The Sun.
London, England, 1832-04-28 00:00:00

SPHIIT OF THE PUMAC JOCritNSLS

evening paper of ye.terday, which prey
tended t.o answer our observations, does itself
too much honour in supposing—or rather in
trying to make its readers suppose—that our
t irle of the same day was intended as a reply Pb
its Aupid remarks on the franchise of the metro-
politan districts. We briefly disposed of the
whole of its objections in a single paragraph, in-
-stead of a long article, and do not feel ourselves
called upon, by its last night's attack on other
grounds, to resume the subject. There is Si)
7,reitt a lack of argument and common honesty

in the Anti-Reform press, that though the
victory on our part may be secure, the triumph
, can Scaacely be reckoned honourable. We shall
. therefore abandon it entirely to its own luctibra-
- tions, and shall address ourselves to a party
which views its extravagance with disgust, and
which has been persecuted by its abuse without
measure and without mercy. If this party, the
party Cif " waverers" as they are insultingly de-
signated, who declare themselves the friends of
Reform but the enemies of the Bill, had the
industry to read, the docility to learn, or the
candour to confess conviction, the should
not despair of making them converts to the
Ministerial measure in all its integrity of
plan or extent of detail. It is with this
hope that we have for the present week dis-
cussed objections which to some of our friends
must have appeared already answered, and re-
peated arguments which to, ourselves: appeared
unnecessary. It is with the same hope that we
now draw upon the patience of our Reform
readers by recapitulating a few of the points
whieli we think we have established. " Line
upon line, and precept upon precept," is as ne-
cessary for a neophyte of Reform, as for any
other incipient convert. The Reform Bill—our
new " Bill of Rights," so necessary to give ef-
fect to the old—proceeds, as has repeatedly
been observed, upon three principles or objects,
—namely, disfranchisement, enfranchisement,
and extension of suffrage. The first happily
admits of no dispute with the moderate Refor-
mers, who threaten us with an attack on the Bill
in Committee. The rotten boroughs are already
gone. We shall not stop to say " any evil of
the dead," though we can say no good, and have
no objection to any•epitaph on them which does
not end with the word resztrgam. The enfran-
chi.ement of, several great manufacturing and
commercial tciwns in the provinces is equally se-
cure. Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, and
several other marts of business and trade hitherto
unrepresented, will appear, after the next elec-
tion, by their representatives in St. Stephen's
as certainly as if they had been called to
Parliament :300 years ago. In the qualifica-
tion for the counties there has been no alte-
ra-ion which can appear to the enemies of the
Bili objectionable. The county constituency
has been enlarged by the admission of copy-
holders and leaseholders ; but both these classes
are as respectable, and certainly as harmless, as
the old 40s. freeholder. The 35 or 36 mem-
bers added to the county representation is rather,
in the eyes of the weavers, a recommendation
than an objection. The qualification in the
towns has been more extensively altered„and on-
these alterations are chiefly grounded the alarms
of the "moderate Reformers." Yet what
should alarm any sensible reflecting man. in the
101. franchise ? We have proved, to the aris-

toerats -that, in many of the old boroughs, this
tualification will be rather a disfranchisement
than an extension of popular rights. We have
proved, that in none of the smaller'boroughs,
entitled to send one member to Parliament, will
there be 300 persons qualified to be electors.
We have proved that in 84 of the remaining
boroughs, only two will have anything approach-
ing to 1,000 electors. We have proved that
only nine or ten will have above 2,000 10/,
voters. We have thus included all the old bo-
roughs and cities at present entitled to send
members to Parliament. In many of them the
constitueucv wil; be greatly diminished ; in none
of them, except those where it is confined to a
corporation, r ill it be greatly increased.
