The Press. — London, England, 1858-02-06 00:00:00

I! 1 • THE PRESS, FEB 122 shown that they thoroughly understood the subject in all its beatings long before this out break occurred. Indeed, the outbreak had been predicted as the necessary issue of the course that Ministers were pursuing, in the pages of THE PRESS. The Conservatives have not been, like these, the accomplices of the Directors ; they have Hot been participators ih the measures which have been productive of the present diaastrone events. On the con trary, they had protested against them with all their might. To them, then, we should see with confidence legislation upon India in trusted, because we are sure that it would be exercised Judiciously and simply with reference to the proved necessities of the case. It would not be used as the Government is using it, to mask a retreat from a policy that has broken down, and to provide a scapegoat for errors that can neither be defended nor concealed. Still less would it be turned to the worst and most fatal use of all, that of serving as an engine alternately of bribes and of threats, now employed to deter from Parlia mentary opposition, and now employed to purchase Parliamentary support; converting India. in fact, by anticipation to the purpose to which many hal predicted it would be con verted by Lord PALMERSTON, namely, that of bolstering up Ministerial power and further ing Ministerial jobs, at the expense of every consideration connected with the welfare or permanence of our empire in the East. It is this, we confess, that leads us so strongly to doubt the safety of leaving legisla tion on India to the hands of the present Pre mier, notwithstanding the conviction we have long since avowed of the advisability of trans ferring the entire government of it to the Crown. The powers already possessed by him have been so greatly misused that we cannot with any confidence see additional powers confided to his bends. Indeed, he has over awl over again informed us through his organs tint those he already possesses are ample, and • that the idea of the Company having ever been au obstruction to him is absurd. Nor has his conduct since he has professed to become a convert to the opposite opinion been less un befitting a Minister entitled to be trusted than before. Instead of coming forward frankly and honestly and boldly, he has twice put forth intimations as to an intended abolition of the Company, and as often withdrawn them; and twice has he caused to be published diametrically opposite statements as to the course which, if the Company were abolished, le would pursue. To show, indeed, how com pletely he has been trifling with the question, we have only to add that in last Sunday's Observer it was distinctly stated that the Cabinet had not then finally decided on the nature of the measure to be introduced. If this is to be the style in which India is to be legislated for by the Ministers, we confess that we see very little prospect of benefit from any measure they may bring in. Sound legislation is not to be looked for from men who show by their vacillation that they know little of the subject they have undertaken, or that they care for it less. If the Indian question is to be dealt with successfully, it must be dealt with by a Minister possessing knowledge, and firmness, and consistency as well. It is not a subject to he made a shuttle cock of as the Minister has been making it, who seems himself to be a weathercock that turns with every change in the popular breath. It is a question to be decided on principles of anited sagacity and solidity, that appear to be wholly foreign to our Premier; and we confess, therefore, that we shall view with considerable anxiety the power of disposing of it intrusted by Parliament to his hands. - MR. BRIGHT, AND REVELATIONS OF RADICALISM , 41 11aDtc.tt.s, painted by themselves," would give an interesting subject to a political author "for An amusing volume. Mr. ROEBUCK'S opinion of Mr. COBDEN, Mr. COBDEN'S estimate of S ir DE LACY EVANg, General THomPsos's philosophical criticism on Mr. Cox of pins bury, and Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE'S lively satire on tie whole party, might make an agreeable • ..,, and trenchant series of curious cro! Tho materials might easily be t i kic north o lies.. Wra?tita a and capital Radicalism can boast. A considerable number of " factory lords at present sit in the Rouse of Commons, and it appeats from Mt. iituoirr's letter that those who declaim idly *lid insolently against " the " tyranny of agricultural iandlords " take, even in 11th. Ilftiont's opittiott o an extremely one sided view of facts. Wilh . tt3gard to the Pailot itself, there could not be a more damaging argument against it than the view put forward by the Honourable Member for Birmingham. For how does the case stand ? At present, even supporters of the Ballot as a mere abstract question would decline to press for it, because they say— " With small constituencies it would cause " greater facilities for increased corruption," as it undoubtedly would ; but, on the other hand, even if the suffrage be widely extended, such a change (unless accompanied by the Ballot) would be dangerous, according to Mr. BRIGHT, to the freedom of the working classes iu larger towns. One party of the Radicals assert—" We must not look for the " Ballot, unless we have large constituencies, " and a wide suffrage ; ' and another party among them cry—" We must not look " for the suffrage, unless we get the Ballot " also," and thus by a logical process the cry for secret suffrage becomes the shibboleth of democracy. FAMILY SOLICITORS AND FATHER CONFESSORS. THE Times has discovered in the family soli citor of modern times a certain likeness to the medieval father confessor. This comparison is somewhat exaggerated, but is not altogether without truth. Each is commonly placed in a situation of almost unbounded trust, and each occasionally affords us an example of about the grossest abuse of confidence of which humanity is capable. No doubt, such cases are highly exceptional; and in both instances, perhaps, the class has suf fered for the faults of individuals. But it is, probably, to such exceptional cases that we in no