The Sun.
London, England, 1834-11-21 00:00:00

SPIRIT 01"IHE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

jesty to draw the conclusion that the Ministry
could not go on. It may be convenient to the
organs of " His Highness " (the Standard and the
Times) to throw upon Lord Melbourne the dismissal
of himself and colleagues ; but all impartial perso--
must see that the representations irn---•
Melbourne never could ha" —rated to Lord
Lordship could
....; proceeded froth him. His
-
..tot make these tepresentations, for the
best
..., et
all reasons, that on all the great questions of
Church Reform, the Ministry were quite agreed. In
fact, it is only necessary to revert to what took place
when Lord Stanley and 'Sir Jas. Graham, the Duke of
Richmond and Earl of Ripon left the Ministry, to be
convinced that there could be no division among Mi-
nisters on the subject of Irish Church Reform. Lord
Melbourne could not confess to what did not exist !
for there never was a cabinet more united than his, on
all the great questions alluded to by the Standard and
the Times. No difficulty could be anticipated in carry-
ing on the public business during the next session, be-
cause on all the questions, as far as is now known, which
could have come forward, and more particularly th.!
questions respecting Church Reform in Ireland. and
England, the Reform of Municipal Corporations,
Law Reform of an extensive nature, the relief to Dis-
senters, &c., there was no dissentient voice in the Ca-
binet. If it be more decorous to convey falsehood
hypothetically than by positive statement, we will allow
to the Times the credit of such decorum ; but it is
proper that it should be known, that were that stated
positively which is put hypothetically, it would be a
positive falsehood. It is impossible to state what in-
ferences might or might not be drawn by his Majesty
from what passed in conversation between Lord Mel-
bourne and himself ; because when there are foregone
conclusions, the most immaterial remarks may be ea-
gerly laid hold of in confirmation of them. This, how-
ever, we can safely state, that nothing that fell from
Lord Melbourne could possibly lead to the inference
that he could not go on with his colleagues. There
were no actual differences in the Cabinet, and Lord
Melbourne was not aware of any questions respect-
ing which they were disunited; but who can say
what is possible or not possible? It is of the utmost
importance that the truth, the whole truth, and no-
thing but the truth, should be stated in respect to this
point. If in Lord Melbourne's communication with
his Majesty at Brighton, there had been any descrip-
tion of serious difficulty in respect to the appointment
rendered needful by the death of Earl Spencer—if
there had been any communication of division or dis-
union amongst the members of the Cabinet which
threatened its destruction, or appeared likely to impair
its efficiency—if there had been any intimation from
Lord Melbourne to the King, or admission or confes-
sion in the course of conversation, of a character
warranting the inference, that on certain questions
which could not be avoided next Session the Cabinet
would be divided, we should less deplore the step which
has been taken. We utterly and entirely deny the
truth of any communication from Lord Melbourne to
his Majesty, warranting the inference that the Cabinet
could not hold together, either new or during the next
Session. We defy our contemporaries to disprove
what we stated in our Monday's publication. The
Ministry has been dismissed because it had resolved to
propose measures of Church Reform in Ireland and
England. The Reform which it contemplated was
intended to strengthen the real interests of the Church,
and increase the numbers and the zeal of its honest sup-
porters by rooting out corruption and removing abuses.
The late Government contemplated other substantial
reforms, the particular plans and measures being in a
state of great forwardness to be submitted to Par-
liament. So far from Lord Melbourne confess-
ing weakness in the Cabinet, or fear to meet
Parliament, nearly the last words addressed by him to
his Majesty at Brighton, were—" That himself and
his Colleagues would serve his Majesty to the last
upon reform and liberal principles." We may be
tauntingly called on by our contemporaries to declare
the authority upon which we make this assertion. We
defy them to prove that we are incorrect ; and we fur •
ther tell them before-hand, that we shall not imitate
one of our contemporaries by any insinuation, or indj_
rest threat of exposing the source from which. -we de-
rive information. We avow, upon our invn responsi-
bility, the truth of what we assert : and we are sure
our readers will not believe that we make the assertion
rashly, and we dare those v`',lo attempt a refutation to
produce any authority c.Or a denial.—Morn. Chronicle.

