The Sun.
London, England, 1854-01-03 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR OF THE AIORYING HERALD.

London, Dec. 29, 1853.
SlR,—The conduct of the press is very praise-
worthy in exposing those undue influences by which
our foreign and domestic policy is controlled.
Facts, however, have not been adduced to an
amount or with a precision sufficient to justify the
prevalent opinion. Let me do a little to supply
this deficiency.

1. The statement that his Royal Highness Prince
Albert is invariably and on all occasions present
when the Queen receives her Ministers, is literally
true. His Royal Highness is not at such times a
silent listener, but takes an active, often a leading,
part in the deliberations. This practice is not of
recent origin, but was first permitted and encour-
aged by ,Sir Robert Peel. Lord Melbourne never
suffered it, and by his prohibition incurred the
lasting, though ineffectual, displeasure of the
Prince.

2. The same illustrious personage corresponds
largely with British Ministers employed at foreign
courts—his letters being, of course, private, and
their contents unknown to the Foreign Secretary
for the time being. Several diplomatists have re-
ceived such letters, being, in fact, private instruc-
tions not conveyed through the Foreign Office.
Where the Court and the Minister notoriously
differ in opinion, as in the case of Lord Palmerston,
it is not difficult to see what must be the result of
this unconstitutional practice. One diplomatist
who was commanded to enter into a correspon-
dence of this kind, declined—or, rather, silently
forbore to obey the order, on the express ground
of its unconstitutionality.
3. I believe (but it is only belief) that, besides
the correspondence here alluded to, there exists a
good deal of direct, and, necessarily, secret com-
munication between the English and certain Conti-
nental Courts. It is matter of notoriety that Louis
Napoleon entered the presidential office a warm
friend to England, and resolved, at all costs, to
stand well with us; that his'friendship was at one
period without visible external cause changed- into
suspicion-and menace of hostility, and that the rea-
son ascribed for this change among well-informed
persons was the accident of certain important mis-
sives not reaching the hands for which they were
destined. Here, however, I only repeat the popular
rumour, corroborated by some indirect proofs, but
for which I do not absolutely vouch.
4. The degrading restriction imposed upon Lord
Palmerston during his tenure of tho Foreign-office
is well known. He was not permitted to send off a
single despatch of any moment which had not pre-
viously received the sanction of the Court—that is,
of the Prince Consort. True, this sanction could
not be withheld where the Minister was firm in his
decision and backed by public opinion ; but the
delay thus caused operated injuriously to the suc-
cess of negotiations in more than one instance, and
Lord Palmerston, unable to explain to Parliament
the reason of this delay, endured the blame for
which others were in reality responsible.
I am little disposed to join in a popular outcry
against regal or quasi-regal authority. But no man,
be his political opinions what they may, can desire
to see that power which the constitution has vested
in Ministers, answerable to the people for their
actions, exercised by a secret, an irresponsible and
an inexorable influence. The interests of the
Crown must be defended, even, if need be, against
those who stand nearest to it. L3t Prince Albert
have full credit for the Exhibition—for his services
to art—and for his exertions to benefit the working
class ; but it is too much that one man, and he not
an Englishman by birth, should be at once Foreign
Secretary, Commander in Chief, and Prime
Minister, under all administrations.—l remain
your obedient servant, M. P.