The Sun.
London, England, 1841-12-13 00:00:00

in -,',,lltit.

LONDON:
31 ON DAY, DECEMBER 13, 1841.

One of the errors, perhaps the great error, of
the Whigs was, that. they always justified their
conduct by that of the Tories. They did not, as
the rule, say that such a course of policy is right
—such an act just—such a proceeding disin-
terested and noble—or such a reform precisely
what the circumstances of the community re-
quire ; but they said the Tories did so and
so, or would do so and so, or, they entertain such
and such opinions, and we shall deserve the
public approbation and support if we do or pro.
pose something better than the Tories would do
or propose. So, continually squaring their con-
duct by no higher standard than the opinions
and actions of the Tories, the public came to
form a mean opinion of them. They were said
to be little or no better than the Tories. The
nation was ripe, when they first took office, to
embrace large and just views. Its moral
enthusiasm was kindled ; and, had they
acted on the principles of right and justice, they
would have been followed, and for ever honoured
by the people. They could have carried forward
the national enthusiasm to the establishment of
a higher standard of political morality,. and both
rulers and subjects would have been ennobled.
They preferred shaping their policy on that of
the Tories, and the result is that they have sunk
in public esteem to the level of their rivals.
The Tories, in addition to their other and more
131efollies, are aping the Whigs •
reprehensible in jus-
tifying their present conduct by what their rivals
did while in office. It is, for example, held to he an
all-sufficient justification, by the Tory organs, of
the refusal to amend the Sugar or Corn-laws by
the Tories, that the Whigs for ten years took no
object. Not only did
they take no such step,
step to accomplish that .
it is said, but in 1840
they voted against a reduction of the sugar
duties, and their chief declared, more than once,.
be madness
in emphatic language, that it would
44: ..; If such, therefore,
tO repeal the Corn-laws.
argue the Tories, were the conduct of the Whigs,
we are quite justified in refusing to grant the de-
mands of the free-traders. So the Tories are con-
tent.to justify their conduct by the malpractices
or or previons. errors of the Whigs, and so the
nation is never to have a higher standard, for its
Valley and its laws than the faults or
crimes of
these rival factions.
If there were no reasons in the continued com-
parative prosperity of the country to 1837, and
in its subsequent declensionif there were no
deficiency in the revenue and no increase of ex-
penditure to ..justify the Whigs in proposing in
1841 what they had neglected to propose, or had
opposed, in 1840—if there were no circumstances
whatever to make the repeal of the restrictions
on trade now more urgent than fbrmerly, we
should still have to tell the Tories that the peo-
ple have gained *ollie political knowledge and
political wktnin since 1840, and that it is neither
sate norwise to seek for the rule of their conduct in
the conduct of their opponents. The public de-
mand a different justification.
that it is of no -
consequence to us what the Whigs
did ; is what you propose right ? Is it just ?
Is it honest? is it consistent with the precepts
of that religion, which you insist that the .nation
" shall =pay, a large army of priests to teach? If
the Tory measures not
• 9 ht---not just—not
honest—not' consistent *4h-religion, to tell the
public that the Whigs could have done the same or
some similar things will only make the Tory
policy be received with the sante contempt and

t,

scorn as was the quasi Tory policy of the Whigs.
We must inform the leaders andwritersof both
parties, that the public will no longer endure the
practice of defending or justifying the follies or
crimes of one party by the supposed greater follies
or crimes of the other. If politicians cannot
justify their conduct by the principles of honesty
and justice, they will not be able to justify it to
the public by proving, from the pages of HAN-
SARD, that their rivals have, at some time or
other, been as dishonest or as unjust as they are.
As the people have gained political knowledge,
the standard of political morality has risen higher
and higher ; and it would be as absurd to
expect their judgment to be guided by the con-
duct of factious politicians, a few years ago, as to
expect that the people of Manchester should de-
stroy their self-acting mules, and take to spin-
ning cotton-thread by the hand-wheel.

