The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-03 00:00:00

LONDON,

of Parliament for the abolition of the office of Lord-
Lieutenant of Ireland. The Noble Lord rests his

opposition to this just and salutary measure on three
distinct grounds, each of which will be embodied in
a separate resolution. He first contends that the
abolition of the office is " contrary to the expecta-
tions held out by the statesmen who carried the
legislative union between the two countries,
and who declared that though her Parliament
was removed, Ireland should still retain
her Court." In other words, the Noble Marquis
desires that it should be considered that the main-
tenance of the office in perpetuity formed part of the
solemn compact entered into between the two Par-
liaments at the period when the federal treaty was
concluded. The Noble Marquis ought to be well
acquainted with the views and opinions entertained
by the chief actor in the transaction, the Minister
under whose auspices the union was accomplished.
On such points his authority is very high indeed,
and we are fully convinced that he is incapable
of stating anything, of the accuracy of which he is not
fully convinced. But, although we gladly render this
justice to his Lordship's character for honour and
veracity, and also as to his sources of information, we
must venture to remind him that the letter from his
late Majesty GEORGE 111., written to his Prime
Minister at the time the measure was in contempla-
tion, and re ad by Lord JOHN RUSSELL
when bringing the present Bill before the
House, clearly and distinctly proved that
although the office might be retained for a time, its
abolition at some future and more fitting opportunity
was even then decided on, a fact of which a Minister
charged with so important a duty as the then Lord
CASTLEREAGH must have been fully cognisant.

If it was then eonsidered that the retention of
the tinsel pageantry of the mock Court was
essential to the welfare and prosperity of
Ireland, or even of its metropolis, a clause
would have been inserted in the Act—we
should, perhaps, more correctly have termed it
an " article in the treaty," making adequate
provision therefore. It was one of the very rare
cases in which an existing Parliament could bind its
successors, and sanction enactments that could not
subsequently be repealed, save with the unanimous
approbation of both countries. Had it been at that
time considered a meter of such vital importance,
the stipulation would unquestionably have been
made, and placed upon such a foundation as
to render it beyond the possibility of doubt or
controversy ; and the absence of any express
enactment on the subject, and that at a time when
so many stringent provisions were carried, proved,
beyond the possibility of doubt, that it was con-
sidered a .matter of comparative indifference, which
might safely be left to the wisdom of future Parlia-
ments to decide on. Lord CASTLEREAGH might have
stated that there was no intention to take away the
Viceregal Court ; but if such a statement were made
it must clearly have had reference to existing circum-
stances, and could not by any possibility be tortured
into a pledge that it should be continued throughout
all ages, even after every pretext for its necessity or
utility had departed. We have already stated that
there might be some advantages derived from the pre-
sence in Ireland of a nobleman representing the So-
VEREIGN, and armed with considerable power and
authority, at a time when no communication
could be made from the English to tho,lrish metro-
polis, or vice versa, in less than three days, or under
unfavourable circumstances, such as might easily
occur in even double that time, but that argument is
completely removed when we consider that the
journey may now be performed in less than twelve
hours, or, in case of emergency, intelligence
received in less than four hours. It
might as reasonably be contended that we
should refuse to avail ourselves of railways,
steam-packets, and electric telegraph, as that we
should obstinately reject the advantages that naturally
follow from their adoption. The next resolution
relates to the time at which the change is to be
effected, which, it is contended, is most inauspicious,
when the depressed condition of the country
is taken into consideration a but surely that
is the very reason why the change should
now be made. A physician does not withhold
his remedies until his patient has fully recovered—it
is at the time when the disease is at the height that
he directs the course most likely to improve the sick
man's health and restore him to convalescence.
The last resolution relates to the establishments and
population of Dublin, which, according to Lord
LONDONDERRY, entitle it to a resident Lord-Lieute-
nant; but we must confess that, admitting to the
fullest extent the natural advantages of the Irish
capital, we cannot see that they afford any reasons for
the maintenance of a useless office which do not
equally apply to Edinburgh and to every other
town with more than a quarter of a million of in-
habitants. They might possibly form good argu-
ments for the repeal of the legislative union, but
none against the measure intended to connect more
closely and consolidate the bonds by which they are
connected, and to render them indeed " an United
Kingdom" in the most extensive signification of the
term.

The patrons of pestilence, the &lighters in dirt, the
sniffers of" ancient" smells, the sovereigns of Smith-
field in short, have received " a heavy blow and a
great discouragement." The Commissioners ap-
pointed to make inquiries relating to Smithfield
market have made their report, and five of them, viz.,
Mr. George Cornewall Lewis, Sir H. Verney,
Mr. William Miles, Mr. Richard 0 wen, and Mr.
Frederick Byng have reported that " it would be ad-
visable to remove the market for live stock
from its present site, not to some other site
immediately adjoining, but to a site de-
tached from the central portion of the
metropolis." As might have been expected,
Sir JAMES Dims and Mr. JOHN WooD, who were
the commissioners representing the City, have pro-
tested against this report; but this was not sur-
prising, they were nominated in order that they
might protest, and they have performed their duty.
It is pleasant to observe that the tone of the up.
holders of the nuisance is completely changed ; instead
of, as heretofore, contending for the salubrity of
Smithfield, and the ample accommodation it affords,
they are now compelled to admit the
truth of all the charges which have been brought
against this, to them, most profitable nuisance,
but then they suggest, meekly and humbly suggest,
that " all inconveniences would be obviated by an
enlargement of the site of the market amply adequate
to its requirements—such an enlargement as has been
proposed by the Markets' Improvement Committee of
the Corporation." This is certainly one of the most
extraordinary modes of abating a nuisance that was
ever proposed, and the Corporation of London must
have had a very poor opinion indeed of the perspi-
cacity of the Commissioners when they ventured to
commend such a proposition to their attention. The
complaint is that the existence of a live cattle-
market in the centre of a crowded metropolis
is a nuisance. " Granted," say the Members of the
Corporation, " but only double the extent of the nui-
sance—let it extend over 13 acres instead of over 6
acres and 15 poles, and it ceases to be a nuisance at
all." Such is the sole argument which the ingenuity
utter
c on only
b The e st a
doom stated in
of the advocates of Smithfield can devise for its con-
ot
sealed.irndue
con-
tinuance—andemonstrateen
its which needs
absurdity.
of Smithfield is, we take it for granted, at length

At length the Board of Health has made its report
on the supply of water to the metropolis. The docu-
ment is of great length, and the Board state, as the
result of their inquiries, that the water supplied to
the metropolis is inferior to the average quality of
water supplied to towns ; that the water taken by the
Lambeth Company from the Thames opposite Hun-
gerford Market is charged with animal and vegetable
impurities, apparently the effect of the discharge of
sewer water, which renders it wholly unfit for use,
and highly dangerous to the health of the persons who
drink it ; that from the inferiority of the water and
its pollution, a large proportion of the population
is rendered averse to its use as a bever-
age. The Board also complain of the inter-
mittent supply, which renders the retention
of the water in tanks and butts necessary, as
aggravating the evils arising from the original im-
purity and pollution of the water ; it recommends
the rejection of all schemes promoted by water corn-
panie6, the abandonment of the Thames And of all