Page images
PDF
EPUB

special kind, we may then obtain additional brilliancy by larger lenses. The lime ball light holds out to us an admirable resource in seasons of occasional danger; but we cannot approve of the idea (for it has never assumed the form of a proposai), of making an unnecessary glare upon our coasts, with the inseparable accompaniments of unnecessary expense and unnecessary danger.

The subject of distinguishing lights has scarcely been touched upon during the proceedings of the committee. We treated it briefly in our former article; and it is doubtless one which demands all the resources of optical science. The method adopted at the Bell Rock, of placing red glass in front of the least brilliant face of the quadrilateral reflector frame, we have already denounced as a practical blunder, disgraceful to science, and discreditable to the Scottish Board; and we are glad to observe that some of the members of the committee had made this criticism the subject of enquiry; and that the result of the examination of Mr Alan Stevenson completely justifies the exposure of it which we were obliged to make.

The Bell Rock lighthouse is a revolving light ?—It is.

Of what colour ?— White and red.

What are the number of burners in the white frame?-Five.
The number in the red?-Five also.

Are you not aware that the light of the white lights from five reflectors will pierce much farther than the red light from five reflectors? -It will, but not very much farther.

Have you never had a complaint, that in hazy weather the Bell Rock lighthouse is seen as a single and not as a revolving light ?—I have never heard that complaint; but I am aware that white lights appear redder in fog; at the same time the white light, though tinged red by the fog, when contrasted with the red light seen through the same medium, can always be distinguished from it.

Should you not think it would have been a greater advantage if the red and white light had been made to penetrate equal distances ?—I think that it would.

Would not the addition of perhaps from three to four burners, with red glasses, have carried that into effect ?-I think an addition might; I cannot say how many would be required.

If, as you state, the white light is seen at a greater distance in a particular state of the atmosphere, why is the red light continued?-In order to distinguish one lighthouse from another.

Is it not the intention that the red and white lights should be equally seen in all states of the atmosphere?—It is.

Did you make any experiments to ascertain, as, according to the present construction, one is not seen at times, by what additions both could be equally visible?-No; we made no late experiments upon that subject; it was tried at the first introduction of the red light.

Are there any means of making the red light equally visible?-Perhaps the addition of a greater number of reflectors might be tried.' The only remark which the preceding piece of evidence requires,

regards the strange assertion, that in the Bell Rock lighthouse there are five white lights, and five red ones, whereas our animadversions, though equally just in this case, were particularly directed against the absurdity of reddening the weak beam of light produced by FIVE reflectors, in place of the strong beam produced by SEVEN reflectors. In Mr Stevenson's folio engraving of the reflector frame, published in 1824, fourteen years after the completion of the lighthouse, the reflectors are, as we stated, SEVEN on one side, and FIVE on the other, and the red glasses are placed in front of the FIVE! It is, therefore, an unpardonable attempt in the clerk of works to diminish the force of our reproof, and the magnitude of the engineer's blunder, by making the committee believe that there were five reflectors on each side of the frame.

The only remaining topic, which calls for some notice, is the execution, by Messrs Cookson of Newcastle, of a lens, similar to the polyzonal lens, cut out of a solid piece of glass. This lens was made for the Scottish Lighthouse Board; and if any proof were wanted of the total ignorance of that board of the scientific part of their subject, it would be found in the manner in which they boasted of this absurd production of art. Mr Cookson deserves every credit for the ingenuity of his work; but the idea of produeing a polyzonal lens out of a solid piece of glass, and reverting to the rude idea of Buffon, was a retrograde step in the arts not a little ludicrous. The value of the built up lens arises not only from the perfect facility of giving every portion of it the most perfect curvature and polish, and of adjusting all its zones to a single focus, but principally from the certainty of obtaining, for so many separate pieces, glass almost entirely free of veins and imperfections, which is quite impracticable in a large piece of glass three feet in diameter. In making a polyzonal lens of one piece of glass, the artist works entirely in the dark. After his labour is finished he is likely to find his lens useless; and we venture to say, that in order to produce eight lenses for a revolving light, the manufacturer would require to cast a hundred, before he obtained a result at all comparable with those which are made in separate zones and segments.

We close this article in the joyful expectation of speedily seeing the accomplishment of a great practical reform in the Lighthouse System; and with the satisfaction of thinking that our labours in regard to it have not been in vain. But in thus congratulating ourselves on what we have done, we do not by any means forget that much credit is due to Mr Hume for his steady exertions in forwarding those arrangements which we hope to see realized.

VOL. LXI. NO. CXXIII.

It was not until Sunday evening that any idea occurred to me of voting against Lord Chandos's motion; but from what I heard that evening, I began to suspect, that by the faction in the House of Commons, but not by the noble marquis himself, his motion was intended as a vehicle to renew the attacks which on two previous occasions had been made successfully on his Majesty's Government; and I had reason to know that if that plot succeeded, the Prime Minister could not, consistently with his honour as a public man, continue in office, but must resign. If he resigned. I knew the inevitable result-the formation of a democratic cabal, whose first measures would be-annual parliaments, universal suffrage, vote by ballot, secularisation of Church property, the alienation of the Church from the State, confiscation of private property, the abolition of the hereditary peerage, national bankruptcy, and civil war.

After a sleepless night of deep and anxious reflection, in which I foresaw, with a kind of inspiration which I cannot explain, but which has before occurred to me, the awful dilemma in which we should be placed if the Government were beaten, I made up my mind on the course I would pursue, and resolved that all the sneers and sarcasms (of which I knew there were plenty in store for me), and no personal or selfish consideration should deter me from my object-that I would run the risk, if need were, of incurring your displeasure, and forfeiting your good opinion and confidence, and my seat for Derbyshire, rather than abandon what, in my conscience, I believe to be my bounden duty to my country and to you.

