The Press.
London, England, 1856-07-26 00:00:00

THE WEEK.

THE coup d'itat in Spain seems thus far to have been completely suc-
cessful. The Government expected resistance, and matured measures
for crushing it the instant it broke forth. In Madrid, the fighting must
have been very severe, from the losses sustained by the troops. At
Barcelona, the insurgents, after three days' fighting, gave way, and
fled into the open country, where they were pursued by the cavalry
and sabred. A considerable force was being concentrated against
Saragossa ; and as the revolt has been suppressed in other places, and
ESPARTERO is reported to be still in Madrid under surveillance
of the Government, it is not unlikely that the Captain-General of
Arragon may make his submission. The conduct of the French
Emperor excites much speculation. An army of observation has been
formed on the Spanish frontier, and the belief is current in Paris that
the duty will not be confined to simple observation should affairs in
Spain take a turn adverse to the general tranquillity of Europe.

An important question was raised last night by the speech of Mr.
DISZAKLI. To what cause are the legislative failures of the session to
be attributed ? Of the measures introduced by the Government, only
two of any importance have been carried; and one of those was
of so exceptional a character as to be rather a private than a
public bill. The Right Honourable Member for Bucks showed that
the causes usually alleged for this Legislative failure were insufficient
to account for it. The true explanation was to be found in the
Ministry being unable to command the confidence of the House. It
represented no principle, and could therefore claim the allegiance of
no party. As the natural result it was suffered only to get
through routine business. While this political chaos subsists, all
measures of practical improvement must of necessity be delayed.
The orator sketched out the true remedy for the evil, and gave an
exposition of Conservative principles which will sink deeply into
the mind of the nation. The speech was most remarkable for the
calm dignity of its tone, for its statesmanlike principles and practical
truths.

Two cases of hardship in relation to Lord PANDIIIRE'S administra-
tion of the War-office are at present before the public. Ths first
relates to army surgeons. When in January, 1855, the Government
determined to establish a military hospital at Smyrna, a proposition
to the medical profession was mode that a year's service should be re-
warded with six months' additional pay as a gratuity. Before
those who accepted this offer had left the country for Smyrna,
more liberal terms were proposed. Lord PANMURE wrote that,
to meet the case of private practitioners, the salary should be
continued for a year after the termination of engagement. In the
same letter his Lordship said the terms should be the same as those
of the Smyrna Hospital, and as the senior medical officers of this
hospital had given up private practice to proceed to the East, they in-
ferred that they should have a claim to this more ample remunera-
tion. After nine months the Smyrna Hospital was broken up, and the
services of the medical men, who offered to complete the term of
their engagement wherever the Government thought proper to employ
them, declined. Because the year's service, through no fault of their
own, was not completed, they are refused the six months' pay on
which they had relied, while surgeons who went out later to Scutari,
and are unable to plead the loss of private practice, will re-
ceive a full year's gratuity ! The justice of the case would
surely be better met by au equitable consideration of such claims
than an obstinate adherence to the strict letter of the
original engagement. The second case relates to the treatment
of the Militia captains. Up to the commencement of the present
war, captains in the militia were required to possess a property quali-
fication of 2001. year. On that occasion the Act of Parliament was

repealed, and these officers placed on the same footing as subalterns.
Now the regiments are disembodied, the Government, while granting
a certain gratuity of so many months' pay to the subalterns of the
Militia, refuse any compensation to the captains on the ground of
their "property qualification." The condition which Government
itself abolished is brought forward as a plea fcr refusing a just claim.
In former times a lieutenant in the Militia was required to possess a
property qualification. Why, therefore, does not Lord PALMERSTON
refuse him his gratuity on the same ground? The same reason would
hold good in the ono case as in the other. But Lord PANMURE has too
often shown that his administration is independent of reason for his
conduct on the present occasion to excite much surprise.

Mr. ROEBUCK'S motion for a censure on the conduct of the Under-
Secretary for War, though negatived by a considerable majority, very
clearly established the one simple fact on which the motion was based
e., that a secret inquiry had been instituted into General BEATSON'S
conduct upon anonymous information. Mr. PEEL contended that
although he did not know from what source the accusation emanated,
General VIVIAN, his informant, did. But is this the system on which a
Minister is to conduct the business of his department? Is it on this
sort of second-hand evidence that charges are to be entertained against
& officer involving his reputation and even his life? Mr. PEEL and
the War Minister were under the most imperative obligations to ascer-
tain w'- '-• "hat degree of credit was to be attached to the Wormer

kh,.