The Sun.
London, England, 1855-03-09 00:00:00

that I then committed an error which I was not prepared
again to commit. No doubt, on the occasion which has
been referred to, I said that if there was a banquet in
honour of his return, and I was invited to attend toit, I should
be prepared to do so in order to celebrate the brilliant suc-
cesses which were then anticipated. Well, I have received
no such invitation—(a laugh) ;--and had I received that in-
vitation, the penishment to which I have referred was so
severe, and I was so conscious of the indiscretion that I
committed, that I know not whether I should have re-
peated it. (A. laugh.) Happily I have not been put to
the test. It is true I stated on that occasion that I had
the greatest opinion of tho proved and distinguished valour.
of Sir Charles Napier, and I added that I thought he was
also discreet. He has confirmed that opinion. Discretion,
the better part of valour, has not been wanting to him.
He has proved himself that consummate admiral whom I
praised for his valour and discreetness. (A laugh.) I shall
only say, in answer to another comment made by the hon.
and learned gentleman, that private letters have been pro-
duced before committees of this house ; but then those
were cases when an inquiry of a judicial character was in
course of prosecution, and when it was the order of the
house that persons, papers, and records should be produced.
I think the house will perceive the difference between the
production of documints before a judicial committee sanc-
tioned by the authority of this house, and the production
of documents such as the hon. gentleman has produced
to-night—partially and, as I should say, most unfairly—
in support simply of an appeal to the house to say whether
it is' consistent with the duty of the Government and the
public interests at stake, that the whole or any part of
them should be produced. (Hear, hear.) He has said,
and quite correctly, that on the whole the conduct of Sir
Charles Napier in reference to the command of the fleet
up to the 24th of September was approved by the Govern-
ment. Certainly, it is a general rule that " a good work-
man does not quarrel with his tools ;" and yet it is true
that the gallant officer, not at tho Mansion-house, but in
an official letter, did state, that the fleet under his com-
mand was ill-manned and unfit to meet the enemy. On
the receipt of that letter, the Admiralty called on the gal-
lant admiral to state the specific ships to which he applied
that remark, and when so called on he failed to specify
any ship. (Hear.) Ido maintain that the discretion exer-
cised by Sir Charles .Napier, in reference to attacks with an
inferior force upon fortresses was, in the terms of my pri-
vate letter, "a wise discretion." I have never quarrelled
with the exercise of that discretion, and had he adhered
to his assertion made early in May and repeated in July,
that Sweaborg was unassailable either by land or sea, no
one word of hesitation with respect to the prudence exer-
cised by him, either in writing or in speech, would have
fallen from me. It is quite true that on the 24th of Sep-
tember, when he, for the first time reconnoitred Sweaborg
close at hand, he did write to the Admiralty a despatch
upon whisk I shall not further dwell, because I do not
think it consistent, with my duty to enter into details
which would, if stated, materially alter the present aspeot
of the case. It is said by the hon. and learned member
that the appliances for that attack, as contemplated by Sir
Charles ou the 24th of September, were not sent by the
Admiralty. But on the 12th of May he said that this par.
ticular fortress was unassailable either by land or sea, and,

relying on the judgment of the gallant admiral, the Board
of Admiralty thought it of practical use to send further ap-
pliances for the purpose of that. attack. It is also certain
that a difference of opinion did arise between naval and
military officers of the highest authority. Into that dif-
ference of opinion lam sure the house will not expect me
to enter, beeause it bears directly upon. naval operations
which have only been suspended for a short period, and
are now about to be resumed. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and
learned gentleman says he has looked at these papers care-
fully. lie is an equity lawyer. What does he think of the
justice of a proceeding which calls upon me to defend my-
self with my hands tied behind my back, when, without a
breach of duty, I cannot produce this correspondence, or
even refer to it ? I have felt my sense of duty so strongly
that I have not brought a paper down with me. I have
only seen a paper prepared ex parte, and marked "confiden-
tial," containing extracts from both public and private des
spatches. And yet this equity lawyer, who is so fond
of fair play, after conning his case and speaking from
a brief, comes down and makes an attack which he
expects me to answer when I have Rot the materials,
and when a sense of public duty, eve' if I had them,
would absolutely forbid me to use them. (Hear, hear.)
