The Sun.
London, England, 1856-07-25 00:00:00

THE CRIMEAN" C(;;11AILSSIO

(From, the Times of Otis day.)
We publish to-day the report of the Board of Inquiry
which sat at Chelsea Hospital. This extraordinary docu-
ment fully realises the worst anticipations of those who
saw in the whole proceeding, merely a plan for screening
men whose conduct had been animadverted on by the
army, the public, and. finally, by Government Commis-
sioners despatched for the purpose to the seat of war. The
Chelsea generals acquit everybody, fully and unreservedly
—nay, they not only acquit, but applaud. There is no
half-work, no admission that the novelty of the situation
or the difficulties of the campaign may have induced in
some cases errors of judgment that ought to be excused.
Each of the implicated officers is declared perfectly blame-
less, the judgment of the Commissioners is reversed on
every point, and it is only grudgingly allowed. that they
were not actuated by malickius feelings, Now, if it were
likely that the nation would attach the least importance to
the verdict here given, it might be contested by argument,
by the recital of facts which every one knows, and conclu-
sions from which few would be likely to dissent. But the
matter is not worth reopening. The result of the inquiry
is precisely what we anticipated and stated openly from
the first.

Con,ider the history of these events, extending over a
period of more than two years. England resolves on send-
ing an army to the East it has a force which, in propor-
tion to its numbers, is by far the most expensive in Europe,
officered chiefly by men of means and family, and under
the exclusive control of a small professional clique. What
did the public—what did even Parliament kupw about
itissorgearripation It --What -interference-At air:...theetie,; irl:_thee4
distribution, the patronage; the discipline, the equipment?
The Court and the authorities of the Horse Guards were
entrusted with the absolute management of every de-
tail. The nation bestowed entire confidence on them dur-
ing 40 years of peace. When war came, the question
was asked, "Is our army ready for it ?" " Yes," was
the unhesitating answer of the aristrocratic military clique.
The army was pronounced by Peninsular veterans to be
capable of any services that might be demanded of it, its
organisation was that by which it had won great victories
in a former war, it had during more than a generation
been governed by men who had received peerages, orders,
and pensions on the ground of their achievements, who
knew what actual war was ;—ho w, then, should it not be
able, as the phrase went, to "go anywhere and do any-
thing ?" Of the talk which we have heard since about
parsimony having destroyed its efficacy, about " the
system" containing the certain seeds of failure, there was
then not a word. Parliament was sitting, and sat till
long after the armies were on tLe Bosphor iv and in Bul-
garia,—until the transports were actually assembling for
an invasion of the Crimea. Why, then, were these mili-
tary critics silent? The conclusion is evident,—that the
authorities to whom the British nation had trustingly
committed the management of its army, both in principle
and detail, were ignorant of the exigencies of modern war-
fare—that a generation of officers had come into existence
who were unable to foresee the necessary result of their
own organisation, and knew not that the British army
must, from the first day of a campaign, move s.eadily and
swiftly to destruction.
The appointments to the chief commands were never
questioned, simply because the country knew nothing of
the subject. *Who chose the generals, why they were
chosen, on what conditions they were appointed, and with
what instructions they were sent to their posts, -we are
not likely to learn. Their names show how far they were
or were not connected with the ruling clique,—the men
who had created the very "system" which is now the
universal scapegoat. Lord Raglan, Lord De Ros,
Lord Lucan, Lord Cardigan, Sir Richard Airey, Colonel
the Honourable Alexander Gordon wero among
the chief persons to whom were committed the
destinies of England in a perilous enterprise. At least it
might be thought that these officers knew the British army
and each other. The want of a common understanding
and of fellow feeling could hardly be predicated of men in
the same rank of life, brought up in the traditions of the
same military school, and the same belief in its perfection
and their own. At any rate, it might bo thought they
would work together, help each other, forget when the
time came any private jealousies, any routine pedantry
about the separation of their " departments ;" further it
might be expected that the last defence that each would
make for any shortcomings 'would be one that necessarily
throws the blame on those with whom ho served.
The hour of active service comes, and with it the cala-
mities of the British army. Now, were those calamities
real or fictitious? Did the men die from want of fresh
food, for want of proper tents, hutting, blankets, and cloth-
ing ? Wore the horses starved with hunger and cold ? In
other words, were the facts dwelt upon in the communi-
cations of newspaper correspondents, in the thousands of
letters from officers and soldiers to their friends at home,
and afterwards officially confirmed by the report of Sir
John M'Neil and Colonel Tulloola, true or fabulous? If
they wore true—if men and horses perished miserably—if
the British army would have been ruined but for the reve-
lations of the press—if, as it is, the British name has
suffered much throughout the world, then there must be
somebody to blame. These are the facts. Disasters took
place, for which the superior officers of the army must be
held responsible. The Crimean Commissioners implicated
certain of those officers. The Chelsea Commissioners ac-
quit them fully and triumphantly. But the disasters re-
