The Press. — London, England, 1858-04-03 00:00:00

325 revenge by showing t to wear Mr. Punch's of Mr. Punch's back variety of form has 1 by the Saturday Bet the dogmas of Th( faith, and to pave t h . wo uld gradually ui aims of the Saturdas in the State, are the seeks for resources i whose standard max be adopted as the n journal which, with with cold water and poses all bounds i indeed, he a most da by its universality. Bards and Scotch malignity of an ine, quently JEFFREY wa self-acting satirist, I even more inconsist so with the pervert without experiment witnessed in a glas the Jesuits in the n for England may be the patent operatiot such a brittle roof o Lord STANHOPE week, travelled over anything like justiet utilization of genius. a Cieeronian tribute and impressively ex with which they we: which some brief ei Noble Lord's own elicited from the le matter of fact, are tl of fortune, or the 1 only in the minds o of a wife, or a si. sudden and irrepara self is an instance proached him with had learned from hi QUINCTILIAN, we SUE topic in the eulogy have intro.itieed the afforded him of gi Christianity. The we desire to call a:t at our public act to declamatory excr tend to deny. But tion to classical lit complained of. W ment than we have at the same time mi It is possible that ti composition—the s flower—may have al rival powers. But case. We do not v want mcre. A new nuisanc4 was first introdueec and no more violent the act and its open venience you might your hat knocked nn THE PRESS, APRIL 3, 1858. reve nge by s howing that the Saturday Review had actually condescended to wear Mr. Punch's cast-off motley, and had reproduced the humour of Mr. Punch's back numbers. The Protestantism of England in every variety of form has been sneered at, vilified, disparaged, and satirised by the Saturday Review. To sap English Protestantism, to introduce the dogmas of Theocracy, and lower the reverence for Scriptural faith, and to pave the way with insidious art for a Romanising clergy who would gradually undermine the National Religion, is one of tho aims of the Saturdayßeview. Theocracy in the Church, and Bureaucracy in the State, are the sole purposes for which it toils; and for means it seeks for resources in the armoury of the disciples of IGNATIUS LOYOLA, whose standard maxim, "Calumniare fortiter, aliquid adhoerebit," may be adopted as the motto of the Sat or Spatterday Review. Such is the journal which, with honeyed words for the missionaries of Rome, and with cold water and Jesuits' powder for the circulators of the Bible, poses all bounds in its assault on contemporary organs. It would, indeed, he a most dangerous journal, except that its abuse is neutralized by its universality. JEFFREY might have groaned under " The English Bards and Scotch Reviewers," only that BYRON, with the maladroit malignity of an inexperienced censor, attacked everybody, and conse quently JEFFREY was not much hurt. The Saturday Review is a sort of self-acting satirist, which scolds down its own character. It would he even more inconsistent than it is if it did not abuse itself, and it does so with the perversity of a self-tormentor. But its existence is not without experimental value. The labours of a swarm of bees can be witnessed in a glass hive; and the literary industry of the school of the Jesuits in the manufacturing of a preliminary school of Romanism for England may be seen by any intelligent observer who attends to the patent operations of the Saturday Review. Those who live under such a brittle roof ought certainly be more cautious. Lord STANHOPE, in his address to the students of Aberdeen, last week, travelled over too wide an extent of ground to enable us to do anything like justice to his oration. The necessity of deep study to the utilization of genius, the importance of the art of public speaking, and a Cieeronian tribute to the consolations of literature, are eloquently and impressively expressed. And we can well understand the applause with which they were greeted. There are two points, however, on which some brief comment seems demanded. One contained in the Noble Lord's own speech; the other in the criticism which it has elicited from the leading journal. in the first place, then, what, RS a matter of fact, are the sorrows which literature can alleviate? the loss of fortune, or the loss of relatives? Surely such a notion can exist only in the minds of those who have never felt either. Can the death of a wife, or a sinter, be lightened by the pagen of TENNYSON ? or sudden and irreparable ruin by the " Waverley Novels"? CICERO him self is an instance against his own theory. And his own friends re proached him with the unrestrained indulgence of grief which they had learned from him might be forgotten in the charms of literature. Qelxcr[LlAN, we suspect, was but repeating a familiar and hackneyed topic in the eulogy quoted by Lord STANHOPE, who perhaps might not have introduced the unicum solatium at ali, but for the opportunity it afforded him of gracefully gliding off to the superior efficiency of Christianity. The second point arising out of this address to which we desire to call attention, is the alleged neglect of oratorical training at our public schools. Now, that more scope might be given to declamatory exercises than is at present the custom we do not in tend to deny. But what we do deny is, that the closest possible devo tion to classical literature can have anything to do with the defect complained of. We had more orators fifty years ago in every depart ment than we have now, while the application to Greek and Latin was at the same time much more stringent and exulusive than our own. It is possible that too great carefulness in philology, and too little in composition—the system which studies the root and neglects the flower—may have something to do with the mediocrity of our orato rical powers. But the Times has. in our opinion, quite misstated the case. We do not want fewer Greek iambics and Latin verses. We want