The Press. — London, England, 1855-04-21 00:00:00

i APRIL 21, 1855. LORD LUCAN. (From a Correspondent.) Tux case of Lord Lucan is for the present closed by the discussion in the House of Commons, and the publication of the noble lord's speech with some explanatory notes. There are two questions arising out of this painful controversy which we shall endeavour to answer. Ought Lord Lucan to have obtained the court-martial which he desired ? In default of such judicial decision, what should be the judgment of the public upon his conduct at Bala klava, and his recal ? It seems to us, that a plain man need have no difficulty in answering either of these questions. For ourselves, we lose all patience when we think of the way in which the authorities (Crimean and home) have dealt with this matter—of the language they have used, and of the reasons they have given for their recal of this officer, and their refusal of the military trial which he demanded. No charges, they tell us, can be framed against Lord Lucan! What! No charges against the man whom his commander-in-chief could address in the words, "You have lust the light cavalry !" No charge against the man upon whom his commander in-chief throws the whole responsibility of that great catastrophe, by attributing it solely to his " mis conception" of orders! Is the captain of a lost man-of-war—lost it matters not how—are the sur vivors of the Tiger, as happened the other day, to be brought to trial as a matter of course ; and is the man who, according to Lord Raglan, "lost the light cavalry," to be refused the perilous privilege which he demands? There was quite enough, to our thinking, in Lord Raglan's report of the action, to justify Lord Lucan, and, what is more, to justify the public, in requiring a court-martial, and the Government in granting it. But, how any man can read the letter of the commander-in-chief to the Duke of Newcastle and still maintain that there are no charges to be tried, passes our comprehension. After repeating and enlarging the charge of " misconception," Lord Raglan mentions a previous order, which Lord Lucan 4 . did not seem to have attended to," which "he must have read with very little attention;" indeed, " so little had he sought to do as he had been directed, &c., &c." Again, Lord Raglan "wishes he could say that Lord Lucan had done all he could to render his misconception as little perilous as possible. But this is far from being the case, in his judgment. He was told the horse artillery might, accompany the cavalry. He did not bring it up. He was informed that the French cavalry was on his left. He did not invite their co-operation! He had the whole of the heavy cavalry at his disposal. He mentions having brougtit up only two regiments in support. And he omits all other precautions, &c., &c." And this is the man against whom no charges could be found ! To one distinguished personage, at all events, that inability cannot be imputed; and we are inclined to suggest, as an effectual mode of meeting the difficulty, that the writer of the above letter be requested to return home for that express purpose. But we are told that Lord Lucas cannot be tried by court - martial, because, according to military law, he is " condoned," by having continued to serve after the occasion to which the charges brought against him relate. Admirable zeal for the law! But the idolators of law, like other idolators, are apt to dishonour the deity they adore. The generous rule intended for the protection of the soldier is turned into a weapon against him ; ant, if this precedent be followed, may at any time furrish the ready means of stifling all judicial inquiry i►to the ease of an accused man, by the simple stratagem of allowing him to continue his services for ever so short a time after the occasion to which the actua tion refers. But, assuming the rule to be correct, as broadly laid down by the Minister of War and tie judge advocate, can there be a doubt as to tie course which Lord Raglan ought to have pursues.? If he believed one half of the charges contained is his letter—if he believed that his lieutenant-generd had " lost the light cavalry " by negligence and rah conception so culpable as that he describes, ought' he not to have at once suspended him from his corn mend, and left him free to take his trial before a military tribunal? But, no. Lord Raglan, either f.om good-nature (and he is a very amiable man), if he believed himself altogether in the right and Lord Lucas altogether in the wrong, or from a dis like to the prospect of any searching inquiry into that day's proceedings, if he felt himselt open to any share of blame, or, probably, from a mixture of both these feelings, took no such decided step, continued on friendly terms with Lord Lncan, and, it seems, was not a Hate surprised when the order arrived re eilling that officer on the ground of the "misunder standing" between them; for that was the alleged reason of the recal—no other. Lord Hardinge and the Duke of Newcastle, like Lord Raglan, would not for the woild " disparage the Earl of Lucan," or" cast • slur upon his professional