The Sun.
London, England, 1835-10-20 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The letter of Lord Morpeth refusing the aid of sol-
diers and policemen to levy tithes, will be a grievous
disappointment to those who look with envy and im-
patience at the tranquil state of Ireland. Their dearest
wish i 3 to detach the confidence and affections of the
people from the Government ; and their calculations
fur advancing that ol,ject have been all built on the
odium which they hoped to cast upon the Lord Lieu-
tenant by involving- him in a tithe war. In applying
for the military force they could scarcely have had any
other design ; for every man of sense or common ob-
servation must be well convinced that.the idea of actu-
ally enforcing payment of tithes in Ireland, until sonic
arrangement shall take place which may reconcile the
minds of the people to the principle, is altogether chi-
merical. The hatred which the very name of tithe in-
spires, if it could admit of any aggravation, has received
it from the occurrences of the last Session of Parlia-
ment ; and with the hatred of the impost, the determi-
nation to resist its exaction has been proportionally
augmented. The tithe-owners are quite aware of this.
They know it perhaps better than those who have no
personal interest in the question, beyond that which
every one may be supposed to have in the peace and
happiness of his country ; and therefore it is scarcely
to be believed that, in their application for military aid,
they were actuated by any other motive than a desire
to embarrass the Government, by drawing it into angry
and fatal collisions with the people. Such consequen-
ces have been averted by the prudent, just, and consti-
tutional resolution of the Government not to employ
the armcd force of the State to do the business of
bailiffs and tithe-proctors. The ordinary process of
law, by which the rights of property are asserted -and
vindicated, lies open to them. They may resort to it,
if they please ; and if they meet with disturbance
or forcible opposition, the Government will inter-
pose vigorously and effectually to protect them in the
assertion of their legal rights. They cannot reason-
ably or constitutionally expect or require more help
than that. What they are disposed to ask beyond
this, would not be of the slightest avail for attaining
that which they profess to be their sole object—namely,
the recovery of the tithes. But this will not content
them ; because they have another object, which is
the real aim and purport of their present proceed-
ings, and that is—to involve the Government of
Lord Mulgrave in the course which made those of
Lord Anglesey and Lord Wellesley so unfortunate.
To levy tithes is their pretext—to levy war their de-
sign. There need no special instances to prove
that the aversion to tithes in the minds of the
Irish people continues unabated. But one has re-
cently occurred so very striking and almost preterna-
tural, that it ought to be mentioned. The seizure
and sale of a farmer's cows for tithe by Mr. Croker,
the rector of Croom, has been noticed in all the papers.
The Tory journals treat it as a kind of triumphant
exploit, and record, with many compliments to the
disinterested generosity of Mr. Croker, that he was
himself the purchaser of the cattle, which he pre-
sented as a free gift to the House of Industry in Li-
merick, to be distributed among the inmates of that
institution. Not any of them, however, have men-
tioned the fact, which is nevertheless true beyond
all contradiction, that the paupers of Limerick re-
fused to taste a morsel of the meat. A more ex-
traordinary instance of self-denial is scarcely on
record. Those poor creatures, faint and hungry,
yearning for a more generous diet than they had
been accustomed to, and with feelings wounded
perhaps by the neglect of their own friends, resisted
the strong temptation of a table groaning under the
prime joints of grass-fed beef from the Limerick pas-
tures—beef, such as might create an appetite under
the ribs of a London Alderman—and turned aside to
their miserable and scanty mess of pottage. They
would not defile themselves with the touch of the tithe-
beef. A sage of the olden time has said that " hunger
makes all things sweet except itself." He knew no-
thing about the nausea which the fumes of a tithe
sirloin create in the stomach of an Irish pauper.
Hunger itself is a luxury compared to that. How
vapidly insignificant does the heroic brag of the "pota-
toes and salt" pluralist look beside this splendid ab-
stinence.—:(horning Chronicle.
