The Sun.
London, England, 1834-11-03 00:00:00

LONDON,
MONDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 3, 1834.

The tests applied to Lord DURHANt by his Glasgow
friends were, Household Suffrage, Triennial Parlia-
ments, and Vote by Ballot, to all of which he pledged
himself. The topics dwelt upon by his Lordship him-
self were the perfeZtting the Reform Bill, the repeal of
the Septennial Act, the purification of the Church
Establishment of Great Britain and Ireland, the re-
form of Corporation abuses, and the continuance of
economy and retrenchment. These things did not
satisfy Mr. COLIN DUNLOP, wbo said distinctly we
required a free trade in corn, and a commutation of
taxes, with an adaptation of them to the means of those
who were to pay them. It is remarkable that though
Lord DURHAM addressed the meeting three times
after this requisition of Mr. COLIN DUNLOP, and
though his attention was again pointedly called to the
subject by a toast given by Mr. WEIR, namely,
" Free trade in Corn, and abolition of Commercial re-
strictions,"—it is, we say, remarkable that Lord
DURHAM was altogether silent upon these subjects.
His Lordship's silence is the more singular, that
when addressing himself as he did to the poli-
tical connection between France and England,
and the commercial intercourse between the two

countries, an opportunity not only presented
itself of advertiog to the topics urged by Mr. COLIN
DUNLOP, and repeated by Mr. WEIR, but it seemed
impossible to avoid taking notice of them. Again,
when his Lordship, subs;quently to Mr. WEIR's
toast, himself gave " the Working Classes," it seemed
still more impossible for his Lordship to refrain from
noticing restrictions which. diminished the employment
of the working classes. If these things are not be-
yond Lord DURHAM'S ken, they at least do not ap-
pear to be within his purview. The three tests sub-
'flitted to him, which he embodied in the two first
topics he urged, raised questions upon which there is
a great difference of opinion among the ablest and the
soundest Reformers, and we cannot see the good sense
of putting In the fore-ground disputable matter which
can lead only to disuniCin and weakness, when union
and strength among Reformers are so necessary for the
accomplishment of matters more immediately pressing.
It is very easy to declaim against pluralities and non-
residence, but we have not heard any honest Reformer
vet say, though pluralities and non-residence should be
prevented in time to come, that those who are now
possessed of pluralities should be deprived of them,
while for the sound correction of these and other
abuses in the Church Establishment of any part of the
United Kingdom, many inquiries remain to be made,
and much information to be obtained, to which Lord
DURHAM did not even advert. The same observa-
tion may be made in regard to the reform of mnnicipal
corporations ; to which this further observation is to
be added, namely, that the reform of these abuses, im-
portant as such reform is, includes only a comparatively
small portion of the community, whereas restraints
upon industry extend over the whole population.
With economy and retrenchment no one will quarrel,
but economy and retrenchment have a limit. There
is, however, no limit either to public or to private in-