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

THE SUN, LONDON. SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 3, 185 5,

currod to me as dangers to be avoided. I say, Sir, that if
this house does give an order of secrecy, and if that order
of secrecy is constantly and deliberately violated, you will
be lowered in public estimation if you have not the courage
and the constancy to give effect to your decision. (Cheers.)
But, if you are going to enter into a conflict with the
press of thi% country, you must gird up your loins and
prepare for a serious struggle ; and I warn you that in
that conflict you will not succeed unless you are backed
by public opinion. (hear, hear, and cheers.) My belief
is that, if you engage in such a conflict, as matters now
stand, you will not succeed. I will say more—that I
think you ought not to succeed, because I believe that the
public interests will not be promoted by your order of se-
crecy. Public opinion will be grossly violated by it, and
justice to individuals will be placed in the utmost jeopardy.
(Hear, hear.) I have told you of the danger of your en-
tering into an encounter with the press without reason or
justice on your side, and in violation of public opinion ;
but is there no other danger to be avoided ? Have you
considered your relative position with reference to the
House of Lords ? The House of Lords have, I believe,
notified to you—at least, I saw the messenger here just
now, though I am not aware whether his message has been
delivered—that they have given their consent that one of
their body shall attend the select committee of this house,
if he should think fit to do so. You change the character
of your tribunal. (Hear, hear.) You convert it into a
secret tribunal. (Hear, hear.) Are you sure that the
House of Lords will consent that one of their members
shall attend a secret tribunal? (Hear, hear.) Your com-
mittee now becomes, not a court of justice, not a court of
inquiry, but an Inquisition—(loud and continued cheering)
—composed of 11 inquisitors, some of whom have prejudged
the question which will be mainly at issue before them.
I know net what the decision of the House of Lords may be,
but I warn you how you come into conflict with the press of
this country and with the privilege of the House of Lords
in suck doubtful circumstances. I could, if I thought fit
to detain yen, multiply instances of many coming dangers
which I foresee from your proceedings ; but I think the
two which I have mentioned incidentally, as lying on the
very surface, are enough to warn you to be cautious in
the proceedings you are about to take. If Ministers, Ad-
mirals, Generals are to be tried—if their conduct is to be
submitted to this ordeal—if further sacrifices be necessary
—immolate in the face of day. (Loud cheering.) Don't
smother and stifle persons reputation which have hitherto
stood the test of time in No. 17. Act as becomes the re-
presentatives of a free and generous people, who never seek
concealment for their thoughts or for their actions. What
they dare to do they are ever ready to avow. There are,
perhaps, dangers in this inquiry. I shall not revert to
them. -I stated them at too much length on a former oc-
casion. lam willing to intrust the inquiry to the 11. gen-
tlemen to whom you have committed it, if you will keep
over that committee the constant check of publicity. I
shall look upon that committee with apprehension greater
than I shall state if you should, in an ill-omened moment,
come to the decision to-night that the proceedings of the
committee shall be secret. In that case I see dangers in-
numerable ; I think the object for which the committee
was granted will net be obtained i and I entreat the house
carefully to pause before they give effect to what I must
consider a most injudicious recommendation. (Cheers.)
Mr. LAYARD said that, when the question of the ap-
pointment of a committee was brought before the house,
he expressed his opinion that it would give rise to (Teat
inconvenience and would shackle the Executive. The ap-
pointment of the committee was carried by a large ma-
jority, and the Government themselves stated that they
would accept that vote as a vote of confidence or no confi-
dence. The house was, therefore, obliged to deal with the
question as it was placed by the Government, putting
aside its merits. Upon that vote the Government went
out of office. If the question had been brought forward
since the present Government had been in office, and
if they had placed it on the ground of a vote of confidence,
he would have felt considerable difficulty in determining
in what way he should give his vote, for ho could not say
that either the houselor the country felt much confidence
in the existing Administration. (A laugh.) He had en-
tertained objections to the appointment of the committee,
because he did not think that the executive Government
could be carried on by men whose conduct was under cri-
ticism up stairs ; but that objection had been removed by
the retirement from the Administration of those members
of the Government whose conduct had been impugned.
The house having decided that inquiry should be prose-
cuted by a committee, it was his duty to ascertain in what
way that inquiry could be- conducted with the greatest
advantage to the public interests, and in a manner to
secure the results which were expected by the country.
He had been somewhat astonished to find that the two

