The Press. — London, England, 1857-01-10 00:00:00

26 " Peelites," of whom a witty writer recently remarked : That, after all, they were of the same weight—Mr. Fred. being a pound of lead, and Sir Robert being a pound of feathers. LORD PALMERSTON'S " DICTATORSHIP." THE partisans of Lord PALMBRI4TON do not show their usual tact in appropriating to their chief the title of Dictator which has been somewhat ironically bestowed upon him by a writer in the Netv Quarterly Review. It is no doubt true, as the reviewer observes, that the English people aro always ready, in times of great public danger, to invest with almost absolute power any statesman who is called to the head of public affairs, and who gives evidence of capacity and zeal It is much better that the ordinary principles of Party Government should remain in abeyance for a term, than that the nation should seem divided at a crisis when all its energies require to be directed against a common foe. The Government of Lord ABERDEEN was over thrown because an impression prevailed that it had not entered heartily on the war, and because, as plainly appeared by the revela tions of Lord JoHN Itossm.r., its members were not united among themselves. It is quite erroneous, however, to assert that Lord PAL MERSTON was the choice of the country. There was no popular movement in his favour, and still less did the Legislature show any desire for his appointment. The censure of the House of Commons on the Aberdeen Govern ment fell as heavily upon him as upon any other member of it. When Lord JOHN RUZSE LL, scared by the appalling accounts from the Crimea, insisted on the necessity of a change in the Win' Department, Lord PALMERSTON remained silent and content. In his capacity of Home Secretary he most unaccountably delayed to urge forward the embodiment of the Militia, though the measure was of the most vital and pressing importance. He was besides a member of the Cabinet which had agreed to open negotiations for peace with Russia while the great battle before Sebasto pot was still pending; and he constructed his Ministry on the distinct understanding that those negotiations should proceed in exactly the same manner as if no change had taken place. These circumstances were all fearfully against Lord PALMERSTON. At first his appoint ment was received rather with sullen submis sion than with anything like the popular acclaim which we are told by the Globe wel comed it. It was not until after Mr. DISRAE LI'S motion in the Commons had compelled the Ministry to throw aside their ambiguous lan guage and uncertain conduct, and had drawn from Lord JOHN RUSSELL that warlike decla ration which destroyed him as a public man when the secret transactions of the period were revealed, that Lord PALM E RSTON'S Ministry assumed a settled appearance, or enlisted any considerable amount of public sympathy iu support of it. It was a necessity of the public situation, on the fall of Lord ABERDEEN'S Ministry, that whoever had been Premier must, if he had shown due appreciation of the realities of the time, and had prosecuted the war with vigour, have commanded the support of the country. The people demanded, with an eagerness bordering on frenzy, some grand development of the national might. Had the Premiership fallen into the hands of Lord DERBY, or Lord E LLEN BOROUGH, or even of Lord Jens RUSSELL, the Administration so con structed would have been certain to receive a fair trial from the country. The decisive vote which overthrew the Aberdeen Adminis tration, and the forbearance shown towards the patchwork Cabinet which succeeded it, are two of the greatest incidents in modern annals. They evince a force of public and patriotic feeling, and at the same time of THE PRESS. practical businesslike sense, which show that the heart of the country is thoroughly sound, and which promise for it a career of illimitable greatness and glory. • In place of magnifying the Dictatorship of Lord PALimairrox, which is due much less to his personal qualities than to the intuitive good sense of the public that recognised the necessity of reposing great trust in whoever was called to the helm of State while the war was in progress, his partisans had muoh better consider what answer they have to make to that part of the New Quarterly reviewer's statement which charges him not only with trickery, but with absolute falsehood in the course of Lord DERBY'S negotiation with him. The main facts of that negotiation were stated by the Noble Earl in his place in the House of Lords • but the reviewer states some c i rcums tances which, if authentic, place Lord PALMERSTON'S conduct in a most unfavourable, if not dishonourable, aspect. He says that Lord PALMERSTON had arefully impressed Lord DERBY with the conviction that whenever opportunity occurred it would give him great pleasure to serve under the Noble Earl. It is matter of history that when Lord DERBY had his interview with the Queen, he at once re quested permission to ask Lord PALMERSTON and some of his friends to join any Adminis tration which he might propose to form. From the Queen's presence Lord DERBY went direct to Lord PALMERSTON. The latter readily fell into the idea that ho should join Lord DERBY. The conversation went so far, said Lord DERBY, in his explanation to the House of Peers, that the post which the Noble Viscount should fill was named. That post, the reviewer states (we know not on what authority), was President of the Council. I ord PALMERSTON fei g ned that the work of any department of real labour would be too much for him; but it was discussed that he should lead the Commons, Mr. DISRAELI having re linquished his pretensions to that honourable distinction in Lord DERBY'S proposed Ad ministration in favour of the Noble Viscount. It was also proposed by Lord PamitErisTox, and agreed to by Lord DERBY, that two of Lord PALMERSTON'S late colleagues, Mr. GLADSTONE and Mr. S. HERBERT, should be solicited to join the proposed Administration ; and Lord Pm.mErisTox undertook the part of communi cating with those gentlemen, Lord DERBY being left under the impression that the nego • tiation would thus have greater chance of being successful. Now, it