Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

circumstances, done it in terms which went to make a prodigy of her illustrious brother. A modern Pascal-a name hardly less honoured perhaps among the savaus of the Institute than it is familiar in the academic halls of our own country has no miracle of his infancy to point to; and yet Chalmers is not surely the less conspicuous in the walks of science and literature, or less wonderful in the breadth and comprehensiveness of his majestic imagination, because the spark of his mathematical and intellectual genius was only struck out in the third term of his college life, and when he had attained his thirteenth year. No less, it is conceived, can Newton be thought to inherit the title of immortal, because only in his thirteenth year did he begin to astonish his playfellows at Grantham, by the effects of that passion for the mathematics, which soon became with him irresistible. The enduring frame of the great Watt needs no adventitious aid from the marvellous in dealing with the facts of his early life; and he whose little finger is thicker than the loins of any ordinary man, may surely afford to hear without being disconcerted, the boastful jargon of the pigmies around him. At thirteen years of age, young Watt, like that other giant Timnath, when the Philistines were upon him, awoke up into something of his real strength on being put to the study of mathematics. This we conceive to be the true date of his intellectual birth,— the happy moment when he took into his hands the mystic key of all scientific knowledge with which, in after years, he was successively to unloose so many of the secrets of nature, and lead manhood to the participation of some of her most precious treasures.

Of the mathematical preceptor of so apt and promising a pupil, too little is unfortunately known that could be very interesting to the reader. In regard to few particulars in the memorials of Watt's youth, is one disposed to lament the scantiness of information more sincerely than in this. His name was John Marr, a name not unknown to historical record. He would seem to have been retained in some capacity in the household and family of the lord of the manor, Sir John Schaw. We have seen his subscription as a witness to some characters granted by Sir John in 1751. In these deeds he is designated John Marr, mathematician, in Greenock. He appears to have had a salary from the town, as in the years 1750 and 1751 there are found in the accounts of the town treasurer more than one payment made to him. Nothing further is known of him than what appears in the records of the society of freemasons, known as the Lodge Greenock Kilwinning, No. 11, of which he was a brother, and in which he acted in some official capacity, having been initiated into the mysteries of the craft in the City of Glasgow. To be able to record more of James Watt's mathematical preceptor would be gratifying, not less on his account than that of his pupil, and the gratification would be proportionately heightened could a relationship, by no means improbable, be happily traced up from him to another John Marr, who was mathematician in the household of King James VI., and friend of the great Napier, of Merchiston. The following anecdote, in which the latter John Marr acts so dramatic a part, is so interesting in itself, and so graphically narrated, that we cannot resist the opportunity of quoting it. Lilly, in his "Life and Times," thus relates the circumstances to Elias Ashmole:-"I will acquaint you with one memorable story related to me by John Marr, an excellent mathematician and geometrician, whom I conceive you remember. He was servant to King James I. and,