hon. members of the_ committee who had voted against
secrecy were gentlemen who had voted against the com-
mittee of inquiry, and that, too, on the ground that the
appointment of such a committee would be a mischievous
and dangerous proceeding. Ho supposed, however, that
they had some reasons for thus ostentatiously showing the
country that they were now voting against secrecy. He
was still more astonished at the line of argument pursued
by the right hon. baronet (Sir J. Graham) and some other
hon. members. The noble member for Totness (Lord Sey-
mour) had asked whether any new facts had come to their
knowledge? He (Mr. Layard) would at once reply that
new facts had become known. The three right hon. gen-
tlemen near him had stated the other night that, if
they were put upon their defence, and if this inquiry
were prosecuted, they might be compelled to enter into
very delicate matters and to call in question the conduct
of our ally. They then expressed a strong opinion against
the appointment of the committee, but to-night, forsooth,
the right hon, baronet contended that the committ3e
should be an open committee, and that all dangerous
questions might be avoided, although it was only the
other night that he told them they would have to enter
into transactions which had taken place between the Go-
vernment of this country and our allies. One objection to
the inquiry being an open ene was that it might affect
private, character, and that was undoubtedly a strong ob-
jection ; but that was not a ground which would influence
his vote, for he looked merely to the question of danger to
the public interests in connection with our relations with
our allies. It was said that secrecy was a novelty, bat
this alliance was also a novelty—the union of two armies in
one great enterprise was a novelty. There were three
courses open to them. The first was to prosecute the in-
quiry by a committee open to the public. What was the
objection to that come, putting aside any question with
reference to private character ? They talked about private
character, but was our ally to be criminated, either directly
or indirectly, without having an opportunity of defendie„.
himself ? The right hon. gentleman would insinuate Viet
we were not the guilty parties; he did not say the right
hon. gentleman would throw blame on our ally, but that
was the inference which must be drawn, and we should
then be in the position of carrying on the inquiry, our ally
net having the means of defending himself, without know-
ing to what mischief it might lead. These being his ob-
jections to an open committee, they applied equally to a
committee at which the members of this house would be
allowed to be present.. The country would not consent to
a half-and-half measure ; they would either have one thing
or the other. This was a great question •it affected every
man in the country ; there was not a cottager who did not
feel as deeply upon it as any member of this house, and the
public would not be satisfied if they were excluded when
members ofParliamont were admitted. He wished to make
no insinuation against any member of the house, but he
would remind them that committees had sat be 6 re new to
which members alone had been admitted. Such a commit-
tee sat last year, seriou-ly affecting the character of some
of the members—and what was the result ? Why, the most
scandalous accusations were spread abroad, against those
gentlemen whose conduct was the subject of inquiry.
Would the right hon. gentleman make no distinction be-
tween 11 members, with a proper sense of responsibility,
and 600 members, any of whom might come into the room,
and who had no sense of the responsibility at all ? If the
committee were strictly secret, of course if anything tran-
spired they would know exactly the number of persons
who were accountable for it. The right hon. gentleman
said the press would be against us ; hut he must say that
was a popular prejudice which the right hon. gentleman
ought to have avoided. His hon. and learned friend had
given notice of this resolution last night, and, if the press
had been so opposed to it, would not the press have
spoken out upon the subject this morning, before the house
came to a decision ? (Hear.) If the press took so deep an
interest in the question—if it attached such importance to
the inquiry being an open one—would not an expression of
its opinion have appeared this morning in every newspa-
per ? Would not a strong appeal have been made t) the
public, such as the leading papers know how to make ?
Would not an appeal have been made to the house to reject
the resolution ? But no such appeal had been made, and
he regretted that the right hon. gentleman was trying to
get up a feeling upon tho question for party purposes. The
press had too high a sense of the immense interests at stake
in this question to cry out after a majority of the commit-
tee had decided that it should be a secret committee ; it
had too deep a feeling of responsibility to compel the house
by public clamour to adopt a measure dangerous to the
public interest. The character of his hon. and learned friend

who had for so many years been connected with the popular
party was sufficiently well known to bo a guarantee to the
public that the resolution of the committee had not keen
adopted upon light motives. No man had more to lose than
himself (Mr. Iriyard) by having voted in its favour; but he
would not be aco ward. When he saw that an act of duty was
necessary he would perform it, and he believed it was essential
to the interests of the country that this should not be an
open committee. The right hon. gentleman had repeatedly
told them that they must rest their defence upon the conduct
of our ally ; the right hon. baronet had used the expression
that the inquiry must "run up" into our connexion with
France. If that were so, our ally must either rest under
the accusations made against him, although they might be
calumnious, or the right hon. gentlemen must be refused
the means of justifying themselves, should the inquiry be
an open one. fie had, therefore, with great regret, and
after mature deliberation, being fully aware Of the ingeni-
ous arguments which might be urged by the right hon.
gentleman, who, he knew, would take the opportunity, if
possible, to damage his character in the eyes of the country,
arrived at this conclusion, but nothing would compel him
to withdraw from the opinion he had formed. ifs had
now stated his motives for voting in favour of the resolu-

--.. ......,....... _____._._ _ _ __.
tion ; he... did not regret baying done so, and he thought it
his duty to stand by that resolution. (Cheers.)

Mr. H. HERBERT said that the hon. member who had
last addressed the house had exemplified in the strongest
manner, by his own conduct, the necessity of having this
inquiry an open one. If he recollected rightly, there ap-
peared a short time since in the public papers an accusa-
tion by that gentleman the most galling and offensive
which could be made by any one man against a gallant ad-
miral employed by this country. Ile believed it was an
accusation of cowardice upon a gallant admiral in the ser-
vice of the country, and that accusation was made upon
the ground of the hon. member having seen some letter
whichb ho believed had never yet been made public, upon
of the
which the lion. member put that construction, which lie
gallantga.,
considered himself justified in making. Thanks to the
Publicity given to that letter by the press,. the statement
beand.mmi member went abroad and met the eyes of the
antral
iwho was the subject of the accusation.
into the proceedings
That
The Tesult was that the
would talcs
such
immediately gave notice that he
as would lead to a full inves-
tigationof the charge brought against him.
other letter which re
was
published in the papers some
appearedr f. to be a retractation and apo-
logy for the hon. member what ho had stated. Apply-
ing these circumstances to the case before the house, might
,reortiE3olllo other evidence,
secret committee,
there not be some other le
accused would
Lave the in
ntithoi itet theoent.ocnceionemsmee:
which would be produced before
which would induce the members of thei
to a conclusion equally erroneous as that of
mem-
ber, and which the party accu
quence of the secrecy of the committee,
nity of contradicting ? With respect to the prol°,(l,lll‘,.tu-
making the committee a secret one, he felt that, if 'lc% for
making
had the honour of being either directly or indirectly con-
nected with any public office, or with any command in the
army or navy, he certainly would refuse to give a single
answer to a single question put to him by a secret com-
mittee, but would appeal to the justice and honour of the ,
English people, and he felt confident such appeal would
not be made in vain. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. LAYARD complained, after the steps he had taken
in order to set himself right is the case to which the hon.

