The Bee-Hive. — 1876-05-27 (London, England)

THE BEE-HIVE.  AMNESTY-THE POLICY OF MERCY.  We are too much in the habit of disguising facts behind words, and our daily experience gives us occasionally very sad proof of this. The Amnesty, debate on Monday night in the House of Commons, coupled with the Amnesty debate in the French Chamber, Illustrate it very curiously. If we go back to the period of the American Civil War, and look at the offences attending it, we may gather some instruction on the point in question.  Nobody now denies the supreme wickedness of the acts of Jefferson Davis and his accomplices. In a country where there existed a free press and a free platform these men provoked a horrible civilwar, in which tens of thousands perished, and they did so for the purpose of upholding and perpetuating human slavery. Looked at altogether, in its cause and its consequences, this was one of the wickedest things ever done in the world. When this diabolical revolt against humanity and law was suppressed, the Government of the American people—a 'Government not• of emperors or kings—simply a Government of the people, acting for the people—and which might with pleas of justice and Policy, have taken hundreds of lives, pardoned all; and, so far as mercy could obliterate the memory of a great wrong and groat suffering, by its example, it called for oblivion and forgiveness. Turning to France, we see the Communists of Paris—not Comiiiinists in the ordinary meaning of that term—Communists simply in their desire to decentralize the Goverment of their country; maddened by the enormous disasters brought on France by the incapacity and treason of those who, up to that time, controlled its affairs, undertook what may be called a hopeless defence of that city, which cost many needlessly thrown away, and much destruction of property, some of it most likely destroyed wickedly and wantonly. Nor do we wish to hide the fact of the murder of the hostages, which was in the last degree wicked and uncalled for. In such a matter nothing should be disguised or extenuated. But wo say that Victor Hugo was right when he compared it with other events recent in the history of France. Events connected With the worst kind of political warfare, and which, if they teach lessons of savage retaliation instead of lessons of mercy, brutalize and madden the men mixed up with them, and convert history into a shame and a reproach to nations calling themselves civilized.  We are glad the people of France did not call for the sacrifice of the actors in the horrible coup d'etat when the power of Bonaparte was trampled in the dirt. The crime of this man and his fellow conspirators included nearly every villany—murder, Perjury, plunder, and treason were some of its features. And it may be said that what they did was coolly and deliberately Planned, and had no reference to guilt or innocence hl regard to any of their victims. In fact it had reference only to the wicked and selfish ambition of the conspiring assassins. We repeat that public vengeance (lid not call for their blood. They were princes, generals, statesmen, churchmen and others, who hate those amongst the people who object to being oppressed and plundered. The People owed to the perpetrators of that crime a terrible debt of vengeance, and if we asked for a list of their victims it certainly would not be a long one. Turning, however, to the suppression of those who set up the Commune in Paris, what do we find? The statement as furnished during the Amnesty debate in the French  Chamber supplies it with horrible minuteness of detail. Here it is:—