The Sun.
London, England, 1835-02-14 00:00:00

.1"t ~ -~~~.~

'HUT OF T

E PUBLIC JOURNALS.

It has been Oftli stated by us within these few
days, that under the improbable circumstance of a no-
minal Whig Government being the result of certain
majorities which the Whigs flatter themselves they will
soon command in the House of Commons, that new
Government must be the hard ridden hack of the
Destructives here, and of O'Connell and the Irish
Repealers. That conclusion, painful and humiliating
as we felt it to be, was forced upon us by the known
state of parties—the weakness of the Whigs them-
selves—first, when compared with the above two classes
of Destructives—second, with the solid, numerous,
and formidable body of the Conservatives ; and, third,
placed between the fires of both. Thus the rationale
of the whole case is, that the Whigs, if their hopes,
chimerical in our eyes, be realized, must lean for pro-
tection on one or the other of the simultaneous parties
by which the Whig territory would on either side be
bounded ; and the truth is too plain to be mistaken,
that in the existing state of Whig exasperation and
violence, their choice of allies will light upon the
Destructive faction. But what we have reasoned upon
from general grounds is now made evident by facts
which have gradually transpired, and for which our
authority is, we believe, incontestable. Recollect that
the proposition to be supported is the necessary subor-
dination of the Whigs to the ultra-Radicals, as a fac-
tion first, opposed to the King's Government, and
next as constituting the Government. Our statement
of some days ago, for which every foul epithet imply-
ing calumny, falsehood, &c., was showered upon us,
is, we have no doubt, not alone substantially, but
strictly and literally, true—that Mr. Abercromby, the
" great principle" Speaker of the combined powers of
Whiggery and Radicalism, owes his dignity of can-
didate for the chair to the high and mighty patronage
of Mr. Daniel O'Connell ; and that if the success of
the scheme be an ovation for Whiggery, it is for
Repeal nothing short of a splendid triumph. It was
not until after some delay, and many qualms as to
the danger of staking everything upon a factious
amendment to the address on a Royal speech which
they feared would be popular with the nation, that the
aristocrats and plebeians of the ousted party agreed to
make joint battle upon the question of " Who should
be Speaker ?" Two committees of preparation, we
have reason to believe, were appointed ; one British,
with Mr. Warburton for Chairman ; another Irish, of
which the President was Mr. Daniel O'Connell. This
latter worthy proposed Mr. Tennyson for Speaker ;
Mr. Warburton's candidate was Mr. Spring Rice.
The name of Abercromby had never once been men-
tioned for the Speakership. However, as angels will
fall out sometimes, so beings of an opposite nature are
not always, and under all trials, imbued with the
spirit of harmony. O'Connell quarrelled with the
English Speaker-maker ; nor could the dispute be
settled until, on O'Connell's offer to throw Mr.
Tennyson overboard, and Mr. Warburton's com-
pulsory surrender of Mr. Spring Rice, a medius
terminus was found in Mr. Abercromby, whose
substitution for both the first named candidates, was
made by the Agitator the sole condition on which
he would corisent to wave Mr. Tennyson's pretensions.
If these facts (as we believe) be true, we ask, is or is
not Mr. Abercromby the nominee of Mr. Daniel
O'Connell, as Radical candidate for the chair? We
ask whether Mr. Abercromby ought or ought not to
feel himself eternally degraded by owing to such
patronage his claims to such an office ? There is a
possibility that Mr. Abercromby may not, when he
accepted the " great principle" proposal of Lord John
Russell, have been let into the whole secret, or sus-
spected what grandee it was that had taken him so
condescendingly by the hand. We are aware that the
members of a Whig partnership showed themselves in
the affair of the communications with the Bishops to
be cautious, distrustful, dry, jealous negotiators. Other
people knew more than was imparted to Lord John
Russell, and Lord John himself knew more than he
seemed to have remembered. Here, however, in this
case of the Speakership, there could, we think, at least
be nothing in the wind of which his Lordship was not
suffered by Mr. Warburton to have full cognizance.
If Mr. Abercromby did not then suspect the polluted
source of the distinction proffered to him,he now knows
it. Or if the Right Hon. Gentleman calls on his
friends for an explanation, they of course, after this
exposure, will furnish it forthwith. But there is ano-
ther circumstance worth remarking for its characte-
ristic pungency in illustration of the rectitude and
manly frankness of O'Connell. That pious Catholic,
as reported the other day, declared with much vehe-
mence, by way of contradicting the fact of his having
at all intermeddled in the election of a Speaker, that
he had never corresponded with Lord John Russell
on the subject I What paltry equivocation I The
question was,—had he meddled with the nomination
of a Speaker ? and his disclaimer was, that he had
" not corresponded with Lord John Russell." True
this was in the letter, but in the sense most false and
unprincipled, for it was not Lord John Russell who
had been appointed by the Whig coterie to carry on
the correspondence on that subject. It was Mr.War-
burton. Could O'Connell assert that he had never
communicated with Mr. Warburton upon the choice of
a Speaker ? But the shuffle was of a-piece with all this
man's morality. However, Sir Charles Manners Sutton
is to be opposed by the Whig and Radical factions, on
principle, because he intrigued to throw out the lastCabi-
• net, and caballed to get rid of the House of Com-
mons. Mark the charges. Now, suppose the late
Speaker should completely rebut those charges—sup-
pose he should be able to satisfy the new House of
Commons that he had nothing to do with the dissolu-
tion of the old one ; and that with regard to the late
Ministry or the present, he had never uttered one syl-
lable to his Majesty in the nature of advice, or even
of observation—what effect will it have on the con-
scientious Whig-Radical opponents of the Right Hon.
Gentleman ? Will such a refutation of every charge
on which they profess to ground their preference of
Mr. Abercrdhiby weigh them so as to increase Sir
C. M. Sutton's majority by a single vote ? No, truly.
If Charles Fox came from the dead to remonstrate
with them, it would be all the same. But what, then,
becomes of the " great public principle" which has
been made the cloak to this frivolous and factious op-
position ? There is no disgrace which a mob of two
or three hundred men, all eager for a common object,
will not incur without blushing. Falsehood, hypo-
crisy, and contempt of the public welfare, which would
disgust every separate individual among them but
O'Connell, are taken by the aggregate as wholesome
food, and swallowed without a symptom of repugnance.