member had alluded, that'oither he or any other hon. mem-
ber should have brought the subject before the notice of
the her.sr. S, much man-rprr —iitr„tine 11,1, how. 7er, ex-
isted with respect to his conduct, that he claimed the at-
tention of hon. members while he explained what were the
real facts of the case so far as he was personally concerned.
First of all there was in the letter, es it appeared in the
public press, the words, "from the maintop of the Aga-
memnon." These words were not in the letter which he had
written, they were a perfect myth. The letter was written
from the Agamemnon, the ship in which he had been stay-
ing for some time ; he had previously been travelling with
a gentleuian-for six weeks on terms of the greatest inti-
macy. When ho left him at the Agamemnon, he (Mr.
Layarcl) agreed to write to him, and although that gentle-
man was a member of the press in London, he separated
him from his employment and profession' and having a
great personal esteem E'er him, he wrote two letters upoa
one occasion, which were sent off by the same post. One
letter contained a statement of various facts which might
have been published by any one, and the letter concluded
with the words, " You are at liberty to make use of the
facts, but do not print the letter." That letter contained no
reflection whatever upon Admiral Dundas, but there was
a private letter in which those remarks were made which
had given offence to the gallant admiral. He had been ac-
cused, very unjustly, of betraying confidence by referring
to a private letter, with the contents of which he had been
made acquainted. But what were the facts connected with
the case ? A captain in the navy brought a letter to a table
at which there were present some 15 or 20 persons, some
civilians, and others officers in the army and navy.
That letter was read at the table, and it contained the ex-
pression which was made use of in his letter what had been
published. That expression was to the effect that Admiral
Dundas rejoiced at the sinking of the Russian fleet. The
moment he (Mr.Layard) saw the private letter whichhe had
written had been published, he wont to see Admiral Lyons,
and to the captain who had read the letter at the table, and
apologised for the indiscretion of which he had been guilty,
and told them that the letter was a private one, and that it
was against his wishes that it had been published. With
Admiral Dundas he was not able to have any communica-
tion, as he was out at sea. He had not for a moment the
slightest notion of casting any imputation upon the private
character of the gallant admiral, or to insinuate that he did
not possess that courage which was shared by every Eng-
lishman in the army or in the navy. On the return of Ad-
miral Dundas to this country reports were spread about
that proceedings were about to be taken against him, and
he told all the friends of the gallant gentleman that he was

perfectly willing to explain-away the statement he had
made in any manner they might desire. When, therefore,
his hon. friend the member for West Surrey (Mr. Drum-
mond) came to him, he (Mr. Layard) said, whatever you
will dictate I will write and sign as a man of honour. The
letter which had recently been made public was written at
his hon. friend's dictation, and Admiral Dundee had ad-
mitted that the explanation was perfectly satisfactory.
The gallant admiral stated that he did not rejoice that the
Russians had sunk their ships in any other sense except that
by so doing they had saved him the trouble of doing it for
them. He (Mr. Layard) accepted the phrase as so inter-
preted, he had written the" letter dictated by his hon.
friend, and thought that no hon. member would have

thought of bringing his conduct in this respect before the
house. He was perfectly ready to admit that he had acted
with indiscretion, but hoped that, at the same time, he had
acted afterwards as az honourableman intho affair. (Hear. )
Mr. 11. HERBERT explained that it was not his inten-

tion to have charged the hon. member with having com-
mitted any breach of confidence, but had alluded to the
case with the view of showing the danger of those pro-,
ceedings being conducted in private.
Sir B. Hall said that he had voted against the original
motion for inquiry, because he felt that if the committee
were granted, and a full and searching inquiry were reads, it
would lead to most serious and disastrous results, and might
perhaps cause disruption between ourselves and our only
ally, or rather, perhaps, our only sincere ally. If the house
did not really want the inquiry to be fully gone into, and
intended by the motion merely to remove the Government,
it would have been muck more honest, and would have
shown much greater moral courage and candour if it had
come boldly forward with a resolution declaring its want
of confidence in the then existing Government. Ho felt
thankful that he had voted against the committee, for it
now appeared that, having granted it, the house had only
created a Frankenstein, which it found itself unable to
control. Ho objected to the proposal to have the commit-
tee a secret one ; and when the right hon. baronet the late
First Lord of the Admiralty stated that it would be diffi-
cult to keep the proceedings from the public press, and
said vary truly that the press exerted a great moral in-
finance in the country, and that it was unadvisab'e to in-
terfere rashly with that moral influence, he was certainly
surprised to hear the hon. member for Aylesbury charac-
terise the power of the presi as "a popular prejudice."
(Hear.) Who was there in that horse who indulged More
in that popular prejudice than the hon. member himself ?
(Hear, hear.) But the house had now received a message
frOm the House of Loris—and the right hon. baronet had
previously alluded to this fact—to the effect that a person
holding the highest rank in this country would be called
before the committee. If he (Sir B. Hall) were placed in
the position of the Duke of Newcastle, and if he had given
his consent to appear before a select committee, and was
afterwards informed that it was to be a secret committee,
he would at once rise in his place and say that he would
not go before that committee and allow five or six gentle.
men to extract from his evidence whatever they might
please, and place it before the house perhaps in a very dif-
ferent light from that in which it should appear according
to the tenour of the whol evidence. It was impossible to
say what might happen as regarded the character of that
noble duke. Why was he to be called before the com-
mittee, except in order that he might tell the whole truth
as regarded the conduct of this war when he was Secre-
tary of State for the War Department ? That noble duke
might feel it his duty to give such evidence in order to
exculpate himself as might place the blame very properly
upon other shoulders than his own. Why, then, should
his evidence be subject to be tampered with, and portions
of it struck out, by hon. members? He hoped that, the
house having granted the committee, the inquiry would
go on, and that it might b© a full and searching inquiry,
conducted in the face of the public. If hon. members
who composed the committee were afraid of the duties
they had undertaken, and afraid of conducting the inquiry
in the face of the public, he hoped they would have the
courage at once to come down to the house and say so at
once, and let the inquiry be either proceeded with in rea-
lity or be given up altogether. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. G. M. BUTT was at a loss to understand how the
proposed inquiry could be a satisfactory one unless con-
ducted in a public manner. He felt certain, indeed, that
the inquiry could never be fair or just, never could be
right, unless it were conducted in such a manner as that
those who might be subjected to charges could know what
the charges were, by whom and in what form they were
made, so as to be able to give the evidence which might
be necessary for their defence or exculpation. With re-
spect to the original motion, he denied that he had given
his vote with anything like hostile feelings towards the
Duke of Newcastle. Ho gave his vote for the inquiry, be-
cause he really felt no confidence in the Government, all
the members of which were equally responsible for that
state of things which, in his opinion, had rendered in-
quiry necessary. (Hear, hear.)

