The Sun.
London, England, 1841-09-30 00:00:00

PARLIAMENTARY.

The Lords did not meet yesterday.
In the Commons a number of petitions were presented
against the Corn-laws, and complaining of great distress.
Mr. Wakley again referred to Mr. Warner's inven.
tion, without obtaining any further information than
that the present Board of Ordnance knew nothing of it.
Colonel Fox, as if ashamed for the Ordnance, ex-
plained that the old muskets with which the navy bad
been supplied were now partially replaced by better

weapons.
Several Bills were forwarded a stage.
Mr. Wakley again sought a further explanation 01
some of Mr. Ward's observations, but did not obtain it.
The House adjourned soon after Five o'Clock.

PUBLIC OPINION.
From the style in which, in the following passage,
the Morniug Herald speaks of Lord Palmerston, it is
evident that the Tories consider him a formidable mem-
ber of Opposition :—" The loss of office and of pay
seem to have galled Lerd Palmerston more than any of
his late colleagues ; and so they may, for in truth the
Noble Lord so loves place, that for more than thirty
years he has rarely been out of it, and never long.
Lord Palmerston has been throughout life " a sworded
Switzer;" to him the " best of causes has been the best of
pay ; he has never " vexed his head" for pleas of right;
office has been the polar star by which he has steered
his political course, and his compass has been his own
individual interests. Party never had such strong claims
on him as his own advancement ; and though at last he
had all that he sought—" King—Glamis—Cawdor—all!"
yet "he played most foully" for them. Lord Palmer-
ston is now an ex-Minister who has not one political
friend ; in whom no living soul has the least confidence;
who is equally incapable of bestowing confidence on any
one ; whose abilities, official skill, and extensive know-
ledge on matters little studied in England, are his only
recommendations to any party; and to the ignorant Whigs
they were irresistible."
The Chronicle remarks, in an article suggested by the
approaching prorogation of Parliament :—" Is Parlia-
ment to be prorogued without any expression of defer-
ence to the opinion and the anxious expectation of a
large portion of the people of the United Kingdom ?
Sir Robert Peel is not asked to do what he so much
abhors—to pledge himself to details. He is not asked
to declare what it is he specially means to do ; he is not
asked to pledge himself to a five shilling duty, or an
eight shilling duty, or a ten shilling duty. He is not
even to pledge his Cabinet to any definite change what-
ever. All that is at present required is, that, in de-
ference to the loudly expressed opinion of a large
portion 'of the nation, he should enter on an exami-
nation of the matter of which they complain ; that he
should make inquiry into their allegations ; that he
should give a fair and fitting opportunity to the Le-
gislature to inquire whether or no this Corn-law is
really the mischievous enactment that it is affirmed to
be; and also to consider what fair and fitting remedy
may be provided for the mischief. The request is a
reasonable one. It requires no deep consideration in
order to comply with it; and in complying with it Sir
Robert Peel would merely fulfil the moral and social
duties which devolve on him as the head of the Govern-
ment of the country. But if Parliament is to be pro-
rogued without any indication that the Corn-law is to
be taken into consideration, a deliberate insult will be
given, and a cruel wrong will be done to a large portion
of the people of the empire."—What cares Sir Robert
Peel for inflicting " a cruel wrong " on the people,backed, as he is, by an unscrupulous majority of ninety-
one? He has the power now; and that power he will
exercise after his own fashion, and at his own good time,
heedless whether' the country approves of his measures
or no. .
The Advertiser thus comments on the tricky conduct
of the Tory Ministry, in determining to renew the
powers of the Poor-law Commissioners for a term with-
out restrictions :—" So the powers of the Poor-law Com-
missioners are to be renewed for a term, without restric-
tion of any kind, Sir Robert Peel most resolutely re-
fusing to permit any meddling with the details of the
subject, until after he shall have had time to ponder
over it in all its branches, and to make up his mind
whether any, and if so, what, alterations may be deemed
expedient in the law. Never was there a more disgraceful
piece of legislative business—disgraceful as many of the
proceedings of the Legislature have been—than this, 1-
lative to the continuance of the Poor-law Commission
by the Conservative House of Commons. Base and
unfeeling, as all the world knew the Tories to be, few
imagined them to have been so steeped in dishonour
and degradation as their treachery upon the Poor-law
question now proves them to be. It is notorious, that in
at least six cases out of ten in which the Conservatives
distanced the other party at the recent elections, they did
so by the course they took with reference to the New
Poor-law, which they held up as abominable, diabolical,
and damnable,' while they characterized the official pro-
ceedings of the Commissioners as the tyrannical govern-
ment of the three devil kings of Somerset House.''
The Morning Post is by no means so positive on the
merits of the Corn-laws as it was a few days since.
After writing a host of heavy leading articles, to prove
their intrinsic excellence, our Contemporary now con-
tents himself with the expression of a modest doubt on
the subject. The Corn-laws may be right, or they may
be wrong ; he is not quite certain which. We quote
his remarks on this point :—" There can be no greater
mistake, and where it is not a mistake, no more malevo-
lent calumny than that of certain brawlers. who say that
the present Ministerial party do not care whether there
is enough of food for the people or not, and only concern
themselves about high prices for their own advan-
tage. Be the Corn-laws right or wrong, they are
maintained from a belief that the whole body of
the' people derive benefit from them, and more espe-
cially that class which depends upon manual labour for
subsistence. So long as the Corn-laws continue the
'labourers of this country must be employed in raising
food for this country's' consumption. Were the Corn-
law sourerpmeaalnedniaaentudrewserefoorurfosruepipglny oebotarni,ned by exchang-
ingnot men would be the chief sources of mounerhsinuepPlyanodf
food, and the men who are now employed in providing
the supply would have no one to hire them, and
consequently, languish in the utmost distress until they
died." would,
The Worcester Chronicle is of opinion that no reme-
dial measures of value are to be hoped for from the pre-
could
seht Government, observing—" Would, that .
feel ourselves justified in holding out thepalteatsasintvgehaenrtiecni--
pation that something like justice would
Butderedwitoth atnhoeplpvreeirhtd
opfeoapine lzhainTghlyrai,Vlamsintiasotrlealti,ona.
Ripon, a Knatchbull, and a Grahame of
as theto
ham
against
, in
the scale
landed aristocracy, who can so hope
indulge in the deceitful visionlar interests will preponderate? thatl ;,ohwe
ms c
na leeh ofm theore pliokpeuly-
will it kick the beam.
The Dublin Evening Post observes, in an article sug-
gested by Lord Shrewsbury's pamphlet :—" To what do
• •
do the professions made on the part of this Ministry
amount
? That they will adopt the very system of even-
handed justice and impartiality in the Government of
Ireland for which the Whigs had been daily and hourly
slandered and denounced—that, in fact, the Tories are
determined to reject the very means by which they tricked
and cheated themselves into power. Is not this a true
:picture ?—Lord Shrewsbury, if he reflect, would be the
last to question its accuracy.