The Press. — London, England, 1855-06-23 00:00:00

JUNE 23, 1855. its desire to procure " Administrative Reform?" Even Mr. DRUMMOND'S jocose cynicism might be silent when such convincing evidence is given that more than talk was meant at the time when Mr. Disaextt first stirred the question. But, without further retrospective discus sion, the subject is now fairly started, and " Administrative Reform" is now before the whole country It is a singular fact that, after the Coalition of Fox and NORTH, the politics turned on purely " administrative " questions. The rival India Bills of Fox and Purr were then what plans in " Official Re form" will be in our generation, after the fall of a still worse " Coalition." At present there are only three parties who can deal with the subject. First, it is not unlikely that organ ised clamour and confederated declaimers may succeed in establishing a tritunitian influence, which will be sure to end in " class cries," and to degenerate into mere elec• tioneering claptraps. Then the Whig Oli garchy may adopt the cry, and pretend to act upon it. But, of course, any reform from their hands would be quite illusory, for they should first have to reform their own close borough system, with its " family compact." And, lastly, there is the practical and con stitutional plan, so vigorously sketched out by Mr. DISRAELI. We are convinced that the plan of the Member for Bucks will be that which will secure the support of the country. It is intelligible, broad, and safe. By giving the offices to merit a death-blow will be given to that system under which the public service is made to swarm with incompetent under lings, the mere spawn of electioneering cor ruption. That talent which now sours in an ungenial shade will ripen when genial patron age is let shine upon it, and the best intellects of the nation will engage in the Civil Service when it shall have been stamped as honour able by the bright rewards given to worth and real services. We are convinced that Mr DISRAELI has proposed to deal with the complicated ques tion in the most statesmanlike manner. It is scarcely too much to assume that a new leaf is turned in our domestic politics. Official Reform will be in the coming year what India Bills were seventy years ago. It is a fortunate omen that the Conservatives have been fore warned and forearmed on this most interest ing of questions. THE SEBASTOPOL COMMITTEE. WHEN the Sebastopol Committee was first ap pointed, many persons supposed that nothing could come of the inquiry. " The evidence " would be garbled, and the report would be " doctored," Jac ; and much to the same effect was glibly said by the affectedly " knowing" talkers about town. Our readers will recollect that we never concurred with that loose and shallow mode of thinking. We felt confident that when a freely-selected Committee of English Gentlemen heard the detailed evidence given of the flagrant mismanagement of the war that they would report accordingly. They have done so. They have produced a Report, guarded in expression, and cautions in accu sation, but most seriously damaging to the characters of the last and present Cabinets. The Ministry of Lord ABERDEEN a few months since was condemned by an enormous majo rity of the House of Commons, " and that " verdict," said Mr. DISRAELI on Monday, " was completely confirmed by the mature in. " vestigations of a Select Committee, and by a " Report such as never before was read in the " House of Commons." And in making the latter statement, the Right Honourable Gen tleman the Member for Bucks was strictly correct. Let us, however, not forget that but for the help of the present Ministry the Cabinet of Lord ABERDEEN would have been an impossi bility. Until all the mischief was done, the Whigs supported the Peelites. They sanc tioned their mismanagement of the war, and THE PRESS. showed symptoms of change only when the destruction of our troops had roused the in dignation of the country. Instead of rushing in time to help a jeopardised army, Lord JOHN RUSSELL fled from office to escape from respon sibility, and divest himself of the burden he had so long endured. No language of THE PRESS could more de cidedly condemn the conduct of the late and present Ministry than this Report from the Committee. It is not surprising that Cabinet Ministers should be in consternation on the issuing of such a powerful document. They acceded to the Committee ; they con sented to the terms of the nation ; they took care that extreme views at any side should not be allowed to predominate in its formation ; and that Committee has condemned the Ministerial management of the war. Under the second head of the Report, the Committee proceeded to investi gate the conduct of departments at home and abroad, " whose duty it has been to administer "to the wants of the army." Let us see what opinion on that important question was pro nounced by the Committee. " Your Committee," says the Report, " must " express their regret that the formation of " a large reserve at home, and also in the " proximity of the seat of war, was not con " sidered at an earlier period." Over and over again we had urged these views, but in reply we were told of the " remarkable abilities of " the Peelites." And, with this Report to guide us, we admit that the Peelites ought to be " remarkable." The Report then goes on with its regrets—" That the Government, " well knowing the limited numbers of the British " army, the nature of the climate in the East, " as well as of the Power we were to encounter, " did not augment the ordinary means of re " eruiting." And it then fixes the scandalous neglect upon the non enrolment of the Militia. On these momentous points we could hardly have used stronger language ourselves. These were Cabinet, not strategic, blunders of the first magnitude. It then applies itself to the special departments, and commences with the Duke of NEWCASTLE. 1. He had no separate office ; 2. Yet he undertook the superintendence of numerous departments ; and 3. His Grace was " imperfectly acquainted " with the best mode of exercising his autho " rity over the subordinate departments." This is strong language as to the appointed Minis ter of War. It then proceeds-4. " While this " country was dismayed by reports, the " Cabinet, according to the statement of " Ministers, was in darkness." 