The Sun.
London, England, 1832-02-25 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Tithes in Ireland may be expected to occupy
more and more every day the attention of the
wo Houses of Parliament. Last night, in the
Upper House, Lord King, on presenting peti-
tions from several parishes in the county of
Louth, made a declaration which horrified seve-
ral Peers. He contended, that " it was utterly
impossible any longer to inaintain the system of
tithes in Ireland. He hoped most sincerely that
no coercion would be resorted to by his Ma-
jesty's Government on the subject. He hoped
most sincerely that they would not enter into
any contest about the matter. He was quite
sure that the people of England would not give
a pound in furtherance of such an object. The
question was, in fact, entirely settled ; for the
whole people of Ireland were determined that
the tithes they would not pay." The Earl of
Limerick " wished to ask the Noble Lord if he
was prepared to add the weight of his character
to the doctrine, that the property which had
been possessed by the English Church in Ire-
land was to be done away with because the
people of Ireland were desirous that it should be
so ? Was the Noble Lord aware of the extent
to which that doctrine might be esrried ? And
yet such was the doctrine upheld by individuals
who ought to be the ministers of peace and good-
will amongst men, and whO had sworn to do no-
thing injurious to the Protestant Establishment
in Church and State ?" And why may not
tithes be done away with, my good Lord
Limerick, if the people of Ireland are desirous
that it should be so ? Is not the property
of the Church of Ireland national property ?
Are not the tithes a portion of the revenue
of the nation, assigned to a class of indivi-
duals who
,either perform, or are supposed to
perform, certain services to the nation ? And who
ought to determine whether that share of the na-
tional revenue ought to receive other destinations
if the nation cannot ? We would refer Lord
Limerick for a correction of his notions regarding
tithes to a very zealous Churchman, who has
published a pamphlet under the title of " What
is to be done with Tithes in Ireland ?" The
author of this pamphlet, Edward Hincks, D.D.
Rector of Killyleagh, has no very exalted opi-
nion of Dr. Doyle, whom he even calls homo
trium literarum, protests against giving up
tithes to the landholders, hopes no part of .them
will ever be assigned to the Romish Clergy, has
a high idea of the excellence of the Protestant
Church, and no very favourable opinion of the
Catholic Church ; but with his partiality to his
own Church, he seems to unite a fearless dispo-
sition to speak the truth, however unpopular it
may be. " The ground of the nation's claim
(says Dr. Hincks) on the landholder for tithe is
in England rather complicated ; but, from the
peculiar nature of Irish tenures, it is in Ireland
a very plain one. The nation was possessed
of the tithes of every acre of Irish land at a
period anterior to that from which the.oldeat
title to land dates. The titles are all grants from
the nation to individuals, and in those grants time
tithes are either granted with the land, or reserved
out of the grant. In the former case, the lands are
held tithe7free ; and there is a large extent of such
land in Ireland. In the latter case, the lands
are clearly liable to the payment of tithe to the
nation or its assignees. Of the latter class of
lands, much of the tithes has been granted away
altogether. Such grants are the origin of what
are called impropriate tithes, belonging to
laymen. 'The remainder has been granted Iron-.
time to time, to clergymen of different ranks,
for their lives, or what has been called their
idcumbencies; and of these clergymen, again,
some have been granted the tithes gratuitously,
without their being asked to make any return for
them, as the clerical holders of rectorial tithes,
where there is a Vicar endowed, and the Bishop
in ahe diocese of Clonfert, where he retains his
quarto pars. Others of the clergy have been
granted the entire tithes, or the half or third, or
fourth part of the tithes of a parish, or a union
of parishes, the nation stipulating with them
that they shall perform certain clerical duties,
either absolutely, or in case of their being
called on by any parishioner. The stipula-
tion be it observed, is bete een two parties
only—the nation and the clergyman. The nation
certainly has conceived that the stipulation is for the
benefit of the parishioners, and it gives liberty to
all who choose it to avail themselves of that
benefit. If they do not choose to do so, it is
then our loss; but that is all. It is not they
who pay the clergyman ; it is the nation which
gays him by assigning to him those glebe lands,
or those tithes which are its property." This
information with respect to the tithes to lay pro-
perty in Ireland, must be new to most English
readers, who do not reflect that Ireland is a recent
conquest. We are well pleased to find a logical
opponent ; and Dr. 'links is eminently so. As
a proof, we have only to quote the following pas-
sage, in which he refutes, in a masterly manlier,
Mr. Stanley and all those who contend that
we are not entitled to withdraw property from
the Church though we may alter the distribu-
tion of it. " The advocates of the inalienable
right of the Established Church of Ireland
(he says) to her tithes and other revenues,
admit, generally speaking, • that the• 'distri-
bution of them among the—Ministers of that
Church may be justly. altered: They are wil-
ling to increase the income of; the poor clergy-
man, at the expense offs wealthier brother ;
and some have even rersocrunsmsled the doing this
immediately—to a certAttleextent, 'at' least—in
regard of the veste,4lWests that now subsist.
