The Press. — London, England, 1855-02-03 00:00:00

102 his duties, they were greatly mistaken ; the popular voice was against him, but he was sure that when the fact came to sifted, in a twelvemonth hence there would be a reaction in his favour, from the just and generous spirit of Englishmen. It was only in last month that the clamour had arisen to its present height, or that great fault was found with the state of the hospitals or of the army. What was the War Minister to have done? Was he have re• called Lord Raglan? The house itself had just voted him their unanimous and enthusiastic thanks. Was he to recal the whole host of subordinate officers, of the commissariat, and so on ? Before doing so, they had consulted Lord Raglan, and Lord Raglan had written, promising to use every exertion for the remedy of abuses. As for the committee, it was allowed on all sides that it was impossible in prin ciple and impracticable in action, and was merely the handle used for casting a vote of censure on the Minister. This was not the way to satisfy the coun try. If the committee was voted, the country would expect that it should be appointed; if not, the cha racter of the house itself would be damaged. There were many other questions about to be brought for ward, on which the house could more safely found its judgment on the conduct of the Minister. If the motion was successful, he could rejoice to think that his last words as a member of the present Govern ment were an indignant protest against it, as luse less to the army, unconstitutional in its naturs, and dangerous to the honour and the interests of the Commons of England. Mr. DISRAELI said that a fair reason for inquiry was to be found in the very fact that a Minister represented the position of the army as very different from what was commonly believed. The inquiry demanded was on the conduct of the war by the Ministers at home, and required neither French nor English witnesses to be summoned from the scene of operations, although he did not think that any inconvenience would arise if a committee of the House of Commons had to visit the heights of Se bastopol. He referred to the differences alleged between this occasion and that of Walcheren. There was a difference, it is true ; in the last case there was a Minister of the Crown who had come forward and stated that the state of affairs demanded inquiry, and that was all the advantage of his position and experience. There was much in that statement which was inexplicable to him. The Government resisted the motion on the ground that it implied a want of confidence. What did this mean? — Does it imply a want of confidence in the Administration which existed forty-eight hours ago? But the noble lord, late the First Minister of the Crown in this house, has quitted that Government ; and he has quitted it with a description of the feelings that prevailed among its mem bers, and of the cordiality which animated their councils. I don't think the Government will resist this motion on the ground that it is a want of confidence in the Cabinet as it existed with the noble lord the member for the city of Lon don as a member of it- Well, then, is it a declaration of want of confidence in the Cabinet as it now exists? But we are told almost from the Treasury bench that whatever may be the effect of this motion—whether the Government win or whether they lose—the event is to be followed by an abdication of all self-confidence on their own part. Do they then object to our voting a want of confidence in an Ad ministration which tells us that the moment it is over, ' whatever may be the result of the motion, they will con sider themselves as no longer worthy the confidence of Parliamer.t? Well, then, is the objection to this motion that it implies a want of confidence in the Government that is to be ? That is a question we have a right to ask. Hard has been the fate of the House of Commons of late years. It has often been called upon to vote confidence in men with whose principles it was unacquainted, but it never has yet been called upon to vote confidence when it did not know either the principles or the men. The right hon. gentleman then reprobated the sin gling out of the Duke of Newcastle in a matter wherein all his colleagues were equally in fault—they were by to advise him, and responsible for his acts. After a series of sarcasms on the way in which these same colleagues had spoken of the duke, he proceeded to say that there was another member of the Govei n ment whose blunders were equally great—he meant the Home Secretary ; and he described the inefteient manner in which the management of the militia had been conducted through the past year. He ridiculed Mr. Gladstone's assertion of the confidence of the members of the Government in each other—a confi dence which, he observed, did not prevent members of the Ministry from coming down to the house ig norant that their leader had just resigned. He then came to the explanation of Lord John Russell, on which he observed : I listened to that speech with amazement. When I lis tened to that speech it seemed to me I was listening to a page from the " Memoirs of Bubb Doddington." Such an all-unconscious admission of what in the eighteenth cen tury would have been called a profligate intrigue, but which in our more mealy-mouthed century must be designated by more euphemistic phrases, is not to be matched in that record which commemorates