The Sun.
London, England, 1833-07-18 00:00:00

LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, JULY 18, 1833.

MR. RUTHVEN'S MOTION.

Division on the 16th of July, on Mr. Ruthven's
Motion, " That the reduction of taxation and the diminu-
tion of the public burdens, by every attention to economy,
are objects of paramount importance; and that, in justice
to the people who pay taxes, all sinecure places, not
merited by public services, should be abolished throughout
the British Empire."
For the motion
Against it
Majority
Number of Members in
MAJO

-9
the House 171

ENGLAND.
Aglionby, H. A.—Cockermouth,
A ttwood, Thos.—Birmingham
Bainbridge, E. T.—Taunton
Bewes, T.—Plymouth
Bish, Thomas—Leominster
Brocklehurst, J.—Macclesfield
Brodie, W. B.—New Sarum
Buckingham, J. S.—Sheffield
Chaytor, Sir W.—Sunderland
Collier, J.—Plymouth
Curteis, H. B.—East Sussex
Curteis, E. B.—Rye
Dashwood, G. H.—Bucks
Edwards, John—Montgomery
Etwall, lt.—Andover
Ewart, W.—Liverpool
Faithful, G.—Brighton
Fellowes, N.—North Devon
Fellewes, H. A. W.—Andover
Fenton, L.—Huddersfield
Fielden, John—Oldham
Fryer, R.—Wolverhampton
Gully, John—Pontefract
Halle, James—St. Ives
Handley, H.—Lincolnshire
parts of Kesteven
Handley, Benjamin—Boston
Hardy, John—Bradford
Harvey, D. W.—Colchester
Hawes, Benjamin—Lambeth
Hughes, Hughes—Oxford
Flume, J.—Middlesex
Hodges, J. L.—West Kent
Humphery, John—Southwark
Hyett, W. H.—Stroud
James, \V.—Carlisle
Langton, Wm. Gore—East So-

RIT Y.
ENGLAND.
Scrope, Poulette—Stroud
Staveley, T. K.—Ripon
Strutt, Edmund—Derby
I'ancred, H. W.—Banbury
fayleur, W.—Bridgewater
Thicknesse, R.—Wigan
Todd, J. R.—Honiton
Trelawny, W. L. S.—Cornwall
Tynte, C. J. K.—West Somer

setshire
'Ward, H. G.—St. Albans
Warburton, H.—Br idport
Whalley, Sir S.—Marylebone
Wigney, I. N.-IBrighton
Williams, G.—Ashton

SCOTLAND.

IColquhoun, J. C.—Dumbarton

shire
Dunlop, J.—Kilmarnock
Ewing, James—Glasgow
Fleming, Hon. C.—Stirlingsh.
Gillon, W. D.—Falkirk
Hay, A. L.—Elgin, &c.
Oswald, R. A.—Ayrshire
Sharpe, General—Dumfries, &c.
Wallace, Robert—Greenock

mersetihire
Lester, B. Lester—Poole
Lister, E. Cunliffe—Bradford
Methuen, P.—North Wiltshire
Parker, J.—Sheffield
Parrott, J.—Totness
Potter. Richard—Wigan
Rick ford, W.—Aylesbury
Rider, Thomas—West Kent
Robinson, G. R.—Worcester
Romilly, J.—Bridport
Romilly, E.—Ludlow
Scholefield J.—Birmingham

ANNIVERSARY OF THE TAKING OF
THE BASTILE.
THE FETES OF JULY, AND THE FEARS AND TRICKS

OF THE DOCTRINNAIRES.

(From 0. P. Q. in the Morning Chronicle.
PARIS, JULY 14, 1833.—Forty-four years ago on
this very day, the 14th of July, the people cried 66
the Bastile '" " To the Bastile !" and the citizens as.
semb'ed there from all parts of the town in groups, armed
with muskets, pikes, and sabres. The sentinels weir
posted. The bridges Were raised. The cannon were
pointed in the direction of the tos'n. The Governor was
charged to change their direction. He refused. Thuriot
examined rapidly the state of the fortress—spoke a few
words to the troops who were under arms—and per-
ceiving that the faubourg St. Antoine was advancing en
masse, he descended to the people—made known the re•
sult of his commission—and the multitude cried, 4‘ We
want the Bastile we will have the Bastile !" The
word was spoken ! The Bastile was surrendered to the
people. It were a useless task to write more of the history
of this event. The Princes—tl,e Princesses—the Courte-
sans of the Court—the Dukes and the Marquises were
singing and dancing at Versailles. But their joy was soon
turned into mourning, and their mirth into grief and
horror. Breteuil, the Prime Minister of Louis XVI.,
who had promised to restore the Royal authority in those
'days, and who was engaged with the Royal Family in
preparing to realize its designs against the capital and the
Assembly, now found all his plans deranged, all his in-
tentions frustrated ; and though at first he hoped that the

