The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-26 00:00:00

THE SUN,

Z 0 Y ---I.z,
7,,.......„
4.,
_. tiff 7(
1 --,C,---*'=-'--4t-s--41
'._ fry
_ :ir.‘!„_l43-7c...-•,, ..-5 . /-,--"7.'--;;;s,*g nib. -'-'4'6

d

LONDON,

stronger case for a stringent and searching investiga-
tion is thereby established than we could have anti-
cipated.

We had previously known that although the report of
the Select Committee, urging the greatest expedition,
was published on the 29:h of July, the tenders were
not required to be put in until the 26th of February.
Nearly seven months were thus completely thrown
laway—a period that would have been exceedingly
valuable if judiciously applied, and the misapplication
of which might have left the entire matter in the
hands of a single company, who could then
have made their own terms, the Government
being entirely in their power. Viewing this part
of the case in the most favourable light, it cer-
tainly bears the aspect of a degree of gross negli-
gence and unjustifiable procrastination, utterly un
becoming in a high officer of the Crown, and deserv-
ing of serious animadversion. The apathy was,
however, perhaps more excusable than the reckless
and headlong activity by which it was succeeded.
The Government had tendered its resignation
on the 21st of February ; on the 23d Lord
DEBBY was entrusted with the task of form-
ing an administration, and his predecessors were
only nominal occupants of office until his arrange-
ments were completed. This was the case on the
26th of February, and notice was given that the ex-
Ministers would surrender their seals of office at her
Majesty's levee on the 27th. The 26th, however,
was the day fixed for sending forward the tenders for
the different mail services. The day which had
been fixed in the previous November could not be
altered. If that were practicable, perhaps some
greater degree of " decency" might have been ob-
served, and more time might have been consumed
before " the foregone conclusion" was announced to
the world. Every minute was, however, of impor-
tance—an hcur's delay might have allowed the question
to be fairly adjudicated on with ample leisure for
testing every point to the very bottom ; but that did
not suit the views of those whose official existence
had so nearly approached its termination. A
stranger might have thought that they would rather
have evaded so great a- responsibility, binding the
country to the payment of 1,596,8001., and post-
poning for eight years the urgent and unanimous
recommendations of a carefully selected Committee
of the House of Commons. The motives must have
been strong indeed that could have induced such
extraordinary hardihood of assertion as that
contained in the Admiralty report of the 27th of
February, the morning after the tenders were lodged
the very morning when " my Lords" bade farewell—
we trust a long one—to the cares and sweets of office.
In that report their Lordships utterly ignored the
fact that the Eastern Steam Navigation Company bad
offered to establish branch communioations between
the ports of Bombay and Calcutta and those of Pe-
nang, Singapore, Hong-Kong, end Shanghae, invol-
ving a distance of 84,000 miles additional service per
annum, without additional charge, an omission the
more remarkable, inasmuch as they pointedly alluded
to the extra service between Bombay and Point de
Galle, volunteered by the Peninsular and Oriental
Company. _ _

But, great as was the speed at the Admiralty,
there was more remarkable expedition apparent at
the official residence of the Financial Minister in
Downing-street ; notwithstanding the melancholy
preparations for the surrender of office, Sir CHARLES
Woo]) found time to peruse the report and record his
approval of it. We know not whether he did so
before or after the levee, but it would be worth
knowing exactly at what hour the report of the
Lords of the Admiralty was signed on the 27th, and
at what time it was transmitted to Downing-street.

The matter cannot stop here. It is due to the
country that every circumstance connected with what
appears to be a gross and palpable job should be
fully and clearly explained. It is also due to Sir
CHARLES WOOD and the members of the late Board
of Admiralty. Any further concealment can only
prove injurious. The Eastern Steam Navigation Com-
pany, whose exertions have saved so many thousands
per annum to the nation, have also a right to an im-
partial consideration of their complaints, and if they
have been used as tools on the occasion, and led into
expenses which it was determined should not produce
any fruits, to fair remuneration for their losses.
Of the propriety of the recommendation of the
Committee, for " the encouragement of an open com-
petition," and their objections to an exclusive traffic
on the Indian lines, we have recently had too strong
a proof in the protest signed Captain CHARLES MORGAN
ELLIOTT, of the Madras engineers, and concurred
in by five officers of her MAJESTY'S and the Company's
service, against the arrangements on board the
Oriental. The letter of the gallant officer—which
is well worthy of perusal—clearly establishes the ad-
vantage of affording a choice between rival
companies, and not allowing a monopoly to
one favoured association, at the expense of
the community, and thus removing the prin-
cipal stimulant to attention, civility, and effi-
ciency. If it was known that rival vessels were to
pass by the same route every alternate fortnight, and
that a choice was thus afforded to passengers, we
should find no such complaints as those which have
emanated from Captain ELLIOTT, and Messrs.
THORNHILL, LEVINGE, WICKHA SI, MAYNE, and
GORDON.

THE FRENCH REPUBLIC.

We have received the Paris journals of yesterday.
There was another grand review in Paris yesterday.
The Civil Tribunal of the Seine was on Friday
engaged on a very serious question regarding the
confiscated property of the Orleans family, and which
substantially amounted to this—whether the act of
coofiscttion was above the courts of law or not.
It may be recollected that, in order to raise the ques-
tion, the executors of Louis PHILIPPE had instructed
the keeper of Neuilly and Monceaux to resist entry by
the authorities in such a way as to oblige the latter to
have recourse to force, and then to summon the tres-
passers before the proper tribunal, which they did,
when their complaint was met by a plea on the part
of the Prefect of the Seine, denying the power of the
court to deal with the mat►er, as' it was the execution
of a decree of the PRINCE PRESIDENT of the Republic,
having all the force of law. On this question of com-
petence the Civil Tribunal of the Seine was occupied
on Friday. After hearing the counsel for the Prefect
of the Seine and M. BERRYER in reply, the Court
made the following important decree :
" Seeing that the members of the Orleans family de-
rive as proprietors of the domains of Neuilly and of
Monceaux, either in virtue of the donation of the 7th of
August, 1830, or in capacity of heirs of their father,
and in part of the Princess Adelaide, their aunt, as well
as by virtue of possession, prolonged beyond 20 years,
founding right of prescription:
" Seeing that their action has for its object the pro-
perty of these two domains:

" -Seeing that the ordinary tribunals are exclusively
competent to decide on questions of property, the vali-
dity of contracts and of prescription:
" That this principle has always been applied to the
State as well as to individuals:

" That thus to the tribunal alone it belongs to appre-
ciate the titles of parties, and to apply the law to the
facts which give rise to proceedings:
" Declares itself competent, retains the cause, and, for
sake of complete investigation, adjourns to this day fort-
night, an d condemns the Prefect of the Seine to the costs
of this motion."