The Sun.
London, England, 1832-10-01 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Mauritius papers from the Bth to the 14th of
July, which we received yesterday, describe one
of the most singular conditions of things which
was perhaps ever exhibited to the world. The
I,llite colonists of that conquered plantation
have made the rejection of the late Order in
Council a question of peace or war, of submis-
sion or of rebellion, and have accordingly com-
menced the execution of their projects by resist-
ance to the Governor and his instructions._
Without any chance of foreign aid, and without
any hope of political independence, they have
declared against the authority of the King of
England's Government, anti have compelled the
King's Governor to dismiss the King's Attor-
ney-General. The new Order in Cbuncil for
ameliorating the condition or the slaves, with a
view to the ultimate Safe abolition of slavery,
had. been transmitted to the Mauritius as well as
to our West India Crown colonies. The pro-
prietors of that colony, who profited so long by
an illicit trade in slaves to the opposite
African coast, after the slave trade had been
declared illegal, and who, after it was effec-
tually abolished, were unwilling to see their
gains curtailed by other rules, saw with alarm
the arrival of the new orders, and of Mr. Jeremie,
who was appointed to enforce them. Mr. Jere-
tnie, the author of an admirable account of
West India slavery, and of a judicious plan for
its ultimate extinction, had been appointed to
the office of King's Attorney-General in the
colony of Mauritius, purely, we believe, from a
sense of his merits, and with no view of reward-
ing political partisanship. Mr. Jeremie shows
himself an enemy of slavery, as every other man
who writes upon the subject must do. He never
declares for its immediate abolition ; but all his
arguments tend to its abolition at no distant
slate. Hence he has been assailed by the up-
holders of the present system ; and hence, being
identified with the policy of the Colonial-office,
his illegal dismissal has been enforced. It would
appear that no sooner had Mr. Jeremie and the
new code of instructions arrived, than the planters
were thrown into a violent ferment. Ad-
dresses were sent to the Governor from a great
body of the colonists, both of town and country,
praying that he would suspend the orders,
and dismiss the new Law Officer of the
Crown. Sir Charles Colville, who is the Go-
vernor of the colony, and who appears to us to
have made too great concessions to plantation—
we shall not say popular, clamour, endeavoured
to sooth the colonists without effect. He could
not directly refuse obedience to the orders from
borne, but he almost furnished an apology to the
planters to resist them. Taking into account
the conduct of the colonists, there never w2e.
anything more unaccountable than the conduct
of the Governor. To the numerous addresses
made to him against the orders and appointment
of the Government at home, he declared, " that
according to the knowledge which he had of the
leihabitants of the colony, he was persuaded
that left to themselves, the colonists would spon-
taneously take measures of Me most decisive
kind for the immediate amelioration and
ultimate extinction of slavery, and that these
measures would be carried to their ultimate
limits without destroying entirely the bond be-
tween master and slave, a bond which it would
be the height of imprudence or madness to de-
stroy without previous preparation." All this
was said in the face of deputations sent to resin
the only means hitherto devised for the amelio-
ration of the slave code ; and in answer to de-
mands for sending away Mr. Jereinie,---a de-
mand which his Excellency himself seemed to
consider as little short of high treason. All this
praise of " spontaneous co-operation" with the
Government was lavished on men who were at
the very moment in open rebellion against the
same Government, and refusing to acknowledge
the Royal commission. Sir Charles Colville
plainly announces to the colonists, that the dis'
missal of Mr. Jeremie by threatened violence, was
to compromise not only questions of philan.
thropy, but the maintenance of the Royal au-
thority, and the honour of the British Crown ;
that it would tend to destroy all the hope which
the colonists entertained of seeing their pre-
sent Government modified to their advan-
tage ;—that it would authorize the introduction
of an entirely new system, opposed to what they
considered their ancient rights, sentiments,
and principles—that instead of appearing in the
character of petitioners, they were now assuming
the attitude of rebels to their King, and traitors to
the British Government ;—that they were evinc-
ing a desire of independence of the British
Crown ; and that if thus left to themselves, their
situation would be deplorable, without a market
for their produce or a protector of their rights.
In short, the Governor and Council at first refused
to be parties to the dismissal of Mr. Jeremie,
and to the suspension of the new orders, though
they were at last obliged to yield. In being
obliged to yield, therefore, afterwards, we may
consider the colony of the Mauritius as at pre-
sent in open hostility with the King's Govern,
tnent,—as determined to resist every attempt to
ameliorate the condition of its slave population,
and, therefore, as a fit subject for enforcing the
laws of humanity by superior power, or for
leaving the planters to their own resources. It
is quite evident that this colony of the Crown
has been enabled to indulge in the horrors of
the slave trade, and the abuse of slave labour;
since the general peace, only by the admission of
its produce to the British markets. It may be
easily coerced into obedience, and punished fo
rebellion, by means which the Government and
the Legislature of Great Britain have at their
disposal.— Times.

Amongst a great variety of letters which have
reached us w ithin the last two days, and which
convey information, or propose topics of discus-
sion, upon the general state of the country, there
is one from Bury, in Lancashire, which we have
read with sentiments of mingled pain and alarm.
