The Sun.
London, England, 1842-10-04 00:00:00

4* ,-nalf.

LONDON:
TUESDAY AIORNING, OCTOBER 4, 1842.

The more we consider Lord ASHBURTON'S
correspondence wit:t Mr. WEBSTER, the more
reason we find to praise his frank and manly
proceeding. During his Parliamentary career,
Lord ASHBURTON was so remarkable, and par-
ticularly of late years, for using what are called
see-saw arguments, that it was commonly said
of his •peee:tes that one part answered the other.
The Noble Lord refined and qualified so much
that be left his bearers in doubt whether he had
ever formed a decided opinion. Knowing that.
presumed infirmity of the Noble Lord's mind,
we certainly did him, when he was appointed
Ambassador to the United States, the injustice
of describing him as an unfit person to under-
lake so important a mission. We now acknow-
ledge our error in answer to both opponents and
criends, and feel much less reluctance to do that
han regret at having fallen into it.
No journalist in the empire has been more
agreeably disappointed by the Noble Lord's
rank and decisive mode of proceeding than we
have. He seems to have carried on his nego-
dations with the spirit of an enlightened
nerchant, who knows to the fraction of a
i.rthing what the thing is worth which he :wants
o 'buy—who states at once what he wilt give for
t, and who cannot be overreacjied. His second
otter to Mr. WEBSTER, published in The Sun,
eems to us to form quite an epoch in diplomatic
..r6,_teedings. It goes stpaigth to the object in
-iew, a,,d states clearly what he is prepared to
oncede and what to refuse.

After noticing the supposed disadvantage of
cieaking first, which be nevertheless readily
.aes—after a just allusion to " an earnest desire,
'hich has distinguished his political lirp, to
Aaintain peace and promote harmony between
ie two countries"—after appealing to Mr.
trEBSTER to bear testimony that, in their in-
drmal communication, he had rejected "those
vices and manoeuvres which are supposed
nomntly to be the useful tools of ordinary
plomacy"—after explicitly stating that they
ere to avoid controversy, agreeably to which
he had not communicated to Mr. WEBSTER an
dditional volume of controversial matter he had
i;en supplied with"—after thus 'throwing aside
the tons of verbiage which have been spoken
ad printed to support the claim of each country
) its own line, the Noble Lord comes to what
ione can be the mode of settling the dispute, that

in fact a new line is to be traced between the State
Maine and the Province of -..N-ew Brunswick."
is his short and off-hand way of getting rid
• all the, diplomatic notes, and protocois of
4eeting's, under which the interest of the two

Aions 'had been buried. Probably this rejec-
on of ten years' eloquent and enlightened dis-
:ssions, including, moreover, the notes of Mr.
ANNING, the ulaster of the late Minister for
oreign Affairs, may give us a clue to the anger
the Globe a:“.1 the Morning Chronicle. Merci-
ssly did the new negotiator, in the frankness
.rd simplicity of his good sense, cast aside all
,e rubbish of his predecessors; and, if he offended
,e of them, he succeeded—which we are now
rsuaded Lord PAI.3zERSTOs never would have
!ne-- iii ensuring peace to the two countries.
The principle on which the Noble Lord pro-
eded was one which we have already praised.
e recommends that they sh3uld " keep in
nd ',he intentions of the framers of the first
.aty- of peace in 1783, as expressed in the
•e.amble to the provisional article, in the fol-
Ting words Whereas reciprocal advantage
d,inirtual convenience are found, by experience,
form the only foundation of peace and friend-
'p between States.'" The Noble Lord, looking
the peace and friendship of the two countries,
king their reciprocal advantage and mutual
Avenience, and knowing that to revive dis-
';es about the old lines would make
!.!ni lose sight of, these principles, prt-
,!ds at once to trace a new line. Without
advantage of having seen these statements,
t: guided only by common sense, we did, on the
t. ult., treat the attempt of the Chronicle to
.:!p alive the discussion of the old lines es mere
veiling, when a new line, co,iveniect to both
:ions, had beeti adopted. We are phased to
• d our views confirmed by the words of the
city of 1783, and by Lord AsnRURTON'S conduct.
'‘'he Noble Lord then proceeded to lay down
I new line on these principles, and to state
silicitly the stipulations he would agree to, and
concessions he would make, including the
4igation of the St. John's, in conjunction with