Sir ROBERT PEEL seems absolutely afraid to
meet Parliament. Adopting the practice of
great criminals in the sister island, certain of
their fate, he has asked for a long day,
and obtained it. The Representatives of

the people will not assemble for the
dispatch of public business till Thursday, the
3d of February, the very latest period to which,
without outraging public feeling, the meeting
could have been postponed; and even a late day
in the week is chosen, as if to carry the dis-
cussion on the distresses of the country into

the following week, and thereby protract business
for ten days. It is certainly a remarkable
feature in the doings of the present
Government, that when the people expect some-
thing decisive—some intelligible communication
from them, they are treated, as it were, with
studied contempt and mockery. On the first day
of the last Session, Sir ROBERT PEEL, in place
of discussing or even noticing the great
[questions that then agitated, and still continue
to agitate, the country, moved for an additional
grant of money, not less than 80,0001., perhaps
00,0001., to make the Members warm and com-
fortable. The proceedings of the Privy Coun-
cil on Friday were not calculated to alter the
unfavourable impression made by such con-
temptuous treatment. We learn from the re-
port that many vain ceremonies were performed,
that the Lon]) CHANCELLOr delivered the pa-
tent for the creation of the Prince of WALES;
that the impression of the Prince's seal was in-
closed in a silver case and placed in a box lined
with white satin, and covered with crimson velvet;
that the name of his Royal Highness was
ordered to be inserted in the Liturgy ; that
" the arms of his Royal Highness were taken
into consideration- at the Council ;" and, last of
all, that Parliament was further prorogued unto
the 3d of February, to meet for 'the dispatch
of public business. The word " urgent," or
important, which we have seen in these
announcements, was, no doubt, purposely omit-
ted. Are we, therefore, to conclude from this,
that even in February nothing is to be done for
the relief of a starving and distracted population,
or that the Prime Minister, chosen by the
aristocracy, - is afraid to publish a word
that can give them a moment's uneasiness,
or endeavours to conceal, even from himself,
the awful position in which the country is placed?
We do not regret these strange proceedings.
They show our merchants, manufacturers, and
broken-down operatives what they are to expect
from a Tory Government ; and these classes will
therefore be urged more and more to help them-
selves, if they expect help from the Giver of all
good.

The Rev. W. G.-WARD, of Balliol College, Ox-
ford, one of the writers of the " Tracts for the
Times," has addressed a letter to the Rev. Dr.
POSEY, correcting some statements relative to the
Oxford controversy, made by Mr. GOLIGHTLY,
which throws some additional light on the
proceedings at the University.' Though we did
not give insertion to Mr. GOLIGIITLY'S letter, as
there was nothing in it which we considered
would interest our readers, we readily insert Mr.
WARD'S correction of what he complains of as a
misstatement in it. We pray our readers to
mark it well. It is as good a specimen of lo-
gical hair-splitting as we are acquainted with :
Mr. Golightly's statement is, that I " told a friend of
his in the course of the present month, that a certain
party in this place might now be considered to be divided
into disciples of Mr. Newman and Dr. Pusey ; the latter
opposed, the former no longer opposed, to Roole. As I
did not wish to trust. my own memory on the subject, I
called upon Mr. Golightly's informant, a gentleman who
is wholly incapable of the least approach to intentional
misstatement. His account of this conversation was as
nearly as possible what follows :—Mr. Golightly was
expressing his suspicions that yourself and Mr. Newman
differed in your manner of regarding the Church of
Rome, and his friend answered, 1‘ Ward recognizes a

distinction between them in that respect, and says that
some follow the one, some the other ; he says, that
Pusey has a strong feeling against Rome, but Newman
has no such feeling at all.
_ _

I think the difference between this statement and
Mr. Golightly's is not altogther unimportant.

We differ altogether from Mr. WARD, and
think that there is not the slightest substantial
difference between these statements. In both it
is affirmed that Dr. PUSEY has yet some
scruples of conscience about embracing the
Roman Catholic religion, and in both it
is affirmed, that Mr. NEWMAN has no
such scruples. This is the substance of
what is said on both sides. What is to come

is more important, and, coupled with what goes
before, presents a picture which sober-minded
Protestants cannot contemplate without great
alarm. We quote from Mr. WARD'S letter:—
I have spoken in print of " the harsh and unkind
manner in which our sister Churches are spoken of, even
by Catholic minded and most highly respected persons."
(Few More Words, &c., p. 32.) And I may refer to the
same pamphlet for an answer by anticipation to the
charge, that such acknowledgment involves disaffection
in the case of any one to our branch of the Church. "To
remain in our own Church," I have said, " and by God's
help endeavour to elevate its tone, cannot be looked upon
by the Catholic Christian as only the cold performance of
a duty, but as a labour of love." (Few Words, &c., p.
44 ; Few More Words, p. 41.) In another place I have
protested against the notion of its being " inconsistent
with the position of a member of our Church to think
other Churches more pure and apostolical" (Few Words
More, p. 81); and have maintained that if ours be a branch
of the Church, it is " a plain sin for any one of us to leave

