The Press.
London, England, 1858-03-06 00:00:00

Nil- zce
THE PRESS, MARCH 6, 1858.\

to his own dignity, and to the rank of

Houses of Parliament.

We do not say that the coarseness of Lord
PALMERSTON'S. demeanour was the chief cause
of his fall from power, but it greatly aided that
event. His deportment was universally flt
to be personalty offensive, and what added to
its impropriety itas the fact of his being rude
withottt provocation. " Manners," says BURKS,
" ate a more ihipdr4lll3l3 than laws, and upos
" thein in a Otat dettiee the laws depehd.
" Manners corrupt tit purify, exalt or debase,
" barbarise or retirk us by a steady insensible
" operation like that of the air we breathe in."
Out aristocracy Mid out English sneinty has
always been distinguished for a system of
manners, in which case and self-respect, with
consideration fur others, were united ; and
without proper courtesy it would be impos-
sible to carry on the business of Parliament.
Lord PALWASTON violated the traditions of
Parliament, while his talents were not so
great as to atone for his faults; and a just
lesson was given to the world by the ease
with which the vaunting Viscount %las proved
to he conquerable even in the midst of his
majority.

'-;.NAk\NN

it became the duty of Lord CAMP.
BELL to act upon that decision it
is a wise provision of the Constitution
which places the liberty and the character of
Englishmen not in the hands of a paid func-
tionary of the Ciown, but of men who aro
indeOendpnt and their equals. The Crown May
pardon ; thejudge bitty ndt teverse : it is his mi.
queationable privi d e td aubmit to the consti-
tional adHsers et t gribn any reasons which
may inditiirb him to from the decision of the
jury, tint he should leave pardon to the source
whence alone it can constitutionally flow. We
do not desire to criticise with severity the
measure of punishment which was inflicted on
the other defendants, for in their case it was
at least substantial. The discretion which a
judge has to exercise is of a delicate and
difficult character. The leniency, perhaps
excessive, even in respect of an offence novel
to the criminal courts, will, the public may be well
assured, not a second time be repeated. Punish-
ment has fallen at last upon frauds which
have too long escaped the vengeance of the
law; and if the first blow fails of its purpose,
the second will only fall with accumulated force.
This case is of further importance as being
calculated to reassure those who may have
been inclined to doubt the sufficiency of the
law to deal with complicated cases of dis-
honesty arising out of the commercial system
of the present day. The law of England
being originally framed in a comprehensive
spirit, and with a view not to any particular
state of society, but to the moral exigencies of
the State at all times and under all circum-
stances, displays an elasticity which enables
it to cope with the most complex as with the
most simple forms of injustice and duplicity.
And it will give additional satisfaction to all
who rejoice in the termination of this case, to
know that it has not been accomplished by
any strained interpretation of the law, or by
any special enactment made to meet the cir•
cumstances, bat by a simple and deliberate
application of a principle familiar to the spirit
of our jurisprudence long before trading cor-
porations and directorial boards had become
recognised agencies in the commercial world.