The Sun.
London, England, 1836-12-26 00:00:00

SPIRIT THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

It 'has I..een stated on something like authority that
Lord 7L;rndhurst is to remain in Paris till the meeting
of Pee cliament ; consequently cannot be present at the
Glasf 'ow dinner to Sir Robert Peel. It has been
also stated that the Noble and Learned Lord was
not. even invited to the Glasgow dinner. Why the
N oble and Learned Lord was not invited it would
be as impossible for us to state, as why the design
of proposing him as Lord Rector, which was Conti-
tlently announced in the Tory papers, was abandoned.
We arc bound, however, to assume there were good
reasons for the preference given to Sir Robert Peel.
The Right Honourable Baronet owes much to Glas-
gow, for the honour shown to him by the Glas-
ow students,
nserved as a reproof to the unarateful
riories, who, led away by their new-horn enthusiasm
for Lord Lyndhurst, had all but forgotten the man
who was so indispensable to them two years ago, that
a Government could not be formed without him.
It has been made evident 'uy the Glasgow invitation
that the reckless leadership of Lord Lyndhurst, how-
cver much it might flatter the Lords, is not exactly a
recommendation to the more reflecting Tories.
• may venture to predict, thien, that Sir Robert will again
he in the ascendant. The thick and thin Tories have
often expressed the wish that the Right Hon. Baronet
had less respect for himself, and more readiness to
throw himself. ni the breach when Toryism is in jeo-
pardy. But Sir Robert probably remembers the anee-
,dote of Voltaire, who, on being told that Frederick of
Prussia owned that he was using him for his purposes,
and that when the orange was sucked he would throw
away the peel, remarked that he would take care of the
orange-peel. Sir Robert thinks of his owti character
as well as of the views of the Tories. The Spectator
on what authority we know not, states that " Lord
Brougham meditates a grand flare-tip at the opening
of the session." In that case Lord Lyndhurst may
find, if Lord Brougham did him a good turn when he
was discarded by the Duke and Sir Robert, he may
repay himself with interest.—Morning Chronicle.
The Times, in its levelling days, never laboured so
effectually, perhaps, as it did to destroy +le Irish Pro-
testant Church. It has modestly told us that it
bestowed the blessing of Reform ;ri Church and State
on the nation. We suppose 'part of the bargain be-
tween it and the Tories is That it should set the Irish
parsons on their legs affP...in. Alas, for the twaddle it
daily utters in that liiopeless cause I Without being
exactly a believer 'in the power of the Times to have
prevented Refonn in Parliament, we yet must own that
the Irish Ca. holies do certainly owe an acknowledg-
ment to our unprincipled Contemporary for the encou-
ragement it afforded them at a critical period, when they
were rrot so well assured as they now are of the sym-
pathy of the people of England with their efforts
against the Established Church. Were any proof re-
quired of the insincerity of the writers in the Times, it
would be found in the utter absence of the power which
they certainly possessed when writing in support of
the good cause. We have here a confirmation of the
truth of the poet's observation
4' Thrice is he armed who hath his quarrel just."
The hirelings must perform their appointed task, but
they perform it like men who despise themselves for
meanness of spirit. In former days the Times was
often hated, but it was never despised. The enemies
of Reform then staggered under its heavy blows. They
were well directed, as well as vigorous. The big blus-
ter is a poor substitute ?or its former energy and elo-
quence. The author of a clever pamphlet (the Letter
from a Lay Dissenter) speaks of " the bludgeon of
the bully of Printing-house-square, who, with all the
tack and d',;licacy of a drunken Irishman in a row,
knocks down his friends when he cannot reach his
foes, and bellows forth the thunder' so peculiarly his
own—less effective albeit than it might be, if it could
be understood by readers residing more than half
a mile from Billinsgate." The efforts of the
Times may, more aptly we think, be compared to
the attempts of an unpractised hand to use a
flail against an adversary, and finds to his sorrow
the force of his instrument on his own head.
The bungling nature of the warfare carried on by our
Contemporary, with its ridiculous boasting, only serves
to amuse the Reformers, whose indignation against it
has been succeeded by a feeling more akin to contempt.
