The Sun.
London, England, 1842-09-28 00:00:00

‘rtie-qt

LONDON:
WEDNESDAY MORNING, SEPTEMBER 28, 1842

The Marquis of WELLESLEY wisely retired from
public life in 1835. Since that period he has grace-
fully cultivated the Latin muse, and has proba-
bly been, as is said, the delight of his friends,
but he has taken no part in public business. Ru-
Mour indeed says that he rentonstrated. against
ahe Affghan war, and wrote to Lord ELLENBO-
-110'1:oil to express his approbation of the order to
withdraw the army. In losing him, however,
the public has not lost an active, vigorous states-;
man, but one who,-full of years and honour, had
previously retired, worthily, to pass the close of
his life in the privacy of his family. If that ne•
cesarily lessens the public grief for the loss of a
statesman, it must enhance the public respect for
the man. We cannot allow him to pass to the
grave without saying a few words of our own on
such a remarkable person.
We find his name mentioned in the corre-'
spondenee between Mr. PITT and the Duke of
ItUTLAND, copious extracts of which are pub-
fiAed in the last number of the Quarterly Re-
r!eu,, and we will quote the passage to show how
early he was distinguished:—
Among the few persons for whose employment Mr.
Pitt himself expresses a wish in these p le,es, it is in-
teresting to trace the name of one who has since at-
tailed such high renown in the public service, and
who still survives in a green and hono.ural old age—
the then Earl of Mornington, the prete.it Marquis
'Wellesley. In a letter of August 9th, 1784 (Lo: d
Mornington being then but twenty-four years of age)
Mr. Pitt says:—
" The ;immediate ol have in writing at this
moment is to state to you- some circumstances relative
to Lord Mornington, and to beg you to let me know
how far the ideas I have conceived on the subject cor-
respond with yours. I find he considers himself 4' ••-
entitled, from the assurances he received both from
you and me (either personally or through Lord
Temple), before you went to Ireland, to expect the '
earliest mark of the favour of Government in that
country Which its circumstances could admit of. He
expresses a full disposition to have made every allow-
ance for the exigencies of a new government, at so
cfitical a time, but I think he seems to imagine that
there was an appearance of his pretensions being post-
poned, either without sufficient grounds, or without
their being so confidentially stated to him as he sup-
posed. he gad a claim to. He seems at the same time
feel a real zeal for the interests and credit of your
government, and a strong sense of the marks of your
,serselal frVid-Jhip.
I am very anxious, for all our
sakes, that there should be no misapprehension on the
subject, both from a high opinion of him, and from
fueling (as I am sure you will) a great desire that any
tiling like an engagement, or even a reasonable expa:
tation, should not be disappointed."
And on the 15th of August following the Duke of
Rutland thus replies :
• " I can have no hesitation of saying that Lord Mor-
nington shall have the first office which may fall
worthy of his acceptance. His inQrits are very great,
which I am sure lam one of the first men to allow.
Morning erton, as I have rlways stated to
him, stands first for
interest much at whatever may off .
I have his
heart, as well from
from a convictionprivate regard as
of his powers to render the public
essential service."

In the same year (1784) he was elected a
Member of the British House of Commons, and
was from that time till 1835, during the long pe-
riod of 51 years, continually and prominently
engaged in public affairs. We may,•for our pur-
pose, distinguish in -his life four epochs, and
speak of him as Governor-General of India, be-
tween 1797 and 1806—as connected with the Go-
rernment at home between 1807-1812—as the
advocate of the Catholic claims between 1812
and 1822, and as the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland
from 1822, with an intermission between 1828_
1833, till 1835. He was in the first period the
successful administrator of a great empire, of
which he much extended- the bounds; in the
second, he was the most conspicuous advocate
of a vigorous prosecution of the war in the Pe-
ninsula, and contributed by his councils, as his
illustrious brother did by his arms, to the rescue
of Europe; in the third, he was the zealous and
steady advocate of religious freedom ; and, in the
fourth, he endeavoured to carry into effect the prin-
cipl es of his own policy, and realise in Ireland that
peace between rival sects, which, on principle,
lw said, would be the consequence of abolishing
political distinctions on account of religious dif-
ferences. He took the lead in fbur great
schemes of policy, extending our dominion in
/Fiala, opposing BONAPARTE in Europe, pro-
moting religious freedom in his native country,
for the first time, rival sects to
arid bringing,
tfe practical belief,-however they might differ
might about another world, that in this they

live in harmony together. In each we find
something suitable to his years; and if, in the
prime of manhood, he was engaged in schemes
of national aggrandisement, in his declining life
he was better employed in promoting freedom,