Lord PALMERSTON said—l wish, sir, to state shortly
to tho house the grounds upon which I am adverse to the
motion now before the house. When this motion was first
announced yesterday, I confess my own impression was
strongly against it, but at the same time I wished to hear
what reasons might be assigned, if any, for the course
which it was intended to adopt. I have listened with great
attention to everything which has passed in the course of
this discussion, and I am bound to say that I have heard
nothing which has in any degree altered the opinion
which at first sight I had formed on the subject. No doubt,
when this committee was first proposed, I felt and expressed
the same objections against its appointment which have now
been urged by the hon. and learned member for Sheffield
as a ground for making the committee a secret one. I felt
that it was possible—and I so stated it to the house—that
it was very likely the course of inquiry might lead to mat-
ters involving danger• to the relations so happily subsisting
between us and our great ally. The house overruled that
consideration; and this was urged not by one, but bymany
hon. members, that that was an evil which might arise
from the investigation. The house, however, with a full
knowledge of that possibility, notwithstanding determined
twico—nay, thrice—that the inquiry should be prosecuted.
I stated, when the question was as to naming the com-
mittee, that, in my own opinion, it was not desirable to
fetter the committee by any instructions. I thought that
if wo submitted this inquiry to men of discretion and
judgment, it would be better not to fetter their
_investiga-
tions or their proceedings by any instructions from this
house. The same principle indeced me to think that we
should not impose a restriction as to secrecy. There are -
occasions when it might be necessary to impose the restric-
tion of secrecy. If you had to lay before the committee
documents which could not be made public without incon-
venience to the public service, or documents which might
involve danger to individuals, in that case it might be ne-
ceseary to make your committee a secret one. There are
certain reasons which require a• committee to be secret,
and there is a power to make it so. There are occasions
►hen witnesses have to bo examined touching their own
affairs, in which great delicacy must be observed, and who
may with much justice require that their evidence should
not be made public, and on those occasions you have a
secret committee. But here you are to examine witnesses
with respect to matters in which they have no private in-
terest whatever for requiring secrecy, and though members
may observe, and doubtless would observe, secrecy, you
could have no restratut on them whatever. They would
go home from the committee-room, and if they
printed the proceedingsyou might stop them, but yen would
have no power whatever to prevent them from stating iu
conversation the matters they had heard ; therefore the
secrecy you would impose on the committee would be of no
value whatever. Then there is this inconvenience beyond
what I have stated, that the public would never be satisfied
with an inquiry of which they did not know the result.
They would think it was a mere juggle. They would think
that the House of Commons wasmerely redeeming a pledge,
and that the, inquiry would be a proceeding replete with
injustice to many persons whose conduct would be made
the subject of the investigation. For these reasons I shall
certainly give my vote against making this a secret com-
mittee. (Cheers.)

Mr. DISRAELI said—There is no doubt that the ap-
pointment of a secret committee is a proceeding which the
House of Commons should hesitate to sanction without
clear necessity. There has been only one instance in which
a secret committee was appointed since I had the honour
of a seat in this house, and I felt it my duty to resist that
motion. It was a subject of great interest which it was then
proposed to investigate—the conduct of the Post-office in
opening the letters of foreign refugees. That subject was
brought bettre the house by the hon. member for Fins-
bury; and the conduct of the Government of Sir R. Peel,
I think in 1841, was called in question, and a select com-
mittee was proposed by the hon. member for Finsbury to
inquire into the circumstances, and into the state of the
law. in reference to this matter. One of the most distin-
gnished members of this a membei of the Govern-
ment, and, I believe, himself responsible for the act in
question, although it was performed through a colleague—
the right hon. gentleman who has given us the information
to-night that he is now only a private member of Parlia-
ment—the right honourable member for Carlisle, then in-
structed the house as to the line of conduct it ought to
tette. He stated that if it was to be a committee of in-
quiry, it should be a searching committee; and, if a
searching committee, that it should be a secret one ; and
the right hon. gentleman moved an amendment, to the
motion to the honourable member for Finsbury, to the
effect that the proposed committee of inquiry should be a
Committee of secrecy, and the house adopted that amend-
ei
tittle
nuo n 3
I•b.
joeufkltlf:oyrenetiolteidresipoeoli;ttmehntoehnbuaesttefoouftr-
oa sea
know
hneacaonrtweoctctochcmaoasmmti onmintotitietntoeenehe,whichassbi
eunvgt
ever
relt
transpired. I mention this as an answer to the observation
Made by the righthon gentleman that a committee cannot
keep secrets. There is a great authority, that if you desire

to make your inquiry a searching one, you should make it
secret, and it obtains confirmation from the right hon.
c'entlorian's Si('.p%:.,:JAcim;.l is 10;i1 •ul

