The Press. — London, England, 1857-10-03 00:00:00

956 This is the predicament in which we found out selves when we began to read an account of a recent gathering in Maldon. When we discovered that the principal speaker was only Mr. WESTERN, M.P., wo confess wo felt a little appalled at what was before us. And , perhaps we should have given the matter a " wide berth," had we not thought that, as it appeared not only a local, but a county meeting, not merely a personal, but a party demonstration, it was a tribute due to the loyal Conservatives of Essex to take some slight notice of the Malden banquet. It may not be a very flattering, but we sup pose it is a just, hypothesis to presume that Mr. WESTERN is a type of the Essex Liberal. In the greater part of hts address we feel no earthly interest. It concerns us not to know how, after some very damaging disclosures in the committee of the House of Commons of the means used to obtain him his seat, ho very narrowly escaped ejection ; nor how ho had baffled his enemies and cha s rmed his friends by presenting a frivolous and vexatious peti tion against his colleague, and been saddled with the costs. All this is a matter of no moment to us, however edit) ing as a political autobiography. But there are one or two portions of his general observations to which we wish to refer as illustrative of the absurd misrepresentations and the monstrous calum nies which a man even of this calibre can palm off upon the credulity of the provincial Liberal. One of these passages is that in which he alludes to the disorganisation of the Conservative party and the want of statesman ship among its leaders. We are to take it for granted that this is the deliberate charge, not of Mr WEs•rERN merely, for then we would venture to pass it by, but of that connection which constitutes Lord PALM E asTos's follow ing. He is its organ for the nonce, and how does he prove his statement? He says there were two occasions last session when there was a demonstration on the part of the Conservative body. The first of these was on the Bill for admitting Jews to Parliament, when Sir J. PAKINOTON " made " a recantation of his principles." Now, we Are not going to insult Sir JOHN PARINOTON by defending him from the aspersion of being either a bigot or a renegade. He can well afford to treat it with contempt. But when a man desires to prove that his opponents are in a state of decrepitude and he in the zenith of his strength, it is strange tactics to refer to an occasion where they signally defeated him ! That Conservatism is defunct because the Jew Bill was thrown out is not a syllogism, though the Liberals of Essex may consider it matchless logic ! Why did not Mr. WESTERN puisue this line of reasoning further? He might have done so with great effect. He might have adduced the amendments on the Divorce Bill, the Probate Bill, the successful resistance to the motions on the Ballot, Pro perty Qualification, and the Irish Viceroyalty. He might have cited the Act on the super• annuation tax, carried against the whole weight of the Government. He might, we say, have ' produced all these and other cogent proofs that the Ministry is triumphant, and the Op position extinct! to Mr WESTERN'S allusion to Mr. DISRAELI'S memorable speech on India we regret to find a still m significant want of candour. He may not have understood Mr. DISRAELI—that is more than probable—but. although we might deal more tenderly with obtuseness, we can not pardon disingenuousness. What is his indictment against Mr. DISRAELI ? He ac cuses him of promulgating ":a plan for crippling the local authorities in India, for taking up a penitential tone with the natives, and issuing a Royal proclamation to inquire into their grievaeces.' Now, did Mr WESTERN really believe this when he said it? If he did not, we forbear to offer any homily upon his con duct; if he did, we have nothing left but to compassionate his ignorance. The Liberals of Essex may beliCie - what they please. They do not seem to be cast in a mould which promises much influence to their opinion; but the country is not so easily duped. The country has formed a very dif ferent estimate of Mr. DisitAzas most able and sagacious statement upon 'the Indian crisis. They see in it not only great intellect THE PRESS, OCTOBER 3, 1857. and vast knowledge, but true and enlightened patriotism; and as each day brings with it its fresh events, its striking incidents, and its tragic episodes, all attesting his foresight, and confirming his predictions, he can well look with disdain upon the calumnies by which he is assailed, whether they proceed from stu pidity or are attributable to malice. LORD JOHN RUSSELL AND EDUCATION. IT has been said by some great man that a person with only one idea in his head is always worth listening to. What is true of individuals is doubtless to some extent true of nations. When a people are violently ex cited about any great domestic or foreign event, all that is said or written upon that topic will in all probability be fresher, more earnest, and more racy than upon any other subject. But, unfortunately for those who merely look to public affairs for amusement or excitement, there must always be a certain number of other questions of which even in the gravest imperial emergencies we cannot afford to lose sight. And after all, even in the most rousing crisis, when, in the language of newspapers, the country is seething from John O'Groat's to the Land's End, how small in comparison is the number by which this immense agitation is sustained. Of all the ills that human kind endure, How small the part that kings can cause or cure. And of all the sorrows, hopes, fears, and anxieties by which the twenty-six millions who inhabit these islands are at the present moment harassed, " how small the part," when allowance has been made for every species of indirect influence which is roused by our disasters in India! The daily struggle of domestic life must still go on—poverty kept from the door, and vice from the family ; sons and daughters must still be provided for ; and lin the harassing anxieties which await upon such duties as these, we can under stand the ease of chose by whom even Delhi and Cawnpore, murder, torture, and dishonour are but topics of transient interest. The Times of Thursday says, truly enough :—" Below or " beside the classes which take an interest in " public affairs are, we are sorry to say, large "classes of our countrymen on whom the " fluctuations of politics, or the successes and " calamities of nations, make but little im " pression." The above remarks sound very like truisms, we are aware ; yet they