The Sun.
London, England, 1860-07-24 00:00:00

Acting Manager—Mr. Wm. Smith.

DRENCH PLAYS-ST. JAMES'S THEATRE,
Directeur, M. Talexy.—Lessee, Mr. F. B. Chatterton.
EVERY EVENING.
Positively the last Night but Five of the season, and last
night but two of 3ladlle. Delphine Fix.
TO-NIGHT,
CHEZ UNE PETITE DAME. •
And LES DEMOISELLES DE ST. CYR.
Delphine Fix.
Orchestra Stalls, 7s. 6d. ; Balcony Stalls, ss. ; Pit, 2s.
Gallery, is.
Private Boxes, from Two Guineas.
Commence at 8.
Box-office open daily from 11 till 5
M. Talexy has the honour to announce that his Benefit will
take place To-morrow (Wednesday), on which occasion Mdle.
Doche will make her first and only appearance this season ;
also Mdle. Fix, M. Paul Devaux, M. Gravier, Mdle. Borp,-hi-
Mdle. Brunetti, M. Belart, M. Gassier, Ciampi, and sidle.
Ferraris.

liadlle.

A STLEY'S ROYAL AAIPIIITHEATRE.-
:,-3. Proprietor and Manager, Mr. Wai. BATTY.
An Extra Grand MIS-DAY PERFORMANCE will take
place on SATURDAY next, July 28, commencing. at Two
o'clock.
This Evening, the Historical Spectacle, entitled FAIR
ROSAMOND, or the AMAZON CRUSADERS. To be followed by
Scenes In the Arena. To concluue with THE SPOILED
CHILD. Little Pickle, Miss Amelia Smith.
Doers open at halt-past fi, performance commence at 7.
Box-office open daily from 11 till 4.
Stage Manager—Mr. W. WEST.
Director of the Arena--M. Felix Revolti.

CANTERBURY
THIS EVENING.
C. H. GOUNOD'S OPERA.
FAUST.
First Time in this Country.

CONCERTS.-

Faust Mr. Henry Herbert.
Mephistopheles Mr. C. Bernard.
Siobel Mrs. Anderson.
Marguerite
Conductor Mr. Jonghmans.
And selections from
Dinorah, Trovatore, Macbeth, and numerous other
Entertainments.
Balcony, Ss, Ilan. M.
Comic Vocalists —Mesh's. George Hodson (the Irish Come-
dian and Mimic), and C. Marshall.
The ETHIOPIANS, consisting of 17 performers (organised
expressly for this Establishment). for the performance of
Vocal and Instrumental Music, Comic and Sentimental, with
Negro delineations, anecdotes, ctc., in addition to the usual
entertainments.
The gallery is open from 5 till 11 on Sunday Evening.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
Txta DAY.—Morning, sh. 50m.—Afternoon, 6h. 13m,
To-moßnow.-Morning, 6h. 36m.—Afternoon, 7h.

~ 4 • , ),...,t,
4, .' C''''. , A ''',- .: .i '.' L.,...,--;"- Z.' 4 • ,:"..A. Y-- 'j4 , .1.,1?
-i.").-W;:it-,,, . ' ?(:?--.e.. ',...,;1-•:,,,,,,,,\ 4.-
.3.it,N, , cc.; :,,I,
~,,,.„4;z.,-„,„.,.,4„.
..t
~ ' 'A,K-;: $"," •-.::,--,,,-:' ~-;,, ----""--,—. S ta;., 4'
L"'"L•Atie,"-v i • '-'1;11,-' • 1,!1,,:,117,,, ',,i7oi-A,..'-:"7'---,
..._,...., • • N.,...„,,f.--., -

THE SUN.
LONDON, TUESDAY, JULY 24, 1860.