it." (P. 30 )
It may be as well to state in this place my strong and
deliberate conviction that Mr. Newman is exercising at
present an influence incomparably greater than any other
person, in retaining within the pale of our own communion
those who migyt be tempted to quit it—a convictiou
founded not only on abstract reasonings, but on my
knowledge of individual facts.
Here we have the startling announcement

that the conversion of many members of the
University to the Church of Rome is owing to
latoillineisnh t
c of
non-profession of that creed by Mr. NEW-
-I;‘,"_, Who is stated to be at heart reconciled to
the Roman Catholic religion. Mr. WARD affects
no co
uee flithloiefiact, that public grati-
tude is due
to Alr• NEWMANsm ,fosreening
otopthenely.npurmo-
fessing -
hers in the University
his example ; and stty who are ready to follow
he even quotes his own jus-.
tification of himself, NEWMAN, and others,
fur the consistency of thinking
purer and more apostoh_t other Churches
England, and yet continuing to abide within
her communion! His own words' quoted above,
are—" I have protested against
the notion of its
being inconsistent with the position of a member
of our Church to think other oh
pure and apostolical." Now,
no honest Chris-
tian, whose countenance is not seared by the
hot iron of Church preferment, can admit the
validity of this protest. It is the sacred duty of
every Christian to join, without a moment's
hesitation, that Church which he believes to he.,
purest and most apostolical. Mr. WARD is so
well qualified for the office of Vicar-General of
the Order of Jesuits, that we are suprised he
does not enter himself a member of that erudite,
but crafty, worldly-minded Society. - But be-
sides the enjoyment of the rich preferments of
the English Church, Mr. WARD and his
friends have another reason for not aban-
doning her communion. His war& are,
"to—tiiil-444 _in our Church, and by GOD'S
help endeavour to elevate its tone, cannot be
looked upon by the Catholic Christian . as • only
the cold performance of a'duty, but as a labour
of love." The plain meaning of -this-is that Mr.
. NgwmAres followers think
they can do more fo

Romanism, as professing members of the Church
of England than as open converts to the See of
Rome; and, therefore, they prefer remaining
where they are, till the country is`prepared to go
to Rome with them.. By elevating , the tone of
the Church, they simply mean the impregnation
of the national mind with Romish doctrines.
This fact is implied in the words •which we have
quoted from Mr. WARD'S letter, and so obviously,
too, that we think no candid person can accuse
us of other than a fair inference from their ob-
vious meaning. . . _

Mr. WARD gives an account of a visit paid
by him to Oscott Roman Catholic College,
which he thinks it necessary to defend. In
such a visit we can see nothing at all reprehen-
sible. We would not be understood here as at
all wishing to diminish a kindly and hospitable
intercourse between the laity or clergy of the
Churches of England and Rome. Nothing can
be more commendable than an interchange be-
tween priests of every communion of all the
amenities and charities of life. With Mr.WARD's
visits, or friendships, the public, has no right to
have any thing to do, and for' our part we dis-
claim any right to object to his dining with the
POPE himself, provided he is himself satisfied
with his Holiness's fare. But his doctrines can-
not be included in the exceptional list with his
dinner companions. When he addresses the
Church of England from Balliol College, Ox-
ford, as a defender of his own Tracts, we have
then to deal with him as a remover of the " an-
cient land-marks" set by the Fathers of the Re-
formation in England.

Madrid Journals of the Ist inst. have reached
us. On the previous day the Council of War
heard the accusation against Don SANCHEZ
TORRES, charged with complicity in the attack
on the Palace. As he was in ale QUEEN'S ser-
vice at the time as one -of the gentlemen in
waiting, his guilt was considered greater than
that of the Christino officers, who had betrayed
no personal trust. He has not, however, yet
been taken, and may probably escape the sen-
tence of ten years' confinement passed upon him
by the Council.
General VAN HALEN has raised the siege of
Barcelona, dissolved the Military Commission,
and restored the regular tribunals to the exer-
uise of their functions. The Town Council is,
however, still dissatisfied, and demands the
demolition of the citadel. They denounce it as
a monument of shame and provocation, and in-
sist that no vestige of it ought to be suffered to
exist. Unless the Town Council changes its
tone, ESPARTERO may be tempted to send them
after their predecessors—a no very pleasant jour-
ney in the prerenthumour of the French Govern-
ment, and with a knowledge that England
wholly approves of the conduct of the REGENT.