constitute in our opinion a valid justification of the speech delivered recently by Lord JOHN RUSSELL at Sheffield on the subject of education. Eng land, we hope, has hands and brains enough for all her requirements; and it would be sad indeed if her foreign embarrassments should be pleaded as an excuse for neglecting her duty towards those who in another generation will have to preserve what she is now engaged in reconuering. Lord JOHN RUSSELL has seldom or never been accused of timidity. When he has, we think his conduct was probably attributable to other causes. And on the subject of national education he declares with his accus tomed boldness that the religious faculty cannot be neglected in any sy stem of educa tion. We entirely agree with him. We are perfectly convinced that the religious party in this country need not be alarmed at the efforts of the secularists, for their scheme would defeat itself. It would be found so much worse to have peculiar tenets inculcated by inuendo than by open preaching, and so impossible to invent a system of teaching in which that should not be done, that a few years would convince the most obstinate secularist of his error. While, however, we so far agree with the Noble Lord as to repudiate the non-religious theory, we fear that the feasibility of his own scheme is almost equi distant. A scheme in which what some people call the " fundamentals" of Christianity shall be taught to all children alike without re ference to theological differences, seems to us quite as Utopian as Mr. COBDEN'S, and we cannot see how at present any better scheme than the denominational can be carried out. We, however, for our part, fully sympathise with the frame of mind which induced the Noble Member for London to broach these subjects. All his own laurels have been won in domestic legislation, as all Lord PALMERS. TON'S have grown in foreign affairs—if laurels they can be called, and not rather cypress leaves ! It is fitting that while all the activity and practical energy and youthful enthusiasm of the country is projected upon our Indian catastrophe, there should be at home a band of statesmen in whose hands social and domestic questions can be safely left. Tho public know that we are consistently opposed to that party of which Lord Jour; Res- SELL is so prominent a member, and that wo have over and over again had occaaion both to censure his measures and to marvel at his conduct. But he is, nevertheless, one of a class whom just at the present day we should be sorry to see growing fewer. And we hail his appearance in public as a sort of guarantee that we shall hear from his lips, with whatever weaknesses mingled, some testimony to the importance of principles, some vindication of the creed that there is something nobler than clay, and something better than expediency. • MR. BERNAL OSBORNE AT DOVER. Mn. R. B. OSBORNE was last week entertained by his constituents at a grand banquet in the new Town-hall, Dover. Between 400 and 500 Liberal electors sat down to dinner, and, after the usual loyal and patriotic toasts had been duly responded to, the CHAIRMAN (Mr. S. Finnis) proposed "The Health of the Borough Members," explaining the absence of Sir W. Russell, Bart., by the fact of that gallant officer having sailed with his regiment to India. _ _ Mr. B. OSBORNE responded, and briefly glancing at the results of the session, which he charc.cterised as " useful and not showy," rassed at once to the great Indian question, and, deprecating the abuse lavished upon Mr. Vernon Smith, said : If anybody be to blame for supposed mismanagement of Indian affairs, that blame ought to attach, not to an indi vidual, but to the united Cabinet. He hoped that " very soon we shall hear that an end has been put to this monstrous conspiracy," and declared that he should not be satisfied with less than the entire destruction of Delhi. Mr. B. Osborne, admitting that we had had "fre quent warnings" as to the state of the native army, confessed that "alas ! though forewarned we were not forearmed." Other errors, too, had been com mitted. We persisted in a course "of petty inter. ference " with native customs, which "could only serve to exasperate and envenom our subjects." But the policy most destructive to us, "most un wise, imprudent, and detrimental to the interests " of England, was tliatj" of annexation " : A hundred years ago all the territory we had in India was a few factories on the Malabar and Coromandel coasts, and in Bengal, amounting to not more than 5,000 square miles. The great Burke in his reflections o.i the French Revolution in 1703 gave a solemn warning in his celebrated passage against the ambition of Great Britain. He says, " I dread that you should be too much dreaded," and the remarkable words which he adds are, " Our empire in India is an awful thing." I have told you what that empire was in 1757 ; what was it in 1703 in the time of Lord Cornwallis's settlement ? It amounted to 200,000 square miles, with a population acknowledging British sway of 40,000,000. What would Burke have said had he lived to see that empire in 1857? The 200,000 square miles under the policy of annexation have swelled to 7,000,000, with a population of 180,000,000. That, indeed, is an awful empire, and ought not to be governed on a narrow and contracted basis, still less on the principles of forcing European notions upon Asiatic insti tutions. With regard to domestic legislation, Mr. B. Osborne expressed his opinions freely. He thought we were " going too fast " in education, that the competitive system should not be " forced on too rapidly," and that he was prepared to advocate a measure of par liamentary reform But if wo are to have another Reform Bill, I do regret that there is one eminent public man who, whatever may have been his political backelidings, is yet a fine specimen of the English gentleman and the English Liberal, and whose name is indissolubly intertwined with the brightest triumphs of the Liberal cause—l regret that Lord John Russell is not a member of the present Government. Be is far too useful a man to be consigned to the dreary shade of a back bench. - - - In conclusion, he thought the present Cabinet, in which there was " community of sentiment and unity of action," exactly fitted to meet a "crisis," whether it be on reform or in India; in fact, he felt "con vinced" that it was for the interests of the empire to have a man like Lord Palmerston at the head of the Government, supported by a Cabinet of men remarkable at least for industry, if not so well known to the public as their distinguished chief, than it would be to have a Cabinet of mere rhetorician.