The Press.
London, England, 1856-11-08 00:00:00

THE WEEK.

THE probability of a coolness! between the Governments of
England and France has this week engaged the public mind in both
countries. An article in the Constitutionnel of the sth, supposed to
reflect the sentiments of the French Cabinet gave rise to some appre-
hension that the points, of difference between the two Courts were
serious and growing ; but that apprehension has been partially dis-
pelled by a calm and sagicious paragraph in the Moniteur. It is
toted in another part of our present issue. Statesmanlike, and in
most respects assuring, as this paragraph is, our political and com-
mercial classes still note that it admits a difference of opinion on one
point, described as little material, and that it notices also a disagree-
ment, or at least an unsettled opinion, as to the manner in which that
immaterial point shall be decided, whether by previous agreement or
by another European Congress. The article in the Moniteur must be
accepted as an unequivocal proof of the desire of his Majesty the
Emperor to maintain in full force the English alliance. The presence
of M. DE PERSIGNY at Compeigne, as the guest of his Majesty, may
probably have some connection with the appearance of this concilia-
tory article in the official journal.
The admitted fact that some difference of opinion between the two
Cabinets dues exist, naturally excites speculation as to the nature and
extent of this difference. It is now no secret, and it does not date
from yesterday.
Since the Treaty of Paris, more than six months back, there
aopears to have been an impression on the mind of the British
Government that the statesmen of Russia were eager to seize occasion
for evading the terms of the Treaty; and the instant that the difficulty
arose respecting the landing of a party of unarmed Russians on
Serpents' I-le to attend to the management of, the lighthouse, the Ad-
ministration of Lord PALMERSTON viewed the act as a confirmation of
its suspicions, and, without concert with the other parties to the
Treaty of Paris, ordered a squadron to re-enter the Black Sea. The
French Government. never approved this act, believing it to be uncalled
for. The British Government persisted, and there is now reason to
suppose encouraged Austria to continue her occupation of the Danu-
bi•,n Principalities under pretence that Russia had evaded compliance
with the terms of the Treaty. The inevitable effect of these acts was,
4) complicate the whole question, and, in fact, to render the terms of
the Treaty nugatory.
The mischief having been done, the Government of France
became more anxious than ever that a European Congress should lie
summoned to settle disputed points. This proposal is resisted by
England, and probably also by Austria and Turkey, on the ground that
the terms of the Treaty do not, according to their reading, require
explanation, and that it would be useless or derogatory to call another
Congress while the decisions of the last remain unfulfilled.
In his speeches at Manchester and Salfbrd, Lord PALMERSTON was
careful to state that the peace with Russia would be lasting if she
fulfilled the Treaty she had signed with faithfulness. His Lordship's
expressions significantly hinted that there was room for doubt on that
head ; and from many such phrases as that the " duration of peace
must depend on the honour and fidelity with which its conditions
" are observed," he left it to be inferred that he considered peace at
t'ie present time to be by no means certain, and that he regarded
Russia as anxious to escape from the obligations of a Treaty most
solemnly contracted.
The real point thus raised—and that between not merely England
and Russia, but also between England and France—is, whether one
party to a treaty has a just right to insist that its own construction of
the terms of such treaty is not only the just construction, but the
sole admissible censtruction. If all parties were equally obstinate, it
does not appear how it would be possible to carry any treaty into
effect; and by refusing to submit disputed points to a European
Congress, it does appear that a Government refuses to adopt the only
means of arriving at a pacific solution which circumstances admit of
Should Russia persist in her view of the Treaty, and should France
consider that view not unreasonable, the present unsettled state of
things may be indefinitely protracted, Austria meanwhile holding the
Principalities, a British squadron cruising in the Black Sea, and
Russia retaining possession of the slip of territory in dispute. The
proposal of France that another Conference should be held, would
seem to present a satisfactory mode of solving the difficulty. It is
only when diplomatists meet together with something like friendly
feeling—with confidence in each other's honour—and with a deter-
mination to allow no minor points to interfere with a settlement of
disputed questions, that a satisfactory solution can be arrived at.
Whatever may be said of the desire of Russia to evade the terms of
the Treaty, it is plainly her interest that they should he fairly carried
out, as she must view with misgiving the continued occupation of the
incipahties by Austrian troops, and the continued presence of British
ships of war in the Black Sea.

