The Sun.
London, England, 1869-06-02 00:00:00

SPIAIT OP TEE PUBLIC JOURNALS,

. _
There isatime for all things, says the Tintea, and th 6
final deliberation on a great measure is emphatically
time for a calm review of its principles and tendenciei.
~Such a review was undertaken by Mr. Disraeli on Mon-
day, and yet no one can read his speech without feeling
that it lacks the first requisite of statesmanlike judgment
—the power of realising the true nature of the crisis. In
ransacking his imagination for discreditable and far-
fetched explanations of the introduction of the Irish
Church Bill, Mr. Disraeli overlooked the obvious,
honourable, and true explanation—that it was
demanded by the mature conviction, in the minds
of Liberals throughout the United Kingdom, that
without disestablishment and disendowment there
could be no peace for Ireland. In commenting
bitterly on the failure of so many amendments,
he refused to see in it a signal proof of the confidence
reposed by the Liberal party in the conduct of Mr.
Gladstone. Never, it is true, were the clauses of a bill
so complicated passed through committee with so little
modification by majorities so overwhelming ; but then
never was a scheme more elaborately or conscientiously
framed, and never was a greater mastery of detail as
well as principle exhibited by a parliamentary leader.
The bill has been accepted by the House of Commons,
not because each Liberal member had been pledged to
each of its provisions, hut rather because it approved
itsolf to members and constituents alike as a statesman-
like and consistent solution of an Imperial question. It
now awaits the verdict of the House of Lords, and we
feel a strong assurance that Mr. Gladstone's closing
words will find an echo.. in that Assembly. We do not
claim, with Mr. Disraeli, the gift of prophecy, and, if
experience proves anything, it proves that no political
vision can pierce much beyond the near distance of prac-
tical action. It is enough that we should be able to
" predict the present," and, unless we misread the horo-
scope of Ireland, it does not portend a new outburst of
religious animosity, but a new reign of political tranquillity,
founded on equality and justice.
The Daily News declares that Mr. Disraeli on Monday
night improvised a new theory of Irish character and
history. Earlier statesmen failed to recognise the real
origin of the calamities of Ireland. They.tried various
remedies —parliamentary reform, municipal reform,
jury reform, great schemes of national education, and
great schemes of national police. These failed, because
the diagnosis of the disease was wrong. The statesmen
who were the authors of these measures, of which Mr.
Disraeli affects for the moment to think lightly—in
another part of his speech he implied a different estimate
of them—failed, he says, to recognise that the
cause of Irish discontent and disturbance was physical.
Mr. Disraeli's philosophy of the past is not more remark.
able than his estimate of the present and his forecast of
the future. He contends that Mr. Gladstone has mis-
taken the aims and desires of the Irish people, whom he
wishes to conciliate. If they were discontented with the
Irish Church Establishment surely, Mr. Disraeli says,
they would assassinate the Irish Protestant clergy. lie
apparently thinks that shooting a man is the mode in
which the Irish peasant expresses his abstract disapproval
of an institution. As to the future, it is lamentable to
think what the nation has lost in Mr. Disraeli. If his
advice had been follov, cd, nd would in twenty
years have been as loyal, contented, and prosperous
as Scotland now is. lie was provided with a pill for the
earthquake, like the mountebank in Addison's essay, to
whom Mr. Bright once compared him. Now we may
expect to see " another battle of the Boyne, another siege
of Derry, and another treaty of Limerick. These things
are not only possible, but probable. You are commencing
a policy which will inevitably lead to those results." From
the possible to the probable, and fr om the probable to the
inevitable, are transitions very easily and rapidly made in
Mr. Disraeli's speeches. Happily they are not so easy or
rapid in history.
The ,Standard is convinced that the rejection of the Irish
Church Dill on the second reading by the House of Lords
would be altogether disastrous both to the Church and
to the Constitution. If, indeed, Archdeacon Denison
believes that a new election would reverse the verdict of
1868 he is right in advising the Lords to engage in a new
struggle. But if, as we feel assured, no such result can
yet be expected ; if the effect of a collision between the
two Houses on the principle of the bill would be to check
the reaction which is in progress, to rally the multitude
•ound the Liberal colours, and to make Mr. Gladstone
more powerful than ever, then we cannot conceive
what principle of duty or policy should induce the
Peers to precipitate a conflict in which defeat is
inevitable. It is impracticable for the Upper House to
resist a Ministry backed by the Commons and the
majority of the nation. The consequence must be either
the political extinction of the Peers or a collision between
the Sovereign and a popular Ministry, from which the
worst consequences might be apprehended. A new
election would send back a House of Commons more
Radical, more resolute, and more angry than the present.
A new Church Bill, worse than this, would be at
once sent up to the Lords. Could they again reject it ?
We have counselled that the Lords should exact
all they can in the way of compromise ; but we
cannot recommend them to engage in a struggle
with the ultimate arbiters of national policy upon
a question which does not admit of compromise. We
cannot advise the Peers to measure their strength against
that of a decisive electoral majority, simply because in
such a conflict they must be beaten, and because they can
be beaten only by means which would destroy the Consti-
tution. We are not called upon to say whether it is worth
while to risk the Constitution for the sake of the Church,
for the fact is—as all moderate men, nay, as most extreme
men who retain their temper and judgment, can see—
that the Lords, by engaging in open conflict with the new
House of Commons, may shipwreck the Constitution, but
cannot possibly save the Church.
The Post says that the confidence it has expressed in
Mr. Motley's fitness for the positiop he fills is encouraged
by the two speeches he made last Monday in answer to
addresses presented to him upon his arrival at Liverpool
by the Liverpool and the American Chambers of Com-
merce. The tone of these speeches shews that Mr. Motley
is aware of the extent of his powers, and is not likely to
exceed them ; while their brevity is an indication that he
does not intend to indulge in that mischievous garrulity
which distinguished his predecessor. These features
make the speeches themselves all the more important
and worthy of attention, and encourage us to
rely fully upon them, and to infer that Mr.
Motley really comes here with a sincere purpose
to bring to an end the differences between us.
Mr. Sumner's speech was in effect an admission, and Mr.
Motley must know that the real cause of the rejection of
English offers has been precisely a want of friendly feeling,
or rather the existence of an active feeling of enmity
towards this country for old grievances. We trust, how-
ever, that we may infer from Mr. Motley's words that this
enmity is now so far cooling down as to allow of the
formation of a good understanding upon secure founda-
tions, for it is useless to hope for it so long as one side
approaches the other with distrustful feelings and revenge.
ful purposes. :From the whole tone of his speeches we
may hope that he will be able so to exercise them as again,
to bring the countries where, as he once said they should
ever be, " side by side in full friendship."