Charles I. When Merchiston first published his logarithms Mr. Briggs, then reader of the astronomy lectures at Gresham College, in London, afterwards of Oxford, was so surprised with admiration of them, that he could have no quietness in himself till he had seen that noble person whose only invention they were. He acquaints John Marr therewith, who went into Scotland before Mr. Briggs, purposely to be there, when these two so learned persons should meet. Mr. Briggs appointed a certain day when to meet in Edinburgh, but failing thereof, Merchiston was fearful he would not come. It happened one day, as John Marr and the Lord Napier were speaking of Mr. Briggs,- Oh, John!' said Merchiston, Mr. Briggs will not come now;' at the very instant one knocks at the gate. John Marr hastened down, and it proved to be Mr. Briggs, to his great contentment. He brings Mr. Briggs into my lord's chamber, where almost one quarter of an hour was spent, each be holding the other with admiration before one word was spoken. At last Mr. Briggs began, 'My Lord, I have undertaken this long journey purposely to see your person, and to know by what engine of wit and ingenuity you came first to think of this most excellent help unto astronomy, namely, the logarithms; but, my lord, being by you found out, I wonder nobody else found before, when being found, it appears 30 easy.' He was nobly entertained by Lord Napier, and every summer after that during the Lairds being alive, this venerable man went purposely to Scotland to visit him.” The only other preceptor was Robert Errol, the first master appointed to the grammar school of Greenock, his nomination having taken place as early as the year 1727, in which year he is mentioned for the first time in the town records. It is not known at what age our young geometrician was sent to the grammar school, or how long he continued under the instructions of its zealous and learned pedagogue. There is, however, the best reason for believing that he made good progress, and attained to a creditable proficiency in Latin, and, most probably, the elements of Greek. And although we are not in a position to hazard in regard tɔ him what the great lexicographer said of his own classical attainments,-"That he should never have learnt Latin if it had not been flogged into him,"- we know that our young philosopher learned his so well, that he is found in his eightysecond year, notwithstanding the contrarieties and occupations of a long and busy life in very different departments of study, making use of his classics with as much discrimination as taste, and delighting even the circles of Edinburgh literati, during its most brilliant epoch, with the extent and correctness of his critical and philological attainments.

This volume is printed in a very tasteful style, worthy of its subject. The illustrations are curious or valuable. The style is clear and distinct. The statements seem all to be carefully weighed. Even the gossip is really excusable and pleasant gossip. Most probably the work will get generally into mechanics' institutions and libraries. It would be a strange circumstance if it did not. And a series of such works, other towns doing for their notables what Greenock has done for Watt, would form a splendid addition to our biographical literature.

EDINBURGH

MAGAZINE.

APRIL, 1857.

THE

CHINESE

OUR old Saxon or Scotch proverbs embody vast wisdom. They avoid the verbiage of the present day, and come straight to a point. They are, as proverbs must be, experimental or practical, and their numbers would furnish the texts of papers on all topics.

A little spark

Breeds meikle wark.

The condition of Britain and China illustrates

the couplet. Some time within the last three to four years a young boatman or labourer on the banks of the Canton river decided to join the rebels. The cause of this impulse in the young fellow's mind, like his appearance, his present existence, his influence, name, or prowess is alike unknown. There was a man, a young man probably, for his father was alive in October last-and he was one of twenty to thirty millions of rebels in China. There was a man--and the man was a rebel-but all beside these bare facts relating to the man is unknown here. In the western world we might suppose that there was a maiden as there was a man, and that the generous heart of the former, being impressed with admiration for the chivalry of Ta-Pa-Wing, she had induced the man to swerve from his allegiance to the Mantchoos. That was often the course of love and rebellion in our own country one hundred and twenty years ago, and more; but as in China females are not visible before marriage, and in point of fact courtship with all its diplomacy, excitement, and romance is reduced to the most miserable vulgarity of buying a wife-we can hardly impute blame respecting this man to woman, since it is not probable that the Chinaman's mother incited him to revolt.

A knowledge of the cause of this unknown's rebellion would be most interesting, because it is that little spark which has caused nominally the dissolution of the British Parliament. It is the romance of the house that Jack built, put into modern practice. There is the man-only, where

Ꮃ Ꭺ Ꭱ .

is the man ?-who rebelled against the Emperor of China. Then, here is the man who begot the man who rebelled, &c. Next, here is the ship that carried the man who begot the man that rebelled, &c. Then, here is the flag and the register which covered the ship which carried the man who begot the man, and so on. So, here is Commissioner Yeh, who despised the flag which covered the ship which carried the man-and onwards as before. Next step, here are the policemen who served Yeh, who depised the flag which covered the ship, &c. Then we have Bowring, next Seymour; Palmerstou following, and followed by Cobden, by the Parliament, by the Queen, and closed up by the electors of Great Britain- -a powerful body indeed to be disturbed in their buying and selling, their ploughing and sowing, by this insignificant person. The story reads thus in extenso :-Here are the electors who obeyed the Queen, who sought new representatives to displace the Parliament, who voted with Derby to turn out Palmerston, who vindicated Bowring, who requested Seymour to terrify Yeh, who ordered the policemen, who trampled the flag which covered the lorcha, which carried the man who begot the man, who rebelled against the Emperor of China.

