The Press. — London, England, 1857-04-11 00:00:00

APRIL 11,1857• poetry, of which he has about as much appreciation as the aforesaid animal of a rose-garden. The review of the " Daisy Chain " is a mach better piece Of criticism, and " The Political Relations of Great Britain and India with Persia" useful and op portune. The Sanitary Review is of too purely a medical character to justify a detailed notice in our columns. Suffice it to say that many of the most urgent sub jects of the day, such as drainage, burials, colliery diseases, diseased animal food, ctc., are treated in its pages, which, though less heard of by the public at large than those of its more popular contemporaries, are quietly effecting an amount of good which de serves our warmest thanks. The National Magazine progresses favourably in the path it has adopted. All the stories are interest ing, all the essays are well written, and all the more practical articles full of good sense and information. Some of the best articles in the April number are, " A French Lady of the Olden Times," " How Mr. Lambkin was Garotted," "Sir Bulwer Lytton," and " Deaf and Dumb Courtship." The Monthly Review is not so good as usual; though, in saying this much, we should add that we have not yet had time to read it through. "Mr. Thuckeray on Charity " is a violent onslaught on the popular novelist which we cannot entirely approve. The Commercial Travellers' Magazine still con tinues its sprightly and feline tone. It betrays a fatal familiarity with not only the dark but the muddy side of London life. We were in hopes that this would wear off; but though the articles are unde niably amusing, they seem likely to continue in one groove. " What is bred in the bone," &e. The London University Magazine maintains that solemnity and sobriety which its academic origin demands. Joking apart, however, this number is really a good one. The paper on bells, and " Our Treatment of the Insane," are both uncommonly good. The literary articles on essayists and the Poet Tennyson are feeble, but elegant and pleasant, if not instructive, " copy." The second number of Paved with Gold, if pos sible, surpasses the first. Mr. Mayhew's thorough knowledge of the life he undertakes to delineate, and the attractive style with which nature has endowed him, are not likely to be surpassed by any lite•.rary philanthropist. We shall not here examine the story minutely, trusting that we may live to see it finished, and be enabled to do ourselves the pleasure of giving it a lengthy review. The illustrated edition of Mr. Russell's Letters wiiich Mr. Routledge is bringing out is nicely got up, and calculated to serve as a good drawing•room edition of this famous correspondence. Mentoires du Due de Saint Simeon. Paris : Hachette. No writer of memoirs is so much and so deservedly esteemed in France as time Duke de Saint Simon, and none is so widely known in Europe ; yet, strange to say, hitherto no complete and authentic edition of his writings has been given to the world, all the editions that have hitherto appeared under his name being merely fragmentary, or scandalously incorrect, or unauthorised. 'rile reason why this has been so is that successive Governments in France, in whose possession the memoirs were until the last twenty five years or so, feared that the complete publication of the astounding revelations they contain about the Coerts of Louis XIV. and Louis XV., about the political affairs of Europe, and about potentates, princes, and statesmen of the time of those sove reigns, would be injurious to the public interests. The present Duke de Saint Simon, to wham the memoirs were given when the Government, after repeated refusals, consented to resign them, also hesitated for some time to let them be published complete; but he lately consented to such a publi cation, and it is now taking place under the auspices of Messrs. Hachette, the eminent Paris publishers These gentlemen are bringing out not fewer than three separate editions of the work—one limited to a hundred copias, in the m - ist costly style of the publisher's art: the second printed on beautiful paper in twenty volumes; and a third, of smaller form and closer typo, in twelve volumes. The last is a miracle of cheapness, the cost of the whole twelve volumes being under H. English money. Thus far only five volumes have appeared, but the re mainder will be brought out with all due despatch. The work is carefully collated with the original manuscript. Great thanks are due to the Duke de Saint Simon for having allowed so inestimable an addition to the historical literature of France and Europe to be produced, after the lapse of a century, in all its integrity ; and thanks are due to Messrs. Hachette for having offered it for sale at a price which places it within the reach of every reader. PUBLICATIONS RECEIVED.—Apiar. 