TOPICS OF THE DAY.
LORD JOHN-RUSSELL'S RETTIalMENT.
Loan Jon ac ItcsseLL's retreat' from. the Cabinet, in tardy an- ticipation of expulsion by almost unanimous Parliamentary cen- sure; hits drawn no further consequences with it. Sir Bulwer Lytton's motioraell te the ground for want of an object ; and Mr. Roebuck's censure - answered its author's purpose by enabling him to give' unchecked' expreasion to that violence of unman- nered invective the indulgence of which seems his chief reward for the toils of political life. The Cabinet remains minus Lord John, who retires with that unabashed self-complacency, and that unabated sense of his own importance, which have ever been marked charaeteristics of the man, and have probably more than any other qualities led to his downfall and discredit. We might be disposed to leave him to the enjoyment of his reflections on his patriotic services and his high character, with- out attempting, to disturb their even tenour, but for one consi- deration. It is not for the credit of the country to lie under the imputation of ingratitude to her great men, or of indiffer- ence to a long career of earnest endeavour for the public good. To submit to such an imputation where it is not deserved, would display and engender a callousness than which no feeling in the public mind could be much more, detaimentaL A cordial ac- knowledgment of service rendered, a generous appreciation of greatness, are essential elements in a healthy tone, of public feeling. If we believed that. Lord John Russell were in any de- gree the victim of calumny and misrepresentation, 'or that his forced-retirement from the public service were not of the most im- perious political necessity, we should regret every word uttered against hive, and be anxious to soften in the utmost possible de- gree our honest judgment on his recent political errors. But we believe.the contrary ; and we cannot'allow his defence of Monday last, and his appeal against the treatment to which he has been -subjected, to pass without comment. His explanation of his own conduct was not remarkable for can- dour.or clearness. But it would appear that the motive which principally urged him to approve the Austrian proposal on the system of counterpoise was the over-importance which he at- taohed to having Austria closely united with the Western Powers; and he would seem to have allowed himself to be deluded into sup- posing that the Western Powers, by reducing their demands, would really have secured the active cooperation of Austria. And per- haps they might had they reduced 'their demands to a point at which they would no longer.in any sense have secured the object -for which they were contending. For all we can really affirm of Austria is, that elle. was resolved to propose no ullimatum to Russia which she had not previously ascertained that Russia -vronld accept; in other words, she was resolved to propose no ultimatum that would carry out the principle of effectually check- ing Russian facilities for directing a coup-de-main against Con- stantinople, whenever it should suit the purpose of that power. All we can gather from Lord Sohn Russell's explanation and the published papers is, that his Lordship was seduced by a vague pro- mise on the part of Austria to make any future aggression by Russia on Turkey a cams belli. We confess to the obscurest no- tion as to the real scope of the Austrian offers which so won the heart and intellect of the English Minister as to induce him to abandon the instructions of his own Government; comprOmise himself by an imprudent 'expression of his private opinion ex- actly where it ought to have been suppresaedt and return to England to support the Austrian , proposition in the English Cabinet. But at this point the explanation' becomes obscurer thazi ever. Lord john affirms that circumstances arose, or were made knolin to hits-in the course of the discussion which ensued, that convinced him of the impracticability of the Austrian propo- sals. They were consequently rejected by theunanimous consent of the Cabinet; and henceforth Lord John was free to express him- self in favour of a vigorous prosecution of the war, without any abandonment of his own conviction, and consequently -without any violation of the rule of conduct imposed on English states- men. It would'have been satisfactory to know precisely what the circumstances were which changed-Lord John's opinion. His con- duct is not so transparent as to Justify the nation in taking such an assertion at more than its evident worth. Was he now for the first time made acquainted with the decision of 'the French Go- vernment ? or was it the state of Parliamentary opinion in Eng- land that determined him P or had he really misunderstood the scope of. the Austrian. proposition and its accompanying offer of a contingent defensive alliance on behalrof Turkey ? Some clearer information on , this, point would add materially to Lord John's statement as a valid d.efence of his own conduct.