The Times of yestarday, affecting to write at the
suggestion of Lord Melbourne, contradicts a misre-
presentation which has gone abroad respecting that
nobleman—namely, that he had " made a direct
avowal to his Majesty that it was impossible for hi •
Administration to go on ; and a request that the King
vould be graciously pleased to commit the Govern-
ment to the hands of the Duke of Wellington." T.„s,
of course, would have been downright treachery ; and
it is needless to add, that no one ever suspected .his
Lordship of anything approaching to treachery.--
But .the Times, though it acquits his Lordship
of a direct avowal that it *as impossible for his
'administration to go on, and of a request that the
King would be graciously pleased to commit the Go
ernment to the hands of the Duke of Wellington, is
get pleased to impute to the representations of his
Lordship, the impssibility of the King's arriving at
any other conclusion than that he ought to dismiss
the Melbourne Ministry. We are quite satisfied that
the Times could not have written at the suggestion,
either direct or indirect, of Lord Melbourne, as the
Standard would have us believe, because the represen-
tations in the Times are false, and Lord Melbourne
would never be accessary to the dissemination of what
was not strictly accordant with the truth. But we will
first present to our readers what actually appears in the
Times :—" Had his Lordship so despaired of the
efficiency of his Cabinet as to have found it his duty to
convey to the Sovereign a persuasion and proposition
of the nature above-mentioned, he would assuredly
have felt himself called upon to apprize his colleagues
before he left London this day se nnight, that he was
compelled to do what amounted to a virtual tender of
his own resignation, and to a breaking up of the entire
Ministry. But the fact is, that his Lordship did no
such thing. He waited on the King, if we are not mis-
informed, to state fairly to his Majesty the various and
considerable difficulties entailed upon him by Lord
Spencer's death ; but he went also prepared to explain
and recommend the means of adequately providing
for them, and carrying on the Government, though
without the aid of Lord Althorp in the House
of Commons. These means and these difficulties the
Noble Viscount did develope seriatim and in full de-
tail to his Majesty. But if the King, upon a calm
consideration of all the contingent results which might
or, as it appeared to his Majesty, must have flowed
from the adoption of any of the proposed alternatives,
became conscientiously satisfied that a dissolution of
the Cabinet at the present moment would be attended
with less serious mischief than at any time during a
session of Parliament, who can blame Lord Mel-
bourne for such an unwished-for termination of his
conference with King William ? We are bound to
add, in candour, who can blame the King for acting,
on different, but certainly not unreasonable, impres-
sions ?" The Times then proceeds to lay what it terms
afro brief hypotheses, before its readers :—" Sup-
pose Lord John Russell had been recommended
for his Majesty's approval as Leader of the House of
Commons—is there, or is there not, reason to appre
bend that his Lordship's pledges, either towards the
Dissenters or with regard to the ultimate disposal of
Church property in Ireland, or both, might have laid
him under the necessity of introducing and enforcing
measures of so bold a character, that other Ministers,
Lord Lansdowne, for instance, and Mr. Spring Rice,
would have taken the opportunity of resigning ? Had
the task of Leader been assigned to Mr. Abercromby,
whose opinions'on the two points specified are under-
stood to agree with those of Lord John Russell, the
same consequences, it was to be feared, would follow.
Oa the other hand, in the case of Mr. Spring Rice being
appointed Leader, although the Right Hon. Gentle-
man might not have meddled with such dangerous mea-
sures as those we have referred to, the Whig Radical
Opposition must have done so ; in which case, no less,
we apprehend, than four of the Ministers must have
voted -against their colleagues, and have then unavoid-
ably broken up the Government in the very heat of
the Session. We state these things hypothetically.