9. BOOKS. The Confidence• Man : his Masquerade. Herman Melville. Psyche, and Other Poems. James Craice. Longmans. David Bryce THE PRESS. Lectures on the British Poets. Henry Reed. Two Vols. Triibner and Co. Divorce in 18.57. The Talbot Case. Ward and Lock. The Two „Convicts. Frederick Uerstaecker. Routledge. Jacqueline of Holland. Hodgson. The Philosophy of the Plays of ShakApeare Unfolded. Delia Bacon. Crrootnbriilv. The German Language. Fidel: Lebahn. Sitnpkin and Marshall. Key to Ditto. Ditto. The Letters of Horace Walpole, Earl of Orford. Peter Gun. ningham. Bentley. A Concise History of the English Constitution. E. Hawley, Esq. Longtnans. The Sight Side of London. J. Ewing Riehie. NV. Twee die. LORD CLARENDON v. THE PUBLIC PRESS. TO TILE EDITOR OF " THE PRESS." Sir,—There is something so fair and candid about your review of "The Press and the Public Service " that I break through a rule which authors are sensible enough to observe very generally, and venture to reply to the few objections you have raised against the principle put forth iii that little book. 1 do so in the confidence that you can only be actuated by the same desire as myself w see this troublesome question set permanently at rest. I trust therefore that we shall discuss the secondary points on which we seem to differ with courtesy and good temper. The subject is one which deeply con • cerns the honour, the happiness, and the interests of many. It has become necessary for their sakes to ascertain whether a supposed connection with the press shall be henceforth an honourable distinction of which a gentleman may be proud, or a brand ot• disgrace which shall ruin him for ever. I feel the responsibility too great to deal with so grave a matter single•handed. lam conscious that I have not treated it so well as it might have been treated ; but it is obvious that it requires discussion : and I can imagine no part of the duties of an editor more grateful than to throw open the columns of his paper for the free anti open ventilation, the fair and equitable settlement of such a question. For he may be thus enabled to assure many worthy persons of the precise nature of their rights and explain to them their duties. Now, to take the objections as they arise in your review, permit me to repeat. that I have explicitly stated no official could be permitted to betray con fidence reposed in him, or in the slightest degree to make use of official information for his private pur poses. The rules which guide the intercourse of gentlemen would render such conduct infamous. But I think you will agree with me that Sir Robert Peel's lecture on Russia, and Sir James Graham's speech at Carlisle, render the preservation of official mystery very difficult. lam quite willing to believe that, despite the experience of Swift, there may be many cases in which secrecy should be preserved. I merely suggest that it is expedient to show how far it can be preserved, and how far its preservation is necessary to the cause of constitutional government. I do not pretend to lay down the law ; I simply ask in justice to many that it may be declared and rendered equal. It has been said that Messrs. Rothschild and Messrs. Coutts preserve secrecy in their transactions, and therefore Government must do the same. This is a fallacy. Messrs. Rothschild and Messrs. Coutts carry on their business at their own risk and peril : if they act unwisely they must pay the penalty. They may conduct their business on any princip!es they please, because if the public is dissatisfied with them it can go elsewhere. 'this is not the case with Go vernment: secrecy may enable them to do much harm in perfect security to themselves ; it may be their only defence against a patriotic opposition. The errors of a Ministry injure the country which they rule ; and misgovernment such as may ruin the nation may be a fruitful source of profit to a Cabinet of jobbers. Their case is by no means similar to that of Messrs. Rothschild and Messrs Coutts. I grant that if a subordinate were to write strictures upon the conduct of his superiors under his own signature he would undoubtedly act in an indelicate and offensive manner. The bead of his department might feel bound to take notice of such writings; but even then in strict justice he must feel equally bound to examine the case fairly and to decide according to its merits. If the conduct of any public man, high or low, has been really infamous or contemptible, it is diffi cult to understand how the public service can be brought into disrepute by his errors being properly described. " Attack us and you attack the Govern ment" is nothing but the old Tadpole and Taper artifice exposed by Bentham. It is not the public service which suffers when Tadpole and Taper are brought to book ; it is Tadpole and Taper. If, however, it be the duty of a head of a depart- ment to make some effort to discover an anonymous 867 writer, he would keep his department in a constant state of alarm and disquietude. He would also pro vide a great deal of