The Press.
London, England, 1855-04-21 00:00:00

Tilt FtESS.

Mr. B.: St. Helena.
Lord JOHN : Ah ! we Whigs made good capital out of that rock and
Sir Lowe, in the old times. lye an affection fur St. Helena. Let's see,
though—are you sure it is ours still? Didn't we give it up to France?
No, no; you're quite right, it was not the island, only the remains of
the Emperor. Go on.
Mr. B.: Australia.
Lord JOHN : That's a place I shall make very short work with, if
the people are troublesome. Another.
Mr. B.: Sierra Leone.
Lord JOHN : An invaluable place. One sends troublesome people
there, and one draws admirable sentiments from it about liberty,
emancipation, and all that Would you like an appointment to Sierra
Leone, Mr. B.? Young men should be enterprising, you know.
Mr. B.: I am much obliged to your Lordship, but my connections
are English, and—shall I go on with the Colonies?
Lord JOHN : What. are there any more?
Mr. B.: Lots, my Lord. There s Antigua, and St. Christopher's,
and Demerara, and Honduras, and Jamaica, and New Zealand, and
Trinidad—
Lord JOHN : Stop, stop! Do you mean that all those are our
Colonies? There must be some mistake.
Mr. B : I can give you some more, my Lord. There's Anguilla,
Bahama, Cape Breton, the Falkland Islands, Gambia, Goza,

Lord JOHN : Be quiet, I tell you. •
Mr. B.: But I know a lot more.
Lord JOHN : Pray be quiet. Such a list of names is quite over-
whelming. Of course I don't mean that I shall have the least diffi-
culty in managing all these places, or that I shrink from the respon-
sibility ; but still one's hands will, I see, be pretty well occupied, if
I add to the duties of my office those of Parliament. By the way,
your memory is very good—do you remember what, in a lump, they
estimate as the number of—of—ha! ha subjects ?
Mr. B.: Well, your own separate number is not very large, but
then they are scattered all over the world. But, between you and Mr.
Vernon Smith, you number about a hundred and thirty-seven millions
of vassals, who look to you for government, counsel, and guidance.
Lord Jour; : Not more? What a fuss people make tsbout the
duties of the Colonial-office. However, here we seem to stop. Let us
have some refreshment. Your memory does you very great credit,
Mr. 8., very great, and I am pleased to see how well informed
you are. [They get out.

amounts required, the Government knight have
expected fair terms, whichever principle they had
adopted, instead of hesitating between two or three.
He objected to the increased taxes on articles of coi .
sumption. Our Whets had paid 10 per cent. income
tax, and they were not less patriotic than they.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY did not believe that any
Chancellor of the Exchequer could raise eighty-six
millions by taxation in any year; and he argued trom
this against our carrying on an aggressive war
against the Russian empire. •
Mr. GLADSTON said that the votes involved in the
proposition involved only distinct prinoiples. The
votes on the loan had no analogy with the votes f.
it
additional taxation. The last was merely a technicil
vote, with which Parliament might deal hereafter ;
but the first would be conclusive as between the state
and the contractors. He objected to voting at once
on that part of the resolutions which provided for the
repayment of the loan. He thought that time should
be given for consideration of that provision. He
could not agree in the proposition 'Which had been
made for increasing the income tax to 10 per cent.;
it involved an extension of the income tax to income
under 1001. a year, and social questions are not to be
decided a moment. Its extension be believed
would come, but Would carry with it very numerous
and complex consideration. Considering that all
loans were contracted at a disadvantage, be admitted
that nevertheless a sudden increase of taxation might
be yet more injurious. So far from any apology being
necessatrfor the late bringing forward of the Budget,
it might have been still further postponed until the
result of the Vienna Conference was decided, and be
pointed out how much of the money asked for
would be saved in the event of peace. Should that
not be. the reeelt our relations with other p. were
would be materiely altered from what they were be-
fore tligeortference began. Retaining all his objec-
tions to the system of loan, he was nevertheless pre-
pared to say aye to the proposition of his right hum
hien&
A desultory discussion followed, in which the
budget was criticised by Sir F. Kelly, Mr. Williams,
Mr. Macgregor, Mr. Muntz, and others ; and de-
fended by Mr. Masterman and Mr. Matins ; after
which the resolutions embodying the budget were
agreed to.
The house adjourned at eleven o'clock.

The proceedings in the Lords were quite utirni
portant

i APRIL 21, 1855.

LORD LUCAN.
(From a Correspondent.)