—Times.

Let the present struggle for the Speaker's Chair
terminate how it may (though of what will be the re-
sult we have never entertained any manner of doubt)
it is clear that the Whig candidate will take possession
of the prize, or retire from the contest, not a little
damaged upon the occasion. We have seldom seen a
public man to whose case the celebrated maxim of
" save me from my friends" more literally applied,
than to the case of Mr. Abercromby. Some how or
other, and by the aid, probably, of not a little of that
faculty called " mother wit," for which his countrymen
are so proverbial, this gentleman had contrived to fea-
ther his nest for life by means of one of the snuggest,
but at the same time disreputable jobs, which, in a
country proverbial for such things, it has ever been
our lot to allude to. By a singular species of- good
luck, if not almost of fatality, both the progress
and consummation of this affair escaped the usual
vigilance of even the Press upon the occasion,
and possessed every prospect of remaining un-
noticed, had not the Whigs, in an evil hour,
brought forward Mr. Abercromby as their candidate
for the Speaker's Chair—as the fittest man of their
party, as well on the score of distinguished talent, as
of high principle, and pure, disinterested patriotism.
Not contented with the most fulsome eul9gium upon
the hitherto unknown, or at any rate, quiet unpretend-
ing merits of Mr. Abercromby, his advocates have
thought proper to load his competitor, Sir Charles
Sutton, with every species of vituperation ; not recol-
lectinq, in Mr. Abercromby's case, " the glass win-
dows, ' which, in spite of the blinds by w..h_ich they
had hitherto been concealed, were sure to excite reta.:
liation. It has happened, as might have been ex-
pected—Mr. Abercromby's pure patriotism, his un-
spotted disinterestedness, stands unmasked ; and this

