The Press. — London, England, 1856-07-05 00:00:00

many _ would be prepared to stiffer almost any amount of wrong, rather than seek a remedy by the tedious and expensive process pursued in Westminster-hall. What, then, would be the case with us if Westminster-hall, and every other court of law in England, were closed to us, and we were compelled, like these Indians, to endure ell in silence, or, as the alternative. make a pilgrimage to Delhi, and fight out the battle for our rights, before a Hindus tam e King and a Hind ostanee Parliament. The obstacles in the way of these peoples obtaining justice are thus great enough already, without closing the door of hope on them by shutting them out from all power of appeal Indeed, on other grounds we should be very careful how we deal with a matter so important; for it is the worst policy of all to try and drive our native subjects into a corner from which there can obviously be but one means for them to escape. It may be inconvenient for Minis ters to have their tempers ruffled by complaints of misgovernment from India; but it is better that the money and energies of the petitioners should be expended in a legal contest here, than in a contest of another kind on the plains of Hindostan. At the same time, we quite agree in the opinion that Parliament is not in itself the best tribunal for the decision of such cases, and that it is only on the supposition of the Ministers obstinately refusing, as in this instance, to refer them to a tribunal more fitted for them, that we would retain (except under very special circumstances) the plan of Parliamentary appeal. As it is, Parliament would refuse to listen to any application in cases where the courts of India were open to the petitioner, with their machinery for eventual appeal, if wrong were done, to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. What then, more obvious than that if the Minister were to refer for the Judicial Committee's opinion the cases which come before him untried, in consequence of want of jurisdic tion in the Indian courts. Parliament would be equally satisfied with the report on them by the Committee, and equally disinclined, no matter on what solicitation, to question the award ? Over and over again have we sug gested this mode of avoiding these scandals and obviating these difficulties ; and we see that Mr. CARDWELL, on the part of the Com mittee on the Nawab's Bill, stated tho same thing to the House. We have thus Mr. CARDWELL, Mr. NAPIER, Mr. KEATINO, Mr ATHERTON, and Mr. G. Burr, the gentlemen who formed the Committee, all agreeing with us on this point ; and we do trust, therefore, that the Government will not treat lightly authority so eminent, and which was shown to have command( d the almost unanimous confidence of the House. Mr CARDWELL alluded, in addition, to another course equally open to the Minister, and also in accordance with the views we have continuously laid down. It was, that Mr VERNON SMITH might have taken the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown upon the subject, and, fortified by these, have pro ceeded to state the course lie purposed follow. ing. We can hardly conceive a case iu which the Attorney and Solicitor General and Queen's Advocate having declared them selves clearly of opinion that justice had been done, any considerable number of members would feel inclined to oppose the Government, or in which there would be the least chance of success for a private bill For no one, it must be remembered, opposes either the Government or the Directors in matters of this kind for the mere sake of opposition ; indeed, the feeling ties aU the other way. But it is impossible, when appealed to, for members to connive at the most flagrant in justice being perpetrated, by conferring en the perpetrators that sense of irresponsibility which is at the bottom of nearly all Indian misgovernment. That much injustice is, and must be, done by the Directors, is clearly proved by the result which an appeal against them to an English tribunal invariably brings forth. There was, for instance, the other day the great Bengal zemindary case ; there was the Dyce Sombre will case ; and there is this case T: PRESS. regarding the heirs of the Nawab of S&L r. In all these the Directors have not only been beaten, but beaten ignominiously, and been told substantially in the judgments that their cases had not one of thou a leg to stand upon. What, then, must be the species of cause in which they have none but weak and helpless opponents to deal with, when these are the style of actions they select to do battle on in the face of England? We believe ourselves that there are thousands of cases of inherited rights in which the parties have been even more shamefully treated by the Directors, if the truth were known, than have been the heirs of the late Nawab of SURAT. However, now that in quiry has commenced, we may be pretty cer tain these things will not continue long to be enveloped in darkness One point re mains to which we must beg to draw the public attention, and regarding which it is essential that Mr. VERNON SMITH should act immediately. The point we allude to is the retaining upon our legal tribunals—at fees which are said to be enormous—the son of the India-house Secretary in every India-house contest with its Indian subjects. Mr. VERNON SMITH must be quite ae are of the influence of the Secretary, and that virtually it is perhaps even more by his fiat than by the will of the Directors that such litigation must in most cases take place. It is undesirable, therefore, in the highest degree, that the spectacle should be exhibited (particularly in cases without a leg to stand on) of the father driv ing the people of India into ruinous struggles in the law courts here, while the son is making his fortune by fees to contest their claims, paid out of their and their native fellow-tax payers' pockets. If these are to be forced by the India-house into such contests, the least that can be done is to see that neither the Directors, nor their Secretary, nor their rela tions or connections, shall in any way profit by the liti ' ation. Under the system we are commenting on the India-house officials