The Sun.
London, England, 1869-05-03 00:00:00

The Times, in commenting on the recent outrages In
Ireland, observes that when a very great evil is to be
traced to its source in order to extinguish it, it is not plea.
sant to be met by a continual succession of negatives. The
real source of the Irish mischief is not land, it is not
religion, it is not money, it is not this, it is not that ; it is
nothing that can be touched, seen, named, or described.
The writers and orators who reprehend British obtuse.
ness or shortsightedness when it attempts to inves-
tigate the mystery may succeed in stopping us
at every point, but they do not mend the matter.
They only make it worse. They only succeed in
proving that any man may shoot any other man for
anything in Ireland, and that the presumption of justice
will always be in his favour. The worst aspect of these
outrages is that which regards the people themselves. That
landowners should be made miserable, unsympathetic, and
harsh, and that now and then their fears should prove too
well-founded, bad as it may be, is yet a less evil than the
moral debasement of a whole race. England, as the
leading part of the Empire, has been held answerable,
in proportion to her power, for the moral condition
of the Irish. "Are they murderers? Then whose fault
is it ? " With regard to the past, it has been too
much overlooked that Ireland has always been unable
to do much for itself, but able to do a good deal
to spoil the work of others. There never was any states-
man or class in this country who could do much for Ire-
land, whatever their intentions might be ; and the
difficulties have always been as much from Ireland as on
this side. We hope for the best when we repair manifest
grievances and redress palpable wrongs. But even here
philosophers tell us we shall have to pay up arrears in the
injurious effects of a triumph justly extorted from us. A
time will, however, come, and we trust it will come soon,
when the Voice of Imperial law and the hand of Imperial
justice will be alike strengthened by the possession of a
better conscience, and then possibly they will be better
respected in Ireland.
The Standard says that an impartial and delibera
comparison of the speeches delivered by the leaders of the
Opposition on Friday night, and the replies of the mem-
bers of the Government in the two Houses of Parliament,
will convince every man that the allegation against the
policy of Mr. Gladstone has been fully sustained, and that
the answer is most feeble and insincere. The case against
the Government is this. They succeeded to office with
Ireland more than usually tranquil and contented. The
Fenian conspiracy had been effectually suppressed
by the prompt and vigorous measures of the Conser-
vative Government. The principal leaders of the
movement were in prison, and the neck of the rebel-
lion was broken. So peaceful and orderly was the state
of Ireland that one of the first things promised by Mr.
Gladstone was that he should not ask for a renewal of the
suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. We ask every
man not blinded by party prejudices to consider whether
the result has verified these predictions. The Liberal
(lovernment, with its programme of heroic remedies, has
been in existence for barely six months. In those
six months what has been the condition of Ireland ?
One of the first acts of Mr. Gladstone, who
had some reason for trusting that the Fenians
would no longer be his enemies, was to let loose
a batch of the principal criminals, whose apprehension
and trial had cost the country so much trouble,
anxiety, and expense. The effect of this notable piece of
clemency we are all able to perceive in the acts and words
of the released prisoners and of their friends. Is not Mr.
Gladstone's bill intended to administer to the relief of the
Irish discontent ? But, if so, it is not too early to look for
some signs of the coming amendment in the Irish con-
dition. In what perverse spirit are the Irish breaking out
into a new and more violent course of disorders, precisely I
when the axe is being laid to the root of what we are told
is the great national evil—the one immediate and pressing
abuse?

