The Sun.
London, England, 1863-07-28 00:00:00

THERMOMETER.

This morning
This day at Two o'clock 76
Wind—S.-Easterly ; light, with fine but cloudy weather.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
Cats D&T.—Morning, llh. 50m.—Afternoon, h. m.
To-moßnow.-Morning, 12h. 24m.—Afternoon, 12h. 55m.

Zjj,"

LONDON, TUESDAY, JULY 28, 1863.

This afternoon has terminated the most idle and
unimportant session of Parliament within our re-
membrance. Scarcely any one thing done that was
at all worth the doing. Scarcely any one thing said
that was at all really worth the listening to. The
future historical investigator of that mausoleum of
debates, " Hansard," will, in all human likelihood,
long years hence, should he come by chance upon
the volume dedicated to the records (such as they
are) of 1863, turn the leaves lightly 'twist finger
and thumb with an air of the most supreme and
imperturbable indifference. As appropriately in-
augurative of this session, the Speech from the
Throne, delivered just below it, upon the regal dais,
by Royal Commission, gave carte blanche both to the
Ministers and the Houses. It presented, for once, no
programme, whatever, for anything at all worthy of
the name of legislative proceedings. For once, the
sweets of office carried with them all, through the
session, something of the dolce far niente. And
sympathetically in every way with the careless idle-
ness of the Government in so far as relates to origi-
nating, or even to indirectly furthering, the rational
or t e moderate interests of the great cause of progress
otgeneral improvement—has been the profound
quietude,
almost We might call it magnanimity, of
the Opposition.
Almost—certainly not entirely.
For the leaders ofher Majesty's Opposition have,
in point of fact' m
the weary
expired, wholly session Which has this day tranquilly
and
solely for the one sufficient
reason that they lacked,
from first to last, the requi-
site opportunity. A
do nevePrtshing
however,they word of commendation,
confronting antagonists eflessdeserveeven from their
more than
°nee, thou 'hor inasmuch as they have,
temptation occasionally
considerable under very
these five Zdtolidnog—theyhave never
once during
0 o precipitEtte matters by -
striven in any Way t
for themselves an ppertnnity. months last past,
making
The Unasergati
ve
the memorable period party
never yet since 1
conversion of the lactoetii its Sir ROBERT PEEL to
disruption by the
a deliberate and
truth, and wisdom, and se'itilatle belief in the
Trade Principles—never
yet beneficence of the Free
momentous
since
that
momentous
for
winter of 1845.6,
the " winte
Conservatism—never since then or
year, has the Conservative partY ' untilso
this
present
om the°
thoroughly so serried in its array, so
completelynoe_ fr and organised. Yet—for
commencement of this session of 1863) down
to the very close of it, this afternoon, we have
heard no whisper even of the merest hint
ears
in what used to be dinned into our '
in times past unceasingly and vociferously,
the machinations of a factious Opposition. Not
merely our good-humoured Premier, but for ver;

decency's sake, we shi-uld imagine even Qui.

saturnine Chancellor of the Excli( quer, must per-
force acquit Lord DERBY and Mr. DisktaELl, tope
ther with their associates and followers, there in the,
Loris, here in the Commons, of anything whatever
approximating in the faintest degree to factiousness.
Yet in many particulars we hesitate not to assert—
scanning the two tides intermediately and quite
dispassionately--that never has a Government been
more flagrantly open to attack than the Govern-
ment of Lard PALMERSTON. Alike in regard to
what they did and in regard to what they did not.
Their smuggling out of view, yet once more, all that
they had, by affecting to champion, taken office for,
now more than four years ego! Their smuggling
oat of view we say yet once more all their old
vaunted enterprises of Reform ' T
• neir doing this,

moreover, not, as hitherto, partially and hesitatingly,
but on the contrary, deliberately and wholesale !
Their doing this (as one might express it) with a
quiet laugh of derision at their dupes (meaning the
nation) a manifestation of scorn visible and audible
at every turn in the whole bearing of our sprightly
veteran the First Lord of the Treasury—all this, if
there were anything ever deserving of this particu-
lar reprobation, has been and is, to the very last
extremity, unprincipled on the part of a
great body of administrators. So much, in a gene-
ralised way, in regard to what Ministers have not
done, have avoided doing, have, to put the matter
in yet plainer terms, deliberately shirked, in the '
shape of responsibilities, ostentatiously assumed, in
the first instance, only in the end to be coolly set
aside altogether I While, as to the manner in
which they have repeatedly laid themselves open to
attack in respect to things said and done, whenever
Ministers have really ventured to say or do any-
thing—it is in relation to these, that the
numerous censors confronting them, have shewn,

