The Press. — London, England, 1854-04-29 00:00:00

386 It is a fact strikingly significative of the dis position of our Government that up to this date our hostility has been confined to show merely. It is now everywhere asked—Why is this? How long is it to last? How long are we to make war as if it were a military masquerade, to fence with buttons on our foils, and fire blank cartridges? We may have peace or war, but #c catinot have bah. Their duties are irreconcilable. The organisation of war demands a pervading energy and a happy audacity that exults in surmounting difficulties. There must be pre sent in a War minister the talent which inspi rits others—the hardy resolve—the divining genius—the foresight that plans—and some thing of the enthusiasm which can "do or die ;" but where shall we look for these qualities in Lord ABERDEEN'S Cabinet? It is mere folly or cowardice to' encourage the idea that commercial relations can be maintained between countries whose Governments are really at enmity. Should hostilities commence in earnest, the delu sion would be scattered in an instant, and that it is now favoured is only another proof that the Government is playing the country false, and that it yet hopes that the Turkish empire may be overthrown by Greek insurrection or Russian victory, before the Czar has felt the force of our arms. On this supposition, and on this only, the conduct of our Government is intelligib.e. The delay at the War-office,—the evasions of the Colonial Secretary,—the issue of the orders in Council,—the emptiness of the Exchequer,—the inaction of our forces,—all are explained. RAILWAY LEGISLATION. IT is understood that the railway companies remain firm in their opposition to Mr. CARD WELL'S bill, and that that enlightened Minister has begun to think seriously of following the example of his colleages, and " postponing,' i.e., abandoning, the measure. It is likewis understood that he himself does not scruple openly to condemn the subterfuge by which it was attempted to obtain the results, with out the machinery, of a parliamentary act. Mr. BOVVERIE, the ostensible mover in this fraud, has been made first a tool, and then a victim. A Russian agent retiring from an unsuccessful negotiation could not have been thrown over more unceremoniously. Put for ward to do that which Mr. CARDWELL desired to see done, but would not himself venture to attempt, and then repudiated in the face of the House of Commons, by the Minister whom he had endeavoured to serve, he has felt it due to his own honour to retire from the chairmanship of the General Railway Committee. It remains to be seen whether a successor will be found, or whether that strangely-framed tribunal will break down after a three months' trial. Meantime a few comments on the Cardwell scheme may not be out of place. The assumptions on which this measure rests are the following—that railway com panies either will not, or cannot, supply to their customers, the general public, the benefit of an unbroken communication by the shortest available route, from every part of the country to every other,—that they cannot be compelled by any existing tribunal to do so, — and that, therefore, new and more stringent checks are imperatively called for. On the above hypothesis one remark must be made. Whatever the faults of the existing system of communication, railway companies are not answerable for them. Mr. CARDWELL himself acknowledges this. He says, justly, that unlimited eompetition between rival com panies in neighbouring districts has led to the disjointed, irregular, inconvenient system which travellers in this year, 1854, experience and lament. But who created this competi tion? Parliament and the Board of Trade. The companies did not desire it. Willingly would they have acceded to any arrangement by which it might have been averted. They had no option in the matter. Until last year, the opinion prevalent both in Parliament and THE PRESS. out-of-doors was that you could not have too much competition—that the greater the hosti lity between neighbouring and connected lines, the better security had passengers against exorbitant charges. Suddenly a new light dawned on the popular understanding. It came to be discovered that competition had its inconveniences as well as its merits—that oompanies perpetually at war were not likely to act together harmoniously—that quarrels between them caused delay, difficulty of transit, sometimes danger—and that to these evils a speedy remedy must be applied. But what remedy ? It was too late to recur to the plan proposed in 1845, by which England was to be mapped out into districts, each assigned to a separate company. The time when mo nopoly was possible had gone by. Every great town—almost every county—had already its rival lines. Therefore, unable to check competition, yet recognising it as the scurce of the abuses complained of, tho committee hesitated to recommend any decisive step. Mr. CARDWELL, however, thinks some such step necessary ; and certainly his proviso has the merit of originality. The substance of his bill, stated in few words, is this : that when ever, in any single instance, a company shall be proved before any court of law (even a County Court) to have failed in providing sufficient accommodation for goods or passengers using its line, or even (as we interpret the bill) with out such previous conviction, but on the bare ex parte assertion of any petitioner to that effect, the Court of Chancery may interpose — take into its own hands the whole arrange ments of the line, regulate the starting and arrival of trains—in short, construct the time tables, and conduct the traffic of the company. Why the Court of Chancery should be selected for these functions—why not the Archbishop of CANTERBURY, or the Prime Minister for the time being, or the Commander-in Chief—for all these high functionaries have as much to do with railroads as the Lord Chancellor—we are not told, and cannot conceive. And the ab surdity of the thing becomes