The Press. — London, England, 1858-08-07 00:00:00

746 be only honest-minded, impartial supporters. Un mixed praise is no praise. There are some things we wish they had not done. We wish they had not passed the Jew Bill. We think that there was no real necessity tor this, and that it was as impolitic as it was contr to Cop servative principle. There are, indeed, extento ting circumstances in it; Lint, after all, the thing is done. This is, indeed, the one great blot on the present Admjnistration. Wf wish also that the Government bad shown so ifrong a dip position to coquet for favour with the rapists. Their Reformatory Schools Bill for Ireland is open to grave exception. It is putting further power into the hands of the priests. In our army, navy, and prisons, too, the Papists have been granted privileges which we deem not safe. The established religion of the country, being the religion the Sovereign is sworn to uphold, ought always to be the first consideration with any Eng lish Government. But still, as we have said before, Lord DERBY'S State policy has been, on the whole, highly com mendable. In his Church appointments, from some cause or other, he has not been so happy. Not one of the three appointments he has made has given satisfaction. Lord DERBY seems to be badly advised in these matters. lie might easily have found, no doubt, had he sought it, neglected merit somewhere in some clergymen who had done signal service to the Church in the Protestant cause, and yet never had received preferment. Two or three such appointments at the outset would have made him prodigiously popular. It is our sin cere desire to see Lord DERBY'S Government strengthened ; therefore, we thus speak. Nothing would have tended to strengthen it more (espe cially if, as is probable, an appeal will shortly have to be made to the country) than some un questionably good Church appointments, in which he showed that it was merit, not party, that was his governing consideration. But to resume. Upon a review of the whole, there cannot be a doubt that Lord DERBY'S Go vernment has made not only great, but solid pro gress, since it came into power. It is, by the general admission, far more firmly fixed in office now than it was when it was first placed there. Then its duration was to be a matter of a few days ; it has now been in office five months. And during that short period more useful measures have been brought forward, more beneficial re forms effected, more solid progress in legislation made, than during as many years that their inca pable predecessors held office. They have been Liberal" in the best sense of the word. This has given them a prestige, which we trust they will do nothing to lose. By judicious conduct during the recess they may yet more strengthen their position. The term Liberal has lately been quite as much misapplied as the term Conserva tive. Double-mindedness is always to be avoided, and therefore any terms that may foster it. But, taken together, the terms may denote what is large-handed yet safe. We agree in the principle laid down by BURKE, that " a State without the means of some " change is without the means of its own conser " vation." We would not exclude all alteration; but if we made changes it should only be to pre serve. A policy of progress was what Lord DERBY announced when he came into office; for, as he justly observed, ." Conservatism is not opposed to progress." His Government have proved it by their acts. The term Conservative alone certainly expresses only one side of what ought to be an enlightened legislator's principle. We would suggest, therefore, that for the future the Derby Government should take to them selves the title, which would more truly desig nate them, of " Conservative Progressionists." THE ALLIES ON THE PEIHO. IT is, we confess, with no comfortable feelings that we read of "our successes in China." Not that we are anxious about the strategical sound ness of our movements. We "do most potently believe " that even greater delay and indecision than we have thus far exhibited would cause us no serious danger. Even without the energetic aid of our French allies we could doubtless laugh sot only at the open resistance of the Chinese orces, but at anything in the way of stratagem THE PRESS, AUGUST 7, 1 or surprise which their semi-barbarous cunning fear either teir ground, will be painted protects his tory as cer 7 further ques bring int. Aeads is oh have prov no advan- can give finless , a chance against European troops. It is an abuse of lan guage to talk of " fighting" against such oppo nents. 16, is likely to suggest. We have little fes that the Celestial warriors will stand their l or that our soldiers d blue jackets stopped in puriult by e worst of the terrors wherewith a C ' ese brave pro individual " reg." e assume victory tain, aaj are o l idy perplexed by the furtl tion, what glolbr pro* it is likely to 1 The rern un cr *e Spy of these heat] vioualy ' nil. 1 eeeat Oplmeuts hav( (bad fresh proof bee it n ul) that nc tages of numbers, armapten , or position these helpless Orientals the shadow of 8 Non rixa est, übi to pulsar, ego vapulo tantum would be an unanswerable remark in the mouth of poor John Chinaman, arrayed under the orders of a despot whom he dares not gainsay, against invaders who►n he cannot resist. But not only is there no glory in our proceedings, they are ab initio discreditable. We went to war — we beg pardon, " commenced hostilities " is the approved phrase—in defence of smuggling under false colours, if not in affirmation of " a false fact." Such, at least, was our best plea at start ing ; but we grew bolder after a time, when the nation stood committed to a rank injustice, and a majority of the House were prepared with Lord PALMERSTON to justir our attack by the resent ment it excited. Then "Free Trade" was appealed to as a pretence for violating a nation's independence, and the sacred text, That they should take who have the power, And they should keep who can, was enforced with all the unscrupulous eloquence of the Times. The Chinese war (another /apaus plume—let us say " difficulty ") might not be quite just—but what of that ? It was sure to be profitable. This was not high ground to take— but was it even tenable ? We cannot think so. Considering the "difficulty" merely as an invest ment, we know that thus far there have been heavy calls and no dividend, and see no reason to estimate the future returns at a higher figure than 0 per cent. Commercial privileges, for sooth, are to be secured ! Is commerce the daughter of Mars and Bellona ? Or are we to find our best customers in those we have beaten and impoverished ? Are