The Sun.
London, England, 1856-03-14 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 14. 1856.

THE SUN.

efficient as he himself had been. 'lf I am not mistaken, I
have heard the gallant officer say in early youth that he
• would never think of going to sea after he was CO years of
ago. That was in conversation, bet when I first went to the
Admiralty the hon. and gallantofficer was so good as to ex-
tend to me his advice, I bail almost sail hie " tuition," in
the important °Mee to nilich I was raised.unexpectedly in
1331, and great with the pen as well as with the sword, the
hen. and gallant officer has published frequently and largely.
I hold in my hand a book wrtton by the gallant officer with
the high sounding title of " The. Navy," which contains
a series of letters written by Admiral. Sir C. Napier, and
edited by the highest literary authority, his relative, Ma-
jor-General Sir NV. Napier, to various First Lords of. the
Admiralty. including Lnd Melbourne, the Delve of Clal
rence, Lord "Althorpe, myself— an humble individus-
among such company—the Earl of Mint°, Lord J. Russell,
the Earl of Ellenborough, Lord Pelmereton, Sir R. Peel,
and though last, not least, the Editor of the limes. Now,
this is in i 831. It is n private communication, no docu-
ment of doubtful authority, uncertain in its use, and not
deliberately given to the public, but it is a letter addressed
to myself on May 17, 1831, and the gallant Admiral says—
Rely upon it, sir, that the generality of men of GO years of
age are not fit for captains ; as admirals, there is greater
scope for the mind, and the signal for exercise will show him
what ships aro in order and what aro not. But most men of
that age are too old for dash a,n,l enterprise. Lord Nelson
fought the battle of the Nile at 39, Copenhagen at 42, and
was killed at 47. Had he been 70, you would probably not
have hoard of either ono or the other. When a man's body
begins to shake, the mind follows, and he is always the last
to find it out. (A. laugh.) .
That was written by the hon. and gallant officer in the
vigour of comparative youth and in a time of pc tog ; but
now time a !venue, and what continues to be the opinion of
the hon. and gallant officer? Here is a letter to the late
Mr. Hume, dated the 23th of February, 1837. He repeats
the proposition which he offered to me as to Nelson :
Fought the battle of the Nile at 39, Copeahagen at 41, and
was killed at 47. Had he not been an admiral till 69, I much
doubt whether you would have either heard of the battle of
the Nile or Copenhagen ; and the battle of Trafalgar. most
certainly, would not have been fought in the manner it was.
(" Hear, hoar," from Sir C. Napier.) Will the lion. and j
gallant gentleman say, :4hear, hoar" to the next passage ? '
There i- a great difference between the command of a fleet
and a seat in the House of Commons. (Laughter.) A man of
(3'd may talk to the house for two or three hours—(laughter)
though exposed to the wit, the sarcasm, A:11 the yawns of
his opponents, and still preserve his nerve and power of ora-
tory much beyond that ago.
(A laugh.) Then c ,nAs an allusion to trying circumstances
which are all foreseen by the hoe. and gallant officer :
But an admiral, in command of a' fleet, has not only hie
enemy to look after, but he has charge of that fleet among
rocks, shoals, lee-shores, stories, aed tempests; anl it re-
quires youth and health to support him in all hisd:fficulties.
(Hear, hear.) But it does not stop here. As time ad-
vances the hon. and gallant officer addresses his opinions
to the Naval Commission appointed in 1339. Full of honest
zeal for the sei7viee the Dame of Welliegton presided over
that commission, and the bon. and gallant officer addresses
a letter to the secretary. He says this of Lord Nelson—
that bright example rightly cherished in the recollection of
every naval officer and every grateful Englishman : •
Lord Nelson fought the battle of the Nile at 39, Copen-
hagen at 41, and Trafalgar at 47; many men of his age
would have done the seine thing ; but I doubt whether Lord
Nelson himself, between 60 and 70, would have attempted
either the Nile or Copenhagen ; and most certainly, at that
time of life, he would not have fought the battle of
Trafalgar in the way he di 1. tfo died at 47, leaving a
brilliant example to folio .v, but which example will never be
followed by one man in a hundred, unless he has youth on
his side."

