The Sun.
London, England, 1827-08-27 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF PUBLIC JOURNALS,

An important public meeting has taken place
at Birmingham, to addr.dss His Majesty in cori-
dolence qn the death of Mr. Canning, and to
thank the Sovereign for having formed such a
Ministry as would ensure the continuance of
" that just, enlightened, and beneficent policy,
which has (through Mr. Canning) directed
the Councils and exalted the character of this
country." The immense numbers which at-
' tended this meeting—'the great respectability of
those who signed the requisition—the spirit anti
ability with which its objects were unfolded and
its resolutions enforced by the speakers, the most
distinguished of Whom was a 1 clergyman of the
Church of England, and the marked unanimity'
which prevailed as to the merits of Mr. Can-
ning's principles, the incalculable usefulness of
his policy, and of that expected from his succes-
sors in this Cabinet; fully bear us out in the
epithet of " important," which we have bestowed
upon the proceedings at Birmingham, which
cannot fail to have their due effect upon the
mind both of his Majesty and his subjects.—

To the little pamphlet which we mentioned
on Saturday last, under the title of " A Remon-
strance from a Tory to Mr.. Peel," is annexed a
Postscript containing matter not 'unworthy of
notice. • The author here quotes, from the:. re-
cently published Correspondence of. Edmund
Burke and Dr. Lawrence, a letter which appears
to. have been written by the Doctor, though' dic-
tated by Burke himself, .and addressed as an
admonition to the late Duke of Portland, Lord
Fitzwilliam, Lord. SPencer, and others of the old
Whigs who had joined Mr. Pitt,. and were lbws
understood to be on the point .of resigning, from
considerations of the policy to be pursued with
regard to Ireland—then, as now, the hinge on
which turned most of our domestic differences,
whether of opinion or of party. The object of
Burke in this address is to dissuade the Whig
Lords from abandoning their post, however un-
favourable to their hopes of a better system for
-Ireland.might be the maintenance of that always
obnoxious personage, the Earl of
.Westmoreland,
in the government of that unfortunate country.
The argument against the resignation was not
founded so much on any error in the views of
the above-mentioned Lords on the subject of
Irish policy, as on the mischief thereby likely to
result to Mr. Pitt's Government, then engaged
in a deadly struggle for the existence of this em-
pire as an independent power in Europe. The'
truth is, that the honour of the Noble Lords on
that occasion could not in she slightest degree
be affected by their remaining in office. Lord.
Westmoreland had been Lord-Lieutenant before
their accession to the Ministry, and might be
continued a little longer without compromising
the principle of emancipation, for which they
had stipulated with Mr. Pitt. The question at
issue being one of time and circumstance, they.
were free to act upon it, according to their sense
of those collateral advantages or injuries which
the public service would be' apt to experience
from their decision. It will probably be consi-
sidered that the advice of Burke was prudent
and reasonable ; and that judging freely, they
judged also discreetly by continuing members of
the-Government. It must likewise be admitted,
that had the resolution of the Whig Lords been
different, their motives could not have • been
with justice impeached : they would have gene
out on grounds not personal but political, on.
grounds divested of all tyrannical dictation to-
wards the Sovereign, of all mean envy or un-
forgiving malice towards a colleague whose re-
spect for freedom and splendid reputation were
his only crimes. There may arrive; how-
ever, cases of an unhappy collision, if not
between equal members of the same Cabin
net, between parties in the Government ssiitlS •
respect to whom no equality of station eY,:iete.— :
If, for instance; one party be, by thy; swum of
the Constitution, responsible for the exercise of -
a certain power essential to the activity and
efficacy of the Government, while another party
who is free from all responsibility makes an at-
tempt to exercise that. power in his own person,
.or to compel those who are accountable fbr their
actions to surrender their free agency, and
against their Consciences to obey his pleasure, to
which side will it then be actilowledged that the
spirit of " dictation" is ascribable ? Whose just
privileges are then invaded ? Whose honest
pride is then offended ? Whose public useful-
ness is then endangered? On whom is an un-
fair
and insidious alternative inflicted ? It seems . •
to be asserted by the Eldon and Peel newspapers
that Mr. Herries is " the King's candidate" for
the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer ; aria
that " from that gentleman's success or failure, ,
the public will be able to judge what degree of.
dictation is exercised towards the Sovereign by
his present " servants ;" and then, after denying
a certain disqualification which had been alleged ,
against Mr. Herries, and stating the delay in
his appointment, these thorough-going apes-
tolicals proceed to ask—" On what is this~
perverse opposition to the King's will founded ?"'
Now, if a chaos ever existed in any human brain,
if must have been in his who thought of apply-
ing the term " dictation," as it has here been
had recourse to. The King has the right of
chSosing his Prime Minister, from the very na-
ture of things ; and even then, such an act of
obvious
tliec Constitution
a n
strd
iltu
tesoloernwnial free
without
our et
its
selietin is n
l ecceossai.y ot left
guarantee.by
The Minister chosen, if he accepts the office, is
responsible for the choice, although he might
have been passive, or altogether ignorant of the
Royal determination in his own favour. What,
therefore, is to be said of those among the King's
subjects, who declare substantially by their con-
duct, that his Majesty shall. suffer for it. if he
dares to direct his choice of a Prime Minister
out as they shall permit. If any knot of persons
combine, either formally or by way of secret un-
derstanding, to frustrate the formation of an effec-
tive Government because they will have one
Prime Minister only, oishave personal objections
h.
to one, what name does dis conspiracy deserve ?
Do they not, so far as they
prerogative Is •
besides, the.
not this, to use the mildest phrase, imam)
etilltecyroacnhontieruttsuoript 'the
a King's
Boyal free
pre
rog choicer
.D. o
" dictation" to the Sovereign;? But when the
y'r'le'sepno'nsib.le [keeper
pKriinalgehaivsiminaiadteerhils,imchseolir —a
eOuncil, and his Secretaries of State, those
alike Gwhoo ifflocrovit:siellerlsepeneslicillgGlbuPeilrlireal:etdtSatlyfarteruStsieSioeceaataailwljuloitntlaioialleerml saiPest:sir'sel
Wabesbta sieedeyedeunaan,rarwetkeasalP:oloapfddsbfoelotalelebill'iesatviecie'dttKx3wh:li'e:lenlitaaloignlalls'o'idisl:
filling King and
u p opeople c
vacant
at
riciht constitutional
b el
ong t
the
responsibility loi tfy
place,b the only one remaining in the Cabinet ?
Is it not monstrous for any man• to set ep the
pretension that such a power is the King's, un-
supported---nay, disapproved_by his respon-
sible Mr. Herries (of which we
miliisters? lf

