The Sun.
London, England, 1844-12-03 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

FROM THE DAILY PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
GLOBE.—The Government organ seems to be
bent upon signalising itself upon the sugar question,
in the only direction left open to it by its very
limited ability to deal with the subject. This morn-
ing we are told that the cargo of Venezuelan sugar,
recently entered at Liverpool, amounts only to " a
few bags," and that they " doubt whether the whole
of Columbia could send us a cargo ;" and, further
on, the Herald's estimate of the quantity ad-
mitted, growing " fine by degrees, and beautifully
less," is reduced to " a few spoonsful." What
miserable trilling! Is this a specimen of Con-
servative ethics ? Is the adherence to or the infrac-
tion of a principle to be :measured by the hundred-
weight? It is, however, admitted, that whatever the
quantity, whether " a few bags" or " a few spoonsful,"
it is of a very doubtful character. We learn that
the bags were unaccompanied with certificates of
origin," and that "there is not the least evidence of
the character of the sugar." And all that is ven-
tured to be asserted is, that the " inference"
that it is slave-grown " does not necessarily follow."
We are told, that " whether slavery exists in
Venezuela appears to be doubtful ;" and all the aid
that is offered us in solving the doubt is the informa-
tion that Mr. M'Culloch, in his " Geographical Dic-
tionary," is " silent upon it I" But we would remind
the Herald of one point which in the mazes of its
random assertions and counter assertions it seems to
have forgotten, but which those most interested in
this discussion have not forgotten, and are not likely
to forget. The Government, by its professions and
declarations made on the introduction of the Act
in question (7 and 8 Vic., c. 28), stands pledged to
the exclusion of slave-grown sugar from home
consumption. The material question is—has it
redeemed—nay, has it left itself power to redeem
that pledge ? Foreign sugar (no matter how much
for the present) has, within three weeks of the Act
coming into operation, entered the market for home
consumption. It comes from a slave-owning
State—a near neighbour of slave-trading States,
" unaccompanied with certificates of origin,"
and without "the least evidence" of its character
in reference to slave labour. An imputation is
cast upon the honour—the good faith—of the
Ministry. The facts upon which the imputation
is based are admitted. The evidence, what-
ever else may be said of it, is at least all against
the Government; and, if left as it is, is, in our opinion,
quite strong enough. The imputation of " the ruin
of the West India Islanda"—and a resolution "to
complete that ruin by maintaining slavery in Cuba
and Brazil"—to those who object to the late measure,
involves such a confusion of ideas that it is impos-
sible to answer it. As to its most obvious mean-
ing we can only remark, that we take no more
advanced ground in favour of a free competition
between slave labour and free labour than that
occupied by that large section of the Anti- Slavery
Party whose views have been so ably expounded by
Mr. Beldam ; and that we advocate the gradual
bringing about of such competition only because we
believe that in a fair and full development of the capa-
bilities of free labour we shall find the only effectual
cure for the evils of slavery throughout the world.
We are told that the population of Venezuela is only
900,000—therefore it is not likely to send us much
sugar. A return made to the House of Commons
during the last few years states the coloured popu-
latioa of Jamaica as 322,421. Mr. Martin states
the entire population to be only 361,490 ; and the
return already referred to states that of the whole of
our West India colonies to be only 798,769. This
for the information of the Herald. Will it now abide
by its estimate on the basis of population ? There is
plenty more of the same sort of argument in the ar-
ticle we refer to, or, to use the words of the Herald,
its " monstrous inconsistencies do not stop here." We
cannot, however, at present devote further time to its
" inconsistencies," and so we will conclude with em-
ploying the Herald's own words in declaring our de-
cided opinion that " the whole history of Peel and
Gladstone-ism—record of continuous meannesses
though it be—may be ransacked in vain for anything
more despicable than this see-saw advocacy ;it is the
ne plus ultra of thimble-riggery.
STANDARD.—The circumstances of the times
impose upon us a new and a perplexing, and even
painful task. We hare the greatest possible objec-
tion to making newspapers the vehicle of theological
or quasi theological controversy ; but topics more or
less nearly connected with this most awful class of
subjects are daily pressed upon us by respected and
manifestly able and honest correspondents, with an
earnestness and unequivocal sincerity wholly beyond
our power to resist. Thus we are constantly forced to
act in opposition to our own deliberate judgment, and,
what adds to the vexation, compelled by the variety
of communications sent to us to be for ever weighing
in what degree we shall act against our judgment—
an exercise that they who have proved it often, must
know to be nearly the most distressing in which the
mind can be engaged. In all this there is, no doubt,
one great consolation. The interest so universally
taken in theological questions proves that the minds
of the people are seriously set upon religious sub-
jects. Forty years ago innovations either in doc-
trine or in order would have been much less re-
garded, but though we gratefully acknowledge this
consolation, we cannot forget that while the public
divide it equally among them, a very undue share
of the heavy price falls upon our class, who, amid
perpetual doubts of the propriety of our conduct (if
we are conscientious), must keep alive the controversy.
