The Press.
London, England, 1855-06-02 00:00:00

WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE?

Tns Committee of Inquiry having closed,
practical men are beginning to " take stock,"
and see what they have gained by the in-
vestigation into the blunders of the war.
There are some wiseacres who pretend to
think that nothing but " the system" has
been proved to bo in fault. They say, " You
" made war on a peace-establishment, and of
" course the results in such (a case could
"be easily anticipated." But that is just our
point; for not having anticipated the conse-
quences, we say the Government was clearly
responsible. "Yes ! but who amongst them
"in particular?" asks some one, wishing to
fix the culpability on persons. Lord JOHN
thinks it was the Duke of NEWCASTLE, and the
Duke thinks it was the system. Sir CHARLES
TREVELYAN, by implication, blames Lord
RAGLAN and the Quartermaster-General. The
Radicals blame "the aristocracy," and there
are various members of the latter class, quite

are various memoers in i.iiv ...... ~...., -1--
unconnected with party, who say that the THE CAPTURE OF KERTCH. to the exigencies of party—wnicn carries on
newspapers forced us into a struggle for A smorio feeling has been produced in this negotiations on one side and talks bellicosely
which the country was not prepared. Ordi- country by the tidings of the last few days. on the other—and which, instead. of adopting
nary people with so many issues before them For its course boldly from consideration of the
the first time in more than six months we
would get puzzled, but, with a little calmhonour of the nation, is driven into a warlike
attention to facts, it is possible to see one's are cheered by the announcement of successes policy by the threatening aspect of the House
way clearly to a distinct conclusion. which may exercise a decisive influence upon of Commons.

512

REVELATIONS OF THE COALITION,
THZ town has not been much edified this
week by the publication of the correspondence
between the Earl of ABERDEEN and Lord JOHN
RUSSELL relative to the War Department.
Lord Jons, in spite of his practice, does not
improve as a letter-writer. On the last occa-
sion when he figured in a correspondence his
hastiness of imputation received a signal
chastisement from the formidable pen of Mr.
CROXER. Though not so skilful as the great,
slashing reviewer in the use of his literary
rapier, Lord ABERDEEN also has inflicted some
severe threats on the crack of Brookes's. Both
of them suffer in the fray, but we think the de
posed leader of the House of Commons has
the worst of it.
The tone of the correspondence is civil but
very cool, and occasionally verges on the curt.
Lord Jot's is fidgetty at the commencement,
when on the 17th of November, 165-1, he takes
np his pen to try and thrust out the Duke of
NEWCASTLE from the War-office. Events in
the Crimea are as gloomy as the weather
*hich scowls over the great landscape in front
of Pembroke-lodge. Lord JOHN has returned
from his part of a provincial lecturer ; the noise
of the cheers have died away, and he is getting
nervous at the tone of " the ribald press";
and whatever becomes of the country " the
" Whigs must be saved " from the impending
crash. But how can he put PALMERSTON
in, and get out the Duke of NEWCASTLE,
after having acqueisced in the appoint-
ment of the latter? He pauses, and re-
collects the memory of the Whigs, and how
SIDNEY'S motto was " Aut viam inveniam, aut
faciam ;" and with that motto on his lips he
resolves to show how the friend of SYDNEY
SMITH could oust the colleague of SIDNEY
HERBERT. He will make a way to put in
" Palmerston," as the noble correspondents
term the present venerable, if not venerated,
Premier. " The War Minister should be in
" the House of Commons," says Lord JOHN.
But the question about a War Minister should
be, not the convenience of his colleagues, or
even of the House of Commons. It is his
aptitude for his post, his experience, and his
proved capacity for affairs ; and Lord JOHN
RUSSELL has had the bitter mortification of
seeing Lord PANIKURE, a Member of the House
of Lords, made War Minister in spite of his
lecture to the contrary.
" On that head," as Lord ions says (the
country was then thinking of " heads " in
another sense), the Noble Lord was clearly
in the wrong. Lord ABERDEEN sensibly re-
minded him that such a proposition should be
permanent, and that it would be " objection-
" able in principle and inconvenient in prac-
" tics." But possibly Lord JOHN was only
raising the point to cover his purposes. The
Duke of NEWCASTLE must be removed to save
the Whigs in jeopardy, and it must be done
adroitly. He falls back on old times, and
talks of wars being conducted by Prime
Ministers, or Ministers of departments :

We have exarn,les of both:—Lord Godolphin, in the
first way, supported the campaigns of Marlborough ; Lord
Chatham, in the other, guided the operations of the Seven
Years' War.
And then, resolving to make a push for
PALMERSTON, he says:—
My conclusion is that, before Parliament meets Lord
Palmerston should be intrusted with the seals of the War
Department.
And signs the letter, " My dear Lord ABER.
" DERN, yours very truly, 3. RUSSELL."
The landscape was just as gloomy at the
Ranger's House, Blackheath, where the
Premier in sufferance was then staying.
lie , answered the display of Lord JOHN'S
party tact, and proficiency in " Gold
" smith's England " (school edition), with
perfect composure, to the effect that an an-
swer, when convenient, would be sent—and
signed the note " Ever truly yours."
In the meanwhile, Lord JoHN had consulted
his pillow, and got fidgetty. He recollected
all his escapades in letter-writing Ghosts of
Edinburgh and Durham letters, and epistles
from Mr. CROMER haunted him at night. " The
" little boy who. chalked up No Popery' on
" the wall, and ran away," became nervous.