The Sun.
London, England, 1840-08-29 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS

FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.
( From the Times.)
The Veto Law is now to be repealed, and the im
portant question is, whether, when that is the " firs
step in the Church's proper outgoing from the position
in which she finds herself," there remains anything else
connected with or arising out of the Veto Law which
can form a proper, and adequate, and worthy object of
contest and of grave collision with the courts of law !
Dr. Chalmers unfortunately says, " Yes ; the disposal
of the refractory Ministers in Strathbogie ;" and he de-
clares that on this matter " we have no choice, and
ought to have no hesitation." He is aware that
this will not be deemed by many to be a
fitting subject for such awful consequences to
the establishment, and begins this head of his
pamphlet, first, by trying to deprecate difference
of opinion ; and, secondly, by appealing to the ministers
of Strathbogie themselves. Now we must say, that as
the Veto Law is to be repealed by the Assembly in
consequence of the judgment of the House of Lords,
and we _take Dr. Chalmers's announcement as settling
that matter beyond doubt or recall, the punishment of
the ministers who have obeyed the law becomes impos-
sible. We cannot believe that the Church, having
found the necessity of repealing the Veto Law, and Dr.
Chalmers having announced that this must be
done, can at the same time proceed to depose the
gentlemen whose only fault has been, that they
declared that they were not at liberty to set at de-
fiance the judgments of the Supreme Court in an action
in which they were individually defenders.
( From the Morning Chronicle.)
The po:itical quietude, we may almost call it apathy,
which now prevails would be an inexplicable phenome-
non were there any truth in the theories continually put
forth by the Tory press, as to the conduct of Govern-
ment and the condition of the country. Incapacity the
most despicable, blundering the most egregious, and op-
pression the most abhorrent, are, according to these
philosophers, the characteristics of the Administration.
They affirm, with vehemence and vituperation propor-
tioned to the alleged occasion, that the revenue is ruined;
that the penny-post makes the Exchequer pennyless ;
that war has been rendered inevitable, and the army
and navy dismantled ; that property is assailed and
poverty tortured ; that our factories have been over-
stimulated, and our fields will soon be uncultivated ;
that Lord Melbourne has not bought the secret of a
new projectile force sufficient to smash the continent
into islands ; that morality is menaced in the persons
of the Chinese, and rebellion arrayed under the banner
of temperance ; that Scotch Presbyterianism is in
much danger, English Episcopacy in more danger, and
Irish Protestantism in most danger ; that all men's
eyes are open to these enormities. Ministers on the
eve of dismission, and their opponents in full march to-
wards inevitable and immediate triumph : of all these
portents they perseveringly assure us, and yet the na-
tion sleeps as peacefully as if the mighty turmoil
were only the summer wind swinging the cradle of
a sleeping child, beneath the shade of a sheltering
tree. " Who will riddle me the how and the why ?"

_ .._
If the public had faith in the smallest fraction of
the Tory sum of accusations against the Government,
the country would be in an uproar from John o'Groat's
to the Land's-end. There would be a daily practical
pressure upon people's interests, opinions, and condition,
the cause of which could not be doubted, and the con-
tinuance of which could not be borne. Everywhere
preparations would be making for the great approach-
ing revolution in foreign and domestic policy. All
minds would be longing for the further development of
the measures to be introduced by the proximate Pre-
mier.t.:le a n accumulation are
nlttitohne poefomplieiceis tamely toicrduwreouslod haonry-
people seem to submit to it quietly when its overthrow
had been rendered so certain that the merit of ass►st-
ance could be cheaply earned. The case is very plain.
There is no belief ; no suspicion of reality ; the whole
is an outbreak of factious gasconade.
(From the Morning Post.)
The effect of the reduction of the rate of postage to
one penny for a letter of half an ounce is, according to
the official statement, as follows :—The number of
chargeable letters has increased to 161,176,000 ; the
rate per letter is now Id., 6822 ; and the gross revenne
1,129,723/. What, then, is the net revenue ? Dc-
ducting the admitted expenditure of 660,0001., the net
revenue is now 460,7231., a reduction, as compared with
the net Post Office revenue prior to the change, of
1,333,612/. Such is the result upon the supposition

.hat the official statements and calculations are well

founded, trustworthy, and accurate. But arc they
so ? On the face of this official announcement
we confess we see much reason to doubt it.

