The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-21 00:00:00

memorandum of Count NESSELRODE. Nay, my
Lord JOHN RUSSELL himself, in his despatch dated
from the Foreign-office, February 2d, 1853, and
addressed to Sir G. HAMILTON SEYMOUR, as our
Ambassador to the Court of St. Petersburg--
goes out of his way to commend that
very quality, where he says, "Her MAJESTY
is happy to acknowledge the moderation, the
frankness, and the friendly disposition of his Im-
perial MAJESTY." Indeed, of all words of com-
mendation, that was the only one justified by
actual occurrences. Moderation the Emperor
Nicholas did not show, as was evidenced even
then by the arrogance implied by the magnitude of
his demands, and as was still more clearly indicated
when he marched his troops across the Pruth, and
sent the appropriate precursor of his Cossack hordes
in the person of his insolent Plenipotentiary to
the Divan at Constantinople. A friendly dis-
position might, indeed, have been assumed for
the moment towards this country, but its hollow-
ness was sufficiently intimated by the insult-
ing nature of the confidence reposed in the
English Government. A confidence, recollect,
which was only based upon the principle
of " honour among thieves"—and which, in
fact, simply amounted to this, that the CzAR pro-
posed to England that in secret compact with him-
self she should aid Russia in perpetrating a series
of monstrous depredations upon one of the great
powers of the old world, with a total disregard
to all the dictates of justice, to all the prompt-
ings of veracity, to the impulses of rectitude,
and with a profound contempt for what might ul-
timately be thought upon the matter by the rest
of the powerful nations of Christendom. Accord-
ing to his plan, as whispered in London so
far back as 1844, when the CZAR conversed
confidentially upon the subject with Sir ROBERT
PEEL and the Duke of WELLINGTON, according to
the same daring scheme as sketched out under
similar circumstances, by the AUTOCRAT, in his
discussion of the matter with Sir HAMILTON
SEYMOUR as her Britannic MAJESTY'S Ambassador
at St. Petersburg—Turkey was to have been
quietly disposed of by Russia and England—
France being treated as a power altogether un-
worthy of consultation, Austria being merely
flippantly referred to as a State existing as it
were only in the rn shadow of the great northern
Autocracy, and Prussia being never once
mentioned as deserving of one moment's
passing consideration. It was under these cir-
cumstances that the CZAR proposed in 1844, at
London, and in 1853 at St. Petersburgh, his
enormous and mendacious project of a Turkish
dismemberment. Documentary evidence has at
length been obtained that that project was from
the first rejected by the Ministers of the
Crown of England. Insomuch so, that it
would actually appear that, repelled by
England, the Russian AUTOCRAT had recourse to
France—failing, however, as egregiously as in the
former instance, in securing the complicity of the
Emperor NAPOLEON by those gorgeous, but utterly
ineffectual, temptations.

An old saying tells us that " Honesty is the
best Policy•" How has it been in this manner
with regard to the policy of the Russian Go-
vernment ? Than the policy of the CZAR in refe-
rence to Turkey, nothing could possibly have
been, from first toalast, more utterly dishonest.
And how has it fared ? Rejected successively by
the British and by the French Government, it
has led the AUTOCRAT onwards, from one outrage
to another—until Turkey is in arms, up to this
moment victoriously in arms, against him both in
Asia and in Europe, along the Danube and
along the Caucasus—until France and Eng-
land oppose him with their combined ar-
maments both military and maritime, along
the shores of the Baltic and along those
also of the Euxine—until Austria finds herself to
have been spoken of by the CZAR as if in acknow-
ledged vassalage, and Prussia discovers that she
has been disregarded by his Imperial Majesty as a
State of utter insignificance ! Those are among the
consequences already of the criminal designs
of the ambition of the Russian AUTOCRAT I The
consequences already. Observe that—for others
will follow. Others must follow now rapidly—
now when so many of the troops of England have
already steamed far on their way towards Constan-
tinople—now when the first division of the French
army has already taken its departure from Marseilles,
while another fleet is preparing to set forward
northwards from the vicinity of Brest—now when
NAPIER is approaching the Sound with his glo-
rious squadron, and when Admirals DUNDAS and
HAMELIN are on the eve of emerging from their
anchorage in the Bosphorus. Again—at this
juncture of supreme expectation—let the battle•
cry, humbly but confidently, be " God Defend the
Right !" while the warrior sons of France and
England side by side fight against Russian bar-
barism in defence of all that is worthiest of pre-
servation among the civilised races of Christendom.

No one will deny that the Oxford University
Reform Bill is well worth having ; indeed, it
were next to impossible that it should be other-
wise. Whoever attacked its legislature, its oaths,
or its collegiate exclusiveness, could hardly fail to
do some good, so great is the confessed scope for
amendment. In place of the now irresponsible
heads of houses, the future government of the
university is to be vested in a body of which the
great majority is elective, and the electors are to
consist of the members of congregation, a body
comprising the whole teaching staff of the univer-
sity, comprising, indeed, the heads of houses
themselves, the college tutors, the professors, with
certain officers and residents complying with
prescribed conditions. Besides several ex officio
members, however, the congregation is required
to elect six heads of houses—a needless deference,
as it seems to us, to the past ; since it might be
fairly presumed that a body so intelligent as the
congregation, and so interested in the success of

the university, could hardly fail to select, if
otherwise qualified, a sufficient number of those
who form a considerable part of its own number.
The declaration of the illegality in future of all
oaths which bind to refusing information to Royal
Commissions, or to opposing all reforms—in uni-
versity phrase " changes"--43 an unmixed good.
We are ready to second any abolition of
oaths which will ever be proposed, but oaths
pleaded in bar of indispensable improvements
—oaths that we have done, or will do, what
is impracticable or forbidden by the imposers of
the oath, cannot be characterised. in language of
censure too strong for the truth. We write de-
liberately in stating that the false swearing at Ox-
ford is unsurpassed in the history of abolished
custom-house oaths, or perhaps in the records of
most trials for perjury; and that, too, in the name
and in the professed interests of religion.
It is proposed with nearly universal approba-
tion to widen the range of studies very consider-
ably, and chiefly, we presume, with regard to
this object, to increase considerably the number
of the professors. The College Tutorial system
is not to be superseded, or in any way interfered
with ; but the professorial system is to be worked
side by side with it, and part of the funds to pro-
vide for the extra professors are to be furnished
by the wealthier colleges under the superinten-
dence of Commissioners appointed by the Govern-
ment. This will also facilitate the carrying out
of another part of the Bill, on the successful ope-
ration of which much of the hoped-for good will,
we think, depend. Private Halls, under the super-
intendence of a Master of Arts, are to be per-
mitted under a license from the Vice Chancellor ;
if the license be made to depend on certain fixed
legal and reasonable conditions, and be not at the
sole discretion of the functionary, this will open
a door for most salutary competition, as it will
not only afford an opportunity for adapting such
halls to whole classes of the community ; but any
man of unusual ability and ardour for the instruc-
tion of youth, like ARNOLD of Rugby, for instance,
could find a
most appropriate sphere for his gene-
rous enthusiasm and talants. We trust that the
conditions spoken of will not be such as to inter-
fere with "unrestricted competition."
And here it is that even on the Bill as it stands
the Government might so easily have hung a fair
compromise, at least of the Dissenting question.
For ourselves, we go the whole length with Sir
Wu, HA MILTO', and vtould make -matriculation,