The Express.
London, England, 1850-12-19 00:00:00

MR. COBDEN AND SIR THOMAS HASTINGS.

At the peace mines at Birmingham last month,
Mr. Bright, is the Leans of his epee& there, made some
'Maims to the evidence given by Sir T. Hastings, R.N.,
before a parliamentary sonasaittee on navy estimates. Mr.
Bright is »ported to have said :
" Where was the danger to which Ragland was exposed ?
There was no superstition greater than the fear of a war
with France,--a superstition whisk had been handed down
to is from the French war. He retiolleeted Sir Thomas
Hastings, an admiral of the British fleet, who was examined
before a eon:mitts* of the House of Commons a short time
ago, was haunted with this fear of France. Davits his I:-
mutation he was pressed border and harder as to the autho-
rity upon which he had grounded these apprehensions. At
tut it cam out,—he stated that he had been informed by •
priest,—eo, not by a priest, but by the Bishop of Madague-
car—(load laughter)—that the intention of the French
people was extremely hostile or warlike. (Cheers.) Only
imagioe, the only authority upon which a British admiral
anticipated war was an idle story told by the Bishop of

Madegasear."
It appears that Sir T. Hastings objected to this allusion to
what had been said before the committee, and wrote to Mr.
Bright, demanding his authority for the statement. Mr.
Bright replied in due course, stating that the anecdote had
been related to him by Mr. Cobden, a member of the com-
mittee in question. Upon this other letters passed between
the parties, and ultimately Sir Thomas sent the following
challenge to the hon. member for the West Riding.
" 16, South Andlerstreet, Dec 14.
" Sir,—l have read our letter of tos 13th inst., and find
that I pre you credit in my list letter for more gentlemanly
feeling and straightforward manliness of character than you
seem to eon rider to be your due. I once more all on you
to state, directly and explicitly, whether, attar manning
my evidence, you tan with truth assert that my sole reason
for believing that the hostile feeling of Fiona to this coun-
try up to 1844 was (minded on an idle story told of the Bishop
of Japen, which Mr. Bright declares expressly he awned in
public on your authority ; and you, therefore, are responsi-
ble to me. And should you, in so clear and simple a case,
refuse to give me a satisfactory explanation, I shall oarlock
that it was and is your intention to insult me, and I shall
plate our correspondence in the bands of • friend, who will
wait en you on my behalf—or, should you prefer It, he will
confer with some friend of yours. I should be glad to receive
lcar answer at the earliest ionible period. as I wish to
eave town.—l am, sir, yours, T. ItARTINOB. —Richard
Cobden, Beq."
Yesterday, Sir Thomas Hastings published the cone.
spondence:

