The Sun.
London, England, 1828-01-05 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

A meeting of the friends of the Earl of Lonsdale
'took place on the 29th ult. to celebrate his Lord-
ship's birth-day, when Mr. Hasell—a man of some
importance, we believe, by his property, in those
parts—addressed the assembly. We do not, in
.Falstars phrase, wish the orator a better Lord (for
we believe the Earl of Lonsdale to be a very good
kind of man), but we do wish the Lord a better
orator. Mr. Risen, however, is not jealous of
rivals in his art, for he is as anxious to revive tin'
bright thoughts of pane7yrists like himself as to pro-
duce his own; he recalls that happy epithet, which
Mr. Pitt sincerely wished had awaked the man who
first uttered it, of " Heaven-born Minister." Why
did not Mr. Resell, then, call Lord Lonsdale the
" Heaven-born Lord"—Lord Lonsdale and the
Yeomanry Cavalry the " Heaven-born Yeomanry ?"
But we would call a little more attention to this
selfsame Wm. Hasell, Esq. than mere derision svoule
attract. He styles himself "An Independent
Country Gentleman ;" whereas, he is in reality no-
thing more than a receiver-general of " Heaven-
born" taxes; to which situation he ,V;IS raised by
this very family which he has been just flattering,
in consequence of his services ill their elections ;and
he may be seen twice a year, with his clerk and
ink-horn, riding the county to collect the public
money. Nay, he dares not either vote at, or can-
vass for, elections now, under dread of a penalty of
MO/. and forfeiture of office. He cannot exercise
his elective franchise as any forty-shilling freeholder
is used to do ! And this is being an independent
Country Gentleman !--Tirrics.
There are now scarcely three weeks before the
meeting of Parliament,—an epoch of some import-
ance to the country, we presume, as well as to the
parties into which the country is divided. We hope
there will be shown as much firmness by Ministers,
as there appears fury on the part of their adversa-
ries. And yet we have been told there is method
in the madness of the latter; for it is said to be pro-
posed by them,—as the House of Commons indicates
more peculiarly the sense and feeling of the people,
—not to try their strength there, but to reserve their
amendments for the Lords. This, if true, would
be to confess that they dare not throw them-
selves on their country for trial. In the House of
Commons all interests meet,—the commercial, ma-
nufacturimg, agricultural ; and a decision given, or
a judgment passed there, is the result of a common
conviction, or the prevalence of a well-combated

