The Sun.
London, England, 1855-02-24 00:00:00

notoriety that many professional men held the opinion that
if Sebastopol had been attacked by the army and by the
fleet immediately after the Alma, that fortress would have
fallen into the hands of the Allies. He expressed no such
opinion, but he felt that in inquiring into the subject it
could not only be the conduct of the British general that
must be scrutinised. The promoters even of the committee
appeared now to shrink from carrying it into effect. The
hon. member for West Surrey, whose wit and eloquence he
much admired, had even admitted the danger of disturb-
ing the French alliance. That hon. gentleman said, that
the committee could inquire into such circumstances as
whether the waggon-train had been despatched without
harness, and similar circumstances, but the country ex-
pected, if there was an inquiry at all, not only an inquiry
into the administration of the War Department at home,
but a full and searching inquiry into the conduct of the
war. The hon. and learned member for Sheffield shook
his head, but he would tell him, that there could not be a
searching inquiry into the state of the army before Sebas-
topol which did not involve the consideration of the whole
conduct of the war. There was another objection of
great force. It was all very well for the right hon. gentle-
man the late Secretary for War, in a chivalrous spirit to
offer no objection to an inquiry into the administration of
the department with which ho had been connected, be-
cause, no doubt, he was conscious of having done all in his
power to discharge the duties of that department.
Nothing could be more natural than that that right lion.
gentleman should adopt that course, or that the Drake of
Newcastle should be anxious to clear himself from the
load of obloquy which had been most undeservedly heaped
upon him, but the hon. member for Kidderminster had
clearly demonstrated how inconvenient such an inquiry by
such a committee would he. The third and more serious
objection which he entertained was the manifest and cruel
injustice which would be committed towards those who
were absent. (Hear, hear.) It was proposed to arraign men
who for half a century had devoted their lives, and, when
necessary, their best blood to the service of their country,
and who had left all but their lives on the field of battle,
and to commit a cruel injustice on an old and distinguished
officer. (" No, no," from the Opposition and from Mr.
Drummond.) He was glad that the hon. member for West
Surrey did not entertain such views, but the hon. metnber
for Aylesbury on a previous occasion, in a speech of great
power, but of a tone which he never wished again to hear
in that house, had intimated that that was the abject. The
hon. gentleman had said the country wanted a man to cut
everything down, and would apply a knife to the
root--(hear, hear)—and he intimated that the object of
the committee was to remove every man who now held
high command. When the proper time arrived, those men
could be arraigned by the Government if they had failed
in the performance of their duty, but for the House of
Commons to take upon itself to perform that act was an
infringement upon the prerogative of the Crown. He had
been astonished on a previous occasion to hear it stated by
the right hon. member for Midhurst that the inquiry
could be a secret one ; but would that satisfy the country?
The people of this country would expect to hear from day
to day the reason of their friends anti relations perishing
on the heights of Sebastopol, awl the coesequeuce would
be that day by day there would be in the public pints
imputations upon public men, who would have no oppor-
tunity to reply to them until the subject had become stale,
and who, when they did have the opportunity of replying,
would be prevented, would not be allowed to impugu the
conduct of any general officer. (Hear.) It appeared to him
to be heaping injustice upon injustice, and he would not
have been satisfied if he had not entered his protest against
the appointment of this committee. (Hear.)
Mr. WALPOLE—I have listened with extreme surprise
to the most extraordinary observations of the right hon.
gentlemen the members fur Carlisle and South Wiltshire,
on the consitutional rights, privileges, and duties of mem-
bers of this house that I over heard from statesmen of au-
thority. It has been stated that there is no authority,
except an authority in the reign of King William and the
Waleheren expedition, for the House of Commons to in-
quire into naval or military operations, and that in both
the cases to which I have referred the operations were at
an end when the inquiry took place. I will presently show
that there exist many authorities of the greatest weight,
Loth in this and in the other House of Parliament, that
where there has been calamity—where there has been dis-
aster—where there has been mismanagement and sup-
posed misconduct—it is the duty of this house and the
duty of the other House of Parliament to inquire into the
calamities and the disasters which were the result of such
mismanagement. I have heard it stated by my right
hon. friend the member for Wiltshire that this is an
inquiry which cannot be acceded to upon the part of the
Government, because an inquiry of this character, if ac-
ceded to, is tantamount to dismissal. Does not my riOlti
hon. friend know that inquiry after inquiry is accedea to
on the part of the Government with reference to almost
every question of foreign and domestic policy, and that
this house most wisely awaits the result of such inquiries,
instead of taking the alternative to which the argu-
ment would lead, namely condemning first and in-
quiring afterwards? (Hear, hear.) My right hon. friend
who has just sat down tells us that we are infringing upon
the duty and functions of the executive Government, be-
cause this house has determined to have a searching inves-
tigation to enable them to judge of the case, so as not to
censure unnecessarily, but to ascertain whether the alle-
gations which have been made, that the system is in fault,
and not the men by whom that system is carried into
effect, are correct. Surely, when you have every kind of
conflicting statement before you to stop the legitimate
mode of ascertaining the true facts of the case, to say we
are not to inquire then is to say, this house—which, As the
hon. member for Carlisle most justly reminded it—is the
grand inquest of the nation, is to shut its eyes to the army
which is perishing before it, and to close up all sources of
a haptrinformation,oceecin proceeding
informationhi
se nidwufdrioiwset
ieoecwanhete;
00.ealardniig.ithli ohr fteat
thnttohec,
hejscenyos
i,,opictrtra:ynti
sistottioinitofghpsoleely.
