The Sun.
London, England, 1832-08-03 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

The very important question which now oc-
cupies so much of the attention of the public—
that of the affairs of Germany—was last night
brought before the House by Mr. H. L. Bul-
wer, in a speech which displayed an intimate
acquaintance with the subject. Mr. Bulwer
gave a succinct account of the rights of the
people of Germany under the old Empire, and
illustrated the Federal Act agreed to at Vienna,
by extracts from the notes of the Representa-
tives of the different Sovereigns at the Congress.
It is curious enough that Austria, which is now
the leader in the attempt to destroy the German
Constitutions, was the power which at the Con-
gress proposed as the basis for a Confederation,
" that the object of this Confederation is the
guarantee of the internal independence and the
external security of the different States, as well
as that of the rights of each class of the nation."
Some of the Sovereigns, the King of Bavaria
and the King of Wurtemberg, who had become
enamoured of the absolute power which they
obtained through Bonaparte, objected to these
very words, " the rights of each class of the
nation." The Plenipotentiary at the Diet of
the Prince Regent of Great Britain, in a note,
declared that—
" He could not admit that the changes which had taken
place in Germany since the Revolution, had given to the
Kings of Bavaria and Wurtemburg any right to absolute
sovereignty over their subjects, nor that the overthrow of
the German Empire had for its legal consequencethe over-
throw of the peculiar constitution of the different States—
that a representative system existed of right from time
immemorial in the German Empire—that the Act of
Confederation of the Rhine itself—that concentration of
despotism, did not accord to Sovereigns a despotic power ;
and that as to the title of Sovereign itself, it was in nowise
expressive of despotic power, inasmuch as that the King
of Great Britain was as much a Sovereign as any Prince
in Europe, and that the liberties of his people, so far from
menacing his throne, were the best guarantee for its sta-
bility."

In this note, the Plenipotentiary of Hanover
concluded by demanding that the consent of
the States should be necessary to all taxes,
their concurrence to the making of all new laws,
and that they should control the application of
the taxes. These views prevailed, and the 13th
Article of the Act declared, " That there should
be Assemblies of States in all the countries of
the Confederation." The 18th Article of the Act
of Federation, to which the Diet now refers as
its authority, was a concession to the booksellers
of Germany, who complained of the want of
protection for literary property—" That the Diet
will occupy itself at its first re-union with an uni-
form law respecting the liberty of the Press,
and the measures to be adopted for gua-
ranteeing authors and editors against the
piracy and contrefaction of their works."
The object of this article was to secure the
liberty of the Press, and the rights of authors.
The Diet, however, now contend, according to
a strange logic, that till there shall be an uni-
form law regarding the Press, there shall be no
liberty. In short, the whole conduct of the
Diet in their late protocols is at variance with
the former liberties of the Germans, and the
stipulations of the Act of Federation. " The

