The Sun.
London, England, 1851-12-27 00:00:00

RESIGNATION OF LORD PALMERSTON,

(FROM A CORRISPONDLNT.)
It is but fair to recollect that one side only of the
explanation necessary to clear up the mystery (for a
ralp tory it is at present) of Lord Palmerston's retire-
ment from a cabinet, of which he was always a lead-
ing and by far the most popular member, is before
the public; and it is important to keep steadily in
view the fact, that the side of the case which has
been given comes from a journal which has invariably
endeavoured to alienate his late colleagues from Lord
Palmerston—which, as the organ of the Russian and
Austrian embassies, has pursued him with unabated
rancour, hostility, and calumny—and which was first
and foremost in that intrigue that was last summer
exploded and defeated by the memorable majority of
the House of Commons on Mr Roebuck's motion.
Great caution is, therefore, necessary before any be-
lief can be reposed in the statements made in the sense
in which they are propounded.
Lord Palmerstun's signal services to the Liberal
cause, his past devotion to constitutional government,
his high, frank, and courageous n beari-g on all occa-
sions, his generous sentiments and his popular
man-
ners, all require, nay demand from the Liberal
party
hesitation before they can credit the assertiontha t
he belied the principles c expressing
f his life, by
" unbounded approbation end admiration for P ied'etat that annihilated the liberties of France." This
is too huge b draught on popular credulity in the
broad, unexplained, and coarse manner in which it is
put, to go down with a public which has hitherto
known him as by far the most advanced and liberal
Foreign Secretary England ever had.
Besides, it is accompanied by other demands on
popular gullibility of a still more difficult character.
We are required first to believe that a Court, from
the hospitalities and courtesies of which (notwith-
standing some gratitude was due to him for his con-
duct and policy in Portugal) he was for upwards of
twelve months excluded, and to which he has of late
been only once re-admitted, has given Lord Palmers •
ton that uninterrupted confidence and support which
were peculiarly and emphatically necessary for a
Foreign Minister in his exceptional and difficult po-
sition; with the representative of every despot bat-
tering at him without, and hostile critics and col-
leagues annoying him within the Cabinet. This the
liberal party cannot credit. Lord Palmerston, be his
present error and fault what they may, had not, it is
certain, that fair play in high quarters which every
Secretary of State needs, but which to him, under
such circumstances, was indispensable.
Next, we are required to believe that those
wretched animosities and pitiful jealousies which Mr.
Macaulay, in his letter to the Lord Provost of Edin-
burgh, plainly stated, prevented the formation of a
liberal administration towards the close of 1846, never
entered the present Minhtry ; we are required to be-
lieve that Lord Palmerston's policy was never opposed
in the Cabinet ; we are required to believe, that it was
most frequently and most energetically supported
therein by a peer, who never opened his lips yin the
Greek debate in the House of Lords ; and more than
all, we are required to believe that on Monday that
Noble Lord was ignorant of the cause which bad in-
duced Lord John Russell to hastily assemble a Cabi-
net Council to receive Lord Palmerston's resignation ;
although we are at the same time told that another
Members of the Cabinet connected with his Lordship,
who did not attend, had declared he would never
again enter a council-room in which Lord Palmerston
was present. This is what the liberal party cannot
credit. It needs something much more authoritative
than our contemporary's statement to exculpate some
of Lord Palmerston's colleagues from the imputation
of unfairness to him.

And lastly, more startling than all, we are re-
quired to believe that the despots of Europe, that
the " strong governments" of the Continent, that
hostile diplomacy in London, that the ambassadorial
intrigues which Lord John Russell denounced in the
House of Commons, as the cause of the Greek con-
spiracy against Lord Palmerston, were all quiescent
on the 'present occasion ; when, at the same time, it
is stated that Lord Palmerston " approved of a coup
d'etat which annihilated liberty in France," in order
that he might form an alliance with France to
counter-weight the northern confederacy. Tbis the
liberal party will also hesitate in crediting. For it
will ask itself, who gains by Lord Palmerston's retire-
ment? Who? Why Russia and Austria, tyranny
and despotism. Yet, with the innocence of lambs,
their ministers in London had nothing to do with the
matter. They opened and shut their eyes ; and some
one dropped the sugar plum in ! Simple souls !
Lord Palmerston's recent conduct may have been
indefensible ; but it is not on such gobemoucherie as
this that he can be condemned. His strength, his
support, his existence lay in the liberality of his
policy. It was on that ground that the House of
Commons so emphatically sanctioned his proceedings
in Greece ; it was on that ground that municipality
after municipality lately thanked him for his exer-
tions in the liberation of Kossuth ; it was on that
ground that he was hated and detested by continen-
tal despots ; it was on that ground that his less
liberal colleagues carped at, and,—it may yet turn
out—at last betrayed him. It is not credible, there-
fore, that he admired and approved of a policy which
annihilated liberty in France; be may have hesitated
from rushing into hot hostility with an usurper capa-
ble of seeking support from any quarter, and daring
any crime. That is possible. Probable, too, it may
be that Lord Palmerston, saw danger in the continued
struggle between a discredited Assembly and a des-
perate adventurer. But that the Minister who created
constitutional government in Belgium—who rescued
Spain from absolutism—who successfully defended
the Swiss from the intrigues of the Jesuits when
backed by Austria and France—who stretched forth
his hand to Italy—who declared that the Hungarians
were not rebels—and who has lost no opportunity of
avowing that in his judgment civil liberty is the only
basis of national happiness—desired to see military
violence permanently rule France, cannot be true,
unless, indeed, the vigorous intellect and the fine
mind of Lord Palmerston have, for the instruction of
mankind, been suddenly sillicted with insanity. If,
however, he did really desire such a fall for France,
no punishment that public opinion can devise is too
signal for such treachery.
What, then, is the conclusion to be reached ? That
the circumstances which led to Lord Palmarston's re-
tirement have yet to be fully explained. And justice
to him requires from the liberal party that it suspend
its judgment until he himself shall have been heard.—
Daily News.