It might not be decorous to present them in a more
positive form, and we shall leave all comment upon
them, and upon the sound discretion of his Majesty's
choice under such perplexity, to the unbiassed judg-
ment of our readers." The concluding sentence inti-
mates, plainly enough, that it is meant that we should
take the hypotheses as a recital of actual facts. The
following appeared in the Standard of last night :
" Since what follows was written, we have received the
annexed, in a note, purporting to be from Lord Mel
bourne's private secretary, but without aaiy name. We
do not think it necessary to alter one word of what we
have written :—" 'We have authority to declare,
once for all, that any reports which may have gone
abroad to the effect that Lord Melbourne either re-
signed his office, or expressed clue, unwillingness to hold
it, or stated that the Cabinet -must break up of itself
either before or soon after the opening of Parlia-
ment, or gave any advice 'with respect to his successor,
are false, unfoundedt 'and contrary to the fact.' "
Before noticing the cc what follows" in the Standard,
the contradiction; in humble • •
our opinion, had
better not have
been given, at least in the above
terms, for it leaves it to be inferred that that
which is DA contradicted, and is far more im-
portant thsus what is contradicted, is true. But we will
now proceed with the Standard;—,, Whoever has been
guilty of misrepresentation in this matter, we have not.
We have said, and we repeat it, that Lord Melbourne
confessed to the King that the late Ministry could not
go on upon the same principles upon which it had
been conducted ever since Lord Melbourne's acces-
sion ; and that a dissolution of the Cabinet, before or
upon the meeting of Parliament, was inevitable. Now,
this is a very different thing from the misrepresenta-
tion contradicted by the Times. There is often much
in a phrase ; and here the distinction between avowal
and confession, is very important. The conference be-
tween the King and Lord Melbourne was of consider-
able duration ; and if we are to read that Lord Mel-
bourne avowed the unhappy condition of his Go-
vernment, we must suppose that such an avowal com-
airmced the conversation ; of course, that his Lord-
ship went down to Brighton prepared to sacrifice
his colleagues, than which nothing can be mare impro-
bable from his honourable character ; but if we read
confession, we naturally infer that the disclosure was
made reluctantly, and at the close of a long, patient,
and a candid investigation of the univ ersally-admitted
difficulties by both parties. This, in.deed, is confessed
in the succeeding part of the art:Ade of the Times,
which very successfully demonstrates that Lord Mel-
bourne could not, without falsehood, withhold the con-
fession which we alleged him, and again allege him, to
have made. The addition that any one has misrepre-
sented Lord Melbourne, as, advising to send for the
Duke of Wellington, is 84 -naked lie of the Globe. We
never hinted anything of -the kind, nor, as far as we
have been able to observe, did any of our contempora-
ries. Here, then, is the state of the question. "We
have asserted, and, Lord Melbourne will not deny the
truth of the ass'artion, that the late Prime Minister con-
fessed to the King that a dissolution of the Cabinet
before or uraon the meeting of Parliament was inevita-
ble. The. Yimes has successfully contradicted the ad-
scititious falsehoods with which the Globe and its ac-
complices would encumber and perplex this plain state-
ment ; but that statement it has not contradicted. By
its silence it has confirmed it, if Lord Melbourne is
the 'prompter of the Times ; and, at all events, our
Coaitemporary has demonstrated the truth of the as-
ee*rtion, by external and collateral proofs. What a
sman of truth and honour must have confessed, in
lord Melbourne's position, the Times has shown, and
there is every reason to believe Lord Melbourne to be
a man of truth and honour. Our readers would, per-
haps, excuse our saying so much in vindication of the
veracity of the Standard ; but immeasurably higher in-
terests than ours are concerned that this point be clearly
understood. As respects Lord Melbourne, it is, at
least, as important to the preservation of his deservedly
-high character, that he should be shown incapable of
withholding the truth from his Sovereign, when com-
manded to state it, as it can be to have it believed that
he would not volunteer a display of his own and his
colleagues' weakness for the purpose of ruining his and
heir Government." The statements of the Times
and the Standard are substantially the same. Both
avoid charging Lord Melbourne with an avowal
that he could not go on, but both represent him
as having candidly confessed what led his Ma-

Yesterday paKed over the new Administration like
the day bef.;fte, except as to speculations, some of
which y; ere retracted, and new ones substituted in their
plP.'oe. We are told by some of our Contemporaries,
who profess to know more of State secrets than we do,
that the Duke of Wellington will immediately have
the assistance of some additional Ministers, who are
to be sworn in to-day. Though we are not so much
alarmed as some of our Contemporaries at the disco-
very that physical causes must continue to operate as
heretofore, and that space and time will not relinquish
their properties to make politicians happy, we shall
be glad to find this prediction of an addition to the
Ministry correct. Indeed, unless the Duke of Wel-
lington surpasses the far-famed bird of his coun-
tryman Sir Boyle Roche, he will require some as-
sistance to relieve him from the fatigues of übiquity.