objects (said Mr. Bulwer) set forth in the Fe-
deral Act were to preserve the inviolability and
independence of the several States, not to make
them the slaves of Prussia and Austria. The
objects set forth in the Federal Act were to give
Constitutions, not to annihilate them ; to assure
the liberty of the Press, not to take it away."
More iniquitous proceedings than those of the
Diet cannot well be conceived. We have seen
what a noble part Hanover acted at the Congress
of Vienna, in the time of the Prince Regent.
Were not the damning fact before the world,
who would believe that Hanover has, under
William the Reformer, signalized itself in this
attempt to crush constitutional liberty, as it sig-
nalized itself, under the Prince Regent, in be-
half of the liberties of the people ? Various
solutions of this apparent enigma have been
given. One alluded to last night is so injurious
to the reputation of the King of Hanover, that
our regard for the King of England will not
allow us to credit it. "We know," said Mr.
Bulcser, " that the King of Hanover, it is
said, during those three days in which the
King of England was supposed to have adopted
a new course of policy and a new Administra-
tion, did sign and approve of the objectionable
document."—lt is difficult to believe that the
individual who was a Constitutional Reformer
in England, could be an enemy of Constitutional
Liberty in Hanover. The reputation of the
King of England demands, however, that some
explanation should be given of the very strange
conduct of the King of Hanover. How much
it would rejoice us to hear that his Majesty's
signature was obtained by some such trick as
that by which it was alleged in a case at Bow-
street, on Wednesday, the signature of Mr.
Becket was obtained to an ale licence. We
would listen to any excuse for the King of Ha-
nover, rather than believe that he could advisedly
sanction an act which exhibits him to Europe in
the light of an odious tyrant, deserving of uni-
versal execration. The motion with which Mr.
Bulwer concluded was, " That an address be
presented to his Majesty, requesting him to ex-
ercise his influence with the Germanic Diet, in
opposition to the course pursued by them, con-
trary to the liberty and independence of the Ger-
man people." The principles on which Mr.
Bulwer urged this interference were—first, positive
treaty, as England had been a party with the
other great Powers to the treaty of Vienna ; and
next, the interest which this country has in the
independence of Germany. I, A hasty, Coolish
o!!sire (he said), to interfere and intermeddle
with foreign States, was as far from his idea of
the course of policy that this country ought to
pursue as anything could be conceived. Still he
could not consent to England's being a mere
cipher, a nullity, in the political combinations of
Europe. He would not consent to the proposi-
tion, that she is to look with perfect indifference
on the Continent, and think that no changes
there can by possibility affect her. But if there
14 anything which immediately affects the in-
terests of England more than another, it is the
rate of Germany." Lord Palmerston assented
to the princple on which Mr. Bulwer contended,
that Germany could not be indifferent to this
country :-
64 Without such an Address as that which he has pro-
posed (said his Lordship,) the advisers of his Majesty will
deem it their duty to keep their attention fixed on those
circumstances which are now taking place on the Conti-
nent of Europe, never, I trust, undervaluing the deep im-
portance of those circumstances with reference to this
country; because, let persons recommend as much as they
will the propriety of England withdrawing itself from all
political connection with the rest of the world, my opi-
nion i., that as long as our commerce is of importance to
us as long as Continental armies are in existence—as
long as it is possible that a Power in one quarter may be-
come dangerous to a Power in another—so long must
England look with interest on the transactions of the Con-
tinent ; and so long is it proper for this country, in the
maintenance of its own independence, not to shut its eyes
to any thing that threatens the independence of Germany."
Anti, approaching still closer to the case be-
fore us, his Lordship seemed to consider Eng-

land bound to watch over and protect all Con-
stitutional States, great and small :
" I, for one," said his Lordship, " am prepared to ad-
mit that the independence of Constitutional States, whe-
ther they are powerful like France or the United States,
or of less relative political importance, such as the minor
States of Germany, never can be a matter of indifference
to the British Parliament, or, I should hope, to the Bri-
tish public.—(Hear, hear.) These States I consider to
be the natural Allies of this country ; and whoever may
be in office, conducting the affairs of Great Britain, I am
persuaded that no English Ministry will be performing its
duty if it is inattentive to the interests of the German
States."

