The Press.
London, England, 1857-04-11 00:00:00

APRIL 11,1857•

poetry, of which he has about as much appreciation
as the aforesaid animal of a rose-garden. The
review of the " Daisy Chain " is a mach better piece
Of criticism, and " The Political Relations of Great
Britain and India with Persia" useful and op-
portune.
The Sanitary Review is of too purely a medical
character to justify a detailed notice in our columns.
Suffice it to say that many of the most urgent sub-
jects of the day, such as drainage, burials, colliery
diseases, diseased animal food, ctc., are treated in its
pages, which, though less heard of by the public at
large than those of its more popular contemporaries,
are quietly effecting an amount of good which de-
serves our warmest thanks.
The National Magazine progresses favourably in
the path it has adopted. All the stories are interest-
ing, all the essays are well written, and all the more
practical articles full of good sense and information.
Some of the best articles in the April number are,
" A French Lady of the Olden Times," " How Mr.
Lambkin was Garotted," "Sir Bulwer Lytton," and
" Deaf and Dumb Courtship."
The Monthly Review is not so good as usual;
though, in saying this much, we should add that we
have not yet had time to read it through. "Mr.
Thuckeray on Charity " is a violent onslaught on the
popular novelist which we cannot entirely approve.
The Commercial Travellers' Magazine still con-
tinues its sprightly and feline tone. It betrays a
fatal familiarity with not only the dark but the muddy
side of London life. We were in hopes that this
would wear off; but though the articles are unde-
niably amusing, they seem likely to continue in one
groove. " What is bred in the bone," &e.
The London University Magazine maintains that
solemnity and sobriety which its academic origin
demands. Joking apart, however, this number is
really a good one. The paper on bells, and " Our
Treatment of the Insane," are both uncommonly
good. The literary articles on essayists and the
Poet Tennyson are feeble, but elegant and pleasant,
if not instructive, " copy."
The second number of Paved with Gold, if pos-
sible, surpasses the first. Mr. Mayhew's thorough
knowledge of the life he undertakes to delineate, and
the attractive style with which nature has endowed
him, are not likely to be surpassed by any lite•.rary
philanthropist. We shall not here examine the
story minutely, trusting that we may live to see it
finished, and be enabled to do ourselves the pleasure
of giving it a lengthy review.
The illustrated edition of Mr. Russell's Letters
wiiich Mr. Routledge is bringing out is nicely got
up, and calculated to serve as a good drawing•room
edition of this famous correspondence.

Mentoires du Due de Saint Simeon. Paris : Hachette.
No writer of memoirs is so much and so deservedly
esteemed in France as time Duke de Saint Simon,
and none is so widely known in Europe ; yet, strange
to say, hitherto no complete and authentic edition of
his writings has been given to the world, all the
editions that have hitherto appeared under his name
being merely fragmentary, or scandalously incorrect,
or unauthorised. 'rile reason why this has been so
is that successive Governments in France, in whose
possession the memoirs were until the last twenty-
five years or so, feared that the complete publication
of the astounding revelations they contain about the
Coerts of Louis XIV. and Louis XV., about the
political affairs of Europe, and about potentates,
princes, and statesmen of the time of those sove-
reigns, would be injurious to the public interests.
The present Duke de Saint Simon, to wham the
memoirs were given when the Government, after
repeated refusals, consented to resign them, also
hesitated for some time to let them be published
complete; but he lately consented to such a publi-
cation, and it is now taking place under the auspices
of Messrs. Hachette, the eminent Paris publishers
These gentlemen are bringing out not fewer than
three separate editions of the work—one limited to
a hundred copias, in the m-ist costly style of the
publisher's art: the second printed on beautiful
paper in twenty volumes; and a third, of smaller
form and closer typo, in twelve volumes. The last
is a miracle of cheapness, the cost of the whole
twelve volumes being under H. English money. Thus
far only five volumes have appeared, but the re-
mainder will be brought out with all due despatch.
The work is carefully collated with the original
manuscript. Great thanks are due to the Duke de
Saint Simon for having allowed so inestimable an
addition to the historical literature of France and
Europe to be produced, after the lapse of a century,
in all its integrity ; and thanks are due to Messrs.
Hachette for having offered it for sale at a price
which places it within the reach of every reader.

PUBLICATIONS RECEIVED.—Apiar. 9.
BOOKS.

