The Sun.
London, England, 1864-06-14 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS,

Tfetne.—The air ite full of rnmottrs of the great
onslaught which the Opposition is preparing to
make upon the Ministry,
and the spoils of office are
for the hundredth time apportioned among the ex-
pectant victors. It is believed that a sufficient
Danish feeling exists in the country, not, indeed' to
assist Denmark, bat to turn out the Government
which has declined actively to assist her; and a suffi-
cient warlike feeling, not, indeed, to go to war,
but to turn out a Government for pertinaciously
adhering to peace. Direful are the threats of what
will be done at a general election, and great is the
gathering in the House of Commons every night to
learn from the "Questions'" and still better from the
" Notices of Motions," when the great day Of trial
will come. In this volcanic state we are grateful
to any one who will give us the least means of
estimating the impending phenomenon, and relieve
us from the suspense in which we are involved.
We, therefure, read with particular pleasure Lord
Stanley's speech at the Merchant Taylors' dinner in
acknowledging the toast of the House of Commons,
If he is meditating an attack upon Downing-street,
Lord Stanley certainly goes to the combat in a
peculiarly tranquil and equable frame of mind. He
seems so thoroughly content with everything that
it would be quite a pity to introduce any change
into the world which goes so smoothly. Lord
Stanley says he has been for fifteen years a
member of the House of Commons, and the
longer and more intimately he has known it the
stronger has become his respect for its opinions
and the general soundness of its decisions. No tes-
timony can be more handsome, and no statement
more convincing, than that of a statesman who thus
fairly and candidly gives his evidence in favour of
that very judge by whom he and his party have
been repeatedly and remorselessly condemned. The
history of the House of Commons for the last ten
years has been the history of the re-verses and defeats
of the Conservative party. It has been one long tale
of successive disappointments. Tantalus himself was
not more cruelly or perseveringly mocked. The tide
of good fortune has been for ever rising up to their
lips and for ever ebbing again. In 1852 they
were indulged with just so much of the sweets of
office as to make them long heartily for a prolonga-
tion of their term, and in 1858 and 1859 they existed
in office during the greater part of two sessions,
without being able to make good their footing on
the promised land. It is not everyone whose opinion
of the House of Commons would be raised by such
experience ; but the Conservative leaders know their
own party best, and if their opinion of the House is
raised by the indisposition to trust them which it has
shown during the last 12 years, it is not for us to
blame the soundness of the decision. Lord Stanley
admitted that for the last two or three years
the House has not done much to gain credit with the
public beyond maintaining a judicious inactivity.
He does not take advantage of this inactive state of
the House of Commons to attribute its abstinence
from hard work as a fault to the Government. He
looks upon it as the result of the present state of
public opinion, and neither quarrels with the nation
for desiring rest, nor expects to be called by his con-
stituents to a severe account for the easy life which
he has led and the little execution he has done in
the ranks of his political opponents. Nay, more;
Lord Stanley's candour compels him to admit that
"in two important departments--that of Law Re-
form and of Finance—very considerable and prac-
tical improvements have been made; and no diffe-
rence of political connection will prevent him or
those whom he addresses from doing full justice to
those by whom these improvements have been
initiated." This is scarcely the language of a
man who is engaged every day in considering how
best he may damage and annoy the existing Go-
vernment,—into what part of their armour he may
best introduce the point of his lance. If this speech
is intended to prepare us for war, it can only be by
a surprise, since no expressions can be used less cal-
culated to create suspicion and alarm. " England,"
he says, "is rich, prosperous, and contented beyond
all former example, and the general opinion among
the working classes is that if there is any well-
founded grievance, they may bring it forward with
a confidence that it will be inquired into, and if pos-
sible removed." Lord Stanley goes on to advise us
wisely to keep at peace with all our neighbours, and
to continue in the same course of steady, consistent
improvement which we have hitherto practised-
Certainly this is not the language of discontent or
repining, but rather of one who has seen matters go
vary much as they ought, though against his own
party, and is determined not to commit himself to
any distinct policy other than that which has sac.
