The Sun.
London, England, 1831-05-28 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The communications of correspondents on the
West India question have quite overwhelmed us.
Another day we may have time to arrange and con-
sider them, which at this moment is beyond ou'
power. Like most other subjects which involve
stupendous interest., and excite impetuous passions,
the parties on both sides appear to us to have rue
into extremes, on either of which, if the Legislature
were to act, the result would probably he pernicious
to the parent country, and nliogether fatal to the
colonies. The slave-owners, it is undeniable, have
displayed a degree of infatuated obstinacy in the
total rejection, or very tardy, sullen, and imperfect
adoption, of measures recommended by the Govern-
ment at home, and enjoined by the almost unanimous
feeling of the people of England, for the immediate
protection of slaves against ill-treatment, and for
the gradual improvement of their intellectual and
moral condition, which, if much longer persisted in,
must bring down upon the refractory planters a
severe dispens 'don of the supreme authority of
Parliament. The Anti-Slavery Society, on the other
hand, would, in their anxiety to realize per saltum
their humane objects, offend both against justice and
common sense, by attempting a premature emanci-
pation of the negroes from their state of servitude.
It is no more fitting that the rem) should, at this
moment, be thrown loose from all restraints, and its
inevitable consequence—destitute of all means of
subsistence—than it is at any time fitting that he
should be exposed to the exercise of capricious and
irresponsible power. The tendency of the proceed-
ings of the Anti-Slavery Society is to produce law-
less liberty;--the slave proprietors, we are afraid,
would stickle fur lawless authority. We cannot
conceive a more difficult question than this, as to the
precise pelicy which ought to he employed towards
our West India possessions. It is not that the views
to be taken of the subject are so numerous, regarded
in their superficial divisions of commercial, political,
and moral, but that these several interests are really
so mixed and complicated, that there seems to be no
chance of disentangling them to any useful end,
The diminished number of the negroes in our sugar
colonies (a circumstance stilted so positively that
it can hardly be unfounded),—we mean of. those
negroes retained in bondage, while the free negroes
have followed implicitly the general law of popu-
lation operating in all free communities, and have
much increased,—is to us, we acknowledge,
the great staggering fact as to the treatment experi-
enced by those helpless beings. If, therefore, it
should turn out on examination,—and perhaps the
case has been already examined with sufficient dili-
gence, but if it should turn out to be an undoubted
truth,—thst in order to make negroes cultivate sugar
at all so as produce a profit to the master, you must
tax their physical constitution so oppressively as to
work a esrtain, though indirect reduction, or even
stagnation of their numbers, the commercial argu-
ment and the moral come at once into open collision;
and it is not a very perplexing question by what
principle a Christian society ought to be governed,
whatever prudence and precaution must be observed
in conducting the application of the principle.
With respect to the Antigua troubles, we are con-
vinced that the fault lay between those who is-
sued the order for suppressing the Sunday market,
and those who, in their obedience to the letter
of that order, chose to overlook the spirit in
which it had origimeed. The order was con-
ceived in a feeling of benevolence towards the
negro, and was not designed to be a cover for
depriving him of any little profit or advantage
which he had hitherto enjoyed. The Colonial
Office never could have contemplated the shutting
np of the privilege of sale and purchase on Sunday,
without transferring that necessary indulgence to
some other day of the week. If the planters, there-
fore, took away ore market, they ought to have
bestowed another,—they ought to have added part
of Saturday to the period of negro relaxation,
which, of course, was what Government intended.
We have seen a defence of the planters on the sub-
ject, which would disgust any man of the least pre-
tension to humeniiy. Some of the estates, it was
said, were so embarrassed, that the interest of the
mortgagee would not admit of any suspension of the
negro's work on any second day of the week
What, the mortgagee have a valid claim upon the
subsistence of the miserable slave ! Why, then,
et this colonial A‘hylock be dealt with like him of I
Venice. Give him the sugar hogshead if he will;
but if ore drop of the neero blood be wasted, or
one hour of negro sickness be caused by the sacrifice
he demands of let himself and no other human
being, "he confi-cate." The question of the West
.Indies will unhappily often recur upon us : we must
place ourselves as a paratonnere between the ad-
verse posts.--Tuxes.