greater when we remember that the business of a law court is " jut: dieere," not " jug dare"—to say what is law, not to make it; whereas, in Mr. CARDWELL'S • project, the decisions given must be without rule, or precedent, or code, to guide them. But the plan is not so merely and harmlessly extravagant as it seems at first sight. In the rejected Bouverie clauses a somewhat similar provision existed, with this significant differ ence—that the Board of Trade there stood in lieu of the Court of Chancery. In the bill it is just hinted that the Court may act with the assistance and advice of the Board. All the world knows what that means. Just as Mr. BOUVERIE was put forward in the first debate to screen Mr. CARDWELL, so here the venerable person of the Lord Chancellor is called in to give dignity and plausibility to an usurped authority, which in practice will be exercised by some small subordinate of a governmental department. If this kind of bureaucracy is to receive the sanction of Parliament, we might as well live in Prussia. Some legislation is doubtless needed, but not legislation in this sense. THE " DESTINY" OF AMERICA AND CUBA. IT is not many months since Mr. EVERETT, after he had ceased to hold office, addressed to Lord JOHN RUSSELL a letter in reference to American progress in general, and especially in the direction of Cuba, the " lone star " of the Carrib Sea. In that letter, which was lengthy, measured even by the standard of American state papers, Mr. Evtatrr expressed "wonder" that the nations of Europe, instead of viewing with admiration " the beautiful" extension and expansion of American power now in the course of development by annexa tion, should regard it rather with an eye of jealousy. This process, which Mr. EVERETT looks upon as the gradual fulfilment of mani fest " destiny," has certainly more charms for the Americas than the European spectator — than the Sovereign of Spain, for example. Still Mr. EvsaErx need neither be angry nor E SATURDAY, alarmed; far, as the great FREDERICK said, " Fortune favours large battalions," so " Des tiny" will declare on the strongest side. That our transatlantic cousins have shown patience and a long-suffering endurance of wrong none can deny ; for the injuries and indignities systematically heaped upon them by the Cuban authorities are positively countless. There was the violent deaths of General LOPEZ and many of his followers, while the liberation of the survivors from imprisonment was only procured after several months' endurance of that " hope deferred" which is so galling to the spirit of the brave and the free. Then there was poor SMITH, the steward of the steamer Crescent City, the authorities would not allow him to land, and he always wished to go on shore ; and this was " a difficulty" which was constantly recurring, for the steamer plied between New Orleans and Havannah. We suppose the prohibition must have inflamed his desire to an extent which was injurious to health, for a paragraph lately went the round of the papers stating that " SMITH, the steward of the Crescent City, was " dead." Peace be to his ashes ! It was not written in the roll of " Destiny" that the enforcement of his right of way over the island, at the cannon's mouth, was to be a step in the " beautiful development" of the process of annexation. Again, there was the proposal by France and England that America should enter into a tripartite treaty with them, for the purpose of preventing any power wresting the island from Spain, and this was certainly a direct provocation to its seizure ; for nothing is more likely to incite a spirited nation to instant aggression than an intimation that it will be vigorously resisted. Even this pro vocation America withstood, and those indigni ties were endured, if not iu absolute silence, at least without active retaliation. But now at this particular juncture a variety of combinations seem to point to a path along which patience may march to reap its reward. " A difficulty" exeeeding all the others in magnitude and complexity has recently oc curred between the two Governments. An American vessel called the Black Warrior was detained by the Spanish authorities at Havannah, for an alleged violation of the regulations of the port. As soon as the news reached Washington the President by in spiration (there was not time for the receipt of accurate information) knew that it was an outrage of the gravest nature calling for large reparation, to obtain, which he resorted to instant action. Directions were hastily issued to equip a naval force, and the American Minister at Madrid was ordered to demand ample satisfaction for the wrong. How M.SouLE was likely to discharge such a mission it would require no wizard to predict, after his duels and strange misconduct in society. Of course, he commenced by naming a sum sufficient to cover all demands in full, viz., 60,0001. sterling, and couched the preposterous demand in terms so insulting that even in its fallen state the ancient pride of Castile for a moment was roused, reared its head, and a befitting an swer was returned. Here for the present the affair rests, but a hundred and fifty years ago something not un like it occurred. It is recorded in a certain " History of John Bull" that John, Nick Frog, and Lewis Baboon, treated old Lord Strutt and commenced surveying his park before he was dead, for the purpose of dividing it amongst themselves afterwards ; but the alliance turned out badly for all parties, and we trust the respectable portion of America will learn wisdom from the fact, and will not alloy themselves with the Loco-focos, or what ever the extreme democrats, who are so aptly and ably represented by M. SOULE, are called, to perpetrate a great wrong on a decaying nation. The possession of Cuba, even if it were peaceably acquired, might itself be a " difficulty" greater than that of the Black Warrior. The very name is ominous. America may one day have millions of " black warriors" within her bounds. I i 1• 1+ i