The Sun.
London, England, 1864-07-11 00:00:00

METROPOLITAN.

The adjourned Warncliffe meeting of this com-
pany was held on Friday at the London Tavern ;
Mr. W. A. Wilkinson in the chair.
Mr Bluebell, the solicitor, read the heads of a
bill to enable the Metropolitan Railway Company
to extend their railway from Finsbury-circus to
Trinity-square, Tower-hill, and for other purposes.
The bill authorised the company to create new capi-
tal for the construction of the extension line, or to
make it by means of a separate capital. The line
was to pass through the Finsbury-circus gardens in
a covered way. Certain streets were not to be
stopped up. Trains were to run in the mornings
and evenings of working Jays for the accommoda-
tion of the labouring classes at reduced fares.
The CHAIRMAN said he did net know of any body
of shareholders being in so favourable a position as
they
fwouerinemicr.:trrezpspeocnt.oibflAthre partrieessewnthobibl.mare
ald
uTnhdeerre.
taken the risk of providing the money for the ex-
penses of the bill and for the Parliamentary deposit.
The shareholders of the Metropolitan Company
were free to have nothing whatever to do with pro-
viding the capital for the extension line, but it they
wished they might subscribe any po,-t ion of it. They
had the option of taking or leaving the extension
shares. The whole matter had been fully discussed
at the ordinary meeting of the company ill February
last, and the report of the directors fully and fairly
explained the objects of the Bill, and that it was to
authorise part of the " inner circle" recommended
by the Parliamentary Committee of last Session.
The traffic on the Metropolitans line was increasing,
and would be further increased by the construction
of the proposed extension lines. He concluded by
moving a formal resolution approving the Bill,
which he trusted would be carried unanimously.
Mr. AUSTEN, a director, seconded the motion, and
explained that the Parliamentary Committees
looked with great favour on the proposed " inner
circle line," of which the Metropolitan Railway
and proposed extensions would form a considerable
portion. All that was wanted on the present occa-
sion was their approval of the Bill, which, if sync-
tinned, would prevent competing schemes for the,ir
present through traffic._
_

Mr. HARTRIDGE said they had better let other
parties make the line; there was no estimate of
either cost or traffic in respect of the proposed ex-
tension, and his opinion was that if they were coins
polled to make that line it would have the effect of
reducing their dividend on the Metropolitan main
line by at least one-third. The most expedient
thing they could do would be to reject the Bill alto.
gather, and he moved an amendment to the effect
that it was inexpedient that the line from Finsbury
to Tower-hill should be made with the authority
and at the risk of the proprietors of the Metropolis
tan Railway.
Mr. ELEES said he held proxies to the amount of
£200,000, and he strongly objected to any extension
lines being made at their cost, and would second
amendment for defeating the Bill.
Mr. PARSON, deputy chairman, explained that it
was most expedient that the extension line should
be made by the authority of the company, and by
the assistance of their friends. He thought that
the deposit of £96,000 in respect of one extension
Bill and £48,000 in respect of the other Bill was a
proof of the responsibility of the parties interested.
It had been said that they did not know who they
were, but he thought all doubt would be removed
when he mentioned that they were Messrs. Brassey,
Peto, Betts, Kelk, Waring, and others. The only
penalty in the Bill for the non-completion of the
railway was the forfeiture of the deposit, and if the
line were not made the loss would fall on those
gentlemen. It was a speculation of those parties,
and when carried out must improve the property of
the Metropolitan Company. The shareholders of
the Metropolitan were bound in good faith to pass
the Bill, which was promoted at the cost and risk
of the gentlemen he had mentioned. Parliament
had r,,:ected a Bill—tbe East London Bill—that
was opposc'd to them on the faith of this Bill being
carried out. They should remember that a similar
breach of faith on the part of the South-Eastern
shareholders at a Wharncliffe meeting had caused
Parliament to revive and sanction the E Ist Kent
Bill for a railway which now termed part of the
London, Chatham, and Dover. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. Jones and other proprietors were in favour
of the Bill, while others expressed an opposite

opinion.
On the amendment being put it was negatived by
a show of hands, and the Bill was approved by 30

agNinst 5.
Air. HARTRIDGE said he was extremely anxious
etors should take the case before the
the prop.'
House of LorL!s•
On taking the Poll the only vote recorded against
the Bill was that of 11t. Hertridge, and in order to
save further trouble he withdrew it.
The CHAIRMAN declared the Bill unanimously
iapproved, and the proceedings conoluded with a vote
of thanks to the chairman.