It is d.fficult for any man in his sober Fences to
conjecture whence came the folly of imagining that
the House of Lords would be capable of opposing
the Reform Bill, when all the world must be so well
aware bow impossible that august body would
find it to make their opposition effectual. We do
not now speak of the state of feeling into which
respectable Noblemen would be thrown, when,
from eojoyirg the esteem and confidence of their
several neighbourhoods, and of the nation generally,
they had rendered themselves, by a single vote in
Parliament, the objects of universal suspicion or
dislike. That is not the argument we now seek to
address to them ; because it is just conceivable that
amen whose mind had been wrought up to an extra.
ordinary pitch of vehemence and passion, may con-
sole himself (for the moment) under any visitation of
public censure, by the belief that he suffers for con-
science sake. No, but we ask those of their Lordships
who may have been indulging some beautiful dream
as to the practicability of beating the King's Ministers
on the second reading of the Bill, what do they
mean to do afterwards? Do they fancy
that Lord Grey and his friends would con..
tinue Ministers after the Reform Bill had been
thrown out ? They might as well talk of a human
body performing all the vital functions after the
treaty was out of it. No; Lord Grey retires in-
stantly on the Bill being rejected. And who comes
in ?—not the Duke of Wellington, nor Sir Robert
Peel. They know too well what they are doing;
they know that there is a majority of much more
than 100 Members of the House of Commons in
favour of the Bill, even taking into account the
nomination boroughs. They are also cognizant by
this time of the fact, that with the dismal exception
of six individuals, all the county Members of Eng-
land, and all the Members for open towns and
boroughs, without one exception, are resolute in
their adherence to the whole measure. Then how
could an Anti-Reform or a mock Reform Ministry
—a. Newcastle, Wetherell, or Lowther Cabinet—go
on against such a House of Commons ? How could
they appeal against such a House of Commons, be-
cause of its Reform spirit, to a nation which returned
It for the sake of that very spirit, and for the purpose
of ea •
rrying the' Bin ? A dissolution would give a
more thoroughl "ieforming 1-louse of Commons, in
which there joul d neither be a chance of Lord
Chandos,norof any one other Anti-Reformist, sitting
as a county Member. Would such a Parliament put
supplies for the publicnstuitseed
rvice into the hands of a
constituted Tory Cabinet so
above ? What, in
that case, would be the duration of such a Cabinet ?
and what the powerofof
resistingat Reform for another
principles month ? Thetsmeasus measure have been
rt settled in
so abundantly discussed, and
really the judgment of the English natiorill'e
that ely
no-
thing more remains but earnest and amica
en-
treaty to all who are yet suspected of .being behind
g
their countrymen in the race of political reasoning,
to bethink them well what must be the consequence
to themselves and to society, should any serious
obstacle be at this the eleventh hour opposed to the'
progress of Reform. A public folictionaly, and
above all, a legislator, at an important and very im-
minent crisis, cannot safely be as slow of apprehen-
sion as those who have no. dice to discharge but
that of meditating what opinions they ought finally
to form. The evils of a perverse decision on this
great question to the House of Lords theinselvep,

,hould they adopt the unfortunate cow se of bidding
defiance at once to King and people, are well pour-
trayed in the little pamphlet to which we have be-
fore adverted, and of which we now present anotht
extract :

" The loss of the Bill, as it is, means nothing more
nor less than the removal of the existing Ministry ; or,
rather, it means a great deal more, but it at any rate
means this. Every one of its members will be out of the
King's service on the morrow. And now we come to the
point at once. Who dares advise his Sovereign to form a
Ministry of Newcastles and Peels, Lowthers and Knatcli
bulls? They may have a narrow majority of the Lords ;
of the Commons the great majority is ag iinst them. We
say nothing of the impossibility which any suck Govern-
ment must find of carrying on the Government in the
House of Lords for want of debaters; we say nothing of
,he storm of public indignation, which must bre..k
swiftly on the heads of such a Ministry. We assume that
every thing. out of doors will be profound peace—that the
people of all tanks will stand patiently by, and see the
combat joined in Parliament without a murmur—we
speak only of that combat in that Parliament—and, we
ask, how a Government can go on with all the members
for cities, 'towns, and counties, all over England, deeply
pledged against it, and a large majority against it, even
taking in the nominees of Peers? Would the Anti-
Reform and Mock-Reform Ministry venture upon a disso-
lution—the third within twelve months? This question
is easily answered in the negative.
" The inevitable consequence; of a contrary line of con-
duct in the Lords, from the one we have suggested awl
advised, are so evident and so frightful, that it is not ne
cessary to enter more into detail respecting them. But
,ye entreat the anti-reforming Peers to weigh, calmly and
dispassionately, in the balance, the certain evils which
must result from their hopeless contest with the country,
with the possible and contingent evils which they antici-
pate, if they yield at once, and with a good grace, to the
wishes of the other orders in the State. These latter are,
the too great preponderance of the democratic power in
the State, and the fear of other changes, if the old land-
marks of the Constitution are once removed.