unnecessary and undignified work for himself. The recent decision, moreover, of his Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge and Lord Panmure in refusing to do so, in the case of "Major Caithorpe, would at once appear a personal insult towards Lord Cardigan, and an insult of the most unwarrantable nature ; for, in no department of the public service would it be more necessary to observe such a rule, if it existed, than in the army. If it be here objected, however, that this is a Foreign-office case, it must not be forgotten that we are for the moment living under the Government of Lord Palmerston, who long held the seals of the Foreign-office. Now, on what principle are gentle men in the emplcyment of the Foreign-office to regulate their behaviour, if not on the publicly• avowed doctrines of a Minister who was their chief for a longer period than any living statesman, and who is actually head of the Government under which they serve? The example of the present Premier is plain and recent; for, in a letter addressed to the Earl of Malmesbury on the Vali of March, Lord Palmerston asserts his opinion with great distinct ness. "I have used," says he, a right which Ido not deem myself deprived of by my official position to express publicly iny opinion of the conduct of public men." Thus, Lord Clarendon stands alone in this matter. He is at variance with the declared sentiments of his own superior; with those of his colleague, Lord l'anmure ; and with those of a prince of the blood in command of the army. It may be difficult to foresee the precise view that any future Government may take p 1 this question if it be not now decided ; but Lord Clarendon's despatch has been submitted to two ex-Cabinet Ministers—one a Conservative and the other a Whir. Both entirely disapproved of it. The words of that despatch will be found literally transcribed on the first page of the preface of the book under review. It was sent to the publisher's by a gentleman en tirely unknown to them, as an excuse for the extraordinary demand of an affidavit to save him from ruin. With regard to this particular case, however, the facts could not in any way affect the real question at issue. For, the Foreign Secretary would scarcely tell us that he made a particular regulation for a particular man, and that if permitted to break through law and usage in on case he would never do so again. It is rumoured, truly or otherwise, that Lord Clarendon was led into error by a man who could hardly have appeared in such a matter with more peculiar ill grace; indeed, by a nephew of George Canning, who ungratefully forgot that l►e owed his rank, his emoloyment, and everything about him to the most scurrilous anonymous writer of his generation. I have altogether failed to make myself clearly understood if I have appeared to wisert the moral right of writers positively to deny the authorship of publications which they are unwilling to own. No reasoning can make a lie defensible. No possible circumstance can be conceived in which a gentleman could be induced to state an untruth. But, it appears to me that the liberty and utility of the higheriportiou of the press certainly does rest very much on the right of anonymons writing, and it notoriously numbets officials among its contributors. I have, tierefore, urged that an anonymous writer cannot be oblied to avow himself when ques tioned; that he may be silent; that when con scientiously in the right he may treat any inquiry with irony or a smile as impertinent, end that the onus probandi should rest with his accusers. Any person who fancies himself aggrieved has a full and sufficient remedy by law ; why should he lay claim to another? Offences punishable by law may be safely left to the law. In these views I am highly gratified t perceive you agree with me. For, you say that there can be no difference of opinion on the question that public servants may express their sentiments freely. If we are correct in this opinion, therefore, we may be permitted to reverse your former proposition and say: What right has any Minister to conduct him self in such a manner as to render a direct lie, which no gentleman will litter, essential to the safety oriuterest of persons under his authority who have properly fulfilled their duties? A writer in such a case would not have placed himself in a false posi tion—it would be the Minister. Again : Would secret information confidentially communicated by unknown accusers ashamed to appear before the man whom they sought to injure be wifficient to support an indictment in a criminal court? Such accusers must be false, false either to the Govern ment or to the man who has trusted them—bars or traitors. If their evidence would not support such an indictment, Lori Clarendon's last excuse is invalid ; and in this case also we agree that he must be in error. To make the present argument of any use what ever for the future guidance of official men, we mit