These admissions are certainly ample enough.
Most people would suppose, after such admis-
sions, that his Lordship was prepared to support
the motion for an address, more especially when
he also assented to the view taken by Mr. Bul-
wer of the object for which the German Con-
federacy was formed :
" I entirely (said his Lordship) take the Honourable
Gentleman's view of the object for which the German Con-
federacy was formed by the treaty of Vienna. The main
and principal object for which that Confederacy was
established, was not only the internal and external safety
of the States which compose it, but also the maintenance
of their individual independence.—(Hear, bear.) It,
therefore, cannot be denied, that any thing that threatens
to destroy or violate that independence would be incon-
si,tent with the principles on which the Confederacy was
established, and so far be a departure from the treaty of
Vienna, to which all the great Powers of Europe were
contracting parties."
Does his Lordship, then, support Mr. Bul-
wer's motion ? No. He has taken a lesson
from the Journal des Debats. England
knows nothing of the people but through their
rulers :
" A certai❑ number of independent Sovereigns (said
' his Lordship), united in a confederacy which is sanctioned
' by all the great Powers of Europe, have unanimously
adopted some resolutions at present applicable only to
their own States, and not involving any point with respect
to their foreign relations with other independent Sove-
reigns. It, therefore, appears to me, that other States
cannot found any just ground for interference with these
Governments, on the resolutions which they themselves
It we voluntarily adopted. In our relations with Foreign
States, we can only consider the acts of the Governments
of those States ; because, looking externally at the States
themselves, it is by the acts of their Governments alone
that Foreign Governments are able to judge of their in-
tentions."
So that the Constitutions of every State of Ger-
many may be destroyed, and the whole of that
extensive division of Europe may be one great
scene of confusion and bloodshed, and yet, not-
withstanding our patronage of all Constitutional
States, great and small, we should not interfere
to prevent the trampling under foot of all the
Constitutions, and reducing the people to sla-
very. The thirty-eight Princes have only to
agree to support each other in the unholy work
of depriving the people of their rights, and other
countries must then look on with indifference.
The Princes of Germany have not made their
intentions any secret. Lord Palmerston says,
though the Government of this country is not
called on to pronounce an opinion ope way or
another, " in my own private opinion, I cannot
help entertaining an apprehension that the Go-
vernments which have entered into these Reso-
lutions have overstated the dangers against which
they were endeavouring to guard, and not framed
with the greatest possible degree of discretion
that measure they propose to apply as a remedy
to tln danger." Greatest possible degree of
discretion ! Why they extinguish every Con-
stitution of Germany, and clap an extinguisher
on the Press ! Discretion with a vengeance.
The Diet says, that the Representatives under
the Constitution should not be allowed to with-
hold taxes,—that the Ruler shall fix the amount
of taxes, and not the Representatives. There
is no mistaking this. What if there had been
a meeting at Hambach ? Would a meeting of
the Birmingham Union justify the King of
England in declaring that the House of Com-
mons ought not to control the expenditure of
the State ? In such a gross case as this of the
Decree of the Diet, it is trifling with us to
talk of being only obliged to know the Go-
vernments. But Lord Palmerston again aban-
doned his own principles, for he declared that,
if the Resolutions were acted on, the conse-
quences, probably, would be a general war :
" I will not deny (he said) that if these Resolutions are
acted o❑ to their full extent, steps may be taken that will
so trench on individual rights, and will cause such serious

differences among the Germanic body, and the individual
members of the Confederacy, as may render it impossible
that the peace of Europe can be preserved ; and that if
the peace of Europe should be broken on such grounds as
these, it would perhaps give rise to a war not merely
between the States of Germany, but a war of opinion,
which would spread its influence beyond the country
whence it bad its source; in which case this country would
not only be entitled, but called on, to take such steps as
circumstances might require to preserve Europe against so
extensive a warfare."
And his Lordship added, " I can assure the
Honourable Gentleman that the Government is
not inattentive to those important events to
which he has drawn our attention." But then

his Lordship consoles himself with the hope that
the men to whom he had just before denied the
possession of discretion, will hereafter be so dis-
creet as to admit their indiscretion. The meet-
ing at Hambach deprived them of their senses ;
but this was but a transient aberration. " I can
not believe (he says) that any one administering
the affairs of a great country, can take so erro-

neous a view of own interest, or of the in-
terests of society, as to wish to deprive those in-
dependent States of tbose constitutional rights,
which are such a blessing to themselves, and such
a benefit to their neighbours." But this is begging
the question. M. Ancillon, the foreign Minister of
Prussia, will furnish his Lordship with a score
of goodly volumes of his own composition, to
prove to him that the Constitutions lauded by
his Lordship are neither blessings to the people
themselves, nor a benefit to their neighbours.
M. Ancillon will not give in so easily as foil
Lordship supposes. Does his Lordship really
suppose that the Sovereigns have any liking fur
Constitutions ? But his Lordship does not
trust altogether to their sense of the benefit of
Constitutions, but to their conviction of the im-
possibility to give effect to their wish to destroy
them.—" I cannot believe that such a wish ex.

