The Press.
London, England, 1856-05-03 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

Lord Panmure's deceptive statements as to the state
of the Turkish army in Asia on the ground that if
Lord Panmure had told the truth he would have given
information to Russia. The capture of Kars by
the Russians would have immense political influence
in that 'quarter of the world; but, although the pre-
sent Government deserved blame for their conduct
with respect to the Turkish Loan, he did not think
that Kars had fallen solely through their want of
foresight and energy.
Mr. MAOUIRE insisted that the great offender was
Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, who did not give to
General Williams that countenance and support
which would have saved Kars.

Sir W. HEATJICOTE observtd that the position of
the question was very much changed by the amend-
mend of Mr. Seymer, and suggested that it was
more for the credit of the house to adopt it than to
give a vote for or against the original motion, which
might be mistaken, and an erroneous impression be
thus made upon the country.
Mr. WARNER reprobated what he termed the heart-
less inhumanity of Lord Stratford, and declined
to vote for the amendment, considering that the
question should be met by a direct affirmative or
negative. He opposed the motion.
Mr. Sergeant SHEE, having a clear conviction upon
the question, advised Lord Palmerston not to adopt
the amendment, if he did not wish to be regarded as
a traitor to his own fame and to disappoint the just
expectations of the country.
Sir B. LrrroN moved the adjournment of the de
bate.

Lord PALMERSTON was of opinion that the house
should come to a deci.ion upon the question that
night, and declared that he was ready to continue
the debate until the latest hour.
Mr. DISRAELI observed that after the amendment
of Mr. Seymer a new feature had been introduced
into the debate, and he should support Sir B.
Lytton in persisting in the motion for its adjourn-
ment.

The house divided upon this motion, which was
negatived by 243 to 173.
Mr. MALnis then moved that the house do adjourn ,
whereupon

Lord PALMERSTON yielded, and consented to the
adjournment of the debate until Thursday, which
was agreed to.
The debate was resumed on Thursday.
Sir BULWER LYTTON said the question was, whether
among other causes a want of energy and foresight
on the part of the Government had not contributed
to the tall of Kars? Admitting, as he did, the ability
of Lord Clarendon's despatches (and if letter-writing
could have saved Kars, Lord Clarendon would have
saved and the fact of Turkish maladministration,
there was, he contended, one fault at.ributable to the
British Government from which the Chancellor of
the Exchequer had vainly endeavoured to free them ;
if a moderate sum had been placed at the disposal
of General Williams, a fortress acknowledged to be
the key of Asia Minor, which had been conquered,
not by force, but by famine, would have been saved:—
I say that either by a direct grant, or by means of a
Turkish loan, or—and that would have been the best and
simplest mode of all—by sending money to your commis•
sioner himself, expressly for the purpose of being employed
in the defence of Kars—l say that by any one of these
modes that city might have beeen saved. ( Hear, hear.)
But when Lord Ellenborough, in the month of August,
called the attention of the House of Lords to the distressed
state of Kars, and the neglect of the war in Asia, Lord
Panmure replied, that Turkey, in that quarter, was well
able to defend herself. (Hear, hear.) Turkey able to
defend herself ! That was the statement of Lord Panmure
in the teeth of the information contained in these de•
spatches which have been published for the purpose of
showing how defenceless Turkey was at that very time;
and the statement was made on the very same day—
namely, the 3rd of August—on which Lord Clarendon, in
a despatch to Lord Cowley, said it was clear that without
assistance the whole Turkish force in Asia must be de-
stroyed or captured. (Hear, hear.)

General Williams had stated in his despatch 23rd of
June that if within four months aid did not come he
saw nothing before him but starvation, and yet that
aid was never sent:—

When Omer Paella pressed the allied generals and
admirals to consent to the adoption of his plan for the
relief of Kars, and founded his arguments on the despatch
of the 23rd of June, showing the urgency and the import-
ance of sending aid to the Turkish force in Armenia, the
allied generals absolutely refused to give any opinion upon
the subject, on the ground that they had no information
from the ambassadors of their respective Governments at
Constantinople which could lead them to suppose that the
affairs of Asia were in a precarious position. That was the
species of concert which seemed to prevail between our
agents in the East.

And yet the Government who had so signally mis-
managed everything, now attempted to throw the
blame on Turkish maladministration. When Lord
Panmure appeared upon thescene, in September, he
did nothing but write to General Vivian "to uphold
the British reputation." If, then, the Government
were so careful in July of the British flag, why did
they permit it to succumb before the Russians in

SATURDAY,

November. Was not the honour of the English flag
concerned in the surrender of Kars ?