mcre. A new nuisance is springing up. Two years ago, when garotting was tint introduced, it was practised with some d-gree of openness, and no more violence than was necessary. There was a novelty, too, about the act and its open practice which reconciled you to any trilling incon venience you might have suffered. You were generally seized from behind, your bat knocked over your eyes, your throat squeezed and your pocket picked, and Caere was an end of it ; for if it was broad daylight you never saw a policeman, and if night, it was not prudent to wait for one. But in the present day all this is changed. Pimlico by (lay and Westminster by night have given place to a first-class carriage in a dark tunnel at any time. The art of garotting, elevated into a science, has f" al lost its simplicity. It i s no l o ng e r a h a rmles s of your watch chain, but it is the complete and deliberate abstraction of every valuable You possess. To attain this desirable result, the garotter fits himself out with a bottle of chloroform, purchases a tirst.class ticket, and starts upon an economical railway tour, which is to combine pleasure with employment and profit. If he is so fortunate as to meet with a single fellow -passenger for any part of the journey, before ho has been twenty minutes in this traveller's company he kicks him faint, knocks him senseless, and then having thoroughly stupefied him by the application of chloroform, robs hint leisurely of everything valuable he possesses, and at the first station placidly gets out, taking care to shut the carriage door behind him. This peculiar crime appears to be on the increase; several cases have occurred recently, and rarely have the offenders been captured. Last week one of the first was caught, tried, and convicted at Liverpool before Mr &nor; 11 IkRTIN, who sentenced the prisoner to penal servitude for life. The Learned Judge, in passing sentence, remarked that if these atrocious crimes were not most severely punished, " no man would be " safe in travelling in railway carriages ;" but with greater sagacity the Learned Baron hit the blot of our railway organization—" Persons " might be robbed and murdered, without any means of communicating " with the guard." This is precisely the one thing ►wanting to prevent such atrocious assaults being committed by professional ruffians upon inoffensive travellers. This principle of communication with the guard has long beer► agitated. We may permit ourselves to be roasted, boiled, or destroyed, in any legitimate manner, ►without insisting upon a principle being carried out ; but if when we travel by train we ere to run the additional rizAt of brutal ill-treatment, garotting, stupefaction, and robbery, for ►want of some communication ►with the guard, it is ob vious that the sooner that communication is established the better. We commend the subject matter of the Learned Baron's remark to the attention of the travelling public. The very remarkable document which has recently been published in the daily journals containin ,, a statement of the causes which led to the Indian insurrection by the Subadar of a native regiment deserves the deep attention of all persons concerned in the settlement of Indian affairs. This letter, if it can be trusted, establishes two primary points of the utmost importance—namely, that the rebellion was far more than a mere military mutiny ; and, secondly, that the greased cartridges formed but a drop in the ocean of aepoy discontent. A variety of grievances extending as far back as 1333 had gradually prepared the native mind for the reception of any unfavourable impressions, however extravagant. The troops had been marched into countries where loss of caste was inevitable through the impossibility of observing the proper religious rites, and they had been outraged by mistaken acts of kindness and gross breaches of faith. On the minds of the upper classes the nonce abolishing the rite of adoption told with p eat effect, and fol lowed by the annexation of Oude thoroughly alarmed all the land holders, nobles, and princes of India for the safety of their tenures. As the letter in question seems both genuine and disinterested, we scarcely see bow it is possible to escape from the conclusions he presents to us. We need not remind our readers how completely these tally with the opinions we have always advanced in this Journal. Doubtless, when public opinion shall have come round to the same estimate of the calamity, it will be forgotten by the public at large that THE PRESS stood almost alone in its assertion of views which expe rience has proved to be correct. THE LADY OF LUCKNOW. (ON THE ARRIVAL IN ENGLAND OF LADY INGLIS.) Back from reddest fields of carnage, Back from darkest hours of pain, Now the brave old land that bore thee Takes thee to her breast again. Never hero scarred and trophied, With the laurel on his brow, Did she hail with gladder greeting, Than the Lady of Lucknow. Oh, the lonely, lonely vigils ! Oh, the stern and stubborn fight ! When the morning brought no gladness, And no quiet brought the night. Oh, the cruel eyes that waited For the leagurei city's full ! Oh the crashing of the cannon ! Oh, the crumbling of the wall ! Oh, the bitter thoughts of dying, Slaughtered in that lonely lair! Oh, the blessed cairn that mingled With the soothing words of prayer ! Oh, the hopes of coining succour, One by one, that died away, As before the shades of evening Fade the lingering gleams of day And 'twas thine to bear the anguish Of the watching and the strife, Undissevered from thy hero, As beseeined an English wife ; Thine, when conquest's hour wits beaming, Proffered aid to dash aside, " Not for me are cushioned litters— " .Let the weak and wounded ride." While men talk of her who battled Till the fight of France was wou, Or of her who strove and conquered, Fast by Saragossa's gun, English lips shall tell the story Of the hearts that would not bow, Standing firm behind their bastions With the Lady of Lucknow. A ~:~~