The Sun.
London, England, 1830-06-12 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Lord Aberdeen finds it now expedient to defend
the very extraordinary manner in which he lectured
justified
by Leopold, by an allegation that it was
by what took place in personal intercourse previous
to the written correspondence. The Marquis of
Londonderry, who, as our readers must recollect,
made some severe animadversions some days ago on
his Lordship's strange epistolary style, remarking
that this could not be the commencement of the
correspondence, without receiving . any answer,
again returned to the charge last night. " How
could," he observed, " the Noble Earl defend the
expression he had used with reference to Prince
Leopold, without further papers ?" " The Noble
Marquis," said Lord Aberdeen, " had also made
some remarks upon the correspondence with Prince
Leopold, and seemed to think that he (Lord Aber-
deen) would not be able to defend himself, and had,
in fact, admitted his inability. He had made no
such admission, nor did he think the accusation came
in such a shape as to reqeire him to defend himself.
It was quite obvious on the face of the correspond-
ence, that, although the letter of the 31st January,
1830, was the first written communication, there
had been much previous personal intercourse, which
justified all the expressions in the letter."—Quite
obvious ! The deuce it is; His Lordship supposes
all the world as clever as himself. It certainly ap-
peared on the face of the correspondence, that it was
very impertinent in his Lordship to lecture as he
did, a man selected from all the Princely stocks of
Europe for his political wisdom and Statesman-like
qualities, for the future Sovereign of Greece. 4up7
posing even the Prince had liscened to advisers of
whom his Lordship disapproved ; and supposing also
that a previous intercourse had taken place ; but
though' to his Lordship, who knows what the inter-
course was, it may appear singular that all the world
should not know as well as himself, that the previous
intercourse wtls personal and not epistolary, others
may well be excused for not discovering thiS in the
correspondence. All that appears on the face of the
correspondence is, that his Lordship lectured Prince
Leopold in a style somewhat unusual in diplomacy;
the uncertainty to strangers is, whether the style is
habitual to his Lordship, or whether some previous
intercourse of one kind or other had thrown him off
his guard. It was natural, too, to conclude that his
Lordship, when the subject was brow ht to iiis no-
tice, if there had been any ju'stificat'ion in previous
•
intercourse, would; have had- so 'much deference to
those who may not be so fully persuaded of the ne-
cessary infallibility of a Gordon, as he is himself, as
to condescend to give at once the explanation which
he has at length, after a week',s deliberation,
deemed it expedient to give. VeW men are possessed
of such stoical indifference-to the good opinion of ale

world, as to refuse to set themselves right with the
public, when the opportunity is afforded, and a
word will do the business; and therefore the delay
of his Lordship being so contrary to what is usually
observed, was very charitably explained to his
Lordship's disadvantage. Nay more, there are per-
sons who would have received the explanation of
his Lordship with more implicit faith, if given at
first, than after the self-denial implied in the delay.
It is for the Prince to deal with the charge implied
in the justification of the rudeness of Lord Aber-
deen's letter, by previous personal intercourse. Lord
Londonderry touched a sore point, when be asked
from the Duke of Wellington information with re-
spect to a passage in Prince Leopold's letter of the
31st January, in which his Royal Highness referred
to the separation of Candia from Greece, and ob-
served, " the hidden interest which caused the sepa-
ration to be determined upon augured no good to
the new State." It is pretty well known that the
hidden interest in question is that of Austria, the
Puissance Conservatrice, which " seemed to have
put the Noble Earl Aberdeen forward, and to be
contented to pull the wires, as if she thought the
whole transaction disgraceful, and she would not
personally appear in it." The Duke of Wellington,
who need fear no rival in the art of giving full effect-
"to uncourteous language, told Lord London-
derry, in a tone and manner which cannot be
described, " For answer to that vestion I beg
leave to refer him to Prince Leopold, for I have
no answer to give." His Grace, it must be al-
lowed, does not seem, by his answers, to be fond of
being questioned. There is nothing like, making short
work of it; for answers to questions only lead to
other questions, and one may find a second ques-
tien more difficult to answer than the first, as many
a man knows to his cost in the witness-box. How-
ever, the hidden influence is known to be that of
Austria, and Lord Aberdeen is accused of being
somewhat too partial to Prince Metternich. Indeed
he admitted the attachment. " The Noble Marquis
was right in what he had said en a former occasion
as to the attachment he (Lord Aberdeen) bore to a
certain individual; but he must object to any argu-
ment as deduced from that circumstance; and,
above all, he must protest against the Noble Mar-
quis taking upon himself to become the interpreter
of the language and sentiments of that individual."