The Herald, referring to a recent article by a contem-
porary, says what Mr. Gladstone means by " justice to
Ireland" he has already told us, and failing any other
definition by our contemporary, we must needs fall hack
upon it. Justice to Ireland, in Liberal parlance, means
governing Ireland according to the wishes of the majority
of the Irish people. What the wishes of the majority of
the Irish people are, now that they have been fostered and
abetted by Mr. Gladstone's and our contemporary's policy,
our contemporary shews plainly enough that it knows.
As we have said, it looks forward to an "imminent
and deadly struggle with Ultramontane aggres-
sions, repeal agitation, agrarian crime, and Fenian
madness." In other words, after encouraging " repeal
agitation, agrarian crime, and Fenian madness
into open revolt by our own gratuitous legislation—or
rather by the gratuitous legislation of one party in the
State, for its own mere party purposes—baying granted
them what they never asked for, pretending that we did
so because we were afraid of them, and thus goaded them
into asking for what they do want and we never intend to
grant, simply because we are in reality not afraid of them
at all, let us exterminate them and drench the island in
blood, in order to extricate ourselves from a diffionity of
our own creating ! And this is—justice to Ireland ! It
is the most extraordinary form of justice, perhaps, ever
presented to a people. Where the people happen to he
ignorant and impetuous, it is sure to bring about the
results for which it professes to be working.
The Telegraph thinks it is useless to conceal a fact
which everybody is repeating—Mr. Brig,lit's speech of
Friday night was scarcely felicitous. That remarkable
address shews the price which we must pay for the
luxury of having in the Cabinet a man who, while
gifted with rare political genius, has not been trained
in the restraints and trammels of official life.
Mentally, Mr. Disraeli and Mr. Hardy might
have rubbed their hands with the fierce glee of faction
when they heard Mr. Bright declare that, not the
Prime Minister, but he, was ready to propose a
plan by which justice might be done to the
cultivators of the Irish soil. Later in the evening
Mr. Hardy scornfully asked who was Prime Minister
of England--Mr. Gladstone or Mr. Bright ? And in a
blast of rhetorical indignation the Tory lieutenant inquired
whether Mr. Bright was so assuredly the dictator of the
Cabinet as to possess the right of speaking in the name of
the Government, when he announced that he would pro
pose a scheme for the settlement of the Irish land dispute,
and when, with no uncertain finger, he pointed to that
scheme with which his name is specially identified. Mr.
Gladstone's answer was a curt "No." To Tory ears
the monosyllable must have been singularly sweet,
since it seemed to indicate that the unanimity
of the present Cabinet is not proportioned to
its intellectual and oratorical strength. Look

ing to Mr. Bright's training, we Cannot affect
wonder at the indiscretion of his unguarded statement;
nor can we suppose that he deliberately intends to act in
defiance of his colleagues. We simply believe that the
unlucky sentences involved no more serious fault than a
slip of the tongue. Nevertheless, it was an untoward slip
that should not occur again. Mr. Bright will doubtless
see, that to strengthen the greatest Ministry which the
country has known for a generation, the President of the
Board of Trade must in practice recognise the fact that
there is a time for silence as well as for speech.
The Star defends Mr. Bright from the attacks made
upon his recent speech on Ireland. All that Mr. Bright
did on Friday was to repeat his confession of faith in
reply to one of the grossest attacks ever made upon
the civic probity and discretion of a statesman.
'We do not believe any member of the Government
was offended. It is not members of the Government
who will complain of these reiterations of Mr.
13right's notorious opinions. They understand each
other thoroughly, and will agree upon an Irish land
measure without more difficulty than they experienced
in framing the Irish Church Bill. It is quite true
that Mr. Gladstone said "No" when Mr. Hardy
asked whether Mr. Bright had authority to an-
nounce the policy of the Cabinet ; but considering
that he had made no announcement whatever,
and that the firm and avowed resolve of the Government
was that no announcement should be made, there was
nothing remarkable in this incident. Office is a thing for
which Mr. Bright would never sacrifice a conviction, but
lie is the last man while in office to be insensible to cor-
porate responsibility or to be wanting in loyalty to his
leader. A competent statesmen will always be as capable
e explaining why he agrees to something short of the
t,oliey which he has theoretically supported as he is of
elucidating that policy itself. But office would be spurned
Ly the highest order of public men if the bare possibility
that they may have hereafter to concur in a compromise
avere held to require such a concealment or suppression of
their present opinions as would darken, starve, and
enfeeble the public mind which they are bound to enlighten
and to invigorate.

The Times says that if the speech of Mr. Sumner against
the Alabama Claims Treaty purported to be a mere
expression of personal opinion, it would have deserved less
motice. When indictments of this kind are drawn up by
no individual, on his own responsibility, against a whole
Nation, they are best answered by a i
drilled silence.
Sumner, howe,:er, fills no ordinary position in the
United States Legislature. Ilk speech, though delivered
tn Secret Session, was forthw;th published by order
ut the Senate, and has already been republished
in this country. His sentiments were not only
Adopted expressly by several of his colleagues, but
Afterwardi received an apparei&t ratification from an
Almost unanimous vote. Whether Mr. Sumner has sue.
seeded in reaching a point of view from which he can see
the.question in its real proportions the world must now
dec:To us he seems to-have greatly weakened the case
ungthally presented by Mr. Adams. I;efore that case is
again considered, it will need to be carefully stripped of
r
. Sumner's passionate arguments in aggravation of
~larn.
ges. Thus limited, it will be entertained by the
.I.4l.tish Government and people with a sincere desire to
satisfy any legitimate demands which can be established
ssumouriust us either in a Court of Equity or -in a Court of
A

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS,