The Sun.
London, England, 1855-07-13 00:00:00

LONDON, FIU DAY EVENING, JULY 13, 1855.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

MUCH-ADO ABOUT NOTHING.
( Front the Morning Pust of this day. )

As the close of the :session approaches the efforti of
party become frantic, and disappointment finds vent in
spleen. The Opposition had determined on the defeat of.
the Government—first, because they were supposed to
be about to make peace ; and secondly because they had
not made peace ; and in the one accusation as in the
other—in the first attack as in the last—all the chiefs
and all the " parties" leagued together, so that people
thought—when Graham and Gladstone, Disraeli and
Walpole, Cobden and Bright, Milner Gibson and Roe-
buck, and all their tails were joined togother—no.minie-
try would resist the onslaught of such a phalanx. But
the truth was, that only the heads were allied for mis-
chief, and the great mass of the Houses of Parliament,
obeying the voice of common sense and public opinion,
vindicated the policy of Lord Palmerston by majorities
of hundreds. _ . _

Opposition was thus, at a nonplus when, on Friday
last, the speech of Lord John Russell was made the op-
portunity for a final attempt on the part of the hungry
for office. Lord John's speech has been seized upon and
twisted from its true meaning, and on Lord Palmerston's
offering con eipondence to the house, explanatory of the
conduct of our envoy at Vienna, and asking for time to
allow it t ) be real, he is accused of shuffling, and of an
attempt to avoid the censure that inevitably will be
passed upon the ministry if the opposition can contrive
it. Mr. Disraeli and his ally, Mr. Roebuck, want to
hurry matters on with undue haste, and with Lord
Palmerston, we can only "applaud their discretion and
their appreciation of the case they have to argue." "It
shows how important it is for their case that the House
should come to a decision before it knows anything
whatever about the matter."
We have already stated, and we repeat that the cor-
resaondence about to be produced, will throw a new
light.- upon the matter and tend to :filter the judgment
that s eine people have in haste arrived at.
Loris' John Russell himself asserts that very erroneous
inference's have been drawn from his speech. He says :
—" It hi's been supposed that, because I stated these
proposition s might have been assented to, that I thought
within these propositions lay the foundations of a
peace. Such a supposition is entirely erroneous." Lord
John, we presume, imagined that our assent to these
propositions would secure the co-operation of Austria
and not peace with Russia. He adds, "My belief is,
now, that nothing remains but a vigorous prosecution
of the w.tr, in order that we may obtain a just and
honourable peace." Still more will it be apparent,
when the fur titer correspondence is published, that the
transient blindness of Lord John, his individual error,
so far from • shaking the confidence of the country
in Lord Palmecston's Government, ought, on the con-
trary, to strength,%n it, as all the influence and talent of so
eminent a man as _Lord John Russell was utterly inade-
quate to change the it firm purpose for one moment, or
to cause Lord Palms Teton to swerve one iota from the
strict line of duty to issis country, and of the thoroughly
Eng.'ish policy on whit 'h he is bent.
But' before the Hous e of Commons is favoured with
Sir Bu lover Lytton's oration upon the subject of Lord
John Reissell's recent dip lomatic mission, it may be well
to examine closely the ter ms of the motion, and deter
mine upon,. what grounds a decision respecting it may be
come to. That the graces (if rhetoric, and all that can
adorn the Lou.' baronet's eloquence, will be brought to
'3; le occasion is quite certain ;. but even these command-
'. accessorie, s will, we think, fail to make that reason-
aa ,le in appearance which is egregiously unreasonable in
its nature. Let' us then take a plain and straightfors
war d view of the subject, before it becomes enveloped in
the c louds of mys tification which Parliamentary discus-
sion i. s certain to conjure up about it. The house is
asked .‘,O record its os
pinion that " the conduct of a Mi-
ni ter Lluring the re 'e eat negotiations at Vienna has
shaken tb a confidence ea. f the country in those to whom
its affairs are entrusted.'
The first thing that st t ikes one on reading the motion
is the excee, compreb nsiveness of the terms used.
Indeed they are more t h. an comprehensive—they are
equivocal, anal. very opposit ' conclusior s might be logi-
cally argued fr con them, in \less some further interpreta-
tion be given to narrow dow
is their signification. What
we presume, be supplied
is wanting in the' motion will .
in the speech, or.: V.; least elicit ed by the discussion. But
we need neither of le nor the ot. tier to show the purpose
in view, which is simply to get rkl, if possible, of the
present Ministry, at -id set up inst `cad thereof a Ministry
under Lord Derby. The questic 'n to be decided is,
whether "the conduct" alleged in `,lle motion ought to
he followed by such a change. The c. 'large against Lord
John Russell, which fits repudiates, s, that he saw in
the last proposition of Count Bud a cl, 'fie to the c[mclu-
sion of an honourabi peace. Now, 4 'bout what an
