The Sun.
London, England, 1836-06-16 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

As it may serve to throw some additional light upon
e motives which actuate the Tory portion of the
House of Lords in their legislation for Ireland, it may
not be amiss if we revert to some of the proceedings in
that House on Tuesday evening. When Lord Dun-
cannon moved the second reading of the Dublin Po-
lice Bill, though Lord Ellenborough, as a matter of
course, recommended delay—the Bill being useful—
yet neither he nor any of his .confederates opposed the
motion. How did the Duke of Wellington and Lord.
Ellenborough treat the same Bill last year ? They
threw it out ! Why ? Because, according to the Noble
Duke, the then Lord Mayor of Dublin had written
to his Grace a letter, in which the ex-civic functionary
stated that he had not had time to -read the Bill and
understand the bearing of its provisions. This was
the sum and substance of the reason why the Duke of
Wellington and his Tory satellites in the Upper House
flung out last year the Dublin Police Bill, which they
seem now disposed to agree to ; and by rejecting the
measure then, subjected the Irish capital to a con-
tinuance of all the evils. and inconveniences result-
ina from that police system which Lord Ellen-
borough now declares to be " most scandalous." The
Noble Lord must have been aware, when the Bill was
formerly before Parliament, of the " scandalous state"
of the Dublin police ; and the Duke of Wellington
knew from experience, that under the existing system
of metropolitan police, there was not in the Irish ca-
pital any thing_ like protection either for life or pro-
perty, especially in the day time ! Life may be taken,
burglary may be committed, property may be stolen in
day-light, in any of the streets of Dublin, with every
chance of impunity, with every prospect of escape for
the delinquents. A maniac—as he afterwards was
discovered to be—walked about one of the most fre-
quented thoroughfares in Dublin, at eleven o'clock in
the forenoon, holding a brace of pistols in his hands,
and with apparent coolness shot dead one of the most
respectable merchants in the city. After commit-
ting the fatal deed he walked off, and would have
most probably escaped detection, had not a gentle-
man who was passing by at the moment, at the peril
cf his own life, seized the assassin. Subsequently
another person, a countryman, was murdered in
the evening by a miscreant who fired at him, at a
distance of some yards, in a poplous street, which
happened at the instant to he crowded with passengers.
This occurred within sight of a military barrack, and
at a very short distance from the head office of police,
yet the murderer escaped, and was net arrested for a
considerable time. Outrages, resulting from combina-
tion, are of frequent occurrence in Dublin, and it
often happens that the gusty parties escape—it inva-
riably is the case that 'blood is shed before the po-
lice fiave heard of the riotous proceedings. These
arc facts—all well known to the Duke of Welling--
- ton, Sir 11. Peel, Sir Henry Hardinge, and Mr. Gold-
burn, each of whom has been Chief Secretary for Ire-
land. Yet the party of which these individuals are
loaders, flung out, last year, a Bill similar to the one
they are now agreeing to—the object of which was to
remedy the grievous evil we have been pointing out ;
nav, the Noble Duke himself was the originator of that
proceeding, the facticusness of which is confessed
by the Tory Lords themselves, in their ,assent to
tin. present measure. It may be asked, what fact:ous
motive the Tory Lords could have hail, in tit: owing
Out the Bill of last year? A selfish and factions eon-
siee:ation influenced their conduct. 'They .-eanted to
keep the Bill, the value of which no one presumed to
qnestion, in pel to, until some caprice or accident might
restore themselves to office ; in which contingency their
frientb, Aldermen Perrin and Smith, were to obtain
• the reward of their services at the last Dublin election ;
and they wished also to thwart the present Govern-
ment.—an object as cherished in their bosoms as even
the ambition of once mere dispensing the patronage of
the Crown, and fingering the public money. Far these
reasons it was that the Tory Peers refused to the ca-
vital of Ireland, last year, a remedy for that police
s .stem which is really most inefficient, and which one
of the confederates against the peace and prosperity
-of the country has now the boldness to avow is " most
scandalous," although he and his party in the House
