The Press. — London, England, 1855-05-19 00:00:00

462 On this great question it is time that the House should be called for a decision. The Opposition bas been too supine. Forbear ance may be imputed to an unworthy dread of responsibility, as eagerness n;kay be imputed to faction. There point 04 which aft Opposition is bound to assert its claime to office, and that point is o attained when tke Government of the day is notoalatisly unequal to its duties. We can understand the reluctauoe of the Conservative leaders to make a direct attack on the Government. It seemed fitting to wait for the whole evidence of that committee of iuquiry which had been demanded by so large a majority of the House ; and while pacific negotiations were pending, criticism on the foreign policy of the Ministry might have been damaging to the pub lic interests. These causes for delay exist no longer. The Sebastopol Committee are about to conclude their labours. The proceedings of the Vienna Conferences to the point of their adjournment, are published. Now, therefore, the House and the country will have ample materials before them for a survey of the policy and conduct of the late and present Governments (if they can be considered as distinct) from the com mencement of the war. It will be the duty of the Opposition leaders—immediately after the Whitsuntide recess—to show from the published documents and evidence why the present Government is unworthy public con fidence, and to call on the House of Commons to decide whether it is willing that the desti nies of the nation shall longer be confined to the hands of men whose whole career as a Government, since they first assumed office in December, 1852, has been marked by glaring incompetency and most ,calamitous blundering. We shall then see how tar the "independent" members of the House are sincere in their censure of the Go vernment, whether they can shake themselves free from the party influences they affect to despise, and whether there is really in the House of Commons enough of common souse—we will not say of patriotism— to adopt that one resource which iu constitu tional Governments is the sole remedy for mal-administration, and which in former periods of our history has suddenly changed the whole face of public affairs, converting despondency into exultation, shame into re joicing, defeat into victory. The leaders of Opposition have taken their decision. They will be no longer a party to the misgovernment which has prevailed. It is for the country to afford them encourage ment and support. SIR JAMES GRAHAM AS QUEEN'S EVIDENCE. THERE was a dramatic propriety in the Earl of ABERDEEN closing the long list of witnesses examined before the Sebastopol Committee. The Noble Earl's evidence was taken appa rently pro forma, for he had nothing to tell but what was already too well known, and he intimated as much in a particularly anile way. As he sat in the chair—cold, dry, and cynical, mumbling out his icy words with even more than his customary frigidity of manner—we could not help feeling how "the race is not to " the swift, or the battle to the strong," when such a public character as that deposed Minis ter was honoured with the Garter ! Bitter thoughts about regiments starved to skeletons would intrude themselves while observing the repulsive rigidity of the ex-Premier's deport ment. There he sat, composed and as self complacent as it is possible for a man to be who seems to grudge himself a smile, and to demean himself as if he were " a spy on his " own importance." Very different was the impression left upon us by the way in which Si: J♦MES GRAHAM gaye his testimony. As he always is when he ias received due Aotice, be was carefully made up fur his performance. The peculiar wonting of some of his answers showed that he had THE PRESS. studiously conned the way in which he might be efficiently sarcastic in case any of the Com mittee should enter on a fencing match with him. But he *4l no pacasion for discharging that reserved tiontmumiti ou of retort which he alirsys beeps se carefully piled. Mr. Roes's* is initetedanalaere.d Ueutor from other ii 4 wy s. There was a UMW WIMMA he would have mocke,4 at an aueounter with ate walking member for half s 4ozen ossestoteuncies in succession; bL Sir jA/lEs GRAH4I, like others, found that the " Sheffield blade s ' is not a very formidable weapon ; and Mr. 4vinu's celebrity arises from winged bulls that will not fly, anct not from winged words, which carry straight the glancing arrows of invective. The Committee was in one of its intermittent fits of " General Peelism," and the descendant of " John of the Bright Sword " had no occasion for unsheath ing his ponderous weapons of offence. Yet Sir JAMES GRAHAM was far from being at ease ; and the fact of his having been a recent invalid is not sufficient to account for the pe culiarly subdued tone in which he gave his evidence on Monday. He could not but be conscious that he belonged to a party who utterly failed in the management of the war. He must have been aware that it was known to the Committee that the Duke of NEWCASTLE had testified to the long and frequent confe rences which he held with the First Lord in the witness's chair. The recollection of such facts, and of the little advantage that resulted from the " administrative abilities" of this brace of Peelites, must have exercised dis turbing influences on Sir JAMES GRAHAM, in spite of his hard-browed impassibility of tem perament. Without being positively crest fallen, the Member for Carlisle on last Monday has not been seen so subdued since the time of his memorable " scene " with a noted Hi bernian representative, when the figure made by the Right Honourable Baronet was em balmed by one of the wits of the day iu verse, " which the town will not willingly let die." Assuming the artificial blandness of manner which he can occasionally put on with con siderable self-constraint, Sir JAMES GRAHAM began his confession with au anecdote. " What a most distinguished First Lord told "him," was adroitly poured out at the com mencement. It is a pity that when