fists where there is a power to carry that wish

into effect ; or where such a wish does exist, I
cannot believe that those who have the desire
deem it possible for them, in the present state of
the world, to carry that wish into execution."—
That is another question. We rely much more
on their fear of the consequence than on their
benevolence. It is possible that the Prinves
may shrink from the execution of their resolu-
tions now that they see the people of Germany
so determined on opposing them. Still we
would not have too much reliance placed on this.
The men who, his Lordship admits, have shown
themselves destitute of discretion, may proceed in
this indiscreet career. We ourselves arrive at
his Lordship's conclusions by a different road.
We have never seen why it should be necessary
for this country, which is itself secure from all
attacks, to interfere with the affairs of any other
country. Our commerce, says Lord Palmerston,
will be endangered by war on the Continent, and,
therefore, we must take part in a war on the
continent, should such a war break out. We
contend that the Government of this country

ought to interpose with its good offices to pre-
vent war—to extend the blessings of liberty and
improvement ; but ought not to make itself a
party in wars. To put up with injuries is not
the way to avoid war, and we shall never be
found advocating a policy on the part ofEng-
land implying a readiness to bear with injuries.
But this is quite different from making ourselves
the common redressers of all injuries. We do
not say that the Germans should tamely put up
with the oppressions of their rulers—nor do we
say that the French, who are differently situated
from ourselves, should refuse all aid to the Ger-
mans, should they find that it is earnestly de-
manded by the Germans. But we contend that the
continent of Europe ought to be no more to us
than it is to the United States. We can afford to
be independent of all European Allies ; and it
is an unequal condition to call on us to make war
merely for others. But the Government of this
country cannot brook the idea of not playing a
principal part in all European quarrels. The
national dignity, it is supposed, would suffer if
the English Government were not to take a part
in every war, and become a party in every poli-
tical arrangement. Between the prudence dic-
tated by the state of our finances, and the pre-
tensions to which we have been alluding, the
policy of the Government of this country has
felt itself of late not a little embarrassed on
more than one occasion. The invasion of Naples
and the invasion of Spain by France, afforded
but an awkward commentary on the loftiness of
our pretensions, to say nothing of the late pro-
ceedings in Poland. Mr. Flume made some
sensible observations on the inconsistency of our
foreign policy. The motion and an amended
motion were negatived. Towards the conclusion
of the discussion Lord Palmerston offered a de-
fence for the King of Hanover, which did not
mend the matter much. The King of Han-
over, like the King of England, acted, he said,
through Constitutional advisers, and though the
King had assented to the decree of the Diet,
he had subsequently made a communication to
the States, which had for its direct object to en-
large and confirm the privileges of his subjects.
But his Lordship takes with one hand what he
gives with the other. If there is no demerit in as-
senting to the decree of the Diet, there is no merit
in enlarging the privileges of his subjects. He
may make a wooden idol of the King of Han-
over, but he cannot give life to his idol the next
minute.—Morning Chronicle.
It is positively reported, in certain quarters,
that another Protocol has been added, on Tues-
day, to the immense mass of ever-varying " irre-
vocable decisions with which the London Con-
ference has enriched the diplomatic history of
Europe within the last 18 months on the Belgic
question. On this occasion, it would appear,
that they have adopted certain suggestions from
the projected stipulations of the King of Hol-
land, and that they desire the concurrence of the
King of Belgium in a departure from the ratified
treaty of the 21 Articles, to which they had, in
the autumn of last year, rigidly required his un-
conditional adherence. The chief point in dis-
pute would now appear to be what some would
call a matter of form, but that form connected
with the most important interests, and involving
the most indispensable principles of national ho-
nour. The Five Powers of the Conference, af-
ter a year's negotiations, in the course of which
they had alternately displeased both parties,
agreed on the 15th of November last to a
treaty, the stipulations of which were to
be " final and irrevocable." The Bel-
gians, though they acted much against
their will, and though their mouths were full
of loud protestations that they were sacrificed
to the genius of
.European peace, consented to
accept the treaty, and consequently expected that
the same feeling of reverence, or of fear, for the
decisions of this Amphyctionic Council, would
procure the concurrence of their Dutch rivals.
But the Dutch Government, instead of submit-
ting to the terms of the award, began to tamper
with the prejudices of the judges by whom it
was drawn up, and actually succeeded, for seve-
ral months, in preventing the final annexation of
their signatures to the document. Nay, the
King of Holland did more. Acting on an as-
sembly rather disposed to favour the claims of
an old associate, titan to admit a new partner to
the rights of their order, he divided the Confe-
rence, and obtained the consent of three of its