of Lords have continued the scandal up to this hour.—
Morning Chronicle.
We do not know that the discussions, if discussions
they can he called, which took place in the House of
Commons on Monday and Tuesday, relative to Irish
Corporations, afford any topic that calls for notice :
but sure we are, that if any ingenious writer, imitating
the example of the learned and able author of the
" Curiosities of Literature," should ever take it into
his head to favour the public with the " Curiosities
of Politics," he will find • abundant materials for one
series at least in the debate of the preceding week on
the same subject. Mr. Sheil, who quite outdid Mr.
?lice's memorable assertion, that " expect" has not
the same signification in Ireland that it has in Eng-
land, especially in reference to a bribe, took great
pains to convince the House that "an alliance upon
terms" is not " a compact." These are in themselves
curiosities. Mr. Rice long since repudiated the word
" Irishman," declaring that he, would blot out the
Channel and dub himself for evermore a " West Bri-
tons" Mr. O'Connell, the other night, declared his
intention of doing the same thing, and pervhaps Mr.
Shell has fallen into the plan, though without any
formal notice. Is it intended that future lexicogra-
phers are to take notice of West Britonism in tongue,
as naturalists must in revising the classification
of animals, and that when they assign to words; upon
the authority of a debate in the House of Commons,.
meanings that were never meant, or.no meaning at all,
they will be expected to substitute for Dr. Johnson's
perpetually recurring " Saxon " the indemnity of the
obscurity that " West British " will convey ? Poor
Trog ! How he would have enriched our phraseology
with his Chimpanzee perversion of the King's En-
. glish, had not the cruel fates snatched him from us,
and left us only Mr. Shen and Mr. Rice to labour in
that vocation 1 • But no matter, the " Diversions " of
" Parliament " will beat the " Diversions of Purley "
yet, if the subsequent progress do anything like justice
to the first promise of these two illustrious West Bri-
tons. Then Mr. Sheil insisted that the Irish must
be, and shall be equal to the English and Scotch.
Now we are very glad to hear this, which, as our
American friends would say, is " important, if true."
The "must " is a flight into the high ropes far above
our reach. The " shall be" we desire to understand.
Does Mr. Sheil mean to say that an act of Parlia-
ment can make the Irish equal to the English and
Scotch ? If so, he is mistaken. Such a result can
no more be effected by such a process than the one
pound note and the shilling became equal to a gui-
nea, when the Parliament voted that they were so.
We hope Mr. Shell uses the words in some other
sense—that he looks forward to the time when the
advantages of civilization shall be more generally dif-
fused throughout Ireland, and when the priesthood of
the misguided populace shall teach them the sublime
truths and the humanizing and peaceful virtues which
Christianity. inculcates, instead of desecrating their
altars with inflammatory political harangues, and ex-
citing to the deadliest hate where their duty to God
they should preach charity
and to their country.requires
and concord. The Irish shall be equal to the English
and Scotch ! Most happy should we _be to find the
prediction true, and besides ranking Mr. Sheil among
the modern prophets, to make a bold push with the
Pope for his canonization. But we are afraid the con-
summation so devoutly to be wished can hardly, by
possibility, happen in our time. Not to multiply from
Ireland instances of horrors, at which the blood runs
cold, we invite the attention of the reader to the fol-
lowing passage from the last Newry Telegraph that
reached this country •.—" The system of setting,
which we have already hinted at, we should have ob-
served is simply this :—A man who has a dis-
like to, or quarrel with, another, employs some
persons from a part of the country with the
Inhabitants of which the unfortunate man to be
beaten Is unacquainted-, and whom he therefore
caniiest identify. The assassins, and surely they de-
serve the appellation, are generally hired for a p nt of
whisky each, for which reward is frequently committed
one of those deeds without a name' which leave their
wretched victim maimed, blind, or idiotic during life.
In a case of transportation of a ruffian for a bad case of
waylaying, a short time since, in Dundalk, the culprit
freely admitted, in his defence, that he never saw or

