The Sun.
London, England, 1836-08-08 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNA S.

We learn from:a Sunday Contemporary, as well as from
rumours in several other quarters, that it is the inten-
tion of the Lords to reject the registration clause of
the Newspaper Stamp Duty Bill. It must be hornet
in mind that this clause-did not form a portion of the
original Bill introduced by the Chancellor of clic Ex.
chequer, but was proposed by Mr, Charles Buller, and
adopted without a division or even a word of opposition
from the Tories, until the bringin up of the Report,
When Mr. Walter divided the House upon the. peg;. •
stration clause, which was carried by a major:4 of 58
against 15 ; in which majority, from the 'Held.7 - ' :-_,
objec-
tionable nature of the clause, we werr., sorry to perceive
Whigs. hod 'Tories.Bat the
the names of Radicals,
hostility of the Lords is not in reality directed against
the clause, bat ago.',ont the whole Bill, which
they hope to svramp by the proposed' mutilation,
and at tbt same time gain credit with the ,
country, or, at least, with the too confidin
ir It'•
portion of it, for liberality of intention of rescind-
ing a clause which must if passed, be attended - with ----, •
much inconvenience to the proprietors„of the Press.
The expectation of the Lords - is founded on the sup-
poil.4o n that the Bill- being a Money Bill, the Com-
iiiOns will not admit of any alterations, but rather re-
ject it altogether ; and though the clause has no refe-
rence AVilatCrer to the qiiestiOn of revenue, the privilege
of the Commons in this respect is one which ought
elpoiitaf.
iilss.eati tenaciouslyeillrliiisrlievilaagryißlea,hsiiiesdeNidyv i
tthtoiol ;ruotli:ugttihl
es
it
toi
sl
obnoxious
übsoeyxvieotrluat the
ct ola introductiontil)see
clause,
most-
all:i
ifo
of
necessary,theanto
ntsh,edseafemaet
stages,titne p res thee r
IN.
the evil intentions of the- Lords, and save those who
have embarlaed or are about to embark property in
Newsn,apers on the faith of the proposed change, from
the loss which the delay or the defeat of the
measure must inflict upon them. The Bill is one
which must not be lost by lordly chicanery. There is
little doubt the revenue would be increased by the Bill.
Already have not only the proprietors of the un-
stamped press announced their intention of conform-
ing to the law as soon as the reduction takes place,
which is the most effectual means of preventing the
contraband trade, and of protecting the fair trader, but
the stamped press has in vatibus ways incurred
enormous expenses, in order to meet the proposed
change of circurnstances. Are both to be floored be-
cause Mr. Charles 13n!ier, has, in a House consisting
of less than 80. Members, proposed a clause objection-
able to all Parties ? In another point of view the re.
duction ;:s of still more importance than in the financial.
11)'e greater the diffusion of political knowledge, the
more speedy must be the reformation of abuses, and the
establishment of popular rights—and this it is which
excites the apprehension and the hostility of the Lords
to the reduction of the stamp duty. But we can scarcely
believe they will be so infatuated as to reject a Bill
which had apparently the general support and appro-
bation of the Tories in the. House of Commons, and
which promises, in every point of view, so many ad-
vantages to ' the country. One thing, -however, is
certain, that the passing of .the Bill- must bring a
greater accession of strength to the Administration than
any Act since its appointment to office ; and, there-
fore, we have the fullest confidence, that no effort will
ba wanting on the part of the Government to foil the
machinations of those who seek to keep the people in
ignorance and degradation, and thereby perpetuate the
unhallowed dominion which they have usurped over
the destinies of the country. To the Ministry, after
all, will-be attributable the failure of the Bill, if fail it,
should e -and ' what will be the feelings entertained
towards them by the country in such contingency, after
all their promises. and professions, we shall not here
attempt to pourtray, but rather leave to themselves to
imagine.—Morning Advertiser. . •
We call the attention of Liberal Members to the
consideration of the Lords' amendments upon the
Municipal Corporations Act Amendment Bill. The
only one of any importance is the introduction of a
clause continuing the charitable trusts in the hands of
the old Corporations. This the Commons have once
rejected. The Lords have insisted, and it will now be
for the Representatives of the people interested in the
