The Sun.
London, England, 1835-05-20 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Among the diversified schemes, all of which have proved
abortive, for pushing the interest of Lord John Russell in
Devonshire, some were resorted to by way of catching the
Radical Dissenters, which, for falsehood, fraud, and irreve-
rend ribaldry, are, we hope, unequalled in the records of
political outrage. We allude more particularly to certain
publications iri the nature of handbills, and entitled " Chro-
nicles of Devon," where the forms and phraseology of
Scripture are pressed into the service of open sedition, and
made vehicles at once for grossly aspersing honest men,
for rendering the Church of England odious to the
people, and specifically for establishing the elections of
Members of Parliament by ballot. All this is mixed
up, instead of any point or vivacity, with the most pre-
posterous and nauseous puffing of my Lord John Rus-
sell, as if a personage of his small (intellectual) dimen-
sions could be the only saviour and the sole fit ruler of
the realm. But the men of Devon comprehended such
things better than those who undertook to teach them—
they banished his Lordship from a county wherein he and
his family have for many years been well known, and
where, therefore, we may suspect, from the consequences of
the election, that inordinate panegyric bestowed on them is
so much ammunition wasted. Nor is the effect of such
indecency upon the minds of the Devonshire Dissenters a
thing to be passed by unnoticed. The Wesleyans above
most others must have been shocked by the levity to which
even the forms of things sacred were exposed, and there is
reason to conjecture that their brethren at Stroud, as well
as their more immediate neighbours at Totnes, will bear
in memory the above proceedings on the day of election for
the former borough ; and in the latter also, should Lord
Palmerston attempt to bury his former mortification at their
expense, it is just possible that the scoff-scripture cause may be
severely handled even by those who are not, strictly speaking,
Members of the Church Establishment. The truth is, that
this matter must be looked at as a whole. The object of
that party of which Lord John Russell is (among Minis-
ters) the acknowledged head, has never been to reform the
Church, and by reforming, to reinforce its moral power
over society. Looking at the means employed, and at the
agents and allies resorted to, for the furtherance of the po-
licy professed by the Melbourne Cabinet, there is nothing
more obvious than the intention to treat the Irish section
of the Church as a nuisance, and abolish it altogether. We
have often declared our full admission that the surplus ap-
propriation clause, taken by itself, was nothing more than a
brutunz fulmen, an innocuous truism, which had little sub-
ject of offence within it but its want of practical and appli-
cable signification. A surplus, by the very force of the
term, means that which is not required for a specific pur-
pose—and if no more had been meant by the resolution
than that such sums as might be found on investigation
superfluous to the wants of the Church taken collectively
should be turned to any other beneficial uses at the discre-
tion of Parliament, we at least should not have been
found among the impugners of such a proceeding. But it
is well understood, and was studiously so contemplated, by
the Whig-Radical supporters of that vote, that it should
not stand, save in connexion with certain appendages and
adjuncts of a nature more formidable than itself—with the
establishment of certain principles by, and in conformity to,
which the question of surplus or no surplus should be de-
termined, and with the further agency of a certain class of
persons, with whom would rest the power of directing the
application of those principles in a manner the most ruinous
to the Church. Here is the real sting of the Russell and
O'Connell politics. The isolated vote was of little conse-
quence, but the animus under which that resolution must be
enforced was the animus of O'Connell and the revolutionary
faction, whose notion of a " surplus" might be easily guessed
at from their hourly denunciations against the existence of
the Church itself as a superfluity, and whose rage for the
overthrow of the Protestant Establishment is such, that
to ensure it they have fbr the time abandoned the very
first element and instinct of Popery, and have the
impudence to hang out the " voluntary principle" for
a bait to catch the Radical portion of the Protestant
non-conformists, as if it were in the nature of things that
any but the rankest and most licentious hypocrite could,
confessing himself to be a Papist all the while, treat the
voluntary principle otherwise than with downright abhor-
rence. No ; an honest Irish Papist must of necessity be
desirous to see his own faith and form of worship raised
above all religious rivals. With him Church property is
of the essence of the Church herself. An Irish Papist
may be aware of numberless difficulties, of numberless
dangers to his own personal interests, arising out of any at-
tempt to reconfiscate private property which may have
been purchased by individual Catholics, relying for their
only title on the antecedent confiscation. But no such
risk of confusion or self-injury attaches, in the eyes of a
Papist, to a seizure of property still in the hands of the
Protestant Church, having undergone no change of owner-
ship but in the single transfer from the Romish unreformed
clergy to those who had adopted the reformation. What
was once transferred, and only once, may be re-transferred
by a single act of power. The Protestant minister is
stripped of his revenue, the priest receives it—there are no

intermediate occupants—there is no complex succession
of proprietors—Protestant and Catholic alternating with
each other—with interwoven titles. The property of the
Church of Ireland, therefore, we feel to be in the very front
of the battle ; and as for disclaimers, disavowals, and so
forth, by lay papist agitators, of any design or any wish to
convert the lands or tithes (under the old or new form) to
the benefit of the popish clergy, we laugh them to utter
scorn. " A breath can make them," and a breath unmake.
