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

be, for t he hen. gentleman had reverted to his old. habits
and, fog, id feud; with everything, declaring that the army
had. lesci a mismanaged, and everything had been misma-
,amme„ • Le It notbilig would-ever come -right until every=
thl el t;. bat hI I been cone should be undone; but, adde I
the .te Iht see:). lea, tie, iu is, triumphant tone, notes ly could
lied f 'wit evit.ii ane thing done in regard to the Meet—
everyl .hinge was perfectly right in thatdeoarteneat, an •t no
ono a .uld get a word to say, against it. The lion. gentle-
man, I reyoneidoubt, did not know these things at that time,
dad hi , supposed must have thought that the ben of secrecy
could be kept upon this correspondence, and that, from au
apprel iension that the public service would be injured by
divull ing them, these things would be kept secret, for he
thong it if his mind adverted to this correspondence the
hon. g antletuan could not have .anticipated so confidently
that ize body could throw blame on what had been done at
the Li lmiralty. No doubt ho should be told, as the' bon.
and ge Ilant member for Gloucester had told them, that
Sir Oh sties "Napier had shown a very bad example in going
to mak a a speech at the Mansioe-house and that it Wes
apinfi , all discipline. He (Mr. Malin;) had no desire to
couch= d. this case otheeeivise than in a perfectly candid
manna r, or to express approbation where approbation could
not ha entertained. He thought that Sir Charles Napier
had co emitted an error in making that speech, and going
to the i'ength to which ho went ; but it had been made the
subject of comment that ho had se id he took the command
of a, flu et badly manned and worse disciplined, and some
°nicer i afterwards wrote to the papers to say that they were
sure ist could not both admiral's intention to cast censure
on these who had served under him. Now he fourril from
the letters that passed two months before, that Sir Charles
:Negev was then remonstrating with the Government be-
catimo they had not formally given their approbation to the
officer a. serving under him, to whose exertions they were
indebete (1 fur the safety of the fleet, to whom they were
inelebszeil for having brought back a disciplined fleet, lifter
h %vises taken out one that was undisciplined. Sir Charles
Nevi* r, in fact, said in a letter written in November
that* be observed that on the return of the French fleet
to Fiennce, the Emperor, iu addressing his Legislative
Chet uel-ers tendered his thanks for the operation of the
Feenclr fleet in , the Baltic, that the services of the
Engl44l navy had been equally worthy of commendation,
that the! e.tertions and merits of his officers deserved to be
acknows N.fged, and that lie regretted that not a single ex-
pression ut thanks should have been tendered to them.
What Sir 0,-. Napier meant by the expression so much criti-
cisedthat his
was, not officers were incompetent, but that
the circumstance.. s me der which the fleet had beeu equipped
necessarily caused .its e'escipline to be imperfect. Ho be-
lieved there was not is sine le captain in the fleet who had
ever commanded a ship in th eßaltic before, a circurnsta ice
which enhanced the difficultie.v a hundredfold ; whilst the
fleet, being se large and power:n.2. had been manned has-
tily, and by men who were incapa 4.'0 of going aloft. ale
thought he had now shown tke heiriee that Sir C. Napier
had been dismissed from his command ill December, rn,
not only dismissed but censured, and fn leis conviction it
was for the iuterests of the public set vice that such a
transaction should be bought under the notice of Parlia-
ment. He trusted that, in doing so, the house would be of
opinion he had not miscoeceived his duty as a erember or
Parliament, but that he had succeeeed in bringing it in a
temperate and moderate manner before the house: He
would not refrain, so long as he had the honour of c,ssat
iu that house, from expressing disapprobation of the pro-
ceedings of any Minister when lie thought disapprobation
was deserved. Hohad ventured to express what he strongly
felt—that the manner in which Sir C. Napier bad been
treated by the Board of Admiralty, and consequently by the
Government of which the noble lord was at the head, was
unworthy ef this great nation. ale submitted to the house
that it was incompatible with the public service of this coun•
try that its distinguished servants should be treated with
neglect and injustice—that they should receive reproach
and uisgrace whore honour and reward were due. It was
also his conviction teat it was absolutely essential to the
'Miele service that these transactions should not be kept iu
the dark, but that the facts should be brought to light, in
order that Parliament mightjudge as to their propriety. As
the right hon. baronet the member for Carlisle had toll
them in the admirable speech he delivered on the question,
whether the committee now sitting should be open or secret,
public reputations were not to be sacrificed in a secret com-
mittee in No. 17. Be adopted the principle of the right hen.
