The Sun.
London, England, 1864-03-07 00:00:00

bone may be thrown a hundred are sent empty
away ; and these do not easily go back to their
kennel, but keep whining and snarling, appealing
to the Bund, to the great and little Fatherland, to
Heaven and earth, against the Austro-Prussian dog
in the manger, who hesitates about devouring
Schleswig, and will not suffer it to be devoured by
others.

However natural and even reasonable may have
been the yearnings of the Schleswig-Holsteiners
after union with what they call their country, it is
not likely that they will at any time fall under any
German Government one-tenth as good, as provident
and liberal as that of their late Danish masters.
The Danes, as I have had frequent occasions to
show, carried their leniency to their disaffected
subjects to a fault. There was hardly a country in
the world where freedom of speech and action was
carried to a greater extent. Not only privy con-
spiracy and rebellion but even arrant treason were
winked at. Flensburg patriots, as I saw with my
own eyes, went over to Kiel to swear allegiance to
the Prince of Augustenburg, both in their own
name and in that of their townspeople, and they
came back to their homes unmolested mad un-
challenged. The Danish soldiers billeted upon the
country people were as inoffensive, as respectful, as
indifferent to the sour looks of their hosts, as
tolerant of ill disguised insult and ill treatment as
so many angels. After all the convulsions of 18489
there was hardly an instance of a political prosecu-
tion in Denmark. Some of the self•banished
patriots shunned their country, a 3 they had left it
for their country's good ; but Denmark had no
Spielberg nor Nisida. Amnesty was extended to
nearly all who would accept it.
It is not so with the men, justly or unjustly,
accused of Danish sympathies who are now tarry-
ing in the Duchies. The so-called patriotic leaders
hunt them down without mercy, they set up a mad-
dog cry after them, and the Austro•Prussian rulers,
who ought to see justice done to all parties, are too
ready to backthese curs in their full cry. A newspaper
is forcibly suppressed in Hadersleben because " it
was published in the Danish language ;" and the
Flensburger Zeitung is bidden to publish Copen-
hagen news as " foreign intelligence," under the
heading Ausland. The number of citizens, office-
holders, schoolmasters, and clergymen who are
compelled to seek shelter from popular fury, either
here or in Jutland, or even in the enemy's country,
at Hamburg or Lubeck, become daily more alarm-
ing. The Schleswig-Holsteiners were tired of their
Danish King Log, but have little reaso❑ as yet to
be satisfied with their Austro-Prussian King Stork.
They are disappointed, wrathful and fretful, and
they vent upon those who can make no resistance a
displeasure which they dare not exhibit before the
new taxmasters they were in so great a hurry to
have among them. The national German party are
anxious, above all things, that the Duchies should
be thoroughly and radically revolutionized. It suits
their purpose to exaggerate the ill-feeling of the
people against the Danes, to rouse them to all
sorts of riot and mischief. Nor arc the Commis-
sioners of the two great Powers, especially the
Prussians, at all earnest in their endeavours to allay
popular fury. There is no man in Sc'l leswig-
Holstein, no man in Prussia, Austria, or the minor
German States who clearly knows what he is driv-
ing at or what weuld answer his purpose best. A
vague instinct prompts almost all parties to give
mischief full swing, that time may show what is to
come out of it all,—what chances each may have to
fish in the waters all have contricuted to trouble.
Talk of personal union, new Constitutions aim-
ing at an equitable acknowledgment of the claims
of rival nationalities ! Why, if Schleswig•Holstei❑
ever came back to Denmark, its present occupiers
will take care that it shall be so fully disorganized
and subverted that Denmark herself will find it
hardly worth having.

rectors, £2l to the auditors, and the secretary's salary was
fixed at £3OO per annum. The meeting was then made
special, and the directors were authorized to raise on deben-
tures £40,000, at 5 per cent., and the proceedings termi-
nated.