The question of our National Defences was brought
forward last night by Lord PALMERSTON, in a
speech worthy of his best days. He did not mince
the matter a bit—that our nearest neighbour is our
nearest enemy. Whatever Louis NAPOLEON may
say—avow—or even take his solemn oath to is all
mere moonshine. A man, be he sovereign or burglar,
who breaks his word as he breaks into men's houses,
cannot expect to be believed in llcaven above or in
hell below, however much he may preach about his
altered conduct, and all that sort of " bosh." You
have deceived not once, but often, and if you "take
me in " once more "the consequence be on my head,
not on yours." That is but the true aspect of our
position with respect to the mock professions
of the present Emperor of the FRENcii—our most
august, but little trusted " Ally."
Lord PALMERSTON, in. his speech, plain and
patriotic, seems to imply much more than meets
the ear. We rather suspect that his Lordship's
private opinion of his Imperial Majesty does not
altogether accord with the fascinations practised
upon him some time ago at Compeigne. No. Events
have opened hig eyes, as well as those of other
people who were fain to believe more than
they hoped. And ;ime, the great Reformer, has
opened their eyes, even to bitter disappointment.
They have found that there is no faith in princes,
but where it is to their own advantage—no matter

who suffers.
The statement of Lord PALMERSTON amounts to
this—a summary of which we extrnt

"He observed that, after the conclusion of the great
war, in which our supremacy at sea had been established, a
long continuance of peace was calculated upon, and the
Government had thought it unnecessary to call upon the
country to secure our dockyards against the distant con-
tingency of a war, and as long as our fleet depended upon
the wind and the weather alone we did right to
rest upon the strength we possessed. Gradually, however,
steam became the moving power, which altered the cha-
racter of nrival warfare and impaired the advantages of
our insular position by bridging the Channel. Referring
to the well- known warning given by Sir JOHN BITIIGOYNE
in his letter to the Duke of WELLINGTON, he observed
that this appeal fell upon deaf ears ; but when Lord DERBY
came into jpower his Government took an important step
to repair our means of defence, and that was followed
lip by the succeeding Government, though some of our
moat important establishments still remained imperfectly
defended. A commission was at length appointed to in-
quire into the facts, and the re:iults had been laid upon the
table of the house. The commissioners' recommendations
would require a total outlay of £11,000,000, including
about £1,500,001 for armaments ; anti be proposed, for the
safety of the country, that these recommendations should
substantially be carried out. To supply the funds two
courses were available, either to vote annually such por-
tions of the sum as the country would like to spend upon
this object, or, as he felt it his duty to recommend,
to endeavour to complete the works at the earliest
possible period, without laying on the country a larger
burden than was absolutely necessary, by raising by means
of terminable annuities a sum sufficient to effect the object
in three or four years. His opinion was that, if these works
mere necessary, they were necessary as soon as they could
be got. The course he proposed was a departure from
principle ; but Parliament had encouraged the raising of
money by loan for the improvement of landed estates, and
that, policy which was good for individuals could not be
Iluvise for the country. By raising the money by means
or terminable annuities there would not be a permanent
,outs en upon the country. It was impossible for any
to Bay that the future, charged as the horizon. was
I,7as free from danger. We had recently eon -
tratenteedl°_ui.l.s.,
iattteo,
a co__
ri;t? tr immediate neighbour across the Channel
t teaty, and experience had proved that com-
merciall,tlr9o between nations contributed to the
preservation
treaty. ut tj.,,Pteace, and he hoped much from this
gt eat nation kerthati'y alone would be frail security for a
army of 600,0 30
,men, so open to attack. France had an
greater force tits nPan;a 400,000 actually in arms, a far
aired for the purpose of defence.
Be did not mean to say iiireq, her army was raised for the
deliberate purl). se of aggression,
but we ought not to rely
upon the forbot sane° of atio
, and France was snot
st,.engthening ersolf upon dandw:
the utmost exer-
tions had been n lade and were trlaiZet;
othheermequi re d for the
most equal to ou r own, which could not
defence of Francs e, but which furnished earls cf tran-
sporting in a low hours a large military force to our
shore •
H pointed ont tho! dangers to which this country would s.
be
exposed by such t attempt; large contributions might be
d.
levied upon the metropolis, or a sudden attack by sea an
land upon our naval arsenals might destroy the very cradle
of our naval power, and the operation most likely to be at-
tempted would be the landing of a considerable force for
the destruction of mu. dockyards. If London should be in
danger, what would be, wanted was the means of fighting