peace, and improvement, amongst his fellows.
He was, no doubt, active andconspicuous in Par-
liament ; in the Treasury, of which he was a Lord;
and at Court, where he was a favourite, before
he went to India; but it was only in 1797, when
he was appointed to succeed Lord CORNWALLIS
in the government of that country, that-public
attention became fixed on him. In general, the
splendid success of his green years makes men
admire more his administratioa in India than
the better points of his riper years; but when
we recollect what CLIVE and HASTINGS, the
clerks of a trading company, had achieved in
India, in opposition to France, before he went
thither, and when we recollect that he was
only the second statesman having a large
body of Royal troops under his orders, who ad-
ministered the affairs of that country, with no
French forces to oppose him; when we recollect
the feeble and disjointed resistance which could
be offered by the native Powers, we cease to be
dazzled by the splendour of his Indian govern-
ment, and prefer his exertions as a statesman at
home, to his conquests in Asia. The effects of
the latter may possibly be transient, and the sort
of meteoric empire we have there founded may
as speedily sink in darkness as it has risen in
splendour; but we are assured that the effects of
his labours to rescue Europe from military ty-
ranny, and to give religious freedom to his na-
tive land, will endure for ever, and be for ever
leading points in the history of civilization.
We are forbidden, both by our limited space
and limited time, from entering into the details
of his conduct, in both dissenting from the
Whigs, who depreciated our military exertions
in Europe, and in censuring the Tories, who
persisted in making them on a feeble and un-
worthy scale, and in frittering them away on
many objects instead • of concentrating the na-
tional energies on one; we must content ourselves

with remarking, that on the great question of
the Peninsular war he took a line for himself,
and contributed, in the first instance, more than
any other statesman—perhaps more than any
other man, except hisillustrious brother—to bring
that war to a successful issue. Neither can we
enter into his praise-worthy exertions to form
a broad and comprehensive Administration
after the death of Mr. PERCIVAL, to which
end he was commissioned by the Prince
Regent ; nor can we notice the narrow " per-
sonal animosities" by .which the Tory states-
man of the day tgwarted his well-meant patriot-
ism. He did not succeed, and one of his bigoted
and worst opponents, Lord LIVERPOOL, took his
place, and prevented all concessions to religious
freedom till they were wrung from the weak-
ness of the Government, to its confusion and dis-
grace. Neither can we dwell on his ad-
ministration of Ireland, which is, we think
foolishly, said not to have been success-
ful, because it was not very brilliant. But
when it is considered how much he was ham-
pered by Orangemen in Ireland and bigots in
the Cabinet, that he governed the country in
peace, and contributed to raise the Catholics to
power and influence, reflect on !im much ho-
nour. It is his merit to have set the example,
under much less favourable auspices than Lord
NORMANBY, of a conciliatory policy ; aid to
have laid the foundation of that better system
of governing Ireland, which has ever since been
carried out. We must content ourselves with
merely hinting at these prominent features of
his varied policy, and leave to those who were
better acquainted with him, and have more
leisure, the task of presenting us with a com-
plete view of the long career of this accomplished
statesman.

We cannot close without remarking that his
extensive public life, connecting him at one end
with the sinking CHATHAM, and at the other
with the rising GLADSTONE, or with PEEL in the
full blaze of his power, comprises almost a
century of events, and designates some very
great changes in the Views of statesmen-, and tite
1 character of Government. CtfATLlAN's....policy
lay chiefly in war and aggrandisement, and he
thought little or nothing of that improvement of
the people at home, which now mainly occupies-
public men. The Marquis of WELI,ESLEY, in
his career in India, followed the principles of
CHATHAM'S policy. He lived to learn better
things and if it be true that he re-
monstrated against the Affghan war and
praised the withdrawal of the troops, he
had-become, with the progress of events, a con-
vert to the opinion that there is more danger
than profit in extending an empire. The vigour
of his days was passed before the present policy
of attending to domestic improvement came into
vogue, and it is rather the fault of the time at
which he was born, than .of any defect in his
character, that he was not deeply versed in those
doctrines of political economy which have in
latter times occupied public attention. There
are proofs in his speeches that his practical states_
man hip, though enlightened, was not based on
theoretic truth ; and if he was favourable-to the
extension of commerce in India, he was not un-
favourable to monopoly at home. AVe have no
recollection that the Noble Marquis ever took
an active part in discussing *such important sub-
jects as the taxes on food, the laws for the regu-
lation of the poor, the education of the people,
the-improvement of their health and haNtations ;
in fact, all these, with many kindred subjects,
have grown into public importance, marking a
great improvement in the thoughts and views
of statesmen, at a time of his life when it
was probably as impossible for him to acquire
new habits of thought as to become a fleet run-
ner. When he began his career, policy was ,
founded on some vague and ill-defined principles,
which did not include the well-being of the
people as the primary object; when his career
is closed, policy is based on facts ; and the
well-being of the people—though there is much
ignorance of the means by which statesmen can
promote it—is professedly the single object they
have in view. The beginning and the end of his
career thus designates a great change in the
principles of Government, which he contri-
buted to bring about, which is, perhaps, more
worthy of study and elaborate exposition than
even the life of this distinguished man.

