The Sun.
London, England, 1834-09-04 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

submission to the suggestions of a better wisdom, or a
submission to those common rules, which are, in all
societies of men, found to conduce to success, what-
ever may be the business in hand. From Babel down-
wards we have never yet heard of the enterprise that
was forwarded by a confusion of tongues ; and it is a
maxim of experience that too many irons in the fire do
not expedite the works of a forge. But it is asked,
would we exclude the motions of independent mem-
bers ? Or should the Ministry occupy the whole field
of legislation ? Certainly, it is clear that the better
the Government, and the better the management of the
majority supporting it in the House, the less are the
occasions or the opportunities for the motions of inde-
pendent members. If the Ministry were seen selecting
objects according to their importance, and preparing their
measures carefully, and pushing them on resolutely,
men of judgment, who had projects worth listening
to, would not interfere with the train of measures steadily
proceeding in the order of expediency, and they would
wait their time, or the adoption of their plans by an
intelligent and active Government. And this brings
us to the remark we have before made, that an able
and diligent Ministry, that employed its various means
and resources which no individual legislator can pos-
sess for the best preparation of the most necessary
measures, would still the clamour of the Parliamentary
projectors, as the men of sense and character, satis-
fied with what was doing, would forbear from urging
their own proposals on the attention of a fully and
usefully occupied House ; and the quacks and block-
heads left to themselves in the business of interruption,
would soon be put to silence by the general senti-
ment of disgust at their obstructive intrusions. As
matters, however, have been ordered, or disordered,
the whole thing has been a scramble—every one
snatching at his favourite measure—all balking and
baffling each other—and feeling with too much truth
that there was nothing balked, or baffled, that
had claims to a more forbearant treatment. In
remarking on the pitch to which the art of doing
nothing with the greatest possible noise had been car-
ried in the last Session, we observed that something
like the principle upon which this very undesirable suc-
cess depended might be traced in the mismanagement
of those ships in which every man proposes his own
manoeuvre ; and we added, that the confusion would be
more admirable still in those cases, if the man at the
helm were as ignorant of his business as the crew of
discipline. We afterwards followed out the same illus-
tration, and the example is seized upon to show that
we require of Parliament the submission to a Minister
which the crew should yield to the captain of a ship.
We need not observe how stupid or disengenuous is
this reading of our instance. The Commons have been
the most submissive, and noisy, and inefficient crew in
the service of the country ; but who has held the helm ?
—the Bear in the boat :
" He ne'er suspects his want of skill,
But blunders on from ill to ill ;
And when he fails of all intent,
Blames only unforeseen event :
On other rocks misguides the realm,
And thinks a pilot at the helm."
But nevertheless—
" The beasts with admiration stare,

