The Sun.
London, England, 1836-05-31 00:00:00

•
timents and its style more from Mr. O'Connell than
from any recognised director of Government affairs,
contains the followin,, very significant allusions to what
it evidently apprehendsa may be the Ministerial course
with respect tc the Agitator's notice of motion against
the House of Lords. Our readers are aware that
Mr. Grove Price proposes to have that notice ex-
punged from the Journals of the. House of Commons.
AVe cannot anticipate the possibility of any honest
Reformer supporting the insulting proposition of Mr.
Grove Price, which, if agreed to, would grievously lower
the House of Commons in the estimation of the country.
The Tories would, no doubt, be rejoiced to see the Re-
formers at variance among themselves ; but Reformers will
be careful to avoid such courses as might have a tendency
to afford that satisfaction to their opponents. The most
dangerous enemies are those of a man's own house, and the
pretended Reformer, who shapes his conduct so as to pro-
mote the views of the Tories, ought to be unmasked with-
out scruple or delicacy. We care not how high or exalted
the parties may be from which mischievous advice may
come ; they must be treated according to their deserts.
If those whose names we have been accustomed to asso-
ciate with the proudest exertions in favour of liberty,
should sully their fair fame by indulging in unworthy jea-
lousies, care must be taken that the cause of Reform bu
not sacrificed from any delicacy to individuals. History
will do justice to their services in the cause of liberty ;
it is our part to see that a reputation obtained by these
services may not be turned against the people."
We could almost suppose the above very ill-written
rhodomontade to be the work of Mr. O'Connell him-
self. Its affectation of not anticipating the very thing
which it manifestly does anticipate—its odd, and some•
what Irish distinction between " high" and "exalted"
—its rancourous allusion to " unworthy jealousies,"
meaning jealousy of Mr. Daniel O'Connell, all seem
to indicate that the precious production, if not his own,
is that of one quite imbued with that spirit, at once
swaggering and pitiful, of which he is the great public
representative. At all events, such a paragraph as
this, coming from the principal newspaper organ of
the reckless movement party, and intimating so plainly
an alarm that persons of high consideration have
with respect to the operations of that party, cried a
halt, cannot but be considered important, and, so far
as that alarm may be considered to be well founded,
cannot but be satisfactory to the friends of Consti-
tutional freedom and moderate measures. There is
another point of view in which this paragraph deserves
consideration, and might afford a useful lesson to those
who, while they support the liberal Administration of
the Monarchy, have no intention of going to such
lengths as will leave no Monarchy to support. Accord-
ing to the political doctrine of the above manifesto,
all remembrance of services in the cause of the Radi-
cal party is to be cancelled the moment that any out-
rage of that party, or its chief, is not acceeded to.
Whatever may have been done by independent men
for the cause of Catholic Emancipation, or of Parlia-
mentary Reform, or any of the measures which Mr.
O'Connell has from time to time described as all im-
portant, the moment that any desperate extravagance
of his, which revenge may prompt, or the necessities of
his position cender desirable to him, is opposed, these
men are to be treated " without scruple or delicacy."
We have long been aware that this was actually Mr.
O'Connell's method of dealing with former friends who
did not choose to go all lengthst with him, for what he
thought his advantage; but we scarcely expected to
see this flagrant tyranny of purpose so openly avowed.
But must refer to another " symptom" of the
dreadful apprehension which reigns in the Radical
camp. The same organ of O'Connellism, when dis-
coursing of the probable treatment of the Irish Corpo-
tions Bill by the Ministry in the House of Commons,

says—
" We cannot suppose that they will disappoint the ex-
pectations of the people. They must know, even that
were they themselves disposed to forget what is due to their
own reputation, and the character of the House, theii re-
commendation would be indignantly spurned by a great
body of Reform Members, and that the duration of a
Ministry reduced to rely
.finr support on its politicut ohpo
nen, s must be brief indeed."