(Lord Mountcaalsal,- in . his correspondence
with the Bistr of Ferns.) Did it never
Occur to thos4Crsons, that the admission of the
right to altertile distribution of Church property
necessariViivolves the admission of the right to
take it *way ? The Bishop of Derry for the
time being, is a Corporation sole, as distinct in
the eye of the law from any other churchman,
as the Duke of Northumberland, or the Earl of
Mountcashel is from any other Peer. Who
would argue that a portion of the wealth of one
of those Noblemen might be takern from him,
in order to render the situation of some pauper
Member of the hereditary Legislature more
comfortable than it is ? Who would talk of
this as an equitable distribution of the wealth of
the Peerage? Who would consider it as at all
different, in its nature from a direct confiscation
of the property diverted from its present owner ?
If then it be admitted, as it generally is, that
the property of that wealthy Corporation sole,
the Bishop of Derry, May now, or at some-
future period, be justly taken- away from that
Corporation, and distributed among some other
Corporations, the difference of toe tenure of
property by a Corporation and by an individual
is virtually admitted ; and surely the admission
of the right of the nation to deprive a Corpora-
tion of its property, in order to give it to ano-
ther, involves the admission of her right to take
it away, in order to keep it for herseP. Mete
are unanswerable arguments, and we trust they

will produce the proper impression on Lord
Limerick and Lord Eldon. " From the property
of the Church (exclaimed Lord Eldon), the
next and easy step would be to lay property.
He had lived long—some might think too long
—but God forbid that he should live long
enough to see their Lordships pass a Bill be-
cause a portion of the people declared they
should do so !" If the property held by the
Church is national property, his Lordship is not
more justified in saying that the resumption of
that property by the nation would lead to the
confiscation of lay property, than he would be
in saying that because an army is reduced, and
the money assignee for its support is applied
to other purposes, therefore no man could count
on retaining the house he has purchased
when any person wishes to take it from
him. But then the grouni, the odious ground,
of legislating, because the people declare that
they should do so! Is it not odious to legislate,
because the privileged few wish that they should
do so ; it is only odious to legislate for the
people. Dr. Hincks contends, that the shire of
national property called Church property, should
only (always respecting vested rights) be assigned
to the Protestant Church of Ireland so long as
the nation deems the services of that Church
useful. This is placing a Church on the only
foundation on which it can legitimately be placed.
There is certainly great truth in what he says
with regard to the property of tithes being in
the nation, and not in the owner of the land as
such. And the injustice of giving the tithes to
the owner of the soil, as a matter of course, is
apparent from this, that of two owners of estates
of. 500 acres, of equal goodness, the on 3 tithe-
free, and the other subject to tithe, who pur-
chased a year ago—the one gave for the tithe-free
estate an additional price, corresponding to
the value of the tithes. An abolition of
tithes would put nothing into the pocket
of the one, but would put a sum equal
to the additional price paid by him, into the
pocket of the other. The difficulty in all these
cases is to rouse such a force as is equal to the
compelling the complaints to be just, without
going beyond justice. The complainants laughed
at reason and justice, and the owners of the soil
say to themselves, the power that is equal to the
effecting any alteration in tithes is equal to their
abolition ; for to no alteration would consent be
given, if it were not seen that opposition would
be unavailing. We have heard this language
in the mouths of some landlords. We there-
fore say that great skill is necessary to rescue this
pnblic . property for national purposes. That it
should continue to be given to the Church of
Ireland long, we hold to be impossible.—Morn •
ini, Chronicle.
