The Sun.
London, England, 1855-05-26 00:00:00

motion of the right hon. gentleman the member for Bucking-
hamshire because it implied a censure on the Government,
and in his opinion it was not desirable to change the Govern-
ment at the present crisis. A decisive majority of 100 had
pronounced" that such a change was inexpedient, but the great
question raised by the hon. member for Kidderminster in his
amendment was not yet fully debated. The noble lord had
threatened him and those who sat near him with their consti-
tuents. He should be rejoiced at an opportunity of stating
his views upon this question before his constituents, but such
an opporttmity had not yet been afforded him. He hoped,
therefore, that the first business after the recess would be to
resume this debate, for it was impossible that due jus-
tice could be done to the question at that hour in ,the morn-
ing ; and if, therefore, they should go to a division, he should
certainly vote in favour of the adjournment. If he understood
the noble lord rightly, all negotiations were at an end. He
had heard that to-night for the first time. The speech, too,
of the noble lord (J. Russell) last night placed the state of
our relations with Russia on a new footing, which appeared
to him would-lead, if not to an inteiminable war, at least to
the commencement of a war of 30 years' duration. (Cheers,
and " Oh, oh !") Although ho was not satisfied with the
declaration of hon. gentlemen opposite as to the policy they
would recommend, yet the speech of the right hon. gentle-
manP (Mr. Disiaeli) laid downrinciPles which appeared to
bitn to afford a prospect of a fairer settlementro
ehetchla.i:i,g tfrhoaitn
tahne-
flounced by her Majesty's Ministers. (
Opposition benches.) Too right hon. gentleman declared that
"in his opinion there were only two modes in which war could
be conducted with Russia—one was the revision of territorial
arrangements throughout Europe, and an attack on the cx-
tended frontier of Russia ; iu fact, a war of nationalities ;
and he expressed an opinion in which he concurred, that
war of that deseriptiou would be interminable, if not hope-
less The s'...c..md mode proposed by the right hon. gentlernaa
was, that the war should be conducted on the principle of
protection to Turkey, so that her independence and integrity
should he preserved, and that that operation should be
effected without the invasion of the territory of Russia. He
was prepared to defend the step taken by the Government,
of which he was a member, in attacking the Crimea ; but
with respect to the future policy of this country ho was con-
vinced that the view of the right hon. gentleman was one
which, if steadily pursued, did not exclude the hope of peace,
while the announcements of the Government, that the nego-
tiations had been abandoned and that the ground of war had
been changed, was not a question of terms, but that terms
being abandoned the war was to assume the position of a war
of nationalities. (Cheers and cries of " Oh.") A more
serious question than this was never raised iu the British Par-
liament, and full opportunity ought to be given for the dis-
cussion. (Cheers.)
Lord J. RUSSELL—A. very important question had been
raised by the right hon. gentleman, but in the 'first place he
must utterly and entirely deny what the right hon. gentle-
man had attributed to him. (Cheers.) What he said was,
that the object of the war, beyond the immediate defence of
Turkey from the aggression committed by Russia, was secu-
rity for Turkey for the future. (Cheers.) He said that the
Government had endeavoured to obtain that security, but he
had never gone beyond that declaration. He bad said no-
thing of nationalities. He said the plenipotentiaries of France
and England were precluded at Vienna from entering upon
the question of diminishing the territory of Russia, but never,
either with regard to territory or to nationalities, had he
given utterance to auy expressions which would justify the
remarks of his right hon. friend. (Cheers.) He conceived
that when security for Turkey was obtained we ought not to
hesitate for a moment to make peace with Russia. (Hear.)
The right hon. gentleman had referred to what had fallen
from the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire. He (Lord
J. Russell) understood the right hon. gentleman opposite to
say that we could not at the same time carry on negotiations
and conduct a war, and he declared that the negotiations
ought to be broken off' and that the war should continue.'
That was his decision, and how from that state of things
he was to evolve peace hereafter he knew not. (Cheers.)
With regard to the question now before the house, there was
one declaration included in all the propositions that had been
brought forward—viz, that this house would continue to give
every support to her Majesty in the prosecution of the war
till her Majesty should be able to obtain a safe and honour-
able peace. He thought that, before they separated for the
holidays, the house should agree to some declaration which
would contain these words— (cheers)—that being a declara•
tion in which all parties concurred. (Hear.) The motion of
the right hon member for Manchester might be taken on an
early day after the holydays. (Hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI begged to congratulate the supporters of
the•noble lord on the majority of that evening, but, at the
same time, had to remind them that, no sooner was that ma-
jority obtained than the noble lord (Lord John Russell) had
risen and recanted the speech which had called forth the ob-
servations of the right hon. the member for Carlisle. (Cheers
and " No, no.") Only yesterday we had a picture drawn not
of the power only, but of the policy of Russia, which equalled
the spirited pencil of Dante. The house was affrighted as the
noble lord drew his description of a power and active policy,
which proved that he thought this kingdom was in danger
from the engrossing power and systematic aggression of Rus-
sia ; but no sooner is the majority obtained—a majority
which had expressed no confidence iu the Government—(oll,
and laughter)—than the noble lord, when his attention was
called to this remarkable statement, immediately rose and
recanted the views which he had given. (" No, no.") It was
another edition of the Sebastopol speech, which the noble lord
recanted the same night in which it was delivered. (Hear.)
And yet he was told the language of the Government was not
ambiguous. (Cheers.) This was a motion which concerned
the honour and interests of the country, and could not bo
disposed of without discussion. He had told the noble lord
that the last division would be only the beginning of a pro-
tracted discussion, and he repeated that to hurry to a deci-
sion now upon the important motion before them would be
impolitic and indecent, although he felt the feeling of the
house to be quite distinct that no more discussion could take
Place at that moment. (Hear.)
Mr. S. HERBERT thought the house had been perfectly
right iu deciding at once upon the last resolution, which was
one of great importance to be settled in declaring the opinion
of the house as to in whose hands the Government should be
intrusted. But now that it had decided a great question as

