The Press.
London, England, 1856-08-02 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

,
I

AUGUST 2, 1856.

destruction of the frontier fortresses of Turkey. These unhappy
bickerings ought not, however, to interrupt the good understanding of
the two States, and the appointment of a Russian Ambassador to
Constantinople is a proof of a desire on the part of Russia that all
such questions should be satisfactorily arranged.

We have now before us the Essay of the Count DE MONTALEMBERT
on Pius IX. and Lord PALMERSTON. On the cutting severity with
which M. DE MONTALEMBERT herein treats our Minister's behaviour
to weak and strong States respectively, we have before commented.
But the greater part of the pamphlet is a defence of the Papal
Government against the aspersions of England and Sardinia,
coupled with a charge that the former is inclined to condemn
that Goverment unheard. We have in London, he says, no
representative of the Court of Rome, and the calumnies which
are there propagated against her have no chance of being
refuted. Are there more abuses, continues the Count, in
the Papal Administration in Naples, or in Belgium, than in the
Russian Administration of Poland, the Turkish oppression of their
Christian subjects, the licence of the press at Genoa and Turin, or
the party violence of some of the Swiss cantons? Why therefore
make such a dead set at Italy? The sum of the whole pamphlet
consists in turning Lord PALMERSTON'S back upon himself, and
showing that England is very little ahead of her neighbours in the
matter of humanity towards subject peoples. Ireland. Ceylon, and the
lonian Islands, of course, do duty as instances of this. And, having
proved to his own satisfaction that England is cruel and unjust, the
Count seems to consider that his work is done, and that there is no
harm in Rome being so too. We are afraid this style of argument will
not find general acceptation.

The old story of COLUMBUS and his egg seems to have been for-
gotten by late correspondents from the Crimea or the Baltic. On all
sides we hear nothing but what we " might " have done in the last two
years. Not only might Sebastopol have been taken with a rush after
the battle of the Alma in '54, but the whole Russian army of 70,000 men,
and the illustrious Prince GORTSCHAKOFF into the bargain, could have
been snared as easily as so many leverets, after the capture of the
Malakoff in '56 Then, as to the Baltic, there is not a town on the
coast but we might have captured with the marines of the fleet, while
Cronstadt itself could have been burnt and destroyed by either NAPIER
or DIINDAS in comparative safety. Now. we all know that it is the
easiest thing in the world to do a thing when we know how ; and
though ail this may be very true, and nobody doubts it, yet we
must remember that apparently we have only learnt how to do all these
great deeds since the Peace, when the exact number of chances which
lay in our favour during war have been easily ascertained, but which
nobody knew at the time. No one now disbelieves, or for the matter of
that ever did, that the most enormous hesitation, to call it by the
mildest phrase, was displayed both in the Baltic and Black Sea, and on
some occasions, something worse, as, for instance, by Admiral LYONS
on the night and morning after the capture of the Malakoff; for now all
the world is well aware that the gale of wind which truly prevented
the fleet from making a diversion in the morning during the assault,
went down at sunset, and by ten p.m. the sea was as smooth as glass;
but no attempt was made to reconnoitre the harbour; not a boat was
sent to discover what the Russians really were about, although the
town was burning, and constant explosions taking place, and every
one really believed that the Russians were evacuating the place ; and
when at daylight they were seen streaming over the bridge in thousands,
what effort the fleet made to cut off their retreat, is well known Sir
EDMUND LYONS and Sir HOUSTON STEWART lay in bed—and did nothing
Similar instances of course might possibly be raked out of the Baltic
campaigns, though the ne plus ultra, we imagine, would be found in the
Petropaulowski affair. and Commodore ELLIOTT'S cruise off the Amoor.
But all these are of course the chances of war, which in itself is but a
"succession of blunders," that man winning the day who makes the
least. We are afraid that the less said about the war the better for
the credit of old England, unless the secret causes of all the hesita-
tion displayed be made public. The Baron de BAZANCOURT and the
French Chief of the Staff account for it in the Crimea by attributing
it to Lord RAGLAN. Is there nothing on record to free the reputation
of the brave old soldier from eo shameful a charge ? The conduct of
the war in the Black Sea, the Baltic, and the Pacific will perhaps never
be satisfactorily accounted for, but at the same time it sounds oddly
and smacks somewhat of a Bobadil, now the war is over, to hear
piendo-military critics telling us we might have done so much, when
we did so little.

SIR C. LEWIS AT THE OPERA.

Vonemst dulees epulau,• et album
Li beru caption, propefunevtus
Arborie ictu.—Nor., Od. R, B. 3.
Last night in the dress circle I
Our classic Chancellor did spy
Applauding Wagner's song,
To the destruction of his glove.
Quoth I to Jones, " This sight cloth move
My soul to wonder strong !"

" It's quite correct," says Jones to me,
" Out of much danger rescued, he

Doth as the ancients did ;
You know this awful session's ended,
And Lewis thence in vestment splendid
Doth sacrifice a kid."
• Qv —The fish dinner.
1.4.--Bir C. Wouti's Bill.

