The Sun.
London, England, 1863-11-11 00:00:00

Hunt had lately told Mr. M'Culloch in a confidential sort
of way several times that his wife was a great trouble to him.
The deceased's house is now in the hands of the police.
We have been requested to state that Mr. Hunt, phar-
maceutical chemist, 6, High-street, Denmark-hill, Camber•
well, who supplied the box of ointment to the deceased
woman, is in no way related to or connected with the mur-
derer's family.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TIMES.—HaIf a century ago, when Europe had
just given the fatal blow which made France recoil
to her capital, there seemed no other object, before
the human race than to isolate and shut up the
common foe. All else, in this part of the world at
least, had learnt the blessings of order, legitimacy,
and submission to the powers that had always been.
Though there were smouldering signs of discontent
here and there, and personages not quite satisfied
with their territory and position, still these were
slight maladies that time would alleviate and even
wholly remove. A great inundation had been
checked ; the day of " enterprise" was over, " re-
volution" had been driven into its den, and all that
was to be done was to raise a sufficient barrier
between the sound and the unsound, the invaded
and the invader. Such was the view of things that
chiefly dictated the Treaties of Paris and Vienna.
It was assumed that Europe, caring for peace above
all things, and France, beaten into submission,
would long acquiesce in arrangements made really,
in a moderate spirit, and generally with a con-
scientious regard to the public good. For fifteen
years the Treaty of Vienna was observed as sacredly
as if it had been written on the skies; and it has
taken nearly fifty years altogether to abrade this
mighty landmark down to the level of history.
The sluggish stream of peace itself, however, has
undermined its own banks, and revolution or
accident has only intervened to consummate a
destruction all but done. The Treaty itself was
such as time could not but work against. There
was in it an element of weakness, unavoidable, re-
cognised, and resisted, but irresistible. In crushing
France it was necessary also to crush the national
sentiment and public opinion. France, like the
august captive in the old story, had to receive a
victorious, and now to her a foreign, lord. Her
hour of calamity was widely shared by those who
could not then move or speak, So when France
reasserted her independence, and shook off her
mister, the example spread. The rent in the
Treaty ran from one nation to another. The hybrid
kingdom of the Netherlands, raised as a barrier
against French enterprise, was shivered in a day,
though it took diplomacy three years to accept and
legalise the fact. There at once was gone, not only
the letter, but the spirit of the Treaty. Two neigh-
bouring nations had now chosen their own rulers,
and what, perhaps, neither Europe poi France at
first expected, these terrible outbreaks of national
self-will were found not incompatible with the
general peace. It must be concluded that immedi-
ately from the expulsion of Charles X. and the dis-
ruption of Holland and Belgium the Eastern Powers
had given up all hope of maintaining the Treaty of
Vienna, even if they desired it. Their occupation
of Cracow gave France itself an opportunity of pro-
testing in behalf of public law, and distinguishing
between its own natural right to choose its own
Government and the violent interference of one
State with another in the face of treaty obligations.
Since then the Treaty of Vienna has been like a
fortress overthrown, dismantled in its most vital
quarter. A parade of validity has been kept up,
but adequate force alone was wanted to destroy
what was left of it. When at last France had
elected a Bonaparte as her Emperor, the Treaty only
survived in a feeble jealousy of national indepen-
dence and French ambition. Italy saw its oppor-
tunity, and renewing a former struggle and a former
alliance, wrested Lombardy from Austria, and ab-
sorbed in a natural unity Tuscany, the " Two
Sicilies," Parma, Modena, and the Legations. Aus-
tria was thus the first of the great Eastern Powers
that was in a position to complain of broken treaty
rights. Russia and Prussia were apparently content
to let the Treaty go down the stream of time, and
to stand upon older grounds. Bat while his hand
was in, the Emperor of the French took occasion
to rectify the line of frontier imposed by Europe
in 1814 and 1815, at a time when everything short
of a Chinese wall was erected between France and
other nations. He obtained Savoy and Nice and
something more on that coast, as well as the
territories of Faucigny and Chablis, the neutrality
of which had been expressly secured by the
great Powers. Besides a footing on the shore
of the Lake of Geneva he made a slight adjust-
ment of the frontier at Les Rousses. If his old pro-
tectors the Swiss are to be believed, he commands
their great lake and can penetrate at once into every
valley of the Confederation. The greatest of natu-
ral barriers has fared no better than the artificial ;
and Switzerland and the treaty are both rent in
twain. Finally, England has given up the protec-
torate of the lonian. Islands, and handed them over
to the new kingdom of Greece. But England Reid
all the great Powers of Europe are invited to a Con-
gress, the first act of which, it would seem, is to
accept all these facts as accomplished. The pro-
posed end of this recognition is to establish there-
from some as yet undiscovered basis for the settle-
ment of existing differences. It may be presumed
that this basis will be the right of nations to choose
their own Governments. But, unless the Congress
point to measures of a war,ike nature or tendency,
no such basis of diplomatic negociation is required,
for there is no right so much admitted as that of
national independence, when a nation is strong
enough to assert its independence and mains in an
indefinite struggle with its former master. If Po-
land or the Confederate States of America hold out
till the conflict itseif becomes a worse public evil
than the risks we incur by full recognition, we cer-
tainly shall recognise the independence of both
peoples. What new basis, then, is Wanted more
than that which virtually exists ? Nor: is it easy to
see how the proposed basis will be stronger because
it is to be founded on a stronger approval—that is,
a more express and particular approval—of every-
thing that has been done in the face of the treaty.