reputation," or "indulge it say expression in any way harsh or grating to the THE PRESS. feelings of his lordship." They would not recal him for " losing the light cavalry"—not at all, only for " adhering to the construction he had put upon the order which ' lost' them." But Lord Lucan—un- unreasonable man—was not soothed by all this amiability; he did not understand this rose-water recal (amiability and rose-water have run freely all through this war). He is inclined to call a spade a spade, and he found the British people disagree. ably disposed to do the same. He "adhered to his construction of the order," because he refused to bear the responsibility of the great loss which was its result; and when he asked for a tribunal of soldiers to say whether that burden was justly laid upon his shoulders, he was refused, because " there were no charges against him." He had been simply requested to come home on account of "mismanage ment." Well might the noble lord prefer the sternest and harshest form of justice to all this killing kindness and cruel consideration for his feelings. Indeed, we are not surprised at the impatience which he exhi bited the other day in the House of Lords. He must have felt that twitching of the fingers and in voluntary clenching of the fist which we feel in the presence of Tartuffe. Nothing is so hard to bear as this kind of Pecksiiiffian civility. We are not among those who quarrel with Lord Lucan for bringing his case before his peers. He did not do so until he had failed in obtaining a more suitable and sterner tribunal ; and he only exercised one of those privileges which belong and must belong to the ex ceptional and responsible position of a member of either House of Parliament. But what of his defence before that great assembly ? With respect to all the additional charges made in Lord Raglan's letter, enumerated above, we hold it to be triumphant. To our mind, he really did fulfil his somewhat audacious promise, and did " tear those charges to rags." We content ourselves with referring to the published speech upon these points. With respect to the main question, the original imputation of " misconception " of the now celebrated order, we can submit our judg ment to our readers in a few words. And first of all, we ask with Lord F.lcho,—lf Lord Raglan's order did not mean what Lord Lucan as well as its bearer understood it to direct, what did it mean ? To this question no answer, so far as we know, has ever been given. What was Lord Lucan's position when poor Nolan rode up to him ? In obedience to a pre vious order (so far as it was possible to obey it) the cavalry was already so far in advance that they had hardly started on their terrible ride before they found themselves under fire, and Nolan tell. They " advanced rapidly to the front," and rode at the only enemy within their reach, and the only enemy who could have been "carrying away the guns." Lord Lucan indeed was of opinion that no guns of ours were being removed, but had he been wrong, and the commander in-chief right, there where the charge was made were the guns, and there was the only spot where he could "try to prevent" their re moval. Again be it remembered that Lord Lucan had every reason to believe that his advance VMS a portion of some great combined movement. He had been waiting some time for the arrival of the infantry which Lord Raglan had before informed him would come to his support. It was natural to suppose that they were at that moment moving upon the enemy. He was now told that the French cavalry were on his left—an admission that he could not see them. It must have seemed to him certain that some great operation was going forward under the guiding eye of his commander-in-chief on the heights behind him, the nature of which, shut up in the valley as he was, he could not understand, but in which he was expected to take his perilous part. This probability increased a thousandfold the cruel difficulty of his situation. Doubtless he might have refused to " advance to the front," since we must not use the word " attack." He might have stood still, in defiance of the order, on the verge of the fire, where he already was. We would to God he had done ao. His refusal to obey an order, which, as it turned out, commanded " the impossible" (in the words of that bullet-pierced letter in poor Cathcart's breast) would have saved many a gallant life. But there was no alternative between doing what he did and doing nothing, and the responsibility of doing nothing was tremendous. While he stood still, his brethren in arms, French and English, might be counting on his advance. What if he were wrong in his judgment, and Lord Raglan right? He was but one wheel in a great and complicated machine. What if the safety of of ere and the success of the (ay were comproniised by his obstinacy? Had these probabilities been realised, it is needless to say that Lard Lucan was a ruined man. Nay, whether or no, it s more than probable that a refusal to move weld have covered him with infamy worse than detb. We must not judge him by our after km.w ledte of the ghastly reality. The true state of the