The Press.
London, England, 1855-07-07 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

of the police would have exposed himself to a broken
head. The inquiry wash purblind one, and if the
Government would advise the house to appoint a
commission he would say nothing further. Less
would not satisfy the people. He repeated the threat
of an armed mob in the park, unless the proper steps
were taken.

Sir G. GREY said that if such inquiry was to be
made it should not be pretudiced by statements such
as they had just heard. The inquiry he contem-
plated was not a secret oile, and he pledged himself
that it should be conducted in a manner satisfactory
to the house and the country. If any attempts at
violence were made they should most assuredly be
put down.
Colonel LINDSAY explained the instructions given
to the soldiers brought iko contact with the police,
in reference to their interference in the park.

Mr. W. J. Fox and Mr. BOWYER made some
observations confirming the allegations against the
police.
After Mr. Benaix had pleaded for the exemption
from income tax of office* in the Crimea,
Mr. BENTINCK, recurrirt to Hyde-park, deprecated
the conduct taken by Mr.,Duncombe.
Mr. G. DusnAs testified to the forbearance of the
police under great provocktion.
Mr. WILLIAMS having added a few words, and
Lord PALMERSTON having explained that the field-
allowance to officers on service would enable them to
pay income tax,
Mr. ROEBUCK denouncel certain observations made
by Mr. Dundas, who hadecommended the use of a
six-pounder against the people. Such language was
not that of a British gen eman.
In answer to Sir J. PA4INGTON,
Mr. WILSON explained that negotiations for a
monthly postal communication with Australia was in
progress with the Penidsular and Oriental Steam
Company.
..

M. Rica objected to grants being made to the
widows of officers killed in action, as compensation
for the price of their Sommissions. Such grants
could not be confin6d to special cases, where the
officer was actually killed in action, and the exten-
sion would involve enormous expense.
Mr. HEADLAM complained of the delay in settling
this question.
Lord PALMERSTON explained that this arose from
the necessity of making art angements.
Mr. A. STAFFORD read some statements as to the
negligent management of the wounded in the Crimea
on the 18th, adverting in Strong terms to the conduct
of Dr. Hall.

Mr. COWAN complained of the abuses of the billeting
system in Scotland.
Mr. F. PEEL could gide no answer to the state-
ments of the mismanage rent of the wounded till he
had inquired into the particulars ; but from what he
had heard he believed our hospitals were fairly
managed, and read a letter from Dr. Hall to prove
that sufficient preparatioh had been made for the
conflict of the 18th.
Colonel KNox asked if the proposed addition to
the soldiers' pay was to be confined to those serving
in the Crimea; as, if so, it would be no inducement
to recruits. He recommended a small additional
pay to the army generally.
Mr. EWART urged the formation of an encamp-
ment in Scotland, as a remedy for the billeting mis-
chief.

The motion for adjournment was then agreed to.
On the motion for going into Committee of Supply
a discussion arose on the prevention of accidents by
machinery.
Mr. M. GIBSON called attention to the conferences
at Vienna, respecting which he complained that the
house had been imperfectly informed ; that if the
proceedings at Vienna had been properly understood,
they would have arrived at different conclusions. He
quoted Count Buol's declaration that the chances of
pacification were never so good as when the British
envoy quitted Vienna— the proofs his circular
afforded that Lord John Russell was prevented from
carrying out those chances by the opposition of his
colleagues—and commented strongly on the ill advised
rejection of ‘ne last Vienna proposition by our
Ministers. He entered into a laboured defence of the
conduct of Austria, who had done, be contended, all
she ever undertook to do. The course the Ministry
had pursued had destroyed all confidence in them,
and was calculated to bring signal disaster on the
country.

Lord Jogs' Russrm denied that we ought to be
disappointed at the events of the war. Recounting
the difficulties of the question, he believed that the
only solution lay in the conclusion of a general
treaty, in which all the great nations of Europe
should take part ; for which purpose tho co opera-
tion of Austria was of the highest importance.
Coming to the Austrian proposition, he stated that
at the outset the Austrian Minister had considered,
with those of France and England, that the best
terms of peace would be the limitation of the
Russian power in the Black. Sea. But there was
another solution, which was, to strengthen Turkey.