President Lincoln may lay aside his file of
Standards and breathe afresh. Major. General Dix,
Commander of the Eastern Division in the city of
New York, may recover his wonted composure.
Ambassadors Dayton and Adams may smooth their
knitted brows, and the placemen of Washington
may rejoice as though a veritable victory had
crowned the Federal arms. " Manhattan" is dead !
The well known and long familiar nom de plume
will no more greet the eye of the reader as he takes
up the broad sheet of the Standard. Fort Lafa-
yette has not closed its hideous gates on the daring
writer, nor has Richmond received an unexpected
exile. The controversy which so suddenly rose
betiveen our intrepid correspondent and the North-
ern Government has been cut short by the hand of
death. Arrest and parole are at an end, and "Man-
hattan" has stepped on to the arena of another
world, beyond the reach of President or provost.
It may be feared that his recent difficulties with the
Federal Government have tended to hasten the
demise of our valued correspondent. His health
had been failing for some weeks; but he was
scarcely past he prime of life, being only in his 50th
year, and at the time of his interview with Major
General Dix exhibited no such symptoms as

would have obviously indicated a fatal issue. But
death has come, and the stroke was sudden. Four.
teen days after the above.mentioned interview
" Manhattan" expired, with little previous warning,
breathing his last in his own dwelling. What might
have been the result of his collision with the Govern.
meat had be been spared to live it is vain to specu-
late. But his departure from the scene is a loss to
the cause of political truth and honesty. His fear-
less pen was a scourge to the horde of peculating
politicians who are the curse of the Republic; and
the citizens of the North might well turn to his
letters as published in our columns in order to see a
picture of their affairs more faithful to the fact than
any exhibited nearer home. No writer held up the
mirror to the face of society with less of tremor and
compromise than " Manhattan." An out-spoken
expression of his own convictions was characteristic
of the man. He might be rough, but he was
faithful, and was worth a host of more cautious
scribes who found it easy to avoid his faults by
renouncing his merits. The English reader, while
perusing the rapid and crowded sketches of our
lively correspondent, might often differ from the
writer, but never failed to receive a vivid impression
of the actual scenes portrayed by that graphic pen.
The style was eccentric, but it was eminently a
readable style, and " Manhattan" was unquestion-
ably a correspondent of " the people." He wrote
in the vernacular, and the freedom which might
expose him to the criticism of the pedant gave him
more ready access to the minds of the masses.
" Manhattan" was no foe to the institutions
of his country. For better or for worse he ac-
cepted them. But while he stuck to the ship, and
hoisted the flag of the Union, he had a quarrel
with the captain and officers. He discerned the
breakers that foamed ahead, and his hope lay in
awakening "all hands" to a sense of the common
danger. He was without faith in the Federal
Government, and had less fear of the Southern
forces than of Northern corruption. In his last
short letter he wrote—" I only hope that when
General Lee reaches Washington he will issue such
a proclamation as will enable us to come back under
the original state rights doctrine." It is less a
matter for wonder than regret to find a writer like