casewould very likely never have been known or belieed, had it not been for the catastrophe which follosed. We devoutly wish, we repeat it, that the midst had been saved, even at the risk of their 379 leader's honour. But Lord Lucan, strong as was his feeling of the madness of the advance, could not have had that entire conviction of doing right which could alone steel a soldier of spirit to such a sacri fice. At all events, a commander-in-chief has no right to place a subordinate in so terrible a dilemma or, if he does, he has no right to make him respon-, sibie in the eyes of the world for a catastrophe which was the result of his unwilling obedience. We, for our part, refuse to condemn a gallant British officer, merely because, at an awful moment, he did not attain that rare height of wisdom and moral courage which could alone have averted the consequences produced by the lamentable mistake of his superior. And we refuse, as we think the people of England will refuse, to free from blame the authors of that too famous order, which " lost the light cavalry at Balaklava." PUBLIC EDUCATION. THE following is the estimate of the amounts which Parliament will be a.ked to vote for the expenses of public education in Great Britain during the current financial year. The vote was brcught on, out of due course, on Monday night in committee of supply, but, on the remonstrance of Mr. Disraeli, only 100,0001. was then actually tAken " on account," and under the plea that the department really wanted money for present expenditure : For grants towards building, enlarging, and kr nishing schoolhouses, under miuutes now in force Purchase of books, maps, &c 4,000 Annual stipends of pupil teachers, and gratuities to schoolmasters and schoolmisucsses Capitation grants Grants in augmentation of the salaries of school masters and schoolmistresses who have ob tained certificates of merit Grants to assistant-teachers Grants to thirty separate training schools, Queen's scholarships, ttc. In aid of salaries for lecturers Annual subsidies in support of training schools —National Society, 1,0001. ; British and Foreign School Society, 7501. ; Education Committee of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotism', 5001. For Kiieller-hall—current expenses, 2.8001.; sa laries, 1,7001. ; repairs anti sundries, &OW— . Retiring pensions for incapacitated teachers Establishment in London one secretary, 1,2001. ; two assistant-secretaries, from 700/. to 1,00,3 , 1,7001. ; seven examiners, from :143/1. to 8001., 1,61(31.; seven clerks, from 1101. to 3001., 1,3381. ; twenty-three supplementary clerks, 801. to 2501., 2,14301 ; one advising counsel, 3 Jl. ; one architect, 4001. Inspection—linty-one inspectors, salaries from 2001. to 6001.,15,9'20 ; inspectors, allowance for personal expenses, 10,250/. ; inspectors, reim bursement of actual cost of travelling, 5,7701. Contingencies, viz.—for extra copying, 1,8001. ; confidential printing, 1001.; sundry small dis bursements, 1001 47,000 4,800 47,000 I,ouo 4,800 I,ouo 9,491 31,940 Toted AN AGGREGATE MEETING OF PROTESTANTS, embrac ing members of the Church Protestant Defence So ciety, Evangelical Alliance, National Club, Protestant Alliance, Protestant Association, Reformation Society, and Scottish Reformation Society, including deputa• tions from constitmencies throughout Great Britain, was held on Tuesday at Freemasons'-hall for the purpose of promoting united action of all denomina tions of Protestants, without regard to party politics, for the repeal of the grant to Maynooth. The chair was taken by J. C. Colquohoun, Esq. The assembly was addressed, and resdutions expressing the unan imous opinion of the meeting were proposed, and supported by, Dr. Cowan, the Rev. G. Townshend, Sen., Sir C. Eardley, the Rev. Hugh Stowell, and many other gentlemen. Some hours being spent, and the enthusiasm of the assemblage appearing still unexhausted, it was agreed to resume the pro ceedings next day. Further addresses and resolu tions were then made and adopted, the result presenting a most vigorous protest against the conti nuance of State support to the papist college. A GENERAL MEETING of inhabitants of the borough of Marylebone was held on Tuesday in the vestry hall, to take into consideration the best means of promoting a testimonial to the late Lord Duulry Coutts Stuart, who for seven years represented that borough in the House of Commons. Sir B. Hall, Bart., M.P., presided, and wits supported by Lord E.rington, M.P., M. Louis Kossuth, Mr. W. D. Cooper, and other gentlemen. Venous speeches were made expressive of admiration and respect for the memory of the deceased noble lord, and a com mittee ultimately appointed to collect subscrip ti ons and carry out the purposes of the meeung. A hand some sum was subscribed in the room, Sir B. Hall heading the list with a contribution of fifty guineas. THE drawing by the Princess Royal at the Pen man exhibition, for which 2001. have been °fared, was timidly valued by her Royal Highness Pen h al one guinea. let pu be mi to br lac arc ge so th th th of ah tic bi ju CC If hi Zr cc h f. it I li d 8 ti I 0 t f. r •