The eyes of England—nay, the eyes of Europe—were fixed
with unalloyed admiration upon the noble attitude of the
brave English soldier, who, with the assistance of three or
four of his countrymen, was upholding—embodying—the
renown of the whole nation. (Cheers.) Kars and General
Williams could not be divided in the mind of any one
Kars was that Englishman, and that Englishman was Kan;
—(loud cheers )—and to have evinced energy and foresight
in preparing for the defence of Kars would have been to
have closed the war with glory, not only to General Williams,
from whose renown nothing can detract, but to England.
The fact was the Government paid no attention to
the applications of General Williams. He asked for
money, surgical aid, and personal authority, neither
of which was granted, and be was left to oonsequenees
of which they were well aware. When an army
was at last sent to his aid, the Government were
astute in discovering objections in respect to the
route, and perplexed the operations by conflicting
orders. When he was asked what was the Govern-
ment to do, he asked in return what had they done?
If he admitted that they could not have written
better, he insisted that they could not have acted
worse. There might he other causes for the
surrender of Kars, but the main fault rested with the
Minister of War.

Mr. V. SMITH defended the Government, insisting
that it was not to blame for the fall of Kars, which
was one of those accidents of war difficult to guard
against, however it might be regretted. Russia had
nothing to pride herself on in the way of triumph,
for Kars had fallen by famine, and not by force of
arms. The war on the whole had been well con-
ducted, the peace well concluded, and he would con-
fidently appeal to the representatives of a generous
people to allow past errors to fall into oblivion.
Colone. DUNNE said that the proper mode of
relieving the fortress was by a march upon the com-
munications of General Mouravieff, that the mute
of Trebizond was not practicable for cannon, and
that that chosen by Omer Pacha was a wise and
proper ono, and, though commenced too late, his exi
pedition very nearly succeeded. He had no doubt
that the blame of the fall of Kars rested upon the
War Department, which deserved, in his opinion, the
censure of the house.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM assumed the substance of the
blame imputed to Government to be—first, having
reason to be dissatisfied with the conduct of Lord
Stratford de Redcliffe, they failed to recal him;
and, secondly, having omitted to send timely aid to
Kars. He agreed with the Attorney-General that
the conduct of Lord Stratford had been reprehensi-
ble, and that the misunderstanding between him and
General Williams was not conducive to the good of
the service ; but, on the other hand, the past lite and
the great services of Lord Stratford must be remem-
bered. With regard to the other point, there could
be no doubt that there was an indisposition on the
part of the French Government to diminish the
force in the Crimea until the capture of Sebastopol
was secured; and, although he did not say, nor
would the Treasury bench maintain, that no error
had been committed, in a situation of danger and
difficulty, it. would be a bold measure on the part of
the House of Commons, after the result, to censure
the Government for an exercise of discretion. With
respect to pecuniary assistance, he must say some
blame did attach to the Government. He thought
that if a credit had been opened in favour of General
Williams, either with the Ambassador or with the
Treasury in England, to the amount of 100,0001. or
200,0001., it would have amply supplied Kars with
all the necessary prov;sions. He thought likewise
that Omer Pacha might have been allowed to with-
draw the Turkish veterans, and that their place
might have been supplied with the Turkish Contin-
gent. There was another point :—With every desire
to maintain the French alliance in its full integri.7,
he thought too much had, not unnaturally, been
conceded to objections not well founded. He came
now to the vote he should give. If the previous
question had been moved, he did not know that he
should not have voted for it ; but he could not re-
gard the amendment, which asked merely for delay,
in that light. He could not consider the motion as
an abstract question—if it were, Ire could not vote
for it ; but it must be looked at with reference to
circumstances and to time. All the principal objects
of the war had been fully achieved, and it would be
ungenerous to the Administration, in such circum-
stances and at that time, to declare them unworthy
altogether of the confidence of their countrymen,
and that they had failed in foresight and energy.
He should, therefore, not vote for the amendment,
and he should give his negative to the original
motion.

Mr. DISRAELI said the right hon. baronet had te►n-
pered justice with mercy. He spoke against the
Government, but he would vote .or them. (Laughter.)
He could not agree with him in his division of the
subject before the house. Lord Stratford's conduct

MAY 3, 1856.