between parties, it was called upon to decide upon a question
affecting the country,—to dispose of, without discussing, two
motions on which the meaning of words required to be mi-
nutely weighed. He was not now prepared to come io a
decision upon those resolutions which related to a subject the
most important which bad occurred since he had had the
honour of a seat in that house. It would be indecent and
destructive to their character to allow such -questions to be
treated as mere postscript to a party debate. 'The noble lord
had complained of having been misrepresented by his right
:ion friend (Sir J. Graham), and sorely the accuracy of that
complaint waS a matter of importance. Now that time oun-
try was called upon to enter upon a new Russian war, when
' time prospect of other interference was held out, he (Mr. Her-
bert) called upon the house to vindicate its privileges, and
not to allow the convenience of a few days holidays to

Fero with their duties at this important moment. He for
ono would not consent to dispose of the matter until he knew
the opinions of the Government upon this new Russian war.
Mr. BARROW, though differing with the right hon. gen-
tleman upon the resolution, agreed with hiffi as to the im-
propriety of deciding without discussion, and equally as much
to proceeding at that time.
Mr. ROEBUCK inquired of the Speaker whether the
house had not the power to revoke its decision as to the ad-
journment? _

The SPEAKER said, it had never been the practice for the
house to revoke a decision formally adopted upon the same

Lord PALMERSTON said, that at that hour of the morn-
ing he did not feel able to resist the feeling of the house for
the adjournment of the debate. (Cheers.)
The debate was then aijourned.
• NEW WRIT.

On the motion of Mr. HATTER, a new writ was moved for
Bath, in lieu of Mr. Phinn, who has accepted the Chiltern
Hundreds.

LIMIT ED LIABILITY.

Mr. BOUVERIE obtained leave to bring in two bills re-
specting the law of partnership, and the bills were read a
first time.
The house adjourned at a quarter past 3 o'clock.

Mr. Pugh paired with Mr. Ewart against Mr. Berkeley's
motion on the ballot.

Mr. Pugh paired with Mr. Milligan for Thursday and
Friday.
Mr. B. Coles paired. in favour of Mr. Disraeli's motion with
Mr. Bagshawe against it.