SATURDAY,

On this principle the last proposition was founded,
which was to give the allies the power of passing
the straits under certain circumstances, without
granting the same power to Russia; to permit
France and England to maintain each two frigates,
while Russia maintained six ships-of-the hne. If
Russia increased that force, the maritime powers
might increase theirs in like proportion. In ad-
dition, Austria consented to guarantee the in-
tegrity of the Turkish territory. He certainly
thought that such a proposition provided a suffi-
cient security for Turkey, and he thought so
still. He bad stated to Count Buol that his in-
structions did not permit him to accept these
terms, but he engaged to lay it before his Cabinet,
and to back it with his own recommendations. That
promise he had fulfilled ; the Cabinet had duly con-
sidered the propositions, and rejected them as not
involving a safe peace. The French envoy, like him-
self, had recommended the propositions to the Em-
peror, who had rejected them before he knew of
their rejection by England. The Austrian Govern-
ment thereupon declared that it did not think itself
bound to declare war against Russia. He then de-
fended his own conduct in retaining office, saying
that if he had quitted it he would have added to
the opinion of the instability of our councils, and the
outcry against authority.
Mr. Comm; made a vehement attack upon this
speech, and the conduct it defended. Lord John
had been acting all along in contravention of his
opinions. He had never fairly stated them until
they transpired by indirect means, and had himself
seriously impaired that confidence in public men
which he professed to serve. He proceeded to
impugn the continuance of the war, and professed
his utter want of confidence in the Ministers, whom
he would gladly exchange for a Ministry taken from
the other side.

Lord PALmEits•ros warmly deprecated attacks upon
public men. He defended the conduct of Lord
John Russell, saying that no Cabinet could hold
together if its members did not sometimes sacrifice
their individual opinions. He then defended the
rejection of the Austrian propositions, enlarged on the
successes of the war, contrasted the position of
Russia at its outset with that which it held at
present, and went once more through the events of
the war, expecting a glorious termination.
Mr. ROEBUCK concurred in the blame attached to
the conduct of Lord John Russell. He admitted
that members of a Government might sometimes
sacrifice their individual opinion, but not on vital
matters. He on this ground arraigned the conduct
of Lord John from the commencement as unworthy
of a statesman, deficient in the proper candour, and
yielding his own principles on matters which affected
the deepest interests of the country. He then en-
tered into a defence of the war, comparing Europe
with Greece and Russia with Macedon.
Lord CLAUDE HAMILTON made some observations
on the present position of the Government in its
dissensions and uncertainties.
Mr. DISRAELI said that the differences of the
Cabinet, long suspected, were now proclaimed. Their
dissonances showed their effects everywhere—in the
Cabinet and in the field—and left the country with
the melancholy prospect of a futile peace or of inter-
minablelhostilities. t He arrayed anew the conduct of
Lord John Russell, whom he charged with having
misrepresented the feelings of his own Cabinet
towards the Austrian Government. Knowing the
difference of opinion in the Cabinet, how could
millions of Englishmen continue to make unre-
served sacrifices under its guidance! With the
principle of the war undefined, and the means of
peace, according to the opinion of a part of its
members in its power, the Ministry refused by a
frank exposition of its views to make even an at-
tempt to secure the confidence of the country, or,
having rejected one set of propositions, to state to
what proposition they would give their consent.
Such was the end of a session so important, of a
Ministry that was to effect such wonders, that the
interests of a country were to be sacrificed to a Ca-
binet majority, and an European congress broken up
by a cabal in Downing-street.
Sir G. GREY defended the Government on the
ground that it was utterly uncertain that Russia
would have accepted the Austrian proposition, even
if it had been accepted by the allies. He denied
that the Cabinet was divided, or had exhibited any
weakness in its proceedings.
Mr. SPOONER went off into the Maynooth ques-
tion. He complained of the conduct of the Govern-
ment with regard to his motion thereupon.
Lord GODERICE called attention to the statement
of Lord John Russell, that the Austrian proposition
was to have been an alternative, the rejection of
which by Russia was to have been followed by the
withdrawal from St. Petersburg of the Austrian
Minister. He could not reconcile this with the speech'
of Sir G. Grey.
Sir G. GREY explained that he had only said that
Austria offered no certainty of the acceptance of his
proposition by Russia.

JULY 7, 1855.

