The Press.
London, England, 1858-01-23 00:00:00

THE PRESS, JANUARY 23, 1858.

postponed for a third part of the pamphlet,
and very concisely states the events which
occurred at Cawnpore and Lucknow, the
marches and battles of Havelock, the spread
of the insurrection in Central India, and the
siege and capture of Delhi. All these are told,
and well told, by our author. He appears to
possess an intimate knowledge of military
tactics ; he narrates with considerable fluency,
clearness, and precision ; his facts, he assures
us, are "based upon authority," and his re-
marks and observations exhibit a thorough
acquaintance with Indian affairs. The work is
dedicated to Lord Ellenborough, and to the
memory of the late Sir Charles Napier,
" pardy because those two great men, each in
" his turn, suppressed mutinies which, in
" their development, only became less dan-
" gerous than the present one, because, in-
" stead of wasting their time in discussing
" milk-and-water theories, in writing minutes
" on abstruse legal technicalities, or in de-
" bating the distinction between treachery
" and treason, they acted not to excite. but to
" crush them, and succeeded accordingly—
" because, also, they not only detected the
" sore spot in the Indian system, but likewise
" applied to it the incision-knife and the
" caustic ' —because they adopted justice
" as the basis of their systems of govern-
" ment—and because, finally, their wise policy
"in Scinde, on one side, and in Gwalior, on
" the other, have assured the safety of India
" in this as in preceding crises."
We cannot conclude without giving two
brief extracts, which do justice to the memory
of two men, one of whom has been harshly
condemned in certain quarters. Of General
Anson our author writes :

He had gone to the upper provinces early in the }ear,
with the assent of the Government and the Court of
Directors, and when the Meerut disaster occerred he was
in the hills. The tidings reached him on the 12th of
May, and he at once wade every preparation which man
could make to meet the coming storm. His operations
will be detailed in a future chapter. It is necessary to
make a cursory allusion to him here, because a great
outcry was made against him on account of the delay iu
reducing Delhi; on his shoulders was laid all the blame,
and men connected with the Government were anxious
to singl.4him out as the scapegoat. The rash schemes
proposed by the Government at this time have been com-
mented upon in a previous page; had they been adopted,
ruin must have overtaken us. The plan proposed and
followed by General Anson up to his death, and subse-
quently adopted by his successor, was the only practi-
cable one ; arid yet, because it involved a little delay, the
gallant general became the bile•noir of viceregal circles
and of the Secretary's-walk.
The fact is, General Anson was no favourite in council.
His abilities were far superior to those of his colleagues,
and in clearheadedness not one of them came near him.
His ways, too, were not their ways. If there was one
thing more than another against which he had set his
face, it was the Calcutta prevailing system of jobbing. He
would have none of it; he would not touch the unclean
thing.

It was a common practice to sneer at General Anson
as a mere Horse-Guards' general, as one who had gained
his honours at Newmarket. But it is nevertheless a fact
that this Horse-Guards' general, by dint of application and
perseverance, mado himself so thoroughly master of his
profession thit, when the mutiny broke out, he drew up
a plan of operations which his successor, a Crimean war-
rior, carried out in all its details, rejecting as crude and
ridiculous the suggestions sent up by the collective wis-
dom of Calcutta. It cannot be denied that this man, who
" gained his honours at Newmarket," when brought in
both the councils face to face with men who had made
legislation for India the study of their lives, " distanced"
them all ; that, whatever the subject, he always mastered
it, and showed in reasoning a strong good sense, which
was more than a match for the special pleadings by which
he was frequently met, whilst in facility of expression and
power of laying down an argument clearly and forcibly,
not one of them came near him.
It will be gratifying to the friends of General
Anson, and to all who knew him, to read this
tribute paid to his memory by one who at least
has proved himself capable of forming and
expressing a correct opinion upon men and
matters in India. Of Sir Henry Havelock he
remarks :