For our parts, we " cannot suppose," that, if the
writer of the above did riot look forward with alarm to
the disappointment, which he disclaims, he would have
thought it expedient to say any thing about it ; and
so far are we front believing that. the duration of the
present Ministry would be shorter, in consequence of
adopting moderate measures, and trusting to Conser-
vative support, and rejecting extreme measures and
Radical support, that we feel perfectly convinced
that the present Ministry cannot continue to exist,
except by choosing the former of the?ie courses.
The nation is weary of Mr. O'Connell and his
desperate attempts ; and unless the Administration
swings clear of him, its shipwreck is certain. Since
writing the above, our attention has been drawn
to the proceedings of the House of Commons on its re-
assembling, and we find amongst those proceedings
that Mr. Grove Price has, withdrawn his notice, in
consequence of some techniCal informality, and 'that
Lord John Russell has actually announced hiS
inten-
tion of opposing Mr. O'Connell in his attack upon
the House of Lords. We shall conclude by simply
referring to this confirmation of our previous infe-
rences. The Ministers have now declared, through
the mouth of their ostensible Representative in the
House of Commons, that Mr.- O'Connell travels too
far and too fast far them. Having found that out, at
last, it remains to be seen whether they will have the
boldness to cut the connection altogether, or whether,
as was once done with the Catholic question, they will
content themselves with resolving that the extinction
of the House of Lords is not JCabinet question, but
one of those indifferent propositions which may be
taken up or laid down at will, without affecting either
the ties of party, or the harmony of the existing Go-
v ermnen t.—Morn ing Herald.
As we anticipated, Mr. Grove Price thought it most.
advisable to withdraw his motion for the erasure of
Mr. O'Connell's notice from the list of notices in the
House cf Common\ The Hon. Gentleman stated
that a technical difficulty alone prevented his following
up his motipp. Mr. O'Connell rose and said that no
technical difficulty should prevent hint from introducing
a motion which he was sure the people of England
would support on its own merits. Mr. G. Price ex-
plained, that what he meant by a technical difficulty
was, that in addition to any other considerations, it
would still be competent to Mr. O'Connell to bring
forward his motion after the erasure of the notice,
the said notice being, merely a matter of form for
the convenience of the House generally, and in no
way affecting the right of any Member to submit the
subject so announced. For our own parts, anxious as
we are that Mr. O'Connell should bring this question
to an issue which must be triumphantly satisfactory to
the friends of good government, we see little reason to
regret the withdrawal by Mr. Grove Price of even the
appearance of any designs to obstruct the designs of the
demagogue. But, as the scion of the house of Russell
incidentally delivered, if not his deliberate opinions, at
least his possible meaning on this question, we shall
bestow a moment's attention upon the miserable views
of this Minister, Lord John Russell's treatment of
this grave constitutional question, which thus came be-
fore him as a Minister of the Crown, may be defined
as blending:, the dullest attempt -at wit with the dingiest
0
perception of constitutional law. The Noble Lord, in
his facetiousness, was pleased to declare that it would
be a slight on the bench of Bishops, whose claims to
sit in the Upper House of Parliament had been dis-
cussed in the Commons, if the general constitution of
the assembly were pronounced beyond the deliberative
powers of the popular branch of the Legislature. Lifting
hhnself to an unparralleled height of pleasantry, though
not encouraged by the smiles of even his adherents,
he stated in addition that he had no doubt of Mr.
Grove Price having received instructions from the
Right Rev, Prelates to avoid subjecting them to so dis •
agreeable distinction. So much for the wit of the
Noble Lord. His constitutional learning is of much
the same quality. He argued that because the House
of Commons had discussed the question to regulate the
succession to the throne, therefore they were entitled to
deliberate on the destruction of the peerage. We shall
certainly not waste the time of our readers by arguing
against such transparent- nonsense ; but we shall con-
tent ourselves with proving that the Noble Lord is
as consistent as he is profound, for he declared in the
House that though they had a right to regulate the
higher branch of the Legislature, he should vote
against Mr. O'Connell's motion for the exercise of
that presumed right. Verily we have wise and high
principled rulers I—Times.