The Press. — London, England, 1855-06-30 00:00:00

JUNE 30, 1855. the Baltic, and but one ship (the Imperieuse) has returned home since the commencement of the cam paign. This correspondent, however, but follows in the footsteps of his fellow-labourers ; for the Indipendance finding it was necessary to cheer the sinking hearts of its Russian readers, and being hard pressed for materials wherewith to work, has lately been engaged in fabricating a series of " canards " the most de- lightful, at the expense of the English troops in the Crimea. It has discovered that Bosquet's division at the Alma was placed in great danger in conse quence of Sir George Brown and SO De Lacy Evans not supporting it as they should have done; and it asserts that their co-operation was only eventually secured by exhortations addressed to those generals by Marshal St. Arnaud in person. This story does not afford much credit to the inventive genius of the Indipendance, and it is only in Belgium, where irre- solution is the normal condition of the troops, that credence could be bestowed on a fiction so palpably absurd. lamin a condition to assert, from personal knowledge, that the story is false from beginning to end; but, as the Times Paris correspondent has dealt with it in detail, and proved conclusively that it is not and could not be true, and as the Intie• pendance has been unable even to attempt a defence of its fabrication, I shall say no more on this subject. Again : before the despatches arrived from the Crimea, and when the news had only reached us by telegraph, the Independance over and over again asserted that General Canrobert's reconnaissance on the Tschern aya had failed iu consequence of his not receiving support from an English division which was ordered to act in concert with him. At length the official despatches come to hand, and prove the utter falsehood of this scandalous invention ; for not only was the reconnaissance perfectly successful, and every object attained that was expected or de sired, but the whole of the English cavalry and horse artillery, and a large force of British infantry, ac• tually formed part of the expedition. The game must be a despairing one, and the Russian troops in grievous want of comfort, when their journals are ;ompelled to resort to fictions such as these. After a nine days' labour the Indipendance was delivered of an article upon my last letter to you. It did not even attempt to deny the accuracy of my assertions, or to give any reply to the detailed ac • count I sent of its correspondents and their opinions. It sheltered itself behind a general statement that the Belgians cannot but sympathise with the Eng lish, as they have so much in common with us ; that offending the national vanity was not a likely way to secure support or sympathy ; and that when the nation was attacked it should be silent as regards itself. To this I simply repeat that, notwithstanding gratitude for past favours should have secured the sympathy of the Belgians with the allied cause, a large proportion of the nation, from dread of Russian power and misplaced fear of the imperial policy of France, desires the success of the Czar and the abasement of the Western powers. As to seeking for sympathy or assistance from Belgium, the day is yet to come when the giant shall call for aid from the dwarf, or when England—that for a thousand years has preserved her soil secure from every foe—shall cry for succour from Belgium, which has successively belonged to every power that chose to take her by force of arms or articles of treaty, and which has so often owed her deliverance to the might of British arms or the exertions of British diplomacy. The Independance was prudently and wisely silent as to the remarks I made on itself, its correspondents and their opinions, for it knew the correctness of every statement and the accuracy of every fact mentioned by me. But comment is altogether unnecessary on the tendencies of the Belgian people or the sympathies of the Indipendance, in face of a fact which I know on unquestionable authority. I informed you (as you may remember) that the Russian Government bad endeavoured to establish a journal at Berlin edited by gentlemen and printed by workmen attached to the Independance, and that the Prussian Government at the last moment interdicted its appearance. The project has been adjourned but not abandoned, and the venue is changed from Berlin, where Russian in. fluenco is predominant, to Brussels, where it equally reigns supreme. The Journal du Nord will make its appearance on the first of next month. It will be printed and published in Brussels, and edited by M. Victor Cappelmans, who has for some years been attached to the editorial department of the Indepen dance Belge. Its information will be derived direct from St. Petersburg, and it will appear as the open and avowed organ of the Russian Government in Western Europe. It is probable that M. Cappelmans has not been selected without some knowledge of his antecedents, and it is equally probable that his appointment to the editorial chair of the Journal du Nord is a reward for long services performed While attached to the Indipendance. The garrison of Sebastopol will now have a third journal to amuse THE PRESS. their leisure hours, to inform them of the want of harmony and concert between the allies, of the shortcomings and irresolution of the British troops and commanders, and of the disasters —real or supposed—overtaking British ships. But time presses, and the Journal du Nord has none to lose; for, according to General Pelissier, the hour is at hand when the enemy will be exicken to the heart, and the " canards " of the Journal du Nord, like those of the Ind4endance, may arrive at Sebastopal for the amusement of the divided and distracted allies when masters of the place, instead of affording comfort and consolation to the Muscovs for whom they were composed.