The Sun.
London, England, 1841-04-26 00:00:00

17".11"
(kIT
Istre

LONDON:
MONDAY, APRIL 26, 1841.

We have of late been highly gratified by the
Times. Oa tV.ednesday it denounced the Con-
servatives, and on Saturday it wrote a bold arti-
cle against Loid CARDIGAN. It spoke of his con-
duct as diabolical, and it demanded his dis-
missal from her -MAJESTY'S service. The Sun
had previously taken a similar view, though it
was impossible for us to urge it with all the ve-
hemence of the Times. Our Contemporary, on
that point, is at present finite a Radical, and,
with his assistance, we may hope to see Lord
CARDIGAN retire or be dismissed from the army.
On Saturday, too, our Contemporary took the
fade of the humble classes akainstybe upper
ciasses, and adopted sentiments ,which we have
of late endeavoured to make -familiar to our

readers. For example, we have, on two several

occasions, lately insisted on the fact that the
.upper classes know little or nothing of the lower
da,:ses, for whom, nevertheless, they persist in
making laws. Our Contemporary said—

'I he lines of demarcation are too strong, and too seldom
passed. One order in society knows nothing of, and (almost)
cares nothing for, those ranks which lies beneath it. The
splendour in which men in the very first rank in England live,
shuts out of sight the whole condition of the humbler classes ;
and the multiplied occupations and engagements of a Parlia-
mentary leader render it impossible for such a one, however
,kindly disposed, to seek out a personal knowledge of the poor
by his own personal investigations.
Hence it follows that men of this class are driven to form
their ideas of their fellow-men, ay, even of their poorer neigh-
bours, often pining and dying within sight of their splendid
habitations, from roe theoretical portraitures of political eco-
nomsts, or the dressed-up " reports" of some hired and tu-
tored " Commissioner."

And this abstract way of viewing " the poor," as if they
were merely one element of a large calculation—one of the
data upon which a theory was to be built, necessarily tinges
with a cold and unfeeling,hue every part of the Parliamentary
'discussions on these subjects. The isuth is, however odd the
:assertion may seem to many persons, that the only rational
away of considering " the poor is to make them the chief ob-
£ct of every plan, the central point of every system.
Our C. utemporary, then, not only insists on
the fact of the legislatois knowing nothing of the

poorer classes, but also insists on the propriety
of those legislators making the poorer classes,
of whom they know nothing, " the chiefobject of
very plan—the central point of every system."
The Chartists could not carry their doctrines
further. They insist on legislation being-directed
for the benefit of the poor, and they desire to
possess the power of making laws only to carry

that object into effect. Our Contemporary by
implication coniremns the Constitution, and the
"lory mode of working it, for that is founded on
a basis which excludes the poor from considera-
tion, and die Toiies emphatically use it to promote
exclusively class-interests. Lest any doubt
should exist as to the extent to which our Con•
.temporary carries his doctrine, he adds—
It is not on Poor laws merely that a wrong strain of
figiught prevails. nestle in which the Corn-laws are dis-
cussed in the House-of Cormnons is equally erroneous, The
question is made to turn- ripen the
interests of the land-
lords or the farmers: whereas, the-only safe and rational way
of dealing with the subject is to ask, what are the interests of the
millions?
we tnnK, be much sur-
, •
The public kill,i
prised at such Radical sentiments in the Times.
Not care for the landlords or the farmers! What
will Breeches-pocket BARING say to that'?
14.1rhat will Farmer RtcrotoND or Farmer Buck-
-CWIIAM say to. that? Not care for the eyes of
society, and think only of the toiling millions!.
The whole House of Peers, and one-half of the
House of ComMonS, will cry out, "Absurd !
Why do we trouble ourselves about law-
making they will naturally say.," Why do we
yrtste our time, when we might be so
much more agreeably occupied, by attending
night after night in the House of Commons or
Lords, but to take care of ourselves and our
friends? and to expect us to take care of the mil-
lions is out of the question." The sentiments of
the Times might suit the Chartists, but they will
be at once rejected as contrary to all principle
.and all practise by the Tories. Our Contempo-
rvry, us fact, by these sentiments declares lihnself a
Chartist, and he looks to the Chartists for his
immediate reward.
The sudden change is remarkable and suspi-
cious; and would be, were it not for the pending
Nottingham election, inexplicable. The last
paragraph of our Contemporary's leader, how-
ever, like the posteript to a lady's letter, is the
most important part of the whole :
The incr,ase of the numl:er of such men as attend to the
poor in the House of Cominons, ou:d be one cf the greatest
advances that could be made towarkls a restoration of the good
feeling and cordiality which are now sensibly diminished, if
not totally lost. And it is when considered in this point of
view that the return of Mr. Walter fur the populous boro?gh.
.of Nottingham becomes a contingency of the greatest possible
importance.
- To get Mr. WALTER elected for Nottingham,
the, Times panders to that democracy which on
sither occasions it so bitterly chides. It is rea-
sonable and moderate when it wants something
of the people, but when it wants nothing then it
is hard and brutal. To insure the service of the
Times it must be kept dependent on the Chart-
ists. Let them once place Mr. WALTER in