This sorry business has agitated the country, and we are inclined to believe has made our constitution anything else than the admiration or the envy of surrounding nations; because a certain portion of the peace-at any-price party-even at the price of seventy thousand heads in twelvemonths within one city or province-fraternised, by an unavoidable accident, with the simple Derbyites, in the plan devised by the subtle Peelites to eject the Palmerstonians from the Treasury benches, and share the seats with the Russellites. The Derbyites expected to rule in conjunction with Gladstone, Graham, and Herbert. The Russellites cherished a similar expectation in the same conjunction. The Peelites alone knew

M

[blocks in formation]

their game. Being nothing in the present Parliament, these cherished knights of the late Sir Robert's round table could be little less in the Parliament to come; whereas, if they had gained office for twelvemonths, they might have swelled into importance, and done something to arrest that change in the dispensation of ecclesiastical patronage that galls them so that they wince; and they might have crippled the power and lowered the prestige of the empire-which seems to be their ruling passion ever since they landed the army in the Crimea without knapsacks, and left them to pass the winter without clothes, food, or fuel. The Derbyites were misguided as usual. They trust their astute Earl; too quick this year as he was too slow in 1855. They are the natural enemies of the Liberal party; and, therefore, they adopt any plan that may be presented of disorganising them. They have been deceived in this instance, and have disorganised themselves, for they will be fewer by fifty in the next, than in the past Parliament. For the humanitarian party, as some wag bas inhumanly dubbed the class of politicians who are erroneously styled the Manchester school, we admit their inability to make any personal gain by change; and their sincerity in apologising for the atrocious Commissioner Yeh, exactly as a year or two since they found excuses for the despotic Emperor of Russia. The phenomenon is unaccountable; but similar phenomena are not uncom mon. Able and honest men in every particular except one, are occasionally defective in one. It is a flaw at which the axle breaks, or the cannon bursts.

Lord John Russell and his few friends are less , excusable than either of the other classes of atoms which formed the perfectly fortuitous concourse against the Government upon the 3d current. They are not morbid politicians, but men thoroughly versed in the tactics of parliamentary life. They say that hey could not deny the errors charged against Sir John Bowring, and were obliged to vote consistently with their consciences. We do not refuse the word of gentlemen. Their consciences were extremely sharp and troublesome no doubt on that occasion, but consciences will some.. times speak tartly; yet they might have been quieted by a middle course. The forms of the House of Commons admitted an amendment that might have been a salubrious opiate to these consciences. A man might have come with clean hands out of the trial, who believed Commissioner Yeh to be an innocent, and Sir John Bowring a rollicking savage, without voting against or for Mr. Cobden's resolutions.

It is true, we fear, that not many members expected a resignation of the Ministry in consequence of the vote. Lord John Russell described the dissolution as a penal measure. The dissolution was not considered easy. The Court party were reckoned upon to thwart the minister, but if there be a Court party the Queen is not one of its number, and therefore Parliament was dissolved.

Viscount Palmerston will obtain a majority; but it might have been a larger one than any minister has had for twenty-five years if he had evinced reforming purposes, and if he had not opposed Mr. Locke King's bill for the reduction of the County Franchise. The new Parliament will be decidedly favourable to his foreign policy, but determined to extend the franchise at home, and opposed to domestic obstructions.

