The Press.
London, England, 1855-02-24 00:00:00

THE ARISTOCRACY AND THE ARMY.

WE are glad that Lord MALMESBURY had not
only the sagacity to discern, but the courage

THE PRESS.

to expose the impending danger that threatens
English society of being rent asunder by a
class-cry. The councils at the Kremlin could
not devise a more fatal mode of debilitating
the strength of Great Britain than to appeal
to most invidious comparisons, and to stimu-
late the personal jealousies of various orders
of the community. Class-cries are always
sure to end in a spirit of wholesale detraction,
and, while falsely pretending generosity of
sentiment, they really echo the pharisaical
self-laudations of that levelling conceit which
reoognise no personal superiority. Their
morality is fundamentally vicious, for its
standard of right or wrong is simply em-
pirical. To produce fair play for talent by
getting up a class-cry, is like trying to abolish
vice by making beauty and grace dress in a
Quaker garb. Those who raise such a cry
incur grave responsibilities in any case, but
infinitely more so when the facts are decidedly
against them. Their quackery at a time of
peril becomes downright criminal.
For we have no hesitation in saying that
Lord MALMESBUBY had the facts on his side
when he appealed to the Army List against
the assertion that military honours were
entirely monopolised by the " aristocracy."
We have ourselves taken the list of Line
regiments, from the Ist to the 98th, and
have examined the names of the " Colonels '
and the " Lieutenant-Colonels" of those
ninety-eight regiments, and we find that
in two-thirds of the entire list neither
the Colonel nor the Lieutenant-Colonel be-
longs to a family of the nobility, English,
Scotch, or Irish. In a vast variety o f cases
the " Colonels " and " Lieutenant-Colonels"
belong to families without any social distinc-
tion. We know that ignorant cavillers on
examining the Army List, and finding that
" Sir" is prefixed to the names of several
officers, will at once agree that such officers
are " sprung from" or " connected " with
" aristocracy." These censors, of course,
know nothing about the Knights of the Bath,
whose decorations are given freely to personal
merit. Their blunders are specimens of the
way in which ignorance discusses questions
upon which it has not the most common
information.
But, it may be said, that though the over-
whelming majority of the chief officers of the
line are not connected with the " aristocracy,"
still that in the " Guards" great numbers of
nobly born officers are numbered. Upon this
point, also, a little attention to the facts will
be sufficient to expose the absurdity of the
"cry." London is beyond comparison the
wealthiest city in the world. Life at the
West-end is luxurious, showy, and profuse,
not only amongst the Peers of the realm, but
amongst the merchant princes, who own
palaces in Belgravia, and whose town houses
in Mayfair are as sumptuous as if their owners
had estates descended through twenty gene-
rations. It is in such a state of society that
the household troops of our great monarchy
are located. To be compelled to mix amongst
such classes with a London standard of
expenses, would be a very equivocal favour to
to a gallant officer, with a wife and children,
and small means. Is it any wonder, then,
that commissions in the household troops
should be given to officers whose families
have town mansions, and who can afford the
personal expenditure of fashionable life in
London? Before we blame the War-office for
the number of aristocratic officers in the
" Guards," we must arraign all London society
for being so expensive, and if once the
" cry" be raised it is not " aristocracy " alone
that will be assailed. Circumstanced as society
is in England, a " cry " against "aristocracy," if
kept up, would be sure before long to sink
into a yell against property. Men who raised
a clamour against pedigree and privilege
would not be content to hear of distinction
by purse, the most invidious of all kinds of
superiority.
We trust, therefore, to hear no more of the
false cant that military honours are monopo-
lised by " aristocracy." Within the last fifteen
years there have been conferred four military
peerages. The two highest of these was given

175

to two distinguished officers—Viscounts
Hsa-
ntxas and GOUGH, and we have their printed
pedigrees before us, and it does not appear
that they had any " noble" ancestors. Lord.
HARDINOE'S grandfather was clerk of the House
of Commons, and his father was a clergyman.
Lord Gomm is the son of a Tipperary gentle-
man. Lord SEATON deservedly got his title
for his brilliant services, but he does not belong
by descent to " aristocracy :" and when Lord
R►OI.4N was raised to the Peerage, there was
not a murmur against " Fitzroy Somerset"
being ennobled.
The number, also, of Scotch and Irish offi-
cers, who actually swarm in the army, and
who have no parliamentary or " aristocratic "
influences, will show how false is the present
cry. The life of adventure and excitement
pleases the martial instincts of men of Gaelic
blood, and hence we have so many of those
officers. They have covered themselves with
laurels, and nobly sustained the valorous cha-
racter of their forefathers, and certainly, though
their numbers are so great in the Army List,
they have little connection with the political
aristocracy of England, now assailed by a false

criirh
at the claims of privates are to the
honours of command, and how far it is possi-
ble to popularise our military service, is wo
important a question for opening here.