a battle with the greatest possible amount of military
force ; for this purpose we must provide such arrange-
ments as would make the smallest number of troops neces-
sary to defend the dockyards, and the effect of the,'' forti-
fications would be to set free a larger amount of force in the
field for the defence of London. Many thought that the sum
estimated by the commissioners excessive for the purpose,
but their estimates included armaments, which would come
out of the annual votes. The Government were of opinion
that £9,000,000 would be sufficient for the purpose ; out of
this about £1,850,000 would be for the purchase of land, a
considerable portion of which would be profitably let, seduc-
ing the actual sum for the works to £7,150,000. He com-
pared this sum with the large expenditure of France and
other continental States for the same object, suggesting
that, with such examples, it would be criminal in this
country to neglect its defence, and that, when the proposed
works should be completed, the country would be placed in
a condition, humanly speaking, of comparative safety. He
then read the resolution he intended to move, granting for
constructing the works £2,000,000 for the present year,
charged upon the Consolidated Fund, and autho-
rizing the Commissioners of the Treasury to raise
this sum by annuities for the term of 30 years,
to be charged upon the fund. The Geverrunent,
he observed, did not ask the whole sum at once, put pro-
posed to spread it over three or four years, and £2,000,000
was as much as could be advantageously spent between the
present month and the same time next year. Application
would be made annually for such portions of the 1.9,000,000
as they were required. He reminded the House, in conclu-
sion, that annuities to the amount of £550,000 would expire
in the year 1867, which would more than cover the interest
upon this loan."
As to the question of defending the metropolis
Lord PALMERSTON did not enter seriously into
that for the best of all reasons'—that it is quite
enough to do one thing at a time : and, further,
that the fortification of our frontiers was the
second line of our defences—the sea bein
the first ; for when we lose the command of
that we may say " good bye" to our glory—nay,
to our very existence as a nation. Our dockyards
and prominent points of defence,such as Dover, are
but the outworks of our citadel of London. ll' hen
these are forced and carried, London must look
to itself in real earnest. But not until then, nor
even then, need London despair. We have
many other lines of defence, besides the hearty
combination of our people, and still more our
now chivalrous and patriotic volunteers. There is no
reason for alarm but much for preventive caution.
England abounds in lines of natural defence—her
hedgerows and her circumvalating hills afford
many strongholds for a brave people resolved to be
free. Much has been said about the invading enemy
making a rapid and grand dash for the metropolis,
even if they failed in their bold adventure. And
as our sense of the possible, if not probable, danger
now quickens our apprehensicn, many plans have
been suggested to meet the emergency. Among
others, there is one entitled " London's true line of
defence," which we copy. It is by a staff officer,
but is no more than the application nearer home
of one suggested by ourselves in this ; journal
some time ago for the more effectual defence
of the coasts—namely, to have railway batteries
traversing along the sea board with proper places
of position wherever an enemy could land. Now,
the Staff officer just adopts our plan or suggestion
by bringing it within some 15 miles of London,
so as to encircle the metropolis. To this we fully
assent, believing that some such plan would
be very effectual, and be economical withal. It
would, besides, give great confidence to the people,
and afford ample scope for individual and combined
exertion in the common defence of our homes and
liberties.
The one great purpose of security is to enure
the people to a confidence in themselves, for
men are but men after all, be they friends
or enemies, or anything you please.
If the enemy invade we must beat them off, and
perhaps pay them off in the same sort, with a con-
sciousness of wrong to inspirit our revenge. That
we are feared and even hated, for fear always be-
gets hate, we know. Let us therefore trust to our.
selves as the only true friend, and our enemies will
respect, because they fear and hate, us the more.
Mr. BRIGHT, as usual, like Mr. BISH of Lottery
renown, would make the House believe that the
expense of these fortifications would cost double
the amount proposed—even twenty-four millions
—and therefore the money would be lost.
Suppose it were, would not Mr. BRIGHT
prefer to lose an arm or a leg than his own pre-
cious head ? The expense of the life annuities
proposed for 30 years, spreading it over time, is
merely that of a ground-rent for a mansion of almost
perpetual comfort and security.
We cannot close our hasty notice of this
momentous question without paying our best
thanks to Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT for his lucid
and manly statement in explanation of the plans
proposed. Whoever wishes well to his country
must wish a speedy success to the completion of
our National Defences.