movements in Paris would not derange his views and his
hopes, yet he soon learnt that it was too late—and the
Monarch himself, who at first exclaimed " it is a revolt !"
was in a few hours afterwards compelled to say to the
Assembly, "It is to you that I confide myself"—and Paris
rang with joy.

I must stop ! We are not at the 14th of July, 1789 ;
but at the 14th July, 1833 ! The Bastile exists no longer.
A huge elephant stands on its site—an unfinished monu-
ment, commenced to commemorate another triumph of
popular sovereignty and national will in 1830, is by its
side—. and between us, and the events we are now recall-
ing to our memory, there have been occurrences not
enough merely for forty, but for even four hundred years.
But where are we to day? If there be no longer a Has
tile at Paris, is there none at Mont St. Michel? If a
voluptuous Court no longer revels at Versailles, is France
yet governed by a National Administration, and by popu-
lar institutions? If vast improvements have been effected,
do not yet vaster appear before us ? What means this
project of fortifying Paris---of fortifying it by a circle of
detached forts—each at only such a distance as to enable
the Government to bombird the capital in the event of a
general insurrection? What means this general indigna •
tion of the citizens—this apprehension of the Government
—this terror on the part of the Doctrinnaires—this pre-
sentiment every where felt that all is not settled—and this
preparation for coining evils and coming dangers ? The
answer to these questions is at hand. The Revolution is
not terminated ! "Down with the Bastiles !" is now the
cry. "We will not have Bastiles" is now the expression
of the national will. Paris is not thus to be delivered
up to the axe of the executioner or to the train of powder
of the monarchical conspirators. The National Guards
cr yon the 14th July, 1833, " We will not have Paris

thus fortified." The inhabitants of the very same Fan-
bourg St. Antoine now declare, " We will not have the
cannon of your detached forts pointed on the city. I defy
the Government to execute its project. Those whose
fathers took the Bastile in 1789, and who themselves
took the Louvre and the Tuileries, the Hotel de Ville, and
the barracks of the Swiss troops in 1830, will not suffer
hemselves to be " bastiled" in 1833. The spirit of 1789
is not extinct. The feelings 1830 are not dead. In society,
and in public too, the most virtuous, affluent, talented, and
patriotic men, now declare theniselv, s to be Republicans.
During nearly the last six months the Republic has made
immense progress—and the young men, of frotn 18 to 30
years of age, can afford to wait a few months or years for
the triumph of their system. But the vengeance of the
people is terrible ! When the garrison of the fortress of
the Bastile refused to surrender, the people cried, " We
will have it !!" The troops resisted, They fired on their
fellow-citizens ! Hundreds were wounded or killed. And
then, when subsequently the same garrison claimed to
capitulate and march out with the honours of war, the
turn of the people arrived—and they cried " Death to the
garrison !" so the garrison was destroyed ! The Tribune
of to-day contains the same thought—the same caution—
the same hint—as that which I would here embody. The
patience of the people is not eternal or boundless ; and the
Tribune adds—

"We shall ay but one word more. After the victory
of the 14th July, the Governor of the Bastile received, on
the Place de Greve, the just punishment of his crime.
A head was stuck at the end of a long pole, and was car-
ried about in the streets and the public places, and below
this bead was written De Launay, for having fired on the
people.'

