The Press. — London, England, 1856-12-20 00:00:00

• :4 •1 4 I A It • , ((rb ert,6l No. 190.—VoL. IV. LONDON, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 20, 1856. U STAMPED .... SJXPENCY.._ NSTAMPED-FIVEPENCE. ress. Supposing this nassage to have come down to us from one of the great orators of anti quity—as from the force of its sentiments and the clearness of its expression it might well have done—the question is, whether we should now recognise it as wise and just, and as pre• scribing the line of policy which a mighty State, conscious of its obligations to right, ought to pursue? There are many statesmen of our own ccun• try to whom this passage might be ascribed. From its total freedom from all sectarian pre- j udices, it might have appropriately fallen from the lips of almost any one of the great men who have presided over• the affairs of this country since the Revolution of 1888. In our own day, it might be assigned to any of the eminent statesmen who have led the parties of Tory and Whig, to Lord CASTLE REAGH, to the Duke of WELLINGTON, Lord GREY, Sir ROBERT PEEL, or Lord DERBY. In reality, it belongs to the latter. It was spoken by Lord DERBY when he explained to the House of Lords on the 27th of February, 1852, the principles by which he proposed to regulate the foreign policy of his Administration. It is impossible to conceive a stronger con trast to the scheme of policy here laid down than is afforded by the acts of Lord PALMRRS• TON'S Foreign-office. The internal adminis tration of independent States is not respected. No effort is made to preserve amicable rela tions with other Powers, and in the differences which arise between our Government and foreign Courts no attempt is made to settle them by temperate representation of the matters in dispute. Lord DERBY proposed to live on terms of good neighbourhood with the other Powers of the world, taking no advantage of the weak, and not seeking to irritate the strong. Lord PALMERSTON proposes to keep our foreign relations in a state of perpetual uncertainty and turmoil, and in place of endeavouring to establish peace on a solid basis, to create such confusion as leaves it extremely doubtful whether war on a grand scale may not break forth at any moment. We believe it to be true that England can better afford to maintain this turbulent atti tude than any other nation of the world ; but is it for her true interests that even she should continue to preserve it when all rational motive for hostility has ceased ? Nine months have elapsed since the Treaty of Peace was signed with Russia. That period wisely employed might have tended to heal the wounds of the late war,—to have restored friendly relations between our Administration and that of St. Petersburg,—and to have allayed the appre• hension of further• hostilities. As it is, every opportunity is taken by Lord PA LME RSTON'S Administration of insinuating distrust of the Russian Government, and of manifesting direct hostility to it. The Persian war is one of the results of this system. Had a good understanding prevailed between the English and Russian Govern ments, their joint representations would cer tainly have been effectual to preserve peace in Central Asia. It is, as Sir JOHN MALCOLM observed thirty years ago, and as the Duke of WELLINGTON sagaciously confirmed, the inte rest of both England and Russia to preserve Persia as an independent monarchy, and as a barrier between the Asiatic provinces of the Czar and the Indian empire of Great Britain. By amicable arrangement that object might easily have be en effected which we have issued a declaration of war against Persia, and, sent forth an expedition to the Persian Gulf; to attain. If the policy of this country is to be one of jealous rivalry with the other growing Powers of the world, we shall have to be constantly prepared for war, and to live in daily expecta tion of it. Their expansion is natural to them ; if repressed in one direction it will burst forth in another. The day for universal empire is past, except as the result of wars which would change the whole face of the world, and bring incalculable disaster in their train. LONDON, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 20, 1850. SOUND principles of policy are independent of time and place. They can be separated from the accidents which have led to their utter. ance, as a gem, detached from its setting, can stand alone, and shine by its own lustre. We can imagine that the following exposition of the policy which should guide the external relations of a great and generous nation might have come down to us in an oration of DEMOSTHENES or of CICERO : THE RAILWAY MURDER AT DUBLIN. IT is absolutely impossible to tell how much the peace of society and the security of life have been endangered by the fact of the railway murder at Dublin being still left shrouded in such secrecy. Here was a bloody deed, crying aloud for retribution, perpetrated long before midnight (while the cashier was making up his books), daringly