The Press. — London, England, 1857-07-04 00:00:00

F. THE PRESS, JULY 4, 1857. they put forward that the Spanish clergy are adverse to her cause, and that the people in reality:still lean to their old Castilian loyalty and to the forms of absolutism. They refuse all participation in the enor mities of Constitutional Government, and protest against the sales of ecclesiastical property, which under their rule would be restored, and against the deprivation of episcopal dignitaries of that power which which was possessed under the protection of the Inquisition. Not long since the Throne was offered to Don JUAN—an army w ith RR experienced General was provided, and large funds Iver at his dis posal, provided he consented to recognise the Cort.es and the Consti tution of Spain. He declined. Some time previously, notwithstanding the contradiction of the Chevalier LUMLEY WOODYEAR, the Conde de MONTEMOLIN was willing and anxious to ►ecognise Queen ISABELLA, if he were periiiitted to return to Spain with the title of Infanta, and with the rights, privileges, and properties appertaining to that Royal rank. We apprehend that the Concordats recently concluded between Rome and Austria, and Rome and Naples, have exercised a certain influence upon the actions of the Montemolinists. But, be that as it may, so long as a French army is quartered at Rome, an invincible obstacle exists to the hopes or intrigues of the Carlist Princes. Fresh exhibitions of the weakness of our strong Government are daily given in Parliament. How the Jew Bill will fare in the Lords is a question of the liveliest speculation ; and whether every Cabinet Minister will fulfil his mission, and vote in its favour, is a point for delicate discrimination. It is worthy of note that, though moved by Lord PALmEasTox as the great Government measure, both Lord CASTLEROSSE and Mr. MossErn. absented themselves on the division. This laxity of Treasury discipline is a singular feature in Lord PALMERSTON'S Administration. What Gargantua said to the monks of Thelen►c, Paz que sous voudras—" Do what thou wilt"—appears to be Lord PALMERSTON'S motto. Upon the Ballot division this week we fini some Members of the Government voting in the minority, some in the majority, and some staying away ; while upon the Medical Profession Bill the Government sustained an undeniable defeat, and this not upon a point of opinion in which a Government may be divided without weakness, but upon a matter of administrative fact, when the supporters of the Government are supposed to act together. Mr. COWPER, upon the part of the Go vernment, entreated the House to reject Mr. HEADLAM'S bill, and accept Lord ELcrio's; and the gratifying result was, that the House scouted Lord Eteno's bill, and indorsed Mr. HEADLAM's, by a majority of 2125 to 78 It is with the deepest regret that we announce the death of the Duchess of BEDFORD, which melancholy event occurred yesterday at the family mansion in Belgrave-square. It would be difficult to esti mate the grief and distress sincerely felt by a large circle of friends and acquaintances to whom this lamented lady was known and beloved. We must caution our political friends that the current number of "Dod " contains not a few errors. It is for the first time attempted in its pages to give the politics of the Peers, and several mistakes aro made in that department. It is stated that Lord LYNDHURST is a " Liberal Conservative." If the Noble and Learned Lord so described himself, of course we bow to authority; but we must remind " Dud " that Lord LYNDHURST boldly opposed the Papal Aggression (counte nanced by " Liberal Conservatives ") ; that he vehemently assailed tile policy of the Emperor NICHOLAS, much to the scandal of Lord ABER DEEN; and that he vote:l a few nights since with Lord DERBY against the " Ministers' Money Bill." It is asserted, further, that Lord PLUNKET (the Bishop of Tuam) is a " Liberal." On the decease of the late Peer, the Bishop succeeded to the barony, and took his seat as a Temporal Peer, and the newspapers ntated that his Lordship sat behind Lord DERBY ; and we suspect it is for that cause that the bitter and unjust attack on his Lordship was made, to which a special reply will be found elsewhere in our impression of to-day. It is further stated that the Earl of DONOUGHMORE is a " Liberal Conservative ;" though the Noble Earl, who is one of the most rising young states men of the day, took an active part in the support of the Earl of DErtev's Cabinet. Lord CLONCURRY, also, is said to be a " Liberal:" but his votes, as far as we have observed, are decidedly thew Of a " Conservative," and his proxy was given to Lord DERBY against the " Ministers' Money Bill." Some of the information conveyed by " Dud" reads with droll effect—as when, under the head of " IVellin,Y -ton (second Duke of)," we are gravely told, " The first Duke was the " celebrated military commander;" and under " Nelson," that " The " Peerage was conferred for naval services." We observe that Lord WENSLEYDALE is classed as " a Liberal." Has " Dud " authority for that statement? Under " Palmerston "it is announced that the salary of the Fast Lord of the Treasury is 5,0001. Would " Dod " say how long has that reduction taken place, and are the future Premiers to be cut down to that figure? General PEEL is a highly honourable member of the Opposition, but, by way of enhancing the gallant General's distinction, " Dud" says "he is uncle to the Member for " Tareworth." We should have preferred indicating the fraternal tie with the late, than the relationship witlt the present, Sir ROBERT PEEL. After a minute account of the official posts held by Sir R. PEEL, not forgetting that " he was secretary to the special mission to Russia at the coronation of the Emperor," it is said that he is " a Liberal," and