bullets tea-lead ? or shot and steel Howqua's Mixture ? It is a blunder from beginning to end. Of course we may terrify a feeble Court into submission, and may dictate terms, if you like it, at Pekin ; but, cui bona? We may compel the Brother of the Sun to open his ports—but we cannot force his subjects to buy or to sell. We may extort his permission to erect factories—but will they be resorted to by an aggrieved and resentful popu lation ? No " special chop," no writing from " the vermilion pencil," will silence bitter memo ries of wrong. You cannot win confidence by terror, or stimulate trade by persecution. As well might you run a cow across country to the milking-stool, or try to shear sheep at a hand gallop. But we are dealing with a view of the question which has been already ably set forth in the Daily News, and will therefore pass on to some other considerations no less worthy of notice which should incline her Majesty's Ministers to strive for a speedy and equitable termination of hostilities, to which they succeeded by no fault of their own—one of the burdens with which Lord PsimEas-rox encumbered their official in heritance. In the first place, it strikes us very forcibly that, valuing the French alliance as we profess to do, we ought to escape as soon as pos sible from the present system of close co-opera tion for undefined objects. It is rendered dan gerous alike by English pride and French vanity. Even during the stern struggles of the Crimea, when the common safety lay in united action, there was often a dangerous feeling of irritation, due to the necessarily imperfect apportionment of the labours and honours of the siege. Now either armament might alone suffice for the work to be done, and even the best embellished Gazette can tell of no laurels worth dividing. Hence arises a petty and unworthy rivalry—nor is it possible to avoid seeing that our dashing allies think more of getting the start of the English than of the easier triumph of drubbing the Chinese ; whilst we, on our part, acting with more fairness, but worse temper, fret sullenly at the gasconader our tended notion liarit: how pies, and think a fat maggot excellent grub? Even our educated classes talk of " the necessity of reading these conceited barbarians a lesson," --as if with regard to them and them only the exercise ofpower might be divorced from responsibility — a s if slaughter and spoliation ceased to be serious things when inflicted on the most industrious and most densely-peopled region of the earth• Strangest of all, even our seamen seem to lose something of their tenderness of heart when poor John Chinaman is to be taught his weakness• The crew of the Alceste burst into a roar of laughter at seeing, as they fancied, the head of a mandarin taken off by a round shot. Is something of the same spirit traceable in accounts of recent " victories" ? We will not pursue this topic further, save express an earnest hope that this evil is w"' its own cure,—that as we know the better we shall feel for them more, and [B5B. which experience should have led us to anticip at e as matters of course. The same feelings are atpro- pagated . by the . public press at home, till pugnanoW pot Ihe French nation halfe believe sat Euglap4 has outlived her histori c prows,s' ',tile magy an iraacibl e John Bull put woug avrifice the peace of the world and civil back h 4r fL CeOUry merely t o con. _ vince theme of their ista e. It is an old tale that the .ion .• ent of th e crowing o f t i itp .We w , fain spare the noble animal's nerves a protracted trial, or, to drop the too familiar metaphor, we would fain terminate a state of things which we feel to be most dan- gerous to the good understanding now happily subsisting between France and Britain. Not should it be forgotten (selfish as such a view may appear) that we are working at these frightful hazards mainly, if not wholly, for the advantage of others. We have long had abun- dant, if not unrestricted access, to the flowery land : we are now doing our best to gain for our enterprizing neighbours a comfortable footing there. This may be generous, but it is the in- discreet generosity of the young civilian who in- troduces his particular friend, a militaire with unimpeachable moustache, to the city heiress, on whom he has himself made an impression. Nor is it with regard to France alone that our Chi- nese hostilities are likely to place us in a false position. We are setting up the law of the strongest in one quarter of the globe : with what face can we henceforth denounce it in another? If we are to remodel Chinese commercial law, and to occupy Chinese territory, merely because it suits us, we must be prepared to look on quietly while Brother Jonathan " annexes " Cuba, or the Czar smothers the sick man, and disposes of his effects. Filibustering is a game which it is not safe to bring into fashion. But is not this (some plainspoken reader may ask) a miserable, heartless style of reasoning? Has oppression no worse fault than that of being expensive, or would freebooting become eligible if we could monopolize the practice ? We feel the force of these inquiries, and can only reply that we give not the best arguments, but those which are the most likely to be listened to in this particular case. Generally speaking, the British nation are sensitively alive to appeals based on justice and mercy. They dislike the Palmerstonian line of quarrel, and would rather beard and grapple with the strong than bully the weak. But China seems to be an exceptional case. We have sympathy for the red man — armed avengers for the negro—are revolutionary at Naples, and philanthropic in Borneo. We protect Australian aborigines, and are jealous of the rights of Indian landowners. But somehow we have no bowels of compassion for the Chinese. The fact is, we have laughed at them till we have forgotten that humanity has its rights and its feelings even in China—that men are men still, though they wear petticoats and pigtails, and women women, though incapable of a polka. From the naive avowal of the delinquent inter- preter in Assox's voyages, " Chinee man ver " great rogue, truly, but have fashion, no can " help," to BASIL IfALL's diverting history . of the decease of the pig " Jean," and the machinations of the Celestials against the " bulk of her personals," our literary notices of this strange people have tended mamly to excite our ridicule. The vulgar notion of a Chinaman is made up of a few Pecu - liarities of diet and dress. What can it signify how you deal with a set of fellows who wear hats like an umbrella, fatten puppies for pie emv,A Even Is not i n our , save to working Chinese id trot