The Sun.
London, England, 1853-07-18 00:00:00

LONDON, MONDAY, JULY 18, 1853.

"Sivis pacem, para helium." The truth of the
adage has never been contradicted save by the
twaddlers of the Peace Society, who would fain
have persuaded the people of the propriety of a
general disarmament, and of the efficacy of reason
and argument to prevent the dangerous conse-
quences that might arise from the total absence of
anything like preparation to repel the aggressions
which the ambition or cupidity of other nations
might encourage. These amiable enthusiasts
would have induced us to believe that the golden
age was rapidly returning—that we might look
forward to the speedy advent of the period
-when " the lion should indeed lie down
with the lamb," without any evil conse-
quences to the weaker party—when Justice
would reign paramount over all the earth, and
the only contests would arise from a friendly com-
petitor, as to who could produce the most valu-
able manufactures for the general consumption,
which could most ably combine matters tending
to the amelioration of mankind, and the happiness
of the human race, without distinction ofcreed
or colour, climate or longing°, with the handsome
profits to which these benefactors of their s
would be legitimately entitled. It is, pecies
,
however,
but a matter of simple justice to the simple-
minded individuals who so loudly advt)-
cated these doctrines, when there was no
possibility of testing their efficacy to ac-
knowledge that they have maintained a total and
unbroken silence since events have arisen to prove the
fearful risks that should have been encountered if
England and France, in accordance with their
ridiculous suggestions, had put their vessels of
war out of commission, and dismissed their well-
trained and hardy seamen to seek employment in
conveying cotton from one hemisphere to another,
and returning with the raw material converted
into bales of calico. None of the Apostles of uni-
versal peace have volunteered a journey to
St. Petersburgh to convince the AUTOCRAT of the
impropriety of his proceedings, and to induce him
to make ample reparation to the parties injured
by his unprovoked and unwarranted invasion of
territories of a friendly power. No broad-
brimmed diplomatists have offered " to beard the
lion in his den"—the CZAR in his Palace—by
lecturing him on his social or political duties, or
Persuading ilixa " to submit all matters in dispute
to the arbitration of judges well versed in inter-
national law—haviug v
Arm, and GnoTrus, and
PUPPENDORT at their Bug
ers "
No; the members
of. the Peace Society are sue .n, if not convinced,
and it is to be hoped that iie:
eifihe
orwrl and for
ever they will hide their
diminished heads, and
c
forbear from intruding their senseless trash upon
nations now thoroughly awakened to its excee ding
folly and palpable absurdity.
They have, however, already occasioned-. eve
which it will be difficult, if not impossible, tiz;;;.
medy. The wauto aggression that has atreacki

led to such injurious results has mainly arisen
from the unfounded belief that their peculiar
views were acceptable to a large proportion of the
people of England, and to the certainty that the
Prime Minister of Queen VICTORIA largely par-
ticipated therein. To the timid and vacillating
policy of the " excellent ABERDEEN," which pre-
vented a bold and manly remonstrance in the
first instance, when the threatened attack on the
integrity of the Turkish dominions, and the inde-
pendence of the Ottoman Government was intimated,
may be attributed the partial execution of these
insolent menaces. If the Western Powers had
promptly repudiated the " engagements" alluded
to in the NESSELRODE Circular, " not to compli-
cate the difficulties of the situation by assuming
an attitude, or prematurely taking steps, which,
on the one hand, would have the effect of encour-
ing the Porte in a course of opposition, and, on
the other, might involve them further than they
then were in a question relating to the honour
and dignity of the EMPEROR." We should not
have had to prove the inaccuracy of the reasoning,
the absurdity of the argument, which attempts to
show that the presence of the combined fleets of
England and France not in the Bosphorus or
within sight of the Turkish capital—not even in
the Dardanelles, but in a sea open to the navies
of the entire world—was not an unjustifiable
entry upon " the waters and harbours of the
Ottoman empire," "a threatening demonstration,"
or "a maritime occupation," that authorised or
afforded any reasons for " re-establishing the
equilibrium of the respective positions by a mili-
tary occupation" on the part of Russia. The

