail hen is, during the
debates of Monday fuel Tuesday. This concession, however,
by no means estabirshes, as Mr. O'Connell pretends, the truth of'
Mr. O'Connell's charge ! What was that charge? That the
English and Scottish Conservative gentry in the !louse of Come
mons were guilty of wilful and deliberate perjury on Election,
Committees I Not one word did Mr. O'Connell utter in thin
way of inculpating his Whig allies, us " perjurers :"—nut one
word, did Mr. O'Connell utter in reprobation of the members
of his own tail, as " perjurers." Yet if the crime of perjury:
was imputable at all, it was imputable in equal proportions to
all parties—to Mr. O'Connell himself, as much, as to any.
other Member of the House ! Mr. O'Connell's charge was
grossly false, front its exclusive character. It was grossly'
false, moreover, from the extent of guilt which it ascribed to•
offending parties. There is a mighty and obt ious difference,
between " foul perjury" on the one hand—and even serious do-
liations from what may be deemed by neutrals, strict impar-
tiality in the decision of election cases. The most honestly-in-
tentioned judge can never be sure that his decisions arc in ac.
cordance with truth ; and if aJudge in a Court of Law, removed,
front the influence of personal interest in the cases which ho,
tries, be yet liable to yield to subtle and indefinable influences'
that may, at any moment, lead him from the truth—it would'
be ridiculous to expect that opposing parties trying their owns
uses should not, frequently, come to most erroneous deci-
siona. The charge of " foul perjury," however, may be as
little deserved, in the case of the violent partisans, as in the
case of the calm judge, whose errors have no connection with
sordid motives ! In an assembly like the House of Commons,
moreover, these factious heats must counteract each other.
The great patties are so equally balanced, that injustice if' com-
mitted on one aide, must, iii the nature of things, be coun-
terbalanced by injustice of the same nature, on the other ;
or rather, the Ministerial party, as being the stronger,
must gain in the interchange of injustice, which
should seem to be inseparable from the constitution of the
tribunals, that now try questions of controverted elec-
tions ! Mr. O'Connell's charge of " foul perjury " against
the Conservatives was in short, most false, and most atrocious ;
—and was west deservedly punished by a " reprimand" Such
t
as the Speaker bestowed ! When we reflect, that the whole'
body of the Irish rose,Memberscu)e
a.itsts,' . it ''' when
erei
rqip
n aiiliiicYel to
to resent
Lord Lyndhursi's phrase of ,
we need be little. astonished that the Conservative Members of
the Home of COIIIIIIOIIS were not disposed to sit quietly down
under the imputati"n of " foul perjury !" In this affair of
O'Connell, the Whigs have emotive:el to add to the number
and depth of their former disgraces.
They have been cornei
pencil to admit O'Connell's guilt ; and yet they have sought.
to screen O'Connell from the consequences of his conduct.
They have sought to do so in nil ; for many of their usual
supporters have refused to rant them in their discreditable
eourse of action in this matter. Hence, the Cons( evative m
s. ea.
joritics of Monday and Tuesday I--Mornina lleen/d_