From the Isthmus of Panama we have news to the 1st of June. A serious riot had occurred there between the emigrants and the natives in which two or three were killed on each side. It grew out of the arrest of a negro boy on charge of theft, and a supposition on the part of the natives that the Americans intended to hang him. Such an incident, however, indicates an unpleasant state of feeling between the parties. Quiet, however, had been restored.
Of Literary and Scientific Intelligence there is not much. Notices of the most important books published during the month will be found in another department of this Magazine. The question of the Unity of the Human Race has been recently revived by some incidental remarks made at Charleston, S. C., by Prof. Agassiz of Harvard, which were opposed to that theory. Dr. Smyth, a learned divine of that city, wrote a book in refutation of the Professor; and we observe that the latter has pursued the matter still farther in a lecture subsequently delivered at Boston. He does not enter, however, into any full discussion of the subject, but takes occasion to disavow the intention imputed to him, of designing to question the authenticity or authority of the Mosaic Record.
Prof. Lewis, of Union College, has published an Address delivered there some months since, in which he reviews with great ability the theories and schemes so abundant at the present day, of which Nature, Progress, and Ideas are the common watchwords. He treats them all as branches of Naturalism and as in direct hostility to the Scriptural doctrine of the Divine government. The discourse is marked by the scholarship, vigor, and clear analysis which characterize all the productions of this distinguished writer.—Bishop Hughes has also entered the lists against the prevalent Socialism of the day; not, however, in an original work but by causing to be reprinted the French work of the Abbé Martinet, entitled "Religion in Society," and by writing an introduction to it.—A new book on California, by Rev. Walter Colton, is soon to be issued. Even in the multiplicity of books upon this subject that have recently been given to the public, one from Mr. Colton's pen can hardly fail to attract and reward attention.—A work on the Logic and Utility of Mathematics, by Prof. Davies, is announced by Barnes & Co. Prof. D. is singularly happy in presenting mathematical truth clearly and attractively to the mind, and we anticipate, in this new work upon the characteristic advantages of his favorite studies, a production that will be widely useful, in promoting juster views of Education and better modes for its successful prosecution.—Prof. Bartlett of the West Point Academy, announces a new work on Natural Philosophy, for the use of Colleges, which will be of value.—Mr. E. D. Mansfield of Cincinnati, a clear, strong and judicious writer, has also in press, a Treatise on American Education, which will be pretty certain to contain a good many practical suggestions worthy of attention.—The Reader of the opening article in this number of the New Monthly Magazine, will be glad to learn that an edition of the writings of De Quincey is soon to be issued from the Boston press of Ticknor, Reed and Fields. No living English writer equals De Quincey in his peculiar department; in acute analytical power, and in the precision with which he uses language. He does not write for the masses—but to literary men, persons of cultivated taste and a critical habit, an edition of his Essays and multifarious sketches will be exceedingly acceptable. We presume, however, that nothing like a complete collection of his writings can be made.—An illustrated Edition of Longfellow's Evangeline is also announced, and a new volume of Poems by John G. Whittier, one of the most vigorous and masculine of living poets. Like other poets of the day, Mr. Whittier addicts himself somewhat overmuch to hobbies, and his present volume is to be mainly made up of Poems upon Labor.—Lowell, also, has a new Poem in press, called The Nooning.—A new volume by Rev. Henry Giles, entitled Christian Thoughts on Life, is announced. Mr. Giles is an exceedingly fluent, vigorous and brilliant writer.—A spicy controversy has grown out of a needless fling at the memory of John Jacob Astor, in a lecture delivered some months since by the Hon. Horace Mann. Mr. C. A. Bristed, grandson of the deceased Mr. Astor, has replied to it in a pungent letter, vindicating his kinsman's character and assailing with a good degree of vigor and success some of the radical theories propounded by Mr. Mann.—A new play, entitled The Very Age, by E. S. Gould, is in press, and will soon be issued by the Appletons. It is said to be a sharp and successful hit at sundry follies which have too mush currency in society.—A good deal of public interest has been excited by the announcement of an alleged scientific discovery made by Mr. Henry M. Paine, of Massachusetts. He claims to have established the positions that Water is a simple substance: that hydrogen gas is produced by the combination of positive electricity, and oxygen by the combination of negative electricity, with water; and that by passing the hydrogen thus obtained through spirits of turpentine in its natural state, it becomes carbonized and will support combustion. The practical result claimed from the discovery is the ability to furnish light and heat indefinitely at a merely nominal expense. The importance of it, if it prove to be real, can not well be overrated. The possibility of the thing, however, is peremptorily denied by scientific men, and it must be evident to all that it directly contradicts scientific principles that have been regarded as fundamental. Practical experiment alone, made under proper restrictions and scientific supervision, can determine its reality. If established the revolution it would produce in the economy of life would not be greater than that which would result from it in the received theories of science.
