The Sun.
London, England, 1853-07-08 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY, JULY 8, 1853.

It is greatly to be regretted that the Marquis
of CLANRICARDE should have suffered himself to
be persuaded into the withdrawal of the motion of
which he had given notice in the House of Lords,
while the Honourable and Learned Gentleman,
the member for Aylesbury was so unceremoniously
dealt with in the House of Commons by the un-
authorised postponement from this day—the time
originally fixed by the Government for the dis-
cussion of the unjustifiable and unprovoked ag-
gression of the EMPEROR of Russia on the Danu-
bian Provinces—until Monday next. It is im-
possible to conceive a subject of deeper interest or
more vital importance at the present mo-
ment than that referred to in the notices of
the Noble Marquis and the Honourable Gen-
tleman. The welfare, nay, more, the ho-
nour of the British nation is at stake, and
Parliament and the country are entitled to
the fullest information, the most unreserved dis-
closures, on the topic. They have a right to
know whether there are those divisions and dis-
sensions in the Cabinet of which rumours have
been so widely circulated and so generally cre-
dited ? Whether there are indeed to be found
persons holding exalted positions in her MAJESTY'S
Government, and high in the confidence of their
Sovereign, who advocate a feeble and vacillating
policy—which would indeed truly subject us to
the reproaches of our Continental brethren, and
warrant the title " PERFIDIOUS ALBION," by
which we have been so frequently, so un-
justly, and so erroneously designated ; and I
which would be as much opposed to the best
interests of the nation as it would be derogatory
to the reputation of its statesmen. On such a
point concealment is a crime, and all should be
open and above-board. It is no time for the ex-
hibition of courtesy, or the bandying of compli-
ments. If unfortunately the Ministerial leader
of the representative branch of the Legislature be
so grievously indisposed as to be unable to attend
in his place, and to give the necessary explana-
tions, surely he has colleagues competent to give
expression to the views and feelings of the Cabinet,
Or to detail the nature of the unfortunate differ-
ences that may have arisen in the composite concern.
Where is the " English" Minister ? Where is
Viscount PALMERSTON ? Who could be found
better qualified to vindicate the policy of a
united and vigorous Government, or with greater
tact to slur over its dissensions, or to excuse in-
convenient or mischievous revelations, than the
Noble Lord ? To whom would the House of
Commons yield a more attentive hearing than to
a man whose great experience in such matters
confers additional authority on all his opinions,
and whose antecedents afford the strongest possible
guarantee that he would adopt a bold and energetic
course on such an occasion as the present ? The
mere fact that Lord PALMERSTON was not put for-
ward, would be proof positive that there was a
divided Cabinet which must speedily fall asunder
from its internal defects.
But even, if Lord PALMERSTON were not forth-
coming, Where was the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer? The Right Hon. Gentleman has given
ample proof of his ability and influence—of his
power of persuading the House to adopt the plau-
sible views he may be pleased to put forward—
and his influence in inducing Hon. G tl
vote black white at his en emen to
dictation. Why then,
if there was any objection to allowing Lord
PALMERSTON to appear as the exponent of the
foreign policy of tho Government, lest the
fact of his holding a prominent position in the
Joint-Stock Administration might be displeasing
to the absolutists whom he had offended by his
bold and manly conduct on all previous occasions
when he held the seals of office—why, we ask,
was Mr. GLADSTONE passed over ? He would not
have been an inefficient representative of the
Government: and might have detailed the results