good administration of these funds to say whether
they will be content to leave them in such hands, or
to reject the Bill altogether, whereby some temporary
inconvenience may occur in two or three boroughs,
such as Ipswich and Sunderland. To these, howevee,
a remedy is still open, by a short Bill to remedy their
particular evils. The Lords have rejected without
consideration the Charitable Trustees Bill, and the
apostate Journal has found an excuse for them
in the lateness of the introduction of the measure
on the 7th of June. What the writer of the long-
winded leader in that paper may say would signify
little, were it not that Lord Lyndhurst had used
the same argument in almost the same words ; and
if the Lords, who are never occupied with any busi-
ness.before Whitsuntide, object to Bills brought in
after that period, it may be useful to examine if the
objection is universal, cr only used when suitable.
This Bill was introduced on the 7th June, as the
Times says, by an insignificant mover ; but we find
e,
the names of Lord John Russell and the Attorney-
General to the Bill ; and in the absence of the former
we hear that Sir Robert Peel refused to discuss it.
Owing to this, however, we are told the Bill was
smuggled through. Now the Bill was in the House
of Commons from the 7th of June to the 30th July ;
the second reading fixed for the 13th ; read on the
17th ; Committee fixed for the 22d ; deferred till
24th, 27th, 28th ; committed July Ist ; report.
considered, after various postponements, 19th July ;
House divided—ayes, 33, noes, SS ; re-committed
26th, after several divisions ; reported 28th, after
five divisions ; • and read a third time 29th,
with a division. But how have other measures
fared ? We find the Established Church Bill read
a second time on the very same day as the Cha-
ritable Trustees Bill, and yet to this their. Lord-
ships had no objection owing to its late introduction.
We find also last year the Corporation Bill introduced
on the sth June. has the County Elections Poll
the
Bill,S Stamp
nip
Duties ll
Biillltile)seenßill, rejected
the
Registrationoil
of
Voters Are ?
Greek Loan Bill, and all others to be rejected, be-
cause it does not please my Lords to attend to busi-
ness before June or after August ? Why arc the Com-
mons not to act upon this principle, and not allow the
Lords to amend their Bill so late in the session ? We
invite Members this evening to give the House of
Lords a Roland for their Oliver, and let the Noble
Baron find that he is not to be the only legislator.
What-could be more senseless than, having driven the
Corruptionists out of the old Corporations, to suffer
them still to rest on the charitable funds, the abuse of
which -was one of the grievances most loudly com-
plained of under the old system ?—Morning Chronicle.
It is, we believe, Lord Byron who states that no-
thing pains a wise man more than •laughter from a fool.
Far be it from us to assume any distinctive character as
to wisdom ; still less could we wish to impute folly to
so great a man as Lord Palmerston. But frivolity,
and that of the most intolerable kind may with justice
be charged against the Noble Lord by any one who
reads his speech on Mr. Maclean's motion with refe-
rence to the affairs of Spain. To us who have not
the enjoyment of that cheerfulness which enables an
Englishman to laugh at the disgrace -of his country, it
appears that few subjects could more imperatively call
for grave and statesmanlike consideration than that
submitted to the House on Friday last by Mr.
iMaclean. The Hon. Gentleman showed that the in-
fluence of the British flag had been prostituted for the
sorriest of party purposes, and that France, in contra-
vention of that farcical co-operation which • Lord Pal-
merston looks upon as the master-stroke of foreign pr.)-
licy, was subservient to the supply of Don Carlos with
provisions and military stores of all kinds. And how did
Lord Palmerston meet this important public question ? •
By the silly dandyism of a dull attempt at merriment,
which, however it may have provoked 'great laughter' from
those who are bound to laugh at the jocular efforts of a
Secretary of State, will, we apprehend, excite nothing
but disgust in the popular mind. Is it possible that e
Lord Palmerston can be so self-deluded as to suppose'
that his miserable foolery about " quiet and steady, and;
ready to rise," can cause anything but contempt
pig_
any man who reads it? And when his Lordship la's*.
ing from his feeble facetiousness to a tone of more b*,1..,
'..
, ._
~ ,
ness like pretension, condescends to the eonsi "t e -• ' -,--...eee.
. .. . - ~,eae.,-,,.„.-7e. •
ilaee- - -
d I

