The Sun.
London, England, 1855-07-14 00:00:00

dL~RL~AT tI~)r~

RESIGNATION OF LORD JOHN RUSSELL

("' Prom the Times of this day.)
Yesterday afternoon Lord John Russell anticipated the
certain decision of the House of Commons by a tardy re-
signation. As constitutional propriety required that the
resignation should be accepted by, the Queen before it was
announced to the house, and her Majesty happened to be
at Osborne, the evening sitting passed, oddly enough,
without any allusion to an event, as we must consider it,
of European importance. It is said that his lordship was
still hesitating between the numerous conflicting consider-
ations that presented themselves, and had even accepted
with all seriousness the invitation of his colleagues to re-
main where he was, when a very remarkable incident de-
termined, or rather compelled, a contrary decision. The
members of the Government in the House of Commons
not inoluded in the Cabinet, represented by Mr. Bouverie,
are reported to have informed him that they were not pre-
pared to vote against Sir Bulwer Lytton's motion. This
removed all doubt as to the result of the impending divi-
sion, and, as Lord John could no longer hope to save him-
self, even at the cost of the whole of his colleagues, he
wisely preferred to do with something like grace what be
would otherwise have had to do with no grace at all. The
Cabinet must feel relieved of a very unmanageable burden.
No doubt, in Lord John Russell it has lost great abilities
and personal influence, and no doubt he is not pleasant
either as an antagonist or as a rival ; but his continuance
in the Cabinet had become impossible. A Minister whom
Russia could claim as a sympathiser, Austria as a plenipo-
tentiary, the Peace party as an advocate, the seceded Minis-
ters as one of their own opinions, and every Parliamentary
foe as a probable auxiliary, was absolutely incompatible
with the safety of Government. Lord Palmerston had,
indeed, requested him to take no notice of the "much
ado about nothing" that had been got up, and to stay in ;
but, when the Premier had tolerated him so many weeks,
in the face of M. Drouyn de l'Huys' retirement under the
same circumstances, ho had no alternative but to hold the
same language still, and, in common phrase, to "stand by
Lord John. But, though Lord Palmerston might be pre-
pared to consult his consistency at the expense of power,
the occasion was not one that depended on the interchange
of courtesies. The public and their representatives would
not stand the incredible absurdity of a war conducted by
ministers, one of whom thought it might have been avoided
but for the obstinacy of the rest. War with a neighbour.
ing nation was bad enough, and could not be helped, but
a fundamental difference about the war in the Cabinet it-
self was a gratuitous aggravation, and could be helped. So
the British public has spoken in no uncertain tones ; the
House of Commons has expressed itself as plainly as it
could do ; and Lord John has given way to the storm, and
retired.
What is now become of Sir Bulwer Lytton's motion—
how those members of the Cabinet are to be dealt with
who are said to agree with Lord John—and who is to fill
up the vacancy, are questions of great moment just now.
It is more important to assign a true value to this event,
and there we cannot be far wrong. Most interesting is it
to trace the growing intensity of the popular feeling, and
its increasing impatience of anything like disloyalty in the
quarrel with Russia. It was the people who forced
Lord Aberdeen into the war, which he would have been
glad to spend the remainder of his days in putting off
by every means in his power. It was the people who
joined as one man to everthrow the Government, when
enormous blunders and neglects seemed to betray an
indolent and inefficient administration. It was the stern
aspect of the people, and its resolute determination that
the sufferings and the deaths of so many thousands should
not be in vain, which infused into our negotiations, in
spite of the chief negotiator, an unwonted °firmness and
dignity. Accordingly, it is the people who have dismissed
Lord John, for the present, to that retirement where he
may, if he pleases, still split himself into doubts, and di-
vide his precarious sympathies between England and Rus-
sia. In fact, the British people, for all that Mr. Cobden
says to the contrary, are resolved to go on with this war ;
to persevere, in spite of losses, disgraces, and even appa-
rently irretrievable disaster. The war may have to stand
that greatest., and severest, and truest of all tests—the
ordeal of failure. Success is no test. It gilds a bad cause
as much as it recommends a good one. Knaves and tyrants
may prosper and give thanks. To suffer the loss of friends,
to pay largely out of the pocket, to bid farewell to private
wealth and national prosperity, to smile on disaster and
welcome poverty, all for the sake of a good cause, makes
that cause sacred, honourable, and heroic. These are the
things that bring us back to the nobility of ancient days.
We cannot command success ; but England is satisfied that
her cause is good, and she will persevere all the more that
she has to do so through many obstacles and in much dis-
couragement. What cause so good as to have escaped
those trials ?
This is the natural feeling of the people, and it is a per-
fectly right one. A very slight reflection will serve to
show that, if there is any subject in the whole sphere of
human action on which there ought to be no doubt or de-
mur, it is the awful business of war. A Government may
or may not be very cordial or unanimous on a question
of reform in institutions that have lasted for centuries
unreformed, or on a question of railways, or other
material improvements ; almost any question, indeed, of
mere secular import may be left open for the variety and
fallibility of human judgment ; but in war we are assuming
as we needs must assume, the tremendous prerogative of
Heaven—the assertion of justice by the sword. The man
who takes the responsibility of sending fleets and armies
to kill, to burn, to waste and destroy; to spread ruin
among millions, to sow the seeds of endless resentments,
to stop the progress of civilisation, and drive the human
race back again to the desert, ought to be very certain,
very hearty, in his hideous work-. To do all this doubt-
ingly, with a perpetually intrusive misgiving that, after
all, there was no need for it, and that we are responsible
for these horrors, implies a singular indifference to huma-
nity, justice, and truths That the nature of the work de-
mands the rmest determination and most unyielding de-
cision, and that hesitation and doubt are sure to be written
in blood and tears, is only a proof of the infinite moral
gravity of the task, and the necessity of a thoroughly re-
solved mind. M. Droun de Lhuys evidently saw this. Had
he felt negotiation exhausted and the war unavoidable, be
might have continued to assist with his counsels. Had be
been a soldier, he would have been bound by the oath of
military obedience, and flip,o would have boon enough
warrant for his conscience and an end of dubitation • but,
as it was, he was at liberty to doubt, and did doubt ; so
ho resigned, and now neither stains his hands with war
nor infects the war with infirmity of resolution. Lord J.
Russell had not the same fineness of apprehension and
gravity of action. He seems to have thought he might take
a voluntary and prominent part in wholesale destruction
of his species, even at the time when he was de-
cidedly of opinion that it was all unnecessary. This is to
play with the sword and throw firebrands in sport. The
British public feels as the French Minister felt on the
matter, and they have now compelled the English Minister
to follow his example. We could wish that the lesson had
not been necessary, but, at all events, we have reason to be
proud of a public opinion that can promptly and decisively
arrest the vacillation and supply the shortcomings of our
rulers.