The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-23 00:00:00

M Ming Al-AX 3

LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 23, 1846.

Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN begins to weary of the honours of
martyrdom. He has hitherto absolutely refused his consent
to any attempt being made on the part of his friends to seek
for the clemency of the House; he would be a martyr, and
he has attained the object of his desire; but, alas,
" Man never is, but always to be blest."

We are seldom so happy in the full enjoyment of our
wishes as we had supposed we should have been, when
hugging ourselves in pleasing anticipations. It is little to be
wondered at that the Hon. Gentleman should have found the
calm and seclusion of the cellar less agreeable than he had
hoped, and that he sheuld find the monotony of his position,
the forced seclusion, the abstinence from political excitement,
and the impossibility of joining in the debates, disagreeable
in the extreme to a man of his excitable and energetic dispo-
sition. Besides, there was not that unanimity of feeling on
his behalf exhibited amongst his colleagues at Conciliation
Hall, which he had probably calculated on. The Irish are a
generous people, and will not readily abandon the cause of a
friend w ith whom they have worked in unison, and with whom
they have entertained feelings in common ; a very general
doubt, however, appeared to prevail amongst the most
sensible and discreet Members of his own party as to the
prudence of the course he had adopted. We believe there is
little doubt that the Irish members of similar opinions to
himself, had, in the strongest manner, urged on him the
folly of the conduct he was about to pursue, and had earnestly
advised him not to permit matters to be carried to an
extremity, but, if necessary, to bow to the opinion of the
House, and to perform the duties allotted to him, and
which he must have known, when taking on himself
the position of a representative of the people, he
would have been required to discharge ; but Mr. O'BRIEN was
obstinate, and resolutely refused to act according to the ad-
vice so given, but to persevere in his headlong and reckless
determination. Accordingly, when the matter was first
brought before the House, on the 28th of April, Mr. O'BRIEN
positively refused to enter into any explanation to the House,
alleging that he had already stated his views fully and
finally in the correspondence which had taken place between
himself and the Committee of Selection, and that
he did not wish to add anything to the mat-
ters contained in those letters, nor was he de-
sirous of withdrawing anything from their substance, Mr.
O'BRIEN then rested his case on those documents, and
the reasons contained therein, and we do not find that he
there sought to justify himself on any alleged informality in
the appointment of the Committee of Selection, or the want
of power on their part to choose the number who should
form the Committee of Inquiry into the merits of the
different Railway Bills. No, the ground on which he then
justified his refusal was, that so long as he continued to serve
in the House, as one of the Irish representatives, he would
not, until Ireland was placed on a footing of
political equality with England, think of devoting
his time to the business of this country, and that he had
no wish to interfere with the affairs of England or Scotland,
unless those affairs were is some way connected with his
own country. The Committees having, of course, considered
the reasons so advanced as quite ir.sufficient to justify his
exemption from an onerous and fatiguing duty, informed him
thereof, but, in the spirit of kindliness and good feeling,
added, that they would be happy to delay his attendance to
a later period, if it would be any accommodation to him to do
so. But this offer he declined, stating that his objection to serv-