gentleman, whom the Whigs put forward as the elite of
their party, to dispute the Chair of the House of Com-
mons with the most competent holder of it which it
has ever possessed, turns out to be, in the nervous
language of the Standard, " the holder of the most
flagitious pension ever granted or ever grasped ;" and
one of whose first duties, probably, were he to fill that
Chair, would be, the irksome and anomalous task of
presiding over successive debates upon this very sub-
ject ; for we hold it to be impossible, now that the real
facts regarding this unjustifiable arrangement are
brought to light, that any Member of the House of
Commons can ever again bring a review of the pension
list into discussion, without this " most flagitious pen-
sion" being placed in the van, and restored to the
country, from which it ought never to have been taken.
It will form, in fact, the great touchstone and test of
sincerity for the future upon this interesting subject.
We are aware that Whigs and Tories share the culpa-
bility of this transaction. We are curious to see how
they will venture upon its defence. As far as mere "vested
interest" goes, that applies with equal force and equal
truth to every other pension of every kind. The nine
points of the law are too often in favour of the wrong
doer, but they establish no moral or equitable right.
If the House of Commons ever succeed in obtaining a
revision of the Pension List, the question to be asked
in the name of the country of every individual whose
right to his or her pension is doubted will be, not the
superfluous one of " What have you got ?" but
" What have you done to deserve it ?" Should this
question ever be put to Mr. Abercromby, we should
be curious to see how he will answer it. Should it
unfortunately be put to him in the character of the
first Commoner in the kingdom, his position would be
most mortifying and degrading. To avoid this em-
barrassment would, we should think, be alone induce-
ment enough to fix the waverers, if there be any, in
the approaching struggle on Thursday.—Morning
Herald.

There is a certain Association in the metropolis
which rejoices in the style and title of the " Society
for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge." In the list
of the Noble and Learned Members of this body may
be discovered the eminent and important names of the
Lord Brougham and Vaux, ex-Chancellor of England,
actual " Memb. Nat. Inst. of France;" the eminent
sponsor of the distinguished Radical pensioner, James
Abercromby, the Right Hon. Lord John Russell ;
honest Lord Althorp, formerly Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, now Earl Spencer, and still prizeman at
Smithfield ; the pious Divine and King-honouring
Prelate, the Bishop of Chichester; the learned pundit,
M. D. Hill, late M.P. for Hull ; Mr. Isaac Lyen
Goldsmid, F.R.S., who is reported to have sub-
scribed a large sum of money towards the re-elec-
tion of the goose of the capitol ; Sir John Hob-
house, some time Radical Member for Westminster,
afterwards tranquil placeman and nominee of the Not-
tingham bobbinet manufacturers ; Mr. John Wood,
long a noisy spouter of faction, now Chairman of one
of the ex-Ministerial jobs : with many other names
equally distinguished for loyalty, letters, wisdom, and
wit. This noble Joint-Stock Company of Lords,
Lawyers, and Levellers, publish a certain book year
after year which is called " The British Almanack ;"
and in page 13 of that notable production for the year
1835 we find a notice of the Kings and Queens of
England from the Conquest, in which there is nothing
requiring particular remark until we come to the death
of Charles 1., when there appears the following
" Commonwealth from the execution of Charles 1.,
Jan. 30, 1649, to the restoration of Charles ll.
Charles 11. (restored), 1660, May 29," with a mar-
ginal note in these words —" In some historical
documents the reign of Charles 11. is reckoned from
his father's death." Was there ever seen, we
now ask, a more pernicious perversion of history or
of morals ? In the first place, this precious
production, given to the world under the pro-
claimed patronage of men who call themselves
British Statesmen or lawyers, styles that an execution
which was, in fact, the most atrocious judicial murder
ever perpetrated ; in the, second place it speaks of
" some historical documents," when it is notorious
that every Act of Parliament—every record of our
annals--recognises the day of King Charles the First's
murder as the date of his son's accession, wisely and
constitutionally acknowledging the grand principle of
our Government, that the " King never dies." It
must be recollected that this monstrous absurdity is
perpetrated not by illiterate and unknown persons, but
by individuals who ostentatiously parade their names
in the title-page of a production, of which any child
who has studied the first rudiments of the history of
his country would be ashamed ;—by Noblemen and
Gentlemen, who when this precious book was printed
were Ministers of that Crown, which privately and
publicly they took every opportunity of degrading,
anxious to diminish the reverence with which Britons
have been accustomed to regard the sacred name of
King. We have felt it our duty to expose this mis-
chievous publication, in order that the unwary may
not be entrapped, and that the factious and unprin-
cipled individuals whose names are appended to it
may be properly understood and appreciated.—Morn-