The Press. — London, England, 1856-06-28 00:00:00

THE WEEK. AMERICAN affairs have again been the prominent topic of the week, and a slight incident at the levee on Wednesday—which has been much can vassed in society—seemed likely in the absence of authentic explana tion to complicate them still further. It is known that the corps diplomatique, with other distinguished persons having the privilege of the entree, assemble in an ante-chamber of the state apartments. The circle is not less brilliant than agreeable. The representatives of foreign Courts meet here on friendly terms the most eminent political personages of the day, ex-Ministers with Ministers for the time being having the privilege of admittance. Among the company, on Wednes day, was Mr. DALLAS, in the full dress of a private gentleman, and with him were noticed two other persons, whose costume was in striking contrast with the elegant dresses of the courtly circle. The appearance of one of these persons was so extraordinary as to excite general remark. He wore a frock-coat, and had, what is termed in " gentish" language, a "bosom full of satin," allowing no glimpse of white linen to be seen, and giving to him altogether a very grimy appearance. That no disrespect was intended seemed evident, however, from the circumstance of a glittering trinket of some kind being set in the middle of his stock. He had evidently smartened himself up for the occasion. During the half-hour that elapsed between the filling of the ante-chamber and the arrival of her Majesty, the singular appear ance of Mr. DALLAS'S friends excited much remark, and whether it were that the attention of the Master of the Ceremonies, Sir EDWARD Cusr, was distinctly called to the costume of the gentleman in question, or that his eye detected the violation of etiquette, it is certain that he felt himself called upon to interfere. It cannot be doubted that he addressed Mr. DALLAS with all the courtesy for which he is distin guished, but, in whatever• phrase conveyed, the announcement that the gentleman was not properly apparelled to be admitted into the presence of her Majesty, must have sounded disagreeably in Mr. DALLAS'S ear. He hurriedly left the ante-chamber, followed by his two companions, and did not return. When the circumstance was known on Thursday, it gave rise to much speculation. Some persons conceived that the United States Government had determined on testing by experiment,—fist experi mentam in oorpore what'amount of indignity the British Court and Ministry would submit; others imagined that the Prime Minister had watched for an opportunity of retaliating the dismissal of Mr. CRAMPION, and had found it sooner than he could have expected The Stock Exchange was agitated, the funds drooped, and at first it was imagined that Mr. DALLAS would, after all, leave the country. But his presence with Mrs. DALLAS at the fete of the Marquis of WEST MINSTER on the following evening, put an end to all such unpleasant apprehensions, and the opinion now is, that he has apologised for having unintentionally violated the usages of the Court. That Mr. DALLAS would be most unlikely to wilfully offend against good breeding is certain. During his residence here he has created a favorable impression of his good sense anti good feeling. In ap pearance, speech, and expression, he seems a genuine descendant of the pilgrim fathers of New England. His manners, if plain, are assuredly not wanting in courtesy. The occurrence suggests the propriety of withdrawing the con cession hitherto made in favour—shall we say ?—of United States' gentlemen appearing in the evening dress of private life. The con cession, it is clear, may be interpreted too widely. Somewhere, as Mr. DICKENS'S barber observes, the lino mnst be drawn, or we shall have gentlemen from Yankeedom entering the Royal presence with cigar or pipe in mouth, and describing a circle of saliva round the throne. Whoever desires the honour of being presented to her Majesty cannot surely object to wearing any dress that may be pre scribed by Court usage. It was only at the commencement of the present Presidency that the concession was made ; it has not answered ; some more stringent rule is necessary. Had Mr. DALLAS been Mr. SOULS, he would probably have knocked down Sir EDWARD CUST, called out the Minister, and insisted on a declaration of war, as necessary to the satisfaction of the dingy-looking gentlemen concerned. There is ono practice, as we are told, of the American Legation which requires reform. Citizens of the United States are very com monly attached pro forisui to their legations at foreign Courts, that they may share in diplomatic advantages to which they have !lo just claim. This is an abuse of a privilege which ought not to be allowed. We fancy that Mr. DALLAs's friend must have been in this way attached to the Legation, and that ho ought not to have been in the ante-chamber at all. Political insincerity was always a permanent defect in Lord PALMERSTON, and the Daily News, in a series of articles, within the last few days, has been exposing the Premier in various ways. It is almost amusing to think of the time when his Lordship was writtea up as the champion of " oppressed nationalities," and when his flashy speeches, meaning anything or nothing, were applauded by the deluded fol lowers of KOSSUTH and NIAZZINT. There is virus in the articles of the Daily News, and appearing in that once Palmerstonian print, the sneer rig censures read with pungent effect. The further papers on the United States laid before Parliament include a defence by Mr. CRAMPTON