The Sun.
London, England, 1841-10-19 00:00:00

THE RAILWAY SUN,

AND THE
PARLIAMENTARY SUN,

ARE STILL ON SALE,

ALSO
TliE CHINA SUN.

PRICE SIXPENCE EACH,
Sun Office, Oct. Is, 1841.

The Publication of the evening Edition of TIES SUN com-
menced at 5 rainntes after Three.

111011 WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE To_monitow
muming...... 55 aintt^9 after 4 I Evening...... 1; minutes after 5.

LONDON
TITESDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1841.

The Standard of last evening contains the fol.-
lowing article, which we believe, though we
cannot answer for ourselves, we should have
copied, whether that journal had made an
appeal or not to our honesty :
We have been favoured with the following, copy of a
letter addressed to Sir Robert Peel. The writer is the
clergyman who has the general charge of Sir Robert
Peel's school at Taroworth, in the Right Hon. Baronet's
kbsenee, and he is the pnriy referred to in the calumny
Which he exposes:—

"TA 31 WORTH., OCT. 17.

the
have been copied into
" I have been told that one or mote paragraphs, origi-
nally in 77e. Sot newspaper, ~1
it, dismissed from :low
provincial papers, stating that Il i 1
Id
5,i,j-jed the petition
sehoo/thc boys whose parents JA ~
lately sent frOm this town.
that there i.
" I trenble roll witlk this to aS.sti re von ,
~
..
.t___,_ a fakehood.
not the sli:..,rlitest shadow 4_,t• an exeli, fors T"."
.hoof lbr a"!-/
" No bro., his bpi, discharged friftm y nur ( I
spo,_
_.... to
cau.ip wfbilever fi,r many months, nor basi._ i'e'l.he
any of them on the .subject of the petition. 1 have
1
honour to be, dear Sir, y•qty faithful servant, ,
._,..,,
- .' R. c. :.:-%,.t. AGE.
P and
It has tot been with a stronv, feeling of sham-
I. ,
di!gust that we have prevailed upon ourielves to pubd.st this letter. It; publication is surAy ittmeces=ary for the
vindication of a man whose personal character ought to
defy slander. If, as a state-snasn,
no Null, a, Sir Robert Peel has
a private gentleman, . pren 'in .Envt:nd, he
has no superior. Ti, ~ use his calumniator is, in such
a case as this hefore us,- Pa
painfid, and degrading, task.
Lying
and malice 'ltay reach that height that We cannot
do justice upon thetn, without impeaching owr common
humanity ; but falsehoed -must be- met by truth, at
whatever sacritice,• if not to neutralize its power—that,
in the case of Sir Robert Peer, character,- must be
superfluous—at least to deter from a-repetition offensive
to the public. The f,,llovving is the lie which has called
for Mr. Savage's contradiction—it was first promul•
gated in a letter-of one of the hired lecturers of the
League :
" There is in Tatnworth a crcantnar school, founded

tY Sir Robert's father, for the gratuitous education of
the children of the ineabitants, so long as a Peel shall re-
present the borough ; and lam credibly informed that
the master (Savage by name, and, as it should seem,
servile by nature) informed the boys a few days since that
he had received a letter from the Prime Minister' ordering
him to discharge the children of all those who had signed
the petition ! The way being thus prepared, the re-
lieving officer and his colleagues went round to the
parents of the children to inquire if they had signed
that important document. And the public may believe
that some disclaimers-were the consequence."
This lie has gone the round of the Opposition Jour-
nals, and was yesterday the subject of an insulting article
in the Examiner. Will those who gave it currency have
the honesty to publish Mr. Savage's contradiction ?
We transcribe the whole article, including the
original paragraph, as well as Mr. SAVAGE'S
letter, and-notwithstanding the big words of the
Standard, if that Journal have no better autho-
rity for them than Mr. SAVAGE'S letter, Mr.
ACLA:6:S assertions remain uncontradicted. The
existence of a school to bribe the electors of
Tamworth " to return a PEEL by gratuitous edu-
cation for their children, is unnoticed; and as
Mr. SAVAGE, the clergyman in charge of Sir R.
Peel's school, writing to him, ought to have
contradicted it, had it been incorrect, by his
silence that part of Mr. ACLAND'S assertion is
confirmed- and substantiated.

