The Sun.
London, England, 1827-11-24 00:00:00

which those interests and passions are so nume-
rinte, and so necessarily opposed as in ours,
nothing short of madness could induce us to
doubt the justice of a measure, merely because
it happened to meet the disapprobation of some.
Indeed, in every society there are persons whose
judgments are so distorted by prejudice, so
clouded by the evil dispositions of the heart, and
so perverted b habit, that the very circumstance
of a measure having met with their approbation,
would be a greund for doubting its propriety.
And, therefore, we felt not only no surprise, but
considerable satisfaction, on finding that the con-
duct, on the nart of our Government and our
fleet, which led to the battle of Navarin, should
have excited the unmeasured censure of
some of our contemporaries. We have already
joined issue on some of the charges more parti-
cularly urged, and had the satisfaction of observ-
ing the awkwardness with which our opponent
endeavoured to back out of his finis-statements.
We have also pointed out to our readers why we
conceived that, on the broad grounds of natural
justice, the Allies were justified in interfering in
the contest ; and we now purpose to endea-
vour, in like manner, to show, that, on the same
grounds, the Allied Admirals were justified in
the course they pursued previous to the battle of
Navarin. It has not been attempted to impugn
their conduct on the grounds that it was opposed
to the unlimited dictates of natural right, which
will always justify an interference in behalf of
these who are pressed down by superior force ;
but it is said that it was contrary to natural law,
so limited and restrained as to become the law of
nations. Now, if the law of nature be limited,
and the natural rights of an individual or a state
be restrained, it can only be justified by showing,
that lee who suffers under the restraint has, by
reason 0! it, received other advantages equiva-
lent to the surrender he has made. The law of
nations is different among different societies of
nations, and derives its sanction from the assent
of those who are amenable to it, who have
tacitly consented to surrender certain natural
Tights, in consideration of other advantages. It
es clear, then, that as this surrender is made in
consideration of advantages to be derived from
it, it cannot be expected from those who have
received no consideration, nor can he who re-
fuses to make the sacrifice demanded expect to
receive the consideration which was to have been
purchased by it. Under this view of the case,
it appears that if the Turks have not formed one
of that society of nations who had tacitly assen-
ted to he governed by what we call national law
they have not themselves conformed to its
exigencies—they cannot expect the advantages
derivable from it ; or that other nations should
submit, in their ietercourse with them, to those
shackles which they themselves have refused to
wear. This is the natural justice of the matter,
whatever may he the precedents which seem to
establish a contrary doctrine. That the Turks
hece never con-foriaed to the law of European
Nations is matter of history. They have never lost
time or opportunity, through their anxiety to ob-
serve established forms, and not only in its com-
mencement, but through the whole course of
its career, their war proceeds on principles of
conduct not recoknised among civilized nations.
It therefore ca,nnoe be expected, that, as regards
such a people, it >s E 0 far necessary to observe
laws to which they rofess no obedience,
as to risk the Noss of war's object for the
sake of commencing it in the formal manner
pointed out by teose laws. But, still further., it.
must be remembered that the delivery of the
Treaty of Londe n to the Ministers of the Porte
was a conditiore I declaration of war, and and it
expressly provid -.d for the commencement of hos-
tilities, without the necessity of recurring to an-
other declaratioe, unless the motives for such a
course should i,e removed by the compliance of
the Turks, for it declared, that unless a certain
line of conduct pointed out by the Treaty was
adopted by the Turks, they would have reccurse
so measures which necessarily involved the com-
mencement of hostilities. They had fixed a
mark, beyond which, if the Turks passed, the
previously declared war should commence ; and
the substance of this Treaty haying been com-
municated to Ibrahim Pacha, both- he and the
Porte knew the point at which they should ex-
pect the commencement of war. Still further,
Ibrahim Pacha had assented to the plans of the
Admirals, and pledged his faith to the observ-
ance of the Armistice agreed on. That faith he
falsified, and that Armistice he broke, by his at-
tempt to leave Navarin, and his savage slaughter
of the unresisting Greeks. So sensible was
.he that he had deprived himself of the advan-
cages of that condition which restrained the de-
claration of war involved in the Treaty of Lon-
don, that his fleet was drawn up in battle array,
:and prepared for the attack of the Allies. The
conclusion to which this circumstance irresistibly
leads us, has been endeavoured to be evaded, by
asserting that the peaceable dispositions of
Ibrahim were evident from the circumstance of
she fleets having been allowed to pass the bat-
teries unmolested, but it must he remembered
that though Ibrahim-was conscious of having
merited an attack, he did not court it. And as
he had before experienced the extreme averse-
ness of the Admirals to resort to force, he was
not without hope that he might again escape
the punishment he had provoked, and there-
fore, while he prepared his fleet for battle,
he did not think proper farther to rouse
the resentment which might otherwise eva-
porate in threats. This forbearance, therefore,
could form no ground for inferring that Ibra-
him was not conscious of having merited
an attack. It is impossible at present to say
what were the intentions of the Admirals in en-
tering the harbour of Navarin. We trust for
their own fame, as men of expanded minds
.and
generous feelings, that they were of a decisive
nature ; but, whatever they were, their entrance
in battle array was justified by the treaty of Lon-
don, and the had faith of Ibrahim, and the cir-
cumstances which led to the actual commence.-
ment of the action are only of any importance in-
aemuch as they serve to show that time Turks were
prepared for, snd expected an attack, and were
accordingly in tbat nervous state of hostility and
ancer from which such accidents (if the firing
on our boat rmest be so called) generally arise.
If, therefore, the interference of the Allies was,
as we have endeavoured to prove, originally just,
she conduct of the Admirals who gave eff'ect to
that interference, flowing, as it naturally and ne-
cessarily did from the treaty of London, and the
circumstances in which they were placed, was
not only justifiable but praiseworthy.—Nete
Times.
It is said in a letter from Leyden, in a con-
temporary of yesterday—" I have found in all
Continental Clergy, an universal complaint
of the very low state of theological learning; in
England, and great curiosity to ascertain the
cause that our
country has ceased to make het
wonted contributions
to the important field of
Biblical criticism."
Lewth, seventy years ago,
ahartsed his brethren
generally with ignorance of