The Sun.
London, England, 1841-08-21 00:00:00

citje Mt,

L4DON:
SATURDA UGITST 21, 1841.

Highly important news from China, to the 17th
of April, brought by the Akbar, Captain DUNA-
RES% in 109 days from Canton to New York, and
thence to England by the Great Western, will
be-found in another part of The San. As doubts
of the authenticity of this intelligence are enter-
tained by respectable merchants in the City,
and as Brother Jonathan is very capable
of a hoax of this description, we cannot
vouch for its correctness. The most apocryphal
looking thing about it is a report that the EM-
PEROR had offered 50,000 dollars for the head of
Captain ELLIOT. After the experience his Ce-
lestial MAJESTY has had of the worthlessness of
such a purchase, the intimation staggers our
credulity. This news being of doubtful authen-
ticity, we quote it without comment from the
American Papers.

The Westminster Conservative dinner took
place.,yesterday, and (i( spite the loud trumpet-
ings of the Tories, was neither more nor less
than a miserable failure. Sir FRANCIS Bun-
DEW was in the ChaW—he, who in his better
days, so often presided at the public dinners of
the Westminster Reformers ! Doubtless, he
felt the humiliating nature of his position—for
it is impossible he can be wholly lost to all sense
of shame ; and if so, the vociferous ap-
plauses of his Tory supporters must have
sounded in his ears like stinging sar-
casms reminding- him ...like of what he
once was, and what he now is. And such
a Chairman as the poor o:d man made !
Never before, we believe, was such nonsense
spoken at a public dinner, even by Mr. BEAD-
SRAM, of Canterbury ! Not Content with declar-
ing that the Tories were the best and most tried
friends of the people, the lioa. Baronet actually
eulogised the " unswerving integrity
srrong determinateness of 'purpose" of Sir
ROBERT PEEL! Tile " strong determinateness
purpose " of the Irma whose chief fault

The Tories having gained nothing by abusing
the " surplieed ruffians" of Ireland, seem now
inclined to try what they can win by falling foul
of the " political Dissenters" of England. The
Morning Post of yesterday said :
It seems proper to notice that the first meeting of this
Conference of hypocrites and atheists was signalised by a
fierce and disorderly squabble upon the question whether
they should or should not commence their daily proceed-
ings by prayer.
This is evidently a false charge. The Dissenting
ministers can gain little or nothing by hypocrisy,
and in them, whatever may be the case with the
clergy, who are tempted by large bribes to be
hypocrites, it would be a most gratuitous vice.
Some philosophers have doubted the possible
existence of an atheist—the Post is quite sure on
the point ; and, to serve a party purpose, calls some
of the most religious and devout ministers of
CHRIST in the kingdom atheists. These gentle-
men have come together to serve the poor, and
save the country. Such conduct the Post can-
not comprehend, and as ignorant people always
abuse what is strange to them, it calls the Dissent-
ing ministers hypocrites and atheists. This lan-
guage exemplifies the consideration in which the
Dissenters are held by the Tories, who, when
they do not want aid at elections, cease to dis-
guise the antipathy in which they hold the chosen
ministers of the people.
One part of the paragraph of the Post, we are
told, is positively false. There was, we are in-
' for,::ied, a suggestion made on the subject of
prayer ; some objections were made to the Con-
ference beg.quiug their aproceedings daily with
prayer, because the prayers of one minister
acceptable to another, and
might not be strict::
after the briefest possible discussion it was quietly
settled that the membei-s who chose should as-
semble in a chapel to Pray) yefore meeting at the
Conference. To call that brier and not improper
discussion " a fierce and disordOrlY squabble,"
is, we are assured, a gross abuse 1/4'4' language.
Far from any intemperance having been exhi-
bited by these Ministers, we cart positively as-
sert that their conduct has been all tn.
at could be
wished.

Some fears were entertained, and not unnatu-
rally, that
collected togu
in a novel
guide them, no
established, to preserve epzlsfoorfthsiexfirhsutntti-lrineedfromevery
part of the empire, and gentlemen
ofevery Christian creed,
Conference, having no precedents to
well-infOrmed Chairman, long
order, and every one of
those gentlemen being
accustomed to speak from
the pulpit ad libitum—some fears were entertained
that these gentlemen would fall into wordy
contention, and that the Conference would
fail in its object. These fears have been most
agreeably disappointed. It way impossible, we
understand, for any body of men to behave
more temperately and orderly, and their discus-

sions, as far as we have hithorto heard, would,
for order and decorum, have done honody to
either House of Parliament, tbough both of
them have a fixed Chairman, and have a long line

of precedents to guide them.
The paragraph of the Post is the offspring of
ignorance and passion, and is full. of untruth and
asperity. In that Journal, whi ch continually
boasts,in a mawkish style, ofits dervotion to truth,
and as continually abuses the Whig-Radicals for
not being animated with a similar ,devotion, it is
quite unpardonable.