members to the project of certain modifications
of their judgment in his favour. These modifi-
cations were, however, vague, and the Belgian
Plenipotentiary adroitly accepted of the ratifica-
tion of these three absolute Powers to the great
articles ofthe treaty, under the peservation of their
future discussion between the two parties chiefly
interested. The Belgic Minister thus gained a
mighty advantage in the negociation. He se-
cured the European part of the question. He
got the Emperor of Austria, the Emperor of
Russia, and the King of Prussia, the three great
" Conservatives," to consent to the abolition of
the treaty of Vienna, which effected the forced
union of the Belgic and Dutch provinces—
he obtained their sanction to a revolu-
tionary Government, and their recognition of
an elected King. These were great and
irreversible decisions which affected the Euro-
pean community, while the few reserved points
of the debt and the interior navigation, though
important to the parties, were important to the
parties only. As the Belgians had agreed to the
treaty in its original terms, out of deference to
the Great Powers, they had a right to call upon
those Powers to execute, or cause to be executed,
such of its stipulations as admitted of no dispute,
for the purpose of coming to a speedy under-
standing on the remaining disputed conditions.
Antwerp, in every project of separation, remains
a city and a province of Belgium. Let then,
says the Belgic Government, the citadel of Ant-
werp be evacuated, let the separation be pro-
nounced, let the independence of each class of
provinces be declared, and with regard to the
disputed points, we can arrange them ourselves
as independent Governments, under the media-
tion, and by the advice, of our common allies.
Could any thing be more reasonable than such a
proposition ? Could the King of Belgium
lay claim to one feeling of honour, or one
particle of independence, if he did not insist
upon its adoption ? But the Dutch Govern-
ment, knowing the reluctance of England to
enforce the treaty by attacking an ancient
ally, and the fear of the Great Powers that the
assistance which France might lend to Belgium
would be purchased at the expense of its inde-
pendence—and aware, at the same time, of the
fact that the possession of the citadel of Antwerp
could not be wrested from its grasp but by a
war, which might extend far beyond the original
subject of quarrel,—has refused to evacuate
the Belgic territory till his Dutch Majesty has
exhausted all the resources of his ingenuity, and
all the obstinacy of his character, in the hope-
less attempt to recover his ancient dominion or
to obtain unreasonable terms of separation,—
The project of the treaty which his Pie„ipoten-

