The Sun.
London, England, 1869-05-22 00:00:00

The Telegraph regards the reconstruction of the
Menabrea Cabinet as a very significant event. The union
of Menabrea, Minghetti, and of Mordini, the quondam
Garibaldian, in one Cabinet, is nothing less,
it believes, than an attempt to form a power-
ful Government to meet the contingency of
an impending war. In political circles at Florence war is
believed to imminent. General Menabria has laid before
the French Government the impossibility of the pro-
visional arrangement with regard to Roman affairs con-
tinuing any longer ; and he has received in reply
an assnra,ice that a great war- is probable,
by force of u hich Italy might attain the object of
her ambition. " The prospects of an alliance between
France, Austria, and Italy are openly discussed in high
political circles at Florence ; and though the current
rumours may be, and we believe arc, unfounded, their
existence explains the sudden coalition which has been
formed, under Menabrea's Premiership, between the
Piedmontese, the Garihaldians, and the Constitutional
Liberals."

ENGLAND AND AMERICA.
The remarkable letter, signed "An American Citizen,"
which appeared in the Times a few days ago, deprecating
the importance attached to Mr. Sumner's speech, was
written by Mr. Grimes, a member of the United States
Senate, and who happened to be in London at the tin:..
He is an influential man, and ho holds that there is not
any prospect of a collision. Mr. Sumner's speech
was published by permission because it is almost
a matter of course to give leave to any member
of the Senate who wishes to make his sentiments
in debate fatly known ; and it monopolised attention
on the late occasion because, happening to be the
only one delivered on the rejection of the treaty
whose author was ambitious of print, there was little
else upon the subject for the public to read. But this in
no way proves that Mr. Sumner's rhetoric or his reasoning
was approved of by the whole, or even by a majority of
his colleagues. Among the fifty senators who voted
for the rejection of the Clarendon-Johnson treaty,
much diversity of motives existed. There is no
doubt, however, that till majority were dissatisfied with
the over anxiety shewn by Mr. Reverdy Johnson to
bring the controversy to a close during the brief period of
his mission ; and they were resolved at any hazard to
chew that America could wait until such time as, without
the possibility of being misapprehended in her tone of
claim, the matters in dispute might be adjusted. As Mr.
Motley comes with no instructions, and our Government
cannot make any further move in the matter, the question
will necessarily be hung up for a time.
Mr. Sumner, in his recent speech on the Clarendon-
Johnson Treaty, laid down at great length what he deemed
the just doctrine of neutrality between belligerents. Be-
tween two established nations, both independent,
there might, he admitted, be neutrality. But
when one was "an odious combination of rebels,"
a declaration of neutrality was unequal in opera-
tion, for it invested the rebels with the rights of war,
and gave them a status which did not properly belong to
them. It was on this ground that he complained of the
Queen's Proclamation of 1861. Sir Francis Head, late
Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada, publishes certain
official documents which exemplify how admirably the
Americans have carried out this doctrine in cases of
rebellion against us. In December 1837 an American
" General," named Mackenzie, made a raid into Upper
Canada. He suddenly appeared before Torcnto at thehead of
500 men. The raid was of the most contemptible character.
Mackenzie not only had no more than 500 men, whilst the
population of the province was 200,000—Toronto alone
having 10,000—but even these 500 were badly armed,
very few having rifles. The mob was dispersed at
once. The Biitish troops had been sent out of
the province, but the people rose and scattered the
" invading force," Mackenzie with difficulty escaping into
the States three days after he opened the " campaign."
So completely did the outbreak collapse that every pri-
soner was pardoned and discharge d.
But how di,l the Amo lean Government act? Mackenzie
was a runaway murderer. Previously to his having
'appeared in arms he bad committed highway robbery,
arson, and murder. It was owing to these crimes, cemm ittcd
before his act of treason, that Sir Francis Head !Nl:est...l
the American Government to deliver him up in virtue of
the treaty then in force. The Governor of New York
State refused. He regarded Mackenzie as a bell iguent, and,
therefore, proclaimed neutrality between him and her
Majesty's Government. Here are the Governor's own
words :

" He (Mackenzie) was at the head of a military force,
a hostile force to the Government, and seeking its subver-
dion and overthrow by violence. It was a civil war ;
whether just or unjust is not material for the present pur-
t)ose to inquire ; it is enough that it was a state of open,
public, and notorious war, on one side to overthrow, and
m the other to preserve, the Royal Government. All who
were thus arrayed against the Government may in view of
its laws be murderers or felons as well as traitors, but so
far as regards other Governments, and as respects the
Question now pending, they should, I apprehend, be looked
upon as traitors only, and of conseqnenco as men who have
not forfeited a right to an asylum within the limits of au
independent Stake."
faa, not only was th's mur..lerer protected,
though be had insultedthe_American Government itself,
hut La arum P neon raged and surpnrtod is ovary urny_ A nrl
the nation whose representatives proclaimed the bellige-
rency of this kind, demand hundreds of millions sterling
as reparation for our proclarra,l:on of neutrality between
the North and the South!