. '

PALMERSTON'S ANSWER TO MAZZINI.
I DO not blame you for writing letters. I seldom write any myself
now, whatever I may have done in the days when my writing could
get my chiefs into a scrape. But I have too much respect for agita-
tion of any kind to be displeased with you for endeavouring to interfere
with other people.
But, God bless my soul, Mazzini ! why on earth do you write
letters when you either have got nothing to say or are afraid to say it?
What is the use of that pedantic rigmarole which you have addressed
to M. Mania about an "illogical order of facts," and an " Anglo-political
conception," and " the negation of republican doctrine "! Is that the
kind of language which earnest men use when they would make
other men in earnest? The hackney jargon of the schoolboy's ad-
vanced class—is this the lightning with which you would fire your
gunpowder?
What did Manin say to Italy? That assassination was not the
road to liberty. What is your objection to this proposition ? He dis-
claims the use of the dagger, and you.profess to stick at nothing. What
is the difference between you ?
By Jove, Mazzini ! lam ashamed of you. lam a man of peace,
Head Pacificator of Europe, assuager of discontent, allayer of suspi-
cions, oiler of troubled waters. But if I wanted to keep the Italians
as you do, at a gentle simmer, ready to boil over when I gave the
signal, it is not with such weak rhodomontade as you put out that I
would do the business. Do you take Italian blood for Italian cream
that you try to whip it up with a fly-flapper?
Whom do you seek to benefit by your snarling and grumbling
against my friend the King of Sardinia?
The people whom you affect to serve ?
Not you. Nobody knows better than yourself that I have my eye
upon Italy, and that I can do more injury to the existing state of
things by a single demonstration in favour of Sardinia than you can
do with a hundred dreary letters and a thousand dastardly daggers. If
I chose to make Sardinia the wedge to split up Italian relations. I
could do so at a blow. And you, pretended Liberal, seek to make the
wedge slip away from the crack in the wood. There is an illustration
for you in your own style.
I consider your phrase about Anglo-political conceptions to be a
piece of exceeding impertinence. It shows that you perceive that I—
that is, England—must be the arbiter of the situation, and you affect
to support such a consummation. Why, my tine Mazzini, what can
you do without me? You have tried the revolutionary game for
yourself, and have had to run for your life. You a Triumvir !—but I
am wrong. There were triumvirs in other days, and one was called
Lepidus. Now then. Do you think that nobody has read history
besides yourself?
I advise you, Mazzini, to shut up.
You are not an earnest man. I am one, and I shall succeed
where you fail. Earnest, not in trying to carry out a highflown theory
of an impracticable Utopia—but earnest in my determination to have
such a blow-up in Italy as will give me a year's popularity at home.
And I bid higher than you can afford to do. My poor Mazzini, with
your stilted paragraphs, and saguipedalia verba, the Italians find you
of less value than a single speech of mine.
I fear that you are a humbug, and I hate humbugs, Mazzini, as
the world knows.

Are you envious of my little King of Sardinia? Do you dislike
him for his gaieties, do you covet his long moustachios, you Birming-
ham Brutus? Do you prefer " the halter and the rod," of which you
speak, to any organisation of which my favorite King shall be the
pivot? Ah ! you patriot philosophers have your weaknesses, like
your kings and aristos. And so you will have no demonstrations
unless all the Italians will agree that the result shall be a republic,
and a republic with a President. And should not the President's
name be Joseph ? It is a good name, dear Mazzini. Joseph was a
skilful man at expounding dreams. Will your expound yours, 0
Rienzi the smaller ? Or have I told it for you, and the interpretation
thereof? The cant of the day talks of profundity, and shudders at
imputing small motives to sentimental men. Yet, my dear Mazzini,
pardon me if I fathom you, and take small heed of your sentimentals.
Now, you leave Italy to me. It is a farm all too large for pure
agriculture; but I can bring up the crop I desire. You have been pre-
tending for years to sow the dragon's teeth, and to bring up your armed
men. Your armed men do not grow, and now you show your teeth
instead of sowing them. Let me try. I have produced a very good
rotation of such crops wherever I have been allowed to sow. They are
my wild oats, and they come up in the sweetest insurrections; and I
have made my market.
Preach against Austria as you please, and I give you full license to
pelt the Tiara. But I cannot help telling you that in trying to interfere
with the Anglo-political conception, you are playing the part either of
folly or insincerity. You have always pretended to want a row in Italy,
and lam the man to set it on foot, and you know it. Why do you
write ridiculous letters? Do you think that place and popularity—one
to be kept, the other to be gained—by an Italian convulsion, are not
guarantees for my sincerity? Let the Anglo-political conceptions
alone—they will not bring forth bad fruit between this and the opening
of our Parliament. _ _ _

Some people may say that we are both humbugs. But you, Maz-
zini, cannot have undergone the variegated experience of your life
without having discovered the fact that some people are very rude.
Which of us is the humbug?
July 31, 1856.

PLLMERSTON.

*-410110*NI.StJ14.