(Cheers.) These were very solemn warnings, and from my
early acquaintance with the hon. and gallant gentleman,
before the close of the French revolutionary war, I was
aware, by contrasting his ago with my own, that ho had
passed the awful limit of 60 years, so dangerous to the pub-
lic service. (Laughter.) But if the doubt of what, for
the public service, it was prudent to do had not arisen,
there was in this very book a totter to another Mint Lord
of the Admiralty, having a personal bearing on the appoint-
ment of the hon. and gallant officer. In a letter to Lord
Minto, dated March, 1837, be says :
A man made an admiral at 40, in constant employment,
with good health, good nerves, and of an active, enterpris'ng
character, may hold good till 64 or upwards ; but a man who
has been on shore for a considerable number of years, unac
custmued to commend, must have his nerves so much relaxed
that it is quite impossible he can command a fleet with the
energy that is necessary at the commencement of a war ' • he
may do wellonough in peace, but war is quite another thing,
and war will surprise us one day or other ; and, depend upon
it, my lord, if we meet with reverses, there will be such a
flame lit up throughout the country that the Lord have
mercy on the First Lord-of the Admiralty for the time being.
(Laughter.) I think the house will agree with me, after
what I have read of the solemn warnings administered to
myself, to the 31i'itary Commission, and to First Lords of
the Admiralty its times of peace, that we were justified in
hesitating before wo recommended our colleagues to give
the hoe. and gallant officer the appointment. But, sir,
those difficulties having been one by one overcome, I had to
consider, in concert with the hon. anti gallant officer, when
appointed to the Command, the objections he had taken to
the manning of the fleet. The hon. and gallant officer, with
laud ableforeeight and prudence, thought that a Russian fleet
of 28 sail of the was a force net to be despised. Whoa
pressed te enter the Baltic with 12 sail of the line and a large
number of zero ws, though the Russians had no screw ships,
he more than once represented that the force was inade-
quate. He stated that the fleet wee very ill-manned. Now
-sir, I do not deny that the hon. and gallant offiser pressed
upon me, in the interviews to which I have referred, the
propriety of issuing a proclamation based upon an Act of
Parliament which I hart the honour of introducing. But
no such proclamation could have been issued, with offer of
bounty on the ono hand, without compulsory service on
the other, if within the time limited sailors did not come
in. I was not prepared at the commencement of the war,
before the necessity had been demonstrated, to urge the
Government directly or indirectly to sanetiou compulsory
servizes. I had the Desistance of my right his. audeeal-
lent friend the First Naval Lord of the A luairalty—as-
sistance for which I can never be sufficiently grateful, and
which, I think, censtitutes a debt of gratitude on the part
of the public. The exertions of my righthen. and gallant
friend, which were unrecnittitt.:, convinced mo that if a
fair trial were given, without a shade of compulsion, the
fleet would be manned. I resisted the pro laueation. I
resisted the offer of double bounty, intimately counected
as it was with compulsory service. The fears of the gallant
admiral were not realised. The hopes and expectations of
the Beard of Admiralty were not disappointed, and my
right hon. anti gallant friend succeeded in manning the
British fleet in a time incredibly short. (Cheers) Iu pass-
ing, I will say that I admit the wisdom of the objections
which wore taken early by the hon. and gallant officer to
the proclamation in question, and, feeling the force of
those objections, in 1851 I myself proposal a modification
of it, to which the house was pleased to give its assent,
and the objectionable per ion of the law is now altered.
(Hear.) After the Ratio fleet was named for the Baltic
service, the Royal Albert, a three-docker, was in the year
185 t named for service in the Black Sea. That ship went
out as the flag-ship of a gallant officer in no resp set .infe-
rior, either in experience or judgment, to the hop.
and gallant admiral opposite—(hear)—from Sir C.
Napier) ; and I would propose to the hon. and gallant
officer whether he means to say the Royal Albert, manned
by volunteers after the Baltic service was supplied, was
unfit for the service, or unfit to be sent into battle by a
British Board of Admiralty ? (Hear, hear.) So much for,
the objections to manning the fleet. (Cheers ) The next
point taken by the lion. and gallant admiral was, that the
ships were aunt to go into action. He has read part of his
letters in which ho made use of expressions more than
once, that there were in the fleet under his command ships
unfit to go into action. The Beard of Admiralty called
upon hint as a poiat of duty to specify those shipe—" to
specify" whatwere the words used in the letter addressed to
him. flow did he meet that request ? He went off about
discipline being improved by exercise. The Admiralty
re-
quested that a report of the state of the ships should be
returned to the Admiralty, pointing out such defect.; as
were the subject of complaint, and he gives as an excuse
for rot sending home the list that it was not easily pre-
pared. (Hear, hear.) The hon, anti gallant officer talks in
respectful terms of the enptains under his command.
Though I have that correspondence. I will not be so un-
generous as to read to the house and give to the public the
confidential communications suede by the gallant admiral
with respect to the conduct of several captains, some
really at the top of the list,- in which he declared, giving
their names, that he thought them unfit for their com-
mands, and that it was hopeless for them to try to amend;
anti in which he proposed to me that he should be at liberty
to make signal, in presence of the whole fleet, "Go home!
You aro no use to me here." I resisted so harsh a measure.
(Cheers.) I have the letters hero. I will not be so ungener-
ous as to produce them. If I did produce them they would
create a degree of illwill against the hon. and gallant mem-
ber such as I am sure he could not confront. (Hear )
I will net betray names. It walla confidential communica-
tion to me. It is very easy now to eey that the captains
were first-rate officers. The private communications
to me respecting these first-rato officers boar quite an•
ether interpretation, and I state positively that, whatever
the hoe. and gallant member may now find it convenient
to say in public, those were not the representations which
he made to me in private. (Cheers.) I stated to him that
I would support his authority to the utmost, but I was
not prepared to sanction the ships being sent homes the
ships and crews being efficient. I stated then if he would
gravely and specially report to the board that he thought
coetein captains should be superseded, I teed so much re-
liance upon his justice and authority that his wishes should
be met, but it must be by superseding the officers anti not
by sending the shim aud crews home. (Cheers ) Now,
sir, another point made by the hon. and gallant Member
was, that there were no pilots on board the fleet. I am
speaking from a recollection, perhaps, not so perfect as of
those who have more ready access to official documents,
but I think my right hon. and gallant friend, who was my
colleague, will confirm mo that groat exertions were made.
[Sir C. NAPIER —" I said so."] The best pilots, and those
best acquaiuted wide the navigation of the Baltic, wore
sought out by the Admiralty bag before the war was de-
clared. [Sir C. NAPIER—" I said so."] I am glad the
hon. and gallant officer makes that admission. I thought
ho said there were no pilots competent to lead the fleet to
its scene of action.
Sir C. NAPIER—I sail that, when we arrived at the
Gulfs, the greater part of the pilots wanted to go home,
and did go home. There were only eight left, and we
found them good for nothing. I say so still.
Sir J. GRAHAM—The hon. and gallant officer referred
to a particular ship, tbeMonarch. Now, on board the Mo-
narch was a person who had made 60 voyages between Hull
and Cronstadt, and who bad for four years been master of a
steamer plying between Cronstadt and Sweaborg. In addi.
then to that, in the month of February or March, the
moment the Baltic was open, a steamer of war was fitted
out by the Board of Admiralty, and communications made
to the Trinity-houses of London and of Hull—a precaution
of the
recommendedn naval
a s t rhose
Trinity-houses were sent through the Cattegat, through
aboutiano a unexampled tot
situ tl
experiencediefo mer historym
the Sound, into the Baltic, for the very purpose of making
themselves masters of the navigation. I do give the
hon. and gallant officer the highest civilise for the able
manner in which ho led a numerous fleet of ships of very
great draught of water through the Great Belt into the
Baltic, a most difficult operation. I ascribe—not exclu-
sively, for I am disposed to give him the utmost credit for
his skill and ability on that ore tsion—but I ascribe a large
portion of that success to the ability and knowledge of the
pilots who were placed on board his ships. Now, sir, I
have been blamed for recommending caution to the hon.
~and gallant officer, and he rather taunts Joe with having
restrained 'his ardour when he first went into the Baltic,
although he also charges me with goading him on as winter
approached. (" Hear," from Sir C. Napier.) Allusion
has been ensile f o an important circumstance by the hoe.
and gallant officer who unwillingly seconded the motion—
and I do not know whether he withdraws his support, for
he seconded it under a misapprehension; but he reprobates
the signal made by the gallant admiral to hie fled* When

was that signal made? It was made on the day when t"e
declaration of war arrived, and nith the permission of the
house I will read the words of the signal. It ran thus :

" Lads, war is declared, with a bold and numerous enemy
to meet. Should they offer us battle, you know how to dis-
pose of them ; should they remain in port, WO must try and
get a them. Success depend§ on thequicktregs and preci-
sion of your fire. Also, lads, sharpen your cutlasses, and the
day's your own."

Now, contrast that signal with the signal of the great model
of the navy--so regarded by the hon, and gallant officer
himself and so regarded by his fellow-countrymen ; contrast
that signal with Nelson's signal on the morning of the battle
of Trafalgar, " &Wield expects that every man will do his
duty,"—that memorable signal which has become house-
hold wends—the exhortation of every British parent who
sends forth his son into the world,no matter what. his avoca-
tion may be. Contrast that signal with the signal made by
the hon. and gallant admiral, and then you will have the
• measure of the diffsrrence between Nelson and the groat
hero of the Baltic. I think that was a signal which led
the fleet to expect a most daring enterprise—that even
skulking behind fortresses under cover of strong batteries
would he of no avail to the enemy; they were to be led to
the attack, they were to sharpen their cutlasses, and he
promised the day should b 3 their ciern I can only tell the
hon. and gallant officer that my political cowardice was
such that.,l was alarmed at his signal. I feared some very
rash undertaking was ab "it to commence, and I thought
it prudent to tell the gallant admiral that we did not wish
or intend to send him on any desperate service, and I
theught it my enty to restrain his honest zeal. That wasonly the :commence Lei t of the Baltic campeign. 'Eels
b. iege the to the hon. and gallant ofilcei's despatch, dated
Kisy 30, from Hango Heal, in which he says that he
teiuks, upon reference to the plans, that Sweaborg is un-
.attac'eable eiVier by land or sea. The hon, end gallant
()dicer told the honse to remember dates. I also beg the
house to rememb r dates. Tisis report is dated May 30.
Now, the house will reeiemb er the hon. and gallant offieer
road a part of a direction from the Admiralty in the au-
tumn of I'=sl, wh. n the matter was brought in question,
in which ho was re peed.° I to report to the Admiralty-
when he should have made la personal reconnaissance of
Sweeborg, what was the ship in which it was made, and
on what day it was made, and what was the nature of the
reconnaissance. The bon, and gallant officer did not read
the answer in full, he will excuse me for saying he has
evaded that answer n'together. He admits that on the
30th of May, when he made that report, he had not been
nearer than eight miles.

