The Press. — London, England, 1858-03-06 00:00:00

THE PRESS, MARCH 6,1858. this important Parliamentary question, the door would be thrown wide open to abuses. But on this and many other most grave aspects of this extraordinary case, we shall have to comment as soon as the official report is published. We observe that Mr. VERNON SMITH endeavours to shelter himself from criticism by the phrase, What purports to be a report of my evidence," and he has traversed some of the statements in the Times. The whole o f the "private" intercourse between Mr. VERNON SMITH and M r . BUTT at the Board of Control was really very singular. Examined in every light, it is a most strange case alto gether, even upon Mr. Burrs own statement; and not the least curious portion of it is the part about the mysterious visitor who warned Mr. BUTT of the conspiracy. Who was this person ? Was the stranger in the interest of the COVERTS, or was he a boat-fide friend to Mr. Burr? Twic3 he had been seen, but not recognised, by Mr. Burr. The whole case, of course, will attract further attention in Parliament. We may observe that from pressure in their space the daily journals have omitted some important questions and answers. The Chairman (Sir J. GRAHAM), as far as we could see, conducted the inquiry with great impartiality. Where witnesses are not on oath, and where the stringent severity of legal cross-examination is not used, it is difficult upon personal charges to come at the exact truth ; hut we reserve for the present some further remarks, and a Par liamentary discussion on this report may tend to clear up all the facts. WE certainly do not mean to inflict upon our readers any carefully wrought sentences in praise of the eloquence of the Earl of DERBY. As readily should we attempt to prove the valour of NELSON, or the generalship of WELLINGTON. " Why praise HERCULES," 3:c. The only points we feel called upon to notice, in the speech of last Monday, are, its peculiar fitness and propriety, and its signal success. The gravity and the modest dignity of that address have struck all sorts of persons—friend or foe, admirer or opponent. There has never been seen a greater agreement among the journalists of all classes, than in awarding to that speech the praise of eminent suitability, propriety, and taste. And, accordingly, it, signally effected its purpose. A Minister accepting office under circumstances of great difficulty, and in the face of an apparently hostile majority, must he desirous of dis arming opposition, and of appealing to those better feelings which lie hidden in almost every human heart, and which, if called forth, would dictate fairness and generosity, even to an opponent. If the speech of Monday last was so intended, it unquestionably accom plished its purpose. The disposition, previously visible in some quarters, to give the new Ministry a fair hearing, has been largely spreading ever since the publication of that speech. The tone of the most hostile journals has become more calm, and anything like a bitterness of opposition is now scarcely visible or audible. The Times remarks : As there are men who can convert a defeat into a victory—men who can deny a boon with more grace than othors can grant one—men who seem ti be independent of the occasion and the material forced upon them —so the new Premier was equal to him self; fluent, striking, agreeable, and almost original, when others would find the whole region before them dry, empty, and barren. The Daily News, the most " Liberal " of all the daily journals, could not at first do otherwise than grumble over a Conservative manifesto. But before eight and forty hours had passed over, even the Daily News began to relent, and it then wrote thus : It appears to us that the true position for independent Liberals to take is one of armed neutrality towards the Government which a constitutional and necessary resistance to Lord Palmerston has for a time imposed upon the country. Lord Derby's manifesto his only shown what every rational person must have anticipated, that a sudden accession to power, even with an adverse majority to face in the House of Commons, has not had the effect of turning Tories into Liberals, Conservatives into Reformers. So rapid a renunciation of principle would have been no solid title to the respect of opponents, and would deservedly have lost the adhesion of friends. And even the Record itself, after a long course of ill-natured censure of Lord DERBY, indulged in for nearly three years past, is now forced to admit that— If the durability of the new Cabinet might be estimated by the character of Lord Derby's speech on Monday evening, no Minister ever entered on his career of office with fairer prospects than the nobie earl whose oratory is so justly admired. It was not only brilliant in its elocution, but characterised by a tone of dignity and good sense which happily contrasted with the last of his great speeches, delivered just before the dissolution of the late Parliament. On that occasion it was Lord Derby's intention to decry a successful rival, to depreciate his administration, to disparage his ecclesiastical appointments, and to intimate how much better he himself could govern the Church and State. The noble earl is now unexpectedly placed at the head of affairs, and he evidently feels the weight of his responsibilities. He speaks like a statesman who knows the difficulties with which he has to grapple, and who has to ask from his oppo nents that indulgent consideration which he was himself too little disposed to allow to his predecessors. The conclusion of the noble earl's speech was such as to induce us to say, " 0, si sic omnia!" His expression of a sense of his own weakness, and of his desire to rely on the Providence of God, was alike dignified and becoming. We cannot but retain our own doubts as to the stability of his Ministry, and our own fears as to the wisdom of the course he may pursue ; but at all events the Queen's Government is at all times entitled to respect, and whatever we may think of the way in which they have vaulted into office, it is plain that, under the circumstances of the country, the Derby Administration ought to have a fair trial. We will only add that, feeling the importance and the intrinsic value of this speech, we have felt it due to our readers to furnish them