The Paris Papers contain a long extract from the
,11ctrian Observer, in vindication of the conduct of
that Government during the negotiations at Con-
stantinople. In order to refute the accusations
brought by the Courier against Austria, of that
Power having endeavoured to counteract the efforts
made by the Allies for the pacification of the East,
to written representation from M. Otterfels, delivered
to the Porte four months before the date of the
Treaty (of 6th July), is given in the Austrian Ob-
server. The Courier persists in maintaining that
the despatch to 31.. de Ottenfels, reprimanding him
for his conduct, is a genuine document. The French
Papers also maintain that it is genuine. The Con-
stitutionne/, in a note on the article in the Observer,
does not hesitate to say, that the oral communica-
tions of the Austrian Internuncio to the Porte were
directly at variance with the wi itten representations,
and cites the alleged reprimand as a paroof that the
oral representations were not such as the Austrian
Court wished to have the credit of making, while
the honour afterwards conferred on the Internuncio
showed that his conduct wae in reality acceptable to
hi s Court. Let us hear the Constitutionnel:—
" Written representations may express one lan-
guage, and oral representations may not be exactly
conformable to the former. We may appeal to
N. de Ottenfels in proof of this truth. The
proof that be did not act in conformity with
the intentions which it was wished to have the
credit of showing, is, that he was reprimanded. The
proof that the obstacles which this conduct opposed
to the regular march of things were not displeasing
to Austria is, that she recompenced her Envoy. M.
trOttenfels is far from being an incapable or igno-
rant man ; also far from being a maladroit states-
man. His instructions must, therefore, have been
very ambiguous, if he could not comprehend them,
or he must have well known the secret wishes of
his Government, as he did not fear acting in oppo-
sition to its direct instructions." On the other
band, the Austrian Observer distinctly affirms, that
throughout the whole course of the negotiations, the
Austrian Minister at Constantinople has uniformly
in conformity with the instructions from his Govern-
ment, exerted himself to put an end to the hostili-
ties, in the manner the most prompt, the most ra-
dical, and the most satisfactory to all parties; and
that the only difference between the Courts had re-
ference solely to the choice of means and not to the
end. With respect to the alleged reprimand, the
Austrian Observer says, " After the solemn and re-
iterared dnarations of the Turkish Ministers, that
neither the accession of Austria, nor her exhorta-
tions, joined to the menaces of the three other
Powers, would shake the resolution of the Grand
Seigner, the Austrian Internuncio had doubts which
were exclusively confined to the form of his con-
duct; and whilst he refused to present an official
Note, of which the inutility was demonstrated even
to evidence, before receiving positive instructions
from his Court, he gave the Ambassadors of the
three Allied Courts, by continuing incessantly to
make the most energetic representations to the
Porte, an incontestable proof of the real with which
he laboured in the work of peace. When a know-
ledge of these events reached Vienna, the Inter-
nuncio was reminded of his preceding instructions,
and an end was put to his scruples of the moment,
by a formal declaration, wade both to the Divan and
the Ambassadors of the three Powers; not bitter
reproaches, as the Journalists pretend, on the faith
of a document maliciously invented. The exist-
ence of this despatch, fabricated at Pera; and
which, after having passed from hand to hand, at
last found its way from the portfolio of some diplo-
matist who is not known, into the public papers, ham
been known to us these two months; and the trouble
which the Journalists give themselves in contrast.
ing it with the recompence lately granted to the
Internuncio, appears ridiculous." The motives
assigned to Austria by the Constitutionnel are contra-
dictory to each other. " We little expected," says
that Journal, " to bear the Austrian Observer speak
of humanity, when for five years she sheaved herself
h
indifferent to outraged humanity in Greece, and
never ceased to snake herself the apologist of the
Seraskier and the Paella, who carried destruction
into that unfortunate country. The true solution" of
that enigma is, that Austria dreads above every thing
a war, which might endanger her power, and weaken
the feeble ties which keep together the mass of he-
terogeneous States which compose the Austrian
Monarchy." We believe thst Austria really dreads
war, above all things, for the reason above stated,
and on account of the state of her finances. But,
then, if she was so much in dread of war,why should
she not cordially endeavour to effect such a termi-
nation of the hostilities between Turkey and Greece
as would prevent a general war ? Austria knew
wishes of the Allies previous to the signing of
tie
Treaty of the 6th of July. When that Treaty was
signed, she was aware that it would not remain a
dead letter ; she saw the preparations of the three
Powers. Of all possible results, that of a war be-
tween Russia and Turkey, which would send a Rus-
sian army across the Friuli, was the one which she
must have contemplated with the greatest uneasi-
ness. Having, then, every motive to prevent hostili-
ties between Turkey and Russia, and having known
long before the conclusion of the Treaty what
the intentions of the Allies were,- and having known
that the Treaty, after its signing, was about to be
carried into instant execution, why should she have
intrigued to thwart the Allies ? Why should she
have secretly abetted the Turks in an opposition
which she knew would bring the Russians upon
them—the result which of all others she most
dreaded ? Prince Mettemich has often been taken

for a knave (we beg the Prince's pardon for using
so coarse a term), but we never heard before that
he was a fool, which acting in this way would cer-
tainly prove him to be. We can account for the
conduct of Austria from the beginning of the Greek
hostilities to this time, on one obvious principle—a
regard to her own interest. She would have wished
to see the Greeks put down by the Turks, because
that would have at once taken from other Powers

all pretext for an interference which might have a
vciv awkward termination. She neveraffected any sym-
pathy with the Greeks; she never regretted the
cruelties to which they were exposed. Though the
accounts in the Austrian Observer, of the various
engagements Between the Turks and Greeks were,
upon the whole, the least mendacious (all accounts
from the East are more or less dashed with false-
hoods, and we only mean to say that those in the
Vienna Paper were the leant false), yet the colouring
was obviously that of partiality to the Turks.—
Austria made no mystery of her wishes. But when
she saw that the Turks were unable to effect a subjuga-
tion of the Greeks, and that the Allies were determined
to put an end to hoqilities—some of them from
one motive, :,:lrae from another—the same policy
which dictated the wish to crush the Greeks, must
have led her to wish for the success of the Allies in
overcoming the obstinacy of the Porte. Her con-
duct throughout was such as to give more weight
to her recommendations to the Porte than those of
the Allien could be expected to have. That she

cordially co-operated with the Allies, we should
therefore be disposed to believe, from a considera-
tion of what her policy would prescribe to her, even
if we had not the distinct assurances, backed by
written documents, which have been made. The
assertions of the Courier, that Austria encouraged
the Porte to resist the demands of the Allies down

to the beginning of October, are entitled to very
iittle regard, opposed as they are to probability—to
the distinct declarations of the Austrian Govern-
ment Paper, and unsupported as they are by any
proof. If there be any one Government in Europe,
of which the policy may be anticipated on any
riven subject, it is that of Austria. Her policy is
anti-revolutionary. She is opposed to all innova-
tions. She hates political reforms, of a decided
character, because of the example. She wishes
every country to remain as it was at the Peace, or
as near to the condition it was then in as possible.
She has herself more to dread from innovation than
any other Power, and we have thus a key to her
conduct. But she is consistent at all events.—
Morning Chronicle.

