The Press. — London, England, 1855-02-10 00:00:00

136 THE WEEK. MINISTERIAL explanations in Parliament, inaction of the armies before Sebastopol, the formation of Lord PALMERSTON'S Government—" an old " friend with a new face," always a suspicious kind of friend—and Sir C. NAPIER'S after-dinner speech at the Mansion-house, constitute the chief topics of the week. Lord JOHN RUSSELL began the work of explanation on Monday. He had not much to add to his former statement. He stated—what all the world already knew—that he should have been willing to accept the post of War Minister had Lord ABERDEEN wished it; but Lord ABERDEEN (lid not wish it, and it is no wonder that Lord JOHN grew dissatisfied. His opinion of his two chief colleagues is curious. Lord ABERDEEN had no mind for the war, and the Duke of NEWCASTLE no capacity for it. In plain words this is what Lord JoHN said. Strange that the two chief offices in the Cabinet should have been so filled, but being so filled there is nothing strange in the disasters which attended the war from its commencement. Had Lord ABERDEEN had a mind for the war, the Duke of NEWCASTLE, under his direction, might have been a fit War Minister, and had the Duke conducted his department with energy, Lord ABERDEEN might have been a fit Premier. But it so fell out that both walked the same way, that way being exactly opposite to the course they should have taken, and which the country expected them to take. In fact, the fair conclusion from Lord Jonx's statement is, that the war was a sham war, con ducted without heart and without head, without design or energy. Lord PALMERSTON saw all this as well as Lord JOHN, and kept silence. Lord JOHN very properly saw the necessity of checking the progress of the Russian arms in Asia, but no one supported him. The failure of the Turkish expedition to Asia was doubtless determined on in some private council to which his Lordship was not admitted. His Lordship's speech passed, off smoothly enough. But did he comprehend himself the tremendous nature of the charges which he was bringing against his late colleagues? What, a Prime Minister, — after war was declared and entered on, whose persuasions and dispo sitions were all against prosecuting the war with eagerness ! And a War Minister, deficient in energy and authority ! Unfortunate combi nation, indeed. But can all the blame be laid on fortune ? Must there not have been quilt somewhere ? Will the country consent to the stiffing of the inquiry voted by the Commons ? The public voice calls Lord ABERDEEN to the bar, and nothing but the verdict of an im- partial jury, delivered after full and vigilant investigation, can pro nounce that the unhappy combination of which Lord JOHN RUSSELL speaks was fortuitous. Meantime, Lord ABERDEEN'S colleagues are in office to care for him ; and an attempt, we venture to predict, will be made to put an end to the inquiry, though apart from all imputations of per sonal misconduct, most essential to elicit all those particulars of mis management which Lord JOHN himself, though a member of the Cabi net, found it impossible to comprehend. Standing in the position Lord ABERDEEN does, there was something unusually expressive in his words on Tuesday in the Lords, when, alluding to the Ministerial negotiations, he expressed his belief that before the House next met they would be brought to " a happy termination." His Lordship, we may mention here, was, with all due solemnity, invested with the Garter on Wednesday. Hundreds of jokes have been flying about the town on this subject. The best is that one in Punch, that it is folly giving the Garter to a mah that has not a leg to stand on ; another, of moodier sort, hopes that the garter may be long enough; but., for ourselves, we only rejoice that he has got the garter and the "sack" at the same time. Lord DERBY'S explanation on Thursday was distinguished by the happiest attributes of his oratory, manly candour, constitutional prin .eiple, highminded sentiment, and the most exquisite felicity of dic tion. He stated all the circumstances connected with his attempt to form a Ministry. Lord PALMERSTON was offered the post of President of the Council, Lord ELLENBOROUGH would have been War Minister, Mr. DISRAELI, to whose disinterestedness Lord DERRY bore graceful tes timony, would probably have resumed the guardianship of the Ex chequer, and Sir E. B. LicrroN would have filled some prominent post. In our last number we asserted that Lord PALMERSTON received the application of Lord DERBY " most favorably," that he " expressed " his readiness to serve under Lord DERBY," and that the " inter " view was satisfactory, and promised to be conclusive." The Times of Monday was so rash as to contradict our statements. "We have no " reason," said that journal, " to credit the assertion of the Tory organs " that Lord PALMERSTON ever gave a qualified or conditional assent to " Lord DERBY'S propositions." Now, what says Lord DERBY himself :- 1 found—for the Noble Viscount was good enough to state to me—that, with regard to any personal considerations, he could have no objection to act in a Government with which I was connected He went so far as to discuss the particular position in the Government in which the Noble Viscount should he placed I certainly returned from the interview with a very strong impression upon my mind that the Noble Viscount was ready and willing, if he should obtain the concurrence of his late colleagues, to join, in unison with them, the Administration which I was endeavouring to form. Were we not, then, justified in stating that from "his interview " with Lord PALMERSTON, Lord DERBY received an impression that the " proposed arrangement would take effect ?" As for Lord JOHN RUSSELL'S explanation of his part in attempting to form a Ministry, it simply amounted to this, that he found no one willing to act with him. Poor Lord JoHN! We must wait for Lord PATMERSTON'S explanation before the series will be complete. But he can have little