—l remain, sir, your obe dient servant, AN ENGLISHMAN RESIDENT IN BELGIUM. Brussels, June 20, 1855. ADMINISTRATIVE REFORM. TO THE EDITOR OF " THE PRESS." Sir,—l read with great interest the article, in your impression of Saturday last, upon "Administrative Reform," and I quite agree, and am extremely grati fied to see it stated, that Mr. Disraeli has taken up his position on it in the " most masterly manner." As a junior civil servant of the Crown, I hope I may be permitted to observe that the civil service of this country can never be conducted in a satisfactory manner until it be strictly and practically admitted to be a "profession "—a profession in which the highest honours and rewards it can otter shall be within the reach of its humblest member. As the civil service is organised at the present time nothing can be more unsatisfactory, nor can anything be more unjust than the way in which its higher offices are distributed. I can see no reason why the higher departments of an office should not be filled up trom the ranks of those who have spent a large portion of their lives in that office, instead of bringing in a man who has no connection whatever with it, and putting him over the heads of a great many deserving and talented gentlemen, who are much better qualified to fill the situation, merely because lie happens to be the protege of a nooleman or gentleman having political influence. For example, could anything be more unfair and unjust towards the gentlemen of the Treasury than the giving to Sir C. E. Trevelyan, a brother-in-law of Mr. Macaulay, the historian, the appointment of secretary of that department?—he, in addition to being a perfect stranger to the civil service of England, knowing nothing whatever of the duties of the office, and being dependent, as be him• self has stated, on the courtesy and information of gentlemen filling subordinate situations under him. Another instance of flagrant injustice towards the gentlemen in the Admiralty was committed a short time since by the appointment of Mr. Phinn to be secretary, rendered vacant by the retirement of Ad miral Hamilton. Surely there must have been many gentlemen in the Admiralty much better qua lified for such a situation than the Radical barrister, late member for Bath. I am confident that no greater stimulus could be applied to the well-working of a department of the State than the knowledge that its higher offices would always be filled by gentlemen belonging to the department, to be allotted as a reward to the most deserving and most meritorious officer. This is practically the system which Mr. Disraeli, when in office, wished to introduce into the civil service; and had not the Derby Government been ejected from power by such an unprincipled coalition of Whig'', Radicals, and Peelites, " Administrative Reform," in stead of only being, as it is at the present time, a platform cry, would long ere this have become an established fact. Hoping, sir, that Mr. Disraeli will soon be in a position to carry out his large and luminous views for reforming the Government departments, ,I have the honour to be, your obedient servant, London, June 2 7 th, 1855. JtiVENIS. THE CASE OF BOYLE v. WISEMAN. TO THE EDITOR OF " THE PRESS." Sir,—We shall feel deeply obliged if you will permit us through your powerful medium to place before the public the facts in this proceeding. Six years since Dr. Wiseman ejected Mr. Boyle from the church at Islington without any canonical offence being even alleged against him. Not content with this injury to his professional avocation, and total deprivation of all means of livelihood, he four years after attacked both his moral and religious character in a series of charges in the Univers which were copied into many English papers. When fully in • formed that his accusations were untrue, he refused to retract them, and Mr. Boyle was then compelled to vindicate all that was left to him—his moral and religious character—by an action at law. It was tried before the Chief Baron Sir F. Pollock, and Mr. Boyle was non-suited, entirely through the misdirection of that judge, who committed a double error in the suit, as proved by the subsequent ruling of the court. Mr. Boyle obtained a new trial, and the second suit oame on for hearing before Mr. Baron 619 Platt, in March last, at Kingston, when the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, Mr. Boyle's damages 1,0001. In this second suit, through the mistake (the judges say) of Mr. Baron Platt, and not on the merits of the case, the unfortunate plaintiff has been sent to a third trial on the same suit. No language can be well stronger than that of Mr. Baron Platt, which is as follows, extracted from the shorthand-writer's notes : It certainly appears