nof
Butauohnneueekdrrt.
t rightso n s e fa nd
Governmentin our
solely to the Executive. lam willing to concede, what
may very properly be conceded, that inquiries of tins kind
which in any way whatever affect the functions of the
executive Government, aro always attended with some in-
convenience, and oftentimes with some evil ; but I ask
you to consider fairly whether there are not times, and
whether this is not one of them, when inconvenience is un-
avoidable, and even evil a necessity? Such a time, I think,
is forced upon you now, and remember it is not forced upon
you by any clamour of agitation from without ; it is not
forced upon you by any caprice or waywardness on the part
of the people ; it is not forced upon you by any selfish am-
bition to displace a Government—(cheers from the Oppo-
sition)—but it is forced upon you by the calm, strong, de-
liberate conviction in every member's mind that there is
something wrong which ought to be remedied. (Hear,
hear.) This conviction is nothing more and it is nothing
less than the echo of fan equally strong conviction out i f
doors. (Cheers.) You are bound therefore to ascertain
—if you can ascertain—the cause of the calamities by
.which you are surrounded, to detect the errors which may
have been committed, to punish the faults, if faults are
brought home to any one, and to remedy the evils of the
system, if all these calamities are to be attributed to the
system, and not to the men. (Hear.) Now, Sir, it being
as I
take it a sound constitutional principle, that you ate
entitled to inquire when a cause for inquiry is brought
under your notice, I agree that the executive functions of
the Government ought never unnecessarily to be interfered
with, for I am not one of those who would lightly or un-
ncessanly interfere or intertneddle with those functions,
but would preserve them to the utmost for the good of the
country. At the same time I would equally preserve the
rights, the privileges, and the duties of this house. I
would keep the two acting together, leaving the Executive
the full power of an Executive, but if her Majesty's Minis-
ters, who are the responsible advisers of the Executive,
had brought us, or were supposed to have brought us, to
anything like calamity or disaster, then, on the part of
this house, and consistently with my duty towards the
Executive, I would assert to the utmost that this house is
bound to exercise its right of inquiry. (Hear, hear.) I
have stated that my right hon. friend the member for Car-
lisle has a little overlooked some of the historical piece
dents which a moment's reflection must have brought to
his mind. He will probably recollect that in the War of
Succession, when General Stanhope had to capitulate for
himself and his forces, to the number, I think, of 2,000
men, at Brihuega, Parliament—l believe on the very next
day, and certainly within one or two days after informa-
tiou was obtained, without official intelligence—insisted
upon an inquiry, although the war was going on, and al-
though that humiliation was followed by a victory. The
right hon. gentleman will also recollect the surrender of
General Burgoyne at Saratoga. Who was the greatest man
at that time in this country ? Lord Chatham. Was he
silent when the intelligence of that disaster came upon this
country ? No. Beth the Houses of Parliament resolved
themselves into committees to consider the actual state of
the nation, and in that committee Lord Chatham moved
for all the papers, which showed—while the war was going
on, and whether there had been disaster or not, a full and
complete exposition of the stateof the army and navy, and
also for the orders and instructions by which General Bur-
goyne was directed to make the attack upon Saratoga.
