The Press.
London, England, 1857-08-29 00:00:00

bane of Lord PALMERSTON.

The large force which was withdrawn from
the Presidencies of Bombay and Madras was
the virtual cause of vast numbers of our un-
happy countrymen being butchered, without
hope of immediate vengeance and of condign
chastisement. The withdrawal of those troops,
and the transference of them tr) Persia, is a
most lamentable incident in this enormous
tragedy. For it is evident that want of men
paralyses all our operations. We could not
spare for the Bengal Presidency the troops
which remained at Bombay and Madras, after
the numbers of these latter had been reduced
by the forces sent to Persia.
Either Lord PALMERSTON was aware of the
condition of the Indian empire, and of the
enormous hazard that he was running by rush-

ing into a Persian war, or he was entirely igno-
rant of the state of things in the East. From
either position the public can deduce only one
result, that the Premier is preposterously
exaggerated as a Minister. The Persian war
was almost a second edition of the Crimea,
and of sending the Guards to Malta, while
making terms iu the contract for bringing
them back next week ! Persia was more
stubborn than was anticipated. The troops
were obliged to invade, and while we were
gaining dubious results, and winning no
laurels, the Indian mutineers saw the oppor-
tunity, and sprung at us.
The terrible event caught Lord PALMERSTON
unprovided. He was taken by surprise. He
did not lose his jauntiness. He had joked
while the army was rotting in the Crimea.
He had never uttered a word of disapproval
of the way in which things were managed in
that dire winter of MI. He then earned
from Mr. CHARLES DICKENS the name of
The Comic Old Gentleman." He appeared
weekly in Punch as a grinning mountebank.
And although Sir CHARLES NAPIER warned,
and numerous Indian remonstrances were
addressed to the home authorities, the Premier
took Indian affairs with jocular good humour.
The storm lowered, the Viscount laughed.
He was told that a hurricane was at hand,
and he scoffed it as a cloudy humbug. At
last the outburst came. Our friends and
brethren in India cried for aid, and the Vis-

835

count resolved to send them " some regi-
ments," but not to call out the Militia, " it was
not necessary." Then at the last moment
this pliable and supple politician changes his
mind, and agrees to call out the Militia. Is
that statesmanship? Is this a great Minister

for England?
There is no extricating the reputation of
Lord PA LMERSTON out of this dilemma—

namely, either the Noble Viscount thought
that it was quite right that the army should

be reduced, or else he thought it wrong,
and had not courage to oppose it, and stand
or fall by his convictions On either horn

of the dilemma the Premier must be

gored.

But when at any titno did

Lord PALMERSTON ever make a stand for a

principle? Did ho not serve ten Prime
Ministers, the Duke of PORTLAND, and Mr.
PERCEVAL, and the Earl of LIVERPOOL, and Mr.
CANNING, and Lord GODERICH, and the Duke
of WELLINGTON, and Earl GREY, and Lord
MELBOURNE, and Lord JOHN RUSSELL, and the
Earl of ABERDEEN, and then coquetted with
Lord DERBY? is not such exactly the kind of
yielding., facile, fluctuating politician, who to
secure his leadership would succumb to any
cry that threatened to come from a majority ?
In his prolonged career his admirers cannot
point to a single instance where the Viscount
ever made a stand for a principle. He was
once well told by Mr. CARDWELL " that there
" was more of the willow than the oak in his
" nature." His object, firstly, and secondly,
and thirdly, has been office—office—office ; and
the means by which he has sought to gain it
and regain it has been the vulgar expedient
of canting with the current cant.

