The Sun.
London, England, 1832-04-04 00:00:00

PIBIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

A correspondent, under the signature of " R.
whose letter is unfortunately too long, :o--
raigns, with just indignation, the attempt n
bully down the King's prerogative of makiop
Peers, which has for some time tigklalized th(
constitutional industry of the l'oq faction. In-
deed, we have seldom read ''s heard of any thins
more offensive to the niind of an educated Eog-
lishman than the pretext by which this outrage
upon the known prerogatives of the King 01
Englend is defendeci—vito that he has no right
o temtrol the deiiherative will of either house
of Parliament. What then ? Has the King no
right to dissolve the House of Commons ? The
proposition alluded to asserts that he has not ;
for if he should at any time exercise that right,
it may so happen—and in three cases out of
four, it has actually so happened—that the
prevailing will of the then existing House
of Commons, has not been merely controlled,
but severely rebuked, and intentionally super-
seded, by the Crown, which has, for the most
part, grounded the dissolution on an express
desire to destroy the influence of that House, as
tompased at the time, upon the policy of the
Government, and therefore effectually to inter-
fere with its deliberations, With respect to the
Upper House of Parliament, the doctrine con-
tended for goes to no less extent than this,—
that the King must riot, at any time, venture to
create new Peers, because, at till times, an addi-
tion to the House of Lords must, of necessity,
act as in some degree a control upon the votes
of the pre-existing Peerage. If it be asserted
that the Crown cannot control the deliberations
of either House of Parliament, " for any object
whatever," and if it be not designed to cover, un-
der such an allegation, the denial of all right
whatever to make Peers, then it follows that, on
every occasion on which Peers are made by
virtue of the King's nominal prerogative, his
Majesty is bound to select the new Lords from
among those of his subjects who are pledged to
the tenets of that faction which constitutes the
previous majority. Parties may be so balanced
in the House of Lords, that the addition of only
two Peers may turn the minority of one into a
majority of one ; and yet the Sovereign, wishing
to call up to that House men distinguished by
talents, services, or virtues, and without the least
reference to any given question, must not dare
to employ his power for fear the new Lords
should oppose the will of a bare majority, and
control it. The argument resorted to stops not
short of that atrocious inference. Et has been
stated, and undeniably, that an hereditary succes-
sion of Tory Ministers has for seventy .years
been making enormous additions to the House
of Lords, for no purpose under heaven but to
strengthen the Tory interest, and to secure the
success of that particular policy, of which it was
the sole aim and object to destroy the freedom
of Parliament. Yet with singular effrontery is it
now asserted that the Crown cannot justly exert
the same privilege for the restoration of popular
rights, which had hitherto been so profusely
drawn upon for their destruction! The crea-
tion of Peers is, it seems, a prerogative, lawful
only when directed against the people : when
enforced in favour of liberty, the Minister is
guilty of high treason ! Will it be assumed that
successive additions to the Peerage for the sup-
port of a long series of party measures carry their
own justification along with them, but that a
single creation, for the sake of a measure em-
bracing within itself an entire system of policy
in its nature comprehensive, permanent, and
fundamental, must be stigmatized an an abuse of
the prerogative ? A contemporary journal has
been instructed to say, that Peers will not he
made until after the second reading:. The
Minister who has taken upon himself such a
delay, incurs a responsibility which, thank God,
we share not with him. If he waits to be once
beaten, on the score of being then enabled to
exhibit a practical and proved necessity tOr an
infusion of fresh blood into the peerage, he waits
for a mischief which mav turn out to be irre-
trievable, except at a cost incalculably greater than
that which he now shuns to encounter.—Times,
Our readers will recollect the asseition of
Lord Tenterden, in the debate of the 28th ult.,
sanctioned and supported by the authority of
the Archbishop of Canterbury,—hoth, we be-
lieve (but certainly the former), distinguished
for success in University competition,—that
" no worse criterion could be selected of general
competency, or fitness for the office of pastor,
than the circumstance of a candidate's having
obtained honours at the University." We re-
spect the above-named eminent persons most
sincerely ; but still we are sure we speak the sense
of all men connected with either University, when
we say that we can see no grounds upon which
an opinion thus damnatory of the systems of edu-
cation pursued at both Universities is founded ;
for it will be observed that the major part of the
students educated at the Universities is intended for
the Church. If, therefore, the prizes are of a cha-
racter which has no reference to the future des-
tination of those who obtain them, they are ill-
. selected, and a change ought to take place. But
we do not think that there is this discrepancy
between the object sought and the means used
fur attaining it, nor can we see why a first-class
man or an high wrangler may not make an useful
parish priest. The chief advantage, probably,
which he will possess over the itinerant preacher '
or non-conformist minister, will be derived from
his University education ; and academic honours,
unless tarnished by an immoral life, will not be
lost upon his hearers. Disappointment in pro-
fessional pursuits has plunged many a well-
instructed person in vicious courses ; and even
the late Bishop Watson,— a man, it will be al-
lowed, of some strength of head,—says, in the
Memoirs of his own life published by his
son, that finding advancement was not given
to learning under Pitt, he turned his
thoughts to other pursuits. Our columns
have teemed lately with cumulative pre-
ferments given on family or parliamentary in-
terests : let us know what has been done for
claimants of another caste. Lord King moved
that pluralities should only be assigned to men
distinguished at the Universities. We will not
go so far ; but let a motion be made for a return
of the clergymen in every diocese above 32 years
of age possessing only curacies, or benefices be-
low 3001. per annum, and who had previously
obtained University distinctions as first-clasships,
wranglerships, prize poems, medals, Sec., and
then it will be clearly seen whether what has been
called the working clergy are men of distinguished
character for intellect ind attainment, who have
been suffered to pine in want and obscurity,
while high connexion and noble dulness hate
been suffered to monopolize all the prizes of the
profession.— Timm

After the failure in Yorkshire and Lanca-
shire, and the display yesterday in Exeter Hall,
we presume we shall not be much furth(r
troubled with attempts to mislead the people on
the subject of the Government system of educa-