if they have shewn anywhere, a semblance,at a
least,
ast,
of magnanimity. Lord RUSSELL, 8 escapade
diplomatist, by
his perverse reversal, for a while, of
all England's policy in respect to the Schleswig-
Holstein difficulty. Sir GEORGE GREY's bungling
and ill-advised onslaught upon some of the most
inoffensive, and, at the same time, some
of the most cherished rights and privileges
appertaining to the ancient municipality
of the City of London. Mr. GLADSTONE'S
abortive attempt to impose a license duty on Clubs,
and, yet more perversely, as a fiscal experimentalist
to inflict a petty and galling tax upon Charities.
The whole Cabinet's complicity in the endeavour to
commit the nation to the purchase, at a monstrous
overcharge, of the hideous Exhibition Building at
South Kensington, an endeavour all the more repre-
hensible seeing that it obviously springs from
some wretched feeling of Court subserviency !
These, together with a variety of other stumbles
and blunders, too tedious or too trivial for re-
capitulation at this moment, have tempted the foes
of the Government to deal with it pitilessly and un-
compromisingly. In regard to the one conspicuous
incident last mentioned, that relating to what is
called FOWICES'S Folly, and certainly also to a most
mistaken sense of loyalty on the part of a small
minority of the British House of Commons, it must
nevertheless be acknowledged, somewhat in mitiga-
tion of the conduct pursued by Ministers, that there
were associated with them in that minority, one or
two of the leaders, among them the Leader, of her
MAJESTY'S Opposition.
Otherwise than in that one exceptional instance,
the Government and the Opposition have, as usual,
marched into opposite lobbies. Yet, though re-
peatedly defeating her MAJESTY'S Ministers, de-
feating them again and yet again upon a singular
variety of subjects, during the five months of this
session now dead and gone, the Conservative party
have simply contented themselves with sweeping
the Ministerial blunders aside one after another.
They have never degenerated, we repeat, in any
one instance, into an unfair, such less—be this said
once more to the credit of the Tories—with a fac-
tious Opposition.

Mr. LAIRD has just published some letters which
concern the late debate in the house. In the first
place he refers to Mr. GIDEON WELLES' assertion
that " he hes an indistinct remembrance that his
department was importuned by more than one per-
son on behalf of Mr. LAIRD." This he denies, but
states that it gives room for supposing that the de-
partment over which Mr.WELLEs presides does ad-
mit of foreign proposals to build ships for the
Federal Government. Next, reference is made to
the assertion of Mr.WELLES that it is not true that
any person approached the firm of Mr. LAIRD with
the object of getting ships built for the Fedeial
Government. In allusion to this Mr. LAIRD states
that he then believed, what he does now, that his
correspondent had the authority of Government for
writing the letters, and he enclosed copies of them.
Before deciding to publish these documents Mr.
LAIRD has taken the opinion of both sides of the
House, and the result is that he is to be at liberty
to publish any document required for his own vin-
dication, but not to make known the name of his
correspondent.

The letter is given, and appears quite authentic.