done in a large building not five minutes' walk from the public post office of the second city in the empire, and almost within earshot of several Dublin journals, with their staff of active reporters. And the man who did that bloody and savage act still roams unmolested by the law I It is easy to imagine how confident hardened villains must grow at the bare fact of such a murder being done in the centre of the city of Dublin, and at the criminal for weeks defying the authorities. The desperate and the de praved take increased courage at such a lamentable spectacle of the frustration of jus tice; they prowl through their haunts of infamy with feelings of security, and they plan and brood over fresh raids on society with unabashed nerve and unshrinking hardi hood. The gallows seems farther off than ever from their destiny while the murderer of Mr. LITTLE lives undenounced, and skulks in safety, defying the police. We are sorry to say that it is our conviction that this mystery about the murder of Mr. LITTLE has (with good intentions) been most injudiciously assisted by the authorities at Dublin. From the first we gave it as the opinion of THE PRESS that publicity of exami nation would serve rather than impede the course of justice. We have now increased reasons for believing in the soundness of that opinion. We think that Government has faltered and acted weakly on this occasion. Be that as it may, there can be no doubt that all that can he effected by secret examinations, and by the whole apparatus of detectives, has been achieved ; and while the blood of a murdered man calls for justice, we do think that a public imp' free examinations in "With regard to the foreign relations of this coun try, I am sure there is scarcely one person in this assembly who does not earnestly desire to see main tained the blessings of universal peace. In my bumble opinion, the desire of preserving peace is not best supported by the display of large military and naval establishments, by the assumption of an attitude of hostility, and by the making offensive preparations; while, on the other hand, it receives no advantage from the adoption of the theories in which some persons indulge of universal disarma• went, or, if not of universal disarmament, of placing the country in a position in which it is incapable of defence. I believe that peace will be best main tained by observing to all foreign States, whether powerful or weak, a calm, temperate, deliberate, and conciliatory course of conduct, not in acts alone, but in words and expressions also ; by adhering, with strict fidelity, to the obligations imposed upon us by treaties, and by respecting the independence of nations, whether great or small, as well as by ad mating their full right to regulate to their own will the internal affairs of their own administration. I hold that we have no right as a nation to entertain , particular prejudices on particular sympathies for this or that form of government which other coup• 'tries may think fit to adopt, be those forms of govern ment absolute despotism, limited monarchy, con stitutional republic, or unconditional democracy. 'That which is the choice of any country, as ?regards its internal government, that, I say, is the choice which the statesmen of this country are bound to recognise. In the conduct of our affairs with other nations, there is more dignity, if any of the subjects of the State conceive themselves injured by a foreign power, in acting with forbearance than with violence. The dignified course in public as in pri vate lite is, in case of necessity, to require as well as to offer such reparation as in our conscience we deem desirable. Such is my opinion as regards our own fellow•countrymen. On the other hand, I am con vinced that if we have reason to complain of the course taken towards us by a foreign country, the best •course to adopt is to calmly, without malignity, or vituperation, or intemperate language, to submit our , cause to the honour and justice of the tribunal to which we make our complaint, and to require from that tribunal that meed of justice which we should 'he prepared to concede ourselves. I cannot but think, that acting steadily on that principle, alike in 'reference to powerful as well as to weak nations, we should be able, not merely to preserve the blessings of peact, but also be able to place this country in an attitude of friendship with most of the other nations of the world." • . now be adopted. powerfully aid in wea, criminal which could shall make this every I.ody. Can the Government one person in particular do so. Their officials their lawyers, their eyes upon the same . name under their discuss the point reason for the various luiry with open doors and into the whole case should Such a measue_zaight weaving mg§hcaltroitid the ould not be ;Add. W. matter perttes *AA ment deny tagiti' - ewpsbl rticular? iw OMNI* ials of the • r police o ;NT b fix Le person, 020 breath. wr 44tA t whether there not ions authorities entertaining ,y~