Among the plans said to be in agitation for the
prevention of robberies, and the improvement of the
police round the metropolis, is one making it com-
pulsory upon parishes to establish and maintain a
competent patrol. Such a plan well matured, and
put vigorously in execution, is likely, no doubt, to be
of considerable service; and as for the additional
expense to parishes, it need not be an object, as
there are few where, from a bad system of watching
and mismanagement in other matters, a great deal
more might not be saved than would be thus in-
curred. At the same time it will not do, we suspect,
to leave the appointment and superintendence of
these persons solely to parish officers or vestries,
who, in general, next to a wasteful expenditure in
unnecessary matters, are prone to exercise a marvel-
lous economy where it is least useful. Of this, the
present race of parish watchmen is an undeniable
instance. In many parishes, the guardians of the
night are selected solely from the parish paupers,
and are put upon the watch merely to take them off
the poor—rate. To say nothing of the cruelty of
exposing infirm and old people to perpetual exist-
ence in the night-air, and want of repose, it is
ludicrous to suppose that such persons can be fit for
duties which require health, strength, and activity.

In fact, so many scare-crows stuckup at the corners
of the streets -would be of quite as much use as
many of the poor automata which we see there;
and as neither the City Parliament nor the Parochial
Parliaments seem inclined to alter the matter, it is
high time that some higher authority interposed to
compel what one would have thought common
sense would long since have induced them to alter.
—.Morning Herald.
The departure of the Ambassadors of the
three Allied Powers from Constantinople, is an
occurrence which utterly extinguishes the hope to
which our weak and faithless Administration had
clung to the last, of the submission of the Porte to
the insolent and unprincipled dictation conveyed to
it by the Tripartite Treaty. By what means that
Treaty is to be enforced, now that intimidation has
been found unsuccessful, is a question of the deepest
interest to mankind, involving as it does the strong
probability of a general European war. Upon this
question the greatest variety of opinions are ex-
pressed by individuals, and there are sufficient
grounds for apprehen.,ion, that the opinions and de-
terminations of the three Governments, by whose
concurrent voice it ought to be decided, 'do
not approach more nearly to unanimity. The
opinion or determination of the English Govern-
ment it is of course impossible for us to know,
or even to guess. Probably we only share this
ignorance in common with the most intelligent
and influential Members of the Administration. We
sincerely believe that there is not one of them who
knows what to say or what to do—at least we are
warranted in this inference, from the ever-varying
language of all the organs of each of the conflicting
parties which divide and distract the Cabinet. One
day we are told that the battle of Navarin has accom-
plished all that the Treaty requires, and that no
further operations either by land or sea arc either ne-
cessary, expedient, or justifiably. The next, that
the occupation of the Principalities by the ar-
mies of Russia will be an excellent measure, fully
warranted by the Treaty, and admirably calcu-
lated to bring the Porte to reason ; but that any
advance beyond this would indicate ambitious
views on her part, and is therefore not by
any means to be permitted. And the following
day it comes out through the same authorities,
echoing in all these fluctuations as faithfully as
they can the sentiments of Ministers, that the rapid
march of Russian forces to Constantinople is the
best possible method of ending the affair triumph-
antly. Believing, as we firmly do, that the present
Administration has neither principle nor system, it
would be inconsistent as well as idle in us to consi-
der any determination to be adopted by it as more
probable than another. As to the opinion and in-
tentions of France and Russia, we are not so en-
tirely in the dark. Those Powers, through the me-
dium of an authorized and regulated press, have
communicated their sentiments to the world; and
whether it be of good or evil omen to the peace of
nations and the welrare of mankind, the fact appears
to be indisputable, that the sentiments of the French
and Russian Governments, as to the measures which
the Treaty of Intervention prescribes or interdicts
in existing circumstances, are diametrically oppo-
site. The Moniteur, the ollicial organ of the French
Government, has repeatedly declared since the atro-
city of Navarin, and since the cessation of diplo-
matic intercourse with the Porte in consequence of
that atrocity has been distinctly foreseen, that no
further measures of a warlike nature were either re-
' quired or authorised by the Treaty ; that the de-
struction of the Turkish fleet had secured the liber-
ties of Greece, by cutting off the means of reinforce-
ment to her enemy, and had thus substantially ac-
complished all the purposes of the alliance; that
' there remained 110 further instruments of hostility ;
that there existed no field of battle, which could be
employed or occupied by either party, with a view
to the defeat or the attainment of its objects; that
in short, however resolutely Turkey might
refuse compliance with the demands of the
Treaty, no active warfare could be neces-
sary against her, and that with the consent
or approbation of France none such should be at-
tempted. This is the language of the French Go-
vernment. The language of Russia is in all respects
the reverse of this, and her conduct corresponds ac-
curately with her language. She has collected a
powerful army on the confines of Turkey, and she
boldly proclaims her intention, with or without the

