The Sun.
London, England, 1836-02-22 00:00:00

to represent us to the whole world as regardless
of the faith of treaties ? Are we reduced
low, that we must first passively submit to the
compulsory violation of our honour, and then volun-
tarily deny ourselves the right of complaint ? But the
prompt and spirited manner in which the Noble
Foreign Secretary replied to the remonstrances of the
Carlist Bishop of LEON, is a proof, if any were want-
ing, that the Noble Lord would not tamely allow him-
self to be bearded by the Imperial Court, for preferring
the discharge of his duty to his country, to a strict ob-
servance of diplomatic etiquette. If the illegal murder
of a handful of Christinos was sufficient to call forth
such, an unqualified expression of his Lordship's official
_ _

resentment, what powerful language might we not ex-
pect him to employ when denouncing the wholesale
massacre of the gallant Poles by command of ,the

tyrant NICHOLAS ?
Without presuming an acquaintance with the rudi
ments of diplomatic intercourse, we may be allowed to
fancy the purport of a note addressed by Lord PAL-
MERSTON to the Russian Ambassador, in answer to
an Imperial complaint of a premature appeal to the
patriotism of the British Parliament. After referring
to the Parliamentary usage of this country, in confirma-
tion of the readiness of Ministers, at all times, to sub-
mit to the representatives of the people such measures
as were contemplated for the conservation •of their
interests and the maintenance of their rights, his
Lordship would possibly continue thus
Your Excellency complains that his Britannic
MAJESTY'S Government has not waited the result
of the negociations pending between the Cabinets of
London and St. Petersburgh. This charge would
have been a grave one, had not the Cabinet of Lon-
don declined to communicate to the Representatives of
the British people its remonstrances against the abo-
lition of the nationality of Poland, while there re-
mained the shadow of a hope that success would attend
such remonstrances. Neither would the charge have
been less grave had the negociations to which your
Excellency refers, as pending between the two Courts,
been first sought on the part of the Imperial Cabinet.
But here it may be necessary to remind your Excel-
lency, for the greater satisfaction of the Imperial Cabi-
net, that there are three material points in the consi-
deration of this question which the British Govern-
ment is boulid to hold in perpetual remembrance.
First, that by the Treaty of Vienna, England guaran-
teed the independence of Poland : Secondly, that the
documents now moved for by the British Parliament,
were withheld as long as his Britannic MAJESTY'S
Ministers had reason to hope that Russia was disposed
to hearken to the mediation- of Great Britain in favour
of Polish nationality—being only made public three
years after the violation of. that treaty ; and Thirdly,
that the negociations now pending between the Cabi-
nets of London and St. Petersburg, were entered upon
at the instance of England, and therefore cannot be pr,!-
smiled to impose a restraint upon the British Cabinet in
any communication which it may think proper to
make to Parliament. With respect to the treaties en-
tered into between the Cabinet of Russia and the
Sublime Porte, and more especially the treaty con-
cluded between Russia and Turkey, at Constantinopl,2,
on the Bth of July, 1833, your Excellency ought not
to regard it as extraordinary if Great Brisain should
express herself apprehensive of the intentions of an ally
which secretly stipulates, at an 'immense sacrifice, for
excluding English ships of war from passing the Strait
of the Dardanelles. In this treaty of defensive alli-
ance, the high contrasting parties have engaged them-
selves to lend mutually material succours and the most
efficacious assistance for the safety of their respective
States, as often as one or other of them shall require
such aid ; and yet, in a secret article annexed, the
principle of reciprocal aid is limited on the side of the
Porte-to shutting the-Strait-of -
foreign ships of war. Your Excellency must be aware
that a treaty made, without the knowledge or consent
of Great Britain, and which has for its object the re-
striction of her dominion, cannot be imposed upon her
without the application of force. And here it may hz
pertinently asked, if the designs of Russia were not ag-
gressive,why stipulate to pay so large a price for the closing
of the Dardanelles against foreign vessels of war, know-

ing, as she must, that their object could be no other
than to support the Sultan against the Emperor ?
If it formed no part of Russia's design to offer an in-
sult to Great Britain, why was her flag not excepted,
or why was she not made acquainted with the secret
article of the treaty, before it received the sanction of
the Plenipotententiaries of his Imi:,:nial Majesty and
his Highness the Sultan ? And were England to dis-
pute the passage of the Dardanelles, would Russia, by
virtue of the treaty referred to, consider herself bound
to succour the Sultan in enforcing the observance of
the secret article ? Upon all these points it must
be obvious to your Excellency, that the British Ge-
vernment ought to have no secrets apart from the great
body representing the people. At the same time, you
will be pleased to remember, that. the Government has
uttered no menace ; unless the pledging itself to the
vindication of the national honour, in the event of the
total failure of means more accordant with its inclina-
tions, be so regarded--a pledge it will be no less its plea-
sure than its imperative duty to assist in fulfilling."
We have purposely abstained from any reference to
the sufferings of the exiled Poles, because it can only
he ascertained by documents in the Cabinet of our
Foreign Secretary, how far such sufferings were the
consequence of the culpable apathy of the British Go-
vernmeut. The Noble Foreign Secretary in his speed►
deprecated the spreading abroad of menaces of war,
and could perceive no grounds for disturbing the peace
of Europe. He likewise defended the closing of the
Dardanelles, on the authority of immemorial usage on
the part of the Porte. But here we find an omission
which remains to be examined. If the closing of the
Dardanelles was an immemorial usage on the part of
the SULTAN, why did Russia secretly stipulate, at the
risk of immense sacrifices, for its continuance ? What
could have induced Russia to guarantee to the
Porte the supplies necessary to resist success-
fully every enemy, without: any expense what-
ever, if the condition annexed thereto would
have been equally well observed without any such
hazardous stipulation ? And as to the maintenance of
peace, which the Noble Lord considers of such im-
portance, we should be most happy to learn what might
be the nature and the extent of the outrage which in
his opinion would justify a declaration of war? Is
the violation of the Treaty of Vienna nothing ? Is
the destruction of the balance of European power
nothing ? Is the erasure from the map of Europe of
one of the oldest and most magnanimous Christian
Kingdoms, nothing ? Is the butchery of thousands of
men, women, and children, and the strewing the wilds
of Siberia with the bones of exiled patriots, to all of
whom Great Britain solemnly guaranteed not only life
but the blessings of constitutional liberty, nothing ?
Is the Treaty signed at Constantinople in 1829, by
which the SULTAN was compelled to cede to Russia
nearly a fifth of his dominions, nothing ! If they be,
then in the name of national honour, what is the out-
rage which the Noble Lord would repudiate by a

menace ?
The Noble Lord may delude himself with a bonc
that by diplomacy England may succeed in restoring
Poland to independence. We indulge in no such plea-
sing delusions. , Russia will never give up one foot of
territory—no matter how obtained—unless compelled