to tell which THE PRESS. SATURDAY, the public are not already in possession of. A decent veil will, no doubt, be thrown over the endeavours of his Peelite colleagues to override him. The position of Lord PALMERSTON at this moment exactly resem bles that of Sir CHARLES NAPIER when the Reform-Club banquet was given to him, on his accepting the command of the Baltic fleet. A parallel, after the manner of PLUTARCH, might easily be drawn. Both are Reformers, without knowing or caring what the shibboleth of the party to which they have attached themselves, simply because they believe it a winning party, means. They arc of nearly the same age, have been closely connected in some of the chief passages of their lives, have had a restless desire to foment quarrels in foreign coun tries that they might find employment in them, and have built on their popularity to raise them to the highest command in their respec tive departments. Last year younger and more efficient men than Sir CHARLES had no chance of commanding in the Baltic, because Old Charley must have his turn; and now " Lord PALMERSTON'S carriage " stops the way." There is always a day for the incapables, "if they " live long enough." By all meant; let the Reform Club give a banquet to Lord PALMERSTON. It will serve him to pour forth some of the rhodomontade he has hoarded up, and the more quickly his claptrap is delivered the nearer we shall be to the end of the farce. The changes in the Cabinet are soon told. Lord Jolla RUSSELL, Lord ABERDEEN, and the Duke of NEWCASTLE retire. Lord PALMERSTON succeeds the late Premier, and Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT becomes Home Secretary. It was thought prudent that he should have no more to do with the arrangements of the war. His post of Secretary-at-War is not, it seems, to be filled up. Lord PANMURE (Mr. Fox Maule), who is favorable, if we remember rightly, to the Peace Society, enters the Government as War Minister, vice the Duke of NEWCASTLE. Lord GRANVILLE, who retired from the Presidency of the Council to make room for Lord JOHN, is promoted from the Duchy of Lancaster to his former appointment. Whu is to be tho new Chancellor of the Duchy we have not heard. Why should not Mr. STaurr come back again? Only those Ministers who have changed places will have to be re-elected, so the new writs are at present confined to those for Tiverton and South Wilts. Lord PANMURE, then, is the only new Wood infused into the Cabinet. The Coalition is to go through the functions of Government in a pitiably-mutilated state. The division between Lord PALMERSTON and his Peelite friends may relate to a more serious matter than mere personal pretension. The Coalition was always divided in its opinions between the expe diency of attempting to obtain peace by success in arms or by amicable negotiation. The Peelites were all for the latter course, and hoped great things from the Vienna Congress. They have still a majority in the Cabinet, and so Lord PALMERSTON, should he himself incline to the bolder policy, will be compelled to yield or to see his Ministry broken up. Meanwhile, what has become of the Vienna Conference which it was so confidently stated would meet early in February ? and in what state are the negotiations with Austria? and when aro we to have the active assistance of that Power ? Not our army—for the term is obsolete—but the wasted remnant of what was once our army, is under a state of quasi improve ment—that is to say, in ether words, the numerical strength of the army being brought down by sickness and death to about 12,500 bayonets, those men have now their rations regularly served out, and also have had warm clothing distributed to each. Some 250 fine mules had arrived from the Commissariat Department, and great endeavours were being made at Constantinople to or ganise a transport corps, though at present with little success. The French, from their superior forces, have extended their position before Sebastopol, and an entire French division has now taken the place of our divisions in our own trenches and works, the ground which our men have been obliged to relinquish from positive inability to hold ! As for our cavalry, there is scarcely a troop left among all the regiments ! The 10th Hussars were at Suez, by the latest accounts, en route from Bombay to Balaklava, but why are there no more regiments en route from India? Have we no more cavalry to spare, and no regiments of infantry, or troops of artillery from that vast barrack, India? Not a day is to be lost now if we would open the spring campaign in force. There has been much dispute as to the loss which our army is now sustaining. The return of deaths from the hospital at Scutari may afford some guide. For the last seven days to which our dates extend the deaths were—Feb. 22nd, 52 ; 23rd, 49 ; 24th, 52 ; 25th, 71 ; 26th, 70 ; 27th, 50 ; 28th, 61: 405 in seven days. If to these deaths be added those which took place in the hospitals of Kululee and Abydos, and those which happened in camp and at Balaklava, it is not likely that the mortality can be less than one hundred daily. Yet, when such facts are stated in the House, they are met from the Ministerial bench with querulous complaint : even Mr. STAFFORD, when alluding to essential points connected with hospital management, and speaking from personal observation, was told to carry his facts to some department or other, no matter what, and not venture to state them in the Commons. The last telegraphic despatch from Vienna—what reliance is to be placed on it, we know not—reports that the Zonaves had mutinied, and demanded a retreat from the Crimea : 400 of them it is said were sent in chains to Constantinople. A sortie from Sebastopol on the 23rd January had, according to the same authority, caused the French army heavy losses. The Russians are showing that they know how to fight. The railroad from lialaklava to the camp had been commenced. According to the Duke of NEWCASTLE it would be completed in three Ilh