The Sun. — London, England, 1855-07-18 00:00:00

committee on this point? The House will excuse me for what lam about to read, as Idoit in self-defence. It is said that I proposed a resolution at the end of the pro ceedings of that committee which had only in its support my own casting vote ; now, I will ask the house when I read the resolutions which were agreed to unanimously by that committee, which were penned by the noble lord the member for Totnes, what is the difference between my resolution and that of the noble lord ? In pag e 4, under the head of " Th e conduct of the departments bo th athome and abroad whose duty it is best to minister to the wants of the army," there appeared these words " The Cabinet appear to have been confident of success. Lord Aberdeen states it to have been their impression that Sebastopol would fall almost immediately by a coup de main. The Duke of Newcastle says that he expected the army, after capturing Sebastopol, would winter there, or else, after destroying the fortress, would return to winter on the shores of the Bosphorus. Sir James Graham has the strongest opinion that the order for the expedition was given at the right time, and was executed at the right time. This report shows the results which ensued upon the frustra tion of these expectations. Your committee have inquired what information the Government had obtained which induced them to order this expedition. In regard to this matter, it may be observed that the Duke of Newcastle had, in his de spatch of the 10th of April, estimated the Russian forces in the Crimea at 30,000 men, and he believes that when the ex pedition was ordered no more reliable accounts had been re ceived, Sir J. Graham sas, h o wever, that at a later period— namely, the la s t wee k i n July—he had obtained from a Cri mean authority a complete account of the Crimea, its localities, its harbours, its roads, its productions, and supply of water, and, what was most important of all, a statement of the force, which was estimated by his informant at 70,000 men, 8,000 of which were cavalry, 40,000 constituted the garrison of Sebas topol, and the remaining 30,000 were dispersed through the Crimea.' Vice-Admiral Dundas had, on the 10th of May, 1854, written to Lord Raglan a letter, in which, relying upon information which he had obtained, he estimated the Russian force in the Crimea at 120,000 men. • The embassies at St. Petersburg and Constantinople were unable to furnish any information upon these important subjects." It is due to the gallant lord to have this statement made to show that he was opposed to the policy, and that the only . persons really responsible for the expedition are the Ad ministration who had the management of it Lord Raglan, in his despatch of the 19th of July, states that the descent on the Crimea is decided upon more in deference to the views of the British Government than to any information in the possession of the naval and military autho rities, either as to the extent of the enemy's forces or to their state of preparation.' " Now, sir, I simply repeat what has been told to me, and I hardly think that I should be violating any confidence if I mentioned my authority, but I will not state it, although I dare say that it is known to the right hon. gentleman. I • am informed that the authorityon which he relied wrote to him a letter, stating that he had been in the Crimea only once, that he spoke upon information gained upon the most cursory travelling through the country, and that what the right hon. gentleman called "a Crimean authority" was a person who bad only been there a few days. Observe, I speak upon authority, and I see a right hon. gentleman opposite who, I think, knows the authority upon which I speak, because he stated to him exactly what he stated to me. (Hoar, hear.) Now, sir, I come to a part of the mat ter which affects the noble lord at the head of the present Administration. He was at that time Home Secretary. Under his command was the militia of this country (hear); and I state that, after war was declared, and before the expedition to the Crimea was undertaken, the Adminis tration took no steps to provide a reserve of force for the army which they were about to employ on that ex pedition, that army being originally in numbers inade quate to the task which was imposed on it. Now, I charge that against the noble lord, and I charge it as a great error, and no mot e ; but an error may lead to great mischief, and I think that it has done so in the case of the noble lord. He took no provision in respect to the militia. The army was sent out totally inadequate, as the right hon. gintleman himself admits. He believes that the army of Russia amounted to 70,000 men, and we sent to the Crimea at the utmost 25,000 men. Mr. GLADSTONE--You forgot the allies. Mr. ROEBUCK—I was speaking of the British army ; but the allies and we together sent a force of 50,000 men. At that time the right hon. gentleman believed that 70,000 men were in the Crimea. Vice-Admiral Dryades believed that there were 150,000 men there, yet we despatched an army of 25,000 men, aided by a smaller army of French to invade the Crimea, and at that time the noble lord who was at the head of the militia took no steps to provide a reserve by means of the militia of this country. Again I appeal to the report of the Sebastopol Committee : " From the 16th of September, when the army l an d e d in the Crimea, until th e en d of October, or, as some witnesses state, until about themiddle of November, the troops suffered from overwork and from dysentery." Now, the statement that the troops suffered from over work means that their numbers were insufficient —(hear)- and every witness who came before us, generals, captains, privates, all concurred in stating that the men were over worked. They went to the trenches for 24 hours at a time —I am understating it. If there had been more troops their work would have been less; and, what w as more th an a ll , had an adequat e provision been made of labour in the Cri mea, that seven miles at the end of the 3,000 would not have stood in the way like a great chasm to prevent the ar rival of all support and sustenance from this country. I heard the right hon. gentleman the member for South Wiltshire, when upon the Treasury bench, say that the whole distance between us and the army was 3,006 miles, but that the last six was the insuperable difficulty. (Hear.) Why, at that time there was there, upon that six miles, the means of making a road tho most complete that na ture offered ; there were faggots in abundance as well as "metalling" —in the phraseology of road-making, lime stone. (Hear.) All that was required was stout yeomen arms. Those arms were not provided ; and at whose door shall we lay the fault ? Clearly at the door of the Ad ministration which sent an army to do a deed which no army could do thus hampered, thus ill-provided, thus " cabined, cribbed, confined." (Cheers.) Why, sir, if they had had 20,000 labourers, could they not have made that road in a fortnight, and should we have heard the harrowing descriptions which we have heard of the misery suffered by our gallant troops upon that occasion? Not at all. Well, then, I say that upon the Administration, and upon them alone, rests the responsibility that our army was totally unprovided, that they went inadequate to the occasion, that we sent a force to perform a deed which was totally unequal to the office, and that, instead of sitting in anxious conference endeavouring to supply the want which their own carelessness created, Parliament separated in August, and there was no Cabinet Council till the middle of October. The noble lord the memberfor the city of London was instructing the population of Glo • cestershire, I believe, by certain lectures • the right bon. gentleman th e h ea d o f t h e B oard of ' Works was shining somewhere in Scotland—(a laugh)—and, in fact, with the exception of the Duke of Newcastle and the right hon. gentleman the member for South Wiltshire, and, I believe, the Earl of Aberdeen—(An hon. MEMBER.— " The Earl of ClarendOn.] lam not quite so sure about • the Earl of Clarendon; but, with those exceptions, all were taking their pleasure from the end of August till the middle of October. Mr. GLADSTONE.—Quite untrue. Mr. ROEBUCK continued.—There was no Cabinet Council daring the whole of that period. The Duke of Newcastle stated before the committee that he was in Lon don all that time; and I believe that the then First Lord of the Admiralty was also at his post ; but they are now out of office—they have received their punishment. (Cheers, and a laugh.) The persons whom I wish to visit are now in office, because they were at that time indulging them selves, and were not looking after their duty. The noble lord at the head of the present Administration, where was he ? The noble lord the member for the city of London, where was be ? The right hon. gentleman the Home Se cretary, where was he ? The right hon. gentleman the President of the Board of Works, where was he ? Why, I could go through the list ; and I ask, why was there no Cabinet Council during all that time? (Hear, hear.) In that interval the Battle of the Alma was fought—the expedition to the Crimea was determined on and exe ceted. You may tell me that the expedition was deter mined on before ; then, why were you not in London to receive intelligence as to the mode in which it was executed? (Hear, hear.) Why were you not at your posts ? The army dwindled away ; cold, hunger, tempest came upon them. You were not at your posts to minister to their wants, and I ask the house to visit with severe reprehension the men who so forgot their duties. (Hear.) Now, sir, it is in evidence that the sufferings of the army were not attributable to the army itself ; that they were not attributable even to the governors or generals of that army; but they must have had a cause, and it is for us to inquire what was that cause. It was that the army was not adequately provided for the operations which they had to perform. They were thrown upon the shores of the Crimea without the means of transport, and although we bad command of the sea, and could convey to j the shores of the Crimea everything that England or the world could offer, yet our troops died six miles from the shore because there was not au adequate road provided by this great country for its army. Can any one believe, Sir, if we hat had a man at the head of the Cabinet, or in the Cabinet, who had the spirit in him vhich this country furnishes, I would say, to the humblest of her sons, with the means which this country affords of performing every. thing which human art or science can accomplish —can any one believe, I ask, that seven miles off mud should stand between us and as gallant an army as ever left the shores of England ? (Hear.) We let them die like sheep. They suffered undor single canvas—there was no oppor tunity of taking them huts to cover them—cold, rain, snow, tempest beat upon their heads ; and the Government of her Majesty were indulging their ease 'while those gallant men were enduring such extremes of suffering. And are the representatives of the people of England to stand idly by and witness such a dereliction of duty? The thought is monstrous—it makes my blood boil. The Government sent forth a body of men to fight the bat tles of their country, and they sent them armed as troops Were armed 30 years ago, notwithstanding all that art has accomplished during the interval. [SiiD. L. Evans —"Some —not all."] I am glad that the gallant general, who knows so Well the sufferings of the army to which he was attached, should correct me if I exaggerate; but evidence was given befor e the committee that the weapon which is popularly known as "Brown Bess" was in tho hands