honourable peace is the re may be, and th. Ire is, a great
diversity of opinions. What the country means is a
peace justified by the ac 7omplishment, of the objects for
which we went to war—a siz., the limitation o. c Russian
aggression in general, and the defeat of that a 6 sgression
in relation to Turkey in r sairticular. But there . are per-
sons both in anti out of Pa Ojai:tient—few indeed in num
ber, but influential in stati en—who think that thos e ob-
jects are to a great extent . accomplished, and only a ,eed
the ratification of some suet t proposal as that of Aust tie
to be conclusively stopped. Lord John Russelfdid no b,
however, commit either himsaelf or his Government to the
espousal of these views. No body was fettered by his ex-
pression of opinion ; and wl ten he came home, and his
views received no confirmatio m from colleagues, the whole
matter dropped, and no one was either better or worse.
When many persons act togs ther for a common object,
as Cabinet Ministers do, it n lust often happen that an
individual member holds stro ugly some particular opi-
nions upon the common policy which, if everything
rested sith himself, he wou gladly see prevail, but
which he does not press in deference to the superior
wisdom, or longer experience, or united counsels of the
rest. Where this happens, neither is the individual in-
consistent in remaining with his colleagues, nor are they
prejudiced by retaining him. Alen are often outvoted,
and then work heartily with the majority that defeated
them. It would be hard if, in -that case, the majority
were declared unworthy to be tr usted on the very matter
on which they bad spoken out and shown their strength.
Apply this to the Cabinet. Me moment LOrd John's
views were broacleed they were discountenanced.
Hal
there been any we akness, or wavering, or any the least
substantial division in the Cabinet, he might have at-
tempted to direct it against the continuance of the war,
and in favour of ato course has advocated. But his
counsels were unanimously set aside, and the policy of
the Government has l !one on with as .much energy,
unanimity, and general effect, a.s though the fertile brain
of Count Buol, or the ea 7 acquiescence of our Colonial
Secretary, had never created this frail opportunity for
the Derby party.
Before it can be said th; at the Cabinet is compromised
by the presence of Lord eT, shn Russell, it must be shown
either that his momentary espousal of the Austrian pro-
posal has actually carried . evil consequences, or that of
necessity it must do so b, sfore long. But all the facts
tend the other way. His views were disapproved the
moment they wore proclaim ed. Nothing came of them.
They died in their birth, many other plans of the
same person. They are no, v dead and buried. There
is no reason to anticipate th, sir resurrection. But should
they by the remotest accidet it escape from their present
limbo, the powers i and the j= sorsons that frowned them
out of life when first held uj ) -to view, will frown them
down again ; and :if not, the ,scaintry will know how to
come to the rescue of its own. honour. As to the pro-
bability of future evils arising from Lord John's recent
rather than presen t views on 'ads question, if the House
of Commons desire s to see hith out of reach of the means
of impressing them tia ion the c ountry, they have a ye ry
simple security in the it own b.,ands. They have but to
negative Sir Bulwer I ,ytton's motion, and give a man ly
and generous support to Lord Palmerston's Cabirae t,
and the thing is done. So far, then, from the Cabin eat
having incurred the E listrust of the country, it has, 'int
our opinion, increase( d, its claim to public confidence. Ilar
instantly disowning t tie returned Envoy's opinions, the V
purged themselves o, f any complicity therewith ; while'
Lord John Russell, b y consenting to retain office under
a Minister who so tots ,lly differed from him on this point,
pledged himself not t, r obstruct, by the interposition of
his objectionable views , the opposite policy of the Cabinet.
We hold, then, that t 5e motion before us breaks down,
and that, since the con duct of the Minister during the
recent Conferences at Vienna—in so far as relates to
the last Austrian prop( ,s al—has not been confirmed by
the Cabinet, it eannot 1 4 said that the confidence of the
country in those to who's t its affairs are entrusted is any
way shaken.
One word more. This i motion is an attempt to sub-
stitute Lord Derby for 2 word Palmerston—the man of 1
many words for the ma nof many deeds—the man of
many failures for the m its tof many successes—the man
who could not and woo ld not form a Ministry in a criti-
cal and trying momen t , if public affairs, for the man
who could and did—th te ratan who has never yet tried
his hand at war, for I' an > nan who has not only tried,.
,t be remembered that all the
but
improvementshas succeeded.
in
th
s ar my, all the military successes,
all the definite bl owe against the enemy that have
taken place since the r B titish army was an almost anni-
hilated thing, have i meal. done since the present Govern-
ment came into p stv er. We put it to the country
whether it is prepar erst to transfer its confidence from the
men who have done so mu cb, to those who have never
yet proved that the., can dt.‘o anything at all ?

