The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-20 00:00:00

-'4l;ls--L
/

.SAllt

LONDON, MONDAY, MARCH 20, 1854.

England has reason—on a closer scrutiny and
on a calmer consideration of past occurrences,
England has reason to be satisfied with several of
the most distinguished among her present Ad-
ministrators. She has reason to be satisfied with
her Foreign Secretary. She has reason, to
some extent, at least, to be satisfied with the
Noble Lord the representative of her metropolis
and the Leader of the House of Commons. Ex-
tending the popular regard from the more respon-
sible Ministers of the CROWN to the more deli-
cately-situated agents of the national diplomacy,
the country has, moreover, reason to feel emi-
nently satisfied with the course pursued under cir-
cumstances of vital interest and of singu-
larly critical importance by her Britannic
MAJESTY'S Ambassador at the Court of
St. Petersburg. Sir HAMILTON SEYMOUR is proved
on reliable evidence, indeed we might say upon
evidence altogether incontrovertible, to have acted
with most commendable discretion, in a situation
of exceeding difficulty. The Earl of CLARENDON
is shown to have justified in several instances at
the Foreign-office the confidence reposed in his
capacity and in his patriotism by all those who
had dispassionately estimated the merits of his
Irish administration. Above all, and beyond all,
the documentary evidence which has at length
satisfactorily revealed these truths in regard to
the Ambassador and the Secretary of State has
demonstrated, clearly and conclusively demon-
strated, in reference to the Noble Lord the
Leader of the House of Commons—an amount
of decision, of sagacity, and of diplomatic tact,
such as are in every way worthy of his high and
historic reputation.
Let the truth be spoken. Fiat justitia, as the
adage tells us, no matter what the consequences.
Hitherto the public have been kept very much in
the dark as to the course pursued in the corres-
pondence (relating to Turkey) between the English
and the Russian Governments. The secrecy main-
tained by Ministers in this respect, although strictly
in accordance with the customary diplomatic eti-
quette, we cannot but still regard as--to say the
least of it—injudicious. Injudicious —nationally :
because tending necessarily to lead into error the
judgments of the population. Injudicious—per-
sonally : because in this very way militating
against their own Ministerial character. If ever
we had questioned the wisdom of OILT rulers iu thus
casting a veil of mystery over their proceedings,
the incident which has now commanded the atten-
tion of Europe would have been sufficient in itself
to satisfy our mind of the extraordinary folly of
allowing acts that might creditably meet the light
of day at the instant of their performance to be
altogether overlooked ; or, worse than that, to be
only vaguely guessed at ; or, worst of all, to be
mistaken and misinterpreted, employed as
a weapon of assault, instead of as a means of
defence, as the source of sarcastic depreciation,
instead of as the materials of a triumphant and
decisive vindication.

It has been so with regard to the present Cabi-
net, or, at any rate, with reference to two of the
moat conspicuously Placed members of the ccai.