The Sun.
London, England, 1834-04-26 00:00:00

LONDON,
SATURDAY EVENING, APRIL 26, 1834.

The Repeal of the Union, " like a wounded
snake," still " drags its slow length along."
It has now reached the fourth night of discus-
sion, yet the Repealers are as big with speech as
ever. Really the matter is becoming quite
alarming, for if the whole forty joints of the
Tail persist in giving out their rattle, we may
expect an oratorical deluge, similar to that scrip-
tural one which " rained for forty days and forty
nights." -Of all the speakers who delivered
their sentiments last night, the only two who
spoke effectively to the point were Mr. LAM-
BERT and Sir R. PEEL. As for Mr. SIIEIL'S
display, it was a very ricketty, crazy affair.
Throughout his speech, the hon. and learned
gentleman seemed labouring under the uneasy
consciousness that he had nothing to say. And
he said it.

Mr. LAMBERT spoke in a most chivalrous
spirit of patriotism. Though he appeared
perfectly aware that Mr. O'CoNNELL's " short
stick" would be put into active requisition
against him, yet he nobly resolved to hazard a
sound drubbing for the good of his country.
Should he even get his skull fractured for
his vote, still his wits, even in this da-
maged condition, should be devoted to the
interests of Ireland. He would therefore,
he added, enter his most solemn and un-
compromising protest against the " short-
stick" system of legislation. We congratulate
the honourable member" on his decision. The
less he has to do with " sticks" the better.
Even Parliamentary ones are a sad nuisance ;
witness Mr. RUTIIVEN, who, as an orator, is
unquestionably the greatest "stick" we ever
heard of.

Sir R. PEEL'S speech was one of the best
he ever delivered. It was eloquent—humor-
ous—argumentative—with a peroration not
unworthy even of BURKE. The right hon.
gentleman is, we perceive, in the minority as
respects the claims of O'CONNELL to the
dominion of the " green isle." He sides with
King FERGUS, in preference to King DAN.
" No one," he observed, " in the event of a
change of dynasty, was better entitled to put
in his claims to the Irish sovereignty, than the
hon. and learned member for Cork. In say-
ing so, he had merely done an act of justice,
and he should now do an act of courtesy,
by proffering his services at the coronation of
the monarch." It is only in this arch, humo-
rous vein that a question like Repeal can be
fitly dealt with. Any thing like serious argu-
ment is thrown away upon it. We say this,
even with the recollection of Mr. SPRING
11 ICE'S masterly speech in our mind.
The truth is, Repeal is but another term for
Rent. The one is the means by which Mr.
O'CONNELL secures the other. With Catholic
emancipation his legitimate influence expired,
and he knew well that he must either rear up
some fresh grievance, or consent to descend
from his high estate, and become merely one of
the eight millions. To this his ambition—the
ruling passion of his life—could not stoop, and,
accordingly, he has set afloat the question of Re-
peal, and, by enlisting the prejudices of his poor,
infatuated countrymen in his behalf, has contrived
to get up a very pretty, decent sort of quarrel,
(as Sir Lucius 0' Trigger would phrase it)
which, while it lasts, will secure him in the
enjoyment of his darling notoriety, and—which
he loves equally well—some ten or twelve
thousand per annum. This is the true origin
of Repeal. It is Mr. O'CONNELL'S question,
and his only. So long as he is on the spot to
nurse it, the bantling contrives to give out a
squeak or two ; but the instant he quits
Ireland, it falls into a state of torpor.
We have heard of many humbugs, but never
of one equal to Repeal. We have heard also of
Many quacks, but never of one who approxi-
mated even remotely to Mr. O'CONNELL.
He stands alone in unapproachable supremacy.