The Sun.
London, England, 1856-05-02 00:00:00

General Williams was made a Turkish officer or the highest
rank, was invested with the Ferik, was evidently contented
with his position, and felt that at last he could accomplish all
that he desired, and could achieve those great results which
from the first he saw with so clear a ken were to be attained.
Therefore, we started the year with great advantages. We
,had a Government fornied to carry on with efficiency this
neglected war in Asia, and at the same time all these squab-
bles, jealousies, and misunderstandings with Lord Stratford—
the evil effects of which Ido not depreciate, but mist ear-
nestly deplore, and think that they ought to be visited on
Lord Stratford, and to which I think he cannot look back
without regret and remorse—were terminated By a fortui-
tous combinatiou'we bad a Prime Minister —a modern Chat-
ham —determined to carry on with vigour the war in
Asia, and all these local misunderstandings with which
the Government of Lord Aberdeen had to struggle, and which
would have been some excuse for them, had been terminated
General Williams was in a powerful position, recognised by
the Turkish authorities, invested with great powers, content,
sanguine, determined to do his duty, and looking only to the
gentlemen opposite to support him, and to give him an oppor-
tunity of at ainiug those great objects, which, had he been
supported, his bold spirit, his mind, so fertile in expedients
and resources, would undoubtedly have enabled him to accom-
plish. (Hear.) If that be a true representation of the p,:si-
tiou of affairs—and that it is so is proved by your own doeu
ments on the table—l have a right to ask what did you (the
Government) do? Talk to me no more of Lord Stratford. I
admit all that I admit that his conduct was, as stated by
my hon, and learned friend, indefensible. I think he may
read these debates with profit. With regard to him I will
agree to anything except the amendment of the hon. and
learned member for Leominster (Mr. G. Phillimore) of which
he himself was ashamed, and which was unjust, unconstitu
tional, and unsupported by evidence. Yet lam told that it
was at one:tune sanctioned by a very great authority. It
would have beca a disgrace to the House of Commons. But
now I ask you—you who were formed as a Government to
conduct the war with effect and to prevent the continiance of
this shameful negligence in the Asian army—you whe had
the advantage of acting with a man who had been put in au
intelligible, powerful, and satisfactory position—what have
you done for the country ? What did you do for him ? This
is a question which appears to me to be a very proper one
for the consiteration of the House of Commons, and I
believe that the people of Edinburgh are of the same
opinion. (A laugh.) I believe that it is much more im-
portant that that question should be discussed, that some
satisfactory conclusion of this involved controversy should
be arrived at, that some determinate opinion should be
expressed on this matter, than that the bill of the hon.
member for Ayr, which the house would not meet to
consider, should be introduced.' Well, what did you do for
Gen. Williams? "• Did-you assist him with men? That is the
most extraordinary feature in- this Case --Webave been told
that this debate has been prolonged for factious purposes,
and that it is quite unnecessary that there should be any
speeches upon a subject which is so insignificant and so petty.
Nay, but ais is a great question, a.,:d one iu which the ho-
nour a the country is deeply involved. (Hear, hear.) Did
you assist General L ill.ams ; and if so, when ? ( Rear, bear.)
We have been told that you hid it not in your power to do
so. I protest that, hail I not myself heard this excuse from
the lips of Ministers of the Crown, and from those of the right
hon. baronet the member for Carlisle—l say nothing oft the
other members who like mu•kieg birds repeated the words of
those high authorities—l shoald have found it difficult to be-
lieve that any man of position*ould have had the courage

Aistand up in his placeaucl use such language. (Hear, hear.)

We have been assured that all the energies of the nation were
concentrated on Sebastopol, and that the stake was too great,
the conflict too arduous, to admit of your undertaking any
other. enterprise. That the stake was great I freely confess ;
that the energies exerted were no greater than the occasion

.emanded events have testified ; that mighty efforts were

required to be made even by the leading nations who were
enin.irked in the struggle is beyond all controversy. But what
armies were assembled on that remote peninsula ? France was
there, Imperial France—England was there, free and patriotic
England—yh'it had by your side the Turkish army, a gallant
band, whose valour had been proved on many a well contested
field ; you had brow.: ht from the north of Italy a body of men,
dauntless and intrepid, for whom I trust that the glorious des-
. _ .