Sir C. NAPIER—I had not been there at all.
Sir J. GRAHAM Ex,ctly en. The hon. and gallant
officer said do the 30th of May that Sweaborg was unat-
taokable by sea or by land—bs being within eight miles of
the plaice, and not having gone close in to reconnoitre.
Sir C. NAPIER—I was not within 100 miles of it.
Sir J. GRA.HAM— The gallant officer was distinctly asked
by the Board of Admiral"! whether he had been close to Swea-
borg on the 3 lth of May.
Sir C. NAPlER—Because I had got the gout. -
Sir J. GRAHAM—This is what he states on the 13th of
November :—" I beg to acquaint their lordships when the
port and works of Sweaborg were inspected by me. I beg to
inform them I anchored off Sweaborg on the-12th of June,
close to the outer shoals, about eight miles off. All the bea-
cons wore removed, and it was impossible to approach nearer.
I sent in the m,ster of the fleet and two steamers to search
for a passage. I intended to inform mys,elf the next day by
a further examination, but the French fleet appeared, and I
proceeded to join them"—not after a personal reconnaissance,
but with the plans and charts of Sweaborg in his bands.
[Sir C. NAPIER—" No such thing."] I quote the words of the
hon. and gallant admiral. It is for him to contradict if lam
wrong in saying that he never closely reconnoitred Sweaborg
until the 231 of September. ("Hear," from Sir C. Nem:a.)
Does the hon. mil gallant gentleman admit that I
Sir C. NAPIER—Yes. Not so close.

Sir J. GRAHAM—WeII, then, if the hon. and gallant offi-
cer had, on the 13th of June, gone in and made a personal
reconnaissance, as ho did on the 23d of Sept., in company
with General Jones, and had made in May that report to t'os
Admiralty which he did make on the 2 ith of Sept., it would
have been•quito possible for the Admiralty in the course of
that summer, or before the close of the autumn, to send out
all the appliances which he might have deemed to be requi-
site. (Hear.) I ascribe the whole difference which ,has arisen
between the hon. and gallant officer and the Board of Admi-
ralty to his neglect in not making a personal reconnaissance of
Sweaborg until so late a period as Sept. 24. That brings me to
another point. The hon. and gallant officer has thought fit
to impute motives, and has said that the change of views on
the part of the Admiralty with respect to an attack, upon
lier..laborg was caused by the . delusive expectations which
ware raised by the false report of the fall of Sebastopol. Now,
he likes dates. General Jones's report was received at the
Admiralty on Sept. 4, ene:osed without comment in an official
letter from the hon. and gallant admiral. The report was
dated August 29, the reconnaissance having taken place on the
231, and the plans of attack bore date August 25. The Go-
vernment had selected Sir H. Jones to go out as a military
assistant to the hon. and gallant officer in the various opera-
tions which rev expected to take place, he being an officer
of the highest merit and experience, and one upon whose
ooinion the utmost reliance could be placed. That gallant
offiaer having closely reconnoitred Sweaborg on the 29th of
August—a duty which the hon. and gallant gentleman op-
posite, although he was the naval commander-in-chief, ap-
pears up to that time to have altogether omitted—expressed
the strongest possible opinion that a plan which ho described
in detail, but which I am sure the house will not expect me
to repeat—a plan for a combined operation of sea and land
furces to the extent of 5,000 men—would ho felt confident
lead to success, and that in seven days. That report was re-
aeived ou the 4th of September, and I regarded it as being of
so much importance Lhat, on the 9th of that month, after the
Cabinet had been consulted on the subject, I ordered it to be
referred to a council of war. Marshal Baraguay d'Hilliers
and General Niel, two of the most distinguished officers in
the French service, had, unlike the gallant admiral opposite,
considered it their duty to male.d a close personal reconuais-
ancc of Sweaborg, and they aamo to a conclusion not quite
identical with that arrived at by General Jones—but to the
conclusion that au attack made with sufficient boldness, by
naval means alone, without the co-operation of a military
force, could be successful, and indeed that the fortress would
not hold out for more than two hours. That was the opinion
of two distinguished military officers after a close reconnais-
sance, and in tho absence of any naval reconnaissance, and upon
that opinion the Government, acting in perfect concert with
the Government of Franco, ordered the matter to be referred
to a council of war. It is said that the views of the Admi-
ralty .hanged with the fluctuation of affairs in the Black
Sea, and were influenced by a supposed success at Sebasto-
pol. Now, the hun. and gallant admiral likes truth, and
fortunately dates sometimes are useful in establishing the
truth,

Sir C. NAPIER.—Yee, when they are properly stated.
Sir J. GRA.HIM.—The opinion of Generals Baragnay
d'Hilliers and Niel was received ou the 11th of September,
and on the 12th the order was sent to reconsider the whole
question, and the hon. and gallant admiral was reminded in
that despatch that the destruction of Sweaborg had alwaysbeen
regarded by her Majesty's Government as a matter of the
utmost importance ever since the commencement of the war.
Now, with regard to the views of the Government being
changed by events in the Crimea. Why, Sir, as I have said,
this order was sent en the 12th of September, and the British
army did not land in the Crimea until the 15th, and the
battle of the Alma was not fought until the 20th of that
month. Now, let us consider the question as regards the
plan proposed General Jonas. General Jones writes :
" After a careful reconnaissance, the only mode which
appears to present itself with any prospect of success, is by
a heavy bombardment from a combined operation by land
and sea." (Here follows the plan.) " The above is merely
an outline of what is possible, practicable, and of easy (me.
cution." "Should every thing prove favourable, the opera-
tion ought not to occupy more than seven or eight days."
" The close of the summer may, probably, be considered the
best time for bombarding Sweaborg, as the winter following
close on the destruction of the public establishments and
buildings would preclude the possibility of repairing or re-
building them during a northern winter."
On the 24th of September the gallant admiral was induced,
by the representation of a military officer, to examine the
fortress himself for the first time, and General Jones accom-
panying him, says, in the strongest manner, that he—
" Sees nothing to indtcs him to alter his opinion as to
the nature of an attack, with a view to the destruction of
the arsenal and tstablishments,"

These reports of a general officer do not appear to have been
very acceptable to the gallant admiral, for afterwards, when
Gen.. Jones, who had taken part in the operations a;ainst
Bomarsuncl, requested the gallant admiral to allow h iu
steamer to reconnoitre Cranstadt—and a more modest re-
quest could not have been made—he was peremptorily re-
fused, and upon that refusal Gen. Jones asked for permis-
sion to return to Eneand. All this, however, is merely in
passing, and I wish now to say a word or two about Bomar-
sand. Do I rightly understand the hon, and gallant admi-
ral when I believe him to say that be did not wish for the
assistance of any military fot,ce in attacking Bomarsund ?
Sir C. NAPIER—That is what I did say.
Sir J. GRAHAM-1 should be sorry to road any private
letters addressed to' me by the hon, and gallant gentleman
without his permission.
Sir C. NAPIER—Yon are perfectly at liberty to raid any
letter if you read it all.
SirJ. GRARAM—Very well; I will, then, road two ex-
tracts from letters addressed to me by the gallant admiral.
The house will bear in mind that the gallant admiral now
states that he did not nuke the ec operation of a laud
force at Bomarsund. Now, on the 10th of June, 1854, ho
writes to me :

" I have anticipated you about the Aland Islands. Sulli-
van has made a complete survey of them, and been up to
Bomarsund, which he finch very stroeg, but requiring a
large land force to attack it." " There is a large harbour,
quite laud locked, where the whole fleet could anchor; but
there is not room alongside the batteries for ships enough
to attack it without a laad force. If Sweden would come
forward it would be different ; or if you can send a laud
force of 10,000 men it could be done."