We will endeavour, in fewer words than the Times
employed yesterday, to put an end to our personal
contest with that journal, having, as we believe, al-
ready sufficiently exposed its stupid attempt to turn
against us the courtesy of our Madrid correspondent.
The Times admits that we conveyed its parcel gratis,
and that it only received one packet from us, and now
insults the understanding of its readers by bungling
attempts at wit, in an endeavour to sustain its previous
absurd charges and the statement of its Madrid corre-
spondent, as though it were possible by such means
to escape the ridicule of so contemptible a position.
Any child would ask, what was the Morning Chro-
nicle to get by conveying the packet of the Times ?
and the Times only would reply by such trash as it
uses to elude the question. Who but the Times
would require such an act of courtesy upon any other
terms than those upon which it was actually performed
by the Morning Chronicle? The Times now says—
One point, however, still requires explanation. Our cor-
respondent says that he sent two dispatches—one by a courier
of the Spanish Government, who started 24 hours before Mr.
Maberly's courier, and a second by Mr. Maberly's courier,
which was to be delivered to us from the Chronicle office.
Our correspondent further 'states, that the second did not con-
tain the Queen's speech, whereas the first did. We received
but one : that came to us through the Chronicle office, and it
did contain the Queen's speech ; so that it would seem that by
some means or other the dispatch which our' correspondent
sent by the Spanish courier fell into the hands of Mr. Ma-
berly's courier, whereas that sent by Mr. Maberly's courier
never reached us. The Chronicle either cannot or will not
explain this little hitch in the transaction, so that we must
continue our exertions to solve the mystery ourselves."
Our contemporary is a rare glutton. Guilt gene-
rally leads to stupidity : if it has not in this case, the
Times would have needed no more explanation on this
point. For the benefit of the editor of the Times, for
no other mortal man can need it, we will give a so-
lution of the remaining difficulty. If the Times,
for once tells the truth, in saying that the parcel
delivered by us did contain a copy of the Queen's
speech, then its worthy Madrid correspondent Turn-
bull must necessarily have told a falsehood ; and
after, his previous exhibition on the point, in which
he is contradicted by his friends, Mr. Honan
and Mr. Bueschenthal, it is only in Printing-
house-square that any difficulty could exist about
it. We promise our contemporary that, hereafter,
it is our intention to leave it, unheeded by us, in the
enjoyment of all its trumpery insinuations against the
individuals who are connected with this paper. The
public may be safely intrusted by us to form their own
estimate of such insinuations from such a source, and
with equal safety they may be left to judge of the false
and cowardly attack upon Mr. Maberly, who is pre-
vented from taking that summary proceeding which
every right judging and good feeling man will be likely
to think would be the fair desert of the party making
such an attack upon a gentleman in misfortune
not here, and therefore not able to defend him-
self. We cannot close these observations without
repeating to our readers the sincere regret we feel at
having again to, trouble them with matters so purely
belonging to the " shop." They will not fail to ob-
serve that it has been forced upon us by our unprinci-
pled and arrogant contemporary, which could not re-
ceive a common favour from us without showing its
spite at this occasional instance of our diligence hav-
ing surpassed its own. In a former stage of this con-
troversy, the Times charged upon us that we wanted
to obtain some part of its circulation, and to share with
it the publie favour. With the Times, to avoid con-
tamination, we would share nothing ; but we have the
gratification of being enabled to say that we are quite
satisfied with the progress of this journal during the
last three months, and we are much mistaken if the
Times do not know, from rather solid evidence, that
we have good reason to be so.—Morning Chronicle.
The Ministerial Papers are very desirous to make it
be believed that the expression of Protestant feeling in
Dublin lately, in consequence of the disgraceful com-
promise between the Repeal-Agitator and the Mel.
bourne Cabinet, was a decided failure ; but, if they
believed so themselves, they would not be so exces-
sively angry at so insignificant an exhibition, nor would
