The Sun.
London, England, 1832-11-10 00:00:00

SPIRIT or THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

- - this day's T Ines will be found an offici*l-
corcespondence (procured for us by a cone-
spondent at Rome) between certain British and,
Austrian -Ministers, PrinceJletternich himself
being one of the latter, which cannot fail, as we
believe, to be read with sentiments of just pride
and satisfaction by every well-judging English-
man. The discussion turns on the conduct of
the Pope to the suffering people of his domi-
nions. Mr. Seymour wrote, on the 7th of last
September, to announce to the other Ambassa-
dors of the great Courts at Rome, that he had
been ordered to quit that capital and return to
his post at Florence, because (we state briefly
the substance of the reason) the Pope had
broken faith with his subjects, and had (under
shelter of the Austrian bayonet) left unfulfilled
the suggestions of a memorandum presented to
his Holiness by the five Powers, wherein they
with (at least seeming) unanimity recommended
to him the adoption of " improvements which
they all concurred in declaring to be indispen-
sable for the permanent tranquillity of the Ro-
man States, and which appeared to the British
Government to be founded in justice and reason."
Mr. Seymour added, that after 14 months, not one
of the recommendations in that memorandum
had been fully adopted and carried into execu-
tion by the Papal Government—that the con-
sequences had been such as it was natural to
expect, namely, that the causes of the na-
tional discontent being unremedied the dis-
content itself had gone on increasing—and
that there was, at the date of his note, no bet-
ter prospect of voluntary obedience by the popu-
lation to the authority of the Sovereign than
when the Ambassadors first assembled. Mr.
Seymour subjoined, rather significantly, that the

Court of Rome appeared to rely the

temporary presence of foreign troops," and upon
the expected " service of an auxiliary Swiss
force, for the maintenance of order in its terri-

tories ;" but that foreign " occupation could not
be indefinitely prolonged" (we suspect that the
Austrian Cabinet makes no such admission), and
that the Pope would not be able to pay a Swiss
corps strong enough to suppress the discontent
of " a whole population"—(that's wormwood),
Mr. Seymour, therefore, stuck to his text. He
declared that the British Government no longer
entertained any hope of effecting the smallest
good in the matter—was instructed to express
the deep regret of his Court that all its efforts
for the peace of Italy during the last year and
half had proved abortive, and concluded thus :
" The British Government foresees that if the
present system be persevered in, fresh disturb-
ances must take place in the Papal States of a
character progressively more and more serious,
and that out of these disturbances may spring
complications dangerous to the peace of Europe.
Should these anticipations unfortunately be rea-
lized, Great Britain will at least stand acquitted
of all responsibility for evils created by the re-
jection of councils which the British Govern-
ment has urged with so much earnestness and
perseverance." So much for the principles of a
just and liberal Government, going frankly, di-
rectly, and without disguise or dissimulation, to
its object. The reply of the Austrian Count
Lutzow is, in fact, little more than a reference
to a note addressed by Prince Metternich on the
28th of July to Sir Frederick Lamb, in answer
to one wherein Sir Frederick had apprized hint
of the intended recall of Mr. Seymour from
the Court of the Vatican. This production
of the Austrian Minister is a shuffling, crook-
ed, and Jesuitical defence of all the Pope's
delinquencies and oppressions towards his sub.
jects, the disaffected portion of whom (that
is, according to Mr. Seymour, the whole)
the great champion of divine right and legitimacy
designates as " a faction inimical to order and
public repose." Metternich here plays over
again the Belgic farce of interference by advice
only, but shudders at the thought of anything
like restraint or coercion upon the Sovereign
Pontiff. In other words, he makes the Em-
peror Francis—that patron of loyalty and
despiser of learning—that puppet potentate
—join with other Sovereigns in declaring
that certain improvements in the Papal sys-
tem of Government are essential to the well-
being of its states, and at the same time sends
hordes of foreign mercenaries to crush the Ro-
man people when they demand the realization of
such improvements, and to uphold the Pope in
his obstinate refusal of them ! The naïveté of
Metternich is, to be sure, quite unique. He
says, that " most of the objects recommended
in the Memorandum' were accomplished
on the part of the Pontifical Government."
The holy father .refused only two principal"
points ; viz.-Ist. The admission of the
principle of popular election as a basis of
she communal and provincial councils. 2d. The
formation of a Council of State, composed of lay
persons, besides the sacred college, or rather in
opposition to it." Pretty well this in the way
of refusal, after asserting that most of the
popular improvements had been accomplished.
A covert attack upon France, for her " forcible
occupation of Ancona," while Austrian troops
Wok possession of whole provinces of the
Papal States,—a vulgar, violent, and feeble
tirade against the folly of conceding to popular
slsinands,—and a fawning recurrence to the in- j
,disso)uble bonds of amity which have ao long
ranked Great Britain and Austria,—make up
the remainder of this wily though shallow com-
position. We give credit to Ministers, and so
will the country, for the spirit and rectitude with
which they have vindicated the national feeling
of Great Britain upon this Italian question.
Nor 'are we without well-founded hopes that
their measures towards Portugal—a subject
in which Englishmen take a far deeper and
more powerful interest than in any other con-
nected with the present state of European poli-
tics—will prove our Government to be capable
of acting as vigorously, as in the case of Rome
they hay,: reasoned wisely. Let Lord Grey and
his colleagues not fear, that in a course which is
essentially right and just, the people of England
will ever desert or betray them. It' a statesman
can conscientiously 'say to himself " such an ex-
ertion of the national resources would tend to
any solid public good," he has only to make
the effort, and the sense and manhood of the
British people will be sure to go along with him.
We are convinced that this conntry has long
been prepared for an active support of the con-
stitutional cau e in Portugal, and grievously dis-
appointed that an end so advantageous aad so
honourable as the establishment of that kingdom
in peace, and under tit protection of Great
Britain, has been hitherto seemingly so ill ap-
preciated, or at least so strangely overlooked,
Hesitation is always construed into weakness ;
it begets contempt ; and when a Ministry once
becomes contemptible, its stanchest friends slink
frcm its defence. Let it be energetic and de;.

