The Sun.
London, England, 1857-01-30 00:00:00

and troops had advanced to the Alma along the
coast line of the Crimea from the point of debarka-
tion. The advance on Bashire commenced on the
9th of December—upon which day the old Portu-

guese fort of Reshire (not Bushire) was stormed
and taken, fatally for some of our brave fellows,

but gloriously for them all. Brigadier STOPFORD
fell, shot through the heart, and pierced with
many wounds, while gallantly leading on the
64th Regiment. Lieutenants WARREN and
UTTERSON, •f the 20th, were killed sword
in hand, and almost side by side—" brothers
in arms and rivals in renown." Captain WOOD
was dangerously wounded—about 40 or 50 men
either killed or wounded—while Colonel MALET
during the final charge of the 3d Cavalry fell
shot through the heart by a wounded caitiff (an
Arab) to whom he had, bst just a moment or so
before, magnanimously granted the boon of quarter!
A decisive triumph at the fort of Reshire was the
happy fruit, however, of this lamentable loss on
our part—the enemy being fairly routed at the
Ipoint of the bayonet. Upon the following morning
(that of the 10th) Bushire itself was finally assailed
by our ships of war—a storm of shot and shell being
directed by them upon the town from a consider-
able distance, and with a deadly and crushing effect
very speedily manifested. An effect so over-
whelming, indeed, that about midday, when our
troops were actually just preparing for the assault,
the flagstaff was suddenly lowered in token of
complete submission. Bushirehad fallen ! About
3,000 of its defenders having perished ! The rest
of the Persian army flying precipitately into the
interior, leaving in our hands, however, a consi-
derable number of prisoners, including among
their number the Governor, and various person-
ages of distinction ! While, as substantial tokens
of their success, the British, besides capturing
the maritime capital, securing to them undisputed
command of the whole Persian seaboard in the Gulf
—found in their possession, as trophies of their
victory, a considerable quantity of small arms, a
vast amount of military stores, and some sixty-
four guns, several of them brass, and almost all
of them in excellent condition. Gladdened by
these events, and having no losses on our side
to deplore save those already mentioned as
having occurred in the attack upon the Fort of
Reshire, Admiral LEEKE returned in the Assaye
to Bombay, carrying with him the good tidings,
and, as prisoners of war, the Governor of the
captured city and the more distinguished among
those who had been associated with him in its
Government. Such are the inaugurative events
of the new British War with Persia—a War which
the Srali was himself the first most wantonly
to provoke, and tlae heinous crime of originating
which he has been compelled already to expiate
thus signally and humiliatingly.

A. great public duty has been partially dis-
charged, a national wrong partially righted—not
by the Government or the Parliament of the
country, but by the leading merchants of the
commercial metropolis of the Uuited King-
dom. The men of Liverpool have nobly
come forward to redress a serious injury inflicted on
the Commissioners, who too faithfully performed
the services required at their hands. Men of all
parties, and of all shades and varieties of political
opinion, joined in offering their spontaneous tri-
bute of approbation and gratitude to Sir Join'
M' FILL and Colonel TIILLOCK for the valuable
results achieved by their indefatigable exertions
and faithful and uncompromising conduct under
circumstances of no ordinary difficulty, requiring
moral courage of the highest order. This unex-
pected and unsolicited demonstration was the more
valuable, inasmuch as it was the only public
document which contained an acknowledgment
that any service had been rendered by the Com-
mission—a fact that reflects disgrace not on the
Commissioners themselves, but on those whose
business it was to recognise and reward their
useful labours.

The admirable answer of Sir JOHN M'NEILL
places this matter in a just point of view. The
treatment of these gentlemen forms an appropriate
sequel to the dark history which they were de-
puted to investigate. Their incorruptible honesty
prevented them from screening the aristocratic
delinquents, whose "neglect, apathy, and incom-
petence," caused the fearful and deplorable evils
which occasioned the loss of so many, valuable
lives, and imperilled the military honour, and al-
most the safety of the United Kingdom. And
yet these men were loaded with rewards. Pro-
motion to the utmost possible extent was bestowed
on them, while the faithful servants who unspar-
ingly exposed their sin s of omission and com-
mission were treated with neglect, and contumely
—their zeal, talent, and industry, everything, in
fact, that constitutes true merit, being blighted
and concealed by " the cold shade of aristocracy."
Such a proceeding is by no means calculated to
induce men of patriotism, honesty, and talent to
lend their aid in an emergency similar to that in
which Sir J. M'NEILL and Colonel TuttocEr were
engaged, and through which they passed with so
much credit to themselves and advantage to the

community.
Sir J. M'NEILL declares that, " when he con-
sented to proceed to the Crimea, he conceived that
his duty to the country was in perfect accordance
with the intentions and wishes of the Govern-
ment. His duty, as he understood it, was to
conduct that inquiry without fear or favour, and
to report the result faithfully, without consider-
ing whom it might inculpate, or whom exculpate."
As he truly declares,-----" The welfare of the
British army, the honour of her MAJESTY'S arms,
the interests of the nation, in more than one guar
ter of the globe, and the success of the war
waged to defend the freedom of Europe, were all
at stake in the Crimea ; and he did not consider
it possible that, at such a moment,
a
give way to personal considerations," one
B ac could
u ad
this he was mistaken. It was not " unde-
viating and painful fidelity " that was re-
quired. It was a convenient subservience
which would induce the Commisssoners to
fling the mantle of protection over the wrong.
doers, to blemish their own high and irreproach-
able characters, in what must have proved the

