The Sun.
London, England, 1841-04-05 00:00:00

of the tariff will disarm the hostility of the
Chartists, or enlist the multitude in its favour.
It will not do theinjustice, nor appease their
discontent. What do they care for an equaliza-
tion of duties on commodities brought from the
Brazils and Demerara? Far from being satis-
fied with such a scheme, they would only re-
gard it as an additional instance of the total
want of sympathy in the middle classes with
them. They would at once say that these
classes are again looking after their own pockets
regardless of us. They know that this scheme
of a revision of the tariff is recommended by an
official man as a means of obtaining a larger
revenue, and they would be urged by such a
consideration to defeat and oppose the revision.
Believing that the Chartists and the Anti-Slavery
body would oppose the revision of the import
duties, while the women and clergy would take
no part in that agitation, we think that the
chances of success,-as well as the very different
principles on which the two questions stand, alike
command all the Anti-Corn-law party not to
merge their definite, moral, religious, and sacred
cause in the more extensive, but merely expe-
dient, demands for the revision of the tarifi:
We do not at the same time depreciate that
revision. We have heretofore shown our in-
terest in the question, and have taken
some pains o prove the folly of several
of our import duties. We will willingly
therefore exert ourselves to procure such a revi-
sion, as distinct from, and after the Corn-laws are
abolished. The farmers and landlords have an
undoubted right not to be taxed in their sugar
and coffee for the benefit of the West India
planters, but we would not hold out that redress
as a bribe for them to give up the Corn-laws.
This question stands on grounds peculiarly its
own, and all honest and religious men are re-
quired by their consciences to make an exertion
to put an end to•the roguish legislation they now
sanction. Revision of the import duties will cor-
rect none of the moral disorders to which the
community is a prey. It will not be a substitute
for the Charter. It will not lessen discontent.
Far from reconciling the lower and middle
classes, it may add to their discord. The aboli-
tion of the Corn-laws is a great act of justice,
and though we believe it would effect all which
the revision of the tariff will not, we do not de-
mand it on that ground we say do justice, and
trust in GOD.

Since the above remarks were written, we
have seen, and transferred to our columns, a por-
tion of Mr. COBDEN'S eloquent address at Man-
chester. To that we refer for a confirmation of
many of our statements.

" The Election Committee farce" is the com-
mon head given in the country papers to the
late investigations concerning -Walsall, St. Al-
ban's, and Canterbury. We own that they in-
terest us very little, because we know the cha-
racter of Election Committees of old, and never
imagined that Sir ROBERT PEEL'S new law
would make in that any alteration. It seems to
be a failure. If the Members want a reason
or an excuse for deciding one way or an-
other, the ingenuity of Counsel will not fail to
supply it. In the • St. Alban's case it was in
fact the Counsel who decided ; so it was in the
Canterbury case. They agreed between them
not to go on with those cases, and there is no
means of making them. The Committee did their
duty, but they are in the hands of the men of
the law.

In that circumstance we see no reason, as
some Members saw, for further interference on
the part of the House of Commons. If
the electors of either place petitioned the
House complaining of the proceedings before
the Committee, the House might perhaps order
some further investigation, but if the electors
put up with being misrepresented in Parliament,
the compromises of parties and the compacts of
Counsel do norconcern the House.

We have no intention by these remarks of apo-
logising for treating, or defending bribery ; still
less have we any inclination to say a word in
favour of a cross in an election any more than in
a pugilistic conflict; but we hold the formation of
Committees of the House to try elections to be
altogether erroneous, and we are neither angry
nor surprised at the natural consequences of
having such tribunals. It is for the electors, not
the House of Commons, to decide who shall re-
present them, and any disputes which may arise
amongst them, ought to be settled by the com-
mon law of the land and by the oulinary tribu-
nals. Justice will never he done in such cases as
long as the House of Commons forms the tribu-
nal by which they are tried.

We insert the observations of .the Spectator
on " counting out," to its former remarks on which
we drew attention this day week. They seem to
us a far better illustration of the ingenuity with
which a strong desire can always plead its own
cause than a justification of the attack on General
JOHNSON. If the wish of Mr. GROTE, or any
other Member, to force some knowledge on an
unwilling public, can justify the House of Corn-.
mons in transacting business without a quorum, the
necessity of providing for the public wants will
always appear to Ministers to justify a similar pro-
ceeding. To slight so excellent a rule as that
which requires the presence of at least 40 Mem-
bers to make a House, for the purpose of allowing
a favourite of the Spectator to enlighten the pub-

lic on some subject which that Journal has at
heart, but about which the public does not care
a straw, is to sacrifice the best Parliamentary
rules to an individual's crotchet. If Mr. URQU-.
HART were in Parliament, how he might, with
the assistance of the new law laid down by the
Spectator, enlighten the public as to the treason
of Lord PALMERSTON ! The Spectator's obser
vations, however, will not bear examination.
They are merely those fallacies which ingenious
men can always find to vindicate the blunders
into which passion may betray them.

At the Court of Aldermen on Saturday, some
of the venerable Members attempted to turn into
ridicule a respectable petitioner who justly com-
pkined of a serious grievance. Mr. ELLIS, of
the Chapter Coffee-house, stated that he and his
family were subjected to great annoyance from
the rattling of omnibuses along Paternoster-row
during church hours, and, unless some relief
were granted, his property would be greatly in-
jured. The Aldermen, if we are to believe the
Observer, laughed at the petitioner, and told
him they could not interfere, as St. Paul's
Church-yard was closed at the instance of the
Bishop of LONDON during the hours of divine
service. Now, every one who enters St. Paul's
on Sunday or Saturday knows what sort of divine
service is performed there, and if the Bishop of
LONDON thinks fit to order all vehicles to pass
down Paternoster-row on Sunday he may, with
equal propriety, declare that the order shall hold
good for every day in the week, and destroy not
only the property of Mr. ELLIS, but of every
householder in the street. Every day brings
forth some new encroachment on the liberty of
the people, under one hypocritical pretence or
another, and if the sensible portion of the com-
munity do not bestir themselves, and resist the
yoke which the priests in both parts of the
island are preparing for them, the once indepen-
dent and free-spirited people of this country
will soon be subject to the most insuffer-
able of all tyranny —the tyranny of the
Priesthood.
Is the Chapter of St. Paul's so poor,
or the revenue of the pious Bishop so small, that
means cannot be found to abate the noise without
tormCnting the sick and dying in narrow streets
not made or intended for such thoroughfare ?
What is the mummery daily performed in our
cathedrals but a miserable imitation of Popish
rites, kept up as an excuse for taking these mag-
nificent buildings from the Catholics ? They
are totally unsuitable for Protestant worship, and
until Puseyism becomes the religion of the land,
we must protest against the mock ceremonies
performed in them being allowed to interfere
with private property, or the health and comfort
of the inhabitants.

Letters and Papers from Madrid, of the 28th
ult., have reached us. ESPARTERO'S Secretary-
General, LINAGE, addressed a letter to the Eco
del Comercio, published in that Journal of the
above date, in. which he states that ESPARTERO
will not accept the Regency unless appointed sole
Regent by the Cortes. Should the Cortes think