The Press. — London, England, 1858-06-05 00:00:00

532 the superintendence of all the civil departments connected with the supply of the army." So that there must he, sooner or later, some caution not to carry the line of "unity" too far. The maladministration of the Crimean war should not be entirely charged upon the official system then in existence. There was then, also, a Ministerial "duality" in the form of a " Coa lition" Cabinet ; the Duke of NEWCASTLE was an inexperienced administrator, and, from various motives, the Whig portion of the Cabinet did not supervise their Peelite colleagues. Under such circumstances, with the best official system, the war might have been mismanaged ; and we do not forget that, even at the turning-point of the descent upon the Crimea, there were no Cabinet Councils held. There were political and "party" faults at that time, as Well as a bad system which has now been exploded. It is impossible to scan the names in the divi sion on Tuesday without seeing that the over whelming majority of weighty opinions was op posed to Captain VIVIAN'S motion. Going down the list, we find the names of the present and the late leader of the House of Commons, along with Opposition members of experience like Sir F. BARING, General CODRINGTON, Sir R. FERGUS RON, Sir J. GRAHAM, Sir W. HAYTER, Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT, Sir H. VERNEY, besides many eminent Ministerlalists. There were re spectable gentlemen in the majority, but the weight of experience and knowledge was clearly with the minority. We have no doubt that, on a future occasion, the house of Commons would be ready, if needful, to reconsider its premature decision, for it must be plain to men of all parties that such " unity" as Captain VIVIAN seeks for in the War-office would be at once derogatory to the Crown and dangerous to the Constitution ; and hence we observe with pleasure, that the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER has announced, that, looking at the numbers present—little ex ceeding 200—and at the smallness of the ma jority—two votes—the Government does not intend to ground any action whatever, upon that hasty and unexpected decision. FORBEARANCE OF THE WHIGS. " SUFFERANCE" was the favourite phrase a few weeks ago. It was dinned into the ears of the pub lic daily and nightly, that the Government lived upon it. It was their only means, their only resource, and when it was exhausted their organization was to be dissolved, and they were to return to their original elements. We took some little pains to expose the adsurdity of this representation, and by degrees the phrase has been dropped, and " forbearance " has taken its place. We were accustomed to hear that the Government existed by the "sufferance" of the House of Commons. Now we are told that they are living by favour of the " forbearance " of Lord PALMERSTON and Lord JOHN RUSSELL ! It may be worth while to give a little consi deration to the characteristics of forbearance. A cobra with its fangs drawn is forbearing. Indeed, it becomes, we know, in that condition more than fbrbearing—it may be made familiar and tame. A leader among the predatory class, when fairly caught and in durance, is forbearing. In fact, as we know from the evidence of gaol chaplains and philanthropists, the most resolute and astute of the class in prison are more than forbearing— they are very models of conciliatory deportment, and are the mildest-mannered and most engaging of men. We cannot say, however, that we should be disposed in either case—either in that of the snake or the Pet of the Predatory Army— to attach much value to a forbearance which is the result of impotence rather than of new prin ciples of action ; nor should we like to rely upon its continuance if there occurred a restoration of ability. Lord l'Ai.mEits - rox and Lord JOHN RUSSELL claim to have exhibited this virtue of forbear ance in a most ample and generous manner, and THE PRESS, JUNE 5, 1858. the journals who support them complain loudly that sufficient credit is not given them for the patriotism of their conduct and the disinterested ness of their motives. We are assured that had it not been for their e ublic virtue, the Govern ment could not have discharged its ordinary and necessary functions, and we must have had, in the middle of a most important session, Parlia' mentary anarchy and national confusion. Lord I'ALMERSTOX, by previous arrangements and cur rent forbearance, enabled Ministers to disen tangle and settle the complications of our tbreign relations, and put financial matters on a satisfac tory iboting for the year; while the timely and sagacious co-operation of Lord JOHN RUSSELL upon the Indian Bill saved the Government from being displaced, and dragged the great subject of Indian Administration out of the category of party questions. As for the late attack, made with such an announcement of power, and with drawn with such a display of impotence, that, we are assured, was not the issue of the intrigues of a Cabal, but th 6 result of a common sentiment of alarm pervading with singular simultaneity the minds of Lord PALMERSTON, Lord JOILN RUSSELL, Lord SHAFTESBURY, and Mr. CARD WELL, lest our Indian empire should be sacri ficed by the strong views and rash action of Lord ELLENBOROUGIL Party spirit on the Opposition side of the House, we have been told, is in abeyance, if not extinct ; public motives govern, and public virtue, as evinced by "forbearance," is supreme. We could almost wish that we had simplicity or charity enough to give credence to all this. But, in spite of our wishes, the events of every day force upon us the conviction that in the past days of Eng lish history Party Spirit was never more rampant in feeling, more active in device, nor more un scrupulous in action, than it is at this moment. At the commencement of the career of the present Government we directed attention to the remarkable difference between the language and demeanour of Lord PALMERSTON as represented by himself in the House of Commons, and of Lord PALMERSTON as represented by the press out of doors. In the house Lord PALMERSTON was mild as the cobra with his teeth drawn, conciliatory and co-operative as the pet of the gaol chaplain ;—scarcely, indeed, save by an occa sional suggestion as to the order of public busi ness, asserting