The Sun.
London, England, 1864-06-29 00:00:00

quite true, for it is impossible to conceive a more
false position than that in which we are now placed.
It would be extremely difficult to determine on what
grounds such a policy is founded, and what object
our Cabinet proposes to effect by this shuffling
manner and inconsistent course. It would seem as
if they were irrevocably pledged to keep out of war,
yet, to vindicate their own fancies and disarm cri-
ticism, they played the part of braggadocios for the
mere sake of doing so. There is one thing quite
certain, and that is, however well this strange and
seeming mode may have served their turn and
suited their purpose in past days, it has now become
quite spent—its virtue has gone, its strength has
, departed. The intelligence that the French EMPERoR
had uttered a disparaging remark, or appeared irri-
tated in discoursing with any important personage,
or conveyed the presage of some dark meaning in a
public address, would most probably occasion the
greatest consternation, and give rise to all sorts of
rumours of war and impending evils ; but the
time has gone by when the expression of similar
threats or recriminations from the potentates of
England can at all alarm or excite. Now this is
not what should be by any means; the majesty of
the country is not thereby lowered, and its fair
fame sullied, yet there is a still more reprehensible
practice now in vogue among many that should
know better and be more elevated in their views,
and that is the habit some persist in of declaring
that we must not go to war because of the risk. If
they spoke of the horrors of war as a deterring
agency; if they expressed their conviction that no
good results would ensue from hostilities, and that
a safer course would be wiser, we might respect
their motives if we differed from the premises of
their arguments. But it is too much to be told
that at this juncture Englishmen are not able to
fight so as to accomplish their designs and to carry
on a war to a successful issue and a triumphant
termination. We expect to hear these opinions
put' forward from time to time by visionaries, or
by those whose birth makes them citizens of the
sail, but whose sympathies and interests are far
away and centred in foreign lands. We do not I
expect, however, in great assemblies and high
places from men of mark, eminence, and
position, a repetition of each absurdities, and a
confirmation of such unworthy statements.
Earl RUSSELL, for instance, the other night, speak-
ing as the Foreign Secretary of England, in his
place, amid the House of Lords, actually declared
that we could not gain anything by going to war.
The French, it appears, pay us a better compliment,
for they say that " England, with her naval power,
' can materially add to the strength of Denmark, and
might bring the war to a close." We could not
expect any other opinion from an enlightened
nation, but at the same time it is very mortifying
to hear that our Allies propose a course which our
Ministers have not the spirit to follow, nor the
honesty to al:ow to be practicable. It is time that
some change was effected, or that we should not
insult our common sense by proclaiming that we
rule the sea, when the Minister who is the exponent
of our policy in the face of the world, can thus speak
in Parliament : "I cannot but think that we should
suffer materially if our mercantile marine were
exposed to all the depredations which might take
place in consequence of being at war." We have
come to something if we are to fear the navy of
Germany. It was only last year that Lord PAL-
MERSTON stated that the reason why the Germans
wanted to possess themselves of "Kiel" was for the
purpose of becoming a naval Power. This the noble
lord very truly designated a vain ambition. It was
not so vain, however, if the mere mention is to
terrify •the navy of a country that was once the
terror of the world. It may be truly said
that Earl Rt;sSELL did not seem to care
so much for the injuries inflicted on the mer-

cantile marine of this country in the American
war. Ho has turned a deaf ear to all complaints,
and resolutely determined to exact no reparation
for wrongs perpetrated on our vessels by the base
and unjustifiable measures of the officers of the
United States. In the Tinzes of yesterday the same
ideas are expressed; and an impression is con•
veyed that if we went to war with Germany we
should be the losers. Really this is a very strange
way of taking up the matter, and it seems a posi.
tion unworthy of the leading journal of this great
country to talk as if there was no chance of our
being victorious in an encounter with foes so
far beneath us in all respects, Now, in
the name of our ancient glories, present
fame, and future prospects, we must pro-
test against this language being employed, not
in the height of political or party zeal, or in the
heat of debate, but in sober reasoning, and a calm
review of our position, it is quite out of character.
When we are told, further on, that " we should lose
man for man till all our army had disappeared,,' it
is surely time that the blast of war were sounded
in our ears, and that we should arise and dispel
these illusions, or foreign nations will core to be-
lieve that we are indeed what our friends are de-
scribing—the degenerate sons of a gallant race, and
the unworthy inheritors of a glorious prerogative.
When NELSON won Trafalgar, and WELLINGTON
returned from Waterloo, or our forefathers
triumphed at Agincourt, it would have astonished
any one to be told that the day would come when
such language would be used to expressour position,
and such an estimate formed of our powers and the
extent of oar prowess.

It was quite consistent with the threatening
aspect of foreign affairs that the close of Monday's
sitting should be devoted to military matt2rs. It
is true, that Mr. ADDERLEY'S motion referred not
to the contest for the possession of the world-famous
Duchies, but a colonial frontier in another hemi-
sphere, bat his motion was founded on the avowed
possibility or even probability of a war which may
happily never come about, but for which it is wise
to be prepared. The right hon, gentleman objected
to the present disposition of our forces in Canada,
and considered it imprudent and unsafe to station
detachments of British troops on exposed posts on
the frontier unless they were adequately supported
by the Canadians themselves. The troops are scat-
tered along the North American frontier, which
extends about a thousand miles, and have little
power of communicating with each other or with
the mother country. He drew a startling picture of
the possible results of such a system, and his views
were supported by Lord ROBERT CECIL, who pointed
out the evils which would ensue if the American
Government, having concluded the civil war, should
think fit to employ all its superfluous war estab
lishment in an attack upon Canada. British troops
might in such a case be easily surmounted and cap•
turgid, and the consequence would be an indelible
arms, unless we could afterwards per.
sfotarmin
some
ur
astonishing
feat of valour. Both advo-
cates of the case were a little extreme in their views,
but there was undoubtedly much truth in the sub-
stance of their views. Both hon. members appeared
to forget what Mr. FORTESCUE afterwards reminded
them of—that an invasion of Canada meant war
with England, and although the Federal Govern-
ment might be very well pleased to capture a few
companies of British soldiers, and to boast of their
glorious victory, yet the most rash and presumptous
of their statesmen would hesitate to rush iato war
with the whole strength of this country. Still fore-