The Press. — London, England, 1857-07-11 00:00:00

THE PRESS, JULY 11,1857. ignorant tragedy-mongers, instead of endeavouring to lead the minds of their readers to a calmer and more impartial survey. A very interest ing point in the history of this mysterious case has perhaps hardly received as much attention as it merits. We allude to the coolness evinced by Miss MADELEINE SMITH through the whole of these trying proceedings. It is a most curious speculation as to whether the behaviour is most compatible with the supposition of her guilt or of her innocence. In the case of older prisoners, experienced in the world's ways and with the callousness acquired by a long life of dissi pation, such effrontery is neither rare nor surprising; but in a young girl who, whatever her other weaknesses, had passed through nothing to blunt her natural sensibility, it is truly wonderful. A great authority within the memory of men now living has informed us that the age of chivalry is past. We could well believe it when we peruse with indignant eyes the reception that has lately been accorded to a young lady of heroic qualities by a people whose father land is the cradle of romance and poetry. Yes, it is too true. Italy— enslaved Italy—the land of the fair and the brave—has been called to arms b 3 a woman, and called in vain. The grossminded multitude, inca pable of appreciating the noble sentiments to which the daughters of the West gave utterance, has had the incredible stupidity to prefer a hum drum Constitutional Monarchy to the only form of Government worthy of enlightened beings—a philanthropic democracy tempered by assassi nation. It is a melancholy reflection that the true meaning of liberty is so little understood—that the only people of that lovely land who are free to give effect to their opinions, who are at once a masculine, a warlike and a sensible race, should be so sunk in apathy and so deaf to reason as to refuse all sympathy with a creed like the above, when propagated even by the persuasive lips of Miss MERITOH WHITE. Of this un happy state of things we confess we do not see the end, and perhaps never shall, until, in the divine words of PLATO, either women become philosophers or philosophers become women. It is not often that any amusement is to be abstracted from a Parliamentary Bill, but Lord RAYNHAM, Sir JAMES EAST, and General BUCKLEY, in their effort to amend the Cruelty to Animals Act, appear to have resolved upon making themselves ridiculous, and upon ren dering their Bill in some measure quite as absurd and impracticable. We all know that animals are occasionally illtreated, but how, in the name of common sense, are we to ameliorate their condition by fining a butcher 5/. unless ho "so conduct his business as to prevent every "child under fourteen years of age from being present or witnessing" the slaughtering of the beasts? This may be excellently well intended, but • who will believe it to be practicable ? What follows is even of a more refined humanity. Section 27 provides a similar fine for any person on board ship who, keeping the live stock " without proper food, drink, or litter," shall subject them to suffering and exhaustion. Now, have either of the amiable, well-meaning framers of the Bill ever been on board ship during a strong N.E. gale in the Channel ? If the captains or owners of a ship are to be fined 5/. for every chicken, duck, turkey, ane sheep that, in a gale of wind, dies from exhaustion and pain caused by want of sufficient food and water, there will be an end to all profits on the cargo. A " Duck and Chicken" Insurance Company will at once spring into existence, end Lord RAYNHAM will no doubt take the chair, supported by Sir JAMES EAST and the Gallant General. But these refined humanitarians do not stop here ; they manfully take up the long-neglected case of the poor eels, and threaten every person " who " flays or strips off the skin" of any live animal, with imprisonment, not less than two and not exceeding six months, while those unfor tunate persons who purchase such skins may he imprisoned for a period of from one to six months. But this clause is not confined even to eels; it embraces the plumage of birds. We are no longer to pluck a goose for her quills, for the same punishment awaits us as if we skinned alive our neighbour's " Tom" or " Tabby." But why, Lord RAYNHAM, have you forgotten the poor lcbster ? Dat veniam corvis vexat censure columbas ! Again, the 34th provision sur passes all the others in its delicate attention to imprisoned puppies or confined cocks and hens. Among the acts of cruelties liable to penalties it is gravely provided that The packing in any basket or box, or in any other manner, or keeping so packed, any fowl or other animal, so as by deficiency of space, or air, or other provision, to cause dis tress or suffering, shall render the person so offending liable to certain penalties. There is in this paragraph an exhibition of tender feeling that we were wholly unprepared for. Would this apply to a modern Falstaff in a foul linen basket? We venture to observe that these attempts to legislate upon petty matters, which are much better left to individual discretion and good feeling, are in the highest degree absurd and uncalled for. The framers of this Bill have exceeded their mark altogether, and, instead of confining them selves to a few simple remedies for the obvious evils existing, have endeavoured to push their principles to such an extent that we should not in the least be surprised if next session they bring in a Bill to stop the slaughter of all animals, and fix us to turnips and asparagus, or gravely propose to abolish our national sports. Lord PALMERSTON'S reply to Mr. BERKELEY upon Tuesday, with reference to the Suez Canal scheme, was as remarkable for the absence of tact as for the presence of a certain brusquerie of tone unbecoming a Primo Minister. So far as it went it might be taken for a piece of downright plain speaking—another term for the disagreeable utter ance of exaggerated views. The Noble Lord characterised the scheme as one