The Sun.
London, England, 1835-05-05 00:00:00

GRAND ROWING MATCH.

The great long-anticipated match between Campbell and Phelps,
and Parish and F. Godfrey, came off yesterday. The match was for
201., and was looked upon as one, by which the championship of the
river in oars, would be decided. All, save Phelps, are well known
to those who are patrons of this manly and scientific exercise. He
is young, and until yesterday he had never been called into particular
notice. He has passed the ordeal, and ere long will prove a trouble-
some customer to the whole of the crack men. Betting was very
brisk among the Noblemen and Gentlemen frequenters of Searle 's
and the other boat-builders at Stangate; and 7 to 4, and in sonic
instances 2 to 1, have been given on Campbell and his partner. At
a quarter past five the men took their stations at Westminster-bridgo ;
they tossed for choice, and Campbell and his partner got it, taking
the northern station. At half-past five they were off like lightning.
Parish and his partner took the lead in that splendid manner for
which Parish has universally been celebrated. Off Lucas's Road
the favourites tried to pass them, but here again the generalship of
the leading pair was splendid; they " picked their opponents up" the
whole distance to the Penitentiary, during which time the fouling
was dreadful, each person expecting that the one or the other boat
must be swamped. At the Penitentiary the sternmost party found
it advisable to try their stamina, and " hooked it." They cleared
their head and rowed by them first through Vauxhall-bridge half a
boat's length a-head. Parish and hii partner never stood a shadow
of chance after this. It was mere child's play without more than
ordinary effort. Campbell and his partner arrived at Putney-bridge
three minutes a-head. The losers were over-matched. It was a
complete victory, and hundreds have changed owners on it. Phelps
took the labour forward and Campbell aft. Several of the crack
cutters were out. A grand salute was fired from Abis's at Putney.

The inhabitants of , Cheltenham arc called upon by
the Journal to renovate the venerable structure known •as
Malvern Church.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

