The Sun.
London, England, 1848-03-18 00:00:00

OlTtniug k 6

LONDOZi, SATURDAY. MARCH 18, 1848.

according to the opinion of Mr. WILLIAM SMITH
O'BRIEN and his very estimable associates—lreland
is ripe for a Revolution. The red banner of sedition
is virtually floating at this moment over the porch of
the Jacobin Club—the tocsin of rebellion is already
ringing in the incendiary declamations of the United
Irishmen—the weapons of outrage, of rapine,
and of spoliation are already brandished in the
hands of a few contemptible and insensate dema-
gogues. Let the orators of Young Ireland beware
betimes lest their yearning towards the Parisians do
not lead them into a dilemma, like that which has
recently cast so much obloquy upon one Mr.
CHARLES COC BEANE. In the last assemblage
at " Confederation Hall," it was proposed by
that patriotic martyr the Honourable Gentleman
the Member for the county Limerick—a representa-
tive, by the way, whose scene of martyrdom was a
coal-cellar, and whose patriotism was made manifest
not so much in the political arena as upon rounds of
unbuttered toast—that a grand demonstration should
be made in the cause of universal freedom upon the his-
toric area of Clontarf. Of course the hero of such a
demonstration is to be the descendant of BRIAN
Boat ; but the probability is that, instead of a
spectacle worthy of Clontarf, we shall have a row not
unworthy of llounsditch or Hockley-in-the-Hole,
and instead of a leader anything at all like BRIAN
Mau we shall have one excessively like BOMBASTE3
or C URONONOTONTHOLOG OS.

While these absurd preparations are making among
the subordinate and (certainly) insubordinate mob-
orators of Dublin, Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL is striving
to secure the tranquillity of his native land
by pacific proclamations. Unhappily these
manifestoes of his are invested with merely
the shadow of that authority which . ever

E 1

accompanied the addresses of the great O'CoNNELL 1
to Ireland. The difference between their influence is
not less enormous than the difference between the
reverberations of the great bell in the clock -tower of
St. Paul's Cathedral and the jingling of a wine-
glass in a kitchen cupboard in Amen-corner. As far,
however, as the awe still exercised by the name of
THE LIBERATOR is concerned, JouN O'CONNELL is
acting in a manner creditable to his judgment and
to his common sense, for he conjures his
fellow-countrymen to preserve that tranquillity
which can alone sanctify their struggle for
poitical liberation. " Any violence," he ex-
claims, " any outrage on our parts, would %rejoice
the hearts of your bitter enemies, make your friends
weep, and throw poor Ireland back into worse mi-
sery than ever !In Ireland's name, then—in Reli-
gion's name—in the adorable name of GOD ! peace,
good order, good humour, no violence, no insult, no
outrage, no resistence to authority, no breach of the
law." Scarcely has this solemn adjuration been
uttered, when the voice of a rebellious and san-
guinary democrat shrieks into the ears, and tip-
:peals to the imagination of Ireland —to that
imagination which has been distraught with fa-
mine, and disordered by a prolongation and an ac-
cumulation of bitter and unparalleled misfortunes.
" Let Irishmen fraternize," is the yell of that
criminal Democracy, which advocates guerilla
warfare as the best medium for the acquire-
ment of constitutional freedom, which would
dash vitriol in the eyes of the soldiery rather than
plead at the bar of the country for the removal of
abuses, which would prefer a crowbar to reason and
a bludgeon to conscience —" Let Irishmen fra-
ternize," is its cry ; "Yes, let Irishmen fra-
ternize and unite, even as the men of
France united, and, in the clasped hands
of Frenchmen, crossed over the biers of their
glorious dead, view the emblem under which Irish
patriots would yet achieve their country's liberties !"
The deliverer of this most inappropriate bombast was
Mr. T. F. MEAGHER, a gentleman already
known in the more ignoble annals of de-
magoguism possessing much of the venom
of MARAT, much of the grandiloquence of
DANTON, much of the dogmatism of St. JUST, and a
little of that satiric talent at personality which was
an evidence of genius in DEsaiouuNs, but which, in his
instance, is only the ebullition of folly, spite-
fulness, and audacity. Let us listen a little longer
to the ravings of this Dancing Dervish of Rebellion.
He is speaking of the courtly hospitalities of Lord
CLARENDON in Dublin Castle, and his own disinclina-
tion (the sour grapes again !) to become their
recipient :

" I desire not such pleasures, such distinctions,"
said he, " I covet not the Castle festivities if bought
by the renunciation cf all that is true and honest in
patriotism, and becoming in manhood. I care not for
the smiles of the spectre of Royalty that keeps open
house for reduced gentlemen. Better is it to swing
from the gibbet than to live and fatten on such terms.
The time has come to end these mockeries. The
storm which dashed down the sceptre of July, now rocks
to its foundation the Castle. The first breeze that shall
shake out the banners of European warfare will bid it
totter. I say to you—lrishmen, watch for that
breeze I"

Mr. MEAGHER latterly seems to be impressed with
a wholesome conviction that he is born to be hanged.
In the last paroxysm of the fustian of his peroration
he gave forth this dismal ejaculation—" If," said he,
" we are to perish on the scaffold, our last words shall
be—' France ! France ! France ! avenge us !'" In all
this we recognise merely an evidence of monomania,
a misconception as to identity. The rhetorician of
the "Irish Confederation" must disabuse his mind of
an extraordinary and unfortunate blunder—T. F.
MEAGHER is 11;.-t ROBERT EMMETT.