There are proverbially two sides to a story, as
there are many to a character. But it must have
greatly astonished the majority of our readers on
Saturday to learn that so much could be said, if
not in defence of the recent conduct of the Druses
of the Lebanon, at least in its extenuation. From
the anonymous communication given by us in our
impression of that evening, it will have been re-
marked that the recent butcheries in Syria are
openly declared to have been provoked by the law
less proceedings of the Maronites themselves.
The European whose correspondence, unauthenti-
cated by any published signature, sets forth this
somewhat startling accusation, appears to have
been resident for the last 20 years in the country
lying between the Lebanon and the Mediterranean.
He may be presumed to have acquired, during that
period, a certain degree of familiarity with the
state of things among the Native population. And
certainly, in advancing this formal charge against
the Christian part of that population as the ag-
gressors in the present instance, he must be allowed
to have done so in a manner sufficiently explicit
and categorical. In his statement of the war be
begins from the beginning. " You will remember,"
he writes, " that last year there was a Druse and
Christian quarrel at a village called Beyt Mary ;"
adding—" That quarrel was settled by a compact
between the Christian Emir and the Druse chiefs
to maintain peace, the Druses paying 30,000
piastres as indemnity for Christian property de-
stroyed." Then follows the extraordinary part of
his declaration. " However," he writes—" As the
Christians found to their surprise that they had
killed more Druses than were slain of them-
selves, it appears that it either entered or was
put into their heads that matters were now
altered, and as the Christians were by far the
most numerous, they could now overpower the
Druses." The assertion , appears hardly credible ;
but, such as it is, we have given' it. "Be that as it
may," writes the correspondent in this amazing
communication, "it is now positive that a society
was formed . . . for the very Christian pur-
pose of exterminating the Druses of the Lebanon."
Nay, the writer goes on to catalogue by name the
leading members of the executive committee " com-
posed of NAUM KICANO; ASSAD, son of ISAAC TAB ET;
MICHAEL FARGALLA, native merchants and bankers
of Beyrout ; and it is said that AYOUB TRABILSY, a
merchant of Deir-el-Lamar, was attached, to them.
Not only arc the names of the reputed chiefs of
this executive committee thus enumerated, but the
writer goes on to specify the nature of the par-
ticular duty entrusted to it—viz., to furnish arms,
ammunition, and money to the Christian popu-
14ti°n• lie even goes so far as to add—" It is

asserted that upwards of 14,000 muskets and a pro-
portionate quantity of ammunition were in this
way delivered to the peasantry." It is remarkable
that the very next sentence in this singular com-
munication tends rather seriously to invalidate its
statements; the writer frankly ackowledging—" I
will not vouch for my correctness in the names of
the individuals of the committee, but they are those
given by public report, and what seems to confirm
the report is that, with the exception of one
(M. FARGIALLA), they fled as soon as it was seen
that the Druses could not be conquered so easily."
The upshot of it all is manifestly, therefore, that
the writer, though a twenty years' resi-
dent in Syria, has been putting forward those
very positive accusations (anonymously) upon the
merest hearsay, upon flying rumours, and popular
conjectures. What certainly helps him out so
far in this direction is the consideration that France
and Russia have almost equally positive inducements
to secure to themselves, either separately or toge-
ther, some specious plea for interposition between
the Druses and the Maronites, between the Chris-
tian and non-Christian part of the population own-
ing allegiance to the rule of the effete Turkish
Government. Inasmuch were these the most ob-
vious probabilities that the news of the late civil
war in Syria had hardly arrived in Western Europe
before suspicions began to be aroused as to whether
the deadly quarrel there had not been secretly
fomented by the connivance of the French and
Russian autocratic Governments. The different
plight of the sick man is at any rate brought once
more pointedly enough under the consideration of
the European Sovereignties. Before any conclusion
be arrived at by those Powers in regard to the
treatment of the political invalid of Constantinople,
it certainly does behove us to inquire searchingly
into the causes of the recent outbreak in Syria—to
decide, at least, whether Druses or the Maronites
have been in this last instance the aggressors—and
to ensure those unhappy regions thereupon, as
best we may, from the recurrence of these periodi-
cal and infernal massacres.