" We do not, of course, address ourselves to those selfish
and trading politicians who, being now out of office, are
only anxious to get into it again. Their reason is clear for
opposing a measure which ensures to the country the con-
tinuance of a more liberal Ministry than has ruled, of late
years at least, these islands.
" But we wish to put the matter to the heads and con-
sciences of those independent and well-meaning Noble-
men, who, we firmly believe, have the best interests of
their country at heart, however unfortunate we may some-
times think their views upon political subjects. We wish
to address ourselves to the Mansfields, Newcastles, Kenyons,
Camden-, Northumberlands, Buccleuchs—to the men in-
capable of sordid feelings, and in whose hands at this mo-
ment rests, as we verily believe, in a great measure, the
decision, whether England shall be a peaceable and a
happy, or a disturbed and a distracted country.
" To them we would say, will you bring immediate and
certain anarchy upon your country, in order to ward off
the possibility of the increase of democratic influence in
the Constitution at some future time? Can you even se-
riously believe that such men as the Dukes of Norfolk,
Somerset, Devonshire, Grafton, Bedford—Lard Gros-
venor, Lord Cleveland, Lord Yarborough, Lord Staffsrd
—tat Lords Winchil,ea and Ilanvers (with whom you
so long acted), and so many others with great estates and
high sounding titles, are anxious to increase the democratic
influence in the country beyond its due bounds? The
supposition that any of these men we have mentioned,
who are placed in situations which render them entirely
independent of the favours of the Crown, would support
a measure the tendency of which was to endanger their
possessions and destroy their real power and influence, is
to the last degree absurd.
"But then, say others of the opponents of the Reform
Bill, if you once remove the ancient landmarks of the con-
stitution, you will be unable to stop when you wish. This
argument would be a very true one, if it were intended to
retain any of the abuses of the system ; but as they are to
be done away with by the Bill, all reasonable opposition to
our representative system is removed—and the defenders
of it are thus placed on a vantage ground, from whence
they may easily defy the attacks of their enemies. Besides,
look at the evidence of history. At the revolution of
IGSS, our liberties were established by the Declaration
of Rights,' which was afterwards confirmed and perpetu-
ated by the act of the same name. Doubtless the advo-
cates of abuses at that time held the same arguments as
those of the present day do now. They said, of course
—You cannot stop here—your Bill of Rights, which
contents the liberals of this year, will not content those
of the next—you will be impelled from concession to con-
cession, till the power of the Cronin is at an end. But
what has really happened ? The Bill of Rights has re-
mained the same ; and has been the text-book of our
liberties, without satiation or change, ever since.
" There is another argument used by anti-reforming
Peers, to justify resistance to concession, which is even
a less valid one than those we have already disposed of.
They say, if the House of Lords yields upon this occa-
sion, it confesses its weakness : and will neither have, nor
deserve to have, power in future. Now this is of all rea-
sons the most futile. Why is every one anxious respecting
the opinions of the House of Lords ? Why are we even
now snaking this appeal to them? Simply, because they
hsve great power and influence in the State—because they
have the right, we trust they will not have the will also,
to negative this great measure of justice and liberality.
Nor is it possible to coercive any contingency which could
deprive them of their power, except their setting them-
selves in direct opposition to the other orders of the State.
If they ' pursue the triumph and partake of the gale' with
the people, their power is safe and immovable But who
can say what may be the consequences of opposing their
wishes? The House of Lords is a powerful body; but
it neither can, nor ever was intended to, overbear the
other estates of the realm, when those other estates are
un;te:l in their wishes and their determinations.

