The Sun.
London, England, 1828-10-10 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE LONDON JOURNALS.

At a crisis of such infinite delicacy as this,
when the Government is feeble and the country
feverish, it seems to us a most important object
to uphold a right spirit in our countrymen, and
to direct it rightly ; because, if we should ever
for a moment give way, either to false theories
of political action, or to feelings unworthy of a
great people—such as have a tendency to impair
oiir strength at home, at the same time that we
are compelled by their adoption to acquiesce
implicitly in the resolves of other Powers, where
foreign interests are concerned—there is no force
in the composition of the - present Government
of Englandpublic to
mind,
but,
withstandon n
the
caony, vicious t
rary ,an übiasnd eor
understood
the
t ood
inclination to take advantage of the most perni-
cious prejudices by Which the baseSt factious of
the most corrupt communities could he in-
fluenced—namely, those which would lead to
the assumption of unjust authority over their
fellow-citizens, and to the abandonment of that
which is just and wholesome in relation to fo-
reign states. The two maxims which the exist-
ing crisis makes it necessary to impress upon the
minds of Englishmen are, justice from fi,_
reigners ; and, that we may demand it•with con-
fidence, justice to each other. If the people of
England, as we have already hinted, suffer them-
selves to be seduced by hots blooded fanatics into
a denial of justice to their own brethren, they
will be likewise driven into the arms of those
sophists who would deter them from " inter-
meddling," as it is called, with the polky of
other nations. That this repugnance to inter-
meddling is a foolish disposition, we are pre-
pared to show. If England had nothing to fear
but the landing of an enemy upon her own soil,
and no property to defend but her agricultural
produce, it is probable that by enrolling a
militia on the . principles of that of Switzer-
land, and letting the world take its course,
she might remain for half a century unmolested.
We need not speculate upon mere dreams.
England, whether wisely or not, has made
numberless foreign conquests ;—whether happily
or not, she has launched her commerce upon
everyssea, and moored it to every shore upon
the earth's surface ; whether for her security and
tranquillity we say not, but there is no political
occurrence in either hemisphere of a nature to
aff'eet the spirit of any Government, or the con-
dition of any known people, in which Great
Britain, by virtue of that same commercial and
colonial existence which contains a portion of
the life-blood of her own body, has not a direct
and substantial interest, - sufficient, not merely to
justify, but to require a positive interference for
the " public, good" of the empire. The cry in
favour of indifference to the affairs of other
countries—to their forms of government—their
changes of dynasty—their wars—their treaties—
their international transactions, is, in the extent
to which some men carry it, altogether indefen-
sible and absurd. The scheme of being sees,
and " keeping to ourselves and our own islands,"
would be an exceedingly plausible scheme, if we
had no rights .or interests beyond the precincts
of these islands ; and if, moreover—which is
well worth considering—other States would
leave us to enjoy our isolated system undis-
tuibed. But every colony of England is Great
Britain—every English merchantman is Great
Britain : we cannot look on tamely if we would
—we cannot sleep on in quiet ; for if our neigh-
bours did not wake us by mere noise, they soon
would try what pinching and kicking might ac-
complish. The debts incurred by our succes-
sive wars are alleged as arguments against our
interference with foreigners. The debts may be
one consequence, and an evil consequence, of
the warlike promptitude of England ; and so
far as those debts were - aggravated by misma-
nagement, whether imbecile or corrupt, we can
say nothing for them. But how many of
these wars since the time of the revolution
were unwise ? The war of the succession
was undertaken on the most solid grounds
of policy, and its object failed from no cause
whatever but the baseness of an Administration
of Tory traitors. The war of 1756 was to pre-
serve a Protestant Ally in Europe from destruc-
tion, and the British colonies in America from
conquest ; they are both sound objects, and we
succeeded in both. The war of 1776 was a
civil war, for the defeat of justice, and provi-
dentially justice triumphed ; but the portion of
debt incurred through that contest was not an
effect of the system of interference so much
complained of withfiffeign states. The war of
1793, this journal has always maintained, was
forced upon Great Britain by the calculated hos-
tility of BrisSot and his colleagues. Why it
price
tist:eis
“sseLer;
was continued to the overthrow of Buonaparte,
Had
we need not explain : it was a death struggle,-
linestimable—it was
slay .or be slain,—and we destroyed him who
ourbsought
e independenceot ridestruction.
purchased
asa nation.was
policy been
ofanyoe
fe
o preferred
etiu three
egrbey
a England,t
foreign o w
arisi occasion
a there.sio
ii
was a fourth of less moment) of the 18th cen-
tury, she might have had less debt, though of
that we are not certain ; but she would have had
less industry, less wealth, civilization, knowledge,
and of whatever constitutes the greatness of a
nation also. Having achieved this greatness, the
question comes, can she " have any safety in
littleness ?" Assuredly not. There are two
who look to no-
thing parties onb
beyond
o nstate policy ; the other, • feels that efforts
ought to be made, and risk
u incurred, when ade-
d this
passivesubject
e x :4twho one,
ne as the end of all
may be anticipated. Or the
latter class was Mr. Canning ; of the former
class,
for the first time in their Nees, are to be
found men whose only war cry is, " Down with
Mr. Canning; his policy scares us, his memory.
blasts tt
es
e value:le i
let
us
sn sacrificethe preasiel preservation of public pro_
s pub
petty and honourc
objects, and
act ill defiance of all his principles ; and then chases
the result of such sacrifice and desertion upon
hitn." We turn the attention of ourreaders to two
letters from correspondents Tunes,
which in this day's
which concur in the one design of contrasting
the conduct of' Mr. Canning with that of his
actual s
successors. There was nothing more ob-
vious than the comparative strength, and ease,
and skill, with which that lamented Statesman
wielded the same power under which the Duke
of \Vellington and his coadjutor, the Foreign
u
Secretary, appear to be daily tottering. He
laid the foundation. of permanent freedom to
Portugal under the dynasty of Don Pedro, be-
cause it was a " British interest" of no mean
order, that the right line of the House of Bra-
ganza should reign
in close alliance. with Great
Britain, and that the alliance should be cemented
by free institutions on both sides, instead of a
despotic rule being established and maintained
under the protection of Spain and the House of
Bourbon. So Mr. Canning protected Greece,
because freedom every where is a " British inte-
rest," and security to commerce a " British in-
terest," and because it was a British and an