The Express.
London, England, 1853-06-20 00:00:00

TO COILK&SPONDkNTII.

• ••••••• st•tion et .7b• Yip.. ' imatig lb@ Maw intelPea
••tieselbse.is MM every Tardy y MeV. la Wu
tor set . .

l.ortiociesorto Wooded foe "Tlw trpta•,"Wdwt Zwukiwg moor,
wool t• at the 011oy 10, louwrl►Mrwy by Two o'clock us the
ftaphtslitWes.

RlOll WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE
".
_Der —lambi. I. ..... Afterroxe. lb.. 2s.

11. s.

la. 3J-m.

LONDON. MONDAY, JUNE 20.

Wit. xavta other doubt may exist about the
consequences to arise from Russia & scandalous desire
to despoil Turkey, one thing, at least, seems certain
—that the dispute, in some shape or other, will
overhang the markets of Europe for some time to
come. Russia's greedy attempt to extend her huge
empire has already affected prices, and the more
success she obtains, the more both trade and free-
dom must suffer. Happily the Bourse is not England
—we can lire, work, and prosper in spite of its
vibrations; but it is vexatious, nevertheless, that
prices should suffer from the unnatural desires of a
despot to increase his already enormous dominions.
But the money market must more or less be affected
for awhile; sensitiveness is one of the peculiarities
of its nature, and such being the case, the best
plan is to look the matter full in the face at once.
end make all our calculations accordingly. The ill
wind that may blow some people no good,
may nit others very well. "Bulls" and "Bears"
have both busy times in store for them. The passage of
the Nlusoovites across the Pruth, or any other phase
of actual hostilities, may make the vibration of prices
comparatively large within • short space of time, or
long-pending diplomatic discussions and annoy-
ances may render the alternations of the money
market less abrupt,—though little less constant
and reel. But present for a time the in-
cubus of doubt about peace or war seems sure to be,
whilst men can only lament the while that to the
hands of • single irresponsible despot should be
entrusted an amount of power able to disturb the
vital affairs of nations. We have pointed out be-
fore how serious is this part of oar present lesson, and
if people will but read it aright—what a moral it
points against despotism and in favour of 4:consti-
tutional freedom. But it is not alone the money
snaraet that may be influenced by the CZAR'iI pro-
ceedings. Russian aggression which seeks the spolia-
tion of Turkey could not be successful without direct
injury to England, not only as regards the infrac-
tion of solemn treaties, but in a commercial sense
also. Unless firm and determined steps are taken
for the preservation of the existing relations of Europe
our trade in the Black Sea may be compro-
mised. When the first news of Russian intent►ons
towards the SULTAN reached London, the organs of the
CZAR in England plied their pens very busily to
show that Turkey was in a state of decay, and that
freedom and progress and the safety of our trade re-
quired the absorption of the dominions of the Caliph
within the iron fold of the Autocrat. We were told
that we had no interest in the matter that should
induce us to attempt the upholding an ancient ally
whilst treaties and their obligations were ignored
altogether as effete, valueless, outgrown. 'f he false-
hood, so far as our commerce is concerned, was
answered by a return obtained by Lord DUDLEY
STVAKT, which showed that the trade between this
country and Turkey amounted in round num-
bers to between two and three millions sterling,
whilst our commerce with Russia was some-
thing like half that amount, and with Austria
a comparative trifle. The documents which pointed
out these facts, did not, however, give anything
more than the total relative values of our trade with
the three nations, but another recently issued Par-
liamentary blue book contributes some more precise
statements. Here is the estimated value of British
merchandise imported at Constantinople in a single
year, 1830:

Ia sailing vessels from Liverpool—cotton and woollen
maaufsetares, and vac, Iron and Mac plates, 753,031/. ;
In sailing vessels from London—East and West India pro-
dime, and various hind, of British manufactures, 223,4251. ;
In steamers from Southampton—fine cotton and woollen
manufactures, cochineal, indigo, and other valuable articles,
833,670/. ; in snow steamers from Liverpool—same kind of
augoes am from Southampton, 812,0001. ; in a steamer from
London, 18,3001.; from England—iron, 27,0001. ; sealer
11,7631. ; in foreirn vessels from England—coals and sundry
goods, 38,40b1. ; total, 2,512.594!.

