The Sun.
London, England, 1856-03-01 00:00:00

General Sir DE LACY IiVANS—I should have been
very glad, sir, to have remained silent on this occasion, but
after what has taken place it is impossible for me to re-
frain from troubling the house with a few observations.
entirely concur with the hon. and gallant gentleman who
spoke last in the eulogies he has paused on my brother offi-
cers ; but the remark which he made, to the effect that 99
out of every 100 persons in the country will refuse to credit
any report which the proposed Government Commission
might draw up, could hardly have been agreeable to this
(the Ministerial) side of the house. For myself, I regret
that, owing to the blunders and inconsistencies of the
Government, such a result as the hon. and gallant gentle-
man anticipates is not at all unlikely to be realised. I
am also exceedingly sorry that the Under-Secretary for
War did not act upon the suggestion offered by the right
hon. baronet opposite (Sir J. Pakington), who said he re-
garded this discussion as entirely premature, and promised
to bring forward a substantive motion on the same sub-
ject hereafter, if the question were for the present post-
poned. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Pee]), however, having
evidently got off his speech by heart, could not be pre-
vailed upon to reserve himself for the future and more
legitimate opportunity thus proffered to him by the right
hon. baronet, but must launch rashly at all hazards forth
on the pest ent occasion, and level his pent-up accusations
right and left on every hand. And, first, he must needs
fall foul of the generals of division. It is perfeetly true
that Colonel Gordon alleged as an excuse for the knapsacks
not being delivered sooner to the regiments that all the
generals of division declined to receive them—all, at least,
save the Duke of Cambridge. Aud here I must say that I
could not but admire the judicious *Jae courtier-like excep-
tion in favour of the Royal duke thus made by Colonel
Gordon. (Laughter.) But I put it to the house whether it
is probable that his Royal Highness, who never saw an
enemy before, would know best of all what was needful to
be done, while the four older generals of greater experience
were entirely and stupidly ignorant on the matter. ("Hear,
hear," and a laugh.) Of course, my bare assertion is not
more valuable than that of Colonel Gordon or the Under-
Sect etary for War. I don't arrogate to myself a monopoly
of the truth ; I only ask the house to look to what are the
probabilities of the ease ; and I challenge the hon. gentle-
man (Mr. Peel) to adduce any proof that the four senior
general officers really did refaso to receive the knapsacks.
(Hear, hear.) But, after what Colonel Gordon has stated,
we must, of course, assume that the Duke of Cambridge's
division actually got their knapsacks. Now, it so hap-
pened that at the very time when Colonel Gordon was miv-
ing this evidence in the Crimea the Duke of Cambridge
was also giving his evidence in this country. Well, does
his Royal Highness corroborate the statement on this point
whieti the hon. gentleman (Air. Peel) has most gratuitously
and imprudently ventured to make here to-night ? And
let me ask (exclaimed the gallant general with some
warmth)—let me ask, what right has the hm. gentleman
to indulge in these rash and inculpatory assertions ? Is it
b 3cause he happens to be the Under-Secretary of State for
War that he presumes in this manner to level his unpro-
voked accusations against the four older generals of divi-
sion? (Hear.) What did his Royal Highness state when
examined before the Sebastopol Committee in the month
of March, 1855 :
" Is your Royal Highness aware at all of what was the
reason of this great delay in the restoration of the knapsacks
after they had been taken away ?—The reason was simply
this, that, instead of each ship, after coming round to Bala-
leave, entering the harbour and discharging its cargo of
knapsacks, and care being taken that the regiments were
informed at the time that such would be the case, a sort of
circular was sent round that a ship was outside or inside the
harbour, and the chance was taken of getting the knapsacks
out. It occurred once or twice, on sending down for them,
that the ship had sailed in the meantime to Constantinople or
Marseilles upon another service, and the knapsacks were
gone. Is the fact within your Royal Highness's knowledge,
that ships laden with those knapsacks went two or three
times backwards and forwards across the Black Sea with-
out landing ?—I think that, that is true. Does not that
imply great neglect in some quarters ?—I think it a very
bad arrangement."
Thus, the Royal duke, who was ready to receive the
knapsacks, did nut get them any more than the four foolish
old generals who refused them. Then, again, what does
his _Royal Highness say further—
" Would it not have been possible, after the flank march
was determined upon, to have all the knapsacks collected
together out of the different ships into one, and to have
sent them round to Balaklava?—l have no doubt that some
arrangement of the sort might have been made at the time.