Our own clear conviction as to the main questions
in dispute can be no secret to any of our readers.
We stand, as to doctrine, upon the Articles of the
Church of England honestly interpreted, and as
they are commonly understood by Protestants; and
as to order, upon the usage of the Church, as it
.bas been known for nearly two centuries, and emi-
nently blessed with success within the
n time of
ne,arly all men living. It is not, however, in
dealing with the men who openly impugn those
doctrines, or violently invade this ordr—with
the Newmans, Puseys, Wards, or the other Ro-
maniats —or yet with the fribhle church milliners,
like Mr. Oakeley, that we have any difficulty.
We know these sectarians, and we may say it
without unduly boasting, that we alone knew
them from the first—as poor imposters, who
bed filched a character for talent by retailing
tawdry paradoxes, such as any unscrupulous
blockhead might prepare ; a character for learn-
ing by quoting—and not always correctly
—books which the good sense, let us add the real
piety, of true scholars, had caused to be left unread
or kept in the background. These men had their day ;
but it was not our fault that they had it, for we
always advised to treat them with disregard and con-
tempt ; and surely this was the proper treatment for
them. The very morning on which we write fur-
nishes, we think, a clear proof that it was : one of
thei." number, a Mr. Ward, of Balliol College, Ox-
ford, f: a 5 lately published a Popish tract, under the title
" The Lleal of a Christian Church" (whoever wishes to
see this Polih tract fully exposed, would do well to
p
read " Oafofd, No. 90, A Practical Suggestion by
the Rev. W. Sinscox Bricknell.") Mr. Ward's tract
claimed the attention of those who had any know-
ledge of the man and his party, and its undis-
guised Popery fully justified their anticipations.
The learned and pious Dean of Christchurch—a man
honoured throughout Europe, and wherever else
%earning and piety command respect--formally com-
pNined of this work to the University authorities,
Ina these authorities acted promptly and resolutely
upon the Dean's complaint. After the Dean had
eomples‘lied, and the authorities had taken their reso-
lution, a
_number of remonstrances from bishops came
in, requiring that the matter should be seriously
taken up. ,Accordingly Mr. Ward was summoned
to appear at twelve o'clock on Saturday before the
Vice-Chancellor, Proctors, and Pre-Vice-Chancellors
assembled in the JDelegates' Room, with a notary
public in attendance. .Mr. Ward attended, and was
then and there require to acklowledgith his
e or to
disavow the book publidshed by him, w
name in the title-page, and to say whether
he adhered to, or disclaimed,
ro-
med, the doctrines p
'Founded in that work. What was Mr. Ward's
conduct ? What would be the conduct of an honest
ingenuous man in such a case ? Would he not say
at once the book is mine--I published it—l adhere
to all its doctrines ? or, I retract them, or some of
.them, as the case might be? But this was
Act the conduct of Mr. Ward ; he asked
for two days' time to answer so plain
a question, as whether he would acknowledge
his own book. Any police magistrate would
know' hew to characterise such a request ; he
might grant the remand, but he would scarcely grant
it without a comment not very complimentary to
the party .soliciting it. In dealing with such persons
as Mr. Ward there is little difficulty. Our embarrass-
ments come from another quarter, and they will be
found sufficiently. illustrated in a correspondence be-
tween Mr. Gabriel Kennard and the Archbishop of
'Canterbury, which will be found in another part of
.our paper. We have great doubts as to the
fitness of printing this correspondence ; but Mr.
Keennard's ability, his gentlemanly styl, and his
manifest sincerity, combined with a kind of promise
given by us to the remonstrants of East Farleigh, to
do all in our power to obtain justice in their case,
hive determined us. Still we are by no means pre-
pared to give an unqualified vote ; though confess
that, for a reason which we shall oft-r at
article, our bias is to say that Mr. Kennartd'
leigh altogether wrong.righti,
land
Ts'Nenedofthis
titre rector of East Far
l.
point, the Archbishop has distinetl decided.
If Ithe rector has been guilty of interpolation. in
if the interpo-
he is clearly wrong and
the Liturgy,
lationa are the same distinctly charged by Mr.
Kennard, they go a free t way to support the
. the of
other parts of his comp aint
trite that th Upeyon
cannot be subject
de
seasons, it is perfectly
solely upon
fended fairly against chairs founded