We deeply regret to see the vile passions of
disappointed diplomatists overflowing into the
Liberal Press; and still more' do we regret that
the reasonings orthat class of men—by no means
instrumental in promoting the general happiness
—should be suffered to poison the stream
of Liberal opinions, and taint the cha-
racter of the Liberal party. It is not
Tess just and benevolent than it is now com-
mercially expedient to cultivate a good under-
standing between the people of England and of
the United States. Of the free-trade party, that is
the especial business. They dwell truly and
justly on the vast resources of the United States,
and they hold out the full participation in
them, ensuring endless prosperity to both
countries, as the rich and certain conse-
quence of abolishing our own laws restricting
commerce. No journal has more ably enforced
their views than the Morning Chronicle ; but of
what avail can be its arguments, when its oppo-
nents, and our opponents, can turn round on it
and bring proofs from its own writings that
anti-national feelings would at all times endanger
these great commercial advantacres..Yeslt r.lay that
journal contained the followin;passage, which is
as much at variance as possible with all the doc-
trines and feelings
jealous and narrow-minded° f tiie freaes-
t rtandee rs,
mostand
iiisi
ins!.
' clnevous Tory diplomatist could desire ---
.
" The account published yesterdayy of the dinner to
painfuln'
LOO Ashburton, at Nel,
sequel to the scene at Bostvo tis difficult to orlk, is an appropriate
con-
ceive anything more
occu-
pied by Lord Ashburton, tothe post
the feelings of a
d then. real Englishman filling th
atnh having just
wheicliuncontrollable
concluded such a treaty, than
burst of triumph and exultation
from the Americans on that occasion."' ~ broke Eve n forthha d
persuaded himself'
the negotiator before that evening
that he had concluded a treaty fair between the two
countries, he must have retired from that feast with

heart aching with the secret conviction that the
interests of America had triumphed in his negotiation
over those of England. A true Engli3hman would
have passed a sleepless night after witnessing such a
scene. Lord Ashburton no doubt had refreshing
dreams of the future prosperity and greatness to which
he had helped the United States to advance."
A real Englishman, then, must see with horror
the prosperity of the United States. But there
was one true-hearted Englishman at that feast,
Lord JOHN HAY, and one Liberal and en-
lightened Irishman, Mr. G RATTAN, who certainly
did not share the feelings 'of the Chronic/e.
There are thousands of persons in England, too,
who, when they read that account, were as much
delighted with the proceedings as those who
were present at the feast. A hatred or jealousy
of America forms no part of their character. If
Lord ASHBURTON have contributed to its future
prosperity and greatness, he may justly be
proud of it, for he has also contributed, at least,
to the peace of the two countries; and, we be-
lieve, to the prosperity of both. The writer
in the Chronicle is evidently incapable,
at present, of believing, like Lord ASH-
BURTON himself some time ago, that there is a
game at which both parties can win. He fool-
ishly fancies, contrary to all experience, and con-
trary to all the principles on which commerce is
based, that because one gains another necessarily
loses. The fact is not so, and a treaty which puts
an end to disputes about literally nothing, must
be a gain to both.
The passage in the Morning Chronicle im-
plies a deep anti-national feeling—a jealousy and
a hatred of the prosperity of America—with an
abhorrence of its liberties, which, out of the
diplomatic and high Tory circles of England, no
Englishman, we believe, shares.
It was delightful to us to learn of the extreme
pleasure which the Americans felt at the com-
pletion of the treaty, for it was a proof that, in
spits of many incendiary writers—in spite of
sympathisers and expatriated men of a bad cha-
racter, who labour to nourish hostility between
the people—the Americans cherish feelings of
friendship towards us, and cherish an earnest
desire to be at peace with England. We saw in
their joy a full assurance of the permanent
continuance of tranquillity, and of the permanent
realization to both countries—in spite of hostile
tariffs—of the prodigious commercial advantages
which the free-traders promise. One of the
most cheeritig features, indeed, of the whole
transaction is the proof it affords that numerous
incendiary writers and unpatriotic statesmen in
both countries have failed in exciting amongst the
people those hostile feelings which are contrary
to their true interests. Notwithstanding the insidi-
ous efforts of artful diplomacy the people of both
countries, we rejoice to. say, are animated with
the most friendly feelings, which not only made
the task of negotiating a treaty of peace easy
and pleasant, but which would brand the Go-
vernments of both countries with eternal dis-
grace if they had failed. We trust that a
growing conviction in the writer in the Chro-
nicle.— giving birth to future improvement—
of having neglected an opportunity of acquiring
honourable fame and consolidating peace between
two brotherly nations, which require only peace
and trade to be mutually prosperous, may be
at the bottom of those unjust, unfriendly,
peevish, and jealous sentiments with which the
Chronicle overflows, not only towards Lord
ASHBURTON, but towards the Americans.