CZAR manifestly does not and cannot comprehend
the reasons for our extraordinary forbearance. He
has no feeling in common with those that avoided
all recriminatory language, and submitted
patiently to his impudent assumptions and
bullying bluster. He ascribed to timidity,
whether • correctly or otherwise, the injudicious
course pursued by English diplomatists, in obe-
dience to the instructions of the Joint-stock Ad-
ministration, in which Lord PALMXRSTON did not
hold the seals of the Foreign-office.
It is not enough to be prepared for war—it is
not enough that our forces by sea and land are
thoroughly organised, and capable of defending
our rights and those of our allies, when hostilities
have been forced upon us. No. Something
more • is required for the maintenance of tran-
quillity. We must be ready for war as well
as being fully prepared for it. We must be
prompt to lift the gauge of battle when insolently
flung down before us. If the notion gets abroad
that we will permit any advantage to be gained
by offering a easus belli which is disregarded—
that more will be conceded in consequence of a
minatory aspect—farewell to the hope of permanent
peace. The CZAR is too well aware of the step
he has achieved—the strength of the position
which he has taken to be easily induced to relin-
quish it, or if he should do so, for the time being,
not to be on the look-out for the most trivial pre-
text for again taking possession of the Principali-
ties. Nothing but action—decisive and deter-
mined action—can avert the most serious evils.
The NESSELRODE Circular has more than justi-
fied it, if any doubt could have previously existed
on the subject, and that the English Government
is bound to display, if it would maintain the con-
fidence and respect of the English people.

Although the annual general Massacre of the
Innocents hag not yet commenced in good earnest,
an alarming predisposition to private Parliamen-
tary infanticide is beginning to be manifested by
Hon. Gentlemen, and we are bound to say that
her Majesty's Ministers are by no means inclined
to oppose the progress of the disease. Several
promising legislative bantlings have already been
brought to a premature end : some nipped in the
bud, before they had acquired a large portion of
the affections of their putative parents ; others
consigned to the limbo of a select committee ;
while others were cut off after they had attained
a fair position, having passed triumphantly
through the dangers and trials of the second read-
ing, and the " affirmation of the principle" by a
fair majority or majorities of the llouse of Com-
mons. When a bill has reached this " en-
gaging" stage when the watchful care of
its Parliamentary parent or sponsor has
safely guided it through the various shoals
and quicksands that beset its early youth, it
requires more than Spartan fortitude to witness
its cruel fate. Nothing but a confident hope of
its reappearance under more favourable auspices
can reconcile the afflicted parent to its withdrawal

or rejection.
At the morning sitting of Wednesday, four
youthful victims were surrendered to the sacrifi-
cial knife. First in importance, as in order, was
the County Rates and Expenditure Bill; the prin-
ciple of which had been frequently considered,
and repeatedly affirmed by the Representatives
of the people. The Right Hon. Gentleman the
Member for Manchester had long exerted himself
zealously, energetically, and efficiently in pro-
moting its progress. No private Member could
have done more to assure the success of a mea-
sure which had not been openly taken under the
aegis of Ministerial protection. Mr. MILNER
GIBSON had every reason to anticipate that his
proposal would have received the Royal Assent
even during the present session. The lassitude and
fatigue engendered by the morning and evening
sittings, and the double work thus imposed on the
labourers at the Legislative treadmill, however,
defeated for the time being his reasonable expec-
tations. He had, however, the satisfaction of ob-
taining a pledge from the Home Secretary that, in
the beginning of next session, her MAJESTY'S Go-
vernment " would propose to Parliament a mea-
sure founded on the principle of popular represen-
tation as regarded the administration of the affairs
of counties." Although, therefore, the Right
Hon. Gentleman must have experienced a feeling
of disappointment at witnessing once more the
temporary withdrawal of a proposition for which
he had struggled so gallantly during many years,
he may console himself with the hope that before
the termination of another session he will see it,
or something very analogous, enrolled among the
statute laws of the land. We will add with Mr.
SCULLY the earnest hope that it may be made
general in its application, and that Ireland may
be included within its operation.
Next in order, but under very different cir-
cumstances, comes the Seamens' Savings Banks
Bill, which had unaccountably survived the ordeal
of a second reading, and stood for committee.
Its parents had, however, ruthlessly deserted
their helpless offspring. One of its sponsors alone
appeared, who candidly confessed that, although
he had allowed his name to be put on the back
of the bill, "he was not acquainted with its
details." The Honourable and Gallant Officer
also made as brief a statement as to the nature of
the agreeable position in which he was placed,
saying that he " had no authority to withdraw
the bill—he had no authority to go on, and
he was not in a position to go on." Under such
circumstances we need scarcely say that the bill
was speedily consigned to the " Tomb of the
Capulets,"
with no hope of a resuscitation—a
result the less to be regretted, as it appeared that
it n
ewasexistence
s totallytence which
carried out its object. The
awnhdoulaybostuiprebrensutoousweLl
usethleessbillwaswtaes,
oft ere-
the
public time.