The first step I took was to write a very strong letter to Lord Chandos, imploring him most earnestly, and urging him by all the arguments I could use, to postpone-only to postpone-his motion till the Chancellor of the Exchequer had had an opportunity of presenting his budget, and the sense of the people as to his measures had developed itself. In vain; I then resolved to go to the meeting at Sir Robert Peel's at the Treasury, where I was the first to announce my opinion plainly, and to express my determination to vote with the Government. The impulse given carried every thing before it, and ten or twelve of the most influential, intelligent, wealthy members for counties, stanch friends to the agricultural interest, placed in the same position as myself, and having voted for the repeal of the malt tax in the last sessions, avowed a similar determination to mine, and from the result of the division, it is but fair to suppose that a great number of others, who could not express their intentions, resolved the same.

Gentlemen, the result has proved the wisdom of our policy, and I exult in the reflection that I WAS MAINLY THE HUMBLE INSTRUMENT OF PRODUCING THIS TRIUMPHANT MAJORITY, which will consolidate the permanency of the present Cabinet-and in the confident hope that you will sympathize with me in this feeling, and give me credit for having honestly and conscientiously, and to the best of my judgment, done my duty to my country and to you.'

This unheard-of proceeding requires no commentary. But let not any one resort, in describing it, to the supposition of mental

weakness. That indeed would be a most perilous thing to all political morality-and it would be wholly unjustifiable. The man who solemnly pledged himself in suing to get a seat, and by his pledge succeeded in cajoling the good farmers of his native province, might probably reckon upon their excusing his breach of faith, if he told them a wonderful story of a communication from heaven directing him to break it! But it remains to be seen whether or not the people will ever again trust such an offender. If they do no one will hereafter pity them, or blame any but themselves for the consequences.

Another case, which we mention by name, is that of Mr Shaw, Recorder of Dublin, and therefore a Judge invested with the highest criminal jurisdiction. We conclude that what we are about to quote from the London newspapers, professing to report what passed in the Commons, cannot be correct. But the statement has not, in as far as we know, been contradicted. Lord John Russell read in his place (says the Report) a speech of Mr Shaw at an Ultra-Protestant meeting held two or three years ago. For that speech Mr Shaw had been lavishly praised in Ireland-possibly his election for Dublin University had been promoted by the credit such congenial sentiments-such kindred feelinggained for him, with that famed seat of sound learning and of true Orange principles. Never had he once thought of contradicting it. His whole clamour had been, in Ireland as in England in the House of Commons, as in Exeter-Hallagainst the government of the Reformers for their Education plan, and its mutilation of the Scriptures, as it was called, in the language of pure ignorance, or for the sake of deluding men with a religious outcry of the Bible in danger,' as well as the Church. Well, the Reformers are turned out, and the Tories succeed them, not only in their places but in their plans; and, behold! when they, the new Ministers, announce their resolution to maintain the same system of education, mutilation of the Bible and all, and even to increase the grant of money for promoting the plan -the first to support them cordially, without one word of reserve, -with no exception in favour of the mutilated Bible !'-the first to be their voter through thick and thin, is this identical Recorder of Dublin City and Representative of Dublin College! The following is the report of what passed on an occasion so memorable, at least in the life of Mr Shaw. Lord John Russell read the Exeter Hall Speech, as recorded in a Conservative paper of great respectability-the Standard-and of course recorded with praise.

The Government (said Mr Shaw) might make what regulations it pleased; but he trusted the people knew their duty too well to submit to

its enactments.

It might degrade our mitre-it might deprive us of our property; but, if the Government dared to lay its hands on our Bible, then we must come to an issue. We will cover it with our bodies-we will! My friends, will you permit your Christian brethren to cry to you in vain ? In the name of my country, and my country's God, I will appeal from a British House of Commons to a BRITISH PUBLIC.'—

Mr Shaw, with warmth, denied the statement. He said it was made by Lord Radnor-Lord Radnor having quoted this speech in the House of Lords-he never said any thing like that. Lord John Russell then continued the extract :

His countrymen would obey the laws so long as they were properly administered; but if it was sought to lay sacrilegious hands on the Bible -to tear the standard of the living God, and raise a mutilated one in its stead-then it would be time to halt between two opinions; then in every valley and on every hill would resound the rallying cry, "TO YOUR "TENTS, O ISRAEL!" The right honourable gentleman, said Lord John Russell, has denied the correctness of the report of the speech. Why, it appeared in the Standard and other newspapers of the day; it was afterwards quoted by Lord Radnor in the House of Lords; and now he takes THE FIRST AND ONLY OPPORTUNITY of giving it a contradiction.'

It may well be doubted whether a thousand denials of this speech by Mr Shaw would, in such circumstances, be available. A phrase or two may be denied with effect, and surely he could mean nothing beyond that; for no one can possibly believe, that he would have reserved his denial till this time, if the substance and general tenor had not been truly given.

But startling as such things are, there are a set of men whose claims to political honesty are just as moderate, and who, afraid of the open avowal of their Tory sentiments, vote with the Opposition, while their hearts being with the Ministry, they are ready at any time to run away from their colours and desert. These men come in for popular places as opponents of the Government; and they dare not act, as fain they would, for fear their real principles should be found out, and they should stand convicted of practising a fraud on the honest electors, who chose them in ignorance of their character. What is the consequence? They prevented the great body of the Reformers from taking an effectual and manly course; that of passing a vote expressing distrust of the Tory Cabinet, and requiring its removal. do these individuals more effectually betray the cause which the people sent them up to support, than even those persons who break their promises. To be sure, a ministry that can stoop and cling to place, with the utter impossibility of carrying a single measure, must be devoid of all shame. What can be

Thus

« PreviousContinue »