Generel Havelock had seen perhaps more Indian service
than any living man. He bad served throughout the first
Burmese war, of which he wrote* clear and graphic history.
In 1838.9 be went into Affghanistan, and only left it in
1842 in company with the avenging armies of Pollock and
Nott: he had in fact remained one of the illustrious garrison
of Jella!abed, throughout our terrible disasters in that
country. In the campaign of Gwalior, in 1843, and in the
Sutlej campaigns of 1845-6, he took a distinguished part,
having in one action had two horses, in another a third
horse, shot under him. It was after this that he became
first Quartermaster-General, and subsequently Adjutant.
General of H.M. forces in Indic. In his private life, and
in manner, Havelock was the moat quiet and retiring of

men. He ate and drank little---sufficient only for the
purposes of life, end devoted his whole time to his prefes,
sion and to his God. Religion was not with Lim a mere
outward sign ; it was a part, and by far the most important
part, of his daily exercises. He hri maimed over the
idolatry-encouraging system of the Government of India,
but he was powerless to prevent it. Nevertheless, he was
one of those men who, in olden days, would have led the
Crusaders to Ascalon, and whose deep enthusiasm would
have inspired all around him with equal fervour in the
cause.

Who indeed that saw that spare figure, below the middle
height, that pale, thoughtful face, seldom showing any
interest in the general conversation, but often lighted up
by the latent are within, would have thought him capable
of mighty deeds? He would sit silent and meditative.
He might be thinking of the yet possible destiny of India
under a bold and God-fearing policy. The smile would
gleam on his face, but as quickly die away, for what chance
seemed there then of action for him ? He was approach.
ing the term of life, the end of his days, and all India lay
before him calm and still, not a breath agitating her
bosom, not even a ripple indicating the quarter from which
a storm might be approaching. The faith of our rulers in
Hindooism was never stronger.
Who that saw him then would have believed that
that pale, thin, spare man, studiously avoiding all fare but
the plainest, was the hero who would place his heel on
the neck of this terrible rebellion?—was the man who,
under a July, August, and September sun,—deadly to
the strongest—would march without tents against twenty
times hie number, would baffle all their attempts to over-
whelm him ? Who would ever make a retreat the prelude
of a further step in advance; end finally, after three
months' encounters with a persevering foe, would succeed
in forcing his way, at the head of 2,500 British troops,
through 50,000 fanatics, holding the largest and moat
defensible city in Asia, and be the first to bring relief to
our countrymen ?
And yet Havelock did all this.
This day (27th November) intelligence has reached Cal-
cutta that he is dead. Mourn not for him, my country.
men, for a nobler and a purer spirit never winged its way
to its God. Mourn rather for India, that at such a crisis
as this, s God-fearing soldier, a Christian warrior, as yet
unsurpassed—in the present crisis unequalled by any—
should have been removed from the head of her armies !

THE QUARTERLIES.
THE Quarterly Review contains several inte-
resting, and one or two striking, articles. Of
the former kind are those on Smollett, on the
county of Wilts, and on Woolwich Arsenal ;
of the latter, "The Historic Peerage" and
the Indian article. The paper on Smollet is
remarkably well written, and, without break-
ing any new ground, is fresh and spirited.
The article on the peerage is a careful roves•
tigation of the roots of our existing nobility.
It possesses considerable merit, both anti•
quarian and histqrical, and is lighted up by
flashes of fancy such as the following :

A certain love of pleasure and pomp—a certain not nn
graceful ostentation —seems to ruffle, like a plume in the
cap, of the men of Edward M.'s days. Feudalism had
flowered, so to speak, and was enjoying itself in the sun-
shine of its prosperity with all its heraldic banners flutter-
ing in the breeze. The earlier barons, not less noble, had
been, perhaps, a shade more grim ; and, in coming from
earlier writers to Froissart, we feel—is it the wine they
axe drinking, or the love-songs they are singing? or a
haunting thought of the eyes of the Countess of Salia•
bury ?—that we are two or three generations nearer the
cavaliers.

This, too, is worth remembrance :

Public opinion on these subjects would be much em
lightened if the public would remember that aristocracies
are prone to grow less respectable as they grow less historic;
that the Roman nobles who flattered Caligula were not of
the families which conquered Hannibal; and that the
French aristocracy before the Revolution had become
hateful, as much by the system which had made noblesse
an affair of barter, as by any misconde.ct on the part of
those who sprang from the warriors of Philip Augustus.

