The Press.
London, England, 1856-02-23 00:00:00

THE CASE OF LORD CARDIGAN.

NEVER, surely, was there so striking an ex-
ample of the fickleness of popular favour, as
in the treatment offered to the Earl of
CARDIGAN. A few months since the high per-
sonal qualities, the cool courage, and the
soldierly accomplishments of that brilliant
officer were extolled to the skies ; and now it
is sought to blast his character upon charges
relative to his conduct in the month of Novem-
ber, 1854. We have examined the whole case,
as it is presented against Lord CARDIGAN, and
there is enough in it to show how cautiously
we should lend an ear to vague charges
brought against any officer of rank in her
Majesty's service.
In the first place, we must call attention to
the proceedings in Parliament on Thursday
night. In the Upper House, Lord DERBY
noticed the extraordinary circumstance that,
although the particular accusations were made
against Lord CARDIGAN in June last, the Com-
ma►nder-in-Chief did not see the Report until it
was placed on the table of the House of Lords,
and that thus a cruel injustice was done to the
Earl of CARDIGAN by withholding the fact,
until recently, that those charges had been
made against him. Later in the evening,
Lord HARDINGE confirmed tho statement of
Lord DERBY with the words, " I did not receive
" that Report until very lately, and as soon as
" I received it I put myself in communication
"with my Noble friend, Lord PANMURE."
That is, really, a singular revelation. Lord
CARDIGAN, in the opinion of all men, had emi-
nently distinguished himself by personal
prowess in the Crimea. His health gave way;
he came home, and he was made an Inspector-
General of Cavalry. Accusations, under Lord
PANMURE'S cognisance, were preferred against
him last summer. The Gallant Earl was con-
tinued in his elevated and responsible post of
Inspector• General of Cavalry, and in that
capacity waited upon her Majesty at the royal
visit to Aldershott last August. There, with
other Crimean heroes, his Lordship was deco-
rated with the glittering insignia of personal
merit; and now it is sought to taint his name.
Then, again, the course of appointing an
anomalous Board for the purpose of "receiving
such explanations" as the officers inculpated
" may desire to give, and to report thereupon
" to her Majesty," is a most unprecedented

FEBRUARY 23, 1856.

proceeding. Lord HARDWICKE, with his dis-
tinguished naval experience, protested against
it. Earl GREY, acutely and logically, exposed
the difficulties of such a tribunal. Is it to be
analagous to a court-martial? if so, why not
have one? How is evidence, pro and contra,
to be received? Is the Judge Advocate-
tieneial to be employed? Is the inquiry to
be judicial? and by what precedents is an
inquiry upon an inquiry, an appeal in England
from a commission in the Crimea, to be
guided? Lora BROUGHAM, then, with his
judicial experience, pointed out clearly that
there was no analogy between the Cintra In-
quiry and the proposed Board, which is to set
like a court of appeal, from the ruling of the
M'Neill-Tulloch Commission. Our readers
must at once see that the course pursued by
the authorities is of a most extraordinary
character.

But Lord CARDIGAN, in the opinion of all
reasonable persons, as far as he is concerned,
has done away with the necessity for the pro-
posed Board. To the country his Lordship
has frankly given an explanation. The whole
question turns upon dates, and the charge of
neglect applies to the fortnight between the
14th and 28th of November, 1854. At that
period Lord CARDIGAN was struggling with bad
health; and he was compelled, much to his
regret, to place himself before a medical
board, and resign his command. The charge,
for such it seems to be (whether intentionally,
or otl►crwise, we cannot say), is, that the
horses of the Light Cavalry Brigade were
neglected by Lord CARDIGAN, and left to
starve.

His Lordship's answers to the charge are
clear and close. He at once grapples with
them, and demolishes them.

1 The evidence of the accusing witnesses
admit that down to the 22nd of November the
horses had received full, " or nearly full," ordi-
nary rations of barley The Brigade-Major of
the Light Cavalry (Colonel MAYow) admits
that do►en to the 22nd of November barley
was supplied to the cavalry. Throughout the
whole campaign it was upon barley that the
horses maintained their condition, and the
charge at Balaklava attests how well they
stood it out. But at a subsequent period of
his evidence Colonel MAYOW admits that he
understood from the Commissariat officers that
no hay could be got at Balaklava.
2. A vast quantity of indignation against
LOl'd CARDIGAN has been excited, because his
Lordship objected to the proposal that troop
horses should be led down to Balaklava, and
return laden with forage. On this point, Lord
PeNNtuax fairly enough said in the House of
Peers on Thursday evening :—" He (Lord CAR-
" DIGAN) might have had the best possible
" reason for declining to do so." His Lord-
ship's reason was plain. " The horses were
" then (when the request was made) totally
" unfit to march seven or eight miles and
" back again, heavily laden with forage." By
adopting the course recommended, a greater
number would have perished.
The plain truth is, that the Commissariat in
every direction had broken down. Routine
ran riot ; difficulties had not been foreseen by
the War Department at home, and the whole
army, officers and men, paid the penalty. But
to charge Lord CARDIGAN with neglect, can be
refitted by attending to the collateral state-
ments of the accusing witnesses, which destroy
each other. How his Lordship did his duty,
let us hear the testimony of Sir EDMUND
LYONS :

I was sorry to hear that your lordship was obliged to
leave this army—obliged you certainly were, for no man
fouglit against the effects of rude campaigning, as well as
against the enemy, more manfully than your lordship ; to
wit, the beat and privations on the Danube, the cold and
exposure before Sebastopol, and the glorious charge before
I Sal a k lava.

These are strong words, and they are dated
on the 3rd of January, 1855, two months after
the alleged neglect took place. Sir EDMUND
I,ross was then ou the spot in the Crimea,
and would he ever have written such a letter
as that, if he believed that any charges were
hanging over Lord CARDIGAN'S head, or even
if any accusations were then made against
him?

THE PRESS.