The Press.
London, England, 1855-06-30 00:00:00

I.l*-?fite.--6Ag2-4(0,/,
z 14.
vit
"t +
it/

No. 113.—VoL.

LONDON, SATURDAY, JUNE 30, 1855.

PRICE SIXPENCE.

t;•kt V rtss.

•
the Cabinet, and from his having charge of
the Militia, particularly noticed in the Report
as having been neglected to the great detri-
ment of the army and the public service, must
come in for a heavier share of blame than his
colleagues.
Mr. Rostrum's motion is postponed from
the 3rd to the 10th of July, only because other
members who had prior notices on the paper
for the former day would not give way. The
question he has raised cannot be shelved,
though an attempt will probably be made to
defeat it on the ground that it would be im-
possible for the Ministry to retain their places
were this vote of censure to be affirmed, and
that a change at the present time would be a
great evil.
Of all fallacies we have to encounter this is
the greatest. Are we to affirm that Ministers
are competent now because they were proved
to be incompetent some months back ? Are
their faults to afford presumptive proof of
their merits, and their errors to constitute a
ground of confidence ? This would be to
affirm that neglect of duty in the past is a
satisfactory guarantee for its due discharge in
the future. What is to become of the prin-
ciple of Responsibility if the acknowledged de-
ficiencies of Lord PkLMERSTON as Home Secre-
tary are only to be recognised by his promo-
tion to the Premiership ?
To admit that the break-up of the present

themselves, and, with manly and vigorous
effort, shake off all obsolete bonds which con-
fine their strength, and rise equal in effort to
the circumstances which demand new rules of
action. Such a time has come upon us.
During a long reign of peace, and a continu-
ally-narrowing domination of Whig power, our
Government has lost all real authority and
power ; and, suddenly confronted in mortal
strife with the mightiest despotism of the
world, we find ourselves with relaxed
energies, with effete statesmen, and with
worn-out systems of patronage. In all crises
of their history, the sturdy sense of the
English people has hitherto instinctively
directed them to the course necessary to their
safety. Will it fail them now ?
The war has to a great extent obliterated
the great landmarks of party, though no cir-
sumstances can ever, for " governing families,"
obliterate the landmarks of interest. Oppo-
site parties in the Legislature meet in
their desire to raise the character and
strength, of the country to impart supe-
rior force to its action, to increase the
efficiency of its departments, and to remedy
all those defects which the strain placed on
our energies shows to exist. If England is to
retain her foremost place in the rank of nations,
it must be by the efforts of a vigorous and un-
fettered Government, disinterested enough to
look only to the efficiency of the public ser-
vice as its rule of policy, and strong enough to
be able to carry its intentions into effect.
Amid the distraction of parties, and the
individualisms of the House of Commons, we
are grateful to Mr. Roxnucx for having raised
an issue on which the opinion of Members
may at last be decisively tested. Those who
vote against his motion, will vote an approval
of the governmental proceedings for the last
two years. They will vote a sanction of all
those culpabilities which the Report of the
Committee emphatically condemns. The in-
dependent Liberal Members must take their
own course. They are not likely to be moved
by words of ours. But we say to the Conser-
vatives, that they have a clear duty to fulfil.
We hope we shall hear no more of the hazard
if overthrowing the Government. The truth
s, we nnot afford to keep such a Govern-
ment up. One more year of its rule may
break us down, beyond possibility of recovery.
New political combinations are required,
and the Whig oligarchy is at present the
great obstacle to an union of the real elements
of our national strength and activity.

LONDON, SATURDAY, JUNE 30, 1855.