" If, therefore, the Lords wish to preserve their present
eminent station—if they wish to prevent those divisions
between the two Houses of Parliament, which, if the tes-
timony of history is to be relied upon, would probably
end in their own discomfiture—if they wish to avert the
renewal of troubles in England, they will ponder well,
and long, and edinly, before they place themselves in col-
lision with a reforming Sovereign, a reforming House of
Commons, and a reforming people.

" Putting aside, however, for the moment, the consi-
deration of the consequences that may result from the
successful opposition of the Lords to the Reform Bill, as
regards the country, let us merely consider in what a posi-
tion they would find themselves, with reference to the other
House of Parliament, by pursuing such a line of conduct.
It is now quite certain, that the House of Commons which
has just been chosen is a reforming one in the most de-
cided sense of that word. The Members of it have been
selected by the people, wherever the voice of that people
has any weight in the selections, for the sole purpose of
supporting the Reform Bill, Their duty, therefore, to
their constituents is to use every means which may be
legally within their power, to enable that Bill to pass into
a law. Now, under these circumstances, if the Lords
negative the Bill, it is quite obvious that the natural course
which the Commons have to pursue is to stop the public
business, and refuse the supplies. Here, then, the Lords
are at a dead lock—what are they to do ? We will suppose,
for argument's sake, that they succeed in turning out the
present Government--or in disgusting them so, that they
throw up their offices. In copse the feebles aga'n ; and
if, under these perilous circumstancca, the feebles dare to
accept office, they have but one step to take-,,namely, to
dissolve Parliametit. We ask any calm and unprejudiced
observer, what would be the result of such a proceeding?
It is obvious it must be the returning of a House of Com •
mons twice as reforming, and tea times as radical, as the
present. For if the country is to a man for Reform now,
what will it be wheu. irritated by further opposition—by
the turning out of those Ministers who hail promised them
the boon they so anxiously desire, and by the coming back
of the rule a the feebles, which they so much abhor ?
Thus, then, the tut ht.* of the House of Lords would be
worse than the first—they would find themselves equally
without supplies, and without the means of carrying on the
business of the country, and in a state of exasperates hosti-
lity with the people, and their representatives."—Timex.

The Order of the Garter, which the King yes-
terday conferred on Earl Grey, was the spontaneous
gift of his Majesty ; and the manner of conferring it
does equal honour to the King and his chief Mi-
nister. The blue riband was given expressly, in the
words of his Majesty, " to mark publiely his appro,
bation of Lord Grey's conduct, and for the same
reason he hail purposely chosen this time to confer
ho-
nour to wkich
the honour." An honour thus tendered, without
any suggestion from the Noble Earl himself—an
She. might hate aspired by his birth,
aissaenminent talents, and long public services, as well
who etrys it—could not be re-
fusedy; ku tattietsma ndlat. bvaof royal approbation; and
,r its value as a testimony
merit,:to know that it Ave; as a reward of personal
Earl several months ag nteanundteired to the Noble
on office—and was then respectful; n
declined.his entering
Ad,
ditional experiencv of the Noble Earl's services,
and

further acquaintance with his character, only in-
creased his Majesty's desire to invest him with a
distinction which it would have been ungracious a
second time to have refused.—nines.