This should be a lesson to all Governments. National
vengeance is terrible ! Royalty has its day, its hour, its
moment ; and Ministers and Kings, instead of profiting
by them, mistake their powers, their force, and their ca-
pacity. The day—the year of the people then returns,
and those who thought themselves so secure, so clever, so
talented, and who flattered themselves that their plans had
succeeded, and their wishes were about to be realized, hear
suddenly the cry of " We will have the Bastile !"—and a
moment afterwards a head is seen at the end of a pole—
and beneath is written the name of some " Traitor, for
having fired on the People." Will my warning voice be
heard by those in France and in England who smile when
the word " people " is repeated, and laugh " at the dogma
of popular sovereignty?" I cannot tell—but this I know,
that the revolution is ❑ot terminated, and that those who
will not march with it will be crushed or swept away by
it. He who bath an ear let bins hear.

We approach the 3d anniversary of another great po-
pular movement in Paris—l mean the 27th, 28th, and
29th July, 1830. The Government has let the whole
year pass away without thinking of this anniversary--
without preparing to meet it properly. But it has now
thought of Napoleon—thought of the Pantheon--thought
of the white marble Pedestal, designed by the Restoration
to insult the French nation—and every where you hear
the axe and the hammer, the trowel, and the voice of the
mason, all engaged in preparing for the festivities of the
" Great Week." The Government knows that to see the
Statue of Napoleon on tie column of the Place Vendome
tens of thousands of Frenchmen will arrive front the De-
partments—will camp on the Boulevards—will spend
days and nights in enjoying this feast, and will indulge
themselves by the hour together in recounting the deeds
of glory and of valour of this idol of their boyish days.
The Government fears that when tens of thousands of the
inhabitants of the Departments shall arrive at Paris, and
shall see all the traces of the Revolution of 1830 removed
—and even the Drr,pau Tricolor kept as inimh as pos-
sible out of sight--that they may be joined by tens of
thousands of the capital, and that they may demand a
rigorous account of those who have thus trifled with na-
tional sympathy and national honour. So the Doctrin-
naires have resolved on giving " splendid fetes," on repro.
seating Paris in the form of a vessel, resisting the attacks
of all foreign and domestic foes, on causing the national
flag every where to appear, on having workmen busy at
the Pantheon, workmen labouring at the Bastile Munn-
me.nt, and on covering over the White Marble Monument
on which the people, in 1830, wrote " Monument a la
Charts," but which is now to be devoted to useless orna-
mentsanda senseless display of Egyptian curiosities, The
Doetrinnaires think all this very clever. They say " Let
us gull the people !"
When the revolution of 1830 took place, M. Guizot
sent for Armand Carrel who is at the head of the National
Journal, and- a man of vast influence and vast energy and
bravery. He told him that he saw very clearly that
France was marching towards a Republic, that nothing
but a Republic could now satisfy the people, and that he,
Armand Carrel, was destined to see the triumph of his
principles. But, added M. Guizot, we have need of you,
we fear less La Vendee and the West of France should
rise: proceed then without delay into the West, rouse
the patriots to energy, rally our friends, prevent the
Royalist party from forming an army against the Revolu-
tion ; and thus, while we are labouring here, you will be
essentially serving us there. Armand Carrel accepted the
mission—proceeded to the West—accomplished a vast deal
of good—prevented a civil war from then breaking out in
the West of France- -and, during his absence, the Duke of
Orleans was elected King. Arinand Carrel now saw
that he had been tricked—that he had been simply got
by the quasi Legitimatises, who had already surrounded the
Y--that he was dreaded as a dangerous man
out Lie of
Lieutenant-w General of the kingdetn-..and that to prevent

( PRICE 71).)

his raising his voice in the capital, Armand Carrel lir
been thus sent away. He returned to Paris. ,4 Yot
have tricked me—you have cajoled me !" he exclaimed
and he then commenced that opposition to the Govern
ment which has ever since been conducted with such sign:,
and wonderful success in the columns of the National.
anecdote has never yet been related—but on its accuracy
you may of course fully rely. " As the Doctr in
nacres acted to Armand Carrel in July, 1830, so they at.,
now acting towards the citiz!ns of Paris and the Depart-
ments in July, 1833. They are trying to cajole them
Under the pretext of a vast love for the revolution, atu,
great z°al to honour it in the opinion of the people—they
conceal the project of making Paris one vast bastile ; and
if the eyes of the country had not been opened by the pres,,
it is certain that such measures would have been taken a•
to prevent the possibility at a future period of a successfu,
resistance in Paris even to such ordinances as those of
Charles the Tenth. Doctrinnaires will have a review of
the National Guards ! They are taking down in each
arrondissement, and in each company, the names of those•
guards who will pledge themselves to attend ; and as they
are sure of hearing the cry of "Down with the bastiles"—
" We will not have bastiles"—they are seeking also to get
up a counter cry of " Viva le Roi !"—" Vivent les Mi-
nisters !" These are the tricks which are being practised
in Paris. This is to be called " Public Rejoicing !"
Fireworks, illuminations, flags, and music, are to terminate
the feees—and then the Doctrinnaires are to re-commence
their efforts for preventing, as.tr.ucla at.-possible, the
realization of all the promise:9 made by the revolution of
July, 1830.
IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, JuLY. 17.