main unaccounted for. Did they produce themselves ?
Did the men die of mere perversity ? If not, then there
must be blame somewhere. The Chelsea Commissioners
prudently refrain from solving the question.
The fact is that the whole inquiry was a farce,—
a scandalous one indeed, and likely to have serious conse-
quences hereafter, but, as far as regarded Lord Leman and
Cardigan, Sir R. Airey and Col. Gordon, a mere mockery.
No one ever heard of an analogous proceeding in -civil
practice. Here were sufferings " horrible and heartrend-
ing," which could not be denied. Government had sent
Commissioners to inquire into them. The Commissioners
made their report, which might be considered to represent
the verdict of a Grand Jury or of a Coroner's Inquest.
The implicated officers were in the position of men charged
with an offence, and Government was bound either to pro-
secute or to declare that there was no reason for prosecut-
iue% Instead of this a Board is appointed, before which
the officers are allowed "to make a staternout." That is,
the defendant is to be tried without any evidence for the
prosecution being brought forward. In the case of Sir R.
Airey, Col. Gordon, and Mr. Filder, Colonel rPulloch was
not even present to watch the case on behalf of Sir J.
M'Neil and himself, who were virtually put on their trial.
Every one knew what must be the result. The court
scarcely concealed its partiality. The implicated officers
and their frierids were allowed to use atone and manner
towards Col. Tulloch which would have called down the
severest reprobation of any judge in a court of common
law. Every witness knew that if he served those whom
the military authorities were determined to uphold he
might expect no small reward ; on the other hand, that it
would be a black day for him if he proved unfaithful to
the common cause. Even a man who has served his couno
try and gained its esteem felt it not inconsistent with his
dignity to come forward and in a pompous harangue be-
spatter with ridiculous praise the authors of a miserable
calamity. Now we have the result. After two months
the report appears. The Board is satisfied that Lord
Lucan "exercised every exertion to meet the peculiar
difficulties which he had to contend with, and
that he is therefore not chargeable with neglect in the
performance of the important duties attached to his com-
mand." Lord Cardigan is similarly acquitted. Sir R.
Airey, and, as the greater includes the lass, Colonel Gor-
don also, are fully exonerated. Although the latter has
told us that he fully agreed with the statements in this
journal about the mismanagement that prevailed, the
Board acquits the department in spite of itself. If warm
clothing was not issued, Sir R. Airey and his subordinate
are blameless, because the " responsibility of that officer
must be understood to be limited to the duty of making'
requisitions for certain stores, and not to their safe cus-
tody, stowage, or even issue." If rugs were not issued,
though in store, it was because they were useless for the
keeping out of wet and cold, though it does not appear
why rugs of this quality should be found in the scores of
the richest army in the world. If the greatcoats were not.
issued, it was because they were too small for the men who
worn under-clothing • if the shoes were not issued, it was
because they were under-clothing
unfit for the purposes of a cam-
paign. If there were no tents, yet Sir R. Airey had, two
months after landing in the Crimea, written home a re-
quisition for them. The paillasses were not issued, be-
cause there was no hay or straw to stuff them with. With
regard to huts, "the Quartermaster-General'i Department
completely fulfilled its duty by ordering huts at an early
period from Constantinople—namely, Bth November,
1854 ;" that is, sending down to some overworked com-
missaries directions to procure wood, nails, hinges, tools,
and carpenters, in quantities that the Mediterranean
would not have supplied in less than three or four months.
It is of no use to go on. One phrase is continually re-
peated—" the responsibility of the Quartermaster-Gene-
ral's Department was confined to making a requisition"
for such and such a thing. The upshot is, that the
department is " completely relieved " from all blame.
tituch is the result of the Chelsea Commission.
The shametul history of these transactions is fitly
concluded by a document which pronounces that each offi-
cer is justified in confining himself to the most bare per-
formance of his ordinary duties. How far the duty of
originating measures rests on the Commander-in-Chief
must be decided by common sense. ,The general idea of
such a person is as riding the whirlwind and directing the
storm ; we must confess, however, that we see no traces of
such an activity in the British Crimean army-. It is sin-
gular enough that in the whole of these investigatione' the
name of Lord Raglan hardly once apprrs. The heada of
departments are "making requisitions on each other, the
Generals are quarrelling, while cold and starvation are
doing their work on the unhappy army, and we now have
it, on the authority of a Board of Generals, that these
officers are completely exonerated. They will receive the
congratulations of their own set, they will keep their rank,
and orders, and pay, and whatever else they may value.
On the esteem or confidence of the public we know they
set little store, and it is fortunate for them, for they will
never receive it. The conclusions to whicie men of under.
standing have come are not to be altereeby the partisan
verdict of such a tribunal as sat at Chelsea. The lesson
remains. We see what notion officers of the dominant
school take of their town duties, and what confidence may
be placed on their predictions before war and their subse-
quent judgment on its events. If the Chelsea inquiry
convinces the nation that there is no hope of improvement
but in thorough reform, it will not have been held in vain.