But other subjects of the SCLTAN dealing with
England have also to be mentioned. At Smyrna,
&lonics, Samemon, and Trebisond , the ships of
Great Britain figure high up upon the catalogue
of vessels of each nation entering those ports
for the useful purposes of trade ; whilst in the lists
of values of imported cargoes, the English are seen as
•rule to rank with the most important. Amongst the
exports from Constantinople to this country, also
considerable, we find large quantities of wheat and
maize, of wool—especially goat's wool—and silk. All
this is exclusive of our trade with Syria,and.more than
that, is exclusive also of our commercial dealings
with the provinces into which Ri_ia has proba-
bly by this tints marched her military hordes. Mol-
davia and Wallachia both figure In the trade en-
tries of this country ; and Dear as Russia is to them,
&glance at the etatiatice of oar ootanseess with the
Principalities will show at ones that the people of
both those states are more extensively allied in
oommerce with distant but civilised Eng.
laud than with the neighbouring, but semi-
savage Russia. The statement of the vessels cleared
at the Moldavian port of Galata in the year 1848, dis-
tinguishing their destination and cargoes, shows
that England brought thence to this country 96,497
qaarters of maim, 31,702 quarters of wheat, and
4,607 cwts. of tallow. In the following year the
quantity of maize and wheat brought from Galata
to Great Britain bad risen to 211,076 quarters, to
say nothing of other miscellaneous products. In
1860 the quantity was somewhat lees, but still
soosiderable, whilst in 1861 the grain brought from
Galata to this country amounted to 346,232 quarters
—besides which, bones for manure, linseed, bales
of wool, and ox-bides were largely supplied to us,
In return for this large export to England we find
Wats baying from Great Britain manufactures
and twist alone to the amount in one year of
1133,3104—their purchase of our products growing
in proportion to oar purchase of their grain. In-
deed the balk of their trade is with
this country. The facts about Wallachia tell
a precisely similar story. The exports thence of
grain to Great Britain in 1831 amounted to
387,473 quarters, besides rapeseed, linseed, and
bone ash; the Wallachisns taking from England in
return, 231,3301. worth of one manufactured article
alone in that same year, besides other goods. In a
word it may be said that these Principalities which
Russia threatens to seize, are two of our granaries
supplying us freely with food, and taking
largely in exchange the products of English
manufacturing industry. Their chief commerce
is with Great Britain, their trade with
Remain comparatively insignificant. But the CZAR,
coos allowed to occupy Moldavia and Wallachia, will
de what he did in 1/448, which was to set his hungry
troops to devour everything the Principalities pro-
dose—impoverishing the people—destroying their
bade—and making their industry valueless to them-1
at or to their customers. How can it with any

grace, then, be said that thc,e Principalities have
no interest in maintaining their present practical
freedom under the Scur.i.:4, which permits the
growth of their commerce? And how can the
organs of the CZAR expect,tm, to be silent When We
hear them say that England hit no renterl4 interest
at stake in the proservation of the independence of
Moldavia and Wallachia! W have before said
that apart from the obligations of Treaties, we have'
other intonate involved in this dispute between Russia
and Turkey. The figures just quoted will surely
bear out the assertion. Under the SULTAN, our
trade in. Turkey is practically free ; under the CZAR
—were the CZAR'S presence in Constantinople pos-
sible—adieu to everything like freedom, of faith, of
speech, of printed thought, or of trade. In &smaller
degree the occupation of the Principalities wpuld be
similarly fatal to all progress political or com-
mercial