5. It then says that the Duke, " perplexed by the indiscreet " silence of those who should have enlightened " him, sent a commission to inquire.' That, says the Report, was " a form of proceeding " ill adapted to relieve the pressing wants of " five thousand men suffering under mis " management and neglect." These are severe terms of censure ; and let us observe that the Committee, so far, are not blaming " routine " or the " system," hut par ticular errors of the Government. The Report then continues to censure in detail further proceedings of the Cabinet. It points par ticular attention "to the evils arising from " the absence of the Master-General of the " Ordnance, abundantly shown in the evi " dence." It specially refers in terms ofptrong blame to the fact of the office of Sufteyor- General having remained vacant so long, and censures the whole Ordnance Department as " imperfect and dilatory in its management." On this head it must be recollected that the Ordnance Department was clearly within the cognisance of the Minister of War. He and his colleagues must justly be held responsible for not giving a head to that office during the absence of Lord RAGLAN. In feeling language the Report then laments the sufferings of the soldiers from " the Trans " port Department at home." But the Com mittee professes to be unable to decide whether the Commander-in-Chief, the Secre tary at War, or the Secretary of State for War, should be held responsible. Under this branch of inquiry the Report records " that " the preparation of ships for the wounded " was at first forgotten, and afterwards " neglected." And it then gives a variety of detail corroborating its decided censure , Government. To illustrate that censure should have to cite at least one-half of grave and most memorable document. prefer to request attention to the first closing paragraphs of this important paper. But let us again remind our readers there never was a less partial or one-sided Committee. The Government eonseni— place the inquiry in its hands. It altered body selected by Mr. ROEBUCK, and was to abide by its own choice. It is a tribt.. constituted that has pronounced emphatically upon the scandalous mismanagement war. It has with perfect candour adi certain evils incidental to " the system, to " routine." But with great elearneF without ambiguity, it records the cull of the Government. On this latter there can be no mistake. After admitting that evils and hardships necessarily to be expected from an expedii sent so far away, the Report proceeds : Your Committee, however, are of opinion that , avoidable suffering has been aggravated by causes wards enumerated, end which was mainly to be attrib to dilatory and insufficient arrangements for the supply the army with necessaries indispensable to its healthy r effective condition. And in the very outset of the Report the of clothing suffered in the early part campaign i recorded. After stating these painful facts the thus proceeds, and as Sir DENIS LE MA , read the following sentence the House loudly : From the middle of November that army was, period of many weeks, reduced to a condition w melancholy to contemplate, but which was endu, by officers and men with a fortitude and heroism passed in the annals of war. But still more significant are the cot sentences, in which the Report rises calm and chastened eloquence. Al lui the horrible state of the sick soldiers, that the first improvements in the condit of the sick were due to " private suggestions, " private exertions, and private benevolence," and chronicles the aid given by Mr. PHIN OSBORNE, Mr. AUGUSTUS STAFFORD, Hon. JOCELIN PERCY, and Mr. MACDONALI the Times. It also mentions the admirable " devotion of Miss NIGHTINGALE," and brands the Cabinet in the following words : The Administration which ordered that expedition no adequate information as to the amount of the ' the Crimea. They were not acquainted with the of the fortresses to be attacked, or with the r the country to be invaded. Not foreseeing the of a protracted struggle, they had not provided campaign. What words of THE PRESS could be than this censure ? Well, indeed, DISRAELI say that " such a Report was " before read in the House of Commons.' its concluding wishes every Englishman concur : That every British army may in future show which this noble army has displayed, and that hereafter be exposed to such sufferings u are • its pages. THE PATRONAGE OF IN IF the present mode of administering . State patronage in England be unsatisfactory , what must be thought of that pursued respect of the patronage of India? great attention to the interests Whig families has been injurious to . service here, what must be the making bodily to the Directors and their families the whole patronage of our Eastern empire? Here, however grasping may be the disposi tion of a statesman, the claims of party must be to a certain extent satisfied. Nor is a Minister's reign perpetual, and when the Opposition comes in, the stream of patronage is necessarily diverted into other channels But an East India Director has no party to manage, nor, when once in the Direction, is there any possibility of his being ousted. He remains a Director till he dies, and in the die- 583 namimMll of the ure we of this t. We -st and State rs that Le-sided nted to !red the Ls ready )unal so katically t of the dmitted m," and :sill, and Ipability ✓ point frankly )s were pedition. Ist this un- uses after- attributed e supply of wealthy and the want .t of the e Report lARCHANT 3 cheered s, during a which it is idured both >ism tumor- including 35 with a [uding to it recites condition gestions, )volence," r. GODOL• FORD, the oONALD, Of idmirable id thus it powerful 'edition had he forces in the strength resources of e p robability 1 for a winter e stronger , did Mr. was never 'ions." In man must air the valour mat none may e recorded in 'DIA. [tering the atisfactory, pursuedi o u ? if a to of certain the public eking over amilies the • •