The Sun.
London, England, 1852-02-05 00:00:00

THE

SUN,

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
TIMES.—It is certainly not a trifling matter to undertake
the revision and repair of almost the only free constitution
which is now left standing in Europe. Nothing but the
prospect of great benefits, or the remedying of great abuses,
can justify such a proceeding. We arc well, and it is not for
a slight or dubious improvement, nor for the sake of remedy-
ing trifling or theoretical defects', that we ought to attempt to
be better. Our present political regimen agrees with us well
enough, and the advantage must be very manifest, and the

danger very small, of any change which we shall do wisely
to adopt. It is with much regret that we state our conviction
that the Reform Bill which Lord John Russell is understood

to be about to propose satisfies neither of these conditions.
It is an inadequate remedy for those gross and admitted abuses
which form the best justification of its introduction; and yet,
inadequate as it is, it carries with it elements of danger
and uncertainty which no prudent statesman will
needlessly or gratuitously called into action. A Reform
Bill worthy of the name should aspire to remedy existing
abuses on the one band, and on the other to extend the fran-
chise in a liberal and comprehensive spirit, always bearing in
mind that there is no measure so illiberal as intrusting the
fi anchise to persons unqualified for its exercise, and that the
uneducated classes have ever been found the readiest instru-
ments for the subversion of well-ordered government and
rational freedom. . . . What public opinion does re-
quire is not a rash and empirical lowering of the franchise,
but a destruction of the haunts of corruption and venality, a
check to the reviving and surviving practice of borough-
mongering, the removal of glaring anomalies and inequali-
ties in the franchise and in electoral divisions, and a vigorous
attempt to check the practice of bribery and intimidation.
To satisfy these reasonable and moderate wishes, Lord John
Russel proposes to perpetuate Harwich, and to extend Caine,
guaranteeing their purity by adding to their constituency a
class of electors more ignorant, more needy, and, therefore,
at least equally venal.
CHRONICLE.--Lord John Russell was either very skilful
or very fortunate in the occasion which he seized for dismis-
sing his formidable colleague. Over and above the point of
official form on which the Premier mainly rested his case on
Tuesday night, and about which the world at large cares
little, the Foreign Secretary had, luckily for his chief, taken
the unpopular as well as the wrong side on a European ques-
tion of capital moment—the question of liberty and usurpa-
tion in France. It is true that Lord John Russell himself—
if we may judge from the apology which he so strangely vo-
lunteered for the French President—seems now to differ but

by a hair's breadth, if at all, from his late colleague, on
the substantial question at issue. But, although that
timid or prudential sacrifice to a supposed expe-
diency leaves very little to choose between the two
statesmen in point of constitutional principle, the first super-
ficial report of the affair is probably that which will still be
taken by ordinary observers. In the view, perhaps, of the
generality of persons, the Minister who has for years en-
joyed the confidence of ultra-Liberals at home and abroad,
has fallen because he was more indulgent to a military
despotism than the official superior whose opinions on ge-
neral politics have never been quoted or discussed beyond
the narrow seas. At all events, on the immediate ques-
tion which caused his dismissal, Lord Palmerston was on
the side of Austria and Russia, and the Pope. An
opinion which he even now deliberately repeats cannot be
explained away. So far as the debate of Tuesday eluci-
dated the causes of the rupture, it must be admitted that the
late Foreign Secretary is a martyr to the cause of Absolute

Government.
HERALD.—So much for the Ministerial speech delivered
from the throne on Tuesday. With regard to the debate
upon it in both Houses of Parliament, we have not left to
ourselves space for any lengthened remarks. It will be seen
that in the House of Commons an explanation—if the