This being the day appointed for the second reading o:

the Irish Church Temporalities Bill, long before 5 o'clock
the Gallery of the House was crowded with strangers,
and the steps of the throne and the bar with M.P.s,
anxious to hear the debates. Among the Bishops pre-
sent, we noticed the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the
Bishops of London, Bath and Wells, Gloucester, Chester,
and Hereford.
Shortly after 5 o'clock, EARL GREY entered the House
in full Court dress, wearing all the insignia of the Order
of the Garter.

The Gallery appropriated to Peeresses was crowded to
excess.

The Letters Patent Bill was brought up from the Com.
mons.

Lord SUFFIELD presented petitions against compensa.
tion to the slave proprietors in the West Indies, from Edin
burgh, Carmarthen, and Stroud.

Lord STOURTON presented a petition for the aboli
tion of tithes, from the Protestants of Westmeath.

The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition
against the Irish Church Bill.
The Marquis of WESTAIEATH said he had looked to

the signatures of the petition presented by the Noble Lorl
opposite (Stourton) for the abolition of tithes, which
pretended to be the petition of the Protestants of the
county of Westmeath, and had found that it was not
signed by one Protestant.
Lord STOURTON said he could not doubt the accu-
racy of the Noble Marquis.

Lord CARBERY presented petitions against the
Irish Church Bill.

The Archbishop of CANTERBURY presented a peti-
tion against the the Irish Church Bill, from five Bishops,
22 Archdeacons, and 826 clergy of the Church of Ireland.
The petitioners expressed strongly their feelings with
respect to the Bill, as might be supposed.—(Hear.)

In justice to the petitioners, he must desire that the peti-
tion should be read at length, and he would take on him.
self to say that it was drawn up with great ability,
and that the sentiments it expressed were highly deserving
the consideration of the House, and he trusted they would
have their due weight in the discussion that was to
take place that night.
The petition was then read by the clerk, and stated that
the petitioners viewed with deep alarm the Bill
which had passed the House of Commons for an
alteration in the Church of Ireland, more par-
ticularly that part which contemplated the destruc-
tion of ten bishoprics, and deprecated the appropriation
of Church property to any but ecclesiastical purposes.
The petitioners also stated that the Bill was a breach of
the sth article of the Act of Union.

The Duke of NEWCASTLE pre,ented two petitions
from East Retford against the Irish Church Temporalities
Bill. The Noble Duke stated that he concurred entirely with
the prayer of the petition, thinking the Bill fraught with the
greatest mischiefs to the Established Church. The Noble
Duke, in conclusion, could not hut regret that Ministers
had thought fit to counsel his Majesty to violate his coro-
nation oath.—(Hear, hear.)

Earl GREY rose to order. The Noble Duke had made
a direct assertion that Ministers had counselled his Majesty
to violate his coronation oath.—(Hear.) He was willing
to admit that it was competent to the Noble Duke
to argue as much as he pleased as to the inconsistency
of the Bill with the obligations of that oath ; but
he must he allowed to state that it was not competent for
him to st ite distinctly in that House that Ministers had
advised his Majesty to violate the sacred obligation of an
oath.—( Hear.) He trusted, therefore, that the Noble Duke
would correct the expression he had used.—(Hear.) As
he had before observed, he was at liberty to argue as much
as he pleased on the inconsistency ni the Bill with
the obligations of that oath, but he had no right to state
distinctly that Ministers bail advised the violation of an
obligation so sacred.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE still thought that, in ad-
vising his Majesty to assent to the principle of this Bill,
the Ministers advised the Crown to that which would
tend to a violation of the coronation oath.—(Hear, bear.)
He feared that the fate of this Bill would be the same as
that of the Reform Bill, namely, that the intimidators would
overcome the intimidated.—(Hear, hear.) He earnestly
deprecated this Bill, for he was convinced that it would be
subversive of the Established Church, and of all property.
He trusted their Lordships would, however, do their duty
to God and their country, and be governed by principle,
not expediency. It was rumoured that, on a late occa-
sion, a letter was written from a certain high quarter
to the Reverend Bench opposite. He did not say that those
who had advised the writing of that letter had done wrong,
but he trusted the Reverend Bench would not forego the
discharge of their duty. If they did their duty without
turning to the right or to the left, without minding con-
sequences, they would not acquire the odium but time
gratitude of the country. Let them do their duty as
Christians and men.