Still, however, we do not believe all that we read,
nor half that we hear, as to his intentions ; and for
this plain reason, if we had no other, that he
has always contrived to keep his own counsel
very well until the moment when he chose to put it
into execution. The Duke is, we believe, by nature,
any thing but a communicative personage, and, with
the example of some gossipping Cabinets before his
eyes, it is not likely that he will abandon his own
course for one which has led others into so many pre-
dicaments. But, to turn from his Grace and the new,
or the expected Ministry, to the Ministry which has
just ceased to exist, we copy the following paragraph,
which appeared in all the evening papers of yesterday :
—" We have authority to declare, once for all, that
any reports which may have gone abroad to the effect
that Lord Melbourne either' resigned his office, or
expressed any unwillingness to continue to hold it,
or stated that the Cabinet must break up of itself,
either before or soon after the opening of Parliament,
or gave any advice with respect to his successor,
are false, unfounded, or contrary to the fact." It
would seem, then, that it was a complete turn out.
But whatever it may have been, the people, we be-
lieve, are disposed to make the best of it, by waiting
until the offices shall be filled, and some manifestation
afforded of the policy chalked out by the new Cabi-
net. Some additional resignations, as was to be ex-
pected, have taken place. Amongst them is that
of Lord Wellesley, who is said to have arrived al-
ready in London. Lord Rosslyn, as we stated be-
fore, is understood to be his Lordship's intended suc-
cessor. The Earl of Errol, Viscount Falkland,
and Lord Elphinston have resigned their situa-
tions in the Household, and the Duke of Devon-
shire has tendered his key of office as Lord Cham-
berlain, but retains it, at his Majesty's desire,
until his successor is appointed. There are rumours
which we do not think it worth while to repeat, as it
would, in all likelihood, impose upon us the necessity
of contradicting them hereafter, as to certain appoint-
ments disposed of by quidnuncs, who may be right, but
who are more likely to be wrong. The Lord Chan-
cellor resigns his office this day, and it would appear
as if it was to be held in Commission, judging from
his Lordship's statement in Court that his successor
was to continue Chief Baron. The arrangement sup-
posed to have been made in favour of Lord Eldon has
failed, and as for any other particulars connected with
ins or outs, we believe that the list furnished by that
veracious authority the Court Newsman contains all
that can be relied on as indisputable.—Morn. Herald.
Lord Wellesley will, of course, rejoice to quit the
Lord Lieutenancy of Leland. Indeed we should not
be surprized if at the moment we are writing these
words the Noble Marquis had virtually ceased to hold
the Viceroyalty. At the present juncture we abstain
from any very elaborate observations upon the wretched
state of that most cruelly and foolishly governed coun-
try. That weakest of all conceited men, Mr. Little-
ton, has been playing a most destructive game, and it
was not until last Monday that a part of the county of
Tipperary was brought under the operation of the Co-
ercion Bill, although it had been evident for a consi-
derable time that it was absolutely necessary it should
be put under legal restraint ; nevertheless till Mondry

TILE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 2L 1834,

the Government had shuffled off the question.