I

cisive, as well as just, and in a short time its
enemies admire, then respect, then support.
"Times.
Although the period of the dissolution of
Parliament is stilt a matter of some uncertainty,
the bustle of electioneering in the city is as
active as if a dissolution had actually taken
place. We observe that a meeting of Alderman
Waithman's supporters is to be held on Monday
next ; and certainly, if past services to the public
cause, faithfully performed in times of no ordi-
nary difficulty and danger, entitle any man to
the suffrages of his :.fellow-citizens as candidate
for a seat in a Reformed Parliament, Alderman
Waithman is eminently entitled to that mark of
their unabated confidence. In his laudable and
enlightened efforts to restrain the progress of
those ruinous theories of the British Doctrin-
naires, which have already had so mischievous
an effect upon our manufacturing and shipping
interests, the worthy Alderman has deserved
well of his country. In opposing those theories
he has not opposed the principle of" free trade;"
he has only, like ourselves, resisted those igno-
rant or inconsiderate innovations, which, in-
stead of being productive of a system of free
trade, only tend to enslave British industry,
and give an unfair preference to the manufac-
tures of the foreigner, who refuses to reciprocate
the advantages which he derives from our generous
folly. Even some of our Doctrinnaires now begin
to perceive the dangerous errors into which they
had fallen, and admit that we should have
preserved our protecting laws until the foreigner
guaranteed by treaty a reciprocal freedom of
commercial intercourse. But we maintain that,
while the present heavy taxation presses upon
the industry of this country, the cost of pro-
duction is thereby so much enhanced as to
render competition wi4l comparatively untaxed
and cheap countries quite impracticable. Un-
doubtedly if what is, by an absurd abuse of lan-
guage, called " freedom of trade," were benefi-
cial to English traders, Alderman Waithman,
as an individual engaged i❑ trade, must derive
his share of its advantages. He must, therefore,
either oppose this delusive system in direct hos-
tility to his own interests, which is a rare motive
of action among public men, or he must op-
pose it because lie is convinced, from a practical
knowledge of its consequences, that it is deeply
injurious to the British trading and manufactur-
ing interests, which is, we think, a sound and
sufficient reason for its being resisted by a faith-
ful representative of this commercial metropolis.
We should regret if, among the Reform Candi-
dates for the city whose claims are peculiarly
strong, there should be any collision of feeling,
for that could only serve the cause of the ene-
mies of Reform. We do not see for what useful
or good purpose some persons wish to draw a
line of distinction between Alderman Waith-
man and Sir John Key, who have both essen-
tially contributed to the triumph of that
great measure, which confers upon the peo-
ple of England the inestimable privilege of
sending the representatives of their choice to
a House of Commons emancipated from aristo-
cratic dominion. The former had fought the
battle of Reform i►r its adversity and peril, and
fought it with resolution and constancy ; the
latter so exercised the office of Chief Magistrate
of London, at the momentous crisis when the