The four or five new boroughs, such as Leeds,
Manchester, Birmingham, and Sheffield, to

which the right of returning members is to ex-
tended by general consent, will, it is true, have
a large constituency. But, in.the first place, it
cannot be inconveniently large, as the whole of
the electors in 26 oldie largest'towns, admitted
~,to elective rights- by the Bill, will not amount to
30.,000, or little more, on an average, than 1,000
; and in the second place, the members of
!bur, five, or six towns could not be danger
fOll3 in au assembly of 658 members, in what-
ever way they are disposed to act, or by whatever
influence they were returned. Poor Henry
Hunt is an evidence of how little mischief can
be done, with the best intentions to be mischiev-
ous, in a body of sensible or honourable men,
under the very worst system of popular election.
'The atistocracy, unhappily, will be strengthened,
?,411,0r than weakened, by the diminution of
Jailers ,orcasioned by the till, in all the old
horough;, • except, perhaps, 10 or 12. To re-
medy an imaginary evil, resulting from the al-
leged excessive number Of electors in five or
six of 'the. large provincial towns, it has been
proposed to raise the qualification in these
towns from 101. to 151. or 20/. We have
stated at length what we conceive satisfactory
objections to this change, and good. reasons for
adhering to the present provisions' of the Bill in
their uniform operation over .the Whole of the
kingdom. It would be absurd to propose cue
rate for Leeds and another for York—one rate
for Manchester and another for Lancaster—one
rate for Birmingham and another for Coventry ;
and yet in none of these old boroughs in the
neighbourhood of the new, can any complaint
be Made made of the numbers or quality of the
constituency which the Bill will create or retain.
There then only remain the objections of the
" .waverers" to the metropolitan franchise—the
Co; and Magog of the Anti-Reform alarmists.
On the justice of this part of the Bill, and the
absurdity of the terrors with which it has been
invested, we are almost ashamed to say more than
what we have already said, or to repeat our for-
.
Mer observations. If wealth,intelligence,patriousm,
knowledge of public affairs, and extent of con-
-tribution to the public revenue, entitle any portion
of the town population of England to a new share !'
• 'ofthe franchises taken from the decayed boroughs,
the suburbs of London could not, with any
' show of justice or common sense, he overlooked.
The metropolis and its suburbs pay nearly the
half of the assessments of the kingdom. They
are only to receive eight Members—whereas, by
any of the foregoing rules, they would be en-
titled to fifty. The 101. qualification admits a
great *orders to -the elective fran-
c 0, census, in such an im-
ense
mike a lit-ge conStO cy. The mere 10/.
*Ciuie!tldera' (or th4sfltwei n ia and -goo
4/-1 -

,~.

ill OM be to the rest of the electors as one tl
;hrec, Fo that no other danger can be appre
lictuled Iron; the descent. in the scale, which
might not be equally apprehended from thf
higher census of In the last place, there
could be no greater danger of a riotous election
in Marylebone, Finsbury, the Tower HamletS,
. ' or Lambeth. than in Westminster or Southwark,
even though the system of polling
.were con,-
tinned the same; but by taking the votes in
smaller districts, and terminating the election
in two days, all danger of tumult or confusion
' at elections are removed. We may therefore
conclude by saying that he who could try to
excite alarm on the addition of eight Members
to the metropolis, on the ground of a tumultu-
ous election, or a dangerous return, would, in
the language of Dr. Johnson, ff have cried out
fire' in the time of the deluge."— Times.
The meeting, on Tuesday, of the inhabitants
of Edinburgh, to the number of 50,000, inclu-
ding all classes from the great landowner to the
honest artisan, united together in asserting the
cause of Reform, was not necessary to prove
' that the people are as determined as ever in that
cause ; but it will deprive the Anti-Reformers
even of a pretext for maintaining the contrary.
