The Press.
London, England, 1855-05-19 00:00:00

CONDUCT OF THE WAR.

On Monday this subject was brought before the
Lords by the Earl of ELLENBOBOUGII, who moved the
resolutions which appeared in Txx Paass of last
week. After adverting to the elements of success
offered by our early victories, our alliances, and the
conduct of our troops, and the absence of success
which had nevertheless attended all our efforts, the
noble lord contrasted the torpor which seemed at the
moment to paralyse the Legislature with the eager-
ness which existed out of doors. He dissected the
present Ministry, showed how unfit its several mem-
bers were tor the conduct of a war—quoted an allu-
sion of the Duke of Wellington to Lord Palmerston
as a "small bird"—said that the public feeling, so
apt to sudden affections for individuals, was now full
of coldness and disappointment towards the Premier.
It filled him with alarm when he saw the gentlemen
of the platform taking precedence of gentlemen of
the House of Commons, and he brought forward his
resolutions for the purpose of enabling their lordships'
house to take its stand in the front of the people.
He then entered at length both into the conduct of
the war, and the Administrative Reform consequent
upon it. Of the latter, he said that the pulling to
pieces of departments in the midst of a war was
highly dangerous. Respecting the former, he criti-
cised the operations both in the Baltic and Black
Sea. He repeated the strictures on the folly of
omitting to send vessels of small draught of water to
the shallows of the Baltic. He thought the expedi-
tions to Eupatoria and Sebastopol mistakes which
had paralysed the action of Austria in our favour.
He would have sent an army to Bessarabia, which
would have been joined by the Austrians, and the
first victory would have placed the Crimea itself at
our feet. He would have sent another into the Asia-
tic provinces of Turkey, which were only saved by
accident during the late campaign. He next ar-
raigned the conduct of the Government in their
general management of the troops. All these mis-
takes arose from the mediocrity prevalent in every
department, which succumbed to system while ability
dominated over it, and forced men to better things.
He had opposed the Reform Bill because he had be-
lieved that it would prevent the ablest men from en-
tering the public service. Mr. Pitt had complained
that he could not put the right men in the right
places. He had yielded to parliamentary trammels, and,
in consequence, his military operations were failures ;
while his father, who disdained those trammels, and
selected the fittest man wherever he was to be found,
had restored victory to our arms. It was fitness, not
favour, which had placed in their high positions the
great ancestors of our noble houses ; and it was not
for their descendants to turn round and say that their
relatives should enjoy advantages from connection
and favour.

Lord PANMURE characterised the speech they had
just heard—and which had been so long prepared
and expected—as full of truisms, unsupported
assurances, and unfounded accusations. It was
true that after a long peace, and many years of con-
tinued economies, our army was not at the moment
ready for a great enterprise. Many defects had
existed, but these had gradually been rectified, and
at present our army was well supplied, properly
reinforced, and in a state of the highest efficiency.
The noble earl had said that the right men were not.
put in the right places, but he had not given a single
instance. It was well that he bad not attempted to
do so as to our military commanders, for nothing
could be more injurious to military service than par-
liamentary injustice. But as to the civil service,
some instances should have been given, and that he
had failed to do so was a proof of the failure of his
allegations. Lord Panmure then considered the
political effect of the resolutions. After the Ministerial
crisis three months since, it would be highly dange-
rous again to recur to administrative change.
The Earl of HARDWICKE urged the impolicy of a
nation maritime and not military undertaking vast
military enterprises. We should have rigorously
blockaded the enemy's ports. The continued doubts
as to the strictness of our blockade had misled the
commercial community, and thrown our trade into
the hands of the foreigners. As it was, the opera-
tons of the fleet were entirely subservient to those of
the army. He pointed out many opportunities
which were missed, and many advantages which
were not secured, for want of due energy in our
n resources.

The Earl of ELors said that on his return from
long foreign service he had intimated to the present
Government his intention of affording them an inde-
pendent support. He had now to determine if cir-
cumstances had not so far altered as to induce him
to support the proposed resolutions. He was bound
to say that they had not. The improvement of our
forces in the Crimea was notorious. The Govern-
ment were prepared with a scheme of military
organisation. The resolutions were inconsisten

THE pItESS.

with themselves : eulogistic and almost ezultory at
the outset, they became denunciatory at the end.
Even if he condemned the present Government, he
could not see any chance of improvement in their
opponents. The last Ministerial crisis bad brought
our Constitution into disgrace abroad, and he ',mild
not be a party to its renewal. In the glories of our
arms and in the conduct of oar hospitals there was
much compensation for our disasters, and much to
retrieve our character in the eyes of foreign nations.
The chief sufferers had been our parliamentary in-
stitutions.