If there was one object more than another
which wise and good men hoped to see resulting
from the Reform Bill, it was the substitution of
general free agency for coercion, as the guide
and mover of every elector's vote. Probably no
occurrences have
ever furnished more abundant
ground of just indignation than the attempts
of the Duke of Newcastle and a few other gran-
dees, either to extort by menaces from their
numerous tenants an unwilling support of cer-
tain candidates, favoured by the Lord, but ob-
noxious to the voters, or to punish the refrac-
tory electors by privation of their leases or other-
wise. A mode of exercising power no less re-
volting to upright and generous minds has been
Occasionally practised by oppressive Ministers,
when they took away offices from the holders,
or resisted the pretensions of meritorious claim-
ants, because of their votes, either as consti-
tuents or. representatives, being adverse to the
wishes of the Government. To obviate the
evil of such tyrannical abuses the cry for
&form was raised, and an honest Minister,

after immense difficulties, carried the reform
principle into a law. It is, perhaps, too true
that the old traffickers in borough property, and
advocates of unconstitutional privilege, have
laboured hard, even since the Reform Bill was
carried, to revive or prolong the grievances for
which it had been the anticipated cure. The
Duke of Newcastle, and Lord Brovvnlow, the
Duke of Beaufort, &c. may have used their
landlord influence for purposes of corrupt
intimidation, and so far the great end of the
Reform till may have been frustrated, by thus
preventing qualified electors from exercising their
own unbiassed judgment, and voting freely for
whatever candidate they might judge proper.
But are there none, save Tories and oligarchs,
who thus pervert the rights of property, and
crush the free enjoyment of constitutional pri-
vileges by their fellow subjects ? We set out
with remarking that a letter from Bury had
brought intelligence of a painful and mortifying
nature. It states no less than the adoption by
" radical" reformers of expedients for carrying
elections their own way, not one whit better
than the most disgraceful of the means imputed
to the Duke of Newcastle and his brethren.
We refer and beg attention to a letter signed
" R." and to a subjoined copy of a resolution passed
by the Political Unions of Rochdale, Bury, Bol-
ton, Tottington, &c. binding themselves, " indivi-
dually and collectively, not to expend one
halfpenny " with any professional man or trades-
man, being an elector of Rochdale, " who shall
refuse to pledge himself to vote for Mr.
James Taylor !!" Did ever a demagogue-
ridden Irish ruffian faction surpass this precious
example of despotism in the affairs of life ? The
Duke of Newcastle ! Why he would be
ashamed of it. What is freedom, if this be
not tyranny the most insolent, barbarous, and
insulting ? What right have these domineering
fanatics to complain, or had they ever to wag
a jaw in remonstrance, at any lawless or selfish
compulsion exercised by men in power at the
worst periods of our constitutional history ?
They will tell us they may give their custom to
whom they please. Ay, and so may the Duke
of Newcastle let his land and tenements to whom
he pleases. Both his Grace and their Majesties,
the Union rabble of Rochdale, " may do what
they please with their own." But both also
must take the consequences of their arbitrary
and vexatious proceedings. Little do they un-
derstand liberty, and still less do they love it
with a virtuous or sound affection, who would
force their fellow citizens to surrender a
constitutional right (for which they, the com-
pellants, were among the first to clamour),
on pain of seeing themselves and their
families robbed of all their means of sub-
sistence. Not a man, no, not one of these re-
solutionists, these non-purchasers, is better than
a rank tyrant in his heart—not a man of them
deserves to be trusted with the-slightest share or
particle of power in a free community, if that
community would preserve its freedom. Mr.
James Taylor may be an excellent person, nor
do we know or even guess at the name of his
opponent ; but it is very clear, that if after get-
ting into Parliament he speaks the language of
such constituents as those men who have signed
the resolutions in his favour, the worst Ministers
that ever disgraced a limited monarchy, and the
basest factions that ever threatened the existence
of regular government, would be they who might
count most securely on the vote and influence
of Mr. James Taylor. But who, again, are
these political unionists ? Why do they still
torment the country with their restless and into-
lerant projects. We had understood that the
Political Unions were to dissolve themselves in-
stantly after the passing of the Reform Bill.
Some, we believe, have done so. Those who
seek to perpetuate a confederacy which ought, in
all fairness, to have died with the occasion which
engendered it, are open to the suspicion that they
have no other aim than to usurp a portion of
the prerogatives which are properly inherent in
the Government and Legislature—that is, to
produce an implacable conflict between the State
and a section of her subjects, with insurrection
and anarchy for its most successful results. The
Reform Bill ought now assuredly to be left to
its own fair operation throughout the country.
Coercion is more abhorrent to a reformed con-
stituency than corruption, because the latter ad-
mits that free agency on which the other tramples.
But let us hope that a spirit so repugnant to all
political honesty as that which our Bury corre-
spondent signalizes will suffer itself to be sea-
sonably checked, since otherwise it is clear as
tight that the middle and upper classes through-
out the kingdom will be forced to retaliate, as
they will be able to do with tremendous effect,
upon the poorest order of constituents. In one
word, this resolution to starve men into a sur-
render of their undoubted right of free election
is not excelled for vindictive harshness by the
most cruel practice of the worst of modern times.
What an outcry has been raised ere now at the
employment of such threats by men of large for-
tune to their tradesmen !—Times.