The Press.
London, England, 1856-05-10 00:00:00

I)ert,6l

LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 10, 1856.

tion went on exactly as it would have done
had they been shut up in an ante-chamber.
We must admit that the line of the Liberal
party has been sufficiently different from that
which we have uniformly advocated. We
argued that the tone of this country should
be moderatebut firm; that we should avow our-
selves favorable to a pacific settlement of the
Eastern question, but that we should insist on
terms which would make that settlement com-
plete, and prevent future complications. Our
opponents, on the contrary, demanded that wo
should show ourselves adverse to peace, even
at the moment of negotiation. They raised
that difficulty of which Lord CLARENDON so
pathetically complains, and now they approve
him for yielding to it.
The war-clamour of the Ministerialists has
had the double effect of making this country
appear ridiculous and of sacrificing conditions
which should have been steadily insisted on as
necessary to the neutralisation of the Black
Sea and to the pacification of its shores. Lord
CLARENDON, in his alarm lest he should be
thought quarrelsome, not only gave up points
on which he should have insisted, but forgot
his position as the Minister of a free country,
and assented to a minatory declaration against
the independent press of a neighbouring
State.

For all that Lord CLARENDON did at the Con-
ferences we might as well have sent over his
suit stuffed with straw to be tied in a chair at
the Council-table. The arrangement would
have been in some respects preferable, as the
dummy would not have committed us to prin-
ciples which, with all respect for our great Ally,
we must declare directly contrary to our policy.
But Lord CLARENDON must be supported as the
hope of the Reform Club, and the rising sun of
jobbers of every degree, though nothing but a
consciousness of the real strength of our
country can prevent us from reflecting on the
part he played in Paris without a sentiment of
humiliation. , riH AH 'I

484

garchy. They do not much resort to the
Pall-mall clubs ; on the contrary, they rather
pretend to disparage the " Clubs" for their
partisanship,' and they talk mellifluously
about " Independence." These are the Tar-
tuffe 3 of the Treasury Benches, and their pro-
ceedings deserve more attention than has
hitherto been bestowed upon Tkey
have escaped notice by their apparently not
acting under a recognised leader. But Mr.
HArma is to them what O'CONNELL Wll5 to the
" tail," and Ministers connive at their factitious
clamour out of season, and reward their season-
aide servility in time.
These members, considered separately, are
of the most ephemeral character as politicians.
As flies do not survive a summer, so most of
these buzzing little folk will not be heard of
at another general election. Their places will
be filled by another swarm as small and as
voracious of Treasury sweetmeats. Formerly
this class of " Liberals" was not to be met
with in Parliamentary circles ; and it would
really be a curious speculation, whether they
did not rise into activity by the pernicious
spectacle of the " Tail Members." They are
in all respects a most dangerous class of re-
presentatives. They do not belong to the
popular and platform " Liberals." who wish to
Americanise our British Constitution. They
are too insignificant, and too sparingly gifted
with talent, to aspire to becoming chiefs of a
party. During the present session they have
been more conspicuous than ordinarily. They
have taken advantage of the absence of the
Manchester chiefs, and they have plied their
votes with assiduity, and have had a prosper-
ous time of it.