This will be to purchase a little formality at the
cost of much conscience, and, in some cases, interest.
England has no interest in the fate of the treaty
except her common interest in order and peace.
Could she in honour and duty leave the Continental
Governments and peoples to settle the matter
among themselves, she can afford to do so. Nor
has she anything to sacrifice, except those con-
scientious convictions the retention of which
constitutes her great moral weight. If England,
while approving the self-emancipation of Italy, and
other acts running counter to the letter of the treaty,
does not approve the suppression of the Republic of
Cracow or the annexation of Savoy and Nice, or
the presence of a French army in Rome, why are
we to purchase our right to sit in this Congress by
renouncing our conscientious protests and belying
our recorded judgments? This is a certain loss,
while the gain is doubtful. We may, indeed, de-
clare our acceptance of some accomplished facts,
reserving our opinion upon others, much in the
same way that even Austria may possibly record
her resignation to her Italian losses. But Austria
may well consider what she is to gain, or what the
cause of peace and order is to gain, by the gratui-
tous rehearsal of her former humiliations. As for
Russia, she has not yet betrayed any superstitious
repugnance to deal with facts, and she has a logic
that can handle or evade any abstract proposition.
Bat, on the other hand, she has long since renounced
the treaty when it stands in her way ; and there
begins and ends her part in this matter. Bat if
France and Austria are ready to show their respect
both for the treaty and for accomplished facts by
entering the proposed Congress, there can be no
reason why we should refuse to join them, so as we
do not begin by admissions fatal to our authority,
and in our case unnecessary.
POST.—Europe must be entering upon an entirely new
dispensation if it accepts and realises the Emperor Napo-
leon's idea of a Congress. It is a project so unprecedented
and of such a grand moral conception that we can only
regard it as an earnest of something to be here-
after—" appearing ere the times are ripe." There
have been Congresses for the partition of kingdoms, the
equation of spoil, and the inauguration of new dynasties,
but a Congress to enfranchise a nation crushed under an
s
excessive severity of repression—a Congress to revise treatie
which, whether right or wrong originally, are distinctly the
bases of the status quo—a Congress to take into considera-
tion the state of things in general and bring
about a
icon-
sensus,s if not a uniformity, of international policy—this
indeed
toa projecth e
feasiblew hi
in
c no
thoi
this
one
generation,
aMti
or;Cobdenand
hei vehe r
n main-
tained one
against
but the Emperor of the French would have
that can
avehadthhee bravery
to propound. Of its success, the u
ably said is that is not impossible.
are immense le. There is muchdifacuiti
the chances of a happy issue, but nothing in the naturees
in
things to ensure failure. There
of it, because if it
can be
getting a Congress together ; there will be still greater ones
in
the
rb
bsyt directionpi
roeme
oovdf wus
giorreikd
Still, obtaining
there its successful t
pr 0 ismuch to
besaidin
favours
k-
ing. Amnadytehitnegwtohrkatitwisill undeniablythe
anticipate
v7a
vocatives—anything that will settle disputes by the voice
of reason—the sanctions of public law,
and the bond of
mutual interests—anything that will preserve from waste
the blood and treasure which are the strength of nations,
ought to receive the warmest favour at the hands of all
civilised principalities and powers.
thoroughly successful, would save men
andA money, Congress, w 0 u
lidf
prevent the bitterness and exasperation which war engen-
ders, would put the responsibility of public policy upon the
right shoulders, and would be a standing witness to the
prevalence of moral counsels over mere physical prowess
and brute strength; But, on the other hand, the failure of
such a Congress as that proposed would be a fatal failure.
Any single Power successfully defying it would be only
stronger after its wiscarriage than before; while lateld _