the doings of another Duke of Newcastle, who was a Minister of England when the House of Commons was called upon by Sir T. Robinson, and when the Opposition was actually carried on by the Paymaster of the Forces and the Secretary-at-War. We THE PRESS. are told every day that it is oar blessed lot to live in an age of progress, and yet we have this confession in our purer days of morality that the noble lord the late President of the Council goes to the Prime Minister and tells him that, in consequence of " antiquated imbecility," as the noble lord opposite (Palmerston) might say,but in zonsequence of incapability and incompetence on the part of a Minister of War at the present moment—in consequence of that Minister not being " the active spirit of the whole machine," he (the Lord President) proposes that one Secretary of State shouldbe dismissed, and another colleague, the right hnn. member for Wilts (Mr. S. Herbert), should be super seded altogether. To make the matter complete, it was the very Minis ter on whose behalf all this disturbance had been made who had to rise, and, with Spartan fortitude, administer a rebuke to the disinterested conspirator who had thus sacrificed himself on the altar of friend ship. Lord Palmerston was shocked at the indiscre tion of his colleague, but he forgot how short a time since he had been guilty of almost the same act, only different because unaccompanied by an equally can did explanation. Lard John Russell had broken up the Cabinet in consequence of his opinion of the in competence of a man to whose appointment he had made no objection because it gave him an opportu nity of saving the balance of power, in introducing into the colonies a supporter of his side. He con cluded with the following pointed observations : I have no confidence whatever in the existing Govern ment. I told them a year ago, when taunted for not asking the House of Commons to ratify that opinion of mine, that as they had no confidence in each other a vote of want of confidence was superfluous. I ask the House of Commons to decide if twelve months have not proved that I was right in that assumption. What confidence has the noble lord the late President of the Council in the Minister for War? What confidence have this variety of Ministers in each other's councils? They stand before us confessedly as men who have not that union of feelings and of sympathy necessary to enable them successfully to conduct public affairs. The late President of the Council, in scattering some compliments among the colleagues he was quitting, dilated upon the patience and ability with which the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs had con ducted the duties of his department. I am not here to question those valuable qualities or that patience, but I say that all the patience and all the ability with which the Earl of Clarendon may have administered are completely lost by scenes like this, and when the Ministers of this country have themselves revealed their weakness to foreign Courts all the ability and patience of that statesman cannot make up for the weakness which is known to prevail in the councils of England. At all times such a circumstance must be injurious, but at the present moment it may be more than injurious. If this be the case—if we are called upon to decide whether the House of Commons has confi- dence in the Ministry, when the debate is commenced by the secession of the most eminent member of the Govern ment—when affairs are in a calamitous state, and when we are told by the late Lord President that the conduct of the war is intrusted to a Minister who he thinks is un equal to the task—l ask the country—l ask the Ministers themselves, whether they can complain that a member of the Opposition should give his vote according to the belief which he entertains that the affairs of the country are in trusted to a deplorable Administration? Lord Joint RUSSELL only rose to repel a personal imputation made by the last speaker. If the right hon. gentleman, when he said that in the last century his conduct would have been called a profli gate intrigue, meant that in those days such a vituperative epithet might have been applied to him, it was likely enough; but if he meant that a true character would have been implied in the name, he most solemnly denied the imputation. He entered into the circumstance of his resignation, said that the whole truth had not been told, but that it would be inconvenient to state what passed between Cabinet Ministers. What he had said last year respecting the Duke of Newcastle had been stated to that Minister, who had stated that he was ready to concur in any arrangement for the public service. Had his suggestion been adopted at the time when no popular cry had been raised against the duke, it would have been a simple interchange of office, and could not in any way be characterised as a "profligate innigue." Lord PALMERSTON was quite willing to admit that the entire Government was responsible for the acts of its War Department, and that no one member of the Government could be fairly singled out for indi vidual reprobation. The Duke of Newcastle had been unfairly dealt with ; the time would come when he would have justice done him. The Government had been taxed as a Coalition Government; no doubt its members had not all belonged always to the same party, but in their deliberations they had never re membered to what party they