The Sun.
London, England, 1855-05-15 00:00:00

routine or practice of their offices. It does not
render it the less necessary for the community at

large to strive with all its power and all its
1
strength to get rid of the vicious system, and to
remove as many obstacles as possible from the
way of Ministers, so that they may be able, with-
out regard to the murmurings of the " Tapers"
and " Tadpoles," to place " the right meu iu the
right places"—to select the ablest men in their
respective departments for the public service.
This is the principle for which the Administrative
Reformers contend—this is the principle asserted
by Lord ELLENBOROUGH in his place in the heredi-
tary branch of the Legislature-. This is the prin-
ciple rejected by their Lordships, by a majority of
110 out of 252—or, including tellers, 256 titled
voters !

The arguments adduced will, however, have
greater weight with the great body of the
People than the members who gave silent votes,
or sent their proxies against it. It is not be-
cause Lord NOODLE deemed it a revolutionary
doctrine, or Viscount DOODLE conceived the
attempt to deprive the nobility of their long-
recognised privileges as little better than a general
" confiscation," or the Earl of NEPOS thought it

very unfair to poor AUGUSTUS and FREDERICK,
and asked, with tears in his eyes, how could
noblemen in such cases provide comfortable
sinecures for their younger sons, or find
husbands for their daughters, that the voice
of public opinion is to be slighted or despised.
That voice has proclaimed " trumpet-tongued "
the great fact, that "it is absolutely necessary for
the future to adopt a new principle in the selec-
tion of officers for the public employment, and, if
disregarded in the Upper House, it must be treated
with deference and respect in that which pecu-
liarly belongs to the people, in which every mem-
ber owes his right of voting to the suffrages of
his constituents.

I The defence by Lord PANAITIRE was exceedingly
weak and vapid. He complained because his op-
ponent did not descend from generalities to parti-
culars—did not adduce instances of the "QUEEN'S
bad bargains," and cite the names of some of the
many detrimentals in the public service. But there
was no necessity for entering into such details when
their name was "legion," and when every man
throughout the length and breadth of the land
could himself speak of his own knowledge as to
persons who fell within the scope of the Noble
Earl's condemnation. Lord PANMUItE, who was,
perhaps, the last man who ought to have com-
plained of the forbearance thus strikingly dis-
played, announced the doctrine that "public
opinion ought to lead both Parliaments and Go-
vernments." In other words, that every " aged
vice" should be retained until it could no longer
be defended—until the pressure from without be-
came too powerful to be any longer resisted. Lard
ELLENBOROUGH, on the other hand, called on their
Lordships "to place themselves in the front of
the people, and at the foot of the Throne to state
their complaint and their dissatisfaction." It does
not require very astute arguments to show which
is the more dignified course, or which is more
befitting the constitutional attributes of heredi-
tary legislators.

Administrative Reformers must not, however,
be discouraged by this failure. We repeat that
which should be inscribed on their banner, Palma
non sine pulvere. They cannot expect immediate
success without setting their shoulders to the
wheels, and exerting themselves zealously and
energetically in the glorious cause to which they
have so devoted themselves. Lord ELLENBOROUGH'S
motion may be regarded as the first step, so far
as Parliament is concerned, in the path in which
we hope and believe rapid progress will speedily
be made.

We believe the view which we have advocated
from the beginning will soon be the universal one
—that no peace can be made worth having with-

out Russia on her knees. That was the policy of
the Allies towards France, even when during the
hundred days she had given no indication of in-
tending any aggressions upon the rest of
Europe. Why should Russia be dealt with
more leniently now ? We look back upon the
peace we have escaped with almost the sensations
of one who perceives at dawn that he has in the
darkness been treading the brink of some dreadful
precipice. Peace was to be concluded on the basis
of the illusive Four Points, -without one word of
many serious questions raised by the incidents of
the War itself. Not a word of the brave Circassians,
nor of Bomarsund and the Alanders ; not a word
of indemnity either to the Allies or to Turkey,
whose exchequer the aggressor has almost drained.
Not a word of the surrender to Turkey of all the

territory bordering on the mouth of the Danube,
of which Russia deprived that Power, and of
which she has made so infamous a use ; and even

the evacuation in perpetuity of the Black Sea by
her ships of war was not insisted on, notwithstand-
ing our having that point absolutely in our

power.

All this must be reversed, if we are to have a
speedy, not to say a safe peace. Let the Allies
openly lay down as their rule of conduct before all
Europe, that all they acquire by their arms, whe-
ther by sea or by land, shall cease. for ever to belong
to Russia, and we believe that she would make
peace only too speedily. The folly of Lord JOHN
RUSSELL'S declaration that the Allies did not wish
to deprive Russia of any of her (stolen) territory
has probably done more than anything else to
prevent peace. Coupling this with the imbecility
which courted Austria, let her into the provinces,
and then made her president in a peace con-
ference, why should Russia put herself in
a fright ? Very different would have been the
effect had we pronounced each conquest forfeited
for ever by the aggressor—had we, as soon as
her ships were sunk at Sebastopol, proclaimed
that not a Russian vessel of war should ever float
again on the Black Sea. And again, when Bomar-
sund fell, that no Russian soldier should ever
assert Russian power again in the Aland Isles ;
and when we took Eupatoria that it ceased
thenceforth for ever to be a Russian town.
Had we added, as we might easily have
done, Odessa and other places to such a
list—in all probability the CZAR would have
soon put an end to a war, every year of which
would have only branded his wickedness and folly
with greater and permanent disgrace.
Suppose we become, as we hope to be, masters
of the Crimea—it will then be ours by at least as
good a right as that of Russia ; wo should say a
better one. Let it bo announced at once to all
Europe that it is Russia's no more. Perhaps
2orne would like her to redeem it ; if so, the low-
est price must bo to refund to Turkey, to Eng-
land, to France, to Sardinia, to all but Austria,
every penny of expense to which the War
aprar s
so
has put them. A policy like this is the
only one by which a barbarous and cunning,
yet
Prom the bergisnyn,ing all has been sacrificed by ir..-
timely geinute
etopfower,
the Pruth to the cruel massacre at can be brought to her senses.
.inope, and theneeor—query—timidity ? Frc in
to the
after
rnua Conferences, all
has been cond ucte
how little woul d on the principle of trying
d do
polite distance, and
the naval murder