It would require no more than one vote of the College-
green Parliament to rest the whole possessions of the
church in whatever hands might be most convenient to Mr.
Daniel O'Connell, whose respect for oaths or other " secu-
rities" we would rather not be desired to estimate. No ;
the triumph of Lord John Russell or of Lord Palmerston,
in whatever county or borough of the empire, is the triumph
of O'Connell, of 'Popery, and repeal. There is no line be-
tween them—not a hair's breadth. The subjection of the
Whig Ministry- to the repeal supremacy may not be spon-
taneous, we are sure it is not, but it is inevitable, and there-
fore real. It is the sovereignty of O'Connell over the
people of England. Such is the appalling state of
parties.— Times.
Mr. Ewart's notices of motion relative to the Prisoners'
Counsel Bill, and the Capital Punishment Abolition Bill,
stand for this evening. The object of the former Bill, we
need hardly say, is to remove from the administration of
British justice the reproach of denying a prisoner accused
of a capital offence, or of any-felony, the right of making
his full defence by counsel. In short, it only asks the
Legislature to recognise the principle of even-handed jus-
tice between the Crown and the prisoner. It is passing
strange that, with all our boasted improvements, we
should be rapidly advancing to the middle of the nine-
teenth century, and that the right of a man on trial for his
life to make that full and unmutilated defence which jus-
tice and reason demand has still to be conceded by the
English law. We were going to say by the British law ;
but it is not so. The law beyond the Tweed is in this re-
spect just and equal. Mr. Ewart only requires that a practice
which secures to the accused in Scotland the means of making
a full defence shall not be limited to the northern part of
the island, but that Englishmen may have as fair a trial as
their Scottish fellow-subjects. Even in England the Le-
gislature has recognised the principle for which we contend
in the case of the highest crime—high treason, and imme-
morial usage has established it in the lowest cases of crime
or misdemeanor. It is in the intermediate classes of crime

—the felonies, many of which are as penal as high treason,
and some of which are in reality less culpable than some
misdemeanors—that the right of a full defence is denied.
Let this vicious anomaly be removed from our Courts of
penal law, and one accused of felony may then ex-
pect as fair a trial as one accused of high treason. Nor
will the removal of the anomaly from our system pro-
duce any more practical inconvenience in this country
than it does in Scotland. Indeed the proposed reform
has not only reason and justice on its side, but the ex-
perienced talent of some of the ablest lawyers of the
present day. As to the other Bill, of which Mr.
Ewart has given notice of motion, we do not know to
what extent it goes, but we think that it might be
pretty comprehensive without asking too much. The
spirit of inquiry which has been awakened of late years,
not only in this country, but in several others, touching
the effects of capital punishments, has been the means of
throwing a great deal of light upon criminal jurisprudence,
and has shown that sacrifices of human life are not only
not necessary to deter men from crime, but that they are
less effective for that purpose than punishments which do
not revolt the natural feelings of mankind. We have pub-
lished from time to time, several calculations founded upon
Parliamentary returns, among others, the convincing tables
so ably computed by Mr. Wrightson. We have published
returns from Belgium, pointing to a similar result ; more
recently the accurate and intelligent AI. Duepetiaux, the
Inspector-General of Prisons in the latter country, has
strikingly shown the inefficiency of capital punishments in his
Statistique de la Peine de Mort ; or rather he has shown
that, with the decrease of executions, the most dangerous
and malignant crimes diminish. Omitting the curious de-
tails of his calculations, for which we have not room at pre-
sent, we will merely state the great results. He takes the
seven provinces of Belgium, and shows that during a space of
19 years, ending in 1814, in which there were 533 exe-
cutions, the number of murders, including poisoning,
was 399, or 21 murders per annum. That during a space
of 15 years, ending with 1829, in which the executions
were only 71, the murders had diminished to 114, or not
quite 8 per annum—that during four years, ending with
1833, in which there had been no executions, the murders
had decreased to 13, be'ng only a fraction more than three
per annum. Thus the mitigation of the sanguinary seve-
rity of the law, and, in the last period, its practical aboli-

tion, was so far from emboldening men to commit crime
that it appears to have produced the opposite effect, as if
the greater mildness of the law infused itself into human
morals and restored to human life that protection from vio-
lence which laws that familiarised the popular mind with
the shedding of blood on the scaffold had only broken
down. The effect ascribed by the Roman poet to the cul-
tivation of the liberal arts may be as truly attributed to en-
lightened penal legislation—
" " Emollit mores nee sinit esse feros,"
whereas cruel and barbarous laws taint the human mind
with their fierceness, and cause it to reflect their own vin-
dictive image.—Morning Herald.
