The Press.
London, England, 1855-05-12 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

" with great zeal. I made great demands on '
" their time; their office hours were lengthened,
" but I never heard a murmur. Never was a
" man better stirred bg his subordinates than I
" was." For this candid and concluikve
admission we thank Mr. HERBERT. NI
honourable frankness with which he test*
to the merits of " the subordinates" does hilt
gloat credit, ktid ice acknowledge that it ill
with pain we are obliged to expose some of
the serious errors of that department of which
Mr. HERBERT was • chief. We always felt
regret at seeing an amiable and accomplished
gentleman like Mr. HERBERT placed in a fatal
pre-eminence by the arduous intrigues of his
political connections, who would insist upon
it that both the Duke of NEWCASTLE and Mr.
HERBERT were endowed with great " admi-
" nistrative abilities."
Thus, quoad the Cabinet, the evidence of the
principal witness this. week before the Sebas-
topol Committee confirms the charge as to the
heinousness of "the leap in the dark" blun-
der, while exonerating " the subordinates "
from censure for our principal misfortunes.
Let us now see, quoad the War Department,
how the evidence of Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT him-
self crimivates its recent " heads."
The utility of " division of labour," and the
value of simplicity of design in gaining a dis-
tinct purpose, seems to have never crossed the
mind of Mr. HERBERT. As we listened to his
candid answers on Wednesday, at the end of
every dozen sentences, the operation of the
Duke of NEWCASTLE'S significant phrase, " It
" grew out of the circumstances," seemed to be
echoing in our ears. Mr. HERBERT'S own posi-
tion in the War-office "grew out of the eir-
" cumstances." He turned himself into a fac-
totum general, and tried to play as many parts
as Caleb (Motor". The weakly and indecisive
touches of an amateur dallying with his
purpose was visible in all his acts. He filled
no distinct specialty. Responsible for no one
branch, he meddled with every question.
Sometimes he interfered as "only assisting
" the Duke of NEWCASTLE ;" and on other
occasions he acted in proprid persona as
Secretary-at-War. Now he appeared as offi-
cially supervising the military hospitals, and
again he figured as " a friend of Miss N [CHITIN
" GALE." Yesterday he spoke as a Cabinet
Minister, to-day he would talk as a senti•
mentalist, and on to morrow he might be sure
to appear as acting from some passing mood
of amiable impulse, but ineffective benevo-
lence. In the meanwhile, troops without
clothing, food, and shelter, hospitals in horri-
ble derangement, testified that dire calamities
" grew out of the circumstances," that the
chiefs of the War-office were not men of the
" administrative ability" which they were pro-
claimed to he by their panegyrists, and which
they believed themselves to be, in their in-
fatuated ambition for wielding the thunder-
bolts of war

The Medical Department seems to have been
peculiarly under the special cognisance of Mr.
HERBERT, and yet it was that which most
completely failed ! Our readers recollect the
evidence of General EvAus, and his remark
that it would appear to have been contem-
plated that there were to be no wounds at all.
Now observe the culpable conduct, not of " the
subordinates," but of the chiefs of the War-
office. 1. " The expectation was that Sebasto-
" pol was to be carried by a coup de main.'
2. It is not denied that in the month of
February, 1854, the eminent military surgeon,
Mr. GUTHRIE, submitted an excellent plan for
the medical arrangements of the expedition.
3. Mr. GUTHRIE pointed out the necessity of a
third assistant surgeon to each regiment, and
he drew the attention of Ministers to the
deficiency of the general mcdical staff.
Yet, though thus forewarned, were the War
Ministers forewarned as they ought to have
been ? That question is at once answered by
a brief extract from the crushing letter of Mr.
GUTHRIE, in the Times of yesterday (Friday,
May 11.) Mr. GUTHRIE states :
At the battle on the Alma there ought to have been
twelve medical-officers with the Brigade of Guards.
General Bentinck, in his evidence, says there were six,
but of that he tells me he is not quite certain ; and I have
reason to believe there were only five, and the conse-
quences I need not point out.
With that fact in their remembrance, let

SATURDAY,

our readers turn to the evidence of Mr. SID-
NEY HERBERT on Wednesday, and what will
they find him to have said? Mr. Boum
reminded Mr. S. Hatitikiti of the speech in the
House of commons, in which the then Secre-
tary of War liinited the medical men at
Scutari, and then Was asked how to reconcile
his official promises with I.tie proven state of
the hospitals, and Mr. H.ERBERT ausvvers—
with mere casuistry than candour—" As
" medical men they exerted themselves well,
" but as organisers they broke down." But did
it not occur to the witness that organisation is
not one of the special things to be expected
from military medical men ? Would it not
have been becoming in him to have recollected
the paucity of their numbers, the burthen of
their duties, the ambulance of pensioners sent
out from the War-office, and the enormous
quantity of work cast upon the deficient
Medical Staff?

And it is thus throughout the whole of Mr.
HERBERT'S evidence. He had sympathy in
misery, but he had not the skill by which, with
some forethought, it might have been greatly
mitigated. Beyond taking an active part in
sending out Miss NIGHTINGALE, we do not see
of what service Mr. HERBERT was in his post,
even with all the kindness of his manners,
and amiability of his intentions.
The Peelites prided themselves on their
rows of statistics and facility in returns. Have
they perused the awful return moved for by
Mr. LOCKE KING? It appears that about five
thousand British troops were lost from actual
conflicts with the foe, and thrice that number
(at least) have perished—from what? Not
from " the subordinates"—but from a Cabinet,
which intrusted the War-otfice to inexpe-
rienced chiefs, who provided for certain evils
after " they grew out of the circumstances,'
and which calculated on carrying Sebastopol
by a coup de main, without knowing ought of
its defences.

