The Sun.
London, England, 1854-07-26 00:00:00

to the latter explanation, if Russia were to reduce her
Black Sea fleet to one or two sail of the line, that would
bring her within the terms of the latter explanation. How
the noble lord had come to diminish his declaration to that
extent it was not for him to explain. It would seem to an
irrapartial spectator as if the noble lord had received some
communication from some of his colleagues either in that
house or in another place—perhaps from the noble earl at
the head of the Gevernment, or perhaps the noble lord had
felt, after having spoken out his sensible, bold, manly
opinion in the first instance, that it might not be altogether
in harmony with the opinions of those with whom he was
acting. That showed more than ever that they were govern-
ed now by men who were not in accordanoe with one another
—not even in agreement with themselves, but vacillating
and distracted in their councils. (Hear.) It appeared to him
that though some of them might be desirous—the noble
lord he believed was one—of carrying on the war with a
vigour suited to the great objects to be attained, there were
others who desired nothing so much as to bring the war to
a conclusion, no matter on what terms. He believed that
the country were generally of opinion that the war might
easily have been prevented if there had been at the head
of the Government a man of capacity, firmness, and reso-
lution, who would not have been afraid to meet the
designs of the Czar by bold and determined language. His
belief was that if such language had been used the Czar
would never have made that aggression in Turkey, which,
having been made, had necessarily led to resistance and to
war. If they had had any other minister than Lord Aber-
deen the war, in his opinion, would never have taken place.
He believed that Lord Aberdeen was sincere in his desire
to prevent war, but his measures to prevent it had failed,
and instead of averting it his pusillanimous conduct, un-
worthy the minister of a great country, had rendered the
war necessary and inevitable. He could not, therefore,
feel any respect for the capacity of a minister who, besides
having taken the wrong course, had failed in the means he
had adopted. He believed that the people felt that those
persona who had not the sagacity to perceive danger in the
distance were not likely to have the capacity to meet it
when it came near. That opinion was supported by facts.
Great armaments had been sent forth, but no results had
been produced. A belief had sprung up that the Govern-
ment wished to saddle the country with a maximum of ex-
pense, and with a minimum of results, in order to disgust
them with the war. Our fleet in the Baltic had captured
some tar, and some exploits had been affected of a gallant
nature, but what victories could we boast of that were
likely to have any decisive effect on the war? Some lives
had been lost in affairs like that of Ganda Karleby, chiefly
because the fleet had not been provided with vessels of a
small draught of water. In the Black Sea Odessa had
been half bombarded ; and—what was satisfactory, no
doubt we had taken possession of the forts at the
mouth of the Danube. Bat these things ought to have
been effected long ago. If we had had vessels of shal-
low draught in the Danube we might have pre-
vented the Russians crossing the Danube. The right
hon. baronet the Fret Lord of the Admiralty had made a
grandiloquent statement of a convoy of twelve transports,
laden with provisions and munitions, which had been
taken Loin the Russians; but the production of the des-
patch showed that these twelve transports were miserable
coasters that had been picked up from time to time by our
cruisers; that their crews did not average mare than four
men each; and that what had been called munitions of
war was oatmeal. (A laugh.) The result was discontent
among our forces. We had not marched our troops to the
assistance of Omer Pasha; and at the present moment they
were stopped at Varna for want of the means of transport.
The only satisfactory achievement in the war was by the
Turks. Omer Pasha had shown his ability as a general,
and the Turks their courage as soldiers. The arrogant
Russians, who talked of driving the Turks before them
like chaff, and of taking a military promenade to Constan-
tinople, had been bold enough in affairs like Sinope, or
against a disabled steamer stranded on their coast, but
had been ignominiously defeated by the barbarian troops
of that power which the Czar talked of as moribund. No
one last year would have dared to prophesy that Russia
would in 1851 be driven across the Danube by the Turkish
troops, unassisted by their allies. Yet such was the fact.