THE CONVICT WILLIAM 1' ovs.—The prisoner has ex-
pressed a desire to see the Rev. W. M. Punshon, Wes.
leva,n minister, of Leeds. In compliance with this
wish, the rev, gentleman proceAed to York yesterday,
i.nd—in company with a minister of that city, who hap.
visited the prisoner every week since he was placed
in York Castle—spent an hour with
.him.—Leeds
Mercury.

[P.26% 4D. STAMPED F'D-

MR. LAYARD AND HIS CONSTITUENTS•

AYLESBURY, JULY
Last night Mr. Layard, one of the representatives in
Parliament of this the county town of Buckinelpanshire,
presented himself before his constituents, at a public
meeting held in the county hall, to render an account of
his public conduct as their representative during the ses-
sion about to terminate, in pursuance of a rule he pre•
scribed for himself when they returned him to Parlia-
ment. The meeting was but thinly attended. Mr.
Acton Tindal was called to preside, and that gentleman
having assumed the chair, and in a few brief observations
introduced Mr. Layard to the audience,
Mr. LAYARD, who on presenting himself was loudly
cheered, after a few preliminary remarks, said 'this year
had passed, like many others, without any great service
having been rendered to the country as far as home poli-
tics were concerned, but it was not so as regarded ques-
t tions of foreign policy. Events had Ocureed withbr the
last few mouths which would tell on this cpuntry as long
as they lived, and of which the effect would probably be
felt for generations afterwards. He alluded, of eiThrse,
to the conclusion of the war with Russia, and to the
peace recently signed in Paris. His opinions on the war
had been to a certain extent justified, and the prognos-
tications he ventured to put forth about three years ago
had been realised. England, and not only England, but
the greater part of Europe, felt that Russia was assum-
ing a position in the balance of power in Europes.vehich
was tending rapidly to destroy that balance of power,
and with it tee liberties, not only of Europe, but eveo
of the world at large. (Hear, hear.) It was for that
reason that the war was undertaken • after the termina-
tion of that ever-memorable siege efforts were made to
bring about a peace. He happened to be in Paris on
the day. the peace was signed. They were aware that
the French Government were exceedingly anxious that
the peace should be signed, and that they scarcely con-
cealed their readiness to make every sacrifice to access,
pli!b tbat 01:48,4 gbatfoliag of the Government, was
encrinragedis if not brought about, by a general expret=
eion of sentiment in France, which manifested itself in
rejoicings on the occasion of its signature which he could
scarcely characterise as other than indecent and totally
unworthy a great nation. He did not mean to Fay that
peace was not desirable. No man could hesitate be-
tween peas- and war in the abstract ; but, unfortu-
nately, in France, the abstract queetinn was only con-
sidered, and the real interests involved in it were put
aside altogether. No one could contend that the peace
which had been cone'ude f had given entire satisfaction
to the country. (Hear, hear.) It was received without
enthusiasm, and was accepled only because we felt that
we were not in a position to carry on the contest single-
handed. He knew it did not give satisf iction to him ;
but, probably for the same reasons which influenced
public opinion, be did not oppose it ; and he would tell
them why. When the war was commenced he thought
we should have taken something more than the mere
cause of Turkey into consideration, and that we should
have done something more for the great European
principles at stake in the contest. (Hear, hear.) He
had hoped our action would have extended much fur-
ther than Turkey, and that many questions affecting
the happiness and liberties of millions of the human' race
would have been solved by this war. That was a
reasonable hope, but it had been utterly disappointed.
We had gained something, no doubt, but he maintained
that what we had gained was unequal to the sacrifices
we had made. (Hear, hear.) As respected the ques-
tion of the Danubian Principalities—Moldavia and
Wallachia —those two provinces were occupied by
between 4,000,000 and 5,000,000 inhabitants speak-
ing a similar language, but differing altogether from that
spoken in Russia, and professing the Greek faith. TLose
two provinces were or rather had been—as the reign of
