The Sun.
London, England, 1834-12-05 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

It is passing strange that the Times continues to
justify the usurpation of the Duke of Wellington by
the precedent of Mr. Spring Rice, who, he says,
" held the same offices in the summer, while all his
colleagues were running about the country ; " that is
to say, Mr. Spring Rice held the same offices as the
Duke of Wellington now holds. Somehow or other,
about small things as well as great things, the Times
must lie. The Duke of Wellington is First Lord of
the Treasury now. Was Mr. Spring Rice First
Lord of the Treasury, or did he act as such in
the summer ? He did not. Lord Melbourne
was either in London, or within twenty-five miles
of London, the whole time. The Duke of Wel-
lington holds the seals of the Foreign department
now : did Mr. Spring Rice hold them during the sum-
mer, or act as Foreign Secretary ? He did not. Lord
Palmerston was in London nearly the whole time, and
transacted the business of his office as usual.—The
Duke of Wellington is Secretary of State for the Home
Department. Was Mr. Spring Rice the head of that
department, or did he act as such in the summer ? He
had occasion to actformally for Lord Duncannon on
one or two occasions ; but Lord Duncannon himself
was acting as Home Secretary in Ireland, and was in
daily communication with his own department in Lon-
don.—The Duke of Wellington is Colonial Secretary
now. So was Mr. Spring Rice during the summer ;
but the Duke has every other place, or, as the Times
confesses, " has concentrated nearly all the powers of
the Government, save only those of Chancellor, in one and
the same individual ;" whereas Mr. Spring Rice had no
office except his own. In fact, all his colleagues carried
on the business of their offices, whether in London
or not ; and there was no concentration of the powers
of Government, either in Mr. Spring Rice, or any
other individual.— There is no similarity betweer, the
two cases. The Times knows this as well as, we do ;
but it must lie; it loves a fib, to its heart, and is never
in such good humour with itself as when it comes out
with a superb falsehood, "splendide 7nendas." The
Times goes on to declare that it " cannot gainsay"
that there is an " inconvenience" in this concentration
system. " Inconvenience I!" A pretty word. Why,
not much inconvenience, for the matter of that : things
go on smoothly enough ; the sun rises and sets—the
earth turns on its axis, without fresh oiling ; and so
far as mere inconvenience goes, Sir Robert Peel is no
more wanted now than he was before the 15th of No-
vember. Indeed, for our part, we should prefer the
undisguised, single sway of the Duke of Wel-
lington, to the sham division of places and power
amongst a dozen of his puppets. But it seems
we are to have Bertrand et Raton done into
English, and performed by his Majesty's ser-
vants at the theatres now building at West-
minster ; and whilst the Duke is the " Minister,"
the real master and maker of the plot, our sleek Sir
Robert is to be the Mercer of the drama. He is to
be the idol of the people, and the plaything of Par-
liament. The Duke, to be sure, is now every thing ;
but, poor man, he is to be anything or nothing, the
moment Sir Robert returns, and is made man-milliner
to the Court. But the Mercer's return is very uncer-
tain ; and it is amusing to see what efforts ale made
to allay the natural impatience of the people for the
arrival of their favourite. A fortnight ago, he was
expected next day ; a week passed, and he was then
positively arrived at Paris, and would be here in a
day or two ; some said that he was on his way, not to
Rome, but Home ; and even yesterday, though he
was confessedly on the banks of the Tiber on the 18th,
and the Queen's page will not have reached him until
the 25th of November, it was currently reported that
he had arrived in Privy Gardens during the night.
This anxious expectation is too much for our sensibili-
ties. We wish the Mercer were arrived with all our,
heart.—Morning Chronicle.

We quite agree with the Standard, that the Duke
of Wellington must make his election between the
Conservatives and the Reformers. We have no doubt
that he will endeavour to feed both parties with hopes,
and postpone, as long as he can, a precise declaration.
of his views. But there are many honest men amoug
the Conservatives, and they will not allow him, to
throw out promises of Reform, even though he might
assure them privately that his object in so doing was to
deceive the Liberals. The Standard of last night
fairly allows that the real cause of the dismissal of the
Melbourne Cabinet was their intended Reform of the
Church, thus admitting that the whole of the state-
ments of apprehended future disagreement in that Ca-
binet, from former diversity of opinion, was a mere tub
to the whale.