if 11•.- •

he merits of the case, we find his seriousness, if pos..
sihle, more farcical than his hazy dreams of wit. The
Noble Lord is reported to have said, " The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman had observed that he should like
tol,now whether this country was really at war or not ?
That question had often been asked by Hon. Genele-
men who were as capable of answering it as he (Lord
Palmerston) could be presumed to he. Any one at all
conversant with the principles of international law
must know that we were auxiliaries of the Queen, and
not principals in the war." - If the expressions of this
very shallow person be correctly reported, we are content
to take him at his word ; and we beg to say, that any
one " at all conservant. with the principles of inter-
national law"---any one mindful of the part which
England has always taken whenever she deemed her
interference necessary—any one sensible of the en-
nobling sentiment of national pride, must feel, that, if
we are really to be considered auxiliaries of the Queen
of Spain, we ought Without delay to, emancipate our-
selves from the skulking policy of Lord Palmerston,
and to adopt the language of his great predecessor,
who, with reference to another part of the Peninsida,
stated, that where the flag of British independence was
planted there invasion should not come. But this de-
cision, so characteristic of true genius, it would per-
haps be unfair to expect from the merest mediocrity.
Still, we are justified in an expression of surprise that
even Lord Palmerston should have sought to palliate
the atrocity of the Durango decree. Will any one
doubt that the grossest possible outrage on British na-
tionality was contained in that decree ? And how does
the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affhirs treat
the document in question ? He tells us that the order
was issued by General Evans as an officer in the
Spanish service, and that as the English Government
could have no cognizance of it, they could not be
held responsible for it. Lord Palmerston prettily
simpered forth, that he was "no lawyer," and
could not precisely say of what crime British
subjects fighting against General Evans would be
guilty. And he added, that " the very mention of
English law showed that General Evans never contem-
plated the infliction of punishment in Spain." Any one
who has' read the decree, or who has paid the smallest
attention to the conflict between the Christinos and the
Carlists, wilt .1t once see the shallow nonsense here put
forward by.Lorcl Palmerston ; for unless General Evans
by the Durango decree intended to inflict summary
punishment on Britisi: subjects in the service of Don
Carlos, it is quite clear that his manifestomeantnothing
i
whatever. The notion.thattish subjects so serving
would on their return; to England be tried for high-
treason
and punished accordingly, is too ridiculous for
the understanding of the most Whig-Radical
,Dortion of
the Westminster "rump." However, it is va to
attempt any unsettlement of the self-satisfied notion
of the Foreign Secretary. He himself is reported
to have said, that "it had been asserted that the
moral influence of England had suffered much
since he had filled the Foreign-office. If so,
why had they been made arbitrators in the most
important quarrel which had recently occurred in
Europe ?" Cannot this vain man perceive that
whatever of the moral influence has been sacrificed is
attributable to his effeminate management, and that
whatever of that influence remains is to be accounted
for by the indomitable energy and salient vigour of the
country, whose influence even he cannot utterly de-
stroy ? Towards the close of his speech on Friday
night he is represented to have stated,- that owing
to the general confidence in those dispensations by
which human affairs are governed, he could not bring
himself to think that the cause of Don Carlos could
prosper. It may be remembered that the Ministerial
journals attempted, though with small success, to cast
ridicule on the expression of Sir R. Peel, that the
Peers were' responsible to God. We .have already
stated that we consider that responsibility more awful
and binding than any which mob-popularity could
impose. But if we are to .cavil about terms, we beg
to ask whether Lord Palmerston attempting to identify
his foreign policy with the providential rule of
the universe be not the most presumptuous and in-
effably ridiculous assumption by which human vanity
was ever yet deluded ? The fact is, that not one point
of the very able speech of Mr. Maclean was touched
upon in the sO-called reply of Lord Palmerston. Will
the Noble Lord, at his leisure, be good enough to give
an answer to this simple question put by Mr. Maclean
—" What, he should like to know, had this country
to do with the quarrels-of the people of Spain, or the
rivalries of a disputed succession ? It was a question
which the people of Spain alone had a right to decide ;
and what had been the consequences of our inter-
vention ? Had the slightest advantage been obtained
by the pouring out of so much British treasure, and
the shedding of so muck British blood ?" In this short
passage the Hon. Member for Oxford has put the
whole question on its proper footing. The English
people have nothing whatever to do with the question
of the Spanish succession. But, conceding for a mo-
ment that we were nationally and justifiably interested
• in the question, then undoubtedly no course could be
adopted more undignified, more calculated to lower the
moral influence of this country, than that pursued by
Lord Palmerston ; and, however confident his Lord-
ship may feel in that arrangement of human affairs
which he told the House would of necessity prove fatal
to the cause of Don Carlos, we and all other practical
men have a right to demand from the person filling the
office and receiving the salary of Foreign Secretary
some distinct and definite announcement in a matter so
important as this, involving, as it does, our position
and influence as an European Power. We are by no
moans anxious that Lord Palmerston should give him-
self tire trouble of attempting an enlarged and states-
man-like view of public questions, but we think it in-
cumbent on him to abstain from the silly affectations
and shallow puerilities to which we have alluded, so
long as he continues in the administration of an impor-
tant public office.—Times.

