The Sun.
London, England, 1827-08-31 00:00:00

SPIRIT OP Trim PUBLIC JOURNALS.

With some satisfaction we refer to the salutary
caution which we exercised in discussing a pre-
tended fact, brought forward within these LW-
days by the Tory journals, and for purposes, it
now appears, the most unprincipled. To those
who had no other opportunity of hearing it, the
Times of Monday and Wednesday last would
make known, that the ex-Tory faction, through
their printed organs, had raised Mr. Herrit!s, late
Secretary to the Treasury, into what was termed
a " King's candidate" for the vacant office of
Chancellor of the Exchequer : in other words,
these exclusive loyalists charged the King with
having condescended to start a " candidate" for
a most important situation of the Government,
without consulting the Cabinet, his official ad-
visers. It affords us more pleasure than we can
express, to declare at the same time our grateful
respect for what have been, in reference to the
Chancellorship of the Exchequer, the language
and conduct of his Majesty, and to offer an as-
surance, no less unquestionable, that they have
not been what the Tories impute to him, but
positively and absolutely the reverse. Our
readers will remember that we treated the " fact"
as a production of the Tories ; but for the mo-
ment assumed its authenticity as an hypothesis,
for the convenience of applying to it a course of
constitutional reasoning, and drawing from it
conclusions which might not be without perma-
nent value to our countrymen. While the rea-
sonings are, we believe, unassailable, the fact we
know to be false. Neither Mr. Herries, nor any
one else, has ever been the " King's candidate."
His Majesty knew the Constitution of his realms
too well to propose, or ever dream of proposing,
an individual to fill a subordinate office in his
Cabinet ; far less to force a Chancellor of the
Exchequer, so proposed, upon a reluctant Admi-
nistration. It is all a base calumny upon the King
—a grievous subject of complaint on behalf of
the Sovereign against some of the most worthless
of his subjects. His Majesty has never aimed
throughout this crisis, at assuming a power which
is, in its essence, inseparable from the responsi-
bility of his sworn Ministers. That some mis-
understanding—produced by an unfortunate
error of judgment in a person whom we shall not
unnecessarily name—has arisen with regard to
this Ministerial appointment, is a truth suffi-
ciently attested : but neither the Sovereign nor
the body of the Cabinet can be charged, with
any justice, .as its author. On the other hand,
1 his Majesty has, it is understood, made manifest
his gracious desire to have himself and his Ca-
binet extricated by the most liberal and concilia-
tory means from this unseasonable dilemma.—
That the Ministers who have suffered so much
embarrassment from the effects of it, at a mo-
ment more especially of such pressing importance
to our relations with foreign States,—that they
should be equally anxious as their Sovereign to
have the knot untied in a manner consistent with
his dignity and comfort, and their own sense of
public duty, we need not take much pains to
prove. What, then, can obstruct or retard for
an hour, the accomplishment of reciprocal wishes
so natural and honourable both to his "Majesty
and to his Ministers ? Of course no title that
'Mr. Herries can produce can seriously stand in
the way of such high interests, and of a con-
summation so infinitely to be desired. Suppose,
for the sake of argument, that Mr. Herries did
receive and accept a tender of the vacant office,
can he affirm that the tender had the voice of
the Cabinet to support it ? that it was not made
to him under a false impression of the power by
which it was sanctioned ?—that his Majesty know-
ing that of which he now is fully cognizant, with
respect to the opinions and feelings of his ser-
vants, would ever have thought of Mr. Herries
for a Cabinet office, any more than of the Man
in the Moon ? Besides all this, can the gentle-
man flatter himself that he has any members in
the Cabinet in favour of his pretensions ? And,
lastly, can he fear that the country would suffer
from his retirement ? With such men as Mr.
Huskisson, Mr. Sturges Bourne, and Mr. Chas.
Grant, all competent to discharge its duties, if
imposed upon them, does Mr. Herries really im-
agine that his fitness for the situation is more in-
disputable than theirs ? Why, we are not void
of some degree of astonishment how an indivi-
dual—not, certainly, of eminent or splendid re-
putation, with the feelings of King and Cabinet,
and it may be fairly added, of the country, too,
against him—can restrain even for five minutes
his eagerness to get free from a position so invi-
dious, and, as he must well know, so utterly un-
tenable as this,. into which he has been thrown
by a mere accidental mistake, which all the
irTiitisittly-dtihseinrekdinitgabple arttiot of society
too
fficwouldoffice.
If
co:personFi
ler a
were asked to dinner, and should be afterwards
informed by the master of the house that he had
been invited through mistake, would any gentle-
man, under such circumstances, think of sitting
clown to table ? It appears that Mr. Huskis-
son's second audience has been postponed to this
day, the Right Hon. Gentleman deeming it ad-
visable to be in full possession of the opinions of
all his colleagues before he again seeks the pre-
sence of his Majesty. We can state, that there
exists but one feeling in the Cabinet upon the
principle by which this question ought to he fro-
yarned ; and that the issue will be a happy One for
both Sovereign and country, we entertain a rea-
sonable hope.—Tintei.

