The Sun.
London, England, 1834-12-15 00:00:00

NUN, LONDON, MONDAVI DMEMIIER 15, Isl 4

ihrenzy to deny that great practical changes in the in-
ititutions of a country can seldom if ever be justified,
if not preceded by a peremptory national call. But
let it be thoroughly understood as our persuasion,
that if this call be irresistible, under a free constitu-
tion like that now possessed by England, so are there
specific questions on which it has already made itself
ruclilrle amoirst us, and which in principle
nay be looked upon as long since carried. Such
t,re the two paramount questions--Ist, of Church
-eform in Ireland and here, involving a purification
of ell abuses in discipline, and a commutation of one
fund for another, to provide a subsistence for ttie
Church ; 2fl, of corporate reform, comprehending, a 4
moval of all those grievances which grow out of the
!orrupt and oppressive alienation of corporate funds and
corporate powers from the hands to which they had
been originally entrusted, and from the ends to which
they had been destined. These two classes of reforms
are as fully passed in principle by the country
as the Reform Bill was passed in its details and
technicalities by the Legislature two years ago.
No Government can resist these two momentous
-eforms, or either of them—no Government can dare
•0 postpone their introduction to Parliament. The
purification of church discipline, we say once more.
the commutation of tithe, the better distribution o!
:hurch revenues, and the redress of corporation griev-
ances, are as much carried in principle as if they were
the law of the land, and wo be to him who ventures to
impede their execution. What, then, is the next subject
of inquiry for the people ? Undoubtedly "by whom
the above great measures are to be carried." And a
question follows, whom have tee at our orders to com-
plee them ? By the successive dispersions of the first
Cabinet of Lord Grey, the secession of the Stanleys,
next of Lord Grey himself, and subsequently the
forced exit of Lord Spencer, even without the last
step resorted to by his Majesty, the Liberal party, that
portion of it at least which has usually been desig-
nated as " Whig," had become sensibly weakened
and disorganised. We never insinuated that even in
that condition of comparative inefficiency the late Ca-
binet might not have contrived to go on a little longer.
All we contended for was, that his Majesty thought
they could not, and under that impression he did an
act which was for the time irretrievable. The country,
therefore, will perceive at once the difference between
the respective qualifications of the two sets of Minis-
ers, whether defects or capabilities. The Melbourne
Cabinet had been engaged in reform measures, and
was pledged to them ; but, pledged or otherwise, it
could not for its life have relinquished them, for it was
in a groove from which the nation would not suffer it to
escape ; but we may make bold, without offence or
unkind feeling, to add, that as body it was by no means
eminent for the or business talents of its mem-
bers. Its spirit might be willing, but its skill was
weak. Now the Conservatives who have succeeded
the last Whig Cabinet have succeeded also to the
obligations and moral necessities imposed upon
them by the wall of the people. They are forced into
the very same groove, and must proceed in the same
direction as their predecessors, or as a Government,
cease to exist. There is no use in saying that if the
Conservatives could have chosen for themselves, they
would have preferred a rotten-borough system to the
present. They cannot. The new system is that of
which they have now become parts. It has clothed
them with its own nature. It has prescribed to them
the conditions under which only they can live. The
strongest galley slave will do the most work at the oar,
though a feebler one might have less repugnance, and
if the former Ministers were (though many of them,
we fear, but nominally) volunteers in the cause of re-
form, it is not too much to set off against that advan-
tage that the Conservative party, albeit impressed into
the service, contain more able seamen amone, them.
It will be expected that we should say something of
the new Cabinet. We have nothing to say. Indeed,
notwithstanding the confidence with which several
Evening Papers published lists of the Ministers, we
believe that at the time of their publication nothing
was settled. It is possible that some of the names
mentioned may be the real names, but surely Mr.
Fleury Baring is not to be a Cabinet Minister. Mr.
A. Baring may be the person meant. He is respect-
able for talent, wealth, and moral character ; but if we
look at him in his Parliamentary position, we see a
man speaking one way and voting another. Can a
mind so peculiar be of much use in a Cabinet—can
its judgment and firmness be relied upon ? There are
other names which have occasioned much surprise ; but
we can wait till we see the official announcement of our

nation, he could not help exclaiming, What folly I
what absurdity I The man who believed them was
an idiot-=the • man who avowed his belief in them
was a traitor. How did men act in private life ? Did
they confide in convicted swindlers ? If they wanted a
wife, did they take a prostitute kiln the §tietts ?"
These are strong expressions; they arc homely, but
they are honest, and the parallel is to the purpose.
They are literally these :—you bid us confide the
liberties of Englishmen to those who have been the
constant and avowed enemies of liberty in every
nation which has made the slightest movement for
the obtainment of freedom. It is true that Sir
Robert has never offered to take the sword in the
cause of tyranny and mental enslavement. Sir
Robert has not done this, whatever he may be, he is
not for an appeal to the sword ; but he lids in all eases
been consenting to those who have drawn the sword—
he has been the avowed friend and partisan of those
~vho have, on all occasions, been ready to crush freedom
in the bud, in what part soever it appeared. There is
not, therefore, the smallest hope of one liberal measure
for the people of England from him, even if he were at
the head of an Administration ; and, though he has
heen nominated as First Lord of the Treasury, the Duke
of Wellington is, in truth, the Premier. Sir Robert must
he considered as the nominee of the Duke, not as the
choice of the King. The Administration must, therefore,
he regarded as a military Administration—a rule of the
sword and the manacles; and any feint movement which an
Administration may make apparently in favour of liberty,
m any form or for any pretended object, can be no-
thing else than a pretence for lulling the vigilance of
the people, in order that the chain may be doubled in
weight, and riveted tegfold in some oilier way. Now
is the time for the people—let them speak out, con-
stitutionally of course, but boldly, firmly, and man-
fully. They must not listen to the voice of delusion.
Bad men never did, and they never will, either origi-
nate or support good measures. This is impossible—
contrary to their nature ; he who believes it is, in the
language of Dr. Lushington, "an idiot;" and he
who attempts to make others believe it is, in-
deed, " a traitor," and a traitor of the worst
kind, as one who attempts to persuade others that
that is true which he himself knows full well to be
false. The people of England arc not, however, to be
abused in this manner ; and though we lay no claim
to the gift of prophecy, we hesitate not to say, that
the Duke and his subalterns will have the hardest task
in which they ever were engaged, in patching up an
Administration. We, therefore, think that the move-
ment will in the end be of '' yeoman service " to the
cause of reform ; and that if the people must shew
that they are in the field and do their duty to them-
selves, their children, and all generations to come,
like men, and freemen, they will soon have the satis-
faction of seeing the attempt of the illiherals, fade
away into the nothing of perfect inanition—a con-
summation devoutly to be wished by every honest friend
to England and to man.—Morning Advertiser.