" Manhattan" becoming the object of much mis-
representation and even personal attack. His
open and reiterated denunciations of all that was
corrupt in the Seward-Lincoln Administration
made him a ready mark for the official sycophants
of the press. The .New ork Tribune of the 17th
of last month quarrelled with him for not believing
in the victories of General Grant, and poured
the most concentrated essence of abuse in thorough
Yaokeo style on his devoted head. Subscqu:,nt
revelations, however, and more perfect information,
have shewn that our correspondent was perfectly
justified in his scepticism, and that his " monstrous
falsehoods were more correct than the official tele-
grams. It is curious to observe how by common
consent a sort of pre.eminence has been given to
Manhattan as an agent of mischief against the
Federal cause. In the midst of all the scurrility
and maltreatment to which he was subjected Maii-
hattan received the compliment of being placed first
and foremost among his class. In the journal to
which we have referred the editor writes vindic-
tively of Mr. Charles Mackay and "other alien
correspondents of foreign journals," whom he
accuses of abusing the " national hospitality by the
coinage and utterance of monstrous falsehood in the
interests of secession and slavery." This would seem
strong language, particularly when the aforesaid
correspondents are ticketed as " rebel liars in our
city!, But when the writer comes to Manhattan he
utterly boils over with excess of wrath, and the
we seem to come hissing hot from the tip of his
pen. Contrasting the ordinary run of literary de.
linquents with our unfortunate correspondent in
partichlar, the editor goes on to say—" Not one of
them, so far as wehave observed, can at all approach
the native —, who serves the Evil One and Jeff.
Davis by writing regularly to the Standard over
the signature of Manhattan." We beg to
be excused repeating the epithet which this
amiable journalist has thought fit to apply to a
political opponent. We would not echo such a
word over the grave of one who, in private life, was
among the most generous of men, and to whose
kindness and largeness of heart many are ready to
own themselves indebted. " Manhattan" wrote
under date 17th May, "The disgraceful wholesale
lying about the war and victories still continues.
Nothing like it has ever been heard before since the
world began. Many be2ieve we have really achieved
a great victory. There is one man that does not
believe it, and that one is Lient.-General Grant."
It is against this and similar statements that the
Tribune enters its virulent protest. Thus—" If
any one happens to owe Old Nick ten thousand
liars, we advise him to turn out Manhattan' to
his creditor, pay his debt, and get a credit for the
' balance in his favour." This is elegant; but time
has served to show that the eloquence is mini).
plied, and that some other name should stand in
the place of our too faithful correspondent.
There is something significant in the argument
of the Tribune. It amounts to this—that it is
consistent to talk of "sending out of the country"
the "alien correspondents of foreign journals," so
long as a "native" writer is allowed not only to
' equal but to transcend them in his daring criti-
cisms on the doings of the Federal Government.
"Manhattan" was a professed Unionist; but that
made his opposition all the more terrible. Are we to
infer that " Manhattan" was to be engaged in order
that the " aliens" might afterwards be summarily
dealt with ? Our correspondent had already been
.
brought face to face with General Dix when this
truculent article appeared. The Tribune
given
dently desired that no quarter should
to the obnoxious scribe. Did the Editor desire to
of repres-
sion the way paved for further measures
point,
despite ? If ho did his pen worked to thatveil
ell the issue.
In some ingenious attempts to v .
of this Lit; or
In eight days afterwards the object
Whatever may b,
attack descended to the grave.
g pens America has lost a
the utterance of hireling
friend, at a time when ;native"friends are scarce.
head ,
" Manhattan" kept his and his hands
clean, in the midst of the general madness and cor-
ruption. future day America herself
At some may
learn that men who were keen enough to see and
be given
honest enough to expose the high-handed treacheries
of an evil time were among her truest friends and
flowed citizens.

of the official text of a despatch of Bishop Mont ad,
commenting upon the London Conference, forwarded
to Count Moltke-Hatfeld, the diplomatic agent of
King Christian IX. at the Court of the Tuileries :
" M. Le Comte,—The Conference cf London has
separated without having restored peace. The neu-
tral Cabinets have not succeeded in bringing the
allied Powers to a more just appreciation of their
duties towards the political system of Europe. We
have stretched to their furthest limits the conditions
indispensable to the existence of an independent
at autonomous Danish S tqte. Bat nothing has
been able to satisfy the ambitious views of the
German Powers.
" The line of conduct we have pursued at ttio
Conference has been stamped from first to last with
tEe most sincere desire of arriving at an ?greemt7.3t,
even were it only to be obtained by the sacrifice of
incontestable rights.
"When the Conference thought a suspension of
arms essential to the success of the negotiations, we
which
hies they
O the enemy. were inter-
preted submitted to a truce, concluded at the most un-
favourable time, and upon conditions which, very
onerous in themselves, became intolerable on account
a the
byhe military
t arbitrary manner
t ianwic
h
In the negotiation we found the allied Powers autho..
ritatively decline all discussion upon the engage.,
ments entered into by both parties of 1851 and
1852, and yet the allies had alleged these same
engagements to Europe as the cause and sole
object of the war. We found the Treaty of Lon-
don. and the principle of the integrity of the
Danish monarchy, which all Europe had recog-
nised as an indispensable element of the European
system, rejected by the Allied Powers, although
they had formally bound themselves towards the
other Powers to respect that treaty and the principle
which it laid down. Finally, abandoning all re-
serve and not content with depriving us of Holstein
and Lauenburg, they further claimed the duchy of
Schleswig, which they pretend to confiscate for
the profit of Germany by virtue of the right of the
strongest, and were at most willing to leave us a
small portion of this ancient province of the Danish