his claim, to be regarded as the Leader of the Opposition. Outside he was de fiant and abusive, daily complaining of Mr. DISRAELI'S occupation of the Treasury bench, and predictin ,, his own immediate return to office. We said then it was thought by some uncharitable persons that the quiescence within the House was deceptive, and that the real PALMERSTON was to be looked for in the columns of his morning journal, trying to get up a sensation abroad, and intriguing at Cambridge house. Were we not right ? Was there ever anything more ridiculous, is there anything more absurd now, than the spectacle of the two com petitors for the next Premiership—Lord PAL MERSTON above, and Lord JOHN RUSSELL below the gangway—each flaunting his forces nightly and upon every possible occasion before the face of the other, like the Kingmakers in SHAKES PEARE'S historical plays, in order to bring his rival to terms ? An effort of patriotism to save India from being made the shuttlecock of party conflict ! Does anybody who has watched events believe that to have been the character of Lord JoHN's Parliamentary move with reference to the Indian Bill ? Why, it was part of the game. It was the great occasion for which Lord JOHN had been anxiously waiting, by which he was to discomfit Lord PALMERSTON just sufficiently to show him that he could not come into power again with out the aid of his ancient colleague. Having cleverly given Lord PALMERSTON a dismaying and unexpected back-fall, Lord JOHN thought he was master of the situation. So for the moment he was, and the result was the New Alliance of Cambridge-house, and the miserable motion of Mr. CARDWELL. And he might have remained so; the Noble Lord might even have had a chance of being again Prime Minister of England, and of again throwing his allies over board when they had served his turn, had not the disgust of the House of Commons broken up suddenly and decisively the carefully arrayed combination, and left them in a state of discom fiture, soreness, and wrath which defied conceal ment, and, reckless of consequences, has exhi bited itself most ludicrously in the recent frantic and feeble attacks upon the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER'S Speech at Slou g h. T a l k of " forbearance " after all this ! We say, and so will every man throughout England say in his chimney-corner, with our old friend Burchell, " FUDGE! OUR POSITION IN FEBRUARY, 1858. THREE several attacks have been made on Mr. DISRAELI, by Lord JOIIN RUSSELL, by Lord PALMERSTON, and by Lord CLARENDON, with reference to an expression used by him at the late Conservative dinner at Slough. He is re ported to have there said—" When I tell you " seriously that the question of peace or war, " when we acceded to office, was not a question " of weeks or days, but of hours, I am sure that " you will remember that peace has been pre " served, while the honour of the country has " been vindicated." The three Noble Lords who have made the Slough Speech a theme for Parliamentary dis cussion seem scarcely able to find words to ex press their astonishment and indignation at this statement. According to their view, the state of Europe at the moment when Lord PALmEnsToN so suddenly tumbled from his seat was one of unusual calm and repose. They find it difficult to conceive what strange dream or spectral delusion can have flitted across Mr. DISRAELI'S vision, to induce him to talk of warlike emergencies. So feeling, it is not at all surprising that they should give vent to some expressions of anger, as well as of astonishment, at representations which they deem so far distant from the truth. But were those representations untruthful , Was the idea of war—possible, and perhaps even near—a new and startling one ? Is the fact so c: At the time of Lord PALMERSTON'S resignation, in February last, had no language savouring of apprehension found its way to the public eye or ear, either by speech or by publication ? The case is not at all as Lords PALMERSTON and CLARENDON would represent it. Fourteen weeks have passed away, and men already begin to forget the topics of conversation which were rife in the depth of last winter. But those who have trustworthy memories can easily recal to mind, if they will, the common apprehensions of that period, as to what might follow the denim ciations of the French Colonels in the Moniteur, and the refusal of the House of Commons to pass Lord PALMERSTON'S Conspiracy Bill. But we need tax no one's memory. We can copy, without any difficulty, passages from London newspapers of February last, which demonstrate, in the simplest of all ways, that Mr. DISRAELI, in his speech at Slough, was merely describing what everybody felt to be the state of affairs in February last. We might cite various newspapers , but . single one may su ffi ce. We take the following passages from the London morning paper which (excluding the penny journals) is second only to the Times : "Ministers will incur a grave responsibility if, after what has taken place, they do not forth. with take the precaution of having a formidable fleet in readiness to protect our shores, in case of any attempt being made to give effect to the menaces of the French Colonels. Lord PAL MERSTON, as the head of the Government, and the presumed guardian of the public interests and the country's safety, should take care, with out an hour's delay, that every available vessel, and every available seaman, should be put into fighting condition."—Morning Advertiser, Feb. 12, 1858. " We do implore Lord PALMERSTON, by every consideration of loyalty which he owes his Sovereign, by patriotism to his country, and by all the responsibilities which rest on him as a Minister, not to lose a moment in putting our , coast defences in the most e ffi cient possible state ., —Morning Advertiser, Feb. 20. " We repeat, that the most urgent necessity exists for putting our coast defences in the most efficient state of which they are capable, 511c1 also of calling out the Militia wit hout delay. Jo I I g e . tt tl e: 0] tl to tl e th is 1) 4 of a of tl It lie lx in dc to da io Id IT Lo ow ? pri n, in of in Dr si g IN fro It in by re to tic to qu; of th re' r, ss isc dil I n th( cal at as prc ie asp hat io ins in Rtt 1- An le the e pat e am all 8 Wit laic o ope flat for ho( cor, to i cot all the V 13u i for o son for