The Press.
London, England, 1855-06-16 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

SATURDAY,

Last night Mr. LAYARD'S long•suspended motion on the
subject of Administration was brought forward and discussed for
several hours. The member for Aylesbury was vehement, as usual, in
hs denunciations of official incapacity, of Ministerial favoritism, and
the " aristocratic element." Sir STAFFORD NORTHCOTE followed up the
subject, only showing a too copious acquaintance with instances and
details, but refusing nevertheless to accept Mr. LAYARD'S suggested
remedies, which he lather pooh-poohed as being vague and unprac--
deal. Sir E. B. LYTTON afterwards moved his amendment in a brilliant
and most telling speech, to which the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
whose address was so dull and clumsy that the House maintained a
nonchalant buzz of conversation while he was speaking, responded by
adopting the alternative presented. Mr LAYARD'S resolution, Sir G. C.
LEWIS declared, contained a vote of censure, and if affirmed would
have led to an immediate resignation of the Goverment. Ministers
were evidently too glad to accept the shield held out for them by the
member for Linconshire. The debate was subsequently adjourned to
Monday next.

Prince ALBERT was not happy in his speech at the Trinity 83i7.
on Saturday last. His allusion to the " morbid exaggerations " of
the press suggests the reflection that he has not yet forgotten or for-
given the public discussions which cut down his annuity some 20,000 1.
a year. His German nature will not allow him to understand Englis h
liberty of speech ; he cannot discern the advantages of a free press,
and perhaps would prefer a censorship to restrain its license. That
effervescence of public opinion which foams and sparkles pleasantly
to the eye of a masculine statesman he regards as poison bubbling in
a Venetian glass. It is to be regretted that on a public occasion his
Royal Highness should have given expression to sentiments which indi-
cate something like distrust of public intelligence, and falls into the
great error of identifying the existence of a Ministry with the welfare
of the Crown and the good of the nation. We are afraid it will be
asked whether the late Ministry was really so deserving of confidence
as from this speech might be inferred. We must take the liberty of
hinting that, whatever may be the faults of the press, they are not
likely to be corrected by his Royal Highness's admonition, however
well intended it might be.

During the week Parliament has been engaged upon various
bills. On Monday Sir JOHN PARINOTON, in reply to Mr. HENLEY, upon
the adjourned debate on the Education Bill (No. 2), entered into a
clear statement of the state of education in this country, and reviewed
the various schemes which from time to time have been proposed.
The debate was adjourned till Monday week. On Tueaiay the
Government were defeated on the Decimal Coinage Bill, and on
Thursday Lord JOHN RUSSELL'S "Victoria Constitution" was read a
second time, in spite of the strenuous resistance of Mr LowE.

An extremely curious case was mooted by Lord DERBY in the
House of Peers on Monday. The point is raised as to whether the
patent for the new Baron of " Fermoy" in the Irish Peerage is not ab-
solutely void. By the " Act of Union" three Irish Peerages must
become extinct before the Crown can create a new Irish Peer. The
provision was introduced in order to guard the Irish nobility against
being swamped by profuse creations. According to Lord DERBY'S
singularly lucid statement only two Irish Peerages have recently be-
come vacant, but the Ministers have tried back upon the Earldom of
Montrath, which became vacant in 1802, and which they allege was
never counted before by the Herald's Office, This seems a singular
fact (if true), when we know that the Irish Commoners are keenly
alive to the vacancies in the Peerage. The whole matter is to be
brought under the Committee of Privileges. On the polical propriety
of making Mr. BURKE ROCHE a peer Lord DERBY did not dwell at any
length.

The Administrative Reformers boast so much of the competency of
mercantile men to manage the affairs of State, that of course we may
assume they are perfectly capable of managing their own. As a class,
however, some ugly cases have turned up lately, and if report speaks
truly we shall in a few days have as flagrant a case made public as has
been exposed for some years. We allude to Messrs. STRAHAN, PAUL,
and Co., the bankers, who stopped payment on Monday last. The city
article in the Times of yesterday states that revelations have been
made which place this case "as oue of the worst on record." Their
liabilities, which they represented to be about 800,0001., is more likely
to reach double that amount, and this enormous deficiency is perfectly
at variance with the causes which they offer for their failure, so much
so that, continues the writer " there is every reason to fear that for a
" long period the house has been existing upon the property of those
" who confided in them," so that these gentlemen for the last year or
two have been grossly violating every principle, not only of honour,
but of commercial and banking laws, in a manner scarcely to be
credited of the merest tyro in business.

The late case of DAVIDSON and GORDON is another equally flagrant
example, and how many more could not be added to the list of late
years ? With every respect for the talents and honour of the British
commercial class, we beg to demur to their assertion that they could,
transact the public business of the State in so faultless a manner. In
the management of their own affairs, they give us none so great a proof
of discretion and care.

Railway and other companies do cook accounts to make
things pleasant, and even some associations, according to Colonel
FREESTINO, will descend so low in the art of cookery, as to embellish
their bill of fare with a list of absent and never intending•to.bapresent
honourable bietnberti