of the charges brought against him by the United States' Government. and the reply of Lord CLARENDON to the last despatches of Mr. MARCY. Mr. CaexProN, in his able - SATURDAY, paper, shows conclusively enough that many of the witnesses on whose evidence the case against him rests are totally unworthy of belief. But this is but a small part of the whole question, as certain acts which the United States' Government positively assert would essen tially violate the neutrality and sovereignty of the States, are not at tempted to be denied—such, for example. as paying recruits, or intending recruits, their passage-money to Halifax, are not denied ; and it is impossible that such practices could be carried to any extent without practically coming under the scope and intent of the neutra lity statutes. But on one point Mr. CRAMPTON'S defence is absolutely conclusive. Quoting Mr. MARCY'S positive declaration that any case in which a person in the territory of the United States is induced by any terms offered to him to leave the States to enlist in the service of a foreign power, is a violation of the neutrality law, he argues that, as her Majesty's Government contests that view, Mr. MARCY cannot ab solve her Majesty's Ministers from blame, holding, as they do, a prin ciple he will not admit, yet punish the agents who act on that prin ciple. Mr. CRAMPTON forcibly says of Mr. Marcy's declaration Now, my Lord, I submit that this principle cannot be reconciled with those main tuned by her Majesty's Government, and that if Mr. Marcy is content to waive, if not abandon his view of the matter, so far as her Majesty's Government is concerned, he cannot reasonably enforce it against the agents of that Government acting under its instructions. To this no other answer can be returned than that her Majesty's Go vernment find it convenient to recognise a distinction which common sense abjures. Lord CLARENDON'S despatch on the same subject is, perhaps, the most curious diplomatic document ever penned. He thinks tho evidence in support of the allegations against Mr. CRAMPTON and the Consuls unworthy of belief; he cannot admit that they have offended against the laws of the United States ; he is persuaded that the American Government is mistaken, but as that Government believes it is in the right, he is bound to accept its belief, and to acquiesce in the course it has taken. Tn plain speech, Lord CLARENDON finds the United States' Government and the British officers are at issue, both on a point of principle and matters of fact. Lord CLARENDON has such a high opinion of both parties, that he determines to believe both, and therefore recognises the justice of a penalty which, in his conscience, he is convinced is most unjust and undeserved. And here the recruiting question, we suppose, will end. On the Central American question, Lord CLARENDON adopts a conciliatory tone, again suggesting arbitration on the main points of dispute, but avoids " committing himself"—the dread of all weak minds—by a single suggestion which might lead to direct and practical negotiation. "Il n'y a qu'un pas de sublime au ridicule." Sir EDMUND LYONS is raised to the Peerage for a lifetime of distinguished services ; General WILLIAMS is invested with the Order of a Knight Com mander of the Bath; 'and—Sir CHARLES WOOD is made a G.C.8., while Sir BALDWIN WALKER is made a Baronet ! Sir CHARLES WooD, we all know, has tried a great many things in his lifetime, and succeeded with none, so, of course, he deserves the Grand Cross ; but Sir BALDWIN WALKER, the man of sensitive honour, weak memory, and no patronage and principles, what has he done to deserve a baronetcy, is asked on all sides? Is it for disclosing private con versations, or for having at the Chatham Election Committee in '53 first sworn that he received the order to produce COTSELL'B papers from Sir JAMES GRAHAM, and then two mouths afterwards declared that he never saw Sir JAMES GRAHAM at all, and that Sir JAMES had never advised him to do anything of the kind, both of which versions were denied by Sir JAMES GRAHAM in the House, who dis tinctly stated that he did see Sir BALDWIN WALKER, but did not advise him to tender any documents in evidence ! It must he gratifying to Sir BALDWIN WALKER to think that such exemplary conduct as his before the Chatham Election Committee in 1853, and such " honourable" proceedings as are connected with his name as Surveyor of the Navy in '52-'53, have at length been recog nised by the Government and rewarded with a baronetcy. We hope he may live long to enjoy it as an instance of the rewards showered upon men of pure political conduct—of men who hate trickery, love truth, and will sacrifice place sooner than pocket thoir principles. If he wants a motto for his new coat of arms, we would suggest—" \facto tha virtute Auer !" WHOM SHALL WE HANG (in the New National Portrait Gallery) ? Well. since, in spite of all the strictures, We are to have historic pictures, And leading artists are to paint Each celebrated sage or saint Or sinner that the land can boast, Of course at once there comes a hitch, — That most perplexing question, which First to select from such a host. And then, before she can permit Her numerous family to sit, Britannia pauses, half afraid— Like Goldsmith's Vicar, when ho stayed To ponder out a grave decision — On every costume and position. I►nprimis, Pam. Oh place him there, With jaunty glance and jesting air. But his career! Let art despair, Or like th' Horatian daub offend, Depicting what at first was fair, But deuced fishy towards the end II THE PRESS. 612