The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-31 00:00:00

MORNING EDITION

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
vane: THE DAILY PAPERS OF SATO lI.DAY.
CUMIN ICLE.—Did .see not take Sir Robert Peel's mea-
sute to aliehs when we ILA%hat he knew no higher standard
of eloqueru;e than to quote Irons Hansard, no higher standard
of statseeriensitip than to puzzle friend and foe alike to guess his
next move t' His speech, as we predicted, carefully avoided all
refererictete the real question at issue, and confined itself to a
barren ditpiay of constitutional pedantry. He told the House
what Pitt had done in 178-4, but he did not tell it what Sir It.
.'Pool meant to do in 18-11—a question of far other and deeper
importauce. Whet is it to the country. whether the conduct -
of Ministers is in strict accordance with the rules of Parlia-
mentary etiquette observed during the party fights of Whig and
Tory, in the good old days of boroughmengery ? It so happens
that it is in complete accordance with the strictest constitu-
tiered precedent, as Mr. Macaulay unanswerably demon-
strated. But what if it had been otherwise ? What the coun-
try really cares for is, to get mea•ures passed which are indis-
pensable to save its foreign trade from ruin, to restore its de-
caying manufactures, to relieve its suffering population, to re-
emit ite fi •ancee without resortieg to new taxation. Such •
meetures Ministers have proposed. They are opposed by the
Torins The leader of the Tory party, the man who—if the
Tories obtain a majority at the coming election—will be Prime
_Minister of England—proposes a vote of censure upon Minis •
tree, for having dared to propose such measures ; and yet he
tines so suc a manner as to leave his own friends in doubt
whether hit first step on obtaining possession of office would
not be to bring forward measures the very same in principle as
those whit:hint now opposes. As Lord Worsley well remarked,
what security have the agriculturists that he will not alter the
Coro.laws, when they see Sir G. Murray, a leading member of
his late Cabinet, seeking the suffrages of the electors of Man-
chester, upitu the assurance that he is favourable to a low fixed
duty on corn—when they saw last year his brother-in-
law, Mr. Dawson, ready to throw the Corn-laws overboard
altoteether. •or the sake of catching a d zen or two of votes at
Devonpoi t ? On the other hand, wat security have the manu-
facturers that their interests will not be remorselessly sacrificed
lo the fears and prejudices of the Tory landowners, when they
cee nu n, high in rank and station in the party. like my Lord
elexiesdele, rising in the House of Lords, and without one word
of contradiction, aS,CI tin: that the whole Anti-Corn-law agita-
tion was nothing more nor less than a conspiracy on the part of
the wealthy manufacturers to get possession of the principal
landed estates in the country, by foreclosing the mortgages on
teem ? eetween the rabid Toryism of such men as Lord
Redesdale and the lukewarm liberality of a Conservative candi-
date for a matiufaeturing town there is a wide interval. At
what particular point between these opposite poles Sir Hobert
Peel proposes to take his stand is a question which it is of
unportanca for the nation to know, and which
3t is utterly impossible for any one so much u to conjecture.
Sir Robert Peel asks, " Where is the man who has more ex-
plicitly declared than I have his opinion upon all the great quest
that hue been under the consideration of Parliament?"
'We mower—where is the great question upon which a single
man in' the country knows which side yon will be found noon
•Ithes time next year ? Will you be for the Corn-laws? Your
.Ist.icultirral supporters shake their heads. and whisper doubts.
you be for excluding slave sugar? Your West India
friends believe so; but belicee and tremble. Will you be for
renewing the Poor-law Commission ? Mr. Walter vibrates
between hopes and fear. Will von be for or against free