It was to be hoped that the English press would have had the wis •
dom to drop its attacks on the Imperial Government of France, seeing
the natural irritation that those attacks had occasioned. We at e sorry
to fi pit this is not the case. A Ministerial organ last Sunday contained
a most slanderous attack on the Foreign Minister of France. The
attack was prominently copied into the Times of Monday :

FRENCH DIPLOMATISTS ♦ND THE CUR.-Our contemporary the Observer contains the
following significant piecl of intelligence, dated St. Petersburg, Nov. 1:—" Count

SATURDAY,

'Milewski, the French Foreign Minister, a Pole, is to have the Polish estates of his family
restored to him again for his services to the Czar in the late war."
The statement itself might have been true. Count WALEWSKI
might have had Polish estates restored to him by the Czar as a com•
pliment to the French Government, or as an acknowledgment that
from his position it was unlikely he could exercise an adverse in-
fluence to the Russian Administration. The slander was in the asser-
tion, which could in no case have been more than an inference, that
the estates were restored to him " for his services to the Czar in the
" late war." This was directly to accuse the Foreign Minister of
France of treason; and had such an accusation been made against any
British subjects, the journals promulgating it would undoubtedly have
been made to pay severely for their calumny. The whole story it now
appears from an announcement in the Constitutionnel is totally desti-
tute of truth. Count WALEvistu had no Polish estates, and therefore
could have none restored to him. The paragraph is from beginning to
ead a most malicious fabrication.

While on this subject we may notice a misapprehension common
in this country as to the degree of inspection exercised by the Govern-
ment of France over the press of that country. It seems to be assumed
that whatever issues from the French press is sanctioned by the
Government, or at least is not objected to by it. The censorship in
Franco has no such object. It is of the mildest form. It interferes
with the liberty of the press only so far as to prevent the publication
of matters dangerous to the existence of order. No one can glance
through the French journals without perceiving that they contain
many things which must be highly offensive to the Government ; but
such publicati ms are not interfered with except when they are posi•
tively of a dangerous and seditious character. It is the same with
publications of all kinds. In the recent works of MM. DE MONTALEM-
BERT and DE ToconEvILLE are contained many passages injurious to the
whole system of the existing Government of France ; but they were
not on that account suppressed. When, therefore, certain of the
French journals are indicated as manifesting hostile sentiments to
this country, and it is thence inferred that such sentiments are sanc-
tioned by the Government, the great mistake is committed of sup-
posing that the Government pretends to control free discussion, when
it in fact only pretends to repress sedition.

Our contemporary the Morning Post, which has been zealous in
reproving that license of the press against which the French official
organ has protested, has this week signalised itself by an abusive
tirade against Russia, which has called forth the justly indignant con-
demnation from some of the ablest and most independent journals of the
Continent. The reply of Le Nord is extremely spirited and dignified.
The assertions of the Post are contradicted in detail, and it is stated
that the action of the Russian Government has been in every parti-
cular scrupulously honourable and conciliatory. The reproof of the
Independance Beige is entitled to more respect from its independent
position :

