The Sun.
London, England, 1844-12-10 00:00:00

t 4,
Acelllllol
_4

LONDON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1844.

Mr. FERRAND is one of those men who with zeal,
energy, and perseverance, backed by good intentions,
make no way in public life, but decline rather than
rise in the estimation of the community at large, and
this in exact proportion to the efforts they make to
be useful. The reason of this ill-success on the part
of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough, is, we think,
sufficiently obvious. He has spirit, but not judg-
ment—ability, but not an atom of discretion—in
fact, he has every sense but common sense. In every
thing he says—in every question he takes up—he is
ever in extremes. Moderation and prudence of lan •
guage he scouts with contempt, as matters beneath
his consideration, and seems to think that the true
secret of eloquence—the art of making an im-
pression on the public mind consists in
hyperbole and virulent declamation. The con-
sequence of this mistaken notion is, that
Mr. FERAND'S speeches, whether within or without
the walls of Parliament, though they may startle for
the moment, produce not the slightest permanent
effect ; and after the first surprise is over, no one
thinks it worth his while to burden his memory with
the arguments, the sentiments, or the overcharged
statements, contained in them. The Hon. Gentle-
man, we see, has been recently edifying his Knares -
borough constituents with his opinions de omnibus
rebus, et quibusdans aliis, and in the course of the
fervid and incoherent harangue which he threw off
to them, after abusing all parties with nearly equal
heartiness, he assured them that it was his firm
persuasion that " England had become a nation
of humbugs." Now, has Mr. FERRAND, who
talker thus glibly about humbugs no, recol-
lection of having published a letter in the papers,
wherein he
.stated, in no very equivocal terms, that
he owed his return to Parliament in a great degree
to the bribery that had been practised among his con-
stituents ? Our memory, we think, does not deceive
us in this matter ; we have an impression that we not
only read, but commented on the letter in question
at the time it appeared ; and we now ask Mr. FER-
RAND how—after having penned such a communica-
tion—he can have the face to come forward and launch
a wholesale charge of humbug against his country-
men, when he himself, on his own showing, stands
convicted of having practised the art in its highest per-
fection at his last election. But this is not the only
instance of rash, headstrong assertion contained in
the Hon. Member's address to his constituents at
Knaresborough. Speaking of the New Poor•law—
to some of whose provision 3, by the bye, we fear no
greater good will result than he does himself—he ob-
served :—" It is a remarkable coincidence, that since
this law was passed, England has never known what
it is to rest in peace. The New Poor-law has sown
the seeds of rebellion. In the northern districts strife
and dissension have reared their bold fronts, while the
south has been wrapped in flames by the incendiary."
What a reckless statement is this. The insurrection
in the manufacturing counties, some two or
three years since, had nothing on earth to do with the
New Poor-law, but originated solely in the depressed
state of trade, and the general strike among the
operatives for higher wages. As regards incendiarism
Mr. FERRAND'S remark is equally unfounded, for
this atrocious crime was first known in England, and
was most generally perpetrated in the autumn and
, winter of the year 1830, at which period the New
Poor-law was not in existence ! What reliance

can be placed on a politician who can make asser

tions like these with such an utter disregard of
accuracy! With the Honourable Member's quarrel
with Sir JAMES GRAHAM we do not interpose
—for the Right Honourable Baronet is no fa-

vourite of ours, and we have not the slightest in-
clination to fight his battles; but when Mr. FERRAND
says of Sir ROBERT PEEL, "he will not hesitate, if
you keep him in office, to sacrifice the religion which
he professes ; and I know full well that there is not
a Protestant in England but believes that he is
stealthily and furtively aiming a deadly blow at the
Protestant religion in Ireland," we must enter our
protest against his statement as a most unfounded
calumny. To break up the monopoly of the Dublin
University, and put education on a more rational
footing throughout Ireland, is not to destroy the Pro-
testant religion of that country, but on the contrary,
to strengthen its foundations, and increase its effi-
ciency. Though no very impassioned admirers of the
Premier, we deem it to be doin hi
justice to say, that there is not ag Public no more than
l. man in the
si
rous empire, not even the 13ishos, who is m o e
• maintain inviolate the interests
of Protesrteantism than
n
Sir R. PEEL.

Among the chronicles of worthless follies perpe_
:rated by the aristocracy, whose fortunate destiny has