The Press. — London, England, 1857-09-26 00:00:00

nisation of India, the employment of Europeans in all the minor offices of control hitherto held by natives, and the establishment of a powerful native police force in lieu of a regular native army. The scheme may or may not have much to recommend it in detail, but it is to be remarked as exhibiting the tendency of popular feeling in favour of the abolition or modification of the existing double Government. 3. A new and revised edition of Mrs. o n Mackenzie's entertaining work will be read with interest at this moment. Her vivid representations of life in India, and her accurate and descriptive account of Delhi, are exceedingly interesting. In a preface to this edition, Mrs. Mackenzie takes " the paternal view" of the blessings of our Indian government, and maintains that it has been every thing that is just and beneficent. If our govern ment of India had been so mild and just as such partisans represent it, the present insurrection could not have existed a month. It is because the rebels are favoured by the mass of the population that they are enabled to keep the field against us, to besiege our residencies, and to massacre our people. Hence, to maintain the paternal theory, it is necessary to show that the rebellion is confined to the sepoys. "It is a mutiny, not an insurrection," says the writer of the preface, whose style every one will detect, and whose matter is beyond Mrs. Mackenzie. But in the next paragraph he admits that the Maho medans "are dissatisfied" at being deprived of their supremacy, and the native princes "intrigue" against us. What better proof can be given in favour of an insurrection ? Are the Mahomedans confined to the ranks of the army, and have the native princes, deposed or regnant, no influence with their people as well as their soldiers ? Besides, in a population numbered by millions, if those mil lions are well affected towards us, how is it that we do not raise another native army to suppress these sepoys? Is there one European in India, except the officials at Calcutta, who would put a musket into the hands of a native ? That is the best test of loyalty. But it is useless disputing the mere military theory ; every fact contradicts it, and its most unscrupulous partisans have at length admitted that the rebellion is the result of a vast and well-organised conspiracy of people and troops against our rule. The remaining paragraphs of the introduction are written in a more accurate spirit : That which has rendered the mutiny possible is the se paration between the European officers and the Sepahis. The officers are better men, both morally and intellec tually, than they were forty years ago, and, as a body, un rivalled for integrity and for both military and adminis trative talent, for the simple reason that our countrymen have nowhere such a earriCre ouverle aux talents as in India. Why, then, have they less influence? Why is the army in a worse condition than formerly ? Becalm the Govern ment have, first, by their absurd system of centralisation deprived officers of all power of reward or punishment, so that even Sir Charles Napier, when Governor in Scinde, could not punish a Bengal Sepahi under his orders; and, secondly, by the pernicious interference of civilians, from the governor-general downwards, in purely military affairs. The officers lose all heart, the Sepahi loses all respect. If the Sepahis were again made dependent on their officers; if the latter had the power of rewarding and punishing, their old intercourse, influence, and affection would revive. Personal influence is the only sure hold we have on the Indian army, and this has of late been systematically discouraged. Government, endeavouring to do everything itself, is overpowered with details, and consequently business stands still, and those officers who press even the most important questions or facts on the notice of the pvernor-general are considered troublesome and importunate. The three armies of Bengal, Madras, and Bombay, are completely distinct, and although all have suffered greatly from centralisation and civil interference, yet the disci pline of the two latter is far more strict than that of Bengal, and the native officers are promoted by merit and not by seniority, which of course makes them more efficient, and gives influence to their European officers. In both, men of low as well as high caste are admitted, while in Bengal the army is composed exclusively of men of high caste and Mussulmans, about every third Sepahi being, a Brahmin. Of course when a regiment is formed of men of different races, castes, and creeds, combination and mutiny become almost impossible. A man must be born a Hindoo—he cannot become so. For instance, the children of a Hindoo rajah by a Mussul man mother are brought up as Maho.nedans, as they cannot share their father's caste unless the mother also belonged to it. The Hindoos look upon religion as a matter of birth, and hold Christianity to be as fit and true for us as woolly hair for a negro, or Himlooism for them selves. It follows that they have no idea of proselytism, and as men of different castes can have but limited inter course with each other—as they can neither eat, drink, nor smoke together—the Hindoo has no idea of nationality. The Sikhs are a