The Sun.
London, England, 1847-01-26 00:00:00

filar ) a_r_;

LONDON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 26, 1847,

" Property has its &sties as well as its rights." Such
was the proposition enunciated ten years since by Mr.
DRUMMOND—such was the proposition against which a
vain clamour was raised at the time by the Irish land-
owners—such is the proposition, the truth of which is
now universally admitted. "The poverty of the country
has a right to be maintained out of the property of the
country "—such is the proposition enunciated in fact,
although not in words, by Lord Jomq RUSSELL last
evening, and admitted by Mr. BELLEW (himself an Irish
landlord), and by Sir ROBERT INGLIS. We take note
of the admission of this great principle. It is an admis-
sion of the priority of the right of the poor to the land.
It goes back to the very origin of the social pact.
Among the many important measures proposed last
evening for the renovation of the Irish nation, this
is by far the most important ; and its importance is
shown by the quotations made by the Prime Minister,
for the purpose of showing the state of England in the
sixteenth century. The state of England, according to
the showing of Sir THOXAS MORE, was worse in the
sixteenth century than is that of Ireland in the nine-
teenth. What is the essential difference between the
England of the sixteenth century, and the England of
the nineteenth? It is this—that in the sixteenth century
the great principle that " the property of the country
is bound to maintain the poverty of the country," is a
great fact in the nineteenth century, which it was not
in the sixteenth. It has never been a fact in Ireland,
but if we can make it a fact, then, after the lapse
of a very few years, Ireland will be what England
is. Never did Lord JOHN RUSSELL show himself so
great a statesman as last_night. The famine in Ireland
is a national calamity, and therefore should the nation at
large bear its proportion of the burden; but the calamity,
national though it be, is aggravated by the misconduct of
the absentee Irish landlords (and the greater portion of
them are absentees), who, grasping avariciously at present
profit have neglected their duties, and have oppressed the
cultivators of the soil. Therefore it is just that, while
the empire bears one-half of the calamity, the
other half should be borne by those through whose
neglect of their duties it has been at least
doubled in intensity. It has been said that great
allowances should be made for the Irish landlords. We
must confess that we have very little sympathy with them,
To benefit the people we would go to any extent ; but
as regards the landlords, we cannot see why, if they
are idle, non-producing insolvent debtors, they should
have any more favour shown to them than is shown to
other unfortunate gentlemen who daily make their ap-
pearance in the Court in Portugal-street. If, residing
on their estates, they deveted themselves to the culti-
vation of those estates, superintending that cultivation,
and giving labour to those who lived upon their pro-
perty, then, indeed, a case might be made out in their
favour ; but we must confess we feel no sympathy with
the man who never sees his tenantry, who passes his
time in the salons of Paris or the casinos of Naples,
because, on a certain day, he finds that those rents
which have hitherto enabled him to waste away his
life in vicious and sensual indulgence, are not forth-
coming, and he is, for one twelvemonth of his exist-
ence, forced to become virtuous from want of means
to be vicious. The :'Ministerial plan, too, is
admirable in the manner in which it pro-
poses to deal with waste lands. All waste lands
below the value of 2s. 6d. an acre, if the owner does not
choose to improve them, may b 3 taken by the State and
improved, and let or sold—in other words, confiscated.
This is an admirable bringing out of the old principle of
the law. We have of late heard a vast deal too much of
landed proprietors. According to the law of the land,
there is no such a thing as a landed proprietor in the
British dominions. The law knows no allodial tenure—
no property in land absolutely. The highest tenure
known to the law is that of fees simple—
that is to say, land held of the State on
condition of the performance of certain duties.
We will not now go into the question of what these
duties are, but, among them, as we are prepared to prove,
were the maintenance, virtually, of all persons born
upon the land, and the proper cultivation of the land
itself, and if either of those duties were neglected, the
land became forfeited to the State, and might be re-
granted to persons who- would perform those duties
properly. Such is the tenure by which every freeholder
holds his land, not only in Ireland, but in England also,
and we are rejoiced to find that Lord. Joust RUSSELL, as
Prime Minister of the Crown, comes boldly forward, and
taking his stand upon the old constitutional law, claims
for the State those lands which the original grantees
have neglected properly to cultivate. It is right that
England should bear her fair share of the calamities
which have befallen Ireland. The Irish, we admit, have
a full right to demand, that in their hour of distress, we
shottld aid them to our uttermost. If the whole wealth
of the United Kingdom, during the next twelve
months, 411 required to support the Irish
people, they have a right to it, because,
as the United Kingdom has legislated for them, it is the
fault of the United Kingdom that laws have not been
enacted to make "the property of Ireland maintain the
poverty of Ireland," in the same manner as the property
of England maintains the poverty of England. But
having given to the people of Ireland every assistance
under the present difficulties, it is incumbent upon the
Imperial Legislature to provide against the recurrence
of such a calamity by giving the poor a lien upon the
land, and by forcing the insolvent proprietors to dispose
of their nominal holdings, so as to substitute real for'
sham proprietors—a solvent for an insolvent gentry.