tiny is yet reserved of exorcising a high and salutary influence
on the fortuces of their country—(hear, hear)—and not con-
tent with these assembled hosts, you had. entered into con-
veutions, enabling Austria to call up from the banks of the
Danube all the chivalry of Hungary to protect your interests
in Wallachia and Moldavia. (Hear, hear.) You were five

nations allied in a common cause—England, France, Turkey,
Sardinia, Austria. That'you were playing a high game, and
that you had a great st ke iu Sebastopol, I do not for one
noment dispute. But was there not another Power wha
liad also a great stake in'that mighty fortress? (Hear, hear.)
`dad not Russia everything at stake in Sebastopol ? (Hear,
hear.) And did she no,, prove by her policy that she knew
well how to gauge the value of the prize she set her heart ou
n Asia Minor? (Hear, hear.) Now that peace has been.
concluded, we can afford to speak of Russia with the respect
and admiration due to the prowess, the valour, and the fore-
sight of which she gate such abundant evidence throughout
the recent contest. (Cheers.) Russia, I repeat, had every-
thing at stake in Sebastopol. Her pledge was as grave, her

interest in tbe-fato of the struggle as momentous as it is pbs-
sible for language to describe. Yet Russia could at the same
moment defend Sebastopol and invade Asia Minor. (Rear,
hear.) And now woare told that the combination of two
such enterprises exceeded our powers ! What a tribute to
our cou,try ! - What a compliment to our great and faithful
ally ! What an enccuragement for these rising Sardinians !
What an animating reflection for Turkey in her future con-

ids with the'Czalr tell her that the banded nations of
luropo made common cause against Sebastopol, and that

Russia, unaided and alone, net only baffled them f r en year,
bUt sent an army of diversion to Kars, while you could not

afford 900 guns to General Williams ! (Hear.). I will not

•
believe that we are s) fallen that the House of Commons will
tolerate such a defence. I tell you that you ought to have
sent forces to Asia Minor—however grave the responsibility
that devolved onyou—however great the stake for which

you were coutending-however arduous the difficulties that

encompassed you. hoar.) Yes, even though you
had not had these true and gallant allies by your side—even
though you had stood against Russia single-handed and alone
it Sebastopol, it still would have been your duty to have

gent assistance to gen.-Williams hi tsii Mbior.

We have

upon the table of this house a desp etch Tiiimlbat heroic offi-

cer, written about the time when the Ministry of the modern
Chatham was formed on the principle of carrying on with
vigour the war in Asia Minor. I believe I am correct in

stating that that despatch bears the date of the very day on
which the nobio lord took his seat as First Minister of the

Drown. In that most interesting document Gen. Willia►ns
gave you an.estimate of the forces necessary not only to se-
mire his communication with •Erzeroum, but also to de,troy
the Russian army in those regions. It was no such extrava-
cant calculation ; it was less than 20,000 men. (Hear.) Yet
this aid could not be grlinted. Our army was engaged at the
siege of Sebastopol, and we are to be told that with all the

resources of England as completely at his oommand as if he
.lad been autocrat, with an enthusiastic nation ready to pour

;heir treasure into his exchequer, the noble lord at the head

of the Government could not afford to send 20,000 men to the
relief of the beleaguered garrison in Armenia It exceeds

