The Sun.
London, England, 1854-08-02 00:00:00

PARLIAMENTARY - SUBSER?IENOY-•
COll SERPA TIT' E POLICY.

We need hardly refer to the frequent exhibi-
tions of Mr. Layard, wherein he disported himself
in the character of the " Craner," immortalised
by Byron, who in the hunting field kept continually
look;ng over a fence, which he would neither take
himself nor let any one else.
The " cross" connected with the meeting at
Lord John Russell's was too self-evident to re-
quire any comment at our hands; but more notice
is required with respect to the latest failure—
namely, that of Procuring a Parliamentary decision
upon the subject of an autumnal session.
Upon that occasion various persons on the Radi-
cal side of the house were understood to be anxious
to make the proposition ; but one after another
they shrunk from doing so, and the matter was
left in the hands of Lord Dudley Stuart, and ulti-
mately it fell to the ground.
With Lord Dudley we have no fault to find.
Ho is an honourable, straightforward gentleman,
though not popular in the house as a speaker; and
we are satisfied that he acted with perfect sincerity
in the whole matter. Nevertheless it was a coup
manque from the distrust excited by the very open
manoeuvres of other and more active partisans.
If the Advertiser is anxious to know who, under
a pretence of great zeal for the cause, has been the
great support of Ministers throughout the entire
session we shall have no objection to enlighten
him ; but at present we shall content ourselves
with stating that there are two members for Mary-
lebone.

To conclude these observations, which have been
in a degree forced upon us,
we may say that the
great fault which has been committed on the part
of the Conservatives for the last few months has
been the want of a distinct declaration of policy,
and an apparent want of unity of action, which
induces those who do not see beyond the surface
to infer a separation of sentiment. This opinion
we can state most positively is a great error ; but
it must not be denied that facts, when known
a d to but few, do not produce their proper impres-
sion. The facts which positively bear upon pub-
-2 lic events are the conclusions which are drawn
by the people, who, after all, constitute the great
cuurt of appeal ; and nothing can be more mischie-
vous than allowing them to be deceived as to the
real condition of things.
steor vbaet iavlei 0
w e
d policy,to exist,
is to which n
be
summed o m la.
tu apkTienh oeauCgrohentry
few words. It consists in a determi-
i eso f ProtestantismEngland,
edYenaoguanicedligt
innastelpoanratoblsyucpopnonretettehde
with
s ttiht
the liberties
tliiobne ar
tl
la
Durham letter, but
faril eeudotem eapllpoeveeer tthhee wßoorlmda, soni spt 0
wc oenr
fs
up
li
lr;
action. To this must be
sboy
feebly Lord Johnme R
t byuhsisuelll i
nin his
as exemplified in measures de-
added a genuine interest in the wellbeing of the
the working classes,
signed to improve their social condition, in contra-
distinction to those misleaders, 'who tell them that
the ballot or extension of the suffrage is of more
importance than moral improvement and propor-
tionate
the
r, politicalw e
bpe rl
ii
ev
vi lee ge
Conservativess .
the centralising principle, lately exemplified by
Lord Palmerston in his Police Bill, has been car-
ried far enough, if not too far, and that its exten-
sion would be injurious to the real liberties of the
people.
To
41the foreign policy which would render the in-
terests of England subservient to the preservation
of Russian or Austria,n despotism, the Conservative
party have proved their opposition more than once
during the continuance of the present complications,
and nothing has prevented their taking more active
steps upon this subject except the anxiety—per-
haps carried too far—of not opposing the Govern-
ment during
war in any way which malevolence
itself could construe into faction.
We believe these to be the principles of the Con-
servative party; we are sure the enunciation will
find an echo in the hearts of the people of England,
who will sooner or later appreciate their true
friends, and shake off the delusion which has bound
them to those who, upon false pretences, have re-
duced the country to its present unsatisfactorY po-
litical condition at home, and its position of utter
• --
degradation in the eyes of foreign nations.-/Iforn
u
i, i g Herald.
---
20i
.R. 4 IL IVA I' TRAFFIC BET URNS.

