Sunbury American and Shamokin journal. [volume] (Sunbury, Northumberland Co., Pa.) 1840-1848, 1843-12-30

No doubt a certain degree of this evil is inse-
parable from every popular Government. Who
in Ireland dares profess any opinion hostile to
the Rotnish hierarchy throughout three of the
provinces, or favourable to it in the fourth
Who in l-3l was safe in England if he proclui-
med his dislike of the Reform Bill What
public meeting has any moderate liberal politi.
clan yentGred to hold OF late years Have not
even the corn-law repealers been fain TO raise
the popular cry Of cheap bread in assemblies col.
lectcd by tickets, and from which the multitude
Were carefully excluded We may not 90 so
fat as the Amcricats in humoring the popular
cry of the hour when we address our constitu-
ents, because our Government is less purely
popular than theirs; but can any one doubt
that the speeches of our political chiefs--aye,
and even their measures when in offce-take
the tincture of the multitude to whom they are
addressed, and whose favor they are expected
to conciliate If this be denied, we may re-
qure to be informed what Lord Sydcnham pre-
csely means when--adyerting TO the free trade
measures respecting timber, sugar, and, above
all, corn, in lS4l-he says, at is an immense
point agreed to get new flag under which to
fight. The people of England do not care a
rush for any of your Irish hobby-horses and
they are not with you upon Church matters,
or grievances of that kind. Even your foreign
policy has not touched them the least and
doubt whether twenty victories would give you
a borough or a county but you have now gi.
ven them an Ineligible principle offering prac-
tcal benefits to contend foT, and though defea-
be attached with reputation, and will make you,
as party in the country, far stronger than
you have been oflate" (p. 90. Now It is to be
observed that the preference here given 10 the
Corn Bill over the Irish Church Reform and the
other measures is not rested on the relative
nerils bat solely on the relative popular ten
dency, of the different plans--their capabilities
MS "hags to fight under;" and the Corn-Law
is preferred because it is better party Shb-
bolcth. No doubt Lord Sydenham would have
right to urge that he had always maintained
the free trade doctrine for its own sake but
why will he not allow American statesmen al
so to prefer their several tenets for their own
sake Suppose he had found letter from Mr.
! Stevenson to South Cafolina friend maintain
ing that some proposition for preventing anti
slavery petitions from being received by Con-
gte7s was fine "fOgto fight under" offering
an Ineligible principle to contend for" and,
though defeated, would make the Virginian
party stronger than it had of late teer," how
little would il have avaled 10 urge that Mr.
Stevenson had always held the same opinion!-
How trlumphantly would Lord Sydenhan7
pointed TO this letter as a confession that Amer.
can statesmen frame their conduct upon the
plan Of panteriEg 20 the tastes and passions o.
tic multitude =! And would it have been dee
med an answer TO his inference fit had appear
Cd ihct the party proposing this extreme course
had never thought of It for ten years which they
had passed in Office, but merely hroughtit for
ward when all other means of obtaining infu.
cnCe had failed, and when their fortune among
the constituent bodies CT the country were be.
coming desperate
Rut these are possibly extreme cases. Are
there no other instances, even in our own bet
Ter regulated system, so much less disfgure,
by popular excess than the Americans no in
stances Of public men shaping their conduc
and their speeches according the the opinions
aud feelings, of even the tastes aud Caprcea, o.
the UpOnle. either 1pnpra l'v ny locally Suro