It is believed that it is part of the policy of the in-
dividual in question to say one thing and mean
another; and one of the objects of Lord London-
derry last night, in moving for further papers, was
" to show, from the opinions delivered confidentially
by our diplomatic servants abroad, that the real sen-
timents of Austria differed from the language of the
Austrian Minister." Prince Metternich wottld not
be a great politician if he said what lie thought.
But let us hear Lord Londonderry himself, a vete-
ran diplomatist, on the subject :
" He would tell the Noble Earl that he (Lord London-
derry) had read this communication of the Austrian Mi-
nister, but there was this difference between that coin•
munication and the papers he wanted, that the first were
communications from diplomatic servants abroad, while
the others were the statements of our own agents to the
Government at home. They all knew what diplomacy
was.---(Hear.)—lt was not always what a diplomatist
said that explained what were his real sentiments.—
(Hear, hear.)—He wanted the despatches from our Am-
bassadors to explain the real state of the fact. Let the
Noble Earl put those papers on the table, and let their
Lorsh.ships see whether those despatches corresponded with
that fiummery.—(Hear, hear.)—They knew very well
that what a diplomatist said, when he talked about cor-
dial co-operation with others, was often complete bom-
bast ; and he wanted these papers to see what were the
sober, steady opinions, and the well-judging opinions of
Isis Majesty's Ministers at that Court upon these commu-
nications. They were persons whose testimony could be
relied on. In all diplomacy there were various absurd
phrases, that he believed were called the apocalypse of the
proceedings."—(A laugh.)

_ .
So that the perfection of diplomacy is to state un-
truths which can always be seen through; for the
testimony of our Ambassadors with respect to the
real meaning of the language may always be relied
on. This is very clever, no doubt ; and how could
Ambassadors have any thing to do, if it were not for
this grand science of diplomacy which finds business
for them in the way of interpretation ? But it
would never do to publish to the world a comment
on Prince Metternich's diplomatic language. This
would be cutting up diplomacy by the roots. Of
course the papers were refused ; for the production
of them would have been inconvenient. Indeed, the
Duke of Wellington suggested a double inconve-
nience which would result from a proof that the de-
clarations of Austria were not believed, for Ministers
had stated that they did believe in them. In diplo-
macy one party must say what they do not mean,
and the other must express a belief in what they dis.
believe. We trust Lord Londonderry will, on a
future occasion, supply us with the 39 Articles of
diplomacy.—Morning Chronicle.

Mr. George Dawson entered on the Consular
campaign with some show of vigour last night. On
a former night he was taken by surprise when Sir
James Graham dealt out his sarcasms so unsparingly
and quite forgot that he had an excellent defence.
In short, he was so occupied with the sarcasms, that
he bad omitted to state'that errors had crept into
the Estimates, and he hoped his Honourable Friend
would be so far softened as not to indulge.in them
any more. Sir James Graham gave Mr. George
Dawson due credit fur the happy afterthought, the
discovery of the errors being exceedingly opportune
after the recent division, and in contemplation of
another. After the corrections were made, ample
materials for an able speech still remained, and Sir
James skilfully availed himself of them. He intro-
duced some instructive contrasts into it. Our Di-
plomatic and Consular expenses in 1792, including
the charge for superannuations and pensions, were
113,9271.; in 1829, 366,0001. The charge for
Consuls alone was 8,0001. more than the whole Di-
plomatic expenses in 1792. But he furnished a still
more instructive contrast. The entire charge of the
Civil Government of the United States was 20,8121.
