The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-24 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Everybody asks, what is to be done with the Muni-
cipal Corporation Bill, as it has been emasculated by
the Lords ? Under other circumstances perhaps the
most dignified course for Lord Melbourne to have
taken would have been to abandon the measure alto-
gether until the next Session, trusting in the meantime
to the hope that the Lords would see the propriety of
giving up their resistance to the wishes of the people
upon this most important question. But when we re-
flect upon the attitude which the House of Lords has
assumed, not only against this Bill, but also against
the Irish Church Bill ; and when we observe, more-
over, the strong probability which exists that their
Lordships intend to deal even in a less ceremonious
manner with the Bill for the Reform of the Irish Cor-
porations—the three great measures of the Session—it
becomes manifest that a constitutional crisis is about to
arise, which must be met by the Ministers and by the
House of Commons with a degree of firmness and
even of vigour suitable to the exigencies of the occa-
sion. It would be absurd to conceal from ourselves
that under the cover of these three Bills, a fierce con-
flict is going on between two hostile principles, for
the purpose of deciding which of the two shall even-
tually sway the destinies of this mighty empire. Shall
a pauper oligarchy, sustained by a conrt fearful of its
own existence, and living within an impenetrable at-
mosphere of prejudices which belong to the petty Ger-
man sovereignties of the last century, control the
growing mind of England—or shall that mind have
its own free and fearless course, adapting the laws to
the circumstances of the times, and remodelling the
public institutions in the manner best calculated to
secure the rights and interests of the community ? A
year has not yet passed, since a popular Government
was dissolved without a moment's notice. Do we not
see preparations made for a similar manoeuvre during
the present antumn ? Here, therefore, is another
evil to be guarded against ; and the means to be ar-
ranged for that purpose require the utmost circum-
spection, as well as the most unflinching de-
termination on the part of our representatives.
We take it therefore for granted, that the Mu-
nicipal Bill will pass the Lords in its peesent
shape, or at least in a shape very little improved
from the mutilated figure which it now ex-
hibits to the eyes of an indignant country. When
it is returned to the Commons, they will, we presume,
reject all the amendments of the Lords, and thereupon
demand a " free conference" with their Lordships, in
which appointed Members of each House will have an
opportunity of explaining the reasons by which the two
branches of the Legislature are respectively guided with
reference to this Bill. After this conference it will be
open to the Commons to pass such resolutions as they
may deem expedient upon the subject. Should the
reasons of the Lords be found invalid for the alterations
which they have introduced, a resolution to that effect
may be agreed to ; and it may be very meetly followed
by a second resolution, expressing the opinion of the
House as to the manner in which the Lords have latterly
exercised the powers entrusted to them by the constitu-
tion. Amongst other things, the extraordinary course
adopted by their Lordships, of hearing counsel at their
bar against the principle of a public Bill, not enacting any
pains or penalties—their receiving at the same bar the
evidence of interested witnesses, in order to overthrow
the Report of the King's Commission, wiil not perhaps
be forgotten. Nor can it be overlooked, that upon
such evidence as this—evidence which no court of jus-
tice would have accepted—all the material averments
have been, erased by their Lordships from the preamble
of the Bill. In order to show that she course of pro-
ceeding which we have here indicated is not altogether
unknown to Parliament, shall here briefly recapitu-
late what took place in 1742, relative to a Bill which
passed the Commons for "indemnifying persons who
should, upon examination, mal-c discoveries with re-
ference to the conduct of Robert Earl of Orford." It
may be recoll,',-tecl that his Lordship was accused of
something very like peculation ; but when the Bill
went up to the Lords, they of course attempted to
screen a membekof their " order," by meetinc, the Bill
with a direct negative. The ( ominous hr7ing ascer-
tained this fact by an inspecG.n of the joernals, ai:,o-
- was made l;v Lord to :
" T'rit the Lords n to om.cur with the Commons of
Great Britain, in a:- :,idemniteation necessal.y to the effec-
ival carrying on of the inquiry now cl,-i,ending in Parliament,
is an obstruction to justk,. d miy prove fatal to tI liber-
ties of this nation."
