The Sun.
London, England, 1853-12-17 00:00:00

will vindicate, if necessary, against his criticism ; but
they have no reason to fear that they will have to defend
it against his hostility.

(Prom the Morning Post. )
It cannot but be a matter of deep regret that a states-
man who so thoroughly and deservedly enjoys the con-
fidence of the nation, as Lord Palmerston, should feel it
to be his imperative duty to resign office at a time when
the counsels of his experience, were they attended to,
would prove invaluable, and when his energy and abili-
ties might so materially serve his country.
During his short but successful administration of the
Home-office, as during the series of years through which
he directed, with such signal advantage, the Foreign
Affairs of England, Lord Palmerston has shown that he
understands as well the interests of the nation in its do-
mestic concerns as he does its relations with other States ;
and he has proved how useful a career may be pursued,
and how noble a fame may be won, by the patriotic po-
litician, if lie carry out the dictates of high principle
with uncompromising honesty.
That Lord Palmerston will be able fully to vindicate
the course which he has pursued, we are well assured.
It certainly met us with not a little surprise that a con-
temporary should, yesterday morning, suddenly an-
nounce the resignation of the Home Secretary before
his vacation of office could be completed by her Majesty's
acceptance of his tender of the seals. Yvt this an-
nouncement, even though a flagrant breach of etiquette,
was a matter comparatively trifling when com-
pared with the amazing statement by which it was ac-
companied—a false statement, maliciously put forth, as
it appears to us, solely for the purpose of prejudicing the
public mind against Lord Palmerston, by misrepresent-
ing alike his motives and his actions.
When the Times states and re-states, through two
long columns, and with every enversion of phrase, that
" Lord Palmerston is not a Parliamentary reformer,"
that " the opinion he entertains on the question of
Parliamentary reform is at variance with that of a
majority of the intelligent classes of Englishmen," that
"he quits the public service because he cannot induce
himself to support even a moderate scheme of constitu-
tional zeform ;" and, lastly, that " Lord Palmerston is
against all Reform, and resigns his place because he will
not form part of? a reforming Ministry." When the
Times states this, it asserts what is entirely untrue.
On the contrary, we have good reason to believe that
Lord Palmerston has been ready to agree to a very
considerable measure of Reforin, though he did not
choose to be a party to proposing to Parliament measures
of change which, in his opinion, went beyond the neces-
sities of the time, and which he thought inexpedientt.
Our contemporary, whose' statement is at once a tis-
sue of misrepresentation, and a gross violation of that
which has hitherto, according to the principle and prac-
tice of the English Constitution, been held sacred—viz.,
the secrecy of Cabinet Councils, proceeds to inform us
that "It seems inexplicable that having worked step
by step with the committee of the Cabinet appointed to
prepare the bill" (and here let us ask, by what violation
of faith is the public informed, through the Times, of
the appointment of Cabinet committees, and of what has
passed or is pretended to have passed in them ?) "it
should only have been at the conclusion of their labour
that he made known his fundamental objection to any
scheme of reform." This statement is again quite false.
We affirm with confidence that it is untrue that Lord
Palmerston's objections were not stated plainly and dis-
tinctly from the first moment when the measures to
which they related were proposed and discus#ed.
There is no doubt but that the country will attach to
Lord Palmerston's resignation all the importance which
the Times claims for it ; but it is a shameful and
a base course which our contemporary, by whomsoever
or whatsoever instigated, pursues, when he states to, and
emphatically impresses on, his readers, that which is
entirely false, in order to misrepresent the motives
of Lord Palmerston, in order to damage his reputa-
tion, and do prejudice to his credit, especially when
it is considered that a period of, perhaps, some weeks
must elapse before Lord Palmerston will have an oppor-
tunity of publicly justifying his conduct to the country. It
is a course of false play which, though it might have been
expected from the hands of the "foreign conspirators"
who again and again contrived such artful and despicable
intrigues against "the Minister of England," is totally
unworthy of any Englishman.
We may be sure that nothing but a strong and insupe-
rable objection on principle to the conduct of affairs could
have induced Lord Palmerston to resign the seals of office
at a time when, if ever the Statesmen of England
should give voice and action to the prescriptions of
public opinion ; and by maintaining the obligations of
international good faith, should be as one man in their
determination to arrest the dangers which menace the
peace of Europe. Unfortunately it has been at this
very time that Lord Palmerston has found it necessary
to resign; in order not to be accessory to a mischief
which his sagacity showed to be inseparable from the
designs in which his colleagues persisted.
The question between Lord Palmerston, his late col-
leagues, and the country, is one which can only be fully
and fairly judged on that statement which will at no
distant date be laid before the only authority competent
to the task—the constitutional tribunal of Parliament.