Who., for instance, could be provoked by such twaddle
as formed the staple of a long No-Popery article in
the Times of yesterday, of which the following may
be taken as a fair specimen :
" Now what we want to impress upon the public mind
of England is, that these two measures (i. e., the appro-
priation clause and the Irish Corporation Bill), which Lord
Melbourne, although he himself tells us that one of them,
and must bo equally conscious that the other, would be 'a
heavy blow and grievous injury' to the Protestant religion
in Ireland, thinks fit to make the I....inges and lifts of his
Administration, arc, in truth, however distinct as to form,
completely identical in principle and design—being framed
for one and the same obvious e•ad—viz., the total subjugation
and subversion of the Protestant Established Church, and
of the entire fabric of English and Protestant power. Lord
C. Manners justly lool:,s at the subject as we have placed
it, insisting that 4 tb..e same principle' of enmity to the Pro-
testant race and 'Church pervading the universal policy of
the Whig Minr.sters breaks out more especially in these two
measures."
What r, falling off since the time when Lord Grey
was day -after day reproached for his tenderness towards
the Irish Protestant Church ; and the idea of main-
taining a Church merely because it was established,
was the constant ridicule of the Times
And does the Duke of Wellington (exclaimed the
Times- on the 29th of February, 1832), fancy that because
the right of time Church of Ireland to tithe is founded on
the letter of the law, the Government must therefore be
blameable for not enforcing the payment of that impost ?
Does his Grace mean to pledge his word for the possibility
of maintaining an institution from age to age, merely be.
cause it is an institution ? Why, the penal code against
Catholics was as much protected by law as is now the pay-
ment of tithe to Protestant clergymen. Yet who was it
that gave the finisher to the penal code, and defended the
act as being one, not of choice, but of dire necessity ?
So Lord Grey and his Colleagues—and indeed every
man, of the least common sense, in the community—
admits that the continuance of tithe is impossible, and that
if a thousand laws were made for its enforcement, not one
of them would be obeyed. When the Noble Duke and
other Noble Persons talk of the King being sworn to pre-
serve the interests of the Church,' what do they mean by
the interests' of the Church ? Is it the interest of the
Church to demand tithe from the peasantry, and receive
nothing but execrations ? Is it for the interest of the
Church to quote Acts of Parliament, and be met by an
appeal to arms ? The fact is, that laws may be obsolete
before they are repealed, and that any law which would
compel a whole nation to do what it is determined not to
do, must be executed, not by writs or processes, but by
armed soldiers !"
Father O'Malley is now merely acting on the recom-
mendation of the Times on the Bth of Feb., 1832
Does he (Lord Grey) flatter himself that in the pre-
sent temper of Englishmen, this nation will consent to
make war upon Ireland for the sake of her 1,000 or 1,800
Churchmen and her 22 Bishops ? When the Church of
Ireland exclaims, Will you rob me of my property ?' she
is answered, Why have you abandoned your *part ? ' Why
have you diverted from uses ecelesiastied: to uses personal
—from the poor to the pluralist--these ample revenues
which originally were designed !'or distribution between' the
Bishop, the fabric of the the poor, and the clergy ?
. . . Two of these "jtaimants, indeed, have been pro-
vided for—the
all. and the Rector have swallowed up
• • •, ..nis can never stand. We have long ago
declared, ar:u we are daily more persuaded, that composi-
tion will no longer do—that commutation will not do—that
any r:rfort, by mere violence, to coerce the Irish nation into
u payment of tithe, must bring at once the State itself into
a desperate and fatal collision with the people. There is no
diserfAit in capitulating betimes with necessity."
'file Times has for all possible cases a ready an-
swer to the Times. There is no reason why, on ac-
count of its present apostacy, the public should not be-
nefit by its past labours.—Morning Chronicle.