" It is our conviction (says the Standard) that neither the
extravagancies of Lord Brougham, nor the virulence of Lord
Durham, neither Mr. Littleton's mean and dishonest practicer,
nor the incompetency of Mr. Charles Grant, nor Lord Pal-
merston's weak and contemptible foreign policy, no, nor alt
together, could have rendered the dismissal of the late Cabinet
so popular, as undoubtedly it is with all intelligent and upright
men, but for the avowed hostility of that Cabinet to the Esta-
blished Church. So satisfied are we of this, as to be con-
vinced that any Government which shall give cause for sus-
picion that it is tainted with like hostility, or even with indif-
ference, must make way for Lord Durham and his gang in
three months. If the late Cabinet have not been dismissed
consequently on account of its hostility to the Church, it has
much cause to complain—to complain, not only of dismissal
without an adequate motive, but of gross misrepresentation by
the Conservative Press, as well as by the Times itself. The
late Cabinet, however, has no such cause to complain—it Rasdismissed upon strictly religious grounds--it was dismissed
because a majority of its members meditated. connivance at a
partial extinction of Protestantism in Ireland,' to use Lord
Kenyon's words ; a partial extinction, involving 4 persecuting
and exterminating principle, that must have rendered the ex-
tinction ultimately complete."
That is at all events speaking out in a manly man-
ner. The Melbourne Ministry was dismissed because
it wished to reform the kiaring abuses of the Protest-
ant Church of Ireknd, which is dear to the Conserva-
tiConserva-
tiveson ncr;Ount of those very abuses. To have a
Pr°t(7.,;ant Church Establishment for a Catholic po-
"pulation is not merely a scandalous misappropriation of
public property, but a constant source of heartburn-
mg, and the cause of many of the evils that retard the
improvement of Ireland. It was known that the Mel-
bourne Ministry meant to reform the Church of ire.
land in good earnest, and this, as is honestly admitted
by the Standard, really led to its dismissal. The
Duke of Wellington has obtained power, because he
will either preserve all the abuses of the Church of
Ireland, or amuse the people with pretended reforms,
merely veiling over the deformity. He cannot, if he
would, concede any effective reform, and he must, there-
fore, throw himself boldly into the arms of the Conserva-
tives. The Standard combats the mistake of its
new ally the Times, that Lord Kenyon's letter can be
embarrassing to the Government about to be formed.
" The strength of the new Government," says our
evening contemporary, " can be found no where but
in the religious feeling of the people, and in their at-
tachment to the Church. We know of no other com-
mon principle of union among Conservatives ; there
is nothing else that we can see to combine an anti-
revolutionary party." By attachment to the Church,
is meant attachment to the vicious distribution of
Church property, to fat bishoprics, to deans and chap-
ters, to golden prebends, to pluralities and non-resi-
dence, and poor and subservient curates. But with this
explanation we admit the force of our contemporary's
argument. The Conservatives cannot be reformers of
the Church, for the great principles of union among
Conservatives is the preservation of Church abuses.
The Duke, therefore, by renouncing all his former opi-
nions, by professing himself a zealous reformer, will
not conquer the distrust of Reformers, who would
only think him a wolf in sheep's clothing ; but -ne will
assuredly provoke the hostility of the Co7dservatives.
They will not allow themselves to be dragged through
the dirt for his sake. As the Standwyl well observes,
" the attempt to govern, without one party in the
country, by balancing between two, has, within some
years past, been frequently tried ; and with such uni-
formity of failure as to mark its complete futility. A_
month would be a long term to allow to a Cabinetfounded upon such a basis of juste•nrilieuism." The
question then at issue is, whether we shall have a Con-
servative or a Reform Government ? This the Con-
' servatives undo; staid, and they give expression to their
feeling ;n a plain and unsophisticated manner. They
contend that Government ought to be conducted for
the benefit of the few at the expense of the many. All
who wish to reduce the expences of the Government to
put an end to pensions and sinecures, to make the
Church more efficient as an instrument for the diffu-