did not form the principal moiety of that subject.
Great pains had been taken to make a scapegoat of
Lord Stratford de Redchtfe, on whom public indigna-
tion was visited by anticipation ; but the motion be-
fore the house had nothing to do with that noble
lord; it referred only to the conduct of the Govern-
ment; and however indefensible might have been
the conduct of Lord Stratford, according to the do-
cuments on the table, yet the Government, not
having recalled him, was responsible for that con-
duct. For these were the principles the house should
recollect concerning the conduct of a public man :
First, never to allow an attack on an individual Mi-
nister when the whole Cabinet is known to be re-
sponsible for his conduct; and secondly, never to throw
upon any individual employed by her Majesty's Go-
vernment abroad the consequences of his conduct—
h ,wever outrageous, iniquitous, or ruinous that con-
duct may have been—so long as that individual, whe-
ther a general or an ambassador, is not recalled by
her Majesty's Government.
When the present Government was formed the
squabbles between General Williams and Lord Strat-
ford were over. The war in Asia was to be carried
on with vigour and efficiency ; but how was the war
carried on? And what did the Government do for
General Williams; did they send him men?—
We have been assured that all the energies of the nation
were concentrated on Sebastopol, and that the stake was
too great, the conflict too arduous to admit of your under-
taking any other enterprise. That the stake was great I
freely confess—that the energies exerted were no greater
than the occasion demanded events have testified—that
mighty efforts were required to be made even by the lead-
ing nations who were embarked in the struggle is beyond
all controversy. But what armies were assembled on that
remote peninsula? France was there, imperial France ;
England was there, free and patriotic England ; you had
by your side the Turkish army, a gallant band, whose
valour had been proved on many a well-contested field;
you had brought from the north of Italy a body of men
dauntless and intrepid, for whom I trust that the glorious
destiny is yet reserved of exercising a high and salutary
influence on the fortunes of their country—( Hear, hear )
and, not content with these assembled hosts, you had en-
tered into conventions enabling Austria to call up from
the banks of the Danube all the chivalry of Hungary to
protect your interests in Wallachia and Moldavia. (Hear,
hear.) You were five nations allied in a common cause—
England, France, Turkey, Sardinia, Austria. That you
were playing a high game, and that you had a great stake
in Sebastopol, Ido not for one moment dispute. But was
there not another power who had also a great stake ia that
mighty fortress? ( Hear, hear.) Had not Russia every-
thing at stake in Sebastopol ? ( Hear, hear.) And did
she not prove by her policy that she knew well how to
gauge the value of the prize she set her heart on in Asia
Minor. (Hear, hear.) Now that peace has been con-
cluded, we can afford to speak of Russia with the respect
and admiration due to the prowess, the valour, and the
foresight of which she gave such abundant evidence through.
out the recent contest. (Cheer s.) Russia, I repeat, had
everything at stake in Sebastopol. Her pledge was as
grave—her interest in the fate of the struggle as momen-
tous as it is possible for language to describe. Yet Russia
could at the same moment defend Sebastopol and invade
Asia Minor. (Loud cheers.) And now we are to be told
that the combination of two such enterprises exceeded our
powers ! What a tribute to our country ! What a com-
pliment to our great arid faithful ally ! What an end ti•
ragernent for these rising Sardinians ! What an animat mg
reflection for Turkey in her future conflicts with the
to tell her that the banded nations of Europe made common
cause against Sebastopol, and that Russia, unaided and
alone, not only baffled them for a year, but sent an army of
diversion to Kars, while you could not afford a hundred
gins to General Williams! ( Hear.) i will not believe
that we are so fallen that the House of Commons will tole-
rate such a defence. I tell you that you ought to have
asnt forces to Asia Minor—however grave the responsibility
that devolved on yon—however great the stake for which
y oi were contending—however arduous the difficulties that
encompassed you. (Hear, hear.) Yes, even though you
had not these true and gallant allies by your side—even
thought you had stood against Russia singlehanded and
alone at Sebastopol, it still would have been your duty to
have sent assistance to General Williams in Asia Minor.

It might be said (as the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had observed \ that the fall of Kars was neither a
military nor a political disaster, but it could not be
asserted that a Minister, with all the resources of
the country at his command, was unable to assist
General Williams at Kars, because the energies of
the Government were concentrated in the Crimea.
But did the Ministers send money to General
Williams
Who will rise in this house and assert that they did.
Not one single piastre did they send. The soldiers of five
nations were wanted—every man of them—at Sebastopol.
Was the money required there also? Were all the balances
of the Exchequer likewise and of the banks needed at
Sebastopol? The noble lord at the head of the War De-
partment should have known, if any one did, what are the
sinews of war ; yet it will not be asserted that he sent any
Supply of them. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord at the
heed of the Government introduced the Turkish Loan
Bill to this house. Its preamble, if I atin recal the terms
aright, declares that the loan is to be raised for the defence
of the territory of the Sultan. Weto you too late in bring-
ing forward that measure ? If so, what is your vindication
of f your tardiness? You charge us with being an obstacle
to, your affording the necessary supplies to the Ottoman
pee. We ars no such obstacle; but, whatever were our