When the war was continued, greater disasters happened
than the surrender of General Burgoyne at Saratoga; but
while the war was going on, when those magnificent colo-
nies were about to be severed, through the success of the
inhabitants of the United States, from this country, what
was the motion made by Mr. Fez in this house? Was he
silent then ? Did he teach us the doctrine that the exe-
cutive functions of the Government would be interfered
with if this House inquired into the causes of the cala-
mities which happened then ? I hold in my hand the re•
pert of the proceedings of ithis House at the commence-
ment of the session of 1782, and I find that Mr. Fox,
after calling the attention of the House to all the circum-
stances of those disasters, ended his speech with this mo•
tion :—" That it he referred to a committee to inquire
into the causes of the want of success of his Majesty's
naval forces during this war, and more particularly in the
year 1781." Down to the very time when Parliament was
sitting Mr. Fox insisted upon an inquiry. The mat-
ter was referred to a committee; Lord North did not op-
pose it—it was opposed, but Ministers wereforced to give in,
and a committee was granted. It was afterwards burned
into a committee of the whole House. (" Oh !") I re• the
two objections which occur to the minds of some hon. mem-
bers—viz., the change from a select committee to one of the
whole House, and the other with respect to the inquiry
being retrospective. I will not blink the question ; but
this shows that the inquiry was into operations which had
been going on down to the moment. The distinction about
the select committee was not taken, the committee
was granted ; it was turned into a committee of the whole
house on Mr. Fox's own motion. And why ? Because he
had moved for papers, and the Solicitor-General was the only
man who had the hardihood to resist the motion on the ground
now taken—that it would interfere with the functions of the
Executive. Lord North himself, however, assented to the
motion, but Mr. Fox having obtained the papers he wished
for, and finding there was no longer any necessity for in-
quiry, moved a direct censure upon Lord Sandwich, who was
at that time Chief Lord of Admiralty. In 1809, the year be-
fore the Waleheren expedition, after Sir John Moore's retreat
to Corunua, and after what was called the Convention of
Cintra, Mr. Pousonby, the Whig leader in this house, at the
very commencement of the following scssiou, moved gene-
rally for inquiry into the conduct and the causes of the want
o f success in the campaign of the preceding year. That was
followed in the next year by the inquiry into the Waleheren
expedition and into the conduct of Ministers ; and then, in
1813 (if any further authority could possibly be needed to
crown this series of precedents), after the retreat of Lord
Wellington from Burgos, Lord Wellesley found such fault
with the conduct of Ministers in not supplying that great go-
neral with sufficient forces to enable him to carry on the
supported
d
wisdom
campaign with success, that he moved in the House of Lords,
highest con-
stitutional
of
by Lo Lord IGrey,fl(i.
k in w
two
elo-
quence which have never been surpassed, even if they have
been equalled, Lord Wellesley moved, I say that under the
circumstances to which he adverted in his speech, the house
should—do what ?—resolve itself into a committee
whole house to consider the state of affairs ? No He
no speeches,
and with oft
h powerse
moved for the appointment of a committee-to inquire into
of the
the circumstancee kkhel results of the late campaign. (Cheers.)

Now, observe ! You have the authority of the greatest
statesmen who ever lived in this country—of Lord Chat-
ham, of Mr. Fox, of Mr. Ponsonby, Lord Wellesley,
and Lord Grey—for insisting on the right of Par.
Harnett to make inquiries into military and naval opera-
' tions, which inquiries might, moreover, affect the executive
functions of the Government. (Hear, hear.) Two of these
motions, the one moved for by Mr. Fox in 1782, and the other
by Lord Wellesley in 1813, were not motions for inquiry-at
the bar of the house, were not motions for a committee of the
whole house to take into consideration the state of the nation,
but they were motions for. committees to make inquiry, that
inquiry extending to all the circumstances connected with the
naval and military operations down to the very period when
those committees were nominated. (Hear, hear.) Well, then,
having shown you that upon principle you are entitled to in-
quire, haying shown you that this principle has been repeat-
edly recognised by high authority, the next circumstance you
have to look to is simply this—whether the circumstances of
the present case are sufficient to justify inquiry. Sir, after
the numerous arguments and observations we have had iu
tjiis house upon that point, I think it would be almost a work
of supererogation to say anything on this subject. It has
been remarked upon by the greatest authority in this house,
it has been recognised by every member in it, that whether
you have inquiry, or whether you forbear to inquire, the cala-
mities which have befallen our army are heartrending and in-
explicable. (Hear, hear.) Now, if these calamities are so
great as to be called " heartrending," I am surd they are of a
nature to justify inquiry. (Hear, hear.) But if, in addition
to this, they are inexplicable, it throws upon you almost the
necessity of instituting an inquiry, in order that you may be
able to solve the mystery in which these " inexplicable" dis-
asters are shrouded. (Hear, hear.) The circumstances of the
present case, therefore, will, I think, be admitted on all
bands to justify investigation, but then comes the next point
—whether you ought to institute this inquiry by a select com-
mittee, or conduct it at the bar of the house and before a