GLASGOW AND SOUTH-WESTERN.
The report of the directors of this company states that
the total amount expended on capital account during the
past half-year was £20,929, making with the amount previ-
ously expended £1,748,803, and £223,121 invested in the
shares of other companies; total £4,969,924. In addition
to the ordinary maintenance of the line £11,070 had been
expended on the renewal of the permanent way since July
31 last, and the directors have debited revenue with £14,000,
which would reduce the balance outstanding on that account
to £12,684. The average rate of interest on the debenture
stock was now reduced to £3 18s 101e1 per cent. The
Kirkcudbright Raiway was opened for goods and mineral
traffic on Feb. 17. Some requirements of the Government
Inspector had yet to be complied with, and the passenger
train service would commence when the requisite authority
was received. The Bridge of Weir Railway would be opened
for traffic in the course of the present month. During the
past half-year the receipts were £11,625 in excess of those
for the corresponding period of the preceding year, includ-
ing £3,982 for passenger traffic. The total receipts on re-
venue account for the half .year ending Jan,3l amounted to
£230,595, and the working expenses to £110,602, including
£14,000 for renewals, leaving a balance of £119,993. To
this was added £1,086 from the previous half year, making
£121,079. From this £43,284 was deducted for interest on
loans and dividend on guaranteed stocks, leaving £77,796
available for dividend on ordinary stock, which the direc-
tors recommended should be at the rate of 5 per cent. per
annum, payable on the 24th inst., leaving a balance £3,655
to the credit of the next account. The traffic receipts per
train mile were for passengers 3s 94d, and for goods and
minerals 4s ; and the expenses 18 51d and is 60 respec-
tively.

THE STIN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, MARCH 7, 1864.