know nothing) be the " King's candidate,' why
then Mr. Peel—nay, Mr. Cobbett—might be
the ‘, King's candidate;' and those who have
to answer with their heads for the course of Bri-
tish policy at home and abroad, may be alto-
gether disabled from executing the measures to
which they pledge their Sovereign and country,
by an enemy lodged, in spite of them, in the
very centre of their councils ! The condition
of a British Minister so fettered .and betrayed.
would be intolerable—the language of the Con-
stitution, did it authorize such contradictions,
would be unintelligible. The Prince who made
(but we know not that any Prince of modern
times has made or has thought of making) such
an open attempt upon the honour and efficiency '
of his servants, would not suffer an usurpation
of any known prerogative from their resistance
to his arbitrary mandate, but he would be him-
self committing an act of .usurpation : such a
Prince would not have to complain of " dicta-
tion" in others towards himself, but he would
be the dictator. No Englishman possessing
the least dignity of.character, or possessed by one
spark of zeal for the public service, or of capa-
city to promote it, could ever submit to such
a fatal intrusion of irresponsible and anti-con-
stitutional power, with the first principles of po-
litical action under a monarchy, limited by the
laws. We have argued this question on grounds
afforded by the Tory Journals, and on statements
which those journals have thought proper to
communicate. For ourselves we have asserted
nothing. We do not say—we do not know—that
Mr. Herries is the King's candidate : we do not
believe that his Majesty, who so well understands
the constitution, would, by grasping at a power
which is inherent in his sworn servants, so far de-
scend from his own sacred pre-eminence of
station, as to aim at becoming like his servants,
a " responsible" public functionary, and annul-
ling the great constitutional maxim that " the
King can do no wrong." Neither do we say,
or insinuate, that Mr. Herries is objected to by
a single individual in the Cabinet, for any reason
beyond that of being a responsible Minister forced
on the Government by the only member of it who
himself is not responsible. But one most gross
as well as despicable falsehood of a Sunday
Paper, we are bound to expose, as being also a
malignant calumny—to wit,.- that any particle of
resistance to the appointment of Mr. Herries has
been made or thought of, on the imagination of
Mr. Brougham (!) being a candidate against
rim : there never, we repeat, was a more con-
temptible falsehood.—lbid.