tie who, in the teeth of all these demonstrations
of the deep devotion of the people to Reform,
. maintains that they arc indifferent, is either an
idiot deserving of our pity, or a shameless knave
with whom it would be useless to argue. It is
hardly possible to conceive a nearer approxima-
tion to unanimity, than has been exemplified
wherever the people have had opportunities of
meeting to express their sentiments. The Con-
servative party in Edinburgh (which is the head-
quarters of the Corruptionists) could not muster
300. The odds are as 100 to one. The re-
formers include a considerable number of the
Aristocracy, nearly all the middle classes, and all
the lower. The Scotch conceive the 10/. quali-
fication and the other parts objected to by
' the waverers essential to the measure—in
short, they will not be satisfied with the
Bill if it is in any way mutilated. With these
demonstrations of' the public feeling, Ministers,
even were they disposed to give way to the Anti-
Reformers, will see the impossibility of doing so
with any regard to their own safety, putting
higher motives out of consideration. What the,
people have set their minds most on is precisely
that which the Anti-Reformers and waverers
wish to alter. The people have set their minds
on it, for the very reasons which have deter-
mined the Anti-Reformers to endeavour to alter
it, because the alteration would impair the effici-
ency of the Bill. Were Ministers to yield to
the Anti-Reformers they would thereby irritate
and provoke the people beyond measure, and en-
able the Anti-Reformers to triumph over them.
There is no security for Ministers but in the
attachment of the people. When they lose that
they are nothing, Sir James Gibson Craig, at
the• Edinburgh Meeting, observed—" Gentle-
men, you may have entire confidence in Earl
Grey.—(Cheers.) The salvation of the coun-
try is in his hands.—(Loud cheers.) The ma-
sure must be carried, or consequences the most
unfortunate must ensue. Trust to him."—Yet
it must be owned the language of Earl Grev on
the second. reading was of a complexion to lead
the people to abate somewhat of their confidence
in his stern determination to yield nothing which
should impair the efficiency of the Bill. It must.
be owned that the situation of a Premier, endea—
vouring to persuade an assembly -against their
will, with a people opposed to • that •assembly,
narrowly scanning every word he utters, is one of
peculiar difficulty. We observed at the time,
that every argument advanced by his Lordship to
make the measure palatable to the Anti-Reform-
ers was wormwood to the Reformers. It is, in
fact, impossibie to serve God and Mammon ;-and
all the resources of eloquence must hail, where
the object is to satisfy parties opposed to each
other. A writer in Tait's Magazine for May,
which we have just received, forcibly illustrates
this in commenting (th the debate on the second
reading :
" 'De very arm with which the Bill was defended in
the Commons has been turned against it in the House of
Lords. . 4 I+l the House of Lords, the policy of
its friends has been to disclaim the principles upon which
it is based. Their task is to persuade their illustrious
compeers, that the Bill is not calculated to extend the liber-
ties of the people, or to secure good and cheap Govern-
ment and Legislation—that, in short, it is the most harm-
less and inefficient measure that ever was proposed. So-
phistry so glaring even the logic of the House of Louis is
ab'e to expo Ye. ' * 4 Even by the showing of
Earl Grey's fr:ends, his conciliatory deportment is only
warrantable on the assumption that it is worn to cloak
the sternest resolution. When a man makes up his mind
tofinesse, lie must not be astonished that even his wed-
wisher+ are deceived. Earl Grey has selected his course,
and will doubtless pursue it—if to a successful issue, with
mote heartfelt gr ttitnde from none than front ourselves.
But as he is confesetily playing a double game, we must
he eKeused if the frailty of our nature lead us to mistrust
hint. Fine spun webs of policy are so easily torn asunder,
that even with the firmest confidence in the intentions of
the attisan, we have little faith in them. In case of tie
failure of the vanguard, we must have a reserve ready ; '
and the only one adequate to the present emergency is a
united and determined nation."

Reform, however, cannot longer be withheld,
and less than the measure now before the public
will not satisfy the people. So long as Minis-
ters surround themselves with the people, they
are on a rock from which they cannot be driven.