speeches of the two Noble Lords can be so termed—of
the causes of the dismissal of the ex-Secretary for
Foreign Affairs was offered by the Premier and Lord
Palmerston. The affair was exceedingly bald and unsatis-
factory; but if we may offer " our " opinion upon the subject,
the Noble Member for Tiverton had decidedly " the best of
it." The admirable addresses of Lord Derby and Mr. Dis-
raeli—temperate in their strictures upon the sins of commis-
sion and omission of the Government, yet thoroughly expla-
natory of the principles by which the country party are
guided, will be read with equal admiration and attention.
They must form the subject of a future commentary.
DAILY NEWS.—The speech of Lord Palmerston will be
read with feelings of disappointment and regret by many
who have heretofore honoured his courage, and energy, and
talent in the discharge of the duties of the duties of the
office he so long has filled. It was listened to with breath-
less attention by the House, but it failed to produce an effect
favourable to the gifted speaker. With the exception of
some adroit pleasantry in the nature of a to quoque, it was
heard in total silence. All the main facts were admitted;
and worse than all, Lord Palmerston, with a species of infa-
tuation, reiterated the expression of his approval of Louis
Napoleon. We willingly forbear from comment. Had there
been no Parliamentary disclosures or debate, the point might
have remained unsettled. But all disguise and doubt is now
unfortunately removed, and for a grave error, rashly com-
mitted, and obstinately adhered to, we are constrained to
own that Lord Palmerston has gone far towards severing
the link that united him to the party whose confidence he so
long enjoyed.
POST.—Lord John Russell, in his singular statement on
the strange proceeding which he was on Tuesday night
called on to defend, dwelt, with discursive complacency, on
the several influences which he declared had not determined
his chronic petulance into acute mischief, but touched,lith
a natural and hesitating reluctance, those which he has se-
lected as his official and Parliamentary materials ofjustifiea-
tion. Thus we heard much of our policy to France, which
has not been altered, and cannot be condemned— much of
the Finsbury deputation, on which it was allowed that the
ex-Minister had been misrepresented—much of that famous
Palmerston policy, which was owned to be worthy of all ap-
proval and imitation ; but comparatively very little of the
ostensible causes which are stated to have led to the unpre-
cedented requital of all these services. These alleged can ies
lie, in fact, in the smallest compass. They are simply. that
Lord Palmerston, in his communications with our Mintst.ers
abroad, and with Foreign Ministers here, did not observe
with sufficient exactness certain points of Ministerial
discipline, armed in a new and extraordinary man tier
with the declared personal authority of the Crown—that he
did not, on other points connected with the less imposing
but, as now introduced, the more constitutional ground of the
supremacy of the Premier, pay sufficient deference to that
Minister's well-known appetite for every description of detail.
The evidence of this twofold offence consisted of a writ ten
dispatch and of spoken words. The dispatch was neither an
instruction nor a Government declaration, but a courteous
and confiding answer to a distinct question from a diplo-
matist who has proved himself unworthy of confidence and
ungrateful for courtesy. The spoken words were the mere
expression of opinion in familiar intercourse, such as has
been always admitted and must always be practised between
the Minister charged with our foreign relations and the re-
presentatives of foreign powers. Lord John Russell teas
sought by a most unfair misrepresentation, to give to the d is-
patch referred to, that of Dec. 16, the character of an instrt tc-
tion to our Minister at Paris —of a document committing Eng-
land to a moral support of certain acts, to the exercise of
moral influence in a certain direction—he would have Itad
the House believe that to have sent this dispatch with out
the concurrence of the Cabinet and the sanction of the Crown
was a grave breach of Ministerial discipline—an offence to
the Crown, to ,be visited by the severest exercise of :the
Crown's authority. But Lord Palmerston showed clearly,
nay, Lord John Russell's own words show clearly, that ithe
dispatch had no such character as that attributed to it—tlhat