The Morning Post has just published against Russia and its Sovereign an article of
the most violent character, and one in the writing of which the English journal has
forgotten its proper dignity and all decency. The Times itself is now distanced in the
passion of its language. In the article in question, the Russian Government is repre-
sented as acting with craft, with fraud, and corruption. As it suits its immediate pur-
poses, and fclioiving the interests of the moment, it is charged with supporting all
political parties and sects, the Royalists, Republicans, Absolutists, Legitimists, So-
cialists, &c. With respect to the terms of the Treaty of Paris, it is accused of tbe most
dishonourable and dishonest conduct, and devoid of every scruple in the way of its
ambitious views. But all those offensive observations are nothing in comparison to the
way in which the King of Naples is spoken of by the Morning Post. In a series of
articles which have lately appeared in that journal, his Neapolitan Majesty is called an
odious and imbecile monster, who is a dishonour to royalty. After such specimens of
newspaper literature, we think that the Morning Post, while defending the rights of the
press against the late remarks of the Moniteur, has very little right to lecture his con-
freres upon the propriety of keeping within the limits of fair and impartial criticism.
If it be true, as is generally assumed, that these attacks in the Post
are inspired by Lord PALMERSTON, a more certain, yet more irrespon-
sible, anode of estranging the two Governments and of keeping up an
uneasy feeling throughout Europe could not be devised.

SIR BENJAMIN HALL does not seem to hit it very well with his
model Board. In the first place, the constitution of the Board itself, as
&scribed in our columns some three weeks ago, is nct exactly the
work of a conjuror. It combines all the evils of both local and cen-
tralised administration without the benefits of either. Marylebone
has adverse interests to Shoreditch, and Islington to Southwark.
When Whitechapel meets Westminster, then comes the tug of war;
and, indeed, the whole time of the Board seems to be taken up in
choosing plans for improvements, which, if left to particular dis-
tricts, would have been accomplished in half the time when the want
was once really felt. In addition to this there is as much uncertainty
about the relative powers of the Board and the Chief Commissioner
as there was about the limits of the prerogative in the days of
CHARLES I. At present, certainly, Sir BENJAMIN has it all his own
way, and rules the roost after the fashion of a Tudor more than of a
Stuart. Things are just now very pleasant for him. If a capital
improvement is carried out, the Chief Commissioner will get
all the credit of it. Who but Sir BENJAMIN will be the talk of the
town? But in cases of failure, the unfortunate delegates will have to
bear all the blame. " Heads I win, tails you loose," is the enviable
prospect before Sir BENJAMIN in all his co-operations with the Board.
He knows his power, clad is not slow to let others know it. His tone
at the Whitehall meeting of Wednealay last was that of a monarch.
King BENJAMIN there had an interview with his faithful Commons ; or,
in vulgar words, the Chief-Conunissioner of the Board of Works

NOVEMBER 8, 1856.

rmeived a deputation from some of the metropolitan officers. if
power is given unto him over sewerage and drainage, if his veto can
still keep us surrounded by nuisances—let us first beg him of his
royal mercy not to reject the humble petitions of his slaves merely
to show them that he can do so. In the next place, we beseech him to
do something for us himself. Let him show that he can not only talk
but act, not only criticise but invent, not only threaten but strike. So
shall he avoid the scorn which follows upon great professions and
small performances, and earn the respect of the public instead of the
adulation merely of his " little Senate " in Whitehall Place.

Our readers may feel some surprise at the appearance of a series
of letters in this journal advocating a new settlement, or disturbance,
of our electoral system. With the general principle thus put forth we
have ourselves little s3mpathy. With think such organic changes are
greatly to be deprecated, and we believe that nothing could be more
disastrous to our political institutions than that parties should in
turn endeavour to mould them, so as to acquire ascendancy in the
State. Yet, should an attempt be made, no matter from what source,
to force a new Reform Bill on the country, the Conservative party will
owe it to themselves to take care that that new bill shall be framed on
such a broad and solid foundation as to render any future tampering
with the representative system, Impossible. The Conservative party
has nothing to fear from a wider expression of public sentiment; nor,
we firmly believe, will it ever suffer any future change to he carried
out for the profit of a faction. As a measure of precaution, therefore,
it may not be unadvisable to look boldly at such electoral inequalities
as our able correspondent has pointed out in his letter in this day's
PRESS.

