The Press. — London, England, 1856-05-17 00:00:00

MAY 17, 1856. tioned "Brookes's," we may remark that Lord BRotottot relates an authentic anecdote of Mr. Pirr (circa 1804), driving home from the House of Commons, and saying to his corn panion--" I have , a great mind to go in and " sup at Brookes s." Mr. Pirr, in point of fact, had not taken off his name, though he never again entered that club after the year 1784. In doing so, as we are informed, Mr. Pin conformed to a custom followed by many gentlemen (and several instances of it have come under our cognisance), of not removing their names from clubs, when either political differences or personal causes have made them cease from frequenting these societies. There is, obviously, a great difference between leaving a name on a list, while absenting from "pre sence" (to use Lord ItANELAoli's word), and giving directions to the secretary to remove it from the list. The latter course is of that peremptory kind which English gentlemen shrink from, unless on grounds of strong pro vocation. It was, perhaps, a matter of mere sentiment in the case of Mr. Pirr to leave his name in Brookes's ; but supposing that Mr. Pirr, while assailing the Whigs, and using both oratorical and literary weapons against the Whigs, had gone day after day, and night after night to " Brookes's," dined, supped, and talked there, and listened to the conversations there—stay, stay. we cannot suppose anything of that kind. We are satisfied that Mr. Pirr would never have given his "presence " amongst a collection of his adversaries, while personally and politically antagonistic to them in the Senate. Now, we must confess that we feel some re luctance in noticing at all the letter of Lord RANELAGH. The members of the Carlton Club, or of any other club of gentlemen, are not amenable to the criticisms of journalists, like those public personages whose acts and speeches concern everybody. We should not like to anticipate any conclusions, or even to suggest them ; but we may say that we believe the decision of the interesting question mooted by Lord RANELAGH will turn on the point what constitutes " presence" in a club. We shall not, therefore, go seriatim through the points of Lord RANELAGH'S letter. None of them is more important than the last sen tence : My resolutions are directed against those alone who, either by writing, voting, or stronger adhesion, have openly or in effect joined the party to which this club is opposed. We do not know whether it is casually, or intentionally, that Lord RANELAGH puts "by writing," first in his categories of conversion. The whole letter is composed in a manly, un affected style, arid it savours not at all of a narrow, inquisitorial spirit. On the contrary, his Lordship seems to allow a certain latitudi narian range ; but he appears to think that toleration must have its limits. It is obvious, to speak generally, that there may be "presence" in a club of a sinister character. A man of mean nature, and malig nant heart, might frequent such a society for personal purposes. He might collect gossip, ferret out party secrets, observe private inter course between particular persons, and armed with such knowledge he may try to become virulently offensive. We do not suppose that any such character is to be found in " The Carlton," or " Brookes's," or the " Reform Club " Such a person would deserve to be classified with the . fera naturm, and a particular kind of "club-law" would be almost justifiable in his case. But without resorting to any such extravagant supposition, we can well imagine that " Brookes's" would be much annoyed if any man, or men, was using that eminent club solely for personal purposes, of a kind that could i.ot be honourably avowed. There can be only two parties in this coun try, Tories and Whigs, or Conservatives and Liberals, in modern parlance. Gentlemen who have no side in politics ought to belong to " White's," or the " Athenieum," the Wyndham," " Garrick," or some other non political society. In " political" clubs, corn- Ilion principles, the same objects, the same an tipathies, and the same recognised leaders, would seem to be fair t es t s o f mem bership. The tdem nolle atque idem velle might fairly be applicable to those societies, and " the , .. THE PRESS. spirit of a gentleman" should, as a matter of course, regulate the conduct of all. We cannot, however, offer any decided opinion on the special subject of Lord RANELAGH'S letter, which exclusively belongs to the decision of the members of the Carlton Club. EAST COAST OF THE BLACK SEA. ON previous occasions we have alluded to the probability of an entire change in the policy of the Russian Government. We said that we saw many indications that the traditional system of aggression which had endured for two centuries would be abandoned, and that the present Emperor would concentrate the energies of his people on the development of their industrial resources. The vast import ance to the whole civilised world of such a change cannot be questioned by any one, how ever much disposed to doubt its realisation. Russia is one of the three great countries on which, at the present day, the peace of the world depends ; and she also contains within herself elements of growth which, nurtured by a few years of steady industry, may prodi giously increase her foreign trade. Commer cial transactions with this country were, before the late war, upwards of three times as exten sive as with any other nation, and, if we leave out Prussia, not far short of those with the whole of continental Europe and America put together. It would be impossible to exagge rate the importance which the growth of a wealthy middle class in that vast country, with the consequent birth of new wants, and demand for new luxuries, is calculated to exer cise on the industry of the British people. Those who wish to investigate this subject for themselves would do well to consult the work of TEOOBORSKI on " The Productive Forces of Russia," the second volume of which has been recently published. Manifestly, it was the interest of this coun try to encourage all pacific dispositions in the Russian Government, and to repress those of an