SINCE the political articles of our publication have been in type, a great and unexpected change has come over the destinies of Britain-the King has exercised his undoubted prerogative in dismissing from his councils the men who had abused his confidence-who had degraded his royal name-who had truckled to his foes-and the Duke of Wellington is the object of his Sovereign's choice. This is all we know at present-it is all perhaps that any body knows-or is all that any body will know, until the return of Sir Robert Peel shall have enabled his Majesty's present adviser to complete the ministerial arrangements. We might very easily employ our ingenuity in specifying appointments that ought to be made, or that will be made; we might speculate on changes that will certainly take place. But there are prophets enough already before us in the field-certainly more numerous than will have their predictions accomplished. And as each of the Irish offices-those with which we are more immediately concerned, have each been already positively bestowed on six or seven different persons, we fear that our candidates would come in rather late.

Much ingenuity has been exercised in devising the cause why his Majesty dismissed his late servants-it requires no great sagacity to know why he ought to have dismissed them; and in the absence of more authentic information, we are willing to believe that the causes why he did dismiss them and why he ought to have dismissed them, are one and the same. Some will have it that this step was produced by the interference of her Majesty the Queen; this is a foul and unfounded calumny, framed with the single motive of bringing that illustrious lady into disrepute with the radicals; but even this party, whatever be their faults, have more

generosity than to tolerate the unmanly falsehood. Others say that his Majesty was disgusted with the mountebank exhibitions of Lord Brougham, who,

to use the expressive words attributed to the King, "has been dragging the great seal of England through the dirt." We just as much believe this story as the other; it is, however, more probable. It is a well-known fact, that the King has been offended with the intemperance and buffoonery of the late keeper of his conscience. Possessing the feelings of a gentleman, we do not see how he could be otherwise. But to our minds, the King's celebrated declaration to the bishops, is a satisfactory evidence that his Majesty has taken no hasty or ill-considered step-that Lord Spencer's death but hurried on the execution of a purpose deliberately formed in the royal mindand that William the Fourth has long since determined to dismiss the ministers who counselled him to break his coronation vows.

Were we to claim credit to ourselves for political sagacity, we might remind our readers, that no later than last month, we prophesied that sooner or later this must be the casethat the spirit of the constitution must eventually triumph over its perverted forms; and the royal will be represented by his Majesty's ministers, and the popular feeling by the House of Commons. We even referred to the crisis of 1783, as one bearing a close analogy to the course of events which we anticipated. For so far our expectations have baen realized; the verification of the rest of the parallel rests with the people of England; and we feel that they will do as their fathers did-they will rally round the throne, and support the principles of their ancient constitution. The monarch has exercised his most sacred prerogative in choosing whom he will for his servants, if this prerogative be now transferred from his Majesty to the House of Commons, the monarchy is virtually at an end. The Parliament are the legislature-they must not, they ought not to assume the functions of the executive. The separation of these two powers has been esteemed the

chief safeguard of our freedom, and Britons must beware how they permit them to be united in the same body.

The transferring of the whole power of the state to the House of Commons, has been for some time proceeding steadily, although surely. Under the old constitution the crown and the aristocracy exercised, through the influence of the close boroughs, control over the proceedings of that body which rendered it less their interests to oppose the gradual concentration in the lower House of all the functions of the state. But the reform bill having destroyed that influence, has virtually effected a revolution; we say not, whether for evil or for good. But it now becomes important and necessary that the powers and privileges of all the separate orders should be distinctly and clearly understood. No instrument of tyranny can be more adapted to crush the liberties of a nation, than a House of Commons when uncontrolled by the balance of a monarchy and aristocracy; the history of the long parliament may have taught the nation this. The question now is, whether they shall be so controlled or not? This is the simple consideration which, apart from all party feeling or all political predilection, must influence every reflecting man to support-not Whig or Tory (these names have been too long the means of confusing every question into which they could be dragged,) but the just and constitutional prerogative of the King.

What may be the measures of the Duke of Wellington we know not; we now give our support, not to him, but to the King. His Majesty's right to choose his own servants is one which intimately concerns the liberties of the nation; and this right having been practically asserted, we deem it the duty of all good men to sustain it. The simplicity of the British constitution has long been so encumbered by multiplied and complicated theories, that its true principles have well nigh been lost sight of. The time is come when its real structure should be clearly defined, and its balance, if it be not now maintained, is irretrievably lost. The maintenance of that balance depends upon the preservation of the King's prerogative. We never have been the friends of arbitrary power, or the adVOL. IV.

vocates of encroachments upon the privileges of the people, but under the conviction we have stated, we claim for the monarch liberty to exercise a right with which the constitution and the law have invested him.