Notwithstanding the unquestionable talents as
a debater which Lord Plunkett once possessed, if
he do not possess them still, he has proved a
singularly unprofitable associate to the political
parties with which he has been connected, which
parties we may remark, by-the-bye, have not
been distinguished by any singular congruity of
sentiment; remembering that his first political
connection was with Lords Grenville and Grey;
his second with Lord Liverpool, Sir Robert
Peel, and Mr. Goulburn, and his last, and most
prosperous (to himself), with Lord Grey's Re-
form Cabinet. Never, surely, was a Statesman
of less practical discretion. Witness the attempt
to vamp up a charge of treason against a
dtunken ruffian for hurling a bottle at Lord
Wellesley's head, and the filing an ex-officio in-
formation against the rioters in that case, after a
bill for the same offence had been ignored by a
Grand Jury, even though that were a Dublin
Grand Jury. To absolve him from this sin
against the Constitution proved a sufficiently
troublesome affair to the Government of that
day ; by the Government of this, his accession
to their counsels has been bought at a price,
-leaven knows, sufficiently dear. In the first
place, they had to defend or excuse the removal
(to make room for Lord Plunkett) of a confes-
sedly upright' and impartial Judge, every way
acceptable to men of all parties ; next they had
to defend a paltry affair of fees claimed, with or
without a proper legal sanction (we don't know
which) from the Irish Magistrates, by his secre-
taries ; lastly, they are embroiled in his squabble
with the Master of the Robs, about a small
matter of patronage, of the merits of which,
after the debate of Wednesday night, we have
nothing to say ; and, meanwhile, the only coun
sel clearly attributable to Lord Plunkett, is the
evil suggestion by which Lord,Grey.was betrayed
into his threat Of enforcing he collection of tithes
against the will of the peosple, which had nearly
cost the Administration. the support of the great
body of the Irish Members. Nor is the turmoil
Which Lord Plunkett has occasioned the only
price which thiGovernment has paid for his sup-
port. As if the Irish Seals, with eight thousand
a year and the patronage attached to that office,
were not sufficient, one of his sons, the Hon.
Thomas Plunkett, has got the Deanery of Devon
with 2,5001. a year ; a second, the Hon. David
Plunkett, is Prothonotary of the Court of Com-
mon Pleas, with a salary of 1,5001. a year, and
also Fitst-Exaininer of the same Court, emolu-
Ments unknown ; . a_ third, the Hon. Patrick
Plunkett, is Counsel .to the Office of the• Chief '
Remenibrancer of the Equity side of the Ex.:,
chequer, and also Purse-bearer in the Court of
Chancery ; a fourth, the Hon. John Plunkett, is
Assistant-Barrister of the county of Meath ; and
a fifth (if we mistake not) is a beneficed Clergy-
man in the Diocese of Dublin I' , It is to be ob-
served, that the juvenile Secretary for Ireland
was the. only Cabinet Minister. in the House
during the debate on the Mastir of the Rolls'
affair.—Morning Chronicle. ,
..,
A short, but not insignificant, conversation
upon Irish tithes took place in the House of
Lords last night, on the representation of seve•
t•al petitions from the county of Wicklow, pray-
ing for the abolition of the tithe system. Lord
King, who presented the petitionq,. expressed his
concurrence in many of the sentiments which
they contained, and declared his belief " that
the question must be settled, because the whole
people of Ireland had declared against the tithe
system as it was now established. This decla-
ration was met—as all declarations which imply
respect for public opinion are met by a certain
party—with lofty disdain. The Earl of Lime-
'rick scouted the idea of legislating-. upon
Church property, or, as his Lordship- thought
proper to phrase it, " of destroying and making
away with the revenue of the Chureh, because
the people of Ireland, or any 'portion of. them,
thought proper to say that they should." Lords
. Eldon and Wynford echoed the same Sentiments
in different words. But the latter Nobleman went
further than either of his 'predecessors, when he
asserted that " the Church of England and Ireland
:had the same foundation" and that the monarchy
:itself was identified with the preservation of a
,system which has already ceased to exist in
some counties, to any practical purpose. These
assertions may be safely' left to themtelves. A

Protestant Church among a Protestant people is
a very different thing from a Protestant Church
amongst a Catholic people, and stands upon a
very different foundation—and, as for the at-
tempt to involve the existence of Monarchy
with the payment of Irish tithes, he might as
well pretend to connect it with the flowing of
the tide, or the changing of the moon. The
fact is that Monarchy is popular in this country,
though tithes are not ; and it is not by getting
rid of obnoxious appendages that any of our
institutions are likely to be injured. If people
will fight with shadows we cannot help them;
but it will be time enough to resist spoliation of
the Church when an effort is made to despoil it.
The attempt of Ministers, so far as it has been
yet developed, appears to us to be for the pre-
servation, not the destruction, of Church property.
