The Press. — London, England, 1858-05-29 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 29 No. 265.—V0L. VI. 1858. STAMPED SIXPENOE. UNSTAId PED PIVEPENCE. SAD PREDICAMENT OF TIIE lIOUSE OF COMMONS. Tiix noble heart of the Times is swelling with mingled feelings of pity, scorn, and indignation, at the unworthy conduct of the house of Com mons;—that House which refused to pass Mr. CARDWELL'S Resolution, and lost the finest pos sible opportunity of turning out Lord DERBY. Just so, in " The Snob Papers," the enviou s, deserted prude of Cambridge " could not find " words to express her pity, scorn, and contempt " for poor Emily Blades, because she did not "squint, and because she had not red hair." It is not, in the view of the Times, either the Cambridge-house clique or the Downing-street officials that have received most damage in the recent scramble. Mr. CARDWELL might be jus tified in his motion—Mr. DISRAELI might have had no choice but to resist it—but, at all events, no excuse can possibly be made for the coy ness or cowardice of the House of Commons : "Viewed in its collective capacity, no body of men could possibly have managed matters worse than the House of Commons seem to have done. . . . . The position taken up by the House of untenable ‘- Neither Mr. CARDWELL nor Lord P, could have brought any charge against them, had this been all ; but, when inquiry was made, Lord ELLENBOROUGII, without consulting his colleagues, at once made public that Despatch. His having done so is not defended by his col-_ leagues, but he himself assumes the blame and its consequences, and ends the question by an immediate resignation. But this did not answer the purpose of the Cambridge-house confederates. They had met, " including most of the members of the late Cabinet," on Sunday afternoon, to frame resolu tions, the object of which was openly declared by the Times, Post, Globe, and Advertiser to be, " to turn out the Ministry, and bring back Lord " PALAtErtgrox as Premier." The frank and manly conduct of Lord ELLENBOROUGIL might have disarmed opponents who were honestly thinking of India and of CANNING, but it had no influence on men who were aiming at Downing street, and merely using India as a pretext ! Now, a House of Commons not servilely attached to Lord PALMERSTON might naturally shrink back at the eight of That .e 9 so unscru welfare of a great _ scuffle for office, and should be condemned for ' one member of the innocent, were speci might well disgust But it next came Ministry had them : far worse than that opponents. Letters public business, had been ex-Minister for India, himself had been and even Lord P. Thus this poor, writaliCilloase of Commons is to be sent about its Minima not, like other Houses, for its impracticality or its pugnacity, but simply for its worthlessness. Does this charge rest on a good and suffi cient basis? BALAAM abused his ass on very similar grounds ; yet the Prophet was wrong and the ass was right. May not Lord PALIIIIRBTON, like the Prophet, have attempted to force his useful servant into a closed-up path ? Let us look at the task which the late Premier required his own House of Commons to perform. A document arrived in this country, about three weeks since, of a very momentous and Questionable character. It is merely absurd to represent the surprise and alarm caused by Lord CANNING'S Proclamation as existing among the Conservatives chiefly or solely. The Liberals in Parliament who are not imbued with Whiggism dislike that Proclamation as much as the Con servatives ; the Liberals out of doors almost unanimously condemn it. That the Govern ment, therefore, should feel alarm and disappro bation at that Proclamation, and should express those feelings in a Secret Despatch, is no crime. LATEST EDITION. all these the four privy to the secretion ! Here was a third cause for disgust and revulsion. On the very eve of the final debate and division there appeared another fact of vast importance ; namely, that Sir JA MIS 0 UTRAM, the best qualified man in India to give a judgment in the matter, had protested against Lord CANNING'S . course as strongly as Lord ELLENBOROUGH himself had done. So that those who inclined to the popular view were now confirmed in their feelings of dislike by an opinion given by a man of the highest knowledge and experience. Let these facts be practically applied. The House of Commons contains nearly 200 members who, though they originally took their seats as . _ supporters of Lord PALMERSTON, are free men— not Whigs, nor bound by family compacts. To could not but come with weight : to wit,— scruples of the religion." 