modem sect of Hinduo dissenters. They have no castes, and any one may become a Sikh. They have little sympathy with the Hindoos, and an intense hatred of their old foes the Mahomedans, whom they have tyrannised over in the Punjaub, as the sons of Islam have tyrannised over the Hindoos. The Mahomedans in India have adopted Hindoo preju dices of caste to such an extent that they will not eat with Christians. They are divided into the two great sects of blitahs and Sunis. who detest each other all over the world, and who can scarcely be restrained from open warfare, anti both parties in India are extremely ignorant THE PRESS, SEPTEMBER 2G, 1857. -- of their own religion. All Mussulmans are ardent proselytisers and fanatics, and look upon the slaughter of an infidel as a short cut to paradise. The majority of those in India are descended from converts made by the swotds of these Paten invaders. The war cry of the Mahomedan is" diu din" (religion), and scarcely anything can hold him back when this cry is raised. When the mutiny took place at Bolarum in 1155, in which Brigadier Mackenzie was all but assassinated by men of the 3rd Hyderabad Cavalry, he and his family slept as secure and as void of all distrust under the protection of the Mussulrnaus of the 3rd Infantry, and with a Mussulman Subailar on guard, as they did under that of the Hindoos of the same gallant and loyal regllthent, because, as the bigoted Naant himself expressed it, " Yih din ka kier nahiu "—this was no religious quarrel. Dot men of the same contingent have lately declared that they cannot fight against their brethren, because now it is " Din ki bat "—a religious question. Great ignorance prevails among Europeans as to what really constitutes and affects caste, and consequently they yield when they should be firm, and are incautious and obstinate where they should yield. A native will often allege his caste as a pretext for not doing something which he imagines contrary to his dignity. AMONG the mass of new publications and fresh editions of popular works, we have to acknowledge an excellent, well-bound, well-printed, and cheap edition of Miss Bronte's works. Jane Eyre has already appeared, and Shirley now follows. We can recommend this edition as certainly the best in every respect of the many cheap editions now publishing. Harry Hamilton (Hodgson) is a lively bustling tale, well told, of adventure at sea and on shore. It is written with vigour, and forms an excellent and original number in that admirable series, "The Parlour Library," which includes also, in cheap volumes, " The Man-at-Arms," by James, " The White Mask," by Mrs. Thomson, "The Hussar," by Gleig, and " Ethel Churchill," by L. E. L.— standard works of fiction now placed within the reach of all lovers of such literature. The Common Objects of the Seashore (Routledge) fulfils its title, and gives a popular description of everything to be found upon the seashore, from seaweeds anC whelk• shells to zoophytes and soft-tailed crabs, cuttle and codfish. It is carefully writtenvaccurate in its state ments, and a most fit present for Children, big or little, as an introduction to the aquarium. Numerous woodcuts, well executed, engravings from the pencil of Mr. Sowerhy, illustrate the text. Here is an ex planation of what we all know by sight, " cuttle bone ": There is a substance that is often to be picked up on the shore, and oftener to be purchased at the perfumers' shops, known by the name of cuttlebone, and, when reduced to powder, used for various purposes. This so-called cuttle bone is not bone at all, but a very wonderful structure, consisting almost entirely of pure chalk, and having been rat one time embedded loosely in the substance of some departed individual of the species called Sepia officinalis. The " bone " is inclosed within a membranous sac within the body of the cuttle, by which sac it is secreted,and with which it has no other connection, dropping out when the animal is opened. On taking one of these objects into the hand, its extreme lightness is very evident, and if it be cut across and examined through a lens, the cause of the lightness will be perceived. The plate is not solid, but is formed of a succession of excessively thin laminte or floors of chalk, each connected with each by myriads of the tiniest imaginable chalky pillars. When the cuttle is living, this structure runs through the entire length of the abdomen, being of equal length with it, and occupying , about one-third of its breadth. The relations of Masters or Mistresses and Servants are cleculy laid down by Mr. Baylis, M.A., barrister, in his excellent little treatise. Such a clear, simple, and accurate statement of the law affecting the rela tive liabilities and vice versa of both parties has long been wanting. There is much useful information in this little pamphlet, which we can cordially recom mend to the public. PUBLICATIONS RECEIVED-SEpr. 21. BOOKS. Inver:ails et Penni Saline. With :a Commentary. By the Rev. A. J. Macleane, M.A. Whittaker and Co. Euripides. With an English Commentary. By F. A. Paley. Vol. 1. Ditto. Publii Coma•diia Ses. With a Commentary. By the Rex, E. St. John Parry, M.A. Ditto. England and France before Sebastopol. By Charles Bryce, M.D. Churchill. Russell's History of Modern Europe Epitomised. Routledge. The Noble Traylour. A Chronicle. By Thomas of Swar• raton. Armiger. Three Vols. Smith and Elder. Letters on Connoisseurship ; or, the Anatomy of a Picture. Chapman and Hall. The Story of Afy Life. By Lord William Lennox. Three Vole. Hurst and Blackett. The Travels of Prince Legion, and other Poems. By John Le Gay Brereton. Longmans. Autumn Leaves. Poems by Dunsterville Brucks. Groombridge. PERIODICALS. The Journal of the Statistical Society. J. W. Parker. The Commercial Traveller's Magazine.' Kent and Co. The Weit of Scotland Magazine. 