If the personal question now at issue between Lord
Alvanley and Mr. O'Connell were one unconnected
with public affairs we should not feel at all disposed
to take any part in its discussion. The question, how-
ever, considering the manner in which it has origi-
nated, is one that bears strongly upon the national
manners, upon the privileges of Parliament, and the
laws and usages of gentlemanly society. As such, it
falls within the province of a public writer to make it
the subject of observation. In the point of honour
two individuals are concerned. In other matters, con-
nected with it the public have an interest, and ought
'to have an opinion. Among the proofs of the supe-
rior civilization of a country, or the reverse, the lan-
guage and manners of its public assemblies have always
been reckoned very conclusive ; but as the Legislative
Assembly of a nation either does, or ought to embody
whatever is highest in education, most polished in man-
ners, and most refined and honourable in gentlemanly
feeling, the style of language and manners prevalent in
such an assembly is naturally considered by foreigners
as a pretty good test of ~,,the state of civilization
to which a country has attained. Thus our tourists
lay hold of the coarse and vulgar epithets not unfre-
quently used by members of the American Congress
to each other as cogent evidence of the primitive rude-
ness and incivility of manners which continue to defy
the ameliorating progress of civilisation under that
democratic form of Government. Tried by the same
test, we think it must be admitted that the habits
which civilisation induces have rather deteriorated than
improved among us of late years ; for undoubtedly the
use of coarse and illiberal language in Parliament has
become more frequent than it used to be ; and rudeness of
manners excites less astonishment, because it is more
common than at any time since the House of Commons,
having got rid of the two other branches of the Legislature,
had constituted itself an absolute and pure democracy.
We will not stop to inquire whether the ascendancy
which the greatest mob-orator of modern times has ac-
quired in the House of Commons has contributed to
lower its tone of language and manners. It is suffi-
cient that the fact is indisputable, and that every fair
opportunity ought to be taken to check the approxi-
mation of St. Stephen's to Billingsgate. From the
time that the 'Whig speech from the Throne was de-
scribed as " bloody and brutal," and the Members of
the people's House were reported to have been de-
nounced to a mob as " six hundred scoundrels," we
thought that frequent occasions would arise in which
privilege of speech in Parliament would be strained
to the utmost limits of that license which gave force
and vivacity to the eloquent philippics of the Dublin
Corn Exchange. Is the case of Lord Alvanley one
that calls for a corrective, or is it not ? As to the
language supposed to have been applied to the Noble
Lord, nobody can say that it is not of the most in-
sulting description ; but, say the Whig Journals that
advocate the cause of Mr. O'Connell, it is a breach
of privilege to call the Hon. and Learned Member to
account for language uttered in his place in Parlia-
ment. Undoubtedly, according to the Constitution, a
Member of Parliament cannot be made either legally
or politically responsible for the utmost freedom of
speech in the House ; but that privilege does not attach
to the publication of his speech, and it is of the pub-
lished speech that Lord Alvanley complains. Mr.
Creevy was prosecuted and convicted for a speech
which he delivered in Parliament, and which he after-
wards published. Dr. Lushington was also pro-
ceeded against by indictment for a speech of his pub-
lished in the Mirror of Parliament; but the proof of
publication, on his part, failed, and he was acquitted ;
but here is no question about legal responsibility.
Lord Alvanley finds in the newspapers certain
grossly offensive expressions, stated to have been
applied to him by Mr. O'Connell. He writes to him
for an explanation and receives no answer. A second
letter is written, which meets with similar treatment,
and he then brings the matter before the club of which
they are both members, and which club, like all clubs,
whose members are of a certain rank in society, pro-
fesses to be exclusively composed of " gentlemen," and
to be always prepared to eject from their association
any person who violates the laws and usages of gen-
tlemanly society. We pass no judgment upon Mr.
O'Connell's conduct in not answering the letters ad-
dressed to him on this subject. He may have good
reasons for his silence. He is known to have dis-
claimed all that responsibility which attaches to those
who acknowledge the supremacy of a false code of ho-
nour ; but we think, for that very reason, he ought to
have the greater guard upon his language, and be
careful how he wounds the feelings of men to whom
he refuses that sort of satisfaction which, though it
be morally condemned, yet still, wherever it is acknow-
ledged, exercises a great control over licentiousness of
language and violence of manners. But Lord Alvanley
being a Member of the House of Peers, say the Whig
papers, has committed a breach of privilege by taking
notice of something said by a Member of the House of
Commons in his place. Those apologists for Mr. O'Con-
nell forget that the insult arose from Mr. O'Connell's
taking notice of something said by Lord Alvanley in the
House of Lords—something which certainly did not jus-
tify the application of the grossly offensive expression
" bloated buffoon l"—if, indeed, the Learned and
Hon. Member used those words ; and if he did not,
we wonder he did not hasten to disclaim them, as well
as the no less offensive epithets said to have been ap-
plied at the same time, to another Member of the
House of Lords, whom he is represented as having de-
scribed as " half-idiot—half-maniac." We published
yesterday the requisition to the Managers of Brookes's,
signed by 24 of its members, requesting, on the part of
Lord Alvanley, a general meeting of the club to con-
sider a statement to be made to it of Mr. O'Connell's
conduct to the Noble Lord, both being members of the
club. The following document which appeared in The
Sun of last evening, shows that the request has been
refused, Lord Duncannon's name appearing at the head
of the list of managers, to whom Mr.O'Connell addressed
his memorable epistles fromDerrynane Abbey last year :
" The Managers of Brookes's Club having had under their
consideration a requisition signed by several members, request-
ing them to call a general meeting ' to consider a statement
that will be made to it of Mr. O'Connell's conduct to Lord
Alvanley, both being members of the Club,' are of opinion
that it would be inconsistent with the practice, and contrary to
the established rules, to take cognisance of differences of a
private nature between members of the Club, and therefore
decline to call a general meeting in compliance with the above
requisition.
( Signed) " DUNCANNON.

" ALIIRMARLE.
" JOHN BYNO.
" Brookes's, 3d May, 1835."

EDWARD BLOUNT.
EDWARD ELLICE.
RONALD C. FERGUSON.