THE FOLLY OF CLASS-CRIES.

IT was in our columns that attention was first
directed to the fact that the departments of
the army in which there was most failure wero
those presided over by persons entirely un-
connected with " aristocracy." Quartermaster-
General AIREY, Commissary-General Fitnza,
Admiral BOXER, and Captain CHRISTIE, of Ba-
laklava chaos notoriety, and several other
seriously-inculpated officials, are in nowise
" sprigs of nobility," or " bits of patrician
" porcelain. " The Duke of NEWCASTLE
fearfully failed in the War Office; but how
little " aristocracy " is responsible for that
fact is visible in the simple circumstance
that the five names of the parties said to be fit
for the post—to wit, the Marquis of Dm-Holism,
the Earl of ELLENBOROUGH, Earl GREY, Viscount
PALMERSTON, and Lord PANMURE-1111 belonged
to " aristocracy !" Does not this simple fact
show the absurdity of getting up a cry against
the nobility of England because a dull Duke
mismanaged the public interest?
Take, again, the two Admirals whose merits
have been so often contrasted. Admiral
DUNDAS sails, if not under false colours, at
least under an assumed name. His paternal
name is "Deans," and his " aristocracy " con-
sists in having married a lady nobly connected.
On the other hand, Sir EDMUND LYONS is son
of one " with a handle to his name," and he is
father-in-law to the Earl of ARUNDEL, the heir
to the Premier Dukedom of England.
Again, Sir JOHN MOORE was unfortunate in
Spain, and Sir HARRY BURRARD was utterly in-
capable. Were the calamities of MooRE or the
blunders of BURRARD to be attributed to their
non-patrician origin ? On the other hand,
Sir GEORGE MURRAY, unrivalled as a Quarter-
master-General, and admirable as a man
of business, belonged to " aristocracy." The
Marquis of ANGLESEY was the first cavalry
officer in Europe, and the PAGETS are an
ancient race. Then, Sir THOMAS PICTON,
the leader of the fighting Fifth Division
in the Peninsula, rose from the ranks,
and the name of Picton is not to be found in
the chronicles of the Peerage. Scores of
other military instances will occur to our
readers, showing that " class " is the most
ridiculous of all cries to raise because a
department has miscarried.
The most conspicuous instance to show the
folly of such a cry, is to be found in the two
great heroes of the last swar—Wattisaves and
NELSON. The first was an aristocrat, the son
of an Irish Peer, the second one of the people,
the son of a humble English clergyman.
It is the same in other professions,
MURRAY (Lord Mansfield) and ERSKINE, famous
in the eloquence of the Bar, were both of
noble parentage. CURRAN, the celebrated
Iriah orator, was, on the other hand, no more

1

isteS

indebted to nobility for his start in life than
that admirable man Lord ST. LEONARD'S. So
in literature, we could ask these raisers of
class-cries to behold the absui dity of their
Cant. Of the great poets of the present gene-
ration, Lord Minos by popular consent is
crowned first. SHELLEY was the heir iu
remainder to an ancient baronetcy, now
possessed by his son, Sir PERCY SHELLEY.
Popular taste at present admires the poetry of
Mr. TENNYSON, a member of a most ancient
landed family, and SMITH, BROWN, and JONES
have not yet evoked such sweet tones as the
Laureate from their well-hammered lyres.
Then look to the minds that have delighted
the community with their genius for fiction.
If the author of " Pelham " be the heir of
Knebsworth and the Lyttons, on the other
hand Mr. DISRAELI honourably boasted in the
House of Commons of his literary escutcheon.
It would be truly absurd to excite a cry of
" class " in these various cases, and we hope
that all people of sound sense will unite in
protesting against an odious clamour, invidious
because inquisitorial, being raised in this
crisis. Once raised, no one could tell where it
would end, though instinct might warn us that
it would point to revolution.