Mr. R. W. Grey's name was accidentally omitted from the
list of members who attended the meeting at Lord Palmer-
ston's yesterday, May 25.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

( Feont the Times of this day. )

It is said to be an ancient practice of the Court of Rome
that on a certain festival of the Church a preaching friar
mounts the pulpit for no other purpose than to impugn the
faith, to distort the truth, to degrade what is right, to vindi-
cate what is wrong, and, in short, to defend the cause of the
Enemy of Man. A similar ceremony was performed last
night in the House of Lords, and the speaker who assumed
the strange office of the Devil's Advocate was no other than
Lord Grey. The Peers who followed, and answered with the
feeling of statesmen and of Englishmen this interminable and
extraordinary harangue, thought fit to pay Lord Grey a com-
pliment on the sincerity of his motives, as they could find no
other pretext for the customary civilities of Parliamentary
debate, but it requires an effort to join in even that faint
compliment, for it is not easy to comprehend the sincerity of
a man who wanders through a, labyrinth of sophisms
until he finds himself arrayed on the side of the ene-
mies of his country. The wretched deserter who
skulks on a stormy night from the pickets before
Sebastopol until he is snapped up by a pulk of Cossacks is
struck with dishonour from the roll of the British army, and
incurs the punishment of death if he falls intothe hands of the
Provost Marshal ; but that military offence may be more venial
in ita motives and less injurious to the public service than the
desertion of a British Peer, bearing a name once illustrious in
the public service, possessing great powers of intellect and of
oratory, but of so frail a judgment and so perverse a temper,
that in the very crisis of a groat national contest he throws
the whole weight of his authority and his example on the side
of the enemy of his country. Lord Grey was entirely at liberty,
as we all are, in the exercise of that freedom of debate which
is the birthright of every Englishman, to criticise and con-
demn the policy of the Government, to dissent from all the
principles on which the Minister of the Crown have acted,
and to deprecate what he conceives to be the effects of this
war. On these points we acknowledge the consistency with
which ho has adhered to what he terms the cause of peace.
But when he was driven by the necessity of his own logic to
go further—not only to censure every act of the British Go-
vernment and its Allies, but to justify every act of the Czar
—not only to impute to the men with whom he has hithertAo
acted during his whole life a criminal blindness of policy and
a disgraceful levity in action, but even to pronounce in the
ha
British House of Peers an elaborate defence of the c t
e,.cct o
the good faith, the moderation, and the political cond "
moral
Nicholas of Russia, wo are astonished that his own moral
sense did not recoil from so monstrous a conclusion.
We aro perfectly willing to take the argument
roy
has stated it. Be it so, that to prove this warasuL.
judsttiand
unnecessary each successive step of Russia has
.been marked
by candour, honesty, and the desire of peace , that Prince
modest
sacilsa
im
of friendship ; and that Prince
Mensehikoff's mission to ClonstantlGnoorptslec
hwaa sk
otffh es
at
Vienna were fresh leaves of the Russian olive branch, Is Lord
the issue'and to take the verdict on the s 3
Grey content ta try
h
facts, and, if they are disproved, to abandon the paradox which
has attempted to dress up in all the dignity of an opinion ?
To make out the appearance of a case he was compelled
not only to misrepresent, but positively to invert every in-
cident in these transactions, and the moment these succes-
sive events are restored to their true form and meaning the
whole structure of falsehood and delusion crumbles into the
dust. If this were all, and if Lord Grey's reputation as a
statesman were the only sacrifice required in expiation of
these absurdities, the result would be indifferentto the world.
hm
aseorde
at
the difficult
expense to be
But we cannot conceal from ourselves the fact that, as far as
u
such a speech has any force at all, that force is used either
atottaiprnoelodn,gotrhbeyweaarusbinyg
peacerenderingto
be peacerc
of the honour of the Allies. Here, among the people of Eng-
land, we well know that so unnatural a speech wi • awaken
of the
no echo but in the indignation ll
country. When the
public so to what shifts the partisaus of poaccoat-any-p;iFe