The Sun.
London, England, 1831-07-14 00:00:00

V) r
....... ._:
...,,,,417341Ltblit
....,-._s„.t. ,

LONDON,
THURSDAY EVENING, JULY 14, 1831.

The Bishop of FERNS presented a petition
last night to the House of Lords, from certain
parishes i❑ Ireland, on the subject of tithes, on
which occasion his Lordship observed, that so
general was the resistance to the payment of
them, and so utterly unpopular was the present
system of collection, that it was almost impos-
sible to get any persons to serve processes.
Lord FARNHAM corroborated this assertion, and
added that the difficulty of collecting tithes
throughout Ireland was mainly attributable to
the writings of Dr. DOYLE, whom, by a pro-
cess of logic peculi.tr to himself, his Lordship
also deemed responsible for the blood shed in
the late affray at Newtownbarry. This last
remark requires no answer, it sufficiently refutes
itself ; but with regard to the very convenient
statement that the difficulty of collecting tithes is
attributable to the writings of this or that indi-
vidual, we shall merely say, that if such be the
case the system must indeed be erroneous,
which enables any one individual to obtain such
extraordinary influence over the feelings and
opinions of the community. Were tithes
placed on their proper footing, and the
Irish Protestant establishment reduced to
its proper level, Lord FA RN HA M would
have no further occasion to lament the undue
power of Dr. DOYLE. But so long as Ireland
is oppressed with a Church that drains her very
heart's blood, affording few, or no, spiritual or
temporal advantages in return ; so long as she
numbers among her episcopal sees the richest in
all Europe, and finds that her wealthiest Plu-
ralists are among her most obdurate absentees,
so long will men like Dr. DoleLE exercise a para-
mount influence over the minds of their coun-
trymen, and when one quits the stage of
contention, another will instantly enter on
it. The writings of Dr. DOYLE are the ne-
cessary results of the odious tithe-system ; es a
conscientious man, and one gifted with superior
discernment, we do not perceive how he could
act otherwise than he has done. He is a daily,
hourly eye-witness of the monstrous effects of
the High Church monopoly in Ireland : he de-
precates those effects ; he exposes them ; but
because he does so, is he to blame ? Surely
not ; it is the system exposed that is in fault,
and that must ere long, " reform itself from
within, or it will be reformed from without with

a vengeance."

In the House of Commons last night, Mr. Al-
derman THOMPSON gave, what he called, an
explanation of his conduct on the preceding
evening, when he voted against Ministers on
Lord MAITLAND'S motion for hearing Coun-
sel in defence of the borough of Appleby. His
explanation was a mere farce, and left the matter
just where it was before. We hope, therefore,
that the Liverymen of London will take the
earliest opportunity of enquiring into the con-
duct of the worthy Alderman, for a false friend is
infinitely more to be dreaded than a manly foe.
We prefer the straight-forward hostility of
a WARD a thousand times over to the false
smiles of a THOMPSON. But the Chronicle of
this morning has shown up the latter gentleman
in his true colours. On Lord JOHN RUSSELL
moving that the order of the day be read for the
House going into a Committee on the Reform
Bill, Sir R. PEEL asked on what principle the
divisions of counties were to be made, if such di-
visions were to be resolved on. Lord J. RUSSELL
replied that he considered the divisions of cer-
tain counties an essential part of the Bill, and
as such, they stould most assuredly be perse-
vered in. After some superfluous observations,
of the usual calibre, from Sir CHARLES
WETHERELL, the House resolved itself into
a Committee ; when on the first clause
proposing the disfranchisement of certain bo-
Mr. WYNN moved that that part of the
roughs,
Bill should be postponed, until the enfranchising
portions had been discussed and decided. A
long, tedious debate on the Bill in general was
the result of this side-wind motion, which ended,
however, as a matter of course, in a triumphant
majority for Ministers of 118.

SPANISH WOMEN.-Mr. INGLIS says, in
his account of a visit to the Prado, at Madrid, " In my
expectations of beauty I was miserably disappointed ;
beauty of features I saw none. Neither at that time, nor
on any subsequent visit to the Prado, did I ever see one
y countenance ; and the class so well known
in t
England, so numerous, denomina.ed ' pretty
4girrilks,'giwhalYaslio'becausevel no existence in Spain. The women were,
without exception, dark ; but the darkness of the clear
brunette is darkness of a very different kind from that of
the
Castilian.
a ni
nt
y ofidnied akin,aee but n
they were generally
o glossy hair; dark,
too ill supported to produce much effect. Rut let me do
justice to the grace of the Spanish women. No other
woman knows how to walk,—the elegant, light, and yet
expressive
; c
firm step of the small and well-attired font and ancle—the
graceful bearing of the head and neck—the elegant dipo-
sition of the arms, never to be seen hanging downward,
but one hand holding the folds of the mantilla, just,below
the waist ; the other inclining upward, wielding, 304 an
effect the most miraculous, that mysterious instrument, the
fan-..these are the charms of the 6panish Women."