of those bubbles which from time to time have been palmed "upon gullible capitalists," declared that it was "physically impracti cable," and stated in as many words that it was "hostile to the in terests of this country," and " opposed " to the principles of British policy in Egypt : The obvious political tendency of the undertaking (said the Noble Lord) is to render more easy the separation of Egypt from Turkey. It is founded, also, on remote specs. lotions with regard to easier access to our Indian possessions which I need not more dis tinctly shadow forth, because they will be obvi o us to anybody who pays any attention to the subject. Now, it is absurd to say that a renewal of an undertaking is " physically impracticable," when the very underta king itself has once been accom plished, but by neglect and desuetude has been permitted to become useless. The Suez Canal scheme is not impracticable—it is perfectly practicable, but we believe at a cost far exceeding the calculations of the projectors ; and when the day arrives on which the application of steam power to ships shall be universal it is more than probable that both the Suez and the Panama canal schemes will be revived with better prospects of success, provided always that the political status of both Egypt and Central America be at that time placed upon a sound and a satisfactory basis. At present the benefits upon commerce and civilisation which the construction of such canals would confer are far more imaginary than real. No sailing vessels—and those, after all, carry the cargoes—would make use of them, while the railroads across each isthmus are now sufficient for all the purposes of steam traffic. The political considerations involved in the question are incontestably of grave import, but offering, we apprehend, other points of view without those narrow limits to which Lord PALMERSTON would confine the policy of this country towards Egypt. The future oft Egypt is a problem which puzzles the politicians of Europe--in truth it is one not readily solved. We beg to call the attention of our readers to the following extract from the Report of the Committee of the Belvedere-crescent Reformatory, in Lambeth : Our own experience goes to show that it is not wise for an institution Ruch as ours to meddle with any kind of boy except what we may term involuntary vagabond. This sort of boy finds himself on the streets either through the death or downright brutality or desertion of his parents. It often, and even generally, is the case that he does not belong to the very lowest class of people. The London vagrant boy has first-rate passive qualities. He is patient of hunger and cold, and endures his sofferin gs often with touching resignation. Perhaps he cannot help sometimes pilfering in a paltry way, oat of sheer necessity, but he will any day rather do a rough job than steal. And here comes the question, who then is the voluntary young thief? Why, simply the boy who, having a home, first takes to the streets as a lark. We cannot stop to prove this now. We know it is true, and for our own part we do not care to have to do with this kind of boy. We are quite sure that for every one such boy you take in hand in a privately belie. volent way you increase the inefficiency of parental superintendence in a dozen other eases. We do not indeed believe that parents turn their children into the streets in order that they may become qualified for a reformatory; but we do say that they get into a habit of thinking that they have as much right to be released from the care of a trouble • some boy as their neighbour had, and that this very habit of thinking so lucre aces the inefficiency of their control. We have commented upon the opinions here expressed in another department of our journal. It remains to be seen how far they are based upon a sufficient induction. They are to some extent new, and if found correct will probably lead to considerable alterations in our treatment of juvenile vagrants. The proposal of the French Government to import into Marti. nique a certain number of free negroes from Western Africa is apt, at first sight, to be regarded as a modified revival of the slave trade Lord BROUGHAM in the House of Lords, and Mr. TURNER last night in the Commons, have extracted from the Foreign Secretary and the Premier every assurance that care shall be taken the proceedings do not merge into a positive traffic in slaves. If that vigilance be exercised we have no fear for the result, for we have strong doubts of the success of the scheme. In the first place, the African has no wish to leave his native soil ; he finds upon it everything necessary for his subsistence, cheap , ready, and at hand. In the next place, when imported into a strange country, he will never work of his own free will beyond the limits which the necessity of existence imposes on him. Have we not already at a vast expense imported into our West India Islands from Sierra Leone the liberated Africans of our captured slavers, and with what result ? Ninety per cent. of these free labourers have preferred squatting in the bush to honest well-paid labour in the sugar plan tations. It is a palpable fact that the African is altogether a different being to the Asiatic. He has neither the intelligence of the Hindoo, the industry of the Chinese, nor the muscular development of the Tartar. He is nothing but an indolent savage ; and if we wish to instil into his mind notions of industry, we must first show him in his own country the profit and advantages of labour. Teach him to plant, grow, and cultivate for objects beyond the mere wants of life. Civilise him with commerce, and in course of time, when his country becomes as overpopulated as China, and his countrymen as competi tive and industrious as the Chinese, he may be anxious to emigrate. At present neither inconveniences exist. Africa is too pleasant a place to live in for the African to desire to leave it ; and if that " vigilance" Lord PALMERSTON promises be fairly exercised, we need have no fears about the revival of a legitimate slave trade.