The House then went into a committee of supply
pra forma, after which it resumed for the transac-
tion of business on the paper, and adjourned at two
o'clock.

Corrtspoithart.
A CONSCRIPTION NECESSARY.
TO THE EDITOR OF " THE PRESS."

Sir,—Some time ago you did me the honour of in-
serting a letter from me, urging the necessity of
having recourse to some method of compulsory
enlistment. lam alarmed to observe that, although
the war is getting every day more exhaustive of our
forces, there is not only no indication of having re-
course to this, but there is no additional activity in
raising men by voluntary enlistment. Since Pelissier
succeeded Canrobert we have lost some four thou-
sand men, the French about three times as many,
and the cholera season is approaching, to he followed
by the winter; and whether that will find us still
before Sebastopol or within its walls is immaterial—
we shall in all probability still be at war.
Now, if the drain from war is to go on in the ratio
of the last fortnight, and that from disease and the
climate in the ratio of last year, where are we, under
the present system, to get the army for .1856? Even
France will feel the pinch ; and no doubt her Em-
peror even now looks with anxiety to the gradual
using up of his levies, when he sees England, his
ally, unable for her own preservation to bring more
than thirty or forty thousand men to the fielu. Can
it be expected that Louis Napoleon will go on making
up our deficiences, when it is possible—we may say
probable—that the present war will develop itself
into an invasion of the soil of France by the united
forces of Russia and the German States? The
knowledge we have of his sagacity forbids any such
expectation. If, therefore, it were only to anticipate
his inevitable call on us to furnish our due quota of
fighting-men, and avoid any perilous discussions
with him on the subject, we should immediately
take steps to quadruple our army. We are bound to
do so by the plainest duty to our ally. We, in our
island fortress, are secure from invasion. Louis
Napoleon can call upon us with irresistible logic to
contribute to the war with Russia an army at least
in the same proportion to our population as the army
of Pelissier bears to the population of France. He
can argue—" You ought to contribute on a much
larger ratio, for France requires the bulk of her army
at home, to serve those purposes of security and
preservation which the winds and waves discharge
for you."
But, besides that we cannot reasonably expect
much longer to fight England's quarrel with English
soldiers in the proportion of one to ten of the French,
there are vital reasons inducing us to quadruple our
army, even although we could rely on an unlimited
supply of Frenchmen. I previously mentioned the
more obvious of these reasons—l will now state
another. Constantinople is a sort of steelyard where
the power of European nations is weighed in order
to ascertain their relative value in the political
markets of Asia. In a time of peace commerce,
luxury, and wealth go for something in the balance,
but in time of war nothing weighs in semibarbarous
Constantinople but fighting-men. Now, in this
respect Turkey herself would make us kick the
beam. France is ten times more ponderous, and
Russia by her own weight keeps the balance quiver-
ing against all three.
That Constantinopolitan opinion is already formed
on these data is proved by the letters of the corre-
spondents in that city of the London papers, all of
whom lament the extinction of the prestige of Eng-
land, and doubtless feel it in their own diminished
importance. Now, the public opinion of Constanti•
nople travels quickly to Persia, and no doubt now
forms an important element with the Shah in judg•
ing whether be will adopt our alliance or that of
Russia. Undoubtedly the rumour of our declines
has crossed to Affghanistan, and the hearts of the
mountain warriors already throb with excitement at
the prospect of wreaking a long-deferred revenge.
But the opinions of Constantinople will also cross
the Khyber Pass and circulate in all the bazaars of
India, and our Hindoo subjects will learn with
astonishment that the power which has been in-
vincible to them is the weakest in Europe. At first
they will not believe the rumour, but if every report
confirms it they will at last adopt it as true ; and
immediately one half of Hindostan is in arms against
u;. There, opinion is worth an army of one hundred
thousand Englishmen. It is this representative
force which keeps the sepoy to his allegiance. Once
destroy the illusion, and he will join his countrymen.
It is therefore worth an Indian army—it is worth
our Indian empire—to keep up our character in
Constantincple. It has already experienced a pe-
. rllous eclipse. Already the proud name of England
is spoken of slightingly by the Turk—already the
Persian wavers in his belief of our power, and the
Affghan is forgetting the lesson of Nott and Pollock.
The world is in arms : we must arm too, and with
%mules, not of thirty nr forty thousand men. but