Ministers have begun to try what looking big as
long as they can will do for a preliminary to the open-
ing of the campaign in the House of Commons. Their
last Sunday-school lesson concludes with these words :
"•'-." We have more than ordinary pleasure in stating,
that in the approaching session there will be the most
perfect union among the Reformers of all classes, and
consequently a determined opposition to their enemies,
the Tories ; and, by a previous passage, it appears
that "the common enemy must assuredly be defeated
in his efforts to disunite Reformers for the purpose of
triumphing over the cause to which all Reformers are
attached." Now, let the public think for one moment
to what extremities these poor devils must have been

driven, before they could have attempted to palm upon
the people of England such nefarious honscnse
as is comprehended in tte nhe've :fox- We,are

assofed of "the 'inlet perfect knion " among the. R&formersofnil classes, Very well. 1:s cl`,'e. \V big
Ministers call themselves "4e'rei-iticrs ? " If so, we '
must inlet from their itXanifesto one of two things
—eillserthat '44 'tb,',e sake of this "perfect union" thee',
the Miiiist&s, have wholly abandoned their opposition
to he ballot, household suffrage, an elective Peerage,
short Parliaments, with one or twa other trifling modi-
fications of the Monarchy, and will co-operate with
their revolutionary fellows in realizing all skech " re-
forms ;" or that the Radicals, to wit Sir W. Moles-
worth, Mr. Grote, 'Mr. Joseph Hume, and the Irish
faction of O'ConnePs Woulfe, Sheil, and Co., beet
agreed to make 4 'burnt-offering of the said ballas c.,
and help Ministers to maintain the tionstitution of
1 Parliament under its existimi !nrm. Which of these
1 sacrifices, we beg to ask the framer of the manifesto
is it, of which he wishes to insinuate the truth ? Has
the Melbourne rump reversed the law of nature, and
given rrecedence to the tail, which now and then
so severely lashes it ? or is the tail to be contented
with hanging in the wake of the rump, and back-
ing its declared resistance to all organic change
in the Constitution ? One or other of these ques-
tions must be answered in the affirmative, or the
assertion of a " perfect union" between the par-
ties is a flagrant falsehood, inasmuch as no one of
the measures we have alluded to is of a nature to admit
of neutrality or compromise. A man who deems the
ballot to be utterly degrading and ruinous cannot unite
with him who considers it an essential and paramount
; flood so with the peerage, universal suffrage, and the
flood
rest of them. To place the politician who condemns
such extravagances in the same class with the po-
litician who loudly applauds and eagerly calls upon
his countrymen, as Sir William Molesworth dots,
to " agitate" for them, describing both by the common
name of " Reformers.," is a childish absurdity or a gross
and impudent fre:ucl. There can be nothing " common"
between steels men, so far as public principle is con-
cernel There may, indeed, be some common scheme
or plot for a selfish purpose, in which the nation has
neither share nor sympathy—a conspiracy for place—
a conspiracy for patronage and plunder. But it is for
" Reformers'' to meddle with such abominations ? If
the Whigs, on the other hand, still pretend that their
system of reform presupposes the maintenances of the
church, and state, and monarchy, while, as is noto-
rious, both English and Irish Radicals denounce all
three as grievances fit only to be swept away before the
march of mind, we submit that it is not with the latter
body we are to attribute to the Whigs any common
name designating political alliance or partnership, but
manifestly with Sir Robert Peel and the Conservatives,
who arc, one and all, solemnly pledged before
the country to as much reform, that is, as much
beneficial change, as may be consistent with the
" maintenance of church, and state, and monarchy."
When the Whigs, therefore, assure us of a perfect
union between " Reformers," is not the mere natural
construction of the phrase, that they mean to express
their readiness for a co-operation with those who ac-
knowledge the same general limits to the reform prin-
ciple which they do, rather than with the party who
spurn at all such limits ? 'We nevertheless challenge
either the revolutionary Radicals or the 'Whigs, if the
union between " Reformers " be meant to signify that
those two factions are the uniting powers, we chal-
lenge one or both of them to get rid of the alternative,
the conditions of which we set out with explaining, un-
less upon the highly creditable supposition that one or
other faction, though still adhering to its own doctrines
and despising those of its worthy ally, is to support by
its votes the policy which it reprobates, and act directly
in the teeth of its declared opinions. For a union pro-
duced by such a desertion of principle, the country, we
imagine, is far from unprepared, nor is there a great
deal of difficulty in conjecturing from which side the
sale of conscience is most likely to proceed. Why
should the Radicals make a sacrifice of their long-
cherished assault upon the Constitution ? We believe
that with many of them the scheme is one of fierce
and reckless fanaticism, rather than of selfish profit ;
and what would they gain by its surrender to the
Whigs ? Nothing under heaven but the remote chance
• that, at some distant period, and under some possible
change of circumstance not to be traced upon any ex-
isting map, they may be able to bring round the offi-
cial Whigs, and the Conservative opposition in both
Houses, to tolerate these revolutionary chimeras.
