The Sun.
London, England, 1820-08-31 00:00:00

usually supporting, Lut sometimes opposing the
Ministry !"
There Mr. Editor, nib your spectacles, if you
wear them, again and read it ! See there six
lines, but in words that deserve to be written in
gold, or cut deep in the hardest marble,—see
there the incorruptibility of the Legislature, the
independence--'of-the House of Commons, :the
constitutional deference of Ministers:--in short,
as true and beautiful an eulogium upon the
principles and practice of the British Constitu-
tion as its most ardent admirers, or the most de-
termined Pittites can possibly wish for !! !
But if I agree with his Lordship in that, I must
still deny the assertion that Lord CASTLEKEAGH
was obliged to postpone the appointment of the
Secret Committee—that is, in the sense there put.
Lord CASTLEREAGH saw that the great propor-
tion of the House were anxious to try at some
middle course, if possible—a wish in which I be-
lieve his Lordship joined sincerely, however lie
might doubt the efficacy of any such attempt:—
He strove not therefore to baulk the trial, but
yielded gracefully, and spewed that it was-not
the Minister's House of Commons but the House
of Commons of the People ! The vote, in which
his Lordship joined, implied no dereliction of
principle on the part of Ministers; no judgment
on the real merits of the question—but of that,
more anon ;—at present I shall leave Lord .Joan
to study his' Bible with a wish that, in future, he
will give to us more of MATT. and less of !
Next -comes something from an Oan
what a dust there is about old IVhigs---,,vhich
some folks jocularly term " Ti ERNEY'S memorial."
The writer seems rather afraid, lest Lord JOHN
should really be considered as the organ of that
party who now, as ever, boast of what they
would do if in power. No doubt ! They seemed
eager enough to come into power upon a prin-
ciple that would have made them prosecutors in
a case from which Ministers must have previously
shrunk, and yet now they have the hardihood to
accuse the cabinet of weakness—wickedness
almost,' pusillanimity, &c. &c.
That the Letter takes a very fair, candid, im-
-partial, and clearly intelligible view of the queF,-
don as between the KING, QUEEN, and People
of Britain, I acknowledge with very great plea-
sure. It is pleasing to see such a display of
sound sense and of just ratiocination—nay, it is even
the more extraordinary when coupled with such
Opposition Humbug, for I cannot give it a more
appropriate name, in the endeavour to throw blame
upon Ministers for doing that which the Old Whig
acknowledges Opposition would have done, with
the only difference, that I can tied out, that
they would have tried that silly proposition about
the Royal Marriage Act, as an ex-post facto law, or
else they would have tried the charge before bring-

ing in the 13111! BUT now WOULD THEY HAVE TRI ED
IT ? In what Court :2 If in Parliament, Upon
what principle
Sir, I defy them to spew any thing either of
precedent or analogy in the Constituti6n, His-
tory, Common Law, Statute Law, Law of Par-
liament, or Laws of Common Sense of BRITAIN,
that will bear them out in this assertion. 'Tis
futile, 'tis worse than futile, for it is deceptive.
The cry about " Green Bags," is really too
absurd. The Old Whig acknowledges that he
would have acted upon its contents—why their
all the Wooden and Wafthmanic nonsense about
its colour ! But I exceed your limits,—with one
point then I shall conclude. That letter is evi-
dently written to excuse, in the eyes of the peo-
ple, the readiness with which the Whigs volun-
teered to take up that accusation which, it was
rumoured, Ministers were unwilling to pursue—
one part, however, is intended for another eye
and ear, but it will fail to convince his Mt-
JESTY that Ministers manifested any derelictiou
of duty, in joining.in a vote, expressing that the
proceedings now in progress must be " deroga-
tory to the dignity of the Crown, and injurious
to the best interests of the Empire." -
The fact simply is, that particularly consider-
ing how the affair has been made a party and a
radical question--the fact is, that whether Guilt
or Innocence shall be substantiated, the pro-
ceeding must be attended with the evils recited ;
but to quash the proceedings, or not to have
commenced them, would have been attend.
ed with consequences infinitely more- prejudi-
cial. Ministers have adopted the •least of
two evils—but their doing so; and acknowled-
ing the evil, is neither slur upon their character
nor dereliction of their duty. A majority of the
House of Commons wished to try a -middle
course—Ministers waived all objections to it,
finding that if it were successful upon the prin-
ciple offered by the House, they would even
then arrive at that middle course which They had
before attempted, and in which they• Would,
am of opinion, have succeeded, provided a certain
person had done his duty in transmitting their
offers ; but was that an attempt on the part of
Ministers to shrink from the plain pail► before
them, or did it form any part of an attempt to
throw odium from themselves upon an Illus-
trious Personage? Besides, what odium ? The
Letter acknowledges that there can be tiO odium
at all in the business—at least the Whigs would
have submitted to it to get into power !
Sir, all the fine things which they would have
done, have been done, as far as consistent with
Constitutional propriety—so that I have now
only to notice that extraordinary Letter from the
itutlandshire Baronet, of which I can Only say,
that there must be an error in the superscription.
He says to the person addressed, that he left the
Queen in ignorance of all things after the King's
demise, and allowed her to believe herself de-
serted—but instead of addressing that, to .Lord
LIVERPOOL, pray ought it not to have been to
Mr. BROUGHAM ?

hour's;
IGNOTUS.

7.,
The Rev. 491VI,AND HILL was last week at
Manchester, ajid preached at the Chapels there,
in aid of the tandon Missionary Society. The
collections made at the doors amounted to up-
wards of six hundred pounds.