The Sun.
London, England, 1841-07-06 00:00:00

- _
PEEL will probably find next year, whatever
may be his scale, that his long and obstinate
perseverance, and the perseverance of his party,
in barefaced dishonesty—picking the pockets of
the people, whom he and they are bound to pro-
tect, by laws, that his grand larceny will involve
him and them in insurmountable difficulties.

The accusations of bribery made by the jour-
nals, of both parties, are general and even awful.
At Nottingham, for example, the Whigs—at
Shrewsbury the Tories, are charged with unheard
of bribery. Never, it is said, was bribery so
extensive, so barefaced, and so profligate, as at
the present election. We fear there is too much
truth in the accusation, and we exonerate
neither party from the charge, though, we be-
lieve, that the most profligate bribery has been
on the side which boasts of most success.

Some considerations, however, arise from these
circumstances, worthy of attention. A House of
Commons, so collected, cannot command the re-
spect and obedience of the people. They, par-
ticularly the unrepresented, who greedily believe
every tale which is to the disadvantage of the
present system, will conclude at once that a Le-
gislature, collected by such corrupt and base
means, is unworthy of all confidence. ‘V hile the
bribers imagine, therefore, that they are achieving
a party triumph, they are sapping the authority
of the House of Commons. If ever the people
could be governed by such a system, the time is
now passed, and at present it would be as rational
to expect that they should honour FAUNTLEROY,
and respect GREENACRE, as honour and respect
a Legislature founded and constituted on the
basest and most open corruption.
It is, • however, exclusively on the sup-
port of such a House of Commons, obtained by
such means, while he is opposed by the QUEEN,
CUM Ll= F..., ..,...---. I_, 4i—> 1...,1L- ..4` }l,O inpnnle-
that Sir ROBERT PEEL relies to carry on the
Government. That is, a hated minority is to go-
vern the hating majority. He has the parsons
and the country gentlemen on his side, we ad-
mit. He has the monopolists with him; but

they will only be able to govern society, and
subdue all things to their will, when the public
mind shall be so transformed that it shall wor-
ship GREENACRE and regard FAUNTLEROY as a
martyr. _ _

Before he has got into office, the great leader
of three-fourths of the people, and the greatest
of all the organs of the,,Tories, the Times, has
declared against the monopolists. The world
will not regard its declaration as less sincere,
because it seems itself not to have been aware of
the bearings of what it said.
The Times had a long and elaborate article
yesterday, the drift of which was to prove that
the free-trade projects of Ministers have such a
powerful charm for the inhabitants of all the
towns in the empire, that they are only pre-
vented from embracing them, and returning an
overwhelming majority in favour of the Whigs,
by believing that the Whigs did not mean to
give them, or were unable to give them, the
measures they promised.
" Can anything," said that Journal, "in the
wide world be more clear, than that if the
people of England, more especially of the towns
of England, had but believed these representa-
tions, they must have returned, with one con-
sent, a long array of anti-monopolists' to the
new Parliament?"

" The drift," it concluded," ofall our observations
is this :—lf the people of all these commercial
towns had believed that Ministers were really
sincere—that they really meant to do, and would
do, what they promised—namely, to increase
the comfort, to promote the trade, and to unchain
the industry of the community,—then it would
clearly have been impossible for them to have
resisted such an offer, or to have spurned from
them so great a boon." Cheap sugar, cheap tim-
ber, and cheap bread, enlarged trade, unchained
industry, increased comforts ; these have, on the
showing of the Times, an irresistible claim on the
affections of the inhabitants of the towns. They
rejected them when proposed by the Whigs, ac-

cording to that journal, because they doubted
the sincerity of the offerers, but that will not make
them desire these things the less, nor regard
them as less beneficial, nor make them less
oppose the Minister, and the party which seize
the Government, on the principle of maintaining
all these monopolies. The Times did not, we
believe, mean to prove, but it certainly proved,

that the Government of Sir ROBERT PEEL,

which has no other support than a corrupt ma-
jority of the House of Commons obtained by
bribery, will be directly opposed to the wants
and wishes of the inhabitants of all the towns of
the empire.
Sir ROBERT PEEL is enamoured with the
bread-tax ; Sir ROBERT PEEL headed the oppo-
sition to the Budget; Sir ROBERT PEEL moved
a vote of censure on Ministers for bringing for-
ward measures for reducing the Sugar duties,
which they could not carry. Sir ROBERT PEEL
has staked his Parliamentary reputation and his
political existence—if there be faith and honour
left in England—on refusing to lower the duties
on sugar, timber, and corn ; and the Times tells
us that these reductions have so great a charm
for the inhabitants of towns, that they will do
almost anything to obtain them.
We shouldlike to know how Sir ROBERT PEEL,
in opposition to the inhabitants of towns, with a
damaged Parliament, and supported by a party
which will fall asunder as soon as they have the
spoils of office to divide and quarrel about, is to
govern the country ? Without a thorough
change in his policy—without adopting at least
the principles of the measures he has condemned,
when brought forward by the Whigs, it will be
impossible foi him to govern for six months, in
spite or the QUEEN and the people.
We have already observed that no mal-ad-
ministration brought about our present distress.
The laws have been properly executed. The
policy of the Ministers, avoiding expense as
much as possible, has been judicious; but the
Corn-laws, the Timber-laws, the Sugar-laws, and
a number of other laws they have been obliged to
execute,are execrable. The laws, then, should be
altered, not the Ministers changed. As no mal-
administration has brought on our difficulties,
so no mere change in the Administration will
remove them.

Will the accession of the Tories to office still
the fears of the landlords ? No, indeed. They
are born of their own injustice, and over their
convictions a change in the Ministry can have
no influence. Will it pacify the Dissenters, and
make them acquiesce in Church-rates and
the further exactions for - the support of the
Church, to which Sir R. PEEL is pledged by his
votes and speeches? Will it hush all disturb-
ance in Ireland ? Far from it. Exasperation
will ensue, which the language of the Tory
journals is already justifying.
Will it put an end to the slumberingiri
ill-willto-
between France and England? Why, s
BERT PEEL, in his Tamworth oration, has stio.-
matised the revolution of 1830 as the offspring
of physical force, and opposed to that moral
force of which he fancies himself to be the head
and the organ. Three days have not yet elapsed
since the Times scolded Lord PALMERSTON for
censuring the French mode of treating the
Arabs ; but what is his indiscretion, if it were one,
compared to the indiscretion of the proximate
Prime Minister, who has denounced the princi-
ple of the French Government?
The supposition that any change of the Exe-
cutive Goveinment, without a change in the
laws, can restore England and Ireland to peace
and prosperity, is absolutely unwarranted. On
the contrary, that change seems likely to in-
crease our difficulties both at home and abroad.
The Government of Sir ROBERT PEEL is, in fact,
to be formed on a principle of injustice, denying
all measures of relief, and exciting, by its nature
and character, turbulence at home, and distrust
abroad.

There is another curious feature in the elec-
l'ons calculated to arrest the attention of Sir
ROBERT PEEL, and of the landowneft andparsons