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

SEBASTOPOL INQUIRY COMMITTEE.

Tins committee closed their long protracted labours,
so far as relates to the examination of witnesses and
collection of evidence, upon Tuesday last, being the
thirty-ninth day of sitting. The late Premier, the
Earl of Aberdeen, was the last witness callod before
them, and his examination formed the sole business
of the final days' proceedings. The following are the
chief particulars elicited from the noble earl :

Mr. LAYARD.—WiII your lordship be good enough to
state when the Government first made any preparations
upon the conviction that war with Russia was imminent ?
I should think about three months before the declaration of
war preparations were made in contemplation of that event.
It had been more or less apprehended, but there had been,
of course, differences of opinion upon the subject.
To what extent did those preparations go ? To placing the
army upon an effective footing '—Certainly, and in Feb-
ruary a large force was sent to Malta with a view to being
forwarded to Turkey in case of a declaration of war, which
did not happen for more than a month afterwards.
Then, previous to January, the Government was under
the impression that hostilities would not ensue ?—As I said
before, there were differences of opinion. Perhaps I was
more sanguine than any other member of the Government
as to the possibility of maintaining peace, but it was a
matter of opinion.
Were any steps taken during the previous year to obtain
information relating to the countries in which war might be
carried on ?-oh, yes ; we endeavoured to procure inform.
ation, but it was very difficult to obtain correct informa-
tion in the East of the state of the Russian forces, and
other things it was desirable to know. I should say, the
most correct information we procured was from a gentle-
man in this country.
After the declaration of war were all matters connected
with the war and the army in the East submitted to the
Cabinet ?—All matters of importance. Of course the de-
partments having the management of the war did not sub-
mit details to the Cabinet. It was consulted upon all im-
portant operations certainly.
Were Cabinet Councils continually summoned until Par-
liament was prorogued ?—Yes.
It has been said that, after the prorogation, until late in
the autumn, no Cabinet Councils were held ?—1 think from
the prorogation in the middle of August, until the middle.
of October, none were held. After the prorogation the
various members of the Cabinet dispersed in various direc-
tions. The Duke of Newcastle remained constantly in
town. I remained until the end of September, and, not
having left London for a single day in the year preceding, I
then went home fora week, and afterwards I was for a week
in attendance on her Majesty. Other members were fre-
quently in town—Mr. S. Herbert almost constantly, but
the greater part of the Cabinet was dispersed.
During that period the expedition had sailed from Varna
to the Crimea, the landing took place, the battle of Alma
was fought, and the siege of Sebastopol was commenced ?
Yes. The order for the expedition was sent as early as
June, but a greater delay than was anticipated occurred
before the army started.
Did not your lordship think it was necessary during that
period to submit any question to the Cabinet ?—I am not
sure that the nature of these meetings is well understood.
I apprehend it is no part of the duty of a Government to
hold those n eetings at any stated time, but only according
to the necessities of the public service. It is true that
during the sitting of Parliament I desired the Cabinet to be
summoned every Saturday. That was for the progress of
legislation and the current business of the week, and did
not render difficult any meeting of the Cabinet upon other
days when the public service required it. Any Minister
may summon a Cabinet Council whenever he pleases, and
for any object either connected with his own department or
any thing else, although it is usual to mention the matter
first to the l'remier, who, of course, calls a Cabinet
together.
Did you not think that an emergency might arise which
would require a meeting of the Cabinet 7—Yes ; and when
the Cabinet dispersed after the prorogation, it was with the
full understanding that a Cabinet meeting might be called
at the shortest notice, and, had any occasion required it,

