On this page

• Text (2)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    length along , with a vast amount of the highlycoloured reading , termed " objectionable . " The Doctor , who was a great acquisiti ^ for the Ultra-Protestant party as an apqsta «« T ( $ 6 nlc > ¦ $ && ¦ < Shar ^| cfc by Dr . Newman , the convert to cat | ic | jpcism , Tvitli outrageous incontinence . He-vindicates his character by bringing an action for libej , ind Doctor Newman defends .. himself with an ^ c ( ver . whelming mass of evidence ,, conveying yiwifAer charges , some of them relating to offences recently committed on English ground . Considered in its cumulative

    effect , this evidence led the public to anticipate a verdict against the prosecutor , Achilli ; although none of the witnesses * ' speaking to the most material points , came into court with unblemished reputation ; and the most was made of their defects of character . In summing up , Lord Chief Justice Campbell elaborated this view of the subject with great power and unction . The jury found only so much of the allegations against Achilli proved , — - " to their satisfaction , "—as respected the fact of his dismissal from certain

    offices : and the aDt > roviner Lord Camnbell reoffices ; and the approving Lord Campbell received their verdict amid the unchecked cheers of a tumultuously excited auditory .

    Untitled Article

    THE WEEK IN PARLIAMENT . ME . MATHER IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS . Lobd Beaumont brought the case of Mr . Mather before the House of Lords on Monday . In the main , bis speech , consisted of a repetition of the facts which we have so many times previously laid before our readers . In the essential points of the story , lie took the anti-Ministerial view , censuring Lord Malmesbury for the conduct of the negotiation , and maintaining , with Lord Granville , that Tuscany , not Austria , should have been held responsible for the outrage . At the close of his speech , he stated what he considered one of the great and salient points arising out 6 f this question , namely , the subjection of Tuscany to Austria . ^ Unfortunately , it had been the policy of Austria to encourage every kind of misgovernment in the Roman and Tuscan S tates . She had urged upon the D ufcea of Parma , Modena , and Tuscany , as well as ujjon the Pope , to adopt a system hostile to all social improvement , and destructi ve of everything like civil and religious liberty . Nay , Austria had gone so far as to encourage those powers to abandon what little good yet remained in their countries ; and Tuscany , which under the laws of Leopold II . had been happy , was now threatened to have those laws abrogated , and to be driven back into that state of barbarism in which the

    delegations of Bologna , Ferrara , Fdrli , Bavonna , and the other ecclesiastical states , were at this moment . In that attempt Austria had been well supported , and had found a ready instrument in what was called ' the clerical party ' in those States . In consequence of the proceedings , of that party , a state of affairs now existed in all those parts of Central Italy which would almost justify a general rising of tho people , both against their sovereigns and the foreign allios of their sovereigns , who at present occupied their territories , and sucb . a rising might , perhaps , before long , become inevitable . "

    But what remedy did he suggest for this ? He recommended that " something" should be done analogous to what was douo in 1834—when the Papal Government was impressed with the necessity of social reforms —[ of which the Papal Government took not the least notice . ] Lord Bha . umont ' 8 attack was very mildly made , as became a Peer of England speaking in tho peaceful atmosphere of tho Houko of Lords . In reply , Lord Mai / meshujiy was quite as mild—indeed , the whole debate was by many degrees tamer than its fellow in

    the Commons . Lord MAnMKSUUltY began by complimenting tho nohlo baron who preceded him , on tho general accuracy with which he had narrated tho caso ; therefore , little need was thero for him to go into detail . Ho admitted that tho assault was '' a most brutal" und inexcusable assault ;—tho act of a violent man acting without an udoqiiato cause . But ho denied that it was a national assault , tin assault upon tho honour of , Great Britain ,

    And ho asked whether every assault counnitted upon Englishmen abroad was to be considered nn assault upon tho national honour , and resented with all tho strength of tho empire . Englishmen abroad were liublo to bo insulted an foreigners wore hero . To tho latter , tho British courts of law ' were open , nnd to tho former , foreign courts of law wore open ; und until juHtico had been denied ton British ' subject in a foreign court of law , no Foreign Secretary would bo justified in intorfbring .

    When ho eamo into ollico , bo found that Mr . Mathor bad been insulted and injured by an Austrian oflicor " quartered" at Florence-. Lord Mximuhiwhy then delivered a nl » ort ; essay on tho law of honour , winch deserves prcwrvation on account of its author .