On the morning of the sth inst. the Infanta
LOUISA CARLOTA, wife of Don FRANCISCO DE
PAULA, left Bayonne for Irun, travelling incog-
nita, and with only an escort of six horsemen.
The political chief of Guipuscoa published at
San Sebastian, on the 25th ult., a decree of the
Minister of Finance, granting a delay, not ex-
ceeding fifteen days, from the 18th of Novem-
ber, for the disposal of all merchandise in the
North of Spain, without being subjected to the
operation of the new commercial tariff.

On the Madrid Bourse the Five per Cents.
were done on the Ist at 321 32, for cash, and at
32 33j 1 32 331- 34 33 32 7-16 33 32k, at diffe-
rent dates. The transactions, 28 in number,
amounted to 17,640,000 reals. The Three per
Cents. sold for 221, cash ; the Foreign Converted
Debt for 25, at 60 days; and the Debt bearing no
interest for 6, at 60 days.

RENT OF ENGLAND AND WALES.—We stated
in The Sun, on Monday last, that the rental of
England and Wales is now estimated, by Mr.
M'Culloch, at the sum of 30,000,0001., which, we
added, we believed to be an under-estimate. We
had neither time nor inclination to enter into an
examination of Mr.M'Culloch's data, nor motives
for making a long explanation on the subject.
We must now, however, copy from the Man-
chester Guardian the following remarks :
" Now, as rents have been more than doubled
since they were estimated by Arthur Young at
22,000,000/., and as that estimate included neither
Scotland and Wales, nor the (prcrbably) 6,000,000
acres of waste land which have been brought
under cultivation since 1770, we shall not be far
wrong if we estimate the present annual rental
of Great Britain at 50,000,000/. to 60,000,000/.,
being an increase of four or five hundred per
cent. within a century and -a 'half." Supposing
we deduct one-sixth of that, or, as rents are
higher in Scotland than in England, one-fifth, as
the amount of the rental in Scotland, from the
smaller sum, we shall- have at least 40,000,0001.
as the present rental of England and Wales.
That supposition would materially strengthen
the case we brought before the reader, and make
it apparent that the rental of England had in-'I
creased in a much greater ratio than the
population since the beginning of the eighteenth
century. We must take this opportunity
of observing that neither Mr. G. King's
estimate of the rent of England in 1696,
nor that of Mr. M'Culloch, includes the rent
of mines, collieries, quarries, &c. &c. and if we
include the rent of them, in which, probably, a
far greater.increase than in the rent of arable
land has taken place since the beginning of the
eighteenth century, we shall at once pronounce
that the rental of England has probably in-
creased two-fold more than 'the population,,
largely as that has increased since that period.
DISTRESS IN SPITALFIELDS,-..a11e Committee
for relieving the distress in the populous but
poverty-stricken locality of Spitalfields, are daily
receiving contributions from the charitable, and
large donations from the wealthy and humane.
In addition to the already highly respectable
members on the Committee, we are glad to learn
that Lord Dudley Coutts Stuart has cheerfully
allowed his name to be added to the list, as have
also those influential gentlemen Mr. Hanbury,
Sir Thomas Fowell Buxton, Bart., and Mr. Jo-
nathan Hopkinson, the great West India mer-
chant. Lord Dudley Stuart, who has always
proved himself the warm friend of the distressed,
has written a very kind letter to the Committee,
and forwarded at the same time a handsome do-
nation. We trust that those who can afford it

will speedily follow so praiseworthy an example.
The Sixth Number of the Journal of the Work-
ing Classes keeps up the hypocritical and lying
character which the former numbers of that
publication established for it. One of the par-
ties in the State, it says, or factions, " tell us

that the sole cause of the present extra distress
is the existence of a duty on foreign corn." No
party in the State, we are sure—no individual, we
believe—says that. A large and, we are happy
to say, an increasing party, asserts that the Corn-
laws, as now existing, inflict great evils on the
people, and that they are one of the most promi-
nent and most wicked specimens of that
great system of class and corrupt legislation
which causes all the evils of the community. He
niust be a madman who asserts that the Corn
and Provision-laws, which are one bad cluster of
laws out of a whole Statute Book of wicked
laws too voluminous to be read or compre-
hended, are the sole cause of the extra distress
now suffered by the people. A journal which
states the question in this form is a false journal,
and its arguments are unworthy of any further
notice.

ISLINGTON MEETING.—A Correspondent in-
forms us that the amended address to the Queen,
which was carried on Thursday, was ordered to
be presented to her Majesty by the two Mem-
bers for the borough. The meeting was then
dispersed by the beadle putting out the lights.

e.
tqr t 04e )4/
r ,t nut 44 •, /a
009 ak,
bASSII6?,