trade, for or against a revision of the tariff, for or against a
loan, for or against new taxes—in a word, what single ques-
tion is there, down to that of letting Reargue O'Connor
esat of gaol, upon, which any man, woman, or child
in the British dominions can say with the slightest approach
to confidence, whether; upon the 30th day of May, I el-12, Sir
Robert Peel will be fin- or against
POST.—The Mini.try cannot be too thankful to Lord
Worstey. Hitherto it has been thought the height and crown-
hie, of self-sacrifice that a man should !ay down his I.fe for his
friends ; but Levi Worsley has sacrificed fur his friends that
,which an English gentleman holds dearer than his life, namely,
his reputation. Two days ago his Lordship stood in a high
position. What is he now ? 'f he leader of the political trim-
mers among the country gentlemen of England.. The change
is a most wretched one, and it was most uniair and uugenerous
on the part of tho Government, or any friend of the Govern,
merit, to work upon the vveaknessof Lord Worsley, and to bring
hint into this fallen condition. Is it possible that the Noble
Lora forgot the nature of the position which lie did occupy
alien he eon;entred to become a leading trimmer? It is
all eery well for a certain class of persons in public life,
who heir a close analogy to a disreputable class in private life,
erephateelly acid to " live be their wits"—it is all very well
e:wit men to display their` cleverness in reconciling different
eourses of comitue, which to ordinary eyes seem inconsistent,
and only to be accounted for in the changing positions of ,olf-
interest. They show their cleverness, and they get their re-
ward, wash, however convenient and agreeable foe theta, cer-
tainly does not consist. of public esteem. Bat English country
gentlemen, of the rank and station of Lord Worsley, generally
hold themselves above this Iseculiar species of ingenuity. It is
not usual fir them to desire a reputation for splitting halts, and
discovering refinements by which truth and untruth may
he brought very near one 'another. Lord Worsley
may set up. for the future as one who can find out
nice distillations. He cut appear , among his country
constituents as though Le were thoroughly and earnestly indig-
nant at the conduct of the Administratiole and within a leer
days lie can explain in the House of Commons that, notwith-
standing all this and all lie bad said to support that appearalee,
he had not absolutely and verbally eecluded himself from giving
his aid to keep the. eadneiniscratian in office. No doubt this
pleading. is very ingenious, very clever, and would go far
towards making Lord Worsley's fortune if he were, like !r.
Horsrean or Mr. Macaulay, one who " lacked advancement."
Bat this is not his 4ship's position, and we do not think he
has done well to srslsitige the open, manly, straightforward
character of an English county representative for that peculiar
species of dexterity which is found useful to political adventurers.
HE RA LD.—At the close of the second evening of the debate
on Sir Robert Peel's " resolution," we are, on a more delibe-
rate eonsideration of the form of. the motion, only confirmed
in the opinion with which its terms impressed us on their first
enunciation. The object of the =doe is, that the House of
Covninoter should record, by solemn vote, its " want of corti -
dente, in -the present advisers of the Crown." If no other
good were to result front the diteussion of such a proposition
it wottld have done this service at any rate—that it had applied
a severe. a ero'eing, an unfailing te-t to the political sincerity
of its: oppownts and of supporters. Already it has coin-
pel.ed more than one impromptu convert to tee doctrine, of a
Cont,crvative pothes of justice asd protection—to the inter, eta
of tlinnestic and coconiel agriculture—to dud' the flimsy disguise
in which he had arrayed himself as an antagonist of the Govern-
Lord Worley (we must presume) is but little aeeus-
toured to _ _ _ .