In no part of the paragraph does Mr. ACLAND i
assert that Mr. SAVAGE had dismissed boys from
Sir R. PEEL'S school, and Mr. SAVAGE'S as-
surance that there is not the " slightest shadow
of an excuse for such. a falsehood" does not
apply to anything said by Mr. ACLAND.
The charge which Mr. ACLAND makes is two-
fold; of Sir'R. PEEL it is said, on the authority
of Mr. SAVAGE, that Sir R. PEEL bad ordered
Mr. SAVAGE to discharge the children of air
those who had signed the petition; and of Mr.•
SAVAGE, Mr. ACLAND asserts that he informed
the boys he had received such an order. Now,
it was incumbent on Mr. SAVAGE, noticing the
matter, to make himself master: of the state-
ments, and, if he could, to give them a positive
and clear contradiction. But he does not say
that he had not received such an order from Sir
R. PEEL---." he says no boy has been discharged
he not choosing, perhaps, to carry the irate
Premier's orders into execution. Mr. ACLAND
does not charge Mr. SAVAGE with having turned
boys out, of the school, but with having informed
them that he had been ordered to turn them
out. If Sir.ROBERT had given no such order,
why does not Mr. SAVAGE, writing to him, say
that he never had
Mr. SAVAGE does not even deny that
be informed the boys. "No boy," he says,
"has been discharged from your school
for any cause whatever for many nuzas,
nor have I spoken to any of them on the
subject." The only plural substantive which
precedes or followS " thein" is " months," and
Mr. SAVAGE really says—" Nor had he spoken
to any. of the months'. on the subject." Mr.
SAVAGE may -have meant' something different
from what he say s, and he mast therefore be
content to admit either that he cannot write
English, or that he gives no contradiction what-
ever to: Mr. ACLAND' assertion that he had in-
formed the boys of Sir . ROBERT PEEL'S order.
Far our parts, we cannot believe that Sir
ROBERT PEEL, would place an ignorant and blun-
dering man in charge of his school ; and there-
fore we suppose that .. Mr. SAVAGE- pure rely
Wrote the sentence to have the appearance of
a contradietion-While it really is, when examined,
no -contradiction whatever., .That: he- is a clergy-
Mart justifies our suspicioa; because the- clergy
are bred: up and regularly taught to disregard
truth, :to maintain a system, and shut. their
eyes' tO'reason
_and-to laugh , least
lege oathi--to. scOrn,,as only -intended! tei:COn-
.trol the conscienceg-of -The 'Vulaar. ' •
.The think a'PainfOl antr:degradiug
task to 'expose the. calumniators of .that Prime
Minister, who, in, these alarming times; has taken
office expressly to withhold food and relief frinn
the•sptarving people; -but if, any persOus have
, calumniated Sir 40BERT, which we as yet deny,
theycluit, ht. have learned bow to calumniate- him
' from-the columns of the Standard; Eleven -years
ago,'he who now " has no equal asa statesman,
and no superior as a gentleman," was
i by the Stamtard, JUT t,-ISCARIOT PEEL, and was
1 thus hi tw6worils'deserib-ed, both as a public and'
private inan, to ho a consummate scoandret In tl, e

.catalOgue of. -villains no blacker name is found
than JUDAS ISCARIOT. Does our Contemporary
hope to wipe out the memory of former gross
and calumnious abuse by present fulsome fiat-

,
co
...bllty 1 ~..,-,
„ "....,..-r-- t
1 . +. A
.- N •
-. •
lat.4id{. ' ' 4' . k ,!, ,,,,_ -
....
.. ~
' ' " ' ,' .7, -,:1,•:, , .w,.... , ~...„
........„.„.,..
-it • ' et.v.:. .
_ _ _

ett