The Sun.
London, England, 1832-03-26 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The King, the people, and the people's represen-
tatives, have now discharged the great duty under-
taken by theth, and expected from them. The
Bill, clear of all damage or deterioration, has passed
a second time out of the House of Commons, and
will this day, if not at once rejected, sue for mercy
to the stern spirit of the other House of Parliament.
What end awaits h there ? To offer any reason-
able surmise upon that subject, we must put the
short, but comprehensive, question, what is the
composition of the House of Lords? Lord Grey,
with a body of Noble Peers, equal, we trust, in
number to those who before supported him, though
it is to be apprehended in no degree more numerous,
is, we learn, true to the whole measure, in detail as
well as outline : there is no doubt of his Lordship's
Ininour in any quarter, and none is here insinuated.
We have had, indeed, our own fears (not confined to
ourselves) for the Noble Earl's resolution ; but they
have been to some extent diminished since Mr. Stine-
ley'ae speech, delivered last Friday morning. God
grant that nothing may occur to reproduce those
painful apprehensions. Upright, nevertheless, and
unchanged as may be the Prime Ministir and his
friend., they must, if the enemy remain unaltered
likewise,—they must, we say, be beaten, and the
Bill a second time lost, unless a reinforcement of
votes he in due season provided. The majority
against Lord Grey was 41,—a large majority, com-
b ring two divisions of antagonists to the Reform
Bill, both of them in their hearts equally hostile to
the principle of Reform, or distrustful of it; but one
section determined against all compromise on any
terms, the other professing to vote against the entire
of the former Bill, because it was one so " sweep-
ing" and intractable that it would be impossible to
bring it within any terms of capitulations, or any
range of compromise, such as their aristocratic tastes
would enable them to accept,—admitting, all the
tt hole, that sonze show of concession must be made
to the unanimou• voice of the British and Irish na-
tions. What grounds, therefore,are there for assuming
that the above two-fold opposition has been conci-
liated, or that the majority of 41 against the old
Reform Bill will now be metamorphosed into a ma-
jority in favour of a B:11 by no means less offensive to
Tory feelings than the former ? For if the majority
be not transferred to the Minister, there lies the Re-
form Bill of 1832,—like its predecessor of 1831,—
already a doomed victim, a stiffened corpse, pierced
with the stabs of 199 deadly foes. Why then it is
notorious that, as concerns the detailed provisions of
this present Bill, the majority against then (and
without them the "principle" of Reform is a dead let-
ter) has not experienced even the smallest particle of
change. The Duke of Wellington, and thorough-
goers of his Grace's kidney, will, of course, resist
the second reading. By some, indeed, it is asserted
that they will meet the measure in limine on the
first reading. If the Harrowbya, therefore, should
join in such a project, the Bill is not suffered
so much as to cross the threshold of their
Lordship's house. But assurances have, it is
said, been circulated, that decency or cunning
will induce the less ferocious of the Old
Sarum party to support the first and second readings
of the Bill. Whatever other qualities may attach to
such a course, beyond all question consistency will
not be among them. Indeed, the members of the
Wellington party are every where denouncing the
Harrowby and Wharncliffe trimmers, for abandoning
the bold line of opposition which they before adopted.
One advantage undoubtedly appertains to the plan
of an early endeavour to overthrow the Bill—viz.,
the utter surprise and consternation with which it
must affect the Minister. If the attempt be made
cordially, and before Lord Grey thinks proper to
make his contemplated addition to the Peerage, the
manoeuvre must be successful. There is no escape or
back-door for the Government, if the whole of the
Opposition en-operate in the scheme of throw ing out
the Reform Bill on its first or second reading, save
only by a Gazetteot Peers in the course ofthis forenoon.
But, admit the second reading to pass well over, is
there no work for the Committee ? It is said, in-
deed, by a contemporary, for whom we have, during
the last six weeks, entertained alternate feelings of
respect and commiseration, that " the Bill will cer-
tainly be read a second time, and that no attempt to
mutilate it afterwards will be allowed to succeed !"
How is this ? In the House of Lords nothing can
fail of succeeding which the mi.jority approves of.
If no mutilation of the Bill should take place, then
the majority of the Peers mast resist the attempt
to mutilate. A majority of that description, how-
ever, can be obtained no otherwise than by a con-
siderable creation of Peers; and in truth, as we
said before, since Mr. Stanley's vigorous and suc-
cessful defence of the Royal prerogative of such
creation, few well-judging persons would hesitate
to feel sure that Ministers had already decided on
having recourse to it. Mr. Stanley must have known
that such would be the persuasion of all who
heard him, and to imagine that the Right Hon
tionlenaam would labour to excite throughout
the whole empire a confidence which within one
week must be followed by the most universal and
deadly disappointment, would be to impute to Mr.
S-anley the capability of wantonly exposing the
United Kingdom to irretrievable disturbance and
convolsaan. On that ground, therefore, we look,
not without anxiety, but with something like an
animating hope, that Lord Grey will not now forget
what is due to himself and to the commonwealth.
As for any reluctance in a friend, and a b;gh-prin-
eipled member of the Peerage, to adopt the sole
step by which that order can be saved from the cer-
tain] vengeance of the whole people of England, the
thing is quite out of the question. The minister
must he a traitor to the British peerage who could
so desert it in the hour of extreniest need. If
Peers he not made, now, after such a speech as
that of the Irish Secretary, the evil will be aggra-
vated a thousand fold, arid the public ruin accele-
rated.—Times.