The following is Mr. Cobden's reply :
UL COBDZN TO BIZ THOMAS HtSTINOB.
Crunapeall House, near Manchester, Dec. 18, 1880.
Sta,—lf in my earlier days my admiration for the genius
of Sheridan had not tempted me to witness the mimic ex-
ploits of Sir Lucius O'Trigger, I might have been at a low
to comprehend the meaning of your letter. Aided, how-
ever, by my recollections of that model duellist, I understand
you to propose that we mould lay down our pens, and have
• personal interview, not to talk over the matter In dispute.
SRN Ivan to approach within speaking distance, but to take
our stand at twelve paces apart, with pistols in hand, and
endeavour to blow out each other's brains. Now, I am
satisfied, without any such experiment on my head at least,
that half an ounce of lead propelled by lees than a quarter
of an ounce of powder, is quite sufficient to shatter the
human skull to atoms, and extinguish in a moment all
powers of reason, all sense of justice, and every religion,
sentiment. Bat how such a poxes' would satisfy me that
had acted unjustly towards you, or convince you of the
contrary, is, I confess, quite beyond my comprehension.
So soon as I had recovered from the fit of laughter into
which, I must confess, your challenge threw me, and after
I had mustered the temptation I felt to name for my second
my much esteemed friend Mr. Punch, I endeavoured to
procure a copy of the report of the committee, which with
considerable dffliculty, and after the lapse of a couple of
days, I succeeded in obtaining ; sod, having refreshed my
I memory by a perusal of your evidence, I will endeavour to
state the facts of the case as between you and myself in such
away as shall admit of no further misapprehension.
After the committee had heard your:evidence at consider-
able length as to the preparations which had been made
(partly under your directions) to repel an imaginary inn-
elms from France. I requested you to state upon what autho-
rity you maimed that the Finset nation were eager to go
to war with this country. Your answers were somewhat
nine, which induced mo to pros you more closely, when
at list you quoted, as a proof of the belligerent disposi.
tins of the French, certain warlike sentiments which some-
body had heard on board a steam boat fall from the lips of
the French Bishop of Japan.
The uplifted eyes and hands of more than one member of
the committee led to the interposition of the chairman. The
room we,, if I recollect correctly. immediately ordered to
be cleared of strangers, and you were requested to with-
draw. I NM then appealed to by some of the members
Ili t►e committee to allow the above part of your evidence
to be expunged; others, on the contrary, wished it to be
retained, as 'spans the trivial grounds on which profes-
sional man are disposed to advocate an augmentation of our
amements.
At last it was agreed that your evidence, when written
eat by the shorthand writer, should be submitted for nor
notion to Lord Seymour (the chairman) and myself. Two
111 three days elapsed before the report was placed in my
heads by his lordship, when I agreed that the passages
respeeti•g the Bishop of Japan should be expunged. In the
meantime I had mentioned the incident to Mr. Bright and
several other members of the house.
The above statement of facts you will net call in question.
You do not deny having quoted the authority of the Bishop
of Japan ; you merely correct Mr. Bright's atom in ealleg
him the Bishop of Madagascar*. You do not gmennes to
call in question my right to mention to a member a dm
House of Commons in his seat in the evening anything or
everything which transpires in the morning Is a public
committee room of the house. You do not even complain of
the evidence which was expunged having been afterwards
made public, for which I could have expressed my regret.
What, then, is your complaint / Why, that Mr. Bright
alleged that the authority of the Bishop was the only proof,
brought forward by you, of the warlike disposition of the
French nation. In the perturbed state of your heeling; you
seem to be unable to perceive that this is • question to be
decided by reference to your published evidence, which has
been in the hands of every member for two years.
lam not Mr. Bright's authority for the sonatas of the
blue books ; I am responsible only for having communicated
te him that part of your evidence which was suppressed, the
1 truth of which you do not deny. Nor am I accountable iss
any criticisms or arguments he may deduce from it.
Your grievance is, then, confined to one word—the word
" only." Now, since the receipt of your last letter I have
felt it my duty to see Mr. Bright, who says th►t, in reply to
I your second letter to him, he has informed you that the re-
port of his speech is net free from verbal inaccuracies. Why
did not you end me a copy of that letter / It &ppm to me
that the whole question at issue is involved in its mean%
and, had a farther opportunity been afforded to Mr. Bright,
he might possibly have removed the whole ground of
complaint.
For myself, I have not another syllable to say upon the
subject. Yes ; I must add a word or two hikes I come
to what I trust will be the sloes of our correspondlimem.
You are a public servant, filing a very nmemilis Mills
and in the receipt of a liberal public stipend. AS ail.=
of the commission for increasing oar coast defame yen wow
largely instrumental in promoting the expenditure ef may
millions of publie teensy for purposes and In a mama
whisk whether right or wrong, are open to dieseadsm. Your
voluminous 'Masse before the committee on the army,
navy, and eminems, Wales attains ; and much of it, in my
humble °plea, is epee te aalmadvemien.
Burk being your peados, you mist, like all public men,
expect that year conduit will be freely summed ; and your
fate will be a laeltier one than that of meet of u if you do
sot find yourself earn eakapprehended, end sometimes ms-
represented. If, unable to reetzain the ebellitime of an
inselble temper, yea must seeds &amp a member of the
legislature to metal embet, merely beaus swam mem-
her k reverted to bare made a shake is a eagle word In
speeds elan hour's lagth, ae beams a repertsee pm may
have slipped eta Maul samenat, then you have mistaken
your mamas. and you meld be masultbm yeur ems reps.
and and the interest ef the gauntry by wearies Mai the
publie service, sad teak
regality Ibr year euesegable
nerves wields the baieleble praising of year own dame*
sirol —I main, Sir, pan, site.,
(Biped) RICHD. COBDEN.
Sir Themes Hastings, B.N.

MUNDiII 07 • Pass CD.NW ON 2111 COANT or
•nuo•.—A phial Ist* to • sootvespary eves UN fol-
lowing " • Wear km smoshool from th•
mew sloop, Omar. Wallohomp, as ito mat, timpalatiog
la all mos Is Somalis elk Os los& of lis as% vadat
atromilmoss. Most oh wads somloas to
$OlOl CloloboVio lblaters), s Mat bolmilsi
to Mids. a moll wok Mak dam as
Mad, w' Os Omp. Ito sumer .ad taps. stos
(ass of doss was 11to most sis) woo boa to
tato dot dam to WNV's left of Its matt of
its dm. Os Ow tam Ito lbw% mow rose os
*soh ItSail lbso all, awl Om Ms So rhos, th.
meg Ihos waft Mt mar." TM somst eloso not is;
how mewl davoea now wom lolt es Marl, or "teem
tkolt moo led bast Iskm away, orWfoal me
treto pooperly amid.