The Sun.
London, England, 1822-06-29 00:00:00

duct of those who acted under him, but we
suspect he would hardly be sorry to have it proved
that his Deputy was the author of the treatment'
of Borthwick, Mr. Abercromby will follow up
the proceeding of last night with a motion for
inquiry, and we shall then see what part Mi-
nisters are prepared to take. If they find ,an
unwillingness on the part of the English Members
to implicate themselves with these disgraceful
proceedings,they will no doubt yield with as good
a grace as they can to the demands ofjustice.—The
late horrible transactions in the East were alluded
to byAlr. W.Smith, who asked Lord Londonderry
whether any official accounts had been received
from our Ambassador at Constantinople respect-
ing them. The feeling which actuates our Go-
vernment may be pretty well discovered in his
Lordship's answer. " Great barbarities had
been committed by both parties, and the Greeks
had been guilty of some cruelties, which however
he would not say justified the recent events at.
Constantinople." Would not say justified ! Sucb
is the nonchalance with which his Lordship
speaks of the butchery of a whole population,
and the deliberate murder of innocent men by
the Government itself for which we are now
exerting ourselves, after a promise too bad been
given by our Ambassador that their lives should
be spared ! Sir James Mackintosh' put some
further questions on the subject, with a view
" to bring the subject home to the honour and
feeling of the British nation."—No satisfactory
answer, however, was obtained from him.

[NEW TIMES:I
We cannot but seize the earliest opportunity
of recalling to the attention of our Readers the
temperate, manly, and convincing reply of Mr.
Stuart Wortley to those wholesale attacks which
it has of late been the fashion to make against
the conduct of Parliament. Successive Parlia-
ments have been involved in one common censure,
because they have given support to successive
and differing Ministers—as Ministers. That Mr.
Pitt should have a majority, Mr. Addington a
majority, and Mr. Fox a majority, has been
at once assumed as proof that the House is ut-
terly prostitute and given over to corruption ; in
Mort, that it is ready to follow any leader, who,
in trite language, has the distribution of the
loaves and fishes. Few men are better fitted by
circumstances to repel this charge than Mr.
Stuart Wortley, and no man could have replied
to it more ably or more completely than he did.
Himself a Member of the successive Assemblies
which had been thus condemned, and implicated as
he therefore is in all the charges which have
been brought against those Assemblies, ' he is
at the same time placed far above the li
reach of any despicable or corrupt motives
which are so liberally imputed to men who dis-
dain them, and his rebutment of the charge was
one of the most triumphant that ever re-echoed
through the walls of St. Stephen's.—Not to ad-
vert to the facts and dates adduced by Mr.
Wortley, the principle be avowed, and upon
which he vindicated his conduct as a Member of
former Parliaments, was this :—That the appoint-
client of Ministers being vested absolutely_in the
Crown, it was the duty of Parliament-to- iecoo.-
nize and support whatever Administration the
Kiugmight in the exercise of his just prerogative ap-
point, until, by their notorious misconduct or inca-
pacity, a full and complete ground was given for
withdrawing the confidence of the House, and
thus rendering it necessary that the Sovereign
should make a new choice. How is this asser-
tion of principle encountered ? It is said to be
" a dangerous doctrine !"—lt is contended that
the House of Commons, possessing the power to
have any Minister it might choose, ought always
to exercise that power—that it ought not to wait
until forced by Ministerial misconduct to inter-
fere, but that it should prevent such misconduct
by a wise and worthy choice in the first instance.