Tux case of Lord Lucan is for the present closed by
the discussion in the House of Commons, and the
publication of the noble lord's speech with some
explanatory notes. There are two questions arising
out of this painful controversy which we shall
endeavour to answer. Ought Lord Lucan to have
obtained the court-martial which he desired ? In
default of such judicial decision, what should be the
judgment of the public upon his conduct at Bala-
klava, and his recal ?
It seems to us, that a plain man need have no
difficulty in answering either of these questions. For
ourselves, we lose all patience when we think of the
way in which the authorities (Crimean and home)
have dealt with this matter—of the language they
have used, and of the reasons they have given for
their recal of this officer, and their refusal of the
military trial which he demanded.
No charges, they tell us, can be framed against
Lord Lucan! What! No charges against the man
whom his commander-in-chief could address in the
words, "You have lust the light cavalry !" No
charge against the man upon whom his commander-
in-chief throws the whole responsibility of that great
catastrophe, by attributing it solely to his " mis-
conception" of orders! Is the captain of a lost
man-of-war—lost it matters not how—are the sur-
vivors of the Tiger, as happened the other day, to be
brought to trial as a matter of course ; and is the
man who, according to Lord Raglan, "lost the light
cavalry," to be refused the perilous privilege which he
demands? There was quite enough, to our thinking,
in Lord Raglan's report of the action, to justify Lord
Lucan, and, what is more, to justify the public, in
requiring a court-martial, and the Government in
granting it. But, how any man can read the letter
of the commander-in-chief to the Duke of Newcastle
and still maintain that there are no charges to be
tried, passes our comprehension. After repeating
and enlarging the charge of " misconception," Lord
Raglan mentions a previous order, which Lord Lucan
4. did not seem to have attended to," which "he must
have read with very little attention;" indeed, " so
little had he sought to do as he had been directed,
&c., &c." Again, Lord Raglan "wishes he could say
that Lord Lucan had done all he could to render his
misconception as little perilous as possible. But this
is far from being the case, in his judgment. He was
told the horse artillery might, accompany the cavalry.
He did not bring it up. He was informed that the
French cavalry was on his left. He did not invite
their co-operation! He had the whole of the heavy
cavalry at his disposal. He mentions having brougtit
up only two regiments in support. And he omits all
other precautions, &c., &c."

And this is the man against whom no charges
could be found ! To one distinguished personage,
at all events, that inability cannot be imputed; and
we are inclined to suggest, as an effectual mode of
meeting the difficulty, that the writer of the above
letter be requested to return home for that express
purpose. But we are told that Lord Lucas cannot
be tried by court - martial, because, according to
military law, he is " condoned," by having continued
to serve after the occasion to which the charges
brought against him relate. Admirable zeal for the
law! But the idolators of law, like other idolators,
are apt to dishonour the deity they adore. The
generous rule intended for the protection of the
soldier is turned into a weapon against him ; ant, if
this precedent be followed, may at any time furrish
the ready means of stifling all judicial inquiry i►to
the ease of an accused man, by the simple stratagem
of allowing him to continue his services for ever so
short a time after the occasion to which the actua-
tion refers. But, assuming the rule to be correct, as
broadly laid down by the Minister of War and tie
judge advocate, can there be a doubt as to tie
course which Lord Raglan ought to have pursues.?
If he believed one half of the charges contained is
his letter—if he believed that his lieutenant-generd
had " lost the light cavalry " by negligence and rah
conception so culpable as that he describes, ought'
he not to have at once suspended him from his corn
mend, and left him free to take his trial before a
military tribunal? But, no. Lord Raglan, either
f.om good-nature (and he is a very amiable man),
if he believed himself altogether in the right and
Lord Lucas altogether in the wrong, or from a dis-
like to the prospect of any searching inquiry into that
day's proceedings, if he felt himselt open to any
share of blame, or, probably, from a mixture of both
these feelings, took no such decided step, continued
on friendly terms with Lord Lncan, and, it seems,
was not a Hate surprised when the order arrived re-
eilling that officer on the ground of the "misunder-
standing" between them; for that was the alleged
reason of the recal—no other. Lord Hardinge and
the Duke of Newcastle, like Lord Raglan, would not
for the woild " disparage the Earl of Lucan," or" cast
• slur upon his professional reputation," or "indulge
it say expression in any way harsh or grating to the

THE PRESS.

feelings of his lordship." They would not recal him
for " losing the light cavalry"—not at all, only for
" adhering to the construction he had put upon the
order which ' lost' them." But Lord Lucan—un-

unreasonable man—was not soothed by all this
amiability; he did not understand this rose-water
recal (amiability and rose-water have run freely all
through this war). He is inclined to call a spade
a spade, and he found the British people disagree.
ably disposed to do the same. He "adhered to his
construction of the order," because he refused to
bear the responsibility of the great loss which was
its result; and when he asked for a tribunal of
soldiers to say whether that burden was justly laid
upon his shoulders, he was refused, because " there
were no charges against him." He had been simply
requested to come home on account of "mismanage-
ment."