had originally belonged, and had no greater difference than might be expected when several men deliver opinions on one subject. In the present state of politics a Government could not be forthed from a single party. As for the con • duct of the war, it was a fair subject for discussion if properly introduced ; but the present motion established a dangerous precedent, pei ilous, if carried out, disappointing to the nation if allowed to drop, inconvenient at home, and dishonourable abroad. A direct vote of want of confidence would be a far more manly and constitutional proceeding. Whatever discussion and dissension had taken place, he trusted SATURDAY, they would be confined to the present Government ; that the future Government will not present to Eu rope the most lamentable spectacle of a country interrupted by paltry political squabbles in a great national undertaking, but that Parliament, following the example of the nation it represents, will be unanimous in its determination that the war shall be carried on with vigour and energy. As the nation is deeply convinced of the justice of the war, and firmly calls for that war not to be concluded without such a termination as will secure future safety against the recurrenle of those dangers to avert which we have been driven to take up arms, he trusted that when this house has said what Government it will have— when this house shall have given its confidence to any set of men who may be intrusted hereafter with the conduct of public affairs, it will give its hearty support to that Government to enable it to carry out the wishes and determination of the nation—that it will not. show to Europe that a constitutional Go• vernment is less able to conduct its affairs than an arbitrary despotism. Mr. MUNTZ could not expect anything from a Ministry in the state of helplessness and inefficiency in which he saw the present. It was useless to look to the past, and all they had to do was to provide better for the future. After Mr. HORSMAN had said a few words amidst great impatience, Mr. DUNCOMBE begged to ask the proposer of the motion if he was in earnest, and really intended to nominate the committee if he obtained the vote for it? This was a duty the house owed to the country, and he hoped it would not disgrace itself by voting a sham. Mr. ROEBUCK said he was perfectly in earnest, and, if the house granted the committee, pledged himself fairly to carry it out. He reviewed briefly the objec tions to his motion. It had been said that the vote would paralyse the Government. Paralyse them! Why, they had acted under a continued paralysis. They were condemned by their own statements, and were unable to make use of the habits of industry and action which formed a part of the qualities of the nation. The Ministry had failed the people ; in quiry was in their hands, and if they refused it they were answerable for any further disaster that would befall the country. The army was melting away, and it would be too late to inquire when there was nothing left. The house divided:— t ..,( 305 Against l4B Majority The announcement was received with emotion, but in silence. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT. The House of Commons on Thursday evening was quite full and extremely animated, when Lord PAL NERsToN ruse to make formally that communication which would have been made on Tuesday, but for the accidental circumstance that the House of Lords was not sitting ; and to state that in consequence of what passed on Monday the Government had placed their resignation in the hands of her Majesty, who had gra ciously accepted it. Under these circumstances the house would feel that the ordinary business could not po-sibly be proceeded with, and he begged to move that it adjourn till to-morrow, not longer, be cause the honourable and gallant member for Nest minster will take his seat to-morrow, and the house could not delay their formal recognition of his ser vices. There was, in addition, the arrangement be tween this country and the United States in respect to the fisheries, and it would be a convenience to the public service if the bill for those purposes could be passed. He proposed the sitting to-morrow for that purpose only, on the understanding that no other business would be brought forward. Some formal business was transacted, anal the house adjourned at a quarter to five, after a few words from Lord EaßinoToN, who could not allow the house to separate without expressing his wish that some allusion had been made to the formation of a new Ministry in the present crisis, and for that reason was glad that the house had not adjourned over the next day. RESIGNATION OF MINISTERS. On Thursday the bar of the House of Lords and the members' and strangers' galleries were crowded to bear the expected statement of Lord Aberdeen. The house itself was for the occasion very mode rately attended. The front Opposition bench was filled early; the Ministerial was for some time vacant. Lord Aberdeen entered about a quarter past five, and received an ultra cordial shake of the hand from some members of the house who were willing to exhibit their sympathies with a fallen Minister. ........,_ After some minutes' delay, Lord ABERDEEN rose and announced his resignation as follows : My lords, after the vote of the House of Commons on Monday night, your lordships will readily imagine th t t her Majesty's Ministers at once resolved to place their