Mr. O'CoNNELL, in his capacity of Head Paci-
ficator of Ireland, has renewed—•what he whim-
sically calls—his " peaceful agitation" for that
very anti-pacific measure, the Repeal of the
Union. This agitation, which usually sets in
with the autumnal equinox, is formally an-
nounced through the medium of a "Letter to
the People of Munster," wherein the Lord
Mayor of Dublin—the most tempestuous Lord
Mayor on record—strenuously exhorts his " fel-
low-countrymen to be up and stirring," assuring
them that "Ireland expects every man will do
his duty," which duty, it seems, consists in bully-
ing England, so as to frighten her into a conces-
sion of the Repeal. By way of encouragement,
Mr. O'CONNELL assures his countrymen that our
" domestic and foreign relations are such, that if
the Irish people, in sufficient numbers demand
the restoration of their Parliament, that demand
becomes irresistible." He adds that, "if at
the time the recent riots in England were
at their height, Ireland had been or-
ganized with three millions of enrolled
-Repealers, Sir ROBERT PEEL, who before yielded
to a combination of not more than one million,
would have gladly conceded the Repeal of the
Union." Mr. O'CONNELL here alludes to the
Premier's concession of Catholic Emancipation ;
and infers that because that measure was granted,
Repeal—were proper exertions used—would be
granted also, as a matter of course. Now
nothing can be more wretched than this so-
phistry. Emancipation was conceded because
justice, common sense, and expediency alike
demanded such concession ; because the House
of Commons and the Cabinet were split
into nearly equal parties on the question,
and were, in consequence, hampered in
their movements; because, in short, it was
more dangerous to refuse than to yield the
boon. But is this the case—is it ever likely to
be the case—with the Repeal of the Union ?
Are justice, common sense, and expediency con-
cerned in the dismemberment of the empire ? Is
the House of Commons divided on the
question ? Do the Cabinet entertain two
opinions respecting it? . In a word, is it
practicable, and, if practicable, is it safe ?
Mr. O'CONNELL must know—no man better—
that the answer to all these questions must be
against Him. All the great parties in the State
have already declared their invincible determina-
tion never to concedeßepeal, and certainly nothing
has occurred of late that should induce them to
relax in that determination. But this is not the
only blunder that Mr. O'CONNELL is guilty of
in his Letter. Here uis a still more absurd one.
He tells his countrymen that there is "inclina-
tion almost universal among them to procure the
Repeal;" and yet, in the very next sentence, he
modestly con tents himself with demanding" three
millions of signatures," just as though—notwith-
standing this " universal inclination,"—he wholly
despaired of getting more ! This is poor reason-
ing, and such as we should scarcely have expected
from a politician of Mr. O'CONNELL'S practised
shrewdness.

We entertain no feelings of towards the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman; on the contrary,
we admire the general liberality and far-sighted-
ness of his views, and are oftener battling by his
side than against him ; but on the ques-
tion of Repeal we are opposed to him in
toto. It is an idle delusion—the mere phantom
of an excited imagination, which nothing short
of a miracle can ever fashion into a reality.
Why, then, does Mr. O'CONNELL still cleave to
it with such pertinacity ? Sane on all other sub-
jects, is he a Monomaniac on this alone? If it
be the stimulus of agitation that his active spirit
requires, surely he can find fitter questions for
agitating than the impracticable one of Repeal !
Arc there not the tithe rent-charge—the ex-
tension of the suffrage—the due promotion
of Irish manufactures—the shortening of
,Par.
liaments—and, lastly,' the protection of the
ballot ? Here. arc questions fur agitation quite
sufficient, we should think, to engross one man's
attention, even though that man be Mr. O'CoN-
NELL; and on each and all of these,we shall be proud
to be found combating by his side. - But Repeal
—it is asheer impossibility, and consequently to
agitate it, is as ridiculous as to tilt, like Don
QUIXOTE, With N 1 ind-mills. Granted, how-
ever, that it could be carried ; what would
be the inevitable consequence ? A decided
break-up of the unity and integrity of
the empire; an attempt at a Republic in Ire-
land; a general convulsion, in which the chief
finallyßepeal e rbsy w:rauly,clo
fb e w
It
de
phle
af srueffs
teor
rear
ts and
i o;
nat
the request of the Irish people themselves, of the
present established form of Imperial Legislation.

No Englishman can read without shame the
numerous acts of fraud, robbery, and forgery,
committed in ourepublic establishments. It was