thing that would cast discredit on the startling
Report of Mr. Rozzrox's Committee—that would
have enabled the Government to impeach its ac-
curacy, on the authority of an investigation con-
ducted on the spot, with all the means of eliciting
truth, and the results embodied by men of
ability and unblemished reputation. Sir Jowrt
M'NmLL and Colonel TuLLocH were not the me*
for this dirty work. They fearlessly discharged
their duty, and voila le resultat. Every attempt
has been made to discredit them, disparage their
labours, and neutralise their Report. It is
true that the Premier, in a manly speech becom-
ing his position, expressed the satisfaction of the
Government with their conduct, and acknowledged
the advantages which the public service had de-
rived from their proceedings. But there was
no official recognition from the department for
which they were engaged—no reward for their
indefatigable industry, and efficient, faithful, and
exemplary discharge of the duty confided to their
charge ; they would not be the tools of the Go-
vernment, the exculpators of those who merited
reproach. Hence the carping criticisms and
petulant attacks of Mr. PEEL, the mouthpiece of
the War-office, and hence what virtually was their
trial by the partial and packed Board at Chelsea.
Lord PANMURE, too, has tardily spoken. Nearly
twelve months after the Report was in his hands,
and when thatßeport had virtuallybeen condemned
by the conduct of the Government, ininstituting a
new inquiry into the same facts by different Com-
missioners, the Noble Secretary for the War De-
partment declared that "the Government" approv-
ed the Report." Why, then, the new inquiry ? Why
the Report of the Chelsea Board ? And what is
the opinion of the Government respecting that
Report, so diametrically opposed to that which
emanated from the Chelsea Commissioners ?
We rejoice that the gentlemen of Liverpool
have spoken so boldly and truthfully. It must
produce beneficial results, and in no respects more
than in showing the true nature, intent, and ob-
ject of Government inquiries, which are not, and
cannot be, accepted by the country as trustworthy,
after what has taken place with respect to one of
which they profess entirely to approve.

On Friday last, when considering the able Re-
port of the " Society for Promoting the Amend-
ment of the Law," we declared that, " although
agreeing in many respects with the Society, we
cannot adopt all their views." We shall notir ex-
plain the grounds on which, with the most pro-
found respect, we venture to differ from some of
the conclusions arrived at, and to suggest what
appears to us to be more judicious, and better cal-
culated to achieve the great objects which every
sincere and disinterested Reformer Inns: have
deeply at heart. Our plan does not agree with
any of those suggested by either the Attorney-
General, Sir FITZROY KELLY, Mr. COLLIER, Or the
Society. It is compounded from all—taking that
which appears to be really valuable in each, and
rejecting the portions thereof which seem open to
well-founded objections.
It is universally agreed by all, with the excep-
tion of the insignificant clique referred to in our
last article, that the testamentary jurisdiction of
the E cclesiastical Courts should be altogether abo-
lished, awl a new tribunal created, which should
have full control in granting probates and letters
of administration. We should add thereto all
cases of divorce, alimony, and jactitation of mar-
riage, for reasons which we shall hereafter adduce,
and which, as we believe, will be found not merely
cogent, but perfectly decisive on the point. The
questions at issue may thus fairly be considered
under three heads, viz :-
Ist, The Constitution of the new tribunal.
2d, Its Jurisdiction.

And 3dly, How far local tribunals should be
authorised to act, and to which Courts the duty
should be entrusted.

On the first point we fully concur with tile
Society, that three Judges would be far better
than one. Their decisions would have greater
weight, and the anomaly of a single judge being
called on an application for a new trial to review
the conduct of another judge, of co-ordinate or
superior authority, would be removed. But we
cannot agree that the Court should consist of one
judge from each of the Superior Courts of Common
Law. We have already pointed out a fatal ob-
jection to this course, viz., that the new tribunal
should be practically closed during nearly half the
year, while the judges were absent on circuit,
or during the vacations, that cannot be abolished
with any regard for the health and comfort of the
learned Judges, and which would be fraught with
the most serious inconvenience to many families.
This alone renders the appointment of a new
Judge, whose time shall be exclusively devoted to
the business of the new tribunal indispens-
able. The only objection is the additional
expense which the Society calculates would
amount to 5,6001. per annum. But although
not yielding to any in the desire to promote every
sound and wholesome economy, we repeat that
such a sum is of comparatively trivial importance
when the vast and complicated interests at stake
are taken into consideration. With this new
judge should be associated two others. One a
Vice-Chancellor, the other a Judge of one of the
Superior Courts of Common Law, who should give
their services gratuitously, and for whose absence
while so occupied, adequate arrangements might
be made by the other Judges and Tice-Chancel-
lors.

2dly. As to the Jurisdiction.—We should not
only confer authority of granting probates, and
letters of administration (dealing with wills of real
as well as of personal estat3), which should be
valid in all parts of the United Kingdom, but also
of construing wills and administering estates, as
urged by the Attorney-General and Sir F. KELLY.
But it should have the exclusive jurisdiction in
such cases, and not a co-ordinate power with the
Court of Chancery, as proposed by the latter
learned gentleman. The serious evils of divided
authority, against which the Society has adduced
irresistible arguments would thus be avoided, and
a Vice-Chancellor, accustomed to the construction
of wills and the administration of assets being
associated with the other judges, there could be
no inconsistency in imposing that part of the duty
relating to testamentary and administrative suits,
which might safely devolve on the new tribunal,
as proposed by Sir R. BETHELL.
There is no part of the business of the Courts
of Equity to which so many and such grave ob-
jections have been preferred as that relating to
the administration of estates. The fortunes of
widows and orphans, of legatees and next of kin,
have been so frequently sacrificed,in a
that
great
unpopularity of the Court may be
attributed to that terrible cause. The imaginary
suit of JARNDYCE V. JARNDYCE, referred to by
one of the greatest of modern writers, furnishes
an over-true picture of the monster grievance ;
and we believe that no portion of the plan would
be more popular, or more beneficial to the com-
munity at large, than that which would completely