have a positive interest in doing injustice to their native subjects. We do not mean to say that they have been actuated by such feelings in these recent transactions, for we will admit that the emplo)ment of a son in such cases Is at first sight very natural. Still the ten dency of the system is that which we have de picted ; the continuance of it must in the long run he fatal to all confidence in the India house, and it should and must be at once abandoned. IMPRACTICAB ILITY OF "ANTI- MAYNOOTH ISM." THE evil of exciting dissension in Ireland at the present time is so great that we feel 'ldled upon to express our hope that no rash movements, under the pretence of advancing pure religion, will be sanctioned by Protestant politicians. Experience has shown that, as religious discord has ceased, the gentry of Ireland has regained its proper position in political life ; and, polemical passions being allowed to slumber, there is every reason to expect that the natural aristocracy of Ireland will be enabled to resume its constitutional position, and fill those seats in Parliament from which, for many years, it has been un fairly excluded. But if, unhappily, an anti- Nlaynooth crusade should be undertaken, we may bid farewell to any hopes of social her mony in Ireland. Let us look at the facts fairly, and let us calculate what would be the certain results of a great Protestant agitation got up for the purpose of destroying an edu cational institution established by Mr. Prrr, and supported by Lord ELDON and Mr. PERCITAL. Our ears would be stunned at once with a Radical cry (assisted by the Whigs) for abolishing or " appropriating " the funds of the Irish Church. On that one question Whigs, Liberals, Dissenters, Voluntaries, Seotch Presbyterians, Nonconformists, would raise a rancorous din, to the no small glee of those worthy gentlemen. Mr. 600nErrovon HATTER and Mr .1. COPPOCK. Our Parliamen tary politics would be taken back to the point at which they stood in 1838. Other " houses" SA' besides that of " Lichfield" would easily be found for the purpose .of " oontpacts and Lord GRANVILLE, or any other complaisant courtier, would (as SYDNEY SMITH said of Lold MELBOURNE) be " a decent head for the Cabi net." Amongst other disadvantages in the adoption of " Maynooth" for a political move ment, would be the result of making Parlia mentary parties turn upon a mere Irish topic. We say at once that our conceptions of the empire—our sense of Parliamentary dignity— make us instinctively recoil from a plan of action which would make Ireland the motive power in our imperial system. Such a course of conduct would result, not in Anglicising Ireland, but in Hibernicising England. Agita tors, violent speeches, Celtic clatter, Milesian rhapsodies, endless altercations, would become the staple of our discussions. Is that desira ble? Is it politic, or profound, or states manlike ? Again, we must ask where are the Conserva tive statesmen to be found who could form a Cabinet agreed upon taking away Maynooth? Is it at all likely that any such Cabinet could be formed ? If not, to what object are our Parliamentary " impractibles " tending? Do they really believe that in the reign of Queen VICTORIA, statesmen with capacity for ruling a variously formed empire could under take to reverse a policy stamped with the positive approbation of PITT, CASTLEREAGH, WELLINGTON, WELLESLEY, and CANNING, and with the Ministerial support of PERCIVAL, ELDON, and other anti-Catholic statesmen? None but dreamers could answer that ques tion affirmatively. We say, emphatically, that " Maynooth" is at once too Irish and too provincial a subject to be adopted as a Protestant test. There are many things in Ireland which cannot be regu lated by an exact application of our English standard. Mr. Pirr, in his great speech on the "Union," said the imperial junction of England, Scotland, and Ireland should pre sent a family likeness, with common resem blance, and special diversity in each. He illustrated his meaning with the happy quo tation:— Facies non omnibus una, Nee diverse tamen, quails decet ease sororum. We must not be too intolerant of some provin cial differences arising out of the peculiar cir cumstances of the sister nations. Sir WALTER Scorr declined being the biographer of Lord CASTLEREAGH, because (amongst other reasons) in he was " unacquainted with the di f f i cult d " intricate questions arising out of the io ea "of Ireland." We fear that those who iFit ld now take a retrograde course, and plunge'us into " Nlaynooth " and "anti-Irish Church " agitation, are in the same state of ignorance as Sir WALTER Scorr described himself, though they have more confidence in their own Judg ment than, that eminent person. The Globe of last night states that the proroga tion of Parliament will take place on Thipalm' the 24th inst. :,•1?• , t- The entry of the Guards into London has not yet been appointed. Until her Majesty fix the day the brigade will remain at Aldershott. Admiral Lord Lyons passed throngh Parisi on Thursday on his way to the Crimea. The King of Sweden bas, through the Minister for Foreign Affairs, sent in his adhesion ou the part of Sweden and Norway to the principles' led down by the powers who signed the treaty Fof Paris respecting the rights of neutrals in time of War. MALDON.—Tbe death of Mr. Lennard bas brought forward, in addition to Mr. Mecbi and Mr. 41'Enteer, another Liberal candidate, Mr. Sutton We tern. fp, Social reform, no church rates, extension of the suf rage, and the advancement of education are the principal points to which Mr. Western pledges himself. FROMT.—The death of HA Earl of Cork and Orrery, and the consequent elevation 'Viscount Dungarvan to the peerage, cr'atea vacancy in the representation. The health of tsti e earl had for some time past been so precarious that measures were taken before hi death by the political parties in the town to be prepared for the election, which appeared to be inevitable. Major Boyle, nepli , w of Colonel the Hon. Robert Edward Boyle, and Mr. Donald Nicol, ex-Sheriff of London, and tailor, will contest the vacant seat. t -. method for olltaining redress. We all know 1 how many there are among ourselves who