We call attention to a letter from Mr. Stonor, in
another column, on the all-important subject of the
appointment to the Post-office at Tetsworth. It will
be seen that not only dfl Mr. Stonor not solicit Mr.
O'Connell's interference, but that he never solicited
any body for the situation, and that Mr. O'Connell
is quite a stranger to the affair. We know not whe-
ther this flat contradiction will satisfy our Printing-hou se-
square contemporaries, which seems determined that Mr.
O'Connell shall have something to do with Tetsworth.
It seizes the occasion of a paragraph in the Oxford
Herald to declare that " it is not essential to the truth
of the story that Mr. O'Connell should know any
thing about Tetsworth," and that " the affair turns
upon Mr. O'Connell's knowledge of Mr. Stonor, not
of Tetswcolli." Mr. Stonor does not, certainly, dis-
claim the knowledge of Mr. O'Connell, so that our
Contemporary, who is so sagacious in smelling out a
Popish Plot, may still suppose that this place of 151.
per annum could not be disposed of without the agency
of Mr. O'Connell.—Morning Chronicle.
To the EDITOR of the MORNING CHRONICLE.
Sir,—A statement has been lately circulated in the Con-
servative journals, originating from a correspondent in the
Times, that I had solicited Mr. O'Connell's interest in favour
of a protege of mine, for the situation of Postmaster at Tets-
worth. There is not one syllable of truth in this statement.
Not only did I not solicit Mr. O'Connell's interference, but I
never solicited any bay for the situation. Mr. O'Connell
can know nothing of the matter, unless he has lately heard of
it from the public papers. I have taken the liberty of for-
warding this communication to you, to enable you to deal as
you think fit with the folly thus raised upon so false a founda-
tion. I have requested a contradiction in those Conservative
journals where I have seen the statement.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
THOMAS STONOR.
Townely, Lancashire, Oct. 17.

The ceremony of laying the first stone of the City
of London School to-morrow, has drawn our atten-
tion to a statement which has been going the round
of the Press, to the effect that Lord Brougham is to
be made President of the " Commission of Inquiry
into Educational Charities." We believe that there
is no official authority for any such design, but the
credit given to it by the circulation of the report, is
one of those indications of universal public sympathy
with an object, the effectuation of which it may be
worthy of the attention of sound policy to consider.
For our own part, without knowing anything of the
matter.--whether such a proposition has been thought
of in any authentic quarter or not, or whether Lord
Brougham might be disposed to accept of such a func-
tion or not—we consider that the inquiry into public
charities could not be placed under the guidance and
control of better hands than those by whom it was ori-
ginated. That something of a practical nature should
be forthwith resorted to on the subject of education in
this country, and on the state of the funds for promot-
ing it throughout -the country, cannot for a moment
be doubted. The time has come now, or it may never
be expected to come. The discussion of the Irish
Church Reform Bill, with that appropriation clause
annexed to it which, however distasteful to the fasti-
dious palates of the Peerage, must inevitably be swal-
lowed by them next Session, has concentrated public
opinion with a more than ordinary intensity on the
great object of the necessity and of the means in the
nation's hands for diffusing the universal advantages of
education. It was from the Schoolmaster's hand that
the mis-shapen idol of Tory misrule received its first
blow, and from the same hand it will receive its last.
The political improvement which the diffusion of pub-
lic information has mainly contributed to maintain,
can only be kept wound up to the " sticking point"
by the same means. 'While we talk of the appropria-
tion of a small surplus—denied to exist by 'the Tories,
but maintained by ourselves—to that popular instruc-
tion which tends as much to the stability of the
Christian religion as to the growth and maturity
of public freedom, we ought not to forget -what
the costly labours of the Commission of Public
Charity slowly and laboriously, but perspicuously,
unveiled to the eyes of the astonished public. That
Commission, which Lord Brougham seven years ago
originated, proved that there are charitable endow-
ments in this country, consisting of personal property
vested in the public funds, lent on mortgage and (AO
convertible securities, to the amount, in round numberEp

of 2,250,000/. This large, fund is at pres Int almost
entirely misappropriated. The diffusion o! public
education through a thousand fruitful channel:if slidi
as Sunday and Infant Schools, or through Meckinics
Institutes, scientific institutions, and reading clubs. in
a great measure originating from, or sustained by the
same master-mind, arc all supported by the nation,
independently of the above enormous fund. To whom,
then, does that fund go ? the original design of the
testators of which was that it should be devoted to the
sacred purpose of popular education ? We say
sacred, for the way to eradicate vice, and to decrease
or suppress crime, is to enlighten the mind.