sion of divine truth, are enemies of Conservatism,
and may alone count, on the hostility of
the Conservative party. The Duke of Wellington is
only the idol of the Conservatives so long as he fights
their battles ; for, as was honestly avowed by Mr. Dun-
das at the Ipswich dinner, " they were not called upon
to decide on the personal merits of Whigs and Tories
—they were not called upon to decide whether the
Duke of Wellington, Sir R. Peel, or Lord Melbourne
was the best person to conduct the Government of the
country ; but they were called upon to decide whether
the institutions of the country were to stand or fall."
Every one knows what Conservatives mean by " insti-
tutions of the country," and by " rallying round the
altar and the throne." The boroughmongers strug-
gled for the institutions of the country. They
lost Old Sarum and Gatton—they have lost ten
Bishopricks in Ireland ; but much still remains,
and for this they are ready to struggle. The
Times, of course, protests that the Conservatives
are destroying the embryo Government, and calls
lustily on the Conservatives to fight under new
colours. "It is a false way (exclaims that journal)
of defending the Duke of Wellington, to allege that
lie is blind to the abuses of the Church of Ireland."
But whether blind or not, he must seem blind to them.
The Duke was brought in to " make a stand" for the
abuses of the Church ; and he must keep to his bar-
gain. We are glad to find the question stated in such
a way as to leave no room for mistake. The people
know what they have to expect from a Conservative
Government ; and having the means at their com-
mand, they would deserve their fate if they did not
give no quarter to the Duke. But we will not libel
te people by supposing it possible that they will sup-
port a bitter enemy of Reform, and place themselves
again under the yoke of Tories and High Churchmen.
The Duke's Ministry will be of short duration ; and
Reform will have gained greatly by the abortive at-
tempt to counteract it.—Morning Chronicle.
We har'sq the pleasure of knowing that several fresh
adhesions to tbfl King's Government have been de-
clared within the last twenty-four hours, some of which
as we yesterday anticipated, will afford most powerful
and striking plods of that manly and constitutional
feeling by which those are actuated who conscientiously
combine to preserve the country from the sacrilegious
hands of the infuriated anarchists by whom her most
sacred institutions are assailed. It is impossible not to
recur to his Majesty's reply to the Common Council.
We there find embodied in a short, powerful, and
pithy sentence all that the country is anxious to ascer-
tain. The King himself is pleased to renew the de-
claration that he is desirous of the reform of existing
abuses. With an anxiety to carry into effect the prin-
ciples which he avows, he tells us also that he hopes
the Ministers whom he may call to power will
justify his expectations and satisfy his people.
We say upon this, as we have said over and over
again before, the Whigs themselves—the honest,
conscientious, conservative Whigs—have set the
country an example of political conduct, by holding
office only so long as their colleagues busied them-
selves in correcting what really might be termed abuses.
The moment they perceived that the principles of the
Destructive party were predominating in the Council
they withdrew ; and if we were now to chalk out a
line upon which the new Ministry should move, we
would say let them take Lord Stanley and Sir James
Graham as their examples--men who are earnest in
the cause of rational reform—men who have stakes in