slight degree owe our deeply-rooted Eng lish mistrust of the Confessional; and we confess to thinking that the public will have learned only a useful lesson from the ghastly revelations of fraud and folly which are occa sionally disclosed in the daily journals, if they do no more than check the excessive confi dence which indolence is too apt to repose in the family solicitor. Only last week we had a notable instance. HENRY HALL and CHESLYN HALL, of New Bos well-court, Lincoln's-inn, solicitors, who were gazetted bankrupts as long ago as June 27 1856, came up for their certificate. Their lia bilities are 150,0001., while their assets will not realise oue-sixth of that amount. On the death of their father they succeeded to " an " excellent professional connection," but, in an evil hour for themselves and their clients, took to horse-breeding, at a place called Neas don.. Their own prope r ty di s appeared—ru in had to be staved off som e how—their clients' money fora time choked the gulf—till at last they appear before Mr. Commissioner FANE, and reveal to us some little professional secrets as to their relations with their clients, which, in two cases at least, seem to us not unworthy of attention. The largest creditor is Sir CHARLES RUSH OUT Rus lIOUT. The bankrupts' father had been his father's solicitor. With the bankrupts themselves Sir CHARLES was "on extremely " confidential and friendly terms." "He " occasionally advised them as to the pur " chase of a horse, and interested himself in " their breeding establishment." Not content with having them for his solicitors, about ten years ago he made them his bankers besides. They seem to have been asked no questions. They sold and mortgaged Sir CHARLES'S pro perty at their own sweet will, and did not credit him with the proceeds. On one occa sion 20,0001. was raised. Owing to the " frightful state of the Money Market," the brothers were compelled to intercept 8,0001. Sir CIILRLES then—it seems incredible, but we I --- )f England. In that particular considerable portion of whatever •canital 111eY . iss-rerdings. (*Wed' .from • k 1 the public journals of tha last ten years. The discords of the Radicals, the way in which they quarrel about leadership on eer thin questions, and their want of political unity, are eithemely instructive to all who study the action of Parliamentary party. Amongst the fladiegi leaders are many gentlb men of greitt indepandencej and high pet - Bond respectability of character. Although opposed to their principles, and hostile to their progress, wo do not dispute the fact that in intentions many of them mean well ; and they have often shown more patriotic feelings than could be found in the servile band that cheers a Whig Cabinet on all occasions. The great political fault of the Parliamentary Radi- cals has been their violent assumption that they alone represented " the people, that the masses were with them, and that all the how mercial intelligence of the country was on their side. The vehement tone in which they asserted their supposed predominating force often misled people as to the real nature of Radicalism in the country. But Radicalism, like Liberalism itself, is undergoing a new process, and it is passing into a state of candid confession. As Conser vatives, we rejoice at the frank avowals that have lately come from the pen of Mr. BRIGHT. In his recent letter to Mr. GEORGE EDMONDS, of Birmingham, the Honourable Gentleman makes several statements which cannot be hastily forgotten. It adds to the weight of those statements that they are in a letter in tended for publication, and not in a mere speech. Amongst those statements are the assertion that—" Any Reform Bill which is " worth a moment's thought or the least effort " to carry it, must at least double, and it " might do mu2h more than double, the repre " sentation of the metropolitan boroughs and " of all the great cities of the United King " dom." Such is the end of " Reform," as proposed by the Honourable Member for Bir mingham ; and Conservatives can see at a glance what sort of Parliamentary Government would result frpm such a measure when we remind them that at present the Cities and Boroughs in England and Wales return 335 members, while only 159 are assigned to the Counties. It is not, however, on the speculative errors of 'lnch a scheme as Mr. BRIGHT advocates that we desire to fasten attention. " The " effort to carry a large measure," and the utility of employing Radical strength and agitation for that purpose, are glanced at by Mr. BRIGHT. Thus, if the Ministerial Bill prove a mawkish and moderate scheme in the opinion of Radicals, their whole connection will be directed to do nothing to support it; but let it be a large scheme (as it undoubtedly will be), breaking in further on the Conserva tive intrenchments, and then, as a step in the right direction, we may be assured that the Radicals, for ulterior purposes, will be banded together for the carrying of the Ministerial measure. Another observation from Mr. BRIGHT is even of more importance, as it lets in a flood of light on the Radicals behind the scenes. "I dread," says Mr. BRIGHT, " to think of the " consequences of a wide extension of the " suffrage in our manufacturing districts " should it be obtained without the Ballot. " It will tempt employers of labour to a hateful " tyranny, and it will bring down multitudes of " the employed. I fear, to a not less hateful condi " tion of political degradation." That is, indeed, one of the most remarkable statements that we remember ever to have seen from a Radical. We have been so often sickened with the cant about " the spirit and " intelligence of the working classes," and we have been so frequently disgusted with the fallacious and invidious comparison of the working men in cities as contrasted with " the serfs of the squirearchy, that it is pleasing to hear a candid acknowledgment that there is another aide to the question. " Employers of labour " in the factory districts are likely to be " tyrants " unless the Ballot is conceded along with a wide suffrage. Mr. BRIGHT, of course, julges from experience and observation, and he certainly ought to know a great deal about " the employers of labour " iu E r