That object is the essential object of the Chris-
tian religion. By whom, then, we ask, is this
fund, so vitally essential to the maintenance and
propagation of Christianity, misappropriated ? The
greater part is swallowed by the great Dagon of
idolatrous mischief—our State Church—already Iva'.
lowing in an ostentatious expenditure, hostile to the
very principles of the Christian religion, and scanda-
lizing to those who sincerely profess it. Our readers
will, perhaps, recollect our notice of one of the most
useful as well as splendid oratorical efforts, to which
we drew their attention, during the last Parliamentary
Session. We refer to a'speebh upon the subject by
Mr. Daniel Whittle Harvey, and which, we under-
stand, as we then recommended it should be, is about
to be published in the form of a pamphlet. The man-
ner in which this misappropriation .has been in many
cases effected, was there laid open with the brief per-
specuity of a master hand. As an examination of the
29 ponderous folios, of some 700 pages each, and which
could be only estimated like dry goods, by the square
foot, or by the ton weight avoirdupois, is out of the ques-
tion—qt is to Mr. Harvey's speech we must again refer,
in pointing out the dexterous ingenuity by which, in
this case, the violation of the laws of meum et tuum
has been perpetrated, by
.the rapacious fingers of
Mother Church. It constitutes a Scapinade worthy
of the scornful merriment of Rabelais, or of the
biting sarcasm of Voltaire. Two instances were given by
Mr. Harvey. Well-Pocklington School was founded
for the benefit of the boys of that town and neighbour-
hood, whose parents could not afford them education
—the founder devising a considerable estate to St.
John's College, Cambridge, for the purpose of sup-
porting five poor scholars at college, whose merit
should entitle them annually to be elected from the
other boys. The principle is precisely the same as
that which governs the elections for the Grecians at
Christ's Hospital. But the fund appropriated to
that support at college, reckoned in the currency of the
time, is small—about 11.45. 10d. This may have been
equal to about 251. of the present time, which would bt
barely sufficient for the purpose, but might with some
additional aid. Now, what do the very reverend
Wardens of St. John's College, Cambridge, do ? The
estates demised by the founder for the maintenance
of the scholars, now produce 6001. a year. The spirit of
his bequest was evidently that the 600/.a year was to be
divided among the five scholars ; but these " reverend
signors, these very worthy and approved good masters,"
have actually the conscience to transfer 11.45. 10d.
annually to the scholars, and put the remainder of
the funds into their own pious and orthodox pockets.
Winchester College constitutes an excellent pendant to
this picture of Christian charity. The revenues of
that great establishment are not less than 14,0001. a
year. The founder, William Wykeham, expressly de-
voted it to the education of the poor, stipulating that
no boy should be admittted on the foundation who
possessed Si. 6s. Bd. of annual property. Now what
do the visitors of Winchester do ? The very converse
of the Wardens of St. John's ; but precisely with the
same object—namely, that of misappropriating the
education fund, and transferring that fund into the
pockets of the well-fed dignitaries of the Church.
