The Sun.
London, England, 1840-12-30 00:00:00

these defects, of one kind or another, the evils o
society are to be traced, though each party would
remedy the defects by opposite means.
The fact being fully established, that our insti-
tutions are defective, the important question arises
in what way are they to be reformed ? Where arc
we to begin ? The proper answer to that question,
can it be discovered, will serve to point out the
means by which the Radicals may be united. We
have just seen, however, that the most ultra Con-
servatives are also Reformers, and as Radical is a
name which some persons dislike, it may be as well
to begin by giving the party a more appropriate ap-
pellation. All Reformers are not Radicals, and to
distinguish our party from the Aristocratic Re-
formers they might be called Democratic Reformers.
We shall then have society divided into restrictionists
and liberators ; into those who would bind
faster, and those who would set free ; those who
would fashion society by institutions, and those who
would make institutions conformable to society.
This distinction, of more value than a mere name,
seems to us to point out the different duties ex-
pected from the Democratic and the Aristocratic
Reformer. It supplies a guide to practical ex-
ertions and to a means of union. Those mea-
sures which remove restrictions and which set
society free, are in our judgment to be promoted
in preference to those which substitute one or-
ganisation for another. They are more in accord-
ance with general principles, more easily appreci-
able, more likely to unite most Reformers, and most
certain to be immediately beneficial.

Not depreciating for one moment those organic
reforms which our friends at Leeds so justly and
strenuously recommend, we, nevertheless, are in-
clined to think that it would be better to bend all
our exertions in the first instance to procure a repeal
of the Corn-laws rather than to engage in any other
pursuit whatever. If it be objected that we cannot
get this repeal, we reply that we can get it easier
than we can get household suffrage and other elec-
toral and organic reforms, the propriety,of which we
concede. Household suffrage will no more win over
the Chartists than the repeal of the Corn-laws. In
fact they are more opposed to the former than to the
latter. Thousands of those who would readily set
the corn trade free doubt the propriety of extending
the suffrage, particularly as to Ireland. We de not ;but
thousands of our friends ar.d party do. All those who
demand household suffrage are the enemies of the
bread-tax. Let them therefore first seek its abolition.
To seek one thing at a time is good policy. The

abolition has already enlisted in its favour a great
number of Democratic Reformers in every part of
the kingdom ; the aristocracy, we have good reason
to know, dread the exertions of the League and its
friends ; and we should say, let Corn-law abolition
be the great practical measure which all Demo-
cratic Reformers out of Parliament should unite
to obtain in the ensuing Session.
Let our Leeds friends recollect that the abolition
of the Corn-laws will place the landlords on the side
of the further abolition of all protecting duties.
They will then aid us in getting rid of the
discriminating dories on sugar, coffee, timber, &e.
To the Dissenters we say, that by abolishing
the Corn-law the rent-charge for the Church will pro-
bably fall so heavily on the land that the landlords
will more readily than now support them in re-
quiring that the Church be separated from the
State. Let the Chartists remember that the land,
lords would be wrathful against the masters from
the abolition, and most likely would be ranged
on the side of the labourers in all their further
efforts to improve their condition. Mr. O'Cori-
NELL complains of absentees; not that he wishes
the Protestant landlords to dwell in Ireland, but he
wishes the produce of Ireland to remain there.
Lit him remember that by opening the English
market freely to foreign corn, the temptation will
be greatly lessened to export produce from Ireland,
and that the abolition would greatly enrich and
greatly benefit the bulk of the population—the
Catholics of Ireland. To all the democratic
classes that abolition would bring an accession
of wealth, a gradual increase in their numbers,
and an increase of power. To all classes of libe-
rators, to all those who would enlarge freedom,
and give society power over institutions, the aboli-
tion of the Corn-law is now more recommended
than any other single measure ; and we earnestly
and seriously put it to all Democratic Reformers
whether they will not now unite, heart and hand,
and, laying as►de for the time, all other schemes
and projects, zealously endeavour to carry the
abolition. If they cannot achieve that they must be
impotent, we are afraid, at present to effect any
great good. Whatever they may resolve on
it will be our business to give that our steady
support ; but we pray them speedily to select
some one object, to attain which all hearts may be
united.

The little general news in the French Journals
of Monday will be found in another part of The
Sun. The Journal des Debats, in publishing the
news from Alexandria, which appeared in our co-
lumns of Monday, merely remarks upon the absence
of the word hereditary in the Convention proposed
by Lord PALMERSTON and accepted by the
Paella of EGYPT. The Commerce states that
Admiral STOPFORD, in disavowing Commodore
NAPIER'S Convention, and substituting another,
merely followed out the usual system of British
policy. We anticipated charges of this sort from
a blunder so unfortunate. But a part of the
mischief may yet be repaired. MEHEMET
ALI is certainly entitled to all the advan-
tages secured to him by Commodore NA-
PIER'S Treaty, and unless Lord PALMER-
STON substitute it for the one presented to the
VICEROY by Captain FANSHAW, it will be im-
possible to deny that MEHEMET ALI has been
treated very shamefully by England. The ratifica-
tion of NAPIER'S Convention can only wipe out
the stain which the act of Admiral STOPFORD has
fixed upon our national honour.

The Constitutionnel glories in the perfect una-
!limit) of opinion which now prevails, and which
from time immemorial has pervaded France, while
the National professes to be unable to read the
sentence of the Judge and Jury upon the Abbe de
LAM ENNAIS without blushing. There is a great
discrepancy between these expressions, and for once
the National has certainly the best of it. In
countries where unanimity of opinion prevails re-
volutions are necessarily unknown, nor could
they comprehend the possibility of such events
as wars of the Fronde and massacres of
St. BA lITIIOLOMEW. In good truth there
is not, and there never was, an unanimity of
opinion in France. When the sparks of dissent
kindled by the Reformation was extinguished by
the blood of martyrs and confessors, the Jansenists
and the Jesuits filled the land with their conten-
tions. Infidelity followed upon the heels of fana-
ticism and hypocrisy, and, in the mad struggle
to free themselves from an intolerable yoke, the
altar and the throne fell together, and were for a
time buried under the mins of social order. The
unanimity of opinion which prevailed in France
during the last half century, is known to all
Europe. Even in hatred of England, France has
never been unanimous—the peculiar virtue upon
which France is congratulated by the Constitution-
net; for when we had the Republicans opposed
to us, we hal the Royalists among the number of
our grateful guests, and when the latter olkiined
the ascendancy, we had refugees of the former