SPIRIT OP THE PUBLIC JOURNALSI

SATURDAY REVIEW.—The Opposition un-
doubtedly takes up with great force any point on
which it happens to rasten, because its leaders have
now the strength of a great following, and because,
if a contest is provoked, it feels the pleasure of con-
scious power. It criticises the administration of
affairs, not only from a vague sense of duty and in
the interest of the nation, but because it thinks its
turn for administering affairs may come soon. Nor
can it be said that mere criticism of this sort ends
in very little, and that the Opposition has no solid
and tangible standing-ground unless it is prepared
to advocate, and if in office to pursue, a totally dif-
ferent policy from that to which the Government
has adhered, It is true that it is a misfortune to the
Conservatives that they have no distinct policy,
and this is in some measure the fault of the princi-
ples they profess and the chiefs they serve under;
but it arises in part from the leaders of the Conser-
vative party being brought at present under in-
fluences which equally effect the leaders of the Go-
vernment, and to which loyalty and respect for
sorrow dispose them, as politicians, unduly to yield.
But even although no distinct policy may be pro-
posed, it is still open to the Opposition to contend
that the administration of affairs is such as to call
for the disapprobation of the house. The present
Government came into office mainly on the ground
that the relations of Lord Derby's Ministry with
France were not sufficiently cordial. Lord Palmer-
ston did not contend that England ought to have
adopted a different policy in the Italian war.
He did not wish we had landed troops at Venice
or crushed the Austrian fleet, but he induced his
supporters to think that we ought to be more
friendly with France and to show our sympathies
with her more plainly. In the same way, at the
present time, the Opposition may agree that Eng-
land is not called on to fight Germany, and that
Danmark must be left to herself as Poland was, but
it may contend that a change ought to be made in
our way of treating continental nations, and that
we should not give reason to suppose that we in-
tend to afford our friends material assistance unless
we are quite clear that this is our intention. There
is as much ground for saying that this would be a
basis of policy distinct from that of Lord Russell, as
there was for supposing, when the present Ministry
was formed, that Lord Palmerston's policy towards
France would be different from that of Lord Derby.
At the same time, although the Opposition may
make it clear that the administration of affairs, and
especially of foreign affairs, admits of a palpable
distinction being drawn between that which is and
that which should be, and although this is quite
enough justification for an Opposition, it by no
means follows that, even if on this particular point
they are right, it would be for the benefit of the
country they should come into office. A change of
Ministry is at any time a very serious thing, and,
with so many clouds hanging over both the New
and the Old World, a change of Ministry would be
more serious than usual. In this particular de-
partment of foreign affairs the Conservatives hap-
pen also to be especially weak. They would have
to face either the glaring incompetence of Lord
Malmesbury or the deep distrust of the character of
Mr. Disraeli which prevails, not only in Parliament
and in the country, but in the Conservative party
itself. Nor is' it to be denied that, however con-
vinced Lord Derby may be of the necessity
of maintaining our present neutral attitude,
there would be a general feeling that a war would
come more easily if a Conservative Government
were in office, and that the very apprehension of
this is itself an evil. It is reasonable that a party
so strong numerically as the Conservatives should
feel themselves entitled to their turn of power, and
the country would gain by the many able men to be
found on that side having the advantage of official
experience; but for the present it may be doubted
whether, either for the country or the Conservatives,l
there is anything better than that they should still
be the Opposition, but a powerful and vigilant
Opposition. An accidental circumstance also contri-
butes to make it just now more necessary than usual
that a vigilant and powerful Oppoeition should
exist. The Times has ceased to have any opinions
of its Own. Whatever Lord Palmerston and his
colleagues say it applauds; whatever they do it
proves to be right in the very nature of things;
whatever blunders or faults they commit it excuses
or passes by in silence. The motives which have
led to this complete identification of the limes with
the Government are, we may be sure, of the most
honourable kind; nor, if personal feeling intervenes,
is it any disgrace to pay the tribute of even an ex-
cessive respect to so old and distinguished a states-
man as the occupant of Cambridge House. But it
is a public lose that a journal which deservedly
stands so high, and which contributes so largely to
the formation of public opinion, should have been
induced by zeal, or admiration, or gratitude, to