Crown.
"It has been a painful task to the Government
of the King to resign itself to follow step by step
these constantly-increasing demands. For, confi-
ding in the justice of our cause and in the autho-
rity of public law, it had committed itself to a most
unequal contest, in the hope of finding that support
in thecouscils of Europe which our arms alone were
unable to give us. And it has been painful to the
Kiag personally, who accepted the Crown upon the
faith of the Treaty of London, and has now found
himself condemned to discuss the partition of the
country which believed it had found the certain
guarantee of its integrity in him and in his dynasty.
"Yet painful as were these sacrifices, they have
been supported. 'lf the Powers of Europe really
desire to abandon the Treaty of Load on'—such was
the language help by the Plenipotentiaries of the
King---' His Majesty, to avoid the recommencement
of hostilities, wi.l not oppose a cession of territory,
provided he obtains thereby not only peace, but
also an independent and perfectly autonomous exis-
tence for what remains to him of his States.' In
this supposition they pointed out the line of Eckern-
forde to Frederickstadt as the frontier. In accord-
ance, however, with a proposition adopted by the
neutral Cabinet, the Danish Government deter-
mined upon withdrawing the line to the Schlei—
the point proposed by England—so as to unite by
this acceptance the imposing unanimity of the four
neutral Powers with Denmark. The cession of
territory to which we thus consented in the interest
of peace was considerable. It mulcted the mon-
archy of upwards of a fourth of its extent. and
deprived Denmark of military and maritime advan•
tages of the greatest value, to augment in the same
degree the means of action and conquest of Germany.
We could not go further in the way of concessions
without sacrificing the very existence of Denmark.
" But all the €ffirts made by the neural Cainets
and all the sacrifices offered by us have remained
futile before the obstinacy of the allies. Upon leav-
ing the Conference we took up our former stand.
upon the treaty of London, and once more we find
ourselves engaged in a war in which we are strug-
gling for existence, invoking in our favour the action
of Europe and the general principle of public law.
Upon their side the allied Powers proclaim the right
of the strongest, and, in despite of the reprobation
of the rest of Europe, desire to annihilate a State
whose only wrong consists in unwillingness to sub-
mit to their domination.
"This is the lamentable result in which the at-
tempt at a Conference has issued ; but, while stating
it, I have, at the same time, a far more agreeable
duty to fulfil.
"During the course of the negotiations, each
time the Government of the King has made a fresh
step upon the way of concession, the neutral Powers
and in especial the English Cabinet, while calling
upon us to take this step, have justly appreciated

the greatness of the sacrifice which we made of an
.ncontestable right.

" The proposal of an armistice put forward by
Lord Russell involved the maintenance of the mari-

time advantages which we had conquered, in
lcom-
pensation for those which the allies preserved on
land. The English Minister for Foreign Affairs has
always recognised the fail justice of our demand that
the engagements of 1851-2 should be taken as the
basis of the deliberations. Earl Russell did not for-
get that the Treaty of London was specially due to
the initiative of England, and demonstrated with
with the full force of irrefutable logic that Prussia
and Austria had contracted obligations towards
their co-signitaries in taking part in that act.
When, lastly, the English Cabinet entered into the
discussion upon the abandonment of the Treaty of
London, Earl Russell declared that it was not
within the competence of the Neutral
Towers to renounce the solemn treaty by
which they had recognised the integrity of the
Danish Monarchy, without at least establishing
the basis of a solid and lasting peace, and
with this view he acknowledged that 'the new,fron
tier line ought not to be drawn further northward
than the mouth of the Schlei and the line of the
Dannewerke." Further, when the plenipotentiaries
of the King pointed out that we could not consent
to a prolongation of the suspension of arms without
the assurance that the English proposition
should
form the basis of ulterior deliberations, Earl Russell
declared that the Government would not itself 'nuke
to draw a
any proposition, nor would it adhere to any propo•
e followed the
sition made by anotherwPeorearndteinnd
Powers,
that Cabinet took the ini4
einsgpecial that of
more northern liEnearolfßduesmseaation,
assured in advance of the consent of
faith of this engage.
Government. It was upon the fa
without
the bei
Danishn g
accepted
tmhee,
"It
trt
prolongation
gttheahtuios
stepoPlenipotentiariesfthbeyws
ing Support. in every point
tiative, and at the same time that We laid it down
use tsepapee no
tes
hiopofatnttehdolevf King
ms
advicett hh ee
Englishp roopfo stheiti
Connaebuoi
of which
h.
engaged his Govern-
mentasourt
ou littisinuantvuanir,y

