The Sun.
London, England, 1854-04-03 00:00:00

~1~

~ c%ly~~lf Ly'o

LONDON, MONDAY, APRIL 3, 1854.

It is impossible for any person to peruse calmly
and dispassionately the important debates both
Houses of Parliament, on Friday evening, in
without
arriving at the conclusion that it is to Lord
DEEN, and to Lord ABERDE= solely, that we en-
are
indebted for the war into which, without any
sinister objects of our own to advance, withouta
any " motives of aggrandisement or designs of
ambition," we have been forced. The accession to
office of the "good and excellent" Earl was received
by his Imperial friend as the signal for putting
forward pretensions which had, nearly nine years
previously, been confidentially communicated to
the English Minister, and in no way discouraged
or repudiated by him. The CZAR decidedly thought
every impediment was removed out of his way, and
that the time had arrived for administexingthecoup
de grace to the " Sick Man," and distributing his
assets according to the " gentlemanly understand-
ing" arrived at with the pilot who controlled the
helm of the vessel of the English State. He had
no reason to doubt that he would have received
the sanction, or at least the tacit connivance
of One who had so well earned and was so ex-
ceedingly flattered by his " good opinion."
Russia and England were, according to the un-
derstandilo,9 expressed in the memorandum of
1844, " to concert together the course that
they should Pursue in common." The AUTO-
CRAT clearly and unequivocally expressed his be-
lief that the time had arrived fur acting on that
agreement—that the patient was in a 'moribund
state, and that "the
Government was
deceived if it thought
otherwise." It was im-
possible for any person (however credulous) who
was cognisant of " the memorandum" to mis-
conceive his meaning, and it
duty of Lord A BERDE to Wall the imperative
Prevent the possibility
of mistake. Any doubtful objection, any trivial
opposition, must have led one so
well versed in
tortious" proceedings to consider that all was ,

as ho desired, and that he would find only " a
show of coyness," that his yielding friend was
like a timid maid, who, while whispering
_ ..

" I will ne'er consent, consented."

The overtures would never have been made,
the proceedings never initiated, but for the posi-
tion of Lord ABERDEEN as responsible adviser of
the British SOVEREIGN, as President of the Coun-
cil of Ministers. It was therefore doubly incum-
bent on him to lose no opportunity of undeceiving
the AUTOCRAT, of showing him that he was
" reckoning without his host" if he in any degree
calculated in obtaining the complicity of the
United Kingdom in his nefarious projects of
wholesale plunder. When MENSCUIKOFF went on
his audacious mission, adding by the haughtiness
of his manner to the insolence of his demand, England
should have spoken out. Had it doneso, we should
not have witnessed the crossing of the Pruth or
the occupation of the Danubian Principalities by
the armed cohorts of the Northern Despot. By
our culpable silence and culpable inactivity we
tempted him into the adoption of measures into
which he would not otherwise have entered.
Once taken, his pride and ambition alike forbade
any retracing of his footsteps, nor did he then,
nor possibly does he even at this moment, fully
credit the sincerity of our resistance, and of our
determination to prevent the dissolution of the
Ottoman Empire. How could he do so, when
the Prime Minister of England not only persisted
in the " policy of abstention,"
in hoping against all
hope that the CZAR would still abate his preten-
sions, and accept the satisfaction suggested by the
Vienna Conference 9 How can he yet do so when
that same Prime Minister, in his place in Parlia-
ment, during the discussion on the commencement
of hostilities, expresses a decided opinion that
" the Emperor was always well founded in his ap-
prehensions as to the dissolution of the Turkish
Empire, and, acting on that belief, said nothing in
the Mentorandu,m but what is wise, what is mo-
derate, and what is judicious?" Can the CZAR
think that we will now act with vigour and energy
when such views are unhesitatingly put forward
in Parliament ? Can the people of this country
believe that adequate securities will be taken
against the repetition of these pretensions under
more favourable circumstances, or that Lord ABER-
DEEN should exhibit his own political blindness
by sustaining a Power which he believes on the
verge of dissolution ? Above all, can our new
but faithful allies, with whom we hope to
be ever en accord, believe that the man who,
while acknowledging that " France was treated
in a cavalier manner" by the EMPEROR of
Russia in that very Memorandum, yet de-
el tires that he sees in it nothing but
" v!hat is wise (!), what is moderate (! I), and
what is judicious (II!), and which he looks upon,
and regards with great satisfaction ?" Surely his
sincerity may be more than doubted after such an
exhibition.