The Bishop of LONDON said that he could not speak
fur his brethren, but for himself he could say, that he was
obliged to the Noble Duke for his advice ; but he trusted
that he bad a sufficient understanding of the great princi-
ples of this Bill to be able to guide him in his public
conduct without the Noble Duke's advice. He
was a little surprised at the language in which the Noble
Duke had conveyed his counsel, for lie did not see how it
could be consistent with the duty of a prelate of the Esta-
blished Church to give a vote on any subject, without
looking at the consequences.—(Hear, hear.)
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM said, the Noble Eari
had stated that it was not competent for any Peer in
that House to impute to his Majesty's Government
that they had advised his Majesty to break his coro-
nation oath. It was not for him (the Noble Duke) to
argue at present whether his Majesty would violate his
coronation oath if he were to grant his Royal Assent to
the Bill now before their Lordships; but this he would
say, that the King could do no act without his ad-
visers,—his responsible advisers--(Hear, hear, hear)—
and that it was perfectly competent for any of
their Lordships to state their opinion upon the
advice given to his Majesty. If any of their Lord-
ships were of opinion that the advice given to him was
that he should break his oath, that Peer would be guilty,
if he did not charge the Ministry with so improper an Act.
Earl GREY said that he would not be driven by all
the sound and all the fury of the Noble Duke into any
premature discussion.—(Cheers.) When he called the
Noble Duke to order it was because he conceived that
the Noble Duke was guilty of a disrespect to the
usages of the House, in flatly charging the Government
with advising his Majesty to break his coronation oath.
No doubt his Majesty acted under the advice of his
Counsellors, and Government did not want the em-
phasis of the Noble Duke to impress on them the due
senss of responsibility which rested upon them in conse-
quence of the advice they gave. The advice they gave
was under the best discretion they could exercise. Un-
doubtedly any Peer was at liberty to argue that the provi-
sions of this Bill were inconsistent with the coronation oath.

47/
6
ILe (pF;ietpra:g.edretyo)mhaer!t7teat
gthaaint;ar_
but it
t!'4.s a y
„ii
ditrweo,
en!!
guiltyani of deliberately
-to arguetbatittt t:, `'ad "'s ;n
styg's
lihugGovernmentisi‘ i
atioestayrgtuoewberree: that,
khisoath.
also cr.mplained that be had recommended a Right Fey.
i
The Noble Ihi had
Prelate to act fearlessly, and not under the influendeif any
argument on either side. He (Earl Grey) und4i.btedfy
thought it the duty of every Right Reverend' Prelate,
as well as every lay Peer, to act according to the
dictates of his own conscience, but also to endea—
vour to arrive at a safe conclusion, after listening
patiently to all the arguments that could be adduced, and
influenced only, if influenced at all, by that argument
which he thought ought to preponderate. Nothing could
have been further from his (Earl Grey's) thoughts, than
to have scoffed at any idea of treating slightly the sanctity
of an oath.

The Duke of BUCKINGHAM said that the Noble
Duke of whom the Noble Earl had complained, had not
attached motives to any advice which had been or might
he given. It was not necessary to impute motives in terms;
it was sufficient to charge his Majesty's Government
with giving that advice which tended to induce his Ma-
jesty to break his oath.

Earl RODEN presented petitions from the clergy of
various parts of Ireland against the Church Temporalities
Bill.

The Bishop of LONDON presented a petition from the
clergy of Chester, against some of the provisicos of the
same Bill.