There have been ,periods in all stages of our
history, when it has become necessary to refer to
the land-marks of the Constitution ; of which
none are more important than those which limit
and point out the power and prerogatives of the
Crown. Blackstone says—" There cannot be
a stronger proof of that genuine freedom which
is the boast of this age and country, than the
rower of examining, with decency and respect,
the limits of the King's prerogative—a topic that
in some former ages, was thought too delicate
and sacred to be profaned by the pen of a sub-
ject." Though a memorable declaration was
some years since made, alleging that the power
of the Crown had increased, was increasing, and
ought to be diminished, the truth we believe is,
that what may be denominated the . personal
power of the Monarchy has by no means in-
creased ; and that the proposition, if true at all,
may be true to his Ministers, but not as to the
King. if rightly and calmly viewed, it will be
found, we suspect, that the greater part of the
personal power of the Crown has devolved upon
etose who have found its application necessary
to tit‘.e management of their Parliamentary ad-
herents;" and the Constitutional principle that
" the King can do no wrong," has resolved it-
self, in some Oen's minds, into his possessing
little more than ti7o power of choosing his Mi-
nisters; a power itself, by the bye, which Parlia-
ment has, in some instanOes, virtually assumed.
We talk of the King as the foCntain of honour;
but the truth is, that those who pos_csess the bo-
rough influence, are oftener the sources through
which honours are distributed, and both .the
King and his Ministers, controulled by this spe-
cies of influence, are compelled to yield both
power and obedience to a kind of oligarchy, which
the constitution neither knows nor recognises.
For an illustration of the truth of this, let any
one look to the possessors of most of the dignities
of the Church, both in England and Ireland,
and' ask himself whether those who possess a
large proportion of them owe their rank and for-
tunes to the Crown, or to the source which we
have suggested. An idea has partially got
abroad, for the accuracy of which we do not
vouch, but which we are inclined to credit, that
there is 1 disposition in a High Quarter no
longer to surrender the rights of the Monarchy
to this kind of assumption. On the other hand,
it has long been contended, that no Minister can
carry on the affairs of this country without pos-
sessing the power and influence which by degrees
have became almost wholly engrossed by those
rdssessing that station. It is a question of
vast Constitutional importance, and one which
iwe should wish to treat with all the respect
-which Mr. Justice Blackstone assigns to it. On
the one hand, though the abstract question re-
mains the same, in practice, and its extent and
consequen.ees, it is widely different from what it
was when the principle was first broached and
established ; and however anxious we may be
that the King's just prerogative should not be
curtal6d, or the ill-gotten power of the borough-
3nongers extended, it becomes quite another
question how far other dangers (those of fa-
vouritism and secret influence, for instance) might
riot arise, were the whole patronage of the Crown
• to be dispensed by the King himself, independent
of his sworn and responsible advisers. It is
much to be wished that, in the present state of
affairs both at home and abroad, and especially
in the unsettled state of the Administration, a
matter of this moment should ,not at present
arise ; 'and we have thrown -cnit these remarks
upon it, only as knowing it to be a subject which
is at this moment engaging the attention of
many, who do not, therefore, expect to see it
passed over by a public Journal professing inde-
pendent and impartial principles.--Morning
Herald.

The old proverb, that ~ one man may better
steal a horse than another look over the hedge,
'was never more applicable to our own case, with
regard to what has been said of Mr. Henries. In
the Morning Herald of Wednesday appeared
the foilowing-paragr, aph, in the shape of a lead-
ing article t....“ It is reported that an obstacle
has arisen as to placing the finances of the coun-
try in the hands of one of the present aspirants
for office, on account of his alleged connection
with a great City speculator." On the subject
of the report thus alluded to, we preserved si-
lence. .In the Marnino• Herald of the follow -
b
ing day the subject was revived in a City article,
in which Mr. Henries was distinctly named ; in
behalf of whom it was naively contended, that