For, after all, though the Anti-Rell;rmers are
strong in the House of Lords, they are weak
every where else. Of all the delusions ever en
tertained, that of their coercing a whole nation is
assuredly the most absurd. There are at present
25,000 soldiers in Great Britain, and nearly the
same number in Ireland. We take it for
granted that Ireland cannot spare any troops for
the coercion of Britain. As aids to the police, in
case of petty local disturbances, the 25,000
soldiers in Britain might be effective enough ;
but it is ridiculous to think, even if the men
were so disposed, that this handful of soldiers
could coerce a mighty nation like this. The
Duke of Wellington, though the Great Captain
of the age, cannot perform impossibilities. If
he were at the helm, he would find himself
wi,hout the means of governing in opposition to
the sense of the nation. The Aristocracy were
strong at the beginning of the Revolutionary
war. They had then the body of the people
with them. An Aristocracy can only be strong
through a nation, and not when opposed to it.
Of all the hallucinations ever entertained, that of
the Anti-Reformers, that they can coerce the
people, is the wildest. The peop!e laugh them
to scorn. We often hear a good deal in the
Tory prints of that Constitutional force, the
Yeomanry.
sinuated, The Yeomanry, it is by this in-
would lend themselves to any plan for
the people.i
coercing Not they. Times are
greatly changed since the Yeomanry prided
themselves on being the tools of other landlords.
If the Aristocracy therefore count on the
Yeomanly, they lean on a broken reed. . The
following contribution to our stock of knowledge
on this !..iihject i from a ctui,lus article en ire

SCottish Yeomanry in the Journal from whicfl
ac have already given a quotation:—
" The tenantry (says the writer) are in a most gloomy,
despondent, and discontented mood ; and being in as I' al
t state as they can well be, no men are more anxious for
change of system. They know any rhunge must be
ftvoarable to them. No class of men are more thorough-
g-oing Reformers. In some counties more than ninuteen
,ut of every twenty of the farmers signed petitions to
t'arliatn nt for Reform. These petitions were got up en
tirely by the tenantry. From nut one county in Scot
land has there been a petition by tie tenantry alone against
Reform. A few of those who were in arrear of rent have
,ar compelled to s;gn such petitions, prepared by their
rndlards or their factors ; but this is no more to be con-
sidered an art of free will, than the retiring to the sanc-
tuary to avoid imprisonment for their rent. Some cer-
tainly refused to sign any petition ; they said they would
not humiliate themselves by addressing a body which
treated their representations with contempt. Scme (we
tell it with regret, hut it is right that the Tories should
know the whole truth) did not scruple to say that matters
were far beyond remedy by a Reform in the representa-
tion ; that revolution is the only cure ; and that Reform
is injurious, by retarding its appro-ch, and by deluding'
the people. With such feelings and notions, nothing cx •
cites the derision of the tenantry more than the Tory pro.
jest to embody them to put dawn Reform. Hence the
efforts to raise troops of yeomanry have been singularly un•
suceeasful. In Fife it is now nearly a year since we read
the appointments of the officers in the Gazette; but we
have never beard of the regiment having been seen in the
field The Tories have had to pay for the uniforms of such
of the tenantry as the state of their accounts with their
landlords forced to enlist. It is injurious to a man's credit
to be sects in (7 yemnanry uniform ; his rent is suspected
to be in arrrar. The most strenuous exertions have been
made in many counties, by men of the highest rank, and
possessing a numerous tenantry, without their baying been
able in same instances to embody a single troop. . Daring
the war the whale regiments might have been raised with
half the effort. The Lairds have been told by theirte-
mnta that, on the slightest prospect of foreign invasion,
they will rise as readily as they did iu 1803 ; but as the
object is to organize a force to protect the Barons in their
castles against the consequences of their own misconduct
and folly, they will leave them to defend theraaelvei as
they hest can. . . . We, therefore, assure
our Tawn readers, that the Tories are much mistaken
when they think they can make tools of the Scottish yeo-
manry to aid them to put down freedom. On the con-
trary, the yeomanry will be found arrayed on the side of
liberty, and not rnly their aid may be relied on, but also
that of the peasantry, who will readily enlist themselves
under the banners of their masters and employers in any
political struggle. The peasantry know well the causes of
their misery and poverty, and who are to be blamed for it.