. .
heard of the man whom he so shockingly abused until
a few minutes before he was employed for the pur-
pose !" Now, what must be the character of the priest-
hood and of the peasantry in which such a- system as
this obtains ? What but a reform more searching than
Radical ever dreamed of, and of a very different charac-
ter from the spurious quackeries that at present pass
under cover of that name, can eradicate this wicked-
ness, civilize the barbarism out of which it grows, and
.place the ignorant instruments and actors in it on an
equality with Scotch men and Englishmen ? Mr. Shell
may take our word for it that he is much too sanguine,
and howeverdisagreeable that truth maybe, it is our duty to
tell it. Another curiosity will be found in the ground, the
sole ground upon which the recent attempt at agita-
tion proceeded, and which is embodied in all the peti-
tions which the agitators have been able to get up re-
lative to Corporations in Ireland, here and in other
parts of the kingdom. That ground is, " that it is
an insult to Ireland to give her a Corporation Bill dif-
ferent to the British Corporation Bills." Well, the
agitation is over, and the petitions are presented—but
what sort of a Bill do the Ministers propose for Ire-
land ? Why, a Bill in every essential particular dif-
ferent and distinct from the British measures. Thus,
then, the agitators have, as usual, made fools of that
portion of the public who listened to them, and the
Ministers have lent themselves to the deception. The
Government and their supporters did before, and are
now doing, precisely that which their innocent dupes
out of doors have been persuaded to petition against,
on the supposition that the " insult to Iteland"
originated with, and was confined to, the House
of Lords.- We confess we are surprised that this
fraud succeeded with any portion, however small
and ignorant, of the people ; because, as none
can fail to knoW, at least, that in Ireland there is
a Viceroy, in whom and whose Council all the Go-
vernment of that part of the empire centres, so none
ought to have suffered themselves to be imposed upon
by the assertion, that to legislate for Ireland in a man-
ner different to that on which legislation for England
and Scotland proceeds is an " insult to Ireland." The
next curiosity is the declaration made by Lord John
Russell, and re-echoed. by the whole party, that the
Lords' Bill is arbitrary and despotic. The fact hap-
pens to be, that whereas the Lords' Bill offers the
local government provided by the 9th George IV. to
any town in Ireland that pleases to adopt it, the Mi-
nisterial Bill, forces that identical government upon a
certain number of towns, giving no option to them to
refuse it, nor allowing other towns to accept it, if
either should be so minded. We will not condescend
to argue what must be palpable to every one
namely, that the despotism in - this matter, if there he
any, is wholly on the side of the Ministers, not on
that of the Lords. It is an admirable illustration of
the proverb, that " one man may steal a horse, while
another will be hanged for looking into a stable."
Ag,a:n, Lord John Russell insists that the Lords'
Bill makes a gross violation of the rights of property
—inasmuch as upon the abolition of Corporations
(which is an enactment common to both Bills) the
Lords arranged that the corporate. property should
he vestezl in Commissioners appointed by the Crown,
until the towns should have elected Commissioners
of their own. This arrangement, one of a mere tem-
porary character, having for its sole object the safe
'eu,tody and protection of the property, until those
interested in it could appoint trustees of their owns and
checked and controlled as it is beyond the possibility
of abuse, is called a violation of the rights of property!
And by whore ? Why, by the authors of the Irish
Church Bill, which contains a clause vesting the whole
of the property of the parochial clergy in Crown Com-
missioners as each benefice becomes vacant ; hut not,
as in the case of the cdrporate property, temporarily
and for the benefit of the parish—no ; for " the pur-
poses of the Act"—that is to say, to be, with the ex-
ception of a miserable pittance, melted down and dis-
posed of as the Agitators may hereafter decree and
direct. But the greatest curiosity of all is, that Lord
John Russell should seriously propose a compromise
with the House of Lords, and preserve a grave face in
doing it. Can he suppose that the Lords haVe for-
gotten his conduct on the English Corporation Bill,
and the answer he gave to those who reproached hire