India we shall notice presently.
Much the most remarkable article in the
Westminster Review is " The Religious Weak-
ness of Protestantism." It is offensively
plainly spoken, and decidedly unfair. But
neither its impertinence nor its sophistry will
counteract its poisonous influence on minds
already tainted by scepticism ; and as we do
not deny it very great argumentative adroit-
ness, and a certain plausible simplicity, we
fear it is calculated to work great mischief.
A paper on Shelley, which is stale, two finan-
cial ones, hostile to the Bank Charter Act, and
a reasonably good one on India, make lip
number not quite up to the average standard
of the Westminster.
The National Review sustains its reputation
by a series of capital articles. The paper on
George Sand is remarkably interesting, and
written with a flow of easy, vigorous English.
The review of Colonel Muro is also very able,
though we dissent from many of the opinions
expressed in it. The sneers at Mr. Shilleto
are vastly silly, and the objections to Colonel

Mure's translations of Thucydides, with the
exception of the one word a 4 XOOI.AMOTLY, are ex-
tremely hypercritical. In our own estimate
of Xenophon, we agree neither with the
colonel nor his critic. " The Monetary Crisis "
is a thoughtful and useful essay, more cautious
and perhaps more scientific than those in the
Westminster, but taking apparently the same
siews on restrictions of the paper currency.
On India, all three Reviews have noticeable
papers. Between the Quarterly and the West-
minster there is the greater contrast, as both
go more into particulars than the National.
Of the revolt, the Westminster says it is a
mere military mutiny, the Quarterly that it is
a national insurrection, and accounts for the
neutrality of the Indian princes and alleged
indifference of the people. The Conservative
periodical, without laying special stress on
the previous misgovernment of the country,
maintains that the war is hut the expression of
a deep-seated national feeling, to which the
greased cartridge lent only an accidental sti-
mulus. The " predisposing condition " was
what " is dignified with the name of patriotism,
" whenever success attends the effort." The
Westminster, on the other hand, seems to
throw the whole blame on the greased car-
tridges, and, though admitting certain prior
causes of discontent, would question the
existence of any fundamental hostility to the
dominion of the whites. It is strange, in speak-
ing of the sepoy army, that both writers should
neglect what is so explicitly stated by Colonel
Briggs, whose work is one of the text-books of
the Quarterly essay, that the native army
which fought under our great old Indian
generals were not Hindoos at all, but abori-
gines, who were some "of the best and bra-
" vest soldiers of Southern India," and " have
" none of the prejudices (occasionally so in-
" convenient) of the Hindoos and Mohame-
" dans," and "afford of themselves at present
" a resource of 4,000,000 males, between the
" ages of twenty and forty-one, to supply the
" casualties of the native army " (India and
Europe Compared, by Lieut.-Colonel Briggs,
p. 50). In regard to the future government of
India, the two periodicals agree in some
things and differ in others. They agree that an
English immigration is much wanted, as a check
On official corruption, and they agree in denying
the wisdom of admitting natives to a share in
the Government. They differ in that the
Westminster would abolish the Company in toto,
the Quarterly retain it with some modifications.
The latter, also, would be satisfied with 50,000
European troops in the country; the former
would require 80,000. Tho National article is
of a more general and philosophic character.
In its view of the East India Company, it is
about halfway between the above two. We
must express our surprise at the disgraceful
attack on Lord Ellenborough, who is univer-
sally recognised by all parties as the man of
the crisis.

Dauntless. By the Author of " Hands not Hearts."
Two Vols. London :J. W. Parker and Son.
THIS is a story of a more openly religious character
than it is now usual to meet with. While entirely
free from cant, it is based on the idea that the only
guiding principle of life is a firm faith in the conso-
lations of Christianity. And the author does not
scruple to introduce sacred subjects in the language
once always appropriated to them, but now rather
avoided, as if we compromised ourselves by the use
of it. The story is good. That is to say, the inci-
dents are exciting and probable at the same time,
the characters are rather carefully drawn, and the
language unaffected and pure. We cannot say
that " Dauntless " rises much above the average
of those clever domestic stories of which every
year witnesses the birth of so many. It takes
rank with " Summerieigh Manor," " Dorothy,"
" The Myrtle and the Heather," and others of
the same class. But the boldness with which
the author speaks out on religion entitles him
to special credit. The plot is rather too compli-
cated to enable us to give any intelligible outline of
it. We may state that it involves the separation of
two lovers neither of whom knows the state of the
other's affections, and which the gentleman will not
declare because of a supposed early attachment
between the lady and a departed friend of his own ;
the sudden reduction of a wealthy family to poverty
by the death of the head, and the support of a
querulous widow and two daughters by the labour of
one whom as a dependant of her husband she had
treated with contempt and dislike ; the marriage of a