The Press. — London, England, 1856-11-22 00:00:00

1116 THE WEEK. Tax accounts which appear in our journals of the difficulties connected with the execution of the Treaty of Paris must be received with distrust. The Ministerial prints, whic:i are most vehement in de nouncing. the perfidy of the Court of St. Petersburg, are careful not to enlighten their readers by any intelligible discussion of the points really at issue. The organ of the Premier, which has often made itself contemptible by frantic denunciations of " the diabolical policy of Russia," has this week again exposed itself to ridicule by laboured abuse of Russian dishonesty, without the slightest reference either to the facts of the situation or to arguments on one side or the other. The Brussels organ of Russia is much fairer. It puts forth intelligible statements, and shows, perhaps purely from its own point of view, what those matters are which require settlement. The Court which fixed the terms of the Treaty of Paris seems the legitimate tribunal for determining the sense which should be attached to disputed particulars. In reality, we believe, notwithstanding the vaunts of our Minis terial prints to the contrary, that the Conferences at Paris will be renewed. The subject is still under discussion, but we do not appre hend that there can he any doubt as to the decision that will be taken. The organs of Lord PALMERSTON'S Administration declare that it is resolutely opposed to the admission of Sardinia and Prussia to the renewed Conferences. On what account the exclusion of Sardinia is to be justified it is not easy to understand. Sardinia had no right to expect that the Government of this country would endeavour to detract from its influence in Europe, or exclude it from a Council immediately con nected with the war in which Sardinia cast iu her part with the Allies. For the moment Russian policy has achieved a great triumph in the differences produced between her two great opponents, England and France. There is one fact connected with the frauds of the Great Northern Railway which calls for special attention. The auditors of the company, men of unquestionable credit, and presumed to be eminent for financial ability, reported that the accounts were perfectly correct, when in realit3 the most extensive system of fraud prevailed, and in the assets of the company an actual deficiency existed to a very large amount. The instance is not singular ; the same circum stance must have occurred in the accounts of the Crystal Palace Company, where the direction was under the control of eminent " Administrative Reformers." Happily, the administration of our Government has been spared any similar scandal ; but is it quite certain that no such frauds are possible, or can we feel absolutely secure with such cases as those of Ronson and REDPATH before us, that there may not be something wrong in the complex systems of Treasury and Exchequer accounts? The state of the Audit-office was last session the subject of some animated discussion in the House of Commons, and the true safeguard against any possible malversation was shown, with irresistible'strength of argument, to consist in bring ing the accounts of that office under the supervision of the House of Commons. We do not know how much longer this eminently safe and practical reform may be resisted by the 4 Government, but until it is accomplished there can be no efficient security against possible mistakes or malpractices. The cases of ROBSON and REDPATH also, men filling the most responsible stations, and having hundreds of thousands passing through their hands, yet remunerated with only trifling salaries, show the expediency, even as a matter of commercial policy, of raising the status of Government officers, and of animating them by the prospect of distinctions and rewards proportioned to the responsibilities of their duties. Can any of our readers give us information respecting the diplo matic services of RICHARD LEVINGE Swirl, Esq., who has lately been appointed Consul at St. Thomas's, then at Buffalo—a post extempo .rised expressly for him—and lastly at Riga? We believe that Mr. SwlFr has not yet departed for either of these places ; and it is pro bable that he remains until the difference between the King of the Two Sicilies has blown over that he may be appointed her Majesty's Representative at the Court of Naples. Meantime, while the gentle man remains in this country, we may inquire, Who is Mr. RICHARD LEVINGE SWIFT ? The names of various clergymen have been mentioned in well informed circles as likely to be appointed to the vacant see of Ripon. A report is very pi e‘alent in Yorkshire that Dr. WHITESIDE, the vicar of Scarborough, is likely to be the new Bishop. We believe this ap pointment would be very popular in the north, as Dr. WHITESIDE has been in the diocese of Carlisle five and twenty years, where he has dis charged the duties of parish priest in three successive incumbencies with great energy and success. The Rev. Gentleman is the brother of the Member for Enniskillen, and a near relative of Mr. JOSEPH NAPIER, M.P. The Rev. Dr. JEREM IE, Regius Professor of Divinity in the Univer sity of Cambridge ; Mr. BROWNE, Norrisian Professor of Divinity, and Prebendary of Exeter; and Mr. SELWYN, Margaret Professor, and Canon of Ely. The latter is the brother of the Bishop of New Zea land ; and certainly, if he is his equal in episcopal qualifications, the clergy of Ripon would have no reason to regret the appointment. He