It is for the preservation of Church property that
the obnoxious tithe system is to be given up,
and all the clamour and all the hard names that
can be brought to bear upon the undertaking
cannot deprive it of that conservative charac-
ter which the compromise at once establishes.
From what has been said, however, it is evi-
dent that the Ministers must not expect to
carry their Tiihe Bill without some struggle.
Morning Herald.

We take for granted that the exclusively loyal
and conservative corporation of the city of Dub-
lin have by this time got quite enough of libel-
ling their Sovereign to his face, and the House
of Commons in his presence. No rebuke so
severe, because none so cool and so contemp-
tuous, was ever within memory administered by
wisdom, power, and public virtue, to a gang of
busy anti malicious blockheads. Perhaps, the
sentence of his Majesty's answer, for which
these great personages were least prepared, was
that wherein the Sovereign was pleased to ex-
press such unbounded confidence " in his con-
stitutional advisers." It seems to have been a
pill not more easily digestible by those who re-
mained behind the curtain, than by the puppets
who came forth in scarlet gowns to grimace and
chatter about affairs of aovernment. His
Majesty's confidence, we trust, will never be
betrayed through the weakness or credulity of
his advisers,—by want of honesty, in the present
case, we know it will not. But as a foolish
boast has been made, that the second leading
of the Bill is sure of being carried, it is right to
inform the public, that no rational apprehensions
have, for some time past, been directed to the
second reading of the Bill. We have little
doubt that, so far, it will pass the House of
Lords by a large majority. The real danger is,
what may be done in the Committee, where the
metropolitan Members, the qualifications, and !
other essential parts of the Bill, are liable to be
fiercely attacked. The Tories have no object so
much at heart as the leading Ministers, by an
exhibition of support on the second reading,
into a belief that all the questions raised upon
successive clauses in Committee will be carried
equally in favour of the Bill as- it stands. If
this plan succeeds, Ministers will, it is expected,
put off the creation of Peers until too late, and
so the Tory triumph will be accomplished. Let
the people he on the watch, and the Bill
and Ministers may both be preserved from ruin.
His MAJESTY'S ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS FROM THE

CORPORATION OF DUBLIN, PRBSENTED AT THE MCVEY,

BY THE LORD MAYOR AND OTHERS, FEE. 22, 1832.

" I have heard with deep regret the sentiments ex-
pressed in the address which has now been presented to me.
" I shall always be ready to listen to representations
of such grievances as may appear to any of my subjects to
give them just cause of complaint, and to afford redress to
the utmost of my power. In this wish lam firmly per-
suaded that I only share the benevolent feelings which pre-
vail in my Parliament. On their wisdom and equity,
and on the integrity of my constitutional advisers, I rely
with a confidence which forbids me to suspect that th, y
Can ever he induced to expose any portion of my subjects
to injury and injustice.

. .•
" Neither was it necessary to claim from me a vigo-
rous and impartial administration of the laws, and equal
protection for all classes of my subjects.' These have been,
from the period of my accession to tic Throne, and ever
will be, the constant and unceasing objects of toy Govern-
ment."'— Times.

The affair of the cholera goes on, exciting
little apprehension or terror in the minds of his
Mijesty s liege subjects. We verily believe,
also, that ere now it would even have ceased to
attract notice, had it not been for three potent
causes :-1. The vast activity of the Board of
Health in searching for cases. No sportsman
was ever so eager after game as these gentry for
a case of cholera. 2. The medical opposition
which has sprung up to their reports. 3. And
above all, the prejudicial consequences which
have resulted to our trade and commerce from
the declaration that this furious and contagious
disease existed in and about London. We
shall bestow a word or two on each of these
topics. It is justly complained that the Board
abstain from publishing the names of the persons
affected, in the cases which they bring forward ;
so that all endeavours to examine the accuracy of
their reports are baffied. Indeed, much search is
nude, and it appears in vain, to find out who
may have been the patients upon whom the
Board have reported. Surgeons and others
who-.must live in the immediate vicinity, have
heard nothing of the facts published, and
are unable to direct inquirers to the spot.
