The Press.
London, England, 1857-03-21 00:00:00

THE 13AL MASQUE AT NAPLES.

AIR. MACAULAY has wittily observed of the Earl
TEMPLE Of CHATHAM'S day, that his course
could be tracked, like that of a mole, by the
heaps of dirt he threw up. Lords PALMERS-
TON and CLARENDON are more skilful in their
underground labours. They are such masters
in the art of secret diplomacy that they long
contrive to baffle observation, and, when at
length caught and challenged, they have as
many shifts to escape, and as many disguises
to assume, as a magician in a fairy tale.
Whenever the doings of the Foreign-office for
the last two years shall be thoroughly exposed,
they will exhibit, we dare allege, such intri-
cacy of intrigue and sinucsity of falsehood as
to excite amazement that English Ministers
should ever have sunk so low, and that the
English people should ever have permitted
the plea of diplomatic reserve to cloak pro-
ceedings which fix a stain of
.perfidy on their
national character.

When the " Correspondence relating to the
Affairs of Naples " was produced, some wee ks
back, it was apparent on the face of it that
some documents must have been omitted.
Between the 19th of May, 1856, when Lord
CLARENDON instructed Sir WILLIAM TEMPLE to
make a representation to the Neapolitan
Government, that " a new course of internal
" policy " ought to be adopted, and the 10th
of October, when the Foreign Secretary in-
structed Mr. PETRE to withdraw the British
Legation from Naples, not a single instruc-
tion to the British agents at Naples would
appear to have been sent by Lord CLARENDON.
Are we to suppose that during that period of
five months, when the public mind of Europe
was agitated by a menaced intervention in the
affairs of Naples, our Foreign-office was silent ?
This supposition is too absurd for even Lord
PALMERSTON to put forward. When questioned
on the subject, he admitted that communica-
tions were omitted from the papers laid before
Parliament ; but stated that, as they related to
certain probable contingencies which never

THE PRESS.

took place, ino purpose could he answered by
the production of the papers.
Now, on this point, the Legislature might
surely be left to judge for itself. The papers,
though they had no practical result, might
throw much light on the action of her Ma-
jesty's Government, and be essential to a just
comprehension of its policy. The conceal-
ment was suspicious. Many of the documents
in the correspondence are wholly valueless,
such Rs the anonymous manifestoes of Neapo-
litan Liberals. If the omitted papers had
been really unimportant, is it likely that they
would have been suppressed?
Lately some significant hints have appeared
in both foreign and English journals on the
true character of these suppressed papers. It
is asserted that they relate to a proposal made
by the Cabinet of England to that of France,
that, in the event of the allied intervention
exciting a revolutionary movement in Naples,
the forces of England should join those of
France to suppress it.
On this subject the Right Honourable Mem-
ber for Bucks addressed a question to the
Premier on Tuesday evening. Was such pro-
posal ever made? Lord PALMERSTON denied
that it was, yet there was a lurking ambiguity
in his language which rendered his denial far
rom satisfactory.

In the House of Lords on Thursday, Lord
HARDWICKE pressed Lord CLARENDON to state
how it was that the Western Powers had
abandoned their intention of sending all
allied squadron into the Bay of Naples, after
their determination to that effect had been
taken. The Foreign Secretary replied,
" Because such a step would probably have
" led to insurrectionary movements, which
" the allied Powers were anxious to avert."

Tins answer supplies a strong presumption
that the suppressed papers must have related
to the probability of au insurrectionary move-
ment, and that they must have discussed
the measures which it would be proper for the
Allies to take in the event of any insurrection
breaking forth. Lord GRANVILLE concluded
the conversation by saying that the subject
must be left for the new Parliament to discuss.
So, after all, there is matter for discussion not
yet before the public.
The Morning Star of yesterday, speaking
evidently from authority, expressly states the
purport of the communications contained in
the suppressed papers :

The allied squadrons were under orders to sail for the
Bay of Naples when England sent to France an intimation,
the plain reading of which was, Before we go we must tell
you that the people are so discontented that the
Muratists are gaining ground, and we are not pre.
pared to recognise a Murat for King; we hope to be
favoured with a frank expression of your views. To which
France replied, Our views are neither one way nor another
—we seek neither to encourage nor repudiate a Murat—the
only thing we will not recognise at Naples is a Republic.
Then followed the fatal response of England, that she, on
her part, would agree not to recognise a Republic, if France
would agree not to recognise a Murat. No, said France,
for how can Napoleon, who wears the crown of France,
"par la volonte nalionale," refuse to acknowledge a sovereign
in Naples elected "par la volonle nationale," and when no
other reason can be assigned than that Napoleon and
Murat are members of the same family ?
From that moment the naval demonstration to the Bay
of Naples was at an end.
And to those who think we have been imposing upon
the public credulity in this matter we reply, that the
diplomatic communications to which we allude are in
existence in French and English, and that they prove our
thrice-repeated declaration that a Liberal Premier was
ready to bombard Naples in order to put down Republican
institutions. The House of Commons meets on Saturday,
and his lordship can have the opportunity of pronouncing
that all this is false. If not, like himself, we appeal to the
country.