1111 Rau and Virtue Dus tr. ROYAL LYCEUM THEATRE. WHAT is a National Opera? S 3MS native co-n- posers, critics, and singers vr3u.1,1 reply- 4 The lyric drama that is essentially English." There must be nothing foreign. The poem—ve must not write "libretto "—muit emanate from an En:flish imagination—Bunn, Fitzball, or Mark Limon, to wit; the score—wa dare not call it " partition " must oe the inspiration of a national mind—F:aglish, Scotch, Irish, Welsh, Australian, Canadian, Weit Indian, or any locality ruled over by our gracious Queen. Tha singers—we shall be libelling them to style them "artistes "—must be actually born within the United Kingdom and the dependencies. Any one bearing a foreign name should be exclu led from a National Opera; he or she would be insulted, hooted, hissed, and yelled at by " native talent." An English poet and a British musician must not be allowed even to select a foreign theme. The scenery must be English ; the getting up—it would be treason to mention "mice en scene "—inust be thoroughly British. There must be no foreign instruments in the orchestras. Down with the Cremonas. English makers must manufacture English fiddles. No more strings from Naples— let the catgut be national. No parchment from any foreign animal. The brass must be dug from English mines, and the wood grown in native forests. When are we to have a National Opera in pursuance cif the lamentations of legitimacy ? Who will he the daring capitaliuts to realise the dream? Certainly not Miss Louisa Pyne and Mr. Harrison, who have just opened the Lyceum as an English opera-house. The new managers have thrown down the gauntlet of defiance at once, by presenting Auber's Crown Diamonds and Meyerbeer's Huguenots on alternate evenings this week, and they have acted boldly, if not prudently. A National Opera on the basis of utter exclusiveness would be absurd. Music is of no country, and an English opera means the univer sality of art as much as this principle is acted upon at the Grand Opera and the Opera Comique in Paris. It is only in London the nonsense is heard about a National Opera. There is no such thing abroad, even in the theatres sup ported by the respective Governments. English music will never rise whilst its professors are merely imitators. Let the musical composers of Great Britain originate a school and a style, and then they may preach about nationality. They are " wasting their sweetness on the desert air" as servile copyists. The patent New Grand National Opera will be a myth until there he another Bishop or Purcell—a creative genius, not a publisher's plagiarist. The experience of the last quarter of a century in the attempts to place English opera on a permanent basis seems to be entirely overlooked. Now Arnold at the Lyceum, Mme. Vestris at Covent Garden, Bunn at both Drury Lane and Covent Garden, Braham at the St. James's, Maddox at the Princess's, Miss Romer at the Surrey, Jullien at Drury Lane, Balfe at the Lyceum, John Barnett at the St. James's, and other operatic managers whose names escape our memory, all in turn gave English musicians their trial. John Barnett, Macfarren, Edward Loner, Henry Smart, Frank Romer, Tully, Henry Phillips, Forbes, T. Cooke, C. Horn, A. Lee, Herbert Rodwell, Rooke, &c., have had their chances, but have they been able, collectively or individually, to establish the Nation Opera, good, and in some instances great, as have been their produc tions? And is it not notorious that the works of (Mozart, Spohr, Salieri, Cherubini, Rossini, Auber, Bellini, Beethoven, Winter, Paer Marschner, Herold, Maurer, Boieldieu, Meyerbeer, D3nizetti, Benedict, Verdi, tk.c., have mainly been the support of every British lyric enterprise ? The mode in which a National Opera may eventually take root in this metropolis is by sowing the seeds of liberality and impartiality, and not those of exclusiveness and intolerance. Let the works of the composers of all countries be conscientiously executed, and then there will be a possibility of permanency in an English opera-house. But how can true amateurs be satisfied with the Lyceum doings last Monday with The Crown Diamonds, and on Tuesday with The Huguenots? The bills an nounced The Crown Diamonds, by Auber; the public should have been told that Mr. Fitzball's version is by Auber, Tully, Brinley Richards, Bene dict, and Rode. By Tully there was the air, " O'er the mountain steep" (the " Muleteers"), originally interpolated for Borrani in the Drury Lane version, and now sung by Hamilton Braham. By Brinley Richards there was the publisher's ballad, "Oh whisper what thou feelest," introduced by Mr. Har rison also at Drury Lane and now at the Lyceum. By Benedict there was the " Skylark" bravura, composed for Jenny Lind by Benedict, but infinitely 947