Why, we ask, but for the pro-Russian ten-
dencies, and the " peace-at-any-price " determina-
tion of " the pupil of METTERNICH," should we
not long ere this have been prepared with an
armament on the Euxine shores, in advance of
Varna—aye, on the very Danube itself—so as to
cut off the invading army, and compel them to
accept any conditions we might have deemed it
expedient—anything would be justifiable to dic-
tate ? Why might we not have landed the united
troops of France and England on the Crimea,
taken possession of that teeming and fertile soil,
and attacked Sebastopol simultaneously by land
and by water? Its capture would have required
little expenditure of men or money, and would
speedily have been followed by the fall of Odessa, and
the surrounding country, placing the Russians
between two fires and cutting off their retreat
through Moldavia and Bessarabia. What would
have been the effects of a policy so bold and de-
cisive ? How speedily might we have anticipated
the restoration of an honourable and an endur-
ing peace if such measures had been resorted to,
and in their absence might not the sincerity of
those influencing and directing the English Coun-
cils have well been questioned ?
But is it too late yet to do so ? Cannot the
evil in some degree be remedied ? Most un-
doubtedly it can, if even at this moment we are in
earnest. Of course, from our own culpable tardi-
ness and remissness, the cost of men and money
will be much greater. The necessary " carnage
and destruction" will be much greater, but still
resolute action is of the utmost importance,
and may even yet materially diminish the
duration of the war. But we must not
temporise or show any symptoms of vacil-
lation. If the " woman who hesitates is
lost," much more so is the nation. lt is that
hes tation of the " good and excellent peace-loving
pro-Russian ABERDEEN" that has encouraged the
enemy, and paralysed our friends and allies. It
is that hesitation which the voice of public
opinion requires to be abandoned—that public
opinion which addresses the Premier in tilt() lan-
guage of the poet of human nature—

"For the love of all the Gods,
Lets leave the hermit pity with our mother,

And when we have our armour buckled on

The venom'd vengeance, ride upon our swords,
Spur them to ruthful work, rein them from ruth."

This is wholesome and salutary instruction, such
AS modern experience has proved to be consis-
tent with true philanthropy. To bring war to a
speedy conclusion, we must " imitate the action
of the tiger," and
" Disguise fair nature with hard favour'd rage."

But it is not in the Euxine and its vicinity
only that we should wage war both by land and
by water ! Why should we not despatch an
Anglo-French land expedition to the shores of
the Baltic also. CourlAncl and Livonia invite us,
and the troops could ably second the exertions of
the fleets. With undisputed command at sea,
and "CHARLIE NAPIER. " is not the man we deem
him if we have not that very speedily, we might
harass the Russians by landing at different points,
and finally
concentrate all our force by land
and by water on St. Petersburg. France has
something to avenge that would induce her eagerly
tojoin in the onslaught. Then should we—

"conjointly bend
Our sharpest deeds of malice on the town !
By East and West, let France and England mount
Their battering cannons charged to the mouths,
Till their soul-fearing clamours have brawl'd down
The flinty ribs of this contemptuous city."
Then, indeed, should we have the game in our
own hands--then would we arrest the tide of
war, and turn it back on our unscrupulous oppo-
nents. Then would the charm of invincibility be
broken—tho pretext to "infallibility" by the head
of " the orthodox faith" exposed, and " the god
of all the Russians" deprived of the blasphemous
adoration of his misguided serfs.
Acts like these would insure a permanent and
honourable peace. But can we hope for them
under ABERDEEN ? Certainly not. Therefore,
now that that " grim-visaged war" is at hand, it
is time that the peace-loving Minister should ab-
dicate the functions for which he is not only alto-
gether unfitted, but totally disqualified—that he
• should drop
he is no longer capable of controlling.from his palsied grasp the helm which