fate of Reform was suspended in the balance, as

to enable the public opinion of the metropolis to
express itself in every shape and form of con-
stitutional meeting, and thereby exercise a great
moral influence over the country at large. Nor
was the obloquy and hatred of the illiberal party
small which Sir John Key brought upon himself
by standing forth, in the robes of his high Civic
office, at the head of the constitutional move-
ment of the first city of the empire. But the
friends of Reform will not be less grateful than
its enemies have been malevolent. Such past
services, indeed, as the worthy Baronet who has
just descended from the Civic chair and Alder-
man Waithman are enabled to point to, are the
best pledges of future conduct. Very different,
indeed, are they from the professions of untried
individuals, who, however well they may intend,
have as yet given their fellow-citizens no sub-
stantial grounds of confidence.—Morn. Herald.
W e do not like the appointment of Sir Thomas
Denman one whit the less for the virulence with
which it is assailed by party writers. Some of
the hangers-on of the Government themselves
were evidently unprepared for it, and would, it
seems, have been much better pleased to have
seen a political opponent raised to the high
office than a man who is likely to carry to it so
novel a qualification as liberal and independent
opinions. But the anger of one high Tory
Print exceeds all bounds. After proving the new
Chief Justice to be " no lawyer," after much the
same iashio❑ that a lady of Billingsgate proves
a man to be "no gentleman," our esteemed con-

temporary sums tip the climax of Sir Thomas
Denman 's demerits by declaring him to be as
fit to command a seventy-four off the Dutch
coast, or to act as cliff de cuisine in the house-
hold of Lord Sefton. This,. to be sure, rather
" out-Herods Herod," and, at any rate, is highly
consistent when coming from a quarter which is
continually crying up the respect which is due
to constituted authorities. To all this malice—
to all this disappointment—to all these revilings,
however, we have one plain answer to make,—

these writers hate Sit:Thomas Denman, and
arraign his appointment, for the very reason
which must render both the one and the other
gratifying to the people in general ; and that is,
because he has been the tried and consistent
advocate of popular rights, and, as such, a
novel kind of personage, at least in our da) s,
for the ermine to devolve upon. Let us not by
this remark, however, be misunderstood as
wishing to see in the new Chief Justice
a political Judge ; on the contrary, we trust
that one compact which the new Judge
will have made with himself, and rigidly
abide by, is that of sinking the politician for
ever. All that we hope and expect from his
past polities is, that they should be a pledge and
safeguard to the people that he will never be-
come that ready instrument of unpopular prin-
ciples, not to say of harsh and unconstitutional
measures, which some of his more immediate
predecessors have been. Should we fall, as we
trust we'shall not, upon evil times, when a strug-
gle between the prerogative and fieedom may
arise, or when the public prosecutor may wish
to sharpen the edge of the law, we have an as-
surance in the past principles and consistency of
Sir Thomas Denman, that he, at least, will hold
out no inducement to the experiment. As the
best earnest of this consistency and integrity,
and a security against the possibility of becom-
ing a political Judge, we trust the new Chief
Justice will have the virtue to resist the Peeraue,
should it be even offered to him. This ww. the
rock upon which his predecessor split. It is the
tempting bait by which vanity has, in so many
instances, been induced to sacrifice lasting fame
The brightest examples-which Sir Thomas Den-

