The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-30 00:00:00

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 30, 1853.

There is, at length, some reason to hope that
the Kafir war will no longer prove a serious drain
on the British Exchequer. General CATHCART
has exhibited a degree of vigour and energy,
coupled with great forbearance, when anything
approaching to an unequivocal submission has
been made, deserving of high praise. We have at
length learned, by bitter experience, the difficulty
of dealing with these savages. The degree of
cunning and equivocation in which they habitu-
ally indulge—the impossibility of yielding cre-
dence to their most solemn promises—greatly
increase that difficulty. The most plausible
pretexts may be resorted to—pledges volun-
tarily given in all apparent sincerity may
be rendered ; but no reliance can be placed
on their redemption, unless ample securities be
taken against any violation of the contract. This
part of the case proves the necessity of stringent
regulations and a strict enforcement of all agree-
ments on the part of the local authorities ; while,
on the other hand, much mischief might be occa-
sioned by driving our adversaries into a corner,
and compelling them to stand at bay—to fight to
the last extremity rather than to submit to con-
ditions too humiliating and too onerous. There
is always danger in reducing, brave men to a state
of desperation. Even a coward will fight when
no alternative remains, and there has certainly
been no indications of pusillanimity on the part
of the Kafir tribes. They have, on the contrary,
exhibited considerable skill and cunning, coupled
with much physical power and resolute courage,
and as formidable opponents have entitled them-
selves to respect and consideration.
General CATHCART appears to have judiciously
Pursued a middle course. His acts have been ener-
getic and decisive, while his counsels have been
moderate and conciliating. He has alike avoided
the Scylla and chary,odus.
of undue lenity or undue
severity. With
an armed foe he has refused to
treat. Before any applications for pardon or
amnesty would be attended to, or even received,
there must have been an unconditional surrender
—an unqualified subrai„ion
to British authority.
But when the enemy had withdrawn, and even an
paid, showing
if there was the power, to com-
plyinstalment of the penalty had been
an inclination,
requisition,
with every the greatest
kindness and indulgence has been shown, the
vigour in the field more than compensating
for,
and and preventing anyinferences from
being drawn from the forbearance in the Cabinet.
But the happy termination of the war—so far
as there can be any confidence placed in any truce
' or treaty with the restless neighbours of our
African colonists—is not all that Governor OATH_
CART has accomplished. He has adopted the most
judicious precautions against future disturbance,
exacting the most solemn pledges from
the defeated
Chiefs not only for their own conduct, but for the
good behaviour of all others under t'ieir control or
influence. They are made practically to insure the
cattle of the settlers from the depredations of
friends and foes, and also to bring the delin-
quents to justice—being bound " to recover and
restore the stolen property, and to punish the
offenders."

Besides these stringent provisions, they are
cautioned against encroaching upon the British
territories, being bound to restrain and punish
all attempts to disturb the peace of her MAJESTY'S
people. And, also, to be responsible for the lives
and properties of the British subjects whom they
may allow to live within their territories. The
conditions and arrangements on which such
permissions may be granted are matters

for special agreements between the chiefs and
the intending residents. With the terms of
these contracts the Colonial authorities will
not in any degree interfere ; but whatever
they may be, they must be strictly observed.
The name of a British subject must be respected
in the kraals of the Kafir chieftains, and of all
who recognise their authority.
Judicious measures have also been adopted for the
formation of a hardy race of borderers—men who
will be at all times able and willing to defend the
frontiers, and to retaliate upon their restless neigh-
bours for any aggression. A sort of military
tenure has been created, by which grants of land
are to be given on condition of residence and
military servitude. The Amatolas and other
lands formerly occupied by the rebellious
Gaika tribes are to be thus parcelled out, but
a preference to those " deserving applicants"
who " have fought nobly in the ranks of the
Colonial levies and other corps during the rebel-
lion now happily suppressed." So many advan-
tages are attached to the possession of these erven,
that we may reasonably anticipate a considerable
demand from men ready to bear the brunt
of any contest, and to protect themselves
and all settlers more distant from the Kafir
territories by their own-unaided efforts. We
may then confidently anticipate that the
financial statement in the next budget will be the
last in which a Kafir war will constitute a formida-
ble item. And even under the present circum-
stances, the Chancellor of the Exchequer will not
be warranted in withholding any relief from the
fear of heavy demands for the pacification of our
African colonies, or the protection of our settle-
ment at the Cape of Good Hope.