give up altogether the task of criticising a parti-
cular Ministry. When, in the course of time, a
Conservative Ministry takes office, we may hope that
the Times will feet the invigorating effects of
the change and return to that attitude of impar-
tial criticism which alone is worthy of the highest
order of English journalism. The Conservatives
well deserve to have a fair trial, and to be treated
with the respect due to a body of men who repree
sent so much of the wealth and force and so many
of the traditions of the country. But we may be
sure that there will be plenty of room for fair cri-
ticism in the conduct of a party which is led by
men so dangerous as Mr. Disraeli and so weak as
Lord Malmesbury and Lord Chelmsford, and which
necessarily, from its very constitution, stand to some
degree in antagonism to that great though vague
and sometimes dangerous movement which de-
rives its impulse from the advancing thought of
the modern world.
SPECTATOR.—It cannot be said that there are
any explicit promises of help to Denmark in the
despatches now presented to Parliament, but there
are many statements which would certainly rouse
a very reasonable hope, of help in the mind of the
Danish Minister. Oa the 24th November a memo-
randum was read to the Prussian Minister which
used this language, " Should I'edetal troops enter
Holstein on purely Federal grounds, her Majesty's
Govern:bent Yr mild not interfere, but should it ap-
pear that Federal troops had entered the Duchy on
international grounds, her Majesty's Government
may be obliged to interfere." Schleswig was not
then even threatened, but after such a statement it
was certainly not unreasonable for the Danes to
hope that the invasion of Schleswig on n inter-
national" grounds wonld be resented by us. Again
in a despatch dated December 10th, Sir A. Paget
" strongly urged" on the Danish Minister to evacu-
ate Holstein without resistance,on the plea that " if
an attack upon Schleswig was made, the other
Powers could then interfere on ground which was
incontestably beyond the limits of the Confedera-
tion,"—and again, " that Denmark would; at all
events have a better chance of securing the assist-
ance of the Powers alluded to by retiring beyond
the limits of the Confederation, than if she pro-
voked a war by resisting what might be considered
the legitimate authority of the Diet on Federal ter-
ritory.' There, certainly, the hope of aid was held
out as a motive to retire. Finally, Lord Wode-
house, in urging eagerly on the Danish Minister
the duty of suspending the " common Constitu-
tion between Schleswig and Denmark which
the German Powers choose to make the cams kali,
said, "It was my duty to declare to him that if the
Danish Government rejected my advice, His (Her 11)
Majesty's Government must leave Denmark to en-
counter Germany on her own responsibility." Den-
mark very reluctantly yielded to the weight of pres-
sure thus applied; the Ministry was changed ; Den-
mark conceded everything she was asked as to the
new Constitution, on condition of six weeks' delay,
to convoke the Rigsraad, and all to no purpose—Sir
Buchanan reporting, after an interview with M. de A.
Bismark. "that until Germany has actually shown
that she is not afraid to draw her sword in a cause
which she considers to be just, and has forced Den-
mark by arms to remove the grievances complained
of, the King will not concede that enough has been
done for the national honour." And England, mean-
while, who has wrung out these concessions—first
the cancelling of the patent of March last, then the
evacuation of Holstein, then the withdrawal of the
Schleswig Constitution, all with the tone of a pro-
tector who is going to give something in return—
when will England consider that enough has been
done for the national honour ? Apparently when
Lord Palmerston has made a few speeches in " the
eambyses vein," and the people have spent a few
thousand pounds on salve for Danish wounds and
English consciences. That we have contemplated
much more serious resistance, and been frightened
into neutrality, we believe the despatches will abun-
dantly prove. Lord IsT tpier, in a despatch 6th
January, says he told Prince Gortschakoff " that an
attack upon Schleswig appeared imminent, and if
that attempt was made, it seemed not improbable
that the Germans might find themselves confronted
by the armed intervention of Great Britain." But
a wet blanket seems to have been thrown on these
intentions by the blank refusal of France. Oa the
24th January Lord Russell wrote to Lnrd Cowley
that her Majesty's Government " seek the
concert and cooperation of France, Russia, and
Sweden, in order to give, if necessary, material
assistance to Denmark in the resisrance of dismem-
berment." This despatch was answered on the
28th January, in a visit from the French Ambassa-
dor here to Lord Russell, in which he stated that,
for various reasons—sympathy with nationalities
and offended pride about the Congress are the chief
_l the Government of the Emperor will not take'
at present, any engagement on the subject of Den-
mark." Since then, we imagine, the zeal of her
Majesty's Government has collapsed. The Anglo-
German despatches have been very carefully edited,

