The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-28 00:00:00

Lord DUDLEY STUART is entitled to their suffrages
for consistency, for position, for abi.lities,forcandour,
for boldness, and for uncompromising independence.
In Lambeth, some show of disunion has resulted
from the blundering appearance of Mr. CHARLES
PEARSON, the City Solicitor. We cannot dream for
an instant, however, that either Mr. HAWES or Mr.
TENNYSON D'EYNCOURT will be deserted—tried and
honourable representatives as they have proved
themselves to be. Mr. CHARLES PEARSON is em-
phatically the advocate of filth and nastiness—
he is for plunging the half-extricated millions
back again into the actual filth and moral
nastiness in which they have been immersed
for centuries. The old prison discipline is the theme
of his eulogiums—that old brutal system which
transformed our prisons into pigsties, and decimated
our criminals by the ravages of goal fever. Mr.
PEARSON is opposed to the Health of Towns Bill ;
an interference with the dirt of the population
appears to him little less than an infraction of
Magna Charts. If the people would preserve their
civil and religious liberty, they must, in the estima-
tion of Mr. PEARSON, prevent the introduction of
anything like cleanliness. Education, again, is so cal-
culated to purify the minds of the multitude, that it
finds as strenuous an obstruction in the person of the
City Solicitor as it has long since found in the pamphle-
teer of Leeds. In plain language, Mr. CHARLES PEAR-
SON is what we have already more than once called a
DIRTY POLITICIAN, but beyond this Mr. PEARSON is,
unfortunately, a dirty politician, physically and
morally. Will Lambeth disgrace itself by sending a
DIRTY POLITICIAN to Parliament ? Will it desert either
of its old champions, HAWES, or TENNYSON D'Em-
COURT ? We cannot think it. To-morrow, however,
the local nomination takes place : let the constitu-
ency then decide between HAWES and TENNYSON
D'EYNCOURT and—A DIRTY POLITICIAN !

Of all provincial boroughs about the representation
of which there should not be one moment's hesitation
the first and foremost is most certainly Stockport.
Do not insultyour ill ustrious Member—Mr. COBDEN—
by associating with him a shallow pretender to libe-
rality and free-trade. Let one name alone be com-
bined with that of COBDEN in the representation of
your interests, and in the furtherance of the interests of
England and of the whole world ! Electors of Stock-
port, remember that you have risen to great dignity
among the boroughs of the British empire, remem-
ber this, and elect as the fitting colleague of Mr.
COBDEN only such a man as Mr. KERSHAW of Man-
chester.
Cheltenham, in like manner, must not be de-
luded from the honourable path it has pursued
ever since it has been declared a borough.
Ever since it has acquired that voice in the Imperial
Legislature it has been represented in the House of
Commons by the Hon. CRAVEN BERKELEY. Con-
sistently, honestly, liberally, boldly, perpetually,
the Hon. CRAVEN BERKELEY has spoken and voted,
as Member for Cheltenham, in the cause of constitu-
tional reform. His name has continually appeared,
during the tw•o past sessions, in the free-trade
divisions. He is an advocate for sanitary improve-
ment, and by his spirited opposition to the monstrous
Bill for the Prevention of Seduction and Prostitu-
tion—a Bill which says little enough for the judg-
ment of Mr. SPOONER, awl which has elicited the
condemnation of Lord BROUGHAM, of Lord CAMP-
BELL, and of all the legal authorities of any eminence
—he has acquired the approval of every honest
constituent. Against this long-tried and consci-
entious Liberal the Cheltenham electors are
surely not going to encourage such a spurious
politician as Sir WILLOUGHBY JONES, or such a
political punchinello as Captain CARRINGTON SMITH.
The nomination is fixed for to-morrow ; let the con-
stituency proclaim that consistency, character, and
liberality are fully appreciated in Cheltenham by re-
turning the Hon. CRAVEN BERKELEY with a trium-
phant majority !