Well might the noble lord prefer the sternest and
harshest form of justice to all this killing kindness
and cruel consideration for his feelings. Indeed, we

are not surprised at the impatience which he exhi-
bited the other day in the House of Lords. He
must have felt that twitching of the fingers and in-
voluntary clenching of the fist which we feel in the
presence of Tartuffe. Nothing is so hard to bear as
this kind of Pecksiiiffian civility. We are not among
those who quarrel with Lord Lucan for bringing
his case before his peers. He did not do so until
he had failed in obtaining a more suitable and
sterner tribunal ; and he only exercised one of those
privileges which belong and must belong to the ex-
ceptional and responsible position of a member of
either House of Parliament. But what of his defence
before that great assembly ? With respect to all the
additional charges made in Lord Raglan's letter,
enumerated above, we hold it to be triumphant. To
our mind, he really did fulfil his somewhat audacious
promise, and did " tear those charges to rags." We
content ourselves with referring to the published
speech upon these points. With respect to the main
question, the original imputation of " misconception "
of the now celebrated order, we can submit our judg-
ment to our readers in a few words. And first of all,
we ask with Lord F.lcho,—lf Lord Raglan's order
did not mean what Lord Lucan as well as its bearer
understood it to direct, what did it mean ? To this
question no answer, so far as we know, has ever
been given. What was Lord Lucan's position when
poor Nolan rode up to him ? In obedience to a pre-
vious order (so far as it was possible to obey it)
the cavalry was already so far in advance that they
had hardly started on their terrible ride before they
found themselves under fire, and Nolan tell. They
" advanced rapidly to the front," and rode at the only
enemy within their reach, and the only enemy who
could have been "carrying away the guns." Lord
Lucan indeed was of opinion that no guns of ours
were being removed, but had he been wrong, and
the commander in-chief right, there where the
charge was made were the guns, and there was the
only spot where he could "try to prevent" their re-
moval. Again be it remembered that Lord Lucan
had every reason to believe that his advance VMS a
portion of some great combined movement. He had
been waiting some time for the arrival of the infantry
which Lord Raglan had before informed him would
come to his support. It was natural to suppose
that they were at that moment moving upon the
enemy. He was now told that the French cavalry
were on his left—an admission that he could not
see them. It must have seemed to him certain that
some great operation was going forward under the
guiding eye of his commander-in-chief on the
heights behind him, the nature of which, shut up in
the valley as he was, he could not understand, but
in which he was expected to take his perilous part.
This probability increased a thousandfold the cruel
difficulty of his situation. Doubtless he might have
refused to " advance to the front," since we must
not use the word " attack." He might have stood
still, in defiance of the order, on the verge of the fire,
where he already was. We would to God he had
done ao. His refusal to obey an order, which, as it
turned out, commanded " the impossible" (in the
words of that bullet-pierced letter in poor Cathcart's
breast) would have saved many a gallant life. But
there was no alternative between doing what he did
and doing nothing, and the responsibility of doing
nothing was tremendous. While he stood still, his
brethren in arms, French and English, might be
counting on his advance. What if he were wrong
in his judgment, and Lord Raglan right? He was
but one wheel in a great and complicated machine.
What if the safety of of ere and the success of the
(ay were comproniised by his obstinacy? Had these
probabilities been realised, it is needless to say that
Lard Lucan was a ruined man. Nay, whether or no,
it s more than probable that a refusal to move
weld have covered him with infamy worse than
detb. We must not judge him by our after km.w-
ledte of the ghastly reality. The true state of the
casewould very likely never have been known or
belieed, had it not been for the catastrophe which
follosed. We devoutly wish, we repeat it, that the
midst had been saved, even at the risk of their

379

leader's honour. But Lord Lucan, strong as was
his feeling of the madness of the advance, could not
have had that entire conviction of doing right which
could alone steel a soldier of spirit to such a sacri-
fice. At all events, a commander-in-chief has no
right to place a subordinate in so terrible a dilemma
or, if he does, he has no right to make him respon-,
sibie in the eyes of the world for a catastrophe which
was the result of his unwilling obedience. We, for
our part, refuse to condemn a gallant British officer,
merely because, at an awful moment, he did not
attain that rare height of wisdom and moral courage
which could alone have averted the consequences

produced by the lamentable mistake of his superior.
And we refuse, as we think the people of England
will refuse, to free from blame the authors of that
too famous order, which " lost the light cavalry at
Balaklava."