,4 Alai i
impossible
engagement of Earl Russell in every point with his
ough we find t to reconcile this
proposition to commit the charge of fixing the
mareation to an impartial Power, we are
in essaying that step, had no intention of placing
less convinced that tho English Minister,
• --
himselinelfe4. 'in contradiction with his fa
promise.

" The resumption of hostilities findsThenmarkstill
Without, allies upon the field of batt!e. But the
justice of our cause has already 1.4.

I around us

the sympathy of the Cabinets told v, isheti of the
nations. We have a right to hop, Ih t these scull-
ments will not permit the ruin of Ponmark to he
accomplished; and we cherish the belief that the
Governments which have shown so lively an into.
rest in the negotiations will not abandon us in a
war so unequal and so unjust.

" Be good enough, M. is Comte, to read this
despatch to his Excellency M. Drouyn do Lhuys,
and to leave with him a copy.--I have the honour,
&c., (Signed) D. G. MONRAD."

LONDON, MONDAY, JULY 11, 1864.

The recent Debate and Division in the English
House of Commons have very naturally given rise
to various comments, critical but not complimentary,
both at home and abroad. A French journal adroitly
adapting the celebrated exclamation of FRANCIS 1.,
says that the English Ministers may ezelaim,
" Tout est perdu fors nos places Equally signifi-
cant 'Vas the prediction of M. EUGENE FORCADE,
which appeared in the Semaine financiere—before
the termination of the debate—" Whether Ministers
have a majority or not is comparatively immaterial.
What can be truly asserted is that the effect of the
debate is wholly unfavourable to the Ministry, and
that even with ,a feeble majority its existence is
doomed. We must look for a change of Cabinet, a
dissolution, and a general election. It is desirable
that England should go through this internal
crisis as soon as possible if it be important that
English policy should speedily resume a settled
and intelligible tendency." While these are the opi-
nions of unprejudiced outsiders, both Ministers and
Opposition are congratulating themselves on
the division ! The Conservatives attempt to con-
sider it a triumph—an attempt which, we must
confess, is not justified by appearances. One of
our Conservative contemporaries laments the defal-
cation of five members whose votes had been
securely counted upon. "Five so-called Conser-
vatives," says the Standard," we regret to say,
were counted with the majority, and we hope that
CriarmaN, Mr. DUTTON, Mr. COItNWELL
LEGIE, and Mr. PUGII, will be able to explain
their voles to the satisfaction of their constituents.''
The vote of Mr. BUTTON appears to have given
considerable ofL.nce, as he had taken part in the
meeting at Lord SALISBURY'S, and there expressed
no dissent to Mr. DISRAELI'S proposed amendment.
r_lla at least are the charges brought against him
by his friends, the lion,
charges which) perhaps,
gentleman will be enabled readily to explain away.
The Irish " compact," with which Mr. C. BEN-
TINCK sought to alarm the Conservative voters, ap-
pears to have existed only
in his own fertile imagi-
nation. Of the Irish members who did not happen
to he Conservatives 16 voted with the Opposition,
and 23 with the Government, while the O'DONOUG.
HUE and Mr. COGAN bath declared that the votes
of the 16 were instigated not by love •
of Opposition,
bat by intense disapproval of the Government--a
se-ntiment which appears indeed to be
almost, one
might say, universal. The Government, victorious
on the battie-field, may in truth exclaim, as ether
successful generals have done before " Another such
Victory would be worse than a Defeat."