approbation or consent of other Powers, to advance
that army upon the dominions of the Porte, and to
continue so to advance it, till she compels the Grand
Seignior formally to submit to the terms of the
Treaty. Solemnly disclaiming all desire of aggran-
dizement, she construes the Treaty of Intervention
to impose upon her these efforts as one of its strictest
and most cogent obligations. Putting then Eng-
land out of the question, with her ambiguous
and equivocal Government, which is barely able
to carry on from day to day the domestic con-
cerns of the State, and which, so far as Fo.
reign policy is concerned, is equivalent to no
Government at all—putting England, for this very
sufficient reason, out of the question, it appears cer-
tain that if Russia should invade the Turkish domi-
nions, as she has declared her intention and fully
prepared herself to do, she will take this step not in
unison with, but in defiance of the intentions and
policy of France; not in conformity with the Treaty
of London, but in violation of it, as it is construed by
France. Thus the iniquitous Alliance falls to pieces,
but not we fear without leaving behind it terrible
traces—nor without sowing the seeds of great cala-
mity to the present generation, and providing for fu-
ture times a memorable and instructive record of the
evils which so stupendous an instance of wickedness
and folly could scarcely fail to produce.—Of the
policy of the Austrian Government we do not at
present wish to say any thing beyond the observa-
tions which we have already ventured to submit to
the Public.—Morning Post.
We took occasion to observe, the other day, in
combating an extremely idle opinion, which some of
our contemporaries have circulated, from ignorance
and inattention, and others from factious motives—
namely, that Russia would break through the stipu-
lations of the Treaty of the 6th of July, to gratify
her views of territorial aggrandisement,—that there
was in supplement of the physical force which the
other parties to the Treaty might oppose to any
such projects, were they contemplated, a moral force
in the general voice of civilized Europe, which would
not allow covenants, voluntarily and solemnly entered
into, to be so lightly dispensed with. We present to
our readers this day, a curious and interesting proof
of the truth of our doctrine, from a quarter where it
would least have been expected. Under the head
of Policy of Austria, in another column, they will
find two documents, published by a Court which has
been so often represented as the decided enemy to
every liberal institution, as the foe to all freedom of
discussion, in answer—not to the reclamations
of Sovereigns—not to the demands of Cabi-
nets—but to the still small voice of the
press, emanating from a London Newspaper
A few remarks appeared some time ago in
the Courier, partly elicited by some discussions in a
Morning Paper, partly by certain documents pub-
lished as genuine, but since denied in the Austrian
Journals; and, in answer to these remarks, the
Emperor of Austria does not disdain to submit a de-
fence of his conduct to the reading community of
England and France. Nay, so anxious is he to
avoid the chance of misinterpretation, that he con-
descends to plead his cause in French, as a more
universally understood medium of communication
than High Dutch. We are at a loss which most to
admire—the wonderful force of the little engine
which has called forth the defence we allude to, or
the frank appeal of the Potentate who has thus
fairly and fully placed himself before England and
Europe, to explain the motives of his policy
in the same Court, and by the same means, by
which they were impugned. We are bound in justice
to say, that so far as the documents go, the Emperor
has succeeded in his object ; and we most sincerely
hope, that having discovered the vast advantage of
the weapon, he will not hastily lay it down ; but
that he will, so far as the prejudices of his country
permit, allow his j0u....1i4t..at50 to use it now and
then, and with due moderation. He may easily
judge how much real power it confers on those who
have the will and the right to use it freely, by the
effect it has produced on himself. The documents,
especially the note addressed to the Porte in March
last, will be perused with interest, without any re-
ference
to the cause that gave them publicity. The
latter shows clearly, that even at that early date,
Austria, so far from thwarting, was honestly
anxious to give every possible assistance to the re-
presentations of Mr. Canning and of M. Ribeau-
pierre. And the refusal of Baron de Ottenfels to
concur in the first representations of the Allied Am-
bassadors, under the Treaty of 6th July, is, we
think, very fairly and reasonably accounted for. The
Azt,trirtn Observer positively denies that the note
blaming the Baron was genuine, and asserts that it
was fabricated at Pera,—New Times.