they combat this " airy nothing" as if it were a thing
of solid and enduring substance, and of giant strength.
Surely that which exists not need not be so elaborately
proved to have no existence. Why should the scribes
of the Treasury wrestle so furiously with a shadow ?
why aim such ponderous blows of their leaden
truncheons at a phantom ? Are they not, upon their
own showing, in the condition of the Knight of the
Rueful Countenance, attacking a windmill t But the
Knight acted consistently ; for he, in his chivalrous de-
lusion, mistook the machine of wood and wind for a
giant ; whereas the Whig assailants of the Dublin Pro-
testant meeting confess that they are perfectly sensible
it is no giant all, but a windmill, if not a mere shadow
even of that ; and yet each of them sets spurs to his
charger most furiously, and dashes at it, with couched
spear and with the most desperate valour, resolving to
signalize their prowess against the formidable " no-
thing" of an enemy, and, by damaging its " nonentity,"
carry off some glory I No ; the Ministerial writers—
the .O'Connelite Whigs of the London Press—are not
labouring under such a delusion as to mistake
the power of Protestantism which has just spoken
out its sentiments in Ireland for an idle
phantom. They know better—they know that
the surrender of the property of the Irish Church to
the confiscating measure of the Repeal-Agitator has
apprised the Protestants of Ireland of the treacherous
return which they have to expect for their " desperate
fidelity" to British connexion, under all circumstances,
from the era of the Irish massacre down to the present
day. The Whig writers know that their employers
are embarked in the-same boat with the man whom
they so lately accused of attempting that dismember-
ment of the empire, which they declared they would
encounter all the blood and horrors of civil war to
prevent. They know that their employers are now
embarked in the same boat with the man whose in-
cessant and pernicious agitation they so lately denounced
in the King s speech, and, knowing this, they dread
the storm which the, reaction of such political tergi-
versation may bring upon the unholy alliance, if Pro-
testant feeling be awakened in time to a sense of the
dangers which, through such a combination, now be-
sets the Protestant interests of not Ireland alone, but
the British empire.—Morning Herald.
It has been stupidly or uncandidly asserted that we
have argued for the subjection of the House of Com-
mons to the control of Ministers. It is impossible to
conceive anything more opposite to the spirit and pur-
_port of our remarks than this monstrous proposition :
the only control to which we desired the representa-
tives of the people to submit themselves is the control
of some modesty and common sense. A little modesty
would forbid much babble with which the patience of
the public and the time of the House have been ex-
hausted, and common sense would show the necessity
of observing some order in the conduct of public bu-
siness, and the prudence of doing one thing with un-
divided attention before attempting another. So far
were we from holding the slavish language im-
puted to us, that in our review of the session we
reprobated the obsequiousness of the House of
Commons, and protested against the new reading of
the Constitution as composed of King, Lords, and
Althorp. A leader or manager of the majority has
been customary, as formerly there used also to be a
leader or manager of the Opposition, and the leader
of the majority is called the leader of the House ; but
to recognize this title, and to criticise the fitness of
the bearer of it for the business of the post, is not to
argue for the subjection of the representatives of the
people to the control of
a Minister. The business of
the leader of the majority is to make a judicious se-
lection of objects, and to arrange the order of measures;
and if he obtains confidence by his skilful performance
of these tasks, his voice will always carry great autho-
rity in protesting against the intrusion of idle projects
or unseasonable discussions, interfering with the pro-
gress of bills important to the country. But this
would not be the control of a Minister, it
would be the control of the wiser counsel, the
authority of approved skill. It is certain that there
has been nothing of this in Lord Althorp's
manage-
ment of the House of Commons, and we have com-
plained of the grovelling servility with which the majo-
rity have followed him in his blundering course. And
is this requiring a submission to the management
of a Minister ? The submission that we call for is a