On the above document we will merely observe that
if the managers have nothing to do with a charge of
alleged ungentlemanly conduct made by one member
against another, they rightly disclaim all cognizance of
the case in question. But we should have thought
that the jurisdiction of the managers exercised as a
Court of honour in such cases, would have the best
effects in preserving the gentlemanly tone and manners
of the members of their society, while it would prevent
appeals to that tribunnal of false honour, which the
tyranny of custom has too long supported against the
laws of the land.—Morning Herald.
A huge portion of barbarous absurdity has issued
within these two days from the organs of the Whig-
Radicals, of and concerning the endeavour of Lord
Alvanley to make Mr. O'Connell amenable, in some
degree, to those laws by which the intercourse of gen-
tlemen is regulated. We are, God knows, very far
from being advocates for duel. A professed or prac-
tised duellist is a systematic murderer, and ought to
be an outcast from civilised men. But so ought any
other systematic aggressor who sports with the feelings
of others, and becomes a ready practitioner of outrage,
in the hope that by virtue of a screen with which he
has provided himself, he may indulge every vindictive
malignant, or capricious impulse at the expense of his
neighbours with complete impunity. The occasion
which has at present forced this irksome topic upon
us, is one of many which might have arisen had
other persons been as much alive as Lord Al-
vanley to the social duty of subjecting a self-
chartered offender to the same obligations which are
universally acknowledged except by that offender
himself. There is hardly a week of Mr. O'Connell's
existence, ever since his " vow in Heaven" was pro-
mulgated, which has not exposed him to a most just
and righteous visitation of resentment from one or more
individuals whom he has savagely insulted, His vow

in Heaven he has always had thelcunning to exhibit
as a grand effort of forbearance towards others ;
whereas the whole course of his demeanour proves it
to have been no better than an ignominious artifice for
his own protection. " I will make my vow," says
this arch impostor, "an instrument for tormenting
others, and for saving myself from retribution."
Let us ask any brave man, therefore, is that a fraud
which ought to be countenanced or permitted ? Is
such a man, like the snake of India, to be held
sacred by the superstitious multitude, because of the
deadliness of its bite ? Is malice to 1-
cx:iiipt
all the pains of crime, because it throws over pusilla-
nimity the mask of conscience and religion ? If we go
to the origin of this complaint brought forward by Lord
Alvanley, we shall find that his Lordship has been
grossly wronged by Mr. O'Connell. The allusion
which the Noble Lord made to that person had no-
thing offensive in it—literally nothing. He merely
asked whether any man could believe that Mr. O'Con-
nell would lend his support to the Administration
without a certain equivalent ? Why, the equivalent
referred to might have been, arid we are firmly per-
suaded that Lord Alvanley meant nothing worse, some
measures with regard to Ireland which might have
served the political purposes of the agitator. The
whole context of Lord Alvanley's interrogaties bears us
out in this construction of his Lordship's words. Is,
then, a Member of Parliament to be called a bloated
buffoon and a venal being, but not worth purchasing.
for demanding from the King's Minister an avowal wile-
the ,lie did or did not concur in political sentiment, or
pr deed upon a common understanding, with one who
entertained projects which Lord Alvanley thought
ruinous to the constitution ? There are two false
colourings, spread by the O'Connell party over the
proceeding of those distinguished personages who
have addressed the managers of Brookes's Club to call
a meeting of that Society. It is said, Ist, that the
affair is a private one, with which the Club ought not
to interfere ; but a transaction personal in its origin
and circumstances may in its result involve considera-
tions affecting many other interests besides those of the
parties themselves. A man may so conduct himself
in a dispute with another as to betray principles and
dispositions which render a social intercourse with him
dangerous or disgraceful to the bulk of gentlemen.
If, therefore, there exist any where a power to
exclude the transgressor from a select Society, and
thereby to preserve its remaining members from a
contact which they feel to be injurious, degrading,
as well as perilous, to themselves, it is no reason
for the non-exercise of such a power that the occasion
out of which sprung the question whether it shall or
shall not be acted on was a personal quarrel. We
have a due respect for those gentlemen whose names
are before the public as constituting the managers of
Brookes's Club, and are satisfied that their motives for
declining the requisition presented to them have been
of the purest nrture, but in their reasoning, as it is im-
plied by their public statement, we do not concur. A
second fallacy, however, has been introduced into
the discussion, the extravagance of which it is impos-
sible not to repudiate. This requisition is alleged to
have been part of a plot for making mischief between
Lord Melbourne's Government and the O'Connell fac-
tion ! Why, in the name of Heaven, was there ever
such folly as this ? What sort of support can that be,
or what is its worth, which offers itself to, or abandons
a Ministry, on condition of a certain individual being
bolstered up in his personal outrages upon those whom
he dislikes, or punished for them in the same way as
people in general are punished, by the decision of a
number of independent gentlemen sitting in judgment
on him, as a member not of a political party, but of a
select though mixed community ? That the sins of a
majority of any club in London, even of that which
calls itself " Conservative," should be visited on any
Minister of the King of England, is a sarcasm on his
Administration the severest that ever was conceived.
That would indeed be an introduction of club govern-
ment new as yet to England, but matter of no auspi-
cious experience elsewhere. If the votes of a club are
henceforth to decide the fate of a Minister, there is
more in the " reformed" constitution of the United
Kingdom than Lord Grey at least, we are sure, has ever
dreamed of. And who are the fancied plotters against
the new Whig Government; through the medium of an
attempt to civilize the learned member for Dublin? Why,
some of the parties to it are noblemen and gentlemen,
perhaps the most zealous in the whole country for the
success of Lord Melbourne's Ministry, and the most
identified with the cause of Whiggism The truth is,
that if Mr. O'Connell has made it a condition to his
support of the Whig Administration, that the members
and dependents of that Administration are to ally
themselves with him, and " back him up" in his inso-
lence and brutishness towards individual gentlemen,
no matter of what description of politics, O'Connell
will be not only the supreme legislator of the empire in
its politics, but the arbiter morum and dictator in what
respects our manners. It appears to us, that if Lord
Alvanley be well protected in this his effort to recall
Mr. O'Connell to decency, his Lordship and the body
of gentlemen whom he has summoned to interfere may
be jointly deemed the most solid benefactors of so-
ciety.— Times.

