The Sun.
London, England, 1848-05-31 00:00:00

-
_IZ°. 41 Alit

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 1848.

Already we have said that the Reform Bill was a
delusion. Already we have commended the new
movement originated by JOSEPH Humm and RICHARD
COBDEN. Already we have eulogised Lord DUDLEY
STUART and Sir BENJAMIN Hann, because, demand-
ing an immediate extension of the suffrage to house-
holders, a restriction to triennial Parliaments, election
by ballot, and the partition of the country into elec-
toral districts, they have, nevertheless, repudiated
the idea of their being regarded as finality men, and
have proclaimed at once that they will only receive
these four grand concessions from the Legislature as
instalments of a gigantic system of innovation. Al-
ready, we say, we have done this, and yet we protest
we have no sympathy (no, not the smallest) with those
who would embarrass Parliament with unnumbered
measures of improvement supported by tumultuous
assemblages and backed by a forest of pikes, and
bludgeons. We know very well that there are hun-
dreds of the bigots of Conservatism who will not be
able to comprehend this. It will appear to them like
a contradiction, or rather an impossibility. Regard-
ing all classes of Reformers, from the rational Re-
formers of the moral force system to those irrational
advocates of democracy who would not hesitate at
airy mode, however revolutionary--physical force
Reformers, in short, Communists, Socialists, and the
lii:e, politicians of the pike school or the vitriol
bottle—as synonymous and identical, these oppo-
nents of the popular movement, cannot comprehend
anything like a jade milled in legislative re-
form. With them the agitations of O'Cox-
xmLL are as pernicious as those of MITCHEL,
the projects of LAMARTINE are not less odious than
;:;;;;-, the schemes of CAUSSIDIERE, the logical orations of
COBDEN are not more worthy of consideration
than the unintentional absurdities and unconscious
birlesque of the redoubtable Mr. CUFFAT. There-
; lave, it is that our ideas of comprehensive and imme-

diate reforms—and yet reforms at once progressive
and rational—will appear in their estimation as
nothing short of being absolutely impracticable.
Nevertheless we reiterate our previous assertion.
We regard a grand and instant movement of reform
as essential—we maintain the necessity of extending
the privilege of the elective franchise to many mil-
lions of the population who have hitherto been de-
prived of that advantage—we demand the ballot, the
diminution of the time allowed to Parliament as
the extreme linsits of its existence—and we aver at
once that we also look upon these measures as mere
instalments of reform, and that we view their reali-
sation as feasible without resorting to bluster, or to
intimidation, or to mob demonstrations, or to armed
processions, or to forged petitions, or to spoken trea
son, or to acted treason, or to any other of the evi-
dences of ignorance, brutality, or humbug. We
protest this—we maintain this—Clerkenwell-green,
Kennington-common, and Horselydown nevertheless
notwithstanding ! The more reasonable members of
the great body called the Chartists have al-
ready come to the same conclusion. They
have abandoned the notion of pushing im-
possible Bills through the Houses of Lords
and Commons, with the pressure of a rabble of
150,000 men. They have adopted the noble and
humanizing principles of agitation which were first
acted upon by DANIEL O'CormaLL, and which have
recently led to such glorious results under the guid-
ance of RICHARD COBDEN. A pact, or treaty of
alliance, has been formed between this section of the
i
Chartists and the Radical Reformers, n obedience to
which fraternization they will conquer many of those
evils which weigh most heavily upon the bulk of the
population. The passage of the Emperor NAPOLEON
from Elba to Paris—perhaps the most sublime
spectacle in ancient or modern history—that
journey in which a great military hero marched in
triumph from the extremity of a vast country into
the heart of its capital, conquering the land of
France with a body-guard of one thousand men,
and without the effusion of a singloedErnoo:i from Elba
to physically,ofbloodlba
blood—
the passage of the Emperor NiyL
to Paris may be emulated morally, if
by a statesman, if not by a captain. We are already
embarked in such an undertaking, we are, politically
speaking, at the outset of such an adventure. We
have reached the Cannes of the expedition of Reform—
before us lie the saowy ways of Provence, beyond
those Grenoble and Lyons—but in the perspective
there is Paris. Let there not be hesitation—let there
be unanimity—and there must be success.

