The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-10 00:00:00

1.113L1C OPINION.

The Times remarks, with reference to the late disastrous news
from India:—" This moment, so critical to ourselves, the Govern.
ment have chosen for exciting a mutiny in °Le of their fellow corps
at Madras by a sudden reduction of pay. It makes one believe
that there is a fatality attending our present-efforts in India, to hear
of such madness. Except cowardice, almost every fault of which
men in command could be guilty has already been committed.
The adoption of the cruel and contemptible Shah Soojah, instead
of an alliance with the popular Dost Mohammed, whom the ad.
dress of Sir A. Burnes had conciliated—the haughty and ill. judged
behaviour (though we do not now wish to dwell on that) of the
late Envoy—the reckless massacre at Khelat i Ghilzie—the
neglect of the warnings given to Sir A. Burnes by Captain
Gray of the intended rising the unfortunate departure
of General Sale's brigade from Cabool at the very mo.
ment when his presence was most required—the neglect to secure
the magazines of provision, which fell a prey to the first rising of
the insurgents, and whirls would else, after all other mistakes had
been made, have saved our troops—crime—negligence—miscalcu.
lation— one upon another—ending in the terrible catastrophe
which people seem to apprehend has now broken upon us, would
indeed remind the superstitious that ' Quem Deus volt perdere
prigs dementat.' We cannot, however, yet believe the account
which is put forward. It is too terrible. It seems, not an event of
the English empire in the 19th century, but a hideous dream, a
horrible tale, when we read of 6,000 men massacred almost in
cold blood—a British Envoy treacherously murdered, and 16 of
our countrywomen (as is asserted) carried off by an army of savage
enemies, with sickening details which we could scarcely bear to
write, feeling, as we do, that there are those in England: to whom
such particulars are not, as to ourselves, mere frightful barbarities
—a fearful page of history brought nearer—but piercing appeals to
their own personal recollections and affections. These accounts,
however, at the least have made our own course more clear. Any-
thing less terrible might have left us still hesitating from shame at
our original aggression, and the consciousness of the ill deserts of
our country. But by the treacherous murder of our officers, and
the settled determination with which they are pursuing, and are
said to have effected, the wholesale slaughter of our men, the
Affghans have at least released us from any debt to them, and left
us free to pursue that course which the blond of our countrymen
and the safety of our empire demand. They have yet to learn
what it is that they have provoked."
The Post says :—" The intelligence from India, which we were
enabled to pub:ish at considerable length in our impression of yes.
terday, can excite but one feeling. The stain on the national
honour, the brave men sacrificed in vain attempts to sustain it, the
miseries endured by their survivors—all concur to stamp these ac-
counts with a character of the steepest melancholy. It would give
us unfeigned satisfaction if we could encourage our readers to de-
rive any comfort from the comparatively cheering manner in which
the intelligence is treated by a contemporary. But this is out of
our power. Our correspondent at Bombay is so intelligent and
cautious, ani has always proved himself so well-informed, that im-
plicit reliance may be placed on his communication ; and if it were
necessary to confirm his statements by additional evidence, such
corroboration would, unfortunately, not be wanting; for we are
enabled to assure our readers that the accounts received by Govern-
ment are, if possible, of a more disastrous nature than those which
we have been the medium ofgiving to the public."