gentleman, that the reputations of our generals and admi-
rals were dear to the country, that they were the property
of the country, and that an insult to them was an insult to
every member of the community. (Cheers.) It was upon
their skill and courage that we must rely for our defence,
and if we could not lend men worthy to command our fleets
and armies, then England would indeed be reduced to 0
miserable condition. (Renewed cheers.) If, when we had.
found sech men, and when the Government of the day pro-
claimed to us that we had found the most fitting man'—if,
because the First Lord of the Admiralty took a view that
was not in accordance with that of the commander of the
fleet, the admiral was to be received on his return' with
ignominy, there was an end to all security for the efficient
performance of the public service. When he found, there-
fore, that no other member of the house was disposed to
bring this matter under their consideration, hehad felt it his
duty not to shrink from bringing it forward, believing, as
he did, that to keep such transactions in the dark would
be attended with the greatest possible detriment to the
public service in general. (Cheers.) The hon. gentleman
concluded by moving for copies of any correspondence
which had passed between the Board of Admiralty or any
member of the Government and Sir Charles Napier since
the 20th December last.

Admiral Sir T. HERBERT said—As a rersomd friend
of Sir Charles Napier, and one who served under him on
many trying occasions, I must beg to trouble the house
with a few words on the motion now before them. The
gallant admiral the member for Gloucester told the house,
a few evenings ago, that Sir Charles Napier was not dis-
missed from his command. Technically speaking he was
not ; but he was removed from his command by ordering
him to haul down his flag, and, to my mind, in a moat dis-
courteous manner, unaccompanied as the order was by a
single complimentary expression in commendation of the
gallant admiral's management of the fleet while under his
orders. Although I cannot approve of after-dinner speeches
like the gallant admiral's at the Mansion-house, yet, after
all Sir C. Napier's eminent seivices—many of them most
brilliant_ ....1...1, as 1...1....0...11.4 .k.a.t.it iLth At,itt.a; ration of
such men a. Lord Exmouth, Sir A. Cochrane, Sir Robert
Stopford, Sir J. Gordon, and other distinguished oiiicei a—
-1 have tun much respect for my gallant friend, who was
once my commander during some trying occurrences, not to
hope that his statement will prove to ba correct, and that
he will stand well with his countrymen. With regard to the
gallant admiral's conduct in the Baltic, I do not think that
he could have done more wile the force at his disposal than
he did, and I firmly believe that it is to his cool judgment,
and wise discretion the country is indebted for the safe re-
turn home of our fleet ; for had Sir Charles Napier been
induced to have attacked either Cronstadt or S weaborg
without the co-operation of a large land force, and the
assistance of mortar-vessels and gun-boats of an easy draft
of water—a force which appears to have been entirely
neglected attaching to the fleet last) year—na y couvictioi is
that the attack would have- failed, and that his ships most
likely would have been all disabled. (Hear.) Can the eulo-
gium pronounced upon Sir C. Napier by the right hen;
baronet the member for Carlisle, at the Reform banquet,
ever be forgotten ? There the right hon. baronet not only
congratulated the club on so thoroigh a Reformer having
the command of the fleet, but aided that his confidence in
him was so great that he had his (the First Lord of the Ad-
miralty's) authority to declare war, if he thought fit, upon
his arrival in the Baltic. Now what has all this boasting
and confidence come to ? That the right hon. baronet and
the gallant admiral have fallen out, the' admiral has been
dismissed by Sir J. Graham from his command, and that
unfortunate misunderstanding—which I much regret, as
being prejudicial to the public service, particularly to the
discipline of the naval branch of it. However, the gallant
admiral in common fairness ought to have an opportunity,
somewhere, of vindicating his character. I have not assn
any of Sir Charles Napier 's cornspmnience with the right
hon. baronet opposite; but if the ccrrespoudence asked
for is refused to be prod need inerel3 on the score of bring
of a private charaCter, it certainly • does not come well
front an Admiralty who made such liberal use of private
and confidential corresponchece -in the inquiry of err.
