The Sun.
London, England, 1834-12-23 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS*.

'We yesterday announced the appointment of the
Earl of Roden to be Lord Steward. The Courier
s2elfls to have been at first inclined to take our account
of this appointment as a joke. Our evening contem-
porary observes truly of this appointment, and those
of Lord Hereford and of Colonel Perceval, " They
distinctly mark the character of Sir Robert _ Peel's

Government, in a more decided manner than his own

address ;" and that " he has gone entirely to the camp
of the Rodens, Stormonts, and O'Sullivans." Well

may the Times observe, that " it is not the persons of
the Cabinet—Sir Robert Peel, or even the Duke of
Wellington—to whom the industrious Aristocracy of
London adhere." No ; after seeing their associates,
Roden, Perceval, and Co., they will be somewhat
slow, we trust, in adhering. In these appointments,
vast respect has been shown to the intelligence of the

country. Truly a man must be far gone in his eafer-
ness to defy " the mania for inevitable revolution, ' to
be able to stomach Roden. The following further ap-
pointments are said to he intended :—The Duke of
Dorset, Master of the Horse. Lord Sidney, Lord
Verulam, Lord Minto, and Lord Sheffield, Lords of
the Bedchamber. It is now said that the Duke of
Buccicugh is not to be Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland.
He must be a bold Conservative indeed, who at the

City Meeting this day shall dare to stand up for a Mi-
nistry which can offer such an insult to public opinion,
as to name to a high office Earl Roden, the originator
of what was called the great Protestant Meeting at
Dublin, at which invitations to rebellious risings
were held out. The account of eleven men killed in a

tithe-battle in Ireland, received by the post yesterday,
was a suitable accompaniment to the entrance of Earl
Roden into the Ministry. The country will under-
stand what is meant by these things. They will serve
as an opposite commentary on Sir Robert 'Peel's ma-
nifesto, which the Times tells us ought to inspire the
most ample confidence in the Administration. Not
such was the langugge of the Times at a similar con-
juncture (12th June, 1832.)
" But, above all things, the nation must be on its guard
ag-i!inst the trick of changing the Ministry bcfore the dissolu-
tion of Parliament—a Court manoeuvre, which would throw
the management of the dissolution—of the election—and of
the new House of Commons, on its assembling—into the
bands of a well-practised, Conservative junta. This must
never be.

Rouse, then—rouse ye, countrymen. The question is—
will you have the name only, or the thing ? Will you have re-
form a living principle, pervading—moving,— cheering—invigo-
rating the nation ? Or, shall it be a dead letter to our mortifi-
cation, disgrace, and ruin ?"—Morning Chronicle.

Who advised the dismissal of the late Ministry ?
Who but the Ministry who succeeded them ? We
had imagined that no position was better established
than this—that the King can do no wrong, because
he always acts through responsible Ministers ; and
that when a Ministry is displaced, their successors, by
the mere acceptance of office, thereby afford a proof of
choir approbation of the dismissal of their predecessors.
No mat► can be forced to take office, but there must be
a consent to take office befor^ effect can be given to a
dismissal. The Times cavils at the expression in the
City Resolutions, of " the advising the abrupt dismis-
sal of Lord Melbourne's Administration." " His Ma-

jests (says the Times) had no other Ministry but
Lord Melbourne at the time. There was none other
responsible for any public act of the Sovereign."
Lord Melbourne could not dismiss himself. The
Duke of Wellington officially communicated him
that his Majesty no longer requi,-'4,:. his
services ; and the Duke of Wellington, ther'l 1a&
vised the proceeding. No matter in what ft
ceeding originated. One great excellence of the Eng 7
lish Constitution consists in the limits it imposes on
the will of a King, by requiring responsibla men to
give effect to it. Kings, like other men, arc indivi-
dually liable to all the infirmities of our nature ; and
in their political capacity, if left to act without re-
straint, they would often. no doubt, sacrifice the in-
terests and happiness of their subjects to the gratifi-
cation of their passions and caprices. But the Con-
stitution has carefully provided against the possibility
of detriment from this source. The dismissal of a

Ministry possessed of the confidence of the nation,
might at times be productive of the greatest injury
to a country; hut then as the responsibility of
advising the dismissal is implied in the consenting
to succeed them, the public are thus secured
against the dangerous and injurious agitation
which would be caused by improper dismissals.
_ .