(.Prot
what of his r ;,,,,, ,flativieerTyinelesiorotfsptletiechdaLy.o)rd John Rug-
In the courser
sell last night; cr
diplomacy.llisra,,li mmitted two inaccuracies so remarkable
as to suggest a
ob-
tained her l'lrp suspicion that his lordship has lost some
clearness by his abortive attempt at
Cabinet. It
, 11 se first of these was in his reply to Mr.
ad asked whether his lordship had ob.-
, 7vv, 40 1
~ lest 'S consent to the statement he made
last Friday r
~,, .ht with respect to the proceedings of the
that he ha/ va s notorious, Lord John Russell observed,
br,,) oght proposals from Vienna, which, as a
matter of
was also course; the Cabinet would look at ; and, as it
notofiovs that the negotiations had come to a,
close, V
of con- nd we were still at war, it followed, as a matter
So w rse, that the ,Austrian proposals had been rejected.
kne•
7t had
The
qt liuWse o
is°tircinitP 110VW told more than everybody
as a bold one, for it admits of a
err N
are taidebted to Lord John Eusieli
)rapt reply.e

for a considerable addition to the notorieties he referred
to. He communicated to us on Friday the exact nature
of the Austrian proposals, and the additional fact that
he and the French Minister were fully of opinion that
they contained the elements of peace; It is true that
the Austrian version of the affair was already liefore the
worl,l. It is true, also, that before last Friday, before
the promulgation of the Austrian statement, even very
soon after Lord John Russell's return, the substance
of his present revelation had been whispered about.
This, however, was no excuse for the alleged breach
of Ministerial secrecy, but rathtr an aggravation ;
particularly when it is found that the persons in posses-
sion of the secret—the people who went about London
saying that Lord John Russell bad returned from Vienna
a thorough c)nvert to the Austrian policy, and ready to
make peace on any terms,—were the very statesmen
who had recently seceded from the Cabinet, and who evi-
dently felt that, though they had sacrificed themselves,
their cause was triumphant, and they had an ally in the
Ministerial camp. It cannot be doubted that the privacy
of her Majesty's Council had been broken in some way
or other ; and, as Lord John Russell considerably am-
plified the disclosure, divulging some very interesting
particulars, it was natural to ask whether he had ob-
tained leave for doing so. For our own part, indeed,
we think the course taken by Lord John immediately
after his return home much more proper—viz., telling
the expectant House of Commons nothing at all except
that Russia was an ambitiou3 and unscrupulous Power,
all the time that he was whispering to a few inquisitive
and leaky friends his asseneito the Austrian proposal ;
but to say that he told the house on Friday night no
more than it knew already is, to' say the least, a most
surprising inaccuracy.
The seeond inaccuracy is the last term in a series of
self-eontrailictions. Last Tuesday week Mr. Milner
Gibson called the attention of the,bouse to the ,circular
in which Count ituol stated that Lord John Russell had
entirely consented to the last Austrian proposal, and that
he had engaged to influence the Government at borne
to adopt that proposal ; or, as Mr. Milner Gibson ex-
pressCd it in a subsequent part of his speech, Lord John
Russell, at Vienna, had informed Count Buol that the
last proposal of Austria offered the means of an honour-
able solution of the question, and that he was prepared
to influence his Government to agree to it. All the an-
swer Lord John Russell gave to this at the time was,
that Mr. Milner Gibson bad totally misrepresented the
facts. This was rather hard measure for Mr. M. Gib-
son, who spoke with the circular before him, and endea-
voured to state its contents with scrupulous fidelity. On
Friday last Lord John Russell bad probably given the
circular a more serious perusal, and did not think it ex-
pedient to repeat his charge of total misrepresentation
against Mr. Milner Gibson. On that occasion he said,
" I certainly thought that the Austrian plan of counter-
poise was inferior to the plan of limitation that we pro-
posed, yet that it might be a mode of concluding the
war with honour to the Allied Powers, and that it would
give—l will not say a certainty—but a very fair pro-
spect, of the duration of peace." On Mr. Milner Gib-
son calling out "Hear," Lord John Russell proceeded,
"The right hon. gentleman asks me whether I have
changed that opinion. Sir, I have not changed that
opinion. I think that those terms were calculated
either, on the one side, to secure li.ustria to us in the
war, or, on the other, to obtain a peace which, although
it might be unpopular, would have been a peace that
would have afforded security for the future." Further
or. Lord John Russell added, after a word on some pos-
sible difference of recollections—" I have no doubt that
the statement of Count Buol is in the main an accurate
account of what I did at Vienna. I said that I had no
instructions that would enable me to agree to such terms,
and that the instructions I had would lead me to sup-
pose that such terms would not be accepted, but I said
that my own opinion was that they ought to be, and
might be, accepted ; and I said to Count Buol that I
could assure him, and that be could convey that assur-
rance to the Emperor of Austria, that I would lay the
case before the Cabinet of this country, and that I
would use my best endeavours to put those propositions
in such a light that they might hope for their adoption.
That promise I certainly performed." Lord John
Russell having thus explained that, though his
arguments received the utmost consideration, they did
not prevail, proceeded to account for his not having re-
signed his seat in the Cabinet. He was anxious not to
unsettle so soon what had just been settled, and there-
fore sacrificed himself to the public good, and stayed in.
If we could also think with his Lordship that his pre-
sence in the Cabinet contributed to the prospect of a
strong Government and a decided policy, then we might
also respect the sacrifice lie had made to the public.
good. It is because we think him a perpetual unsettle-
ment, a faulty piece of timber, an incurable leakage, a
rot in the Government, ever ready to open the passage
by which power and confidence will pass over to some
other combination, that we think very lightly of this
boasted sacrifice. _ _