Now, let us ask the question, " How far can
" these mock Liberals be accepted as repre-
" sentative politicians?" A negative answer
must be returned to that query when we
balance their votes against the opinions of
the country. They panegyrise the Ministers
who achieved the peace, and yet their con-
stituents' do not reciprocate the feelings of
artificial joy with the diplomatic prowess of
Lord CLARENDON. The country is frigid on
the subject upon which their disembodied
corps of Treasury janissaries are in an affected
flutter of rapture. As discordant as per-
formers in a Dutch concert on the leading
questions of the day, these Liberals of the lip
have all acted in harmony when Lord PAL-
MERSTON was tottering to his fall. The man-
ner in which they extricated themselves from
their dilemmas would be most amusing, if it
were not more disgusting.
Mr. LAYARD, in his speech on Monday night,
made a remark which is strikingly suggestive
of the character of these mock Liberals.
" Large ships," said the Member for Ayles-
bury, " had proved to be of very little advan-
" tage in this war. What was there to prevent
" Russia' from having a swarm of small gun-
" boats?" The hint is not lost in the Par-
liamentary warfare of the present Cabinet.
They cannot command many political three--
deckers ;—they cannot compel The Lord John
Russell and The Earl Grey to hoist Ministerial
colours. Those fast-sailing frigates The Cob-
den or The John Bright are not under their
orders, but they have a flotilla of diminutive
craft, each of which obeys the signals of the
ardent HATTER. They cruise into whatever
lobby the Port-Admiral of Downing-street is
pleased to direct them. They leave Bellamy's
Bay at the first signal from him, and discharge
their volleys just as he likes. These are the
independent Liberals ! These are the parties
who boast that they do as they please !
It has been said that the gods of ancient
Greece seemed to look down with serene irony
on the follies of their idolators. Contempt, in
spite of his mirthful propensities, is at times
visible in the Premier's demeanour towards
the "independent" portion of his worship-
pers. He listens to their hollow " oppo-
sition " with derisive air; he smiles when they
inveigh against him; for he knows how they
secretly play his game for him. They help to
divide the House of Commons, and to disturb
the action of the " Liberals" out of doors.
The Premier knows them, despises them, and
.--uses them.

THE PREgS.

OUR MAI:: :::11E SURRENDER.

TIIE surrender of ,our .maritime rights by the
declaration atticha.:l4 the late treaty has
taken the nation by surprise. It had been led
to believe that a sanguinary war had been
brought to a successful conclusion, and that
all the objects for which- we embarked in it
had been attained. How domes it, then, that
in the hour of viotory our Ministers have
abandoned privileges, sanctioned both by the
law and the p vac tics, of =liana,. and. up. .Lo. this
time consistently maintained by England in
defiance of the most formidable combinations?
These rights have been held in times past by
statesmen and politicians of all parties, with-
out exception, as essential to the preservation
of our naval supremacy. Between Tory and
Whig and Radical there was no difference of
opinion upon this point previous to the com-
mencement of the late war. The Ministry who
embarked in that war did so with notorious
and avowed reluctance, and they introduced
certain innovations into our maritime law, the
effect of which was to enable the enemy to
carry on his foreign commerce with compara-
tively slight interruption, through the instru-
mentality of neutral States. By this means,
it cannot for a moment be doubted that
Russia was enabled to prolong the contest.
We all recollect how, by means of the con-
venient neutrality of Prussia, she contrived to
render our blockade in the Baltic a gigantic
sham. Our readers are perhaps not aware,:
that this state of things created much dis-
satisfaction ou board the British fleet; but
everyone remembers the outcry that was
raised at times against Prussia, at times
against America, for the material aid which
they were thus enabled to render to the enemy.
Indeed, it can hardly be doubted that, had the
war continued for another twelvemonth, the
nation would have compelled its rulers to put
an end to the systematic and disgraceful
frauds that were practised in the profaned
name of humanity and enlightened policy
during the late struggle. It is well known,
that there were jealous supporters of the pre-
sent Ministry in both Houses of Parliament,
who were strongly opposed to the continuance
of this state of things
Yet, in spits of experience so conclusive and
so recent, and in spite of the stern lessons of
our former history, our rulers, with an infatua-
tion that is hardly credible, persist in main-
taining those pernicious theories through
which our naval strength was paralysed—for
such is the literal fact—during the late war.
Nay more, they have bound the nation, so far
as they can bind it, to adhere to these theories
in all time coming; and they have done this
without the consent, or even the knowledge,
of the Legislature. When war was declared
against Russia on the 28th of March, 1854, the
Crown, for the first time in our history, waived
the right of taking an enemy's goods from a
neutral ship. It sanctioned, in short, for the
time being, the right of the enemy to carry on
his trade in neutral bottoms. The legality of
this waiverion the part of the Crown cannot
be doubted, whatever opinions may be enter-
tained as to its policy ; for it is the unques-
tionable privilege of the Sovereign to relax the
laws of maritime warfare as occasions may
arise for the exercise of this power. But our
Plenipotentiaries at the Paris Congress have
bound the Crown, so far as they could bind it,
to observe in all time coining the same rule
with regard to neutral navigation as was ob-
served during the late war. They have de-
clared that in all time coming the enemies of
England shall have the privilege of carrying
on their trade in neutral bottoms. They have
deliberately surrendered a right which we
have maintained in times past against " a
world in arms," and which PITT, and Fox, and
WILBERFORCE, and Column., alike considered
essential to the power and safety of the na-
tion. They have declared that in all time
coining England shall recognise the rule of
" free ships free goods " a consummation
for which her enemies, and, above all, Russia,
have been scheming for the last eighty years;
and, rather than consent to which, Lord Isiar,