(Hear.) That was on the 10th of June, and the gallant ad
miral evidently considered the subject fore deeply, and on
the 12th he again writes :

" Capt. Sullivan returned after having made a complete
survey of Bomarsund, which he reports is very strong. He
was well received on the islands by the inhabitants. By all
accounts the garrison consists of 2,203 men. It is a solid
granite work of two tiers of guns, supported by three round
towers, and he does not think there would be water enough
for large ships, and not room enough for such a force as would
be adequate to reduce it; but a laud force could be sent to
great advantage, supported by the ships, aid there is a secure
harbour which would hold all the fleet. I 10,0.10 men could
be spared I think it might bo reduced, which would be a great
triumph, but no time should be lost."
(leer.) Now, in consequence of that letter of the gallant ad-
miral, more than 10,000 men were sent in order to render
success in the attack upon Bomarsund certain, as the gallant
admiral expressed the opinion that an attack might succeed
if supported by 10,000 troops. Now, sir, lisputos like this,
between British admirals and British genera with reference
to attacks upon forts, I am sorry to say, have taken place
before, and the present is not the first occasion upon whick
British admiral has abused a military colliague. I will just
read to the house a passage from modem history, which
shows what was the nature of the quarrel which took place
between Admiral Vernon and General Wentworth, ou the oc-
casion of the siege of Carthagena. Lord Stallion in writing
of Admiral Vernon, says :
" He became a great favourite with the multitude, who
were, like himself, impatient for peace, and prone to consider
the noisiest patriot the most sincere. On the breaking out of
the war he was appointed an admiral and commander of the
West Indian squadron by the very ministerwhom he had as-
sailed, from the same concession of popular camour which had
produced the war itself. Ho was undoubtelly a good officer,
so far as courage, enterprise, and experience can constitute
that character ; but he was harsh and haughy to his inferiors,
untoward with his equals, mutinous and raling to all placed
above him in authority."
(Laughter.) The character given of him by borate Walpole is
that he was an unwise, brawling admiral, Those reputation
wrs greater than his courage, and whose courage was far
greater than his skill. Unfortunately these quarrels be-
tween admirals and generals are not uifenquent in the
military and naval annals of the country. jut leaving tkese
historical recollections; IMP/ UOW to t% Mop point —mooted

again to-night by the hon. and gallant member for Christ-
church (Admiral Walcot)—of whether stone walls are or are
not really assailable by ships ? Now, the bright example of
the Agamemnon in the attack upon Fort Constantine leads
. .

me to thin that, with skill and groat courage, it is possible,
unier special circumstances, to attack stone walls and for-
tresses with ships, though, it is a perilous operation. - I am
left, however, in perfect uncertainty as to what is the delibe-
rate opinion of the hon. and gallant officer (Sir C. Napier) on
this subject. Writing on the Bth of January in the present
year a letter to the Times, from which I have already
quoted—
Sir C. NA.PIER—I wrote no letter of that date.

Sir J. GRAHAM—The hen, and gallant officer's memory is
vary treacherous as to what has occurred lately. (Laughter.)
This letter was written on the Bth ofJanuary,lBs6, and pub-
lished in the Times on the 10th of that month. [Sir C. Nartzit
—" Oh, yes ; I remember."' The hon. and gallant officer
said he did not write a letter of that date; but a little reflec-
tion has taught him that ho is wrong. This letter enters
fully into the question as to the attack on stone walls by
ships, and here is the result of his long experience—not, re-
member, contained in a speech, but in a letter deliberately
written. He says :—" I served 15 years last war, and it never
was the custom for ships to approach batteries at all." That
is the assertion in the letter. Now I think my noble friend
at the head of the Government is somewhat under a misap-
prehension with reference to the advice given by the hon.
and gallant officer as to the attack on Acre. I have heard it
said that successful attack was owing to the advice given by
the gallant officer. Now, on inquiry, lam assured, that the
reverse is exactlytrue —("hear," and laughter)—that the gal-
lant officer counselled Admiral Stopford not to attack Acre,
and upon the very grounds stated in his letter to the Times
that he had served 15 years last war, "and it was never
the custom for ships to approach batteries at all." (Hear.)
Now, the hon. and gallant officer is a great writer. I have
read some of his letters published in a large volume, but he
has published two volumes on the Syrian war and the attack
on Acre ; and in that history, vol i., p. 213—(a laugh)—
where he .endeavours to engross to himself a large portion of
the praise duo to that gallant exploit, I find the following
passage. Will the house remember that on the Bth of January
he says it was never the custom in the last war for ships to
approach batteries at all, and then listen to the following ex-
tract ?

" I had frequently been engaged with batteries last war
(laughter) —and, I believe, was the only officer in the Equadron
who had ever commanded a ship in action against stone walls
--(renewed laughter)—and the system I followed—(Yon see,
he seemed to have had a regular system of attacking stone
walls with ships —" the system I followed] was the one I had
always been accustomed to. It was the p'an followed by the
leading ship at the battle of the Nile ; and I am not awaro
that Lord Nelson found fault with Sir Samuel Hood for an-
choring abreast of the-leading ship ; and if that is the tactics
to be followed in aVackini; a line of ships, it is certainly the
same that ought to be followed in attacking a line of stone
walls."

(Cheers and laughter.) Well, now, this is not all. I must re-
fer again to the volume from which I have already quoted, for
a letter addressed by the hon. and gallant officer to my noble
friend at the head of the Government, and in that letter the
hon. and gallant smear, in the year IR3B, enters with great
ability upon the question of the attack of stone walls by ships.
Recollect that be had declared Sweaborg to be unattackable by
sea or lAnd. Now, I will read the whole letter :

"My dear Lord Palmerston.—l am very glad that it is
your intention to communicate my letter to your colleagues ;
since writing it, I observe the French are greatly strengthen-
ing their squadrdn in the Gulf of Mexico, and, from the nature
of their armament, there cannot be a doubt but they intend
attacking St. John de Ulloa. If they merely meant to block-
ade the Mexican ports, a frigate and small craft are by far the
best description of force for that purpose; but line-of-battle
ships and bombs [there is not much about gun-boats herol
plainly indicate their inclination of attacking the castle and
defences of Vera Cruz,

"I have been twice there, and am quite certain, if they
attack with [with what? why, with] boldness, they will take
it. Many naval officers will disagree with me, but few know
what ships can do, when well placed, against stone walls—
(laughter)—Algiers for example.
" Nobody thought the French would have forced the Tagus
because Sir Charles Cotton did not do it after the battle of
Vimeira— they did, and succeeded.
" St. John do Ulloa is not so strong as St. Julian, and a
ship can nearly touch the walls [it being prayed that at
Sweaborg there is deep water close to the walls themselves],
and the Ntexican soldiers are not fire eaters. (" Hear, hear,"
from Sr C. Napier.)
" I know the afiniral —he is young and enterprising : if
he take St. John d• Ulloa, Vera Crnz will be at his mercy,
and they may probably make a second Algiers of it.
" I write this to your lordship, because the castle is gene-
rally supposed to be [What ? like Sweaborg—the very words]
unattackable by sea, and thinking so, your lordship might be
lead astray."