The Star is glad to say that the question of the Hudson's
Bay Company is soon likely to be removed froni the
cog-
nisance of the British Legislature. A bargain has been
struck struck between the Imperial Government and the Hud-
son's Bay Company ; and Mr. Monsel was able on Tues-
day to assure the House of Commons that this bargain
would be ratified by the Dominion of Canada. To Lord
Granville belongs the credit of having solved what almost
appeared to be an insoluble problem ; and never
did he exercise his characteristic tact with greater
judgment or, more advantage to the public interest.
He offered an ultimatum which has .Proved irresistible to
both of the contending parties. A vitally important point
was raised by Mr. R. N. Fowler, who urged that it was
the duty of the Imperial Government.to make stipulations
on behalf of the Indian population, and to secure to them!:
ample reserves. • Mr. Monsell's answer was one of sympathy
with the natives, but also one of confidence in Canada.
The Government of the Dominion has pledged itself to do
justice to the natives ; but it is not the less expedient that
Great Britain should exhibit a just sense of re-
sponsibility towards a class of her subjects who
have irresistible claims upon her consideration. Lord
Bury would give them no reserves at all. This advice
was dictated by no feeling of inhumanity, and yet if acted
upon is would inevitably lead to a succession of Indian
wars, and to the ultimate extinction of the race. Why
should the Hudson's Bay Company have ample reserves
of land, while the Indians, who are the original owners of
the soil, are left to starve? The fact that such a sugges-
tion should be offered is a justification, if any were
wanted,'for Mr. Fowler's speech ; and we cannot doubt
that the Government of the Dominion will take a large
and just view of its obligations in this matter.
The Tclegraph.. says that the matteris now, so near, tae
final stage, that the Hudson's Bay Company is to sell its
rights for £300,000, and that the Imperial Government pro-
poses to annex the territory to Canada, if the colony will'
pay the stipulated sum. Heretofore, Canada has not
closed with the bargain, and, indeed,• she is grumbling at
the demand for so large an amount ; but there can be
little doubt that she will accept the offer, and the Prime
Minister evidently holds the matter to be virtually settled.
confidently anticipate, the
A few months hence, we may
great unreclaimed territory will be added to the p ,ssessi?ns
of the North American Confederation. The. fact remains
that so long as the land belongs to a trading corporation, it
must continue a desert. Now that the North American
colonies have been organised into a Confederation, the
'
time has come for transferrer a magnificent territory from
ril!ers who are guided by the principles of the counting:
houiB alone, to rulers who are gn:de,l by the dictates of
an imperial policy. But in the -act of transfer we must
not forget to guard " vested interests." We do not refer to
those of the company, which will take care of itself ; hut to
those of the aboriginal inhabitants, the Indian tribes. When
we resigned our ancient control over Canada, and made the
colony eelf,governing, we required the inhabitants to
undertake the responsibilities as well as share the comforts
of virtual independence. Among those responsibilities
was unquestionably the fulfilment of the bargain made
with the Indians ; but the colony has neglected that duty.
It would be satisfactory to learn that the Imperial
Government has urged the Canadians to perform it; and
at least, now that, we are to place the Indians of the
Hudson's Bay Territory under the rule of the Canadian
Government, we-must take precautions against any
_denial otjuatictotk. Iplese aborigines. I