)clief. (Hear.) Say, if you choose, that as a matter of high
~,eliey you did not think it necessary to interfere ; say, as the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had the intrepidity to assert the
other evening, that the fall of Kars was neither a military nor
political disaster—say that or anything like it, and, how-
ever the facts of the case may be, you will at least have a
plausible case for argument ; but, in the name of com-
mon sense, and if you would not insult the intellect of the
house, do not ask us to believe that you were prevented
from vindicating the honour of our army in Asia Minor, be-
cause, forsooth, your energies were concentrated on Sebasto-
pol. (Hear.) On the treaty of peace which the right hon.
hart. thinks so satisfactory I shall express no opinion, except
to say in general terms that peace is a great blessing where
war has been carried on so inefficiently—(a laugh)-e-and that
for my part, aileron I have seen, I should be disposed to welcome
my peace which is not disgraceful. I may be permitted,
however, to observe that the right hon. gentleman appears
to me to have quoted erroneously the only two articles or the
treatyothe tooonwthraicohtinhhas
contracting
p
artailelsuded. presumel should
ehreresorry
ttho
Ts euerka yy
in favour of the Christians according to the stipulations of
that.treat.y, nor can I believe that the forts upon the eastern
coast have been destroyed as he supposes them to have een
under the provisions of that document, The treaty, as I
read it, does not at all touch those important places. This,
by Tway of an episodical answer to the right hon. gentleman's
own episode ou the subject of the treaty. Reverting to the
question niore immediately under consideration. I will take
leave to assure the right hon. baronet that, whatever the
treaty may be—whatever humiliations its conditions may
impose on Russia—whatever may be her sacrifices of terri-
tories, fortresses, or fleets, Russia is entirely compensated for
all her.losses by this avowal of the English Minister in the
presence of the English Parliament, that united Europe,
when pitied-, against her, was not so strong as to be able to
offer resistance to her simultaneously in any two regions.
i;ut, if you did not send men for the relief of Kars did you
send money? This is a question that has been asked on both
side's of the house, and, if it be not satisfactorily answered,
the right hon. baronet will not stand justified before the
country in supporting the Government. I:.deed, I must
take leave to inform the right hon. gentleman that the grounds
on which he seems disposed to vindicate his vote are not
such as are likely to find favour with the country. When he
speaes ho is listened to by others besides those who are, as-
semble'd in this chamber. The people of England Watch with
interest what falls from his lips, and when they are told that,
in the opinion of one of the most experienced of our states-
men, a Minister is to be exempted from the penalty of his mis-
conduct—the censure of this house—merelybecauQe he happens
to be an old comrade of the right hon. bait they will be amazed
at the doctrine, and confess that they haeo.heard from him a
sentiment' ell calculated to shake their confidence in public
men. (Hear, hear.) But -I again ask did Ministers send
money to General Williams ? Who will rise hi this house and
assert that they did, Not one single piaster did they send.
The soldiers of five nations were wanted—eve y man of them
—at Sebastopol. Was the money required there also ? Were
all the balances of the Exchequer likewise and of the banks
needed at Sebastopol? The noble lord at the head of the. War
Department should have known, if any one did, what are the
sinews of War; yet it will not be asserted that he sent any
supply of them. (Hear, hear.) On subjects -of fina .ce the
Chancellor of the Exchequer is, of -Course, a high authority.
Without meaning any disrespect to him, however, he must
permit.me to say that I did not concur with him in thinking
that the fall of Kars was neither a military nor a political
disaster. I3utr on questions of finance, whatever our political
opinions, we naturally listen to anything that falls from the
right hon. gentleman with the respect due to his high posi-
oHme ko
tn o
tow s
dt he
yv eilhuaet oaf omyos no emy
howeverand d o e s
smn oatlpretendd
tfoiorna. m
havectisuaMinisterrei
posed
) rjye ibc Chancellor
nate
carrying
? :lootfto
wef advantage
sT tiohtafaht ortaletfihaostdeni
etvoheaypetip csNoevttsrhniiatnani
tGogtnehee
Exchequer,ne ra
,Williams.
supposing
w" But,"e sayshad
pro
.
hsettaoHnawcooeichitsist:hihtool
doctrine
ltedch
soalwi
Commons.
oemlu hedanvvehs er.a
vhh(eeHaabdie.edaeota.a,f
hear.) The functions of au Opposition under our form of
Parliamentary Government are clearly defined and intelli-
gible. Every Minister knows that the measures he intro-
duces, if they have weak points in them, will naturally en-
counter animadversion. The country
per-
sistexpeoetsppoitsitibouottothere
antagonisticil.s:iemvnwith n
fit oil
Confidence
icee n
aa.s-
The legitimate remedy of
any
yed be, to the tribu-
nalare limits to this resistance. and I defyyif
ti
ao
aft() anyeli n
feeling
eon!. tt ha
commono f t imei in
enalopasycpeoe.iul
a M
oi Minister ips tuebrlpublic
lies
opinion.in nu ; t iHmuatt eI
a maxim which the right hon. gentleman cannot _ controvert,
that it is the duty of the Government of this country to pro-
pose all such measures as they believe to be essential to the
public welfare, without the least reference to what may be
the conduct of 'an Opposition. The assertion of a different
principle is a libel on our institutions, and I say; " Perish our
Parliamentary constitution if its spirit be such that iu a period
of war—in a critical emergency—a Minister dare not avail
himself of the national resources because he fears the criticism
of an Opposition." (Cheers ) Yet we have been told in this
debate that we are nor, to allude to the extraordinary doctrines
advanced by the Minister in defence of his conduct ; and the
hon. member for Edinburgh, accusing us of faction, says it is
not of the slightest consequence that we should trace national
, calamities to the .r source, and that the assertion of the most
dangerous principle is, forsooth, to go unchallenged in the
; House of Commons. But if the position taken by the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer was constitutionally so untenable, how
does it work practically ? The noble lord at the head of the