The Press. — London, England, 1855-02-17 00:00:00

4e;Xce $2/6-(rj t r t cr; ( No. 94.—VoL. 111. LONDON, SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1855. Ct V rtss. To effect this great object Lord DERBY was willing to make great sacrifices. It cannot be said of him that he was anxious to obtain power that he might appropriate it among his immediate adherents. Mr. DISRAELI set a noble example of self-sacrifice by consenting to resign the post which his brilliant orato rical powers entitled him to claim as Leader of the Commons in Lord PALMERSTON'S favour. To secure the Noble Viscount's assistance Lord DERBY consented to receive into his Cabinet the two colleagues with whom he was known to be closely associated. Many mem bers of the Conservative party would have viewed this fusion with great regret, nor could any circumstances short of the extreme urgency of the case, and the public require ment for a firm Administration, have ren dered it either expedient or justifiable. But in considering this transaction it is to be distinctly understood that the application of Lord DERBY was to Lord PALMERSTON alone, and that it was to obtain his adhesion that the admission of Mr. GLADSTONE and Mr. HERBERT into the projected Cabinet was consented to. Those gentlemen were viewed as an indispen sable part of Lord PALMERSTON'S personal fol lowing, and as make-weights to be cast into the scale in consideration of the strength which Lord DERBY'S Cabinet might have gained by the popularity and influeoce supposed to be attached to Lord PALMERSTON'S name. To those gentlemen Lord DERBY made no per sonal application whatever. Lord PALMERSTON undertook the office of addressing them, and assuredly Lord DERBY would have sanctioned no such overture had he not imagined that Lord PALMERSTON only waited their consent to join the projected Ministry. It is true that Lord PALMERSTON made no promise, but from the conversation which took place, and the discussion on the office which it was proposed he should fill, Lord DERBY left him with a strong sentiment that the arrangement would take effect. Lord PALMERS - ToN promised that his definitive answer should be sent at five o'clock that day. It was not sent until half past nine, and then, as all the world is aware, contained a refusal on the ground that, owing to the vote of the House of Commons, he could bring no strength to Lord DERBY'S Government. From what took place it would naturally be supposed that his decision was influenced by the adverse opinion of his late colleagues. No such thing. It is established, on the con trary, that their refusal was influenced by the adverse opinion of Lord PALMERSTON. He had determined not to join before he knew what their decision would be, and had stated that determination to them in plain terms. We arrive at this important fact from that passage in Lord DEanv's speech, on the Bth inst., in which he alluded to the letter he received from Mr. GLADSTONE, two or three hours after the receipt of Lord PALMERSTON'S refusal. In this courteously worded note Mr. GLADSTONE expressly said, " I alsolearned from " Lord PALMERSTON that he is not of opinion " that he can himself render you useful ser " vice in that Administration." After this intimation from his Lordship, no option was in reality left to Mr. GLADSTONE and Mr. HERBERT. Instead of being solicited, as Lord DERBY had every reason to suppose they would be, to join Lord PALMERSTON in assenting to the proposed arrangement, they were in reality solicited to concur with him in rejecting it. PRICE SIXPENCE. It is not easy to understand why Lord PALMERSTON should have applied to Mr. GLAD STONE and Mr. HERBERT at all, unless we sup pose him actuated by the paltry motive of showing that Lord DERBY was willing for the sake of national union, and to secure a strong Government, to admit into his Cabinet states men who were justly obnoxious to the Con servative party. By the clever strategy of Lord PALMERSTON, it is now known that Mr. GLADSTONE and Mr. HERBERT were afforded an opportunity of retrieving their past errors, and of rejoining that party to which from connec tion, from the constituencies they represent, and from their first introduction into publics life, they unquestionably belong. But, at the same time, it ought to be known that the pro posed fusion would have had no one point of resemblance with that Coalition—here• after to be styled infamous—which we have never ceased to condemn, and of which the country is now reaping the bitter fruit. A statesman in Lord DERBY'S position might well conceive that for the time that Ministry must be the best which. without sacrifice of unity in its councils, would secure the greatest amount of administrative ability and the strongest parliamentary sup port. But he would never have consented to preside over a balanced Cabinet, or