using a st3lo of rlenoree u waren he is a great inaeter,
which I may designate as the oratory of terror—(a laugh)—
and on this occasion he has indulged in that style of ora-
tory, and has accumulated every possible and impossible
danger which he says might arise from a secret committee,
in order to influence the house. I think that, should this
committee be secret or select, it will be beneficial ; and I
de not anticipate any of those dangers shadowed by the
right bon. gentleman. I hardly recollect an occasion of
importance on which the right hon. gentleman has not ap-
pealed to the mace on that table, and has not knocked
down the house with it. (Laughter.) There iss. however,
one circumstance in this discussion which excites in my
mind some suspicion, and which must have some influence
on the decision of the house—that every person who is op-
posed to a secret inquiry has also been opposed to the ori-
ginal inquiry. That circumstance makes me lock with
considerable suspicion on the proposal. I cannot admit
the arguments adduced by the right hon. gentleman, that
a court of justice should never be a secret one, for wehave
precedents for inquiries of a secret nature by such tribu-
nals, as, fur instance, that by the grand jury. Then again it
has been argued theta is impossible to maintainthatsecrecy
which is th object of this motion. I cannot conceal from
myself that from the nature of this inquiry, from its being
of so multifarious and comprehensive a character, the diffi-
culties of maintaieingsecrecy will be proportionately great;
nor can I understand how you can draw a line between
the admission of the public and of members of this house.
You would probably have garbled accounts of the pro-
ceedings and evidence published. I cannot credit for a
moment that if this were to be a secret committee, the
secrecy would not be honourably kept. I would have
confidence in the common sense and honour of the mem-
bers of this house, and I would :not believe that the se-
crecy would be violated. I le)lieve this, that practically,
by excluding both the public and members, you might ob-
tain the object of this motion ; but against that conveni-
ence there is the great disadvantage that must be expe-
rienced if an inquiry of national interest, in which the
feelings and honour of the country are centered, should
be carried on in a manner which would excite suspicion
and distrust. I think the balance is in favour of a public
inquiry. (Hear.) Ido not myself anticipate those disas-
trous consequences from this inquiry to the maintenance
of the friendship between ourselves and our ally which has
been so frequently-and so needlessly referred to. I repeat
that I put my trust in the discretion and ability of those
whom we have appointed to inquire. Prudence and cau-
tion are the characteristics of a select committee of the
House of Commons. (Hear.) I do not pretend to say
that there are net objections and advantages of another
class to those I have mentioned, but I think the balance
of advantage is greatly in favour of an open inquiry. Al-
though it may be for the personal convenience of members
that the public should not be admitted, I think it would
be advantageous if, in this public inquiry, means could be
taken that the results of the inquiry should appear before
the public in a complete and impartial manner. If the
house determine that this shall not be a secret committee,
I trust that the committee will take care that the reports
of Its prooeedings shall be authentic. (Hoar.)
Mr. H. DRUMMOND, as one of those stigmatised as an
inquisitor, hoped he would be permitted to make a few
remarks. He had not given a factious vote when the com-
mittee was appointed, for there was only one consideration
then present to his mind-- what would be the effect on the
minds of our soldiers should the House of Commons refuse
such an inquiry. It was well known to what objects the
inquiry was to be confined ; and he saw no possible danger
that' could arise from inquiry why the house that day
should vote 4,000 horses to go to the Crimea when they
had not a morsel of hay there to feed them. (A. laugh.)
He had heard much use made of those suspicious words, a
full and searching inquiry; and every one expressed a con-
viction that there was danger in it to our alliance. He
was not enamoured of that alliance. He doubted that al-
liance, and
.perhaps before the session was over he might
state his opinion with respect to it. But it was not before
this committee that that question could arise. He thought
that the policy of the war, and of our national and rnilitar y
proceedings, should be altogether excluded from inquiry.
The right hon. gentleman bad talked of the press, and he
(Mr. Drummond) knew that there were men who had a
cowardly fear of the press ; and it was beciuse he knew
that these were not the men who wielded that bauble, the
mace, against the House of Stuart, that he thought there
was any danger at the present moment. But the danger
was now from an opposite side ; and there was not a man
who dared do leis duty against that danger. Of all the
cringing baseness that over apparel in English heart's,
commend him to the cringing conduct of Liberals to the
daily press.
Mr. ELLICE was in favour of a close committee, pub-
lishing its evideace from time to time, as certain portions
of it were completed.
Mr. ROCHE said they had better hand the matter over
to the Government, and abandon their idea of a committee,
for a majority of the members appointed were already ap-
palled at the task which they had undertaken.
After a few words from Mr. J. BALL and Mr. BENTINCK,
Mr. T. DUNCO)IBE, in consequence of some observa-
tions made by the noble viscount the First Lord of the
Treasury, had put a-question to the hon. and learned mem-
ber for Seheffield, for the purpose of ascertaining if it were
his intention to press the inquiry. The hon. and learned
gentleman answered that he was in earnest, and, come
what might, he would prosecute the inqiiiry. (Hear.) Not
one word was thou said about a secret committee, though
secrecy was certainly advocated by many hon. and right
hon. gentlemen who opposed the appointment of any corr.
mittee, and objected to any investigation at all. (Hear.)
Wheathe right hen, baronet the member for Droitwich
was appointed on the committee, he was exceedingly can-
did. He said he would act upon it on the condition that
there should be the most searching inquiry into the state
of the army, and he saw no danger, then, in the investiga-
tion. He never said a word about the committee being.
secret. That was not one of the conditions. He said, " I
shall be a sort of ferret on this inquiry ;" but he never
stated as one of the conditions on which he would consent
to serve that it should be a secret committee. The right
hon. gentleman, however, told them that evening that the
condition on which the majority of the committee would