for attempting to disfranchise by that Bill the freemen
whose righ:s the Reform Act reserved to them ? Lord
John Russell's answer can never be forgotten. It ad-
mitted that the reservation of those rights was a part
of the bargain with the Lords—that it was introduced
to reconcile the Lords to other parts of that Act ; but
that it was not intended to keep faith with their Lord-
ships on the subject I Talk of Punic faith !—we will
back the modern Whigs against all the tricksters of
antiquity and of their own times put together.—Tinier.
It affords us no small' 'gratification to find that the
Prisoners' Counsel-Bill is to be disinterred from the
oblivion winch the enemies of equal justsice had pre-
pared for it, and that Lord Lyndhurst has under-
taken to introduce it to the House of Lords for the
second reading this day. We are well aware of the
attempts which were made last session to " cushion"
this Bill in the House; where Lord Lyndhurst is so
distinguished a leader, and which attempts were then
but too successful. It is equally true and lamentable
that Lord Brougham struck the blow which had nearly
proved fatal to a measure, without the adoption of
which the life of the poor man can never have the
same protection that is thrown round the property of
the rich. It is the more melancholy to think of this
conduct on the part of Lord Brougham, when it is re--
collected that one of the ablest ertieles that ever appear-
ed in support of the principle of the Prisoners' Counsel
Bill was published in the Edinburgh Review, about nine
years ago, from the pen of Mr. Henry Brougham,
who, only in last Session, endeavoured to strangle in
embryo the Bill for carrying the principle which he had
so ably advocated into effect ! If Lord Lyndhurst
should carry the Bill, how great will be his triumph, as
a reformer of the law., over his professedly more liberal
political rival ? We are sorry to find that there are
some Barristers who regard this question as one of
pounds, shillings, and pence. They who would place
sordid pelf in the scales of justice against the life of
man, may be very ingenious reasoners, but their logic
savours 'of that intense and gross selfishness which
proves to their own satisfaction that injustice,: with a
large amount of fees, is better than less profitable jus-
tice. So undoubtedly it is for the Barristers, but not
for the public ; but we have pleasure in being able to
state that, though there are some members of the Bar
who loudly complain of the time which trials of pri-
soners for felony would occupy, if the Bill were passed,
and who prefer, because of its greater gains, rapid
injustice to slow justice ; yet it is by no means the
prevailing sentiment at the Bar, where there are still
many advocates who would rather see ten prisoners
well and deliberately tried, than a score murdered
from precipitancy. It is impossible that equal justice
can be afforded to a prisoner unless he is allowed to
make his full defence, by Counsel, in answer to the
full accusation made by the Counsel for the prosecu-
tor. As to time, a great deal is now consumed in
irregular cross-examination, which would be saved if
the Prisoners' Counsel Bill became a law. But
the real question is not one of convenience or inconve-
nience, but of justice or injustice ; and prisoners
charged with felony cannot have justice, unless allowed
to make their full defence by Counsel.—Morning
Herald.
It is difficult, if not impossible, to imagine any ade-
'quate apology for the conduct of the present Ministers
of the Crown in all that relates to the Church of
England. Our readers are aware that several sees are
now vacant, and have been so for a considerable
beriod. From the delay in appointing Bishops to these
ereaved dioceses, great inconvenience and much posi-
tive injury must necessarily have arisen. Some of
the most solemn and important ordinances and rites of
the Church of England are suspended, or, if adminis-
tered at all, administered by some stranger, who has
no permanent or intimate connection with the i
e esc
eccle-
siastical district in which. they are required, and who
is therefore of necessity less cognizant of the condition
t lesso t p a
i acquainted o
consciousl
functionso
of the
responsibility
of that -department of the
iCpselsrrut profoundlyar
ienh
with its peculiar wants,,hicaillida less
aßs ~,hop regularly and canonically ap-
pointed would naturally become. The affairs spiritual
and temporal of the vacant dioces are liable, in the
absence of that superintendence and controul which the
constitution of the Church has required and pro-
vided to fall into confusion. Ordinations, charges,