the Civil and Military Government taken together
were 24,2891.; and the whole charge for its Civil
Government, Diplomatic and Consular Expenses,was
52,4201. A Republic is unquestionably an odious
form of government; what a pity we cannot devolve
on such a Government ova diplomatic extravagance,
our military mania, our palace-building propensities,
and our superannuations, and borrow from the Re
publicans for our beloved Monarchy a little of that
economy which causes loyal subjects so many a
heart-ache, when t 42 frequent visits of the tax-
gatherer remind them of the expence of the Govern-
ment in America. Sir James moved that the Es,
timate of Consular Salaries lie reduced from 89,9701
to 79,9701. The Chtmeelior of the Exchequer
" challenged the Honourable Baronet to name an
Administration in this country that had ever been so
little desirous of exercising for its support, in the re-
ward of adherents, the extent of political patronage.
—(Hear, hear, from the Treasury benches.)"--
This may be allowed, wiyl►ouc any- great stretch of
candour. T, Gove►'nmeiit can only be carried on
by means of corrupt influence ; and where core,
ruption is the system, it would be difficult to say
which Administration is most corrupt. What Sir
J. Graham said will be eternally applicable to all Ad-
ministratins under our system. " When their prc,
fessions were brought to the test of their acts,
they did not appear to be marked with sincerity.
All their reductions affected subordinate officers—
. men powerless, destitute of influence; but they uni-
formly avoided anything like reduction ; when. they

It is scarcely more than two hundred years since
Sir Ed ward Coke, then Lord Chief Justice of the
Court of King's Bench, disputed the most essential
point of the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery
—namely, the power to give relief after or against
the judgment of a Court of Common Law. The
contest upon this subject was so warmly carried on
in the year 1616, between this learned and eminent
Judge and the Lord Chancellor Ellesmere, that in-
dictments were preferred against the Counsel, the
solicitors, and the suitors; together with a Master in
Chancery, for having incurred the penalties of
prcennodre by questioning-in a'COstrs. of Equity a
judgment obtained in the Court of King's Bench
upon alleged gross fraud and imposition. This dis-
pute, which involved 'almost the existence of the
Court of Chancery, was finally decided by the King
in Council against the opinion of the Lord
Chief Justice of the King's Bench, which de-
cision may be, said to have laid the founda-
tion of the present enormous and still in-
creasing power of the equity system. Of so
comparatively recent a date is the growth of that
vast and formidable jurisdiction. It was subsequently
to this dispute that Lord Bacon, who was the suc-
cessor of Lord Ellesmere, reduced the practice of
the Court of Chancery into something like a regular
system, though he did not preside there long enough
to enable him to complete its formation in a manner
worthy of his accurate and comprehensive mind.
Nor was it until the time of the Earl of Notting-
ham, who was appointed to his high office in 1673,
that the system of the Court of Chancery was
really consolidated, and made available to the de-
cision of those questions of property which arose
out of the extension of trade, and the abolition of
the military tenures. From that time to the pre-
sent, what a change has taken place in this branch
of our juridical system ! Not only has the Court
of Chancery, whose existence was almost disputed
in the reign of James I. become the most important
Court of the realm, but two more Equity Courts
have been added, and the erection of a third is now
proposed, which would make the Courts in Equity
equal in number to what the superior Courts in
-Equity and Common Law, taken together, formerly
were. But as to the necessity of a new Court or a
new Judge in Equity, as proposed by the LRk. I
Chancellor's Bill, now pending in Perliamerk"con—
siderable difference of opinion 'exists in Westmiii'
stershall, The opponents of the measure among
lawyers appear to be by far the more numerous
body, and to coincide in opinion with Sir
Charles Wetherell that such an appointment will
not materially tend to facilitate the despatch of
Equity business. • It is quite certain that such
an appointment would increase the quantity of ar
peals; and we think Sir Charles Wetherell right in
calling on Parliament to ascertain by evidence the
necessity of such a measure, before they saddle the
country with the expense of it. We believe the
present Lord Chancellor to be as well disposed as
any of his predecessors to administer his high office
with that purity and rectitude whieli are sure, sooner
or later, to secure that honourable and lasting re-
putation, which, unlike the transient praise of party,
is confirmed by the unbiassed suffrages of a discern-
ing public; but, at the same time, we are of opinion
that it is not in the power of that Learned Lord,
or of any Other hidiVidual filling that station, to oh-
viate the evil consequences of the radical defect itt
a system which unites the office of a Judge with that
of a politician, and makes it necessary for a Lord
Chancellor to divide his time between the duties of
the Bench and the duties of the Cabinet. We ven-
ture to say that, until the political character of the
Chief Judge in equity is separated from the judicial
one, the system will always be complained of, what-
ever number of additional equity Judges may be ap-
pointed; and, if these two incompatible characters
be once dissevered, the appointment of a new Judge
in Chancery will be found to he quite superfluous.—
Morning Herald.
