The Sun.
London, England, 1868-05-02 00:00:00

Orders by post punctually attended to.

111 HE " SUN" NEWSPAPER.-G. It. GLENIE
delivcr3 the L NTE EDITION at Chelsea, 7.40; Kilburn,
8; Starch-green, 8; Woolwich, 7.10; Uxbridge, 9.•20; 'Watford,

rgiHE THIRD EDITION OF 64 TIIE SUN,"
giving all the SPORTING NEWS of the day. may he seen
at JEMMY M tNI ON'S house, " The Swan and Horse Shoe,"
Little Britain, City, E.C.

TItE LATE EDITION of " TIE SUN " at
JAMES SPEEDY'S, "The Wehington,"Wellington-street,
Strand.

Ir. LATE EDITION of " THE SUN " at
J. SMITH'S, 3a, Bow-street, Covent-garden.

E LATE RDITION of " THE SUN " at
4_, W. SMITH'S, ""tarnden St.res," 78, Park-street, Camden

torrn

LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 2, 1868.

The question now uppermost in all men's minds
is, " What will,the Ministry do ?" But there is an-
other equally important and perhaps more difficult
of solution, which is, " What will the Opposition
do ?" It is evident that Mr. GLADSTONE has made
up his mind to do something remarkable this ses-
sion, but what that may be is as yet undetermined.
It is by no means so necessary for the Ministry to
resign, as some seem to consider it is, to suit their
own wishes, for they have every right to remain in
office until the sentiments of the country at large
have been ascertained through the medium of a gene-
ral election. There is nothing to prevent Mr.
DISRAELI from putting off the dissolution until
January next, provided the Opposition are willing
to behave in a constitutional manner. We should
hope that Mr. GLADSTONE will have too much re-
spect for his own reputation to comport himself in
the manner some have foreshadowed. He must know
that in a►l probability he will have many chances
of coming into office hereafter, and need not settle
the point now or leave it as hopeless for ever. Sir C.
O'LOGHLIN, it is true, informed the house the other
evening, that it was the intention of some of the
Opposition to push the contest a l'outrance, and to
move a vote of want of confidence in tne Ministry, if
they should not resign on the question of the Irish
Church. This may be nothing but bounce, but
even if it meant more, it is to be hoped that Mr.
GLADSTONE'S own sense of the fitness of things,
and the advice and representations of his wiser
friends and followers, may induce him to put off
the evil determination referred to, and follow in a
truer, nobler, and more statesmanlike policy. It
surely requires little time and thought to show the
extreme impropriety of proceeding to the extremity
hinted at. In the first place, it would show most
effectively that the real object in view has been to
get the Liberals into office, and not to amend the
irregularities iu the Irish Church. It would be an
exhibition of factious manoeuvring, and of party
spirit triumphing over statesmanlike feelings and
public interests, alike sad and contemptible to wit-
ness. So much would it detract from the credit of
those who would resort to so paltry a device that
they would be in reality the losers in the game if
they succeeded to all intents and purposes.

If anything were needed to render the protest
against such a scheme more strong it would be the
question of the Reform Bill, and that alone is an
unanswerable argument against Mr. GLADSTONE'S
factious proposition and vexatious policy.
Why should he meddle in this uncalled-
for fashion, and dictate terms in this
arbitrary style, when so much remains to be
done in so short a time, and when so little time is
left for it to be done in. Ile is acting in an unfair
spirit altogether, and we wonder what Mr. BRIGIIT
and his school of politicians would say if the Con-
servatives had so far forgotten themselves as to bid

for officca after this fashion ? We should hear a
great dell of the want of reticence displayed by
certain grefxly politicians, and their greed for office
overcomin g their respect for constitutional usages,
and no art. It is scarcely likely that if we searched
diligently in the records of " Ilansard" we should
find a. parallel for the conduct now pursued
by th e leader of the Opposition. Who,
this time last year, dreamed that the
month of May we are now in would find us
in the midst of a struggle about the Irish Church,
and awaiting with anxiety the solution of a Minis-
terial crisis thereupon ? We believe that there
would be just the same silence about something
else. Mr. GLADSTONE'S resources are so many, and
his ingenuity so great, that he would have created a
question of vital import had none appeared ready
at hand. Mr. DISRAELI, as we said before, has
every reason on his side in adhering to the deter-
mination to remain in office until the new Parlia-
ment reassembled. A few necessary preliminaries
must be got through first, but they will not occupy
much time unless most particularly met by some_
parties in the House. Why, then, cannot this
constitutional cause be taken instead of time
being wasted and expectations disappointed by the
persistent prosecution of Mr. GLADSTONE'S schemes
and devices. If he be not content with the Irish
policy of the Government next year, what will be
easier than to challenge it ; but he wants to be first
and foremost to inaugurate the new Parliament
himself, and though he obstructed the passing of
the Reform Act of last year as much as possible, he
desires to appear as if the country owed it to him,
and actually to reap what others sowed, though
being in office at the culminating moment. Surely
the honour and patriotism of this House of Com-
mons have not fallen so low that he will be
permitted to carry out these selfish pro-
jects, and indulge in the realisation of
his ambitious aims. It is one thing to
affirm the Resolution about the Irish Church, and
another to follow Mr. GLADSTONE through thick
and thin in his perverse attempts to regain office at
any cost. Let the independent Liberals, who have
so often before been appealed to, and not in vain,
come once more to the rescue, and save, not the
Ministry—for the rise and fall of Cabinets is a
matter of minor importance compared with the
momentous interests at stake—but protect the
character of the House from reproach, and the re-
pbiudtdatiniognfoorfoffitheeeirasowthne
psaaorrtyificferoomf
cotnhseistcehnacrygeanodf