We have reasons of our own for believing
that this statement is substantially correct.
We feel no confidence in Ministerial denials.

While it is evident from the Neapolitan
correspondence that Mr. PETRE, at Naples,
had lent himself to a mean system of es-
pionage, and had in the interest of the
Liberals turned himself into an informer
against the Neapolitan Government, the Eng-
lish Minister at Florence had, as we arc cre-
dibly informed, been writing for so►ne length
of time to Lord CLARENDON, affirming in strong
terms that Mr. PETRE'S stories were all romance.
It would seem from accounts which reach us
now, not for the first time, that the British
Legation at Florence is the hotbed of Austrian
Italianism, and most earnest in its efforts

267

to gain evidence to uphold the King of NAPLES,
and to refute the statements of Mr. PETRE.
Lord NORMAN BY, if we are correctly informed,
has repeatedly urged his views in despatches
to the Foreign-office. Yet our Legation has
left Naples on Mr. PETRE'S representation,
while the Marquis of NORMANBY, the devoted
friend of the Sicilian Government, and the
apologist of all its acts, remains at Florence
as the sole representative of Southern Italy
for communicating with her Majesty's Go-
vernment !

THE CHURCH AND THE CONSER-
VATIVES.

THERE must always be parties in the Church
of England. When the heavy hand of Rome
was removed from the national hierarchy,
those inevitable differences sprung up which,
within certain limits, are the sign of health
and vigour But we ought not to forget that
the existence of controversies has been inno-
cuous to the Church of England, very much in
proportion as they have not been identified
with the support of political parties. In past
times Low Churchmen were not necessarily
Whigs, nor High Churchmen as inevitably
Tories. That their theological views corre-
sponded respectively with certain different
sects of political ideas must, of course, he
admitted. But the assimilation was purely
speculative. The adherence of both to that
party which was known to be the friend of the
Church was practical ; and from the moment
that the Church became exposed to even the
most distant peril, an overwhelming majority
of both parties rallied round the Conserva-
tives.

At the present moment an attempt is being
made to alienate the Evangelicals by. extolling
the pure Protestantism of Lord PALMERSTON ;
and it is hoped that the High Churchmen,
being pledged to the Peelites (for we know no
other name), and the Low Churchmen to the
Premier, very little of the ecclesiastical influ-
ence in the country will be at the service of
the Conservative party. The scheme is cer-
tainly ingenious. But we doubt if the tools
are strong enough. Lord PALMERSTON, with all.
his transcendent powers of imposture, must
sink under the impersonation of the " man of
God ;" while the ultra•sacerdotalists will be
sorely put to it to detect an enemy of the
church in the representative of the House of
Stanley and the Tory country gentlemen of
England.

Such is the political situation at the present
moment; and, bearing in mind our opening
observations, we think the clergy would do
well to ponder on the advice recently ten-
dered by Mr. DISRAELI, before they permit
conflicting theological views to be identified
with conflicting politics.
That advice is to turn their eyes for a.
moment from internal divisions to the aspect
of the world without—to note the greedy
satisfaction with which their religious ene-
mies are watching their present proceedings,.
and to take timely warn►ng lest they them-
selves unconsciously undermine those ram-
parts which have hitherto shielded them ffmn
assault. Secure within these, the Church
may differ with impunity on tho various
dogmas of theology, but denuded of them, such
disputes would instantly be made the means
of rending her frame to pieces.
On which, then, of the two great parties
can the Church rely for support in the hour of
real danger? This question cannot be an-
swered by a reference to the personal senti-
ments of particular party leaders. Most of
our party leaders are aristocrats, and have
hereditary sympathies with the Church. We
must look rather at the character of the classes
by whom these leaders are followed, and the
nature of the measures which may possibly be
forced upon them. We do not imagine
Lord PALM ERSTON is unfriendly to the Church.
At the present moment, indeed, Ile has excel-
lent reasons for the contrary sentiment. But
Lord PALMERSTON, though he governs the
country, does not govern the Liberal party.
Ho might be willing to he the Church's guar-
dian, but who will be the guardian of himself?
Who but Church haters of every shade of
opinion and every extreme of hostility?
Could he save the Church, even if hejw•ould,
from the pertinacious eflbrts of his own sup-,

268

porters? We know the yielding disposi-
tion of the Noble Viscount. Would he not
he placed at their head in spite of himself,
and carried triumphantly over the breach he
might at heart have preferied to defend?
On the other hand, there is no danger to be
apprehended by any party in the Church from
the ascendancy of Lord DERBY. The Conser-
vatives, while eminently a Church party, are
eminently free from subservience to any
one party in the Church. They represent the
great clerical middle class, and for his own (Bs.
like of extreme views Lord DERBY has spoken
for himself.
The Church will be told that Protestantism
is in danger, and therefore she must support
Lord PALmEasToN, or that Church principles
are in danger, and therefore she must oppose
Lord DERBY. These cries will be unsparingly
used. But let the Church look to herself.
Let her observe from whieh quarter the real
danger threatens, and regulate her conduct
accordingly.