The We,t India question becomes more and more
embarrassing. The actual state of those colonies is
one of complicated dfficulty, and the crisis seems at
hand I.vh.-n the difficulty must be met by some de-
terminate measure. In the meanwhile the distress
of the planters calls loudly for relief, while
the feelings of the different parties, not ex-
cepting those of the Government itself, are
in a state but little calculated for dispac-
sionate consideration. Though much of the
existing evil may be attributed to the want of sys-
tem in -.the general government, great allowance
should bemade for the position in which it stands be-
tween the great principle—the abolition of slavery—
to which it is pledged, and the refractory spirit of
the resident Legislatures, by which its attempts
have been hitherto defeated. Add to this the ur-
gency of the extreme abolitionists at home, who call
for the immediate and unconditional repeal of slavery
in our colonies; and a case will be made out to show
that, if Ministers have failed in their policy, their
failure has not been without some countenance and
excuse from the difficulties with which they
ere surrounded. But now that affairs have as-
sumed so serious a complexion, it is necessary that
they should take some decisive step, the prelude to
which should be a distinct avowal that the rights of
property shall be respected. Accompanied with
this condition there is scarcely any proceeding, how.
ever strong, to whieh the public would object in
their anxiety to see an end put to a state of things
which ought never to have existed—a state of
things which is a disgrace to the name of legislation,
and to the general character of mankind. We
concur in many of the observations which fell from
Mr. Hume, in tile tLibate which took place in the
House of Commons ; but one of the topics
suggested by him for inquiry appears to us to admit
of no question whatsoever—namely, whether the co-
lonies are not in a situation to govern themselves,
instead of being kept in leading strings. This
country is too far committed in the cause of
the slaves to leave them at the mercy of
the colonists, however capable the colonists
might be in other respects of performing
the functions and defraying the charges of Govern-
ment. God forbid that, with evidence before our

eyes of the difficulties thrown in the way of amelio-
ration, though backed by the influence and power of
England, we should ever think of abandoning the
cause to the uncontrolled discretion of the local.
Legislatures ! That the relief to be afforded to the
colonies in their present distress should have some
r ference to their concurrence in the humane object
of the mother country no one can disapprove; but
the determination to respect the rights of property
should be distinctly avowed, as the best and only
means of giving effect to any beneficial arrangement.
One insinuation dropped from Mr. Buxton, in the
course of the same debate, which ought to be at
once disproved, if it can, by the advocates of the
planters; we allude to the insinuation that the in-
surrection was their own work—in fact, that it
was planned by them. It is unnecessary to make
any comment on such au act of wickedness. But
those who feel it as they ought will surely lose no
time in denying and disproving it if they are able.—
Morning Herald.