Lord 'Melbourne is reported to have said to the
Noble Lords on the Opposition side of the House, on
the last evening of their sitting, that of late they had
appeared to legislete under the influence of fear, which
influence was .unfavourable to the clearness of their
mental Vision. It i$ stated also that this remark re-
ceived the tittering approbation of the "small party"
of Lord Melbourne's political friends who sit on the
.saine side of the House with hhil. When presumption
is wisdom, and to laugh at it is wit, we may find
sornethine; to approve in this language attributed to
the Minister, and the reception of it by his scanty
hand of supporters—but not until then. But as even
the tossing up of a straw may be of use to show which
way the wind blows ; or the falling of an apple from a
tree, if it lead to reflection upon the law of Nature
which causes that fall, and the circumstances that at-
tend it ; so we may find, even in the petulant frivolity of
Lord Melbourne, an occasion for useful observation
applicable to the present state of public affairs.
Fear is net, in the abstract, either wicked or contemp-
' tible. Its Taality depends upon the source Iron. which
it sowings—upon the object which inspires it. Not to
tbvell upon that hallowed fear which the inspired wise
man has called " the beginniug of wisdom," who does
DCA know, that to fear to do wrong—to violate a sound
prieciple, to purchase a present convenience or plea-
sure b' the sacrifice of an ascertained rule of moral or
political virtue, is in the highest degree honourable ?
Who does not know that to fear to do a base thingis
the very opposite of baseness? We admit that,
among men of the world, such immorality as they do
not practice, is more frequently avoided through scorn
of its meanness than fear of its guilt ; and we are
glad to have the good that follows, even horn the in-
ferior motive ; but that it is inferior, is as certain, as
as that the sentiment of pride is a less noble and a
less worthy motive of action than the sense of duty.
According to this view of the matter, which we humbly
submit to be that which true religion enjoins, and true
philosophy approves, there is nothing to be ashamed
of in having acted from fear, until the nature of that
fear being investigated, it turns out to be unworthy ;
nor is it by any means true that fear necessarily ob-
scureseor distorts the sight of the mind. A reason-
able fear is, perhaps, more than anything else an
assistant to mental perspicuity. What indeed else is
the thing called " caution," of which we all approve?
ithOn the other hand, to be without it, is to be insane.
f-*Pf " When valour preys on reason,
ji ' It eats the sword it fights with."
is something worse than this—namely, the
,:. -affectation of it, nhich cowards put on to conceal from