committee of the whole house. Now, nothing is easier When
you want to avoid an unpleasant subject than to say that
some other course would be better than the course proposed
in reference to it. I feel confident if any one had proposed that
you should institute an inquiry into the state of our army
and the conduct of the war departments which have had to
administer to the wants of that army before a committee of
the whole house, you would immediately have been met by
these forcible objections : that the whole business of the
country would be stopped by such a proceeding ; that evi-
dence must be taken, examinations must go on, cross-exami-
nations must be allowed on the part of any and every mem-
ber in this honee who chooses ; and that you could neither
conduct the operations of the war nor any other business with
any prospect of advantage or success. (Hear, hear.) Now
in principle there can be no reason why you should not refer
this matter to a select committee. A select committee is
nothing more nor less than a delegated authority from this
house to certain of its members to act for it, when it would
be inconvenient for it to act as a body. (Hear, hear.) Re-
member, also, that one great objection always taken to an in-
quiry before the whole house, in addition to the objection
that it puts a stop to public business, is that in point of fact
it becomes so inconvenient to go ou with an investigation
conducted in this way that it is really a good mode of getting
rid of the inquiry altogether. (Hear.) More than this, you
cannot fail to observe that you must either exclude all stran-
gers from this house, or allow the proceedings carried on here
to be published ; and I can conceive nothing more inconve-
nient or more dangerous than to say that these proceedings
shall be published from. day to day ; that evidence partially
taken shall be partially known ; that a pre-judgment of the
case shall therefore take place, and that the result of the in-
quiry shall be canvassed in a manner which takes away from
this house its deliberative judgment upon the circumstances
which are ultimately to be submitted to it. (Hear.) For ell
these reasons—though I grant that there are difficulties with
reference to a select committee-- I think it is preferable to re-
fer the matter to such a committee, limiting the inquiry, if
necessary, in such a manner as not unduly to interfere with
naval or military operations. But then we are met with the ob-
servation—" Why not have limited the inquiry at the time
you granted this committee? Why have not the inquiry by
means of a commission instead of a committee ?" The answer
is, I think, obvious. Inquiry was a duty. It was for this
house to insist upon an inquiry, but if that inquiry was at-
tended with disadvantages in the form in which it was moved
for, it was incumbent on the Ministers of the Crown to advise
the house how that inquiry should be limited and qualified;
and having so advised it, and then the inquiry should go on
under these limitations. (Hear.) Now, when I addressed the
house before I remarked that this was the duty of the Minis-
ters of the Crown, and independent members could do no
more than either assent to dissent from the inquiry, unless
prepared to take upon themselves the responsibility which
belonged more properly to the Executive. I cannot here help
taking notice of an observation often made both out of doors
and in Parliament, but one which seems to me totally un-
called for and which I trust will not be repeated here, as it
is, I consider derogatory to the character of this house. I
have heard it said that this house is now upon its trial, that
responsible government is now upon its trial, that representa-
tive institutions are now upon their trial. I agree in the ob-
servation, but I deny the inference. (Hear ) This house is
upon its trial, and what it has got to answer for upon that
trial is, whether it will insist upon all its former rights and
privileges, or whether it will now abandon them when in-
quiry is so imperatively needed. (Hear.) Responsible Go-
vernment is undoubtedly that which we ought all of us to up-
hold to the utmost of our power, and we ought to take care
that in upholding it we are not trenching in any way upon
those executive functions of the Crown which are fleeces try to
its efficient working. What is the very essence of responsi-
bility ? It is literally to mete out approbation to the Minis-
ters when they act wisely and do right, and to pass censure
ou the Ministry when they are wrong. These are the life and
soul of responsibility. They are the very springs by which
responsible Governments are put in motion; they are the
correcting power, by means of which that motion, that
action is kept within duo bounds, and by which it is
directed to wise and beneficial ends. (Cheers ) Take away
the controlling power of this house, take away its approba-
tion or its censure, and you take away all checks upon public
men and all stimulus to public exertion. This is the way in
which, indeed, you will injure responsible Government, and
the representative institutions of the State ; you will injure
it if you abandon that one high privilege and duty of this
house. (Hear.) I for one cannot but think that. iuiteaticie ro
thosarwiao still form that gallant army before Sebastopol, you
ought to inquire into these complaints ; in justice to those re-
lations and friends who have suffered loss either from misma-
nagement or by unfortunate occurrences, you ought to grant
an inquiry; and I must also add that, in justice to your-
selves, in justice to the generals commanding, and in justice
to every party, you ought to separate the innocent from the
guilty, the capable from the incapable, and that you ought
to express your approbation of the one, and you ought to
visit the other with your censure and your punishment.