The orders in Council, authorising reprisals and
embargoes, were on Wednesday decided OR at
Buckingham Palace, and subsequently published
in a second supplement to the Gazette. They are
in the usual form, and may be regarded as neces-
sary supplements to the previous declaration of
war. There is, however, an addition thereto,
affording certain indulgences to those who may
henceforth be termed the enemy—an addition
decisive as to the good intentions of the Allied
Powers (for France has issued a similar no-
tice), who, as we stated on Wednesday,
exhibit " a laudable anxiety to free warfare of one
of its many horrors." Six weeks' time, until the
10th of May, is allowed to Russian merchant ves-
sels, in any port or place in her MAJESTY'S do-
minions, for loading their cargoes and departing
therefrom ; and such vessels will be allowed " to
continue their voyage, if, on examination of their
papers, it shall appear that their cargoes were
taken on board before the expiration of the above
term." Certain cases are, however, noticed
which will not be allowed these privileges.
If the owners or commanders of these ships
should be so oblivious of their mercantile
character as to convey officers iu the military or

naval service of the enemy, or any articles pro-
hibited or contraband of war, or any despatch of
or to the Russian Government, they will justly
forfeit every claim to the kind consideration of
this country, and their ships and cargoes will be
liable to confiscation as lawful prizes. It is also
provided that any Russian merchant vessel which,
prior to the date of that order—the 29th
instant—should have sailed from any foreign
pot t, bound for any port or place within
her MAJESTY'S dominions, shall be permitted to
enter into such port, or place, to discharge her
cargo, and afterwards forthwith to depart without
molestation, and to continue her voyage to any
port not blockaded.

This, to a certain extent, is as it should
be. It is a graceful tribute to the genius
of commerce. The Maritime Powers, forced
into hostilities which they had made every
possible sacrifice to avert, do not wage war on
peaceful merchants. Although they would be
fully justified in seizing enemy's property wherever
it may be found, and thus reducing the resources
that might be brought into operation against them,
the confidence of those engaged in a peaceful mission
is still respected, and they are permitted to depart,
not merely seathless, but with their object fully
accomplished. But it certainly seems that the
time conceded is more than that which could
reasonably have been required. For vessels that
have already been for some time lying in our
ports and making preparations for their departure,
six weeks, or even three weeks, appears more
than could be wanting for any legitimate purpose
—more than could have been anticipated, and
more than we believe was ever previously granted
on a similar occasion. It must be borne in mind
that hostilities have not been resorted to in con-
sequence of a sudden or unexpected dispute. We
have looked for a declaration of war day by day
for the last six months, and censured, the delays
that were sanctioned by the Government. War
has not, therefore, burst unexpectedly, like a
thunderstorm, over our heads. The aspect of the
political horizon was sufficiently ominous to warn
all parties within its range of the necessity of
setting their houses in order, and entering into
no engagements which it would take even a fort-
night to wind up. Besides, we must recollect
that in this affair we are giving these great ad-
vantages where we cannot hope for anything like
an equivalent from the adversary. Notwithstand-
ing all these matters, however, we trust that the
laudable precedent will be henceforward, to some
extent, recognised, and that there will be no
seizure of the persons or property of innocent
travellers or traders, without affording ample time
and opportunity for the withdrawal of either, or
both, from the hostile nation.