their princes bad now ended— governed by two semi-in-
dependent princes, under the suzerainty of the Porte.
Russia by certain treaties had a right, not of direct in-
terference, but of protecting or rather guaranteeing a
certain form of government in the principalities ; and
she used those treaties and those privileges to establish
a direct right to interfere in their internal affairs, which
led to very serious and fatal results. Whenever it suited
Russia to pick a quarrel with the Porte the first step she
took was to enter the principalities, which she did on
the plea of enforcing the privileges of the people, and so
to excite some popular commotion. One of the great
objects of the war was to prevent Russia having this
pretence of interference, and to abrogate the treaties
which furnished it. This first point, be thought, had
not been attained ; nothing definite had really been
done ; the question had been left altogether unsettled ;
and that must also be attributed to the indecent haste on
the part of the French Government to conclude a peace
as quickly as possible. It was proposed at the conference
that the principalities should be united into one inde-
pendent province. That question was also deferred ;
so that, in fact, this question of the principalities had
been left entirely undecided in Paris. Within the last
two months he had been in Turkey, and had conversed
with persons of influence connected with or well ac-
quainted with the principalities, aad he was convinced
that the opinions he had. formed were correct, and that
what he had stated to them would come to pass. They
wereaware that a new frontier was to be given to Mol-
davia on the Russian side. The frontier line was settled
by Austria, and included above a third of the province of
Bessarabia. We could, and ought he believed, to have
demanded more ; we ought to have retained the old
Bessarabian frontier to the Dniester, which furnished a
good military and well-defined line. The Russians ac•
cepted the frontieras proposed by Austria, which included
much valuable land, several places of importance, and
would have been an important acquisition to Moldavia.
But what happened ? At the conferences in Paris the
Russians pretended that the proposed frontier could not
be carried out, and they produced a map, which there was
every reason to believe contained a wrong delineation of
the country. They proposed that we should give up nearly
two-thirds of that which we had already agreed to cede,
and adopt a frontier line suggested by themselves. We
had actually accepted those terms. The new frontier
line included no valuable territory, and it was so drawn
across the marshes formed at the mouth of the Danube,
that access could not be had from one point to the other
of the ceded territory, which would be almost useless to
Moldavia. The only acquisition was, that the mouths of
the Danube were freed altogether from Russian control ;
but she retained still a good military aggressive frontier,
and could always intimidate the adjoining principality.
(Hear.) With regard to the second point—the navigation
of the Danube—that had been undoubtedly secured to
Europe, and he was happy to find that English enter-
prise was already taking advantage of that great opening.
That was one of the good results of the war. Again,
surely we ought to have done something for the Circas-
sians. It was a most ungenerous policy, and utterly un-
worthy of this country, to leave a gallant people, who had
for 40 years fought with very powerful enemies, to their
fate. (Cheers.) There was no country in which British
enterprise and capital would find a greater outlet than
in Turkey, and which would make greater returns to us,
and therefore it was essential that we should maintain
the very best relations with the Turks. But he regret.
ted to find that our policy towards them was only calcu-
lated to separate us from Turkey and to throw her into
the arms of France. One of the first results had been
the introduction of the French system of government
and centralisation into Turkey, which was utterly op-
posed to the liberty of a people. After explaining in
some detail the reasons that led to his recent financial
mission to Constantinople, Mr. Layard-.proceeded to
state that already Russia had commenced violating the
treaty signed in Paris by destroyitig the forts of Kars,
Ismail, and Reni, which she was bound to give up to the
lurks. He also commented upon their cruel treatment