LIEUTENANT COLONEL SIMMONS and General WILLIAMS have COM-
menced a controversy in the Times newspaper, which we regret upon
many accounts, but which it is to be hoped will have this one good
effect, of setting the public right with regard to the whole question of
the defence of Kars. Colonel SIMMONS objects to certain expressions
in a book published during the summer under the title of " Kars and
our Captivity," by Colonel LAKE, which he considers to reflect upon the
Turkish General in a manner wholly unjustifiable. It is said
that OMER PACHA, had he been " brave and resolute•" might
have marched straight upon Kars, driven away the Russians, and
relieved the garrison. How far this was possible, we shall endeavour•
to show in our next week's impression, by which time we understand
that the public will have received further information upon this subject
in the shape of a pamphlet in vindication of General KMETY. In the
meantime we shall content ourselves with repeating the words used by
us on a previous occasion when the letter of Colonel CADELL wss pub•
fished in the columns of the leading journal. " So far as military science
" is concerned, OMER PACHA has a right to be placed on, at least, an
" equality with General WILLIAMS, and why should not his condemnation
" of the attempt to hold Kars be received with as much respect as the
" strictures of the latter on the attempt to relieve it." The assertion
of General WIILLIAMS that OMER PACHA'S campaigns had been all
against unarmed rebels, is a piece of sophistry too glaring to require
exposure. Granting that eleven out of the twelve had been what
he describes, was not the one campaign of 1853 against the flower of
the Russian army—were not the victories of Citate and Oltenitza—
was not the resuscitation of the entire Turkish army—sufficient to
place him far above any rank to which General WILLIAMS'S services
entitle him. The latter is a brave man, and a patient and resolute
one, but he has yet to establish his character as a master of the art
of war.

Mr. EDWIN JAMES has published an address to the electors of
Hull, which might well be stereotyped as an expression of the Liberal
creed at the present time. He is favorable to the ballot and extension
of the suffrage, •and is determined to support Lord PALSIERSTON'S
Government, which is notoriously hostile to both. He applauds the
peace which has just been concluded, but has evidently a lingering
hope that another war will spring out of it. The address might very
well be embodied in four cries, which we recommend to the consider-
ation of all Liberal politicians—Reform Hypocrisy ! War Establish-
ments ! Foreign Complications ! and PALMERSTON for ever !

NAPLES AND PALMERSTON.
(AN IM AGINARY CONVERSATION.)
Ala—" Sally, Sally, shilly, shally."
" Pammy, Pammy, shilly shammy, Pammy, why not name a day ?"
" Hurry, Hurry ! I shan't flurry—Naphs, I shall come your way."
" Pamtny, why not make your mind up—why embitter thus my cup ?"
" Naples, I've so little mind, it isn't worth while making up."

" Pammy, Pammy, 0 ! mio speme—you have promised many a year
What you'd do for poor Italia when the right time did appear.
Listening to the loud rimbombo of your oaths to help me well,
1. have been and gone and done it--is your promise all a sell?"

"Fiddle faddle, stick that saddle on the right horse, Naples, now,
Kick out Bomba! sound la tromba! zounds ! I don't see clearly how.
Sure saltpetre I have threatened, Mr. Petre I've withdrew,
Ships I'd send—but tho' I love ye, Naples, I love office, too."

" Parnmy, Parnmy, shilly shammy, do riot mock my lingering woe,
Play me not thus shilly shally, Pammy, do nut tempt me so.
While you're smiling—me beguiling--doing double all you can,
Think, padrone—think, dear crony—is it actin!, like a man 1"

1069

LORD PLATITUDE AT MANCHESTER.
(CORRECTED REPORT.)

cannot exactly say with many aspiring orators that 1 am un-
accustomed to public speaking—•(laughter)—but I may truly declare
that I am unaccustomed to submit my oratorical wares to the dealers
of Manchester; and as I know them to be good judges of eloquence,