lilt nt..

" Do good by stealth, ant blush to• find it fame ;"
for th flpulaus,r of his country constituents at the stand he
my:).tust Ministers on the Sug3r Duties question, and
for uncompromicing resistance he menaced them
with -7. the Corn-law alteratious, had scaratly yet
r1:11..m. in a fit of remorse, or of I astonishment, at

Ineing himself in so becoming a position, he stood forward on
Thursday night to declare that he could not dream of concur-
ring in Mote of want of confidence. He could not, forsooth.
be any party to such a condemnation of the very Government
which hail meoetscl, and been beat upon, the Sugar duties
question—wiiich had mooted also, and will also be beaten upon,
the anti-Conn-law rest lotions l What there was about the
Government of Thureday eight of anti-agricultural and anti-
Briteh policy, which there seas not on the last night of the
debate on Lord Sandon's motit'i, for which his Lordship
voted, it surpasses our ingenuity to ctiecover. Will Lord Wors-
ley venture to tell the county of Lincoln what the new light was
which had meanwhile thus suddenlyetewned upen him ? Was
it the storm which had cleared the dense and Oppreesive
atmosphere without, that had done a similar service wiesier
for the noble Inconstant? Mr. Ingham, too, avowed himself
last night one of these et-I
-hand " who. after the
fashion of the eat-Member for Ipswich, Mr Gibson, are seized,
at any moment they cheese to call for it, with a vision of the
necessity for repudiating their last recorded political principles
and connections. Perhaps the rebuke of Lord Sendon, from
its hottest and forcible application, may induce the Hen. and
Learned Gentleman to reeennsider his extreme "subtleties,"
and finalise to vote as lie Noted on Lord Sandon's motion the
other night. It will be but a consistent inconsistency in a
Member of the new school of political ethics, the doctrines of
which are so little reducible to the standard of ordinary
philosoph .
TlMe:S.—Men who have outlived their character have in
sonni respects a great advantage over the rest of the world.
In the first plate, nothing conies amiss from them ; however
base their conduct, it surprises nobody, but is received as a
mere matter of cuerse, with the apathy with which we are ac-
cuetomed to show to the everyday occurrences of life. It is
like a November fig, or a Juiy frost. in London ; men light
their candles or put on their great coats, but never think of
abusing the tile-tate. 'thorough-bred political dishonesty, and
the abandonment of self.respect, are robur et ces triplex to a
public man in the nineteenth century. It is with this reflec-
tion Caere' !test upon our minds that we have risen from
the perusal of the speech delivered ley Sir Robert Peel
on Thursday night. A more unanswerable review of
constitutional precedents and doctrines, or a more search-
hie exposure of the contrariety between these prece-
dents and doctrines and the conduct of Lord Melbourne's
Government, it would be impossible to conceive. Every
part of history which could in any way be erought to bear
upon the subject. from the accession of the House of Ha-
nover to the present day, was diligently explored ; every Whig
statesman of eminence was called in to bear testimoev against
his degenerate followers ; and by the unvarying evidence of
history, as well as by the concurrent voices, of all
uttered i the great
by their own words, n •
teen their own party,—nay,
times when they had still a character to lose,—the profligate ,
and imbecile Ministers who are now endeavouring to force on
a eol isiiir betwi en Parliament and the Crown, and to obstruct
the progress of all legislation for the sake of securing to
themselves dinners at Buckingham Palace, and salaries
in ' Duo ning- street, were brought to judgment. Dis-
missing with, 'a vritherireg
ilicated acts of mise,overnmentYentdrapid
,;lance, the corn-
in.al-adininietration,
politi-
eel, financial, and diplomatic, whicha the future historian of the
last five years will have to record. with
quences, the Right Hon. Baronet confined all their evil conse-
fined himself to a demon-
stration of the mere matter of fact stated in his notice of mo-
tion, "that her Majesty's Ministers do not sufficiently possess
diel the eorence of the House of Commons to enable them to
carry through the Ilouse measures which they deem of essen-
tial -importance to the public welfare," and of the plainn
conclusion, from that fact, that "their continuactirie
thie
office tunder such circumstances is at variance l
spirit of the Constitution.," Both these propositions
he established with such overwhelming abundance of
proof, that it may be doubted if any criminal
out;
at the Old Bailey was ever more fully made and the,
crushing effect of his arguments and statements was heightened
by Lis 'total abstinence from those rhetorical artifices and
embeliishrnents, which no man better understands how to use
epon orseasions theneSir R. Peel. In this instance, however,
he stood forward with that consciousness of irresistible strength,
with that well-g-ounded assurance of moral victory, which
discards: every thing like exaggeration or subtlety of speech,
and feels that the calmest, the most temperate. end the simplest
--sleet had alienist said the dryest—language is the best. He
purposely eiiderstated everything—he gave the accused the full
benetit of every ques,ionahe point, and offered to make every
posbhs allowance fur their conduct; yet, after all these de-
ductions, he clearly convicted them of the highest political of-
fence of which British statesmen ran be guilty. The futile at-
tempts of his mortified antagonists at self-defence, served only
to Amy hew completely the ground was cut away from under
their fee.. •
ADVERTISER.—Every body is askin. what Sir Lotert
Peel, or those whit forced upon him the motion for a rote of
oresfidence, could:have expected to gain by the proceeding.
The Ministers had already intimated their intention to dissolve,
and it watt notorious. that they only awaited the issue of the
Corn-law debate, and the winding up of the business of the
Seseion, trefultil their purpose. lint all at once Sir Robert
Peel, or rather that section of his supporters who have over-
mastered Sir Robert Peel and his own proper section, were de-
tencined to bring the matter to an end—in order that the
Corn-laws might not be discussed. There is every pro-
bability that this policy will fail, and that the Govern-
ment will hive a majority ;: in which case, as we ob-
served before, the adverse majority on the Sugar Duties
will 'be neutralised, the Parliamentary credit of the
Minist"Nrl4lllllftelellit voting is concerned, be rein-
stat aileks7 enisee men must be a false move, and
~tseemfteire'or dig relit to the Tories. But the mati-
nee of conducting the
Prise sing is as foolish as the proceed-
iag itself... Sir Robert. Peer quoted the failure of the Govern-
ment on the famous Approenetion Clause, on the Jamaica Bill,
and on the Sugar Duties. ee'fhe first happened in 1635 or
J. 36, the second in 1834, ti gtd the lag in 1841. To say no.-