consent to serve would be secrecy. Then let them appoint
'another committee. Nine other names could be got as
good as the nine who would only serve on that condition.
The committee was appointed in accordance with public
feeling, and that public feeling would not allow that'in-
quiry to be stifled, evaded, garbled, compromised, or mys-
tified. The objects of the committee would be more effec-
tively attained by publicity, and less injustice to indivi-
duals would be done by the committee being public.
(Hear, hear.) When the late Secretary-at-War opposed
the committee the other evening, he was ready to agree to
an inquiry into the conduct of those whose duty it was
to administer to the wants of the army in the Crimea. He
said he was quite ready that his conduct should be inquired
into, and was it right that his vindication —if it should be
a vindication—should not go forth to the public. (Hear,
hear.) He would say the same thing of the Duke of New-
castle. In the course of his experience, he (Mr. Duncembe)
did not recollect any public man who was so loaded with
obloquy as the Duke of Newcastle, and was it quite right
that he should have no opportunity of coming before that
committee? (Hear, hear.) Whatever his vindication
might be, it should be as public as the obloquy ; and if he
had no vindication to offer, let the obloquy rest upon him.
They must recollect the opinion that had been given by
the noble lord the member for the city of London, and the
correspondence that had been read, from which it appeared
that great credit was due to-the Duke of Newcastle for the
manner in which he had discharged his duty ; that it was
the fault of the system, and that he was controlled by
others. (Hear, hear.) The Duke of Newcastle made an-
other statement in another place, and the public generally
thought that the statement made by him was perfectly
satisfactory. He (Mr. Dnncombe) had never heard that
statement controverted in that house. (Hear.) The noble
duke should go before the committee, and the committee
should publish the evidence they received, and the only
instraction to the committee should be that they should
report from day to day, and thereby tray misrepresentation
on the part of the public press or any other person in the
room would be avoided. (Hear.) They were told that
they would in some way or other injure their alliance with
France ; but they had appointed no committee to inquire
committee
omanitytethe connectedwould
goulit
b ejustified uwfiietd in
with tsetoiino. anyPpr)encharmy, and the
inquiry con-
nected with France. (Hear, hear.) The public wanted
to know what had become of the army that had bean sent
to the Crimea—who had starved them, who had refused
them shelter, and why disease had overtaken them—
but they did not want to go into the policy of the war.
(Hear, hear.) Supposo the Duke of Newcastle, the First
Lord of the Admiralty, or the late Secretary-at-War
' said they would only give their evidence on the-condition
of the committee being secret, there would be cause for
the committee to come to that house, but at present they
had no cause to come there ; they had examined no one ;
they were in no difficulty, but there was a little squabble
amongst themselves. (Hear.) It was really time that
something should be demo with the committee. They
should have members on it who bad some fortitude,
etreegth, and courage about them—(hear, boar)—and they
should not be troubled with such childishness. (Hear.)
The wrongs of which the people complained had been pa-
-1 railed in the face of the world, and they required that
those disasters-and wrongs should be inquired into by the
light of day. (Hoar.)
Mr. NAPIER thought the tribunal appointed to inquire
into this matter was the best judge of the mode in which
tho inquiry should be conducted. He felt that the com-
mittee were sincere in the opinion they had given ; and he
should, therefore, give his vote for the motion.
Me. CROSSLEY said that if the committee were to sit
with closed doors, members only being allowed to outer,
reports of the proceedings would be published from day -to
day in an incorrect manner. If they had a committee at
all, let it be public, and let every question put and answer
given be fully reported. He was satisfied the public would
soon PCO that what had been referred to this committee
could never be done by it, and that if this war were to be
managed at all it must be managed by the executive
Government. (Hear, hear.)
Sir H.WILLOUGHBY thought it was the duty of the
hone° to take care that the inquiry should enter a safe
channel. It was quite clear that if they attempted to make
the committee secret, they would occasion evils of the
greatest magnitude, and he should, therefore, join with
the noble lord the member for Totness in resisting the
motion. (Hear.)
Mr. BOWYER understood that the proposition fer a
secret committee was advocated because the committee
would thereby be enabled to erase such portions of the
evidence as in their opinion ought not to be published.
That, at first sight, might appear to be a specious argu-
ment; but unless the public were to hear not only the
truth but the whole truth they would not be satisfied.
Mr. ROEBUCK, in reply, said the proposal he had
made to the house was of an extraordinary nature, whilst
the instrument which he had asked permission to employ
for the purpose of this inquiry was equally exceptional ;
but the unequivocal expression of opinion which herd been
pronounced against both would preclude his going to a di-
vision. (Hear.) He should yield to the almost unani-
mous opinion of the house in favour of publicity, and pro-
ceed with the inquiry in the ordinary manner, resolving,
nevertheless, to have a thorough and searching investiga-
tion. (Hear, hear.) His, colleagues wished for a thorough
and searching investigation, but they thought it could only
be had through the means of a secret investigation. The
home, however, seemed to be of a different opinion; but it
was somewhat strange that the great majority of the per-
sons. who opposed secrecy were those very members who
were opposed to the appointment of a committee
altogether. To use the language of the hon.-member for
Aylesbury, they considered this motion as a triumph on
their part; but to bring in aid a homely expression,
" what was sauce for the goose. was sauce for the gander,"
and although he did not mean to say that either he was
the ono and the right hon. baronet the member for Cara
lisle was the other—(a laugh)—he must yet remind the
right hon. baronet and the house that, when it was pro-
posed in July, 1814. that a committee of inquiry should
be appointed into the conduct of the Post-office with
regard to opening letters, the right honourable baronet
was an advocate for secrecy, but he did not think the
matter could be fully investigated before a simple
select committee. (Hoar, hoer.) Now, that- was pro.