It seldom happens that a political pamphlet
survives beyond the particular season which may
have witnessed its publication. It has been de-
clared, moreover, upon competent authority, that
scarcely half-a-dozen brochures of this kind have
ever been known to pay even the expense of paper
and printing. Scarcely a quarter of the new year,
however, has elapsed—and already 1853 has been
productive of two very striking and remarkable
proofs to the contrary. Mr. COBDEN'S masterly
argument in Three Letters runs through edition
after edition, and—what is much more extraor-
dinary—it elicits a rejoinder so very singular and
remarkable of its kind as to be, we feel assured,
altogether without any precedent. That rejoinder,
in fact, appears in the shape of a pamphlet*
which was originally published in 1802, and
which has now in 1853 been re-published. Never
was there a more startling instance of political
resuscitation. It may be said to constitute, in
fact, an unparalleled example, politically speak-
ing, of suspended animation. It is printed in
1802 as from the hand of ROBERT ADAIR, Esq.,
M.P. for Appleby, and is re-printed in 1853 as
from the hand of Sir ROBERT ADAIR, G.C.B.
Like Ensign Beverley and Captain Absolute,
they are simply " two gentlemen in one,"
or, in other words, are identical. It is the
same pamphleteer who, after the lapse of
more than half a century, " revisits thus the
glimpses of the moon," not less anxious than
the clever fellow in the Arabian story to
sell old lamps for new ; or, in other words,
to answer " 1793 and 1853" by " The
Letter of the Hon. CHARLES JAMES Fox to the
Electors of Westminster, with an Application of
its Principles to Subsequent Events." We ques-
tion very much whether the evidently sanguine
anticipations of Sir ROBERT ADAIR will, in this
matter, be fully realised. We doubt very much
whether the triple shotted " great gun" of Mr.
COBDEN can be knocked over quite so easily by an
ingenious little pop-gun which had been thrown
aside fifty-one years ago, and ever since then for-
gotten. As well might a carrier pigeon attempt
to compete with the electric telegraph--or a cross-
bow with a Cords revolver--or a pack-horse with
a steam-engine—or a canoe with a screw-propeller.
We don't wish, in speaking thus, to be regarded
as gratuitously uncomplimentary. We make no
allusimi to the pamphleteers—referring only to
the pamphlets in Our comparison. Sir ROBERT
ADAIR is about the last man to whom we should
feel disposed to direct the language of imperti-
nence—supposing that we were capable of treating,
in this manner, any public writer whomsoever.
His " antecedents," as the cant phrase of the
day has it, would effectually preclude us
from the attempt under any circumstance,
while even the most splenetic and spiteful
of his opponents would be disarmed by a correct
appreciation of his character. Nevertheless, with
all our respect for his career, and all our admira-
tion for his abilities, we must still acknowledge
that we find it difficult to admit the force of his
reasoning as opposed to the simple, and, to our
minds, wholly incontrovertible, logic of his anta-
gonist. Cordially as we may applaud the skill of
the diplomatist, we cannot remain blind to the
obtuseness of the pamphleteer. We recognise
the tact displayed by him in 1806, upon the oc-
casion of his mission to the Court of Vienna ; we
readily bear witness to the skill with which he
participated, in 1808-9, in the negotiations for
the Peace of the Dardanelles ; but we behold, as
clearly as any elementary truth that could be
named, the very singular misapprehension to which
we are indebted for this inapt revival of commen-
taries, first made in 1802, upon Mr. Fox's cele-
brated Letter to the Electors of Westminster.

We speak as impartial witnesses in this argu-
ment. We regard Mr. COBDEN as decidedly in
the right, and Sir RORERT ADAIR as decidedly in
the wrong ; and we think thus, moreover, let it he
remembered, although we still view in the light
of a fantastic day-dream the peace policy of the
Honourable Gentleman the Member for the West
Riding of Yorkshire. Whatever the merit of
that policy, it cannot affect, we conceive, in any
material respect the bearing of the present con-
troversy—we mean that, be the promoters of this
benevolent but high-flying project of Arbitration
right or be they wrong, that cannot alter by one
tittle in regard to the treatment of France dur-
ing twenty-three years, the innocence or guilt of
the English Government. During the course of
the introduction to the present reprint of his
pamphlet, Sir ROBERT ADAIR says, we cannot bir;
think rather too flippantly—" Mr. COBDEN must
make a coalition with Mr. BURKE and Mr. PITT,
before he can persuade the world that Mr. Fox
by his opposition to the war of 1793 was advo-
cating either French principles at home, or
French ascendancy abroad." Surely never was
there—quite unintentionally we believe—more
flagrant prevarication. " Persuade the world
that Mr. Fox by his opposition to the war of
1793 was advocating either French principles at
home or French ascendency abroad 1" Why the
thing is preposterous. Mr. COBDEN from ti. c;
first page of his admirable pamphlet down to the
very last never once attempts to " persuade the
world" of anything at all of that description.
Instead of arguingthat Mr. Foxadvocated " either
French principles at home or French ascendancy
abroad," all that Mr. COBDEN endeavours to prove
is, that Mr. Fox was opposed to those who would
not allow to France the inalienable rights of all
nations, those of choosing her own principles,
securing her own independence, and selecting her
own form of government. Perhaps no one will
be more surprised at this accusation than the
Hon. Member for the West Riding himself—if
he can
nb e supposed to experience anything like
!Au-prise nowadays at any amount of misappre-
hensionsand misrepresentations.
It is insisted, in another part, by Sir ROBERT
ADAIR, that the failure of the negotiations for
peace in 1806 was attributable to NAPOLEON'S
exorbitant demands for the concession of Sicily,
and this, too, after his acceptance of the principle
of Uti possedetis. That is a very old story.
We shall expect now to witness all kinds of odd
revivals s l
ft this—and
aoncit theth poisoning
the
pamphlet
o f the siJaffa,i Wes
hebe told againe r thai ia, although it has been proved, as clearly as
at
anything ever was proved, that not a single grain
medicine chests
of poic.irin was at the time in the

* The Letter of the lion. Charles James Fox to the
Electors of Westminster, dated January 23d, 1703'
with an Application of its Principles to suloequent Events.
By Robert Adair, Esq., M.P. for Appleby. Published
in 1802, and now Republished with an Introduction by
Sir Robert Adair, G.C.B. Bvo. pp. 89. Ridgway.
Landon; 1853.