However disappointed many may feel at the ter-
mination of the debate in the House of Cnamons, it
is some satisfaction to reflect that the House of
Lords, at all events, vindicated its character, and
did not allow the force of ministerial influence to
hold sway, and subvert the effct of the vote of
censure, which nearly all must have felt to be richly
deserved from their past conduct and their present
incompetency relative to this Dano-German ques-
tion. Lord MALMESBURY acquitted himself of his
task In a very credizabie manner, and his speech
wAs well worthy or the occasion. 114 alluded, in

the first place, with feelings of regret to the absence
of Lord DERBY, and a very general expression of
regret seemed to be felt at the non-attendance of the
noble earl. Few of the most prejudiced partisans of
Government could fail to concur with the noble lord
when he lamented the violation of the Treaty of
1852. That he truly designated as a very bad pre-
cedent. Nothing can be more correct than this, for
the want of good faith exhibited by the Prussians,
and in a manner, sanctioned by the other Powers,
cannot be too much deplored or too deeply
regretted. All the trouble and anxiety that were
expended upon the formation of that Treaty are
-thrown away, all the hopes that were indulged in
as to its efficacy are now frustrated, and there is
nothing but disappointment in the whole affair.
Well may statesmen and orators complain of such
a state of things, and declaim against the authors
of the outrage. Lord MALMESBURY reviewed the
complicated details of this vexed question with
great clearness, and also with considerable modera-
tion. There was great force in the allusions he
made to the want of policy displayed by the Go•
vernment. They went on in a vacillating manner,
and did not seem to have made up their minds what
line to pursue, until they reached that degrading
point when, as Lord MALMESBURI emphatically de-
, scribed it, Earl RUSSELL had to propose himself the
dismemberment of a kingdom the integrity of which
was considered essential to the welfare of Europe
and dear to the feelings of the people of this coun-
try. This was not the worst, however, for when
he had submitted to the indignity of making this
proposition, he was obliged to endure a refusal from
the " triumphant Germans." Never, in modern
times, has there been such a flagrant instance of
incapacity exhibited in our foreign relations, and
political opponents have seldom had a case out of
which they could make so much capital in the way
of recrimination and abuse. It cannot be . said,
however, that this license was carried to ex-
tremity on the part of the Opposition in either
branch of the Legislature. The scene that occurred
in the House of Commons was entirely owing to
the mismanagement of the Treasury bench, and no
one to the left of the Speaker had to retract his
words, and own that his remarks were injudicious
and ill-timed. Lord MALMESBURY could not better
have wound up his remarks than by quoting pas.
sages from two speeches made by Lord PALMER-
STON, which are totally dissimilar in tone and pur-
port. One was the famous one of last year, in which
he declared that "it was an important matter of
British policy to maintain the integrity and inde•
pendence of the Danish monarchy," and the other
discourse was the extraordinary one lately delivered
to the House, in which he said that nothing short
of the war assuming the most frightful proportions
could induce this country to reconsider its present
determination of preserving peace. It will be a
subject of regret to many that Lord BROUGHAM
should have put himself up as the earnest apologist
of Ministers. Sorely such a position is unworthy
of his past rtputation, and inconsistent with the
principles of which he has always been
so strenuous an advocate. He seemed to go out of
his way to use terms of the strongest kind to express
his decision. He said that he had never entertained
more decided opinions than those which he felt
bound to express on that occasion. His attempt to
explain away the significant expression of Lord
PALMERSTON that Denmark would not stand
alone if any attempt was made to interfere
with her rights and independence, was
extremely feeble. The noble lord had endeavoured
to make out that this bore reference to France and
Russia quite as much as to this country. All that
need be said in respect to this remarkable interpre-
tatim is, that 't has come too late ; and if it were
so, how is it that the Speaker himself did not thus
reply to the attacks made upon him concerning his
inconsistency in making such a declaration, and
then acting in contradiction to it. Earl RUSSELL'S
virtuous indignation respecting the charges that
were brought against him would have been lndi•
crous had the subject not been one of grave im-
port to many. This is a strange time to indulge
in beasts of endeavouring to promote peace and to
maintain justice, and a still stronger to choose for
exulting in the conviction of promoting freedom
in Europe and throughout the world. No one who
has studied politics attentively can say that there
is the slightest foundation for these grandiloquent
assertions, and for the sake of consistency it is
well that the verdict of the majority of the noble
lord's auditory was recorded against him.

