The Sun.
London, England, 1855-03-31 00:00:00

TIIE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 31, 1855.

Russia, to prevent a repetition of such occurrences as we had
'ecently witnessed. (Hear, hear.) He was glad to see the
ioble lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs had re-
%urned to his place, because it gave him an opportunity of
expressing a hope that, in carrying on the present negotiations
ho would be actuated by the same spirit which animated him
last, when ho said that a great power like Russia could not
he permitted to hold such a position as should enable her, at
her own free will and caprice, to disturb the peace and tran-
quillity of Europe. (Hear.)
The Duke of ARGYLL thought it somewhat odd to find
the noble earl defending observations coming from a noble
lord who last year snubbed him for indulging in a precisely
similar line of remark.

The Earl of MALMESBURY must interrupt the noble duke.
He did not think the speech of the noble duke in good taste
at this moment ; but if it were, it was not true. He denied
that he was " snubbed" by his noble friend, though be might
have been somewhat unfairly rebuked by his noble friend for
what he said.

The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said what had passed on
the occasion referred to had really gone out of his mind alto-
gether, but ho did not think it right that matters of this
kind, occurring accidentally in debate, shoultbe recalled.'
The Duke of ARGYLL declared that it was in perfect good
humour that he had recalled the incident ; but he had risen
chiefly to state that the noble earl had mistaken the ground
of objection which his noble friend (Earl Granville) had taken
to the speech of the noble earl (the Earl of Ellenborongh).
His noble friend did not object to any noble lord rising in his
place to comment upon the events of the war or the conduct
of the negotiations, provided his remarks were kept within
proper bounds; but his noble hind's objection was directed
to the peculiar character of the observations which fell from
the noble earl opposite. He always listened with great at-
tention and great admiration to the eloquence of the noble
earl, but it appeared to him that the noble earl had made
his speech to-night without any specific object. Certainly it
only contained one suggestion, and that was a recommenda-
tion to erect a Turkish fortification in the Bosphorus. Beyond
that, the speech appeared to be devoid of any object, but the
noble earl gave it as his opinion that the army in front of
Sebastopol could do no more than it had already done, an
opinion which, coming from a high military authority like
the noble earl, was calculated to do much harm. But the
noble lord said we went to Sebastopol for our own objects.
Now he denied that ; we went to Sebastopol as much for the
object of Austria and Germany as our own.

The Earl of ELLENBOROtIGH—What I meant was that
the object was common to England and France, but not com-
mon to all the other Powers engaged in the war.
The Duke of ARGYLL confessed that he was quite unable
to understand the drift of the noble earl's speech to-night, par-
ticularly when he compared it with some of his former speeches
on the same subject. Last year the noble earl told them that
this was a statesman's war. If he meant by that observation that
the war was antagonistic to the feelings of the people, the noble
earl was wrong; but on the other hand, if he meant that the
war was waged for a great object, which only great statesmen
could appreciate, how could the noble earl expect that great
object to be accomplished if Russia was to remain in undisturbed
possession of the Black Sea? If the noble earl thought any re-
sult short of that ought to satisfy great statesmen, he could not
agree with him, but how could the noble earl advocate the aban-
donment of the Crimea, when it was only the other day that he
said the safety of our Indian possessions in some measure de-
pended upon our raising the Asiatic tribes against Russia ? He
confessed it appeared to him that the noble earl had made his
speech for the sake of speech making, without any specific
object, but certainly without being able to present to the Go-
vernment or the house any new consideration, either as re-
garded the mode of carrying on the war or the object to
which it ought to lead.

Lord COLCHESTER gave some explanation of what the
noble earl meant when he advocated our seeking the aid of
Prussia and other Asiatic states, It was not to protect India
but to harass Russia that the noble earl wanted those states
to be stirred np, With regard to the objections which had
been urged against touching upon the negotiations for peace
while they were pending, of what use would it be comment-
ing upon them after they were closed, when it would be too
late to make any alterations ?

After a few words in explanation from the Duke o 1
ARGYLL;

Lord-ABINGER said if there was any want of confidence
on the part of the public, it was owing to the want of public
counsel and the want of publicity of the reasons on which
the measures had been undertaken. There had been no
statement of the military reasons which led to the expedition.
During the time the ❑oble duke the late Secretary of War
was iu Office, he was greatly in need of military counsel,
and it was the impression of the public at the time that Go-
vernment were proceeding in the prosecution of military
measures without military advice. The noble earl below him
(the Earl of Ellenborough) had only expressed in better
terms than anybody else what was the general opinion, when
he intimated a doubt as to the importance of Sebastopol in
the main object of the war. He (Lord Abiner) was afraid
that Government were proceeding on the same policy, for ho
believed they were sending out a large cavalry force to the
Crimea consisting of raw troopers and young horses. If Go-
vernment would condescend to take the advice of military
men, they would find that this force would do little in the
prosecution of the war, and that the generale could not rely
upon them.

The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said he must trouble
their lordships with a few words in explanation. The noble
duke opposite seemed to attach so much importance to the
discrepancy which he found between his two speeches that
he must take the liberty of calling the recollection of the
noble lord the President of the Council to the fact that he
(Lord Ellenborough) had always objected to the expedition
to Sebastopol. He thought so strongly on the subject that,
although in the country, he sent to the noble earl two papers
—whichihe had written for his own satisfaction—containing
opinions elaborately worked out on the subiect, against the
expedition ; but, the expedition having been undertaken, he
said in his speech, to which the noble duke had alluded, that
the course which they were pursuing now was not the course
which would lead to success. If they allowed themselves
to be pressed by the whole military force of Russia, who
could bring troops up by land, whilst they had to carry them
by sea with insufficient means of transport, they would be
beaten, and the only course was to press Russia upon both
flanks, on the Danube and the Pruth as well. There was,
therefore, no discrepancy between the two speeches. He
had always olteeted to the expedition, but after it had been
'undertaken he took the liberty of stating in that manner the

....7.. .... .. 1.. ~l.t~n_