THE BURMESE EMBASSY TO
CALCUTTA.
WE should have read with infinite amusement
the account of the termination of the Burmese
Embassy to Calcutta were it not for the con-
templation of the somewhat serious results that
are likely to ensue from it. In the whole
records of diplomatic history there never
occurred anything so absurd ; and we can
easily conceive how greatly the farcical result
must have mortified that very self-sufficient
personage the Marquis of DALHOUSIE, who, at
a cost for salary of twenty-four thousand a year,
and for expenses of fifty thousand a year more,
is sowing the eeeds of the ruin of India, and
at the same time is building up his own for,
tune at Calcutta. For a Governor-General of
such enormous personal pretensions to be so
outwitted, and made sport of by a mere bar-
barian, was a sight truly ridiculous. After
his Lordship had told all the world, through his
organs, that the Envoy had come specially to
do him homage, to avow himself the slave of
the English, and to give a legal title by treaty
to the territory we have occupied, though it
can hardly be yet called conquered, the anti
climax was too absurd for the gravity of the
gravest, and it has been received with an
unanimous burst of laughter from one end of
India to the other.
The fact is, that the little Marquis, like his
worthy ancestor and predecessor in the lord-
ship of Cockpen, was so immersed in the
consideration of his own consequence, and so
convinced that the Burmese Envoy could have
no other object than to pray, on any terms,
for peace, and he was so puffed up with the
expectation that his reign would receive at its
termination the crowning glory of the formal
cession of Pegu, that he went out of his way,
to an unheard-of extent, to make himself
agreeable to the barbarian who was sent to
treat with him. A Government steamer
brought the Envoy from Burmah—the Vice-
regal carriages and cortege met him at the
landing-place at Calcutta—almost royal ho-
'flours awaited him at the Governor-General's
palace—he was lodged and fed sumptuously at
the public expense—guards of honour were
assigned him—the troops were passed in re-
view before him—and, in short, every honour
was shown to him that in Europe would be
accorded to a crowned head. At last, after all
these preliminaries, a grand Durbar, for the
reception of the Royal message, was held by
the Governor-General, attended by all the
minor magnates, and surrounded by all the
pomp and glory that encircle the Viceregal
Throne of Calcutta. The long-desired mo-
ment had now arrived when the object of the
mission was to be officially communicated,
and when the Burmese was to give utterance
to the message of his mster—when, lo in-
stead of the anticipated cession of Pegu, it

THE PRESS.

contained exactly the reverse, namely, a very
firm and specific summons for its immediate
restoration to the King of BuRMAH, from whom,
as was alleged, it had been unjustly taken.
For one moment the assembly stood aghast,
but the farce was too much for them, and they
burst into a general titter, while the rage of
the befooled Marquis found vent in a most
indecorous, if not blasphemous, reply. To
claim for the power which ho swayed a
duration continuous with the duration of the
universe was to show alike his ignorance of
history and a want of reverence for (lon--his
ignorance of history in not knowing that na-
tions, like men, have their periods of progres-
sion, maturity, and decay—a rule to which we
can hope to form no exception; and a want of
reverence for Got--for what can be more
irreverent than to assert for the sovereignty
man wields an attribute peculiar to the sove-
reignty of the Deity, in whose eyes the
mightiest empires are but as dust, and their
terms of existence but as a summer day ? This
assumption by Lord DALHOUSIE of the lan-
guage which the Holy Scripture puts into the
mouth of the Almighty is a mark of the height
of arrogance and pride to which the possession
of unrestrained power may lead a self-sufficient
and conceited man.

The probability is that the return of the
Envoy to Burmah will be speedily followed by
a descent of the Burmese army on Pegu to
enforce their Sovereign's demand. If so,
adieu o all hopes of getting troops from India
for the Crimea ; indeed, as Burmah is as un-
healthy as Balaklava, we shall, in that case,
have to supply the waste of life in two
armies instead of one. It is not so much that
question, however, which immediately affects
us as a question in reference to Lord DAL-
HOUSIE that was lately mooted in the Times—
and that is how far such a man as he has
shown himself to be is fit to conduct the
war with Russia in which we are now en-
gaged. It is well known that in all that
related to his own proceedings in the business,
he most grossly mismanaged the second Sikh
war, and that but for the exertions of others,
and more particularly for the indomitable
courage of Lord Gouou, it would have ended
in failure, instead of, as it did, in a rather
doubtful triumph. It is also well known that
his interference in the affairs of the Burmese
war was of a nature equally mischievous, as
GODWIN'S posthumous work proves, though
the parts of the manuscript most crimina
tory of Lord Dtmiousixhave been confessedly
suppressed. Then, again, as regards the
commanders under him there is not one with
whom he has not quarrelled. Lord Govan he
caused to be superseded ; to the late Sir
CHARLES NAPIER he purposely wrote such
letters as made it impossible for him with
honour to retain his command ; Gonwis he re-
called from Burmah ; and to Sir CoLIN CAue-
BELL, the Orimean hero, he behaved in such a
manner as to induce this noble old soldier to
say that poor as he was he would rather break
stones on the road for his daily bread than
continue to serve under him. Yet, notwith-
standing all this, notwithstanding that Lord
DALHOUSIE knows nothing of war himself, and
that all the military arrangements which have
been dictated by himself have been pre-
eminently bad—notwithstanding that he has
quarrelled not with one commander only, but
with every commander in succession who has
served under him, all of them being superior
men to himself, and superior, perhaps, to any
other available generals in England—notwith-
standing that as a climax to his misgovern-
ment he has now laid the foundations of a
second Burmese war, and at the same time
allowed himself to be outwitted by a barbarian
envoy, and made the laughing stock of the
public in India and of all men acquainted
with the facts in England—notwithstanding all
this, he is actually held up by the Coalition as
the man most fitted to restore the prestige of
our arms at Sebastopol, and to cope with the
astute diplomatists and generals of the Em-
peror of Russ's.
England was sunk low enough when its
armies were committed to the guidance of a
Newcastle, but it will find a lower depth still if
they be ever intrusted to the direction of such
a man as this.