The " Friendly Advice to the Lords" has ex-
cited, as we anticipated, a very great sensation. We
quite agree with our contemporary (the Standard),
that the friendly adviser is" some great person," and
his advice certainly deserves the serious considera-
tion of those to whom it is addressed. We ex-
tracted from it a passage calculated to throw light on
the marceuvres likely to be resorted to, in order to
defeat the Reform Bill. But eiti bozo? Let us
suppose the opponents of the Bill successful in em-
batrassing the Ministry, would they not thereby
place themselves in a more critical situation than
ever ? For, be it remembered, the present opposition
is the only one in our history which is without any
support in the nation. The middle and lower classes
are everywhere, in their hearts, devoted to the
Bill, and determined to support those to whom
they are indebted for it. No Ministry can be
found to conduct the affairs of this nation with
that nation united against it. This point has
been fore.bly put by the friendly adviser. "We
ask," he says, " how a Government can go on with
all the Members, for cities, towns, and counties,
all over England, deeply pledged against it—and a
large majority against it, even taking in the nominees
of Peers ? Would the Anti-Reform and Mock•
Reform Ministry venture upon a disc lotion—the
third within twelve months ? This question is
easily answered in the negative." The friendly ad-
viser does not mince matters with the Lords in
warning them of their danger. The House of
Lords," he says, " is a powerful body ; but it
neither can, nor ever was intended to overbear the
other esta!es of the realm, when those other estates
are united in their wishes and their determi-
nations. If, therefore, the Lords wish to pre-
serve their present eminent station—if they wish to
prevent those divisions between the two Houses
of Parliament, which, if the testimony of history is to
be relied upon, would probably end in their own
discomfiture—if they wish to avert the renewal of
trouble' in England—they will ponder well, and
long, and calmly, before they place themselves in
collision with a Reforming Sovereign, a Reforming
House of Commons, and a Reforming People.—
Putting aside, however, for the moment, the con-
sideration of the consequences that may result from
the successful opposition of the Lords to the Reform
Bill, as regards the country, let us merely consider
in what a position they would find themselves, with
reference to the other House of Parliament, by pur-
suing such a line of conduct. It is now quite cer-
tain that the House of Commons which has just been
chosen is a Reforming one in the most decided sense
of that word ; the members of it having been se-
lected by the people, wherever the voice of thee
people has any weight in the elections, for the sole
purpose of supporting the Reform Bill. Their duty,
therefore, to their constituents is to use every means
which may be legally within their power to enable
that Bill to pass into a law. Now, under these cir-
cumstances, if the Lords negative the Bill, it is
quite obvious that the natural course which the
Commons have to pursue is to stop the pubic busi-
ness, and refuse the supplies. Here, then, the
Lords are at a dead lock—what are they to do 9
We will suppose, for argument's sake, that they
succeed in turning out the present Government, or
in disgusting them so, that they throw up their
offices : in come the feebles again ; and if, under
these perilous circumstances, the feebles dare to
accept office, they have but one step to take—
namely, to dissolve Parliament. We ask any calm
and unprejudiced observer, what would be the re-
sult of such a proceeding ? It is obvious it must
be the returning of a House of Commons twice as
reforming, and ten times as radical as the present.
For if the country is, to a man, for Reform now,
what will it be when irritated by further opposition—
by the turning out of those Ministers who had pro-
mised them the boon they so anxiously desire, nod
by the coming back of the rule of the feebles, which
they so much abhor ? Thus, then, the last state of
the House of Lords would he worse than the first;
they would find themselves equally without sup•
plies, and without the means of carrying on the
business of the country—and in a state of exaspe-
rated ho,tility with the people and their representa-
tives. The present House of Commons is not
likely to wish to injure, or trench upon, the privi-
leges of the other House of Parliament ; but this
would probably not be the case with one summoned
under the circumstances which we have imagined."—
Morning Chronicle.

It is with great regret we observe that a meeting
called for the express purpose of detailing the suffer-
ings of the starving peasantry of some parts of Ire-
land, and of soliciting the aid of the affluent and
humane for their immediate relief from actual famine,
should have been converted into a scene of sectarian
acrimony and religious contention. There are per-
sons who, in their intemperate zeal, forget that the
first principle and finest lesson which religion teaches
is char:ty. Surely the angry discussion of abstract
principles, while their fellow-creatures, in the agonies
of starvation are appealing for succour from over-
whelming calamity, indicates nothing like the true
and vital spirit of religion in the theological gladiators
who, at a time and place consecrated to the claims
of benevolence, throw down to each othtr the
gauntlet of religious battle. Their zeal, though not
so intemperate, would appear to us to be more
sincere, if they had the good feeling and decency
to suppress their hostile emotions, until the duties of
charity were performed, and have discussed the causes
of human misery, after having first alleviated their
directs. Whatever share political or religious systems
may have had in producing the evils under which
Ireland labours, and which render the peasantry of
a fertile country the most wretched on the face of
the earth, it is certain that the poor people, whose
calls for relief are now so urgent, are the victims,
not the authors, of the calam;ties which they en-
dure. The first duty of Christian feeling is to
aftbrd them the assistance of which they stand in so
much need—and when that is done, there will be
leisure to inquire into the best means of preventing
the recurrence of such desolating. misery. Religion
without charity, says the most eloquent of the
apostles, is but a " sounding brass and a tinkling
cymbal." And certainly the augry disputants who
brought the meeting convened at Exeter-hall, on
Thursday, tor the starving' Irish, to a violent termi-
nation, by turning it into an arena of religious con-
troversy, displayed 'more of the. " sounding-brass"
of outward piety, than the vital spirit of genuine
religion, in their,speeches and their aetions.—illorn-
ing Herald.

