The Sun.
London, England, 1827-08-30 00:00:00

yoci. for the country that they should do
The other course, then, which the Whigs may
pursue is that 'of• growing lukewarm upon the
Catholic Ciainis—of meeting henceforth their
Catholic clients and expectants with chilling
looks and half-averted eyes—of attempting to
moderate the desires which hitherto they have
laboured so successfully to inflate—of resisting
demand the jt.lStiee of which they cannot dis-
Vde, the imperious and immediate necessity of
granting which they cannot do otherwise than
acknowledge, by temporising apologies and equi-
vocating delays. They may probably set, that
this is a path along they cannot walk erect.
Every than at least who is not a Whig, sees
it plainly enough ; and if they should attempt to
shuffle through it, how plentifully will they
be bespattered by dirt in their ignomini-
ous progress ! How they will be bruised
and lacerated by the rough impediments
in their way, placed there by themselves
in order to bruise and lacerate others !
I-tow they will be stung and annoyed by the
noxious creatures that they have themselves clie-
ri::hed into vigour for the annoyance of honcster
men ! It is plain enough that a course so op-
probrious can have only one termination—that it
leads to their expulsion from office, as an inevi-
table consequence of total abasement of character.
The Whigs, if they are so tenacious of office as
to adopt it, will accumulate upon their own
heads the hatred and resentment of the Catholics
—a hatred and resentment which in this instance
will be just, and which the Catholics cannot but
manifest universally if they are endowed with the
least spark of manly, spirited, or generous feel-
ing ; and while the Catholics must inevitably
entertain and express these sentiments, the Pro-
testant part of the people, who have generally
minds too intelligent not to detect, and hearts
too honest not to disdain political trickery, will
pour forth the frank expressions of their loathing
and contempt. If the Whigs will travel this
road, we have now shown them the end of their
journey. Overwhelmed by the just resentment
or the merited disdain of every class of the King's
subjects, Catholic as well as Protestant, it is im-
possible that they should any longer be retained
as the Ministers of a generous, high-spirited,
and patriotic Monarch.—Morning Post.
The Times of yesterday had an elaborate, but,
at the same time, a foolish and a mischievous ar-
ticle, upon the subject of the Ministerial ar-
rangements which yet remain incomplete, but
which probably, before to-morrow, will be
finally settled :

"It is just three days," says the Times, "since the papers of
the Tory faction announced the existence of ' a King's candi-
date' for the only vacant office in an otherwise complete
Administration. We did not think it of so much import-
ance to inquire what truth there might be in the state-
ment of these gentlemen, as to show the country what
must be the consequence if such candidates were permitted
to succeed—that such a victory would be nothing less than
disgrace to the King's Cabinet, confusion to the systematic
policy of the empire, and an utter paralysis of all the prin-
ciples of regular and responsible government."
We wish our contemporary had told us which
are the Papers of the " Tory faction." Where,
indeed, is the faction itself ? The Times has
never been a discreet advocate. It has a pro-
pensity to unconscious mischief about it, which
makes it more useful as an enemy than as a
friend. Why does it talk of the Whig Members
of the Cabinet, and of the Tory Members ?
Would it insinuate that though united for one
common end, though labouring in one common
cause, there are conflicting principles at work ?
We can well believe it intends no such thing.—.
It is merely its want of tact (to use a modern
phrase, which means any thing), that leads it
Into this blundering. But we have a fe-7 plain
facts, which will show at once how ill-infurined
the Times is, as to what is really taking place,
and at the same time disabuse the public mind.
The writer of the article to which we have re-
ferred, supposes the appointment of Mr. Herries
to be the chief point of difficulty in the final ar-
rangement of the new Administration; and the
whole gist of his argument upon that supposi-
tion is grounded on the assumption that Mr.
Herries is the person selected by the King for
the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer, with-
out the advice of his Majesty's Minister. He
even goes
so far as to insinuate, in terms virtu-
ally
amounting to assertion, that the office was
tendered to Mr. Herries (and refused by him)
through another channel than that of an autho-
rized responsible Minister. We are enabled to
unravel the whole of this web of falsehood, by
the single clue here afforded to us. We state,
upon authority, on which our readers may rely,
that there is not one word of truth in that in-
sinuation or assertion. Who set the Times at
work to promulgate so silly, so improbable a
story ? Lord Goderich was the channel (and the
only channel) through which the office of Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer was offered to Mr. Her-
ries ; nay, more—it was so offered as having
been agreed to by the King, on his Lordship's
recommendation ; no other communication on
the subject having been previously made to Mr.
-ferries, directly or indirectly,t hrough any other
channel whatsoever. Now we . give the Times
its choice, either to confess that it knew no-
thing about the matter, or that it falsified what
it knew. We defy it to disprove our state-
ment. Our contemporary is on a wrong
scent. It is fooled itself, or it is playing the
fool with others. We suspect its enviable situa-
tion is a compound of both. It has stumbled
on one truth however, and it is fair it should
have the benefit of it. It is quite correct in
stating that the offer was in the first instance
positively declined by Mr. Herries. That Right
Honourable Gentleman has been no officious
seeker of the honour, the emolument, or the
patronage of the office. The Times affects to
found its animadversions on what it calls the
scandal, in the form of a boast, of the Tory
Journals. "An hypothesis," it continues, "is
more convenient to us than a fact." We believe
it. Facts are not so pliable as hypotheses. They
give a man a great deal of trouble, when it is
his business. to mislead. As, however, our con-
temporary confesses that he prefers an hypothesis
to a fact, and as the whole of his fanciful argu-
ment which follows, is founded upon his favourite
basis, we may relieve ourselves from the trouble
of a further controversy. We think the Times
would have done right to follow the ex-
ample of our transatlantic brethren, and prefix
to his lucubration the significant caution
of " ( Important if true." We hope Mr.
Huskisson reads the Times. We hope too
he sees it early in the morning. If so, he would
be prepared for
his intervew with his Majesty
yesterday. " Supposing," says our contempo-
rary, " all which we say to be the truth (a mon-
strous supposition by the bye); is it too much
to expect from Mr. Huskisson that he will ad-
dress his Majesty in some such language as
follows ?" And then follows a very edifying ha-
rangue in the person of the Right lion.
beginning Gentle-
man, ,, Sir," (that is the way to speak
to a Soverei-m) " I cannot advise your Majesty
to appoint Mr. Herring your Chancellor of the