.~~

the world that Which they can scarcely conceal from
themselves, to coyer the baseness which squats toad-
like upon their hearts, and makes them loathsome to
their own souls. Conscience will sometimes break in
with its piercint light upon the foulest recesses of a
fallen man's mind, and show him what a gross place
he has allowed it to become ; but too often pride will
come and put out the light, but not the recollection of
it ; that will remain, and. in the fear lest others should
perceive it, a .ktering affectation will be put on, and
fear itself %via beget a charge of fear against others.
If, under any eirciimstances, sneering were a proper
substitute for argument, in a place of such dignity as
the Upper House of Parliament ought to be, the re-
proach of fear—fear of an unmistakeably abject cha-
racter—might well be retorted upon the Ministerial
party. The Conservatives may fear to sacrifice the
Protestant religious .establishment to the demands of
Roman Catholies-Lthey may fear to give up principles
of the Constitution, which the whole scope and ten-
dency of the political law of the country teaches them
to consider themselves bound to defend.. It may be a
inciter of conscience to fear to do these things, which
the spirit the time has suggested to reckless inno-
vators, and the want of spirit on the part Of the Ministers
of the Crown, has allowed to get into a position of formi-
dable advancement. This is not dishonourable fear. But
what shall be said of Ministers, whose every act almost
is admitted to be the result of a " pressure" from some
influential quarter or another, which they are afraid to
resist. Lord Melbourne himself endeavours to convey
to the House that which appears to be reluctance,
even when he asks them to pass the measures to which
his Administration has consented. He presents a Bill
to the House, with expressions which convey that he
is sorry it must be so ; but the strength of the influence
which demands it is such that it cannot be helped.
Now, the meaning of this is, merely, that the parties
who support him would support him no longer, if he
did not propose these innovations, to which he is re-
luctant ; and, through dread of his Government being
overthrown, he does himself, and asks others to do,
that which even his own mind does not contemplate
with approbation. Is this a man to taunt others with
fear? Whether it is more honourable to fear to do
what conscience disapproves, or to fear to lose the
reins of government, and the personal advantages, or
honours, or whatever they should be called, which ac-
company the; possession of office? Is not the fear to
lose such advantages the basest kind of necessity which
could fall upon a public man ?

" Intactis opulentior
Thesauris Arabum, et divitis
Caemcntis licet occupes
Tyrrhenum omne tuis et mare Apulicum ;
Si figit adamantinos
Summis verticibus dira necessitas
Clavos ; non animum metu
Non mortis laqueis expedies caput."

With what reason, sense, or consistency, can Lord
Melbourne twit his opponents with fear ; since upon
almost all occasions his object in the House, and that
of 'his partisans out of the House, is to call upon their
Lordships to partake his fear? Nothing is more un-
usual than to find on the Ministerial side any argu-
ment in favour of a particular measure upon its own
merits. It is not attempted to show that the measures
are good, but if they are not " conceded," great danger
to those who refuse the concession is at hand. It is
maintained that the Conservatives in the House of
Lords do not fear so much as they ought. They are
told, that they are blindly obstinate, rushing upon their
own destruction ; and yet the head of the party which
uses this sort of language, when it expects to wrest
from the fears of Noble Lords that which their duty
and honour forbid them to yield, is himself the man to
taunt these Noble Lords with fear ; and his friends en-
courage this consistency by their laughter. We are
really tempted to inquire, when we read this, whether
..Lard..Nelbourne's supporters were laughing with him
or laughing at him. The latter would certainly be
more natural ; but the light reproof of ridicule is not
enough for conduct so unworthy of a Nobleman and a
Minister.—Morning Herald.