As for Mr. Littleton's personal feelin—
happy release" from " at his
rule, contempt, and ridi-
no man who Ms titarly kir and 'twenty
thousand pounds a )ear would, unless he were a vain
and presumptuous blockhead, endure), they must be
in the highest degree agreeable. To be sure, if he
could have fallen back upon the Chair of the House
of Commons, notwithstanding- that the late fire has
considerably damaged the plans of the Speaker's
house, whic'h the Right Hon. Gentleman had so care-
fully marked and arranged for his own use and pur-
poses, it might have been better. As it is, he will
ascend into private life, and, as-usual, enjoy his otium
sine dignitare. Mr. O'Connell, who was at Cork on
Monday, copies Mr. Hunt in political opinion, and we
know that just after the arrival of the intelligence of
the break-up, or rather break-dozen, of the Ministry
at that place, he openly in a coffee-room there abused
in the grossest terms the late Ministry ; but, as
everybody also does, most especially, pointedly,
and, particularly Lord Brougham, and expressed
the greatest possible satisfaction that he should have
an opportunity at a public dinner that evening of vitu-
perating, not only the retiring party, but their succes-
sois, whoever they may be. The last letter of this
rabid animal is even more seditious than any of the
preceding ones. We are told that whenever Mr. Lit..
tleton finally leaves his office, the departure will be cha-
racterised by a disclosure of ignorance, inability, idle-
ness, folly, and political timidity, which will burst
upon his successor much in the same way as the dirt
and nastiness of a low and filthy tenant. of some corn•
mon lodging-house is betrayed to the next comer by
the rags and tatters left about in the corners and cup
boards. Indeed we rather suspect that in all the pub-
lic departments the snails will be found to have left a
line of slime and slaver behind them which, when ex-
hibited to the public eye, is likely to afford plenty of
amusement and even instruction.--Morning Post.

The Standard of last night attributed the article
which appeared yesterday morning in the Times to the
suggestion of Lord Melbourne, because it contained a
vindication of his Lordship from some unworthy ca-
lumnies, touching his recent statements to the Sove-
reign on the subject of his own Cabinet, as we must
not have felt an unbidden eagerness to rescue from de-
traction the good name of a Minister whose estimable
qualities had secured to him the respect of the public,
and, so far as our sense of justice would permit,
the occasional support of this journal. We shall do
no more than add, that it was not the misrepresenta-
tions of the Standard at which our article pointed.
But it seems odd enough, that while one of our con-
temporaries charges us with writing yesterday what
had been dictated by the ex-Minister, another--a sa-
tellite which has recently taken to attend upon our
motions with subservient, though rather suspicious, vi-
gilance—brings forward the somewhat inconsistent ac-
cusation, that in our article of the day before we had been
" instructed" by the Duke of Wellington to hint the
possibility of a liberal policy on the part of his Grace.
Now really, it does seem, to say the least of it, rather
preposterous, that at this time of day, and after an
experience in public discussion which has already
borne the brunt of two generations of disputants and
rivals, we should not be allowed the common capacity
of speaking a word but at other men's dictation. We
defended Lord Melbourne because it was our duty.
Again, because it was our duty, as guides or correctors
of public opinion, to set the prospects of the country
in a just and holiest light before our readers, we
anticipated not so much the " possibility" of liberal
measures by the Duke of Wellington, as their absolute
necessity, if, as might b., taken for granted, it was his
Grace s inclination to remain four months in office.
What are all the boastings—all of what, within these
two or three days, we are justified in calling the
exag-
gerations of public distrust and apprehension—good
for, if not to prove the impossibility of any man being
deci-
dedly Minister of this kingdom who will not march on
o.nd vigorously in the cause of practical reform ?