The inquiry refused by a large majority of the
House of Commons, although it was demanded by
nine-tenths of the Irish representatives, was last
night partially conceded by the House of Lords-
The Earl of LIICAN moved for a Select Committee
" to inquire into the operation of the Irish Poor-law
Acts relative to the rating of immediate lessors,"
and although strongly opposed by Ministers, his
motion was carried by a majority of six. We
regret that a general investigation was not
directed, such as that which had been
sought for in the House of Commons.
The Noble Lord who brought forward the subject
might be said to have a peculiar interest in the matter
to the extent to which it was carried. He had been
repeatedly attacked in Parliament and in the public
journals, in reference to large arrears of rates said to
be owing by him, the justice of which charges he
had most strenuously denied. It cannot be forgotten
that the property of the poor-law guardians in the
Castlebar Union, a considerable portion of which be-
longs to the Noble Earl, was recently sold under an
execution for debt, and the alleged grounds for so
stringent and unseemly a proceeding were that-the
majority of the proprietors throughout the district
were defaulters, and that it was absolutely impossible
to collect funds sufficient to pay the outstanding
accounts of the tradesmen, and to provide the means
of existence for the enormous number of destitute
poor who were cast upon the resources of the union.
Legal proceedings, it appears, have been instituted,
and are now pending in the superior courts in Dub-
lin, and also in the local courts, for the purpose of
ascertaining the parties justly liable for the payment
of these rates, who are consequently morally respon-
sible for this untoward state of affairs. What-
ever may be the result of these pro-
ceedings, the inquiry will be valuable.
It will be ascertained whether the law itself is radi-
cally wrong, or whether the grievances complained of
are imputable merely to the mode of its administra-
tion. Possibly, it may appear that the censures that
have been so liberally bestowed are wholly without
justification. In any event, the real delinquents will
be discovered, and if a legislative remedy is re-
quired, that remedy may be applied without any
unnecessary delay. Parliament should not wait until
wrong has been actually inflicted. If it can be satis-
factorily shown that the law is in any respect erro-
neous or inefficient, the Legislature should interpose,
and prevent any British subjects from being un-
justly oppressed or injured. We rejoice, therefore,
that the proposed inquiry has been granted—we think
it was due to the Noble Lord to afford him a full
opportunity of vindicating his own conduct. The
anxiety he has shown for a searching investigation
goes far to prove that he believes himself to be unjustly
accused, and those who have heretofore condemned
must now, at least, suspend their judgments until the
report of the Committee.
We must, however, deplore that that which was
refused in the popular assembly to the almost unani-
mous request of the Irish representatives, should
apparently be conceded to the personal interests of an
individual Member of their Lordships' House. This
could not have been asserted if the inquiry was ge-
neral, and not limited to the operation of a parti-
cular portion of the law. We are not amongst the
opponents of that law ; on the contrary, we ad-
vocated to the utmost of our power, its general
policy, although many serious defects were patent
on the face of the Act, against which we remon-
strated, believing that the humane intentions of the
Legislature could never be fully carried out so long
as they were permitted to remain. A. general
inquiry would separate the wheat from the
chaff, and enable the Legislature to retain
that which ;is really valuable, and to cut off every-
thing the tendency of which may be proved to be in-
jurious. The quarter-acre clause especially should
be repealed. It is impossible to find language suffi-
ciently strong to censure that atrocious provision, by
which a direct premium is held out to the hard-
hearted and oppressive landlord, and he is enabled
to clear his estates, and to drive those who might be
enabled to provide for their families with a very
trifling assistance, from the humble homes in which
they were born and brought up, by under-
hand means, and without being exposed to
the public odium and disgrace which a stringent
exercise of their legal rights would inevi-
tably expose them to. We have already re-
peatedly pointed out that the mere withholding of
employment by the owner of the estate himself, and
by his immediate neighbours, whom he would be
enabled to oblige in a similar manner, must inevitably
drive any struggling cottiers to the workhouse for
relief; that,:however, cannot be afforded until he has
and easy mode
of ejectment given up his holding, if above a quarter of an acre,
to his reputed
is
lanttloosrdp.roAvidseudm, summary
of the most
y
heartrending suffering may inflicted
be on the
humbler classes.

[Although the following arguments respecting Sir
HENRY LYTTON BULITER'S share in the recent mis-
understanding between the British and Spanish
Governments, are totally at variance with the
opinions maintained by ourselves, we have no hesita-
tion whatever in giving insertion to the paper of our
correspondent, as it indicates the view entertained
upon the question at issue by a large portion of the
community.]