The Press. — London, England, 1858-01-30 00:00:00

THE PRESS, JANUARY 30, 1858. painful subject, and one hitherto but too prominent in the news from India, he deprecates the vengeance sought to be exacted for the alleged dishonour of Englishwomen, by asserting his belief that such atrocities have never occurred to the extent usually supposed. After careful inquiry, be declares that he has been unable to substantiate a single instance in which the honour of our countrywomen has been outraged. There seems here a strange oversight. Does he think it likely that women who have endured such misfortunes would be very ready to proclaim them? Would they not rather hide their heads in the deepest obscurity than confess to the world the humiliation to which they had been subjected ? If this be the case, as we have heard in fact it is, is there anything wonderful in the difficulty which he finds in proving the truth of these accusations? In the next place, what becomes of the inscription on the wall of the Assembly room at Cawnpore, which, invested with the solemnity of a dying declaration, contains ono word which no special pleading will explain away ? That there is exaggera tion on the point we do not deny; but that there have been very numerous instances, the letters of credible witnesses, and the proba bilities of the case, we fear leave no room for doubt. We believe we may state confidently that among the earliest measures introduced by Government at the approaching meeting of Parliament a bill, framed with special reference to the recent atrocious attempt upon the life of the Emperor of the FRENCH, will be produced to restrict the privileges of aliens. It is obvious that the unrestricted liberty hitherto enjoyed by political refugees in this country has been conditional. There has ever ,existed a tacit understanding that our hospitality was not to be abused, and if such men commit a wilful in- fraction of that understanding they can have no just cause of complaint at the imposition of a restrictive law. A curious case has lately arisen out of a recent marriage between a gentleman of the Mahomedan persuasion, late Major in the Turkish Army, and an English young lady. The course which the affair fol lowed is rather remarkable. Mr. ST. AUBYN, the rector of Stoke Damerel, proceeded to publish their banns in his parish church. His curate, Mr. Brass, forbade them as calculated to bring scandal on the Church ; but whetherany canon was infringed by the proceeding we are not informed. By way, however, of overcoming the difficulty, the rector seems unfortunately to have taken a step which is undoubtedly forbidden by the letter of the Rubric, and administered the sacrament of baptism to Major MAHMOUD, without previously notifying it to the bishop of the diocese. It were to be wished that official persons would comply with these little forms, which are not enjoinel without good reason, can hurt no one's conscience, and would frequently prevent litigation most injurious to the welfare of the Church. It is desirable that this question should be placed on a permanent footing. Our increased intercourse with the Turkish empire may lead to many such caaes. But individuals should remember that by taking the settlement of such points into their own hands, they rather retard than promote the object they have at heart. We believe that the conduct of Major MA HMOUII has not been approved by the Turkish authorities. But we have no doubt that by the exercise of a little patience anti prudence, the affair might have been arranged satisfactorily to all parties, and the present disagreeable embarrassment avoided. Our readers may be interested in knowing that many Christianised Turks are serving as officers in the Turkish army. But they are not allowed to marry, and MAHMOUD had accordingly resigned his commission before he entered into the proscribed state. The official despatch©s of Sir COLIN CAMPBELL and General WINDHAM published in last night's Gazette throw some light upon the recent operations at Cawnpore. The conclusion, we apprehend, that will be drawn from them is that General WINDHAM slightly exceeded his instructions iu attacking the enemy, and then, from the inadequate forces at his command, he suffered a disastrous defeat. His instructions, it is clear from the words of his own despatch, were " to preserve " the safety of the bridge over the Ganges and his communications with Sir CoLIN at Lucknow. But General WINDHAM healing of the advance of the rebels, chafing under the inaction so necessarily imposed upon h im by Sir CoLIN CAMPBELL, and having received no letters from Sir Court at Lucknow "for several days," was " compelled to act" for himself. This question of compulsion is just the point. Sir COLIN had not re plied to General WINDHAM'S frequent notes for an excellent reason, he had not received them ; and from this we may infer that the communications between Cawnpore and Sir COLIN had not been kept opet. from the paucity of troops General WINDHAM had at his disposal, and which the threatening aspect of the Gwalior rebels compelled him to concentrate at Cawnpore. General WINDHAM, however, feeling himself "compelled to act," advances out of his intrenchments, passes through the town, camps six miles beyond it, attacks and defeats.; the enemy next day, and the day after is attacked, and front sheer inability, from the inadequacy of his forces to afford the necessary support to his front and flank at the same time, defeated, with the loss of his camp equipage and stores, the abandonment of more than one lin portant post, the whole of the town of Cawnpore, and the death of many brave men. The next day the fighting was renewed, and with sufficient success on the part of the enemy to render the preserva tion of the bridge over the Ganges a matter of serious anxiety. The destruction of this bridge would have imposed a serious responsibility on General WINDHAM. Happily, however, for all, Sir COLIN CAMPBELL reached the other side of the Ganges that evening, and crossing to 109 the intrenchments, made such immediate dispositions as checked the advance of