of man y regl meats before Sebastopol, and assuming one-fourth of the army to have been thus armed—[Sir D. L. Evans—" Only one - fifth."l—W e ll , one-fifth; but I saythat even if one man was improperly armed it is the fault of the Administra tion, and the man so armed was a sacrifice to the want of care, diligence, and foresight on the part of those to whom the conduct of the war was intrusted. I say that it is only proper that this house should visit with severe reprehen sion persons who so carelessly dischared their duties. With regard to medical stores, that army should never have been sent to the Crimea unprepared with them, even if the troops were in health to perform their duty; but before the army left Varna plague in the shape of cholera attacked it, and then, surely, it was the duty of the Government to provide for it everything which the medical science of this country could af f ord. What was the description given to the committee of tho wretchedn ess endured by the troops before S e b as t o p o l ? They were described as broken down by disease --disease more potent than the enemy; they slept under single canvas, their legs up to the knees in mud, they were rained upon when suffering all the horrors of diarrhcea:. and all the other miseries to which poor human nature is subject were experienced by that army. Was the arm th Weremeans? not. And upon whose head must be charged the mischief which lam now describing? I say, upon the Administration. But it is said—and I now come to a part of the subject upon which I can hardly touch without in the committee hes already performed that for which it was appointed. It is said that it has got rid of all the enemies in the Administration, of those who were the cause of the mischief. Now, sir, for my own part, I am f ar from believing that suc is the case. (Hear, bear.) It h e sa i d you have turn ed out Lord Aberdeen, the Duke of Newcastle, and the right bon. members for Car lisle, the University of Oxford, and Wilts and what more do you expect ?Do you want to see every body punished? I, sir, say y es; I want to see everybody punished who de serves it. (Hear, hear.) I think that that argument is unfair to those who were more immediately connected with the conduct of the war. Perhaps, I may be permitted to say—and I say it in no spirit of presumption—that I think the Duke of Newcastle has been made a scapegoat— (hear, hear)—that he has been sent into the wilderness I with n t k h e sin that f o e f ve the r t herthere was a Administration m s on his had n whoreal really s cha te (Hear.) d his duty conscientiously, that man was the Duke of New castle. (Hear, hear.) Ile acted according to the best of he was always at his post; and he was ever his intent ability; upon the honour of England and the welfare of the army which was submitted to his care. (Hear, hear.) I say, therefore, sir, that to throw all the blame upon the Duke of Newcastle and to make his retirement from office a sufficient holocaust to the anger of England, is an act of in justice to which I will not consent to be a party. I say the same with regard to the right hon. member for Wilts. (Hear, hear.) No man could have been more intent than that right hon. gentleman had always been upon the hon our of his country, and on performing the duties of his office. I do not mean to say that he did not often do wrong. I think he did; but then I draw the distinction between him and other members of the Administration, that he was conscientiously endeavouring to perform his duty and was always at his post--(hear, hear)—and his kindliness of spirit was always pervading the office to which he belonged. (Hear, hear.) I say that that right hon. gentleman and the Dula, of Newcastle acted to the best of their abilities for the welfare of England ; and that they should be offered up as a sacrifice for the sins of the rest of the Administration is an act of injustice which I think that this house cannot but disapprove—(hear)—when there are those who have done the injury still holding the seals of _power, while the least guilty have gone out of office. With regard to the right hon. gentleman the late First Lord of the Admiralty, I hope he willexcuse me say ing that I think he made some serious mistakes. I think he made a grave mistake in building large ships of war, when, in my opinion, he ought to have built marine batte ries of small vessels, but at the same time there was about him a desire to do his duty, which does not appear to me to have been evinced by the other members of the Govern ment. I say, therefore, that it is no satisfaction to me to have got rid of those individuals. I am glad that any man who has done wron g is out of office, but what I want is, that all who have done wrong should go out—(hear)—and I hope that the house will support me in that desire. I feel, Sir, that to adequately bring forward this resolution re quires a strength beyond that which I possess, for myfeeble body is only now borne up by the indignant spirit within. I have seen a brave army of Englishmen pining and melt ing away in destitution. I have seen them thus in conse quence of the errors and the supineness of the Administra tion, and I have seen the persons who formed that Adminis tration come back to office unstricken by any expression of opinion on the part of this house. It is now manifest that the Administration which I wish to censure have been guilty of wrong, and whether the result of carrying my resolution be to transfer po wer f rom th ose w h o s i t on this side of the house is to me a matter of total indifference. All that I wish for is justice, all that I desire is to see that we shall never again be in the position of calling on a body of our brave fellow-countrymen, and at the same time sit here night after night faced by a body of men by whose supineness and errors they are being consigned to an untimely grave. (Hear.) In this spirit I have moved the resolution which I now, sir, place in your hands. lam aware that I have inadequately performed the duty which I have undertaken, but I have done so to the best of my ability, and I now leave the question to the decision of the house. (Cheers.) ,General PEEL, in moving the previous question, said—The resolution, sir, which the hon. member for Sheffield has placed in your hands, in the first place, calls upon this house to ex press a deep feeling of regret at the sufferings of our army during the winter campaign in the Crimea. To that portion of the resolution I am sure that every member of this house will cordially assent, and I think would also be willing to add some expression of admiration for the fortitude which that army displayed during all its privations. The resolution, however, goes on to say that the house, coinciding with the resolution of their committee, that the conduct of the Administration was the first and chief cause of the calamities which befel that army, do hereby visit with severe reprehension every mem ber of that Cabinet whose counsels led to such disastrous re sults. Before the house consents to agree to that resolution, it ought to consider what are the principal considerations which it embodies. Now, sir, I think that, if the words of the resolution convey any meaning at all, that meaning is an expression condemnatory of the policy of the expedition to the Crimea. Now, I am not prepared to come to that conclusion, or to condemn the policy of that expedition. I voted against that resolution in the committee, and I am not prepared to adopt it now. It is perfectly true that little was known of the state of the Russian army, or of the Russian fortresses in the Crimea, but if no expedition was to be undertaken without full and accurate information of the facts I venture to say that the allied armies would have attempted nothing at all against a country so situated as Russia. (Hear.) No great object can be gained without running some risk in its attainment. (Hear.) The best test, however, of the expedition to the Crimea is, that there was a:better chance of success on the first landing of the army than there has ever been since ; that there was a better chance of taking Sebastopol by a coup de main—a sudden assault—than by a protracted siege or cam paign in the field. Another point to be considered is the state of the allied armies at that time. They had been de pressed by sickness and inaction, and it was absolutely ne cessary that some means should be resorted to in order to restore their spirits. Above all, however, the state of public feeling at home must be looked to. Throughout this coun try there was a general opinion that some blow ought to be struck, and I will venture to say that if nothing had been attempted we should have been called upon to condemn the Government for not doing that which we are now asked to pass a vote of censure upon them for doing. (Hear, hear.) But, independently of the policy of going to the Crimea, the hon. and learned gentleman has made great complaints that the army upon its arrival there was not provided with sufficient land transport. Now, I speak with great deference in the presence of the hon. and gallant gentleman (Sir D. L. Evans), but I do not concur in the blame cast upon the authorities in this respect. I believe the great object of the expedition to the Crimea was to land, in the first instance, the greatest possible number of combs batants ; and, even if we could have had greater naval trans port at our command, it would have been far better to em ploy it in conveying more troops and more cavalry than in supplying the means of land transport. It has always ap peared to me that the reason the army did not advance im mediately after the Battle of the Alma was not from the want of land transport, but from the necessity of protecting the wounded ; and I have little doubt that if the forces of the allies had at once advanced the result of that glorious battle would have been the immediate fall of Sebastopol. (Hear, hear.) That, however, is a point on which I think neither the hon. and learned member nor myself is the best judge. Well, although Ido not blame the policy of the ex pedition to the Crimea, I must say that I cannot observe in it any of that sagacity which the hon. and gallant mem ber for Cambridge (Colonel Adair) refers to in his resolu tion. (Hear, hear.) It is quite evident that the Govern ment looked forward to only one result of the expedition, and that a successful one. It was not until after the 18th of October that the failure of the Allied armies to produce the anticipated result first opened the eyes of the commanders to the fact that a long and protracted 'siege would be necessary, and not only to that fact, but to the still more lamentable one that if they could not succeed in their enterprise, neither could they withdraw. The Allied armies were forced to en counter a winter in the Crimea, and that they were subjected to the misfortunes which consequently befel them was not a matter of policy, but a matter of necessity. Then, again, the great cause of these calamities— the cause to which I have ever attributed all the sufferings to which our troops were ex posed—was from our having commenced great military pre parations with inadequate means. (Hear.) Did not the Go vernment in the first instance send out a greater army than the reduced state of our establishment permitted of ? It is per fectly true that the Duke of Wellington advised this country never to enter into a little war; but even a greater misfor tune than entering upon a litle war is to enter upon a great war with little means. (Hear, hear.) In the first place, you sent out every available man you could lay your hands upon, having no reserves to fall back on for the supply of those casualties which sickness and engagements with the enemy are sure to entail. lam