Since the foregoing was commenced we have
received intelligence of the return, without
opposition, of the Finsbury Tribunes—THOMAS
SLINGSBY DIINCOMBE and THOMAS WAILLEY.
Honour to the electors of Finsbury t they have shown
themselves worthy of their representatives, and have
afforded a brilliant example to the other constituen-
cies of England. May we not regard it as a
splendid augury that the two first Members of the
new Parliament are such men as Mr. DUNCOMBE and
Mr. WARLEY ?

We have often seen some provincial would-he
dandy of slender pretensions aping the style and
appearance of a man of fashion, and fancying that, by
closely following the shape and materials of the
garments, the peculiarities of the gestures and man-
ner, he was placing himself upon afooting of equality
in the opinion of the surrounding multitudes with
the object of his imitation. The wretched mimic is
himself generally deceived, and some few of his im-
mediate followers may flatter him, by asserting that
he really rivals the other, but the public in general
are not so easily blinded ; they readily distinguish
between the sterling gold and the gilded counterfeit,
between the polished and educated gentleman and his
servile imitator, and the latter will only succed in
exciting a contemptuous smile at the folly of his
absurd and ridiculous pretensions. So it is with the
Protectionist leader. He wishes to be regarded as a
statesman, as one fitted to conduct the councils and
to wield the destinies of the empire. With this view
he copies the sayings and doings of Sir ROBERT
PEEL. If the latter addresses a pamphlet to his
constituents, the former thinks it essentially neces-
sary that he should pen a voluminous epistle to the
happy borough which, he condescends to represent.
If statistical facts are brought forward by the
ex-Premier as evidences of the soundness of
his judgment, and of the beneficial results of his
policy, the modern Quix, tte crams his letter with
an equally imposing array of figures, intended to act
as a counterpoise thereto. Here, however, the re-
semblance altogether ceases ; for while the one con-
vinces any unprejudiced mind, and by the most un-
answerable arguments establishes the truth of his
propositions, the other brings forward a series of
fallacies easy of detection, and which can scarcely im-
pose upon the most credulous or superficial. The
real strength of a case is frequently discovered from
the weakness and insufficiency of the answer ; so in
the present instance, if any doubt or hesitation could
remain after the masterly exposition of Sir ROBERT
PEEL, it would be completely removed by the reply
of Lord GEORGE BENTINCK, the many points left
wholly untouched, or slurred over with some frivo-
lous and insufficient answer.

All the earlier parts of Sir ROBERT'S address are
left wholly unnoticed, or met only by that easiest ar-
gument, a torrent of vituperation and abuse. In this
respect Lord GEORGE would appear to have grounded
his tactics on something similar to instructions fre-
quently given to an advocate, viz., "We have no de-
fence ; abuse the plaintiff's attorney." Hence no
speech, or letter of any kind, is ever free from per-
sonal invective and vindictive attack. He does not
venture to impeach the great result set forth by the
ex-Premier, that a remission of duties to the enormous
amount of 7,625,0001. had not only been unattended
with any corresponding loss to the Exchequer, but
that there had actually been an increase in the ordi-
nary revenues of the country in the financial year,
ending the sth of April, 1847, over that derived from
the same sources in the year ending the .sth of April,
1841. He appears in that respect to rest satisfied
with the abortive defence contained in his statement
to the House of Commons, the folly and absurdity of
which we exposed in The Sun of Thursday last.
The present effort is directed, not against the won-
derfula results of the free-trade policy, but it is
attempt
tolare
h
urgent rgentand
there was
ssityfort not
he
altera-
tionthat
that was insisted
on by the late Mi-
nistry. In order to establish this proposition, he
attempts to show that there was no real scarcity or
distress existing in Ireland until after the change of
the corn-laws, and the total abolition of protective
imposts on the food of the people. Notwithstanding
the fearful realities that were unfortunately
too ap-
parent, he persists in asserting that Ireland was in a
prosperous condition in the earlier part of
prosp 1840 that
there was no actual failure of the potato crop—and
with a most reprehensible want of candour, he wholly
omits all mention of the 733,000/. advanced at the
instance of Sir ROBERT PEEL from the na-
tional Exchequer, one moiel as a gift, and the
residue as a loan, for the relief of the distress in