Sir John Bowring has been abandoned by his personal friends in this country on this subject. He has been assailed in bitter language by Messrs. Cobden and Roebuck, who do not generally run together, but who were both intimate and personal friends of our representative in China. The coarse invectives of political opponents are not remarkable, for they are not unnatural; but the acquaintance of the politicians whom we have named with the gentleman whose proceedings they censure, should have imparted a tone to their criticisms which they do not possess. They both know that Sir John Bowring when resident in this country opposed war, except in the last extremity. He acted, we believe, as Secretary to the Peace Society, and advocated their principles. He opposed the employment of force until kindness and persuasion were exhausted. Probably he even went farther, and advocated passive obedience, which is the root of slavery. He was connected with all the measures taken to obtain a complete enfranchisement of our own people. He held opinions on some subjects which we reject, but they are principally of a non-political character; but no man who has observed his career would say, up to this Chinese question, that he was addicted to war. His conduct and his principles rebut the charge. If he be liable to the imputations of his friends, a singular alteration in his character and feelings has occurred.

Even since his official residence in the East, he has been charged with leniency to the Chinese. His decisions were opposed to the interests of the British merchants, between whom and the Chinese authorities differences had arisen. He always appeared to give the Chinese the benefit of any doubts. He did not interfere in favour of the revolutionists, whom he might have essentially served. He even has been accused of indirectly aiding the Imperialists. We might ask his late friends with confidence, whether any British official exists whose antecedents would render a charge of cruelty and oppression on a grand scale against him less likely to be true. They say that their charges are supported by the papers produced in Parliament. We think that they are not; bu: even if they were, we dislike the condemnation expressed in certain quarters. The crimes or errors of an old friend who has long followed a satisfactory course should not be overlooked in silence, but they should be treated in sorrow.

The papers contain all the inculpatory evidence that exists; for the private information from China is in Sir John's favour. He is supported by all

THE CHARGES AGAINST SIR JOHN BOWRING.

those gentlemen who are connected personally with China, or by all who know anything directly of the matter; and he is opposed by those who, if they entertained any doubt relating to these affairs, were bound to give it in his favour.

The attacks made upon Sir John Bowring have been not only ungenerous, but they are wretched falsehoods. The charges would, if true, justify any man of honour and integrity in declining his friendship, and yet those old and professed friends of our representative in China hear without investigating, and greedily repeat these scandals without ascertaining their veracity. His position required forbearance from his foes, and especially from his friends. We are removed nearly eighteen thousand miles, and two months in time, from the scene of action. Acquaintance with Chinese affairs and character is not diffused largely among us. The British officials in China before this war, were considered, in their several positions, not more likely to break the peace than any other men who could have occupied them. Therefore they should be judged leniently, while we are prepared to prove that there have been scandalous falsehoods promulgated respecting their conduct from both Houses of Parliament. Sir John Bowring was charged by his opponents in the lower House with lying, in reference to the Arrow; and they quoted his own letters in proof. Many of them, we believe, sinned in comparative ignorance, because they had not read the blue book; and it is curious that his friends did not defend him with all the materials in their possession. The audacity and boldness of the charge placed very neatly by Mr. Burroughs, late a Conservative member for East Norfolk, in his leave-taking from his constituency, of which wer quote a paragraph, takes away one's breath. It is so circumstantial that the reader feels there must be something in it. We quote from Mr. Burroughs, because we believe him to be a very honourable man-although he should have read the blue book before, being deceived himself, he commenced to deceive others. He, doubtless, took the word of the distinguished Commoners and roble Peers who harped upon this string, and will now regret that he bore false testimony against a gentleman engaged in the discharge of onerous responsibilities. We quote Mr. Burroughs :

For myself I can solemnly declare, that in giving my vote I had no desire to displace Lord Palmerston's Government... My object in voting as I did was to induce Lord Palmerston to do that which I thought he ought to have done in the first instance, and which he has done since. The public documents upon China are voluminous, but I will give you an extract from them. On the 11th of October, Sir John Bowring wrote to the English consul, Parkes :"The Arrow had no right to hoist the British flag. The license to do so expired on the 27th of September, from which period she was not entitled to protection." On the 14th of November following, he wrote to the Chinese Commissioner Yeh :-" The Arrow lawfully bore the British flag under a register granted by me." Now if, as I

believe to be the case, the bloodshed and misery to the English residents in China, as well as to the Chinese, have

195

been occasioned under a false pretence (and both letters cannot be true) I put it to you as Englishmen, as men of common sense, conversant with the arrangements of your own business, whether such a mode of managing the affairs of this country in a large Empire at a distance merited the unqualified approbation of the Government.

