The Sun.
London, England, 1862-02-28 00:00:00

I%\
4 -.lb sT -

• .

'~

questioning Lord could not have ascertained whether
an answer had arrived or not from Turin before he
had fired off another Anti-Italian oration in public.

There must have been, we must suppose, some
reason why such a speaker could have been :so
eloquent—so hasty to be eloquent, on what seems
likely to turn out to be a " bag of moonshine"
after all. For long we could imagine none—at
length we observed that the address to the electors
of Longford, of the Hero of Spoleto, Mr. MYLES
O'REILLY, had just been issued, and it occurred to
us that it might possibly be the key to the mystery
of Tuesday and Thursday nights.
Lord PALMERSTON has offered to the member for
Longford, Lieutenant-Colonel L. WHITE, one of a
wealthy family of consistent Liberals, a lordship of
the Treasury. The family has always had several of
its members in the House of Commons, and they have
been steady supporters of Catholic Emancipation,
and of all liberal measures affecting the Catholics,
The hero of Spoleto, however, has announced him-
self a candidate, to prevent the re-election of Col.
WHITE, on what grounds our readers may see by
the following extract from his address :—" Men of
Longford,—A Government hostile to your religion
—to its venerable Head and to its dearest interests
at home—has dared to ask you to sanction their
anti-Catholic policy, of which the Chief Secretary
for Ireland is the exponent. Hop into g
take you
unawares, they have directed your late member
to present himself to you for re-election in the
quality of their official. As might be expected,
you have refused to endorse their act with your
approval, you have invited me to vindicate the in-
dependence and dignity of your county, and I
hasten to obey the honourable call. Should I be
elected, my conduct shall prove your noble confi-
dence has not been misplaced. I shall oppose in

Parliament, as I have often done elsewhere, the

system of sacriligious invasion and robbery pursued
by Piedmont, which has received the support of

English Ministers,"
With such doings at Longford before us, the
questions and orations of Tuesday and Thursday
did look, we confess, a little businesslike. It would
be something to eject a Lord of the Treasury, if the

year of mourning was not suitable to the ejection o:

a Premier. It might, therefore, be a judicious move
to exhibit in the same cartoon the hostility of Lords

DERBY and MALMESBURY to the " sacrilegious and
robber Government of Piedmont," and the friendly
temper of Lords PALMERSTON and RUSSELL
towards the same vile Government. See, men of
Longford, our zeal in behalf of mercy to Papal
brigands, and see how the Government, which is
hostile to your " religion, to its head, to its dearest
interests here," winks hard at even such atrocities
as these for the extinction of the pious brigands,
who went forth with the blessing of the Holy
Father. Whether the proclamation were a forgery
or a fact, would make little difference for such a
purpose. It would equally serve to show the zeal
of ea-Ministers in behalf of the brigands of the
POPE and St. FRANCIS
It cannot be long before we hear the whole truth
of the matter. Probably many hours will not
elapse. But had the truth came out first, there
would have been no opportunity to sendoff to Long-
ford photographs of the Italian policy of the in and
the out cabinets. Mr. O'REILLY could not have
descanted on the very last illustration of Govern-
mental hostility to the Porz. That the document
in question is a pure fabrication, that it is even the
resuscitation of one of MURAT'S of 1810, seems
hardly to be doubted. The Duke of ARGYLL
said—" He had on the previous evening
met an Italian gentleman, who ' had just
arrived from Turin. He asked this gentleman
about the proclamation, and his answer was that
he had heard of such a proclamation appearing in
the newspapers, but that on inquiry he had found
it to be a forgery—a mere rechauffee, in fact,
slightly altered, of a proclamation of MURAT'S, in
1810, when he was engaged in putting down the
brigands. He (the Duke of ARGYLL) should regret
very much the publication of this proclamation if
it should turn out to be genuine." We should all
regret, indeed, its genuineness as much as Lord
DERBY, but we certainly think there is every pro
bability that (unless Longford be kept in mind)
the noble lord has only found that remarkable
curiosity, " a mare's nest."

Clear-headedness and clearness of statement ought
to be one of the first results of education ; yet never
did the gentlemen of the House of Commons find
themselves in more hopeless confusion than when
discussing last night a point relating to National
Education. Nobody could, as Paddy might say,
understan3 nobody. We are not quite sure that
all the members went away, after all, understanding
what they were to do.
The revised code needs, Mr. WALPOLE thinks,
further revision. To effect this object he will pro-
pose, on the 25th of Mirch, that the House, on a
future day, go into committee to consider certain
resolutions he will then lay before it. But he and
some other members wish to know whether the
Government will or will not oppose its going into
committee. The Government replies, we cannot
tell till we see what we are to go into committee
about. Thus far all seems fair ; yet Mr. AYRTON
and the Conservatives want to extract from the
Government an assurance that the committee of the
whole House on the code shall be granted. They
seem to fear that the Government considers the
code so perfect, that it cannot be mended—or, rather
that it has gone to the extreme of concession in
sparing teachers and managers who have little
claim on the national Exchequer.
Mr. WALPOLE offered the Government the alter-
natives of adhering to his original plan,which was to
name, on the 25th, a future day for the committee, on
which future day the house should go into com-
mittee as a matter of course, and between the 25th
and that future day to lay his resolutions on the
tba table of the house for the consideration of hon-
ourable members; or, as the other alternative, he
was willing to go into committee on the 25th itself,
and to lay his resolutions before the house previously
to that time. The Government accepts the former
alternative.

But why, then, dispute further about it? Why,
because the Government will not give an absolute
answer that it will consent to going into com-
mittee, till it has seen the resolutions. That
seems to us to have been the real point
in dispute last night. It appears that even ii the
Speaker do leave the Chair by an order of the day,
nothing can hinder the Government from voting
the Chairman out of the Chair, if they are strong
encugh to do it—a cow se actually punned in regard
to Lord RUSSELL himself and his celebrated string
of Educational Resolutions. The solicitude of the
Conservatives, and of all who are more eager to
get money from the State than work
from the teachers, looks rather hopeful. It
seem as if the common sense of the members
appreciated the honest intention Q of the Govern-
ment to secure work for pay ; and as if the
majority of the House did not intend to
be cajoled into
Reform, which Canno marringb a m
be called a uch needed
party proposal.
On the other hand there seems to be an intention to
make political capital out of the
most miserable
pretence of vested interests, we recclieet en; t 9