especially the unadorned article, I really feel a certain bashfulness—
(lttuyhter)—which, however, I will hope to surmount. lam quite
aware, Sir, that I owe my invitation upon the present occasion to the
position into which it has pleased our Sovereign to raise so humble au
individual as myself. But you may ask why, holding the views that I
do respecting the duty of a Minister, I should, as Premier, appear in
support of an educational movement. Sir, I hold that the noblest
thing in the English system is our local self-government, and
I consider that while Englishmen will govern themselves, and save
the Executive all trouble, they best fulfil their duties as citizens.
(Hear, hear.) Therefore, Sir, there is a kind of inconsistency in a
Member of the Government interfering on such an occasion. But the
world, Sir, is full of inconsistencies. I think it is the eminent poet
Shelley, of whom some of you may have heard, and whom I will
trouble you not to confound with that confounded proser Sir John
Shelley—(laughter)—who remarks that " all is mutable except muta-
bility." I don't mean a joke, and my ability, such as it is, cannot be
called mute. (Laughter.) But I think, Sir, that nothing is consistent
except inconsistency, and for that reason I feel not the least abashed
at addressing you to-day. (Cheers) Now, Sir, as we are on an educa-
tional subject, I have something to bring up—(bvighter)—l propose to
bring up for a moment the subject of war. People have said that I
am a warlike person, always wanting to fight somebody or other. No-
thing can be more untrue. I am the most peaceable person in the
world. But, as the late Mr. Sheridan, of whom some of you may have
heard, makes one of his characters observe, " There is nothing so con-
ciliating to young people as severity,"—(laughter)--and I think that
there is nothing so conducive to tranquillity as restlessness. ( Hear,
hear.) However, we are at peace now, so we need say no more on that
head. If my humble endeavours to induce Franco and Russia to
quarrel with us— in a civil way, and for the better development of the
energies and resources of those nations—my only object—are not
crowned with success, why, we must see what can be done elsewhere.
For, Sir, progressive improvement is the great thing after which we
must all strive; and nothing improves a country so much as the calling
forth all its resources. (Hear, hear.) I venture to promise some pro-
gress of this kind before many months are over, and I am happy to
inform you that the officers in the Queen's service have received hints
to be ready to join their respective regiments, and that my good
friend Sir Charles Wood has ordered fifty new gunboats, all out of
his own head. (Applause.) And now, Sir, a few words upon the sub-
ject of this institution. I think, Sir, that the doctrine that people
should be uninstructed unless they can be educated like senior
wranglers is entirely a mistake. Any information is better than none
at all; and in saying this, I may add that I practise what I preach, for
when questions are asked of me in the House (unless they are ques •
tions which I have desired should he asked) precious little information
the querists get out of your humble servant. (Laughter.) There is
poetic couplet upon the subject which I do not agree with, and I
should much prefer it bad it been written thus :

A little knowledge is a useful thing;
Like tumblers' boards, it helps you to a spring. (Loud awn.)
I could illustrate this to my hearers by anecdotes of things that have
occurred in Parliament. I couldttell you how clever men, especially
Irishmen, have got hold of a little knowledge about matters concern-
ing which it was very undesirable that the world should have any
knowledge at all, and how this has been, if not a Pierian, a political
spring for them which has tossed them up into capital berths. ( Hear,
hear.) But to take a more extended view of the subject, I would
venture to say—learn a little, and the ;ess the better. I assure my
hearers, that the science of Government is most easily practised, not
in countries where the people know nothing, and the Government is
compelled, for its own credit, to manage for them, nor where they
know everything, and the Government becames a puppet, but in
countries where the people, as in England, know just enough to think
that they understand everything, and where a little judicious conduct,
on the part of the Ministers, leaves them in power but relieves them
of responsibility. (Cheers) What is spitefully called a smattering I
greatly admire, and regard as the best education for ninety-nine hun-
dredths of our people. Smattering and chattering are the safety-valves
of our glorious Constitution ; and in Manchester, among your noble
machinery, glorious engines, splendid boilers, and unequalled a—a—
pistons, you all know the value of the safety-valve. ( Loud cheers.)
Having other speeches to make in your town, I shall not occupy your
time longer ; but before sitting down I beg to assure you, in the most
earnest manner, that nothing can give me greater pleasure than the
recollection that I have addressed such an audience as this—(Aside.
That is—that it's done.) Loud and long continued cheering followed
the Noble Lord's speech.