It is dated "Washington," and refers to the building
of an iron-plated ship, and the fullest directions are
given in regard to its manufacture, and it is stated
in confidence that the object is to take repossession
of the forts in one specific Southern port. There
is an important memorandum annexed to this letter
which refers to a floating battery that is required.
This is to be " planned with the specific object of
going into ports guarded with batteries, and
forts which are within from 300 yards to half a
mile from the channel, the floating battery or iron-
plated ship to be so constructed as to be able to pass
the forts comparatively unharmed by the fire of the
batteries, both horizontal and plunging. She is
wanted for no other purpose." No one who reads
these details but will give implicit credence to their
eraisemblance, and acquit Mr. LAIRD of making
any egregious error in putting faith in their vera-
city. There is another letter which states that the
writer has been very long absent with General
FREMONT'S army in the far West, but that on re-
turn to Washington he had laid the answers to his
inquiries before the Secretary of the Admiralty, and
that disappointment was experienced at not receiv-
ing a direct statement relative to the construction
of the battery. In confidence it is mentioned that
it was " intended to force an entrance into Charles-
ton harbour, defended by Forts Sumter and Moul-
trie!' There is a letter written by Mr, LAIRD also
published. The date of this is last April, and he
refers to the debate in the House of Commons with
regard to the Alabama case, and his own speech
thereupon, in which he states that his firm had had
an application from the Secretary of the Navy of
the Federal Government, through a friend of his, to
build vessels of war. Mr. LAIRD goes on to say
that
he will not publish the correspondence unless
he fee-a compelled to do so through the Federa,
Government denying his statement, in which event
he
which he
will he compelled,otherw otherwise
sreelgf-rdeet.fenAcier,
Mr. LAIRD
At ?Rep a
trulyste
states, that top
deny the truth of this assertion will
most unfair to him
tered very fully en-
into and I
be
LAIRD oa so that they have en-
Finally, Mr.
sHoobuyset.he repeated
He has kept
ai th e
declaresc laat
that a of
hasfhevess e Ins everrequired.
men-
tioned these applications
ukntil he was compelled to do
s attack until
their friends in the
ent
himself and his , notwithstanding that
Bona
haveandn been repeatedly assailed
in the American
public
tin Truly dgoe'll Pres'
and also at
kp
Lloengegra.silent would have he
e:nm aay that to have
truth of the charges
afr
there-
fore he considered him7ldfieuasgtiafivieed6btieheinnat,o
and
admit the
n
his case. Impartially considering th:akingknown
appear that there is every reason to ook4ir it
mil"'
the justice of Mr. LAIRD'S remarks, and t on
0 give him
credit for taking a fair notion of the state of things
Why should the emissaries of the Federal Goveros:
ment take such pains to contradict what is most
probably a mere minor eircumstanco and an aeknow-

ledged Let to many. It is quite absurd to goon iu

this manner, and no one will believJ that no ti ucb
applications were made. As Mr. LAIRD saj s, there

is no doubt that the name of his correspondent is
very familiar to Mr. GIDEON ELLES. This latter
gentleman, doubtless, finds it very convenient to
make use of envoys and emissaries, and when their
work is done, or when their mission is over for the
time, he gives them up altogether, and even some-
times denies their collusion with him. So it is
doubtless in this affair that has lately engaged so
much attention, and there is every cause to congra-
tulate Mr. LAIRD on the bold stand he has made in
this dilemma. He has no reason to be ashamed or
afraid of the part he has taken, and as an English-
man he stands bound to explain his conduct, and to
testify to the actions of those who are not so inde-
pendent as ho is.

In a letter to our leading contemporary yester-
day Lord MALMESBURY gives en explanation of a
passage in his recent speech on Poland, which has
given rise to some misunderstanding. The noble
earl, after censuring the manner in which her MA-
JESTY'S Government have interfered in the Polish
question, proceeded to express his conviction that
milder measures, more consistently carried out,
would have been more effective. He reminded the
Ministry of the arguments which they had 'them•
selves brought forward in defence of the course they
had adopted with regard to America—a course
generally approved by politicians of both sides.
Those feelings of interest, of compassion, and of in-
dignation at the cruelties practised, which render
the affairs of Poland so deeply exciting, were, as
Lord MALMESBURY reminded us, equally called
forth by the American war. The desolation spread
over the fertile lands, mostly inhabited by men of
our own race and kindred, the bloodshed, the suffer-
ing, the barbarous acts which have disgraced its
annals, the hopelessness and the profitlessness of
the struggle, are considerations which must farce
themselves upon the most indifferent and unthink-
ing. The damage done to E o glish interests, directly
and indirectly, might have served to stimulate our
feelings, but Ministers have resolutely maintained
the attitude they first adopted. In the face of these
facts, Lord MALMESBURY felt called upon to pro-
test against our Polish policy, when another debate
on the prospects of that unhappy country brought
the question of English intervention once more
before the House of Lords. What is the position,
asked Lord MALMESBURY, that we are now occupy-
ing ? "First of all we gave advice, and then we
made positive propositions. These have been re-
fused, and what follows ? The controversy will be
continued by angry arguments, which will gradually
drift into reciprocal recrimination, and possibly
end in a war, that is what we have to apprehend."
There is certainly some possibility of such an issue,
though the English Ministers have generally
accompanied their strongest despatches with assur-
ances to Parliament that no such result was contem-
plated. It was impossible, however, to remain inac-
tive in the face of such barbarous proceedings, al-
though the apathy with which our ancestors looked on
the dismemberment of Poland, and the indifference
with which the English Governments of 1831 and
1846 witnessed proceedings which should at least
have called forth strong protests, considerably
weaken any representations founded on the rights
of the Treaty of 1815. Above all, the conduct of
England in hastily concluding peace with Russia
after the Crimean War, without securing some gua-
rantee for the future treatment of Poland, is open to
the severest censure. It may be said that treaties
and verbal promises had been proved to be fruitless,
but if the representative of England had expressed
the honest convictions of her people at the Confer-
ences of Paris, Russia, with the recollections of the
Alma and Inkerman fresh in her memory, would
scarcely have turned a deaf ear. It might have