ing on those Committees was founded on the relation which then
existed between Great Britain and Ireland, and was in no way
connected with personal convenience. No course then remained
for the Committee, thus bearded and set at defiance, but to
bring the matter before the House, and to demand of them
by what sanction their authority was to be enforced. If Mr.
O'BRIE4's defence was to be considered a sufficient one, the
entire business of the country would be brought to a stand ;
few gentlemen would be found willing to undertake such
arduous and thankless duties, if they might escape it by a
mere refusal. On the occasion of the first debate, two grounds
were put forward as a justification; the first, that under the
Act of Union the House had no power to enforce the at-
tendance, in fact, had not the authority claimed
over the Irish Members ; and secondly, that the vio-
lation of a power delegated to the Committee
was not punishable as a contempt. It was urged that there
was a special statute for compelling the attendance of
English Members which had not been extended to Irish
Members. The Rouse very fully discussed the question, and
e
ergs majority decided that the reasons urged were not
bsuyffiacilent excuse for his refusal, and that a contempt had
t
been committed. The Rouse, however,
aneroopering
nity to
mercy
with justice, afforded a " locus penitenti,,e
the Honourable Member of re-considering hisPrecrsiuo
obeying the strongly-expressed feeling of ithe Houseby aandd.
journing the debate for two nights, although Mr.
O'BRIEN, through his friend, Mr. ROCHE, stated
that he ' thought it quite unnecessary that any fur-
ther delay should be interposed, that he was so
convinced of the rectitude of the course he had adopted, and
so impressed with its propriety, that his resolution remained
unchanged. On the following Thursday the Hon. Gentleman
was committed, the House having refused to hear him, lie
being unprepared to purge his contempt by obeying g their
order. Since then Mr. O'BRIEN has on different occasions
peremptorily requested the withdrawal of notices of motion
which had been given for his discharge, being determined to
owe nothing to the mercy or
tphiteyfirsoftt glimmering
heHouse.
aWfreetam.
hail
his present appeal as exhibiting
ing sense,an. G
althoughentlGentleman
eab
thinkad it w
apologisedo uld have
fobeen i stilla
folly, wiser if
the and
d oub
at not t the
Housepoms ewdofuul dt ure
havesu bbuelei nss gihnt e d whichtoh case
remitted w e
punish-
ment wkich they always inflict with regret, more especially
when the person punished is one of themselves. Mr
O'BRIEN's present ground of defence is that there is no evi-
dence in the authentic records of the House that Mr. EST-
COURT and the other gentlemen who had acted as the Com-
mittee of Selection bad received due authority from the
House to act in that capacity during the present session, and
that, therefore, all the proceedings which have led to
his imprisonment have been void and informal, ab initio,
and he, therefore, claims his immediate discharge.
We cannot think that there is much force in Mr. O'BRIEN's
objection; we have no recollection of a plea to the jurisdic-
tion of any tribunal having been entertained, unless it had
been brought forward in the first instance, and we do con-
sider that Mr. O'BRIEN has let slip the time within which
he could have questioned the authority of the Committee-
On the contrary, he tacitly admitted it, by resting his de-
fence on totally different grounds; he treated then as re-
gularly appointed, and his correspondence with them was
on that footing; he would, therefore, we apprehend be now
estopped from setting up any argument, founded on their
absence of qualification ; but were it even otherwise, we
do not think that there would be any validity in the objec-
tion. D 7 the rowlatioi of On lath Foluary lact, tin