Mr. GLADSTONE—It is impossible to magnify the im-
portance of the question which the House on this occasion
has before it ; not to mention the fact that three persons
who having recently stood, under peculiar circumstances,
in thO position of responsib'e advisers of the Crown, and
having felt themselves compelled by an absolute sense of
public duty to separate from • their colleagues, all of whom
they esteemed, and with whom they agreed, are desirous to
make a statement of their motives for having so separated
from them. It can be but rarely that the patience of the
house can be so severely taxed by a series of personal ex-
planations; and, for my own part, I could have been glad,
agreeing as I do in every particular with the observations
and statements made by both my right hon. friends, to rest
satisfied with those statements which they have so made,
were it not that the question which led to our resignation is
one of deep political and constitutional importance, and that
our individual fates—wholly in themselves insignificant—
are mixed up inseparably with matters of the greatest in-
terest to the nation. As far as I myself am concerned,
perhaps I may be permitted; without leading the house too
far back—inasmuch as we are (as it has been observed) In a
chronic state of crisis, and as it is difficult to separate the
events of the last few days from those which preceded them
within a very short period—to allude in one or two sen-
tences to the first series of events in this crisis, and to the
position in which my name has appeared before the public.
In that early stage, when Lord Derby received a commission
from the Crown, an offer was made by Lord Derby to my
right hon. friend the member for Wiltshire and myself, togs-
ther with the noble lord now First Lord of the Treasury, to
make a Government. That matter has been explained in
many various forms. I received, first, from my noble friend,
the present Prime Minister, his statement of the communica-
tion. Some time after there appeared a different version of
it from a statement made by a noble earl in another place ;
and, lastly, after a multitude of explanations serving rather
to confound than enlighten, I heard a third statement from
the right hon. gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire,
delivered in this house, so much varying as to the nature of
that communication, I will not say, from what had been said,
but from what had been understood, that I venture to assure
the house (I don't know whether it has much historical inte-
rest), that at this day I am in ignorance of what was really
the offer mado to myself by Lord Derby. (Cheers and laugh-
ter.) But, however that may be, I wish the house to be
aware of the part which I took in that matter, and as my
share in that communication remains in-writing, and has been
alluded to both in this house and in another place, perhaps I
mar be permitted to read a short letter I addressed to Lord
Derby, conveying my answer to the message from him such
as I then understood it. In that answer I have expressed the
opinion, that the best thing that could have happened for the
country, under the circumstances of the late crisis, brought
about by a vote of the House of Commons, would have been,
that Lord Derby himself should have been in a position to
form a Government from his own adherents. (Hear, hear.)
I maintained that opinion with reference to the circum-
stances of the country, which required that the great ques-
tion of peace of war should be dealt with without reference
to any other questions, and I did hope and did believe that I
should have bad the pleasure of affording my humble assist-
ance to Lord Derby in an independent position to that end ;
and that, instead of being asked to adopt a proposal which, I
believe, is fraught with mischief to the country, we should
have substituted for it some mode of inquiry into the causes
which have led to the calamities we all lament, that would
have been more effectual, more constitutional, and more sa-
tisfactory both to Parliament and the people. (Hear, hear.)
However, the letter I wrote to Lord Derby was in these
terms : _ _

" Downing-street, Jan. 31, 1855.
My dear Lord Derby,—Lord Palmerston has communi-
cated to me the wish you have been so good as to express,
that, in common with him and with Mr. S. Herbert, I should
become part of the Administration which you have ham
charged by the Queen to form. I also learn from him thai,
he is not of opinion that he could himself render you useful
service in that Administration, but that he would have every
disposition to give you the best support in his power, and he
has just left me with the announcement of his intention to
write to you an answer to this effect."

I may, perhaps, here interpolate an explanation, that my
noble friend (Lord Palmerston) did not, at the moment when
he- made the announcement to me of Lord Derby's wish, in-
form me that he did not think that he himself ceuld accept
the offer made to him. It was at a later period,, when my
noble friend made some further communications to me, that
ho thus expressed to mo that opinion. My letter proceeded
thus :

" I think it only remains to me to reply in similar terms.
Any Government, owing its origin to the late vote of the
House of Commons, and honestly endeavouring to do its
duty, must have peculiar claims to support in connection
with the great national interests involved in the question
of war and peace. Ott public grounds lam dispesed to
believe that the formation of a Government from among
your own political connexions would offer many facilities at
this moment, which other alternatives within view would not
present ; and, unless when my opinions might no leave me a
choice, it would be my sincere desire to offer to an Adminis-
tration, so constructed under you, au independent Parlia-
mentary support."
