The Press.
London, England, 1857-10-24 00:00:00

VILE PRES 'Qhionriß 24, 1857.

Buttxc" constantly appealed to byl-ioliticians,
and the other day, in one speech, the Secre-
tary for the Admiralty twice quoted from " the
great BURKE." Tile ;sal of BURKE in urging
on the Revolutionary War was undoubted, and
at the close of li paat famous person Waa
a stittM upp ch sortef Of Government and el
King OEOROII 111. et the last literary prq-
dnction of Iluaxx the " Thoughts on
Regioi4e Peaeet" R w #1 the conduct of Mrel,
Par was severely punadverted upon, and
the Minister censurpik for want of energy ade-
quate to the occasion.
Let us see further how far this newfangled
theory that an Opposition should be kept upon
the " silent system" is warranted by the
examples of great statesmen, renowned in
Parliamentary history, and respected by all
men for their "patriotic" conduct. Mr. CAN-
NING was a great man, and felt ware.y for the
public cause. When Mr. ADDINOtON, with
faltering grasp of the reins, was guiding the
official chariot, did Mr. CANNING hold his
tongue or keep his pen idle ? Was not the
town then edified and amused by the most
stinging raillery, and by some of the most
caustic political criticism ever offered to a
Minister? Then it was that "the Doctor"
was held up to the derision of all England—
While his faltering speeches leg,
And his pericvlshobble vilely,
Cheer—oh ! cheer him, brother Brame,
Cheer—oh ! cheer him, brother Hiley.
With a wave of his hand or a slight shake of
his head, Mr. PITT might have recommended
" the silent system." to Mr. CANNING, but he
did not do so. When the conduct of the war
in Spain was placed under the control of Lord
CASTLEREAGH, were the Whigs of that time
very squeamish in their strictures on Lord
CASTLEREAGH? Did Earl GREY, Mr. PON-
SONBY, Mr. WHITBREAD, and Mr. TIERNEY
pursue "the silent system" towards the Mi-
nistry of that time? But we shall not appeal
to the examples those times. Let,us come
nearer to our own period.
We suppose that it will be admitted that
the Duke of WELLINGTON and Sir ROBERT
PEEL meant well to the public cause. In
critical questions connected with foreign
affairs the Duke of WELLINGTON was never on
" the silent system" as far as regarded Lord
PALMERSTON'S Course of constant inter-
meddling with the internal condition of other
nations. When Lord. DURHAM did certain acts
in Canada for which he had neither law nor
warrant, the great Conservative Opposition of
that day did not follow "the silent system,"
and one of its most eloquent speakers, the
accomplished Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT, was put
forward to express its disapprobation. Nor
were the Duke of WELLINGTON and Sir ROBERT
PEEL silent about the lamentable vacillations
and timidity of Ministers in dealing with
Irish Agitators. But we need not go farther
to find preced2nts against " the silent system"
than the conduct of Viscount PALMERSTON at a
most dangerous period, when war was
threatening between this country and the
United States. Was Lord PALMERSTON silent
about the "Ashburton Convention "? Were
his associates in Parliament, and his organs
out of doors, silent at that most critical period
(lW) when the state of Ireland was also an
object of intense solicitude ? Was Lord
MAcauLar taciturn on that occasion? On the
21st of March, 1813, we find Lord MACAULAY
addressing such language as the following to
the House of Commons :

Are not the symptoms of pugnacity still greater than
they were before? What other effect could be hoped
for? time ran any natMA segue a (Moscow's' which does
an/ respect itself ' lf England cannot find
safety in her firmness and iignity, she can never find it
is sabserviencyand Acme. . . . I say that one
article of the treaty hes been ratified in one sense at Wash-
ington, and in another sense in London
think, too, I can see in the feelings of the other Powers of
the world towards you the effect of what you have done
with the United States.