In bringing the case of Dr. Webber before Parliament,
Lord Stanley seems to have made certain that the High
Church party would join with him in condemning the con-
duct of the Vicar, and calling for a measure of reform to
prevent such grasping practices. Great must have been
his surprise when the Member for the University of Oxford,
to whom he had specially appealed, warmly defended every
point he had attacked, and rebuked him as no better than
the ungodly, and a spoliator. If Lord Stanley has been
simple enough to believe that the correction of abuses en-
tered into the views of the High Churchmen, Sir Robert
Inglis's speech must have dissipated so idle a notion. He
observed with respect to the petition presented and sup-
ported by Lord Stanley,
" It behoved the House to be most careful how they allowed
themselves to be persuaded into the belief of any statements
made in such petitions as these ; for they might be assured,
that if they permitted the rights of the Church to be once suc-
cessfully invaded, the pseudo-popular party, gaining fresh cou-
rage from so unhallowed a victory, would proceed to the de-
struction of property of all other kinds. The Noble, Lord
was one of the last men from whom he should have anticipated
an attack on Church property. The Noble Lord was looked
upon by the Established Church as one of her champions ; and
it was a most unexpected thing to hear him bringing forward,
he would not say as a matter of charge, but of invidiousness, that
a vicar happened to receive 1,0001. a-year, or a college 3,5001.
When the plus or minus of Church property was brought in
question, the security of that Church was in danger."
If Lord Stanley wishes to retain his place among the
Inglisses, Winchilseas, Newcastles, &c., he must lay the
lesson to heart, that when the plus or minus of Church pro-
perty is brought in question, the security of the Church is
in danger. The plus in its revenues (its sign of the
Cross), and the minus in its congregations, he must accus-
tom himself to regard as equally just and proper. Where
the revenues are concerned, ecclesiastical arithmetic consists
of two rules only, addition and multiplication. Last year,
in the debate on the Irish Tithe Bill, Lord Stanley more
distinctly stated the principle, which Sir Robert Inglis now
argues against him, that the Church must not be made a
thing of proportions ; and flocks without pastors in England
are surely as consistent with the rule of unfitness as pastors
without flocks in Ireland. Poor Lord Stanley seems
doomed to false positions. With respect to the High
Church party on the one hand, and the true Reformers on
the other, he appears to be taking the same sort of ground,
offensive to both sides, that he occupies with relation to
parties. He is the Little Isaac of the political stage, ever
standing " like the blank leaf between the Old and New
Testament." How must those words of Sir Robert
Inglis have struck his ear, that " it was a most unexpected
thing to hear him bringing forward, as a matter of invi-
diousness, that a vicar happened to have 1,0001. a year, or
a college 3,500/. !" These are accidents of fortune which
Lord Stanley must take care not to advert to, if he would
retain his place among the Saints of the High Church.
The Vicar who happened to have 1,0001. a year (how nice
is the phrasing!) is also a Prebendary of Westminster, and
Dean of Ripon ; but of course there are circumstances of
the plus kind, from the mention of which Sir Robert Inglis
carefully abstains, as dangerous (i. e., the mention, not
the fact) to the security of the Church. The 1,0001.
a year from Kirkham is only, it appears, a part of what
Dr. Webber has happened to possess himself of. The fol-
lowing passage in Sir Robert Inglis's answer to Lord Stanley
is admirably characteristic :
" The Noble Lord stated that the Vicar had absented him-
self from the parish from 1829 till 1833, and only returned un-
der peculiar and unconciliatory circumstances. r The fact was
that the object of the Reverend Gentleman in visiting the pa.
rish had nothing in it of a selfish or personal nature ; he visit-
ed it in pursuance of Lord Tenterden's Act, for the purpose of
taking care that his successor's interests should not be compro-
mised by the agreement he had entered into ; and he had dis-
tinctly stated that whatever might be the increase of vicarial
tithe, it should not be paid during his incumbency, but only
on the accession of the next Vicar."