Above all, the Medical Board is charged
with refusing all communications from those who
do not hold the doctrine of contagion in this
disease ;—a most monstrous act of injustice and
partiality. Medical practitioners, not hired as
inquisitors, hare patients suffering under spas-
modic complaints ; but, as, they ' asSert;.'neither
capable of communicating disease, nor having
imported it from contact. with sufferers else-
where : and further, they maintain that there is
pot more of the cholera. which does exist than
they have often known at other times, without
creating any particular sensation. The sufferers
in their commercial enterprises are of all men
least likely to be silent or tame under the dimi-
nution of their gains • and probably would be
the last to be convinced that real Asiatic
choleracatch
was committing ravages, except it should
themselves : and the distresses of the humbler
labourer must oppress his parish, burden
hrdeousntehs,
the
rates, and give perplexity to thlely in ouroveevrisiesermsr.lustßhuet
thesestill, if
andthealimoaltahtelyr
concomitantwere rea
We ought to be excluded from the
pale of Christian nations if we concealed the
fact from our neighbours : but the public is as
Yet far from being convinced that there has been
any just cause for sounding the trumpet of
alarm, and still more from perpetuating the note
throughout Europe.— Times.
Lord Plunkett has been. an enormously dear
'bargain to the present Administration, and, we
might add, to the country; -but the latter of
course, in these reforming times, is a consi-
'deration to which it would be altogether nil.:
fashionable to advert. The evils which have been
inflicted upon the community on account of the
Noble and Learned Lord we therefore postpone
in deference to the spirit of the hour, or regard
them only in their inseparable outmexion with

the loss of character, popularity, and power which
Earl Grey and his colleagues have been so in-
fatuated as to undergo, in order to obtain and
preserve the assistance of such a judicial Mi-
nister and political agent in Ireland, and such an
advocate in the British House of Lords, as
Lord Plunkett has proved himself. His Ma-
jesty's Ministers purchased the services of Lord
Plunkett at the outset by an act which proved to
the satisfaction of all mankind the utter hollowness
and insincerity of those professions of economy to
which they had been mainly indebted for the acqui-
sition of power. By displacing Sir Anthony Hart
to make room for the present holder of the Seals, a
man of tried and proved integrity, sound learn-
ing, exemplary moderation, indefatigable dili-
gence, possessing the unbounded respect of the
Bar and the full confidence of the community,
to place his high office in the hands of Lord
Plunkett, whose integrity, learning, moderation,
diligence, and disinterestedness were all of a
character different from those of his venerable
predecessor, and all precisely such, to adopt the
explanation of Earl Grey, as eminently qualified
him for the confidence of his Majesty's present
Government—by effecting this change, at an ex-
pense to the country of several thousands a year,
the Administration was self-convicted of the
most wanton, unprincipled, and revolting disre-
gard of the pledges of rigid economy in the ex-
penditure of the public money, by means of
which they had forced themselves into place.
This single act would have been enough to sink
any Administration, and would have destroyed
the present had they not resorted to the desperate
expedient of saving themselves for a time by
exciting and flattering the political passions of
the lowest order.of the community, and, in de-
fiance of all consequences, placing themselves
at the head of a revolutionary movement. By
this sacrifice of consistency, respectability, and
reputation his Majesty's Ministers, however, ac-
quired the desired ally ; and a valuable and
most congenial ally in truth he has proved. He
set himself to work at once, not to support the
interests, but to imitate the example, of his
friends. They had removed Sir Anthony Hart
to make a good place for him, and he forthwith
removed a Lord Chancellor's Secretary worthy
of Sir Anthony Hart, to make room for a Lord
Chancellor's Secretary worthy of, and nearly re-
lated to, Lord Plunkett. The imitation did
not, however, end here. They had saddled the
country with l an expense of 4,0001. a year for
the sake of committing the property and rights
of all the Chancery suitors in Ireland to the
hands of a congenial partisan of their own. He
attempted to extort from the unpaid Magistracy
of Ireland illegal and unjust fees, in order
to swell the emoluments of his Secretary and
relation, and to enable the latter the better to
pay the pittance of 5001. a year to his deputy,
upon whom, in the acknowledged puffiness of
the princpal, the entire dutybof the office has de-
volved. The effects of this faithful imitation of
Earl Grey, on the part of Lord Plunkett, have been
to deprive, for a considerable period, a large part
of Ireland of any Magistracy whatever, to acce-
lerate the progress of turbulence and insurrection
in that country, and finally to force Lord Plunkett
himself, and the Irish Government which sup-
ported his claims, or, which every body knows to
be the same thing, the claims of his Secre-
tary, to confess that these claims were illegal and
unjust—that the demand of the disputed fees,