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, JUNE 16, 1836.

and confirmations are totally neglected, or dele-
gated to a stranger, while at the same time the
temporalities of the diocese are endangered in the
hands of persons who have no paramount interest in pro-
tecting them from assault or dilapidation. What is
the motive which induces the present Administration
to keep these dioceses vacant ? Are they anxious to
shoNV to the world that they hold the episcopal office
to be superfluous ? Is it their purpose to furnish the
Humes and Roebucks of the House of Commons a

new economical argument for the extinction of the
episcopal order ? rls the episcopal interregnum of
which they are the authors one of the results of their
alliance with Mr. O'Connell, and intended to show
that in the Protestant Church Bishops are •needless
incumbrances ? Or is this protracted dislocation of
the proper Members of the Upper House of Parlia-
ment meant to convey a lesson to the country in favour
of a more comprehensive and permanent reform of that
branch of the Legislature ? By whichever of these
motives Ministers may have been impelled to try the
present experiment it is quite certain that the experi-
ment has failed. However surprising it may appear to
the Ministers of the Crown, the fact, we believe, really
is, that the dioceses left without Bishops feel the want
of them, and that, if the sees are left much longer va-
cant, remonstrances will reach 'Whitehall of such a
nature as cannot be conveniently or safely disregarded.
It may appear, at first sight, that the neglect of
Ministers to fill the vacancies on the Episcopal
Bench as fast as they occur is a proof of a di in-
terested indifference on their part to patronage.
The proof, however, will scarcely stand the test o f a
very rigorous examination. The Whig Ministers en-
danger the safety and undermine the character of the
Church by omitting to exercise the desirable pa-
tronage of nominating Bishops. But, in the mean-
while, they grasp a patronage not properly theirs, a
patronage far more valuable than that of the Bishoprics,
which they seem to surrender, in the benefices in the
gift of every vacant see, which during the vacancy fall
into their hands. This, it will at once be seen, is
neficial and convenient to the Administration in every
way. The value of what they get is much greater
than the value of what they lose. They have few
men belonging to them whose elevation to the epis-
copal rank would be tolerated by the friends of the
Church, who may not yet be prudently defied. They
have many men who may be introduced into rectories
and, vicarages without attracting much notice. • The
Church patronage most available for their purposes is
that which may be distributed in the dark. So far as
patronage is concerned, nothing, we believe, would
suit the present Ministers so well as that all the
Bishoprics of England and Wales were vacant. The
above considerations are sufficiently trite and ob-
vious. Ministers have not overlooked—have not
been permitted to overlook—them. Hence the ne-
cessity of some apology for their conduct. And
what is that apology ? They say that they cannot
appoint Bishops until Parliament has determined
the future amount of their incomes, these being
-now problematical in consequence of the meditated re-
forms of the Church. They go further. They allege,
we believe, that the clergymen, whom they might se-
lect for the vacant biLhopi.ics could not accept the ap-
poilitraiuts subject to the condition of abiding by the.
future regulations to be adopted by Parliament with
respect to income, for that acquiescence in such a con-
dition Would be simoniseal on the part of the newlv-
appointed prelates. We are seriously told that this is
the Ministerial apology for, leaving the dioceses of
EiQand without bishops. The apology seems to us
to be more revolting and more vicious than the act for
which it is tendered as an excuse. It is an apology
far too durahle to be good for anything. If it is
available to day, when three or four bishoprics are
vacant, it will be equally available this time te:i
years, when, upon the present system, and accord-
ing to the ordinary course of nature, much mare
than half
.of the sees of England and Wales would
have become vacant. Admit the validity of this apo-
logy, and Ministers have nothing to do but to keep up
the question of Church reform, without deciding it, fur a
certain period, and ail the bishoprics of England will have
accumulated in their hands, and all the Church patronage
of England will lay at their absolute disposal. Is this a
power which any constitutional Administration would
desire to • usurp ? Is it a power whiCh the friends of
the Church or the Constitution of England can per-
mit any Ministess to exercise ? But, apart from the
above general reasoning, which, however, is conclusive,
do not Ministers know, must they not of necessity
know, from transactions in which they have borne a
part, that their apology is worthleSs ? Did not the
present Bishop of Derry enter into the possession of
that diocese on the express understanding that he was
to submit to any future diminution of income which
Parliament in its wisdom might think proper to enact ?
Was not the appointment of Dr. Ponsonby made a
matter of boast by the Whigs on the express ground
of this understanding ? Was not the world sickened,
on the occasion of this appointment, by the self-glori-
fication of the Whigs on the score of their prudence,
forethought, 'moderation, economical abhorrence of
large revenues—especially ecclesiastical revenues ?
And now, merely because the Whigs find it convenient
to hold several Bishoprics in their own hands, are we
to be told that Dr. Ponsonby is a simoniacal Bishop,
and that Earl Grey, and a greater still than Earl Grey,
became in his case the abettors and promoters of si-
mony ?—Morning Post.