And now for Lord John's last night's addition to this
singular story. "It has been inferred and supposed,"
he now observes, " because I said that at the end of
fapotousi
nt ti
hd eoa
tn
egfnohtrt hmpa
eovatie
ci
een.e
te n
Such
thoseos
he n bedtparo
supposition
p,e
pitthoi
osaintt Io
mot hawiynokfi
iolnrdmo
bwea,
April and in the first days of May I thought those pro-
:pso rnme
totally erroneous. It is entirely contrary to the fact
that I consider now those propositions would form
the foundation of peace. It was my opinion, and, as I
stated the other day, I retain the opinion, as to what
might have been done ; but, after the events and pro-
ceedings which have since occurred, I believe nothing
`rut a vigorous prosecution of the war will obtain
ti arms upon which peace can be concluded." Wa
ca I only avow ourselves utterly astonished that any
ri fish statesman should be, or profess to be, so
Bun t of apprehension as to substitute the " in-
ferent le and supposition" here described for that
which. the House of Commons and the whole
British public drew from his speech on Friday night.
We are quite sure thaton this point Mr. Disraeli exactly
represent s every intelligent reader of the above passage
when he s aye, "I do not see that the statement which
the noble 1. erd has made at all changes his situation with
regard to tl 'e house, and as respects the narrative which
he made on Friday night. I did not hear that anybody
on Friday nib 'ht hinted that, in consequence of the speech
of the noble k he was at this moment of opinion that
peace ought to k ) negotiated with Russia upon the basis
of the proposit ions which he approved at the time he
has now mentio ued. That was a point which was not
at all brought in to consideration." Why, of course, the
Austrian propos, d has gone to the wind slang ag
on o. It is
s
now sufficiently ( :tear to the veriest ptnger th
Eneland will not be content even with her own plan of
limitation, but wit '1 require much stronger security. We
cannot suppose tha t any one would imagine even Lord
John Russell going ,s bout t persuade people that Russia
might possibly cons el it to let the allies keep a fleet equal
to her own in the :61; tick Sea, and join in guaranteeing
the independence of ' Turkey. The idea is not only ex-
ploded, it is ridicul one
,; nay, more, it is become a mat-
ter of sarprise their Count Buol should ever have suc-
ceeded in palming :so singular a conception yu a British
Minister. The real " int "rence and supposition " that the
public draws from Lord John Russell's speech is, that on
the great question o:f peace or war, which must for some
time occupy the puleiic, to the exclusion of all others,
:and which on the firs t great reverse is likely to convulse
:any Government, the re stands Lord John Russell, the
professed author of pacific counsels, the man who
brought a message of peace which his colleagues
thought fit to reject, the testifier to peace in evil
.
ll
times, the man whose advice, it be said, had it
been followed, might have saved us myriads of
lives, and millions upon millions of treasure. That is the
position which Lord John has obtained for himself, and
we hold it to be dangerous to any Government of which
be may happen to be a member. As for the pacific sug-
gestions of the seceded Ministers, they are set down to
the motives that usually rule the Opposition. Not so
Lord John's importation from the Austrian Chancery.
It is capital, and in the Possible hour of disaster Lord
John will turn it to the best account.