And think him a prodigious bear:"— Times.

were in direct violation of public law, and that they
could not be carried into execution without exposing
France to the risk of a war with several Powers, in
which war these Powers would be clearly in the right
according to the law of nations, and France clearly in
the wrong. We have still another piece of informa-
tion to communicate to our readers in connection with
this subject of the supplementary Articles to the Qua-
dripartite Treaty. Lord Palmerston, unchangeable in
his faith in the infallibility of Prince Talleyrand and
of himself, could not see any necessity for referring
any question to the Law Officers of the British Crown.
But Lord Melbourne thought it safer to follow the
cautious step of Louis Philippe. And, contrary to
all recent precedent, the Premier prevailed. The ques-
tion which had been submitted already to the Law
. Officers of the King of the French was again sub-
mitted to the Law Officers of his Brittanni;Majesty,
and we have the satisfaction of announcing their unani-
mous decision. It was a decision adverse to the addi-
tional Articles. It was a decision declaring in effect that
the Articles which the Foreign Minister of England had
signed could never be carried into execution without a
violation of public law. It was a decision impeaching
the judgment or the integrity of the Foreign Minister.
What the result will be we cannot tell. Whether Lord
Melbourne will succumb to Lord Palmerston, or Lord
Palmerston to Lord Melbourne, is still doubtful. All
that can be gathered from the foregoing facts is, that
the Foreign Secretary must retire, or that law officers
of the Crown must forthwith be found whose learning
can better accommodate itself to the exigencies of the
Foreign-office. Yet the whole embarrassment is not
told. We have still further news to impart. The,
Queen Regent of Spain, having a solemn treaty to pro-
duce, is by no means disposed to listen to the casuistry
of doctors of the civil law, whether English or French.
She has distinctly claimed the fulfilment of the bond.
Ske has done more than claim the fulfilment of the
bond, for she has declared a blockade of a large extent
of the coast of Spain, which, unless that bond be
valid, and unless its obligations be faithfully discharged,
she has no imam to enforce. Lord Palmerston was
driven to set Doctors' Commons and the Attorney-
General at defiance, or to submit to the ignominy of
having led his fair ally, the Queen Regent of Spain,
into a very painful and injurious embarrassment. The
disgrace of Lord Palmerston and the embarrassment of
the Queen Regent of Spain might have been lamented.
But better these than that the law of nations should be
renounced and derided by the British Government. It
is with great satisfaction therefore that we impart to the
public our last piece of intelligence, namely, that an an-
swer in the negative has already been returned to the
application of the Queen Regent for the maritime
assistance of Great Britain to prevent the importation
into Spain of arms and ammunition. The additional
Articles of the Quadripartite Treaty have been signed
only to be repudiated. Louis Philippe and the
French Jurisconsults have vanquished Prince Talley-
rand. Lord Melbourne and Doctors' Commons have
proved too strong for Lord Palmerston. The
above narrative, which is strictly. and literally
correct, shows with what consummate prudence
and integrity the affairs of the nation are
carried on. Upon the principle of non-intervention,
we agree to furnish fleets and munitions of war to one
of the parties to a civil war, in a country with which
we have nothing whatever to do, and generously. omit
any stipulation for payment. For the maintenance of
our national dignity we become parties to a Treaty
which, by our first inquiries respecting the principles
of public law, we arc compelled to renounce. But we
cannot reasonably complain. It is to the " spirit of
• the age" and to the " march of intellect" that we are
indebted for this novel method of upholding the cha-
racter and maintaining the interests of a great nation.—
Morning Post.