The Earl of WINCHEISEA considered the conduct
of the Government so bad in every way that he
should vote for the motion simply as one of censure.
Earl GRANVILLE, adverting to the differences of
opinion as to the proper mode of conducting the war
expressed by the speakers on the other side, hoped
that if they succeeded in their motion they would
reconcile their opinions before they formed an Ad-
ministration. He then entered into an elaborate
argument to prove that appointments were not made
on private or personal grounds. He gave the few
instances where members of the great aristocratic
families held office, and observed that they were all
popular men, and identified both by pursuits and
opinions with popular feelings. Arguing that official
appointments were by no means the prizes they were
often supposed, he gave instances of men in high
mercantile situations who had refused, on grounds
of personal interest, governmental offices, and said
that men of administrative talent would not take
office simply because they were wanted. He ad
mitted that the complete exposure of our affairs had
done good; but deprecated our continued abuse of
ourselves, when we had so many causes for satisfac-
tion. As for the resolutions, he argued that their
adoption would be the greatest encouragement to
Russia and endanger our alliances. He reminded the
house of the despondency which had preceded our
greatest successes in former wars.
_ _

- The Earl of DERBY, in defence of Lord Ellen-
borough's resolutions Ind speech, said that the
former might be characterised as truisms, and were,
in fact, founded on facts universally admitted, but
they were none the less proper for discussion at the
present juncture. He contended that the allegations
brought against the Ministry had not been answered.
His noble friend had been taunted with not pro-
ducing instances of unfitness : he might easily have
named the late head of the War Department, the
present Clerk of the Ordnance, and Under-Secretary
for War, as not peculiarly fitted for the duties of their
respective offices. A strong public feeling had been
excited, which it was not safe to disregard. Without
concurring in all that had been said in late public
meetings, he looked upon them as proofs of a rooted
dissatisfaction. Outcries had been raised both
against aristocracy and routine. Now routine was
the very essence of regular Government, but the
real evil was the absence of a mastermind to use
and apply the machinery. He thought that
exaggerated ideas were abroad as to the selection of
persons for high office, and he pointed out the
restriction in the choice of the Prime Minister, who
must choose trained men from his own party, and
of parliamentary experience, the number of whom
eligible for office was greatly diminished by the
Reform Bill. Yet it was his duty to select, without
partiality, the most fitting men, and he could not say
that any Government had fulfilled that duty. After
some sarcastic observations on the way in which
Lord Palmerston was spurred on to his Administra-
tive Reform, he criticised somewhat severely the
spirit of those reforms. Although at such ajuncture
he would be most unwilling that anything should
occur to place his party in office, he felt bound to
vote fox placing the resolutions on record, as
embodying the genuine expression of the sentiments
of the people.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE entered into a detailed
defence both of his appointment as War Minister,
though a civilian, which was strictly in conformity
with constitutional usage, and other civilian appoint-
ments in the War Departments. He then proceeded
to comment upon the proceedings in the Crimea,
once more defending, examining, and explaining all
the conduct that had been pursued, and the disasters
that had occurred, and thought that our present
position was full of hope.
After the Marquises of CLANRICARDE and LONDON-
DERRY had spoken against the resolutions as
ill-
timed and at present impolitic, _

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that while
instances of incompetent appointments were held
back, it was evident that the man aimed at was Lord
Palmerston. He vindicated the Government, which
was in disfavr,ur because the English bad thought
that they had only to wish for success to obtain it.
He recounted the disgraces which had accompanied
the successes of King William and Lord Chatham,
and reprobated the resolutions as proclaiming to
Europq that we had been defeated. He contended
that though we might be disappointed in many de
tails, we had no right to be disappointed with the
general results of the war. He enumerated the

losses and injuries inflicted on the enemy, and said
that. the resolutions condemned the conduct of
France as much as our own.
After a brief reply from Lord ELLENBOROLGH, the
resolutions were rejected by 181 against 71. Of the
majority 66 were proxies. They were not called in the
minority.