the country to guarantee the sincerity of their prin-
ciples—men whose abilities enable them to see and ap
preciate the dangers of the experimental school of po-
litics, and who had the good sense and good feeling
to stop at a given point, beyond which, even to ruin
and destruction, their plebeian successors would
blindly, viciously, and stupidly have rushed with
reckless desperation, preserving nothing except
their own paltry popularity with the revolutionary
faction, who, nevertheless, lord it over them,
praising them one day, and pelting them another,
demanding pledges, and holding them in subjec-
tion—the mere delegates of a party mob instead of
being the free and independent Representatives of the
British people. And yet—even after the public and
disgraceful squabblings of the Cabinet Ministers at the
Edinburgh dinner—after what everybody knows to be
the fact—we are still told that there was no dissension
in the Cabinet, and now we see that Lord Melbourne
(the persecuted victim of his late hungry colleagues)
has thought it necessary to make speech number two
to his admirers in the country, in order to repeat the
assertions which other people have made upon this
point ; and to infer that he and his friends have been
shamefully treated by his Majesty, in the teeth of his
Lordship's own declaration, one day old, that he did
not feel himself personally aggrieved ; that there was
no intrigue ; and that he was perfectly satisfied with
what had happened. We have admitted before, and
are ready to admit again, that Lord Melbourne made
no statement of existing differences in the Cabinet ;
nor that in his answers to the prudent and pertinent
questions of the Sovereign he said that it was at
that moment impossible to carry on the Government.
What was said was that such were the divided opi-
nions of the individual Members of the Cabinet that
when the time came for'the discussion of certain topics,
then would come the dissensions. The water will not
boil till the fire is lighted. The elements of combus-
tion were in the Cabinet, but they would not, as Lord
Brougham would elegantly and wisely have said,
" constitutionally flare up" till the match was applied;
but then the result was so sure that even if, by his
Majesty's authority, the debateable questions were kept
out of discussion in the Cabinet, and some irrespon-
sible Radical started the same hare in the House of
Commons, the sight would be seen of one portion of
his Majesty's Ministers voting one, and another the
other way. Everybody will agree that " prevention is
better than cure," and accordingly the country feels
deeply grateful for the firmness and decision of its
King, by which a consummation so devoutly not to be
wished has been averted. To the reply of his Ma-
jesty to the City address, and to the rectitude, inde-
pendence and integrity of Sir R. Peel, we look with con-
fidence for the successful issue of public affairs. It
has been said that discontents and hickerings will arise
as to the occupancy of office and the formation of the
Ministry. We disbelieve this. We believe the ge-
neral disposition of all those likely to be affected by
the new arrangements to be that of cordially uniting
for the good of the country, and we think Sir Robert
Peel will not be long in gathering round him men of
honour, and who, even if they have hitherto varied
upon minor points of policy, will be unanimous in the
performance 'of the great duty of preserving the con-
stitution from the danger in which the briefest ascend-
ancy of Radicalism would infallibly involve it.—Morn-
ing Post.

It is stated by the Courrier Belge of the Ist inst.,
upon " the most respectable authority," that the first
act of foreign policy of the Duke of Wellington, after
taking the oaths as Minister, was a note sent by a
Carlist messenger to the King of Holland, to announce
to him that the formal intention of the new English
Cabinet was to make no change in the line of foreign
policy adopted by the preceding Ministry. The same
paper also states, thrat a note of the same tenor has
been sent to Berlin, Madrid, Frankfort, Paris, Vienna,
and Constantinople. This intelligence, as far as it
goes, tends to corroborate the account which the
Morning Herald received from its Belgian correspon-
dent, and published on Tuesday, respecting the pur-
port of the message from the Duke, said to have been
delivered at the Hague. That a change of Ministry
would have the effect of disturbing all settled relations
in Europe, of violating the faith of treaties, and plung-
ing the nations into the calamities of a general war, no
person save and except the fabricators of " general
alarm," or the dupes of the artifices of faction,
for a single moment believed. Yet such have been
the disastrous prospects held out by the agitators,
who now labour to get all society into confusion, that
they may ride upon the storm of their own creation.
But it is one thing not to disturb the settled relations
with Foreign Powers, and it is another to go in with
the truckling, vacillating, and un-English system of
the Palmerston policy ; if that could be called a system
which seemed only governed by chance, and tossed
about perpetually upon the waves of accident. That
the Duke of Wellington will attempt to dethrone
the present King of the French and restore the
banished Bourbons, no sane person could believe,