A pamphlet has just made its -appearance, which
is supposed to speak the•sentiments of his Majesty's
Ministers, and bears strong internal evidence that it
has proceeded from the pen of the most practised
political writer of their body. This pamphlet bears
the title of Friendly Advice to the Lords on the
Reform Bill, and we cannot more accurately cha-
racterize it than as an undisguised attempt—an at-
temptsas audacious and revolutionary as it will prove
vain and fruitless—to bully and intimidate that
estate of the realm into a complete and unreserved
abdication of the whole of its unconstitutional func-
tions—a wholesale surrender of its rights, its powers,
and its duties, as a deliberative assembly, whose
concurrence is necessary to the completion of every
legislative act. ,The Jacobin incendiary who
has perpetrated this outrage—fur such, what-
ever be his rank, we take leave to pronounce
him—after assuming—gratuitously, as we sup-
pose he will presently discoverthat the House
of Lords will not venture to express an opinion
hostile to the Reform Bill, in the shape of an
amendment to the Address, goes on to sur-
mise that instead of this direct mode of attack
upon the Bill, that illustrious assembly will labour
to throw out the Reforming Ministers, by means
of a systematic opposition to all their other measures
—that they will oppose the Chancellor's law Re-
forms, Lord Melbourne's Sub-letting Act, and
whatever else they can hope to defeat, " But,"

proceeds the revolutionist and the bully, " let
the Lords beware of all such tricks, for tricks
they are. All of their manoeuvres mean only
one thing—hostility to the Reform Bill. The
meaning of every thing the Opposition will say is,
throw out the Bill'—the meaning of every ques-
tion they will put is, ' throw out the Bill'—the
meaning of every vote they will give is, throw
out the " The meaning of this is suffi-
ciently intelligible. The House of Lords, and by
parity of reasoning the House of Commons also,
are to be precluded from discussing, amending, or
rejecting, any measure his Majesty's Ministers may
think fit to propose, or those bodies are to lie under
the imputation of striving to get rid, by a side wind,
of a measure which they dare not openly and di-
rectly resist. Lord John Russell's Bill is so stu-
pendous an effort of legislative wisdom, a display so
bright of pure and disinterested patriotism, that the
Ministry under whose sanction it has been produced
are entitled, in virtue of this single claim, to domi-
neer over both Houses of Parliament, and to be
henceforth the absolute and irresponsible law-
givers of the land. These Ministers have at-
tempted measures which, in the opinion of many
even of their own devoted adherents—which,
in the opinion of the House of Commons
that brought them into power, threatened
some of tire most important of our colonies
with ruin, and would actually have commenced
a system of confiscation upon the property
of the public creditor ; some of them are known to
b- upon principle the enemies of the Church, and
eager to invade its property and its rights; yet
perish the colonies, perish the fundholder, perish the
Church, rather than that either House of Parlia-
ment should presume to fetter the hands or impede
the career of men who have had the wisdom to dis-
cover that the holders of houses worth 101. by ti►e
year is the class of British society which ought for
the future to enjoy a monopoly of legislative power,
and the impartiality and disinterestedness to per-
ceive that the individuals of this class, whose
houses happen to be built upon ground belonging
to Whigs,are from this circumstance alone entitled to
much the largest share of this legislative monopoly.
The pamphleteer and his patrons or colleagues
will find themselves grievously mistaken, if they ex-
pect that the House of Lords will be deterred by
any such jacobinical denunciations from the full dis-
charge of their constitutional and sworn duty. That
House will resist no measure which a majority of
its Members believe to be salutary, neither will it
sanction any which they conscientiously believe to
be mischievous. We needed not the evidence which
this production affords to convince us that the con-
tinued existence of any Ministry so incapable and
unpiucipled as the present, is incompatible with
the exercise of Parliamen►ary vigilance, or the due
discharge of any of the constitutional functions of
the Legislature. But it would require much more
cogent reasoning than this production contains, to
convince any reasonable mind that the present is
the moment at which either House of Parliament
ca., without the basest and the blackest guilt, abate
any thing of its wonted vigilance, or abdicate any
of its constitutional duties.—Morning Post.