by which they suspended many and alienated the
whole body of the Magistracy of Ireland, was an
unjustifiable attempt at extortion. This, it might
be thought, was plunging as deeply into the mire
of venality and corruption as could reasonably be
expected of any Government, even although it be
a Government professing to be, par excellence,
an economical and reforming one. Another, and
if possible still deeper, disgrace was in reserve
for the Administration of Earl Grey in conse-
quence of its connection with Lord Plunkett. By
a notion of justice, and expediency and law, which
may be called distinctively Irish, a dispute had
arisen whether that high judicial officer, the
Master of the Rolls, was fit to be, and was in
flu by law, entrusted with the appointment of
the Registrar of his own Court, or whether this
valuable and important office should go to en-
hance the otherwise pretty extensive patronage of
the Lord Chancellor. Of course it was not to
be expected that a man of the character of Lord
Plunkett, and with the impulses which the man-
ner and circumstances of his own appointment
must have imparted to any man, would easily
forego any thing in the shape of patronage. He
determines accordingly to keep the appointment,
and by virtue of his judicial power deprives the
counter-claimant, the Master of the ltolls, of
the opportunity of bringing the question before
a Court of Law. He resolves, that is to say,
to be the sole Judge in a cause in which he is
personally interested. A fit Judge, to be sure,
to pronounce upon such a question, as we
think we have already seen Then the Master
of the Rolls, deprived of all other means
of asserting what he believes to be his right and
the right of his office, applies to Parliament for
an Act, not to decide the question, but to enable
him to put it in a train for legal decision. And
what is the result ? Every man in the House
of Commons of whatever party, who opens his
mouth upon the subject, does so to proclaim the
justice and reasonableness of the proposition,
with the exception only of the merest ames per-
dus of the Ministry, and to scout the impudent
offer of Lord Plunkett, that he will give free
course to the law upon the condition that he and
his nominee shall not be personally affected by
its decision—that what the, law may pronounce
to be illegal and unjust shall be. perpetuated so
long as it can be advantageous‘to him, as a re-
ward, we suppose, to the virtue and Magnanimity
of a Lord Chancellor who has condescended to•
ghle ishmAmtitsotrenrieayl
apiel
dr insitotlhiceitloarw.
Solicitor-General
nb
ee heard.ra l
The English t
supported
iniquity. The Irish Attorney and Solicitor-
General were absent or dumb. Mr. O'Connell
said that the conduct of Ministers was unjust ;
that the opposition to the Bill was monstrous ;
that the Judge who, the motnent his own pecu-
niary interest was affected shut the door of justice,
was not likely to obtain the confidence of suitors,
on whose pecuniary interests it was his province
to decide ; and that the Ministers who could
support such manifeSt iniquity were not fit to be
trusted upon the question of Reform or upon
any ocher. Mr. Hume, who said the other night
that the cause of Reform would justify him in
supporting Ministers in any thing, however gross,
found it necessary to his conscience and cha-
racter—a conscience not the most tender, a re-
putation not the most exalted—to withhold his
support upon this occasion. From the tone of
the House of Commons upon the subject, it is
scarcely too much to infer that indelible infamy
is stamped. upon the brow of every man who in
this instance voted, with Ministers. They are in
number 88, and of the IVlembers present they
constituted a majority of four. In effect, Mini-
sters were disgracefully defeated. It is impos-
sible, after the debate and this vote, that Lord

Plunkett should, without a legal decision, keep
his nominee in the office. It is next to impos-
sible that the country should longer endure an
Administration which has placed itself in so ig-
nominious a position. And why has Earl
Grey's Administration thus sacrificed itself for
sake of what at first view appears to be the pecu-
liar and personal iniquity of Lord Plunkett ?
This is really the mysterious and appalling ques-
tion ? What secrets are among them which
place a whole Cabirret thus in base and abject
and desperate servitude to the selfish and unprin-
cipled objects of one man ? And such a man !
A superanuated driveller, who was once clever--
a man who could speak with power while he
thought himself entitled to be listened to with
respect—a person who now speaks but to apo-
logise and shuffle, and never apologises and shill:-
fles but to show that he cannot do either even
with ordinary dexterity.—Morning Post.
We learn, on what we consider satisfactory
authority, that the English Reform Bill will not
be transmitted to the House of Lords until the
Scotch and Irish Bills have also been passed.
The three Bills, we understand, are to make their
entrance at the same time into the House of
Peers, backed and supported by all the Members
of the House of Commons who will naturally
become Peers, or who are to he made Peers. We
need not mention the reasons which are alleged
for the adoption'of this line of policy by Lord
Grey, for they are self-evident. The strength of
the Commons in support of the Reform Bill
must be maintained.—Morning Advertiser.