THE SUN,

House resolved that the Committee of Selection should form
Committees of Inquiry on Railway Bills, and directed a cer-
tain notice to be given to the Members whom they might
choose to select. Their existence and power was thereby
fully recognised and adopted by the House, and it is futile
after that to urge the want of authority on their part, that
they had not been duly selected. Besides, the contempt
for which Mr. O'BRIEN was committed was one to the
entire House; the House itself, by a majority of
no less than 124, the numbers being 139 to 15, decided that
Mr. SMITH O'Baz was in contempt. He got an opportu-
nity of purging that contempt, of which he did not choose to
avail himself, and it is idle for him now to allege that the
House had not the power of punishing that contempt. If it
was competent for them to do so in instance, it was surely
in the present case. We will, however, hope that Mr.
O'Bnrrorr will see the absolute necessity of acting with
greater diseretion, and withdrawing from a contest in which
he must be the only sufferer, and that the House will there-
upon restore him to freedom and his privileges as a Member of
the Legislature.

We cannot remember the country ever to have been so
passive and tranquil, during an important political conjunc-
ture, as it is at this moment. The mind of the nation is
fixed almost exclusively upon the House of Lords. Never
since the Reform Bill has this august branch of the Legis-
lature filled so large a space in the eyes of the country.
The national intellect is absorbed in weighing the respective
probabilities of the success or failure, in the Upper House, of
the great measure sent up by the Commons for the abolition
of the corn-laws. Short of any question affecting the funda-
mentals of the Constitution, none could be devised so in-
tensely calculated to interest, not only the United
Empire at large, but likewise its vast dependencies,
as this great scheme of commercial reform. Yet the
contrast between .the state of the country in 1830
and 1846 is most striking. At the former period it was
literally convulsed. We stood upon the brink of a volcano ;
the minds of men of all classes were stirred to their inmost
depths. The Constitution was rocked to its very foundation.
The House of Peers happily shrank from the fierce contest
of popular tumult, engendered by their prejudiced resist-
ance to reasonable and long-coveted changes in the repre-
sentative system, and England came out of the ordeal free
from the disastrous consequences of physical commotion,
which must have resulted, had the painful crisis been pro-
tracted. At the present hour order and tranquillity prevail
throughout the land. Were a stranger to visit us it would
be difficult to make him believe that this state of national
repose was co-existent with a doubt whether a mea-
sure of vital importance to the happiness of millions, and
which has just been sanctioned, amidst ringing plaudits, by one
broach of the Legislature, would be suffered to pass the
other. Yet such is the case. Before the end of next week
the problem will be solved. We shall then know the
division upon the second reading, which will pro-
bably be conclusive, one way or the other, of the
flits of the Bill. To ourselves, this remarkable state
of things is fraught with matter of which we have reason to
be proud, and assures us that the hopes of the people will be
speedily accomplished. Strongly as our affections are set
upon having the privilege of enjoying freedom of commerce
wiih all the world, the patient endurance of our countrymen
demonstrates, under the circumstances, a confidence
in the collective wisdom of their public men, and
valuable institutions, such as no other country
could, we believe, at this time, furnish us with a
parallel. The dignity of their conduct, and soberness of
their views, is the strongest proof of the admirable use the
people make of the enlarged franchises conferred upon
them by the Reform Bill. There are those, however,
who regard the present posture of affairs very dif-
ferently, and draw conclusions the reverse of those
to which 'we deem the premises entitled. The Protec-
tionists assume the absence of all outward excitement to
be a proof that the country is not desirous of seeing the
Corn Bill imbedded in our statute book. Do they flatter
themselves that they will fail to be reminded of the numerous
petitions sent to both Houses from all the great corporate
bodies of the kingdom since the enunciation of the measure
by the first Minister of the Crown ? Do they conceive that
the accredited influence of the League is to be disposed
of by a sneer and a taunt? Have they read history to so
little purpose—are they so ignorant of the workings of the
constitution—as to be unaware that so gigantic an Association
could have been formed, including amongst its members
persons of the highest rank and greatest wealth in the State,
and have gone on for years, strengthening with its
strength, without the certainty of ultimately accomplishing
the object that summoned it into existence? Do they forget
that it is before this pyramidal guardian of the rights of
commerce, to its acknowledged enlightenment and embodied
experience, to the startling facts it has brought forward,
and to the cogent arguments it has adduced, that
the first and ablest men of the day have bowed
their heads in submission ? Whilst the Anti-
Corn-law League exists, it is idle to talk of the country being
apathetic or indifferent to a measure which owes its birth to
this powerful organisation. The League is passive now,
because it is conscious of the righteousness of its cause, and
of its own inherent strength—is satisfied, from the political
history of the last few years, that its efforts are on the
eve of being crowned with success, and not the less so, from
the House of Commons having legislated in favour of their
wishes by the commanding majority of 98. Their confidence is
moreover increased by the knowledge that their cause has been
ushered into the House of Lords by the Duke of WELLING-
TON, who, more than any ether man, felt the rebound ofpopular
disappointment in the memorable year of 1830, and whose
influence amongst his compeers, from his straightforwardness
of character, and his moderation and foresight, the fruits of
experience, is greater than ever was possessed by any single
individual. Their confidence is, besides, the greater
from the indisputable fact that, Lord STkscr.ET excepted,
all the distinguished men who have of late years
formed successive Governments, have been, end will be, their
ardent and eloquent advocates. Should it, however, eventu-
ate that these powerful elements of hope should be dissolved,
and the Minister driven to appeal to the country
through the rejection of the Corn Bill by the Lords,
the League, and the other great bodies who are
associated with them in feelings, would then be seen arising
from their slumbering strength, and calling forth such a
national demonstration, as would effectually secure, in the
new Parliament, the due reflection of their irresistible will;
and the three years grace, at present accorded to the Pro-
tectionists, would then be deservedly withdrawn.