The Foreign events of the past month have not been of striking interest or importance. A diplomatic quarrel between England and France is the only incident which has attracted any general attention. This misunderstanding has grown out of the demands of British subjects, supported by their government, against the government of Greece, for losses sustained through its agency; but it is so entirely a matter of form that no serious result can well be apprehended. For some years past the English government has been pressing King Otho to an adjustment of these claims. One of the most important of them is that of Mr. George Finlay, who, when the Turks were leaving Greece on the formation of the Hellenic Kingdom, purchased certain portions of land from some of these emigrants. This was as long ago as in 1830, and his right to the property thus purchased and paid for was never disputed. But six years afterward King Otho seized upon these lands in order to inclose them in the royal gardens, and he has never paid for the property to this day. Another claim is that of Mr. Pacifico, a British subject, born at Gibraltar, and occupying at Athens the office of Portuguese Consul. It has been the custom for some years at Athens, on Easter-day, to burn an effigy of Judas Iscariot; but, in 1847, in consequence of the presence of Baron Rothschild, the government prevented the ceremony. The idle and reckless portion of the people, to whom such public spectacles are always matters of most interest, spread the report that Mr. Pacifico, being a Jew, had occasioned the discontinuance of this custom. A mob was soon raised by this report, which went to the house of the obnoxious consul, beat in the door, plundered the house of money to the amount of 9800 drachmas, and destroyed papers proving claims upon the Portuguese government to the amount of £21,295. For these losses Mr. Pacifico claimed restitution, and invoked the protection and aid of the British government in securing it.
These are the leading claims which have given occasion to the pending difficulties. The British government took up the subject and pressed the Greek authorities for payment of the claims. This was refused, and force was resorted to. The ports of Greece were blockaded and a bombardment threatened. This led France to offer her mediation, and Baron Gros was dispatched by the French government to Athens to arrange the dispute with Mr. Wyse, the British agent. The British government, for a long time, refused to allow the intervention of France, as the question in controversy was one which did not require or allow such interference But M. Drouyn de Lhuys being sent to London, a negotiation was prosecuted for three or four months, which resulted in an agreement between the two governments. Meantime Baron Gros at Athens, having interrupted proceedings there, Mr. Wyse resumes his demands upon the government of Greece, and, by strenuous coercion, secures all he had demanded. And Lord Palmerston decided that his proceedings must hold good. The French government was, of course, indignant at this disregard of the London convention, and withdrew her Minister from London. The dispute, at the latest dates, had not been settled, but it is not likely to lead to any thing more serious than a temporary estrangement between the two nations. It is generally believed that the quarrel is kept open by the French government, because it serves to divert public attention somewhat from the unpopular and unconstitutional abridgment of the suffrage, and because it has created an excitement favorable to the views and purposes of Louis Napoleon.
Not the least important result of this controversy has been the new position which it has induced Russia and Austria to take, in regard to the rights of British subjects residing within their dominions. The sympathies of these two nations, as well as of France, are, of course, with Greece: and the attempt of England to extend full protection to its subjects residing at Athens, has led the Emperor of Russia to address a note to Lord Palmerston, stating that he utterly rejects the principle on which British subjects or any other foreign residents in his own states, or those of any other government, had a right to be treated more favorably than the native subjects of such state; and he added, that for his part, he should expect such strangers, the moment they came to reside in his dominions, to conform themselves to the laws and usages practiced by Russians. An old law or custom had existed in Russia to this effect; it had long fallen into desuetude; but on the present occasion it has been revived by the emperor, and is now in force. The note of the Emperor of Austria is to the same effect; and though separate from that of Russia, runs concurrently with it. Lord Palmerston replied to this note, and received an answer couched in still stronger language and concluding in the following emphatic clause: "As the manner in which Lord Palmerston understands the protection due to English subjects in foreign countries carries with it such serious inconvenience, Russia and Austria will not henceforth grant the liberty of residence to English subjects, except on condition of their renouncing the protection of their Government." These documents have not been published, but their substance is given, on the authority of the London Times.
The doings of the British Parliament have not been of special importance, though they have involved the discussion of important measures. The misunderstanding with France gave rise to repeated demands on the part of Lord Brougham and others, and explanations by the ministers, in which the latter have been vehemently, and with apparent justice, charged with prevarication and concealment.—The Subject of University Reform has been incidentally discussed in the House of Lords but without decisive results.
In the House of Commons attention was called to the case of the black steward of a British vessel who had been taken out of the ship at Charleston, S. C. and imprisoned for two months simply because he was a Man of Color.—LORD Palmerston said that the case was not new; that such a law as that mentioned existed in the State of Carolina; and that the British government had remonstrated against it as a violation of the principles of international law, as well as of the treaty of 1815: but the reply had been that the Federal government was unable to revoke the law, and that, if England insisted, the American government would be compelled to terminate the treaty of 1815. The English government, therefore, had not thought it expedient to press the matter further; but it should be remembered that the law is known, and that those who go there expose themselves to it voluntarily. This acquiescence of the British government in a law and practice of one of the United States, directly in violation of the rights of British subjects, has not escaped severe animadversion.