SECOND EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT,

(THIS EVENING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the chair at three o'clock.
TRINITY (NORTH* LEITH) HARBOUR.
Mr. WILKS presented a petition from 236 merchants
and traders of Edinburgh in favour of the Trinity (North
Leith) Harbour Bill.
Mr. POULTER moved the second reading of the
Trinity (North Leith) Harbour Bill.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL would feel it his duty
to oppcse the second reading. He was given to under-
stand that the Standing Orders of the House would not be
suspended in favour of this Bill, and that it would not be
brought forward again. He would move that the Bill be
read a second time that day three months.
Mr.'"POULTER defended the Bill. It had been con-
fided to him in the absence of Sir A. L. Hay, and he did
not think that any opposition would be now offered to it.
Mr. R. STEWART would feel it his duty to oppose
the Bill. -He did not think, after the unanimous feeling of
the House expressed on the former occasion, that it would
have been again introduced.
Mr. POULTER said if the merits of the Bill were to be
discussed, he should claim the indulgence of the House.
Mr. LEADER complained of the unfair and harrassing
opposition which the promoters of the Bill had had to
contend with, both from that and the other side of the
House. He should support the second reading, because
there wa3 no opposition to the principle of the measure
either in that or the other House, and because it had been
lost on a former occasion, not from any objection to its me-
rits, but from a mere technical error.
Dr. BOWRING thought it would be great injustice to
the promoters of the Bill not to allow it to proceed.
Mr. LABOUCIIERE felt it due to his lion. and Gal-
lant Friend (Sir A. L. Hay) to state that it was understood,
after the decision of the Chair had been given, that he did
not mean to press the suspension of. the Standing Orders ;
but his Hon. and Gallant Friend by no means gave up the
Bill altogether--(Hear, hear.) Although he thought it
right to say so much, he must add that it was a perfectly
hopeless task of the promoters of the Bill to go on at that
'advati'eed period of the session.
•The ATTORNEY-GENERAL contended that, on
the second reading of a Bill, any Hon. Member was per-
fectly competent to discuss its merits. The understanding
in his opinion was; that the Bill should not be proceeded
with.

.......
Mr. AGLIONBY did not think it quite fair in the op-
ponents of the Bill to come forward at that stage ; they
should have made their objection when it was introduced
to the House. He contended that they were not now at
liberty to discuss the question of the suspension of the
Standing Orders.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL and Mr. POULTER
severally explained.

iMr. WILKS strenuously supported the Bill, which
he said was now about to he rejected from local and corpo
rate influence being used against it.—(Question.)
Sir E. CODRINGTON also supported the Bill. -
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
.divided,- when the numbers were—
. For the second reading -
. , Against it..
Majority against the second reading —l
The Bill is consequently lost.
LEITH AND NEWHAVEN RAILWAY.

On the motion of the LORD-ADVOCATE, the
Ifeith and Newhaven Railway was read a third time and
passed.

HALF-PAY OFFICERS.
An HON. MEmßEit begged to ask the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman below him, the Secretary of the Treasury, whether
be meant, in the observations he had made a few evenings
since, to state that all the officers of the army and navy
dismissed his Majesty's service had been dismissed for mis-
conduct ? The statement had occasioned considerable an-
noyance to many most respectable ithiividua!s.
Mr. C. WOOD believed what he had stated was cor-
rectly reported, and regretted that any observations which
had fallen from him had given pain to any individual. He
had mer.nt to say that the cases brought forward by his
Hon. and Gallant Friend behind him (Sir E. Codrington)
were those of individuali who had been dismissed for
conduct, but he had never intended to apply the observation
to all the officers dismissed his Majesty's service.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the Order of the Day•
for the third reading of the Registration of Voters' Bill.
Mr. SINCLAIR, as we unerstood, objected to public
business being brought on so early as half-past three o'clock.
Lord J. RUSSELL said three o'clock had been fixed
for proceeding with the Bill.