(From the Morning Herald of this day.)
Ministers aro making desperate efforts to recover
their lost ground, and to repair the mischief done by the
unhappy revelations of the ex-plenipotentiary. Certa'n
documents relating to the recent negotiations at Vienna
which appear to have turned up most opportunely, were
last night laid upon the table of the house, and upon
these papers—if we are to believe a morning contem-
porary—Lord John Russell relies for the defence of his
weak and contemptible behaviour. We are coolly asked
to believe that the British public have been altogether
in the dark as to the real cause of the resignation of M.
Drouyn de l'lluys, which these mysterious documents
are to explain, and we are further told that no blame at-
taches to Lord John Russell for not having followed the
example of the Frenelf envoy on his return home. In
1 short, that there was no parity in the relative position of
1 each ; for that the French minister resigned in conse-
quence of a " difference " with the Emperor upon an
1 other and a distinct question.
As it is quite impossible to separate the acts of Lord
1 . John Russell from that of the Cabinet, we presume the
krirovernment will take its defence upon the papers in
q, sestion. Lord Palmerston rested his refusal last night
to ,suspend the standing orders in favour of Sir E. B.
Ly tton's motion on the ground that these papers
wo ald only be this day in the hands of members,
and accordingly next
and. that they could net get hold of their contents
on which hangs mere than the fate
in time for the debate. To such a proposition it
was not for the leader of the oppositi Mondayir E.
manifestly
nesttlime in hopes, like Mr.
Bisufilxweear
fLorytatodnebtao
toeboj
of a co inproinie,ed. Administration.
y another of those at-
tempts of
Micawb er, "of something turning up.. News from the
camp of some brilliant, some decisive success, would per-
haps serve to steady for a time the present politically de-
moralised .A.dministration, and impose it some month,
longer upon the country. Those who have looked at the
latest accounts from E'ebastopol must regard any such
chance as a desperate one. A dexterous use of the chapter
of accidents has kept Lord Palmerston in office for four
months. It is hardly to be wondered at that he should
cling to it still as his best if not his only resource.
If the papers laid before the house last night contain
anything approaching to the vindication of Lord John
Russell, what are we to think of his confession of last
week ? If they constitute a defence, why have they been

withheld until his eliarad:er as a British Minister has
suffered irretrievably ? Has any rational max, either
here or in France, any doubt as to the true cause of the
retirement of M. Drouyn de. l'Huys ? The French
Emperor. is determined upon a vigorous prosecu-
tion of the war—he is bent upon the reduction of
the Russian power—M. Drouyn de l'Huys took a course
at the conferences at variance with his instructions—
at all events at variance, with the deliberate policy
of the Emperor—in that course he had the countenance
and support of Lord John Russell, except the protocols
have misrepresented the entire affair. Since the return
of 'both envoys to their respective courts we have had
declarations, through the organ of the French Govern-
ment, from the lips of the Emperor himself, in which the
Austrian proposition, founded on M. Drouyn de l'Huys'
suggestions, which Lord John Russell undertook to
press upon this Cabinet, are condemned in pointed and
unmistakeable terms. What need have we of further
explanation of a matter as clear as the light of heaven ?
M. Drouyn surrendered the portfolio for foreign affairs
because he had no alternative. Lord John Russell re-
mains in the Cabinet of the Queen, professing a policy
in direct opposition to her straightforward and resolute
ally. Such is the state of affairs which these remarkable
papers are to set right. In our last impression we an-
nounced the probable resignation of Lord John. We
have reason to know that resignation had been resolved
upon, and would have been tendered but for the earnest
solicitations of the leading Whig pacificator. Whether
it can be much longer withheld by a desperate effort to
keep the Whigs together remains to be seen.
In the hour of his need Lord Palmerstnn, it appears,
has had recourse to the assistance of the "Irish party ;"
it is acknowledged by him, as our Parliamentary report
states, that a deputation of these gentlemen waited on
him to seek his support for the 14th clause of the Tenants'
Compensation Bill. The noble lord announced last
night, amidst ironical cheers, that he had acceded to
their request inasmuch as he bad already voted for the
clause on the second reading cf the bill, and not only
did the accommodating minister promise his countenance
and support, hut he also engaged to bring up seven
members of the Government, who have not, and it is
believed, did not, intend to vote for the clause in ques-
tion. We leave this fact before our readers ;if it does
not imply a contract, there is no such thing in Parlia-
mentary management, and no meaning in the derisive
cheers with which Lord Palmerston's explanation was
received.