Next came the ProbateTihof Wills and Grant of
Administration Ea
by the Honourable Gentlemanshad been introduced
the Member for
Sheffield, with the view of removing
serious grievance connected with the one very
testamentary
jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts, viz., that
which, under certain circumstances, rendered ne-
cessary a useless increase of expense, by multiply-
ing the probates of the same will, if there were
bona notabilia in different provinces. So that
instances have occurred where it became necesAlry
to take out probates from the Prerogative Courts
of York and Canterbury, and also in Scotland and
Ireland. Mr. HADFIELD very properly felt desir-
ous of abating this nuisance, in favour of which
not a single argument could be advanced. He
was, however, obliged to succumb to the, general
weariness, and to content himself with a promise
i
fmna Lord l'Axatraszorr, that the question of Pro-

bates would be treated by the Government mea-
sure, which is to be brought forward next session.
Last came the Simony Law Amendment Bill,
which stood for a second reading. The question
which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the
Member for Kidderminster was anxious to
bring under the consideration of the House
was undoubtedly one of very considerable
importance. A great abuse—one that brought
scandal on the Church, and led to very loud and
general complaints—was aimed at. The sale of
patronage, under any circumstances, is a crying
grievance. The right of appointing a pastor to a
Christian congregation should not be made a
matter of barter or sale. A more sacred trust
could not be confided to any individual ; and it
is truly deplorable when we witness the delibe-
rate violation of that trust by its being turned
into a means of obtaining money for the patron,
or providing for an unworthy or unqualified per-
son, who had no claims to such a situation save
the possession of money by himself or friends ;
and the readiness to invest that money in acquir-
ing " a cure of souls in a good sporting county,
' where the duty was single, the population small,
and the parsonage-house roomy and comfortable."
What could be more disgusting than to find that
infirmity, and decreptitude, and ill health were
the only qualifications looked for by a patron,
who had omitted to dispose of the next presenta-
tion previous to the death of the last incumbent ?
Such a system cannot be defended, because it is
"an aged vice, a grey iniquity." Means should
be taken to remove the reproach from the Na-

tional Church ; and Mr. PHILLIMORE is entitled to
much credit for having directed the public attention
to the subject. Under present circumstances,
however, it could. not possibly be carried through
its various stages during the present session, and
therefore the noble Lord who took charge of its
progress during the accidental absence of Mr.
PHILLIMORE, exercised a wise discretion in not
pressing it on to a division against the opposition
which it received. It, or some analogous mea-
sure, will, however, again be brought forward; and
we trust that the blot may eventually be erased
from the escutcheon of the Church of England.

We rejoice most heartily that the bill for the
removal of professorial tests in the Scotch Univer-
sities has passed a second reading. It is high time
that these mischievous implements of bigotry
should be wrested from the hands that use them
merely to deprive Universities of the noblest in-
tellectual life which might otherwise animate them.
The bill, as it is to pass, is, indeed, but a compro-
mise, and the teachers of mathematics, chemistry,
mechanics, and so forth, are to pledge themselves
not to imperil the Assembly's Catechism by their
problems and experiments ! Well, be it so. The
professors, if doing their duty to their pupils
and their sciences, will assuredly have other
things to think about ; and if the Presbyterian
D.Ds. think it worth while to furnish the profes-
sors of science with such dust to shake off their
feet against the timid bigotry of ecclesiastics,
why, it is never worth the professors' while
to object. For ourselves, we hold all similar
declarations, whether required of Roman Catholic
Members of Parliament, of municipal town coun-
cillors, or of non-Presbyterian Scotch professors,
very cheap. They convict of cowardice, or of dis-
trust of the merits of their own cause, the party
which enforces them, while they never do and
never can bind, to any practical purpose, the party
who takes them.

