The Sun.
London, England, 1834-05-05 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

We confess that the state of the questions affect-
ing the practical grievances and political rights of
the dissenters, is extremely unsatisfactory. We
much lament that Ministers did not open the Par-
liament with a bold and direct recognition of the
claims of the dissenters, and a bona fide promise of
the earliest practicable legislative redress. The
public proceedings of the dissenters previous to the
session were marked by moderation and good sense ;
and they rested their case on its simple merits,
without resort to any meretricious mode of agita-
tion. All the various sects of religionists appeared
to be united in one great common cause. The new
distribution of electoral power derived from the re-
form of the representation—the liberal character of
the administration—the illumination of public opi-
nion, entitled them to assume a firm and bold posi-
tion. The House of Lords might over-awe the
ministers, but the dissenters relied on a reformed
House of Commons and on their own active and
invincible organization. The unfortunate Marriage
Bill fell like a thunderbolt on their sanguine hopes ;
and the non-appearance of any ministerial measures
for the relief of their other grievous political wrongs,
naturally reduced their confidence in the Govern-
ment. Still the leaders and the most sensible mem-
bers of the dissenting body ascribed their disappoint-
ment rather to the lack of power than the want of
will in ministers. They forthwith demonstrated to
the legislature and their political enemies the Tories,
a determination to pursue and attain their rights.
Ministers in Parliament, and at various interviews
with metropolitan and provincial deputations,
promptly acknowledged the reasonableness of their
complaints. Confidence in the earliest practical
redress appeared to succeed the recent dissatisfac-
tion and misgivings. A ministerial measure of
church rate relief was promised, but its appearance
again raised the storm. The dissenters and a con-
siderable body of church laymen had long denounced
the unjust principle and the pecuniary burden of
church rates. They now contend that, although
the ministerial measure may reduce the fiscal ex-

tortion ten shillings in the pound, yet that the
transfer of the moiety of expenditure to the land
tax (part of the state income of England, Wales,
Scotland, and Ireland) is the proposition of a prin-
ciple more obnoxious than the existing mode of
ecclesiastical taxation. They justly argue that it sanc-
tions by a modern law the very principle of an an-
cient statute which they seek to terminate, and
that it adds 250,000/. a-year to the permanent
revenues of an overgrown church establish-
ment. The dissenters urge that the mea-
sure, instead of any relief, is viewed in all its re-
lations as an aggravation of the grievance, and an
extension of it from England and Wales to Scotland
and Ireland, inasmuch as the 250,000/. in lieu of the

compulsory tribute is abstracted from the common
treasury. Such is the unsatisfactory state of these
• questions, and in the meantime it is impossible that
at this late period of the session any perfect mea-
sure of parochial registration can be prepared, con-
nected as that question is with other important
pending legislation. And will the Tory peers ad-
mit the dissenters to the universities ? Now, under
these circumstances we hope that the government
will not perplex themselves and press forward crude
or unpopular measures, but give an honourable pro-
mise of satisfaction in the next session. And, in
the mean time, we trust that the dissenters will not
push matters to extremes, but make some allow-
ance for the difficulties of the government. The
dissenters, disappointed in their reasonable demands,
have been " rising in price" and calling out for se-
paration of church and state. Will they gain by

this extreme and premature course, and may they

riot play the game of the common enemy, the To-
ries ? Will it not lead to a schism among the dis-
senters ? We shall hereafter discuss this new and
critical position. In the mean time, we trust the
dissenters will weigh well the consequences of any
steps they may take, before they commit themselves
too far to recede.—Morning Chronicle.
Great interest is attached to Mr. W. Harvey's
motion, which comes on this evening, for an address
to his Majesty, praying a revisal of the particular,
items of the Pension List. A still more pressing
(if not so general) importance belongs to this ex-
pected discussion, from a belief, which, strange as
it may appear, is extensively prevalent, that Minis-
ters feel themselves bound by considerations of
delicacy towards the Crown, or some equivalent
motive, to resist the course proposed by Mr. W.
Harvey, and in case of being left in a minority on
that question, forthwith to tender their resignations.
It is merely because of the existence and currency
of such a rumour that we deem it worth observing
on,—the extreme want of judgment which it ascribes
to his Majesty's Ministers, or to whichsoever of
them might be involved in the imputation, render-
ing it altogether preposterous and incredible in the
eyes of rational men. The opposition to the medi-
tated address is manifestly a different topic
from the subsequent conduct of his Ma-
jesty's Ministers, whether in retaining office
or resigning it. To the argument on which
that opposition is said to be founded we can-
not subscribe. It pleads the maintenance of good
faith with his Majesty, as an insurmountable obsta-
cle to any tampering with the pension list as settled
by act of parliament. If Mr. Harvey's or any
other motion should meditate a reduction of the
gross amount of the pension list, already granted to
King William, even by 20s. per annum, we should
be the first to exclaim against such an infraction of
a concluded bargain, or, at all events, such a vio-
lation of a clear and acknowledged understanding.
as utterly unfair and dishonest. But is this the
case ? Mr. Harvey's motion, if we have understood
the notice of it correctly, recommends an examina-
tion by Parliament of the public grounds on which
each separate pension (above, we presume, a certain
amount), has been granted, and an exercise of
the right of addressing the Crown, or re-
duce or prospectively revoke, such grant, ac-
cording to the merits of the case, or the condition
of the parties. Now, as there is not a syllable here
implied about any intention to cut down the sum-
total of the pension list, or to break through the
letter of the contract entered into with the King,