IS YOTNG DERDYISM about to become schismatic ?
Or does it only affect to set up for itself a right of
private judgment on particular points whereby it
hopes to cajole the sympathies of certain wanderers
in search of truth whom the old shibboleths of
Toryism repel? Has the prophet BENJAMIN really
invented a new sect, with a creed made up one-half
oat of Radical precepts to perform good works, and
the other half eat of Tory beliefs in undermined
authority and fading traditions? Is a word, is
Young Derbyism the faith of a new political church,
or only the lingua franca spoken in • temporary
chapel-of-ease to the Carltoo, where unsettled be-
lievers in all the recognised dogmas congregate for
the interchange of doubts?
Such questions are naturally suggested by the
course which has been taken by Lord STANLEY and
his political Mentor, Mr. DISRAELI, ever since the
fall of the Derbyits Administration. It can hardly
have been forgotten how different was the tone
maintained by the late Chancellor of the Exche-
quer while in office on a great variety of questions
from that which was stupidly adhered to by most
of his incompetent colleagues. It was not
his fault that Protection was not openly
thrown overboard at starting, and that the
indefensible exemption of landed property from
legacy duty was not abandoned in deference to
public opinion. But the dull weight of the Hun-
WICKES and NORTHUMBERLANDS, the CHEZ/170MM
and the PAKINOTONS, was not to be thrown off ; and
so the only SAMSON of Conservatiem had to submit
to be shorn of that wherein his strength lay, and to
be paraded before lords and dignitaries as an object
of mockery and mirth. But the liberal locks of
SAMSON are beginning to grow again ; and if he has
really been taught by experience, and will not suffer
himself again to be shorn, he may yet have strength
and fiod opportunity for using it. It has not
escaped observation that throughout the senseless
debates on the Clergy Reserves Bill, as well as in
those on the Succession Tax, the voice of Mr. Dia.
RAELI has hardly been heard, and never as question-
ing the principle of those measures. In many divi-
sions this session, of a strictly party nature, neither
his name nor that of Lord DERBY'S son is to be
found. Indeed, the line taken by the latter has
been in some respects still more significant. Lord
STANtey's pamphlet recommending the aboli-
tion of church rates, coupled with his vote
in favour of the Bill for the admission of Jew.
to Parliament, and his absence from the late division '
on the Ballot, are incidents against the possibility of
whose occurrence four-fifths of his father's followers
would unhesitatinglyhave offered (their common gage
of belief) a bet of ten to one any day last year.
What such signs and symptoms amount to is another
affair. There are those incredulous persons who
still continue to doubt that they augur any substan- '
tier charge in the future intentions or tactics of
Toryism. They cannot believe that after having got
into office by a Protectionist ruse, and having lost it
by an awkward attempt to get rid of its conse-
quences, Lord DERBY and the other old aris-
tocratic chiefs of the Conservative party will
now attempt to regain it in the disguise
of Reformers. With such sceptics as those
to whom we refer, the demonstrations of
Young Derbyism pass for no more than a desire to
open an unlimited credit at the Radical bank over
the way—a proceeding which, however intended,
there 'Loy be bat little objection to, so long as the
"promises" tendered are honourably paid. The
party of Progress are not very likely to reject aid,
come from what quarter it may. If those who are in
the position to lead onward will not lead, they cannot
complain that men are not ready to dawdle behind
them. It is very well to talk of a Coalition Cabinet com-
prising a rare combination of aristocratic preten-
sions ; but in the main the strength of such com-
bination would seem to consist very often in the
joint-stock power of standing still. No wonder that
in this condition of things so cunning an observer
of the wants and wishes around him as the slippery,
whirligig. versatile member for Backs should conceive
the idea of opening a new Conventicle by the side of
the old established Minder, and setting up a young
man, as yet little known, but of some vigour and
promise, to preach to those whom disoontent with
the mnmblings of the established priesthood may
lead to listen to him. The subject of India is oer-
taialy a favourable one to test Lo, d fitenexe's
powers. He has had the advantage of personal ob-
servation, and that very recently, of the coun-
tries and nations rudely clamed together under
the same of the British Empire in the East. He
can speak as a personal witness of the appearance
at least of men and things in those distant
regions, and with the aid of diligence and leisure we
may assume that he has mastered the historical de-
tails which are undoubtedly necessary for their due
appreciation and portraiture. He has with him to a
great extent the sympathies of all who are disgusted
with the insufficiency of the ministerial scheme; and
it will go hard with him if he does not make abetter
speech on the question than the memorable exhibi-
tion of Sir CHARLES WOOD. But, notwithstanding
all this, Lord STANLEY must beware how he suffers
his motion to assume the appearance of a mere skilful
manoeuvre for party purposes. There are greater
interests at stake than those of a Coalition Govern-
ment, or those which may possibly be served by the
dodges of Young Derbyism. Lord STANLEY is sure
of a hearing in the house; but if he wants to gain a
hearing in the country, he must aim at doing some-
thing more than merely crimping votes for • parti-
cular division. He must show that he is true to re-
form in India, and not false to reform in England.
If he allows himself to be made a tool for running
the one against the other, he will deservedly fail;
yet this will be the inevitable consequence, should he
persist in framing his motion in such a manner as to
imply that in the event of his success, permanent
legislation is to be postponed from this session until
next. Everybody who is impartial and disinte-
rested—everybody who is generous and just in the
sentiments by which he is actuated towards the peo-
ple of India—feels that a Continuance Bill for two
or three years is indispensable, in order that time
should be given for hearing fully and fairly the case
on behalf of the aggrieved before conclusions are
finally adopted regarding their future government.
This journal was the first to suggest and to advocate
I that course, and we have given probably more space
to this question of Indian Reform than nay two of
our contemporaries put together. We have, therefore,
Isome claim to be heard on the point, and we repeat
that the essential act of national justice and of

legislative decency towards India—a practical Cots;
Bounce Bill whilst further evidence is listened
to, may be • taken lb either of two ways;
Parliament may 'either poet/inns the eofisideration
of. all administrative • change until 1865 or 18.56,
I*l enact feb the iaterval a mere temporarylaw,
.eentianing in force foi that period ail 'arrangements
.now existing; or, the pending measure may easily
be so modified as to become mere transitionary one,
the term of its duration being limited--say to three
years. If Lord STANLEY comes forward to make
one or other of tines propeeitione, public opinion
may support him; but if, on the contrary, he pursues
an ambiguous course, he will leave himself open to
the present suspicion of trying the mere Young Tory
dodge of blocking up the way against Electoral
Reform next session by a useless and profitless ad-
journment of the India question till February next.
If be adheres to this latter attempt, it will of course
become the duty of every sincere liberal to oppose
him. It is very well for Reformers to accept any
reforms they can get by the aid of Young Derbyism,
but to allow any new Disraeli-Stanleyite trick to be
played off upon them is a very different thing.
Radicals have too often been used as Tory catspaws
already.

INDIA.