(Loud cheers.) That is the close as well as the beginning of
my communication with Lord Derby. But I bound to say
that I so far agree with the opinion expressed the other night
by my right hon. friend the member for Miclhurst, with rd-
spect to coalitions, that I believe the best thing that could
have happened for the countrh—qouPiderieug the state to
which Parliament had actually arrived, was that an attempt
should in Rot liatle to OitiMMMIlAt We
_

en°
Derby, and, if that could not be accomplished, the
a Government from this side of the house, to be
exclusively of those who had in and through theL.
crisis acted together. (Hear, _hear.) I and bow'rt,
that events,•so far as they have gone up to the pre
have strongly confirmed me in that opinion. (chee,V
respect to the intermediate proceeding-namely,
tion of the Government of my noble friend (Lord 1'7,t0
after what my right hon. friend the member for clriell!
affirmed as to that which was the sole question in 0 4
a stipulation or understanding, it. is needless for 11.,,
more than that, whatever I might think of the par
prospects of that Government, under the eircumst.Sn,S,
ing no differences with him, but feeling a warm 4n",. best I
gard for my noble friend, founded on an experieno
community of opinion as a colleague, and co.opera7
him in a political party, during two eventful Year!,_ifi I
should have been wanting in my duty to my countr7oo
not accepted the offer which my noble friend was se goe I
make. (Cheers.) But I am bound to say that there
the
a painful matter of a personal character involved I
transactions. To me nothing would cause,
ing more acute than to be separated from my nobleast%)
Earl of Aberdeen. This house has listened-as it w I
listen-with patience to attacks made from leasTai.d. I
upon the fame and public conduct of that noble le I
in v11)10111,00 I
iu office, it was, perhaps, difficult for me to have ent'd
to defend him from those attacks. But he bas beef, nee I
by a blow darkly aimed from an official hand ;
an
my right hon. friends and myself have followed, 107,70, I
be permitted to express my feelings and stater
with regard tolord Aberdeen. (Hear, hear.) I_o,l ,
a man who has been much misunderstood T"„e"-d in I
have elapsed since I heard Lord Aberdeen denoun". clog I
house by one of the most honest statesman of In' of
person holding principles that made him the eneullteriel I
kind. Such was the idea that men could the'l_L.iiivia
Lord Aberdeen. lam unwilling to name the in $ long
uttered those words, but I am quite sure be lea,
deeply regretted the attack he then made on Lo to to
(Hear, hear.) But after that Lord Aberdeen licetiti`e eel'
the trusted colleague, the admired colleague, d the
colleague of Sir Robert Peel, his faithful ally, °le objet
encourage him in every measure that bad for I Lei I
benefit of the people. (Cheers.) Now, again, s oat,'
deen has fallen from his former friends; but :011
not call it calumny, but error of twenty Ica dices 0
polled, so, you may rely upon it, these poi get:
it
be dissipated, and the fame of that man, net,s,°o ejetit'ff.
count of the high office he has held, as from PL 00er
admirable character, will not only live, but his ofe"
ture to say, will be enshrined in the grateful e
reamoar!"
his country. (An ironical cheer.) Well, Sir, I t.
the hon. member for Aylesbury is so intolerittel
should have thought that he would have been con o 0
rif tle
latitude of vituperation that this house proP_,e 130,0er
(Cheers.) I believe he belongs to a Liberal Parv'pel„f ,
in what sense! While myself Chancellor of thtoiolls„,"01
forbore from wounding his tender feeling 131 wcoeorPit
kind, but surely, now that he has purged the otbers, 0,
the foul element in my own person and those of the bout
be permitted to me, by the kind indulgencoue ef.ver„c
express an opinion that I constitutionally ts' who
-and that I know to be shared by every luau, cheer 9.!
the friend and colleague of Lord Aberdeen. %, r
is no gratuitous accusation upon my part, for :rireloenf° soesi
heard au assault on Lord Aberdeen. Ills roe" atil
public life is not sufficient to mitigate the the A /i'rfi',
gentlemen among us, because he has retired ), et el?
lliS Sovereign's regard, earned by half-a-eentl'roiset9e,
(Cheers.) The hon. member below me the n'edoatilti,"/
Surrey (Mr. Drummond), has made that the
off;hloP'3,:
talent assault upon one who is endeared ton; cs' iforP'
by an affection and veneration as warm as en-soase, 1P404,1
mankind. (Cheers.) Now, sir, thanking t'"
1 te el.