'let us ask, on the other hand, would such a pr;-
Reeding on the part of the House of Commons be
at variance with the spirit of that engagement ?
The law of 1831, which determined the amount of
the civil list under its respective heads, allotted a
c,..7tainsum of money per annum to be granted by
his m:i. iesty in pensions ; but, like every other ap-
plication 01 the Royal prerogative known to the
constitution of
this country, the grant of pensions
was never to be made, but subject to certain well-
understood conditions, and on the responsibility of
the sworn ministers of the Crown. If, therefore,
there should appear on the face of the pension
list to be grants made to parties not compre-
hended within these conditions 1f pensions, large
or otherwise, have in fact been bestowed upon
men and women (or on their families) to whom the
slightest service, or capability of service, in
.letters,
science, civil affairs; or warfare, at any period of
their existence, cannot by any human skill or inge-
nuity be traced—if there by persons, not of condi-
tion, nor fallen into indig,enca by inevitable and
therefore blare; Bless causes, placed i 4 the enjoyment
of pensions amounting collectively to many thou-
sand pounds, and therefore being no other than
interlopers and depredators upon a fund especially
destined by the legislature as a support for merito-
rious claimants on Royal (that is, on national) gra-
titude or compassion, let us calmly ingairo p rea-
sonable minds whether such be not cases of gross
abuse, and fit subjects for a resort on behalf of the
people of England to that boasted shield of the pub-
lic interests, Ministerial responsibility It is true,
that at the time such unconstitutional grants were
made and first submitted in the annual accounts to
Parliament, the House of Commons—the unre-
formed House of Commons—did nothing towards
rectifying each instance of abuse as it arose; nothing
to impeach the misapplication of the public money,
or to bring to his reckoning that corrupt minister
through whose interference, or by whose connivance