1. The whole movement, cloaked under the name of India, was notoriously aimed at Down ing-street. _ _ _ Now, this what the House 2. It proposed to punish fifteen men, for an indiscretion committed by one of the fifteen, without the knowledge of the rest; he, the month since, times before, and , _ lawfitl for Lords and for the House of Commons, respec tively, by resolution of the House, to determine that the form of the said oath, so far as such oath rests upon or refers to the Christian faith, shall, _ . _ . for the purpose Watered to persons be modified, fl accordingly House shall seem I above stated of the said oath without any change of to account Commons is one utterly untenable on any ;ea: pulous as these. That the mashie or consistent ground The House empire should be risked on a e of Oseesseas eannot yield to threats without that a whole Ministry should materially dot ffieff its influence, and therefore shortenin g its ensesse e. Th e una ff ecte d terror an act of which all but 01 of meeting its consdtuents is a sr , were entirely inn ' • ducement to the present arbiters d _ _mwity spirit which , . send it to them. A Ho use th a t 41 kennerable mind. B efficient support to neither side is 145 , 1. IN r• out that the accusers of the I already, and on ly awa i ts t h e tion. Before Friday nie n to selvesd been guilty of conduct Parliament wou ld h ave a alloy political which they imputed to their offence ; the time may mow when it from Lord CANNING, on publi will be universally in an inevitable rece i ve d an d secre t e d by th e ei political necessity. " -,".... ' / . A and even Lord PALMERSTO: ?ose only of such oath being admi- ersons professing the Je ....h religion, and to make i ip ollr7l,_rs• tion in such manila ~.. - 71 , .. 1 ejg t seem best calcul mt . .. -- 7 4 1', j i ath to the horfsit "•: 11— cal( he said persons . 1 ,..• • . :,•• ov A amendment i. .. kil ' ~ t mse of Lords ~ ,L'l liel idA d ? - ' d and had refu• • W t.ir4l- .1 - - il l--ga.- '....-..... • '4..ati t % - it shall now quiet to do, offender, having already submitted to the penalty for what he alone had done. 3. The accusers were found to appear in court with hands very far from clean. They charged Lord ELLENBOROUGII with rashness, in publish- ing one letter: he charged them with dishonesty, in concealing, not one, but several. 4. The substantial right, in the whole matter, seemed at last to rest with Lord ELLENBOROUGH whose judgment exactly tallied with that of Sir J. OUTRAM. Now, with all these considerations pressing upon those Members of the House who were not chained to Lord PALMERSTON'S chariot-wheels, what could have been ezßected to happen, but that which, at last, did happen—namely, that a large number of those Members who were masters of their own votes, should inform Sir W. HATTER, at the last moment, that ehey posi tively could not march through Coventry with him and his employers? And it is for thus pos sessing, and using, a conscience, that they, or rather the whole House, is given over to hopeless perdition by the Times newspaper ! LORD LUCAN'S PROPOSED AMENDMENT. THE Earl of Lucl.x has already made his name— famous, shall we say ?—by a terrible error at Balaklava. Is he desirous of rendering it still more unpleasing in the eyes of his countrymen by a still greater error in Westminster ? He then only sacrificed a noble body of soldiers ; should he now be successful, he will make havoc of the highest assembly that England knows. His Lordship has given notice, that on taking into consideration the Commons objections to the Lords' amendments to the Oaths Bill, he will move a new clause, to this effect : " Provided also, that whenever any of her Majesty's subjects professing the Jewish religion be required to take the oath appointed by this Act on any occasion other than an application to be admitted to sit and vote in either House of Parliament, the words ' And I make this decla ration upon the true faith of a Christian' shall be omitted ; and that from • after the passing of this Act it shall be - the House of