We are yet unable to communicate any posi-
tive intelligence with regard to the Ministerial
arrangements ; but we trust we shall be enabled
to inform our readers to-morrow that every thing
has been settled in a satisfactory manner. We
are sure that no light matter would induce men
who agree as to the policy which the Govern-
ment ought to pursue to ensure the welfare of
the nation, to expose, by their disunion, the
country to the hazard of an opposite system; and
we have, in the anxious wish of his Majesty
during the formation of the Ministry lately de-
prived of its distinguished head, to secure to the
country such an Administration as would most
effectually promote its interests and preserve its
reputation, and in his well-known mild and libe-
ral character, the best guarantee that no obstacle
to a satisfactory arrangement can ever proceed
from the Sovereign. We have, indeed, every
so
ago, of a satisfactory issue, will be
amply realized.—Morning Chronicle.
give We have been unwilling to
currency to
outrca thnre fore days believing, that the assurance we held
the idle rumours of the day,
arising out of the
appointment of Mr. Herriea to the Chancellor-
ship of the Exchequer;
and equally unwilling
are we now to attempt
to reason conclusively
upon what can only he considered as mere hypo-
thesis. This much, however, we may say—•
that if Mr. Herries were appointed by the Pre..,
mier to that honourable and laborious situation,
and if subsequently he were approved of by tlis
King, then the talk about the ~ dictation" of an
irresponsible" personage to a responsible half-
formed Cabinet, Pi tbo most dAyallinii and ncn.

sense. Has the King the right of appointing his
Ministers? The Constitution of these king-
doms answers in the affirmative ; and then, we
ask, where is the dictation in appointing one
particular individual to one particular situation ?
If the King had not the Constitutional Preroga-
tive of choosing his own advisers—how came the
Treasury Journals to laud with so much eulogy
the Monarch's selection of the late Mr. Canning
as Premier, and to follow it up with such loud-
tongued praises of the nomination of Lord Gode-
rich as his successor ? What greater exercise of
power, or prerogative, or constitutional right is
there in appointing Mr. Herries, than in the se-
lection of Lord Goderich to the situation of Pre-
mier ? In short it is a mere waste of language
to argue the matter on any such flimsy, illogical,
and unconstitutional pretensions. If Mr. Her-
ries be nominated by the Premier, and approved
of by the King, he must be supported, even
though the generous Whigs should be forced to
resign their places. To be sure it will be rather
.a curious sight to see them march back to their
old seats ; but there is a " vaulting ambition"
which often o'erleaps itself, and so it has been
with the consistent Whigs. That the Whigs are
in a state of great consternation must be evident
from the tone and language of their principal
Journal for the last week or ten days ; and that
they have used every effort, and would now make
every sacrifice to retain their situations, is some-
thing more than matter of speculation. What,
we ask, have we gained by their accession ?
What are we to lose by their dismissal? We
answer emphatically—Nothing. On the con-
trary, the thinking part of the community would
hail it as a blessing, and the friends of our Pro-
testant Constitution as the safeguard of the
nation. The Whig Journal has almost in so
many words told us, that if Mr. Herries be con-
firmed in the office of Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, the Whigs must go out, as a matter of
necessity. We should be glad to take them at
their word ; but—Timeo Danaos.-31orning
,Post.