Stafford's dockyard appointment to refuse it.
Sir JAMES GIIIIIAM—I have great pleasure in
assuring the house that it will not be necess try for me, in
answering the hon. and learned gentleman, to detain them
for anything like the length of time he has occupied in
opening his case. For, sir, I have not come down hefe
prepared to read extracts from public despatches, and
much less do I come here prepared to read garbled extracts
from such despatches. (Hear, hear.) Much less am I
prepared to enter into tho details of private conversations.
I have not the advantage of holding in my handsanything
like that brief of a confidential nature which has been put
into the hands of certain members of this house. But at
the outset of what I have to address to the house, I shall
jast refer to the passage with which the hon. member con-
cluded his speech, when he asid he was anxious to vindi-
cate the honour of this country. Now, sir, lam not de-
void of a desire to vindicate the honour of this country,
and I heard the. honourable and learned gentleman, with
the deepest regret,' say, as I understood him, that the
honour of this country, which was so dear to him, had
been lost by the disasters which, had befallen our arms.
Now, sir, whether I look to the Black Sea or the Baltic, its
to what concerns the navy, I am satisfied that the honour
of this countryhas been maintained; and as regards our
army, I know that all is not lost. (Hear, hear.) The
honour of that army and the honour of this country, as I
believe, are still intact. (Loud cheers.) We have never
met the enemy on any one occasion in which our arms
have not been victorious ; and whatever the suffer-
ings of our troops may have been, their exemplary
patience, their gallantry, their good conduct, far camel.
all my powers of praise—(cheers)—and in the presencet of
this house I am glad to declare that the honourhoet h
country and its arms is safe. (Renewed cheers.) T hon.e
and learned gentlemaa has commented upon a
Governmentex
expression
used by my noble friend at the head of the.
on an occasion to whioh- he delights in referring—that the
highest proof of sagacity lies in looking several moves before
one. Now, I must plead guilty to a great want of sa-
i't for the moves made by the hon. and learned gen-
tlemanee'y'on this occasion were not foreseen. I did not anti-
cipate that he would have thought it consistent with his
duty to read extracts froiu despatches in his pussessi n
public despatches of the highest possible. importance,'which
the Government of this country has not yet been asked by
the House of Commons to produce, and with regard to
which it remains to be aeon whether, when they are
asked, they will think it consistent with their duty to the
public to advise the housa to sanction their production.
iTheir discretion will be exercised by them ; what is due
to myself, I will shortly endeavour to state to the house.
The hon. and learned gentleman talks of the introduction
of new things. Is there anything more new, sir, with all
your experience in that chair, have you seen or heard of
anything so unexampled as the course pursued by the hon.
gentleman ? I have not culled from private letters, with.
out the consent of the writers of those letters, such extracts
as, to use hie own words, would maintain the view he
takes of this case. If there is to be any production of
I these letters, let it be complete and entire. But, until
that production shall have taken place, I trust the house
will not form any opinion from these extracts which the
hon. and learned gentleman has called, in order to
sup-
port the view he takes of this matter. I said I didnot
expect the moves that have taken place. Had I been
asked before this night whether I thought the day would
come when Sir Charles Napier would put his case into the
hands of a lawyer, sitting upon the opposite side of the
house would appear as plaintiff in a case charging the
Government, of which my noble friend the member fur
Tiverton is the head, with having treated him, as the hon.
1 and learned member has said, with insult and contuniely—
' I confess to you that nothing further from my anticipa-
tions could possibly have occurred. Put there is anotl,er
part of the 'conduct of the hon. and learned gentleman
which, I confess, surprised me. He referred to the dinner
which took .ace at' the Reform Club, for which, as I have
bef9re aids I hate deno_pei!ance. I bay° already stated