We concur with Sir Robert Peel, and with some
of our contemporaries, in lamenting, as a deplorable
circumstance, the apparent incapacity of the House
of Commons, under its present system of regu-
lations, to transact the business with that degree of
expedition and of efficacy which the country has a
right to require. This is a public grievance of the
highest order : if carried to the excess to which it
now seems tending, and continued for any length of
time, it amounts to little less than an indirect aboa
lition of the Legislature ; for surely it is neither to
look at each other, nor to yawn aver long speeches,
nor to worry adverse individuals or parties by ab-
surd propositions or captious objections, that gentle-
men are sent to the House of Commons. They
might much better stay at home than spend whole
Sessions of Parliament, as the last has beet, consumed,
in wanton loquacity, with no—or next to no—at-
tempt at doing business; because the Ministers of
the Crown, at least, might in that case be left to the
discharge of their official duties, from which they are
now withdrawn for the greater portion of every
(lay, and, as it would seem, for tie purpose under
Heaven but that of " helping" the. Opposition " to
do nothing." We do not recollect a session
Parliament wide!' had Wur'a to show for it-
self, except Bills, at this late season of the
Yea.:, us the session which has already lasted four
months, but which, for aught that we can see, must
endure for four months longer, or leave the most
important of those measures unexecuted, some of
which were already prepared, apd others promised,
from the first opening of the session. How all this
is to end we cannot certainly foresee, So far from
supplying deficiencies, or correetiog errors, or intro-
ducing well-considered improvements in the State,
the mere soutius,. of the most urgent business
cannot Lse carried on under such a system. Yet
the worst of it is the difficulty of discovering
a cure, at once unobjectionable and effectual.
An evening contemporary has recommended the
appointment of a standing committee of membevi of
triedeti i)a the and industry, at proper salsifies, for
settling e
details of private Bills, Considerable
use mightri' warning
undoubtedly be skived from such an
s
institution ; but the questiost must occur, whether
the whole power of the House should be delegated
to these ite, isaid officers, or whether there was to be
a right of appeal from their decisions by the parties
interested in the Bills ? If the judgment of the
committee were to be final, then an enormous power
would be lodged in its hands, and taken away from
Parliament. If, on the contrary, a right of appeal
' to the whole House were to be allowed, there
would be no lack of discontented parties to rip up
the proceedings of the committee, and to occupy
the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Commons
as fully as its original and direct jurisdiction is already
made an instrument for wasting the public time. It
has again been suggested that a committee should
be named for the purpose of considering such Bills,
the introduction of which to Parliament might
be proposed, and that tile right of pretepting

We recommend to our readers an attentive pe-
rusal of the conversation in the House of Commons
respecting the mode of paying Consuls. As a mere
question of expence, there is no doubt that on thorn
face of the subject the system of fees is more econo-
mical than the system of salaries. But another
question arises: is it equally fair—is it equally re-
sponsible ? In the Lords, the Marquis of London-
derry exhibited more zeal than information on the
Greek question. It would be a curious illustration
of the familiar Latin proverb " Par part gaudet,','
if this ex-Ambassador should turn out to be a prin-
cipal adviser of the ex-Sovereign of Greece. Indis-
cretion is a common result from two apparently very
different causes—timidity, Which blinds the vision,
and temerity, which overlooks the mark. When
this Noble Lord talks of England being reduced to
a second-rate Power, indignation, at such a charge,
from such a quarter, stops our utterance. If
we do burst our silence against him and his de-
ceased relation (whom we wish to forget), would
we direct that stream of contemptuous animadver-
sion which we are quite willing, if unprovoked, to
suppress; But though we forbear, the public do
not forget. The result of the' proceedings in the
Lords exhibited a striking proof of the weakness Of
hastily concocted coalitions between parties who
have no common principle of adhesion. Th. " rash-