man has before him, the celebrated names of
Holt and Hale, never fell within this vortex de-
structive of legal virtue. Let Sir Thomas Den-
man remember that he has now attained the
highest rank which an honest Judge can aspire
to; and that the " higher still" was the sin
which the fallen angels had to deplore.—Morn-
ing Herald.
At the dinner at Uxbridge on Thursday last,
to which Lord Henley was invited, his Lordship
was reported to have said :
" Since he had teen called upon to come forward to
represent the county, he had canvassed the town of Ux-
bridge, and he sincerely regretted that he had not had an
in
stance
a of waiting upon every elector. In one
a shopkeeper had put this question to him, ' Sir, are you
an advocate for Political Unions ?' He certainly was
pleased at the interrogatory, for, although he differed with
violent men on both sides, nothing so strongly excited his
aversion as a Political Union.—(Cheers.) His mind was
most decidedly and irrevocably made up as to the evil ten-
dency of Political Unions! His answer satisfied the
honest and independent elector, and the Noble Lord se-
cured his suffrage. In the three estates of the realm was
'vested the sovereign power, and any union that attempted
! to bully the Parliament was unconstitutional, and repug-
nant to the spirit of the laws.—(Cheers.)"
This is a Reform Candidate ! "In the three
estates of the realm," quoth his Lordship, " was
vested the sovereign power." This is precisely
what was said by the Anti-Reformers, who con-
tended then, as Lord Henley does now, that
" any Union that attempted to bully the Parlia-
ment was unconstitutional, and repugnant to the
spirit of the laws." Will his Lordship, how-
ever, say, that the House of Lords would have
consented to the Reform Bill if it had not been
bullied ? He will not surely have the boldness
to say so. The sovereign power was as much
vested in the three estates of the realm before
the Reform Bill as since ; but there is this im-
mense difference between the two periods—one
of the estates is now what it ought to be—the
representative of the nation—and before it was
not so. And here we have the key to the se-
cret of the facility with which one of the branches
of the Legislature could be then bullied, and to
the difficulty with which it could now be bullied.
The people were on °lie side, and one branch of
the Legislature on another; and no one surely will
have the hardihood to maintain that any Govern-
ment is justified in resisting the will of a nation
unequivocally expressed. The same reasoning
that would justify the resistance of a branch of a
Legislature to a great organical change, called
for by the will of a nation, would justify any des-
pot who happens to be in possession of power to
resist the will of the people ; because the prin-
ciple is the same, whether the resistance is by
one or by several. If, then, the resistance of
one branch of the Legislature could only be
overcome by bullying, all unions that added to
the power of the people to give effect to their
views were a good and not an evil, be-
cause they facilitated the attainment of a good
end, and took from the obstinate branch of the
Legislature the hope of being able to resist
with success the determination of the nation.
Had the organization been less perfect, the
aristocracy might have been tempted to hold
out, and that which was attained without
disorder, and without bloodshed, might have
been purchased at a dreadful expense of human
life, to say nothing of other calamities.
The motives for Unions no longer existing, be-
cause the people can directly influence the Le-
gislature, the Unions will either have the views
of the nation, or they will not. If they have the
views of the nation, there can be little motive for
their continuance, because, ift hat can be obtained
through the constitutional means of Parliamen-
tary representation, which the Unions are seek-
ing, the latter are superfluous. If they are not
identified in views with the nation, they will be
without power. Lord Henley's mode of rea-
soning is disingenuous. He dares not disap-
prove of the measure of Parliamentary Reform,
but he disapproves of the means by which Par-
liamentary Reform was carried. He takes care
not to distinguish between the demands of one
emergency and the demands of another. Lord
Henley is also a Church Reformer, and the
following is the explanation of his views regard-
ing Church Reform :
" The next question (he said) upon which he should ex-
plain his vies s, was one that had occupied a considerable
portion of his time, and, he believed, was the means of his
introduction to the county—he meant the Church. He
had, as his best friends well knew, a sincere affection for
the opinions of his Dissenting brethren, whom he acknow-
ledged to be most ready and willing promoters of religious
and spiritual education. Anything in the shape of par-
tiality on the score of religious opinions was abhorrent
from his nature.—(Loud cheers.) But he was a Church-
man, and an advocate for a national establishment, as be-
neficial and necessary. He was determined to support the
Established Church in every legal and lawful way.—
(Cheers.) Those endowments possessed by the Church
were as much the right of the Church, and as inalienable
from ecclesiastical purposes, as the estate of any gentleman
in the company. He could not imagine such a state of
public affairs as could justify the State in alienating the
property which he considered sacred.—(Hear.) He was
free to discuss other things which had a tendency to defeat
that friendly intercourse between the Church and the
people. With a view to effect so desirable an object, he
would promote a proper commutation or composition ; and
he could not see any prospect of ever being able to concede
more. It was quite clear that the hierarchy were quite
alive to the necessity of a change, and he was sure that
many months could not elapse before the question would
be fully brought forward by persons capable of deciding
the question "