And now we beg the reader carefully to con over the following extract from the despatch of the 11th of October, and learn that both letters are true. We take all that relates to the Arrow's register :

It appears, upon examination, that the Arrow had no right to hoist the British flag, the license to do so expired on the 27th of September, from which period she has not been entitled to protection. But the Chinese had no knowledge of the expiry of the license, nor do they profess to have had any other ground for interference than the supposition that the owner is not a British subject; that, however, is a question for this Government, who granted the register, and it is clear that the Chinese authorities have violated the 9th article of the Supplementary Treaty, which requires that all Chinese malfaisants in British ships should be claimed through the British authorities.

The difference made by the additional paragraph in the despatch of the 11th of October will be observed. Sir John Bowring places the breach of treaty with China by Commissioner Yeh, not upon a fiscal arrangement at Hongkong, but upon the broad ground that the Arrow was known to them as a British ship, and in no other capacity. Consul Parkes-in a note of which no notice is taken by Mr. Burroughs, because none was taken by the political leaders whom he followed-Consul Parkes says, regarding this matter, on the 12th of October :

[ocr errors]

I also forward, as directed by your Excellency, the register of the" Arrow." When the document was deposited with me on the 3rd inst., the year for which it was granted had expired a few days previously, but if the statement of the master is to be believed, it was because the lorcha was then at sea, and has not been in the waters of the colony since the 1st of September last, that timely application had not been made for its renewal. He states that on the day thence for Macao, where he lay for a fortnight, painting named he sailed in her for Canton, and proceeded from

and re-fitting; then loaded again outside Macao, re-entered that port, discharged a portion of his cargo there, and brought the remainder, consisting of rice, on to Canton; after the delivery of which he was to have left, on the day on which his crew was seized, in ballast for Hongkong, prior to proceeding, as he believes, in charter to Ningpo.

The

We are informed that the circumstances of the Arrow at the date of the seizure are usual. lorchas make long voyages, and the license for their register may often expire during their absence. The owner should renew that, and therefore, in a despatch of the 13th of October, to Consul Parkes, Sir John Bowring says ::

I will consider the re-granting the register of the " Arrow," if applied for; but there can be no doubt that after the expiry of the licence, protection could not be legally granted. This letter refers to the claim of the owner of the Arrow to protection, which had ceased; but the right of the British representive to concede protection remained. one question had If the owner of nothing to do with the other. the Arrow had sought protection to his ship, it might have been declined in strict conformity with

The

96

MR. BURROUGHS AND SIR JOHN BOWRING.

the law. If the British representative chose to overlook this irregularity, he had the power.

With respect to the short extract from the dispatch of Sir John Bowring, dated on the 14th November, we prefer to precede it by an extract from the letter of Commissioner Yeh, to which Sir John Bowring's of 11th November, is a reply: It was shown on trial of the prisoner, that the lorcha was built by Sooaching, a Chinese; a register was purchased for her of the merchant Block for 1,000 dollars, and that

:

she assumed the British flag without being entitled to it (or fraudulently). She was lying at the time of the seizure off the Dutch folly; and, as has been clearly proved, with no ensign flying, it being, as it appears, an established law with British vessels to haul down their ensign when they drop anchor, and not to hoist it again until they get under weigh. Had it been shown upon the trial that her flag was bond fide that of a British merchant vessel, it would have been doubtless correct to follow some other course than the one pursued, but the fact being that a Chinese had assumed the flag without title, what need was there for Mr. Consul Parkes to put himself forward as his advocate ?