to me a very great reproach to the law of this country that the plaintiff has been assailed by a libel, and to this moment he has not been able to prove to the satisfaction of the court the publication of it by the libeller. And I must say that 1 greatly regret that any mistake of mine—for I must take it for granted I am mistaken, though 1 am difficult to be convinced I am mis taken—that any mistake of mine should have prevented the plaintiff on his second attempt merely tc prove the publication by the defendant of the libel for that purpose, and not on the merits of the case, that he should again have failed. Now, sir, deeply as Sir F. Pollock and Mr. Baron Platt may regret their erroneous decisions, there is one unfortunate individual, the plaintiff, to whom, being frustrated in two actions, and in each case not on the merits, more than regret—total ruin—ensues. Not only has he been deprived of all remedy by the misdirection of two judges, but for anything we can see to the contrary he may suffer by the entire fifteen. And never can he recover the expenses of the two previous trials, supposing him successful in a third; so that the offender, if his purse will only afford it, can set at defiance in this case also the laws of England. We ask, if such be the case, why is there no public prosecutor? Why do not the judges either institute a remedy, or defray expenses incurred by their ignorance, or mistake, out of the private purse either of the misdirecting judge, or a general amount subscribed among them all. For the future, any amount of damages given to the unfortunate plaintiff will become absorbed by the previous expenses in the two former suits ; and it seems that each judge will charge the jury to throw out of their consideration the earlier proceedings. Now, sir, having taken up entirely on public grounds the case of Mr. Boyle, we ask, is any one to be allowed to avail himself in this improper manner of the errors of our judges to perpetuate wrong. As Mr. Baron Platt has observed, Dr. Wiseman has not the manliness to meet the evidence against him in a straightforward manner. No person in England or Europe doubts that he is the author of the libel. His own counsel admit it; and can it be that a high ecclesiastic of the Roman Church shall dare thus to use the incidental errors and mistakes of the English bench against his unhappy brother priest and victim ? We appeal to the British public for aid to obtain justice for a crushed, wronged, and ruined man. Connected as this whole line of conduct is with the Italian aggression, we yet do not rest simply upon that, though a prime element, but we call on all un prejudiced parties to aid us in obtaining a remedy for private injury to personal character, for ecclesias tical oppression and defamation, for gross wrung done to a British subject, and for shameful con tumely heaped on our law and its judges by a triple, or possibly a decuple adjudication in a single suit.—We remain, yours faithfully, J. W. WORTHINGTON, H. BATEMAN. 27, John•street, Bedford.row, June 28, 1855. FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE. Tuesday, June 26. BANKRUPTCY AN N ULLED.—Tmomts RICKARDS, Riches court, Lime-street, dealer In wood and general agent• BANKRUPTS.—Ii SPIRY LOCIZY Huainan, Monmouth-road, Bayswater, blander—WlLLlAM EPWORTH TULL, Merk•lane, WHIR and spirit broker—DANIEL GOLDING, Islebam, Cambridgeshire, butcher—FREDERICK Div Ens, Great Bell-alley, Moorgste.street, licensed victualler— ROBERT MARTIN and DAVID WARDI.AW Scorn, Great St. Helen's, City, merchants, ship and insurance brokers, and Customhouse agenta—FRANCIS }Amino Tuctinn, late of Copthall-builuings, City, and Horachurch, Esser., COM minion agent and bill-broker—RICHARD KIRKMAN LANG, Ar gyle-street, Regent-street, and Union•creseeot, Wandsworth-road, bill-broker and gas-manufacturer—S* l ' l AL Tan Avis and WIL• LIAR HARRISON, Nottingham, upholsterers--Gtonon BUTLER PORTING, Devizes, innkeeper—Wu-Luiz JONZI, Bump, builder —Ttiouts ROBERTS, Llanstephan, Carmarthenshire, and New port, Monmouthshire, builder and contractor—Witt-um Hainan- WATER, Cheltenham, coal merchant and brick and the maker— JOHN WARBURTON, Sheffield, edge-tool manufacturer--Gtonom NORMAN BULT, Tiverton, druggist—JoHN BKISTLIST Cl/11. Bardsley, Lancashire, brewer. SCOTCH SEQU ESTRATIONS.—JoHN froaans,OldMeldrtun, druggist—DUNCAN WEAL, Perth, surgeon-dentist and druggist —ROBERT J AC KSON, Glasgow, bookseller and stationer—Wu-Lux TtPKAy, Mute, Sutherlandshire, merchant Friday, June 20. BANKRUPTS.— JAMIS BUR►ORD the elder, and Jamie BITE. FORD the younger, Saint Neota, Huntingdonshire, builders—Joust STEVENSON, Barham, Suffolk, innkeeper—JOHN H ovum', Black friars-road, furnishing ironmonger—Wm. DI awoonin, Gray's inn-road, draper—Hmaav Iliulivotani, Sheffield, file manufac turer—THomAs ELSTON, Newton Heath, Manchester, manufac turing chemist—THous I'ARTON, Ruyton, Salop, licensed victualler—HAßßlZTT SWINDELL, Ashbourne, Derbyshire, wine merchant —Wm-iv Stanawoon and NnWMAN MHZRWOOD, builders and contractors—AßTHUß EDWARD TROWSE, Holborn, coach and type smith and spring maker—lsuc BROWN Tooley. square, licensed victualler —RoszaT DZIIT, Athersto n e, War: wickshire, builder—Clawson EDWARDS, Old Swinford, Wore's: tershire, innkeeper—HitanniT ROOK, Birmingbarils Inslmillo bedstead manufacturer,