The Sun.
London, England, 1832-07-24 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The feelings excited in the French capital by
the monstrous resolUtion of the Diet at Frank-
fort, are displayed with sufficient energy in the
journals of the 16th and 18th inst. The Ac:
in question is discussed under several points of'
view,—viz., in its relation to Germany, to
Europe, and to Fiance ; and we fully concur
with the liberal papers in affirming, that under
no one of these aspects can it be looked at other-
wise than as a proceeding which calls not merely
for severe condemnation, but for uncompro-nis-
ing and resolute resistance. Whilst the Con-
stitutionnel and other papers regard this out-
burst of the spirit of " legitimacy," as a direct
overthrow of the general constitution of the
Germanic body, arid an undisguised precursor
to some hostite attempt upon the French revo-
lution of 1830, the Journal des Debats alone
special-pleads upon literal and formal pretences,
fbr the sake of absolving the Government from
the discharge of duties manifestly entailed upon
it by the new position into which Germany, and
through it all Europe. has been thrown by this
aggression of the great military Powers. The
Journal des Debats seems disposed to treat the
attack of the Diet upon all the German States,
whose independence was assured to them by the
acts of the Allied Powers prior to 1820, as a
mere police regulation. If Statesmen ought to
concern themselves more with substances than
phrases, this " police regulation" is no less than
a comrlete absorption by Austria and Prussia of
the whole of Germany. A distinct assertion ofcon-
trol over all the most essential rights of sovereignty,
—over the right of taxation —the right oflegislation
—the right of discussion—the administration of
justice, and the liberty of the press, in States
whose independence had hitherto been lawfully
recognised, amounts in fact to their extinc-
tion as independent Governments, and invests
other Powers, not parties to the crime, with
the same real title to resistance and redress,
as if Austrian and Prussian armies had taken
military possession of every inch of Germany.
It is vain to say that any positive and definite
increase in the power of one German Sovereign
over others, not contemplated by the negotiators
of 1814 and 1815, would not confer upon
France anti England a right to interpose by di-
plomacy or by arms. • The " settlement of
Europe" was nothing more than a specified dis-
tibution of territory in some instances, and esta-
blishment of authority in others. If the territory
so assigned to any one State be invaded, or an
authority, funning part of any one constitution
then framed, be subverted by foreign violence or
foreign fraud, a wrong is done to the Govern-
ments by which Europe was " settled"—to such
of them at least as are not sharers in the wrong
or have not approved the perpetration of it.
The Journal des Debats admits, that if the
limits of any one German state be infringed
upon, so as to alter the territorial proportions. of
the country, a case will arise to call upon even
the Government of France to interfere with it.
But, gracious Heaven ! is the real usurpation
of all the powers of sovereignty throughout
all the minor States, of less importance than
the ostensible appropriation of' territory annexed
to one or more of them ? Are mankind to be
insulted by this substitution of words for things?
Shall we be told that he who converts forcibly
to his own ends all the actual resources of a
petty kingdom, or a duchy, whether in the shape
of funds or soldiers, is less a plunderer and less
a conqueror than he who forcibly takes posses-
sion of the soil, and affixes to it a name which
it never formerly was known by ? We maintain
that this late decree of the Confederation—or of
Austria and Prussia coercing and. compelling
the federation—is an open outrage upon the
" settlement of Europe," a dislocation of the
balance of power in Europe, a removal of those
checks and a destruction of those safe-guards
which were provided and insisted on by the repre-
sentatives of the several Powers assembled between
1814 and 1820, as guarantees against sudden vio-
lence on the part of' the great military Sovereigns,
and that as such it has been an injury inflicted
upon France and Great Britain, as parties interested
for the independence of the minor States. The '
Jotanal des Debats would fain divest France
of the right and duty of interference upon this
question, because " it was for England to watch
over the independence of the smaller States of
Germany, because England was a party to the
Congress of Vienna, and is so to the Diet of
_Frankfort, in virtue of her kingdom of Ha-
nover." But France, in the person of [VI. de
Talleyrand, was likewise a party to the COE-
gress of Vienna ; and as for England being so
to the Diet, thank God, Hanover is no king-
dom of ours. After the life-interest of King
William shall be at an end, Hanover is the
Duke of Cumberland's kingdom, with which
Great Britain, we trust, will thenceforth have
no concern. We shall not indeed regret to see
fulfilled the anticipation of the Journal des
Debats in one particular. That paper doubts
not that the Parliament now assembled will
require explanations from his Majesty's Minis-
ters, touching the part sustained by Hanover in
the late deliberations of the Diet.' It is ob-
vious that ostensibly the British Ministers are
no ways accountable for the acts of the Hanove-
rian Government, and that as to official expla-
nations, Lord Grey will have none to offer.
