The Sun.
London, England, 1856-08-08 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY, AUGUST 8, 1856.

The Russian occupation of the Isle of Serpents
has touched Austria on the teederest.point. She
cared little for the integrity of the Ottoman E n-
pire—was only, in fact, desirous of obtaining a
handsome share of the plunder whatever it might
be. But the free navigation of the Danube Waq
quite another point. It would not at all suit the
purposes of Austria to have the main artery of
German commerce choked up or impeded. It wa4
the manifest intention of the late Czars to
transfer the trade from the Danube to 0 Tessa that
made the Government of FRANCIS JOSEPH solici-
tous about the results. Had it not been for the
bar and the quarantine establishments at the
Debouchoure of the river Austria would have
adopted the Prussian policy and maintained a
strict neutrality, at least until one of the bellige-
rent parties had obtained a decided advantage
over the other. Then, indeed, she might have
interfered, but only to the extent of getting all
she possibly could for herself. The Pickwickian
maxim, of "shouting with the strongest mob,"
was a leading principle from which she could not
easily be induced to deviate.
She has now distinctly. deliberately, and une-
quivocally cast aside the mask, and explained
that to obtain the free navigation of the Danube
for Germany was the principal reason of her
intervention to restore the peace of Europe !
Rad it not been for that paramount object she
would Dave regarded the sanguinary cantest with
RS much complacency as that with which the
ladies of ancient Rome witnessed a gladiatorial
exhibition. But her pocket was concerned. The
success of Russia would have ruined her hopes,
for she was well aware of the tenacity with which
the Atrrocaar clings to everything calculatel to
promote the wealth of the nation over which he
rules. She, therefore, in the interest of Germany,
interfered, but not to any extent likely to
involve her in hostilities. At all events she
carefully retained a loophole through which she
could wriggle out of her re3ponsibNties, and
avoid the performance of her most selemn obli-
gations. We witnessed an example of this at
the conclusion of the Vienna Conferences in
1855, and but for the overpowering influences of
Germanism she would not have been allowed
another opportunity of interfering "to bring
about the peace of Europe." The first fault was
undoubtedly hers, but the second was that of
the Allied Powers, who should have profite.l by
their bitter experience, and declined farther com-
munication with a double-dealing and perfidious
State, that availed herself of a quibble which
even an Old Bailey practitioner would have
blushed to put forward.

She is now, however, for ono; in earnest. It
is positively stated, and with much appearance of
truth, that she has addressed a very strong note
to Russia, earnestly protesting against the occu-
pation of the Isle of Serpents, on the ground that
the free navigation of the Danube would be en-
dangered and even neutralised by the measure.
She has, however, so often played the part of
the Shepherd's bly in the fable, that others
will not easily credit that the cry of " wolf"
on the present occasion is well founded. It
1113 Y be given in earnest, but Austria is not a
credible or trustworthy witness ! And if the in-
• terests of Germany were' alone at stake we should
be inclined to bestow exactly the same amount of
attention, and no more, that was bestowed by
Austria and Prussia on the affairs of Europe.
But England is concerned in seeing that solemn
treaties are faithfully and
scrupulously
observed.
She cannot see matters for which she has
made such serious, and, we regret to say,
such unavailing sacrifices, so Epaedily and 80

MlNlONCiarmilwoio;sopm4finimi

contumeliously set aside. We yesterday stated
the announcement that the British Fleet had re-
ceived orders to concentrate its forces in the
Black Sea, to superintend the execution of articlf,
20 in the precious Treaty. It has, however,
since been rumoured that this salutary order ha,
been countermanded, and that the matter is agail
placed in the hands of the diplomatists—and that
while Russian troops are occupying the Turkisl
soil ! The rumour is not positively confirmed ;
but there can, we believe, be no doubt 01
the illegal and forcible occupation of the Isle
of Serpents, and under such circumstances
there can be no second opinion as to the course
incumbent on the other Powers. The invaders
should be summarily and ignominiously expelled,
and Russia should be compelled to make ample
compensation for the injury so wantonly and un
wisely inflicted. The principle of indemnity whit},
she has herself invariably acted on should be
brought into operation, so that she might see that
no further piratical acts or violations of contract
could be indulged in with impunity. Russian faitl,
can no longer be credited. She should learn the inevit-
able result of such a character; When Punic faith
became so tainted in the olden times that no re-
liance could be placed therein, the next cry that
arose was delenda est Carthago. It was shown
that the existence of such a nation was dan-
gerous to the welfare of other States ; and the
inevitable result was the destruction of those who
would be bound by no treaties, and respect to
promises. Let Russia ponder ere it is too late
on the painful but salutary lesson, and reflect
that if she persevere in her present course, it may
become her lot also " to point a moral and ado] n
a tale " for the benefit of posterity.

So long as the Bishops of the Established
Church are Peers of the realm so long we must
look for anomalies of a prejudicial nature to reli-
gion in connection with them. There are, how-
ever, some occasions of scandal it is by no means
necessary to the union of Church and State to re-
tain, but which, on the contrary, call for the most
prompt and decided action on the part of the Lest
friends of the Establishment. Among these is the
way in which some of the Bishops have, durit g
the last twenty years, been paid.