The Herald thus alludes to the rumoured massacre of the Bri.
tish troops by the native tribes of Affghanistan :—" In the depth
of a Siberian winter they have slaughtered a British army, mur.
dared two British civil authorities, and hem in three thousand Bri-
tish Indian troops in a frontier town. They first half starved the
force in Cabool, and then cut it to pieces. In the midst of their
successes they offer terms ; they are the immediate evacuation of
their country ; and they make this offer with a perfect knowledge
of the strength which the Supreme Government of India can in
the spring bring against them. They acknowledge that British
artillery can open the passes to Cabool, and clear the defiles ; they
are aware that they cannot withstand the power of the British
nation ; you may,' they say, ' again occupy our cities, and by brist-,
ling our hills by your guns preserve them from our attack ; but In so
doing you do not conquer the Affghans; you can subdue us only
by extermination.' We may level the cities and scour the plains,
from Jellalabad to Herat—our reward will be famine and
pestilence ; the Affghans will destroy all provisions, and drive their
flocks into the mountain recesses; each succeeding summer may
witness our dearly-bought victories, but winter will yearly restore
to the Affghans their triumphs. Will, then, the British nation
enter into a war of extermination ? Will the British Parliament
sar.ction such a war ? Have we become such emzmous hypocrites
as to censure the barbarities of the French in Algiers, and yet enact
similar scenes ourselves in CentrA Asia ? What injury had the
Affghan tribes ever done to our empire in India, or to British
subjects, before we invaded their country ? What right had we
to occupy Afighanistan, and to disturb its Government, save that
which might gives to us ? If Persia carried on war in disguise
against us at Herat, could we not have diverted the strength of the
Shah from Ids eastern to his western frontier, by debarking an army
from the Persian Gulf ? If Russia intrigued against us in Central
Asia, why did we not countermine her intrigues in the Black Sea 2"
The Advertiser, alluding to the disastrous reports from A fFghan.
istan, says :—" The right divine' in the East is practically the
right of the strongest, and therefore England ought, instead of
snaking a revolution in favour of an outcast Prince, to have conso-
lidated around herself the powers already existing. This ought
to have been her policy. Now, however, there is no choice left.
Our authority in Affghanistan must be asserted, and the treacher-
ous murder of Sir W. H. Macnaghten must be avenged, even if the
whole resources of our Indian empire were necessary to accomplish
such results. There is no middle course open through which Eng-
land may retreat. She must unflinchingly maintain her autho-
rity in its widest latitude, so far as is consistent with native institu-
tions, or altogether abandon her eastern empire."
The following are the observations of the Chronicle, on the sub-
ject of the recent news from Affghanistan :—" In the dates to which
some of the events are assigned, there are discrepancies which it
is difficut to understand. Thus intelligence is published in the
Delhi Gazette, which says that Major Pottinger as the successor of
Sir W. hlacnaghten, commenced negotiations un the 24th of De-
cember: while all accounts agree in assigning the murder of the
Envoy to the 25th of December. At the dinner of the Seaman's
Hospital Society yesterday, Captain H. Tuckett, who may be re-
garded as an authority in Indian affairs, stated that he had had
letters by the last mail, a month ago, announcing the death of Sir
W. Macnaghten, and we believe the death of Captain Trevor was
announced by a Contemporary at that time. We are not, of
course, disposed to refer to discrepancies of this kind for the pur.
pose of throwing doubt upon the general accuracy of the intelli-
gence ; but until we shall have more authentic details we shall not
regard the position of our force in Affghanistan as so desperate as
it has been represented."

mabwErsr—TißADr.—coniramacr.
The lace-manufacture at Taunton is in a very decayed state
more so than it has been during the last seven years. The opera-
tives are all working on short time.

The Hon. Hanbury Tracy has beetT;;;;dOn the Reform side
for the Brighton contest, and Lord Alfred Hervey, the Marquis of
Bristol's son •n the Conservative.

SIIVa7O MILITAILY.
The anniversary of the campaign in Egypt, under Abercromby,
in 1801, wns celebrated yesterday at the United Service Club
with the usual splendour. Twenty-five officers of both services,
and of al: arms, sat down to dinner.

There will be three launches of vessels this season on the Thames;
the Worcester, 50 guns, building at Deptford; the Chichester, 50
guns, building at Woolwich; and another smaller vessel at the
latter dock-yard.
At a meeting of the Seaman's Hospital Society at the London
Tavern yesterday, Admiral Bowles stated that since its foundation
upwards of 60,000 seamen of the Port of London had been relieved.
Among the subscriptions received, the more prominent were, her
Majesty (annually) 105/. ; the King of Denmark, 1001.; Trinity
Corporation 121st donation), 300/. ; Merchant Elder Brethren
(16th donation), 100/. ; the Hon. East India Company (10th dona-
tion), 1051. ; together with numerous others, amounting on the
whole to 1,003/. 10s.