the enemy. The rest is better detailed in Sir .OLIN'S despatch of the 10th December. It is clear, however, from both despatches, and particularly from General WINDHAM'S, that " want of men " was the proximate cause of his defeat. He was tremendously outnumbered. It is the old story over again. When will our Govern ment learn that skill and daring will not always compensate for inequality of force? From the tone of both Sir Coutes and General WIND HAM'S despatch a certain coolness is perceptible between the two Generals, and from the reported return of General DUPUIS of the artillery to Calcutta, we may assume that Sir COLIN CAMPBELL has frankly expressed his opinion upon a too free indulgence of the very laudable and natural desire of all men fresh from England "to get at " the enemy. The very essence of Sir COLIN'S system of tactics is precision, and to attain that lie must have obedience in the strictest sense. When the proper time arrives for striking a blow he issues precise instructions as to the time and manner in which the blow is to bo delivered. We fear after a careful perusal of these despatches that General WINDHAM cannot be held altogether blameless in the dis astrous affair of the 27th and 28th November. Now that the whole question of " Reform " must be actively dis cussed in all directions, it is probable that frequent references will be made to the " electoral statistics " of Mr. NEWMARCH. Not a few of our correspondents have asked us the question—" On which side is " Mr. NEWMARCH to be counted ?" And the inquiry is by no means unreasonable or irrelevant. Yot in answering s uch questions the journalist often has some difficulties. It is not right, for example, to hold an inquisition into the party opinions of a private person who has not chosen ostensibly to commit himself. An English gentleman has an undoubted right to address the public on any social question without being compelled to answer a peremptory inquiry as to whether he supports any party in particular. But after such an announcement as will be found in another part of our impression of to-day it will be impossible for gentlemen who treat of " electoral" affairs to avoid being classed, rightly or wrongly, in one or other of the great political divisions of the country. We cannot call to mind any speech or tract of Mr. NEWMARCH in which that accomplished inquirer has distinctly committed himself. Even in the valuable reprint from " The Journal of the Statistical Society," which is a sort of manual of electoral statistics, the learned and able writer says, with a sort of deliberate looseness:— I do not pretend that on these fundamental questions T am entirely neutral It is probable that I entertain opinions so distinct that I might be described u a pronounced adherent of one of the great parties. This language has an uncertain sound, and the "it is probable" reminds us of the fatal " perhaps" which was too constantly to he found in the "opinions" of the late profound but undecided Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH. We believe, however, that it is not difficult to describe the general character of Mr. NEWMARCH'S opinions. In the first place, Mr. NEWMARCH has one of those minds which do not think politically. Abstract truth is his idol, but deductions in politics must be made with reference to time, circumstances, and opportunity. A mere ethical inquirer cannot by any contortion of intellect twist him self into a politician, no more than a mere ethnologist. Politics are practical essentially, although by dexterous logical processes they can be sublimated into speculative abstraction. Mr. NEWMARCH is such a devotee of abstract truth, as it is worshipped in the Statistical Society, that even if his nature became by accident tinted with the hues of the "Orange," " Green," or "Blue and Buff," all these party colours would gracefully disappear from him at the moment of his perceiving what he supposes to be abstract truth. This character of mind is not un common amongst purely scientific natures, and it is very noticeable amongst that eminent clique who denominated themselves " Philoso phical Radicals." Traces of it were visible in the exercitations of Mr. WARBURTON, Mr. GROTE, and some of the other admirers of Mr. BENTHAM. It is worthy of note that Mr. JOHN STUART MILL, as his mind has matured, has thought more closely with reference to prac tice, and to social exigencies, than others of that school. Mr. NEW MARCH, on the whole, according to present appearances, must he ranked with " Philosophical Radicals.' Ho is far more of an ultraist and of a sectarian than Mr. GREG (of the Edinburgh Review); but, at the same time, we believe that Mr. NEWMARCH is wholly incapable of warping statistics to the purposes of any party in the State ; and to those competent to handle them on either side of the question, his lucubrations on " electoral statistics " will be extremely interesting, but we are not prepared to accept them as politically decisive, and there is no part of them which should be accepted with more caution than his " groupings" of counties, " according to a princple of territo " rial and industrial similarity." Any practical logician must at once perceive that in the " grouping " a series of erroneous conclusions may have been tabulated ; but on this point we shall have more to say on another day. Our readers will recollect that we have always maintained that the force with whiob Sir COLIN CAMPBELL relieved the garrison of Lucknow ail not exceed 5,000 men. We are now in possession of accurate details of the number of his troops after the relief of the Residency, when he had been reinforced by the forces under Sir JAMES OUTRAN and Major-General Nous. They then consisted of forty-eight field guns, thirty siege guns, 6,000 infantry and 600 cavalry. Our previous calculations are thus completely verified, and we may learn what trust is to be given to the exaggerated estimates of our forces which are furnished in the Government telegrams, and so po►n pously put forth by the Government journals. - , - .14* V •47.1.—.,c77 i~. .~., . . . . I •;'•