Just as the Board of Admiralty were " led astray" by the
reports of the 30th of May. (Cheers, and laughter.) I now
have to thank the house for the patience with which they
have hoard me. Into this discussion I have been drawn most
reluctantly. It is not of my seeking. Had it not been for
the particular.circumstances of the c so, I should not have
done what I have done to-night, in reading private letters.
I am scrupulotsly fearful that I have transgressed in reading
those letters, but the house in judging my conduct on that
point will remember that the circumstances were very press-
ine.. (Hoar, hear.) Before doing so I took counsel with
the house respecting the propriety of this proceeding, and I
myself did not sco how snoh a course was well to be avoided.
Sir, this house is always a friend of truth ; it dislikes special
pleading ; and I think I have stated to the house openly and
fairly what are the real facts of this case. (Hear.) One
point only remains for me to touch upon. I am, it deems,
the friend of Russia. The Emperor Nicholas himself, had be
been at the head of the Board of Admiralty, could not have
done more than I did to promote the interest of Russia
Well, there are many witnesses upon the bench below me.
(Cheers.) I will defy any one in this house to say that any
effort was omitted by me. (Cheers.) Neither in the Black
Sea nor in the Baltic may wo have been successful as we des!
sired ; but in my conscience I can say that; whatever may
have been our failures, they have not proceeded from want
of exertion on the part of the Board of Admiralty. (Cheers.)
With respect to preparations, I say distinctly that, if we had
received the hon. and gallant officer's report of what was
necesssary, in his opinion, for the attack of Sweaborg by
naval means only in the beginning of June, it was quite
in the power of the Admiralty to have sent out
ouch a quantity of mortars as would either have sur-
ficed to plant on the islands occupied in the attack in
1855, or, placed is mortar vessels, would have aided the
operations of the fleet in the manner recommende6l by the
hon. and gallant officer, before even in his view the season
would bare prevented the attack. Be that as it may, how-
ever, was I negligent in the intervening time f In concert
with my colleagues I prepared in the autumn of 1854, to be
ready to sail with the fleet in the spring of 1855, 26 gun-
boats, 22 mortar vessels, and five floating batteries, all built
and ready for sea in April, 1855. By an agreement with the
French Government an equal force of gun-boats, mortar yes-
eels, and floating batteries had been prepared and built by
France ; and, in addition to four screw line-of-line ships,
commonly called block-ships, we fitted five other line-of-

battle ships with high-pres'auie engines ; so that there were
ready for attack in the Baltic in the spring of 1855, nine sail
of the line, 2G gun-boats, 22 mortar vessels, and five floating
batteries ; this number of gun-boats, mortar vessels, and
floating batteries being doubled by the arrangement made
with France. The hon. and gallant officer says that there is
treason in it.
.If that is his opinion this discussion ought not
to stop here. (Hear, hear.) I have confronted the hon.
and gallant officer this evening. lam ready to confront him
anywhere ; and I defy him to prove the accusations which he
has this night scattered with so much recklessness about
him. (Hear.)
Admiral BERKELEY said ho was sure the house would hear
it with surprise when he stated a fact which had happened
that evening, and which had hurt him more than he could
possibly express. He had been in communication privately
with the hon. and gallant admiral when ho first went to the
Baltic ; but when he (Sir C. Napier) thought proper to enter
into a public controversy with the Board of Admiralty, he
(Admiral Berkeley) had thought it only proper to cease to
write to him. Upon that the hon. and gallant officer wrote
to him in these terms :—" My dear Berkeley,—Your letters
are such a comfort to me, I miss them, pray continue to
write." Ho (Admiral Berkeley) wrote back, " Dear Sir
Charles,— I will continue my correspondenoi on the clear and
distinct understanding that neither now nor hereafter, you
will ever make a letter of mine public. (Hear.) The house,
then might suppo-o that he was not a little Astonished to hear
ono of those private letters read after such an agreement.
(Hear) But the hon. and gallant admiral produced a second
letter, and took credit to himself for not reading to the house,
becauie he said ho (Admiral Berkeley) had committed him-
self. Now ho would toll the hon. and gallant admiral that
fighting was not the only quality that was required of a Bri-
tish admiral. Ho must be a man of the world,—a man of an-
doubted honour ; and he must not do that which the world
held to be a culpable thing, namely, exposing private COlTOS-
penance without the permission of the writer. The hen.
and gallant admiral had so mixed up his private with his
publics letters that it wa ; almost impossible to follow him, but
Is would go straightforward, and tell the hon. and gallant
admiral and the country, putting aside the whole of the cor-
respondence which had been read, that he (Admiral Berkeley)
as the first naval advisor of the First Lord of the Admiralty,
did not wish, had not advised, and would not have been a
party to allowing his flag to be again hoisted in the Baltic
while he had a seat at that board. (Hear, hear.) Ho would
tell him why—because he was totally physically unfit. (Hear,
hear.) His nerves were completely gene. (Hear, hear )
Now, don't let the gallant admiral or the house mistake him.
He did not mean to say ono word against the undoubted cou-
rage of the gallant admiral. He did not mean to say that an
old man would not stand to be shot at as well as any younger
man, but the gallant admiral's own letters, which had been
read by the right hon. member for Carlisle (Sir J. Graham)
proved that ho was himself of the same opinion. But be
thanked God. they had one bright example which was an excep-
tion to the rule in the Commander•in-Chief in the Black Sea.
(Cheers.) Well, for the first time, soon after the hon. and
gallant admiral got to the Great Belt it was evident from his
public correspondence to the Admiralty, that he had a very
great disinclination to enter the Gulf of Finland, and that
when he got into the Gulf of Finland he had a very great in-
clination to get out of it. (Laughter.) It was very true that
fogs did come on, and that the fleet was in some danger after
leaving Elfanabben, and that the admiral was separated from
his ships. Bit when the ships joined him the hon. and gallant
admiral was heard to say with more force of truth than dignity
of expression, " What a old fool I was to come up into
this infernal hole, if I ever get out of it I will never come
back again." The hon. and gallant admiral soon lost the
confidence ofhis ewn officers, nor did he succeed in gaining the
confidence of our allies. (Hear.) Squibs and earicatureswere
flung about the fleets, and every one wishe I themselves in the
Black Seainstead of in the Baltic. It was true, and he would
do the hon and gallant admiral the justice to say that he had
this from the officers of his fleet, and if he had said one word
of what did not take place, those officers were in this country,
the greater part of them at Spithead, or at Devonport. They
would see the report of these proceedings to-morrow, and if
he had said any single thing damaging to the gallant admiral,
that was not borne out by facts, the greatest favour that any
of those officers could confer on him (Admiral Berkeley), was
to write and say that he had done se, and the hon. and gal-
lant admiral should have the most ample reparation. (Hear.)
Among other things, the hon. and gallant admiral had said
that ho had not had efficient pilots, or rather that he had-had
extremely bad ones. Now on that subject, he begged to say
that every exertion bad been made to provide proper pilots;
that the master of the Trini'y-house had been consulted on
the subject, and that by his recommendation persons had
been obtained, who, he believed were fully competent to the
duty. Again, the lion, and gallant admiral bad found fault
with the charts ; but not only had he been provided with the
Admiralty charts, but he also had supplied him llt e best Danish,
Swedish, and Russian charts of the Baltic Sea ; and he might
mention that the captains of the blockading squadron who had
gone to the Baltic before the ice had broken up, and re-
mained there long after the fleet had left, exploring
every creek and harbour, had expressed their admiration
at the minute correctness of those charts. The honourable

rid gallant admiral had stated that the ships were
badly manned, badly disciplined, and not ready to go into
action. Now the contrary was the case ; the men were five
feet eight inches in height, and all volmateers, no impressment
Wing been reaerted to; and although in Ram times aim

