The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-05 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The vigorous yet cautious policy of the Administra-
tion of Sir Robert Peel affords an admirable contrast
to the half-rash half-timid conduct of the defunct
Ministry. The Right Hon. Baronet and his colleagues
appear armed at all points. Is a question put relative
to Church Reform ? No shuffling, no semi-explana-
tion, but a bold declaration that, however difficult the
question may be—and no one but a fool or knave can
deny that the question is one of immense magnitude
and importance, involving in its consideration not
merely the temporal welfare but the eternal happiness
or misery of millions—the Government is prepared to
grapple with it in all its various and complicated bear-
ings, and to bring it, by the blessing of God, to a safe
and permanent adjustment. Is Corporation Reform
made or attempted to be made a handle for embarrassing
his Majesty's advisers? Sir Robert Peel turns the tables
upon his opponents, and demonstrates in the most satis-
factory manner that neither he nor his colleagues
have the slightest interest in preserving what are called
the abuses of Corporation. It would, indeed, have
been made a subject of heavy abuse, a fine topic for
declamation, on the part of the precious medley called
by courtesy the Opposition (shades of Fox, Windham,
Sheridan, Tierney, Ponsonby, and Whitbread, what
would you think of the Russell Menagerie ?) if the
Government had not awaited the report about to be
made by the Rushtons, Hoggs, Dwarrises, and Cock-
burns, before they proceeded to legislate upon the
subject of inquiry. Let us not he misunderstood. We
have always protested against the mode and purpose of
issuing that Commission. We have had but one opinion
of the qualifications of the briefless Barristers to
whom the management of it was entrusted by the
late Ministry. Yet we cordially approve the determi-
nation cf the present Administration to do nothing
-until that report is laid on the table. Whether it be
advisable to follow its recommendations—whether the
various portions will indeed dovetail sufficiently toge-
ther, must be matter for future consideration. We can
only for the present express our unfeigned and unqua-
lified approbation of the conduct of Government on
that important and interesting subject. On Tuesday
evening, to mention another instance of the zeal and
diligence of the King's Government in preparing ne-
cessary measures of Reform, Sir John Campbell
thought fit to ask a question of his highly-gifted suc-
cessor relative to the establishment of Local Courts.
" Here at length—(we have no doubt the Member for
Edinburgh inwardly chuckled)—here at length have
I hit upon a topic which will embarrass and annoy
the law-officers of the Crown." But the rejected
of Dudley was mistaken. The answer of Sir Frederick
Pollock is plain and unequivocal—" A measure is in
contemplation, and will be speedily announced, which
will be, it is trusted, satisfactory to all classes of his
Majesty's subjects." Not, indeed, such a plan as was
brought forward by the erratic and inconsistent ex-
functionary, whose loud tones of factious opposition
have degenerated into a grumble about the state of the
atmosphere in the new House of Lords, but a safe
and efficient measure, one based upon the acknow-
ledged and recognised principles of British jurispru-
dence—a measure--need we say more in support of
its claim to public confidence ?—to be devised and
elaborated by a Lyndhurst, an Abinger, a Pollock,
and a Follett—men who shed lustre upon the learned
profession of which they are the most distinguished
members. We state a simple fact when we say that
we hear this observation from almost every lip—
" The Opposition has done for itself." Sheridan,
who knew well of what materials the Whig party is
composed, said " that the Whigs would build up
a wall against which to run their heads if they
could not find one ready made." This prophecy
has been repeatedly fulfilled to the letter ; so that
we question if there exist in the world at this
moment a more uninfluential and insignifiCant
body than the factious antagonists of the present Ad-
ministration. Their own organs are even silent on
their behalf, or utter at most an inarticulate growl,
subsiding by degrees into a querulous murmur. We
own we should not be very much surprised if the game
of secession were tried by the less disreputable portion
of the medley, leaving Wakley, Lushington, Gisborne,
O'Connell, ‘Harvey, and Hume behind, to carry on a
guerrilla warfare for the sake of annoyance. Mr. Hume
has, we perceive, been at his dirty work again. His
attack on Sir Robert Peel with reference to the Rath-
cormac affray was discreditable even to the Greek
Loanmonger, and was promptly, vigorously, and sternly
repelled. The Administration of Sir Robert Peel will
proceed in their determined, manly, and constitutional
course, looking neither to the right nor to the left, but
pursuing that policy in relation equally to the eccle-
siastical and civil, the foreign and domestic, affairs of
the country which they think most conducive to the
honour of the Crown and the interest and welfare of
all classes of his Majesty's subjects.—Morning Post.