fully borne out in that description of the state of the army by a paragraph in a memorandum of my right hon. friend the then Secretary at War. That me morandum, which is dated Nov. 17, 1854, has reference to the increase of the army, and this is the description which the right hon. gentleman gives : " England has not usually been very successful at the commencement of her wars, for the reason that she does not in time of peace maintain an army large enough to be capable of lasting as well as sudden extension. (Hear.) It is possible, as this year has shown, to create, at very short notice, a very efficient and, for us, considerable army ; but it is quite another thing to maintain those numbers and that efficiency. The army of the East has been created by dis counting .the future. (Hear.) Every regiment at home or within reach, and not forming part of that army, has been robbed to complete it ; the depots of the regiments under Lord Raglan have been similarly treated." I think that fully bears me out in saying that there is no very great proof of sagacity in the policy which sent out so much larger a force than you had reserves to keep up. (Hear, hear.) But, although I think the Government were ill-advised in giving way to the cry raised in this house, throughout the country, and by the press—for it was in this way that the Government were urged on to this undertaking—l will not condemn them on that ground, for I believe their mistakes originated in their desire vigorously to carry on the war, and I infinitely prefer such a determination to the more peaceful spirit which was evinced by some members of the Cabinet, but you have no doubt placed yourselves in a position from which there is now no retreat, and I believe there is not a man in this house who does not wish that every exertion should bo made in order to carry out the objects for which our gallant army and that of our brave ally have so nobly fought. I can assure the hon. and learned gentleman 15 is from no party mo tive that I will not agree to his proposition. I have recorded my party predilection by the vote I gave on the resolution of the right hon. gentleman the member for Buckiughamshire, the professed object of which resolution was to turn out the Government; and I did so, sir, because I believe the time has arrived when a better, because a stronger, Government should be formed from this (the Opposition) side of the house. (Hear.) But, although entertaining this party feeling, I never will be a party to casting a censure upon honourable men, w h o, i n my belief, have exerted themselves to the ut most of their power in performing the duties of their office. (Hear.) I believe that far too much of this sort of blame has been cast upon individuals in the course of our proceedings in the committee--(hear)—and I am certain that some of our best public servants are deeply hurt by the insinuations thrown upon them in the course of that inquiry. I have in my hands a letter from the late Lieutenant-General of the Ordnance, an officer whose character is far too high and whose services are too well known to render it necessary for me to dwell upon them. (Hear.) He writes to me to request that I will take any opportunity which the forms of the house admit of to vindicate his character from what appears to him to be an unfair attack. "It has," he says,— " Caused me considerable annoyance to be exposed to such a charge from so high an authority, after a prolonged service in which I have endeavoured faithfully to discharge my duty, and (as I had hoped, until now, it was allowed) with credit to myself. After the perusal of the report I only find one point upon whirl} any ground of censure is directly applied to me, and that is the charge that, ' from the lan guage of Sir Hew Ross, it would seem that he was imper fectly acquainted with tt e constitution of the board of which h e was a member.' This I emphatically deny, for I had made myself perfectly acquainted with my duties, both as Lieutenant-General and as a board officer. The difficulties of uy position early called my attention to these poirits, and had the examination been carried further to give me an opportunity of explanation, I should only have illustrated the evidence of Colonel Anson in 1849, which went to prove that, - though one board officer may constitute a board, yet that A r all important questions the signature of a second officer is desir a bl e, and in some cases indispensable. " Asa n 'ember of the Board of Ordnance for five years, I can state n iy cordial agreement with the evidence given by the gallant , officer. Sir Hew Ross then goes on to say VI ith regard to the general censure 011 the members of the be .ard, whatever may have been the differences that ex isted, L'iy conscience acquits me of any want of judgment an ten iper,' and I can with confidence appeal to my col- I TFE SIJN, LONDON,, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JULY 18, 1855, leagues whether, except on the question of discipline in the laboratory, I was involved in any difference with either." But far the best testimony that can be borne to the services of Sir Hew Ross is the evidence taken before the committed as to the state of the artillery sent to the Crimea. It will be remembered that Captain Shakipeare and Viscount Hardinge both spoke in high terms of the state of the artillery, its equipment, and every thing belong,ing to that department ; and I have here a letter from Lord Raglan to Sir Hew Ross, dated June 1, 1855, in which he says : " I observe that blame is freely thrown upon the Ordnance. Now, my belief is that the board have done better than any other department. The artillery are well equipped here ; the men had what was requisite for them sooner than the rest of the army, and altogether they seem to have done everything that was possible for the service." But if injustice has been done in the case of those who were present to speak for themselves, what shall be said of those accused behind their backs, and who knew not what were the charges made against them ? (Hear, hear.) Too many of these, alas ! have been removed from among us, and are indifferent now both to your censure and your praise ; but I fear their last moments were embittered by the thought that their services were so little appreciated. (Hear, hear.) I am perfectly certain that the hon. and learned gentleman in the attacks which he has made has done nothing but what he considered to be his duty, and I feel assured that in the course which he has taken he thought that he was acting up to the wishes of his constituents and of the country at large. But, depend upon it, the people of this country are too generous and too just to approve, in their calm and sober moments, what is so contrary to their principles of justice. (Hear, hear.) The committee themselves shrank from such a step, and when the hon. and learned gentleman proposed a resolution to condemn the conduct of Lord Raglan he was only enabled to secure the support of one hon. gentleman. (Hear, hear.) And, suppose that these re-solutions had been carried, what would have been the answer given to them, and how would they have been received by that army now deploring the loss of their chief ? What would have been their answer to the charge that Lord Raglan had no sympathy with and neglected the men placed under his charge ? With the permission of the house, I will read two letters upon this question, not from staff officers, or from men who had any interest or connexion with Lord Raglan, but from regimental officers, doing their duty in the trenches. The first is from an officer in the 34th Regiment—a regiment which has suf fered as much as any regiment in her Majesty's service. He says— " Poor Lord Raglan died last night very unexpectedly, which has put us all out of spirits, for be was universally liked, and the men would have done anything for him." (Cheers.) Another officer says,— By Lord Raglan's death the British army has suffered a greater loss than it has had yet to encounter. (Hear, hear.) Throughout the army, as far as I can hear, there is but one universal expression of regret. If those who have been so lavish of their virulent, scurrilous, and undeserved abuse of poor Lord Raglan will now have the goodness to point out a successor who can efficiently fill his place they would save much trouble." (Hear, hear.) Why, sir, I believe that there is not a man in the army who is not now lamenting the death of Lord Raglan, and I believe that his great anxiety for the army and what he must have suffered from the insinuations and *barges which have been made against him may have had the effect of precipitating his end. (Hear, hear.) But what ever I may feel with regard to the conduct of the Government and with regard to the state of the public departments at the commencement of the war, I cannot but complain of the con duct of this house in constantly interfering with the executive Government and in pressing forward upon every occasion to make attacks upon officers founded solely upon anonymous letters in the newspapers. (Hear, hear.) The very idea of an army in the field being accompanied by a host of newspa per reporters, upon whose statements the Government are call , d upon every day to institute inquiries into the conduct of the men in command of the troops, and who are constantly throwing out insinuations against those who have undertaken the most responsible duties, is most absurd. (Cheers.) Well might Sir John Burgoyne say that the expedition to the Crimea was altogether an exceptional case, and I am perfectly satisfied myself that many instances could be given to show that the interference of this house and of the Press has had a most injurious effect. (Hear.) I am not one of those who were very sanguine as to the results to be derived from the appointment of the Sebastopol Commit - tee. I always thought it impossible for that committee to conduct as it ought to be conducted, such an inquiry as that which was intrusted to them. I admit the great assiduity of the gentlemen who composed the committee, and their anxi ous desire to arrive at a just conclusion, but, after all, their labours ended in a vote of censure upon men most of whom had already left office. Under all the circumstances of the case, I think that the wisest thing this house could do would be to adopt the proposal which I have to make to them, and pass on to the previous question. Without looking on to the future further than to take warning from what has passed, it should be our endeavour to look forward, and with one united heart and voice to carry on the war with that vigour which can alone insure success. (Hear.) Lord R. CECIL seconded the amendment. He pointed the attention of the house to the inconsistency of the speech of the hon. and learned gentleman with the terms of the motion. Colonel ADAIR had placed an amendment on the paper, justifying the expedition to the Crimea, and regretted to learn from the Speaker that according to the forms of the house it could net be submitted for consideration. If the house were to take a generous view of the case, they might come to the conclusion that the disasters in the Crimea might be attributed to other causes than those stated by the com mittee, such as the novel mode of warfare resorted to in the defence of Sebastopol, which could not have been foreseen ; the storm in the Black Sea, leading to the loss of some of our largest transport ships, and other causes. As to the amend ment, he was nearly as much opposed to it as the original motion, for it sought to prevent the house from passing an opinion on the subject, and he should therefore decline to vote on either. Mr. CONOLLY said the policy of going to Sebastopol was not raised by the motion before the house ; the charge was, that the means