The Press.
London, England, 1856-12-06 00:00:00

THE WEEK.

THE announcement in the last issue of THE PRESS, that the Confer-
ences would be resumed at Paris, has this week been confirmed by
two of the Ministerial journals—the Morning Post and the Globe. These
prints intimate that the Conference will only assemble, however, to
give effect to Lord PALMERSTON'S edicts ; that he has secured the co-
operation of France, Austria and Sardinia, and that Russia will put
forward pretensions only to have them rejected with contumely. This
may possibly be the case ; but the renewal of the C onference is, at all
events, a great fact. The points which have prevented the faithful
execution of the Treaty of Paris will be fairly discussed ; and it will
be a great advantage to be free from that mystification which has sur-
rounded the whole question since the adjournment of our Parliament.
An important item of foreign intelligence is the note addressed by
the Ambassadors of France and Russia at Constantinople to the
Turkish Minister, REDSCHID PACHA. The substantial authenticity of
this note there appears no reason to doubt, though we observe that
the Vienna Correspondenz asserts that two notes were delivered sepa-
rately by the Ambassadors—their purport, however, being the same.
The communication contained four important interrogatories ; first,
whether the Government of the Sultan was willing to leave the whole
question of Bolgmd and the Isle of Serpents to be disposed of by a
Conference at Paris, or would prefer the offer of Russia to cede the
Isle of Serpents and the Delta of the Danube—Russia retaining
possession of Bolgrad ; second, whether the Porte did not conceive
that the occupation of the Danubian principalities by Austria was
contrary to the terms of the Treaty of Paris ; thirdly, whether
the presence of an English squadron in the Black Sea
was not also contrary to the term of the Treaty ; and fourth, whether
the Divans of the Principalities would be at liberty to declare in favour
of their administrative union. If this statement be correct, it is
certain that the policy of France and Russia on the Eastern question
is adverse to that of England and Austria. The Court of Paris may
perhaps conceive that it has just ground of complaint, as unquestionably
it has fulfilled the terms of the Treaty itself, and has lent no coun-
tenance to its infraction in any way. The first occasion of difference
between the Governments of France and England, was probably the
ordering an English squadron into the Black Sea without consultation
with our Allies. This one false step first led to a coolness between
the two Governments, which subsequent events seem rather to have
aggravated than appeased.

The public mind seems at last alive to the fact that we are about
to commence one of those little wars which have always been imme-
diately disastrous to the credit of the country, and ultimately have
swollen to colossal proportions. We allude to the expedition about to
make war on Persia ; the alleged cause being the siege of Herat by a
Persian force. As Herat was formerly a frontier fortress of Persia,
and one of its bulwarks against invasion by the Affghan tribes, there
appears no just cause why Persia should not attempt to regain p oases-
sion of it, more especially as the fertile province of Korassan has been
repeatedly laid waste by barbarous incursions. We can imagine that
Russia must be well pleased with this British expedition. It
seems likely to play effectually into her hands. If Persia can be per-
suaded to resist the dictation of England, and to defy this expedi-
tionary force, Russian aid in men and money will not be wanting.
In that case our efforts would only succeed in establishing Russian
influence in the Persian Court, and a war with Persia, backed by the
resources of Russia, waged by us at so great a distance from our supplies
might prove to be one of the most arduous contests in which we ever
engaged. Already there are reports that the Russian Government is
preparing to assemble a considerable force on the southern shore of
the Caspian, that it may support Persia in the event of hostile invasion
of her territory. Our Government, on the other hand, is intriguing
with theiAffghan chiefs, is subsidising our old enemy, DOST MAHOMMED,
supplying him with arms which may one day be turned against
ourselves, and seems inclined to send a new expedition into A ffghan-
istan, to march to the scene of hostility. It would have seemed our
safest policy to have endeavoured to strengthen and maintain the
independence of the Persian kingdom as a barrier against Russian
encroachments, rather than to take steps to weaken it and bring
Russian forces into its aid. The late war will have been concluded to
little purpose if it is to be instantly renewed with Russia in a locality
where our operations must necessarily be slow and enormously
expensive, and the success of our arms, without great efforts, be
extremely problematical.