The King must not dismiss lus servants with-
out the allegation of good and sufficient cause
like an individual in private life. The Ministers who
take the places of the dismissed must be prepared to
show that their measures were injurious to the interests
of the community, and that the King was justified in
ridding himself of them. The resource of a dissolu-
tion of Parliament is a sufficient check against factious
combinations in a House of Commons ; and, on the
other hand, the inability, when the dissolution
has taken place, to obtain a majority in the new
House favourable to the Ministry, must be taken
as a proof that the dismissal was factious and ill-
advised, and that the Ministry who approved of
it, by taking office, are unworthy servants of the
Crown, because they have deprived it of. the' con-
fidence of the Representatives of the nation. It. is not
necessary to inquire whether the present Ministry did
or did not really advise the dismissal. The Times
wishes the public to believe that the King alone could
have determined on the dismissal, because it was not

the interest of the present Ministers to advise such a
proceeding. "It is, we believe" (says the Times),
altogether unquestionable that the Duke of Welling-
ton was taken as much by surprise when the news of
the breaking up of the Cabinet reached him, as was
any one of Lord Melbourne's colleagues, when his
Lordship announced it to them on his return from the
King ; nay, more, that if the Duke himself had been
under the palace roof at that moment, he would have
been very apt to dissuade his Majesty fram the prompt
and, in some respects, invidious measure of dismissing
the late Cabinet when he did." But this leaves the
matter precisely where it was. That the dismissal was
ill advised, does not surely prove that Ministers should
be responsible for it.—Morning Chronicle.
The scene which occurred at the late aggregate
meeting in Dublin could hardly, we think, be called
deliberative—and yet its discord and uproar were just
as expressive of the impartial, unbiassed sentiments of
the respectable and intelligent classes of the city of
Dublin, as the unanimity of any " aggregate meeting"
at which Mr. O'Connell has figured for the last
twenty years. Those sort of meetings in Dublin, as
well as in some other places, are usually got up and
managed by the agitators in such a way as to ensure
about so much free opinion as can co-exist with the
tyrannic domination of an intolerant party in a packed
assembly—such freedom of opinion may be best de-
scribed by the phrase which has been applied to what
our English Doctrinaires call " free-trade,"—viz., a
" one-sided reciprocity " of feeling. Any man who
had the boldness to stand forward and utter sentiments
adverse to those which the meeting was intended to
palm upon the world as the result of free discussion,
soon found that the only " freedom " which he was
allowed to practise in safety, was the freedom of
agreeing to whatever .the managers of the drama set
down for the actores, labulce to recite, and the audience
to applaud. At the late aggregate meeting, however,
the O'Connellite faction, who used to have these
things all their own way, were met upon their own
ground by men who proved that they were not afraid
to face them on their own ground, and, what was of
more consequence, that they could make as much noise
as themselves. Party confronted party, the Orange
met the Popish agitator—John Judkin Butler stood
opposed to Daniel O'Connell, and

When Greek meets Greek then comes the tug of war."