during peace, had only two-thirds of their' complement, on
this occasion the ships wore fully manned, Ho most dis-
tinctly charged the hon. and gallant admiral (Sir C. Napier)
with having, through want of firmness and want of decision,
caused the delay in the attack on Cronstadt. Acre had been
referred to ; but all the facts of the case showed that the
whole glory of that transaction was due, not to the hon. and
gallant admiral, but to an hon. and gallant admiral deceased
—Admiral Stopford. But if anything could tend more to
lower the character of Sir Charles Napier = (sic)—as a British
officer, it was this, that out of spite to the thou First Lord of
the Admiralty and the Board of Admiralty, he had during a
war with Russia, and for the purpose of gaining a little popu-
larity with the multitude, stated that the Admiralty had de-
prived the men of their just pay, and of all those indulgences
to which' they were entitled. Such conduct was not9nly
unbecoming, but it. was so bad, that if the hon. and gaflant
admiral himself were in power, he would have struck any
man off the list who had been guilty of it. The man who
could so misconduct himself was not fit to govern others, nor
was any man fit to command a fleet who did not know how
to obey those whose duty it was to command him. (Hear.)
Capt. SCOBELL could not sit to hear a man oppressed
by the three-deckers of the Admiralty, without, simple
tender as he was, opening a gun in his defence. The gal-
lant officer had been taunted with not bringing forward his
motion quickly. Now ho had used all the diligence possible
according to the forms of the house—be had been unfortu-
nate in his ballotting, and was unable to bring forward his
motion earlier. He had bean charged with reading private
letters, but the late First Lord had read really private letters,
while the gallant admiral had only read the letters of the
First Lord of the Admiralty himself. The gallant admiral had
to that day had his honour unquestioned ; it was not his fault
that he was old; if he was deficient in nerve or limb why did
the Admiralty appoint him? (Cheers ) It quite stirred him
to find all the life of such a man raked up and thus subjected
to scrutiny, As for the speech of the right hon, gentleman
below him (Sir C. Wood) it was taken up with the reasons
why he came to appoint the gallant admiral; it had nothing to
do with Sweaborg or Cronstadt. He did not find that the
army officers were criticised in the same way ; on the con-
trary, they were sheltered; army officers were defended by
the Government, who did not shrink from falling foal of ono
of the most distinguished officers of the navy. The amount
of the insinuatioLs thrown out was that Sweaborg was
not taken in 1851, If so, why was it not taken in
1855, when the force was mach larger I Mortars,
guns, and, above all, screw steamers were furnished in
abundance, and yet scarcely a shot was fired, and not one
from the large ships. The Admiralty had sent out in 1855
one of their own men, cognisant of their own plans, and vet
he had done far less than had been done in 1854. The gal-
lant officer had been most unfairly treated. He had ar-
rived at the close of his career when every man's fame was
dear to him, and so his speech, of which the fault was being
too clever, and which drew attention too much away from
the point at issue, had been perverted and abused. He would
sty that the fleet in 1854, badly manned, as all new fleets must
be, had done more than the fleet in 1855. This bad manning of
the fleet was owing to the insufficient bounty, and he (Capt.
Scobell) could not see why the same rule was not applied to
the blue jackets that was applied to the red. As to the men
of sft. 8, why these wore not the men for the navy. Were
pressed men over sft. 8 ? And ho should like to see which
would execute the best manoeuvres—the long-legged sailors
or the short•legged ones, The question was, whether they
would examine the conduct of the fleet in 1854 and 1855, and
he hoped that, when peace was arrived, the committee
would be granted, and that the gallant gentleman would
leave the house as an honourable untarnished Englishman.
Mr. MUNTZ remembered to have heard from the right
hon. gentleman below him (Sir C. Wood) that everything had
been going on in the Baltic as well as it was possible to go
on, and that everything had been done that it was possible
to do. But now it appeared that the gallant admiral was
charged with neglecting his duty. He left it to the house and
the right hon, gentleman to reconcile his first opinion with
the charges he now brought forward.
Mr. LINDSAY 'said that the charge was that, on the
order of the 4th October, the gallant admiral had neglected
to attack Sweaborg. Now, it was precisely on the 4th of
October that the false intelligence of the fall of Sebastopol
reached this country, and he could conceive that the Ad-
miralty, flushed with the supposed success, had issued orders
which, if the gallant admiral had followed, would have been
at the loss of every ship under his command. Had the gal-
lant admiral acted on those orders he would in all probability
have destroyed the English fleet. The right hen, baronet in
making these attacks on the gallant admiral's conduct in the
Baltic appeared to forget that in censuring him he also cen-
sured our Allies, It occurred to him (Mr. Lindsay) there
was something wrong in the administration of affairs at the
Admiralty, as exemplified by the contrary orders issued with
reference to the gallant admiral's leaving Flange Sound.
Mr. MALINS felt great pain at the course adopted by the
right hon. baronet in collecting materials that night against
the gallant admiral which should have incapacitated hime

from being put in command of the Baltic fleet in 1851. The
right hon. baronet at the Reform dinner took credit for hav-
ing selected the gallant admiral as the best to whom he could
entrust the command of this fleet, and if the right hon. ba-
ronet's conduct in that respect was culpable, what could be
said of the conduct of the naval lord (Admiral Berkeley) who
had evinced such personal ill-feeling towards the gallant ad-
miral (Sir C. Napier)? If he knew at the time of the gallant
admiral's appointment what he had stated that night of the
gallant admiral's conduct at Acre, why did he concur in his
sppoiatrnent to the Baltic fleet? The right hon. baronet by
his speech had dexterously endeavoured to draw the house
Irons the real question before them. He suggested to the gal-
lant admiral the propriety of his withdrawing this motion, and
to rest the vindication of his character on the generosity of
the English people, who would ultimately do him justice.
Mr. OSBORNE said that this discussion was most nuforteu
nate, and not altogether creditable to the house. But who
was the cause of it t Tho late First Lord of the Admiralty
had been charged with political cowardice, and as a traitor to
the cause of his country, He knew his great exertions in the
cause of his country; and was he to sit there and make no
reply? Then, again, he (Admiral Napier) had said that the
gallant Naval Lord of the Admiralty (Admiral Berkeley) had
been charged as unfit to sit at that board. Was he also to
sit quiet under this charge ? The hon. member for Tynemouth
had spoken as if the order to attack Sweaborg had been pe-
remptory, but it was no such thing. The attack was ex-
pressly forbidden if found to be desperate, according to the
ordinary chances of war. The matter was left entirely to tie
judgment of the gallant admiral. Tho attack upon Acre as
a question of naval science, and was that to unfit him for the
command of a fleet 1 But the command of the fleet was a
Cabinet question, and the gallant naval lord had nothing to
de with it. The question was, had a reconnaissance been made
of Sweaborg in sufficient time 1 It had not. Had it been
made in May there would have been time to have sent out
mortars or anything else that was necessary. He thought it
was an error of judgment to bring this subject before the
house, and he thought that in resorting to that stop it would
have been better if he had had his eye loss upon Marylobono
and more upon Sweaborg. (A laugh.)
Sir C. NAPIER rose to reply. The gallant admiral de-
fended the course which he had adopted at Sidon and Acre.
The right hon. baronet had not answered a single accusation
that he (Sir C. Napier) had brought against him. Every one
knew that the right hon. gentlemen was a special pleader of
the first ability, and ho had prepared his case with great
skill, but he had not given any satisfac`ory reply to the
charges made against him. The right hon. baronet had said
that if he (Sir C. Napier) had reconnoitred Sweaborg in May,
all the appliances could have been sent out to him in time to
attack Sweaborg that summer; but how could he have done
this when he was not at Hauge till the 2d of June ? The right
hon. baronet charged him with being unwilling to enter the
Gulf of Finland, but how could this be so when, although
with 12 sail of the line under his command, he only went in
with seven ships in order to tempt the Russians out to fight
him t On the 30th of May, when it was said that he had
shown unwillingness to attack Sweaborg, he had never seen
the place, and all he knew of it was from a plan which he bad
obtained from a Swedish officer of engineers. Ile was off
Sweaborg on the 12th of June, and, having anchored about
seven or eight miles from the place, he prepared a report con-
taining a clear and accurate account of the manner in which
the place ought to be attacked. On the 30th of the month he
sent another and fuller report to the Admiralty, but they had
never published it. The months of July and August were
the only periods in the year when operations could be
oared on in the Baltic with gun-boats and mortar-
vessels, and how could those have been supplied to him by.
the Government even if they had resolved in June to forward
them ? The right lion, baronet had charged him with having
repeatedly applied to him for employment, but he had no
recollection of having done so, and the right hon. baronet
'should have produced his letters if he had intended to make
the charge. The right hon. baronet had endeavoured to
turn him into ridicule, and had expressed his regret that
such letters had ever been written him. But when an offi-
cer's character was attacked and a court-martial refused
him, where was he to look for redress unless he availed him-
self of all the documentary evidence in his possession He
thought the right hon, baronet had much more to answer
for on the score of letters than be had, as he bad read private
letters of his (Sir C. Napier's) alluding to officers serving in
the Baltic fleet, whose names, although not given, were re-
ferred to in such a manner that many officers might suppose
they were the. parties refer, ed to. True it was that he had
made signals to the sailors on the declaration of war that ,
they should sharpen their cutlasses ; but that was no reason
why he should go and i oeklessly throw away the fleet. Nel-
son never went into harbours to attack stone walls ; Corn-
wallis never did, nor Howe, nor Sir James Saumarez ; and
certain he was that Sweaborg never would have been attacked
by either of them—the look of it would have been enough.
Tho right hon. gentleman knew as well as he did that the
motion had been put off only because there had been no op-
portunity to bring it on. Tho fast, however, was, that
the Admiralty said he was turbulent and insubordinate,
and therefore lie was not sent back to the Baltic, so that if
he had not been turbulent and insubordinate he would not
have been unfit to command the fleet. He said he carried out
his fleet into a sea never before navigated by ships of a
size, without a pilot that knew anything of these waters, and
the charts were exceedingly imperfect. In short, the right
hon. gentleman had failed to answer any ono of the points
which he had put to him, and ho had perverted his letters in
order to damage him, or rather to cover his own mistakes at
the Admiralty. Such was the conduct of a public officer. He
thanked theliouse for the kindness with which they had lis-
tened to him. He would withdraw his motion, feeling satis-
fied that the country would read his speech, and see that he
had been unjustly, unfairly, and improperly treated.