cisely this case. There could not be a thorough and
searching investig,ation in a select committee,

ing evidence nudes the plea that disclosures woulu involve
the public safety, and the anxiety of the committee in ask-
ing for secrecy was to do away with that excuse. The dif-
ficulties in the way of the committee were very great, but
neither he nor his colleagues wore of the cowardly disposi-
tion attributed to them by the hon. member for Finsbury,
and believing the inquiry could yet be made "thorough
and searching," through the instrumentality of an ordinary
select committee, he should bow to the wish of the house,
and endeavour to devise the best means for obtaining a
satisfactory result. He believed this inquiry had already
done good—indeed the appointment of the committee had
spurred on the Government to make reforms in the army ;
and in withdrawing the present motion he must express a
confident hope that the labours of the committee were des-
tined to lead to stillgreaterreforms. (Hear, hear.)

The motion was then withdrawn.
SUPPLY.

Ou the motion for going into a committee of supply,
Mr. RICH, who had the following notice on the paper,
said he should postpone it until a more convenient opportu-
nity, viz., On going into committee of supply of the army
estimates, to move " That it is expedient that measures be
taken for promoting the efficiency of our military academies
and other established provisions for preparing officers for
regimental and staff appointments."

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY wished to know if there would be
any further supplemental estimates in connection with the
army ?
Mr. PEEL replied in the negative, except the commissariat
estimates.
The house then went into committee of supply on the army
estimates, commencing with vote 10.
On the question that 64,0001. be voted to defray the charge
of the pay of general officers in her Majesty's forces not being
colonels of regiments,
Mr. WILLIAMS asked for some further information re-
specting the clothing of regiments. He gathered from what
fell from the hon. Uder-Secretary the other night that it was
still to be left in the hands of the colonels, although they
would not pay for it. Now if that were so the saving to the
State would be nil.
Mr. PEEL said the colonels had superintended the-clothing
for the ensuing year, but in all future years it would be abso-
lutely undertaken by the Government themselves.
Mr. PHINN asked whether a general order had been issued
relative to the promotion of general officers, and if so, whether
it contained a provision that any officer who had served six
years as equerry to her Majesty would be entitled to rank as a
general officer ?
Mr. PEEL said an order had been issued, but it contained
no such provision. (Hear, hear.)
The vete was then agreed to, as was also a vote for 55,0001.
to defray the charge of full pay of reduced and retired officers
in her Majesty's forces.
, On the question that 318,0001. be voted to defray the
I charge for half-pay and military allowances to reduced and
retired officers in her Majesty's land forces,
Mr. P. O'BRIEN took the opportunity of complaining that
officers on half-pay had been promoted in preference to
younger officers who had obtained distinction iu the Crimea
simply because they had not the means to purchase their pro-
motions.
Mr. WILLIAMS objected to the existing system of half-pay.
Officers ought to be called into active service upon full pay,
or compelled to sell out. None lout wounded and disabled
officers should be entitled to half-pay:
Col. NORTH was glad to hear this testimony of the hon.
member for Lambeth in favour of the purchase system.
Mr. S. KNOX said this remark only showed the hon. mem-
ber's ignorance of the service. Surely if one man sold out a
purcqaser came in, and how could that reduce the half-pay
list? The hon. member should inquire into these matters
before he ventured to lecture the house upon them.
After a few words from Mr. OTWAY and Lord LOVAINE,
Col. DUNNE observed that it had been stated that Govern-
ment had sold commissions which had lapsed by death ; he
should be glad to know if that were so; and, if it was, what
became of the money ?
Mr. PEEL replied that such commissions had beeji sold,
and the money applied to the reduction of the half-pay list.
Col. NORTH entered into an explanation with regard to
tho case of the private in the 26th Regiment who was tried
and punished at Newcastle-upon-Tyne for theft. The hon.
member for Lambeth had said the man was found guilty
by the officers of the regiment to gratify the commander ;
but, so far from that being the case, the man was tried,
not by a regimental court-martial, but by a district
court-martial, the offence being insubordination and robbery
from a comrade. The hon. member was also mistaken in sup-
posing that corporal punishment only prevailed in the •Uritish
army, because in the Prussian army it was much more strictly
enforced.
Mr. WILLIAMS said he had made the statement originally
on What ho considered reliable authority, it having come to
him from a most respectable source. He objected entirely to
the punishment of flogging, the maintenance or abolition of
which depended in a great degree on the officers of the regi-