But we do believe that no British Minister of
Lord Grey's Cabinet will hesitate to pro-
nounce his entire disavowal of all sympathy with
The spirit of those proceedings at Frankfort, or
his full disposition to watch over and avert any
practical application of them to the undue re-
straint of independent authorities, or the oppres-
sion of individual rights among the Germans.
If Germany be trampled on as Poland has
been, while Great Britain and France lotyk:'oir
like unmoved spectators at a disgusting drama,
the next act of the piece will not have Germany
for its threatre. But the isolated condition of
France and England may well avenge mankind
for the effeminate cowardice or stupid negli-
gence wherewith those two nations will have
seen successively stormed every tenable outwork
of the fortress of European freedom.-7' intes.
Yesterday we received Dutch and German
papers of recent dates, some extract& from which
will be found elsewhere. The new propositions
made by the Conference to the King of Holland
are alluded to in the Dutch journals, but no de-
tails are given. There is, however, a private
letter from the Hague, in the Handelsblad,
which states that the King of Holland persists
in refusing to evacuate the city of Antwerp, until
the modifications he requires in the 24 Articles
be acceded to by Belgium, and confirmed by a
treaty between Holland and the Five Powers.
The Governments of the different • German
States have not been slow in publishing the de-
spotic decree of the Federal Diet, and in issuing
orders to the magistrates and other authorities to
enforce its provisions. It is worthy of remark,
that the Berlin State Gazette of the 19th, which
gives, an account of some proceeding of the

States of- Hanover to the 17th, passes over
unnoticed the important fact, that the Second
Chamber of those States had, on the 14th, pro-
tested against the decree of the Diet, though its
official publication on the same day by the Ha-
noverian Government is conspicuously an-
nounced. Movements of troops towards the
Rhine are mentioned in several papers, and it is
reported that negotiations referable to the situa-
tion of the south of Germany have been com-
menced between the Governments of Prussia
and Hanover. The Hanau Zeitung states,
that in consequence of some disorders at St.
Wendel, that town is, for the second time, oc-
cupied by Prussian troops.

Since this was written we have received the
address of the Viceroy of Hanover to the Ge-
neral Assembly of the estates of that kingdom ;
in which, with great diplomatic simplicity, the
Royal Deputy avoids all allusion to the possibi-
lity of any opposition to the decree. We shall
return to this subject.—Times.

The Irish Reform Bill was read a second time
in the House of Lords last night. There was
no division, but a debate, which, though brief,
was more than commonly pithy and characteris-
tic. The Duke of Wellington seemed to indulge
the fancy that the whole constitution of Ireland,
as established at the Union,—nay, what is al-
most incredible, that his own ahilition of the
penal laws, and dii,franchisement of the 40s.
freeholders of counties, whilst the freemen and
freeholders of cities were continued, had been
framed for the sole and exclusive purpose of
perpetuating the " Protestant interest" in Ire-
land,—an hallucination, at which Lord Plunket
might very well throw up his hands and eyes,
exclaiming that it was " statesmanlike loftiness
cf vision with a vengeance !" The breadth in-
deed of the old Tory policy towards Ireland,
and we are sorry to say of the Duke of Wel-
lington's with it, may be measured by their
arguments on the Irish Reform Bill, not one of
which went for more than a funeral howl over
the decayed carcass of " Protestant Ascend-
ancy." Why will the Duke of Wellington
speak ? Times.
A declaration made last night by Lord
llowick in the House will give great satisfaction
to our Colonies. His Lordship had moved a
grant of 17,4381. to defray the charges of the
Ecclesiastical Establishment in the North Ame-
rican Colonies. Mr. Hume observed, that the
North American Colonies did not wish for one
farthing of this grant, which was not for the
support of religion, but for the exclusive sup-
port of the clergy of a small fraction of the
people. But he would not, he said, oppose
the vote if the grant were only to be for four
years. Lord Howick then declared, that as
the clergymen died off, or were otherwise pro-
vided for, their places were not to be filled up.
Mr. Hume asked, " Bishops, and all ?" " Aye,
said his Lordship, " Bishops and all. The
salaries were to be withdrawn from the Ministers
of the Established Cnurch. It was resolved
that the North American Colonies should pay
their own clergymen." This, we have said, is a
most important declaration. The people of
Great Britain may as well call upon the colonists
to pay the clergy of the Church of England and
Scotland, as the colonists call upon the people
of this country to pay their clergy. But the
people wish us to leave to them the pay-
ment of their own clergy. They know that
the more money is taken from us for Civil
and Ecclesiastical Establishments, the less chance
they have of obtaining good government.