SECOND EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, Seven 0' clock.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT,

HO USE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
DUBLIN AND DROGHEDA RAILWAY.

Mr. O'CONNELL brought up the Report of the Com-
mittee on the Dublin and Drogheda Railway.

METROPOLITAN SUgPENSION. BRIDGE.

Mr. TOOKE presented a petition from the Vauxhall
Bridge Company against the Metropolitan Suspension
Bridge, which stood for Report to-day. The petition
prayed that the Bill might be either re-committed, or re-
ferred to the Standing Order Committee, on the ground
that great irregularities had been committed.
MANCHESTER AND CHESTER RAILWAY.
On the motion of Mr. WILBRAHAM the Manchester
and Cheshire Railway Bill was read a second time and
passed.

they were not the men whom he would have selected for
such a Board. In place of being men of science and ma- 4
riners, they were Edinburgh lawyers, and the sheriffs of
some of the maritime counties. It was a question of life
or death, and therefore he hoped that Hon. Members
would pay some little attention to it. Applications had
been made from the year 1820 to the present time, and
what was the answer ? Why, that the measure, was totally
unnecessary, because the island had the protection of a
roadstead. The engineer stated it was a dry harbour ; now
in a correspondence that took place in 1827, it was stated
that" according to the report of the Commissioners, this
was not'a place where it was necessary that a Light-house
should be established, as there was no water there. Now
he held in his hand two affidavits of pilots, who stated,
that during the last month they had sounded this road-
stead, and had found 18 feet of water at the lowest ebb of
the tide. He was determined to do what was necessary,
in order that justice should be done to his constituents.
The SPEAKER called the Right Hon. Gentleman to
order. If the Right Hon. Gentleman wished to enter upon
a debate, he should make a motion upon the subject. He
should move that the petition be printed, and then make it
the subject of a motion. The Right Hon. Gentleman
might then move for leave to bring in a Bill.
Mr. C. FERGUSSON thought it, was useless to attempt
it. He thought that the forms of the House had been changed
since he came to that House. Hon. Members used to have an
opportunity of statiugthe case of the petitioners. He thought
he had a right to state the case of the petitioners, but he
had no right to have a debate upon it—that he admitted.
—(Loud laughter.) He had a right to make a statement,
provided he did not travel out of the petition.—(Cries of
" Oh.") He would give 'notice, that on Thursday next, he
would move for certain papers connected with the Board
of Commissioners.
Mr. HUME hoped that the Right Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. C. Fergusson), considering that the session was draw-
ing to a close, would fix some day, as it was of the utmost
importance that the subject should be taken into considera-
tion in all its bearings.
Mr. GILLON thought a little explanation might be
permitted on petitions of great importance—otherwise they
were presented by a Member, shoved into,a\ bag, and never
more heard of.