said nothing of the Crown, the Government, or the nation
--that it only, in answer to Lord Normanby, explained guid
repeated the opinions of Lord Palmerston, as they had been
expressed in conversation. Still more futile is the pretence
of the conversation with M. Walewski, on the subject of th
ae
events of the 2d of December. It is not urged that the 'w
ter of that conversation is unwise or impolitic. It can'aot
be denied that its spirit has been adhered to in subsequent
conversations with the name Minister, on the same subjoct.
The offence was not the nature of the opinion, but
the expression of any opinion at all. Yet, but a few hours !had
passed since Lord John Russell had dismissed the Queon's
ablest Minister by his sole act— on his sole responsibility—
before he was himself committing the alleged offence, which
had so excited his constitutional indignation. Nay, it seems
there was more than one of the Ministry, including the Pre-
sident of the Council and the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
who was thought entitled to express an independent opinion
on foreign affairs to a Foreign Minister. It was only to the
Secretary of State for that particular department that the
subject was forbidden ground. Such are the paltry and in-
consistent pretexts which the Prime Minister of Engln,nd
seeks to impose on the nation as the true causes for a in ea-
sure which has shattered his party, disquieted the whole
country, weakened constitutional confidence throughout
Europe, and given fresh impulses to the old Intagonism of
Absolutism and Democracy. For our own farts, we must
be allowed to take Lord John's explanation in the most
purely official and conventional sense possible. We cannot
conceive his own defence to be anything but a formal jplea
more derogatory to his reputation as a statesman than would
even a candid confession have been, had such confession been
possible. The whole history of the French communications
persuaded, remain to the public as they do. in
ou
among those influences to which Lord Pal.
will,r own Nl' e
oarpeinion,
merston's removal cannot justly be attributed. Lord John
Russell's defence is, in fact, so evasive and so unsatisfac-
tory, that it is suggestive and confirmatory of all that IN
feared. Its only redeeming points are " the moral influ-
ence" which his declared opinion in the House of Commvus
demnation of those
gives to Louis Napoleon's maintenance of authority in
France, and the uncompromising con
safety and to lower our
French continues to jeopardise our
mischievous English papers whose reckless abuse of the
reputation.

COURT CIRC ULAR.
WINDSOR, FEB. 4.

terTahayer.e was no addition to the Royal' dinner party
Park:
anld'hseloQpouseethniasnmdol:oriinncge. Albert walked in the Home
The Prince of Wales, the Princess Royal, and the youngei:
members of the Royal Family, took their usual pony am
walking exercise.
The Marquis and Marchioness of rfreadalbane, Loy]
Cowley, and Lord Portman, have been invited, and are ex •
petted at the Castle this afternoon.

Colonel W. L. Iy'reLabouchere,
Labouchere,
m.p., had an interview with the
deputation from th3e,
Right Hon. llenr yesterday, at the Board okf
yesterday,
and Fellows of Eton Col-
Trade.
.i
Whitehall.
the General Board ( )f
The deputation con-
sisted had an interview,
a Thomas Carter, M.A. ;
B‘ cheldor,
Rev. Edward Crave n
Health, at their offices, NI,T
sisted of the Rev. the Provost, thei
Registrar to
Ilawtrey, D.D., F.A.S.; the Rev.
T. Wright Flower, John
from the Directors of the. Australian Gold
E. S. Creasy, Counsel; and Mr. T.
the A College.
deputation
Mining Company, consisting of Messrs.
William Walker, and Mr. Jr.
Lambert,
tary), had an interview with Earl Grey yesterday at
(Secre-
t the Co-
lonial-office.
Colonel W. L. Freestun, M.P., had a interview with Sir
George Grey yesterday at the Home office. A
deputation from the parish button, consisting of
Messrs. Allem (churchwardens), (overseer), Corner
Morer, and Capt. Miller (parishioners), and. Mr. Mellish.
(vestry clerk), had an interview with the Right Ironota_
able henry Labouchere yesterday at the Board of Trade: -
--..m........•••••••

--_____----------
On Tuesday the parish church of Lambeth, w lc b
the Bishop
OPENING or TIIE NEW CHUTICII ATh . %Ail!
8B
bLeTeun .e-;
tirely rebuilt, was opened 1., ith much ceremony
of \Vinci:ester, assisted by a large nuhnel bosirayo foundations,f theloc.a l
clergy. The new edifice is built upon t
Ti ts
and follows the ,ancient ground plan. -- df oa
a nave, with aisles, clerestory, porch on the consisan
South,
well-apportioned chancel. It is in the early dedOrated style
of architecture. The roof is open and of handsome construc-
tion—that of the chancel is vaulted in oak. The sermon in
the morning was preached by the Bishop, that in the even
ing by the Venerable Archdeacon Robinson, D.D.,
Master of
the Temple.
1 We are requested to state that the public will be
admitted, gratis, to view the House of Lords every Saturday
during the session, between the hours of 10 and 4 o'clock, by
tickets, to be obtained at the Lord Great ChaMberlain's
QeCICQ Any Saturday from 11 till 4 9'cleck.