even if the Duke of Wellington had given no formal
assurance to the contrary. The Duke of Wellington
must be very anxious to destroy his own work, if he
were now to advise his Sovereign to retract his
recognition of Louis Philippe, the Duke having
been the Minister who advised that recognition, and
gave the example of acknowledging the revolutionized
dynasty of France to all the other States of Europe.
But to acknowledge the sovereignty of the French
King is a very different matter from allowing the
course of English policy to be made blindly subser-
vient to his views, as it was made by the Whigs, under
the incapable Administration of the late Secretary for
Foreign Affairs, both in the case of Belgium, which
has been reduced to the condition of a French pro-
vince, in the unprincipled attack upon Holland, as we
before stated, and in the case of Spain, the quadruple
alliance having been drawn up for no other purpose
than to enable the citizen-despot to establish in that
country his no-principled system of Government, nick-
named the juste milieu system, and to which is mainly
attributable all the calamities with which that unfortu-
nate country is now oppressed and nearly overwhelmed.
We cannot believe the Duke of Wellington will be so
utterly neglectful of the interests of his country as to
allow England to be thus drawn, as Lord Palmerston
was drawing her, in passive humiliation, in the wake of
French policy. Let him preserve peace with France,
but let him beware of the wheedling, cajoling, ensnar-
ing, and treacherous policy of the wily Doctrinaires,
and their intriguing chief--the Citizen-King, who has
been all along secretly courting the alliance of Russia,
while he has held the Whig genius of our Foreign
Department in his leading-strings. Again, although
we do not advise the Duke of Wellington to break up
our settled relations with Prussia or Russia, yet if to
consult for the political interests, the honour, and the
commercial influence of England be, in his estimation,
nobler objects for a British Statesmen to pursue, than
to truckle to and conciliate the Holy Alliance, lie will
use all legitimate means to counteract the selfish pro-
ject which Prussia, is pursuing, to the exclusion of
British manufactures among the German States by
means of her commercial union. He will also take
more decisive steps than the Whigs took, who indeed
took none, to prevent Turkey from falling into the grasp
of Russia, and our trade from being ruined in the
Levant. He will also speak in a tone that becomes a
British Statesman to Russia, touching the Treaty of
Vienna, and the destruction of the neutrality of Poland.
He will, we trust, at all events, exert himself to put a
stop to the persecution of the Poles, over whom the
shield of British protection ought to be extended. We
equally trust he will not go on with the absurd and
abortive Palmerston system of protocolling with regard
to Holland and Belgium ; but, if he cannot bring
them immediately to terms, leave them to fight out
their own quarrels ; and in all cases where England is
not bound by treaty to interfere in the disputes of
foreign States, act strictly upon the principle of non-
intervention, which the Whigs always proclaimed, but,
except in the case of the Poles, always violated.—
Morning Herald.
It has rarely fallen to our lot to perform a more gra-
tifying duty than that of inserting the following letter
from Lord Brougham to the present Lord Chancellor
Lyndhurst, respecting the recent offer of his services
as Chief Baron of the Exchequer. Our words on
Monday last, when the former admirers of Lord
Brougham were silent, respecting his claims to pro-
tection from the poisoned shafts of his enemies, and the

latter were allowed to ride rough-shod over his
well-earned reputation, were—" It is true, that he
urged the matter strenuously, but not dishonour-
ably—he urged it as a matter of economy to the
country, not in the shape of a desire of place—he
claimed nothing for his services—he claimed employ-
ment only. He did not offer himself as a Govern-
ment hireling—he expressly claimed not only exemp-
tion from supporting it, but the right of opposing it.
In all this, notwithstanding the comments of some of

our contemporaries, we see nothing very specially
disgraceful. We think, unquestionably, that Lord
Brougham, great and numerous as the benefits are
which he has conferred upon his country, might well
have spared to his opponents and personal enemies the
opportunity of turning the circumstance to his discre-
dit ; but until the insinuations have been proved—
until Lord Lyndhurst, a good authority in law, what-
ever he may be in point 9f fact, has done somewhat
more than merely publish the contents of the letters
upon his own ipse dixit, at his own dinner-table, we
shall take leave to think as well as we have ever done

