The Press.
London, England, 1857-01-31 00:00:00

THE WEEK.

THE details of the capture of Bushire show that our Indian troops
have behaved with their accustomed gallantry. We have to lament
the death of two distinguished officers, Colonels STOPFORD and MALET,
though the total loss was slight compared with the importance of the
success achieved. It is worthy of note, as indicating the real object
of the expedition, that the first thing done upon entering Bushire was
to proclaim it British territory ! Is Bushire to be regarded as a
simple equivalent for Herat, or as a " material guarantee" for the
future? The frank speech of the Emperor of the FRENCH last Sunday
to FEROIIK KHAN indicates that his Majesty's desire for an arrange-
ment of our differences with Persia has not been diminished by the
tone which the English Administration has thought proper to adopt.
The report in the Ministerial papers of the submission of the SHAH,
though not improbable in itself, requires confirmation.
The continuance of the war in China is a matter of general regret.
The destruction of the factories by the Chinese will entail upon
Canton, measures of severe retaliation. As it is dear that the
Imperial Commissioner and Sir JOHN BOWRING can never come to
terms, might not a special Envoy sent from this country so arrange
matters as to obtain for us the full benefits of past treaties, and the
advantages of a general reconsideration of our relations with the
Chinese Government?

The selection of the French capital for the meeting of the
Neufchatel Congress is satisfactory. Paris has been chosen, and the
choice exhibits in a remarkable light the peculiar policy of Lord
PALMERSTON'S Government, which in foreign affairs takes up an
untenable position, raises difficulties, and makes an irresolute show of
opposition only to give way when the question becomes more serious
and the credit of the country has been in some degree compromised.
The liberal amnesty granted by the Emperor FRANCIS JOSEPH, and
the remission of two millions of taxation, is acknowledged by all
Italians to be a step in the right direction towards the conciliation of
his Lomhardo•Venetian subjects. The violent hostility displayed
by the Sardinian press towards the Emperor on this occasion
appears ungracious. We shall probably soon hear that the good
offices of the English Government will be required to bring about
a better understanding between the Cabinets of Turin and Vienna.

We observe that the accuracy of our report of the Prince de
LIONE'6 observations on Sir ROBERT PEEL has been called in question
by some of the Belgian journals. We feel it due to our Brussels
correspondent to state that we have no doubt whatever of the literal
accuracy of the version published in our journal of last week ; and we
are satisfied that this must be the conviction of every member of the
deputation present. Into the reasons which led to the publication of
a modified version of the Prince de LIGNE'B reply it is not our wish to
enter. We respect the political influences which prevail at Brussels ;
and if the late Secretary of Legation to the complimentary
mission to the Russian Court, and present Lord of the
Admiralty, can derive consolation from believing that the Prince
DE LIONE only said of his language that lit " was less worthy of a
gentleman than of a drunken pothouse orator," far be it from us to
diminish his satisfaction by insisting on the harsher expressions that
were really used. In justice to ourselves, however, we may say, that
if our report was in any respect imperfect, it was on the side of sup-
pression.

The answer given by Sir JOHN M'NEILL and Colonel TULLOCH to
the address lately presented to them by the Liverpool Chamber of
Commerce indicates a resolution to stand by all and every of their
Ftatements in disparagement of certain officials employed in the
Crimea during the late war. In our opinion they do not improve their
position by assuming this dogged attitude. Sir RICHARD AIREY's
" Addresses " and the letters of the Staff Officer have now opened the
eyes of the public. They begin to see there are two sides to this
question as well as to every other, and the influence which these
publications have produced may be understood from the tone adopted
on the subject by many of our leading periodicals. The Quarterly
Review, the New Quarterly, Frater's Magazine, and the Dublin University
Magazine all adopt substantially the same view :—That neither the
Commissioners nor Mr. RUSSELL were free from certain human in.
firmities ; that they took a great deal from hearsay, and were not too
particular about the character of their witnesses. All this is excusable
enough under the circumstances in which they were placed. But
what cannot fail to prejudice their case in the eyes of all impartial
persons is, the obstinacy with which they ignore the results of subse-
quent explanation, and cling to errors about as well grounded as ",Tack
and the Beanstalk," or the " History of Puss in Boots." Sir JOHN
MNEILL talks of the boundless resources of this country, and the
abundant provision which the Turkish provinces were capable of
Hfrording, and asks exultingly who can believe it was impossible to
p ovide food and shelter for an army of 20,000 or 30,000 men ? But
.sir JOHN conveniently forgets that it took from four to six months in
getting out the goods that were required from this country ; and that
whatever amount of provisions might have existed in the Crimea—and
nobody ever alleged that there was a scarcity —were rendered
unavailable from want of transport. For getting the army into a
it suffered so greatly from these two causes some-
to blame ; but it was not Lord RAGLAN) it was not
it was not Mr. FILDEK.

r.

nosition in which
b is very likely
Sir R. AIREY, and i
1:,