The Press.
London, England, 1855-01-20 00:00:00

t tt6s

Ot rtss.

be a great misfortune ; but it is an aggravation
of the evil of our present state that the weak-
ness of the Coalition is due to the scheming
selfishness of its chiefs. They retain their
places that they may the better plot against
each other ; and, while every art of petty in-
trigue is set in motion to advance their secret
ends, it is the country which, in the neglect
and mismanagement of its most vital concerns,
is made to pay the penalty of their mischievous
rivalries.

Our political distraction is perfectly well
known to foreign Courts, and according to
their sentiments is viewed by them with com-
placency or contempt. Russia has all to hope,
and Austria all to gain, from it. We can
expect no sympathy with our weakness.
England is the single country in the world
that adheres to constitutional government,
and the firmest of our allies may not be dis-
pleased to observe how signally it is fail-
ing us in the hour of trial, and how un-
favourably it contrasts with a more despotic
system. As the natural result of the Coalition
tactics, our voice is no longer regarded in the
councils of Europe ; it is not thought possible
that we can pretend to a policy of our own;
we have slipped into the rank of a second or
third rate state; and it is, perhaps, indicative
of our waning influence that France has lately
drawn closer towards Austria, as if to intimate
how little reliance couldi be placed upon our
stability.

The negotiations now proceeding at Vienna
are confessedly opened on our part under false
pretences. They are intended to impose on
the enemy or on our own people, and either
way partake more of the nature of a discredit-
able trick than of an honest bond fide transac-
tion. According to the Ministerial prints, we
must hope to capture Sebastopol while the
treaty is in progress, and thus snatch an
advantage which we have not the spirit openly
to demand. This false and stealthy policy has
rarely proved successful, and has never yet
been the chosen policy of this country. The
objects for which the war was undertaken may
be achieved by force of arms, or by pacific ne•
gotiation ; we may separately trust to either,
but not to both at the same time.
It would be perfectly fair in our Govern-
ment, having distinctly explained the only
terms on which it would treat, to refuse to
lay down its arms until the enemy had given
some guarantee of his sincerity. The preli-
minary negotiation would then be short and
simple, and it would speedily be ascertained
whether deceit on either side was intended.
But this is not the course proposed. It is
said that we are to treat, not for the only
terms which will satisfy us, but for less than
we intend to take, and trust to the chances of
war to gain for us what we dare not ask, or
are not likely to obtain, by negotiation. It is
a rule in moral philosophy that, as negotia-
tion is the' only means by which wars can be
ended, its language should always be plain and
honest ; b at we, in negotiating, are to say one
thing and intend another. We appeal to the
common sense of our readers whether we have
not correctly represented the tone of the
Government journals. Day after day this
view is put forward as if it were highly credit-
able to the sagacity and good faith of the
Ministry instead of being utterly damna-
tory of botl I. England might pardon error,
might pardo n weakness, but we are much
mistaken in its spirit if it ever consents to

pardon treachery that, if successful, must
for ever hishonour our national escutcheon.
In this disgraceful scheme we trace again
the malignant influence of Coalition councils.
A section of the Ministry is willing to let the
negotiation proceed, firmly believing that it
will come to nothing. Another section, per-
haps with deeper craft, urges it forward, be-
ieving it will prove a reality. One party is
ipersuaded that the question will be decided
at Sebastopol, another party that it will be
settled at Vienna—while waverers and waiters
on Providence conceive that both may be
right, that diplomacy and the sword may
work very well together, and that the question
must be near a satisfactory settlement when a
resolution is taken to civilly ask only as much
as we are likely to get, and forcibly seize and
hold, whatever we can obtain by force of
arms.

The opening of the year was to witness the
definitive conclusion of an offensive and de-
fensive alliance with Austria. In place of that,
we are now amused with the promise of a
new Vienna Congress. Will Parliament
longer be a party to the delusion which has
been practised respecting this Austrian
alliance ? If peace be practicable, or thought
to be practicable, let the fact be stated ; it
cannot come too soon, if the terms be satis-
factory. But therein lies the whole question.
What are those terms? Is this peace-nego-
tiation, like the invasion of the Crimea, to be
" a leap in the dark?" Are we to know nothing
of its objects till we are irrevocably committed
to it? Or are we to enter into the negotiation
with the understanding that it is to be a mere
formality to afford Austria a further period of
delay? It is a cruel mockery of the sufferings
of our army and of the anxiety of the nation
to represent, in the same breath, the diplo-
matic proceedings at Vienna as sincere and as
hollow—as intended to lead to a definitive
treaty of peace, and as unlikely to have the
slightest result. Everything is to be feared
from a Government which, by its latest mea-
sures, has shown itself to be entirely destitute
of foresight and sincerity.
When Ministers last met Parliament the
Foreign Enlistment Bill was demanded as a
measure of extreme urgency. No one who
heard Lord PALMERSTON address the House
on that occasion will forget the earnestness
with which he spoke. The bill was essential
to the relief, perhaps to the salvation, of our gal-
lant army in the Crimea ; we could procure an
accession of able-bodied and experienced re-
cruits in no other way. A majority of the
Legislature was credulous, the bill was passed,
proclamation was made to the world that we
could no longer depend on our own popula-
tion to maintain our army, and what has been
the result? The States of Germany, from
which recruits were to be drawn, have pro-
hibited enlistment in their territories; many
months must certainly elapse before a single
foreign regiment can be embodied ; and de-
plorable, indeed, must be the state of our
army before Sebastopol if it is to wait for
succour until the pet force of Lord PALMERS-
TON and Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT 18 ready for
action.
This bill completed the measures which the
Government, to the end of the year, deemed
necessary for the prosecution of the war. All
their demands were conceded—all their sup-
plies voted. They might have had still larger
powers had they thought proper to have asked
for theni.iWith every requisite for success, to