was distinguished at. Eton both for scholarship and bodily activity ; and latterly not less for his liberal and kindhearted disposition. He THE PRESS. has lately, we believe, proposed to give up some part of the revenues of his chair, which amount to 1,0001., to augment the poorer professor ships. We cougratulato the Premier on having such good men to choose from. The electors of Hull seem singled out for victimisation by the jackals of politics. First comes that ardent and sincere Liberal Mr. EDwIN JAMES, the mention of whose name in connection with the Solicitor-Generalship was an insult to the legal profession—a mere Nisi Prins tumbler, and one of the very few Queen's Counsel whom the benchers of his time have resolutely refused to elect. First comes this eloquent patriot with a farrago of Liberalism, enough to bewilder an ordinary practical statesman, and on his retirement to Southampton, where he has been endeavouring to prove that in the whole cycle of politics there is no question on which his own opinion would not be more valua ble than that of any other man, forward comes Mr. JAMES CLAY, with a wink and a smirk, after dodging the " Corrupt Practices at Elections " Act, and announces himself as a candidate for the suffrages of this free and enlightened borough. Having been unseated for bribery once, the public would have supposed him incapable of re-entering the present Parliament; but, through a cheery flaw in the Act above mentioned, he is ready to creep in again with undiminished confidence in himself. The Act in question, as a correspondent has explained to us, practically repealed for the present the provisions of the sth and 6th of Victoria, by enacting that whoso shall be guilty of bribery, shall &c., &c. Thus Mr. CLAY'S bribery having been proved before the Act was passed, instead of after, is not affected by its regulations. A piece of corrup tion, which was one of the main causes of the Act being passed at all, is by that very Act transmuted into purity. Mr CLAY has been re leased from the consequences of his actions by a law intended to make those consequences more stringent., and he now comes forward with rather the air of an injured man who had been kept out of his rights. But we live in an age of fraud, political, commercial, and religious, and it is useless to complain of what is now, in some shapo or other, an almost every-day occurrence. In SwiFr's works there is an erratum quoted from Faulkner's Dublin Journal:—" for' Her Grace the Duke,' read 'His Grace the Duchess.' " A ridiculous correction of the same kind has appeared in the Globe. In endeavouring to rectify a statement in our columns, the Globe has committed two original blunders of its own. We never said that Colonel KEOGH was " a violent Roman Catholic." We inferred that the gallant officer was of the Romanist persuasion in religion on account of the peculiar way in which that gentleman was alluded to by persons at the last Carlow election. Any English journalist would be war ranted in draWing the same conclusion, but we shall not print extracts to justify us. as we would then, perhaps, be reflecting on high official persons not now before the public. Let the correction stand—" In place of the Honourable Mr. FFRENCH (a Roman Catholic), Lord CARLISLE has appointed Lieutenant-Colonel KEOGH, one of the Liberal Protestants of Carlow." Just at the present time it shows much temerity in the Globe to stir the mud of " Sad leirism." It was only the other day that the unseemly spectacle was seen of two Irish judges—one a " Liberal Protestant," and the other a " Roman Catholic"—canvassing for promotion. In support of the claims of the latter, official aid, not unconnected with Carlow elec tioneering, was employed ; and if the Globe would refer to the " special authority" before which it bows, " well-informed Irish friends" might advise it to keep clear of " Carlow Catholics," whether in or out of office. Thus the Globe has been doubly wrong : first, in reporting lan guage of THE PRESS never used by us ; and secondly, in raking up recollections which are annoying to its own supporters. SATURDAY, A CASE OF ETIQUETTE. [The following letter refers to a police case which occurred in the course of the week, in which, by an eccentric and extraordinary display of fastidiousness, the writer, who is " a coalheaver," was refused admission to the Reform Club.] Fox-h'under the-Rill Hadelphay Warf Sunday. Sir,—Not dy'e think hof that 'ere jolly lot the Reform Club as vouldn't let my friend stand nothink at their tap—cause why the varmints kinsidder theyselves, wot no one else dues—many chalks above a coaly? Talk o' the Liberal party as vouldn't sarve me vith the heavy for coppers down, an' most o' theyselves a goin' tick vith the cook! I send this writin' to say that hit' i 'ad a know'd the sort o' crib it was I vaunt a goin' for the sake o' a drop o' beer to demean myself a sittin' down vith a lot o' Hirish an' sich like. I'm told here at the tap o' the Fox that there ain't a crammer in all the papers that ain't made up in that ere blessed Reform Club. Your most obedient THE IDENTICAL COALT. COCKBURN AND WORTLEY. Sir Alexander Cockburn is a lawyer and • statesman \lr Stuart Wortley Is gentleman.—Times, Nov. 21, 181 G. Cockburn's a statesman ! Shade of Follett hear ! Cockburn's a lawyer ! Sugden, do not jeer !. Wortley's a yentleman we own—but, pray, Won't the two epithets hold good each way ? Wortley's no lawyer, that we all confess: But Cockburn not a gentleman F—oh, yes !