LORD PALMERSTON AT THE MANSION HOUSE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XXI, Issue 1193, 6 February 1864, Page 3

LORD PALMERSTON AT THE MANSION HOUSE.

It is impossible to say that the accession of a Lord Mayor is a great event, or the feast an important political occasion. A Lord Mayor is installed every year, every year he blocks up Fleet-street with his procession, and presides in the evening at his mighty banquet. He must be a man of much originality if he can devise anything new, or give a reason why the transference of the civic sceptre from his predecessor to himself should be remembered. The 9th of November is one of those anniversaries which make one feel the swift lapse of the year. It seems so short a time since the last procession was described, the dishes of the last dinner enumerated, and the last Lord Mayor complimenting and complimented. Yet, though commonplace generally prevails on . Lord Mayor's Day, there is enough of interest in one part of its proceedings to secure for it notice not only at home but in foreign countries. The custom of entertaining the Cabinet Ministers and eliciting a political speech from their chief does more to make Lord Mayor's Day a vital institution than do the gilded coach, the men in armour, the encomiums of the Recorder, or any other tradition of the City. The Pre- ; mier comes forward just at the middle of the non-Parliamentary period, when people have recovered from the lassitude of one session and are willing to speculate on the next. He speaks, often for the first time since the dispersion of the Legislature, and even though he may confine himself to generalities, people still like once more to hear the official voice, and to learn on the highest authority how their own country and their neighbours are faring. This year there were many subjects which might have been dwelt upon, for the world was never more active for good or for evil. The most bloodthirsty and cruel war in one region is counterbalanced by the most extraordinary prosperity in another. France, Prussia, the late United States, Mexico, the Russian Empire, China, Japan, our own India, Australia, and New Zealand, might be cited as instances of good or evil fortune, ot unexampled cheerfulness, or of discontent, anarchv, and revolt. There is no want ot questions on which a Minister might explain 1 his views or take credit for foresight and wisdom. But out of all that were before him Lord Palmerston selected those which have been most in the minds of men, and which have interested the people ot tins country almost as much as if the events were taking place on British soil. In regard to the American war, the Premier re-asserts the principles which have all through guided his Government, and once more declares that a strict and impartial neutrality is the policy which will be maintained duiing ns tenure of power. On the American question no member of the Cabinet has spoken less than Lord Palmerston. While several ot his colleagues have at different times expressed opinions as to the issue of the strugg e the rights of the parties, the Premier has kept a judicious silence, broken only when the enormities of General Butler called from ] him the indignant words which echoed even sirr Gets Orleans. But from what Lord said last night it is not hard to discern that his opinions are those which prevail generally among his countrymen. He regres he horrors of the war, aud says that it is im possible to predict its conclusion. 1 Federals chose to be guided by the opinion of bystanders, e nerhans nidge more accurately of the game than those actually engaged, the X W °"'J 0 tainlv give over their scheme of conquest. . f t se e m s to the observer in Europe that, to ! useTe language of Lord Palmerston, the

combatants are " slaughtering each other by hundreds of thousands, aud carrying on a contest the result of which it is impossible to foresee, and the end of which now, after more than two years' duration, he would be a bold man indeed who would venture to predict." But for the present -at least all counsel is lost on the party who prolongs the contest. All that a British Government can do is to stand neutral, and bear the worst hindrances to commerce which the laws of war, stretched to their furthest limit, can inflict. Lord Palmerston says that if it had been in the power of his Government to do anything by friendly intervention, no efforts would have been spared to effect it. But this has been impossible. At the time when the Emperor of the French desired us to join him in his scheme of intervention, there was among the Democratic party in America such a series of demonstrations in favor of peace that a foreign statesman might reasonably have thought the time had come for an effort on the part of Europe. But the British Minister knew the Federal temper better than Napoleon. It is now beyond a doubt that if there had been an offer of mediation on our part, it would have been received with anger, and resented with contumely and insult. The Government was as much justified in resisting the entreaties of France as it has been in disregarding the coaxing or the threats of the two belligerents. Lord Palmerston merely affirmed again the principle on which his Cabinet has acted during the whole duration of the war, when he said that the Government was determined to maintain " a strict and impartial neutrality." With regard to Russia, Lord Palmerston gave the best explanation possible of his Government's proceedings. It does not set Lord Russell and his colleagues quite right, for no defence can avail to clear those who commit the imprudence of threatening what they have no intention to perform. The Premier justly stigmatizes the Russian policy in Poland as " a barbarous system of deliberate extermination," and he says that his Government endeavored to enlist the opinions and feelings of civilized Europe in a joint remonstrance. But he admits that the attempt has been a failure, and thus, as the Emperor of the French confessed in his Speech, has caused a more grinding oppression to be exercised on the unhappy Poles. We can only hope that, in spite of the Notes to Russia, followed by the disavowal of warlike intentions which made Prince Gortschakoff treat them so lightly, there is sufficient good sense in the Russian Court to cause an end to be put to these outrages on humanity. If this be not the case no one can answer for the peace of Europe, though we as a nation have, with more prudence than consistency, resolved that no blow shall be struck by an English hand. To abstain, indeed, from Continental wars, in which we should purchase at an immense cost the privilege of giving a contingent to a French army, is the best security not only for our continued friendship with the principal European nations, but also for the maintenance of that plenty and prosperity which npw pervade the land. Lord Palmerston, observing that the commerce of this country had reached a point which it had never attained before, paid a compliment to the City of London for the extent and variety of its mercantile transactions. But if London is growing more and more the centre of the commerce of foreign nations, and bills are drawn upon it to pay debts all over the world, it is more than ever the duty of statesmen to allow no light cause to draw us into a war. The safety or the honour of their own country is of course a precious charge, and must be defended at all hazards; but when we consider that one chief cause of London credit is the circumstance that this country is out of the system of Continental Europe, and exposed neither to wars nor revolutions, we have a right to ask whether the aid we could furnish to an inland territory would compensate for the loss to ourselves by entering on another Russian war.—Times, Nov. 10.