to have admitted " open questions " as a part of his policy. He would have been in name and in reality the head of his Government, and would have permitted no other influence in it than was naturally due to the ability and experience of its individual members. Such a Govern ment as he contemplated would have been equal to the difficulties with which it would have had to cope, and would completely have satisfied the wants, if not the sentiment, of the couu try. To the formation of such a Government Lord PALMERSTON objected, only bemuse he could not be at the head of it. Between him self and Lord DERBY there was no opposition of principle—no difference whatever on any question of public policy, or on the manage ment of the war. By pretending to consult with MT.GLADSTONE and MT. HERBERT, LOTdPALMERB. TON seems to have had a double object in view —to cast off from himself upon them the odium of refusing the arrangement proposed, and to exhibit Lord DERBY as soliciting the co-opera tion of men lately condemned, with himself, by a vote of the House of Commons. Tho artifice did not succeed. The large views and disinterested aims of the statesman only stand out in bolder relief from contrast with the petty devices and grasping selfishness of the trickster. THE COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY. No one can be surprised at the intense anxiety with which the people of England look forward to the conduct of the House of Commons at the present time. The public has been startled by the rumours that every possible exertion is being made in Ministerial quarters to stifle the inquiry for which the House of Commons so decisively voted. But in spite of all at• tempts to cloak the truth the Committee must go on. The House of Commons that would recede from investigation in this flagrant case, after, having three weeks since, voted for it by a majority of 305 to 148, would be degraded. Such scandalous tergiversation could never be forgotten at the hustings. LONDON, SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1855. THE formation of the Palmerston Cabinet has been a triumph for the Emperor of RUSSIA, if for no one else. The Czar must see with infi nite joy the Aberdeen Administration recon stituted, freed from the odious suspicion which attached to Lord ABERDEEN'S name, from the blundering diligence of the Duke of NEWCASTLE, and from the inquisitive que rulousness of Lord JOHN RUSSELL. Had Lord ABERDEEN never been Premier we should never have had a Russian war. The Emperor NICHOLAS was prompted to assail Turkey by a fixed belief that a cordial alliance of France and England against him was impracticable, and that our party divi sions, embittered by still impending Reform Bills, would prevent us from ever opposing him with vigour and success. His first expec tation was defeated by the wise foresight of Lord MALMESBURY ; his second has been coin pletely fulfilled by the selfishness which for two years past kept together a band of poli- ticians who " only agreed to differ," and now by the infatuated ambition of the man who fills the post of Premier of England. Lord JOHN RUSSELL has himself declared, with the greatest deliberation and distinctness, how impossible it was that the war should prosper under Lord ABERDEEN'S direction. This week Sir DE LACY EVANS bears witness to the same effect, and openly proclaims that Lord ABERDEEN was "wholly and entirely un " qualified to perform the duties of Premier, " so as to insure a proper and energetic con " duct of the war." What else has this journal said from the first hour when the rupture was threatened? Never was there a time when it was so greatly for the interest of the nation that leading statesmen, not directly compromised by the failure and mismanagement of the War Department, should forget petty differences and join together to form an Administration which would be certain to receive the support of the Legislature and the confidence of the country. The favorite philosopher of Sir WILLIAM MOLKSWORTH has said that aman may see himself in the faces of others better than in his own glass. Ask any intelligent poli tician of the Continent what administrative combination would prove most formidable to Russia, and he would reply, Lord DERBY, Lord ELLENBOROUGH, Lord PALMERSTON, and Mr. DISRAELI. Had this combination been achieved, the flush of joy with which the re ports of our daily decreasing strength at Sebastopol were hailed at St. Petersburg would have changed to the palor of apprehension, and dread would have sunk to the soul of the Czar that at last the might of England was about to be aroused, that " her meteor flag " was to be freely flung upon the breeze, and that the peal of popular applause which hailed the construe tion of a strong Government was the signal for the discomfiture of his legions. ` b' +~ 'S~ '\