It is quite true that the letter of Sir Charles Napier _
of the 24th of September, with reference to the attack on
Sweaborg, did present to the Board of Admiralty an en-
tirely different view of the subject from that contained in
his former communication. It then appeared perfectly
clear to them, even on the showing of Sir Charles Napier
himself, that it was perfectly possible if the whole force
then in the Baltic was reunited, to make an attack by the
naval force alone on Sweaborg ; Use departure both of the
English and French fleets was accordingly arrested. And
then the hon. and learned member has not thought it un-
worthy to assign a motive for the instructions sent out on
the 4th October. He said that accounts had then been
received of the supposed fall of Sebastopol, and that, acting
under the influence of the excitement which then pre-
vailed, the Board of Admiralty varied their instructions,
and gave orders entirely different from what they had given
before. I give the most positive denial to that statement.
The new orders to which he has referred were sent out on
the day after we received Sir Charles Napier's letter of the
24th of September, and if the hon. and learned gentleman
will look at the close of the despatch of the 4th of October,
I think that he will see that Sir Charles Napier was told
that he must make no desperate attack; and that whethez
he should attack or not was left entirely to his own discre•

tion v Warning was given him that if the mi ens placed at
his disposal were adequate, the country had a right to ex-
pect
that everything that valour could do should be at-
tempted ; but that the decision as to the course which
should be taken rested entirely with him. (Hear, hear.)
If that passage is in the despatch, I must say that I think
the hon. and learned gentleman has been guilty of a want
of fairness and candour towards the Government in not
reading it. (Hear.) Something has been said with re-
spect to au assertion made both by myself and nay gallant
friend the member for Gloucester, that Admiral Napier
had not been dismissed from the command of the fleet.
It is quite true that on the whole the Admiralty had pc.
ground for censuring Sir Charles Napier fur his conduct of
the fleet, but it is not true that the Board of Adiniralt
did not censure certain acts of Sir Charles Napier with re-
ference to the authority of the Government. On the con
trary, they had more than once to warn the gallant admiral
that the language and tone he assumed towal de the autho-
rity under which he served did not appear consistent with
the subordination and deference due to the supreme autho-
rity under which he so commanded. Then, as to bip
alleged dismissal. It is quite certain that admirals, hav-
ing performed similar services in the Baltic, have receiveu
similar orders at the end of the autumn so to strike 0-lei!

flags. Admiral Hope, who commanded in the Baltic iu
1812, was on his return ordered to strike his flag. It doe:
not however, follow that, when an admiral is ordered t&
strike his flag, ho may not be ordered to rehoist it. It
rests with the authorities to decide whether the conduct
of the officer in that command has been such as to entitle
him to that confidence. And I do not think that it wilt
redound to the efficiency of the service, or be conducive ti
good discipline, or hive a happy effect on our forces, whe-
ther by sea or land, if this house should sit in judgment
whether it is right that, at the termination of a naval
campaign, they should again employ a particular offices
or not. It is quite clear that Sir C. Napier, on the 24th
of September, in writing this despatch with reference to
future operations before Sweaborg, did takea course which
insured him the command in the Baltic if that plan was
adopted. But it was for the executive to determine whe-
ther, having regard to the whole conduct of the gallant
admiral, it was desirable to reappoint him. I have had
the honour of knowing Sir Charles Napier for a long pe-
riod. I have the greatest admiration of the gallantry he
has displayed on many trying occasions. These are not
empty words. On my responsibility, in the year 1353, I
awarded to him a good-service pension, as a mark of the
respect of the Admiralty for his past services. But I
should be altogether unworthy of my place in this house,
and of the office which I lately had the honour to fill, if I
did not say that the tone, from a very early period, taken
by Admiral Napier in commenting on his instructions
was turbulent and insubordinate, and assumed a character
which I should say was altogether inconsistent with his
duty to the Admiralty, and that if the Admiralty had
tamely submitted to it, and orderedhine to rehoist his flag,
it would have set the worst possible example to the sere
vice. I have now told the exact truth with regard to what
occurred. I have not a partial° of unkind feeling to Sit
Chas. Napier • on the contrary, I deeply regret what has
happened. But again I repeat it, I think it will be a very
great misfortune if the executive Government consent to
the publication of this correspondence. If I had had any
doubt before as to the propriety of ordering Sir Charles
Napier to resume the command of the Baltic fleet, the course
he has pursued since he was ordered to strike his lag—his
language, to which I have before a lverted—his not having
hesitated, when angry with me and the board under which
he served, to produce documents of a most confidential
nature—would certainly have removed any hesitation on
that subject from my mind. (Hear, hear.) I now leave
the matter in the hands of the house. They will decide
whether this correspondence shall be produced. But never
in my life was I more astonished at any course taken by an
hon. member of this house than at that which the hon.
