The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1861-09-29

M. P. rcsigning all hope of political preferment,
and almost an acknowledgment of his incapaeity
ever to become prominent member John
Sadlier, the Irish banker, who committed sui
eide on Hampstead Heath some years ago. had
been Lord of the Treasury, and Mr.. Gregory,
the member for Galway and advocate of the
rebel cause in the British Parliament, was re-
Gently rendered the same Office, but declined be-
cause it would have ruined his political pros
poets. Lord Of the Treasury is mute in the
House, but is always present to vote for the
government when o division takes place. He
is thus useful dummy, and nothing more
Now Lord Monck can point to nothing
higher in his brief official career than
having been one of those junior lords, whose
might easily be performed by the gorilla if
it could only be taught to say shear hear"
at certain intervals during the ministerial
speeches. Why Lord Monck has been deputed
to fill this important position-and especially
important at the present time-is explained by
the fact that he is the personal friend of Lord
Palmerston; and Lord Palmerston, through life,
gardless of cost and the interests of the Crown.
The English press may we'll cry out against
the insult to the Canadians involved in this
appointment. They have right to some one of
more tried capacity. 1t may be that Lord
MOnck is the possessor of genius which only
requires opportunity for its Development; but
he has shown none of it so far; and a man who
10 Mt 70 do Tho ~ ocN
such time as this ought to be selected for
qualities which be has already shown himself
to be possessed Of During their fits of pc
riodical restiveDess the Canadians are hard
people to govern, and they may soon be ex-
posed to unusual exciting causes arising from
the war in the United States. The action Of
the Governor General would in either case be
of the greatest moment to the home govern
ment, and it will be we'll for Great Britain to
run as little risk as possible in the choice of the
man to whom she entrusts SO much of her
fortunes in the New World.
The London Quarterly Review ON tho
Fate Of Our Democratic Institutions.
The London Quarterly, the organ OF old tory
ism in England devotcs an article to the discus
demonstrate the downfall Of democracy and
the impossibility Of permanence to repub-
lican institutions. To look for sympathy for
democratic government from such quarter,
or coincidence with the republic in its mis-
fortune, would be absurd. But we have a
right to fair statement of facts, and the
Quarterly has no right to assume, as it does
. Al A., A..
has it any right to make such unfounded state
ments as that the New York HERALD was
mobbcd, and compelled to change its course
The HERALD was not mobbed. That fabrication
was set afoat by the Tribune. Nor have we
changed our course. We have been consistent
from the beginning We have ever been for the
Union. and against all secessionists, whether at
the South or at the North-whether they were
the disciples and followers of Yancey and Davis
or of Greeley ana Garrison Tho Qaiayfcrly is
full Of blunders, and betrays great ignorance
on the subject on which it writes.
The Union is not yet at an end, and therefore
the argument against democratic institutions,
founded on the contrary assumption, is falla-
cious 1t is true the republic is on its trial
We are struggling against the effects of
the anti-slavery poison instilled into the
community by British propagandism, and
when we have succeeded in this the
republic will be stronger than ever, and
continue to be worshipped by the downtrodden
millions of Europe as the star of empire which
is to light them to liberty. 1t is remarkable that
the organs of English opinion, whether reviews
or journals, now ignore the existence of the
slavery question, and say little even about cot
ton. They exult in the fact that the wedge
they have inserted into the republic has split it
| in two, and this they regard as the consumma-
| ton of their hopes and as new lease of power
| to despotism in Europe. But they are prema-
ture. The end is not yet. France, in her first
Revolution, had to wade through rivers of
blood, and to contend with domestic as well as
foreign foes, including England; but her unity
| was maintained, and she is to-day the greatest
nation Of Europe. England for long series of
years Rad her soil deluged with blood in the
civil wars of the Roses. Was democracy the
cause of this, or was England ultimately di-
vided? Again, by the wars of her Revolution
extending over period of about sixty years,
|
but again came out unscathed. What right has
the Quarterly to conclude that the American re-
public will not also ride triumphant over the
waves? AS we'll might we argue that monarchy
was the cause Of the terrible revolutions and
civil wars in France and England, and that
monarchial institutions were there proved to
be . failure. as that the Quarterly should con-
clude that American democracy is failure, ana
that it is the cause Of the present civil war.
But even supposing that the rebellion in this
country should finally result in two separate
permanent governments, would that prove the
failure of democracy? As well might we prove
the failure of monarchy by the partition of the
kingdom of Poland, or by the separation of
Portugal from Spain, or Of Belgium from Hol-
land, or, more recently, of Lombardy from
Austria. Nobody contends that democratic
institutions are perfect. They have their