The Times is still mute upon the subject of Lord
Londonderry's nomination to the Russian embassy.
Nor has any other Tory print of the slightest preten-
sions to respectability ventured, so far as we know, on
the desperate enterprise of justifying, or even of exte-
nuating, this most precipitate and ill-advised measure.
We must, in fairness to Sir Robert Peel, acknowledge
our belief that lie had no hand in this indecent job.
We understand that a promise of the post was extorted
from the Duke of Wellington before the Premier's re-
turn from Rome—that it was the first fruits of the
new Administration, offered at the shirne of - the Holy
Alliance—a compliment paid to the discrimination
and taste of the Count Pozzo di Borgo I Can it be
true that any public officer of this country has been
appointed upon the recommendation of a foreign
Court ? Is England indeed so far debased, as that
her Sovereign dare not name a representative upon
the Continent without consulting the index of prohi-
bitions kept in common by the Northern Confederacy ?
The writers in the Times attempt to palliate their
recent apostacy, by declaring that their only rule of
conduct is their devotion to the general interests. Let
us take them at their word. Who denounced more
indignantly than they did the nomination of Lord
Londonderry when first it became known to an asto-
nished public ? The whole country, they said, would
" protest against it." They hinted, moreover, that if
it were persevered in, they would not hesitate to pub-
lish the chronicle of his Lordship's memorable career
at Vienna. Whither then has fled the indignation of
the patriotic weathercock ? By what arts has it been
appeased ? What has become of the menaced exposure,
which was actually in type? From whose charmed hand
has it accepted the .cup, that appears to have steeped
in oblivion all its magnanimous resolutions ?. " Mea-
sures not men," are our motto, said the Times. Well I
Here is a measure, and, God bless the mark ! here is
a man—both apparently objectionable in the extreme,
according to that journal—certainly so according to the
opinion of every intelligent person in the country.
Nevertheless, after a momentary swagger on the part
of the Tinges, we hear no more of its opposition, either
to the measure or the man, than if the said measure
had never been thought of, or the man had ceased to
be numbered amongst the living. Whence comes this
reserve ? Does the Times, as its enemies insinuate,
now approve of this transaction, so lately the ob-
ject of its bitter condemnation ? If this be tine,
then we can only confess that the English lan-
guage furnishes no mode of diction sufficiently
emphatic to anathematize the destitution of all
principle, the disregard for every sentiment of
honour, which such base servility of soul exhi-
bits. If the change of opinion have been made upon
any intelligible or rational grounds, why are not those
grounds announced to the people ? The explanation
is due to the rank of the embassy, if not to the worth
of the Ambassador—it is due to the Times itself, de-
graded as that journal is in public estimation—it is
due, above all, to the Ministry, which it is strangling
by its awkward support. If, on the .other hand, the
Times still thinks that the objections to Lord London-
derry's appointment are insuperable, what shall we say
for its regard to the public interests, when it gives those
objections the " go by" rather than by agitating them
to embarrass the provisional Ministry ? We must
infer, as a necessary consequence, from its systematic
silence, that it postpones all questions in which the
interests of the community are concerned to the
narrow and selfish dictates of a political coterie—
that it is manacled, gagged, by the adulterous , con-
nexion which it has formed with the enemies of the