The clergy, whom we pay, deem them-
selves in gratitude bound to do what they can to
oppose the improvement of the people. Mini-
sters have adopted a more manly course. They
see that the connection between us and our co-
lonies must be one of affection ; that we can
only hope to retain the colonies by making it for
their interest to be connected with us. It is a
proper sequel to the Reform Bill. It is well
known that the expenditure under the colonies,
is not for the benefit of either colonies or mother
country, but to give incomes to younger sons
and brothers of the aristocracy, who cannot be
provided for at home. The nobility and gentry
must provide out of their own estates fur their
children like other people. Such a declaration,
however, could not be made, without producing
its effect on the Ultra Tory party. Sir R. In-
glis asserted, that wherever the flag of England
was flying, the Church of England was the
established Church of the country. What if
the people do not belong to the Church of Eng-
land ! This, however, roused the national
feelings of Mr. Dixon, who said, as a Scotch-
man, he could not sit still and hear it de-
clared that wherever the flag of England was
flying, the Church of England was the
established Church. How absurd to utter
such nonsense, as if the colonies conquered by
the men and money of an united kingdom could
he considered to belong to the religion of one
more than the other. With respect to the
colonies possessed by England before the union
with Scotland, that is another affair; but on
every principle of law, the subsequent acquisi-
tions having been made out of the common stock
are common in every respect. The Church of
Scotland is as much an established Church as
the Church of England; and there is this dif-
ference between the two, that a fraction only of
the English belong to the English Church,
whereas Scotland is united in religion, the whole
population, with the exception of 50,000 Epis-
copalians,andaboutloo,oooCatholics,beingPres-
byterians, agreeing in creed and discipline, with
exceptions unintelligible to strangers. To sub-
ject the Scotch, the Catholics, and the English
Dissenters to an English Church Establishment
in the colonies is a piece of injustice that will
not be tolerated. The only consequence of ut-
tering such offensive declarations as those made
by Sir Robert Inglis must be to injure the clergy
of the English Church in the colonies, where
their flocks form a small fraction of the popula-
tion.—Morning Chronicle.
Swift used to complain that he could preach
nothing but pamphlets ; but there was much
both of wisdom and benevolence in the politics
of Swift ; and Ireland, to this day, acknow-
ledges the debt she owes him with gratitude.
Still it was in a tone of critical censure that
..the
Dean observed upon his own peculiarity, and we
believe that the religious world in general will
feel no hesitation in admitting that the peculia-
rity of . which he accused himself was a fault.
But if the preaching of useful pamphlets be
justly considered out of place in the pulpit, and
in the lips of a Minister of religion, how much
more must violent tirades against the Press,
which, though liable to abuse, like other useful
institutions, is deeply rooted in the affections of
the people, as the best protection that has yet
been devised against the inroads of power. It
cannot serve the cause of religion—it cannot
serve the cause of morality, to make the :pulpit a
sort of rostrum for the assertion of political dog-
mas. A Clergyman compromises the dignity of

his office when he quits the high ground of mo-
ral
and religious truth, to deal with topics on
which his congregation are often better
informed than himself, and upon which,
whether better informed or not, they
will refuse to he dictated to by such
a functionary. This we should say , gene-
rally of all political discussions, whether right or
wrong, because they are all inappropriate to the
place and to the person. But when, besides
being inappropriate, they are false and bad, cal-
culated,to disseminate error, to discountenance
freedom, to promote tyranny, who is there that,
with a proper reverence for the Temple of the
Most High, will not turn away abashed from the
wretched jargon which the very sanctity of the
spot only renders more disgusting and intoler-
able ? We have been led to these reflections by
the perusal of a letter from Salisbury, which we
have not room to insert, and which describes a
sermon preached in the Catheral, before Mr.
Justice Taunton, on Sunday last, by the Re-
verend Mr. Towle, the Sheriff's Chaplain.
The Reverend Gentleman took his text
from St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians,
chap. v. verse 13, " For, brethren, ye have been
called in liberty ; only use not liberty for an oc-
casion to the flesh, but by love to serve one
another." Upon this text the Sheriff's Chap-
lain founded a violent tirade against the
Press, more adapted to a Tory dinner speech
than a Christian discourse. He described the
Press as " a terrible power, which had
gained a fearful ascendancy over the minds
of men. God and man were alike the objects
of its impious attacks—truth and falsehood
were alike its weapons. It spared neither the
fame of the living nor the sacred memory of the
dead ; it resembled the least generous of the
brute beasts, of the forest that killed not alone
for the purposes of food, but also sported with
and tore the mangled corpse of the victim which
had satiated its hunger." Can we wonder that
when such trash is uttered from the pulpit, the
popularity of our clergy should be on the decline ?