We do not believe that we are approaching a contest between the crown and the people; we do not think that either the crown will attempt any encroachment upon the privileges of the people, or the people any interference with the prerogative of the crown. Our gracious monarch is too sincere a friend to liberty, to tolerate in any minister an unconstitutional exercise of his prerogative, even if he had a minister mad enough to advise it; and we are well assured that loyalty is too deeply implanted in the hearts of the British people to permit of their sanctioning, on the part of their representives, any assault upon the legitimate rights of the monarch. It is only necessary that each party should remember their own rights, and maintain them without interfering with those of the other, and all will be well. In writing upon this question we fling all party considerations to the winds; every man but the republican and the democrat must now stand by the King; and, in England, these form so inconsiderable a section, that though noisy they will be powerless; this step of the King will call into action the conservative feeling of the country, and before this the destructives will sink into their original insignificance.

We have stated our conviction, that the subject of the Irish Church was the cause of differice between the King and his ministers. It is useless to deny that upon this question the Whigs have on their side the present House of Commons. How far the sentiments of honorable members were influenced by the magic of the treasury benches we do not pretend to say; but even if the House of Commons are obstinately bent upon the destruction of the Church

unless our government be a democracy-this does not imply that their mandate must be complied with-the King's ministers, in the discharge of their executive duty, will support the law as it is: the Commons cannot change it without the consent of the King and the Lords, and unless ministers transgress the principles of the constitution,

3 B

in the management of the executive functions, or an application is made to the legislature for new powers-the House of Commons have no constitutional right to interfere.

And here a heavy responsibility devolves upon a body of men of whom we confidently anticipate that they will not shrink from its discharge. The necessity of applying to the legislature for new facilities of realizing the property of the Church may produce a refusal from the Commons that will terminate in consequences that it is difficult to foresee. The landlords of Ireland can obviate this necessity by taking the payment of her income upon themselves. This will remove all possible cause of dissension between the Crown and the Commons; and every motive of interest and duty unites in urging the landed proprietors of the kingdom to this step. A great majority of them have already availed themselves of the power given them by Mr. Stanley's act: a new and, if possible, more imperative duty urges the remainder to imitate their example.

From the period of the month at which the intelligence of the dismissal of the Whigs reached us, we can do no more than present our readers with these hurried observations; in fact, at present we know little of the character or measures of the new ministry. That it will be a firm one, we may augur from the energy of the illustrious individual who has been placed at its head. That it will defend the Irish Church, we have the earnest in the expressed determination of the King. Beyond this we know nothing. We think we may predict, that in this country the Duke of Wellington will maintain the law, and not truckle to the base ascendancy of a dishonest and intriguing demagogue. He will govern Ireland upon principle, and not with reference to the convenience of securing Mr. O'Connell's forty votes. Let him do this, and we promise him the support of every honest man in the island in crushing the despotism of agitation and of murder. We venture upon no new doctrine in combining them. These, however, are points that can better be discussed at a future period at present, it is well that the question before the mind of the public should be the simple

:

right of the King to choose his own servants, and to control the executive department of the state.

There is one comfort, that the late exclusion of the constitutional party from office has separated from them all the trading politicians who once professed Tory principles, only because Tory principles were the path to power. The Grants, the Palmerstons, the Plunketts-all the time-serving and despicable hypocrites, who were ready to serve any master that would pay, can never again be seen in monstrous coalition with honest men of any side. They now take their leave of office, and for ever. Alternately the slaves of all party, they are now despised by all alternately false to every employer, they never will be taken into service again. Whatever party gains the ascendancy, the nation is at least rid of such ministers as these.

Another source of gratification is, that some of the late ministers have thrown off the mask-shown themselves in their true colours-and have displayed their real character of ingratitude and baseness. Even in the late cabinet we believe that there were some honorable men; but what shall we say of Lord Palmerston, who, after having for four years been in the service, and received the pay of his sovereign, could dictate, if not pen, against that sovereign the abusive, the all but treasonable articles that have disgraced the columns of The Globe? Or of Lord Brougham, who, after having, during the same period, filled the highest office of the realm, and having fulminated from the woolsack his invectives against the Trades' Unions, could now enter into combinations-should we not say conspiracies-to revive them, for the purpose of embarrassing, not the Duke of Wellington, but his royal master-that master to whom this same Lord Chancellor, but one short month ago, used (believe himself) to transmit, each night, by post, a confidential account of each day's buffoonery? Time was when the very imputation of such conduct would have excluded the suspected individuals from the society of English gentlemen-but the last four years have made us familiar with strange things.