an unfit claimant had been so provided for. But
is it a reason why the law should never be en-
forced against delinquents, that it had not been
appealed to at the earliest momentiby a House of
Commons which was itself a sharer in the crimes of
the Ministry, and in the public plunder which they
distributed among their adherents ? Is it a reason
because, when the people had no efficient represen-
tatives, and could obtain no practical remedy for
the evils inflicted on them by the most gross mis-
government, that now, when they have chosen pro-
tectors of their interests, and now, when the same
wrnmrs continue to press upon them, they should
make no examples of the still unclkastised offenders,
nor put on record any warning for the future? On
these grounds we feel no small surprise at the hos-
tility which is said to be entertained by a reformed
administration to an inquiry into misdeeds, in which
they, at least, are not conscious of having partici-
pated. As for any motives imputed to the mem-
ber for Colchester other than his avowed motives
for bringing forward this question, we have nothing
to do with them ; the only consideration for
Parliament ought to be, " whether a sufficient
foundation for an inquiry has been publicly laid?"
It is not, we must add, the pensioners them-
selves against whom, as a body, the indigna-
tion of the people ought to be directed, but
against those unfaithful stewards of the state who
have lavished its resources upon them. But, leav-
ing at this stage the question, whether an opposi-
tion to the intended motion can be justified on the
part of his Majesty's reform Ministry, let us turn
to another branch of this subject, and on the hypo-
thesis of a majority dividing against them, ask what
ought then to be their conduct ? The answer is
suggested at once by the nature of the change
which they have themselves effected in the compo-
sition of Parliament, in the relations between the
people and the House of Commons, and by their
own consequent position as administrators of a mo-
narchy now for the first time, strictly speaking, con-
stitutional. They ought to submit with deference
to the voice of Parliament, concur with a good
grace in the proposed inquiry, and act like men
who understood the real drift of their own professed
principles, and their own already executed measures,
by taking the will of the nation expressed through
its representatives for their guide on this important
question. Resign in defence of a Tory pension
list ! Suffer martyrdom at last for that public
enemy whom it has ever been their pride to wage
war against, and latterly their boast to overthrow !
Sacrifice themselves, and whatever fame they
had earned, on that very altar of corruption
whose idols they had already demolished,
and whose priests, with the help of the people of
England, they had expelled! There is nothing in
the history of political weakness and cowardice to
be set against an act of suicide like this. If Lord
Grey's Cabinet be tired of office, or scared by the
risks of manifold failure in which they have in-
volved themselves, and by their apparently slender
chance of extrication, can they devise no pretext
for dissolving their government less odious than
this wretched one of an unsuccessful apostacy to
the malflactices of Toryism in its very sanctuary—
the back-stairs and purlieus of the court? There
are at this moment paths enough (and we grieve to
say so) to an honourable, or at least a not disgrace-
ful retreat, for Lord Grey and his ill-assorted col-
leagues. There are causes for resignation com-
pleted, or in progress, which would secure to the
present ministers the warm sympathies and cordial
gratitude of the people ? A section of the court,
and a considerable section of the old oligarchy in
the House of Lords, would rejoice at such an open-
ing for their own revived dominion. Shortsighted
and foolish beings 1 For what period would
they speculate on holding the reins of government
in the teeth of that House of Commons which has
often outvoted Lord Grey? If the Duke of Wel-
lington, for example's sake, or one high& in rank
than the Duke of Wellington, had, while we are
writing, the Whigs out of Downing-street, what
would be their first question ? Would it not be
an inquiry into the sum-total of Tory strength in
the House of Commons, as compared with the
whole of the combined liberal interest ? And what
would be the next question of the Duke of Wel-
lington ? " Will your Majesty permit me to re-
sign, seeing that there is a majority of 3 to 1 against
me ?" What then would be the unavoidable re-
sult of this apprehended folly of the Whigs ? They
would,—going out upon a worthy and national
ground—have parliament and people with them,
and be recalled to power in a week. They would, on
the contrary, resigining for the Pension List,
draw upon their own heads the mass of exe-
crations hitherto concentrated against the To-
ries. They would raise the Duke's party
to comparative popularity ; the nation would
accept with eagerness that party for its epheme-
ral ruler, as less hateful, and a thousand times less
despicable than the recreant and irreclaimable
Whigs ; and the principles of rational reform after
a time, would degenerate into those of radical extra-
vagance and fury, the Destructives rising to their
bad eminence, on the downfall of Whigs, Tories,
church, King, and constitution. Let us hope that
so mad a scheme as this of making common caused
with the pension list will even yet be abandoned by
the existing government. There is more at stake
than any single administration. Endless confusion
must follow such a mistake. We have heard that
some well-wishers of the Ministry mean to propose
an amendment,—by way of back-door for getting
out of the dilemma. It is to extend the field of in-
quiry to compensations, &c. ; and to institute a
committee instead of an address. But one thing is
certain. If the remedy after inquiry—viz., a power
to revoke—be withheld by the amendment, while
the original motion embraces it, that amendment will
fail both within doors and without. It will be looked
upon as a paltry subterfuge, and will recoil upon
the ministers for whose accommodation it is intend-
ed. This is to us, and will we fear to our readers,
have proved a very painful subject.—Tinges.

STONY COVERING OF THE SKIN.—I have
at present under my care a man, who is nearly en-
crusted with a stone like skin, very closely resembling
the barnacles of the native oyster, or what is called
" rough casting," so frequently seen on the outside of
lath or plaster houses. He cannot sleep for any
length of time, because the recumbent position causes
in him the sensation of lying upon a board thickly
studded with nails, or as he expresses it, " lying on a
bag of sticks." The first appearance of this covering
occurred about six months ago, since which time it
has been rapidly increasing, and little doubt exists but
that in a short time the man will become as thoroughly
encased in a hard coat as the armhdillo or the rhino-
ceros.—Mr. Kitching, Surgeon of Aldersgate-street,
in " The Lancet."

A decent-looking woman, named Bridget
Gale, was on Thursday night brought before Mr.
Halls at Bow-street, charged with having been found
in Craven-street, Strand, in a state of nudity, with the
exception of her chemise, the remainder of her dress
being scattered on the pavement. She had been, she
said, for the last week most grievously tormented by
the evil one, and on that morning, while sitting at
work, the Saviour came and told her to go to the end
of Craven-street, and then begin to throw off her
clothes, and to continue to do so until she should ar-
rive at the house No. 4. She was then to take off her
left shoe and stocking, which, together with her apron,
she was to cast from her. The remainder of her
clothes, with the exception of her chemise, was then
to be removed, and having completed her stripping,
she was to knock at No. 4, and the gentleman who
appeared was to save her soul from damnation. The
defendant, who told her story in a collected and ra-
tional manner, said, in answer to the magistrate, that
she was the wife of a private in the Ist Regiment of
Foot Guards. She did not, she said, consider her
conduct either indecent or immoral. She added, that
she was shortly to be married, as she was tired of her
husband. Mr. Halls having directed that the defend-
ant should be taken care of in the station for the night,
yesterday morning, when she was again brought for-
ward, she repeated her strange story. The magistrate
directed that the poor woman should be handed over
to the care of her husband, who came to the office, on
learning where she was, for the purpose of conveying
her home.