propriety.
At any rate, Mr. DISRAELI had better do his
utmost to frustrate the tricks and over-
come the obstacles that surround him.
He will have the sympathy of all who
admire independence and value perseverance;
and we still hope that, notwithstanding all the odds
against him, he may yet weather the storm, and be
able to have his opportunity of fighting the battle
fairly in the right place. The tactics of Mr.
GLADSTONE were defeated last year by the determi-
nation of the independent Liberals, and it may be
that the same result will yet come to pass through
their exertions. We can imagine nothing more
unlikely to conduce to the strength of the Liberal
party than this effort at regaining office at any
cost. This is not the first time that the leader
of the party in the House of Commons has
made factious struggles, but really the pre-
sent occasion furnishes an instance of more
inexcusable selfishness than any on record. Only
those who are hopelessly prejudiced in the matter
will refuse to admit that the circumstances in which
the Ministry are placed are exceptional ones, and
that they have just claims to consideration. On no
party grounds, on no prudential motives, in no re-
ligious interests, but for the sake of justice, for the
love of fair play which is indigenous to this coun-
try, we hope and trust that the majority of the
[louse of Commons will stand firm under the pres-
sure now put upon them, and remain true to the
trust reposed in them by their constituents. No
man of spirit would owe the rise of his party to
the devices of faction, and the most ardent '
opponent of Her MAJESTY'S Government on poli-
tical grounds may consistently support them in the
position they are now placed in. They stand at bay,
as it were, oppressed and hindered by the ceaseless
persecution of those who are greedy for office. The
general opinion throughout the country will certainly
condemn Mr. GLADSTONE should he, after all the
warnings he has received, exhibit a reckless deter-
mination to try the venture at any. cost, and put
only one object before him, that of regaining office.

The continuation of the Impeachment Trial at
Washington shows more and more clearly the
animus of the prosecutors. No shadow of impar-
tiality is kept up, no pretence of a case, for the pub-
lic interests maintained ; the bitter hostility and
personal greed of office are the only moving springs
of action. We have often commented on the
manifest injustice and unreasonableness of re-
fusing to hear evidence which plainly bears
upon the case, and this system of persecution is
being kept up more strenuously than ever as time
goes on. There is a manifest dread of eliciting too
much, a fear lest the defence should make their
case so strong as to render conviction impossible,
and thus the truth is sought to be hid rather than
brought to light. The more closely does the evi-
dence objected to affect the case, the more decidedly
is it repulsed, provided always that it is favourable
to the accused. The Chief Justice, in pursuance
of the Constitutional and judicial course he has
from the first adopted, generally decides ttat the
testimony may be received ; but when put to the
Senate, the majority almost always is found on the
side of the Radicals. We have now somevery glaring
instances of this shameful system of repression.
It will be remembered that the PRESIDENT'S counsel
put forward Mr. Secretary WELLEs, who had im-
portant evidence to offer respecting the Cabinet
consultations on the Tenure-of-Office Bill. It is
manifest that if the PRESIDENT contemplated the
infraction of the laws, his consultations with his
own Cabinet must tell powerfully against him. If
the Managers really believed that Mr. JOHNSON
had been guilty of half the offences they charge
against him, they would not be so apprehensive of
hearing the evidence of those who were most likely
to know his intentions and fathom his designs.
The Senate refused to receive the testimony of
Secretary WELLES, but we now find by the intelli-
gence brought by the Russia on the 18th ult. the
defence renewed the attempt to bring him forward.
Chief Justice CHASE decided as usual that the testi-
mony was admissable, as indeed why should it not
be? The Senate, by 26 against 20 votes, over-
ruled this decision, and by the same vote rejected
the testimony of the Postmaster-General, who was
prepared to prove that the Cabinet had advised the
PRESIDENT that the Tenure-of-Office Act did not ap-
ply to Secretaries of State appointed by Mr. LINCOLN.
Mr. EVARTS announced that this ruling excludel
the testimony of Messrs. SEWARD, M'CULLOCH,
BROWNING, and others, which the defence had in-
tended to offer. Thus a whole body of witnesses,
the best qualified from their position to know the
whole truth of the case, are summarily rejected
without any definite I eason. Very much depends
on the attitude assumed by the PRESIDENT in