An injunction, we perceive, has been obtained by
the King's Printer against the publication of cheap
copies of Acts of Parliament. We are far from
blaming this. Persons possessing vested rights of
this description are as well justified in asserting and
protecting them as the owners of any other descrip-
tion of property in standing by it. At the same
time it cannot be denied that the Statutes at large
are a sealed book to the community, and that, while
men are bound to know and to obey the laws, the
King's Printers so exercise their monopoly, that
few, besides wealthy and professional readers, ever
see or know the real contents of an Act of Parlia-
ment ; which brings upon the Legislature the
odium of weaving a mesh to catch the unwary,
instead of erecting a beacon, plainly telling
men what to shun. Whether the office of
King's Printer is such as, in its present state,
at least, ought to continue, is a point which we
do not now mean to enter upon. What we would
suggest is that those who hold the office should,
at any rate, not act the part of the dog in the man-
ger, by giving us neither cheap Acts themselves,
nor allowing the public to be served with them
through any other channel. Let the King's Printer,
instead of keeping up his commodity at its present
enormous, and therefore to most people unattainable,
price, publish a cheap edition of the Statutes him-
self. Let an Act of Parliament be attainable at the
same relative price as a pamphlet or a newspaper.
We suspect that there would be both policy and
profit in this; for people must be very negligent ob-
servers of the spirit of the age who do not gather
from it that few monopolies will be long sustainable
which oppose shemselves to the free and cheap sup-
ply of the article, whatever it may be, over which
they exercise an influence.—Morning Herald.
An evening contemporary (the Standard) intro-
duces a letter to Lords NVharncliffe and Harrowby,
with the observation that it is from "one of the
most able and patriotic noblemen in the empire."
The letter states, that—
" It is a known fact, that their Lordships have been
pursuing a course of exaggerated representations and fal-
lacious arguments to draw off Members in the House of
Lords from their determined and steadfast intention of re-
jecting the second reading of the Bill." " This (adds the
Noble Letter-writer) has reached me through so many
channels, and my personal friends, who may have fallen
victims to your political reasoning, have so decidedly cor-
roborated this circumstance, that I cannot for a moment
doubt it."

The object of the Letter-writer is, by opposing
the Lords Wharncliffe and Harrowby of the 3d of
October last, to the Lords Wharncliffe and Har-
rowby of the present day, to damage them in the
estimation of their party.
" Is it possible (he says) that Lord Wharncliffe, whom
I heard with my own ears, on the 3d of October las,,
make the following speech in the House of Lords, in which
he cautioned me and all the other Peers, in a most em-
phatic and peremptory manner, not to vote for the second
reading of that Bill (and which caution and advice I was
induced to follow, out of respect to his seeming honesty
and candour), should now become the advocate of passing
the principle of, a measure as efficient as the last, while
he knows that if the Bill passes the second reading, it is
cat ried in all its details; t ref.-r to his own words—
" EXTRACT FROM LORD WHARNCLIFFE'S STERCII, OCT. 3.

" My Lords—This fact was manifested in the Hous► of
Commons upon this very Bill, for there were many who
voted fir the second reading. who did so in the hope that
an opportunity would be afforded them of amending the
Bill, and what was the result? Why, when it was too late,
they found themselves laughed at ; such will be our fate,
if, with the experience of the fact before us, we should be
so weak as to pur-ue a similar course.'
" I call upon Lord Wharnclffe, then, to state to me,
whom he thus advised en the Reform Bill of last year, why
I am not still to follow the same counsel on the present
occasion. His Lordship will surely not argue that the
Bill is less fatal or democratic than the firmer."

It would seem that Lord Wharncliffe has been
more successful than is palatable to this out-and-out
Anti-reforming Peer, in seducing the Bishops :

" I have next been told (he says) that Lord %%atm-
chile has created a strung sensation of fear among the
Bishops. and that he actually boasts of having brought over
many of the Right Reverend Bench to vote for the second
reading.
" Until I witness this defection, I have too strong a
faith in GOD and in the Church to conceive it possible; but
if it be so, I shall from that moment consider the Church
dese ving tl,e ruin impending over them, having themselves
contributed to is accomplishment. But if the Church
look back to Lcrd Wharnelltre's advice in October, I find
it in the same speech as follows :--
" EXTRACT FROM LORD IA'HAIINCLIFFE'S SPEECH, OC-