It is remarkable that while meeting after meeting is held
to protest against any interference by England in the war between Turkey and Russia, and while Member after Member boldly avows to his constituents that he holds such interference utterly unjustifiable, the party of " British interests " neither hold public meetings, nor declare plainly at what point they would advocate intervention and to what purpose they would use it. No one has spoken better on this subject than Mr. Osborne Morgan, in the address he delivered to his constituents at Wrexham yesterday week. " He was not," he said, " and never had been, for peace at any price. On the contrary, he loved peace so well, that under certain conditions he would even fight to secure it. But before England drew the sword, let her be sure that she drew it in a just and righteous cause." The Turkish cause, he said, would not be such a cause. " Lord
Beaconsfield, instead of devoting his energies to building up out of the Christian populations of Turkey a barrier to Russian ambition, had clung to the notion that Turkey would go on because she could fight. The result was that we had handed over the key of the situation to Russia, and if Russia got to Constantinople, she might thank Lord Beaconsfield for having got there." That we believe to be the popular view in all our large con- stituencies, though the Pall Mall will probably continue to main- tain, as it has so often maintained, that men like Mr. Osborne Morgan,—the great champion of the Dissenters on the Burials' question,—are mere mouthpieces of a sacerdotal party, bent on taking their revenge for the Public Worship Regulation Act !