of Lord Brougham, and to prophecy in addition, that
though under a cloud of almost unanimous censure at
present, he will, in due season, re-appear, in all the
brightness and splendour which extraordinary talent
and extraordinary genius can throw around him."
That we were not mistaken in the view which we took
of the character and conduct of the Noble Lord, the

letter which we now copy from the Globe of last night
(the letter will be found in another part of The Sun,)
most amply proves. His Lordship seems to admit, indi-
rectly, the indiscretion of which he was guilty in fur-
nishing, for a moment, to his personal and political
enemies, the opportunity of misrepresenting his mo-
tives, and tarnishing his fame, by ascribing to his con-
duct reasons for which there existed no legitimate
grounds ; but his letter proves, in every other respect,
that in making the offer he was actuated by the purest
patriotism—by the loftiest and most commendable am-
bition—by the honest zeal of a man who leaves all
considerations behind him in order to serve his country
by saving its money, and improving its institutions.
That he was actuated by any other motives we defy
his worst enemies to prove—that he was likely
to be actuated by them, the whole course of
his life—his innumerable services to his country—and

his unceasing zeal to accomplish every needful re-
form in Church and State—so amply disprove, as to
render it a work of pure supererogation to enter into
the slightest detail.—Morning Advertiser.

Lord Melbourne has at length spoken out, and vin-
dicated not only what we said respecting the dismissal
of himself and colleagues from the King's councils, but
given the lie to those who, in order to palliate that
sudden, extraordinary, and, we think, dangerous step,
attempted to fasten upon him the infamous charge of
having turned his colleagues out of office, by repre-
senting to his Majesty that there was disunion in the
Cabinet upon important points of domestic policy, and
that, in consequence of that disunion, he could not
hope to carry on the Government for any length of
time. We told our readers, from the beginning, that
the statements of the renegade Whig and Tory
press on this subject had not the slightest founda-
tion—we declared it to be false that Lord Melbourne
had ever spoken to his Majesty, either of dis-
sensions in the Cabinet, or difficulties in carrying
on the Government—and we added emphatically, that
even if he had been inclined to make mention of such
matters—supposing them to have existed, which they
did not—the Royal mind was made up on the subject,
and did not allow the time necessary for the perpetra-
tion of what would have been treachery to his col-
leagues, and treason to the cause of Reform. In all
these assertions we are borne out by the answer of
Lord Melbourne to the address of his friends and
neighbours, the Reformers of Derby. " The death of
Earl Spencer," said the Noble Lord, " having de-
prived the Government of Lord Althorp's services in
the lower House of Parliament, it became his (Lord
Melbourne's) duty to take the pleasure of his Majesty,
and make the requisite arrangements for filling up the
deficiency. It was sufficient to say that, in taking
these steps, his Ma.jesty intimated to him that he would
not impose upon him that task; but that he intended
to resort for that purpose to other Counsellors." We
make no comment upon this point—he who runs may
read in it the most ample verification of all that we
have stated. His Lordship, however, wentfarther than
merely to intimate the painful manner in which his Ca-
binet had been broken up—he declared without cir-
cumlocution that all the statements which had appeared
respecting it in the adverse portion of the press were
" erroneous and unfounded.' " Every rumour," said
he, " had been seized upon; and although it was the
nature of the press to seize upon every statement in
important cases, and although he, on ordinary occa.
sions, did not blame such proceedings, yet, in the
present one, it had, undoubtedly, far overstepped the
truth, and resorted to the publication of statements,
none of which were correct. Circumstances had been
stated as facts which were utterly false, and where any