witting me these retrospective and persona „e ha, 10,1
on to the question now before the house. ",..-noioa,";o,l'
her Majesty's Government because that GotoThetelie),;,
I grant, in circumstances of great difficult'', Prhein, ev.,l
between the alernatives, as it were, before "",, bos'd
think a fatal choice. Sir, I heard to-night,..at-Do ;I',,ePlet
man, the member for Devonshire, remark teTret.ni,
de
for the first time in this debate that who'lo,'„ 10,,ta.1
were deserters, and those who quitted it ire fie 'f,ivc
hon. gentleman asserts the opposite doctrincs ere„ Vevfor
who under difficult circumstance, retain to 0""/eb",,,e-
-though they change their intentions, and t:,„tIlt1/31' SO V'
their intentions and quit office, according "a(efe „itii6„,'
Devonshire, are deserters. Well, sir, I c°:llst"
prised to find the hon. gentleman entertain
cause I do recollect a case in point, if I nia/Pliielle ed
t 0
him a suggestion, which I would commend t 'l'4oo
Under difficult circumstances in this countriu',aos, 0, 104
the year 1845, with a famine impending tent' cod ,
Peel adhered to office and changed his 00)
Derby adhered to his intentions and gutted°or Pttfii
afraid, according to the hon. gentleman, that (I,osoPir
was faithful, and Lord Derby a deserter' t tslll,oo,
cheers.) I certainly have never applied tie"„too00e,
t°„,ir Derby, and undoubtedly I don't venture iebt/er
sure of any kind on the course taken by ese/40
noble friends. I know, sir, too well fros„eof
difficulty, the pain-I might almost say the "we tjuni,
hag at decisions for the government of one'l teoTlf!
sharp passages of public affairs. I know tha
sume to find fault with those who arrive A co
d/Orioi
site to my own. (Hear.) But, sir, lam Build hi,
noble friend at the head of the Government and
we are right or wrong,
we shall hear no such imputations, because owiefiwol
haven
eceinomfgoeudr eouffreintentions t
abtutwtehheavbees-t f
is a simple one. You uld and ~40•7t.'
s
to
oubsta 10.4
(Hear.) Wehave nothing to do but to tepee o fJsect
February the expressions we used on the 29t`; P7,,3°
is impossible for me to-night to denounce 'l'loo :t
Vf
select committee of inquiry into a great vra'j
now pending and in progress, more violentll,oo"tine `4:
say, than I ventured to do on the oecasion,itoeV t/;
mentioned to the house. I think that, neP.,o6s ,y,e(,
own words, one of the most disagreeable pre'tOstetP
reading one's own words. (Laughter.) But i?lotao
we forget to-day our feelings of yesterday. 'lloe ,10e°/
however, that I look back now with sati,,f3ccooleitity
pressions I used myself with respect to enae thi
Jo /
29th of January, and I venture to teliVt tuese wt
ness is not to govern, but to can *C" 000, f. 4
The
pr
Your motion is without precedent, honoura
matters means wisdom. (Cheers.) Bas uulr°
for Aylesbury condemns the consin''' Von. ile
ridiculous, and he is right in his conderana
„a ell
tory for the true purposes of inquirY".,-„-d to "`,,,V,
-of evils. It is unconstitutional; it win .e..
confusion and disturbance, increased disastehr,ors,), 01V,
and weakness abroad. (Hear, hear, and c `10,7
less and mischievous for the purpose c, ntenlipP ole
full of danger to the plain dignity and 1101. 800
mons of England. Sir, I used these w0r0,%00460rt,
January, from the bottom of my heart, and. ffoOdd
apology now for appearing in the face of the_ the
mons to state to them why I resigned ale' eel:of or:41
party to measures which I then denounced. oil
light of the resignation of office. It was I:2eriod
part from the work of my department in a.,/-teyc_Se.„l':
exertione-it was painful for me to part fro„doa;, PTA
and it was painful for me to part from the ;in
servants with whom I bad been associAeu
.101,i
and revenue department,. But these pain-
borne. They are incidental to the course of rtilef
if the house differ in judgment with regard tom Pe Itol.
the decision arrived at, they will at anY!,,`:ecl_r 0,,1°.f0;
that decision was one for which I am not oPlorarei'
the way to imagine extraordinary and far-.,10
but which has been founded upon convictions deoet;#:!/
tertained and expressed with all the force of i°7ool,ltY
re 4 ,•
And now, sir, I come to the question of
beg to 'call the attention of the 'house striel'Jtwoleo%.
tinetness, to the matter which is at issue
subject is one of such deep importance Oa: retssoil
treme anxiety that there shall be no reisunos,oaco deb I
point. And here let me spry a word in ref° pr 040,11,„
from the right hon. baronet the member foretot, Bfol4
Pakington.) I listened attentively to his °P„tiees set °olio
him for his generous appreciation of the gr,oDejt.„,
hon. friends and myself. But I listened, t,04 m-jOipP,l
tion to an observation which was foundeo "try, beirity,4
public views. If I understood him corre „up's 003, #
-that in his opinion there was much to 11).'if 0.4,
conduct of the Government ; and, sewn if serisflo
him right, he intimated an opinion that :or Diof
had been open to him to pursue t at in41110$1,„ cl 4 pr
commission appointed by the Crown, tadyii:oorl°ool
mentary committee, he would have been
... oily(
such a commission. I hope I have coll!cantl9:gt Of
right hon. baronet. I have repeated !„ea,')o
the purpose of establishing points of differyowievor ,o to
the purpose of establishing points of Agee i here 0440 V
will be clearly understood that we are uvre 00;0$0,10 ‘;'o
nents of inquiry. (Hear, hear.) We '"of 00"040.