It must be highly gratifying to the working
classes to observe, that at present • the discussion
on the Corn-law has dwindled t 4) one point,
namely, its influence on wages. There is a
secondary point, indeed, yet undec's :ed, namely,
the quantity of land the repeal of Cie Corn-law
would put out of cultivation; butt hat is consi-
dered by the Tories only of import trice so far as
it would diminish employment for the people,
and reduce the rate of wages. Thus ; the benefit
of the working classes has, in fact, ; tAtTording to
the opponents of repeal, become th only con-
sideration for the settlement of tL question.
That brings the matter to a simple issue, of
which the working people are the best; fudges.
We may observe, as to the land go,hii s out of

is, that he possesses no determination at all,
but is solely guided by expediency ! The
" unswerving integrity" of the trimming politi-
cian who carried Catholic Emancipation, after
quarrelling with Mr. CANNING for being favour-
able to it; and whose slipperiness of purpose is
so proverbial, that even his own party cannot
trust him ! Really when one reads trash of this
sort, one would almost be tempted to believe
that political honesty is not the only thing that
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT has lost, but that he is
deprived also of what political sagacity he
once possessed. We are the more confirmed
in this opinion by his declaring immediately
afterwards, that the "proximate Ministry would
maintain the present glorious state ofsociety ;"
which same society he nevertheless asserts to be
in a condition "of imminent peril," such as de-
mands the gravest consideration ! Capt. Rous
followed Sir FRANCIS in a speech of orthodox
dulness; but in which he made the important
declaration that he " hadin view nothing but the
welfare of this great country, which he would
endeavour to promote to the best of his abi-
lity." This is encouraging, and will be
as balm to the souls of all true patriots.
Henceforth, let all anxiety on the score of the
people be at an end, for Captain Rous will look
after our interests; and with such a man to be-

friend us, what need have we to fear ? By way of
appropriate close to the entertainment, the song
of the " Fine Old English Gentleman" was sung,
in express compliment to Sir FRANCIS BURDETT.
What a bitter sarcasm is this ! Till now, we had
always understood that a " fine old English
gentleman" was one remarkable for the uniform
steadiness of his principles, and his attachment
to early and tried friends; but we now find that
he is most appropriately represented, when he is
shown to be a drivelling apostate, a deserter of
all his old connexions, and a supporter of those
who are the worst enemies of the people !

The bitter and simultaneous attacks made by
the Tory journals on the Manchester Conference
is a splendid homage to its utility. The sincerity
of the gentlemen who are there assembled can-
not be impeached, and therefore their dress and
manners are ridiculed. Their motives are above
suspicion, the facts they have brought to light of
great importance, but they are to be annihilated
by the wit of a few Tory scribblers. Let them,
however, be of good heart, their works will de-
fend them, and present an unassailable bulwark
to Tory malevolence.

We can readily explain the animosity of their
opponents. They are Christian ministers ofevery
denomination save one. There were none of the
clergy present except the Rev. Mr. SPENCER,
who, though belonging to the Church, shares none
of the principles of the established priesthood.
The Christian Ministers of every sect except the
Church have denounced the bread-tax as un-
Christian. The clergy have not joined in
the denunciation, and the conclusion univer-
sally drawn is that the Church of England is not
a Christian Church. It acknowledges some
other master than CIIRIST, and some other autho-
rity than Els.

The Conference is at tacked, too, by another party
in conjunction wtth the Tories. The invitation
was limited to Christian Ministers, and several So-
cialist preachers presented themselves under that
character. They- being known were refused ad-
mittance, and thereupon both Socialists and
Tories, with one accord, accuse the Conference of
unfairness. What would the Tories have said
had they admitted Socialist preachers, and what
would those preachers have done ? The
Tories would then have abused the Con-
ference as irreligious and atheistical; and
the Socialists would on all occasions have
propounded their own nostrum as a re-
medy for the admitted distress. The Mi-
nisters of the Conference acted wisely and well
therefore in refusing to allow the Socialists to
meet with them ; and the Tory Journals turn
round on them and abuse them even worse than
they abused Lord MELBOURNE for presenting
the leader of the Socialists at Court.