The Sun.
London, England, 1858-05-25 00:00:00

sible with the publication of the despatch. It was
palpably intended to restore Lord PALMERSTON
to the Premiership, and to confer on him the
political dictatorship to which he aspired.
Lord SHAFTESBURY threw himself, heart and
soul, into this intrigue. On Monday he gave
notice of moving the resolution agreed on at the
Sabbath-day meeting. If he were not present in
person at that assembly, he was thoroughly
acquainted with the nature of the proceedings,
and acted on that knowledge. He derived his
inspiration from headquarters ; and we confess
that we can see but little distinction between what
he so emphatically denies, and what he is com-
pelled to admit—between being a concoctor of the
artful scheme, or lending himself thereto, and
throwing the weight of his character into the
same balance with the Kojectors.
But he was not satisfied with the unpleasant
position in which he had involved himself, but by
a spasmodic plunge contrived to make a move-
ment analagous to the unpleasant passage from the
" frying pan into the fire !" He felt that it was
necessary to do something to retrieve himself, and
to stimulate the waning enthusiasm of his quondam,
admirers. He accordingly addressed a letter to
the Jupiter Tonans of Printing-house-square, com-
mencing with a grave inaccuracy, declaring that
the Prime Minister stated that he (Lord SHAFTES-
BURY) had attended a political meeting on Sunday
at Cambridge House, and emphatically denying
that he had done so. We pointed out the defi-
ciency of that attempted vindication—that he did
not venture to assert that he was not visiting at
the mansion in Piccadilly while the plot was under
discussion, or that he was not the first to act in
carrying out the artfully-contrived scheme. We
also explained that, although he heard Lord
DERBY'S address, and the imputations so freely
cast on his conduct in becoming the champion of
that factious plot, it was not "until after many
days' chewing the rueful oud" that he attempted
to make any denial.
It now appears, from the Premier's letter,
which will be found in another part of our im-
pression, that he made no such statement as
that ascribed to him by Lard SHAFTES-
BURY. His very words were —" I do
not know whether 'he (Lord SHAFTESBURY)
attended it ; but I presume ho had communicated
to him the result of that Sunday meeting," It
did not, however, suit his purpose to grapple
with the real facts of the case, and therefore, after
a week's silence, when he had many opportunities
of correcting himself, he chose to ride off on a
collateral issue, and to misrepresent the words of
a brother Nobleman ! Surely to have applied to
Lord DERBY in his place in Parliament would be
the more just, as well as the more courteous pro-
ceeding ; and we do not envy the mental obliquity
that thinks otherwise.

The Liberals, and their would-be leaders, will
now have a few days to consider their position.
The latter will, we opine, return to Westminster
considerably cooled in their ardour for place, by
the result of the three nights and a-half's debate.
The former will, many of them, learn their power,
and will see that a little honest determination
not to be dragged through the mud by their lordly
leaders, is quite enough to make these leaders do
!heir bidding. We hope the lesson will not bo
lost on the independent Liberals. It is rumoured
hat there were many traitors in their ranks—so
much the worse for them, had it come to a disso-
ution ; but those who remained faithful were
vac) enough to compel the reluctant ex•Preunier
to order his lieutenant, CARDWELL, to retreat.
The independent electors now see that they can
heat even PALMERSTON and RUSSELL combined I
Even the union cemented by a dinner was not
strong enough to vanquish the sturdy rebels, who
maintained that it was their duty to vote, neither
for PALIIERSTON, nor for RUSSELL, nor for dear
ad party, but for honest truth, and for the con-
lituencies which sent them.
Now, let the Independents maintain their posi-
ion. They can effect vast good by so doing.
They will be the very salt and leaven of the house.
We will do the Tories the justice to believe that
they are not so ungrateful as the Whigs. Tories
Rio not keep out of office the best men of their
party because considerably in advance of them-
selves. Lord STANLEY, Sir JOHN PAKINGTON,
and Sir FITZROY KELLY, all are welcome to their
Cabinet and Ministry, though all so much in ad-
vance of their Premier ; they have given him
support, and he acknowledged it in forming his
Government. HOW different from the Whigs I
Who has even thought of seeing Mr. MILNER
GIBSON, Mr. BRIGHT, Mr. ROEBUCK, and other
Liberals of high standing, in a Wbig Cabi-
net? Had Tories had corresponding men,
would they have left them outsiders ? We affirm
that there is no comparison between the Whigs
and the Tories in the position accorded by each
to the most liberal members of their respective
parties. There is an intolerable selfish family
exclusiveness about the Whigs, from which the
Tories, in constituting a Cabinet, appear to be as
free as men can well be. We believe, there-
fore, that the same more genial spirit of fair-
ness may lead them to concede some of the points
on which the advanced Liberals have set their
hearts. The Tories would not like those points
per se ; but then the Independent Liberals have
stood honourably by them, as a shield against
party manoeuvres. They have refused to let the
family clique turn them out merely to instal
themselves again in office. Lord DERBY and Mr.
DISRAELI may well consider that they are entitled
to some quid pre quo ; and, by conceding it, not
only would consistently enough show political gra-
titude for political support, but they would, we
can well imagine, get through many sessions.
Lord DERBY confesses himself in a minority in
the House of Commons. He must govern, there-
fore, by concession in some things in which con-
cession is not dishonourable. To whom can he
concede ? The Pahnerstonians he can never re-
concile ; they want office—office only. He can
reconcile them only by turning out. The Inde-
pendent Liberals, on the other hand, do not care
about office—at least but few of them do. They
really want measures, not men. He may conci-
liate them and keep in the Government
too. Not only that, but he may Com-
pletely take the wind out of Whig sails
for many a long year.
Take the Ballot ; it is
not, properly speaking, a
Radical more than a
Tory measure. It is simply a measure to give every
man his own vote, and to free him from corrupt-
ing influences. Mr. DISRAELI himself has warmly
espoused it ; his letter to the electors of Maryle-
bone now lies before us, in which, speaking of
Triennial Parliaments and the Ballot, he observes,
" Unless these measures be conceded, I cannot com-
prehend how the conduct of the Govermnent can ever
be in harmony with the feelings of the people." This
is true now as ever, especially of the Billot.
Now, let but the present 'Ministry make up its
mind to concede this point, and they will find the
advantage of being " in harmony with the feelings
of the people." The Ballot is sure to be carried.
Et few years sooner can make no difference to an
empire, but a few years are an important part of
the life of a Government. Let the Tories but
have the manliness to meet the people on this