" The endowments possessed by the Church
were as much the right of the Church, and as

inalienable from ecclesiastical purposes, as the
estate of any gentleman in the company !" Ad-
mitting, with his Lordship, the necessity of an
Established Church, it does not follow that a
Church must possess the exact amount of pro-
perty necessary for ecclesiastical purposes. There
may he too small an amount of property for these
purposes, and there may also be too large an
amount of property. Supposing that Henry the
Eighth had left to the Protestant Church all the
lands and all the tithes possessed by the Catholic
Church before the Reformation—that is, we sup-
pose, about one-third of the lands of the king-
dom, and about twelve millions sterling a year
—his Lordship will not surely say, that this
would not be too large a sum fin ecclesiastical
purposes. Such an amount of property would
render the Church utterly inefficient for eccle-
siastical purposes. It may be, that after the alie-
nation of the most of the lands belonging to the
religious houses, and a great portion of the
tithes, the remainder is just the amount ne-
cessary for ecclesiastical purposes. But how does
his Lordship know that? The question is one for
inquiry. It; however, we must inquire before
we can determine, what becomes of his Lord-
ship's principle that the property cannot be
taken from the Church ? His Lordship never
can maintain the monstrous proposition, that no
amount of property of which a Church is in
possession can be deemed too much ; and if he
allows that a Church may • have too much for
ecclesiastical purposes, he must allow the Legis-
lature to measure the possessions by the standard
of the amount necessary for ecclesiastical pur-
poses, and to withdraw from the Church what
exceeds the standai di to be applied to other pur-
poses of the State. And this man who evidently

is an utter stranger to correct reasoning, has
the_ presumption. to set himself up as a can-
didate for Middlesex ! He is an adept at
what is called begging a question. It may
be that the Church of England does not pos-
sess more property than she ought to possess,
and that all that is required is a better distribu-
tion of her property. But Lord Henley
does not take this ground. By placing the
property of the Church on the same footing as
that of private individuals, he would exclude
the Legislature from all power of determining
the amount of property necessary to render the
Church what it ought to be—i. e. efficient for
ecclesiastical purposes. Lord Althorp repu-
diated, in the most distinct manner last Ses-
sion, the principles laid down by Lord Henley.
His Lordship might as well go a step further.
He might say that the Legislature ought not
to step between the founders and those who,
in obedience to the directions of the founders,
enjoy Church property. But then, unfortu-
nately for him, the property held by the Church
was left by the founders for the saying of masses
for the souls of them and their descendants.
The Legislature may then appropriate property
for one purpoSe which was destined for another.
It may substitute one Church for another ; and
his Lordship will find it something difficult to
reconcile all this tNith the inalienable right of
property in the present holders.—Morn. Chron.
However important to the general peace and
future welfare of Europe the immediate settle-
ment of the affairs of Belgium and Holland may
be, still we cannot but think that a much more
important object, in both respects, remains to
be accomplished, in interposing an effectual
check to the further, and already dangerous,
progress of Russian domination, by the resto-
ration of Poland to the enjoyment of her an-
cient independence, rights, privileges, and ter-
ritories ; and it. gives us pleasure, in conse-
quence, to find that not only are there many
others who participate in the same opinions
with us, but that they are using every exertion
to keep alive in the public mind the claims and
the wrongs of Poland—the injuries inflicted
upon her by Austria and the two great northern
Courts, as well as the necessity of checking in
due time, the rapidly growing ambition, and al-
ready overgrown power of Russia. We allude more
especially to the formation of Literary Unions
and Associations, both here and in other parts
of the kingdom, for the express purpose of col-
lecting and laying before our countrymen, satis-
factory information respecting Poland, and keep-
ing alive the spirit of indignation at the cruel
and unjust treatment which she has experienced
at the hands of Russia, and the unmerited neg-
lect with which her wrongs, and her gallant at-
tempts to redress them, have met with from
Europe generally. One of these Associations, as
our readers are aware (we mean the London),
continues to publish a monthly work, of great
merit and increasing popularity, entitled " Po.
lonia," already noticed by us, on more than
one occasion ; and we have had along with
it this month, the pleasure of receiving
another, published under the superinten-
dence of the " Hull Literary Association of the
friends of Poland," and entitled " The Polish
Record," which has been established for the
purpose of promoting the same important objects.
We earnestly wish that it may receive that pa-
tronage and support from the Fublic, which the
justice of the cause advocated by it, and its own
intrinsic merits, so amply deserve. To trust to
the efforts which may be made, either by the
Hull, or by any other Association for the re-
establishment of Polish independence, may
appear a vain and chimerical hope ; but greater
events have sprung from much smaller be-
ginnings, and when we think of what has
been accomplished by the Press, alone and
single-handed—within the last three years,
—we see not only no reason to despair,
but every reason in the world to entertain the
most sanguine hopes of its almost unanimous
advocacy of the cause of Poland, as well as of
the ultimate restoration of that unhappy coun-
try. The tyrants who hold her people in chains,
laugh not at its exertions, but tremble at its re-
sults ; while in Poland the knowledge that there
is sympathy with her fate among the free people
of Europe, must tend to keep alive the spirit o
resistance, and to prevent the extinction of that
hope of future restoration, without which all at.