belongs to " The Carlton, Brooks's, and Boodle's Clubs." SHER. DAN once remarked that " there were gentlemen to whom it was a al t . • . THE WEEK. THE rapid and contagious spread of mutinies in the native Indian army, after Mr. V. SMITH'S assurance a few weeks back that the " disaffection " was "at an end," has taken the country by surprise. In the absence of all official documents, it would be premature to discuss the measures taken at Meerut for the suppression of the movement. General HEwirr's position was very critical, and possibly he thought it of more importance to hold Meerut than to risk pursuit into Delhi. However, there is no longer any doubt that our position in India is, at this moment, one of extreme peril. The native army has hitherto been regarded as our main strength. It has, it is true, at different periods exhibited symptoms of disaffection, but it has never before, not even at Vellore, brought about so grave a crisis, nor exhibited such desperate, such bloodthirsty animosity against its British officers. The mutiny must be crushed. When that is accomplished, it will be time to consider the best preventive for such a crisis in future; but mean while we protest against the policy of disbandment, which on all sides is rather eagerly supported. If we disband every native regiment that shows a tendency to revolt, the country will swarm with banditti, the roads will become infested, a species of guerrilla warfare will arise, the Bengal Presidency will be kept for months in a state of feverish agitation, while among the natives a deep, resentful, and perilous discontent will arise, and this, in the volcanic state of India, is a consideration not to be lightly dismissed. The next regular mail will not reach us for eight or ten days, but it is probable that in the event of the mutiny spreading over the other Presidencies, or irrepressibly breaking out in the north-west provinces, a special steamer will be despatched to convey the in telligence. It is impossible, of course, to predict the limits of such a movement. It appears to be confined entirely to the army ; and if General ANSON has been enabled to move down in force upon Delhi, by this time a terrible retribution has crushed out one of the most alarming mutinies occurring since we held India, but one incon testably brought about by the moat abominable maladministration on the part of the Indian authorities Lord GRANVILLE'S reply to the questions put by the Duke of NORTHUMBERLAND and the Marquis of SALISBURY on Thursday with reference to the appointment of an Admiral of the Fleet, is not com plimentary to the flag officers of the navy. Lord GRANVILLE, with a gaucherie he is sometimes guilty of, said that in the opinion of the Government there was at present " no person particularly marked out "to fill an office of the sort." The post is purely honorary. It has always been the custom to appoint to it the senior flag officer, and it is an ungracious distinction in the case of the present gallant officer at the head of the list to keep open the commission. It is possible that the " person" (I) so particularly "marked out to fill an office of the sort " may not yet have arrived at that position on the flag list which would be agreeable to himself and satisfactory to her Majesty's Government. It is not hazarding too much to say that the decision of the Ware• ham Election C ommittee has surprised—even Mr. CALCRAFr himself. The glorious uncertainty of the law or of the turf may now fairly yield preference to that of an election committee. Never, apparently, were bribery and corruption so distinctly set forth. The Committee admit it was " proved" that two electors, BAKER and lIALE3, were bribed and intimidated by Mr. PIKE, a member of Mr. CALeaArr's Committee, to vote in favour of Mr. CALCKAFF. The case was clear. Mr. CALeaArr's counsel was in despair. And yet to all appearance, in the very teeth of the evidence, the Committee decide that the acts of Mr.PIKE were wholly unknown to Mr. CALcaArr, and return that gentleman as duly elected. How is it possible to find any one guilty, if an active member of the Committee of the candidate is to be held to do what he pleases, without in any way implicating members ? Surely a candidate or his agents should have sufficient control over the committee to prevent their misconduct. Is it possible that in so small a constituency as Wareham such flagrant bribery could have been perpetrated by a member of Mr. Cateala - r's Committee, and yet be unknown to the candidate o.t his agents? It is scarcely credible, and yet such is the result of the Wareham Committee decision. Were it not that Parliamentary Committees are always framed with the view to secure the strictest impartiality of opinion, and to exclude all prejudiced persons, all per- sonal friends of the petitioners, and especially those who might by position or interest have been called upon to exercise their influence at the election, we confess that we should regard this decision as eminently unsatisfactory. As it is, upon the face of the evidence printed, we can only accept it as au admirable illustration of a non sequitur. The letter published elsewhere of the Chevalier LuMLEY WOODYEAR —an Englishman—and dated from Naples, must be received with due caution. It is written by authority in the capital of one of the Bourbon Princes, who has strongly expressed himself in favour of Spanish Unlism. But the question is not one of Sovereigns, per sonally, but of Go% eminent and the form of Government. The Nlontemolinists at pi esen :.leclare themselves against the right of the Queen of SPAIN to the Throne, and affirm that she is a popular monarch, elected by the pe,ple, in right of their caprice, mid in iticfiance of the principle of hereditary legitimacy. Very especially do k. 652 IP 0 •••