A fierce tug it seems to have been—a tug of sound and
fury such as in the cave of -Solus, when all the winds
arey in a state of riot and mutiny, could hardly be
equalled. Ossian might compare the tumultuous din
to the fall of a hundred hammers on the anvil, or the
rushing of a hundred mountain streams ; but the
poet's powers of illustration would fail to convey any
adequate notion of the " dread reality." The con-
fusion of Babel was order and tranquillity compared
with it. The shout of the multitude in the Roman
Forum, that stunned with its shoek the passing eagle
or the crow (we do not well recollect which) was tame
compared with the roar of the " Dublin aggregate,"
when all became " simultaneous" orators and listeners

N

there were none. It was the first time in which Mr.
O'Connell found himself in much the same situation
in Dublin as Mr. Sheil once was at Pennenden-
heath—the unheard orator of an " unspoken speech."
But then he can do as Mr. Sheil did on that occa-
sion—publish it as if spoken, with all the cheers that
would have accompanied it had it been but heard.
That the meeting was disturbed, and that its object
was defeated, there can be no doubt. But what was
its object ? It' was to make it appear that the inhabi-
tants of Dublin had met together and resolved to
coerce the King in the exercise of his lawful pre-
rogative, as to the free choice of his own public
servants. It was not the measures of the new
Ministry which the people of Dublin were called
upon to condemn, for those measures have not vet
come before the public. They were called upon by
the Roman Catholic agitators to pass a sentence of Papal
excommunication—upon whom ? Upon Sir Robert
Peel and the Duke of Wellington—the authors of
Roman Catholic emancipation—the Statesmen who
dared to oppose public opinion in England, to open the
the gates of legislative and political power to the very
men who now with signal ingratitude and folly conspire
to exclude them from the councils of the Sovereign.
Let the Protestants of England learn what sacrifices
Popish agitators are capabl of making from this one
remarkable instance. Let them learn how little it
costs their feelings or their consciences, to cancel all
recollection of inestimable obligations, and sacrifice
their benefactors. The liberality of Wellington and
Peel cherished the snake that now attempts to sting
them to death. Nor did the agitators forget, in the
frenzy of faction to whom they are indebted for all the
privileges which a Protestant Constitution can bestow
on the most loyal Protestant subjects ; strange to say,
the only, or almost the only reported words of Mr.
Sheil—a King's Counsel, too—are the following taunts
to the Orangemen :—" Remember, Orangemen, I con-
gratulate you—the Duke of Wellington carried eman-
cipation—the Catholic emancipator I I wish you
joy." Thus, at the very moment that the spirit of
Roman Catholic faction was busied in endeavouring to
effect the political extermination of the Duke of Wel-
lington and Sir Robert Peel, at that very moment one
cf the leaders of that faction cast in the teeth of his
opponents the " astounding fact" that Wellington was
the great benefactor of the Roman Catholics ! Did
not Mr. Sheil perceive that such a taunt recoiled with
tenfold force upon himself and his intolerant and
priest-ridden party ? " Remember, Orangemen," he
says, " that we, the Roman Catholics of Ireland,
owe our political existence to Wellington, and, there-
fore, we will do every thing in our power to vilify his
name, to slander his character, to belie his intentions,
and to ensure, if possible, his political destruction."
It is quite certain that if it had not been for the
liberality—what the great mass of the Protestants of
England thought the too great liberality, of the pre-
sent Premier and the Duke of Wellington, the Roman
Catholics of Ireland never, at least in the present
generation, could have obtained the measure of political
freedom and power which they now enjoy. The
Whigs, whose recall they demand, to enable them to
supplant all regular government in Ireland, to extir•
pate the Protestant religion, and dismember the em-
pire by the repeal of the Union--the Whigs, we say,
never ventured to think of, much less to propose, such
a measure as unqualified emancipation. They threw
the question even of qualified emancipation overboard
wh(n Mt Canning was in office, and the Whigs
crov d la:hind him on the Treasury Bench. The
Duke of Wellington was a Tory, yet he had the ex-
reme liberality, and no less courage, to propose, and
the persevering firmness, with the aid of Sir Robert
Peel, to carry a measure of unqualified emancipation.
The Whigs were astonished, and applauded it as an
act of transcendant wisdom—the Roman Catholics
vowed eternal gratitude—they promised statues and
monuments to perpetuate the recollection of his bene-
ficence. If they did raise any monument of sufficiently