that country up to the harvest of 1846, and would
strive to have it inferred that 120,6521. only had been
expended for that purpose. Could there possibly be
a stronger confirmation of the truth and justice of the
arguments put forward with such force and power by
the real statesman, to whom we owe the final defeat
of monopoly ?
He then draws a contrast between the scales of
Lord LIVERPOOL and CANIIINO in 1827 and of Sir
R. PEEL in 1828, 1842, and 1846, and attempts to
show that, as greater variations in the price of grain
had taken place since the introduction of the latest of
these systems, than during the continuance of any
of the others, the attempt was a total failure. Here,
again, he appears to forget a statement contained in
the earlier part Of his letter, viz., "that as yet this
vast free- trade experiment has only been tested
under circumstances of famine." How the Noble
Lord can attempt to show any deductions
whatsoever, either favourable to, or in opposition to
the policy, in the face of such an admission, it is
not for us to explain. Like the redoubted Tom
Thumb, " he makes the giants first, and then he kills
them." It would seem a fairer line of argument if
he were to afford some view as to what would have
been the probable results had the Legislature still
continued the protective policy, and retained the
several restrictions on the supply of food. It scarcely
requires a prophet to tell us what fearful scenes of
misery and suffering would have been enacted had
the remission not taken place. The Gallant Pro-
tectionist then passes to the future policy of
the country. He takes his stand on the navigation-
laws, to which he avows the most devoted adherence,
as " the last battle-ground of old-fashioned English
protection of British interests." And he congratu-
lates himself on his brilliant plan for the relief of des-
titute railway scripholders, by the advance of
16,000,0001. of British capital to Irish railways,
which he seems to think would have completely re-
moved the necessity for any other expenditure, again
forgetting that his plan, if sanctioned by the Legisla-
ture, could scarcely have been brought into general
operation up to the present period, and that it
would not have saved one shilling of the
vast outlay rendered necessary for the immediate
relief of the people. It would be unjust to deprive
the Noble Lord of the credit due to those parts of
his policy founded on better principles. We heartily
join him in his reprobation of the mischievous Act of
1844, by which the monetary transactions of the
country are fettered and its energies restrained,
and also in the just indignation against the
unprincipled defaulters who have swindled British
subjects out of such enormous sums of money.
We have, however, no sufficient grounds for judging
of the means by which he would attempt to remedy
these evils, and we confess we have not sufficient re-
liance on his judgment and prudence as to leave these
vitally important subjects to his discretion. The docu-
ment is manifestly intended to influence the elections
on behalf of the Protectionists generally, and we can
only say, that we heartily desire that it may obtain
all the weight that it really deserves—and that every
elector may see that, by supporting a protec-
tionist candidate, he will be lending his aid, in the
words of their leader, "to restore (what he calls)
protection to the farmer in some shape or other."

According to the latest accounts Switzerland
is again likely to become the scene of civil war.
The Deputies of Lucerne, Ury, Schwytz, Unter-
walden, Zug, Friburg, and Valais, have issued the
following protect, in which they declare that they feel
it their duty to make preparations so as to oppose
any attempt of the other cantons against their rights
and privileges. _ _

" Berne, July 22.
" The conventions which have been adopted by the
high electors of the undersigned Deputies of the cantons
of Lucerne, Ury, Schwytz, Unterwalden, Zug, Friburg,
and Valais, are nothing else than a convention on the
manner of rendering each other assistance, a thing
foreseen and imposed on the cantons as a duty by Art. 4
of the Federal Pact. Events, till then unheard of, caused
those resolutions, and made it a duty for the cantons to
come specially to an understanding on the manner of
executing this disposition of the Federal Pact to guaran-
tee themselves against any attack which might take
place against their territory and against the right
of sovereignty which belongs to them. These resolu-
tions are a defensive alliance commanded by the duty of
our own conservation, and they are based on Art 4 of
the Federal Pact. Whilst the apprehensions of the
cantons which signed the conference (the seven cantons)
are still justified by the present situation of federal
affairs, the undersigned Deputies had reason to expect
that sufficient guarantees would be given to them for
the full and entire recognition and defence of the rights
of sovereignty, and of the rights of religious liberty
which belong to these cantons. Instead of that, twelve
cantons and two half cantons have declared the League
dissolved which was concluded for their security, and the
seven cantons have been rendered responsible for the
observance of that decision. The undersigned Deputies
find themselves forced to declare, in the name of their
cantons, that they do not recognise in a majority of the
cantons of the Federation the right to take such a deci-
sion, and that they see therein a new attack against the
rights which are guaranteed to them by the Federal
Pact of 1815, and against their right of sovereignty
since confirmed; consequently they do not recognise
that decision, and referring themselves to the declaration
made on August 31, 1846, and strong in the sentiment
of liberty and independence purchased by the precious
blood of their fathers, and conserved till now by the
grace of God, they solemnly protest against the deci-
sion. To this protest they add a declaration which is
quite as solemn, namely, that the seven cantons will act
as they have acted till now, and will prove in the future
that they only desire and are determined to observe the
Pact in all its dispositions, as well as the oath they have
taken."