of the Tartars in revenge for the assistance they gave us
during the war, and ridiculed, as a thing for which there
was no precedent in history, the belief now so generally
entertained, even by such statesmen as Lord J. Ru,i3ll
and others, that Russia would now suddenly abandon
her whole traditional policy and apply herself to the con-
e,trucion of railroads and the like. Passing on to the con-

sideration of the Anglo-French alliance, he said our pre-
sent position as regarded France was utterly unworthy
of this country. No man was more anxious than he for
a French alliance formed on an equal basis, bnthe would
never consent to that alliance if the condition was a sa-
crifice of the interest or the honour of England. (Cheers.)
Our posifion at this moment with regard to France was
exceedingly dangerous, and unless we took care it would
leaf ns into great difficulty. (Hear.) He admired the
Emperor of the French as much as any man, but hecould
not sympathise with the form of government he had in-
troduced. Adverting to the unhappy social and politi
cal condition of Italy, he (Mr. Layard) said no man in his
senses would deny the existing state of things there, ex-
cept a few who were under the lamentable domination of
priestcraft, which appeared to destroy the moral sense
that enabled men to distinguish between right and
wrong. Mr. Layard then pointed out in some detail the
reforms required in our military and administrative sys-
tems, to wnich, now the war was over, he hoped the
country would apply itself ; and criticised, by anticipa-
tion, the forthcoming report of the Crimean Board of In-
quiry, which, he said, would whitewash everybody who
had been accused, and leave them in the enjoyment of
their rank and promotion, while the only persons that
would suffer would be Col.- Tulloch and Sir J. M‘Neil,
the commissioners sent to the Crimea, who had been left
unsupported by those whoseinterests they had made every
sacrifice to defend. He looked upon the Government of
this country as a pure monopoly in tha,hands of a family
party ; but for that the people themselves were alone
to blame, in not taking the bull by the horns and insist-
ing upon a change. In the military service men had
been taught that, unless they had connexions and means
by which they could bring their merits before head-quar-
ters, they could alone seek for justice through the p -
lic press. Hence men of every grade in the army wrote
to the Times and other newspapers, instead of applying
to thosie who should be their protectors ; and it would
be fnind that in almost every case where promotion had
been given to such as gained it by merit alone it had
been obtained through the aid of the public press..
He would say all honour to the Times for having come
forward and supported those who deserved well of their
country. The people could never be too grateful to th.•t
journal for all that it did for them during a great.na-
tional crisis. (Cheers.) The hon. gentleman briefly
reviewed the appointrnant of the Duke of Cambridge to
the chief command of the army—on whom he passed a
high eulogium, from which appointment he looked
I earnestly for an entire reform of our military ilyotom.

'0727-4/:„.7
[34e(Sln to the subject of adenlnZatlva &twin,
acknowledged that it led to several important improve.
nieeti, but confessed that he regarded it almost as a
hopeless matter unless..tle. Parliamentary cons ituencies
• would bestir theinselvel and give a .etrong and unmis-
takeable expression of the popular opinion on the sub-
ject. Mr. Layard, in conclusion, expressed a hope ihnt
his votes in Parliament had given satisfaction to h •
-eenetituents, and was-much-cheered at the conclusion cI
his speech. •
Mr. J. GIBBS, an elector, expressed in flattering
terms his approbation of the Parliantestary deticltiEt of
Mr. Layard, which, he said, had tended to advance
civil, commercial, and religious freedom, while he had
never given one vote adverse to the liberties of the
people. (Cheers.).
Mr. R. DICKENS, though deprecating the strong ban*
kering which Mr. Layard had for the war principle,
nevertheless heartily approved his conduct generally, and
moved, amid much cheering, a resolution expressing the
entire confidence of the meeting in him as their repre-
sen ative.

The (notion was seconded by Mr. Gibbs, and after a
few words from Mr. H. Watson, was carried I y arcla-
mation, and Mr. Layard, ace unpanied by some of his
political supporters, retired from the ball.