SATURDAY,

sox, who well knew what it meant, said that
she ought to shed her last drop of blood !
And what equivalent hays we obtained for
the surrender of a privilege which we have
uniformly maintained for the space of five
centuries? When a nation or an individual
gives up a right, it is usually abandoned from
one of two motives. Either the surrender is
made from necessity, °compensation in some
shape or other is obtained. Have we been
compelled to surrender a most important na-
tional right at the close of a successful war,
and if so, by whom? Have we obtained an
equivalent for the sacrifice we littile'niade, and
if so, what is it? As Lord DERBY truly re-
marked, we are utterly in the dark upon both
these points. We know not whether the sur-
render was made spontaneously aud gratui-
tously, or whether it was the result of pro-
longed discussion. But this we do know, that
the surrender in question is without a prece.
dent in our past history. We defy Lord
GrRANVILLE to produce one. His Lordship, in
incidentally alluding to the matter, did not
attempt to satisfy his hearers upon this point.
To waive a right, and to surrender and re-
nounce it in all time coming, are two very dif-
ferent things. The rule which is now
declared to be for ever abandoned has been
incorporated into our jurisprudence by a long
and uniform train of decisions ; and we may
add, what is less generally known, that it has
been no less firmly engrafted upon the law of
the United States. The Constitution of this
country invests the Crown with the power of
suspending the laws of maritime warfare in
various ways, but does it allow these laws to
be permanently altered and cancelled by the
same authority ? Can the mere act of the
Sovereign at once and for ever preclude both
himself and his successors from the exercise
of a privilege in the maintenance of which
the nation is so deeply interested? Our Mi-
nisters have not yet attempted to reply to
these questions ; but Parliament would resign
its high trust if it did not insist upon a full
inquiry into the circumstances which led to
the late disgraceful surrender of our rights.

HOW THE TREATY AFFECTS ASIA.
LORD DERBY, in his late speech on the treaty,
in the House of Lords, dwelt very forcibly on
the position in which it leaves Asia. While
professing to curb effectually the ambition of
Russia, it merely diverts it into another
channel. Territorial aggrandisement in
Europe is forbidden, but to territorial
aggrandisement in Asia there is put no stop
whatever. On the contrary, it is rather in-
vited if anything by the avowed determination
of our Ministers not to attempt, to control by
arms the progress of Russia iu that quarter.
They will not allow Russia to menace Turkey
through the means of a fleet in the Black Sea,
but. they will permit it to menace her ten
times more effectually and permanently by
conquests in Asia—conquests which must iu
the end so completely overshadow her as to
make the weight irresistible with which she is
fallen upon by her aggressor in any future
war.. To meet the attack under those new
circumstances fleets will be powerless, and
none but the possessors of au overwhelming
land force will be in a position effectually to
interfere. In such case England's voice would
obviJusly go for little, and all our continental
allies, saving France, would probably show as
great a disinclination to the adoption of active
measures as they have done in the war that is
just concluded. But France alone could
hardly undertake the task, reinforced as
Russia would be by all the hordes of Asia,
even if other views and other employment for
her armies did not—as they possibly would—
prevent her.
We cannot help thinking, therefore, that the
opportunity which has thus been allowed by
our Ministers to slip by unimproved is one
that will never in human probability occur
again. If they were in earnest in their desire
to curb the power of Russia, and mentally
equal to the task, they should have affixed

it as well as in the West,
well as in Europe. It is
such terms Russia never
she must have assented

in the strictest accord-
for which the war was

:n. These were, in sub-
;sia to re-enter into and

per limits as existing at
ie war broke out. In
lbject, or, indeed, as the
.wally attaining it, she
reed to renounce all fur-