to insure success were utterly inadequate, and it was, therefore, that the house was called upon to censure those who had been entrusted with the management of the ex pedition, and had neglected furnishing proper supplies to our suffering army. He gave his cordial support to the motion of Mr. Roebuck. Mr. LOWE said that when tho Sebastopol committee was nominated he took the liberty of objecting to it, on the ground that its investigations, if complete, would require the exami nation of witnesses necessarily absent on the public service and the raking up of matters which had better remain secret; and if incomplete, would be full of the grossest injustice to individuals, and in every respect unsatisfactory. He also ob jected to it because it was an inroad on the stability of the executive Government. Ho now asked whether those objec tions, very ill received at the time, had not been borne out ? (Hear, hear.) The committee themselves acknowledged that their investigations were incomplete and partial ; and, if so, he asked with what face could the house pretend, upon the authority of such evidence, to come to any judgment upon the character and conduct of the meanest indivi dual in England, much less of a whole Cabinet and body of statesmen ? (Hear.) No judge or jury would convict the vilest criminal upon evidence which appeared on its face to be par tial; and he maintained that the House of Commons was bound by , the same principles of justice as the smallest bench of magistrates in the country. It would be inconsistent, after what he had said, to examine the report of the committee to see how far it justified the censure proposed by the hon. and learned member for Sheffield, because, although it might affect their views and influence their conduct with respect to the future, as a judicial document to found a censure uppn it was absolutely worthless. (Hear.) It was said that the sufferings of the army arose from the circumstances under which the expedition was undertaken and executed. But then the unfor tunate circumstances under which the expedition was executed arose from the winter campaign, and the winter campaign arose from our being unsuccessful in our attempt to get into Sebastopol. The committee should not have attached any stain to the characters of honourable and upright men without hear ing the whole evidence that could be got ; and the whole evi dence could not be got, inasmuch as the men who ought to have been examined were absent on the public service. Nor' could such a committee make any inquiry into the conduct of our allies. Nevertheless, that committed was a source of great danger to the Anglo-French alliance, and, notwithstanding all the care and caution which the members of that committee had displayed, the result was that the House of Commons was called upon to decide whether it should pass a vote of censure on the acts of the French Emperor. If they did wisely, they would forbear going into the question at all, for it was one which did not affect solely the English Cabinet; but every censure they passed against their own Ministers would be used against the Emperorof the French by those who were opposed to his policy. How could a cordial alliance be maintaine,l, if we were to drag into discussion and subject to censure the acts of the Government of the country to which we were allied ? (Hear.) The hon. member did not seek to cen sure the Administration of Lord Aberdeen, for that Admi nistration no longer existed ; but he sought to lay his finger upon every man who had formed part of that Administration, and to follow him with a species of ostracism through life. But no vote of censure could be passed by the thembers sit ting on the Government side of the house on the members of the late Administration, for it was mainly the members of the late Administration who formed the present ono ; and no such vote of censure could beconsistently passed by the Opposition side of the house, because when Lord Derby received instruc tions from her Majesty to construct a Government, his only hope of success in doing so was by applying to the members of the Government who were then retiring from office. Thus both parties, by themselves or their leaders, bad precluded themselves from passing any vote of censure ; and he was very glad of it, because by passing such a vote they must censure the French Government as well as their own, they would be acting on the most imperfect and incomplete information, and they would be contradicting their own deliberate opinions. Th• Marquis of GRANBY thought the motion calculated to weaken the executive, and he would, therefore, suppor th• amendment. Mr. J. PHILLIMORE said the Cabinet, as a whole, were responsible for any errors which might be committed; but it was absurd to say that the censure should Individually at tach to every member, for that would be to make the Secre tary for the Home Department respOusible for what was done by the War Minister, of which he was entirely ignorant. He would, therefore, oppose the motion. Mr. GORDON considered that the resolution on which the hon. member for Sheffield proceeded was not sufficient to jus tify the house in coming to such a conclusion as he desired to draw from it, or to cast any stain upon the characters of public men who had grown grey in the public service. Tho evidence that was admitted in the Sebastopol Committee was suqh as would not have been allowed by any court of justice in the kingdom; but whatever was the value of the evidence, nothing could justify the house in coming i to such a resolution as it was now called upon to agree to, except the unanimous opinion of the committee that they should do so, whereas it was well known that the resolution which, had been referred to was carried only by the casting vote of the chairman. He should feel it to be his duty to vote against the motion of the hon. and learned gentleman. _ Sir J. WALSH thought that public opinion and the house itself were as much to blame for the expedition to the Crimea as the Government which had decided upon sending it. H e felt there was great difficulty in coming to a vote on the ques tion, and he would therefore vote for the amendment of Gen. Peel. Mr. MAGUIRE said that he should not have risen but for the strange silence of members of the Government on a ques tion of the greatest and most vital importance. Last night the noble lord (Lord P a l mers t on ) s h owe d vaun ti ng courage, and even a pugnacious disposition towards the opposition when he knew their hands were tied in consequence of the conduct of the subordinate members of his own Government, who got the noble lord (Russell) thrown overboard to save the rest of the crew. The noble lord's present silence contrasted strangely with his Donnybrook-like pugnacity last night. (Laughter.) He should be ashamed of himself if he shrank from givinc , ex pression in that house to the feeling he entertained respeAing the conduct of the Government on this question. Noone could deny the utter mismanagement of the expedition to the Crimea, and he thought the noble lord was bound to give some pledge that th ere would not be a repetition of the same calamities. He thought that there was not that vigour which we had a right to expect, for no more had been done in the Baltic this year than had been done last year. Russia was becoming powerful, not so much from her own energy as from our want of it. The question before the house was whether the Government was responsibl e for the conduct of the war or not ? Was the present Cabinet, as representatives of the , late Cabinet, responsible for our disasters, for the issuing of the green coffee to the troops, and for the want of a road from Balaklava ? Were they not responsible for having brought law some 10,000 or 12,000 of the finest troops in the world ? The hon. member (the Hon. A. Gordon) had said that whilst attending the committee his heart had sunk with in him at recollecting the number of reputations which were perilled, but his heart should have sunk within him when he recollected the number of lives which had been lost. Another hon. member had said that the number of reporters who fol lowed the army was absurd, and that the press had caused much mischief. Now he boasted that he was a member of that press which had done more for the salvation of the army than all the members of the Government, for without the press not one soldier would have left the Crimea alive. It was not the press which had sent the troops to the Crimea unprovided ; the press had urged upon the Government that the troops should be sent, not unprepared, but prepared. Were the Go vernment prepared for the Baltic campaign at this moment, yet had not the press urged upon them the importance, not of large ships, but of gun and mortar boats ? Had not every in dependent member who had spoken done the same, and yet they were as unprepared now as when they sacrificed a gal lant admiral because he would not knock his head against a fort. The very nomination of the committee had upset the late Government, and some members of the Cabinet had re tired, but were they not to make amenable those who still remained ? The country had no confidence in the Cabinet, and there was nothing that showed it more than the utter absurdity of the hon. and gallant general—he spoke of him with the greatest respect. (A laugh.) It bad been said that it was highly desirable to carry on the war with unity, and as with one mind on the part of the Cabinet, whilst every revelation showed that behind the curtain there was nothing but a cat and dog life. (A laugh.) He had voted for this committee because he thought that inquiry was right, and he believed that the evidence which bad been given crimi nated every member of the Government. To a certain ex tent the late members of the Government were guilty, but they were no more guilty than those who remained to sit on the Treasury bench. He believed that the Duke of New castle, for instance, had done more than any other member of the Government, for he had remained in town to do his duty, while some other members of the Government were amusing themselves going round the country showing the gracefulness of the scholar, combined with the dignity of pub lic men. Was thereany member of the Government who could turn his mind to the subject of the Crimea without a shudder running through his frame, when he thought of the awful sacrifice of life that had taken place ? All who had fallen at Alma, Balaklava, and Inkermann wore as nothing to the number who had fallen by the swords of the incompetents opposite.