The country is certainly much indebted to
Chief Justice Best, for the impressive manner in
which he called attention to the diseased state of
our social system. That lie himself is very im-
perfectly acquainted with the causes of the evil
which he deplores, and labours also under great
misconception as to the facility with which it is
possible to remedy the evil, is no doubt obvious
enough. It is much easier to describe the evil,
than to discover through a patient analysis the
cause of it. Sir Wm. Best assumes that we owe
an immense debt of gratitude to the Magistracy,
who dispense justice gratuitously throughout the
country : and assumes also, that without holding
out the bribe of the Game Laws, we could not
be in the enjoyment of this blessing. It is again
maintained by others, that so long as the
peasantry remain in their present state of desti-
tution, they will pursue poaching, which they do
not look on as.a crime, and that poaching ine-
vitably leads all those who follow it to the com-
mission of crime in the long run. The people
are trepanned as it were, through the instrumen-
tality of the Game
_Laws, into the commission
of what they would shrink from in the outset.
The order, then, would seem to be this—
poverty leads to poaching, and poaching to crime. ,
But what caused the poverty ? Now, if it can
be shown that the Magistracy have reduced the
people to poverty, the Magistracy are, of course,
the authors of all the consequences which flow
from that poverty - that is, are the causes of that
appalling demoralization which now presents
itself every where ; we should imagine that even
Chief Justice Best would pause before he praised
them again. Far be it from us to say that the
Country Gentlemen of England were aware that
the various Acts which they solicited and ob-
tained from the Legislature for the controul of
the poor, would have the ultimate effect of con-
verting the peasantry into criminals. There are
few persons who coolly contemplate the perpetra-
tion of evil. The Magistracy, like all other men,
were fond of power, and never doubted their ability
to exercise it beneficially for the community.
Even the worst tyrants in History coveted
power, for the most part, under the idea that it
would enable them to do more extensive good.
The country gentlemen were as firmly persuaded
as Chief Justice Best is, that in their capacity of
Magistrates they were conferring the greatest be-
nefit on their country, and that they could not
possibly interfere with any thing without doing,
good. When they destroyed the connection be-
tween labour and its reward they certainly could
not be aware that they were at the same time de-
stroying the worth of .our agricultural population.
When we turn to the accounts of the debates in
Parliament, about the period when the system
first came into operation which converted la-
bourers into paupers, we find men of the highest
name expressing themselves in language that be-
trayed a lamentable ignorance of the principles of
political science. iliben Mr. Whitbread brought
iu a Bill to regulate the wages of labourers in
husbandry, Mr. Pitt distinctly advocated the
principle, the giving effect to which has caused
all the mischief which is now so much deplored.
0, Were the minimum (he said) fixed upon the
standard of a large family, it might operate as an
encouragement to idleness on one part of the
community ; and if it were fixed on the standard
of a smell family, those would not enjoy the be-
nefit of it for whose relief it was intended, What
measure, then, could be found to supply this
defect? Let us (said he) make relief, in cases
where there are a number of children, a matter
of right and an honour, .instead of a ground for
opprobrium and contempt. This will make a
large family a blessing, and not a CPTsP ; and this
will draw 3
proper line of distinction between
those who are atig to provide for themselves by
their labour. and .those who, after having enriched
their country
with a number of children,
He have a
o,r ."
claim zipon its assistance f their support
afterwards distinctly points to • the.du grailtir,g re-
lief according to the number of chijdreP, as.
ea
measure which would almost proce 3 min-
nium in England. Mr. Whitbread, whose views
seem to have been equal 4 unenlightened, thought
that the wisest course for Government, in-
stead of putting the relief afforded to such on the
footing of a charity, supplied, perhaps, from a pre-
carious find, and dealt with a reluctant hand,
would be at once to institute a liberal premium for
the encouragement of large families. Mr. ?FPx
*steered clear of any positive absurdity, by ex-
Pressing himself in a vague and general manner,
but he knew just as little of the matter as either
of the other two. Had premiums for large fa-
nimill'itas been instituted, Paddy would have carried
on tne Pri •
zes to a dead certainty. What a very
narrow
escape Paddy has had 'of being a Patriot
of the first
Order. Unfortunately for him, his
prolific powers 'have been called into exercise at
a time when the admiration of Mr. Pitt's social
philosophy is rather on the wane. It is hardly
fair, however, to single out Mr. Pitt, Mr. Fox,
and Mr. Whitbread, for animadversion, when a
consultation of the Records of Parliamentary
eloquence will amply prove that the « wisdom