appearance of truth seemed to be made out, or had
any just foundation, it was so perverted as to be calcu-
lated to more mislead the public than absolute falsehood
itself." With regard to internal divisions in the Cabinet
his Lordship was not less emphatic and positive.
" Nothing of this sort," said he, " would at all have led
to its breaking up if the King had not dissolved it.
I beg,' said his Lordship, to give a clear, distinct,
and emphatic denial to this assumption. That some
shades of difference on important measures did exist,
and would always exist, might be the case ; but that
any such variation in sentiment has caused the event
is erroneous and untrue." Referring our readers to
what his Lordship said respecting those measures of
Reform which his Cabinet would have introduced, had
life been granted it, and made it its endeavour to pass,
we conclude our brief analysis by pointing the atten.
tion of our readers to the important explanation fur-
nished by his Lordship, of the meaning attached by
him to the expression that he did not feel personally
aggrieved by the breaking up of his Cabinet.
Of this expression the Tory journals have laid
hold as a complete and entire proof, not only that
Lord Melbourne had confessed to the King that he
could not long carry on the Government, but of his
approbation of the conduct pursued by his Majesty.
What, however, does Lord Melbourne say now ?
Why, simply that he was not " personally aggrieved,"
because the question was not a personal, but a public
one—because it was a matter of state policy, not of
individual liking or disliking--because it was not Lord
Melbourne and his colleagues who were dismissed as
Ministers—but their policy, as being too much i❑ ac-
cordance with the spirit of the age, and too rapid in
the uprooting of abuses, to be palatable to those who
depend upon their existence for the maintenance of
their party. In a word, the truth is now out in all its
fullness ; the Melbourne Administration fell not be
cause it would not, but because it would, reform ; and
we cannot help agreeing with his Lordship, that the
event was as sudden as it was unexpected—that it had
" occurred abruptly," to use his Lordship's language,
and " at a time when the public mind was in a state
of especial calm and quiet. '—Morniug Advertiser.
It appears to us that nothing can be more useless
than to proceed further with explanatory statements,
whether in the way of justification or the contrary, as
to the causes which have led to the breaking up of
Lord Melbourne's Government, until they can be
given on an authority which no man will dispute.
There is extracted from the Derby Mercury an ad-
dress of confidence to his Lordship, and regret for his
loss of office, which drew from the noble Viscount an
answer containing many just and valuable sentiments,
together with wholesome advice to the Dissenters,
warning them against disunion. But with regard
to the dissolution of the Ministry, his Lordship
deals, for the most part, in general terms, and
these importing decided condemnation of the reports
which have been circulated by the press. In one
instance only the late Premier states a distinct
fact in the affirmative--namely, that his efforts to
supply the place of Lord Althorp in the Cabinet
were met by his Majesty with " an intimation that
lie would not impose such a task upon him, but
would resort to other Counsellors." It would be inte-
resting no doubt to ascertain, which Lord Melbourne
has not given us the means of doing, at what particular
point of his Lordship's communication with his Ma-
jesty, and at what specific stage of his efforts to find a
successor for Lord Althorp, this abrupt notice of the
Royal disposition was afforded. Some unwelcome pro-
posal, we are convinced, must have been made to the
Sovereign, which called forth such a sudden announce-
ment, for Lord Melbourne no where says that the in-
tention to " resort to other Counsellors" was notified to
him at an early stage of their deliberative interview at
Brighton. We repeat, however, that it is useless to
continue bandying about contradictions, where the par-
ties have as yet no official tribunal to appeal to. The time
must soon come when full and authorized explanations
will be called for ; and until then we shall repose our
entire confidence in the sources whence our own past
statements of fact have been derived. As for the
wanton abuse which has been flung out upon us by
one particular clique of scamps, of whose sordid envy,
and undying malignity, their language is as thoroughly
characteristic as it would be disgraceful to any other
portion of the daily press, we are just enough affected
by it to reiterate with more earnestness and determina-
tion than ever the avowals by which it has been pro-
voked. We adhere, then, in the most binding and
solemn manner, to all the views and principles of Re-
form to which we have ever pledged this journal,
for England, for Ireland, and every class of their in-
habitants. We declare our own perfect and abso-
lute indifference as to the hand from which we and
our countrymen receive the blessing of improved in-
stitutions ; and we have so deep and just a sense
of the value of that great law which was obtained for
the united kingdom, by the energetic exertions of the
people themselves, through the instrumentality of
Lord Grey's Administration, as to be convinced that