Cdr the Duke of Wellington's intentions we know as
little as those reptiles which crawl about our path, and
spit at us their second-hand venom. The intentions of
the Duke of Wellington we infer from his acts, or,
more strictly, from the single act of his undertaking
office ; whence we conclude, that he wishes to remain
in it, and that, with his clear understanding, he will
therefore pursue that course, his deviation from which
must soon be followed by his or any man's expulsion
from power. His Grace is too sagacious not to see
that an anti-reform Cabinet cannot long exist. But it
is foolishness to debate with those who are primed
with virulence and slander, only to serve the malig-
nant passions of selfish, mortified, desperate, and un-
principled men—of men, who when spurned by
their Sovereign from the bench of justice, pre-
pare to mount the rostrum of sedition, and beat
up throughout Great Britain for partisans against
the State, among the lowest of the reckless rabble.
If the Duke of Wellington were to advise his
political enemies, he could offer them no counsel more
eventually favourable to himself or more insidiously
destructive of that sound spirit of reform which alone
Can ever triumph in this country, because with none
other can men of property, intelligence, and character
concur, than to set on foot the spurious and sordid
agi-
tation which has been attempted throughout the me-
tropolis since Saturday last, and has in every instance,
without exception, experienced a miserable failure, be-
cause none but the slop-traders in unmeaning turbu-
lence have any concern with it. There can, we re-
peat, be no recipe more infallible for degrading the
memory of Lord Grey's and Lord Melbourne's admi-
nistrations, and for injuring so far as it is susceptible
of injury, the great cause of reform, with which
their names must ever be associated, than by con-
necting them with a miserable and artificial clamour,
stipulated for no definite or rational end, and only
spreading invitations to mischief among the classes
most prone to excitement. Whether the Duke of
Wellington or Sir R. Peel, or whoever may be des-
tined to the more prominent part, will succeed or not in
carrying on the Government, it is wholly impossible
for us to say—it must depend exclusively on their
measures. Whether they will meet this Parliament or
dissolve it, none of the wiseacres who dogmatize about
them can tell. If they can by any (however informal)
means make known to the country a clear determination
to act in the spirit of that reform in Church and State
to which Lord Melbourne had fairly pledged himself,
we know not why the Duke and the Right Honour-
able Baronet should fail to meet the existing House
of Commons from any fear of a capricious reception.
The constituency of England is now too extensive and
too national to accept or reject any man from merely
personal motives ; and the House of Commons which
represents it must, in that as well as other respects,
sympathize fairly with its feelings. Most of the better
order of Whig or Liberal statesmen, whose names have
ever been much before the public, having, as materials
for an Administration, been pretty well exhausted by the
Grey and Melbourne Cabinets, are, we fear, disposed
of for the present. The immediate alternative, there-
fore, seems to be between the Duke of Wellington
and Messrs. Hume and O'Connell. But a little
time will decide for us on which of them our hopes are
to rest, or whether a fresh combination may, in case
of need, be produced from any available portions of the
two preceding Governments. It might induce some
of the more impatient inquirers into the future policy
of the Duke to be less urgent, if they would consider
that a Minister in this country, has not, out of Par-
liament, any recognized constitutional mode of de-
claring his intentions except by acts ; and, in the pre-
sent imperfect state of the Government, the Duke of
Wellington can hardly feel himself justified in exe-
cuting any act which is not absolutely essential to the
ordinary course of public business. The only thing
which he can with propriety do, we may fairly assume
that he has done. Without any knowledge of the fact,
we may, without much difficulty, venture to pronounce
that every Ambassador has been authorized to
inform his Court that our relations with foreign
States remain unaltered. The Duke's policy has al-
ways been pacific, and would, we haw." no doubt, con-
tinue so, even without the iron band of tree ties ; and
none but an idiot can suppose that he is a inch to
violate those existing international engagements which
have been ratified by his Sovereign and by Parlia•
went. There have been diplomatists who have con-
sidered treaties as mere sheets of scribbled paper. The
Duke has always shown that he considers them as