COURT OF CHANCERY, DEC. 13.

SOARES V. GOWER.

In this case the plaintiff laid claim to certain bonds, the
produce of a loan raised for the service of the Aliguelite Go-
vernment in Portugal, and which are now in the hands of
the defendant, the plaintiff having the counterparts. An
injunction was obtained from the Vice-Chancellor, restrain-
ing the defendant from negotiating or otherwise disposing of
these bonds, and the matter was subsequently argued seve-
ral times at great length before Lord Brougham, who ulti-
mately intimated an opinion that the injunction must be
continued, and a receiver appointed, unless the ,defendant
found security for the monies which might come into his
hands as the produce of the bills. Although this was his
Lordship's opinion he pronounced no definite order to that
effect, but observed, nevertheless, once or twice, when the
matter was mentioned to him, just before he gave up the
Great Seal, that he thought he had disposed of the point at
issue.

The LORD CHANCELLOR declined to interfere. He
knew nothing of the case ; but as far as he saw from what
was before him, Lord Brougham had intimated an opinion
on the point at issue, and afterwards informed the parties
that if they furnished him with a note of what had taken
place at different times, he would pronounce a final judg-
ment. There was some confusion in the matter which his
Lordship could mot attempt to unravel ; but if the parties
pleased, they could apply to Lord Brougham himself on
the subject.

new rulers.—Times.
A few days ago we called the attention of our
readers to the absurdity of the promulgated report
that the return of the Tories to office would change
them to reformers, and that the mere fact of their
having power would make them become the advocates
of those measures of which, out of power, they were
systematic and uncompromising opposers. This is
a new view of the virtue of mere office, and one which
any man must see is contrary to the whole tenour of
past experience. It has always been the natural ten-
dency of office to corrupt those by whom it is held, or
in other words, to become corrupt itself, and to infect
the holders with a portion of the corruption. This
is the very principle which renders reform by the
people necessary ; and we have ever found, in
the whole course of politics, in what country sower
we make our observation, that there has never been
any reform in any government, in which reform has
not emanated from the people, and from the peo-
ple only. There is no need for citing particular in-
stances of this, because there is not one instance of

opposition to it ; and it may, therefore, be laid down
as an axiom, that the people are the source of
and the men in eice are the source of all cor-
ruption. This-Axiom must never be lost sight of, as
it is the only one upon which we can proceed in fram-
ing a prospective judgment of the conduct of public
men. We may rest assured that, be the men who they
may, and their professions what they may, they never
will, when in office, act completely up to those pro-
fessions which they make when appealing to the pub-
lic for its support in the attainment of office. This
holds, in part at least, in the case of the most liberal-
minded of official men. They become, to a certain
extent, attached to office, for the sake of office ;
and therefore the public must, even in their case,
discount a little of the expectation which is formed
of them. The Whigs and their Reform Bill prove
the only great exception on record. But if such be
the case with those who are sent into office from the
people, and by the people, how much more must it be
the case with those who are not of the people—who
have been trained and nurtured in opposition to every
popular feeling—who have been literally bred, and,
during their Whole lives, in opposition to every thing
iberal. A Conservative, in the common acceptation
of the term, is a conservator of what ? Why of all.!
offices, and all abuses of office. Those who wish, for
their own selfish ends, to sacrifice the country at the
footstool of the Tory Minister, affect to persuade us
that the Duke and Sir Robert, and those whom they may
be pleased to enlist as their assistants, will carry on
measures of reform. The allegation is not true—it is
false in fact and unfounded in philosophy—an at-
tempt at deception through which even a child
can see. What is its foundation ? Whn, simply this,
that the men who were formerly in office who were
opposed to all reforms, and who, in the time of the
Reform Ministry, though beaten by numbers, were
not convinced by argument, or one jot altered in sen-
timent or disposition, will now, that they are again in
power, support those very measures which it has bee❑

the whole business of their lives to oppose. They
who say so must have some sinister mot►ve for so say-
ing—must be bought, or c*ed for sale, to the party
in whose favour they attempt to abuse the public ear.
That " men do not gather grapes of thorns, or figs of
thistles," is an aphorism of high authority, and not the
less true that it is old ; and any one who reflects for a

moment will see how perfectly it applies to the case in
hand. The words of Dr. Lushington, a staunch and
hearty Reformer, and by no means a violent one, as
delivered at the Tower Hamlets meeting on Th
irs-
(lay last, and received with very marked applause, are
so applicable to the present case, and so well worthy
of being borne in mind, that we cannot refrain from
quoting them When he heard people say, for
God's sake trust the Duke I for heaven's sake listen
to Sir Robert Peel I and remember Catholic Ernanei-‘