The Confidence• Man : his Masquerade. Herman Melville.

Psyche, and Other Poems. James Craice.

Longmans.
David Bryce

THE PRESS.

Lectures on the British Poets. Henry Reed. Two Vols.

Triibner and Co.
Divorce in 18.57. The Talbot Case. Ward and Lock.
The Two „Convicts. Frederick Uerstaecker.
Routledge.
Jacqueline of Holland. Hodgson.
The Philosophy of the Plays of ShakApeare Unfolded. Delia
Bacon. Crrootnbriilv.

The German Language. Fidel: Lebahn.
Sitnpkin and Marshall.
Key to Ditto. Ditto.
The Letters of Horace Walpole, Earl of Orford. Peter Gun.
ningham. Bentley.
A Concise History of the English Constitution. E. Hawley,
Esq. Longtnans.
The Sight Side of London. J. Ewing Riehie.
NV. Twee die.

LORD CLARENDON v. THE PUBLIC PRESS.
TO TILE EDITOR OF " THE PRESS."
Sir,—There is something so fair and candid
about your review of "The Press and the Public
Service " that I break through a rule which authors
are sensible enough to observe very generally, and
venture to reply to the few objections you have
raised against the principle put forth iii that little
book. 1 do so in the confidence that you can only
be actuated by the same desire as myself w see this
troublesome question set permanently at rest. I
trust therefore that we shall discuss the secondary
points on which we seem to differ with courtesy and
good temper. The subject is one which deeply con •
cerns the honour, the happiness, and the interests of
many. It has become necessary for their sakes to
ascertain whether a supposed connection with the
press shall be henceforth an honourable distinction
of which a gentleman may be proud, or a brand ot•
disgrace which shall ruin him for ever. I feel the
responsibility too great to deal with so grave a matter
single•handed. lam conscious that I have not
treated it so well as it might have been treated ; but
it is obvious that it requires discussion : and I can
imagine no part of the duties of an editor more
grateful than to throw open the columns of his
paper for the free anti open ventilation, the fair and
equitable settlement of such a question. For he
may be thus enabled to assure many worthy persons
of the precise nature of their rights and explain to
them their duties.
Now, to take the objections as they arise in your
review, permit me to repeat. that I have explicitly
stated no official could be permitted to betray con-
fidence reposed in him, or in the slightest degree to
make use of official information for his private pur-
poses. The rules which guide the intercourse of
gentlemen would render such conduct infamous.
But I think you will agree with me that Sir Robert
Peel's lecture on Russia, and Sir James Graham's
speech at Carlisle, render the preservation of official
mystery very difficult. lam quite willing to believe
that, despite the experience of Swift, there may be
many cases in which secrecy should be preserved. I
merely suggest that it is expedient to show how far
it can be preserved, and how far its preservation is
necessary to the cause of constitutional government.
I do not pretend to lay down the law ; I simply ask
in justice to many that it may be declared and
rendered equal.
It has been said that Messrs. Rothschild and
Messrs. Coutts preserve secrecy in their transactions,
and therefore Government must do the same. This
is a fallacy. Messrs. Rothschild and Messrs. Coutts
carry on their business at their own risk and peril :
if they act unwisely they must pay the penalty. They
may conduct their business on any princip!es they
please, because if the public is dissatisfied with them
it can go elsewhere. 'this is not the case with Go-
vernment: secrecy may enable them to do much harm
in perfect security to themselves ; it may be their only
defence against a patriotic opposition. The errors
of a Ministry injure the country which they rule ; and
misgovernment such as may ruin the nation may be
a fruitful source of profit to a Cabinet of jobbers.
Their case is by no means similar to that of Messrs.
Rothschild and Messrs Coutts. I grant that if a
subordinate were to write strictures upon the conduct
of his superiors under his own signature he would
undoubtedly act in an indelicate and offensive manner.
The bead of his department might feel bound to take
notice of such writings; but even then in strict
justice he must feel equally bound to examine the
case fairly and to decide according to its merits.
If the conduct of any public man, high or low,
has been really infamous or contemptible, it is diffi-
cult to understand how the public service can be
brought into disrepute by his errors being properly
described. " Attack us and you attack the Govern-
ment" is nothing but the old Tadpole and Taper
artifice exposed by Bentham. It is not the public
service which suffers when Tadpole and Taper are
brought to book ; it is Tadpole and Taper.
If, however, it be the duty of a head of a depart-
ment to make some effort to discover an anonymous