Sir JAMES communicated what the Tory Lord SPENCER had said to him, three or four generations since, that he did not also reveal what the Whig Lord SPENCER said of him, after his junction with Sir ROBERT PEEL ! Possibly, however, the witness thought that was already sufficiently well known to the Committee. He then proceeded in his unpleasant task of self-crimination, though he took uncommon care in veiling his dilatory errors. For ex ample, when he had to confess about the fatal want of organisation in the transport service, Sir JAMES GRAHAM said : I suggested to the Secretary for War that day by day the requisitions should be listed and approved by him, and that when so approved it should be the duty of the Trans port Board to carry them out. Thal suggestion was nut altogether adopted when I left office. The transfer of the Commissariat to the Secretary of State took place in November. Observe, here, the admirable art of his reti cence. There was one phrase often on the Duke of NEWCASTLE'S tongue, which Sir JAMES, like a "canny chic!" of the north, took special care to avoid. He did not say " grew out of " the circumstances," but his own words fasten that sentence on himself and his colleagues with as much tenacity as if ho had used it fifty times. Where was his boasted talent for administration, when May, and June, and July, and August, and September, and Octo ber, were all allowed to pass without so obvi ously necessary a change being made ? "It " was not until November that the transfer of " the Commissariat took place." In that we confess there is an extraordinary amount of accusation against the ex-officials. Here we have a public man, who got a most ex aggerated reputation for official ability, con fessing, that though the transport service had been at work for several months, no change in its flagrant mismanagement took place until it " grew out of the circumstances." Then what becomes of the boasted reputation of thq Right Hon. Baronet and his friends for energy, knowledge, perseverance, and all the other SATURDAY, qualities for which their panegyrists have e + praised them ? Such was the enormous error, as far a s l arge measures fur ale ai aon were conce rne d but let ua now see WA' AMR GRAHAM S unfor tonal& mistakes as to . detaOla. This part de serves particular coestderegon. No two officials, or subordinates (call them a s pm, please) f more 4044,0d1y were blam e d from al sides thy, kimiral BOXER and CaptAn CeRISTIE. 14 is most important to know 1411}t they were specially nominated by Sir JAMES GRAHAM, and he took vast pains in trying to excuse himself. He artfully tried to digest himself of any blame, awl threw the responsibility of the introduction of BOXER and CHRISTIE upon two dead men ! Admiral BOXER was " first made known to him in 1830, " by Sir Toostss HA.IADY I" then CAW B praise Qt NELSON'S captain, and BOXER got all the ad vantage of association with a famous name. It appears that Sir T. HARDY said, that " BOXER " was one of the best seamen he ever knew.s And Sir JAMES " remembered that character " when he returned to the Admiralty ;" and he still continues to recollect it " until he returns " there again." So, old BOXER was nominated because Sir T. HARDY praised him for seaman ship a quarter of a century ago ! But Sir JAMES " has such administrative abilities." Then, as to the unfortunate Captain CHRISTIE, another dead witness is appealed to by Sir JAMES GRAHAM : Captain Christie was only known to me by his naval reputation, as having served as lieutenant under Sir G. Collier, when that officer had command on the coast of Africa. I had the greatest possible respect for the memory of Sir G. Collier, whom I considered an admirable officer ; and I found Captain Christie had been a lieutenant whom he held in the greatest regard. Does this style of nomination show " practical capacity" in Sir JAMES GRAHAM? Sir GEOSOS COLLIER and his memory is held "in the " greatest possible respect " by the ex-First Lord, and therefore his First Lieutenant was appointed to a most laborious post, in which special talents for business and collective organisation were required. Well, after such confessions, we can only say, which we do now in perfect sincerity, that, on public grounds, we are not sorry that the Admiralty is under the care of Sir CHARLES WOOD and not Sir JAMES GRAHAM. A twelve month since we could not have fancied that the time would come when we should utter such an opinion. But ev - eu worse still remains. Admiral BOXER, on September tith, pressed on the Admiralty the want of receiving-ships at Con stantinople. " I regret," said Sir JAMES, " that " steps were not taken to comply with the " request." Then, candidly reiterating his " regret," he made a lapsus lingua of the New castle kind. " Circumstances very speedily " arose which led mo to reconsider the " matter," and then the much•wanted receiving ships were ordered. "It grew out of the ch.- " cumstances." The Coalition has spoken its own epitaph on its reputation - -" lately " deceased." We can now easily comprehend the exces• sive ardour with which Sir JAMES GRAHAM endeavoured to prevent an inquiry into the conduct of the war. It is now plain to all the world that he has been most egregiously over rated. Nothing more true, or more severe, can be said of him than that things could not have been worse, and might have been better, if Sir CHARLES WOOD had been in his place. The Sebastopol Committee has removed the gild ing from the showy reputation of Sir JAMES GRAHAM. In the heated times of the Reform Bill he was lauded for his extravagant reduc tion at the Admiralty ; but all know that he has not been an able " First Lord " in time of war. He is of the statesmen who have sur vived their reputations, and whose perform ances have rebuked their pretensions. The general result of the whole evidence before this important Committee we reserve for future consideration. THE TURKISH QUESTION AND ITS RELATION TO INDIA. IN the debate in the House of Lords on Mon day evening, Lord GRANVILLE, in reference to some remarks of ,Lord guEtwitouoli, informed