opposite tendency. We fear we have done the reverse When the roar of cannon and the blaze of fireworks shall be exciting a fic titious and temporary enthusiasm in this country for the peace which has been con cluded, more genuine enthusiasm will doubt less be prevailing in St. Petersburg for the war which is just going to commence. At last the Caucasian provinces seem within the grasp of the Czar, and a fortunate combina tion of circumstances has enabled him to consummate the long-cherished designs of his family. Russia has never yet had such large masses of troops concentrated on her southern frontier, and never seems, apparently, to have thought it worth while to bring them down merely for the sake of the Caucasian war. Now, however, that they are on the spot, she appears determined to lose no time in turning them to good account. There are three distinct grounds upon which the warlike preparations now going on at St. Petersburg must excite regret. In the first place, the existence of war in any part of the Russian empire after the late Treaty, is some thing like turning a patient out of hospital only half cured—he is soon as bad again as ever. By the contest in the Caucasus the old military spirit of aggression will be kept alive, and the hoped-for devotion of Russia to indus trial pursuits materially checked. In the second place, the certain, if possibly remote, danger to our Indian empire by the advance of Russian power in Asia, has been more than once pointed out in our columns. As long as we maintain our naval supremacy, the posses sion of Constantinople by Russia would be less dangerous to our power than her approxi mation to our Indian frontier. We could bridle up her fleets within the Bosphorus, but who could look forward with equal confidence to a meeting between her infantry and our sekoys on the banks of the Indus ? '1 hi .dly, the occupation by Russia of this 230 miles of Cir cassian coast at once renders the neutralisa tion of the Black Sea a mockery. Nor can it be simply admitted and deplored as an in evitable result over which we had no control. To have insisted on the independence of this coast would ha the most legitimate The fact is, that _ these countries has never been recognised either by Turkey or the Western Powers : in 1836 it was expressly denied by Great Britain, while the erection of forts along the coast, which gave Russia possession of no land in the interior, cannot be regarded in any light but as a mere temporary occupation for the purposes of war. There are reasons, there fore, both positive and negative, why the neutralisation of the Circassian coast, and the destruction of the forts, should have been strenuously insisted on Such demand was not a violation of the status quo ante, it foal not introducing a foreign element into the discus sion, and it was required in order to give effect to a leading conditionla the Treaty, and to prevent the Plenipotentiaries from stultifying their own work. By the blockade of the Circassian coa st, the tribes of the Caucasus will be completely sur rounded. The Euxine was their only outlet by which to obtain arms, ammunition, and supplies. That is now sealed against them, and, with the overwhelming masses of Russian troops that may be launched against them, their fate cannot long be doubtful. A well known correspondent of the " leading journal" has called the Circassians barbarians, and has likened them to the Hebrews in the Book of Judges, and the Swiss before their Confederation. But his parallel tells woefully against himself. Did not the Hebrews main tain themselves against their enemies, and drive back the tide of Assyrian and Egyptian conquest for many generations? What would have become of revealed religion but for the valour of the Hebrews? And what would have become of the liberties of Europe had these same Swiss barbarians been conquered by Austria, and become, centuries ago, an integral part of her dominions? The thirty years' war would have had another ending, and Protestantism been trampled under foot from Copenhagen to Trieste. We willingly, there fore, accept the parallel. Let us look on the Circassians as we have been taught to look on the heroes who resisted the feudal array of Austria, and we shall not yet think it too late to take some steps for insuring the freedom of the eastern coast of the Black Sea. UNDETECTED CRIME. IT is a curious and startling speculation what the proportion of undetected and unsuspected crime may be to the crime which is known and published, and what the number of crimi nals moving freely in society may be com pared to the number brought to justice. This is a subject which has never yet engaged statistical inquiry, though very worthy of con sideration. Undetected criminals are of two classes--the perpetrators of crimes which have never been suspected or discovered, and the perpetrators of crimes which have come to light, while the perpetrators themselves have remained hidden. It is from the first of these classes that society has most to dread. How many persons may at this moment be occupying a respectable position, and perhaps wearing a sanctified appearance, who bear about with them a brain capable of plotting intricate crime, and a heart capable of the most fiendish cruelty. How many John Dean Pauls may there be in the mercantile world, some at this moment struggling with embarrassment, some just emerging from difficulty, but ready for despe rate expedients should temptation present itself. The murder by Tawell was discovered by accident. How sleekly would he have walked the earth in drab and broadbrim had it been decided that his victim died in a fit ! Was that murder his first ? Who can tell ? The probabilities, perhaps, are, on the whole, against a first case of poisoning ever being suspected. Taking that dark and deliberate species of murder which compels into its ser vice the secret agencies of nature and the latest discoveries of science, what a painful train of thought is roused by the occurrences of the last few months 1 Deaths have occurred inAde inimmompmeoppinme 459 ive been oiily to insist on one of .mate objects of the war. that the Russian possession of es has never been reenonised