It might naturally be expected that the first
effect of a reduction in the rate of postage from
7d., 7,488, per letter, to id., 6,822, per letter, would be
a great increase in the number of letters transmitted by
the post. The Government statement takes the be-
nefit of the sudden, abrupt, and perhaps temporary in-
crease, and does not enable us to rectify it by any al-
lowance for subsequent reduction when the spurt was
over ; for instead of giving us the number of chargeable
letters transmitted by post month after month, week
after week, and day after day, as an official statement
might have done, and, with a view to entitle itself to con-
fidence or respect, ought to have done, the only in-
formation imparted to us in the rough and compara-
tively useless fact of the aggregate number of letters
transmitted by post during the five months that have
intervened since the 11 th of January, when the penny
rate came into operation. There is another, a more
important and still more manifest, fallacy in the assump-
tion of 660,000/. per annum as the permanent and sta-
tionary expenditure of the Post-office. We need not
tell any man of common sense that the expense of con-
veying and delivering 161,176,000 letters is likely to
be greater than the expense of conveying- 76,296,116,
or considerably less than one-half of the former num-
ber ; nor need we ask any man of common sense what
confidence he will repose upon an official statement
which loses sight altogether of an element so import-
ant as the increase or diminution of outlay, while it
affects to give an estimate of actual or probable net
revenue.

(From the Morning ~rlerald.)
Mr. Daniel O'Connell's repeal speech at Liverpool
(of which an abridgment will be found in another part
of the paper) differs little from his repeal speeches elsz.
where. The Liverpool harangue centained the same
shallow bluster—the same impudent falsifications of fact
—the same cowardly vilification of his antagonists, by
which Mr. O'Connell's oratorical effusions are wont to
be distinguished. The effect of his speech was, of course,
—nothing. Mr. O'Connell talks most valiantly of his
antagonists in their absence ! Who that reads his al-
lusions to Sir James Graham, and to Lord Stanley—
to Sir Robert Peel, to Lord Sandon, and to Mr.
Cresswell, could recognise in the spouter the same
skulking sneaking personage who, in the House of
Commons, shuns all fair opportunities of measuring
his strength with the men whom he disparages by his
coarse ribaldry ? So far as Lord Stanley, more espe-
cially, is concerned, Mr. O'Connell, it is notorious, re-
girds that Noble Lord's powers with a feeling akin to
the reverential! Who that has witnessed the pitched
party battles that are fought on the floor of the House
of Commons, has failed to witness Lord Stanley's chal-
lenges addressed to the slanderous Beggarman, to bring
to issue the matters between them ? And who ever
saw the Beggarman venture to accept the challenge ?
Daniel's deep fear of the heir of the house of Derby
assumes, at times, forms that are absolutely ludi-
crous. When Lord Stanley, last Session, in-
troduced his Registration Bill, he made several
most pointed allusions to O'Connell, and called
upon that worthy person to substantiate certain
grave charges which he had ventured to make, a
week before, at the Corn Exchange. Daniel was silent.
The debate lasted for several nights, during which Da-
niel never ventured to open his lips. Lord Stanley, be-
fore replying, contrived again to intimate to the Beggar-
rean, that it might be desirable to have a confirmation,
or retractation of the offensive charges. Still Daniel
was mute. At length Lord Stanley concluded his re-
ply ;—and then, the mendicant—in utter defiance of all
the rules of debate, rose to answer Lord Stanley, and
actually perpetrated a long speech, so soon as he felt
t,at he was safe from his formidable antagonist ! Da-
niel is, at best, but a dull person. A small portion of
courage would, however, save him from the irredeemable
contempt with which he is now regarded !

A REACTION.—The publicans of Dublin had
a dinner of mutual condolence on the 13th instant, to drink
the " glorious memory" of their calling, and a speedy re-
peal to the Union. A "native" Parliament might do
who may excusably believe with
Burns,wonders
Freedom and whisky gang thegither."
thatl
or these folks,
Most of the popular men of the day were freshly remem-
bered at their reunion, except Father Mathews ; and
"No man said— God bless him!"