But if Lord John really changed his opinion on his return, as he says, from whatever 'circumstances, new or then first known to him, why did he'offeeto resign ? If his opinion really was henceforth with the Cabinet, all motive for resignation was apparently gone. Count Buol might indeed have charged him with inconsistency; but the answer to that charge lay in a statement of the circum- stances which had caused him to change his opinion. Surely the justification which sufficed for his own conscience and col- leagues would have sufficed for Count Buol and the public. Yet the offer to resign was repeated more than once. Here, we may be quite sure, is an hiatus in the candid narrative—which, how- ever, Lord John enables, us in part to supply from a previous
screech of his own, where be informed the House of Commons that his- opinion was not converted but " overruled " in the Cabinet. We indeed, from a point of view quite different from Lord John's, can see why, the mere acceptance for a moment of the Aus- trian proposals rendered it incumbent on Lord John Russell to re- tire from a Cabinet which was to enjoy in any'suffieient measure the confidence of the country. But it is plain that Lord John himself has not yet reached this point of view. He looks back on that act of his as not an error of judgment even, but as an opinion sound at the time, which subsequent change of circumstances jus- tified him in relinquishing. Those circumstances out of the way, he would, we presume, recur now to that opinion. Itis this ma, nly which renders him unfit to serve the country at the pre sent crisis as a Cabinet Minister. This view, however, of his con= duct he is either entirely blind to, or chooses conveniently to ignore. If he rightly conceived the public opinion with respect to him, he would not complain of ingratitude and calumny on the part of friends and the public, but would see at once, that, differing on a momentous question with his friends and the public; he could no longer enjoy their confidence in carrying on-the war, but must in- evitably destroy their confidence in any Cabinet of which he might form a part. When a statesman of eminence and influence com- mits an error of such magnitude as to deprive him of that confi- dence which is the ground and warrant of his power, it is nothing less than childish absurdity to talk of the withdrawal of that con- fidence as an act of public ingratitude. -Undoubtedly, in the attaoks made upon such a man in order to eject him from the office he no longer deserves to fill, criticism becomes retrospective and one- sided ; his faults and not his virtues are dwelt upon, the " advo- catus Diaboli" is called into activity, and we do not expect a ba- kneed estimate of a long and eminent career. But no past ser- vice can really avail in such a case to stay the sentence of con- demnation on the recent error or crime. It stands by itself, and the past career is merely brought in by way of illus- tration or rhetorical effect. Lord John has been treated on this principle. It would have been absurd in forcing him from office to enlarge upon his virtues; and Lord John would have shown more magnanimity and good sense if he had appre- ciated more accurately the meaning of the strong feeling so universally displayed against him. He has fallen not from ca- lumny nor envy, neither from the hostility of foes nor the ingra- titude of friends, but because the heart of the nation is set upon prosecuting the war against Russia to a very different termination from that approved by Lord John Russell, and because the nation dares not and will not intrust influence in her councils to a man who would terminate the contest on terms insecure, disgraceful, and utterly unworthy of either the efforts or the reputation of Fiance and England. No doubt, much in lord john's previous career, and especially his conduct at the termination of Lord Aber- deen's Government, have alienated from him those who admire a frank, sincere, and generous bearing in a statesman; no doubt, he has forfeited much of the esteem of the country by a tricky uncer- tain Liberalism that could not be depended on in action ; but these things have not caused his fall, only letaiened the general regret at snob a close to a long career of eminence. So much on behalf of the nation, which has rejected Lord John Russell from the list of 'her trusted servants. If, as has been said, there remain in Lord Palmerston's Cabinet any who are sharers in the fault for which he has suffered—any who think the power of Russia so formidable, or the danger of a prolonged war so great, that peace without decisive victory is desirable for England and for Europe—let them at least be warned by Lord John Russell's ex- ample that such is not the opinion of the people or the Parliament of England. It was not, perhaps, to be expected that Lord Pal- merston should have voluntarily deprived himself of such Parlia- mentary and political support as Lord John Russell could supply by his presence in the Cabinet, but he has to a certain extent shared the offence he condoned. The public will scarcely believe but that Mr. Disraeli may have some grounds for his bold assertion, that for a time the Premier himself had not been irrevocably decided against the terms of peace his Plenipotentiary accepted, still less that no member of the Cabinet shared Lord John a opinions. A haze of suspicion will cling round the Cabinet till much more distinct utterance has been given by all its leading members to sentiments perfectly in accordance with the demands of the nation; though Lord John Russell has considerably reduced the value to be set even upon the most apparently frank utterances of opinion from Cabinet Ministers.
Now at least, we should think that these prolonged and futile attempts at negotiation must have been carried to their utmost limits ; and that from this time forth the nation may brace herself for victory, in the full assurance that her efforts will not be baffled and robbed of their reward by diplomacy which seems smitten with hopeless imbecility. It has long been evident to all persons whose brains are of the ordinary stuff, that our quarrel with Russia is to be. settled by deeds and not by words. Diplomacy can but reduce facts to words, not alter the condition of facts. When France and England have subdued the obstinate resistance of Russia, diplomatists may be usefully employed in recording the fact ofRussia's submission, in such terms as to make it available for praotical use in the public law of Europe. Till that is done, diplomacy will only be worse than useless; unnerving our efforts, distracting our aims, and letting powers like Austria interfere to mar the completeness of our work, and interweave with it her selfish aims, and miserable, cowardly, timeserving policy. It is an avowal of this fact that we desire to hear from our Ministers; an avowal more than ever necessary now that one of the most emi- nent among them has shown how weak his grasp of the fact was, how feebly he sympathized with the spirit of the nation he repre- sented. Those who are not prepared to make such an avowal, and to stand by it, ought, as men of honour and conscience, to come out of the Ministry. Their presence there is treason to the country and dishonourable to themselves. They are there either to deceive and betray the nation, or to belie their own consciences. England wants no service rendered at the price of a man's sincere convic- tions, and is not so poor in men of worth as to be reduced to em- ploy traitors.
Previous page