Anything more injurious to the interests of the
Established Church, and, what is of more conse-
quence, to the interests of religion, than the case
of the Bishop of DURHAM, it were difficult to con-
ceive. Now we are not about to endorse, though
we may deem it necessary to mention, the vulgar
calumny heaped on that, in the ordinary accepta-
tion of the words, liberal-minded, and learned, and
able Prelate ; on the contrary, without approving
of his conduct in relation to his income, we
incline to think that the occasion of offence was
as much, in the first instance, his misfor-
tune as his fault. However this may be, in
the estimation of many his Lordship has been
grievously to blame. Oa his appointment to the
bishopric of Durham it was generally understood,
and we believe given out in Parliament, that his
acceptation of the see was accompanied by an ar-
rangement with the E.lclesiastical Commissioners,
whereby his income should not exceed 8,0001.
a-year. Time rolled on, and to the disgust of many
and the astonishment of all, it came out that the
right reverend prelate had been receiving annually
sums far in excess of that amount. There was, ai
a matter of course, a great outcry, and the
name of the Bishop of Durham was most
deplorably associated with trickery of no very
reputable kind, and alt the less reputable
in connection with a Christian prelate. An
explanation was called for, and it then
appeared that the aotna/ arrangement between the
Bishop and the Commissioners was, that his Lord-
ship should have the farming, so to speak, of the
estates of the see, and pay over a cer-
tain sum annually from the proceeds to
the Commissioners—this sum having been 11
fixed on some sort of average satisfactory to both
parties. The suspicion may be fairly entertained
that the Bishop knew what he was about when he
made the bargain. Be this as it m ty, the E?cle-
siastical Commissioners were certainly to blame
in enuring on a bargain without an adequate.
knowledge of what they were doing, and a pre-
sumption may as fairly be raised in the Bishop's
favour. The stage where he became obviously
culpable was immediately after the outcry was
made, when, if he had consulted his own dignity
and peace, the interests of the Church of which
he was calculated to be an ornament, and of re
ligion itself, he would have slid—" I regret there
should have been a misapprehension about the
matter ; but as it is evident the country believes
8,000/. a year is what I ought to receive, 1 will
be content with that income, and sill in future
hand over all is excess of that amount to the
Commissioners." The Bishop unfortunately stool
on his legal right, and the result is that to this
hour the E,ta.blishment has been scandalised.

It is not, however, what may be said in defence
or otherwise of the Bishop of DURHAM that con-
cerns us—it is that like occasions of scandal should
be prevented for the future. That learned Prelate
was not alone in the above particular, and at the
present time the danger of such cause of scandal
being perpetuated is sufficiently great to call for
something effectual being done. Several Bishops
have been of late appointed subject to future
arrangements with the Commissioners, and two
sees, Durham and London, are now vacant—we
may say three, as in all probability the see of
Landon will, if justice be done to the wants of
the diocese, be divided. Other sees must shortly
fall in, and in each case the subject of income will

hive tc. be (halt with. The Ecclesiastical

Commissioners hive power " so to regulate from
time to time the amounts, times, modes, and con-
ditions of payment to be made to or by the said
Ecclesiastical Commissioners, as the case may be
—by or to any archbishop or bishop as to secure
to every such archbishop or bishop the annual
income rained for him in the same or any other
act now in force, and no more." But who is there
to regulate the Ecclesiastical Commissioners so as
to insure proper arrangements to effect the ex-
pressed p arpose of the Legislature ? The past
speaks so ill for their judgment that but little, if
any, depen dente can be placed on it for the future.
The " Thiry]. Report of the Select Committee of
the House oif Commons on the Ecclesiastical Com-
mission" offers no better ground of hope, its re-
commendatic In being that the management of cer-
tain estates it tould be handed over to bishops from
which to de xi ye their income, the said estates
to be subject° 1 to periodical inspection at the
instance of the Commissioners, and all disputes to
be settled by a rbitration. The adoption of this
recommendatiot I will not prevent occasion of
scandal, though it may diminish the grievousnesl,
while the groat; evil is retained of exposing the
estates of t hi Church to the worst pos-
sible msnag en/ent. ArhY sh mild a Chris-
tian bishop be a lan led proprietor, even
though he 'bet a per ? And why should
the public bat 'e it held out to them that the
Bishops of the Establishment are in receipt of
fixed incomes w hen they are not ? Is the credit
osafetrhiaecd to
Eestablir- went for honesty to be perpetually
pride? The Judges of the land are

itipendia,ries—the LORD HIGH CHANCELLOR. and
he LORD CHIEF JUSTICE included. Why should
,lot those who pride themselves on being the suc-
cessors of the Apostles have fixed, instead of
luotuating, incomes'? We can discern no earthly
.eason, while we sea abundant reason of the most
_:ogent description why they should.