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

LONDON, FRIDAY, MAO 14, 1856.

Sir CHAS. NAPIER. has at last had his innings,
And, we regret to say, has not profited greatly
thereby. He has undoubtedly cast considerable
dirt of "My Lords," and more particularly on
Sir JAMES GRAHAM ; but he has not escaped
without some of the fragments falling on, and
adhering to, himself. He had even considerable
difficulty in finding a seconder, and it was only
the generosity of a distinguished officer, who
" would not see a brother admiral adrift without
tasting out a tow rope," that brought the matter
legitimately before the House, and elicited the
replies of the present and the late First Lord.

None of the parties emerge creditably from the
encounter. They seem to have been playing at
cross purposes, al initio —each desirous!of evading
responsibility, and making the other side responsible
for any short-comings or failure. A little more
energy and decision would have been eminently
beneficial to the nation. But the personal had
manifestly a much greater interest for the per-
formers than the national side of the question,
and between the First Lord and the Admiral the
community fell to the ground. With different
instructions Sir CHARLES might have added fresh
laurels to those which he had formerly obtained.
With another Admiral the Board might have
escaped the animadversions to which it has been
justly exposed. We fear that the popular -verdict
will be something analogous to that of Mencurio,
and that " a plague of both your houses" will be
the general exclamation.

That Sir C. NAPIER might have done more un-
der his actual powers is unquestionable ; but, un-
fortunately, he was from the very commencement
of the attack discontented with the means placed
at his disposal, and having started as a prophet
of Evil, he was resolved not to cast discredit on
his own prescience. He was too sharp in detect-
ing the red-tapisb "dodge," Had he, like NEL-
SON, placed his blind eye to the telescope, it would
have been better for the national interests, and
Ms own reputation. But, instead of turning the
means at his disposal to the best advantage, he
seemed chiefly intent on placing the Admiralty in
the wrong ; and it is but simple justice to state
that they rendered important assistance in the
attempt. It is difficult to say which party has been
most disfigured in the transaction ! The panto-
mimic encounters between sweeps and bakers,
where the alternate marks of soot and flour give
a magpie appearance to .the performers; seems
'the only suitable comparison to the result.
Sir CHARLES materially damaged Sir JAMES,
who in return administered many hard hits to his.
assailant, while Sir CHARLES WOOD met the usual
fate of mediators and emerged from the melee more
seriously injured than either of the belligerents.
Like PICKWICK betwen the valorous POTT and ,
SLUR he received the heaviest punishment, but
it was self inflicted, and proceeded neither from
the. carpet-bag, or the fire-shovel.
The Hon. and Gallant Member for Southwark
did' much for the Board, but with singular want

f discretion, their advocates refused to avail
themselves of the'circumstance. Had there been
no reply, they would have come out of it with
flying colours. But they were not so easily satis-
fied. Like 831110 counsel who- are not contented
with the failure of an accusation against their
clients, they patched up the case for the prosecu-
tion and ensured a conviction. If Sir. CHARLES
Nezza had so grossly misbehaved himself as the