The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-30 00:00:00

aside in this struggle. The ties of humanity, the
claims of suffering, the laws of civilisation, and the
respect for religion are all broken and tramped
upon in this sanguinary strife and this vindictive
struggle. No excuse is to be accepted from any
cause whatsoever ; in short, it seems that the aim
and object of these emissaries of the paternal Em-
peror is to rival the reign of terror in France, and
to renew in Warsaw and its environs the scenes
and sights that made Paris the wonder and terror
of the world. It is too much to hope that any
good will result from the communications that have
been forwarded by the three Powers; the most de-
cisive answer is the code recently published, where
arbitrary rules and crushing measures seem de-
signed to last till the crack of doom. It is no use
for Ministers to pen courtly phrases, and for diplo-
matists to use elegant expressions, when Generals
are compiling such scrolls of terror, traced in the
blood of thousands. No age, no sex, no profession
is to be a shield or defence for those who offend ; and
woe to those who fall under the ban of such judges
as those who rule over Poland in unrighteousness
and wrath. It is scarcely credible that nowadays
such a proclamation could come from any country
calling itself Christian or civilised. It would have been
a disgrace to the dark ages of tyranny, and it will
remain a foul blot on the fame of Russia for many
generations. If from mistaken motives of prudence,
and the inconvenient position of affairs, there is no
nation that is able at present to take up arms to
succour the Poles, still the sentiments that will pre-
vail upon the perusal of this document will be
synonymous. From one end of Europe to the other
there will be heard the voice of scorn and reproach
against the cruelty, the treachery, and the inhu-
manity of the conduct that now profanes the soil of
Poland, and brands the memory of Russia with
lasting infamy.

The question as to who shall undertake the re-
sponsibility of defending our colonies cannot yet be
considered as settled. From time to time some
event brings it up, and the old difference of opinion
is shown. Last night the petition of the New
Zealanders presented by Lord LYTTELTON was dis-
cussed in the Upper House, and the noble lord, in
calling attention to it, remarked that the two ex-
tremes of colonisation had been tried without abso-
lute success. The old Greeks, when they left their
native country, took with them their goods, their
constitution, and their laws. They departed in
organised bodies,separating themselves for ever from
their country by that act of voluntary exile. The
modern position has been exactly contrary to this.
England, the chief coloniser, has retained her
colonies beneath her own control, restricting their
trade, imposing heavy imposts, and holding them
back from the path of progress by every means in
her power. It is wise, no doubt, to guide the inex-
perience of youthful an.bition, but if you curb the
high-mettled steed too closely, you may provoke
him beyond control. The stormy parting be-
tween England and her mighty Western colonies
taught our legislators and statesmen a wise lesson.
There is little fear now that any minister would
gravely propose to the House of Commons to levy a
tax on the Australian settlers for the benefit of
England, and there is still less likelihood that the
House would support such a proposition if made.
Still, while we have wisely come to the conclusion
of exercising but a very partial control over the
inhabitants of our colonies, there are some points
which demand the attention of the mother country,
and cannot be decided by local instead of imperial
authority. The first of these is the question of self-
defence. The American contest has lately reminded
us of the danger to which our Canadian frontier
would be exposed in case of a war with the Norther❑
States, and the troubles of the New Zealanders have
also renewed the question. There is no doubt much
to be said on both sides. It is asked by the one,
why this country should be called upon to support
the expense of wars incurred with no view to her
benefit, and concluded, most likely, with no advan-
tage to her. On the other hand, it is said, with
equal reason, that colonies are likely to be dragged
into any war which the mother country may engage
in, that their trade may be ruined, their coasts in-
vaded, and all the horrors of war come upon them
unsought and unsuspected. Their weakness, it is
argued, would prevent them from quarrelling with
great Powers on their own account; but if England
still preserves her nominal dominion while re-
fusing her assistance, she is rendering them liable
to be greater sufferers than herself from any war she
may engage in. The just course in this, as in most
other cases, appears to be the medium one. The
colonies should unquestionably contribute, and con-
tribute largely to their own defence, in fact such a
course must approve itself to their English inde-
pendence of feeling and the pride which all pros-
perous settlers must take in their new country.
The Home Government, however, readily came for-
ward to assist the young and struggling state. The
difficulties to be contended against, the scattered
settlements, the dangerous neighbours, and the large
tracts of ground thinly populated and undefended
from aggression, are all to be weighed in the bal-
ance. However ready the colonists may be to des
fend themselves, there are cases when they could
scarcely do it successfully, if unaided. Our North
American provinces, for instance, could hardly, be-
fore this miserable war commenced, have resisted
the whole power of the United States, while it was
a duty that England owed to herself, as well as to
them, to protect the integrity of their possessions.
There is, too, a vast difference between the inhabi-
tants of Canada and Nova Scotia, and the settlers in
New Zealand. The comparatively scanty number of
the latter, notwithstanding the progress of the colony,
render them by no means independent of the
natives. Whatever the origin of the present dis-
putes with the Maoris, there is no doubt that the
natives have become exacting and tyrannical. It
is to be hoped that peace will be speedily placed on
a lasting basis, and the Maori taught to believe
that they will best consult their own interests by
keeping on terms with the colonists. But they
must also be made to understand that Englishmen
seek justice and peace from principle, and not from
fear. They must not suppose that the abandon-
ment of unfair claims, the renunciation of extreme
demands, are due to the dread of their anger or
interference. It is no doubt a difficult matter to
adjust wisely and well; but we trust our Govern.
ment, both home and colonial, will not forget
justice to the colonists in indulgence to the
natives.

Sir John Hay's bill on Naval Agency is to
morrow (as we are reminded by the Army and
Nary Gazette), to be committed, and, from all we hear, the
Admiralty are resolved to give it opposition. The service
will regret this, and it would be desirable if it could be
otherwise arranged.

COUNT D'ORSAY AND MR. RAIKES' NOSE.—The
well-known Tom Raikes, whose letters and me-
moirs have been lately published, and who was a tall, large
man, very much marked with the smallpox, having one
day written an anonymous letter to D'Oreay, containing
some piece of impertinence or other, had closed it with a
Nwaferum. a:lneesrdt:os
letter
you
amped it with something resembling the top of
a thimble. The Count soon discovered who was the writer,
and in a room full of company thus addressed him--" Ha ha ray good Raikes, the next time you write an anony-
mousO
Oup
visitorsr
Aft,
ron;itt leselotkuw;intr
SOUTH
ynnio:Erjsu nose:
027.
0;6:514-*
now 8 AiteedOte3.
he
1 Total number since the opening of the museum free daily
731)15.