the Cabinet would have been summoned arid would have
assembled in less than forty-eight hours. It is not merely
the importance of events that requires a Cabinet Council
to be held, but when there is some object to discuss and
some determination to be arrived at.
When the army landed in the Crimea the Government
was of opinion that Sebastopol would fall by a coup de
main ?—That was the general belief.
When the army came round to the south and found the
place too strong to be so taken, was not that a matter for
the Cabinet to meet and discuss ?—I do not know that any
fresh instructions could have been given to the generals
in consequence. The Minister of War was in London,
and if he had had any difficulty he would have summoned
the Cabinet.
Did not the fact of the city being found stronger than
was anticipated, and the army having to lay a regular siege
to it, completely alter the complexion of the expedition?—
I think not.
If you had anticipated that Sebastopol would have re-
quired a long siege would you have thought it right to de-
spatch the expedition so late in the year ?—As I have said,
the instructions for the expedition were sent out in June,
and we had no reason to suppose they would not have been
carried into execution earlier than they were. At the same
time, when the expedition did sail, it was in sufficient
time.
Did you not think it was too late in the year to under.
take the expedition ?—I do not know. The generals had
perfect discretion not to undertake it at an unseasonable
time. The delay arose, I should say, not entirely from
want of preparations, although, I believe, there was not
sufficient boats, but that want was not the principal cause
of delay.
Was any proposal made by Lord J. Russell or any other
Etember of the Cabinet early last year for a consolidation of
offices ?—No ; I had a good deal of discussion with Lord J.
Russell and other members of the Cabinet upon the subject.
I came to the opinion, as I believe Lord J. Russell did
also, that it was not a fit time to carry those plans into
effect.
Lord J. Russell, then, opposed the consolidation of
offices ?—No; on the contrary he recommended it, but after
a good deal of discussion and consideration we came to
the conclusion that it was not desirable at that time.
In answer to various questions, the noble earl
stated that he could not remember whether it had
been proposed to give the War Minister the assist-
ance of a military secretary. Lord Aberdeen after-
wards said :
Although the appointment to the War Department had
been approved by Lord J. Russell and the whole Cabinet,
early in November, to my great surprise, Lord J. Russell
wrote to suggest that the Duke of Newcastle should be
removed, as he was not satisfied with the conduct of the
war by the duke.
Previous to that date had Lord J. Russell made any ob-
jections?—Not a syllable.
The CIikIRAILN.—I suppose your lordship has no objec-
tion to produce such parts of the correspondence as have
not yet been made public ?-4 can have none. I can't say 1
I desire to produce it. It is a disagreeable personal discus-
sion, objecting to a colleague, of which I should not have
said a word if Lord J. Russell had not said what he thought
it right to say. The correspondence would show my rea-
sons for retaining the Duke of Newcastle where he was,
and why I did not agree with Lord J. Russell.
Did not Lord J. Russell say in the house that he had
left the Government on account of " the horrible and
heartrending" accounts from the East, and by so doing
attributed to some extent the occasion of those accounts to
the want of a proper management of the War Department?
—At least, that was the inference the public drew. I
thiuk it would be a very erroneous inference to draw.
When Mr. Roebuck gave notice of his motion Lord J. Rus-
sell wrote to me, saying he could not oppose the motion,
and as it inculpated or affected the conduct of some of his
colleagues he felt it his duty to resign his office. That wan
the first I heard of it and to my great surprise.
General PEEL.—Did any correspondence take place
before November ?—No. The correspondence to which I
allude began early in November, and finished about the
end of the month or the beginning of December.
Had the Government obtained all the information neces-
sary before the sailing of the expedition for the Crimea?—
We obtained very various information, leading to very
different conclusions, and it was not easy to ascertain the
r espective degrees of credit to be attached. On the whole
I think the most correct information we received was, in
this country, from a gentleman who had recently been in
the Crimea. His information turned out to be pretty cor-
rect as to the amount of the Russian force and the state of
the country.
Then you think as much information was obtained as
authorised the expedition ?—That was the opinion, I be-
lieve, of the military authorities.
I presume the condition of the army in the East was,
after November, brought under the notice of the Cabinet?
—lt was, but very late. I believe a great deal of the dis-
tress and difficulties existed before we had any official notice
of it. We had information from private so irces and from
the public papers before we had any official information
of it.
In your o?inion, should the Cabinet have been furnished
with that information ?—Certainly ; anything which re-
quired a remedy from this country.
To whom does your lordship attribute the neglect of not
having furnished that information ?—The authorities on
the spot must of course be the persons whose duty it was
to complain of anything that was amiss, and to endeavour
to remedy it, if necessary, from home.
About what period was the Cabinet informed officially
of the state of things in the East ?—lt WAS very gradually at
first; not receiving any official information, the statements
were naturally mere or less discredited, but they gradually
became confirmed, and then we arrived at a knowledge of