The Press.
London, England, 1858-08-07 00:00:00

Non rixa est, übi to pulsar, ego vapulo tantum

would be an unanswerable remark in the mouth
of poor John Chinaman, arrayed under the
orders of a despot whom he dares not gainsay,
against invaders who►n he cannot resist. But
not only is there no glory in our proceedings,
they are ab initio discreditable. We went to war—
we beg pardon, " commenced hostilities " is the
approved phrase—in defence of smuggling under
false colours, if not in affirmation of " a false
fact." Such, at least, was our best plea at start-
ing ; but we grew bolder after a time, when the
nation stood committed to a rank injustice, and a
majority of the House were prepared with Lord
PALMERSTON to justir our attack by the resent-
ment it excited. Then "Free Trade" was
appealed to as a pretence for violating a nation's
independence, and the sacred text,

That they should take who have the power,
And they should keep who can,
was enforced with all the unscrupulous eloquence
of the Times. The Chinese war (another /apaus
plume—let us say " difficulty ") might not be
quite just—but what of that ? It was sure to be
profitable. This was not high ground to take—
but was it even tenable ? We cannot think so.
Considering the "difficulty" merely as an invest-
ment, we know that thus far there have been
heavy calls and no dividend, and see no reason to
estimate the future returns at a higher figure
than 0 per cent. Commercial privileges, for-
sooth, are to be secured ! Is commerce the
daughter of Mars and Bellona ? Or are we to
find our best customers in those we have beaten
and impoverished ? Are bullets tea-lead ? or
shot and steel Howqua's Mixture ? It is a
blunder from beginning to end. Of course we
may terrify a feeble Court into submission, and
may dictate terms, if you like it, at Pekin ; but,
cui bona? We may compel the Brother of the
Sun to open his ports—but we cannot force his
subjects to buy or to sell. We may extort his
permission to erect factories—but will they be
resorted to by an aggrieved and resentful popu-
lation ? No " special chop," no writing from
" the vermilion pencil," will silence bitter memo-
ries of wrong. You cannot win confidence by
terror, or stimulate trade by persecution. As
well might you run a cow across country to the
milking-stool, or try to shear sheep at a hand-
gallop.
But we are dealing with a view of the question
which has been already ably set forth in the
Daily News, and will therefore pass on to some
other considerations no less worthy of notice
which should incline her Majesty's Ministers to
strive for a speedy and equitable termination of
hostilities, to which they succeeded by no fault
of their own—one of the burdens with which
Lord PsimEas-rox encumbered their official in-
heritance. In the first place, it strikes us very
forcibly that, valuing the French alliance as we
profess to do, we ought to escape as soon as pos-
sible from the present system of close co-opera-
tion for undefined objects. It is rendered dan-
gerous alike by English pride and French vanity.
Even during the stern struggles of the Crimea,
when the common safety lay in united action, there
was often a dangerous feeling of irritation, due to
the necessarily imperfect apportionment of the
labours and honours of the siege. Now either
armament might alone suffice for the work to be
done, and even the best embellished Gazette can
tell of no laurels worth dividing. Hence arises
a petty and unworthy rivalry—nor is it possible
to avoid seeing that our dashing allies think more
of getting the start of the English than of the
easier triumph of drubbing the Chinese ; whilst
we, on our part, acting with more fairness, but
worse temper, fret sullenly at the gasconader

our
tended
notion
liarit:
how

pies,
and think a fat maggot excellent grub? Even
our educated classes talk of " the necessity of
reading these conceited barbarians a lesson,"--as
if with regard to them and them only the exercise
ofpower might be divorced from responsibility—as
if slaughter and spoliation ceased to be serious
things when inflicted on the most industrious
and most densely-peopled region of the earth•
Strangest of all, even our seamen seem to lose
something of their tenderness of heart when poor
John Chinaman is to be taught his weakness•
The crew of the Alceste burst into a roar of
laughter at seeing, as they fancied, the head of a
mandarin taken off by a round shot. Is
something of the same spirit traceable in
accounts of recent " victories" ?
We will not pursue this topic further, save
express an earnest hope that this evil is w"'
its own cure,—that as we know the
better we shall feel for them more, and