tiaries lately submitted to the Conference had
no other object, and conveyed a direct insult on
the whole of their 18 months' proceedings.—
The time was therefore come for declaring that
the evacuation of the Belgic territory, and the
execution of the other indisputable conditions
of the treaty, should not be made the basis of
any fresh negotiation. The King of Holland
has no more right to propose a new treaty to
the Conference than the King of Belgium.—
Both are declared equally independent by that
corporation of Governments which, having
formed the political union of the Dutch
and Belgic provinces, has now, by the same
authority, effected their political divorce. Nei-
ther King Leopold, therefore, nor his Ministers,
nor his Chambers, can consistently with their
own security, independence, or honour, permit
themselves to enter into any terms about the mo-
difications of the existing treaty, till Antwerp is
evacuated, and the other undisputed conditions
of the separation are -executed. All the Proto-
cols of the Conference ought to be regarded as
so much waste paper till these ends are accom-
plished. There is one consideration on this part
of the subject which should not escape attention,
and which places in a strong light the injustice
of the Dutch diplomatic project. Were the
Dutch garrison to evacuate Antwerp to-morrow,
their Government would abandon no reasonable
guarantee for obtaining equitable conditions of
peace,—they would not confer upon the Bel-
gians any additional power of navigating the
Dutch waters,—and they would surrender no
right of even shutting up the Scheldt which they
at present possess. On the other hand, were the
Belgic Government to succeed, as succeed they
undoubtedly would in a few days, in destroying
the citadel, and annihilating the Dutch garrison
of Antwerp, they would not advance their
object one inch in opening the Scheldt to
their commerce, while the fleet of Holland could
blockade the mouth of that river, and entirely in-
terrupt the usual channels of their trade. This
lodgment in the Belgic territory is therefore
held only in terrorern—it is held to wrest undue
conditions from the Government of Brussels out
of an alarm for the bombardment of the second
town, and first mart, of the kingdom. Can the
Allies of the Conference, who have negotiated so
long to avoid a war, longer permit the continu-
anceof a state of things which must inevitably
end in hostilities—the signal for which will be
the conflagration of a peaceful city, the ruin of
its trade for a long course of years, and the
barbarous slaughter of so many innocent vic-
tims ? Maestricht is already blockaded ; all
navigation on the Maese is interrupted ; the
King of Holland considers himself in such a
state of hot war with his former subjects, that
all commercial or personal intercourse between
' the two sets of provinces is prohibited ; armies
too great for the resources of two such States
are maintained in mutual hostility on their re-
spective frontiers ; batteries are everywhere rising
round Antwerp; its quays are converted into
covered ways ; and its docks are protected by
redoubts ; the sentinels of the hostile forces are
so near as to converse with each other, and the
cannonier stands with the lighted torch in his
hands. Is this state of things to be continued,
that his Dutch Majesty may settle the toll of a
canal ; or settle, within a few guilders, the amount
of his stock in the Brussels Bank ? No, let
the Conference, as they have decreed the " irre-
vocable" treaty, overcome the obstinacy of his
Dutch Majesty, and compel its execution by
something more peremptory than a new protocol.
—Tines.