It will be observed that Commissioner Yeh says that the Arrow "had assumed the British flag without being entitled to it," or, as translated by a foot-note, "fraudently"-a matter entirely unconnected with the expiry of the register. In answer to the statement of the Commissioner Yeh that the Arrow was not entitled to use the British flag, or that it was fraudulently assumed, no answer was more natural than the words written by Sir John Bowring on the 14th of November :

Whatever representations may have been made to your Excellency, there is no doubt that the lorcha "Arrow," lawfully bore the British flag under a register granted by me, and that Treaty obligations were violated by the seizure

of her crew, without the intervention of the consul, by your officers, and that this violation required a reparation as public as the outrage. I have undoubted evidence that the British flag was flying when it was pulled down by your officer, and I quite approve of the conduct of the Consul in

the whole of this affair.

This explanation and these extracts show how easy it is to make a falsehood, and how difficult to undo the web; but Mr. Burroughs will regret that he placed garbled extracts in his valediction to East Norfolk, and that, while gracefully retiring from a constituency whom he had represented in Parliament for some time, he attempted to take away with him the good name of an official who is guiltless of the charge against him.

Those persons who originated this admirable specimen of garbling, will not be ashamed of the matter. It answered their purpose for a time, and no more was required.

The space we occupy in dealing with a specific charge will not be grudged to the vindication of a British official, whose character as an eminent politician, as a literary man, a scholar, and our representative in a distant quarter of the globe, is a matter of consequence to all, except our domestic enemies," or to his "candid friends," and to them also in the present crisis.

[ocr errors]

Another charge against our governor at Hongkong originated with some parties in Parliament,

and has been repeatedly used in and out of Parliament. It was a schoolboy crime. Sir John was not sorry for what had occurred. He did not adequately express grief at the necessity-if a necessity arose-of appealing to Sir Michael Seymour. We had hoped that the governor of any British colony might reckon safely upon credit for regretting the loss of life in any operation, without expressing sorrow in his despatches, which are, or should be, concise documents. This hope was, however, founded in error, and our diplomatists are expected to have extracts from our moralists ready for use. The time allowed to elapse after the men on the Arrow were seized before the employment of force to recover them, shows the indisposition of our authorities to violent proceedings. On the 16th of October, Sir John Bowring writes to Commissioner Yeh :-"I regret to find that your Excellency did not comply with my reasonable requirements, and that, in consequence, an imperial junk has been captured," &c.

On the 23rd October, he writes: "Every precaution will be taken to show the 'people' that any misfortunes which may happen are attributable to the mandarins." On the 27th, the present calamities would never have occurred, "if the Chinese authorities had not shamefully violated their engagements." Upon the 29th, a copy of Commissioner Yeh's proclamation, calling upon the householders "to exterminate the troublesome

English villains," and "offering a reward of thirty dollars for every life taken," was received at Hongkong. The 30th brought more copies of "incendiary placards posted against the walls of Canton, calling upon the people to destroy the English barbarians." How were these placards received? By refusals upon the same day to receive the co-operation of the rebels, or to allow a person holding an admiral's commission from the Nankin insurgents to enter the port with his fleet. If the port of Canton be meant, we consider the British authorities censurable for interfering in the case. They should allow the insurgents a fair field, for they may be successful, and cannot be altogether grateful for our intermeddling against them; but the refusal in the peculiar circumstances of the 30th October does not indicate a bloodthirsty disposition. After rewards had been offered for the assassination of British subjects on the 31st of October, Sir John Bowring writes: "I lament to report that no evidence is yet given of any disposition on the part of the viceroy to enter upon amicable negotiations." More decisive evidence that the governor of Hongkong sought to prevent the loss of life and property, is supplied on the 2nd of November. Sir Michael Seymour received agreeable testimonials of character for generosity and humanity from all parties during the discussions in the Commons. Sir James Graham was peculiarly fervent in praise of his absent friend. The Admiral, we believe, would have dispensed with the compliments in return for

« PreviousContinue »