The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-03-04 00:00:00

FRIDAY.

The London Diocesan Church Building Society Bill was
read a second time.
_. -

THE POLICE BILL.—In answer to Mr. DEEDEB, Sir G. GREY
said, he could not exactly say when he should be able to bring
on this bill until he saw what progress was made with the
war estimates. If no vote were taken to-night, he should not
be able to move the second reading until Monday, and, if the
estimates were not all voted on Monday, he should be obliged
to defer it until Friday, or the next open day.
THE CRIMEAN COMMISSION.
On the order for going into a committee of supply, Mr.
ROEBUCK moved, as an amendment, the following resolution :
—" That the appointment of a commission of general officers
to report upon the report of Sir John M`Neill and Colonel Tul-
loch is to substitute an inefficient for a very efficient mode of
inquiry: and that the effect of such appointment will be to
hide the misconduct of those by whom various departments of
'our army have been subjected to the command of officers who
have been inculpated by the commisioners appointed to in-
quire into their conduct." In explaining the object of his
motion, he went through the successive acts of what he
termed the terrible drama to which it referred—the roar of
disapprobation raised by the press as to the condition of our
army abroad; the discredit cast upon the reports by the
government, which affirmed that the army, so far from suf-
fering, was properly cared for; the repetition of the stories
of suffering and misery ; the appointment of the Sebas-
topol Committee, the effect of which was to cause a dis-
ruption of the Aberdeen Ministry, while every statement
of the press was verified to the very letter ; the appointment
by the succeeding government of Sir John M`Neill and Col.
Tulloch to proceed to the Crimea, who inquired and reported,
their report justifying every assertion made by the press.
The officers inculpated by this report were the Earl of Lucan,
the Earl of Cardigan, Sir Richard Airey, Colonel Gordon, and
Commissary-General Filder, The government had now issued
a commission directed to certain general officers to report on
the report of their own commissioners, putting upon their
trial the very men they had sent to inquire. By this course
be thought they had done an irreparable injury to the army,
which it would be dangerous to possess with a notion that it
was deserted in the hour of need. If a government allowed
the army to suppose that they were guided, with relation to
its interests, by party or selfish feelings, woe be to them and
to England.
Sir J. Pix itra-ToN said he was unable to give his support
to the motion, to which he entertained grave objections. It
was in his opinion, open, in a large degree, to the objection
that it tended to prejudice a case that was still pending with
regard to the officers whose conduct was the subject of inves-
tigation. Under these circumstances he had decided that his
duty was to abstain from entering upon a full discussion of
these important matters until a future occasion. At the same
time, he felt bound to state his opinion that the conduct of
the government in regard to these transactions was open to
the gravest censure. Sir John noticed the extraordinary,
omission to communicate the report of the commissioners to
the commander-in-chief of the army, and, as illustrative of
the general system at work, he adverted to the particular
case of Commissary-General Filder. He drew a distinc-
tion, he said, between the conduct of the government
in giving appointments to the officers in question pend-
ing an inquiry into their conduct and the fact of their
promotion. The government should have awaited the
result of the inquiry ; bat they had acted in an indiscreet
manner in making these appointments before they had received
a report-from the commissioners. He uttered not a word to
inculpate those officers ; their complete exculpation would
leave his complaint of the conduct of the government precisely
'the same.
Mr. F. PEEL said that Mr. Roebuck should have brought
forward the motion, since the principle of the course he was
then taking was precisely similar to that of his proceeding last
year, when, after the report of the Sebastopol Committee had
been laid upon the table, he had proposed that every member
of the cabinet at the time when our expeditionary army left
this country should be stigmatised and displaced from public
_ _

In the course of the subsequent discussions, in which Sir D.
Evess took part,
Mr. GLADSTONE could not help expressing a sentiment, in
which he believed many shared, of regret at the latitude given
to this debate, consequent upon the speech of Mr. Peel. He
was sorry that the house should be called upon to give an
opinion upon the conduct of the Crimean Commissioners.
Whatever might be the terms of the notices of motion, he
concluded that the Government would give no colour to the
charge that the board of general officers was to revise the re-
port of the commissioners ; but the royal warrant authorised
the board to inquire into the statements contained in that
report and into the evidence upon which it was founded ; and,
although Mr. Roebuck had challenged the Government to
say whether they were going to try the report of the com-
mittee, no answer had been given to the challenge. Who the
officers to be tried were was not known. But the most im-
portant point was the position in which the commissioners
were to stand before the board. They had not been appointed
to try the conduct of any officers.—so that the terms of the
motion involved a clear error ; they were ordered to collect
facts and to suggest remedies. Mr. Peel had intimated that
there were points in the report which required rectification ;
but the facts were in the main true, and the commissioners
ought not to be brought like criminals before the board. He
hoped the precedent of the Convention of Cintra Board would
be followed, and that the present board would not have to try
facts collected upon the spot, but only to ascertain the military
responsibility of officers whose conduct was indirectly im-
pugned by the commissioners.
Lord PALMBRSTON observed that the course of the debate
must have shown to Mr. Roebuck that he had not exercised

a sound discretion in choosing that moment for making it.
He justified the course taken by Mr. Peel, and censured the
personalities in which Sir De Lacy Evans, he said, had in-
dulged, attacking officers high and low—a proCeeding incon-
sistent with his generous character. It had been said that the
appointment of the Board of General Officers was a reflection
upon the commissioners sent to the Crimea; bat their pro-
ceedings had been entirely satisfactory to the Government, as
well as to the advantage of the service, and the result had
been that, from the time they had put matters to rights, the
army had been extremely well supplied. The Government
were much obliged to those gentlemen, and there was nothing
in the appointment of the Board which implied the slightest
reflection upon their proceedings. But the state of the case
was this :—the report of the commissioners contained state-
ments which several officers considered cast a reflection upon
their conduct; some inquiry was due to their character, and
what better opportunity could there be for such an inquiry
than was afforded by the appointment of a Board of General
Officers ? The Board was not to report upon the report of the
commissioners, but to inquire into those matters which certain
officers considered cast a reflection upon their conduct, to re-
ceive explanations, and to report thereupon. He vindicated
the appointments of the officers impugned in the report, and,
in conclusion, pronounced the motion neither well-timed nor
just. If it was intended to censure the Government, he said
the censure was eot deserved, and, so far from its being in-
tended to try the report of the commissioners, the Government
attached the highest value to that report and to the result of
their labours.
After some further remarks the motion was withdrawn.
SUPPLY.—The house went into committee of supply, and a
vote of £7,000,000, for the payment of the land forces, was
agreed to.
The Consolidated Fund (21,631,005 ls. 5d.) was read a
third time, and passed.
The Marine Mutiny Bill was read a seeond time, as was also
the Mutiny Bill.
The Secretary to the Poor Law Commissioners ( Ireland )
Bill passed through committee.
Colonel PATTEN obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend
the law relating to factories in such a manner that questions
between inspectors and owners respecting the fencing off of
"gearing" and "shafting" may be settled by arbitration, as
is the case with " machinery."
Mr. PEEL obtained leave to bring in a bill for further
regulating the payment of the out-pensioners of Greenwich
and Chelsea Hospitals; and the bill was brought in and read
a first time accordingly.
COMMITTEE ON THE COURT OP CHANCERY (IRELAND)
BILL.—On the motion of Mr. WHITESIDE, Mr. NAPIER was
discharged from further attendance on this committee, and
the name of Mr. Grogan was also added to its other members.
The House adjourned at ten minutes past 12 o'clock.