Lord PALMERSTON'S choice of Bishops is said to have been not a
little influenced by the advice of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY. Three
Low Church nominations, as in the cases of MONTAGU VILLIERS, Dr.
BARING, and the Rev ROBERT BICKERSTETH, seem rather one-sided. It
seems strange that such a mind as the Premier's should he suddenly
seized with " Low Church " fever, and the choice of three " Low
Church" bishops certainly does look as if the Viscount, distrusting
his own fitness, had applied for external advice somewhere. It is to
be observed that Mr. BICKERSTETH is not " the Bickersteth," but only
nephew to the late eminent author. Doubtless he has considerable
personal merits of his own, though they seem rather to belong to the

SATURDAY,

character of a good parish priest than a bishop. It has been remarked
by a Liberal organ, on Tuesday, " Good in many respects as Lord PAL-
" MERSTON'S appointments have been, the men he has chosen are hardly
" equal in knowledge, eloquence, learning, sagacity, courage, modera-
" tion, and influence, to the emergencies of the times." There is truth
and exaggeration in that remark. Their " courage " and " influence "is
considerable, and they have some " sagacity ;" but we admit that " the
learning " and " eloquence " of Bishop MONTAGU VILLIERS and Mr.
BICKERSTETH are not adequate to the wants of a Church assailed on
every side by subtle scepticism, energetic dissent, and the well-dis-
guised sophistries of Rome, and whose most educated clergy are
now divided seriously on questions of Church government. It is.
said also that if such appointments save us from " semi-Romish
fanaticism " we run the risk of an " ultra-Protestant bigotry.'
Without adopting that view, we may say that such a system of selec-
tion does incur the danger of disparaging the claims of that profound
theological erudition which has always been one of the glories of the
English Church. We doubt whether, at Oxford or Cambridge, the
late appointments will be approved ; and if Lord SHAFTESBURY in-
fluenced the appointment of Mr BICKERSTETH we feel assured that the
original selection of MONTAGU VILLIERS was considerably aided by the
Earl of CLARENDON.

The recent verdict given in the case of "Lord LIICAN v. Daily News,*
is such as the majority of the public most likely expected. English-
men are so justly jealous of the liberty of the press, that they are
perfectly willing to shut one eye to its license. A newspaper article
comes under the head of " privileged communications," and malice
is not to be presumed. To prove it must always be extremely hard
work, where the defendant has so ready an answer to plead as the
exigencies of the public welfare. It does not, however, follow that be-
cause a newspaper ought not to be convicted of libel, that therefore it
has not transgressed the limits of public duty and good taste. It may be
inexpedient to visit with legal penalties language which may very
fairly come under the ban of the social tribunal. Our own conclusion
is that the use or abuse of the privilege of the press must be left in
great measure to editorial discretion. Such seems the rational deduc-
tion from the verdict in question, and so much it seems impossible
not to concede to the present position of journalism.

Whether the suggestions of an Oxford Undergraduate, published
in the Times of last week, really emanate from a young gentleman in
statu pupillari or not we of course cannot determine. But, commit-
ting ourselves to any opinion on their practicality, we may say they
certainly seem at first sight a fair solution of the difficulty. The com-
missioners seem virtually to have recognised the injustice as well as the
inexpediency of throwing open school and college foundations to the
whole world where these were working well, according to the intentions
of the founders. We cannot ourselves approve even of such changes
as have been introduced into St. John's College, and which were
censured in this Journal more than two years ago. However, as they
seem to have advanced no further on the same road, we have perhaps
no great reason to complain. But it must be obvious, one would think,
to persons of candour and common sense, that to slightly diminish
the value of existing foundations by deducting something to establish
fresh ones of a different nature, would be preferable to changing the
character of those foundations altogether. Merchant Taylors'
School, for instance, would, we are sure, gladly have surrendered
something in the value, for the sake of retaining the permanent
character, of its scholarships. By the Undergraduate's plan, the same
number of fellowships for life would remain to encourage students—
one great object to be desired at the present day—while a temporary
provision would also bo secured for those who required support at the
threshold of professional life. The Undergraduate may have been in
error as to the exact amount of the Queen's College and Magdalene
revenue ; but that is a matter of detail, and does not detract from the
merit of the general plan. To found a certain number of university
studentships, tenable for a term of years, out of the revenues of the
colleges, leaving the college fellowships in statu quo, minus the almost
imperceptible depreciation which such a tax would involve, seems to
us a very equitable and practical device for reconciling the claims of
he public with the vested interests of existing educational bodies.