" There is not a single Tory in office, and, by the
blessing of God, there shall not be a single Tory in
place either."—The above is an extract from Mr.
O'Connell's last speech to his followers in Ireland--
and we have to announce to the public to-day, that,
in conformity with the mandate herein issued—lst.
Lord Heytesbury's appointment to India is cancelled.
2dly. Sir Howard Douglas has been recalled. 3rdly.
Lord Amherst's appointment is suspended, prepara-
tory, we believe, to its being finally cancelled also.
Now, we entreat our readers to compare these facts
with the announcement made in Mr. O'Connell's
Speech—" That, by the blessing of God, there
shall not be a single Tory in place, either
and we ask them, is it possible to believe that this
man, however officially unconnected with the Go-
vernment, is not in point of fact the dictator of its
measures—or whether Mr. O'Connell, however dis-
owned as a coadjutor by Lord Melbourne, is not, to
all intents and purposes, a member of his Cabinet, and
his colleague in the Government We entreat of the
people of England to compare this, the first act of the
new Premier, with the conduct pursued by Sir Robert
Peel on similar occasions, on his accession to office,
and to ask themselves the question, is any, the least,
credit, to be attached to the declaration so often re-
peated by the organs of the Administration, that " there
is no understanding whatever between Mr. O'Connell
and the King's Government." We shall not now enter
into a lengthened consideration of the question of Lord
Heytesbury's recal. We believe we may assert, with-
out fear of contradiction, that there existed on all
sides but one opinion as to that Nobleman's fitness for
the office to which he was nominated by Sir Robert
Peel. The appointment was received even by the
Whigs themselves as one against which it was almost
impossible to find a single objection ; and we know
that it was viewed in this light by the Court of Di-
rectors, and for that reason was unanimously con-
firmed by them. Yet here is the appointment of
Lord Heytesbury cancelied, on the eve of his depar-
ture for his Government, and after he had received the
usual allowance for his out from the East India
Company, without the shadow of a complaint either
as to his incapacity to discharge the duties confided
to him, or the pretext of any single act committed by
him to disqualify him for the office for which he was
selected by his Sovereign, and by the unanimous ap-
probation of the East India Direction. The same
reasoning may be applied to the conduct of the
Government in the recal of Sir Howard
Douglas, and in their suspension of Lord Amherst.
We shall return to the consideration of these
measures of the new Ministry,—but at this moment
we shall confine ourselves merely to the announcement
of them, and leave the public to form, from what we
have said, some idea of the liberal and enlightened
policy they have to expect from Lord Melbourne and
his colleagues. It will be necessary, however, we
apprehend, that the sign manual should be obtained
to the cancelling of Lord Heytesbury's commission,
before it can be legally effected ; and we have yet the
hope left, that the eyes of the Sovereign will be
opened to the policy of his new advisers by this act,
and that his Majesty will not suffer the public service
to be impeded, and the money of his East Indian
subjects squandered, in providing another outfit, either