Of late the noble earl at the head of the Government had
talked of carrying on the war with the concurrence of
France and the " other powers." He wished to know what
was meant by the words " other powers." Perhaps Aus-
tria and Prussia were referred to. What assistance had
Austria rendered to us ? We had not experienced the
hostility of Prussia; true, but that was all that could
be said of her. A treaty had been concluded between
Austria and the Porte; but why had Austria not entered
the Principalities? They had been told that Austria
would drive the Russians out of the Principalities,
but the Russians had not retired, and were preparing to
d ;feed themselves. What was meant then by the use of
such words, when Austria had not declared war. Every-
thing had been done to conciliate Austria. It had ever
been the policy of the Earl of Aberdeen to conciliate Aus-
tria, and to look to Austria as if Austria ought to be the
guide to British councils. It was in reference to such a
disposition, that the noble lord the Home Secretary, now
a colleague of the Earl of Aberdeen, made use of the re-
markable expression, in speaking of that noble earl, that
the country was guided by the counsels of antiquated
imbecility. When the war broke out, it was proposed to
enrol a body of Poles in the Turkish service. He believed
the noble lord the Home Secretary approved of that pro-
posal, but it had been laid aside for giving offence to Aus-
tja, though it now appeared that Austria did not object
to it. It would no doubt be a great advantage to have
Austria on our side. Let the allied forces once att .ck
Sebastopol, as the noble lord talked of their doing, and
they would soon find Austria on their side. (Hear, hear.)
But so long as the troops of Russia were able to set at de-
fiance the allied forces of England and France, so long
would Austria be unwilling to declare war against her
Now, the hon. member for the West Riding, who in speak-
ing of him had used the expression of " his hon. and de-
luded friend," but in whose case he might return the com-
pliment by calling him his hon. and philo-Russian friend,
had observed that the contest iu which we were now engaged
was not one favourable to the cause of oppressed nationali-
ties. But was not the Emperor of Russia one of the great-
est enemies of nationality? Had not he crushed the
liberties of Poland and of Hungary, and would it not be
desirable that that arch-enemy of freedom should as far as
possible be humbled? His hon. friend had spoken of crum-
pling up Russia, but he (Lord D. Stuart) could not
see that we had as yet succeeded in making any impression
whatever upon that power. Such being the position of
affairs, after tour months of war, a general distrust of the
honesty and energy of the Government in prosecuting
hostilities had begun to spread throughout the country.
The people of England had begun to entertain fears that wt,
may even be hurried into some ignominious, unstable, and
unsafe peace; and that the House of Commons may com-
bine with the Government for that end by permitting the
war to be carried on, as had hitherto been the case, with-
out vigour or energy. Under these circumstances he had
thought it proper to take the course which he had that
even'ng adopted, and for that course he might observe
that he had the authority of precedent. A motion similar
to that which he had submitted to the house had been
made by Mr. Dunning in the year 1780, by Mr. Erskine in
1783, and by Mr. C. Grey, afterwards Earl Grey, in 1805.
The noble lord concluded by making the motion of which
he had given notice.

Mr. S. HERBERT said the noble lord who had just sat
down had concluded his speech by referring to precedents,
in order to justify the course which he had that evening
thought it desirable to adopt. Upon the ground of prece-
dent he had no complaint to make of the noble lord. Simi-
lar motions had been made upon questions of natures the
most diverse ; but they were distinguished from that of
the noble lord by the peculiarity that they had been brought
forward by opponents of the Government as a direct cen-
sure upon its acts, and as an expression of want of confi-
dence in its administration of affairs. He could only say,
that if the noble lord had that evening thrown down a chal-
lenge, the Government were ready to take it up—to offer
the noble lord battle upon his own terms, and to abide by
that decision at which, with respect to their conduct of
the war, the House of Commons—the representative
of the opinions of the country—might arrive. Before he pro-
ceeded, however, to deal with the speech of the noble lord,
he should wish to offer a few observations to the house
with reference to some statements which in the discussion
of the evening previous had been made by the hon. mem-
ber for Aylesbury (Mr. Layard). That hon. gentleman,
having made some quotations from a letter which he said
he had received from the East, had gone on to remark that
the Duke of Wellington having complained very loudly at
the commencement of the Peninsular war of the great de-
ficiency which existed in the organisation of the commis-
sariat department, had, by the application of the high ad-
ministrative ability which he possessed, brought that de-
partment to a state of the utmost perfection towards the
conclusion of the campaign. But the hon. gentleman had
gone further, and observed that the admirable system
which had been framed under the Duke of Wellington had
at the conclusion of the late war been suddenly altered, if
not completely abolished ; so that the fruits of the Duke
of Wellington's labours had been lost to the country.