The cobweb of plausibilities which has been accu-
mulating round the question of the Montpensier alli-
ance ever since the opening of the French Chambers,
was blown away on the 20th ultimo by the very
enunciations of M. GUIZOT himself. That eminent
statesman may be capable of distorting truth with
some adroitness when compiling elaborate statements
in his cabinet; he may be, and unquestionably is,
very felicitous in making out a marvellously sophis-
tical case on the wrong side, when dropping docu-
ments one after another into his Ministerial portfolio;
but in the tribune of the Chamber of Peers all his
speciousness blunders into the most naked guile, all
his ingenuity stands forth as the most palpable
hypocrisy. On explaining to the Chamber of Peers
on the evening in question the policy pursued by the
French Government in relation to the marriages of
the Spanish Princesses, M GUIZOT very ostentatiously
reminded his auditors that he was speaking "in the
presence of the Chambers, of France, of England, and
of the KING." In addition to this he distinctly affirmed
that he by no means spoke for the purpose of defend-

IV the —policy of his Administration. He was not
defending that policy, and yet the whole of his
harangue had nothing about it distinguishable from
special pleading ! We would undertake to declare in
the most positive and deliberate manner posssible,
that there never was articulated a ministerial expla-
nation so manifestly flawed by reservations, so im-
pertinently disposed towards the British Government,
so miserably characterised by shameless and con-
temptible shufflings. M. GUIZOT had the coolness to
insinuate that some such course might be expected
from him in his pretended explication of the mysteries
of French diplomacy in the Peninsula. During the
preliminary portion of his address, he observed, " I
am fully aware that my words may have some in-
fluence on the present delicate situation, and I pray
the Chamber to imagine what my position really is,
and to go freely with me both in my frankness and my
reserve." Those expressions were a most necessary
stomachic to enable the Peers to digest the very
crude explanations and assurances vouchsafed to them
by the Minister. It was the trumpet blown before
the Pharisee, and which only rendered his hypocrisy
the more ostensible.

After insisting upon the doctrine which had
continued to be the actuating principle of the French
Government in regard to the Peninsula since 1841,
namely, that under all circumstances the hereditary
sovereignty of Spain should not be permitted to pass
out of the Bourbon dynasty, M. GUIZOT entered upon
an enumeration of the different suitors to the hand of
her Majesty Queen ISABELLA. 11. First, the Comte
DE MONTEMOLIN, he remarked, was the candidate
supported by the three Northern Powers, and was
virtually rejected by the populace ; secondly, the
Comte DE TRAPANI was the candidate supported by
Queen CHRISTINA, and so on throughout the cata-
logue, from Prince LEorox.n of Saxe-Coburg, to Don
HENRIQUE and ultimately to Don FRANCISCO. "No
one," says M. Guizor, "is more con-
vinced than myself that the struggle for in-
fluence in Spain between England and France is
disastrous to her." A very prettily-turned sentence,
that—under the circumstances ! It reminds us, in-
voluntarily, of Rao crying shame upon the caitiff
who would " stab a man in the dark," at the very
moment he is pinking RODERIGO with his Damascus.
It were superfluous to enter into a minute analysis of
the fallacies and mis-statements of M. GUIZOT
when addressing the Chambers on Wednesday.
Our columns contain the documents relating to our
Peninsular and Parisian correspondence, laid upon
the table of the House of Commons on Friday even-
ing by the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Those
documents, together with the internal evidence of
M. Guizofs own oration, form the most fitting
commentary upon these flagitious distortions of
the truth. And, supposing the falsities of
the French Government in this matter were not
sufficiently manifest already, Lord PALMERSTON
will very shortly deliver in his counter-statements,
which, we doubt not for a single moment,
will be amply elucidative of the guile of
France and the candour of England in this
ugly transaction. We must, nevertheless, com-
ment upon one observation uttered by the
French Prime Minister. "Never," said he, speaking
of the co-operation which was so desirable between
Engl and and France, in reference to Spain, "never
has England entered frankly into the concert; her
policy was one 'of reserve and procrastination !'
Scarcely had the echoes of his voice in pronouncing
those syllables died away, when the air vibrated
with his expressions of esteem towards Lord
ABERDEEN, for the cordiality with which
he had co-operated with France during the Adminis-
tration of Sir R. PEEL. The inconsistency of this
would be altogether incomprehensible, did we not
remark that the panegyric upon Lord ABERDEEN
was merely an introduction to an abusive allusion to
the Government of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, and espe •
cially to a rancorous vituperation upon Lord PAI,
MERSTON. Lord PALMERSTON, however, requires no
apologist ; he is fully equal to the exigencies of his
eminent office