The arrival of the Bombay mail shows us that the
Afghans are not yet tranquil. Sirdar MAHOMED
AZIM KHAN, the brother of SHERE ALI KIIAN, the
Chief of Affgiaanistan, has made an attempt to re-
volutionise the country, dethrone his brother, the
AMEER, and seize the reins of government. In this
attempt he failed, the AMEER having, by some
means, learned his plans, and completely
frustrated them. AzlM KHAN fled to Kebat, where
he took refuge with the British Commissioner of
the district. His brother, the Ameer, has sent an
envoy to Peshawur, soliciting the aid of the British
Government in reducing his refractory relatives to
order, but this appeal has, perhaps judiciously, been
refused. Meanwhile, active steps are being taken
to bring the Bhootians to reason. The 10,000
rupees hitherto paid them on the frontier of Assam,
as subsidy, are to be stopped ; a tract of land at the
foot of the Bhcotan hills is to be annexed to British
territories, and the B'noetan frontier is to be gar-
risoned by troops who are to prevent all supplies
from passing to the hill tribes from British India.
This is a very practical method of bringing them to
their senses, since they are dependent cn us for most
of their supplies. There is consequently good
reason to hope that this outbreak, which at one
time was feared would assume a serious degree of
importance, will be speedily put down, and our
authorities will be left to direct those matters of
internal administration and reform which are so
munh needed throughout the whole country. We
have not succeeded in uprooting the savage fanati-
cism of the Hindoes, and we cannot hope to produce
a perceptible change in their tone of thought for
many years to come, but we can repress its outward
manifestation. It is right, wise, and prudent to
show a kindly toleration to the ignorance and pre-
judice which no denunciations will enlighten, but
which we may hopo to overcome by gradual and
patient endeavour. But we must not let our tole-
rance carry us so far as to countenance actions that
are an outrage on our feelings and principles as a
Cnristien nation; and since we undertake the
maintenance of public order we have every right to
our conviction in thi
enforces matter. In many
iustances, sach as the disposal of the dead, it has
been thought wiser and better to defer enforcing
a much required change until the Hindoo mind was
more willing to accept it ; and however great may
be the necessity of sanitary reform, the decision
was not to be questioned. But the treatment of the
dead and of the living are two very different
things; and our authorities have
usually always
been careful to draw the line between harmless
prejudice and mischievous fanaticism. %%7 may,
therefore, hope that a cruel case of suttee 'which has
just occurred in Metywor will not pass unnoticed.
A son of the Rajth of Beygoon having
died, his
body was committed to the filmes, but his unfortu-
nate widow. was Rho thrown on the pile And he-44

there till she was dead. It is some time since so
painful a case has occurred, since suttee is no longer
common in India, but we suppose that the high
rank of the 'victim was the reason for this crime,
which we should imagine would immediately have
attracted the notice of the Governor-General.
Among the reforms talked about, we hear of a
general order having been issued introducing
wholesale changes in the Indian commissariat,
with a view of providing our troops henceforth
with better and more plentiful food. It is not so
much in quantity that there has been ground for
complaint as in the quality of the food, which
might be very good in itself, but was ill-adapted
for the Indian climate. Meat and spirits may be
very palatable and wholesome in cold, damp
northern climates, but under the tropical sun they
become absolutely injurious. The contrast afforded
by the diet of the natives to the ordinary rations
of our soldiers prove the need for change, since if
rice and vegetables are the most common articles
of food, we may likewise conclude they are more
wholesome than heavier diet. There is no reason
why our men should not have plenty of variety, and
have their food palatable and pleasant, but hitherto
there has been very little thought given to the
matter. We have acted rather on the pln pur-
sued by our authorities of former days, who sent
the troops to India with tight stocks and heavy
headgear. It is very strange how long it takes our
red-tapists to realise ithe fact that the necessities of
climate will not bend to routine. However, we
are improving, though slowly, and we may there-
fore hope for a less appalling list of preventible
deaths for the future.