It is said that the Deputies of the seven cantons
quitted Berne after signing the protest. The depu-
tation of Geneva presented a motion declaring that
any relation with the separate League by officers or
military employs of the Federation, is incompatible
with their duty, and that the Federal Directory
should be charged to inquire into the position of such
officers and employes This motion, and the protest
above given, would, it was believed, be taken into
consideration at the sitting of the Diet on the 23d.
At Geneva a body of free corps has been enrolled
for the support of the orders of the Diet.

On the 224 an apprehension was entertained that
disturbances would occur at Glaris and Lau-anne.
The Patriotic Society of Lausanne, on becoming ac-
quainted with the resolution of the Diet pronouncing
the dissolution of the Sonderbund, published a
Proclamation, engaging the inhabitants to enrol
them3elves as volunteers in the corps franc. The
Council of State of Yawl immediately took the
energetic: resolution to dissolve that society, and,
to attain that object, published an ordinance which
has created great sensation in Switzerland. Im-
portant news from abroad compelled, it is said, the
authorities to disavow the proclamation ; but the
Prefect MEYSTRE, who signed it, was neither dis-
missed nor interfered with. The following is the let-
ter of the French Ambassador to the President and
Executive Council of Berne, which has been alluded
to by the Helvetie:—

" Berne, July 20.
" Gentlemen,—l have this moment learned that on
Saturday last, the 17th inst., M. Jenni, a member of
the Grand Council, caused his dog to publicly wear the
Order of the Legion of Honour on the promenade of the
Engni at the moment when it was most crowded. I
have to request you, gentlemen, to give me satisfaction
for this act, which I shall refrain from qualifying as it
deserves. Not having any doubt as to the manner in
which you will regard it yourselves, I leave the matter
in your hands, relative to the means that you may
I deem proper to adopt in the present cae--whether yo
determine to proceed against M. Jenni ex. officio, in ac-
u
cordance with the full powers conferred by the law on
the executive authority ; or whether you determine on
demanding from the Grand Council the application of
such measures of discipline which every body possesses
its
with respect to members."

The Government of Berne replied to the Ambas.
sador :

" I. That it could not proceed against M. iex
Jenni
officio, as the law did not give it any power to do so;
2. That the affair in question did not regard the Grand
Council, inasmuch as M. Jenni had not as yet taken the
oaths; and that his election was inipuzned; that besides,
the regulations of the Grand Council did not authorise
any measures of discipline to be taken relative to its
members in matters which concerned their private life ;
3. That if the Count de Bois-le-Comte considered him-
self wronged, he could apply for redress to the courts of
law."
A letter from Lucerne, of the 17th, in the Augsburg
Gazette, says :—" In the course of this week 3,000
guns have arrived in the Primitive Cantons ; they are
destined for a general armament. To be ready for
all events, the governments of Schwytz and Zug will
immediately cause ammunition to be distributed to
the troops. General de Sonnenberg passed in review
eight battalions of the landwehr. At Lucerne and
in other cantons redoubts are being constructed in
certain places. In the radical cantons the clubs dis-
play extraordinary activity. Still what proves that
the radical
"thWijasul is not very strong g this