opponents of inquiry even in the sense Twtitil.s'l4 fie
shut out from the view of the house that., to ev
nary circumstances, it might be desirable
070fola.0011,drce•
their view. The question raised here is t
0f the fa`l ioei
with respect to the inquiry into the state t 0 o°lllo tie
Crimea ; and it is, secondly, with respeetpotk nil
the conduct of the Government departiu.;„ of to tuoioll
spect to the latter, it is the sincere ciestlirf crOtiir
there should be every facility for an incl ec, good 0/
departments, so that it would not involve
,"042:1 ivtllie
this house into the management of the tea grpe 01 two
But that is the difficulty of keeping the', °,,,reit',,105,,
tinct. We are of opinion that the stets, e''''tllo4",ol
Crimea is not a fit subject of inquiry bli-ote 'tot
~tl3o,er
house. When Lord J. Russell entered ,'„tea,;o tilo
upon his retirement from office, be eleta"„pee.,ef
could not join with us in negativing Ou'notite"ieev;ot
yo
equally unable to give his sanction and c(,),1
quiry, and he stated his belief that eu-f tils. if wetter.e
have the effect of paralysing the action °I osse orb' tivy
respect to the army. We, however, Pets it eiDteo),o,3
inquiry into the Government departtneti 0%, tilt+ if
we should appear before the cemmittee!belief," opell
office. lam also bound to say Ido net fro - 4:00 ,e;
evaded Parliamentary inquiry by retirin' lie I Du of ,P,o,
as to the appointment of our successere; of ratio 015,1
that there are gentlemen in this (1931b1e recitlll,;iieo,,,(s
whom we are now cultivating anu9:l be 0C
neighbourhood-(laughter)-who
to discharge those duties from opPr'ooohahen
",inr,'
do not think that there is any reason "-tiereeli.o4 sii„,eo/otl
nience when I recollect that these g° meat locoenvaly
culty in communicating to me in the the
manner their satisfaction at finding tha"toria9l' for II',"
got rid of worthless and incongruous aesir°. a5°601,41,
But I must confess that I appreciate th:mt youo 00,t
apart from the reasons for it: I gi•anis that 1°
of fooling in the country which require „et,ione„o t°s
with the utmost caution and circurnePt` be V,ooe
that the vote of this house, could effee interes_nf eff,e'co;,o
out ruinous detriment to the publie„-oce---,
upon the deference-I would say obe.aougei
man ; and under these circumstances, result, taokoce
inconvenience at best would have beenotioitteeloooti $,0:(1
been prepared to submit even to a Goveropene;tioley:i
that inquiry into the conduct of rich oorroole
meats. But the larger question 7-tracting o'tire°oe
night ago- -which was begun by du,' its ',set- tooth''
this country, but which has not yet
rierstion istbe #eifi,el4
its end-(hear, hear)-the larger rl-stigate,o dfy
committee shall be appointed to in.vile state eoc1;0
army in the East ? And here I
will
lit to l'iTeeso, °bottle,:
which it seems to me that oug
own a- - to ,op,
conceive nothing more simple, inf
tr,roY huus°.fferifjg°ther•ro'l
a generous sketch of the duty 0- 1. the eur soe
not but view with pain and horrol
"Posed
eleie,eo,
our forces in the East have been "Putiou, 0%.010 el " °V
will not adopt that strain of exagg
to those sufferings, which I asp eiles of a the IP
consciously into it through the sPef moo t .tos
00e,
house. (An ironical cheer.) 34Y9:`,°,,is thre" schn'o. go,
Pomfret (Mr. M. Mines), if he 11,;elied
four osii)pooi
tO
as I have done, would have been '..P12:0 or Pei ~or o.o'
cororrY toseeoite
_night havewl disaPr ;pie ined:;lo 0.4
tice of my observations ; because tu7egeribe„setVootiln etli
men who haves poken to
destroyed, as annihilated, as geul' „erisheui3O Pi
eus e'
member--" Perished ")--aYe 11 not
ngerOUS of t 0111100 DJ/
courage that really very da
s„...;001 0 ,d fO,,
the words used. I hope the hone° Nfaluti oieellue eov or'
speech. Still, our pain at the
which adtaltuotw 1304
plated its brilliant exploits, an,`, 0,0
no limits to be placed to the dutne etc
house to ascertain the causes of
ttowo-;:swinefltoro,r -
and when ? (Rear.) !If You are
thip with a Tien tg. Ciagi t 9

. ~,