The laws affecting corn and navigation were last
evening unanimously passed through their remaining
stages in the House of Lords. This is prompt legisla-
tion, combining the dictates of wisdom and humanity.
The whole empirebut especially Ireland and Scot-
land—will recognise in this rapid enactment of mea-
sures of alleviation a commendable spirit of benevo-
lence and sympathy on the part of the Legislature
t cordially
with the severe trials of destitution and famine to which
they are at present so deplorably and extensively
exposed. The same generous sympathy and the like
unanimity welcomed the introduction of the compre-
hensive and philanthropical plans which Lord J. Rus-
SELL last evening submitted for rescuing Ireland from
the existing social evils, and for preventing their recur-
rence. It is impossible to estimate the advantages of
etn fo
he
mitigation
the moral effect produced in the minds of afflicted
millions
whenandliberally
otftheir hn
heartrending
its thatdig powers Parliament
r
hey
learn
exercises
re
suffer-
ings. It binds their affections towards a pro-
vident Government, attaches them to the insti-
tutions of their country, and fortifies them to a conti-
nuance of the exemplary patience which they have
hitherto exhibited to such a praiseworthy extent, that
it properly constituted a theme of eulogium in her
MAJESTY'S recent Speech to Parliament.
We have, however, to regret, in consequence of
what has passed in-the House of Commons, and what
transpired in the Upper House on Saturday, that
some considerable delay is likely to intervene before
we shall possess a law, conformably with the scheme
broached by the Government, securing to us the advan-
tages that will accrue front the use of sugar in
breweries and distilleries. The Protectionists are
desirous that this measure should be limited in its
duration—viz., to the Ist of next September. The
Ministry, on the other hand, are fixed in their opinions
that it ought to be rendered permanent. There can
be no doubt that the Ministerial view is the sound
one. That of the Protectionists would, if adopted,
be found pernicious in the extreme. Lord STANLEY
is anxious for a Select Committee to inquire into, and
examine, by viva Voce evidence,the probable effect of the
measure. We hope the Government will resist this
suggestion. Such pToposal would have no chance
of success in the House of Commons. The labours
of a Select Committee may be spun out with tedious
prolixity, and we have no doubt that such would be
the case, were the merits of permanently regulating
the duties on sugar, molasses, and rum, to be sifted
by such a tribunal. Our readers must bear in mind
that this measure is not consequent upon the distress
prevailing in Ireland, but is (independently of its
adaptation to the principles of free trade) an honour-
able fulfilment of an implied pledge, given to our
West Indian colonies, when we exposed them to coin-
petition with foreign sugar. It is but just to the
West Indians, that after they were deprived, and
very wisely so, by our adoption of free trade, of the
advantages they possessed in our home market in the
shape of differential duties, they should be allowed to
bring their produce, of every kind, into competition
with that of any other, here or elsewhere. This
hope was distinctly held out to them last year. An
implied pledge of a similar character was given to
the Canadas, in respect of corn, simulta,
neous with the relaxation in our tariff o

differential duties favourable to Canadian produce.
That understanding was subsequently faithfully com.
plied with. Lord STANLEY officially carried it into
effect, and no man more strenuously insisted than did
his Lordship, when threatened to be thwarted by the
agricultural representatives, that it would be a
gross breach of national faith not to permit their corn
to be imported into the United Kingdom with the
benefit of a diminished duty. Nutatis ntutandis,
Lord STANLEY is bound to take the same course now
with the West Indians which he formerly adhered
to on behalf of the Canadas. The West Indians
could derive no benefit from a temporary law of a
few months in reference to their sugar, rum and
molasses. Such a law would be only "a delusion, a
daunt(ilesa
in question.
No merchant would embark
his capital upon the unc.rtainty incidental to a teen
onti,ld.gbie.viangcarnigsee
porary and exceedingly limited alteration of the
fraught asouPeigklettri respective duties
with mercantile
to the Speculations of (;ambler;, and entailing heavy
lossei upon all who ventured to mix themselaires up
with so precarious a commerce. - The colonists are
naturally as impatient of particular restrictions as we
have become ourselves. They demand simple justice,
and the Imperial Parliament will assuredly render it
4