The Sun.
London, England, 1869-07-17 00:00:00

STRONG LANGUAGE.

------- -
The Standard is very angry because the Liberals
are united, though two years ago it used to be for
ever chiding them upon their dissensions. It states
that " the contempt with which the Lords' amend-
ments have been treated is the contempt of brute
force for reason, of numbers for intelligence, of self-
will for authority." It is, perhaps, scarcely
worth while criticising words written under
the impulse of anger. Yet an analysis will at
least afford some amusement. Why is a majority of
124 in one House to be called " brute force," and a
majority of seven in the other to bs considered
" reason ? " Are arguments the more logical in
proportion as they fail to convince ? The actor who
cried out, "my wound is great because it is
so small," was answered by a voice from the
pit, " then 'twould be greater were it none
at all." And so we presume that the House of
Commons' majority would inspire most confidence
with our contemporary if it did not exist. It was not
thus this time three years. We are told, further,
that is a triumph of numbers over intelligence. That
is a matter of course. When people. differ from us
they must be fools. Finally, self-will has prevailed
over authority. Yet we were told a day or two back
that a majority of the house of Commons really
desired concurrent endowment, but did not dare vote
for it because of the constituencies. Clearly, there-
fore, M.P.'s have not been acting from "self-will."
As to "authority," we imagine that the House of
Commons is at least of equal authority with the
House of Lords.
MR. CIIARLEY'S LAMENT.

Mr. Charley is endeavouring to bring about his
"righteous retribution" on the head of Mr. Glad-
stone, but unfortunately he meets difficulties in the
way. He had a fine piece of eloquence to pour upon
the right hon. Premier on Thursday last ; but, alas !
the Speaker stopped its flow. The House, moreover
—profane men all—laughed at Mr. Charley's tears;
and refusal to weep with him who wept. For Mr.
Charley was in a lamenting strain. Not that be
expected to soften the hard heart of the First Lord of
the Treasury. That was an impossibility, and Mr.
Charley got wroth as soon as Mr. Gladstone's name
was mentioned. The subject under discussion was
the date at which establishment should cease.
Stern and unkind Gladstone said 1871. Then uprose
the member for Salford, exclaiming how short
shrift was given to the Church. But what could he
expect ? " The Constitution," he exclaimed, "is at an
end.' Then, turning to Mr. Gladstone, who had
brought it about, he said :
" The right hon. gentleman gathered up in his own
person all the functions of the State, as Augustus did
those of the Roman States. Her Most Gracious Majesty
meant the right hon. gentleman, and the House of Lords
were his most obedient and humble servants. The House
of Lords were told that they had no course open to them
but to submit to the right hon. gentleman."
Here, raising his voice to the highest key, Mr. Charley
said, pathetically, " Talk of Americanising our insti-
tutions —" When, lo ! Mr. Denison unceremo-
niously " put the extinguisher on," and the retributive
avenger sank back feebly into his seat.