a settlement of the boundary. And from the
plan he then sketched out, we cannot see that he
afterwards consented to make one important de-
viation, except giving up the Madawaska set-
tlement on the south side of the St. John's. He
defended the right of the settlers very ably, but he
was compelled in the long run to yield to the more
stringent reasons, which suggested the propriety of
establishing the river as the boundary between
the two States. Regretting that a loyal people,
however small in numbers, should be separated
from a Government to which they are attached,
we must admit that the arguments against Eng-
land retaining a strip of territory on the Ameri-
can side of the river were insurmountable, and
Lord ASHBURTON could not avoid giving up the
Miclawaska settlers. If, when all their rights of
property were ensured to them, we must call
theirs a sacrifice-we must add that it was such
a sacrifice as States ever make of their subjects in
wars, to secure a general advantage.
With great tact and great gentleness did Lord
ASHBURTON pursue this negotiation, at one time
seriously endangered, to a close. Mr. WEBSTER,
from having, we presume, been longer engaged
with the subject than the Noble Lord, could not
throw aside so completely as Lord ASHBURTON
did the rubbish of former discussions, and some-
times, in conjunction with the Commissioners
from Maine, he insisted too much on the
old claims, and forgot that they were
to establish, "by compromise," a " new
line," which should be " mutually and
reciprocally advantageous." Finally, as we
already know, Lord ASHBURTON'S desire of
settling, " on amicable and equitable terms," a
controversy "which the authorities of the two
countries had tried in vain for half a century to
effect," overcame all obstacles, and he concluded
a treaty which seems to us calculated to give to
both countries security and peace, without sacri-
ficing one tittle of the honour of either.

