The Sun.
London, England, 1855-03-10 00:00:00

SIR CHARLES NAPIER.

(Fioni the Tholes of this day.) •
The investigation of the Crimean expedition having
been transferred by the House of Commons to a select
committee, the discussion of the proceedings of the Baltic
fleet offered a ready way of getting over an evening
which might otherwise have hung heavy on the hands of
a Legislature no longer, as hitherto, bewildered by a mul-
titude of measures, and overwhelmed under the weight
of its avocations. Of the exact merits of the con-
troversy we are not permitted to judge, for the
public service does not permit the whole of the facts to
be laid before us, but some things appear to us to
be established without the least probability of being
rendered dubious by any future disclosure, and these
we propose to state with as much fairness and as inuch
brevity as we can command.
The first, and by far the most important conclusion, is,
that it would be neither just nor generous in this country
to feel or to express dissatisfaction with the perform-
ances'of the Baltic fleet. Theugh it has not been tirought
advisable to bestow on the officers and sailors of this
gallat,t armament the thanks which have been lavished
on the Admiral and fleet of the Black Sea, there are
many respects in which its naval campaign may bear
comparison with that of its more highly-appreciated
The officers of the Baltic fleet had, undoubtedly, to train
and discipline the crews of their ships, and have by coin-
mon consent worked up thiS excellent raw material into
most efficient and admirable seamen.. They have main-
tained a strict-and complete blociade in conformity with
the law of nations, instead of imagining that by stopping
the passage into the Black Sea they did all that could
be required of them. Their campaign is marked by no
episode like the loss of the Tiger, they succeeded in corn-
plete:y demolishing Boma raund, the projected Sebastopol
of the North, they effectually kept the enemy within his
ports, and, while the flu,sian steamers for months
passed in and out of Sebastopol at pleasure, Cronstadt
and Helsingfors were hermetically sealed. Provided
only with large ships, and without the assistance of gun-
boats and floating batteries, they were unable to ap-
proach the shores of that shallow sea and destroy the
enemy's town, but our fleet has preserved to us, to our
coasts, and to our trade, all the impunity of peace in the
midst of war, and has shown to Europe how little the
vaunted naval resources of Russia can avail when the
real masters of the ocean enter the lists. The chief has
quarrelled with the Admiralty, but we must separate
him from those he commands, and only regret that the
differences that have arisen should seem for a moment to
obscure the services of so many gallant seamen, or have
interposed between them and that grateful acknowledg-
ment which they deserve at the bands of their country.
As to the case of Sir Charles Napier, it is by no means
so easy to express an opinion, for the simple reason that
we are not possessed of the data upon which that opi-
nion must be formed. Regarding Sir Charles Napier'e
services as a whole, and without reference to any corre-
spondence between him and the Admiralty, we have
said that we see no reason to be dissatisfied with them ;
but the case is by no means so clear when that element
is taken into consideration. The Government seem to
have been of opinion that after the fall of Bomarsund,
Sweaborg should have been attacked, and there were
not wanting high authorities to support that view.
If we understand the case rightly, Sir Charles Napier's
objection turned much more on the lateness of the season
and the uncertainty of the weather than on any engi-
neering difficulties. This objection the result does not
appear to have supported, for the Baltic remained open
for three months after the capture of Bomarsund, and
the weather, however inclement and disagreeable, was
not such as to prevent the prosecution in those waters
of ordinary commercial enterprise. It was not by nicely
weighing difficulties and forestalling every possible con-
tingency that might occur to baffle and defeat their ope-
rations that our great admirals have raised the navy
of this country to its present height of excellence and
renown. The possibilities they have been in the
habit of calculating were those of success, not of
failure, and they have striven to make an opportunity
rather than sought to avoid one already made for them.
Had Nelson reasoned thus, where would have been the
glories of the Nile or Copenagen Had Lord Exmouth
reasoned thus, where would have been the capture of
Algiers ? Had Sir Charles Napier reasoned thus at the
siege of Acre, a most glorious day would have been lost
to our annals. We do not presume to prejudge the case,
but, as far as we can understand it from the lips of Sir
Charles Napier's own advocates, supposing the enter-
prise to be otherwise feasible, the mere lateness of the
season does not appear a sufficient objection.
But, while speaking with diffidence as to the merits
of the matter in controversy, we can feel no difficulty
whatever as to the course Sir Charles Napier has taken
with the view of vindicating his character and redressing
his real or supposed ill-treatment. 'Whatever were the
differences between the Admiral and the Admiralty, :t
is clear that he was neither recalled nor dismissed, that
no public charge was made against him, nor anything
said or done to injure his reputation. His command had
expired, and it was not thought proper to renew it. This
is a discretion necessarily vested in the Beard of Admi-
ralty, and one which Parliament, if it have the public
service at heart, will never venture to interfere with.
The widest distinction ought to be taken between re-
calling an officer from a command, or refusing to re-
new that trust, and preferring charges against him
affecting his personal honour or professional reputa-
tion. The latter is public property ; the former is,
and must be, in the discretion of the Executive. In
order to form a judgment on the propriety of a re-
c 111, Parliament must have access to numerous con-
fidential documents which the necessities of war

withhold from the knowledge of a popular assembly. It
must place itself in the position of the Executive, and
call for all the information that Executive possessed.
The result of such inquiries can only be that cfficers
found incapasle will be continued in employment to the
detriment of the public service, unless some specific act
sufficient . to justify their recall in the public eye can he
proved against them. The tendency in this direction is
already a good deal too strong. The dread of the re-
sponsibility of recalling Generals and Admirals is al-
ready far too great for the public good, and the House
of Commons will act wisely in doing nothing to aug-
ment it. We therefore think that Sir Charles Napier
had no case to bring before the House of Commons.
But, if we disapprove of bringingt shallslleh wqeuessatyioonfs
tbhee-
fore the Legislature at all, what
manner in which the defence or accusation—we know
not which to call it—was conducted I An Admiral,
just returned from a service which is to be renewed in
two or three moths, by the same men, in the same
waters, against the same enemy, with the same objects
as before, does not hesitate, in order to revenge himself
on a Ministry from which he thinks he has received un-
I handsome treatment, to throw himself into the arms of
f the party to which he is politically opposed, and to place
at
,the disposal of the Opposition a confidential cor-
respondence, the possession of which he owes to the
favour of those who are now the objects of his attack.
But this is merely a party consideration. The doeu-
! ments with which Sir Charles Napier furnished Mr.
Malins—and printed extracts which be distributed
with his own hand from beneath the Speaker's gallery
to members of the House of Commons—were nut
his own property, were not his to give or withhold,
but were the property of the nation. It is not
because Sir Charles Napier feels himself aggrieved by
the conduct of the Ministry that he has a right to pub-
lish papers of the most secret and confidential nature,
which may cost us, for aught we know, thousands of
Eves and millions of treasure. Mr. Malins said he would
select his extracts so as to do as little injury as possible
to the public service, but what right has lie or his client
to do to the public service any injury at all The
quarrel is between the admiral and the Government ;
the nation is no party to the dispute. ¶he interests of
the nation must not be compromised for the sake of
private or personal considerations. The case has not
been provided for in our statute-book—it has not been
foreseen by our legislators. But, had it been so, we
cannot doubt that the law would have treated the wilful
and advised publishing, by a public servant of con-
fidential communications received by him in tnat capa-
city, without the assent of the Government by which
he is employed, as a heavy offence against public morals
and the public safety.

ELECTION INTELLIGENCE.