LORD PALMERSTON'S GOVERNMENT.
THE feelings of the nation at the period which
immediately' preceded ' the overthrow of the
Aberdeen Coalition appeared to he so intense,
its convictions deemed so profound, and its
tone so determined, that it would have been
thought an act of monstrous daring to impugn
its sincerity or resist its purpose. He who
had ventured to predict that the sentiments
which so generally prevailed with regard to
the mode in which the war had been con-
ducted under the sinister auspices would
prove to be shallow, vapid, and evanescent,
would have found his prophecy received with
indignant contempt or scoffing incredulity.
Such an one would have been told that he mis-
conceived the genius and the spirit of the
English people. He would have been re-
minded that though the public mind might be
slow to be taught and difficult to be awakened,
when once the lessons of wisdom were en-
forced by the admonitions of experience—
when once enlightened to feel the ign )miny of
the yoke to which it had been subject—its
course was bold, its decisions rapid ; nor
would it rest till every link in the degrading
chain was broken, and it stood erect in the
proud consciousness of a realised enmancips-
tion.

How have these bright anticipations been
fulfilled, and this high character vindicated?
The Government of Lord ABERDEEN fell not
from intestine divisions : it had held its place,
we will not say with dignity, but at least with
the semblance of strength, though long dis-
tracted by conflicting counsels and low in-
trigues. But its disruption was the deliberate
act of the community, roused to indignation
by the accumulated evidences of its disastrous
blundering. The vote which was taken ou
the memorable motion of Mr. ROEBUCK was
pronounced to be an overt expression of
national distrust and parliamentary reproba-
tion. The country would no longer tolerate
the rule of a Cabinet which, while arrogantly
assuming to itself a monopoly of legislative
capacity, had shown itself weak and ignorant,
timid and irresolute, and, by its infatuate

MAY 12, 1855.

blindness and obdurate folly, had imperilled
the success of a great enterprise, and brought
discredit upon the British name. Are we
giving utterance to the language of exaggera-
tion, are we venting the prejudices of the par-
tisan, when we say that it was the general
belief of all classes in the kingdom that they
had placed us in the anomalous position of
being constrained either to prosecute an un-
necessary war or consent to a dishonourable
peace ?
The junta of statesmen who served under
Lord ABERDEEN were accordingly censured
and overthrown by an overwhelming majority
in the Commons House of Parliament. But
what was the ignoble consequence which fol-
lowed this auspicious event? The instability
of popular feeling was never more signally
exemplified than in the clamour which was
raised in favour of Lord PALMERSTON. Though
a prominent member of a disgraced Adminis-
tration, though on his own confession respon-
sible for the disastrous policy it had pursued,
an abetter of all its folly, and a party to all its
blundering, this family statesman was selected
by the fervid acclaim of the community to be
its foremost citizen. The nation proclaimed
him the god of their political idolatry, and at
his feet, amid the sounds of the dulcimer and
all kinds of music, all classes bowed their
homage. Never did a Minister find himself
placed on a loftier eminence, or command a
more extended regard.
What was the first act of this triumphing
tribune of the people ? How did he assert
that mature wisdom and that patriotic spirit
for which he need such imposing credentials?
He summons to his aid the very men of whom
the country had made such haste to deliver
itself. Composed of the same elements as
the Cabinet which had recently fallen, with
a somewhat stronger infusion of Whiggism, it
assumed office to carry on the policy which
had made such havoc with the highest in-
terests of the State. There was no need that
Parliament should be told that its interference
had eventuated in results which were worse
than nugatory. It was idle to dwell upon the
apparent identity of the two Administrations,
for it was openly avowed by Lord PAL-
MERSTON that there was no cardinal distinction
or fundamental diversity between them. It
profited not to remind his impetuous ad-
mirers that he and his colleagues constituted
the larger portion of the Coalition of Lord
ABERDEEN, and had therefore the opportunity
of infusing life and vigour into the decrepit
counsels of that senile blunderer, had they
not concurred in the insensate course which
he had pursued. And when by a discreditable
manoeuvre, amounting to a breach of faith,
the Premier found himself deserted by the
Peel party, of what avail was it to show that
he had lost all the talent which could give a
Government strength or entitle it to con-
fidence, and that the Whig coterie, with all its
arrogance and all its incapacity, had become
dominant in the councils of the Sovereign!
The name of Palmerston served as a charm
to dispel all unpleasant misgivings, and dis-
arm all hostile criticism. His star was still
in the ascendant in the political hemisphere,
his reputation was untarnished, and his power
unimpaired.
What say his worshippers now? Not eight
short weeks have passed, and behold the
image fallen from its pedestal, defaced and
disfigured ! Within that brief period the na
tion has had its dream of hope and its
awakening of disappointment. Rapidly, but
surely, has the tide turned. The statesman
who might have passed from the arena with a
name which posterity would have recalled
with admiration, has found that the crisis
which raised has also dethroned him ; and
those who enabled him to realise his culmi-
nating ambition, are constrained to witness
his exposure and attest his disgrace !