but Mr. Layard has passed over a sentence which
will give rise to some discussion. On the 'nth of
January our Ambassador at St. Petersburg writes
to Earl Russell, reporting a conversation with
Prince Gortschakoff. (Page 504.) In that conver-
sation the Prince remarked, " it was in his opinion
most desirable that the action of Austria and
Prussia should not be separated from England and
Russia in any question of moment; the four Go-
vernments happily now thinking and acting in
harmony on a question still more important than
that of Holstein and Schleswig ought not on this
matter to be split into two camps opposed to one
another." What is this question—Turkey, or
Poland, or the Rhine ? Has our Government really
been reinvigorating the Holy Alliance, as the Ern*
peror of the French seems in another despatch to
think? Russia, Austria, Prussia, and England act-
ing in concert—what on earth does it a►l mean ?

LONDON REVIEW.—In answer to a question in
the House of Commons, Mr. Layard, on Monday
night, made a further revelation of the position
which we have taken up in reference to the Dano-
German conflict. Denmark, it seems, has a ship of
war in course of construction in a private yard in
this country. When hostilities were impending,
the Danish Minister informed our Government of
the fact, and offered to stop the work if we desired
it. Our Government did desire it, and orders were
given to that effect. On the remonstrances of the
shipbuilder, however, the vessel was allowed to be
launched, subject to the Danish Minister giving his
word of honour that she should not leave this coun-
try without the leave of the authorities. The con-
duct of Denmark in the affair had been, Mr. Layard
observed, marked by the most perfect good faith.
Tnere is no doubt that it was marked not merely
by good, but by chivalrous faith. Denmark went
out of her way to inform us of what we might
possibly, though certainly it could not be supposed
that we should probably, regard as a breach of
neutrality, from which eventual embarrassment
might spring. But the auestion for us is, whether
we are in this case bound to be thus neutral or not,
and if we are not, the next question is, by what
motive this position of neutrality is forced upon us ?
Now, as to the first question, it is to be observed
that the Dano-German war is not one of those in
which we can profess to stand wholly aloof, hold-
ing nothing but an abstract opinion on its merits,
or a barren sympathy with one of the combatants.
It is caused by infraction of a treaty to which we
were parties. It is an assault, in our avowed belief,
utterly unprovoked, upon a State with which we
are bound in alliance. We may decide fur our-
selves that we are not so far involved as to be
obliged to draw sword in the quarrel, yet we are
certainly not therefore neutral. It is not merely
our opinions that are ranged, with absolute unani-
mity, on the side of Denmark, in regard to the
justice of the quarrel. But it is that engagements
solemnly entered into by us, in concert with other
Powers, have been deliberately trampled underfoot
by the German States. It is admitted on all hands
that we have in these circumstances an ample casus
belli, if we think fit to exercise it. This is
admitted even by our Government, which long age
warned the intending invaders that if they took up
arms" Denmark would not be found alone." Now
we may choose to leave Denmark alone. But it is a
wholly different thing to say to her that we will
not only fight for her, but that we will not suffer
her to obtain ships and arms by purchase from us.
When we have declared the attack unjustifiable in
the eye of public law and of European interests, it
is certainly a very strange proposition to lay down
that we shall give to the breakers of law and dis-
turbers of Europe all the benefits of law and all the
encouragement of impartiality, and shall prevent
the weaker party, the victim of violence, from pro-
em ing the means of defence. If, then, neutrality
is pushed to such excess in such a case, not called
for by law, we may next ask why we have adopted
it ? The frank answer will be given, that it is be-
cause, if we had not, Austria and Prussia would
have declared war against us. We may take leave
to doubt that assertion. Each of these Powers has a
good deal too much to do at home without declaring
war against Great Britain. Both together are un-
able to crush Denmark, whose total population is
less than that of London. It is not very probable
that, with Poland and Venetia in their rear, they
would proceed to declare war against Great Britain.
But supposing they were really to make such a
threat, what then? Is this country really sunk so
low that she dare do nothing, however right and
just it be, if a foreign despotism announces that it
will consider the act a casus belli ? We know,
indeed, that we are already in that position as re-
gards Russia. A Government despatch, declaring
our recognition of Poland as a belligerent, was
stopped by telegraph because Russia announced
that she would regard its presentation as a casus
belli. The lesson has not been lost. The Germans
know that we have crouched, like a whipped hound,
beneath the crack of the autocrat's knout, and they
too threaten us with their cases belli if we give
cou a tenance to the gallant little nation for which
a new partition is in preparation. And it seems
Lord Palmerston's Government shrinks back at the
menace, and gladly accepts Danish magnanimity as
our protection from the danger. How much lower
are we to sink before we have drunk the full cup of
humiliation ?