The candid and straightforward explanation of LA-
MARTINE, must tend in a great measure, if not en-
tirely, to appease the strong sentiments of apprehension
and indignation so generally excited by the circular of
LEDRU-ROLLIN. In that explanation, which was ad-
dressed to a deputation of the " Republican Club for
the Liberty of Elections," the Minister for b'oreign
Affairs, speaking as a Minister, both in his own name
and in that of the entire Government, solemnly and
emphatically declared that the Government, consi-
dered themselves bound by truth, and justice,
and respect for the national sovereignty, not
to interfere directly or indirectly in the elections.
He admitted that as individuals they might propagate
their own opinions among their friends; but "as a
Government," he proceeded, " armed with any share
of the public influence, we would blush at the re-
proaches which we had uttered against the Govern-
ment which preceded us for corruption, if in place
of the corruption whose infamies had given rise to
the Republic,we used that other corruption—the worst
of all corruptions—the corruption of intimidation and
moral oppression of conscience. No ; the Republic
must come out, and shall come out, free and pure 1"
[his assurance is certainly very explicit and most
emphatic, and the eloquent orator by whom it was
uttered, so far from wishing to conceal his senti-
ments, continued, " I desire, we all desire, that this
should re-echo in the public opinion of Paris and of
France. We desire that public opinion should be
re-assured, and should not take in an alarming sense
some words wrongly interpreted in the",. dnpue
merits of the Minister." Thus the eigapae)
tion was not only full and unresiiviac
but, a very unusual thing in Ministerial explanitions,
even the anxieties s, bleb had elicited it were re-
vealed. The people of France, startled by the decla-
rations of M. LEDRU Roemer, very justly appre-
hended that they might be about to lose the sub-
stance for the shadow. They foresaw with the
instinctive prescience of self-preservation that their
real power, their inalienable rights, might
be beguiled from them even in the name
-
of liberty itself. They foresaw that the " so-
vereignty of the people" would be merely an
empty name if the people had not an unrestrained
voice to raise, nor an uncontrolled vote to give, in
the selection of the men who were to represent and
rule them. They foresaw this, and, undazzled by
the glory of the prospect which was unfolded to them,
and unsubdued by the greatness of their Ministerial
leaders, they unanimously and vehemently protested
against the proposed innovation—against all inter-
ference with their elective prerogatives. The popular
Government have wisely conceded to the popular
demand. They have done more. They have
admitted its justice and lauded its propriety.
" Be assured," said LAMARTINE to the deputation,
" that the Provisional Government rejoices that you
have come, as the exponents of true and free repub-
liean sentiments, to demand an explanation of the
conduct it intends to pursue in these elections."
This demand on the part of the deputation elicited
from the Minister the full and satisfactory explanation
to which we have already re ferred ; it elicited, moreover,
from that eloquent Republican the utterance of the
following indubitable truth, which, like the explanation
which accompanied it, should animate public opinion
not only in Parisi and France, but throughout the
world. " Citizens," he exclaimed, "of all the dogmas
which have survived that overturning of thrones and
empires which we have witnessed during the last half
century, there is but one dogma which we regard as
sacredand imperishable—that of national sovereignty."
This is a truth in which, without being Republicans,
we may entirely coincide; for what, in fact, does
a national sovereignty signify ? What LAMARTINE
intended it to signify is fully explained by his
remarking that the Government would never
make any attempt against that national sovereignty
by interfering at the elections. This implied
definition is a correct one. " National sovereignty"
signifies only this—the people, the great body of the
people having a voice in their own government, and
in the framing of the laws which they must obey.
But how is this to be obtained ? By anarchy, where
no one commands ? By democracy, es here no one
obeys ? By Republicanism, which decrees all equal ?
In our opinion the answer is unquestionable. Na.
tional sovereignty can only be equitably established
and duly maintained by a Representative Constitution.
By that form of government alone, whether the
supreme head be a monarch or a provisional ministry,
can the rights of the people be fully exercised, and
that exercise rendered compatible with social order
and harmony. hence it was that the French
Minister, after declaring his loyal submission to
the sovereignty of the nation, added as a
correlative of his declaration, that the re-