Ever since the foolish system of protocolling,
on the part of our Whig Government, in con-
junction with the Holy Alliance, began, in re-
ference to the affairs of Belgium and Holland,
we have taken but one view of the question
and, though we have repeatedly incurred the
displeasure, the taunts, and the denunciations of
the Ministerial Journals, for doubting the wis-
dom of our diplomacy—the sincerity of our
" Holy" Allies, and the capacity, as well as the
sound principles, of Lord Palmerston, yet have
events so confirmed our predictions, that the
difficulty is now to find those who differ with us
in opinion, as to the imbecility of our foreign
' policy, and the mischiefs to which it is likely
to lead. The protocolling project, as we again
and again stated, was only to give time to the
States of the " Holy Alliance" to prepare their
armaments to put down what they designated as
the bad examples" of revolution, and to extin-
guish liberty all over Europe. The Whigs had
objected to any intervention in the quarrels of
Belgium and Holland, just before they came
into power ; and the present Secretary at War,
Sir John Cani Hobhouse, had given notice
of a motion, the object of which was to pre-
vent any intervention on our part : yet no
sooner were the Whigs in office than they
turned round upon their own avowed principle
of non-intervention, and commenced an inter-
ference which is likely to be interminable, unless
the " Gordian knot" of complicated diplomacy
be cut by the sword—and every day more and
more complicates the question, instead of simpli-
fying it. When our Ministerial contemporaries
were preaching about the honourable intentions
of the Russian Government, and the amicable
professions which had been made to our Court,
by the Members of the " Holy Alliance," we
ventured to question the rectitude of the prin-
ciples of Russian policy, and even to declare that
all the amicable professions of Russia were but
the mask upon her designs of vast and insati-
able ambition. Even when Casimir Perier—
the representative of the wretched juste-
milieu system for which France will yet
weep tears of blood—declared in the Chamber
of Deputies, that the " Great Powers" had
resolved on a general disarnzanzent, and
when all our Ministerial contemporaries echoed
the delusive declarations of universal peace
as an absolute verity, we pronounced it a
trick of State, which was eagerly laid hold of by
the politicians of the Bourse, because, by de-
ceiving people, it had a tendency, for a sea-
son, to the
push up the funds. Facts soon proved
the accuracy of our opinion, but it was in vain
that we pointed out the continued preparations
for some great blow, which the despots of Rus-
sia, Austria, and Prussia were making for the
augmentation of their armies, ever since the sub-
jugation of heroic and betrayed Poland. Since
that time, while those Powers have been amusing
Lord Palmerston and Prince Talleyrand, with the
children's play of protocols made to-clay to be
unmade to-morrow, the march 9fnzilitarypower
has been in constant progress on the continent.
The establishments of tyrannic dominion have
been perpetually receiving new accessions of
force, and now all Germany bristles with
bayonets. The rights and national usages of
that community of States are declared to depend,
upon the arbitrary will of despotic rulers, who,
while they talk of preserving peace and order,
mean only the enslavement and humiliation of all
free people. And this is the peace of the Pal-
merston policy—what a peace ! and thus is Eng-

land repaid for her dastard bribe to Russia in
the affair of the Russian-Dutch loan job—a
bribe that enabled the Autocrat to overpower
the gallant people of Poland, whom England
and France were equally bound to protect, by
treaty, and by a sense of their own true interests,
that they might preserve the barrier of Western
Europe against " Muscovite " ambition. But
the King of Hanover has given in his adhesion
to the " unholy league ! " Now is this consis-
tent with the liberal professions of William the
Reformer ?—Morning Herald.

The Lord Chancellor last night brought in
the Bill for controlling and curtailing his own
patronage. He is content with a salary less than
has ever yet been assigned to the office which he
holds, and he sacrifices also the best part of that
indirect income and positive power which has
generally been esteemed the most valuable orna-
ment of the Great Seal. All parties are struck
with his disinterestedness, and pay the respect
which is due to the rare instance of a publie man
redeeming his pledges as soon as he can,—not
affecting, as so many have affected, that though
they adhere to the principle of the recommen-
dations which they made when out of office, yet
a slight experience of public affairs has convinced
them that they were too precipitate, and that the
Reform► which they suggested as of immediate
urgency, had better be brought about moderately,
and bit by bit. The clear sense and upright
character of the Chancellor have flung aside such
considerations with scorn ; and he is in office,
what out of office he stated a Chancellor should
he, The Chancellor may despise his enemies ;
we do not think he has any reason to be afraid
of his friends : but there is a class of persons
whose praises he should regard with caution,—
persons who hate him in their hearts, though they
eulogize him publicly, and even privately, when
they think their eulogy will reach his ear. But,
no : the sagacious mind of Lord Brougham can-
not be so entrapped. He accepts the praise as his
due ; he returns courtesy for courtesy ; but his
mind keeps the one great object in view,—not
the conciliation of his enemies, nor the flattery
of friends,—but permanent public good.— Times.