meut.
Captain BELLEW thought members were bound to make
more strict inquiry before hazarding statements which sub-
sequently turned out groundless or exaggerated.
Mr. GILPIN strongly objected to the sale of commissions
by Government. The reasons alleged for tolerating the ex-
istence of the practice between private parties did not exist
in the case of the public.
Mr. PEEL would not wish to defend the principle of such
utdheermsoerldviensa
jruystciifiremai m-
n-
rsa
et as no
rc methodteisn;g btouof
tfiGliolnivnetghr neum emergencye netomh an ad
st
of
fnu commissions
present crisis.
Mr. HENLEY inquired what became of the money received
from this sale of commissions by the public ?
Mr. PEEL said the sum realised was invested in public
securities, and would be held for the purpose of reducing the
charge on the half-pay list which otherwise would arise when
the.number of officers on active service was reduced on the
termination of the present war.
Mr. HENLEY wanted to knovi in what office the money
was lodged ?.
Mr. F. PEEL said he imagined it was in the office of the
Commander-in-Chief. As to the names in which the money
was invested, he could not say withoat inquiry.
The vote was then agreed to.
15,7071. for half-pay reduced allowances to foreign troops,
and for pensions to wounded officers.
Colonel DUNNE asked whether the Government bad ob-
tained those foreign troops
Mr. F. PEEL was understood to say that as it took 20
regiments to compose a legion, he should say that they were
certainly not in existence.
The vote was agreed to.
124,4741. for pensions to widows and officers.
Mr. MAGUIRE paid he wished to allude to a subject of the
greatest importance. This vote was to provide pensions for
the widows and orphans of officers in the army; but he could
not, for his part, understand why the widows and orphans of
the humble soldiers in the ranks should not be as much the
objects of the consideration of the state. (Hear.) The pro-
vision which existed for them was of a temporary and purely
eleemosynary kind ; and, great as was the amount raised by
the Patriotic Fund, it would not be long before it was the
duty of the state to provide for the emergency that would
then ensue.
Colonel KNOX confessed that he could not see the justice
of providing for one class and not for another. (Hear.) It
'was most objectionable to be sending round the begging-box,
shutting up other charitable institutions, and calling upon
the public to do that which it was the duty of the state to do.
In his opinion her Majesty's Government ought to, make
some statement as to what wero the intentions of the Royal
commission, with regard to the large sum they had at their
disposal. The Patriotic Fund of the last war was badly
managed, and he believed the balance, amounting to not
less than 80,004., found its' way to the National Debt
Office; 'at all events, if it were not there, it had never
been satisfactorily accounted for. In the present case,
he trusted the GoYernment would take on itself the
responsibility of making provision for the widows and
orphans of the soldiers, and not leave them to depend for
their subsistence on the uncertain charity of the public. Be-
fore sitting down, he could not refrain from alluding to the
services of his gallant friend, Major Powis (hear, hear), who
had so zealously and indefatigably assisted in providing for
the comfort and welfare of hundreds of women and children,
who, but for his exertions and those of the gentlemen with
whom he had acted, would now have been starving in the
streets, or pining away their existence in the workhouses.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. S. ADAIR, as a member of the executive committee of
the Patriotic Fund, said he was confident that that fund
would be administered in the most judicious and efficient
manner. The first cases the committee had considered were
those of the widows and orphans of warrant officers, non-
commissioned officers, private soldiers, sailors, and marines ;
and for these several classes they had agreed upon a scale
of allowances which took effect from the let instant. The
committee felt themselves debarred to a considerable extent
from contributing to the relief of those who might not come
within the terms of th o Royal warrant, and whom there
desire would lead them to relieve, considering that the
families of non-commissioned officers, private soldiers, and
sailors were the first objects of their care. Nevertheless,
they thought that in cases of. urgent necessity they might
give some relief—of course limited in its amount—to the
widows and families of officers who had also perished in
this war ; and he had reason to believe, that if it were
known to the public generally that the executive committee
were precluded from giving such relief as-they could wish to
the widows and families of officers, the public would be dis-
posed to provide a special fund for that purpose. (Hear.)
He could assure the gallant officer, in conclusion, that the I
utmost care and the . most constant supervision were exer-
cised by the committee hi the distribution of the fund.
Lord A. PAGET wished to know if there was any chance
of either the price of the commission, or compensation for
it, being given to the widow or orphans of the officers who fell
in the Crimea ? At the battle of the Alma, at the famous
charge of cavalry at Balakiava, and again at the battle of
Inkerman, there was not a colonel of a regiment of whom it
might not be said that he had, from 8,0001. to 10,0al. hang-
ing round his neck---that was to say, if he were killed in ac-
tion the whole of that money would be sacrificed. He had often
heart it stated that too much money was given for commis-
sions ; but they all knew that the officer who once refused to
give full price for a commission was afterwards looked upon
as a "black sheep," and his chance of promotion very much
retarded. (Hear, hear.) He had relations in the Crimea.
One of these was a younger brother, who had a wife and four
children at home ; if he had fallen in action hisefamily would
have lost their all. He had also a very near and dear relative
in the cavalry charge at Balaklava—(hear, hear)—and if he
had been killed in the action he would have left his widow
with no more than 7,0001. or 8,0001. to subsist upon. (H ar,
hear.) Surely the price of the commission, or some compen-
sation for it, ought to be given in such cases.
Mr. F. PEEL reminded the committee of the unsatisfac-
tory alternative which was always presented to the Govern-
ment in dealing with these questions. In time of war,
when the patriotic feelings of this house and the country
were stirred to their utmost depths by the gallant deeds of
our soldiers and sailors, the Government had pressed upon
it every case of charity, and was called upon to be liberal,
and even profuse, in dealing with such cases. But, if it
yielded to all these applications, what was the consequence 7
As soon as the war terminated, then questions of economy
were taken up by the house, and in their turn pressed with
equal vigour upon the Government, who would probably be
charged with extravagance and forgetfulness of the principles
of economy in conducting the affairs of the nation. (Hear.)
It was said to-night that they were voting a large sum of
money as pensions for the widows and orphans of officers, and
declining to recognise the claims of the widows and orphans
of private soldiers. But was that the case ? Did they recog-
nise the claims of officers of the army who had their widows
and orphans pensioned by the country ? The fact was that the
fprinciple
fo
tf
hteh
oi smvcoetres wwahso cdoime
dp eonfs at
the
eo n
valuer
otfh
to
hloss
obmymt
ihse

sions. Ry the fifth vote a sum of 22,3671. was proposed ex-
clusively for the education and maintenance of the children of
common soldiers. By means of that vote no less a number of
boys than 800 or 900 were provided for, so that the proposal
was not so one-sided as the hon. gentleman opposite supposed.
Mr. MACARTNEY thought it was the duty of the
Government, when the country had been driven into a war
by the msmanagement of the late Prime Minister, to bring
forward some provision on a liberal scale for the wives and
children of officers who perished in the war. He was quite
sure that Parliament would not hesitate to provide for the
children of officers, as well as for those of private soldiers.
Mr. NEWPECLA,Tg could not help fooling that it was