It is fit that the British public should have some
information from time to time as to the position in
which its Government really stands in relation to the
other European powers. And, unless thay receive
this information from us, there is, unfortunately, very
little chance that it will be communicated to them at
all. The Palmerston system of policy includes three
essential principles which we thus enumerate :—Prin-
ciple the first, is to keep the British people in the dark
as to every thing that is going on ; principle the se-
cond, is to yield in everything implicit obedience to the
dictates of France ; principle the third, is to treat with
perfect contempt the law of nations, whenever that law
is appealed to by parties that cannot bring into play
the precise number and weight of artillery which, in
Lord Palmerston's opinion, is necessary to give to the
law of nations any kind of value. From France and
the other capitals of Europe, where there is less of
mystification and dishonesty than in London, we have
acquired informatiOn which enables us to place
before the British public a clear and distinct
view of the actual position of our own coun-
try with regard to the affairs of the Penin-
sula. We state this fact confidently, and a most
disgraceful fact it is to the British Government,
and the British people, that there is no nation in
Europe kept in such utter darkness as the British
with respect to the foreign relations of its Government.
We state this fact with the natural boldness with which
men state facts which they are fully prepared to prove,
for we are about to prove what we assert by the commu-
nication of intelligence new to the British people, and
not new, for we derive our information from no mysterious
sources to the upper classes of society in any other Euro-
pean State. Why, we indignantly ask, should there be
a mysticism in the foreign affairs of Great Britain which
is unknown in those of any other country, unless it be
that in the Foreign Office of Great Britain there is
less of manly integrity and of straightforward honesty
than in the Foreign
,Office of any other State ?
The British people do not yet know, except from
the
.intimations we have already afforded them, what
extension their Government has given to the Quadri-
partite Treaty, which, in honour of the principle
of non-intervention, brought the united forces of
France, Spain, and Great Britain to bear upon a
domestic dispute in Portugal. Upon this part of our
foreign relations we shall now shed an additional ray
of light. The supplementary Articles to the Quadri-
partite Treaty, agreed upon and formally executed by
the Representatives of France, Spain, and Great Bri-
tain are four in number, and, as we have already stated,
are in substance as follows :—Art.lst, or the preamble
to the Treaty, states that, with reference to the state
of affairs which has arisen in Spain, the Quadripartite
Treaty,is incomplete. Art. 2d binds France, by every
means in her power, to guard the frontiers and the
coast of Spain, in order to prevent the supply of arms
and munitions of war to the insurgent forces. Art. 3d
binds Great Britain to adopt the same measures of
precaution ,with respect to the coast of Spain ; and
further binds Great Britain to supply to the forces of
the Queen Regent of Spain munitions of war, with
the exception of arms, no stipulation being con-
tained in the Treaty as to the time or manner
in which payment for such supplies is to be
made. Art. 4th provides that the foregoing Articles
are to be of the same validity as if they had been
comprehended in the original Quadripartite Treaty.
This intelligence, we believe, is news to the people of
England, and, considering that the Whig Govern-
ment started with the principle of non-intervention as
part of its stock in trade, this news is perhaps rather
different from what might naturally have been expected.
But we have another very important piece of intelli-
gence to communicate to the public, of which they
have yet heard nothing. These additional Articles to
the Quadripartite Treaty having, as a matter of course,
been communicated to the Representatives of the great
Powers of Europe not parties to it, the latter, with
one accord, presented remonstrances against the addi-
tional Articles, upon the very intelligible ground that
they could not be carried into effect without violating
the universal law of nations. Upon this Lord Pal-
merston looked more-than usually silly, and even Prince
Talleyrand was observed the next night at the Travellers'
Club to inquire more frequently than is common with him,
" What is trump ?" For the Prince is in this respect,
as in many others, quite unlike Lord Palmerston.
He generally knows what is trump. There was, in
short, a general consternation and dismay among the
diplomatists of the revolutionary school. They felt
that they had overshot their mark. Caring little for
principles of any kind, they feared that the time was
not yet quite ripe for setting principles at defiance.
We will now tell our readers another piece of news.
Louis Philippe, the King of the French, listens to
Prince Talleyrand, and makes use of him, but he re-
collects that the Prince is more famous for taking care
of himself than of his masters. And although we
cannot go so far as to say that Louis Phillippe had
any conscientious scruples upon the occasion, yet cer-
tain it is that he had misgivings of some kind or other ;
for he thought it prudent to apply to the official Juris-
consults of France as to the legality of the additional
articles of the Quadripartite Treaty. And we can
confidently inform our readers that the Law Ad-
visers of the King of the French told him that
the Articles which Prince Talleyrand had signed.

PREROGATIVE COURT, SEPT. 3.

IN THE GOODS OF MARY RAISE, DECEASED-CURIOUS DE.

POSITORY FOR A WILL.

Dr. CuRTErs applied for probate to the will of the de-
ceased party in this cause. The will, which gave the bulk
of the deceased's property to her relatives, was witnessed,
but neither signed nor dated. The residue was also undis-
posed of, nor were executors named in the instrument. The
deceased had, however, made declarations that she had
executed a will, and that she had deposited it in the tool-
house at the bottom of her garden. On her decease search
was made, and the will was found in a jar among the other
papers deposited in the toolhouse. As the parties inte-
rested were willing the probate should pass to the will, the
Court was now asked to grant the prayer.
The COURT said it was impossible a paper like the pre-
sent, neither signed nor dated, could pass probate. No
executors were appointed, nor the residue disposed of, and
he must, therefore, declare for an intestacy.

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 1834.