The motion eras withdrawn. -
DRAFTS ON BANKERS BILL.

On the order of the day for the second reading,

Mr. A. PELLATT said as this bill involved a matter of
great importance, ho suggested that the second reading should
be postponed until the 2d of April.
Mr. AIASTERMAN also urged the postponement of the
measure.

After a few words from Mr. Wilkinson, Mr. Wilson, and
Mr. Hankey, the bill was postponed to the 2d of April.
The house then adjourned at half-past twelve o'clock.

[ADVERT/SEMEN-I%l A few more of the extraordinary cures
without Medicine of ladigettion (Dyspepsia), Flatulency,
Constipation, Nervous, Bilious, and Liver complaints, Cough,
Asthma, Consumption, and Debility effected by Du Barry's
delicious health-restoring Revalenta Arabica Food, are
here given : Cure 52,422. -- Bridgehouse, Frimley, 3d
April, 1854.—Thirty-three years' diseased lungs, spitting
of blood, liver derangement, deafness, singing in the ears,
constipation, debility, shortness of breath, and cough, have
been removed by your Revalenta Arabica. My lungs, liver,
stomach, head, and ears are all right, my hearing perfect, and
my recovery is a marvel to all my acquaintances.—J.cars
Rour.ars, Wood Merchant. —From the Venerable Atcli-
deacon of Ross.—No. 32,836. —Three years' excessive
nervousness, with pains in my neck and left arm, and
general debility which rendered my life very miserable,
has been radically removed by Du Barry's health-restoring
Food.—ALEXANDER STUART, Archdeacon of Ross, Skibcrecu.
In canisters, 51bs. lls.; 121b5., 225. The 12Ibs. carriage
free, on receipt of post-office order. Barry du Barryan :and
Co.,- 77, Regent-street, Loudon ; Fortnum, Mason,
.
Purveyors to her Majesty, Piccadilly; also at 60, G
church-street ; 33J and 451, Strand ; 4, Cheapside
.; 6S,_.
t , Cornhill ; 49, Bishopsgate-street ; 55, Charing-eross 54,
1U Loper Daker-otreot ;63 and 150, Pend.ritre• 1a

TALBOT'S DIVOTWE BELL.

HOUSE OF LORDS, MABou 13.

The house met at half-past 10 this day to hear farther
evidence in support of the3petition of Mr. John Talbot
for a divorce from his wife, Marianne. There were pre.
sent—The Lord Chancellor, Lord Brougham, Lord St,
Leonard's, and Lord Monteagle.
Mr. Talbot was represented by Mr. Serjeant Bytes and
Mr. Honeyman, and they were opposed by Mr. Serjeant
Wraugham, Mr. Edwin James, and Dr. Ball ; but Mr.
Serjeant Merawether, who is to watch the bill on tie
part of some of Mrs. Talbot's relatives, did not appear.
To understand the position of the parties, it is reces•
nary to repeat that the opposition proceeds mainly from
Mr. and Mrs. Pagett, the brother-in-law and sister
of Mrs. Talbot, who are prepared to contend that
she is a victim of a foul conspiracy, ',lli& drove her to
insanity.

When the inquiry was resumed, the Lord Chancellor
expressed a desire that the housemaid should be recalled.
This witness had proved that she carried wine to Mel-
len, the groom, at the express eesire of Mrs. Talbot, and
that she caw Malian and Mrs. Talbitjon the bed in Mr.
Talbot's room in a position that left no doubt of the na-
ture of their intimacy: - _

B.li;Mooney, the housemaid in question, was, there-
fore, again placed at. the bar, and examined by the Lord
Chancellor' and Lord St. Leouard'e. She said—l broke
two of the four bottles of wine. No one saw me. I don't
know what kind of wine it was by the swell. E threw
the br tken glass into the privy or water-closet outside
the house, and wiped up the wine with my apron, and
threw that also into the water-closet. My mistress heard
of it the next morning. I was on good terms with the
lady's maid, but we never sat together. She sat in the
housekeeper's room. I never mentioned to her the sup•
posed familiarities between Mullan an I my mistress ;
but I once spoke to her of some shirts I got no for Mal-
ian. They were my master's shirts with new collars
and wristbands for Mullen. When I saw Mullen and
my mistress I s iicl nothing, but drew back out of the
room as quickly as I could. I was on good terms, the
best terms with Mullen. I can't say that they saw me.
My mistress quarrelled with me the next morning, and
said if I d.d not do her work in the way she liked I
must go, and I said, "Very well, Ma'am, I will go."
Cross-Examined by Mr. E. James—l never had any
conversation with Thomas Quirk, a shoemaker at Kelly's
beer-shop, about it. I have often said to people who
asked me that there was nothing in it. I never offered
to be sworn upon a one-pound note that there was no
truth about the reports of Mrs. Talbot ; but I did men.
tion it to some persons after the first proceedings.
The witness was then directed to be kept apart from
others tiil witnesses were called to contradict her.
The Rev. Mr. Collie, examined by Mr. Serjeant Byles
—I am a clergyman of Church of England, residing
Fermoy House, in ti e county of Cork I knew the
Williamses intimately. La consequence of what I heard
from them and my own wife on these matters I commu-
nicated with Mr. Crosbie, the elder brother of Mrs. Tel-
bot, and with Mr. M'Causland, the father of Mrs. Talbot;
but that was altogether kept secret from Mr. Talbot.
The evidence of these transactions was objected to,
and postponed, as not at present having reference to
the charge of adultery, although it might be very im-
portant afterwards to rebut any case made for the de-
fence.