for some shelved politician, who cannot obtain a seat
in Parliament, or for some favoured nominee of Mr.
O'Connell, whose continued support cannot otherwise
be relied on.—Morning Post.

The electors of England, and not of England only,
but of Scotland and Ireland, are gloriously doing their
duty : tidings of victory fly to us from each part of the
United Kingdom, as may be seen by the following re-
turns :—Lord Howick has been re-elected for the
Northern division of Norsioirn,,,,rinnd S;r John
c—r-is f„r eic) ui l,aiuburgli ; and Mr. Perrin,
the Irish Attorney-General, for the city of Cashel.
But two more of the English elections remain un-
decided, nor have we a doubt but the result will
be equally gratifying to the friends of liberty and
order. The re-election of Lord Morpeth and Lord
John Russell is alone wanting to consummate the
triumph of the Reformers : success is certain. The
men of York and Devon will not be wanting in the
crisis. The age before the Reform Bill was one of
speculation ; the present is one of action, and the
workings of that great measure afford the prospect of
glorious results to the country ; but if the intrigues of
faction, or the obstinate imbecility of an individual,
were suffered to blight the budding fruits of the reform
in our representative system, it were better we had
hugged our chains, and continued the tame victims of
oppression, than to have galled ourselves in a struggle
for freedom, and after breaking our fetters leave the
avowed enemies of our liberties still to preside over
our destinies. The Tories must be now convinced
that so far from a re-action having taken place, their
temporary usurpation has only served "to fire the
flagging zeal" of the lakewarm Reformers. In en-
tering the field at Dungarvon and Leith the Tories
merely expose themselves to certain defeat.—Morning
Advertiser.
We are enabled to announce that although the os-
tensible object of Lord Eliot's mission to the head-
quarters of the contending armies in the Peninsula is
to prevail on both parties to exchange their prisoners,
and to acknowledge the ordinary laws of war, yet his real
purpose is to declare to Don Carlos that, even should
the rebellion be successful, England and France never
will acknowledge that Prince as Sovereign of Spain.
The Allies feel themselves solemnly pledged to the
young Queen and to the Constitutional order of things
in that country by the Quadruple Trealy ; and as the
mission is the result of an application made to the
English and French Governments under that treaty and
has the entire sanction of the Cabinet of France, we
have reason to hope that it may be attended with suc-
cess. Don Carlos has been further informed that
he can entertain no hope of assistance from the mem-
bers of the Holy Alliance ; for even if the) were dis-
posed to aid his cause, they would have to conquer
France before they could send a single soldier into
Spain. Under these circumstanees, we are taught to
believe that Don Carlos has expressed his willingness
to withdraw from the contest. He is anxious to join
the Princess of Beira, who is about to take up her re-
sidence in Italy ; and measures are in progress for
enabling him to escape from the hands of Biscayans and
Navarrese, who are resolved, if they can, to detain
him amongst them. Should Don Carlos succeed
in making his way out of the Peninsula, as we trust
he will do, we may still, however, apprehend that Zu-
malacarreguy is determined on continuing the contest
as long as he can command even a single party of
Guerillas. It will, therefore, be necessary for General
Valdez to bear down upon the insurgent provinces
with all the forces under his command, and to take
the most decisive steps for the purpose of reducing
these districts to order. They are so much disposed to
anarchy, that they eagerly seize upon any pretext for
disturbance. Don Carlos they have hitherto used
simply as an instrument for the gratification of their
turbulent passions ; when he quits them they will
probably proclaim Zumalacarreguy as his Vice-
roy, and fight it out to the last. The procla-
mation which Valdez has issued, very frankly offers
free pardon to all those who are disposed to
take advantage of it for fifteen days ; but when that
period shall expire, the war is to be carried on upon
the terrible principle of extermination. This is an
alternative which can only be justifiable under cir-
cumstances similar, we are afraid, to those which now