LONDON, DP.IGHTON, AND SOUTH COAST RAILWAY.- .
Tra,flie return for the week ending July 29,
1854
Corresponding week last year 20,027 1 2
Total of the half-Sear to this date, 1851
65,191 14 8
Total of the half }ear to this data, 1533
C 3,367 6 11

AND SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY.—iTaffiC re-
turnoi c.othue,
week ending July 2':), 1851 ....,,£S„IG 11 8
coixespouding, week last year ..................... 4,(327 12 7
GLAfs

Increase in 1351

.............. £7BB 19 1

ME LEEDS NORTHERN RAILWAT.---The Committee of
the House of Lords have thrown out the bill for the in-
frinaiom the rights of the preference shareholders of the
preference shareholders of the Leeds Northern Railway
Company.
INSTALLATION. - On Thursday Lord Panmure was in•
stalled into the office of Provincial Grand Master, to
which he was appointed by the Grand Lodge of Boot'
laud on the demise of his lordship's father.

The observations which we felt it our duty to
make on Friday last have excited more attention
than is generally conceded to the remarks of jour.
nalists at this busy period of the session. We are
well pleased that it should be so ; but the manner
in which these remarks have been made use of ren-
der it necessary to return to the subject, as we
are resolved that there "shall be no mistake" with
regard to the end and object of observations which
have called forth a more than ordinary portion of
comment. Our readers will remember that we at.
tributed the great mass of the undeniable evils of
which we complained entirely to the system of
" Parliamentary subserviency," which allowed a
Coalition to carry onasystr,mofpfoaselesslsepr, object-
less, etencject
less, and consequently and produced an
Opposition
fly powerless."pur
These state-
ments of ours have been used by different persona
for different purposes.
It will be remembered that some days since, in
commenting up on the felevleinlgesaboefdtshteropurgels;
upon
regard to the Coalition,
which,
inclined to
ordinary
oppositionnai.y
circumstances,evinced
bywould journals
be
support the Ministry. Amongst these we pointed
out the Daily News, the Morning Advertiser,
and Punch, while we laid but little stress
upon the habitual supporters or opponents of the
Government.
Referring to this Mr. Urquhart, in
a recent letter, has remarked that the blame which
we felt it our duty to attribute to the Opposition
side of the House ought to remove us into the
category of neutrals. We cannot assent to this.
Our opposition to Lord Aberdeen's Ministry is
founded upon the total want of principle which the
Coalition have manifested—a want of principle
which is the result of an unnatural aggregation of
materials, and which, from the strange fusion of an.
tagonisms of which it is compounded (each destroy.
ing the other, and rendering the whole worthless
and useless, stagnant and foetid), deserves well the
dirtiest title which in political parlance can be ap-
plied to any conceivable entity amongst parties at
the present crisis. We are not neutrals, and we
are the opponents of those who have neutralised
themselves ; we, therefore, cannot accept the ad-
vantage which Mr. Urquhart would assign to us.
Our opposition to Lord Aberdeen arises from an
imperative sense of duty, and we must be hostile
to him and his adherents.
On the other hand, the Morning Advertiser, in
an article published yesterday, and which is in
many respects highly complimentary, wishes to in-
terpret our remarks as bearing exclusively against
the Conservative part of the Opposition.
The particular portion of Parliamentary history
upon !which we grounded our remarks was the
debate which arose upon the vote of credit for
3,000,0001. ; and, speaking of the Conservative
party, we said that a portion of them refused to sup-
port Lord Dudley Stuart upon the plea of his beings
Radical, and that portion must bear as they may
the censure which they have deserved. Another
part of the Conservative opposition we stated feared
to censure the Government directly, and therefore
they made a move on their own account to restrain
the granting of a practical despotism to the Minis-
try for the next six months. This, we think; is
much to be lamented, but, as being grounded upon
what we consider an error in judgment, it is not
open to the same unmitigated disapproval which
we have thought it necessary to apportion to the
first departure from duty.
With regard to the opinion of the Conservative
party with reference to the mode of—not—carry-
ing on the war, no mistake can possibly exist ; but
we consider that it would most certainly have been
desirable that a record of that opinion should have
been made, whether they divided in a minority or
otherwise. Their votes would have been appre-
ciated hereafter.
To return, however, to those who would not vote
with Lord Dudley Stuart because he was a Radi-
cal, we repeat that no excuse can be made, for it
was a desertion of duty ' • but when we look at the
modified course pursued by some of the members of
the Opposition, a palliation in degree may be easily
found for theiroffence. Now, to this part of the sub.
ject we wish more particularly to call the attention
of the Morning Advertiser, which perhaps will be
surprised to learn that during the entire session the
Radical portion of the opposition has upon any
question which bore upon the existence of the
Ministry systematically deserted the Conserva-
tives.