Whatever, therefore, may be Iv:toting in the day of trial,
it will not he men ; for the rural population of Scotland
alone will furnish 250,000 able to bear arms."
To reason with the Anti-Reformers were
useless, hut it is not useless to show them that
their cause not only is unjust, but 'hopeless.
You may. preach long enough to a robber before
you inspire him with a respect for his neigh-
bour's property; but you may succeed better if
you show him that the man whom he is about to
attack is better armed than himself, and that the
house into which he means to break would be a
trap-for him. It is well that they should know
that the people are aware of the utmost extent
of the mischief they can effect. We defy them
to prevent Reform.—Morning Chronicle.
For several years past, whenever a statement
has been made in Parliament of the declining
prosperity of commerce, or the peculiar distress
of any branch of trade or manufactures, the
practice has been for the Minister who takes
cognizance of this subject to endeavour to dis-
guise the red state of the iacts, to refute the
practical evidence of experienced men, and an-
swer the voice of public complaint by producing
a bundle of official documents, which, if they
do-not directly state what is false, are elaborately
contrived to mystify the truth. The returns of
the annual imports and expos is of' the country
have been made great use of from time to. time,
bY different Administrations, to convey erroneous
impressions as to the actual state of trade and
commerce. The late Mr. Huskisson was parti-
cularly expert in paper•demonstrations of the
increasing prosperity of a falling trade. The
shipowners still recollect how completely,
to . the satisfaction of a crowded House
of Commons—in which the cheers of the
" political economists were, at that time,
much more powerful than the suggestions
of common sense—he made their affairs flourish
in all the glowing colours of documentary im-
provement, though his destructive policy had
actually smote them with the cold hand of ruin.
In this sort of official mystification he has not
an unworthy successor in 'Mr. Poulett Thomson,
whose discovery of the " fructifying principle of
money" in the pockets of those who have none
would, undoubtedly, have entitled him to a very
high degree of reputation among the ingenious
philosophers of Swift's " flying island." One
circumstance which has greatly contributed to
the deception practised upon the public mind
by official returns of exports and imports is, that
the official value, not being the real value, is
itself a deception. We recollect that, two or
three years ago, Mr. Alderman 'Waithinan parti-
cularly directed the attention of the House of
Commons to this point, and proved the fallacy
of the Ministerial deductions from the returns,
by showing the difference between the official
and the actual value of the goods exported. In
the present year the same Hon. Member gave
notice of moving a string of resolutions relative
to the important and interesting question of the
actual state of trade, founded on the official
returns, distinguishing the real front the
official value, and thereby showing the
increase or the decrease in the quantity
of goods exported, and the enhancement
or depreciation in price. 'These resolutions
have been more than once postponed, in conse-
quence of other business, or there being " no
House." They are, however, to be moved soon
alter the recess. Having seen a printed copy of
them, we can take upon ourselves-to say -that
the calculations on which they are founded will
show a decrease in the exports, which, notwith-
standing our increased population, amounts, in
the 11 years from 1819—the year of Peel's
Currency Bill—to 1830, to not less than six
millions and a quarter per annum. They will
also show that, from the sth of January, 1819,
to the sth of January, 1830, the real value, as
compared with the official value, had suffered a
depreciation, upon the average of the five latter
years, to the vast annual amount of nearly
19,000,0001.—while it appears that, in the last
two years, a further depreciation has taken place
amounting to upwards of 3,000,000/. It may
he inquired how it happens that there should be
so great a difference between the official and the
th reale divalueffer
difference
et o lead d
believe,persons
lookingacquainted
att
withl
e
Parliamentary returns of our export trade,
uy
iffmetdrheedg r
eaatofficiallgyr eparto
svpdaeleurpeerde,csilea‘t,thi forth,depreciation
ill
f,t.rahei at
ti"tilierfilltarsa s
odnei
official value, then, is an estimate founded
on the rate of prices in the Custom-house books,
formed at a distant period, and which, though
originally the same as the actual value, affords
no criterion of the actual value at present, though
it may have its use in relatively showing the in-
crease or deptession of expos is in a series of
years as to
alequantityyear aenncdling price.