solid materials to endure for a single lustrum, it has
outlasted their "eternal" gratitude.—Morning Herald.
We understand that the letter of Sir Robert Peel to
his constituents has produced a most favourable im-
pression in the diplomatic and influential circles in
Paris. Letters have been received in town from par-
ties of weight in the French capital, who were consi-
dered unfavourably disposed towards our present Mi-
nistry, expressive of the highest admiration and satis-
faction at the address, which has excited such a power-
ful effect on the minds of Englishmen. Our Paris
correspondent, in the postscript of his letter, dated
Saturday, which reached us by express, and was in-
serted in our impression of yesterday, mentioned the
gratifying fact of the great monied interest of France
being perfectly content with the manifesto of the Pre-
mier. The immediate rise in the French Funds must
convince all dispassionate persons that in France no
fears will be entertained of the pacific policy of our
Government. Such an assurance would of course be
needless for our readers, but we hope that our Whig
and Radical contemporaries, who have been so anxious
to impress upon the public the danger arising from a
Conservative Administration for the preservation of
tranquillity in Europe, will be sufficiently candid to
state the truth ; if not from an abstract love of the
principle, at least from the ambition of being consi-
dered veritable organs of opinion in every clime, how-
ever those opinions may differ from their wishes.—
Morning Post.
Once more, for the last time, because it is the latest
moment at which such exhortations can be made avail-
able, we most earnestly recommend and urge all the
gentlemen who have signed the requisition for the great
city meeting this day, and all who agree with them
in sentiment, and all whom they can by discussion
or example influence, to attend in person and main-
tain their opinions by their
.presence, their voices,
and their votes. Their enemies are on the alert and
busy. They are beating up for bottle-holders in every
direction to pre-occupy in crowds the place of assembly,
to confound the proceedings of the requisitionists,
and defeat the object for which the meeting has
been called. It is true that the advertisement has
been issued by, and on the part of, and is addressed
to, those who are " desirous of expressing their as-
surance of loyalty and attachment to their Sovereign
on the occasion of the late exercise of his prerogative,"
or, in other words, who approve the late exercise of
the Royalprerogative, in opposition to those who have
avowed that they regard it as a grievance, and would
expel from office the Ministers whom it has called into
activity. It might therefore in strictness be made a
question, whether they who condemn the entire pur-
pose far which, and for which only a certain class of
persons, concurring in its expediency, have declared
that they will meet together, are entitled to admission
amongst the latter, when their presence could tend to
nothing but the proof of a fact already known and
loudly blazoned—namely, that there are bodies who
differ from the requisitionists, and who condemn the
late exercise
.of the Royal power. If however we had the
ordering of such matters, we should say to the constitu-
tionalists, " Don't stand upon punctilio, or even upon
your undoubted right to exclude from a meeting,
the design of which is to give expression to a definite
sentiment, those who would do their utmost to obstruct
that expression, but face them, and let the country see
what descriptions of persons range themselves on either
side of this interesting question, and who and what are
the respective chiefs." Nothing, we state frankly,
would be to us less surprising than that the anti-
Royalists who threaten to intrude upon this day's
meeting should mean to employ the weapons of cla-
mour, violence, and very possibly even personal out-
rage, rather than permit an assembly of which wealth,
intelligence, and character constitute the bases, to have
even the shadow of freedom for the declaration of sen-
timents which would find an echo in every corner of
the realm. But honest English gentlemen ought
not to shrink from violence in the discharge of
either a private or public duty. They have the laws
to protect them. They may become each of them, as
the necessity arises, peace officers, and with their own
right hands protect themselves from aggression. If
noise, and uproar, and fury, and insult, be had recourse
to as a means to embroil the proceedings, and to make
it appear that they have no ostensible result of the na-
ture contemplated by those who signed the requisition,
then, as a last expedient, having tried every other, the
requisitionists may still command the press as their
medium for publishing the resolutions which a facti-
ous tumult will have prevented then!' frera earrying