ceeded so well. It looks, then, very much as if the
anticipations which have been ventilated so freely of
late were destined to end in nothing. Lord Stanley
may fairly be accepted as the representative of the
good sense and the moderation of the great English
people, who are of no political party at all, and who
see no reason to apprehend political agitation, be-
cause they are consoious of having done nothing to
deserve it. A fe w years ago such a speech as that of
Lord Stanley, made by a man having held high office,
and aspiring to hold it again, young, able, and am-
bitious, would have been an absolute impossibility, an
effort of virtue of self- denial of which no matnwould
have been found:capable. Nom matters are mending
so fast that political personages often receive quite
as much justice from their antagonists tinhorn their
allies, and the medium through which their act
are seen by their adversaries loses almost all its
power of distorting character. No one is sagacious
enough to foresee what will be the end of the pre-
sent European complications, but there is no diffi-
culty in believing that the present Government
will be judged, whatever may be the result of the
Conference, in a much fairer and more equitable
spirit than political parties in this country have
hitherto been in the habit of manifesting towards
each other. There are two difficulties in the way of
carrying a vote of censure—the first that the mere
ill success of negotiations set on foot with the best
intentions, and Carried on with the most praise-
worthy diligence, can hardly, in the present state
of feeling, be imputed even to a hostile Government
as a crime; and the second that, even if the Tory party
were agreed upon such a censure, they are unable to
satisfy the conditions of STIOCORII which the House
and the country requite of them. Supposing that
they could combine to condemn what has been done,
could they combine to point out any course for the
future, to lay down any comprehensive plan of
action, or indidate any rule of conduct, by following
which the country would obtain a more assured and
a more honourable position 1 The complaints that
have been made take the shape of upbraiding the:
Ministers for not acting up to the menadea they
have uttered, and for suffering themselves to be
outvoted in the Conference and upbraided by
Austria and Prussia without having recourse to
war. But is the Tory party ready to embrace this
alternative? Are they really prepared to plunge this
country into a doubtful struggle with two of the
greatest military Powers in the world merely to
show their goodwill to another whom they are un-
able efficiently to assist P We oppose to such views
the pluin sensible declaration of Lord Stanley—
that so long as they are wise enough to keep at
peace, the House have nothing to fear from their
constituents, In other words, that the opinion of
the country is strong against war, and that, there-
fore, the Tory party is in this dilemma—that if it
profess itself favourable to peace, it will fail for
want of a cause of complaint against the Govern.
meent ; and if favourable to war, it will fail because
the country does not share its predilection.
HERALD..--It is curious to observe how the tone
of the apologists of the Government varies as time
goes on. It is impossible now to maintain the high
pretensions which were advanced when the public
were more ignorant, and, therefore, more easily
deceived, than they are now. Three months ago
it was fearlessly asserted that there was nothing
with which fault could be found in the conduct of
Ministers, and that no phrase which could be inter-
preted either as a promise to Denmark or a threat
to 9errnany, had fallen from Lord Russell's pen.
It is too late to hold that language now. Even
from the meagre residue of despatches which Mr.
Layard's careful editing has left behind there is
plenty to convict Lord Russell of bluster, which his
subsequent conduct has made ridiculous, and pro-
mises which his timidity has converted into an
indelible stain upon England's honour. These things
lie upon the surface, and it is now of no use to deny
their existence. Consequently the line of
logised.decence
is changed. The despatches are no longer eulogised.
It is admitted that the Government wrote and
spoke as if they intended to go to
iw.e,arthoant bthehemoateliaftiobdnloes.f
the Treaty of 1352. The defence
sarvatives
pe
ttitvear
t.
edThthisen
would h
seemstapology ohaavveedgonuietenocab
of Ministerial writers and sLpaeradker,psa,
lmanedrattohneyevreee-
isregarding all constitu-
gpreat iat
eufpeponfaarllthoecvc,aasniodn,s,d
aerial decorum, is perpetually taunting the Oppo-
sition because they will not present him with a
policy of their own. " What would your policy
be ?" appears to the aged Minister a sufficient plea
in answer to all the charges of imbecility and
weakness that are brought against him. It seems
who absurd that Ministers ho are gravely incul-
pated should seriously imagine that it is any kind
of defence to set up a hypothesis, without a shadow
of proof, to the effect that their antagonists
would have done no better than them-
selves. It is scarcely less ridiculous to see
HelplessaPrim e Minister trying to veil his own
perplexity by throwing the duty of an.
nouncing a policy upon those who are not charged
with the duty of devising one, and who have not
the official information as to the exact condition of
negotiations at the moment which would enable
them to do it with confidence. Still it may be
worth while, as this defence is advanced with so