sthT of January,
hus it
tuiLr
appearsy,
that, from
1799, in which year the declaration of goods
exported in real value was first declared, the
e exceeded the amount of our exports in real valu

' official value -by inbre th-an 12 millions i •
annum; and in the year ending 1803, the exec
of the real over the official value amounted m
19,906,437/., or, we may say in round number ,
to about 20 millions. From that year, howeve ,
a depreciation in the real, as compared with the
offieia I value of our exported goods took place,
so that the excess of the former over the latter had
diminished in the time which elapsed between
the Peace of Amiens and the passing of Pee(
Currency Bill to 5,615,563/., or better than
5-ii millions. After the year 1819 the excess was
on the other side, that is, the official value became
greater than the real value ; and we find that in
the year 1824, five years after the passing of
Peel's Bill, the official value exceeded the real
by 4,202,486/. ; making a difference between
that year and the year 1819 of nearly ten
millions of depreciation !—the excess of official
over the real value in 1830 was 13,215,406/. ;
making a depreciation compared with the year
1819 of nearly nineteen millions. To show the
use which Government has made of the returns
of the official value to deceive the public, Alder-
man ‘Vaithman refers to the speech from the
Throne at the commencement of the year 1830,
in which it was said that the exports had ex•
ceeded those of any former year, and afforded
indications of active commerce." Now what
was the truth of the matter ? The exports had
exceeded those of the former year in quantity, as
denoted by Ocial valuation, to the amount of
3,445,955.—but in real value they fell below
those of the former year by 937,5061. ; making
a depreciation in that one year of 4,383,4611.
Thus did the Duke of Wellington's Administra-
tion make use of those official returns to deceive
the nation, and give an impression of commercial
prosperity which did not exist. We shall take
another occasion to advert to the state of the lin_
ports.—Morning Herald.
We published on Thursday, for the amuse-
ment and edification of our readers, a full report
of the proceedings of a Political Union at New-
castle-upon-Tyne, as a sample of the temper and
feelings of those self-constituted bodies which his
Majesty's present enlightened and liberal Minis-
ters permit to exist, in contempt of the King's
Proclamation and in defiance of the law. Do
the Ministers' then still rely upon the assistance
of illegal confederacies, whose members publicly
proclaim their determinatiOn to refuse the pay-
ment of taxes, should Parliament neglect or
delay to legislate according to their dictation ?
Or is the connivance of the Administration in
this continued outrage upon Law and Govern-
inept the result merely of contempt towards the
offenders, who would be indeed merely ridi-
culous were it not that their language tended to
the production of riot And bloodshed ? We
think Ministers can scarcely be so infatuated as
to regard these seditious Associations as the
objects merely of contempt, although the
character and menaces of the orators who figure
among them are sufficiently contemptible. For
while their threat not to pay taxes if the Reform
Bill should be rejected or mutilated is only ridi-
culous, inasmuch as few of their number have
any direct taxes to pay, it is mischievous also,
inasmuch as such language is calculated to in-
, flame the passions of the ignorant multitudes who
hear or read their speeches, and to diffuse the senti-
ment of disrespect to law and authority. That these
club orators are known in their respective neigh-
bourhoods to be men without reputation or import-
ance is little to the purpose. Their inflamma-
tory speeches and resolutions travel beyond the
sphere in which their personal and social insigni-
ficance can operate as an antidote to the poison
they diffuse. . For instance, the threat not to
pay their assessed taxes, when uttered by the
members of the Political Union of London, is
laughed at in the metropolis, where every-
body knows how inexpressibly small a fraction
of the national revenue these worthies can ever
have the opportunity to withhold. The orators
of the Newcastle Club excite no doubt in that
good town similar hilarity. But we beg to re-
mind his Majesty's wise and prudent Ministers
that the effect upon the minds of the ignorant
and vulgar is somewhat different when the Lon-
don speeches are promulgated at Newcastle, and
the Newcastle speeches in London. Distance
baffles time senses or. mankind, and calls their
imagination into play. When seen and heard
from afar, pigmies may be mistaken for giants,
and the braying of an ass for the roaring of a lion.