Save as to the time allowed, there can be
no difference of opinion as to the propriety
of the course adopted by the Governments
of England and. France. But then auother,
and a more difficult question arises, as to the
exemption of neutrals trading in- the produce
of the country with which we are at war, and
to a certain extent, at least, supplying the "sinews
of war" to the enemy. It will be said on the
one side that the only way in which we can hcpe
to bring Russia to reason, is by the crippling or
total destruction of her trade and commerce. A
matter which, with our maritime superiority, may
easily be effected. We may confine her vessels
within their ports and prevent the conveyance by
sea of any of her products. How very damaging
this would prove to the parties concerned, howvery
speedily it would open their eyes to the iniquitous
conduct of the AUTOCRAT, may easily be imagined.
The Russians of all classes, serfs as well as nobles,
would behold in the strongest light the evils of
despotism, and be disposed to bring the conflict
to a speedy conclusion, by making the required
submission, and giving ample guarantees for their
future good behaviour. Nay, more, it would
probably be productive of great reforms, and
the iutroduction of Constitutional Government,
when they saw the intolerable evils resulting,
from the indomitable pride and grasping cu-
pidity of one intoxicated by the possession
of arbitrary and irresponsible power. We can
only hope to terminate the untoward state of
affairs now existing, by making these evils as pain-
fully perceptible as practicable. We must not
wage a "rose-water war." The hostilities forced
upon us should bring with them their own fear-
ful consequences to those with whom we are
engaged. It would be but a very doubtful kind-
ness to them, as well as very questionable policy
on our own part, to afford the means of pro-
tracting the contest, and of offering up their
myriads of serfs as food for gunpowder. It
is not by the destruction of men so much as by
cutting off the supplies that we can hope to bring
the AUTOCRAT to reason. He may find new con-
scripts, men pressed into the ranks of their op-
pressors, and compelled to fight, under a flag they
loathe, in a cause they abhor. -No ; the destruc-
tion of commerce is better than the destruction of
life, even if those lives only belonged to our ad-
versaries, and that none of our own gallant de-
fenders were involved in similar danger.
"Fleets and armies are," as ADAM SMITH tells us,
"maintained not with gold and silver, but with con-
sumable goods. The nation which, from the annual
produce of its domestic industry, from the annual
revenue arising out of its lands, labour, and con-
sumable stock, has wherewithal to purJhase those
consumable goods in distant countries, can main-
tain foreign wars there." We are, by sanctioning
the trade of Russia with neutrals, giving it the
means of carrying on the war, of supporting the
invading army that has already crossed the Da-
nube, and which, so far as we can judge, is striving
for the attainment of the great object of Mus-
covite ambition—the occupation of Stamboul.
Is that prudent or judicious ? Is it fair towards
either the Ottoman Empire or towards our own
troops who are engaged on their side ? No bene-
fits to be obtained by our own merchants can
compensate for the evils that must follow such a
milk-and-water proceeding.
Besides, although the nation has unquestion-
ably decided against the principle of protection
for our own fellow-subjects, it is equally opposed
to bestowing exclusive advantages upon strangers
which are denied to those having stronger claims.
If we allow trade at all, our own merchants should
have their share of its profits. But it is forbidden
—and very properly forbidden—to them, and
therefore it should not be allowed to strangers.
Such are a few of the many arguments that
have been advanced against the propriety of pass-
ing, free, enemies' goods in neutral vessels. That
they are worthy of calm and. attentive consideration
will at once be manifest, and however laudable
the intention of the Government, we should not
suffer ourselves to be led astray by impulse, or to
act on a feeling which cannot bear the test of
reason or reflection. We do not, however,
wish ourselves to be understood as deciding the
question. There are many powerful arguments
which have been and may be adduced in favour of
respecting the rights of neutrals, which should be
maturely and carefully examined before a final
judgment
is arrived at. We place the most
important
problem of the day before the public,
trusting that
some (Epirus may be found capable
of discovering a satisfactory solution thereto.

To the greater part by faura,mp o ably, of ,our
been educated there ;
r b
orfeatdheersg,euoexrfaoirdpuibslibeuthatvhee e for a splendid
aristocratic and high-church mystery, But few
they care not to read about an institution with
which they have no direct connection ; they know
of it but from common report, and from that they
chiefly hear of the youthful extravagance of the
scions of our aristocracy, of its tractarians jour-
neying to Rome or gone thither, and of its rigid
exclusion of everything like heterodoxy or non-
conformity from the benefits of the education it
gives. They also know that it claims to be, par
excellence, a national university. Of rival anti-
quity with a great municipal corporation, which
has also lately been rudely made to bare its hoar
head before a commission but of yesterday's ap-
pointment, it was long presumed to be too vene-
rable to be submitted to such vulgar interroga-
Lions. But the age of steam, railroads, and
f Li t phs biis ) do.nrivo 11 ,re
phrenologists of every living specimen of the
bump of veneration, Windermere has been invaded