The Irish are clever folks at committing a murder and escaping
its consequences The police, we are always told, are very active,
the authorities mysterious, and the Government interested; but
it happens that nothing comes of all this activity, mystery, and
interest. May not this result be partly attributable to that system
of secrecy the Irish police adopt in their preliminary investigations.
In the case of the cruel murder of Mr. LITTLE, the authorities
appear to be carrying this practice to a ridiculous extent. Secret
sittings of a secret board secretly take place ; some secret police are
secretly tracing a secret clue ; other secret police are secretly watching
secretly suspected persons, while the terrible secret itself yet remains
shrouded in the darkest secrecy. A little publicity, we are inclined to think,
would do good. The facts of the case, so far as they are known, would
be circulated and commented on far and wide ; every fresh discovery
would stimulate public feeling, would lead to mutual reference and
inquiry, and tend to multiply traces indicating the murderer. In the
case of Courvoisier it was a result of this publicity which determine‘,l
his conviction. A certain portion of plate was missing from the house;
this fact came to the ears of a woman to whom Courvoisier had con-
fided the care of a small parcel. She was induced to open the
packet, found plate engraved with the murdered nobleman's crest,
gave information to the police, and convicted the murderer. It it
the publicity given to the intelligence obtained which leads person
not implicated in the crime, but acquainted with the criminal,

A SEA SONG.

Our good Queen was walking alongside the ocean
(Which is hers in good right, as we know ve►y well),
When the waves of a sudden ran up in commotion,
And left high and dry, an old gent in a shell.
Eight quickly a-stepping from out his sea-carriage,
Says he, " Mum ! I'm Neptune," and made her a leg ;
" I've come with this east wind in no time from Harwich."

Says the Queen, " Dear! now have you ? be seated, I beg."
" Thankye kindly," says Neptune. " Well now then, my daughter
(And he laid down his Trident and squeezed his hair dry),
To know all the news and wot's done on the water
We takes the Times daily—my missus and I.

" Well ! I was a-reading to she at her mirror,
Off the Foreland, in five fathom, just at the slack,
About them 'ere wessels, th' Erebus and Terror,
And I raly was werry much taken a-back.

" There's a swab, d'ye see, Mum, that writes in that paper.
To say it's no use to send—shiver his jib !
I tell you they're safe from store-room to sky-scraper,
Thof' a little bit ice-jammed and squeezed in the rib.

" I was in the No'th Sea, t'other day, at Cape Riley,
And met by appintment the Father of Whales
(Is their young Prince a-blooming, Mum?) Well! be spoke highly
Of the crews and the ships and the pluck that perwails.

" You've been werry near 'em, leastways what is left there,
Them watches and trinkets and what-nots was theirs ;
But. shiver my timbers ! if I'd have beleft 'ere
That England would have left their poor bones to the bears.

"I shan't say how many's alive now and hearty,
You know where to go—you've sons ready'and brave;
If you don't find poor Crozier, Sir John, and his party,
You'll find,—or you ought ! where God's made 'em a grave.
" But as for that 'nonymous long-shore swab—Damme !
(I really begs pardon. it's nateral, you know !)
HI catch him, I'll colt him, I will though, by Sammy !
I'll cook him in icebergs, and stuff him with snow."

But here, as his Godship grew quite red and flurried,
He rose, made his scrape, went aboard, and away;
And back to her palace our little Queen hurried,
To bring her brave men home—or news where they lay.

SIR CORNEWALL AND THE SEWERS.
(A Scene on Thursday last.)
(Enter, to the CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER and the CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF
WORKS, MR. THWAITES and the Model Parochial Parliament. The usual
courtesies having been exchanged, and the Parliament having taken its seat,
The CHANCELLOR.—And now, gentlemen, ad rem.
A MEMBER (whispering).—Ad what, did he say?
Another MEMBER (con fulentially).—Sh! Rem 's short for memo-
randums—he's looking for 'em. don't you see ?
First MEMBER (thankfully) —All !
The CHANCELLOR —I am favoured with your presence, gentlemen,
as I gather from documents before me, in order that you may submit
to me, as representing the financial department of her Majesty's Go-
vernment, your reasons for thinking that the metropolis ought not to
bear the whole expense of making itself decent, and ceasing to be a
nuisance. That is the case, I believe, Sir Benjamin?
CHIEF COMMISSIONER.—Rem acu te.:egisti, Sir George ?
First MEMBER —There's the other with a rem, now. And what's
that about ague ? It's cold enough here to give one, certainly.
His FRIEND.—Do hold your tongue, will you? Hear what our
Ben says.
Mr. THWAITES.—Without quarrelling about words, a thing which
you must have observed that I never permit the Metropolitan Central
Board to do, you have stated the substance of our ease, Sir George.
We have no objection—inasmuch as an Act of Parliament demands it
—to drain London. But as we are in no respect bound to keep Erith
as a comfortable phice for the yacht men who go down to eat Mother
Mytton's puddings—or her successor's, which I may incidentally re-
mark are capital, as is the cuisine at the Crown—
The CHANCELLOR (laughing).—Lucky for you that there's no
advertisement duty, Mr. Thwaites, or I should be down upon you for
eighteenpenee.