with the best report. of it that it was in our power to obtain ; and in the previous pages they will find it given with more fulness and more accu racy than in any other journal. The appointment of Lord CHELMSFORD to the Chancellorship has been a source of general gratification with men of all parties. Few advocates have ever been so popular, and such favourites with society, 229 as the eloquent "Sir F. Thesiger," whose noted name now merges in a higher rank. His distinguished talents and his successful career could not of themselves have given so much popularity to 11,11'.1 CHELMSFORD. His graceful person, his manly demeanour, and his finished manners marked him out as a thorough gentleman. He was free from all petulance and coarseness, and he was entirely exempt from the wrangling turn of mind which is too often the penalty for forensic success. He excelled in various kinds of advocacy. Nu one could state a case with so much clearness, and he had great art in biassing the feelings of a jury, and sometimes exciting them most powerfully. On repeated occasions bursts of applause have broken forth after his highly-wrought appeals to the hearts and consciences of a jury, and the natural character of his eloquence was one of its highest met its. His fine voice, clear elocution, and interesting appearance were great aids to bis fluent and forcible style. In the House of Com mons, also, Lord CHELMSFORD was a frequent and most able speaker, and he was a universal favourite with the memhers of both parties. The deepest sympathy was felt for him while the fate of L►tcknow was uncertain. In most important cases Sir F. THESIGER often pleaded in Courts of Equity, and we believe that his silk gown was given to him by Lord Chancellor BROUGHAM after an ingenious argument in the Court of Chancery. Taken altogether, " Sir F. Thesiger" was a great ornament to the Bar, and by the dignity of his character and manners be upheld the honour of the profession. We have no doubt that he will be equally distinguished in the House of Lords, where he certainly will be a great improvement on Lord CRANWORTH. The legal discus sions of the Law Lords occasionally run in a boisterous style, but Lord CHELMSFORD'S " gravity, blandness, and suavity " will calm the disputants, and impart a more serene tone to expression of their differ ences. On the whole, few men ever ascended the Woolsack with more universal feelings of goodwill. It is an obvious if not a very creditable policy for the opponents of a Government to single out one member of it for attack, and by a series of reiterated blows to attempt to injure him in the estimation of the public. This course, however questionable in a moral point of of view, is, nevertheless, oftentimes highly successful ; for although each individual charge may be satisfactorily met, yet the general impression remains that one who is constantly blamed can hardly be undeserving of censure. Lord MALMESBURY was made g victim of this policy during Lord DERBY'S former Admi nistration, and several journals seem so elated with their previous suc cess as to appear disposed to adi another name to their list. General PEEL has been attacked by the Times and the Daily News. The latter journal, having accused the Gallant General of discontinuing the com petitive examinations for admission into the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich, handsomely acknowledges its error upon discovering that the act was that of Lord PANMBRZ, who, as we informed our readers at the time, arrived at the determination to do so about Christmas last. So much for one accusation. For the rest, the opi nions of the Times we can all of us estimate at their just value. The times pronounces General PEEL to be totally unfit for his present position, and on this ground—that he is a soldier; that his profes sional advancement and chance of honourable employment depend upon his standing well with the authorities of the Horse Guards ; that, therefore, he will sacrifice the interests of the public to the pre judices of the Commander-in-Chief; and that, above all, for the last thirty years the Secretary at War has been uniformly a civilian, that being of itself a conclusive reason against the appointment of an officer to the post of War Minister. We are sorry to cut so pretty an argument from beneath the feet of those who rely upon it. But the claims of justice are paramount, and we must point out that General PEEL, receiving the pay ofa lieutenant colonel unattached, and being a major•general only by brevet, cannot be employed on active service, as he has himself stated more than once in his place in Parliament, and therefore has nothing to gain and nothing to lose by the favouror displeasure of the authorities at the Horse Guards. He is, in fact, except in title, uo more of a soldier than Lord PANS! URIC who had been a regimental officer for nearly the same number of years. In conclusion, we arc fain to admit that if a desire to be on good terms with the Horse Guards is synonymous with subserviency to the in• fluence of the Commander-in-Chief, and if a neglect of every represen tation, and a disposition to thwart every opinion of the authority who is responsible for the efficiency of the army be deemed indispensable qualilcations for the post of Minister for War, then, indeed, a sorry substitute has been found for Lord PANXIIRE ; but if it is considered that the head of the War Deparment should be a man whose most anxious desire is to promote the welfare of the army, and to secure as far as possible the comfort of the soldier, as well as most efficiently to perform the responsible duties of his office, we must retain our con viction in favour of General PEEL, who is most certainly the right man in the right place. Our readers must not indulge the hope that with the Palmerston Administration the Oaths Bill has faded away. Lord JOHN RaSSKLL acts in this matter withoutreference to the existing Government. He intends to ask the House of Commons to proceed with the Bill on the 1t th of the present month. Those of our readers, therefore, who had been purposing opposition of various kinds to this measure, should persevere without reference to the change of Ministry. Petitions to the House of Commons should be forwarded immediately; those for the House of Lords in a fortnight or three weeks. L