Ler neighbours on every

thereafter to annex the
of them to her empire
,fined as an infraction of
)3r the armed resistance
,ratting Powers. There

'thing -wild, nothing im-
unjust, in such a stipula-
more than has been in
almost every European
lion would have proved
!e for the future tran-
far as Russia was con-

,this rests merely on the
signing Czar. There is, in
treaty to prevent his
its he pleases, so that he
`le Sultan, but from the
iwers and communities

the Ministers that the
tothing for us, and that,
thing in return to them.
neither had the Turks
s that we should have
and our treasure like
The question is, not
and the other Asiatic
us, but how far it will
r Russia be allowed to
subjection to its Crown
are as deeply interested
ircassians themselves; per-
we were in the question
by Russia on the Euro-
sr desirous we may be of
regard for the interests
no reason whatever why
distinction between the
Id Asiatic nations. As

should sacrifice every
ly contributing in every
in any way compensate
ife and for our vast ex-
re had a right to hope to
in as good a position—
trse, excepted—as that in
ut, as the matter stands

to means the case. For
ttual bar against Russia's
will divert it naturally
the East, where alone it
mister to its cravings ;
make any stipulation in
:scion upon that side, it
ve by States that must

n such as we have de-
effectually met the diffi-
ted this contest in all

1 lifetime of the present
sult would indeed have

isation for all our loss of
But from Ministers who
useless to look for any-
ightedness ; and so the
lost of raising up a
"ession on ourselves in
'r in which we are really
aggression on India by
but on the north and

sere is nothing whatever
I land. There we have
)y army to defend the
a mere sprinkling of
n• have we a single fort-
le our arsenals, beyond
dpments, are almost en-
;Lich circumstances, the

.s power to extend her
'as doubly necessary, and
the neglect. Ministerial
to be sure, of our in-

ut it is in utter ignorance
Lord HARDINOX knows

"MCI
•
MAY 10, 1856.
limits to it in the East
On the Asiatic side as N%
idle to say that to su
would have assented ;
to them, they being i
ante with the objects f
professedly undertaker
stance, to compel Russ
remain within her prof
the period when the
furtherance of this oh
only means of effectu
should have been fore
ther aggression on he
side; and the attempt
territory of any one c
should have been deft]
the treaty to be met by
of all the other contri
would have been noth
practicable, nothing un
tion ; it is, indeed, no r
turn imposed upon a]
Power. Such a provisi
an effectual guarantee
quillity of the East, as
cerned ; but, as it is, th
disposition of the reign
fact, nothing in the 1
making what conquests
makes them not from tl
other neighbouring Poi
on every side.
It has been said by
Circassians had done n,
therefore, we owed notl
But, for that matter, n
done anything for us
poured out our blood
water in their behalf.
what the Circassians
nations had done for ti
affect our position if
bring them all into su
Viewed in this light, we
in the matter as the Circa
haps more deeply than
of any conquests made 1
pean side. And however
showing a disinterested
of public law, there is n
we should make this d
ease of European and
little is there why we
object, however deeply
sense to it, that could :
us for our losses in lif
se. At any rate, we
come out of the affair i
these sacrifices, of tour:
which we went in. Bu
at present, this is by
the placing an effectual
aggression to the West
and by necessity to the
can find food to min
while by omitting to 131
the treaty for its repres
will be uncurbed savi
in turn succumb to it.
A simple stipulation
scribed would have d
culty, and postponed
probability beyond the
generation. Such a re:
been a fitting compens
blood and treasure. B
drift into wars it :s u
thing involving farsig
opportunity has been
barrier against aggres
almost the only quartet
vulnerable. Against a
sea our navy provides,
north-west frontier the
to prevent au attack bj
nothing but a Sepoy
empire, with only a
European troops. Not
ress to cover it, while
the ordinary field equi
tirely bare. Under at
linutation of Russia's
empire eastwards was
nothing can palliate ti
speakers talk largely,
vulnerability there ; Ua
that they speak. L