exist in the northern provinces of Spain. May they
speedily have an end I We must add, that the Spa-
nish question is not the only one upon which the
Duke of Wellington, while he was Foreign Secretary,
followed up, in a perfectly honest and faithful sense,
the foreign policy of his predecessors in office. With
respect to the Dutch question, he expressed himself
determined to abide by the views of the Whig Go-
vernment, although it is notorious that he had looked
upon the King of Holland as an " injured man." So
also with respect to Portugal, he declared that he
considered that kingdom as quite settled, and that he
would not suffer it to be disturbed by Don Miguel.
As to the only other important subject connected
with our foreign policy, that of the new rela-
tions founded by the secret treaty between
Russia and Turkey, the Duke followed it up pre-
cisely as Lord Palmerston would have done, in every
dispatch which he had occasion to address to Lord
Ponsonby. We have thought it fairly due to the
Duke of Wellington to give publicity to this state-
ment, which can only tend to confirm the high repu-
tation which he already enjoys for his strict adherence
to the letter, and even the spirit, of the obligations
contracted by this country with Foreign Powers. At
the same time the public will plainly see, in this ad-
hesion of the Duke and his colleagues to the policy
of Lord Palmerston, which, before their accession to
power, they uniformly denounced as ruinous to the
interests of the country, an irrefragable testimony in
favour of the grounds upon which, in every instance,
that policy proceeded. Had it been calculated, as the
Duke and Lord Aberdeen had frequently declared in
the House of Lords, to involve the country in war, to
bring disgrace upon the very name of England, and
to destroy her best commercial resources, they would
hardly have ventured, we presume, to enforce Lord
Palmerston's views and instructions, previously con-
veyed to our Ministers at all the Courts of Europe.—
Morning Chronicle.
The present Lord Mayor has evinced a moral intre-
pidity in upholding the just authority of his office,
which is apparently extremely galling to the noisy de-
magogues who brawl and talk fustian in the Common
Council ; and this day an opportunity will again offer
itself, when his Lordship will not, we trust, endanger
his well-merited reputation for loyalty to his Sove-
reign, by allowing himself to be made a party to fac-
tious and revolutionary measures. A motion is to be
made to day in the Guildhall for an address to the
King, thanking his Majesty for dismissing his late,
and allowing his present Ministers to be pressed upon
him. This address will be carried, because the re-
spectable portion of the Common Council most injudi-
mllo7 abscr.t Al% iuunu tiie
small but gallant band that yet fight the good fight, and
because the principal demagogues have issued their
mandate, which their servile followers dare not question,
much less oppose. The Corporation of London enjoy
the privilege of being heard on the throne ; but it is
absolutely necessary that the Lord Mayor and two Al-
dermen at the least should attend on such occasions ;
an abundance of Common Councilmen may be de-
pended on, as they get ten shillings a-piece for " loss
of time." At the last address it was our fortune to
witness the miserable cavalcade. There were one or
two Aldermen—whether rejoicing in the respectable
, cognomen of Key, Harmer, or any other name, dwells
not in our imperfect memory ; and several coachloads
of Councilmen, in a very tolerable state of preservation ;
still, though not fastidious, " We would not have
marched through Coventry with them, that's flat."
The Lord Mayor's refusal to attend prevents the
King being insulted personally, and he is bound, as
the King's representative, to prevent it ; and, as the
head of the Corporation to protect its character. We
think the Chief Mifagtiisiterate right in granting the
meeting. The citizens, by their representatives, have
the prescriptive right of making egregious fools of
themselves, and
affect this important
adbdurtessit sTi °Ulu
r
c'avriill
sign it, and f d
degree the subjects' pnv ege, or in
g.
hil:oloufr e suggestedT h o
ipartsyli wouldgwh slightest
the Home Seer:7:y
notcomposition
approve soef thetiot
less find himself much coinfrw. war their
doubt-
the perusal ' will,
of it, and rvi- ...ed and edified by
„ mstlp if he should then be

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, MAY 5, 1835.