no other Administration can, in spite of it, oppress
or misgovern this emancipated realm. We are sure
that neither the Duke of Wellington nor Sir Robert
Peel could attempt so desperate an enterprise. The
frenzy of the undertaking would appal them, or any
men beyond the precincts of Bedlam ; and yet it is for
this testimony which we bear to the Reform Bill, and
this slighting of the utmost force of the Conservatives,
if directed against its provisions or against its conse-
quences, that the flood-gates of virulence and scurri-
lity have been opened upon us ; and because our free
and independent judgment respecting the prospect of the
country under one party or another, both being alike but
willow-rods compared with the supreme sceptre of the
national sovereignty—it is because this our judgment of
what may be expected from Conservatives and what from
Whigs differs from that of a print which has noto-
riously no permission to utter an opinion of its own,
but has interests to serve which are not those of the
nation, that the menials spirt their noisome tobacco-
juice in our faces. Now, justice to the English
people requires that equa/ justice should be rendered to
all classes of English statesmen. Why should the
Duke of Wellington and other Conservatives be
abused for changing their system of measures with the
changed condition of the country ? Ought they to be
praised for stubbornly, stupidly, and wickedly striving
to govern the kingdom on anti-reform principles, after
the whole anti-reform machinery has been swept away
by law ? Ought the Duke and his friends, on the
other hand, to be excommunicated, because now
that a measure which he opposed has become
law, he proposes to obey the law, to administer
the law, and to adapt the character of his policy
to that of the changed institutions of the country,
which he cannot unchange if he were ever so bent on
it, unless the people of England, having power in
their hands, choose to restore it to the oligarchy from
whom they have wrested it ? Certainly it would be
most convenient for the Whigs (we wish we could find
a better than that obsolete term), but for the Whigs it
would be most convenient, it would amount to a perpe-
tuity of power, if the Conservatives were to cling, un-
der all the most varying circumstances, to a system of
measures by which it would be now impracticable to
govern England, and the very first proposal of
which would oust them at once from office. The
Conservatives, we assume, have too much com-
mon sense for this. They will try to act accord-
ing to the only mode by which it is at this time pos-
sible to carry on the affairs of the Empire, and for
this implied promise they are absurdly, but incessantly,
vilified. When Mr. Canning became Prime Minister,
no man could be more impressed than he was with the
moral and political necessity of Catholic emancipation;
yet he threw it overboard by stipulation during
George IV.'s life, and quashed all mention of the
Test Act and of Parliamentary Reform. To the
two first of these measures, and to their expediency
and sound policy, Canning had pledged his reputation,
pronouncing that the peace and safety of the realm
required that they should be carried. Yet he gave up
these vital benefits, and thereby to that extent was an
" apostate." What, then did a large body of the
Whigs—Mr. Brougham, Mr. Abercromby, Lord
, and Lord
Lansdowne, the Duke of Devonshire
Hollar ?
No
Holland ?Did,
they all applauded him
they condemn or abuse Mr.
Canning ;
them became his colleagues. Here was apostsome of
acy from
good to bad—from a principle whose excellence was
acknowledged, to an indefinite postponement of its

application ! And Canning and the Whigs were
right. They did all that they had it in their power
toexecute for the cause of freedom. They could do
no more, therefore they attempted nothing more, and
the people of England approved them. But now, be-
cause the Duke and his friends hold out assurances
that they will turn from bad to good, and govern ac-
cording to popular principles, not being able to help
it, with them it is called " apostacy," and every other
rancorous name, although the men who submitted to
an evil necessity, and ruled on Court principles, be-
cause, as they said, they could not help it (and many
of the late Ministry were among them), were raised into
idols by the political worshippers of the hour ? Is this
justice ?—we appeal to our countrymen, is it justice ?
—or gross iniquity and miserable faction ? On this
gr,ound of reasoning we are prepared to stand.—Times.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DEC. 4.