The Sun.
London, England, 1835-07-16 00:00:00

PIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

It is proper that the country should be told, that the
Tory Peers and factious courtiers are forming fresh
designs to overthrow the Liberal Administration, and
to defeat the consequences of the Reform Bills. A
special meeting was held yesterday at the Duke of
Wellington's attended by the Tory Leaders of both
Houses, when the Party, it is rumoured, resolved to
hazard the dismissal of Lord Melbourne's Government
practicable. We can further inform the Public,
that a decided schism exists among the Opposition, as
to the policy of Sir Robert Peel with respect to the
Ministerial measure of Corporation Reform. Al-
though Sir Robert Peel has hitherto succeeded
tolerably well in controlling the Tories in the
House of Commons, he has not converted the Peers.
On Monday we exhibited Mr. Croker as the de-
structive Commentator on the Corporation Bill in
the Quarterly Review. We know that the Ultra
Tory Lords participate in his estimate of the mea-
sure. A considerable portion of the Tory Press
has not concealed its abhorrence of Municipal Reform.
Yesterday a manifesto appeared in a laboured pam-
phlet, entitled " What should the Lords do with the
Corporation Reform Bill?" The authors of this
pamphlet—for the authorship is plural—recommend
to the Lords a " bold stand," and hesitate not to point
out " the position which Sir R. Peel ought to have
taken." The Tory pamphleteers, in a subsequent
passage, indicate the mutilations which the Lords
" ought" to effect :
" The Ministry have fairly outwitted themselves in their
prompt attempt, and had Sir Robert Peel happily seen his way
to the advocacy of the 101. franchise, he would have secured
the confidence of the Parliamentary electors, and, on ths re-
jection of the Bill, would have insured a majority on a dissolu-
tion. He has not seen this ; but it is yet not too late. The
Commons will not alter, but the Lords may ; and if the Lords
show a willingness to cede all the material points of reform,
without involving confiscation or household suffrage, they may
yet arrest successfully the progress of this extreme revolu-
tionary measure."
The pamphlet abounds in the grossest errors and
the most absurd fallacies ; but it is temperately written
tap an Alarmist tocsin, and the palpable drift of it is to
gain over the Lords to the destruction of the measure.
The Pamphleteers place before their Lordships the
awful alternative :
" On the other hand, should the Lords pass it, what will
follow? The national consequences have been before de-
picted; and though we may for a few months pause, the move-
ment will have proceeded beyond recal. Republican princi-
ples will gather strength under the increasing boldness of the
' Men of the Movement,' until, during the weakness of' a Re-
gency, or the crisis of some unlooked-for calamity, the Mo-
narchy may sink before a Long Parliament, and a Protector
or a President succeed."
If such really would be the consequences of Muni-
cipal Reform, the " Men of the Movement " would,
indeed, have reason for rejoicings—such few as are
Republican ; but the false prophets will not impose on
their countrymen. All these diatribes are intended to
make the Lords gird up their loins, and fight for
abuses. How long is the Reform Bill to be neutralised
by the Tory Peers ? We would not, however, wish
to put before the Lords plainer truth than the follow-
ing extracts from this pamphlet, which follow a lamen-
tation over the effect of Parliamentary Reform :-
4. When, under the Reform Act, the nomination boroughs
were destroyed, and the elective franchise was so largely ex-
tended, the House of Commons became, in the fullest sense,
independent of the Peers. The whole House was at once
dependent on popular feeling; and though property and sta-
tion may exercise some influence, yet Public Opinion will
exercise far greater, and the feelings of the House of Peers
will never for themselves be respected. Now it is manifest
the real government is in the Commons. The Peers will not
dare to exercise a check upon them, save where such a check
will be consonant with public opinion. Should they stop a
popular measure which has the support of the Commons, the
Supplies' afford an opportunity of commanding obedience,
which the Commons are now accustomed to, and which nei-
ther King nor Peers can escape."