• He thought the hon. and learned member for Sheffield would have been unworthy of his high position if he had not brought forward this motion ; and he would forfeit that position if he did not bring the matter to a decision at once. (A laugh, and cries of " Question.") He well under stood that mitigated cockcrow from the back benches, but he thought that ho was speaking to the question as much as honourable members who had preceded him. Discussion upon. these matters had been deprecated for fear it might damage the French alliance, but there was no fear of that, for the competency of the French contrasted with our in competency. At a time when their cavalrywas ready to take the field our cavalry were gnawing their tails off. (Loud laughter.) He meant that the horses were gnawing each other's tails off; and, although his slight mistake might cause laughter to those gentlemen behind the Treasury bench, he could only say that the reality had caused no laughter in the Crimea. When our troops were starving the French troops were well fed ; the French hospitals were well managed, while the British hospitals were filled with horrors which it made one shudder to contemplate, and the recollection of which ought to bring a blush of shame to the cheeks of the members of the Government. Was the country to forgive blunders which had brought 10,000 men to an untimely grave ? and was it to overlook disasters which could have been prevented by placing the right men in the right places ! Re hoped that some member of the Administration would rise in his place and state to the house why the present Government were not liable to censure for the mismanagement of the expedition to the Crimea. A short interval having elapsed, during which the house appeared to be awaiting a statement from some member of the Government, Sir J. GRAHAM rose and said,—Sir, I have waited until the last moment in expectation that some member of her Ma jesty's Government would rise —(hear, hear)—upon an occa sion of such importance to indicate to the house the course which they thought ought to be pursued. I imagine that, considering the present advanced period of the session, and the business which remains to be transacted, it is for the pub lic advantage, and also in accordance with the wishes of the house, that this debate should be closed this evening. (Loud cries of Hear, hear.) I, unlike the hon. gentleman who has just spoken, do not think that the evidence before the Se bastopol Committee sustains the resolution before the house, and although I was a member of the Government at the com mencement of the war and during some period of its prose cution, and had made up my mind to vote against this resolution, still I have waited with respectful attention to ascertain the course which the present Government, lately my colleagues, proposed to pursue. I have felt that, with regard to this matter, my portion is to a certain extent different from that which they occupy. I originally opposed the appointment of the Ncommittee and persevered in my resistance, and when the Government of my noble friend arr i ve d a t the conclusion that they would not resist its appointment I felt myself bound to resign the office which I hail the honour to hold, and therefore my position is somewhat different from that occupied by the Government. I have heard with great pleasure the speech of my hon. friend near me (Mr. Lowe), and in joining him in resisting the ap pointment of the committee I entirely adopted the views which he expressed, and on the present occasion I shall act in a manner identically the same. I cannot think, after a com mittee has been appointed by so large a majority of this house after so much expectation has been excited in the country, that it is possible, with due consideration for the feelings of the people of this country, to give the question upon which it reports the absolute "go by." Without entering into the technicalities involved iu the speech of the lion. and gallant general, I think that if his amendment were agreed to it would give rise to a great deal of misunderstanding out of doors. Before this inquiry was instituted I saw the danger of it, and many of those objections which I ventured to take to it have, I think, been confirmed by the course taken by that committee. The committee have abstained front making any political inquiry, sensible of the danger of that course, but that very abstinence has rendered the inquiry incomplete. According to the opinion of the committee itself the inquiry was anything but satisfactory, for in the report it is stated that " The fulness of the investigation has, moreover, been re stricted by considerations of State policy, so that in the out set of this report your committee must admit that they have been compelled to end an inquiry which they have been unable satisfactorily to complete." The hon. and gallant general has referred to the insufficiency of the British force originally sent to the Crimea, and he has dealt with the question as if it concerned only the English force ; but did the committee take the same view of the sub ject ? Tho committee stated that the great evils which had occurred were to be traced to the excessive fatigue of the British troops, and the report says that the fatigue necessarily resulted from the inadequacy of the force for the task assigned to it. But, does the report pause there ? No ; it goes on to say,— "The British army was a portion of an allied force. The whole scheme of the siege, the extent of front to be defended, the positions to be maintained, and the works to be under taken depended on military considerations, and were decided upon in conjunction with our allies. Your committee regard these matters as beyond the limits of their inquiry." There is another point to which I wish to call the attention of the house. I have the highest opinion of the candour and love of truth of the hon. member for Sheffield, but he has, in quoting from a letter of Lord Raglan, inadvertently, made a most important omission. The hon. and learned gentleman left it to be inferred that Lord Raglan was influenced in un dertaking the expedition to the Crimea against his own judg ment by the English Government. Now, I may say just in passing that the instructions given to Lord Raglan left him the fullest discretion as to whether he would undertake the expedition or not. The hon. and learned gentleman read a passage from the despatch of Lord Raglan, as it appears is the report of the committee, but not as it appears in the de spatyh itself. The passage read by the hon. and learned gen tleman was,— " The descent on the Crimea is decided upon more in deference to the views of the British Government than to any information in the possession of the naval and military authorities, either as to the extent of the enemy's forces or to their state of preparation." That was the way the hon, and learned gentleman read the passage ; now observe the important omission. The passage, as written by Lord Raglan, is,- " The descent ou the Crimea is decided upon more in defe rence to the views of the British Government, and the well known acquiescence of the Emperor of the French." Now, the omission of the words " and the well-known acqui escence of the Emperor of the French" appears to me a most important alteration. Nor is that all. Tho house will, per haps, allow me to read a short passage from a French news paper bearing on the motion now before us. The Assemblee Nationale, entertaining the opinion that this subject had better not be reopened, observes : " But England was not engaged alone in that expedition. In order to judge with equity the conduct of the English Government, it is proper to know what was its share in the initiative and the decision ; it is proper to know, in all their details, the circumstances under the pressure of which it was proposed, or deliberated, or resolved upon." And it makes these pregnant inquiries—" Does Mr. Roebuck reckon on proposing these questions ? Are the Ministers prepared to answer them," Most decidedly Mr. Roebuck was not prepared to put such a question—most decidedly the English Government was not prepared to answer it, if he had. But I will not press this part of the subject further; I only wish to explain the vote which it will be my duty to give on the present occasion. I resisted the appointment of a committee. I did not think that the investigation could be pushed to the extent which would satisfy the ends of justice, and, if pushed to the full extent, which would bo necessary to render it satisfactory as an inquiry, I believed that considerable danger would ensue, (Hear, hear.) That danger has been avoided by the pru dence of the committee; but I say I do not think justice has been done. (Hear, hear.) Well, then, if a mem ber of this house possessing such opportunities for the formation of a sound judgment as those enjoyed by my hon. and gallant friend who has moved the previous question—if ho really entertains, on the whole, the opinion that the par ties accused are entitled to their acquittal—it will be said that I, fearing the result of this inquiry, did the utmost in my power before the inquiry was entered into to prevent its in stitution, and now, when the investigation is complete, w h en the evidence is before the house, when the judges who heard that evidence are capable of pronouncing a decision—l, hav ing sought to burke the inquiry, now shrink from asking the the judges to pronounce their decision. Sir, I cannot place myself in that position, and I certainly shall think it my duty to resist the previous question, in the hope that the house, having fully deliberated upon this important matter, and having the materials for forming a judg ment before them, will pronounce a decision—ay or no— whether the members of Lord Aberdeen's Government were guilty of such misconduct in their high offices that they de serve the severe reprehension of the house. (Hear, hear.) If that shall be the decision of the house, however, harsh I may feel it to be—however inconsistent I may think it with the best interests of the country—however much, in the circumstances of the present moment, it may narrow the choice of the men who for the advantage of the public service should be selected for places of high trust—however much it may contract the number of those who can henceforth be em ployed in the honourable service of their country—yet I think that would be better than to shrink from a decision which it seems to me right should be pronounced. Certainly, there fore—though I regret that' we have not the light which the noble lord at the head of the Government might have thrown upon the course we ought to pursue, and though I should have been glad to have had the advantage of his advice—yet my position is somewhat different from his, and basin.' made up my mind as to the course upon which, upon the whole, I think it would be my duty to take, I thought it respectful and right to state shortly to the house what that course was. Lord SEYMOUR said if there was no evidence to warrant the censure of the house upon the late Government, so neither was their any evidence for their acquittal; and be was NU' prised, therefore, at hearing his right hon, friend say he would oppose the previous question because the house ought to pronounce an opinion, when, by his own showing, they had no evidence to enable them to do so. He thought there was no use in going back to past errors. What they wanted was security for the future ; and sufficient had - been done without such a motion as that of the hon. and learned mem ber for Sheffield to insure that every energy would be em ployed to prevent a recurrence of those evils which they all deplored. Sir J. PAKINGTON, like the right honourable baronet (Sir J. Graham), had expected that some member of the Go vernment would announce the course they intended to take. (Hear, hear.) The right honourable baronet had adopted a manly and straightforward course, and did not wish to shelter himself under the previous question. Now, why did the Government shrink from stating their intentions ? Last night they avoided a vote of censure by sacrificing the most eminent of their colleagues. If rumour spoke true they were now about to avoid a vote of censure by sheltering themselves under the equivocal course of the previous question. The hon. and learned member for Sheffield had appealed to the members of the com mittee to give him their support on this occasion, and he (Sir J. Pakington) was prepared to give him his support. He had arrived at that decision with reluctance and pain, (Oh, oh, and cheers.) He knew not why, in making that statemeEt, he should be interrupted with murmurs, for he had never spoken with more sincerity. (Hear, hear.) He considered that the vote which he was about to give involved a censure, not only on the ministers opposed to him, but on other men, of the highest honour and character in the house, who were members of the Government of Lord Aberdeen: (Hear, hear.) The country was in a state of great peril, the public mind was uneasy and anxious, and the house was not at liberty to draw those nice distinctions- to consult those feelings of personal delicacy which might properly animate it at other times, but must give that vote which it believed to be right. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned member for Sheffield had called on the house to decide whether they would ratify the report of the committee, which, for all practical purposes, was a unanimous report ; for in substance it differed very little from the draft report of the noble lord opposite (Lord Seymour), which contained a censure on the Government, but which was rejected by the committee, who considered that if a censure was pronounced, it ought to be pronounced in more direct terms. The noble lord prepared a second form of words which also contained a censure, and which also was rejected, as not being sufficiently pungent in form, and the words of the chairman were at length adopted. (Hear, hear.) In his (Sir J. Pakington's) opinion, any member of the house who might have a doubt about meeting this motion would have that doubt removed by the complete inefficiency of any reasons which were heard againist it. The right hon. member for Carlisle had taken up one reason which had been advanced by the hon. member for Kidderminster, and had argued that the in quiry was incomplete. But that was an evasion of the ques tion. (Hear, hear.) He (Sir S. Pakington) denied that the inquiry was incomplete, as far as this question was concerned. There were other matters into which the committee might have inquired, and to that extent the inquiry was incomplete, but he denied that the report before the house was incom plete. There was nothing in the report, or in the conclusion to which the committee came, which was not sustained by the evidence. Auy one who would compare the report with the evidence would see that the objections of the right hon. member for Carlisle and the right hon. member for Kidder minster were not founded. The hon. member for Kidder minster said that the house was assembled that night to dis cuss the policy of the Emperor of France, but he (Sir J. Pakington) felt bound to dispute the accuracy of that state ment. (Hear.) A more erroneous or unfounded conclusion could not be arrived at. This was the indentical bugbear that had been raised up against the committee. (Opposition cheers.) This the bugbear with which it was endeavoured originally to stifle inquiry. It was said that there would be danger to the French alliance in inquiring into the conduct of the war. But what had been the result ? The right hon. baronet the member for Carlisle had that evening very fairly admitted that the committee had altogether avoided that danger, and he (Sir J. Pakington) contended that not only was the house free from any danger in recording its opinion, but he would go further and say that nothing could be more dangerous than to close the lips of members from expressing constitutionally their opinions on the conduct k of the Govern. ment because we were connected in alliance with another Go vernment. (Hear.) There was, therefore, no reason, on the ground of the French alliance, to prevent the house from stating whether or not they agreed with the decision of the committee. Neither was there any reason for taking shelter under the motion of the previous question. (Cheers) His hon. and gallant friend (General Peel) had made remarks on the report of the committee, and had taken exception to some parts of it ; but he was a party to that report, he had sat on the committee, and by every rule he was as much a party to those parts of the report as any other member. His hon. and gallant friend stated as another reason for moving the previous question that the motion involved the policy of going to the Crimea. That he (Sir J. Pakington) denied. (Cheers.) Neither in the words nor in the intention of the hon. and learned member for Sheffield was the policy of going to the Crimea involved. (H ear , h ear, from Mr. Roebuck.) Had that policy been so involved in the motion, he (Sir J. Paking ton) could not hesitate to support it, for he was one of those who disapproved of that policy. (Hear.) If hon. members con sidered the state of affairs at the time when that policy was adopted, they might well hesitate before affirming that it was the wise one. The siege of Silistria was raised, the Danubian principalities were evacuated, Constantinople was safe, and all the objects for which the war was originally declared were at tained ; it was, therefore, a grave question whether the whole policy of the war should have been changed, and that instead of a defensive we should have embarked on a war of aggression. An honourable member had that night anticipated a British occupation of the Crimea. Was that the intention of the Government ? His belief was that from the first invasion to the present her Majesty's Government had never any definite idea of the result of the expedition. (Opposition cheers.) They were told by the noble lord in a recent debate that even in the event of a successful aggression they were not at liberty to ask for any cession of territory. Only two iconditions could have justified that expedition—that we had a sufficient force for the undertaking, and that wo had a moral certainty of success. But that question of the policy of the expedition was not before the house. The question raised by the hon. and learned member's motion was, be the 'policy in the ab stract good or bad, were the Government of tho day justified for an hour in attacking Russia with inadequate means, and hazarding the honour and glory and prestige of England in this rash expedition ? (Cheers.) In his opinion, the expedi tion was a violation of every rule of war and of every dictate of prudence. They had the evidence of members of Lord Aberdeen's Government on these points. They had the lan guage of the Duke of Newcastle on the 10th of April, when he wrote to Lord Raglan that before the siege of a fortress so strong, the necessary information should be obtained on many points on which little was then known. There was prudence and proper caution in that advice. But not a word of answer did the Government receive. The months of April, of May, of June, passed by. On tho 29th of June the Government were still in ignorance of the strength of Sebastopol, of the Russian force in the Crimea, and of all those points of in formation which the Duke of Newcastle' said it was in dispensable to have before the Government ordered the army into the Crimea, In July they received an answer, but it was that Lord Raglan could not obtain the infor mation. But in the course of the inquiry evidence was given by Lord Aberdeen that, though the expedition was directed in complete ignorance of all information neces sary, the Government did receive in July what they be lieved to be correct statements. They were to'd that the Russian force in the Crimea was 70,000 men, and yet the Government of this country staked the army of England, and sent only 25,000 British soldiers to cope with 70,000 Russians. The first event was the battle of Alma—a most glorious battle —but he believed that all military men would concur with him in describing it as a battle fought against all human pro babilities, and that if the Russians were as true to themselves and fought then as they subsequently did at Inkerman, we might not have gained that victory. He had no hesitation as to the course his duty prescribed to him to take on this motion, and he should add that there was nothing in the conduct of the present Ministers of the Crown which dimi nished that sense of duty on his part. The events of the pre vious night had shaken the country. They had reason to be lieve that the Government had not played them fair. And if they considered the present circumstances they were still without knowledge or assurance that the Government were even yet taking adequate means for providing reserves for our army. Ho (Sir J. Pakington) asked where was the re serve of the Foreign Legion, of which they had heard so much ? Where was the militia of England to whom they were to trust for a reserve f There was no part of the conduct of the Government more culpable than their neglect of the militia when embarking in this great war. They ought to have a militia force of 120,000 in the three kingdoms, but it ap peared from a return which lie had obtained that the militia force of the three kingdoms amounted only at that moment to 50,000 men. He believed also that the army was not now at the strength which the house had voted, and theso were all-important points bearing upon the war. It appeared to him that the Government had neglected the great interests intrusted to their care, and though it might be painful on per sonal grounds, his sense of duty was clear and strong ; and acting upon that sense of duty, he felt bound to give his sup port to the motion of the hon. and learned gentleman. Sir C. WOOD was surprised to hear the light bon. gen tleman repeat what had been denied on the previous night by those best competent to do so, when an accusation was made against them of having shrunk from a vote of censure. His noble friend stated on the preceding night that they were pre pared to fight the battle of the noble lord the member for the city of Loudon—(hear, hear)—and were perfectly prepared to resist the motidn of the hon. baronet the member for Herts. (Hear, hear.) It was not with the wish, or with anything but the unwilling consent of his colleagues, that Lord John Russell had resigned. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. baronet was not justified iu saying that they now shrunk from any responsibility that belonged to them, but they were prepared to vote with the hon. and gallant general —(ironical cheers)—and in taking that course they were not shrinking from the discharge of their duties. (Hear, hear.) It was true they opposed the appointment of the conimittee, because they believed and thought the inquiry must be im perfect. The investigation had proved, as they predicted it would do, an inconclusive inquiry, and that was th e g r ound on which they would vote for the motion of the hon. and gallant general. (Hear, hear.) If the inquiry were perfect, and if all were disclosed that should be disclosed, they would be the last persons to shrink from the result. (Hear, hear.) The right hon, baronet said he did not see the reason why the question that had been raised should involve the policy of the expedition to the Crimea, but the words were scarcely out of his lips, when he asked if they were justified in going to the Crimea, and he said that in going to the Crimea they had violated every rule of war and dictate of prudence. (Hear, hear.) Ho (Sir Charles Wood) was not disposed to shrink from the responsibility of the expedition to the Crimea, and he believed the expe diti on to Sebastopol was a wise undertaking. (Hear, hear.) No doubt success bad not attended the expedition up to that moment, but they had the opinion of those on the spot that success was almost within their grasp. The hon. and learned gentleman said that the evils were to be traced to the chasm of six miles between Balaklava and the camp, and he charged the . want of a road to fill up tha chasm entirely upon the Administration, but he should like to know when the hon. and learned gentleman had come to that conclusion, for in the month of June he held au opinion diametrically opposite. (Hear, hear.) He Sir Charles Wood) regretted that the noble and gallant lord, to whom the hon. and learned gentleman had done tardy justice, was deprived in his life-time of the credit to which he was entitled—(hear) —but they.now began to appreciate the value of the noble lord. (Hear.) The following were tho