The witness was, therefore, ordered to witly'ra,v.
Bridget Queeney, the wile of a labourer at Mount
Talbot, examined by Mr. Sergeant Beles—l was lane-,
drymaid for half-a-year at Mount Talbot. Mullen slept
over the laundry. I have twice seen my mistress r 4.0 to
Mullen's room, and have heard theos talk and laugh
together. The child went there for anything I knew.
I was Pent to the carpenter's shop by Mrs. Talbot, and
she sent the child with me, Mullen being then ie the
room with her. This was only once. I left them there.
I washed Mullen's shirts. My mistress asked me why
I did not do up Mullan's shirts as well as say master's,
and made me wash them over again. My mistress came
twice in one day to see about it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant Wranghans—l never
knew my mistress to mind any servant but Mullan. She
never saw the kitchen-boy do his room up or look to it•
cleanlineen

A Surveyor was here examined to show that the wit.
ness could not have heard the laughing and talking she
decribed in consequence of the position of the rooms in
the laundry, but he admitted that voices could be heard.
The probable accuracy of the statements of the wit-
ness appeared to be carefully tested by the Lori 211.,n.
teagie with little slips of paper used on a plan at the
table of the house.

The cross-examination of Bridget Queeney was
resumed I did not leave my place ; I was
dismissed. I told my mistress I hoped it was not say.
thing wrong, and she said Mr. Talbot did not like my
butter ; for I was dairymaid as well as laundrymaid. I
never heard that I was charged it taking things to
my relations in the village. I swear that.

Patrick Carr.—ln July, 1851. I was a top sawyer at
Mount Talbot. I know Mullan. In conleguanes of some-
thing I looked through a window and saw Malian end
mistrals lying down on some straw on the back stsbl ;
Doogan was with me. I went back and said nothing.
Cross-examined by Mr. E. James—l was not exa-
mined before this. I gave this statement first to Mr.
Smith, an attorney's clerk, who came down to Mom t
Talbot about three or four years ago. I gave it after.
wards in Dublin at the office of Mr. Adair, an attlrney.
Mr. Finnerty, the steward of Mr. Talbot, paid for my
going there. Smith was the first person I told it to.
I am a married man, but I never told it to my wife, or
any of the servants at Mount Talbout. - Smith. I swear,
was the first person I told it to. I heard of the charge
against Mrs. Talbot in 1852. I can give no aeoount of
dates. I never told Finnerty about it or anybody else
till I told Smith. Mr. Talbot was present when I told
Smith. Doogan gave a statement at the fame time.
Mrs. Talbot had a riding horse kept in the grand stable.
What I saw was between 2 and 3 o'clock. r saw her first
go into the grand stable, but I do not know if her horse
was there. Mrs. Talbot wore a dark dress and a dark
shawl. She had no riding dress on. I never saw her ride,
but the horse was called hers. Milian went into the
back stable first. I did not go to the window between
the ash-pit and the stable until I saw mistress
go into the back stable after Mullan. I went to the
ash-pit to put a coal on my pipe, and then to the window
of the stable. The coal was a pretence. Thera are
stalls for six horses. Ido not know bow long Milian
and my mistress stayed in the stable, for I went away
at ones that I might not be noticed. When Mrs. Talbot
went away I heard that she had been charged with adul-
tery. I have pot worked constantly for Mr. Talbot,
but I work for him when he wants me. I have not
,one all his sawing. I was his tenant at the time this
happened, but lam not his tenant now. I keep ao se-
.•ount of dates. times, or days, and cannot say when I
first told it to Smith.

Re-examined-1 nave been in America, and returned.
in November last. I went there after I gave my evi-
dence to Smith. I went to America about a month after
I saw Smith. Was in America about two years. I did
not tell Smith I was going to America when be exa-
mined me.

Patrick Doogan—l remember being with Patrick
Carr at the stable. I saw Ainllan go to the hack stable,
and then I saw Mrs. Talbot go to the grand stable, and
follow Mulian to the back stable. I put a coal in my
pipe, and then went to the window of the hack stable,
and saw Malian and Mrs. Talbot lying. They were to-
gether. I did not see them for more than a very short
time, for I west to the carpenter's shop. I was not be-
fore examined in the ecclesiastical court.

Cross-examined by Mr. E. Jamas—There were two or
three ef the woo4n bars of the windows broken, so that
I csuld see through. The space was between eight and
aine inches. Yoo could Fee two stalls. I swear they
~vere lying down in a stab. There were two windows; I
c 1ti,,1 see through both. Ido not know how Mn.
Talbot was dressed, but she bad a ehar.vl and bonnet
when she passed to the grand stable. Carr firsts said
that we should go. Carr said he understood Mrs. Tal-
bot was on that design, and we said we would go and
see. Ido not think I told my %%ifs. I think I first
told it to Halloran. He knocked it out of me after the
first trial, in the yard of Mount Talbot. I was a tenant
of Mr. Talbot's at the time. I was after that examined
by Mr. Smith. Carr was present. Halloran said he
should riot wonder they knew something about it, and
then he said he would go and tell Mr. Talbot we know
something about Mrs. Talbot's conduct. He gave me
nothing to drink. I know Martin Carrick, and have had
some talk with him about it, but cannot say that I told
him I had given a statement in Dublin that I could not
swear to. I never told him, as a tenant of Mr. Talbot,
I was afraid of being turned out. (Paper produced.)
That is not my handwriting. I swear it. I did not
sign a paper to Mr. Carrick. I read writing badly. I
never read or saw the paper now in my hand. I signed
a paper for Mr. Talbot, but not for Carrick. (The wit-
ness repeated his denial that he never saw the paper be-
fore, and he then wrote his name twice and at interval.,
on the desire of Lord St. Leonards and of Lord
Brougham. Tile signatures and the paper were pre-
served for future production.) I never signed with a
mark. Ido not keep my own accounts. I never had
a paper read over to me by Carrick. I never mentioned
it to any one but Carr, but we talked it over sure fifty
times or more.
lie-examined by Mr. Sergeant Byles—l have known
Carrick fur five or Hix months. He is an under-agent,
who had something to do with getting up the evidence.
He ence gave me something to drink in a whisky-shop.
If there was any paper exhibited to me at that whisky-
shop—if
but
there was anything signed I was drunk,_
do not recollect it ; nor do I recollect that he told me
my evidence would not be of any use to him unless
could swear that I saw 2ilue allannytlhyih forinif withMrsoevidence..T:e:l
bet. He never promised I
swear that.
t°Ps. si
Fill woYf et
rh'ebsuatwl-
saaT:2llLrs°.rTiablbtOtLgoeGtneartdhes—stlabwleas noveort
the
pit. I could see her quite plain. Thes:..ing
by place was
ofas
not a pit sunk in the ground, but supported
wood.
As it was near two o'clock the further proceeding was
adjourned till to-morrow, in consequence of their lord.
ship's attendance en the jurisdiction committee.
It is understood that their lordships will not allowtlae
case for the defence to be opened till some time after
Easter, of which due notice will be given to counsel.
The next sitting will be devoted solely to the hearing of
evidence in support of the petition.

A NEW TRANSLATION OF Tim Biniz.--The list of pe-
titions to Pariiarnetit just published includes one from a
respectable congregation of Chri,ktians at Newington-
green, praying' for an icoproved version of the Bible, on
account of the inaccuracies and errors with which the
authorised version abounds. The petition was pro•
seated by Mr. Heywood, M.P.