in spite of WORDSWORTH ; and the London Cor-
poration and Oxford itself, the last great monu-
ments of mediaeval civic and university institu-
tions, must be stripped of their ivy, and assimi-
lated to the rest of the modern social fabric. Long
was the dignified resistance to the utilitarian; and
we could almost have wished that the Heads of
Houses had awaited in their places the attack of
the modern Gaul; as Rome's ancients are said
to have awaited, with statue-like repose, the
ruffians of the host which had already stormed
the city, but the near approach of the Reformers
seemed too much for Hebdomadal nerves, and
silent resistance descended to a counter proposal
and a convocation coup d'etat.
It is gratifying, however, to be able to inform
the uninitiated reader, that the RUSSELL-GLAD-
STONE Oxford Reform Bill is rather a resurrection
of old Oxford than a fatal mutilation of the Uni-
versity. Till about the times of the Reform Bill
hardly any one, certainly not many of Oxford's
most learned sons, knew anything about its real
history. The demands of Dissenters at that time
to share the education of a national institution
led, as much as anything, to careful investigation,
and the Edinburgh Review had unquestionably the
honour of doing more than perhaps all besides to
force the truth upon the minds of those specially
concerned, and to call more general attention to
the true state of the question. With all his won-
derful argumentative acuteness, his vast learning,
and his habits of unwearied research, the well-
known writer of these articles placed the whole
subject in the light of day, and made the know-
ledge of but very few the property of all. He
showed, beyond all controversy, that Oxford as it
is, is not Oxford as it was, nor Oxford as it might
be, with infinite advantage, too, to education and
the nation.

At its commencement, and till the time of the
Reformation, Oxford was a University ; now, and
nearly since that time, it has been a collection of
private school corporations, and the university has
been reduced to a cipher. As a university, it
consisted iu early times of a large body of recog-
nised public teachers, whose classes were open to
all, and or the students. For a very long time,
all graduates on taking their degrees engaged by
so doing to lecture publicly for a certain time in
the University ; hence there was ample instruction
for any number of students. At first it was gra-
tuitous, but small fees were subsequently allowed.
Partly to enable poor students to attend the lec-
tures, and partly to watch over their morals,
houses superintended by a graduate, and frequently
endowed more or less, were opened and licensed ;
nor could the license be refused to reasonable qua-
lifications. Hence the rise of colleges which were
charitable institutions to aid poor students. With
the same object graduates of eminence were sa-
laried as lecturers, to save the students the ex-
pense of the fees ; these were the professors. For
a long time Congregation consisted of all the gra-
duates engaged in teaching in the university, and
it was their right to originate all measures and
propose them to Convocation, which comprised all
the non-resident graduates also. As the Heads of
Houses, such as have been mentioned above, gained
influence, they and the college deans were also
included in the Congregation. It would be
uninteresting to the general reader to peruse
the details ; but the results were these—
that salaried graduates termed professors,
whose lectures were public, became, by the
time of LAUD, the chief teachers in the University ;
that till the Reformation the Halls, which were
free, counted by hundreds, and the students by
thousands ; but that afterwards the Colleges con-
trived to get all the tuition to themselves, and the
College fellows to become the sole tutors, while
the professors became a nullity. These results
were mainly brought about first by LAUD'S estab-
lishing the famous Hebdomadal, a weekly board,
composed of the Heads of Houses, persons of no
other qualifications than that of being more easily
manageable by LAUD himself ; and next by the
Earl of LEICESTER, the Vice-Chancellor in 1750,
having obtained for himself and his successors the
sole power to license halls or private houses, a
power which they have used ever since to suppress
all competition with the Colleges. Hence profes-
sors, as efficient public or University teachers,
have been reduced almost to a form, and halls, in-
dependent of the Colleges, which as parts of the
University, could, with the aid of professors, be-
come stimulating rivals to the Colleges, have
ceased to exist. The present halls belong to the
Colleges. So far, therefore, as the bill now before
Parliament gives legislative power to the resident
teachers, increases the number and importance of
professors, whose lectures are open on equal terms
to all, and facilitates the opening of private houses,
it does but restore Oxford from its present condi-
tion of an aggregation of close Colleges to its for-
mer one of a national University.