The sense of these passages is excellent, whatever
the design of the writers might be. The Appropria-
tion Bill is not passed ; the loss of the Irish Tithe
Bill must be the destruction of the Irish Church--
these are securities for the conversion of the Lords,
which give us some confidence that they will not pro-
voke the people. We should say that the immi-
nent question is, " Shall the Commons or the Lords
govern."—Morning Chronicle.
In another column will be found an abstract of the
Bill introduced into the House of Commons by Mr.
G. Poulett Scrope for the relief of the poor of Ireland.
The question of the second reading is fixed for Wed-
nesday next. It would be difficult to select a more
thankless office than that of legislating for the poor of
Ireland in the present state of opinion with regard to
poor laws in those quarters which are most likely to be
influential with the Legislature, and even with the
people themselves. The Irish landlords are, generally
speaking, against a compulsory provision. Mr. O'Con-
nell is against it and for it. He is against it in his
speeches, and for it in his votes, but his speeches are
of much more importance than his votes, for the
former produce an influence upon thousands of his while the latter is a mere isolated in-
dividual act, deprived of all influence, except its
weight in the division, by the counteracting force
of the observations which more than neutralize its
efficacy. Under such circumstances it is, we repeat,
a thankless office to legislate for the poor of Ireland,
and perhaps some portion of the reluctance manifested
by Government itself may be ascribed to the same ap-
prehension. But all this only adds to the merit of
such men as Mr. Scrope, who persist under such cir-
cumstances in using their humane endeavours to pre-
vent famine from continuing to be the epidemic disease
of that country. Mr. Scrope's Bill aims at introducing
into Ireland the principles of the poor law of Eliza.
beth, through the machinery of the Poor Law Amend-
merit Act of last Session. But the bastardy clauses
are omitted, and the workhouse system is omitted, and
in lieu of that system is sn'ostituted employment upon
public works and home colonization, with the ultimate
resource of emigration, in cases which may call for
such a remedy. It is evident, therefore, that an at-
tempt has been made in this Bill to avoid the most
objectionable parts of the poor law machinery, a ma-
chinery to which we feel such strong objections our-
selves, that we will own we were startled at the first
view to see it extended under any modification to Ire-
land. To the adoption of the principles of the poor
law of Elizabeth we apprehend there will be but little
objection amongst those who admit the necessity of a
compulsory provision. It is a delusion to expect that
anything short of that can be permanently beneficial,
or even for the time effective to any considerable
extent. Talk as they will of the danger to property
under such a law, it is nothing to the danger, coupled
with disgrace, of allowing multitudes to perish, or
pretending to save them by the mockery of temporising
expedients. Ireland has tried the " voluntary prin-
ciple" of relief long enough, and it has failed. Com-
pulsion, however disagreeable, however unsentimental
it may sound, must be resorted to, for this plain rea-
son, that there is no other way of apportioning the
relief to the wants of the people, or of equalising the
burden upon those who ought to contribute, but by
compelling all such to do so. It may be natural
enough for the Irish landlords, who have never paid a
single sixpence in poor rates, to think that they will
be so much the worse off for every sixpence they are
called upon to pay—to think that every successive de-
mand will be so much out of their pockets without
the prospect of any return. But however natural it
may be, we cannot help considering this a very short-
sighted view of the question. Tranquillity alone would
be tantamount to capital in Ireland. It would act as a
stimulus to improvement by removing the great pres-
sure which has long kept it down. Public works and
home colonization would do much as parts of the new
system, but little or nothing of themselves. The land-
lords must be roused to activity. They must be
shown and forced to see that it is their interest to pro-
vide employment for the labouring classes, that they
have duties to perform, as well as rights to exercise and
rents to squeeze out of indigence and suffering. We
cannot, however, expect, after what has already passed
on this subject in Parliament, during the present Ses-
sion, that any thing will be done in the way of direct
legislation. The excuse of the Commission of In-
quiry is still as strong, and will be as strong on Wed-
nesday next, as it was a week or two ago. But it is
one good symptom for the cause, that such motions,
instead of being scouted, follow fast upon each other's
heels, and that the necessity of taking some step is
now so far admitted, that the opponents of Poor Laws
are driven to act upon the defensive. We trust that,
as they cannot long find excuses for delay, they will