THE motion of Mr. ROEBUCK directly raises the
question of Government Responsibility. The
principle must be affirmed or rejected—yea or
nay. It will -not do to assent to this principle
by words and deny it by acts. It must have a
practical application, or be utterly nugatory.
The Report of the Sebastopol Committee
states that " the responsibility of the expedi-
" tion to the Crimea rests upon the Home
Government ;" that the Administration having
launched this force against the Crimea, sepa-
rated at the prorogation of Parliament in
August, and never met again till the second
week of October ; that whereas the order to
invade the Crimea was given to Lord RAGLAN
on the 29th of June, the formation of a reserve
at Malta was not determined upon until early
in November; that steps were not taken suf-
ficiently early for forming a reserve at home,
for augmenting the army beyond the ordinary
recruiting, and for rendering the Militia avail-
able for obtaining supplies of men and for
relieving the garrisons in the Mediterranean.
Finally, that the suffering of the army in the
Crimea (and we know what that suffering was,
and what terrible havoc it made in our ranks),
resulted mainly from the circumstances under
which the expedition to the Crimea was un-
dertaken and-executed—the want of informa-
tion—the hope of immediate success—and the
absence of all preparation for a winter cam-

Government would be an evil, would be to
admit that it is equal to the emergencies of
the time, and that no better men can he
found. We will be no party to this cant. We
believe that the existence of the Ministry as
at present constituted is the greatest peril the
country has to encounter. Our resources are
breaking down under its exclusive and ener•
vating rule, and it is impossible that our
national strength can be fairly put forth until
the men and the system are totally changed.
We look in vain to the acts of the Ministry
since its formation for any evidence of its
capacity or proof of its success. Its career
may be summed up in a single word—failure.
It has failed in negotiations for peace. Tt has
failed to raise our army to the strength cheer-
fully voted by Parliament: it has failed to send
an efficient fleet to the Baltic, and to reinforce
the army in the Crimea. Experience does not
make fools wise. In 1855 we are repeating all
the errors of 1854. Admiral DUNDAS is urging
from the Baltic the demands for gun-boats
made last year by Sir CHARLES NAPIER. and
Lord RAGLAN again suffers from that appre-
hension of " no reserve " which crippled his
action when the assault of Sebastopol was first
undertaken. Since this date last year we have
actually lost ground. Our Baltic fleet is no
stronger than it was, while the enemy have
enormously increased their defences ; and in
the Crimea our army is much weaker than it
was when the invasion was first undertaken,
while the feeble reserves which then existed
have been exhausted.
How much longer can we afford to lose
ground as we have done during the past year ?
How much longer is it safe to trust to the for-
bearance of a generous ally? France cannot,
in justice to herself, permit that enormous dis-
proportion to continue which now exists be-
tween the British force and her own army.
In the life of every nation there are periods
when it becomes a question whether old usages
which have outlived their time shall be suf
fered to prevail and drag down the country
with them, or whether the people shall rouse

paign.
We have the emphatic declaration of the
present Premier that the chief acts of the late
Cabinet in relation to the war were collective,
not individual acts. In the debate of the 29th
of January, when the appointment of the Com-
mittee was affirmed by a majority of 305 to
148, Lord PALMERSTON, alluding to an observa-
tion by Mr. DISRAELI, that the motion for the
Committee was not levelled against any indi-
vidual member of the Cabinet, thus expressed
his agreement in the principle laid down
There is one point in the speech of the Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli) in which I wish to ex-
press my entire cordial concurrence with him. The Right
Hon. Gentleman has stated that the present motion does
not single out the Duke of Newcastle as one member of
the Cabinet for special and solitary condemnation, but
that the whole Cabinet who were and are his colleagues up
to the present time are equally, with him, responsible for
those matters for which his conduct appears to be brought
into question. We have stated that we consider ourselves
to be jointly and inicommon responsible for all those points
up'.n which the motion of my Hon and Learned friend is
founded, and therefore, Sir, I wish to say this on the part
of the Government, that without that unworthy proceeding
which I think the Right Hon. Gentleman has imputed to
some one or other in the course of the debate, we consider
that any blame which ig to be thrown upon any one member
of the Government should be equally shared by all.
After this it cannot be pretended that all
the members of the late Cabinet are not
equally responsible for the grave faults
charged on them by the Report. No distinc-
tion, on the authority of Lord PALMERSTON,
can be made between them ; and if any such
distinction could be drawn, he, from his long
experience of official life, from his weight in