mpressed the youthful AUTOCRAT with a seEse that

the Western Powers were watching his treatment
of his Polish subjects ; it might have altered his
opinion of the " illusions " of Polish patriots, and it
might have saved him from the cardinal error of his
otherwise enlightened and merciful reign. Europe
has more causes than one to regret the hasty con-
clusion of peace, which, like the Treaty of Villa-

franca, left the tale half told, and after the blood-
shed, outlay, and disturbance of a European war,
failed to secure even one generation from a renewal
of hostilities. From these and other circumstances,
the Ministry have undoubtedly been placed in a
difficult and delicate position with regard to Poland.
On the one hand, there is the natural sympathy for
a wronged and oppressed people, whose cause has
always been popular with the people of this coun-
try. On the other hand, is the hesitation to embark

in a war which would probably include our
Prussian ally, and the doubt with which
French interests in the matter are regarded.
Lord MALMESBURY suggested that the Ministry
might have acted with prudence and dignity by
withdrawing their Ambassador, after friendly re-
monstrances had been disregarded. Lord GRAN-
VILLE, in indignantly asserting that stch a step
would have been ten times stronger than any which
had been taken, misunderstood the noble earl's
meaning, which he very clearly explains in his letter
of yesterday. He did not advise that our Ambassa-
dor should now be recalled, after what has taken
place, which would certainly be equivalent to a
declaration of war, but he said that we might at
first have expressed our honourable indignation by
withdrawing our representative at St. Petersburg,
whore our friendly remonstrances had been disre
garded. "We should thus," said Lord MALMES-
BURY, "have shown that we would no longer hold
relations with a Power so uncivilised, so uncertain
in its faith, and whose acts so revolted the feelings
of this country." Such a course was followed with
regard to the late King of NAPLES, without involv-
ing us in hostilities, and if adopted at the outset,
would certainly have been the strongest protest we
could have made. If our Government have deter-
mined that no consideration shall induce them to
defend the rights of Poland with the sword, it would
have been a wise and dignified course to have fol-
lowed the policy re erred to by Lord MALMESBURY.
such a reproof coming from a Power like England
would have more effect than folios of despatches and
countless diplomatic protests. It would show that
the statesmen of the foremost country in the world
regardeu the haughty and insolent Russian autho-
rities as unworthy to be ranked within the pale of
that civilisation which they disgrace by the atro-
cities which they sanction, and the want of faith
which seems to form part of their political code.

THE CAPE MAlLS.—According to the new Cape
of Good Hope mail contract the Cape mails are to
be conveyed by the Union Steam-ship Company between
Plymouth and Table Bay in 38 days, exclusive of stoppages,
and vice versa. The mail packets are to call at St. Helena
and Ascension on the return voyage, The penalty for de-
lay during the voyage is £5O per day, and for not providing
a packet to start on the prescribed day £6OO per day. The
contract is for seven years, The subsidy, which is £25,000
for tho first year, is to be gradually reduced to £15,000 per
annum. The Postmaster-General has the power to extend
the service to Algoa Bay. The mail packets are to leave
Plymouth on the 6th or 7th, and Table Bay on the 20th or
21st of the month. The course of post to the Cape will be
83 days.

EmtwiGs.—A popular prejudice prevails against
\vholely
these insects, founded on an erroneous belief that
they get into the human ear, and thence into the brain, a
rier the 'wax. unphilosophical notion,
contained in the ear would form to the en-
trance of any liviug creature,
there is no passage through
as, were it not for the bar-
the drum of that organ win could admit of the passage
of the most MiAllte creature in existence.