tempts to wrest her from the iron dominion o,

Russia, would be vain and hopeless. We give,
as a sample of this new and patriotic under-
taking, the following contrast between the con-
duct and merits of Poland, and those of her fell
destroyer :

" Poland was a powerful and independent nation, when
Russia was subdivided into petty monarchies, and in a state
of vassalage to the Tartars.

" Poland is, now, extinguished as a nation, being
swallowed up (the Prussian and Austrian portions ex-
cepted) by the Russian Empire, the most enormous that
ever existed.

" Poland never was an encroaching Power : Russia has
always been one.

"Poland, although the most chivalrous nation on earth,
has been content to fight only in her own defence ; Russia
has been always influenced by the lust of conquest and
dominion.

" Poland once extended from the Baltic to the Black
Sea ;c—even at the end of the 17th century was as large
as France, comprehending upwards of 200,000 square
miles ; but by the treaty of Vienna it was limited to
48,000 square miles ; and by the Ukase of the Russian
Emperor, in February last, it is doomed to be engulphed
in the autocrat's immense dominions.

" Poland, since the time of Sobieski (1696 t, had a
population of 20,000,000 ; by the Treaty of Vienna it
was reduced to 3,500,000 ; and by the infamous Edict of
the 26th of February last, it is to be drafted off to Siberia
and to Russia, by the double system of banishment and,
tran.location. The autocrat having declared that lie will
m ike a Poland of Siberia—and a Siberia of Poland ! ! !
A declaration which reminds us of that made by the
Grand Vizier of the Turks, Alahomet Etnin, in 1769,
with reference to the same unhappy country :—' The
system of protecting Poland,' said he, and entering into
an alliance with her, for the object of using it as a ram-
part against the Russians, might lie good for the Chris•
tian Courts, but such a plan could never enter into the
councils of an empire which makes its operations depend
only on its will and power, and whose policy has always
been to surround itself on all sides with deserts.'
t, Poland has supplied our wants in times of scarcity,
and relieved our manufacturers of their superabundant
stock. Poland might, indeed, become the granary of
Europe, and the emporium of British industry ;—but,
within the deadly grasp of Russia, she must bend to a

jealous system of commercial policy, disadvantageous alike
to herself and Great Britain ;—some corn, it is true, may
occasionally come from Poland, as tallow and hemp come
now from Russia ; hut no manufactures of consequence
will go thither in return.
Poland was the first nation in northern Europe
which possessed political rights, the liberty of the press,
religious freedom, and security of persons and property.'*
She possesses these blessings no more, and her oppressor
never did possess them ; of which the world needs, indeed,
no formal proof.
.4 The Poles were always distinguished for valour and
frankness of disposition, the Muscovite for perfidy and
low cunning, qualities which he retains to this day. The
Poles are as eminent as ever for the virtues which for-
merly characterized them, and in reliance under Providence
upon them, and the justice of their cause they still che-
rish the hope of achieving the independence of their coun-

* Address of the Polish Refugees in France to the British
House of Comriions, May 29,1e32,
•