PUBLIC EDUCATION.

THE following is the estimate of the amounts which
Parliament will be a.ked to vote for the expenses of
public education in Great Britain during the current
financial year. The vote was brcught on, out of due
course, on Monday night in committee of supply,
but, on the remonstrance of Mr. Disraeli, only
100,0001. was then actually tAken " on account," and
under the plea that the department really wanted
money for present expenditure :
For grants towards building, enlarging, and kr-
nishing schoolhouses, under miuutes now in
force

Purchase of books, maps, &c 4,000
Annual stipends of pupil teachers, and gratuities
to schoolmasters and schoolmisucsses
Capitation grants
Grants in augmentation of the salaries of school-
masters and schoolmistresses who have ob-
tained certificates of merit
Grants to assistant-teachers
Grants to thirty separate training schools, Queen's
scholarships, ttc.
In aid of salaries for lecturers
Annual subsidies in support of training schools
—National Society, 1,0001. ; British and
Foreign School Society, 7501. ; Education
Committee of the General Assembly of the
Church of Scotism', 5001.
For Kiieller-hall—current expenses, 2.8001.; sa-
laries, 1,7001. ; repairs anti sundries, &OW— .
Retiring pensions for incapacitated teachers
Establishment in London one secretary,
1,2001. ; two assistant-secretaries, from 700/.
to 1,00,3 , 1,7001. ; seven examiners, from :143/1.
to 8001., 1,61(31.; seven clerks, from 1101. to
3001., 1,3381. ; twenty-three supplementary
clerks, 801. to 2501., 2,14301 ; one advising
counsel, 3 Jl. ; one architect, 4001.
Inspection—linty-one inspectors, salaries from
2001. to 6001.,15,9'20 ; inspectors, allowance for
personal expenses, 10,250/. ; inspectors, reim-
bursement of actual cost of travelling, 5,7701.
Contingencies, viz.—for extra copying, 1,8001. ;
confidential printing, 1001.; sundry small dis-
bursements, 1001

47,000
4,800
47,000
I,ouo

4,800
I,ouo

9,491

31,940

Toted

AN AGGREGATE MEETING OF PROTESTANTS, embrac-
ing members of the Church Protestant Defence So-
ciety, Evangelical Alliance, National Club, Protestant
Alliance, Protestant Association, Reformation Society,
and Scottish Reformation Society, including deputa•
tions from constitmencies throughout Great Britain,
was held on Tuesday at Freemasons'-hall for the
purpose of promoting united action of all denomina-
tions of Protestants, without regard to party politics,
for the repeal of the grant to Maynooth. The chair
was taken by J. C. Colquohoun, Esq. The assembly
was addressed, and resdutions expressing the unan-
imous opinion of the meeting were proposed, and
supported by, Dr. Cowan, the Rev. G. Townshend,
Sen., Sir C. Eardley, the Rev. Hugh Stowell, and
many other gentlemen. Some hours being spent,
and the enthusiasm of the assemblage appearing
still unexhausted, it was agreed to resume the pro-
ceedings next day. Further addresses and resolu-
tions were then made and adopted, the result
presenting a most vigorous protest against the conti-
nuance of State support to the papist college.
A GENERAL MEETING of inhabitants of the borough
of Marylebone was held on Tuesday in the vestry-
hall, to take into consideration the best means of
promoting a testimonial to the late Lord Duulry
Coutts Stuart, who for seven years represented that
borough in the House of Commons. Sir B. Hall,
Bart., M.P., presided, and wits supported by Lord
E.rington, M.P., M. Louis Kossuth, Mr. W. D.
Cooper, and other gentlemen. Venous speeches
were made expressive of admiration and respect for
the memory of the deceased noble lord, and a com-
mittee ultimately appointed to collect subscriptions
and carry out the purposes of the meeung. A hand-
some sum was subscribed in the room, Sir B. Hall
heading the list with a contribution of fifty guineas.
THE drawing by the Princess Royal at the Pen-
man exhibition, for which 2001. have been °fared,
was timidly valued by her Royal Highness Penh
al
one guinea.

let
pu
be
mi
to
br
lac
arc
ge
so
th
th
th
of
ah
tic
bi
ju
CC
If
hi
Zrcc
h
f.
it
I
li
d
8
ti
I
0
t
f.
r

•