They rule that Si. 6s. Bd., when the grant was made,
is equivalent to 661. 13s. 4d. ; by this process they ex-
clude the poor, and the school is now wholly devoted
to the sons of noblemen and gentlemen. We give
the two foregoing examples as specimens of the inge-
nuity by which the ecclesiastical plunder which we
have described is effected. The whole amount of the
fund thus misappropriated, as far as the investiga-
tion of the Commission extends, amounts to two mil-
lions and a quarter. Here is enough to educate not
only the poorer classes of the country, but even the
middle classes, free of expense ; and let it be also con-
sidered that the same misappropriators have absorbed
in the same unprincipled mariner another large fund
which presses heavily on the middle classes, and has
nearly crushed the agricultural—we mean that third
portion of Church property devoted by the Roman
Catholic hierarchy to the maintenance of the poor. We
think we have now stated quite enough to show that
not a day ought to be lost in bringing the labours of
the Commission of Public Charities to something like
a practical conclusion—in snatching the noble bequests
of our long-sighted ancestors from the grasp of indivi-
dual rapacity—and in withdrawing those streams of
charity, which ought to fertilize the whole land, from
the ecclesiastical reservoirs in which they are now
stagnating. Society at large ought to drink from the
well-spring of those fountains of education which are
still fresh and full—although a few stall-fed pluralists
have had the audacity to confine their fertilising ad-
vatages within the tabooed precinct of Aristocratical
exclusiveness—the " sealed fountain" of clerical indul-
ne ce—or the mouldering circumvallation of monastic
c 3
prejudice and monopoly.—Morning Advertiser.
Our Ministerial contemporary of the Chronicle has
not yet shaken off his ill-humour with the government
of the barricades, on account of the apparent disposi-
tion of the latter to count its gains in peace, and dis-
courage as much as it can any further developement of
the revolutionary principle. T. give satisfaction to
our contemporary, and the knot of statesmen whom lie
represents, Louis Phillippe, having spent much hard
cash for the purpose of manufacturing a revolution in
France, and getting himself made a Citizen King,
ought to be equally profuse in his outlay for the pur-
pose of promoting revolutions in other countries, with
the strong probability in his view that their example
would extend to his own dominions, and end in unmak-
ing that Citizen King for whom Louis Phillippe has a
most affectionate regard. Our contemporary is very
unreasonable surely. It is for such shallow politicians
as Lord Palmerston to foment the revolutionary spirit
for its own sake—the prudent King of the French
will encourage it only when it affords an oppor-
tunity for the advantageous investment of capital.
Like a safe and thrifty citizen, he spends no
coin without the prospect of a return. As to signing
a treaty or two, more or less, to oblige so good a friend
as Lord Palmerston, that is another affair. It would
be uncourteous to refuse ; particularly as Lord Pal-
merston is a man who will never attempt to hold a
friend, especially a powerful friend, too rigidly to the
performance of his compacts. If, as the Chronicle
peevishly complains, the French Government now
seem to regard the Quadripartite Treaty as a mere
piece of waste paper, is not this exactly what every
body knew (not Lord Palmerston, or the Chronicle,'
but every body who knew any thing at all about the
matter), the French Government would do the mo-
ment the Quadripartite Treaty became burthensoune,
disadvantageous, or inconvenient ? We hope the
Chronicle is right in its conclusion, that the French
French Government has thrown that league over-
board. It is the very best thing that could be done
with it ; especially if it be fairly susceptible of the
construction given to it by our Contemporary.
We have hitherto understood this compact to re-
late only to the affairs of Portugal in the first
instance, and of Spain in the second, is its terms im-
port. But it seems we were mistaken. It was in-
tended, according to our profound contemporary, as a
barrier against some supposed confederation of the
monarchies of Austria, Russia, and Prussia ; so that,
had it remained in 'force, we should have been bound,
in the event of a quarrel between France and any one
of the three Powers of the North, to interpose ac-
tively in favour of the former. If this be the sound
construction of the treaty we think it would be quite
as well, at least for us, that France, by throwing it
overboard, should 'leave Great Britain to apt, in any
such emergency, according to the view she may happen
to take of the circumstances of the ease, and" the con-
duct and objects of the parties. Our contemporary,
however, sees the matter in a 'different light. He
would be inconsolable for the abrogation of this pre-
cious treaty but that he finds in the faithful alliance of