In candour we are bound to express our belief
that time Nobleman at the head of his Majesty's
Government has no wish that any more Custom-
houses
should. be burnt down -by mobs, in the
cause of Reform. The extreme contrast between
his speeches f the present Session and of the
last shows that the events at Beistol have made
a due impression on his mind, and that he is
now convinced of the danger and impropriety of
inflammatory orations, when delivered by Minis-
ters of State. This is a step, at , least, in the
right direction. Now we would submit to the
improved judgment of Earl Grey whether a Go-
vernment which encourages the delivery of effu-
sions tending obviously and directly to the de-
struction, by mobs, of custom-houses and ex-
cise-offices (in'such a case it will not be denied
that to permit without legal rebuke is to encour-
age) will not 'be to all intents and purposes
particeps criminis, in the event of the future
perpetration of such violent and atrocious
acts ? The remorse on account of past
errors and calamities, - for which we are
ready to give the Noble Earl credit, most
be less deep and effectual than - we would
wish to suppose if he hesitate as to the
proper answer to this question. Let us now
propose another question to the Noble Earl, the
answer to which must be quite as free from dif-
ficulty. Some persons there are, although we
believe but few, who are payers of assessed
taxes, and who in the Political Unions of Lon-
don and other places have boasted their deter-
mination, and have been applauded for the boast
to withhold payment provided the House cf
Lords exercise an independent judgment upon
the provisions of the Reform Bull. Some of
these persons 'are manufacturers, employing a
considerable number of workmen. Now our
question to Earl Grey is. this :—lf Government
tolerate the illegal Societies in which such threats
are uttered, and neglect to execute the law in
the case of the manufacturers, whether they
be engineers or cotton-spinners, or anything
else who dare to utter them, can the same Go-
vertnnent afterwards when the workmen of such
masters, acting in the spirit and under the
stimulus of this unreproved sedition, shall per-
chance proceed to set fire to the Custom House
or time Excise Office, inflict the last fatal penalty
of the law with any regard to consistency, ho-
nour, humanity, or justice ? The question is,
not whether certain persons who make a trade
of politics, and would be the first to forget their
threat whenever an attempt to execute it may
seem likely to make the trade a losing one,
will pay their taxes or not, for this would be
indeed a very slight and frivolous question ; but
'he question really is, whether the Govern-

:vent is not bound, in justice and hurnanitr,.
to • take the necessary means of chastising
spirit, or the affectation of it, which cannot be
displayed without extending itself to classes of
society among whom it must act of necessity, if
it act at all, by deeds of violence to classes of
society who can manifest their hostility to the
revenue of the State in no other way than by
the destruction of its offices or the massacre o:
its collectors ? We hope the Government is
sufficiently sensible by past experience of the in-
convenience of having first incurred the climes
which they were afterwards compelled to punish.
If so, our present remonstrance will not be dis-
regarded. His Majesty's Ministers will assur-
edly be responsible beinre God and min for
every act of violence which may be produced in
the United Kingdoms by political excitement and
exasperation, if they do not immediately bring
to condign punishment the incendiaries of the
political unions, who are daily labouring to ex-
cite their fellow-subjects to the perpetration of
crime.—Morning Post.