There is a general unqualified charge against the
Press, which is just intelligible enough to satisfy
every. one of its falsehood. That there are in-
stances of abuse in the Press of this country we
do not deny, but it is just as unfair to exhibit
this clumsy caricature as a faithful picture of
its general character, as it would be to select
the author of it as a fair specimen of the
Clergy of England. And yet there are people
capable of doing both. As for the figure
which concludes the notable paragraph we have
quoted, it would be well for the sake of per-
spicuity that the Rev. orator had named " the
least generous of brute beasts," to which, with in-
finite taste and temper, lie compared the public
writers of the day. It may be that our acquaint-
ance with animal nature is imperfect, but we con-
fess we are at a loss to determine the species of
his brute beast. Even the hyena, we believe,
ceases to bite when it has lost the inclination to
swallow ; and, as for " tearing the mangled
corpse of its victim," the lion, for all his gene-
rosity and majesty, does-the same, and will con-
tinue to do so until he arrives at a greater ex-
pertness in the art of carving than his history has
hitherto afforded any reason to hope. But it is
not the ferocity of the Press, it is the truth of
the Press, that renders it so obnoxious to a cer-
tain class of politicians, including certain divines
and lawyers, who love truth as the Turks love
women—to keep it under lock and key. We
hope, however, that amongst other reforms now
in progress, this absurd and mischievous anti-
pathy to the great bulwark of our political rights
will yield to more correct notions, and that the
time is not far distant when men will be ashamed
to plead guilty to such doctrines, much more to
announce them as of Divine authority.—Morn-
trig Herald.
It will seen from the report of the proceedings
in the House of Commons last night, that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer expects to be able
to bring forward the Budget on Friday next
This document, if we may be allowed so to de-
nominate it, was wont to be looked forward to
with great curiosity, as well as sometimes with
considerable anxiety ; but delayed as it has
been this year, to almost the end of the Session,
it can have but little interest for any one, unless,
contrary to expectation, Lord Althorp should
state what are the intentions of the Government
respecting the ensuing year's Budget. Everything
in the shape of a reduction or imposition of taxes
for the present year that can be stated, is already
well known to the public; and the speech of his
Lordship, in consequence, can only exhibit a dry
detail of the appLcation of the public money to the
various purposes for which it has been voted.
We would fain hope, however, that his Lordship
would set the mind of the public at rest on va-
rious points—such as the stamp and advertise-
ment duties—in which an alteration ought to
have taken place long ago, and the dubious state
of which is most pernicious to all the interests
concerned in them. When it is once proposed
to aboiish or to impose a tax, the sooner it is
done the better; for there is no state of things
which paralyzes industry and locks up capital to
such an extent as suspense.—Morn. Advertiser.
There is one question which we should like
to have put to every candidate who shall solicit
at the ensuing election the suffrages of a popu-
lous constituent). Does he come relying upon
his personal qualifications, his unblemished cha-
racter, his distinguished talents, his active in-
dustry, his ample fortune ? Or is he the se-
lected champion of one of these rebellious asso-
ciations which every virtuous and honest citizen,
be lie Whig or be he Tory, condemns ? Has
the orator of the Council answered for him at the
tavern, and the President of the Union intro-
duced him at the Club ? If he have endured
the pollution of this support, if he have listened
to the adulation of these allies, though he
be bound by nobility of blood to the defence
of the Aristocracy of the State, and bribed
by the extent of his rent-roll to the pre-
servation of its property, though you know
his intentions to be pure, though you
fancy his principles to be firm, be sure
that in such a man there is no good hope.
He will not stop up the way which he has not
been ashamed to tread, nor break the ladder by
which he has miserably consented to rise.
Lifted by sedition, he will do the work of the
seditious ; and the very talents, the very respec-
tability, which would make an independent
Member of Parliament useful and illustrious
will make more fearfully mischievous, and brand
with deeper shame, the pledged delegate from
a treasonable conclave—the interpreter of a
rabble's will. It is time that this nuisance
should be abated. We cannot foresee what
questions of awfulmoment may be dicussed
in the next Parliament, nor with what re-
sult their
discussion may be attended. But,
a; all events, let the debate be held at
governmentTi'eroe.r constitutional
Westminster, and let the decision be the de-
(..isihoonpeJO no longer
offora
freedom if we teach our industrious farmer and
good Parliament.