[B5B.
which experience should have led us to anticipate
as matters of course. The same feelings are atpro-
pagated. by the
.public press at home, till
pugnanoW pot Ihe French nation halfe
believe sat Euglap4 has outlived her historic
prows,s' ',tile magy an iraacible John Bull
put
woug avrifice the peace of the world and
civil back h4r fL CeOUry merely to con.
_
vince theme of their ista e. It is an old tale
that the .ion .• ent of the crowing
oftiitp .We w, fain spare the noble
animal's nerves a protracted trial, or, to drop the
too familiar metaphor, we would fain terminate
a state of things which we feel to be most dan-
gerous to the good understanding now happily
subsisting between France and Britain. Not
should it be forgotten (selfish as such a view
may appear) that we are working at these
frightful hazards mainly, if not wholly, for the
advantage of others. We have long had abun-
dant, if not unrestricted access, to the flowery
land : we are now doing our best to gain for our
enterprizing neighbours a comfortable footing
there. This may be generous, but it is the in-
discreet generosity of the young civilian who in-
troduces his particular friend, a militaire with
unimpeachable moustache, to the city heiress, on
whom he has himself made an impression. Nor
is it with regard to France alone that our Chi-
nese hostilities are likely to place us in a false
position. We are setting up the law of the
strongest in one quarter of the globe : with what
face can we henceforth denounce it in another? If
we are to remodel Chinese commercial law, and
to occupy Chinese territory, merely because it suits
us, we must be prepared to look on quietly while
Brother Jonathan " annexes " Cuba, or the Czar
smothers the sick man, and disposes of his effects.
Filibustering is a game which it is not safe to
bring into fashion.
But is not this (some plainspoken reader may
ask) a miserable, heartless style of reasoning?
Has oppression no worse fault than that of being
expensive, or would freebooting become eligible
if we could monopolize the practice ? We
feel the force of these inquiries, and can only
reply that we give not the best arguments, but
those which are the most likely to be listened to
in this particular case. Generally speaking, the
British nation are sensitively alive to appeals
based on justice and mercy. They dislike the
Palmerstonian line of quarrel, and would rather
beard and grapple with the strong than bully the
weak. But China seems to be an exceptional
case. We have sympathy for the red man—
armed avengers for the negro—are revolutionary
at Naples, and philanthropic in Borneo. We
protect Australian aborigines, and are jealous of
the rights of Indian landowners. But somehow
we have no bowels of compassion for the Chinese.
The fact is, we have laughed at them till we
have forgotten that humanity has its rights and
its feelings even in China—that men are men still,
though they wear petticoats and
pigtails, and
women women, though incapable of a polka.
From the naive avowal of the delinquent inter-
preter in Assox's voyages, " Chinee man ver
" great rogue, truly, but have fashion, no can
" help," to BASIL IfALL's diverting history
.of the
decease of the pig " Jean," and the machinations of
the Celestials against the " bulk of her personals,"
our literary notices of this strange people have
tended mamly to excite our ridicule. The vulgar
notion of a Chinaman is made up of a few Pecu-
liarities of diet and dress. What can it signify
how you deal with a set of fellows who wear
hats like an umbrella, fatten puppies for pie
emv,A Even

Is not
in our
, save to
working
Chinese
id trot

them more wisely, more mercifully—must we
add, more justly ? They are covetous, no doubt ;
let us not enlighten them. by an exhibition of
rapacity. They are cunning—the weak often
are ; let us show them that the strong can afford
to be honest. They are. arrogant ; let us forbear
to trample on the pride of Con-fu-tsee with
greater pride. They are idolaters ;—shame and
woe to us if we offer them shells and rifle-bullets
as our best " evidences of Christianity."

THE REFLUX FROM ROME.
WHEN the Irish Union was first proposed by
WiLLIAm Prrr, there was much curiosity to
know what were the feelings of King GEORGE 111.
in relation to that measure. In those days Mr.
GEORGE BANKES was a favourite and confidential
friend of the King; and Mr. WILBERFORCE
records in his Diary that he asked Mr. BANKES,
" What did the King think of the Union with
Ireland?" and he received for an answer, "If
the measure will be for the good of the Church,
his Majesty is not disinclined to it ; but if it
will be for the disadvantage of the Church, the
" King will not be favourable to it." The strong
Protestant instincts of the King told him that
come serious inconveniences, and even possible
dangers, might be anticipated from the legisla-
tive junction of a country where the Roman
Catholics were in a majority with a nation in
which they were little more than a fraction of a
'ect. Whatever might be the political or corn-
nercial advantages of the Union with Ireland, it
was obvious that such a measure would give the
Roman Catholics a formidable locus standi in the
.mperial Legislature • and accordingly we have
een England agitated profoundly in its domestic
• olitics by the constant recurs ence of the per-
etually-changing " Catholic Question," and the
notice-book of the House of Commons shows
hat we are as far off as ever from arriving at any
ermination of this subject. Whether we like it
it not,—whether we are tired of it, or other-
rise,—the Roman Catholics will not allow us to
oe quiescent, and it will be absolutely necessary
lot to overlook the peculiar strategy which they
ave now adopted.
Last week, in our first leading article, we
lescanted on the laxity and indefinite belief, and
an the " no-principle of the age." We were
eferring, of course, to the state of opinion in
England considered socially and politically. We
,bserve that our remarks have received extensive
:irculation even amongst " Liberal" organs
which seldom copy from our columns. All that
we there said will appear in stronger relief, on
observing how little obnoxious to the charge of
Indifferentism " are the adherents of the Church
A Rome. Never were its members showing more
Weal and personal earnestness than now. Amongst
them there is no tendency "to give up," "to
merge all distinctions," " to assume ambiguous
lesignationa," or to shrink from committing them-
.elves in an " out-and-out " style. The contrast
xtween the intensity and organized zeal of the
Roman Catholics and the "open-question" sys-
km of languid Protestants is painful to contem-
,late.

We do not desire to indulge in hackneyed cries,
,r to repeat the gloomy vaticinations of former
Nriods. We wish to look at facts as they come
toefore us, and to illustrate their operation. We
said last week, that " Whoever studied carefully
the flux and reflux of opinions that has been
going on of late years must be convinced that
'all principles are undergoing a process of solu-
' tion which betokens some approaching state of
`transformation." No sooner have means been
nven for squeezing the Jews into Parliament,
'han the Irish ex-Attorney-General of the Whigs
;Ives notice for a new " Catholic Relief Bill," and
Proposes to make all oaths uniform. It is note-
vorthy that the Roman Catholics of England
and Ireland had committed the question into the
'lands of Mr. Sergeant DEASY, but it is now to
be transferred to Mr. J. D. FITZGERALD, who is
aPnvy Councillor, and who has already held the
highest Crown office in Ireland. Yet this ques-
tion of abolishing the Oath of 1829 is only put
forward as a means of uniting the English and
Irish Roman Catholics, and giving them a joint
Found for political action. Lax and indifferent