    Mr . Mather being injured , lie had one of three courses to pursue ^ , " Thirty yeara agqhe would , perhaps , Have adopted that b $ | £ . of thes £ < fourtes ) which would haVe then consisted in , dje ^ nding ft-Qjii the' officer who Had insultediiim personal reparation fb ^ the iiwult . He did not at all blame Mr . Mather for not havingadopted that course ; opinions had , ffeirtunately , clianged on the subject of duelling ; the advance- of civSiaation bad determined that such a mode of settling differencest between genildfnen was no longer de * fensible or praofcieable . ( Heai » , hear . ) But , though the practice of duelling had , happily , become obliterated from our customs , the cognate , idea that it was no compromise of the dignity of one gentlema n to accept from another who had insulted him , — -it might be without an intention to insult , without premeditatibn , — -a full , frank , and

    gentlemanly apology , had not departed from among us . ' However , a man ' s honour must always be in his own hands , and therefore he could not presume to blame Mr . Mather that he had not thought fit to adopt this second mode of settling the matter . Certain it was , however , that a full and frank apology had been offered to Mr . Mather by the officer who had insulted him , with the distinct declaration that the insult had never been designed for him personally . Mr . Mather , however , had not thought fit to accept this apology , and he had refused , further to seek his satisfaction in the civil courts of the country . From the outset Mr . Mather had made up his mind that the insult was a national insult , and as such , must be avenged by Her Majesty ' s Secretary of State . "

    Lord Maxmesbitbt then narrated how Mr . Mather had , " uninvited , " looked in at the Foreign Office to consult with his lordship ; urging upon him that he had to obtain satisfaction for a national outrage . He had snubbed Mr . Mather upon that point , representing it as ho business of his , and insisting that Mr . Mather was only concerned in procuring satisfaction for the personal outrage ; and that he ought to assess his own damages , as he would have had to assess them in an English court of law . " Mr . Mather , " says Lord Malmesbury , " did not object to this course , " but only asked for time to consult his friends .

    Then , leaving the story of his negotiations with Mn Mather entirely , Lord Maxmesbtjet turned round to reply to Lord John Russell , who said that the Queen ' s Advocate ought to have been called in to assess damages . But , replies Lord Maxmesbttex , I could not call in the Queen ' Advocate , for there was no Queen ' s Advocate to call in . Sir Herbert Jenner was buried on the funeral day of the late Government , who , anxious to reward their various friends , inducted a new one into the situation of Sir Herbert Lord Campbell— -That appointment was made by the Archbishop of Canterbury . The Government had nothing'to do with it . Lord MAliMESBTmY . — -They had most likely something to do with it in the way of recommendation .

    Then he glanced off to the topic as to whether Austria or Tuscany were responsible , and he certainly was of opinion that Tuscany was responsible . As to the amount of damages , he had calculated what an English jury would have given Mr . Mather for the " personal detriment , " as national honour was not at all involved . " There was ono point in which ho freely admitted that he had been to blame . On Saturday , tlie 27 th , aftor receiving what ho then considered tho final dospatch , settling tho whole question—not satisfactorily , indeed , but still Bottling it , as ho imagined—ho had sent off a dospatch , without opening another despatch which had meantime arrived , and which had a material boaring on the subject .

    Ho admitted his fault in this ono instance , and tho only palliation ho could offer was tho enormous mass of business pressing upon him in all shapes and -from all quarters . When So mentioned that , in tho course of tho year , 33 , 000 despatches , without reckoning their inclosures , passed to and from tho Foreign-office , it might afford eomo excuse for tho accident that ho had delayed till tho Monday to open this despatch , coming on tho Saturday . ( Hoar , hear . )" Lord Campbeix defended Mr . Scarlett's share in tho transaction , and contended that ho had not acted contrary to his instructions ; that it was left to his discretion as to what sum of money ho could get ; and that ho had not , as had beon assorted , surrendered tho

    principle of Tuscan responsibility . Tho Earl of Aberdeen felt that there was no national difference in tho question at issue ; but that reparation for tho personal damage should have rather boon sought from Austria than from Tuscany . As to insisting on tho independence of Tuncany , that would not alter existing facts , seeing that tho Austrian forco was not under Tuscan jurisdiction—iu relation to uh , Tuscany was just as independent oxcopt in so fur as tho Austrian forco was concerned . Ho would not enter

    into , but ho condemned , tho Austrian military code ; but bo contondod that tho officer , who had only obeyed that code in cutting down Mr . Mather , could not bo blamed , ltoparation was , howover , still due , and tho Austrian appeared to think so ; but after tho expressions of rogrot from Princo Schwarzonborg and Princo Liehtonstoin , a national affront was out of tho question . The Earl of Aberdeen did not blame , nor did ho praiso , tho Government , but ho damaged thorn by his diplomat io way of stating tho case . Ho placed Lord

    .-. ¦ : !¦ ¦ ¦¦ ¦ ¦ ' ,-.- - ' ¦ ¦ > ' 'r « : ¦ . ¦ . ¦ :.. - ¦ : ,- ¦ ' ¦ ¦ ~ " Malmespu ^ iji this } dUemma : ^ Either / ' said he , "the noble earl musC » ow ' claim a larger sum , after acquiescing in t ^ at offered , or he must insist on Tuscany acknowledging tyst responsibility—and he could not expect to convince her that such was the case . " TJp the fopje of Italian Independence he was close and suspicious : — : '' . ;¦ - ' . / ., ' . ' . ''¦ . V- ^ s ' ' ^ whii lt : bi || d ' .: t )« en ' 8 a 4 d of the state of Italy and occupation of parts of it by Austrian forces , no one could regre £ inope than himself the necessity , or supposed neces sity , of that occupation ; and no one would be more delighted to see this time when those forces could be withl drawn , and withdrct > wtt with safety / but it was a singu ^ supposition that had been suggested , that Austria

