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

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 these 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 purpe ; ut of
this about £1,850,000 would be for the purchas ose
of laond, a
considerable portion of which would be profitably let, reduc-
ing the actual sum for the works to £7,150,000. lie 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 Government,
he observed, did not ask the whole sum at once, but 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 £9,000,000
as they were required. He reminded the House, in conclu-
sion, that annuities to the amount of £580,000 would expire
n the year 1861, 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. IV 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 eircumvalating 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 apprehension, 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. Nov,
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. MKT of Lottery
renown, would make the House believe that the
expense of these fortifications would cost double
the amount proposed—even twenty-four 2111.111011,9
—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 fur 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 cur 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 he
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 Muses of the Lebanon."
Nay, the writer goes on to catalogue by name the
leading members of the executive committee " com-
posed of NAIDIKICANO; ASSAD, son of ISAAC TABET;
MICHAEL FARGALLA, native merchants and bankers
of Beyrout ; and it is said that AYOUB TItABILSY, a
merchant of Deir-el-Kamar, was attached to them.
Not only are 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-
Llltion. He even goes so far as to add—" It is