levied strength" of Lord Londonderry, and Proh
pudor ! his new liberal allies, quailed when the
moment of action came. They could not stand the
ordeal of a division. We admire the principles
and respect the motives of many of the emi-
nent persons now in opposition; but by their
love of justice and truth, and, most of all,
by their own well-earned reputation, we ad-
jure them not to enter upon a forced alliance
with a party with whom they have no affinity
either personal or political. What communion
" hath light with dankness ?" Equally coetrarY'to
the nature of things would be an union with Lord
Grey and Lord Eldon,—between Lord Holland and
Lord Londonderry. We do not now investigate
the principles of the respective parties; we put out
of the question which of the two parties was night,
which was wrong;- but, diametrically opposite, es-
sentially adverse as were almost all their objects and
all their modes of attaining them, we say that nothing
but some manifest State-necessity can ju,tify an an-
4.etopt to amalgamate elements so decidedly dis-
iMidant ? What is that State-necessity ? Surely
not the petty question of the boundary of Greece;
—surely not the paltry question of tine pretensions
of Prince Leopold.—Tiwe,

The rational and civii!,zed part of the public is
equally disgusted at brutal exhibition of prize-
fights, and at the misplaced and ruinous lenity which
is too often shown to the ruffians engaged in them,
and their abettors. One of the former class of de-
linquents, who has within a few days beaten a fel-
low-creature to death, ought, we submit, to be
brought with all possible speed to trial, and sub-
jected, if found guilty, to the sharpest punishment
that the laws of England authorise in cases falling
short of " murder.' The offence never will be
effectually discouraged, until some signal example
shall have been made of one or more practitioners
in this butcheriy and degrading kind of outrage.
Much has been said of national character,--of
English courage, generosity, &c.,—and of the use-
fulness of inculcating the employment of the fits
instead of the knife or the stiletto. We have no ob-
jection whatever to see a stout Englishman de-
fend himself bravely with his fists, or chastise
an aggressor with that natural and powerful
weapon. But what shocks us, in common with
many of those whose feelings are of more importance
to the community, is to see fellows trained up to
gain a livelihood by gambling with their bodily
strength, and exposing their own lives, and some-
times taking the lives of others, for a wretched bribe
of a few guineas from blackguards, under the name
and in the clgthes of gentlemen, ho look on with
no sensations but those of cock-fighters while the
work of human agony, and often of death, is • going
forward. We repeat, that whoever of this race. of
desperadoes shall be laid hold of, should at once be
tried, and, if possible, severely punished. The
prosperity of the " prize ring" is not essential to
the maintenance of Englishmen's character for
straightforward and manly courage, or to their pre-
ferring the shut fist as a weapon when requisite, to
the drawn blade, or to the bowl of poison. Is it
possible—we trust not—that a Noble Lord (who
used to take an active part in opposition politics) is
a patron of the prize-ring ? We will not believe so
degrading a charge.—Times.
An idea of the instability of the present Ministry,
or, to speak more plainly, of its speedy dereliction
of office, has, of late, been gaining ground in all
quarters ; and the formidable Opposition which
seems now to be arrayed against it, lends no incon-
siderable colour of probability to it. The language
of the Home Secretary, however, is even more
pointed, and seems to say that, even in his opinion,
the demise of the Crown, arid the demise of the
existing Cabinet, may be almost contemp_nnszeous
events. "If the present IVEr.I--itry should continue
it I should continue to be Secretary
of State"—and other similar expressions, have been
used by him of late, with an emphasis which assur-
edly means something less than a certainty either of
the Ministry continuing in office, or of his remain-
ing as Home Secretary; but a short time will shew
whether such a meaning ought to be attached to
them, or whether they are merely words of course.
The country, we believe, is indifferent whether
there be, or be not, a change, and is only anxious
that it should have an efficient and economical ad-
ministration, without much regard to the parties or
materials of which it may be composed.—llierning
Advertiser.