The Sun.
London, England, 1840-10-26 00:00:00

PPR MN, LONDON, MONDAY, OCTOTIFIII 2

another part of The Sun. In taking a brief notice
of that letter, we trust that we shall treat Air.
O'CONNELL with that respect which he deserves ;
at least, we have no wish to act otherwise, and it
an uncivil word escapes us, it will be not by design,
but by accident.
We demur to Mr. O'CONNELL'S definition of
the word Union. " A union," he says, " between
two countries means a complete political amalga-
mation and a complete identification of the inhabi-
tants of both in their rights, franchises, and privi-
leges ; in short, a perfect equality, in the eye of the
law, of all the people of both nations. A union
means the constituting of one nation by all the
people of both countries." Mr. O'CONNELL sup-
poses that we must agree with him in this definition
or description of a union. We beg to say that we
do not, and affirm that no union ever yet existed,
or probably ever will exist, which answers to his
description. _ .

England and Scotland have long been united,
but the laws of both countries are different, and
there is no identification of the inhabitants of both
in their rights,franchises, and privileges. Alr.O'CoN
NEL L'S definition will not even apply to the caunt es
of England, in several of which the descent of pro-
perty is regulated by different laws, and it is only
nominally true of their political rights. The argu-
ment which Mr. O'CON N EL L draws from represen-
tation applies to the West Riding of Yorkshire, with
more than half a million of inhabitants, sending
only two Members to Parliament, whilst Rutland,
with less than
.20,000, sends two, as well as to
the county of Cork, or the county of Mayo. If
a union consists in a perfect equality of representa-
tion there is no more a real union between the seve-
ral counties of England and of Scotland, than be-
tween England and Ireland.
In The Sun of Saturday we inserted the address
of the Leeds Parliamentary Reform Association to the
Committee and Members of the Ulster Reform Asso-
ciation, and it is remarkable, in relation to Mr.
O'CoNNELL's definition of a real union, that the
gist of that address consists in a just complaint of an
inequality of representation. If that definition, were
correct, the several towns and counties of England
must be as little united as England and Ireland.
All the people of the different towns and counties
of England are not constituted, according to Mr.
O'CONNELL'S definition, into one nation by a
complete identification of their inhabitants in their
rights, franchises, and privileges.

Even in the United States of America that is
not a real union, according to Mr. O'CoNNELL's
definition. The different States have different
electoral laws, different schemes of representation,
and the weight of each State in Congress is not
exactly proportioned to its population a;id wealth.
There is a greater similarity between the rights, fran-
chises, and privileges of the. people there than of
the people here ; but not an identification. In no
other country does a real union, as defined by Mr.
O'CormEnn exist ; and as the unions of the
counties of England and Scotland, and of the States
.)f North America, have promoted the happiness and
power of these nations, we cannot do otherwise
than dissent from Mr. O'CoNNELL's description
or definition of a real union.

Such a union as he defines must be the result
of a long connection. England and Scotland are
approximating to it, but have not yet realised it.
Even the counties of England, long as they have
been connected, have not yet realised it, for the
rights, franchises, and political power of the inhabi-
tants of Kent, York, and Norfolk are not identical.
The Act of Parliament which Mr. O'CoNNELL
calls the Union Statute is one step •towattls
such an identification betyyeen England and Le-
land, and to break it would be to retard that
which Mr. O'CONNELL and we both desire
co promote. Catholic emancipation achieved
,ince the Union Statute was passed

Ithough long and unjustly delayed, is one speci-
men of the approximation towards equal ri; hts
which it has brought about. The Poor-law is
another. There is also an approximation in evil
as well as in good. The labouring population of
England, particularly in the agricultural districts,
are fast sinking into the same state of poverty
as the lumper-fed peasantry of Ireland, and
the armed police of Ireland is closely imitated by
our rural constabulary.
Nor are other points of painful resemblance
wanting. There is not, rightly considered, so great
a dissimilarity between the appropriation of the
ecclesiastical revenues of England and Ireland as
O'CoNNELL supposes. It is true that in
England the bulk of the unthinking herd go like
sheep to the Church whither their landlords lead,
but it is equally true that the bulk of the revenues
of the Church belong to the aristocracy, and the
people have no share in them. Independently of the
numerous dissidents from the Church, the con-
gregations belonging to it have no control what-
ever over the revenues of the Church, and have no
influence in the choice of their pastors. One small
section of the people called the Aristocracy, in
reality dispcises of the whole revenues of the
Church, and the bulk of the people must, and do,
support the well-paid political priests, and poli-
tical allies, of that small section. We are not,
in fact, so sensible of our.„injuries as are the Irish;
we are a more sheepish, humble people, but the in-
justice done towards us is very little less than is
done towards them.

In Ireland, no man is imprisoned for Church-
rates, whatever he may be for tithes. In England,
men are imprisoned for Church-rates, and may
be for non-payment of tithes ; and if there be not
an identification of the rights and privileges of the
two peop!e, there is nearly an equality in their
sufferings under similar vicious or barbarous laws.

We admit that the appropriation of the ecclesias-
tical revenues to the Protestant Church exclusively
in Leland is a gross injustice. Mr. O'CONNELL
says the English would not submit to
a similar injustice, and they would be
base slaves if they did. In that sentence he has
pronounced his own and his countrymen's condem-
nation. Why do the Irish submit to it. Are they
base slaves ? Whatever the English aristocracy
may desire, the people of England do not desire to
see the Irish submit to the slavery, and as they do
submit to it, they are pronounced by Mr. O'CoN-
NELL to be base slaves. At the same time we
beg he will recollect that the tithes in Ireland have
been commuted and much reduced since the Union.
that ten Bishoprics have been abolished, anal if
full justice have not been done on this head
to the Irish, it has been because they have not
manfully, courageously, and pertinaciously—as
Mr. O'CONNELL implies the English would—
insisted on having justice done to them. Mr.
O'CONNELL'S own instalment system has stood in
the way of perfect right.
The Church of Ireland is a specific grievance,
and we rejoice that Mr. O'CONNELL has placed
it first and foremost in his battle. Let him, as
we have before said, rally
his countrymen against
that scandalous invasion of the rights of conscience,
in the name of religion, but really for nothing more
noble than a base pecuniary object, and he will be
all that is wise, virtuous, and
supported by
honest throughout the empire. But the Dissenters
of Yorkshire might as well say that there is no
union of the different parts of England because
they do not share the ecclesiastical revenues of
England, as Mr. O'CoN NELL assert that there is

no union between England and Ireland because the