The motion was lost be a small majority ; but when
makin2; it the Noble Mover offeied some remarks, so
peculiarly applicalile to the cons Jet of the majority of
the present House of Lords, that we cannot refrain
from quoting a few passages from his speech
" The rejecting of thi Bill." he observed, " rill be at-
tended with eonsequences mu,,t be datwerous to our
Constitution. It will make the people begin to despise Par-
liaments, and despair of ever meeting with any relief from
them. An absolute Government, without any form of liberty,
is certainly better am! more tolerable than a Government sup-
ported by an assembly of men, who, under the pretence of being
the guardians of public liberty take every opportunity to betray
it, and serve for nothing but that of making the Government
more expensive, and the Prince more arbitrary."
It should be observed, that at the period of the ses-
sion phen this resolution was proposed, the supplies
had been all granted, and the Mutiny Bill had been
passed. It was argued on the other side, that the
Lords, in.rejectin„.. this Bill, had done no more than
they were entitled to do as a branch of the Legislature,
on which Sir John Hind Cotton remarked—
" The very being, as well as the character, of the other House
depends upon their rejecting no more such Bills as that we
lately sent up to them. It was not the army, it was not the
Commons, that put an end to the existence of that House in
King Charles the First's time ; it was their own conduct. By
refusing their consent to popular and necessary laws; they ren-
dered their House hateful to die people. This enabled the
Commons and the Army to turn them out of doors. If ever
the like case should again happen, the same cause may very
probably produce the same effect; and therefore what hap-
pened at that time should be a warning to the House to endea-
vour at all times to preserve a good character among the
people.
" Suppose this motion to be looked on as a censure. Is not
censure itself sometimes the duty of a friend? We are not
by this motion to excommunicate the other House ; and I hope
they will not excommunicate this, even though we should
agree to this motion. If they should, as we have the purse in
our power, they would find themselves no great gainers by the
bargain. That they have a right to refuse any Bill we send
up to them must be acknowledged ; hut that we have no right
to find fault with the use they make of that right, no man can
surely with any reason pretend. May not a man make a bad
as well as a good use of any right he enjoys ? And if he does
make a bad use of it, has not every other man a right to say he
does, and to censure him with so doing? Censure, when it is
just, will always carry punishment along wi!li it."
To the suggestion, " let the measure wait over
until the next session," the same speaker replied—
" Now the Honourable Gentleman comes to talk of what
may be done in the next session, I do not know ; for I hope
none of his Majesty's counsellors will advise him to put an end
to this session by a prorogation till the nation has obtained
satisfaction. A short recess would, I know, be agreeable to
most gentleman, but this we may be indulged in by an ad-
journment as well as by a prorogation."
It may be a fit subject for the consideration of the
Commons whether they will agree to the Appropria-
tion clause in the Consolidated Fund Bill, until " the
nation shall obtain satisfaction" with respect to the
three Bills already specified. It may also be a ques-
tion whether—looking to the danger of another sudden
dissolution of the Ministry, the most popular and,
we fearlessly assert it, the most sincere and determined
Ministry the country has ever yet possessed—there
ought to be any prorogation at all for the present.
If these measures produce no effect, others may be
resorted to which shall bring the Lords to a sense of
their true position. "If they be obstinate," as Sir
John Cotton well observed, " they must be beat out
of it. If they be mad, they must be physicked out of
it. A strong purgation would be the best method
the nation could take for obtaining justice from Par-
liament, both in this case and every like case that may
happen hereafter." Let but the Commons and the
people and the Ministry remain united as they now
are—let each do their duty firmly in their respective
spheres, and they need not fear the issue—Morning
Chronicle.

In the House of Commons on Saturday, Mr. Att-
wood presented a petition from Birmingham, " thank-
ing the House for having passed the Municipal Re-
form Bill, and praying that it would stand firm in not
allowing any mutilation of that most admirable mea-
. sure, secure as the House was of warm support on the
part of a fearless and generous-minded nation." The
Hon. Member, it appeared, had in vain endeavoured
to provail on his bOUtitialitoa tb treat that ancient