Still this test-protected liberty of teaching
science was not enough for Sir ROBERT INGLIS.
His Episcopalian co-religionists, it appears, had
stretched their consciences to sign the confession
of a Church which anathematises bishops, there-
fore Sir ROBERT thought the chairs were open to
those sound in his own pliable faith ; but some
worthy Presbyterians, not of the Scotch Establish-
ment, could not consent to sign themselves Esta-
blishment-men. These men, therefore, though
agreeing with the Church of Scotland, probably in
everything but the question of patronage (chiefly

a secular matter), Sir ROBERT desires to exclude
from office. In a word, the English Episcopalian,
though anathematised by the creeds of the Scotch
Church, stands up to fight the battle, which Scot-
tish members decline, for the remnant of the
Scotch Establishment against the Free Church of
the majority. This is the sum of the whole oppo-
sition.

Poor GOLDSMITH remarked that it was " im-
possible to argue with JOHNSON, for if his pistol
missed fire. he knocked you down with the butt
end of it." We may truly say of Sir ROBERT
et hoc genus omne, that there is no arguing with
him, for if reasons fail he knocks you down
with an oath. Not a profane one, oh,

no ! but, in this case, with a royal one ; it
appearing to him, no doubt, a royal road to his
desired goal. By the QUEEN'S oath he charges
us to desist from admitting intellectual light into
universities except through " subscription" win-
dows. He takes up the London Gazette of June
20, 1837, and proves that Queen VICTORIA sub-
scribed the Oath of Security for the Church of
Scotland against Episcopalian interference.
Oaths should be "an end of all strife ;" but Sir
ROBERT, and the few survivors of his school, con-
trive to make them the most strife-enkindling
inventions in the world. They did so in the con-
troversy on Roman Catholic Emancipation ; they
do so when any portion of Church lucre is in
danger, or when, as in this instance, brains are
likely to overpower bigotry. One thing is obvious
to all, that the appeal to oaths, like the ap-
peal to " vested interests," is never made unless
the cause is in itself defenceless ; when common
sense, reason, the wants of society, the changes of
circumstances, and all the considerations that in-
fluence disinterested and sound-minded men are
irresistible, then the fanatic or the conservator of
abuses conjures up the ghost of an oath to deter
you. No instance probably can be produced of a
cause intrinsically good being defended in either
Houses of Parliament by the appeal to an oath.
Sir ROBERT INGLIS, however, is not the man
who has a right to watch over the safe-keeping of
others' oaths. Sir WILLIAM HAMILTON has ap-
pealed to him ever since 1835 to see to his own
oaths. He has shown him " that those pro-
ceeding, to a degree (and Sir ROBERT is a gra-
duate of Oxford) without fulfilling all indispen-
sable conditions, are declared perjured by statute,
and no graduate now fulfils even the most impor-
tant of these." He has called on him, by every
consideration of honour and religion, to put an
end to the flagrant and gross perjury of which the
heads of houses are distinctly, and not merely
constructively, guilty, by their own statutes. The
argumentum ad hominem proves nothing, it is
true, for or against the general question ; but it is
overwhelming against Sir ROBERT INGLIS.
of all men, cannot maintain the inviolability of
oaths, even when their sense and application is
clear. He is a graduate in virtue of what his
own university statutes declare to be perjury.
Ho resists—and the heads of houses, who are
in a worse moral plight than he, do the
same—all interference of the Legislature to
modify the statutes and oaths which convict
him. Either, therefore, such official oaths may
be broken openly without guilt, and Queen
VICTORIA need not trouble herself about a for-
mality, or Sir ROBERT INGLIS and the heads of
the Oxford Houses are chargeable with a crime
which they would shudder to think of. We
leave Sir ROBERT to choose his alternative, only
adding that we think Queen VICTORIA will be
promoting the true interests of the Scotch Church
by assenting to this Bill ; and we only hope that
it may speedily be presented to her for signature.
We trust that a majority of 106 to 17 in its
favour is conclusive of its fate in both Houses.

It is hardly worth while to enter upon the
general question of Tests in Universities just now;
but surely the time is come for their entire aboli-
tion in regard to literary professors in every
department,
in English as well as Scotch Univer-
sities; and to youth and laymen in every case. It
is quite enough that those who enter the Univer-
sities to take office in the Church, should at a
proper ago sign its Articles, or some Articles of
reasonable length and simplicity; but after the

* See "Discussions on University Reform," &c.
Longmans. 1852. Especially pages 530, 450, and eon-
teat