And so on. It was in the same session, when
the eyes of all the statesmen iu all the. Courts
and Cabinets of Europe were closely watching
the Government, and while the monster meet-
ings were disturbing Ireland, that Lord JOHN
Russer.t. bitterly mocked at the inactivity of
the Cabinet--" If Ministers think that Mr.
" OCONNELL is breaking the law of the land,
" why don't they prosecute him ? Is the
" Right Honourable Baronet afraid of him ? "

Or words to that effect. " The silent system
was not in those days recommended by
Liberal politicians foc gig example of an Op-
position.
We tt , there, tat no member of' the
Op Ii will *nd 'their undoubted
right' o Oxpressi di' probation at the
lama tab laggar ay which Ministers
acte4 f flAck fft h respect to the
~
mutt'. It is ifiett the right, but the
"pa utic" duty of 'a Opposition to expose
the intapaCity of a Ministry which does not
vigorously discharge its functions. And never
did England stand in more pressing need of a
determined Opposition than at the present
time: Let the Opposition abandon its rights,
and it is not difficult to see that the empire
will be " drifting " into difficulties amidst help
that may arrive only " too late."

THE DANUBIAN PRINCIPALITIES.
THE diplomatic cheek Lord PALM.ERSTON'S Go-
vernment encountered last August upon the
question of the illegality of the Moldavian
elections has been confirmed by the recorded
opinions of the newly-elected Divan of Molda-
via, and by that of the other Principality.
The recently elected Divan of Moldavia has
de3lared almost unanimously in favour of a
union of the provinces. The Moldavian elec-
tions of July last returned an anti-union ma-
jority to the Divan. We need not here recapi-
tulate the discreditable intrigues and double-
dealing upon the part of certain Powers de-
sirous to influence those elections. Suffice it to
say, that Lord STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFE at Con-
stantinople was placed by his Government
in a position so false as to state to the
Porte, in conjunction with the Minister of
Austria, that to annul those elections of Mol-
davia would be a violation of the Treaty of
Paris, and that, with Baron PROKESCH-OSTEN,
he would not shrink "from any responsibility
" which might result to the Porte " from a
" refusal of adjournment."
This vigoeous and decided avowal of a
principle and a policy is chiefly memor-
able for the unconditional surrender of
both within a fortnight Since that period
fresh elections have taken place in Moldavia ;
and though we were assured that her Majesty's
Government retained so much the bias of
their old opinions that they did not intend
"to give up their views with regard to the
" future Government and Constitution" of time
Principalities, it wouldirptiear that our Minis-
ters have restricted their interference, limited
their iataigues, and in point of fact have
adopted a more temperate course of conduct
than such a statement indicated, or that their
previous evasions of the obligations imposed
upon them by the Treaty of Paris would have
led U 3 to expect. We need not here discuss
the causes which have brought about so
marked a change in the Danubian policy of
our Government. They are to be found per-
haps as much in that want of integrity and
good faith which precipitated the capitula-
tion at Osborne as in any others of graver
import.
The elections both in Moldavia and Walla-
chia have returned a majority in each Divan
in favour of the union of the Principalities,
and not a mere customs union, such as
originally designed by Lord CLARENDON, but
the union of the two provinces under a foreign
prince. These expressed wishes of the Divans
form but one element, it is true, in that chief
consideration, the integrity of the Turkish em-
pire, which will have weight with the Con-
gress of the five Powers about to regulate the
definite organisation of the Principalities.
But the wishes of the Roumans are now defini-
tively expressed. They demand permission
to unite the provinces under one sovereign
Prince, who shall be selected by the congress
of Paris from where they will, so that be be
not of Moldo-Wallachian extra gt. They will
recognise the suzerainty of tl3O Porte, and
desire only to make and enjoy their own
laws, and to pay one Government instead of
two. These desires are not immoderate, for.
after all, what is there in the question of
union? Moldavia and Wallachia are not
Turkish provinces seeking in the turbulence of