    encouraged these Governments to do all that was t yrannical monstrous , and unjust , in order that she might have the credit of her own provinces being well governed in comparison . That was a position which passed all Jesuitism he ever heard . ( Hear , hear . ) There was something so absurd in it that it was impossible to imag ine that any Government in its senses could take sutfe a course . ( Hear hear . ) The Austrian occupation of Tuscany was very much to be regretted ; but we must remember " theRoman . territory was occupi e d by the French first ; and he ( the Earl of Aberdeen ) supposed ( though he did not know on what conditions the French occupied Rome ) that they were also exempted fromRoman tribunals and independent of them . ( A noble lord made some remark . ) Yes nominally , there was the state of siege . They were independent of-the Roman tribunals . ( Hear , hear . )"

    Lord GEANVllriiE made a long spejech , referring almost wholly to his own conduct in the Mather affair . He said he directed Mr . Scarlett to apply to the Tuscan Government for reparation , as it would have been a positive insult to the Grand Duke to have passed him over in applying for Tedress , and thus gratuitousl y pointing out his dependent position to the world . Lord Deebt held that from first to last there could be no question of national hisult or national indignit y . The officer did not even know that Mr . Mather was an

    Englishman . The assault Was a roost brutal and unjustifiable outrage , but it was not an attack upon pur national honour . He thought that Mr . Scarlett had made that which should have been a personal matter into an international grievance . Austria had tendered ah ample apology , which Mr . Mather had rejected " in the most contumelious manner , " and demanded from the Tuscan Government punishment of the offender . But the Austrian army had been placed beyond its jurisdiction by a secret treaty , a treaty we could not recognise ; nor could we recognise the ( presence of the Austrian , army except as a force in Tuscan employ . Now , we had full right to demand reparation for a

    British subject from the Tuscap government , btit , said he , " we could not demand that she should do that which , by treaty , she had involved herself in the impossibility of doing . " He then went at great length into the case between the Government and Mr . Scarlett , laying heavy blame upon that gentleman for alleged departure from instructions . He summed up as follows : — "What I think may be drawn from tho discussion which has just taken place is this—that an injury having been inflicted on a British subject , we took the question up in a double light , of an insult offered to this country and an injury to a British , subject . With respect to the Government

    first , wq have received from , | the Austrian , and the Austrian officers concerned , tho fullest explanations and expressions of regret ; and with regard to tho second , wo havo treated it throughout as a case for private reparation , which a British subject has a right to claim and to expect . Wo also thought that the Tuscan Government was the only ono from whom wo had a right to claim that reparation . Wo maintained , throughout , tho principle that nations cannot bo uphold in all tho privileges of independence , and at tho same timo bo allowed to refuse to b « liable to the responsibility of independence . ( Hoar , hoar . ) ' In ns far as lay in our power , wo have endoavourod to obtain pecuniary reparation for tho injury inflicted on tho individual , and an acknowledgment on tho part of Tuscany of that obligation of winch wo biiou the

    never ceaso to demand tho enforcement , namely , pro tection by their tribunals , or , if not by fchoir tribunals , «* least by tlioir executive , of British subjects passing tlir 0 U S " or rosiding in tho Tuscan territories , from whatever quarroi they may bo assaulted . ( Hoar , hoar . ) JJn ( lu 0 & ^ thi ' if tho Tuscan ^ Government persist in refusing to iuliu uu » plain and j > alpablo obligation , it will bo impossible lor «« -x MaioBty ' a Government to continue to treat witli . tliom w an indcnondont nation entitled to tho rights oi «> P { " ™ T intorcourHO . Consecmently , although it ih impossiblo miow conBistont with public duty , wo can lay boioro tno J _ i" » » any instruotiona which may have beon given to tir Bulwor , your lordHhips will find from one dospatch in tno papers on your lordHhips' tnblo that , in tho ovont oi u » plain' duty not being recognised by Tuscany , with wna over pain on our part , weHhall . bo compelled to susj ^ all diplomatic relations with that country . " ( I W Jlt )" ;;' After a little further discussion , Lord ijoowiio " withdrew bis motion for tho production of b » r M ™ *

    Uulwor ' s instructionH . LOUD DEIUIY ' S EDU 0 ATIONAI 1 'OLIOY . On tbo order of tho clay for tho consideration oi « J > OoiiHolidatcd Fund Appropriation Bill , as liinonaou , Lord John KUSSKI . T , iulflllcd , on Monday , tho pr miso ho gave last week , and called tho « ttontlOn .. ^ Hoivm ) to tho recent minute of tho Committee ot ooui ¦ V / Corrjaa / - woTj

    Untitled Article

    598 . ;¦* TH : ^

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), June 26, 1852, page 598, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1941/page/2/