867

writer, he would keep his department in a constant
state of alarm and disquietude. He would also pro-
vide a great deal of unnecessary and undignified
work for himself. The recent decision, moreover, of
his Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge and
Lord Panmure in refusing to do so, in the case of
"Major Caithorpe, would at once appear a personal
insult towards Lord Cardigan, and an insult of the
most unwarrantable nature ; for, in no department
of the public service would it be more necessary to
observe such a rule, if it existed, than in the army.
If it be here objected, however, that this is a
Foreign-office case, it must not be forgotten that we
are for the moment living under the Government of
Lord Palmerston, who long held the seals of the
Foreign-office. Now, on what principle are gentle-
men in the emplcyment of the Foreign-office to
regulate their behaviour, if not on the publicly•
avowed doctrines of a Minister who was their chief
for a longer period than any living statesman, and
who is actually head of the Government under which
they serve? The example of the present Premier is
plain and recent; for, in a letter addressed to the
Earl of Malmesbury on the Vali of March, Lord
Palmerston asserts his opinion with great distinct-
ness. "I have used," says he, a right which Ido
not deem myself deprived of by my official position
to express publicly iny opinion of the conduct of
public men."
Thus, Lord Clarendon stands alone in this matter.
He is at variance with the declared sentiments of
his own superior; with those of his colleague, Lord
l'anmure ; and with those of a prince of the blood
in command of the army.
It may be difficult to foresee the precise view that
any future Government may take p 1 this question if
it be not now decided ; but Lord Clarendon's
despatch has been submitted to two ex-Cabinet
Ministers—one a Conservative and the other a Whir.
Both entirely disapproved of it. The words of that
despatch will be found literally transcribed on the
first page of the preface of the book under review.
It was sent to the publisher's by a gentleman en-
tirely unknown to them, as an excuse for the
extraordinary demand of an affidavit to save him
from ruin.

With regard to this particular case, however, the
facts could not in any way affect the real question at
issue. For, the Foreign Secretary would scarcely
tell us that he made a particular regulation for a
particular man, and that if permitted to break
through law and usage in on case he would never
do so again. It is rumoured, truly or otherwise,
that Lord Clarendon was led into error by a man
who could hardly have appeared in such a matter
with more peculiar ill grace; indeed, by a nephew of
George Canning, who ungratefully forgot that l►e
owed his rank, his emoloyment, and everything
about him to the most scurrilous anonymous writer
of his generation.
I have altogether failed to make myself clearly
understood if I have appeared to wisert the moral
right of writers positively to deny the authorship of
publications which they are unwilling to own. No
reasoning can make a lie defensible. No possible
circumstance can be conceived in which a gentleman
could be induced to state an untruth. But, it
appears to me that the liberty and utility of the
higheriportiou of the press certainly does rest very
much on the right of anonymons writing, and it
notoriously numbets officials among its contributors.
I have, tierefore, urged that an anonymous writer
cannot be oblied to avow himself when ques-
tioned; that he may be silent; that when con-
scientiously in the right he may treat any inquiry
with irony or a smile as impertinent, end that the
onus probandi should rest with his accusers. Any
person who fancies himself aggrieved has a full and
sufficient remedy by law ; why should he lay claim to
another? Offences punishable by law may be safely
left to the law.

In these views I am highly gratified t perceive
you agree with me. For, you say that there can be
no difference of opinion on the question that public
servants may express their sentiments freely. If we
are correct in this opinion, therefore, we may be
permitted to reverse your former proposition and
say: What right has any Minister to conduct him-
self in such a manner as to render a direct lie,
which no gentleman will litter, essential to the safety
oriuterest of persons under his authority who have
properly fulfilled their duties? A writer in such a
case would not have placed himself in a false posi-
tion—it would be the Minister. Again : Would
secret information confidentially communicated by
unknown accusers ashamed to appear before the
man whom they sought to injure be wifficient to
support an indictment in a criminal court? Such
accusers must be false, false either to the Govern-
ment or to the man who has trusted them—bars or
traitors. If their evidence would not support such
an indictment, Lori Clarendon's last excuse is
invalid ; and in this case also we agree that he must
be in error.

To make the present argument of any use what-
ever for the future guidance of official men, we mit