words which the hon. and learned gentleman had submitted to the committee, but for which, to their credit, only one man could be found to give his vote. There, the hon. and learned gentleman said that Lord Raglan was in a great degree immediately respon sible for the sufferings of the army, and that if the requisite forsight had been shown by him, much of the misery arising from the want of the road from Balaklava would have been saved, (Hear.) •A month ago Lord Raglan was the cause of the disaster, but Lord Raglan was removed from the charges of the hon. and learned gentleman, and he now found it con venient to place the responsibility solely on the Leads of the Government (Hear.) But what said the committee in their report ? That the probable failure of the communication was not brought to the notice of the Duke of Newcastle until it was too late for him to take measures in England to remove the deficiency. The hon. and learned gentleman said that the object was to pass a censure on the members of the present Government who were members of Lord Aberdeen's Govern- ment ; but in the early part of the discussion on this question they had heard nothing but charges against the Duke of New- castle and Lord Aberdeen. They were removoi from office, and, the whole Government paid the penalty imposed on them by the censure of the House of Commons, and resigned toge ther. After two intermediate attempts had been made by ether persons to form a Government his noble friend formed one, including three gentlemen who peculiarly belonged to the Government of Lord Aberdeen; one of whom Lord Derby had attempted to include in an administration to be formed by himself. (Hear, hear.) These three gentlemen subsequently retired from the Cabinet, and then another attack was di rected against his noble friend. (Hear, hear.) He (Sir C. Wood) thought that the charges against the Duke of New castle, the right honourable baronet the member for Carlisle, and the right honourable gentleman the member for Wilts, were most unjust, and he congratulated them on the testi mony which the honourable and learned gentleman had on that evening borne to the efficiency with which they had dis charged the duties of their departments. He always thought that the time would come when such an opinion would do justice to the exertions they had made in their several de partments; but, sanguine though he was that such would be the case, he little expected that such justice would be done to them by the honourable and learned member for Sheffield, who was seldom so complimentary in his language—(hear, hear)—and nothing but a perfect conviction of the truth of what he said could have caused him to pay a compliment so extraordinary when coming from him. (Hear.) The hon. and learned gentleman, then, having entirely acquitted those gentlemen who managed the several departments connected with the war, went on to bring charges against other mem bers of the Government, who certainly could not interfere with the management of those departments. He (Sir C. Wood) had certainly not the slightest inclination to throw off any responsibility belonging to him as the colleague of the noble duke the late Minister of War and the right honourable gentleman the late Secretary-at-War ; but the honourable and learned gentleman must have a strange notion of the way in which the business of Government was conducted when he said that the colleagues of these Ministers were guilty of the mismanagement of departments, which in the same breath he stated to be admirably managed by those who were at the head of them. (Cheers and laughter.) The noble duke was in London, and according to the hon. and learned gentleman, managed his department with admirable skill and assiduity, but his right hon.. friend the then Secretary for the Colonial Department (Sir G. Grey), who was absent in Scotland in at tendance on her Majesty, was to be censured fer not having interfered with its management. (A laugh.) His right hon. friend the late First Lord of the Admiralty had, he believed, never left town in the course of the autumn for a single day, except in the discharge of bis duty; a compliment, therefore, was to be paid to his right hon. friend, whilst he himself, as the then President of the Board of Control, was to be cen sured because he had not interfered with the Admiralty. The then Secretary-at-War was in town, and was accordingly complimented, whilst his hon. friend the President of the Board of Works was to be censured for his non-interference. (Laughter.) All of the Ministers still remaining in office were to be censured for net having meddled with business that did not belong to them, and interfered with departments which the lion. and learned gentleman said were admirably managed. (Cheers.) The hon. and gallant general who had moved the previous question, no supporter of the Government, but an active member of the committee, as well as the noble lord behind him, by whom this report had been drawn up, both agreed that the evidence taken was incomplete, and that it was impossible to pronounce a satisfactory decision upon it. Her Majesty's Government did not think they were justly chargeable with shrinking from any responsibility belonging to them, when they concurred iu opinion with th ese t wo dis tinguished members of the committee, differing in politics and sitting on opposite sides, but agreeing that the proposal of the hon. and learned gentleman was not one that should be adopted by the house. (Cheers.) Mr. GASKELL moved the adjournment of the debate. Viscount PALMERSTON—I hope the house will come to a decision to-night (Cheers.) Mr. DISRAELI had also hoped that the house would have come to a decision to-night, but the only reason why they had not done so was the great delay which had taken place in members of the Government rising to speak. But for that, the debate would have been so far advanced that the house might have divided, but he did not know whether, under pre sent circumstanees, it would be possible for them to do so. Mr. BRIGHT hoped the house would not be put to the trouble of dividing on the question of adjournment. He did not know that during this whole session a question had been brought before,it of such immense importance as this. Viscount PALMERSTON—With regard to no person hav ing risen from this bench earlier in the evening, there were obvious reasons why—(loud ironical cheers from the Opposi tion)—reasons why other persons might wish to deliver their opinions. (A laugh, and hear.) If the house wished that the debate should be adjourned, of course he should not offer any opposition: The debate was then adjourned. Mr. ROEBUCK inquired to what day it was to be ad journed ? Viscount PALMERSTON—To Thursday, On the motion of Lord R. CECIL, a return was ordered of the names of all parishes in cities and Parliamentary boroughs in England and Wales in which (during the last 15 years) church rates have been refused, and since that refusal have ceased altogether to be collected, specifying the population of each parish, the number of churches in it, and whether divided into ecclesiastical districts. Mr. WILSON obtained leave to bring in a bill to give effect to a convention between her Majesty and the United States of America. MAYNOOTH COLLEGE.—ADJOURNED DEBATE. The or er of the day having been read for resuming this adjourned debate, and the question having been put, Mr. V. SCULLY moved that the debate be now adjourned. Mr. SPOONER saw no reason why the debate should be adjourned, and the only object of moving it was to prevent the house entertaining the question. Viscount PALMERSTON said surely the hon. gentleman could not be serious in askinc , the house to resum e at thi s ti me of night (half-past 12 o'clock) a debate which, without any great spirit of prophecy, he might predict would last a great many hours. The hon. member would best consult the con venience of the house in not wasting another hour in discus sing a question which must inevitably be decided against him. The house then divided, when there voted— For the adjournment of the debate 97 Against it Majority —9 Mr. KIRK immediately moved that the debate be adjourned till that day three months. The house again divided-- For the motion 93 Against it Majority -3 The announcement of the numbers was received with loud cheers, especially by the Irish members. The Lunatic Asylums and Regulations Acts Amendment Bill was read the third time and passed. The Sale of Spirits (Ireland) Bill was read the third time. A verbal amendment, moved by Colonel DUNNE, sub stituting the word " district" for the word " jurisdiction," was agreed to. Mr. MACARTNEY then moved the adjournment of the de, hate. The house divided, when there appeared— For the motion Against Majority —36 After some further conversation the bill was passed. TREASURERS OF COUNTIES (IRELAND) BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. TRINITY COLLEGE (DUBLIN) BILL. This bill was passed through committee. The other orders were then disposed of, and the house ad• journed at half-past one o'clock. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—JULY 17. MAYNOOTH COLLEGE.—ADJOURNED DEBATE. Motion made, and question put, " That the debate be ad jounled till this day three months." The house divided ayes 93, noes 90. AYES-93. Antrobus, E. Grace, 0. Atherton, W. Greene, John B-ill, J. Grenfell, Chas. Bass, T. Grey, Sir G. Berkeley, G. Grey, It. Bonham-Carter, J. Hall, Sir B. Bowyer, G. liankey, T. Brady, J. Harcourt, G. Brand, IL E. W. Hayter, W. Brotherton, J. Herbert, H. Bruce, Lord E. Holland, E. Buckley, Gen. Horsman, E. Byng, ti. Howard, Lord Castlerosse, Viscount Hutt, W. Cavendish, C. Ingham, R. Cobden, R. Keating, R. Cockburn, Sir A. J. E. Kennedy, T. Cogan, W. H. F. Lewis, Sir G. C. Cowper, W. F. M`Cann, J. De Vere, S. Maguire, J. Dillwyn, L. Meagher, T. Duffy, C. G. Milner, Sir W. Dungai van, Viscount Moffatt, G. Dunne, Col. Molesworth, Sir W. Ellice, E. Mona. Viscount Esmonde, .7 . Mon creiff, J. Ew art, J. Monsen, W. Fitz Gerald, T. Mulgrave, Earl Fitzgerald, W. Murrough, J. Fortescue, C. Norreys, Sir D. Galwey, hir W. North, F. Goderich, Via. Northcote, Sir, S. O'Brien, P. O'Brien, Sir T. O'Connell, D. Otway, A. Paget, Lord A. Palmerston, Vint. Perry, Sir T. Philipps, J. Pollard -Urquhart, W. Ricardo, J. Ricardo, 0. Russell, Lard J. Russell, F. C. Russell, F. W. Sadleir, James Scholefleld, W. &ally, F. Seymour, H. Smith, R. Strutt, E. Sullivan, ➢lichael Vernon, G. Villiers, C. Waterpark, Lord Wells, W. Whatman, J. Wilkinson, W. Wilson, J. TELLERS Kirk, W. Fagan, W. NOES-90. Anderson, Sir J. Freestun, Col. Baird, J. Frewen, 0. Ball, E. Greenall, G. Barrington, Viscount Guinness, It. Baxter, W. Gwyn, IL Bell, J. Hadfield, G. Bentinck, G. Hamilton, Lord C. Bignold, Sir S. Hamilton, G. A. Bromley-Moore, J. Heathcote, Sir W. Brockman, E. D. Henley, J. Buck, L. W. Horsfall, T. B. Cairns, 11. Joiliffe, Sir W. Campbell, Sir A. Kendall, N. Cecil, Lord R. Kershaw, J. Child, Smith Kinnaird, A. Codrington, Sir C. W. Knatchbull, W. Cole, H. A. Knight, F. Cowan, C. Knightley, R. Craufurd, E. H. J. Langton, W. Crook, J. Liddell, H. G. Crossley, F. Lockhart, W. Deedes, W. Lushington, C. Disraeli. B. Macartney, G. Duckworth, Sir J. T. Macgregor, Jas. Duncan, G. Masterman, J. Duncombe, Hon.W. Meux. Sir H. Egerton, W. Michell, W. Egerton, E. C. Moody, C. Evelyn, W. Morris, D. Ewart, W. Mowhray, J. R. . Fergusson, Sir J. Mullings, J. Naas, Lord Newark, Viscount North, Col. J. Ossulston, Lord Pakenham, T. H. Palk, L. Palmer, Robert Pellatt, A. Pigott, F. rilkington, J. Scott, F. Smijth, Sir W. Smith, J. B. Smith, M. Smith, Abel Stafford, Marquis Stanhope, J. Startle, Le G. Stirling, W. Stewart, Sir M. Stuart, IV. Taylor, Col. Tollemache, J. Vance, J. Verner, Sir W. Vyse, Col. Whitmore, H. Wickham, H. W. TELLERS Spooner, R. Newdegate, C. MARKET NEWS.