SATURDAY,

PROMOTIONS FROM THE RANKS.
LORD STANLEY, in his eloquent speech at
King's Lynn, stated only the simple truth
when he reminded his hearers that promotion
from the ranks had necessarily been rare, on

account of the long peace not having given our
privates opportunities for performing those
daring feats of individual heroism by which
several of them in the Crimea have risen he
the well-won honours of commissioned officers.

With the paise given to these gallant men we
can heartily sympathise. Good character,
competent attainments, a stalwart arm, and a
stout heart, have gained their deserts, when
these manly spirits were gazetted to carry the
colours of their regiments. By their personal
chivalry they won their coats of arms. A
College of Heralds can give them no more
honourable blazonry than the uniform of a
British officer, marking the rank of a gentle-
man, won on the field of martial fame.
But while rejoicing ovet these deserved pro-
motions, we must decline to endorse with
approval the crude conceptions of those who
desire to abolish the sale of commissions, and

demoralise thoroughly the character of the
British army. We believe that the originators
of those wild propositions have not considered
the peculiar social conditions under which our
English army exists, and as the subject is one
of most serious importance, we desire to show
the danger of such levelling theories.
An army in any country is a tremendous
moral and material force. It influences the
manners and habits of thinking of the whole
population. When raised to a large standard
it almost overpowers the authority of any
other institution ; and hence France, Russia,
Prussia, and Austria, must be classed as
essentially Military Monarchies. In those
countries the ruling Sovereigns are also head*
of their armies, and the habits of society, the
yearnings of ambition, and even the spirit of
literature, amongst those nations are largely
eoloured by military prejudices. In England,
on the contrary, commercial feelings, and con-
stitutional traditions, mark the tastes of her
population. Our society is formed on an old
basis ; it has a peculiar territorial distribu-
tion ; it has " Town and Country"—" Whigs
and Tories"—" Church and Dissent." It has
many factions, a host of newspapers, freedom
of speech, and liberty of association.
In such a peculiar state of society a de-
mocratised army of the French revolutionary
pattern would be worse than a perilous expe-
riment. It would be organising a powerful
cause of the gravest social changes. It would
be a huge anomaly in our careful system of
free privileges and established property. The
ambitious spirit of such an army could not
possibly be contented. It would, des facto,
have such an influence that it could have no
check to balance its organisation. By the ne-
cessity of things, it would pass into an armed
political league. We should soonfind ourselves
ruled by what a great orator once called " a
stratocracy ;" and under the specious desire of
popularising our military system we should
find " too late" that we had been disorganis-
ing our free institutions, by substituting in
their place a great military force, the precursor
of absolutism.
We say, then, that we cannot approve of a
democratic organisation of the English army.
At present it is (in no party sense) a highly
Conservative institution ; but if all its officers
are taken from the ranks we shall be setting
up a power that has no alliance with the pro-
perty of the country. If the gentry of Eng-
land were a limited class, and if they were
degenerate in manhood, such a scheme might
have some claims to consideration ; but their
numbers are too great, and their personal
spirit too high, to give any decent pretext for so
sweeping and revolutionary a change.
But, in saying so much, we again repeat
that we hope liberal rewards, with no niggard
hands, will be dealt out to heroic privates, or
to men of military aptitude, who distinguish
themselves pre-eminently. Let it be felt
throughout the ranks that there is no impass-
able chasm between the officers and privates.
So much can be done without sweeping
changes, or perilous experiments. We can
shower rewards upon the deserving without,
in the spirit of levellers, sowing the Reeds of
social destruction.

1