We admire the private character and chivalrous bearing of
the Duke of RICHMOND, but we detest the tyrannical ar-
gument, that public men are to be debarred in politics—which
is strictly an experimental science—from taking advantage
of reason and experience combined, and declaring that
they are wiser to-day than they were yesterday. Those
who hold this doctrine necessarily announce themselves to
be infallible, an arrogance from *which all reasonable men
turn with contempt. It is a doctrine from which, if con-
ceded, no public man could escape without censure. It is a
bigoted dictum, which, like chaff, would be scattered by
the slightest breath of reason. Would the Duke of Ricu-
sioND be content to be forced to cultivate his land
as his ancestors did, and to be deprived of the va-
rious improved processes of agriculture since established by
our enlarged knowledge of chemistry and mechanism? We
suspect not. And yet, if his argument hold good, he ought
not to reap the advantages derivable either from his own
experience or that of others, in this or any other
science. We submit that cenfidenee in public
men should be measured by the success of
their measures. Sir ROBERT PEEL says he has for more
than three years tried a great commercial experiment, the
result of which has exceeded his most sanguine expectations,
and is satisfied that national prosperity is greatly enhanced
by commercial relaxation. The protectionists cannot deny
the first part of this statement, but insist that
the second ought not to be considered, because they contend
a bargain was struck by which the tide of prosperity
was not to be suffered to cover a particular water-mark.
Such reasoning will not satisfy the country. Sir
R. Pxjcr. has emphatically denied he was ever a
party to such a bargain. Nothing can be more
unconstitutional than such a surmise, and the Minister is too
sound and practical a statesman ever to have countenanced
so glaring an absurdity. The more we reflect upon the
great question of the day, in all its bearings, the more we
are satisfied that the enlightened policy of the Ministry will
prevail, and that the advocates of monopoly and restriction
will be completely discomfited.
N

vo
little stir has been created among the senior officers of
the navy by the appointment of two captains to the rank of
commodore for a temporary and experimental purpose.
Sir GEORG* COCKBURN, it is said, denies all participation in
the act, and the denial is so probable, so much in keeping with
the old worn-out system religiously observed at the Admi-
ralty, that it may be taken as a matter of fact. The junior
Lords of course could have nothing to do with it, and
the blame therefore falls on the shoulders of that
restless innovator, the ex-Governor-General of India,
who, by his sweeping reforms, attempted while he held
his brief, appointment, made all the sinecurists in Hindostan
tremble, and threw the Conservative and venerable Directors
of the India House into the utmost consternation. When
his Lordship was appointed to the Admiralty, and a good
of theantircuipleated establishedsomaterial
by
the
naval reformer was associated with him at the board, in the
cphearsnognes ,ofsomCae ptainß u
s,we
modification
wisdom of our ancestors; but which, in place of showing any-
thing like wisdom or benefiting the country, has been the
great est curse on both the naval and military services. Accord-
ing to this wise regulation, either all the officers in the service
are considered equal in professional skill, activity, and
genius, or the interests of the country are sacrificed for the
personal interests of individuals. A young admiral or ge-
neral, however superior in every respect to most, or even all,
his colleagues, is not to be appointed to a command, tow-
ever dangerous the crisis, while a senior officer remains on
the list. An aged admiral, though naval tactics may have
changed, or however necessary may be personal ac-
tivityprime the
and the prudent daring of a man in
of life, must have the command of an expedition
vital importance to the
both hazardous and of
would be affront because it
interests of the country,
pass him over and select one in every respect superior for
perhaps, was that
The last instance,
such an undertaking.
who •
of Sir ROBERT STOPFORD, commanded the Syrian ex
pedition. We have no wish to say one word of disparage-
ment reflecting on the skill and ability of this venerable
officer, but it is a well-known fact that he was long past
a Sam rocll44Pg
the prim of Ida whoa In itaderto