EXAMINER.—CoIoneI Crawley has found a wortby
champion in Lord Longford, who claims for him a
general sympathy he will certainly not obtain.
Lord Longford complains of the pension granted to
the family of Sergeant-Major Lilley, thinking it a
wrong to Colonel Crawley. And he truly observes
that the public naturally put their own construc-
tion on the restoration of Captain Smales. Lord
Longford would have had Lilley's family left to
beggary, and Mr. Smales denied the reparation to
which be was entitled; for it seems that justice to
anybody was Jomehow or other prejudicial to the
peculiar case of Colonel Crawley. It was not
enough that a good soldier's death was at least,
hastened by an illegal punishment, his family
should have been left to want, and Captain Smales
should have been ruined by an unjust sentence, all
to serve Colonel Crawley. The ruin of six or seven
persons of different ranks, which has actually been
worked, is not enough to satisfy this man's champion.
These and other similar extravagances of Lord
Longford did not surprise us, bearing in mind the
old maxim similis simaligaudet, but we confess that
we read with amazement the last words of Lord
Shatlesbu'y in answer to a reproach levelled at
him for his most praiseworthy part in bringing
about the court-martial :

"Every private soldier has now seen that no injustice
can be done even to the rank and file of the army without
moving both Houses of Parliament, and putting into opera-
tion all the powers of the State, to inquire into the wrong,
and, If it be proved, to redress it."
Why, thin is precisely what has not been seen. It
has been seen that a soldier could be illegally kept
in confinement where confinement is punishment
injurious to health, and that this wrong, compassed
conjointly by his Colonel and two General Officers,
has been suffered to pass wholly unpunished.
" What safety is there for me ? asks a noble Gene-
ral in the House of Lords; but " What safety is
there for me ? " is the more real question of every
soldier and non-commissioned officer in the service.
The articles of war which rule the soldier are also
designed for his protection, but of what
.forcein
Lilley's case was that most important article which
stands in the army in lieu of the security of the
habeas corpus. The unfortunate Lilley has passed
beyond reach of redress, but the pernicious example
remains of a deliberate infraction of the articles of
war, and what was done by the two Generale and
Colonel Crawley in India may be repeated elsewhere
with the same cruel consequences and impunity.
The evil precedent is established, and the soldier
feels that the articles of war so rigorously binding
upon him are of no force to restrain the unjust will
of his superiors. The inquiry into the treatment of
Lilley without cognizance of the main point, the
illegal imprisonment, was nothing better than a
juggle. What would be thought of separating the
fact of a false imprisonment from the circumstances
of the treatment of the injured party, and resting
the issue on the question whether or not there
was unnecessary severity ? none whatever, no
detention of any sort, being justifiable.
Would it be any answer to a charge of false impri-
sonment that the aggrieved was kept in actual
luxury ? Could an acquittal be claimed on the ground
that he was not subjected to torture ? 111-treatment
would be an aggravation of the offence, •but the
contrary would be no defence. The taking away of
liberty is the substantial wrong, and comparatively
immaterial are the circumstances, the sort of prison
and duress. The question, indeed, of necessary or
unnecessary severity was stark nonsense with refe-
rence to an illegal imprisonment. In fact that ques-
tion implied that the confinement was legal, which
it notoriously and confessedly was not beyond the
eighth day. The issue of which Col. Crawley has had
the benefit was a Nee issue, and hence the greatest
scandal to military justice of our time or perhaps
any other. When the Mutiny Act is before the House
of Commons we trust that the article violated in
Lilley's case will be the subject of special consideri-
tion with a view to giving it more stringency, if
more it wants, or if not, of raising the question why
its infraction was suffered to pass unpunished in the
lamentable instance at Mhow. It is not, perhaps,
generally known that the writ of habeas corpus does
not run in the military services, and that the security
for liberty in lieu of it is the important article which
was overruled by the sic volo, sic jubeo of military
tyranny in Lilley's sad case. We rest our trust in
the House of Commons, because it is too clear that
in the House of Lords there is not the spirit or the
disposition to cope with the bluster and swagger of
Mites Gloriosus. In the Commons there are true
soldiers who need not, like Lord Longford,proclaim
themselves soldiers, because their gallant services
nave sufficiently done that for them; and the sym-