-We see with satisfaction that the condition of
the working classes continues to claim the first
place in the consideration of the most intel-
ligent journals.
" It is not sufficient," says the Westminster Review,
" to have suppressed the disturbances, we must investi-
gate their cause and prevent their recurrence." "The
late insurrections have shown that there can be no im-
punity for further negligence or delay. Let our rulers
lay its impressive warnings to heart, and he wize in
time. Let them manfully grapple with the great sub-
ject of popular wrongs and popular distress, without
wasting more years in party warfare which has already
so alienated the people.'
The Times of yesterday, in an article, much of
which commands our assent, had the following
observations. We quote them for their own
weight and truthfulness, and the warning they
breathe, as well as for the assent we give them :
"Right or wrong, too, it has furnished some tolerable
test to those who can examine and judge, of the force,
combination, and energy with which a large body of
these classes are now able to pursue an object on
which they have set their wills. It has shown a tre-
mendously extensive body, possessing—whether by
persuasion, or personal influence, or mere organiza-
tion, or well applied force, or fraud, or, which is most
fig, nidable of all, by real and settled community of ob-
ject—a power of moving ataheir will an overwhelm-
ing portion of the manufacturing workmen of the
kingdom. And certainly not the least threatening
characteristic of the movement is the degree to which
this body has fulfilled its own plans of a peaceful war-
fare. Not that it has actually abstained from vio-
lence : yet that violence has been controlled within
definite limits, and has been exercised with a delibera-
tion and purpose which distinguish it broadly from a
mere outbreak of temporary feeling—a riot of Mer-
thyr colliers or of Bristol bargemen."
"If there be any destined historian of the British
convulsions of the nineteenth century, he will distin-
guish them from all others as having been effected by
men without property, but who could read, write, and
understand each other—neither the senseless outbreak
of undirected masses, nor the orderly change of which
Nobles and Parliament are the guiding and balancing
principle—a movement of numbers against wealth and
rank, yet no Jacquerie or servile war ; deliberate and
progressive, yet owning no allegiance to the existing
order of things, appealing to no present or past con-
stitution, professing no reverence for the recognised
laws and distinctions of society—not the work of am-
bitious genius or blind despair, still less of sober pa-
triotism, but of an unsound and widely spread intelli-
gence—of a conscious power and fancied wisdom in
those who think they must gain by convulsion ; or-
ganized not so much at the bidding of one or two able
and influential speakers, as by a slow experimental
process, by partial trials of strength, and by constant
arid general communication of ideas among large bo-
dies of tolerably acute and instructed men."
The Review gives, from the personal knowledge
of the writer, an example of the discipline and
order observed by the Turn-outs, which we will
also quote :
" In one case, where a numerous party assembled at
the house, and marched through the garden and
grounds of a gentleman of large property, residing
near the seat of the disturbances, they promenaded in
correct procession, never strayed from the gravel
walks, never touched a single flower, or committed
the smallest injury ; and one of the leaders called the
attention of the gentleman to the regularity of their
march, and made him observe that to each forty men
there was a captain or constable attached, whose duty
it was to preserve order among them, and whom they
were bound to obey."
Our daily Contemporary, after dwelling so em-
phatically on our " Jacquerie, deliberate and
progressive," does not jump to the conclusion like
some other Tories, that half our towns must be
engulphed ; on the contrary, lie quotes M. DE LA
-MARTINE to show that the " world is becoming
mechanical," or manufacturing, and that we must
give a soul to manufactures, that take them as
a man takes a wife, and make the best he can of
her. The conclusion our Contemporary draws is
that "we must change the men," and this is to
done "by plain, practical zeal, in subordinate
instruments, which will fix itself un the spot, and
devote itself to the work." In other words, our
Contemporary relies on establishing zealous
priests in every small district, as a mean,
of correcting ,and controlling that fin midabie
organization, " guided by intelligence a;,d
moving at will an overwhelming portion of the
manufacturing- population," which he has
brought under notice. We will not reiterate
our own opinions, often expresses, that the
Church and the priesthood are utterly incom-
petent and inefficient to the great and necessary
end proposed; we will only say that if men in
authority can suggest no other and better means
than the priesthood to rule, govern, and guide
the multitude, there is much ground fur future
glamor. If the priesthood had indeed preserved
and acted on the true spirit of Christianity, the
religion of love—of which the one great idea is
that of self-sacrifice—they might impart " that
soul to manufacturers" which they want, and
guard against that " hardness of heart to which

those nations are prone who make a God of
gold." Unfortunately for the country, the
clerxy, on whom the Times relies to give a soul
of love to manufacturers, are as much poisoned
and corrupted by the love of gold as the most
avaricious manufacturers.

We have given in another part of the paper a
portion of the lengthened correspondence ez:rried
on in- nearly two months betweep Lord Asti-
BURTON and Mr. WEBSTER: relative to the
Boundary treaty, and ..i.e glad to find that it
confirms the flout-I:able opinion generally enter-
' tained of the candour and ability with which his
Lordsl,4 conducted the negotiations. The first
letter is from Lord ASHBURTON, dated Washing-
ton June 13, and contains a general view of the
long-continued controversy with an intimation
that he was authorised to treat for a conven-
tional line. The American Minister in reply
statcs that he is duly authrised to prooceed to
the consideration of all the disputed points, and
respectfully
invites his Lordship to state gene-
rally
his view of the case, and the expectation of
his Government. The
vitation is accepted
displays
n
iliffi:rs widely from thatl
long, wmlaysanner in which this in-
much frankness,-and
hiteohrmia,
sitoaohdofte
Sao ‘mv i
ttl :
nes:i:rd in those
times obscure State
Papers called protocols.
i. 1 trust," says the Noble Lord, " that you
will have perceived in the course of my hitherto
informal communications to you, that I approach
my duties generally without any of those devices
and manoeuvres which are supposed to be the
useful tools of ordinary diplomacy. I have no
other mode of acting than an Open, plain dealing,
and I therefore disregard willingly all the disadL
vawage of complying with the invitation given
me to be the first to speak." He then

`yr
A '1,41,14;
oe. ',„.llkio.4tlitrt;tSQ'l'octo;;gpk,,tt:v
"iv% , • • ,
- '