• There is another consideration also which we know
has influence with many of the long-sighted Radicals.
It is, that the sins of the Whig-rump Government fall
in a large proportion upon the heads of the revolu-
tionary party, and entail upon them immeasurable dis-
grace
and scandal. It is past all doubt that there never
has been recorded on the page of English history an
Administration so selfish or corrupt as this. Never was
the public revenue so lavished in bribes under the name
of salaries—never was jobbery carried to such a shame-
less pitch—never was the actual amount of patronage so
wasted on despicable tools—never was ingenuity so
ransacked for the multiplication of offices before un-
heard of, that fresh swarms of hungry minions might
be stimulated in their daily task of packing and per-
verting all the local and subordinate institutions of the
country to the uses of faction. Why, the myriads of
new placemen, appointed to work out the insidious
designs of the " no patronage" Cabinet, will frighten
Europe when they come to be unkcnnelled by some
old fashioned friend of economy and justice in
the House of Commons I And well know the Radi-
cals how keenly the eyes of all England are fastened
on these misdoings. They well hnow that a club or
clique more rapacious than the ten or dozen families
who form the etat major of the Whigs never existed on
this earth, and never preyed upon a nation. We shall
have them paraded before the people of England. Each
household of aristocratic Whiggery is asink of insatiable
greediness and corruption, as well as a haunt of exclusive
and morbid arrogance. One day, in their former cha-
racter, that of which alone the people need have cog-
nizance, they shall be unrelentingly exposed. But
do they flatter themselves that the Radicals are not
aware of this ? Do they dream that the Radicals
are not aware how odious it makes Whiggcry to the
whole English nation ? And why should not the Ra-
dicals feel indignant at being made sharers in the un-
popularity of those whom they have kept in office,
without being sharers to any decent amount in the
spoil ? It is not then for the Radicals to give way, or
to yield one inch of their utopia of democracy, for
which they would get nothing in exchange. It is the
Whig,s who make money of concession. It is the
Whigs who will sell their consciences, and put the
price into their pockets. Their sole notion of govern-
ment is their individual gain. In the meanwhile, see
how the humbug tells in Ireland, where the genius of
Whiggery is little known, being seen through
the medium of O'Connell's, and other Papist re-
presentations. Mr. Woulfe—one of that faction
which reviles the people of England as an alien race,
but will not submit to be called aliens by us in return ;
this learned personage has been making a speech at
Cashel, wherein he bedaubs the Mulgravc Go-
vernment with compliments taken at second hand
from his master, for the " happy relation" between it
and the " Irish people," meaning thereby the rebel
association and its adjuncts. The " relation" is in-
telligible enough : " claw me, and I'll claw you." We
never read more trash than in this electioneering effu-
sion ; and the taste, common sense, love of truth, and
integrity of the speaker, arc in nothing more discernible
than his misrepresentation and abuse of Lord Lynd-
" of every word" which O'Con-
hurst ; his adoption
nell uttered, when he boasted of making corporate
bodi?s normal " schools of agitation" (not peaceful
agitation, the report of his speech did not say that,
though the word ~ peaceful" was foisted in after-
wards) ; and,
finally, the Learned Gentleman's grave
assurance to the credulous beings whom he imposed
upon, that Mr. Richard Shell, another Jack-the-
Giant-Killer, had committed such havoc on Tory
nerves in the House of Commons, as to make Sir
Robert Peel and Lord Stanley quail in his presence,
and rather sit silent a whole evening than expose them-
selves to the terrors of a castigation from that dealer in
rhetorical artifices I Oh I oh ! oh I—Times.
It is not without reason that several correspondents
ask us wherefore Lord Melbourne, or Lord Mul-
grave, who represents him, has yet appeared to show
such an ominous indifference to the words and acts of