Thus we see that the Vicar visited his parish after an
absence of three or four years, not in pursuance of any duty
imposed upon him as a minister of Christ, but in pursuance
of Lord Tenterden's Act—it was not the Gospel, but a
statute that moved him to his flock ; and he came not. for
the cure of souls, but for the cure of tithes—for the pur-
pose of taking care of his successor's pecuniary interests,
and not for the purpose of taking care of his existing flock's
spiritual concerns. Good man ! he visited his parish purely
with a regard to the small tithes of him who might come
after him—anxiety for his flock's heavenly inheritance had
nothing to do with the matter, according to the showing of
Sir Robert Inglis. It would seem almost to be a maxim,
take care of the pounds and the shillings, and the souls will
take care of themselves. But there was a Curate for that
secondary concern, and let us consider the exquisite con-
sistencies in the circumstances of his appointment, as stated
by Lord Stanley :
" One of the parties employed by Dr. Webber, as Curate,
was a gentleman of the name of Matthews, Master of the
Grammar School there, one of the fundamental rules of which
institution was, that the Master should be allowed to attend to
no other business or occupation whatever, but should wholly
employ himself in the duties of the school. Besides this, Mr.
Matthews was engaged part of his time by Dr. Webber in the
collection of tithe; his appointment to either of these employ-
ments had been protested against by four of the visitors of the
school, but to no purpose."

Another 111ciAer, whose estate adjoins the parish of
Kirkham, and who is a visitor of the school, stated that it
was in consideration to stop the payment of the school,
master, the duties of the office so filled by a gentleman em-
ployed both in the cure of souls and tithes, being, of course,
very imperfectly performed. This is rich enough indeed—
education and religious instruction obstructed by the same
sordid arrangement—nothing well done, in all probability,
but the tithe-collecting. Sir Robert Inglis says that no-
thing is to be considered but the legal rights of the Church.
When the questions of the First Fruits and Tenths, and
Trusts of Ecclesiastical Property terminating upon the
conformity of the dispossessed Papists or their heirs, come
under Parliamentary discussion, the clergy will be bound to
abide by the rigour of the law upon which they now make
their stand.—Morning Chronicle.
It is highly gratifying to observe that the advice, based
upon experience, which but a few months back we ten-
dered so anxiously to, and enforced so earnestly upon, the
Conservative party, namely, to form Societies for the pur-
pose of watching the registry and securing the enrolment of
bona fide electors, has been at length followed with energy
and spirit. What, indeed, availed it that the wealth, in-
telligence, and respectability of a county or borough were
arrayed on the side of order and good Government ? When
the struggle really ensued—when the decision was to be
made by a majority of registered votes—how worse than
ridiculous was the situation of the well-meaning but idle
and careless individuals whose virtual disfranchisement had
been effected through their own neglect. With the mid-
land counties these admirable associationss for the pur-
pose of purifying the register originated. The electors of
Newark and Leicester, unwilling to be misrepresented,
determined to associate for this most constitutional as well
as legal purpose, and the elections which took place at the
commencement of the year afforded an example of what
might have been almost universally effected, had the friends
of the Constitution in all other been equally zealous and
watchful. Our humble but sincere exhortations have now
been reinforced by a most powerful and influential in-
structor in the person of Sir Robert Peel, who insisted with
great force on this interesting topic in his unrivalled speech,
on a late important occasion ; and the daily announcements
which we have the gratification of making yield a satis-
factory reply to the appeal of the Right Hon. Baronet.
" Oh, but," say our opponents, "we will form counter-
associations ; nay, if need be, we will revive our Political
Unions for the purpose of offering that assistance to the
honest voter which consists of" death's-heads and well-sea-
soned bludgeons." Be it so, we fear them not. Let
but the real substantial elector remain upon the
registry, strike off all who have no right to vote,
enforce the provisions of the Reform Act strictly,
and without favour or affection, and we have no
fears whatever for the result. That such a course will be
adopted we have now no doubt. Meanwhile, and until an
opportunity for fairly polling the constituent body shall be
afforded, let the Conservatives of Great Britain continue to
meet, and to unite in a common determination to act with
energy and zeal in support of the good cause. Let the
rich and the poor, the exalted and the humble, understand
that their interests are one, and inseparable—then the plots
of wicked and foolish men will be discovered and crushed,
and the interests of this mighty empire be again placed
upon a secure and immoveable foundation. The state of
the registration, the county registration particularly, in
various parts of the kingdom sufficiently attests the neces-
sity of associations, to stimulate some individuals to the
effort, small as it is, which the Reform Bill requires, as
a preliminary to the exercise of their elective rights ; and
to regulate or counteract the excessive zeal with which
others employ themselves in the creation of faggot
voters. Our excellent Contemporary, the Standard,
brings under the notice of its readers an instance which
illustrates the combined effects of unjustifiable apathy
on the one hand, and of equally unjustifiable zeal on, the
other. That remarkable instance is supplied by the parish
of St. George's, Bloomsbury, in which the whole number of
registered voters is fourteen, of whom no less than seven,
or one-half of the whole county constituency resident in