and learned gentleman the member: for 'Wallingford has
thought it consistent with his dignity to pursue on this
occasion. lam certainly glad that it is not a member of
the naval profession who has acted in this way. (Hear,
hear.) As for the equity and love of justice of the hon.
and learned member, it may be very good practice in the
courts, but it will not, I think, satisfy the House of Com-
mons. (Cheers.)
Admiral WALCOTT, after declaring that he was not
influenced by any party feeling en this question, that be
much regretted the course taken by Sir Charles Napier,
in addressing the company assembled at the Lord Mayor's
.
banquet at the very time that his application for a court
martial
did endernot
enter enrin
considerationteany a i
bzu en of thetshsieAdmaa papers
which d
that he rs
which had been referred to until they were all before the
n t
which
house—said that it was true that there was a very preva.
lent impression that the achievements of the Baltic fleet
magnificent
however, this impressione
had
b eneont
sent adequateot. toH
eeean thought,agu
was unjust. For there could be no doubt that a fleet de-
spatched to sea on so short a notice must have been ill-
manned (as Admiral Napier had asserted), and besides
it w
that,sent, from
it was
fm necessarily
inefficient in the seas to which
being without an adequate number
of praums or gun-boats adapted for shallow water.
Ho believed, too, that it was quite erroneous to sup-
pose that ships could act successfully against stone walls.
What had taken place at Bomarsund and on the naval
attack of Sebastopol had shown the fallaciousness of the
public expectation on this point; and he believed that if
the Dey of Algiers had not been so cursedly afraid of our
fleet—(loud laughter)—and allowed them to come unmo-
lested close under the batteries, that it was very doubtful
whether Lord Exmouth could ever have gained the posi-
tion from which he operated so successfully. He certainly
e far
against
h such
athere-
fore, did not say that a fleet could not run into S,bastopol or
anything
movementelse;
ben
atthteenchdearNevsitwh srt
ereetOssto. 1s
fore, as he could judge, Sir Charles Napier had exercised
a wise discretion in net running the risk of crippling his
fleet, and had fulfilled the just expectations of the country.
(Hear, hear.) With respect to the production of these
papers he quite agreed that they ought to be wholly or not
was
s prudent
rather t
inclined
nr produce ut coo
deferau y
at all before the house. He could not say whether it world
b
otfoththeme authority; le u t n t
of
fi s
the po i the
right
hon. baronet. As
to the order to Sir Charles Napier to
stake his flag, it was true it was conveyed in a curt way;
but then the
Admiralty
were invariable' curt. (A laugh.
Nor could he say that the order was either in itself a cen-
sure or a dismissal, or that it was not conformable to rule
He did, however, think that, as the Admiralty said they
were on the whole satisfied with his conduct, and at all
events brought no charge against him, it would have been
only a proper consideration for his feelings had they, in
ordering him to strike his flag and come on shore, con-
veyed to him that fair and merited praise which the gal-
lant admiral's letter drew from them two days la.ter. (Hear,
hear.) ' He thanked God we had now a fine fleet at Spit-
head, ready to sail
in a few days. A more efficient fleet
could never leave these shores. It would possess one great
advantage Which Pit C, Napieex fitlt would