The Press.
London, England, 1858-06-19 00:00:00

THE PRESS, JUNE 19, P5B.

they fall into the great error of fancying that
blustering and bullying are more powerful
engines for obtaining their objects than a calm
adherence to the strict dictates of inter-
national law.
If peat experience did not tell us how slaw
nations are to learn, and how quick to forget the
lessons fiirnished tom by passing events, we
nlight that the rAglish public would not
speed4lrget the Imam which the transaction,
of the late and present Administration with the
King of NAPLES ought to teach. The swaggering
Government of Lord PALMERSTON could do
nothing for the two cives Romani who were
incarcerated in the Neapolitan prisons. The
King of NAPLES knew perfectly well that Lord
PALMERSTON, whose whole administration of our
Foreign Policy had been one undeviating course
of violation of the recognized principles of inter-
national law, could not appeal to those principles
without exposing himself to ridicule; and he
also knew, equally well, that public opinion in
England would never stand another Don Pacifico
outrage ; so his Majesty knew that he could
safely defy and insult the British Government,
and the British Government knew that his
Majesty knew it ; and the British Government
moreover knew that they had provoked the King
to insult them by their offensive treatment of
him at the Peace Conferences at Paris, and had
brought down this revenge upon themselves. So
my Lord PALMERSTON thought it most con-
venient to " eat the leek ;" and hp did so with
the aid of some Bethel! sauce. For 13ETHELL was
called in ; and he gave an opinion that the
dyes Romani were lawfully imprisoned, and that
England could do nothing for their release. Lord
PALMERSTON accordinsly pretended that he
abstained from action in deference to the law of
nations. He, who had never respected that law,
but had unscrupulously laid down one law for
one occasion and the direct reverse for the next,
according as it suited the purpose of the moment—
this blustering statesman suddenly appeared as the
most docile and obedient of slaves to Sir RICHARD'S
exposition of the law of nations—an exposition
which, in all probability, himself had instructed
Sir RICHARD to lay down ; for no sooner did we
get honest opinions from the Law Officers of the
Crown under the present Government, than Sir
RICHARD'S law was scattered to the winds, and
the King of NAPLES readily yielded to the
temperate and dignified exposition of the law
as enforced by the new agent of Lord DERBY'S
Government.
Lord MALMESBITRY has certainly done much by
his Foreign Policy to improve our position in the
world ; but let us not suppose that this genera-
tion of Englishmen can ever recover the same
position for their country in which it stood
when, in an evil hour, that clever but unprinci-
pled statesman (Lord PALMERSTON) first grasped
the seals of the Foreign-office.
Day by day we shall see its evil effects. We
have now at this moment an example before us.
We are told, that " the orders given to the
" American officers sent down to the Gulf are
" believed to be of so belligerent a nature as
" virtually to place the power of declaring *or
"in the hands of captains of gunboats. !If
this be so, it is a violation of international law.
No Sovereign State has a right to delegate such
powers to its subordinates. But how can En 4
land remonstrate ? How, after the exam e
which she set at Canton, can she complain, i it
fp/
be followed by other States ?
But how have we got into these complications
with the United States F We do not believe
that the proceedings of our cruisers; if they are
correctly describes result from any instructions
of the present Government. If they be really
acting under the instructions which they have re-
ceived, they must have been given by the late
Government. Cui bono ? it may be asked. We
confess we think we can discern the object. The
late Government wanted an excuse for carrying
out to completion their surrender by this country
of the right of search—an exclusively belligerent
right—so, if that right were exercised in an in-
defensible way (as if this report be true it has
been) against the vessels of the United States, it
would afford the Government of Washington an
opportunity (of which it appears it has availed
itself) to demand the unqualified abandonment
of the right, and the Palmerston Administration
a plausible excuse for consenting to its etomplete
surrender. ~

- -
CHURCH RATES : THE QUESTION 01'

EXPEDIENCY.
WE argued the question of Church-rates, in our
last itumbetr, on the high ground of principle.
We died the triumphant reasonings of Dr.
Dwuntr, it Republican imd a Presbyterian,
show tilt " the Legislature is bound to estah-
lish and maintain the worship of Gon; simply
" because it is bound to pursue every lawful and
" expedient measure for the promotion of the
" public welfare; to which great purpose religion
" is not only useful, but indispensable."
But upon this ground the moat powerful oppo-
nents of Church-rates are not very ready to meet
us. A dozen articles on the question have ap-
peared irt the Times sine;,le.opeto;:iif the
presene4fisiiiun;:eyggi 04,4,1144 ,hqi twig,
not npopi Tprioucipliso. bat upon etpedieney. Air e
have been' Juouttbdti Shut the Church can do.very
veirowell Willbott Clifirch-rates ; far better in
fact;' gran with , tham. We have been told to
look** splendid Cvlietr-PA erected in Belgravia,
and At thg more numerous though plainer
churches built at Islington; and to remember that
all this was done by the Voluntary Principle.
And we have been upbraided for doubting whe.
ther the Church tetluld htild on her way without
halting, if Churches-were wholly relinquished.
We reply, that-,the few instances thus cited
are not sufficient ,to bear the weight that is
thrown upon them. They are special cases; and
it would be a great mistake to found upon them
a general
Let