Where the hon. member had found the materials upon
which to base that statement, he (Mr. S. Herbert) could
not say; but, in reply to the hon. member, he should
simply state that that system which the Duke of Welling-
ton had succeeded in bringing to perfection towards the
end of the war still continued to remain unchanged. It
was true that in England the commissariat had been alto-
gether abolished, but the system of the Duke of Welling-
ton had been maintained throughout our colonies exactly,
upon the same footing as that upon which that illus-
trious personage had placed it. The only change, in,
fact, that hail been made in connection with the sub-
ject had consisted in substituting for the head of the
commissariat department a responsible minister of the
Crown—a change which had been deemed necessary for the
welfare of the service and the interests of the country.
The person whom the Government had selected to conduct
the affairs of that department was dr. Commissary. General
Fielder, who had served under the Duke of Wellington,
and in whom the greatest confidence had ever been placed
by his distinguished chief. So far, therefore, from the
system of the Duke of Wellington having been upset, that
system had been, as he had shown, maintained in fall
vigour. " But," said the hon. member for Aylesbury, " you
sent out last autumn to Turkey a gentleman connected with
the commissariat for the purposeof procuring information,
and all that he has done has been to write an essay
on the manners and customs of the inhabitants of that
country." Now, the observations of the honourable
gentleman tended to induce the house to believe that the
pamphlet which had been written by the gentleman in
question treated of every subject rather than that with re-
spect to which it was desirable that information should be
procured. He (Mr. S. Herbert) should, however,
merely quote, in reply to thestatement of thehon. member
some of the marginal heads, indicating the subject matter
contained in the several paragraphs of the pamphlet.
They were as follows :—" Supply, of food," Price of
Where to be found," " What are the best
f transport," " What weight you can put upon a
e meanss
ine e
camel,"
, "
•
What weight upon an ass," &c. In short, there
was contained in the work in question a variety of the
most minutethe heads o
pamphlet
himself, a d been
and
that he had been d
of the
theat ails with
commissariatre respect c to subjectsmightt
de upon which
desire
e toobtain
jn.
is'ortrnit
n 3ittioend ;to
kind enough to make some corrections in
it, wltk the view of making it useful to those engaged in
the public service. Bat the hon. member had further said,
eci that
for
Aylesbury the
"You sent out only one man for the purpose of procuring
sad
de he
eb
memveller
hon. believed
ttoh e
thatnec esstsaatreymiennfto information."
sa,t itohna.t"
persons had been
had sent with that view, and that one gentleman been
ordered to put himself in communication with Mr. His (Mr. S. Herbert a) answer
eight or nine
Cal-
vert, the very individual who was best fitted to give such
information as might be required. The hon. member had
made those statements, relying upon the truth of letters
which ho had received from persons who in many instances
were not themselves upon the spot, but who merely re-
ported the rumours which reached them, and whose asser-
tions were believed to be correct, because they were made
by individuals residing iu the country where the circum-
stances narrated in those letters were supposed to have
occurred. He should give an instance in corroboration of
the accuracy of hill opinionuPon that subject. It bad bees