The Duke of WELLINGTON seems never at any
time to have expressed a high opinion of Lord
PALM ERSTON'S abilities. The Duke knew well his
dimensions, and Lord ELLENBOROUG H a couple
of years ago told the House of Lords that, in
the Huskisson affair, the Duke, when called
out of his room at Downing-street, said, " It
" was only PALMERSTON. He's but a small
" bird." In subsequent years the Duke of
WELLINGTON had abundant opportunities of
judging of Lord PALMERSTON'S abilities, and
none of the Premier's adulators can point to
a single passage in one of tne Duke's speeches
or letters in which respect was avowed for the
talents of the present Premier. Yet his Grace
often, in his manly way, acknowledged his
high opinion of the public talents and the per-
sonal characters of several of his Whig anta-
gonists. He did so in the cases of Earl GREY,
Viscount MELBOURNE, Lord BROUGHAM, Lord
JOHN RUSSELL, and many others. The fact is
notorious that the Duke of WELLINGTON placed
a low estimate on the powers of Lord PAL -
ME RSTON. The Noble Viscount is adroit in
dealing with individuals, but where are there
any proofs of prescient sagacity, of lofty views,
of great designs skilfully conceived and stur-
dily executed ? He was never chief of any
political connection until the precipitate con-
duct of Lord Joh N RUSSELL enabled the Noble
Viscount to vault iuto the vacant seat. And
this is the Prime Minister whose weighty
powers are fulsomely adulated by the para-
sitical politicians who kneel at the footstool of
official power !
Since this wicked and ferociously savage
mutiny broke forth Lord PALMERSTON hi,s
done nothing superior to what his " appen -
dages " might have performed without his
aid. In his speeches on India these has
been nothing great, heartetirring, or intel-
lectually grand. His vehement vituperation
of the Chinese last spring contrasts with the
languid and conventional tone of the Noble
Viscount's recent addresses. He is an accom-
plished man of the world, but he is an
ambiguous politician ; he is a skilful Parlia-
mentary tactician, with a hand for every party
and a heart for none, but he is not a masterly
Minister; he has vast experience, but he has
not inspiring energy. A man clutching through
life so tenaciously to mere office is not the
ruler capable of wielding the sword of State
' with the resolution that cheers friends and
crushes foes.

836

FRESH COMMERCIAL FRAUDS.
IT is with the greatest concern that we note
the fresh commercial embarrassments which
are just now in course of investigation Under
the very eye of the London public, the Royal
Surrey Gardens Company seems to have
verged on the catastrophe of the Royal Bri-
tish Bank. A capital of 32,5001., subscribed
only fifteen months ago, is unaccounted for;
additional debts have been contracted for
28,0001., of which 11,5001. are wholly un-
secured.

This looks bad enough in all respects, but
in point of positive criminality much worse
remains to be told. A dividend of ten per
cent. was declared last October ! And at that
time there were 741 shares of the company
still unissued. " Meanwhile," says the " City
Article " in -the Times of Friday, "it is coin-
" plained that Mr. James Coppock, of Clcreland-
" row, St. James's, who is represented to have
" been the acting director, makes no sign."
Poor Mrs. SEACOLE is said to have not got a
farthing of the money raised by the late
manifestation in her behalf; and Monsieur
JuntEn asserts that he has been cheated, and
that he is a ruined man. The explanations
given before the Bankruptcy Commissioner
on Thursday do not clear the matter up.
At Liverpool, an extensive broker has been
committed for trial on the charge of obtaining
money on false pretences by fraudulent use of
bills of lading The tecused is prosecuted at
the suit of Messrs. BIND HAM and Co. The
evidence of Mr. JOHN BINGHAM, as reported, is
extremely curious. " noferolant (Mr. :lons
" DOHERTY) offered several securities with a
" view to covering their loss ; but witness ob-
" ject.ed to them. chiefly on the ground that they
" were not sufficient security. Witness very
" likely suggested that he should obtain his
" brother-in-law's (Mr. RICHARIMON'B) security
" for 2,0001" In other words, " BINOHAM and
Co. " would have hushed the whole matter up
if they could have secured their own " L. S. D."
This appears to be an extraordinary mode of
doing business. Time was when (alleged)
frauds of such a character should, by the law
of commercial opinion, have been exposed on
'Change. " Black sheep " would not have
been allowed to taint their neighbours.
The recent railway reports, also, are most
unsatisfactory to peruse. What with the ex-
travagance of some directories, the reckless-
ness of others, and the " wind ups" of some,
the public feeling of confidence is much
shaken. In truth, the commercial classes
(.vhich the " Liberals " boast of as peculiarly
their own) have little reason to plume them-
selves on the way in which they uphold the
character of the country. Idle declaimers
against " aristocracy " ought to study the
scandals revealed lately. We should lie sorry
to introduce a class test in morality. Human
nature is essentially the same. and " tempta-
tion " is the trial which tests the presence of
real virtue But we ask of the milers against
" the aristocracy " or " the landed gentry " to
think of the vast number of commercial frauds
recently brought to light.
Punishment must be inflicted in an
exemplary manner on persons who com-
promise the character of the country. Sir
JOHN PAUL was a baronet, but he was satu-
rated with the unscrupulous spirit that
animates too many of our modern " commer-
cialists." He paid the penalty, along with his
partners, for the crime. Ronsos and REDPATH
have been brought to justice. SADLEIR was
his own executioner, and his brother is an
outcast from society, after having been spurned
from the House of Commons.

The new Act passed this year will doubt-
less operate to some extent as a preventive.
But when the foundations of commercial
morality have been once undermined its
restoration is a matter of melancholy uncer-
tainty. It is, perhaps, hopeless to expect that
this country should now listen to any warn-
ings against a too exclusively commercial