-(THIS DAY.) CORN EXCHANGE. To-day's market was very scantily supplied with English wheat. All kinds sold readily, at fully Monday's cur rency, and a good clearance was effected. We observed a slight falling off in the general condition'of the samples. The imports of foreign wheat have been under 6,000 quarters. The transactions in that grain to-day were by no means extensive, yet the late advance in prices was well supported. All floating cargoes realised full quotations. The barley trade ruled dull, and the quotations wore well supported. In the value of malt no change took place. Oats, beans, peas, and flour were quite as dear as on Monday. ARRIVALS THIS NITER. Wheat. Barley. ( Malt. Oats. 690 10 t 40 2,450 5,77 3,940 9,350 English .. Irish .... Foreign .. Flour. 380 4010 sks BOROUGH Hop. Nearly 800 bales of American hops have come in; anti 2500ur market is very d u ll , at barely Monday's prices. Doty, ,000/. WRITECHAPEL. Beef, 3s 4d to 4s 4d ; mutton, 3e 8d to 4s 8d ; lamb, 48 8d to 5s 8d ; veal, 3s 10d to 4s 10d ; pork, 3s Gd to 4s 6d per 81bs. by the carcase. COUNTRY MARKETS• LIVERPOOL—JULY 17. ,„40 1 There was a good attendance of millers ano_.ls"ft4 day, and a fair demand for the useful descriPtloo, at ld to 2d per bushel over-Friday, raski n g tllB 2 the week 2d to 3d per bushel. Flour was ids?, 0 4 010, sack dearer. Oats ld per bushel decline, an d t i o p, per load, and an improved demand at the redu c 51 0 ley, beans, and peas unchanged. For Indianol ,d i r: rnand was slack ; the quotation for mixed , h ° 1 0) 3 4 5, yellow 395, and white 40s per 4801b8, vu e reduction on the week of fully 5s per qr. IPSWICH—Jurr 17. t We had the smallest possible supply of W 116 14 0011 to-day; prices, of co urse , were v ery high, 14 ' Is l , were made wore at an advance of fully . 2s per d clool has been very heavy in all these districts, aA much " lodged." Ilg 44 '' PER QUARTER. A Wheat, red (old) 76s to 766 Barley, grinding ." 0 Ditto (new) Ditto, white (new) 80 s t o 84 6 P eas .................. ; Ditto (old) Barley, malting AVERAGES FOR THE WEER ENDING JULY i 4, -, 1 Wheat Oats a l ~ 0 An, 00 'w Peas - ~ 000 ea Beans HULL—JULY 17. There was a moderate show of wheat to-dal , ;, to were strong in demanding an advance of from qr., which checked b us i ness somew h a t, but lets , r were Obliged to comply t o th e ex t en t of ol es tr: l 9 more money, 80s being th e curren t rates for to 4 4 red wheat to the grower. F ore i gn in itnP r L /l o ore' i ' at is to 2s dearer 411 round. Barley attrocr,, Prq tion, and is the turn deare r . O a t s rather all better demand. Linse e d i s t o 2 s d ea rer, 9,13 d re qt o cakes fetch more money. Rap e cakes in good scarce. Bones 5s per ton dearer. 8 Wheat, English, red 78 to 801 1 Ditto white BO to 82 1 Dantzie and Konigs berg •7B to 80 1 Pomeranianand Ham- Peas grey and Linseed, Black or''' Ditto Petereburg u l. 'Di a t n to ge ß l .......... ~ Ditto Konigsberg a ji Memel .............. g Od Line. e. , -; 05 , Ditto fine for. ":,,0J Ditto inf. for. e . Lve s t'); Rapeseed..... t" ea tO: Rape cake5... 1271 Tares, English.••••• 0 03 Ditto foreign o`, Guano OOl 0 0 . P 0 ' Bones Rye Meal ............. pbur g h Danish, Holstein, and Friesland 6B to 72 Russian and Odessa 63 to 68 Oats, English Ditto Danish Ditto Friesland Ditto Russian 29 to 31 Barley, malting Ditto grinding 32 t o 35 1 Beans Ditto foreign Peas, white and yel 44 to 46 , 1 01 , COURSE OF EXCHANGE.-DOT° , Amsterdam 11 17% Gibraltar .. •• , Ditto, three months .. 11 19 I Leghorn •• • • Rotterdam 11 19% Genoa ........ "'' • „,' Antwer .............. 25 37% Milan 44 . Bra se .... • • ........ 25 37% Venice " Hamburgh ............ 13 7% Naples •• •• • • AltOna •.••••.••• • • • • • • I Palermo ..... •• • „,, Q i Paris— ...• _•• • • .... 25 7%; Messina .. • ...... : Ditto, thre) months .. 25 35 Lisbon ........ Marseilles 25 35 0p0rt0........ .• Bourdeaux .. • • Rio Janeiro..... • Frankfort-on Maine 118% Buenos Ayres. • •'V s 'igl , Berlin New York, 60 day ' „0 0 0, Vienna.......... • • .... 12 20 Philadelphia Trieste.. • • 12 22 PRICES OF au.: 1 0 0 P Petersburg 35y, Foreign Gold in , 8, Madrid 50 Portugal Gold CO 0 „ 8, Cadiz ..... 50% Mexican DAM'S . 1 Barcelona New Dollars 0 Seville .• ••••••• • • • • • ••• Silver in bars • o '‘ SEABORNE MALLS. (N signifies that the malls are sent from cy the night—and M by the morning—deep Day when made dpl in General Post- Office, London:* a the (0 OS! )atch.) a'n' t o'J port Dispateb_e' Liverpoo l . 10 1i 1 iLiVerPOCa Southan# ll l j 0 D S oouvtehra 1 1 ou le If: Plymouth • j Dover • • • SouthamP , &taboo Pl ° .000 Dover .... pit SouthouP t° vSoarintbousamport°,,2,r, Isouthw.Pul „ SouthaniP w- ,1 i seuthanw t° ' Vol IPover gotitharaP w !Dover .•••.. _ _ gon thamPtonl r 4 :g ps ° p ly :i v : n :l I t : ro a a a ntl i t P P p . : 4.t t 0. °I:: i tl,rt tof u I / . ID Over ...• f10Ver..... • ! D IP Hol j head • • SouthamPW ° " SouthamPt o° Agg . Liverpool 'Dover M ~/ I t A vP & N th amp Dover • . southamPt ° , l ' V ar ious pas' Dover ~ • • " SoUthan , P W° ISOUthanWO troe4 /Yellow) Pal , Dover .. •• Dover •• " SouthelnPol3t southowto!H tlif A fall on a Sunday, the mall 6 „ W ' ig day. with the exception Of l'utef, Cana, both of which will be dee" - .. . 4' itBPO THE WEEKLY TRACT SOIMITY AND -PS , , t et , t , el kr AO i i° 4 ING.—The committee of the Weekly Tract 047- o bje' s o' for a considerable period widely agitated tbeA ti rcol open-air preaching among the clergy of the: m .ovroir England, and the Nonconformist minister , ' "7 0 fp r i for the country, offering to supply them with trt e- prel' v o o tribution at the close of their services. Tu A e 'tt o "je, many weeks past has testified to the increas e :bo ll . l eo' which has just been aroused to the subject, an d 0 - i i i : O S with encouragement to proceed in the via' itit',ll 4 the most effective means of reaching the n33 60e 4 ; 10 5 ihO Word of Truth. The Weekly Tract Scei e v l :oB 0 0 1 sent forth to the work duly-qualifiedmen, bel' 6 , l o ) , ill, tract distribution and open-air preaching are 1 0: 1 0 " efforts, which appropriately walk hand in hal l ' t bollre these several means an average of at least-§" dire ct persons are from week to week brought under r i ligious instruction. ~.,e(br iY [ADVERTISEMENTd—The di ffi culties and dange-- •• ,311 up Infants by hand or wet nurses have been entO o4 if e' come by Du Barry's delicious Revalenta Arabica P, an d feeds, strengthens, and removes all those little pei 9 pgi c ve:,," gularities infants aro so subject to. The follel-60 A speak volumes :—" Grammar School, Stevenage , to F" O'i 1850. Gentlemen —I think it but common just/ o , o l of pt; state that I have used Du Barry's Revalenta Al lb 2oec i ef tl fil A last four months, during which time our infant 1 1 °' A i L'A disordered bowels, from which it had 'suffered 0- ,11,"1 1 the previous six months, whilst being nursed, tb ° . , - ;1* f t care was taken to prevent it. Had I known of 9° 0 10 , ,,05; Food sooner it would have saved my infant nin cb ,6 S' ie i ' l me also the heavy expense of a wet nurse.—l an'' , - ;on d ' i AMBLER." CUM 2704.—"1 consider you ablessin,g, Pror at large. It is not to be told all the benefit v oe , , ,- 4 Revalenta Arabica Food has been to , fl atO r : 4 o my little boy cries fo r a saucer o f i t evella. Prot WALTER KEATING , 2, Manning-place, Five 09- 16 P'0111 7 ,11 In canisters, 11b. 25.. 9d.; 21b. 4s. 6d.; 51b. 11 0 . ;AO, 10: The 121 b., carriage free, on rece ipt o f Post-office °*" ei' o pil' Du Barry di Co., 77, Regent- s t ree t, L on d on ; "rt Sil Piccadilly ; 60, Graces Bur c h- s t ree t ; 330 , an d 4 °1 0 ,0 1 160 , 4, Glieapside ; 60 and 38, C orn hill ; 49 , Bishopeg p ea ro 55, Charing-cross ; 54, U pper Baker-street; °'' 18, f t ,: Oxford-street ; 89, High-st r e e t, C am d en- t o wn ; %4, Atier mall; 7, Pall-mall-East ; 132, Now Bond-street ; eel, comb-street ; 13, King William-street, City ; 3 °t t : of' street; 21, Cockspur-str e et ; 95, F arr i ng d on - s tre‘ ‘ , Paul's Churchyard; 6, Edward-street, Portman.'" BIRTHS. OF A SON. ..AllP l ' On the 17th inst., at Hanger-lane, Stan:doh' . 1 0 . Thomas Horwood. of CA On the 16th in s t., at Brighton, the wife or Worgan, Bombay Artillery. 11". P o On the 14th i ns t., a t t h e Lawn, Talse- hi ll, $O4. C. Leckie. On the Bth inst., the wife of Robert Lem" , ill" A l OF A DAUGHTER. Of On the 15th inst. at Hampstead, the wif e lie 33urrows, Esq., of Lincoln's-inn. On the 16th inst., at Hawley road K e ntish - t OWl)' W. J. Wood. fOf MARRIED. ' 1 4 '0 A r /1,41 0 On the 16th inst., at Hanwell Chitral*, —4 - ie trve ° err, Esq., Royal Canadian Rifles, son of the 17 0 ;,,fe , err, 87th (Royal Irish) Fusiliers, to Xatherine, tb e t ip sF ,eon'd daughter of the late G. Baillie, Esq., ° I 14 0,0 F fanwell, Middlesex. i e ttoY P On the 16th inst., at St. George's Chapel , f .Ao_l 1 'homn.3 Dunlop Findlay, Esq., youngest o°lli e spowi., I q n dlay, Esq., of Easterhill, Lanarkshire, t ° 1 Sit y oungest daughter of the late Lieutenant-Get ter- Jouglas, K.C.8., ° DIED. iiii jof et On the 14th inst., at Penton Lodge, nl i gr :Eliza, eldest daughter of Wm. Cubitt, Esq./'J' Robert On the 17th inst.. Marianne the wife of liob e -j un, Esq., of her Majesty'sP riv y Council Ofnee' hall. rf gen On the 12th inst • , at Camden town, Cap r a -- e t :Bunne On the y, aged 55. 16th inst , at St. John's Lodge, Battl- aa George Wm. C oc k er ell, Esq., aged 73. c„ yo lie LONDON : Printed and Published by 11117 111) `' 11 0 %, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at Me Sun Offic e ' co ov Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy. in t he Middlesex, Woduesdsy, July 18, 1855. COUNTRIES tmerica(byßrit.pack)N %merle" (by United Bts. packet) ........N tmerica (by IJ. States packet) ...... ..N Australia (via South ampton) . ..... ....M Ditto (via Marseilles) N Ditto (via Cape of Good Hope) ............N Africa (West Coafit)..N Alexandria ..N Alexandria Bahamas ...........M Belgium Brazil Buenos Ayres ..M Cape of Good Hope ..N Cape of Good Hope ..N Cape de Verds ......N Ceylon (see India) Ceylon .. ............N Channel Isles China ... . Constantinople Constantinople Cont. of Europe M & N Egypt (see India) France .. & Gibraltar .. Greece (see India) Greytown 2nd & 17th of moll' IlamburghNiTuesday 86 Friday llavannah .......... Zvl,2nd of the mouth Holland ..... Honduras ..........Mil7th of th e month . . India (VlaSouthampt.)3l.4th & 20th of mon. India (via Mars e illes) M ,9th& 25th of month lonian Isles (see India),7, 17, & 27 of mon' Ireland & NlTwice daily ...... Lisbon•• .• •• •• •• •• ••M 7,9, 17, & 27 of m. Madeira 9th of the month Madeira • . • • • • •• •• •• N 23d of month •• • • Malta (see India) Malta ..N 8,18, &28 of mon. Mauritius (see India) Mauritius 14th of the month Mexico •• •• •• .••.••M 2nd of the month.. Naples.. .. •• .• .• ..N sthlsth2sthoZmon. New Granada Ai 2d & 17th of month New By private ship .. Papal States sthlsth2sthofinon. Peninsula .. .• .• M 7th 17 th 27 thonnon • Pertl •• ••• •• •• •• • • M 2d & 27th of mon. Port Natal ..........N By private ship... Sicily sthlsth2stholmon, : Tuscany ......... ...N sthlstb2sthormon.. Venezuela ..........M 2d& 17th of month 1 Van Diemen's Lan d (see Australia) •• •• • • doe • • West Indies ........31 2d& 17th of month I Every Friday .... ....... 23d of the month .. 8, 9,.24, & 30 of m. 4th & 20th of mon. 17th of the month Dai1y............ 9th of the month.. 9th of the month.. 9th of the month Mon.,Wed.,&Fria. & 17th of month Once a month.... 8,13.18,23 ) &28 of m 4th & 20th of mon. 'Twice daily .... • • Twice day.. • i 4, 7,17, 20, 27 ofrn• When any of these d %patched on the follow! Southampton), and the preceding day. Ca d t Oit t 04, 4. :Au t