is an inference irresistibly suggested by the very plain and distinct narrative of the reviewer that Lord PALitEnsToN throughout this interview was acting the odious part of a hypocrite ; that he never intended to join Lord DERBY ; that he was looking to the Premiership himself while he feigned to be unequal to any real work, and would be glad to sink into the side-post of President of the , Council. If the facts irresistibly lead to this conclu sion, we must then suppose that Lord PALMERSTON had a double object in soliciting Lord DERBY that he might be the medium of communication with Mr. GLADSTONE and Slr. HERBERT, soliciting them to join. Ist. He absolved—so far as Lord DERBY was con cerned—s )me of the chief members of Lord ABERDEEN'S Ministry from blame, and thus partly neutralised the condemnatory vote of the House of Commons. And, 2ndly, and chiefly, he prevented Lord DF.nnv from enter ing into any direct communication with Mr. GLADSTONE and Mr. HERBERT. Lord DERBY left Lord PALMERSTON with the full conviction that the arrangement discussed would take effect. In any case, Lord PAL MERSTON was bound to fulfil the understanding he had come to with Lord DERBY. He was bound to ask Mr. GLADSTONE and Mr. HER BERT whether they would join with him. This was what—beyond all question—Lord DERBY expected Lord PALMERSTON would do. Lord PALMERSTON broke his faith, and broke his word with Lord DERBY. Instead of writing to Mr. GLADSTONE and Mr. HERBERT Soliciting them to join him under Lord DERBY—as the Noble Earl most clearly understood he would do—ho wrote to Mr. GLADSTONE and Mr. HERBERT stating Lord DERBY'S offer, and adding that, so far as he was concerned, he SATURDAY, had declined to join ; and he made this state ment literally correct by despatching, a missive to Lord DERBY stating that he did not think he could give any material assistance to any Ministry which Lord Derby could form. Wo do not think that there is, in the annals of English statesmanship, any example of equal deception. It was successful ; and by those who think that the end justifies the means it will be defended. A narrative plairay setting forth these facts is not, how ever, te be got rid of by glorifying Lord PAL MERSTON as Dictator. The question is, how did he obtain his Dictatorship ? In the speculations of the New Quarterly reviewer—particularly criticised by the Globe —as to what Lord DERBY might have done, it would be useless to enter. We must think the judgment of Lord DERBY, on the actual circumstances of the time, entitled to far greater weight than the poet : facto criticisms of any anonymous writer. The patriotism of Lord DERBY at that crisis is unquestioned ; and the highest kind of sagacity usually goes band in hand with the highest kind of prin ciple. The noblest intellectual faculties and the finest perceptions of honour are rarely found apart, whatever Lord PALMERSTON'S ad mirers may say to the contrary. HOW TO DEAL WITH OUR CRIMINALS. WE are glad to see that Mr. CHARLES PEARSON, the City Solicitor, has promised the Lord Mayor that he will bring the subject of the proper mode of dealing with our criminals under the notice of the citizens. Mr. PxsasoN has shown himself, on more than one occa• sion, a man of good sound sense, and he is the first to propound the wholesome doctrine that the criminal should be made to pay the cost of his apprehension and trial. We say " the trial," but in doing so wo run some risk of injustice to an author who has preceded him, and gone somewhat beyond him, even in this attempt to do justice on the criminal and on society. The writer to whom we allude conceals his name, but evidently from no fear of giving utterance to strong and comfortable doctrines. His work is entitled, " The Evils of England, Social and Economical, by a London Physician," published in 1848. We extract from it one passage, which shows to what extent he has anticipated the City Solicitor : The citizen who has been robbed has a right to demand restoration to the uttermost farthing. And here your prison comes into play for all crimes attended with loss of property or with its wilful injury. 1, for my part, can con ceive no moral discipline equal to this discipline of re• storation. It would be infinitely more efficacious than sermons or personal exhortations of any kind; and as restoration could only take place by labour in prison, you would get that too. But a necessary condition of this system of labour in prison, for the purpose of restoration, must be that the prisoner shall earn not merely the means of repayment, but the cost of his board, lodging, and clothing. This expense must be first paid, and the res. oration of the stolen property must come out of the sur- plus. From this surplus fund,too, ought to come all the estimated costof the apprehension of the offender, including he time of the policeman. and an allowance to witnesses. The food supplied to each prisoner ought to cost a defined fraction of the money earned by him, whatever that might be. The work done should be as various as possible, that it might suit the capacities, previous employments, or habits of life of the culprits; and, in order not to compete with the labour of the rest of the community, should be devoted to the reclamation of waste lands belonging to the State. The slight loss sustained by the labouring class, in consequence of this displacement of labour, would be amply compensated by the money thus paid back to the nation's labour•fund. It can scarcely be necessary to state that the wages paid for all prison labour should be the fair current rate of wages for the same work performed else where. Substituting the word " restitution " for the word "restoration," we think these views de serving of attention. There is another point in which the author's views bear strongly on the suppression of crime, and in which he is still more original, and not less deserving of attention. He strives to prove that the indis criminate almsgivers are the great culprits of the community, by keeping in existence the great classes dangereuses, the mendicant thief class, which supplies the staple of all our great criminals, as well as of our lesser offenders.