(Hear.) Of course at sea it is not, perhaps, a very easy mat-
ter to shift knapsacks from one ship to another. I appre-
hend the simplest course would have been to have lauded
the knapsacks of each regiment at Balaklava, and then to
have made the ships available At once for any other duty."
If the hon. gentleman in his study of blue-hooks--a study
to which I believe he is much : wldicted—(hear, '.tear, and
laughter)—would only refer to General Bentiaick's evi-
dence he would find that gallant: officer folly corroborates
his Royal Highness, and that he could not get the knap-
sacks, notwithstanding the wends rful alacrity c f Col. Gor-
don. Then what does Col. Wilso a, of the Guavas, tell us?
He was asked— _ _

" You steted that the men had no change before yon
came away ; had they not got their knapsacks 2—Before I
came away I do not think 20 of our English soldiers had
their knapsacks except the two con 'panics of the regiment
which had been placed on board th e Bellerophon, under
Lord Frederick Paulet, and Lord Fr ederick brought those
men on shore with their knapsacks, and those, 1 believe,
were the only men that had their knapsacks out of the
whole brigade."
And, agaiu,—
" Do you know what steps 'sere, taken on the part of the
officers to obtain their baggage w'aile encamped before Se-
bastopol ?—I know that the offic, era repeatedly sent down
their servants to Balak-lava to endeavour to discover the
ships iu which they had sailed t o the Crimea for the pur-
pose of getting their baggage. I did so myself, and on one
occasion the Tanning, the ship in which I before said I
sailed to the Crimea, did an-ive' and I sent my servant
down, and they told him that they had been ordered at
Constantinople to disgorge all the baggage, and to put it
into store there, so that I got Thoth ing."
That was the excellent arrangtament which Col. Gordon
made for the Guards. Ido not wish to trouble the house
with a variety of evidence upon ;this subject, but perhaps
hon. members are not aware why it is that the subject of
the knapsack is dwelt upon. se, much. I must remind
them that it was 'tattle by them edical officers that in eons
sequence of the troops not havines a change of clothes their
sufferings were aggravated, and know the sick and wound-
ed went down to Scutari with the 'ir shirts sticking to their
backs, in the most deplorable coat lition, no provision at all
being made for them at Bal eklava . (Hear.) So much for
the willingness of the Duke of Cs teubridge to receive the
knapsacks. Now, Sir, as 800 V. as I Veen' of this, I obtained
a document from General P ennefaelter, who commanded
one of the brigades under iey crisis, and from Colonel
Armstrong (General Aden's, who commanded the other
brigade, having unfortunately been killed), in which those
officers said they sent down to Balaklaya whenever they
heard of a ship coming into harbour with baggage, but they
invariably found the knaysaek s had been sent on to Con-
' stantinople or some other sdscn. The hon. gentleman the
Under-Secretary quotes Gordon, without knowing
whether what Co]. Gordon A ays is sound or not, and I
complain that he has not ci mdidly avowed he was not'
aware of the evil consequences which have resulted from
the knapsacks having been wit, hheld and sent about from
place to place except to that aulece where they were re-
quired. I admit that perhaps senne confusion was inevi-
table, but I do not think that Belch efforts we'e made or
arrangements concluded as prudence would have dictated.
I complain, also, of the readiness 'which I disceever from
the evidence Col. Gordon displays tee shift the blame which
might be attributed to him upon the shoulders of other
persons. The five Generals of Disrisien were' all absent,
one of them unhappily having p erished, and then Col.
pd
Gordon says, slaash, except his Psoyal Highness, those
generals caused all the difficulty by' their refusals to se-
cept the knapsacks. • The hon. gentleman the Under-Secre-
tary of War, not appreciating the discreet observations of
the right hon. baronet (Sir J. Pakington), goes into the
whole question, and challenger the opinion of Parliament
upon the whole question. (Hear.) At one time ho says
a commission is about to be appointed, a trial its pending,
and therefore it would be unfair to make any reenarks but
the moment after he commences an attack upon everybody.
(Hear.) The hon. gentleman says this motion is unfair,
because the commissioners are somewhat assailed by this
proceeding, but immediately afterwards be does not hesi-
tete to commence an attack upon the commissioners.
Surely these commissioners are equally entitled to fair play
as the officers who are said to he reflected upon by their
report. (Hear, hear.) And, sir, after all, those commis•
sioners were officers appointed and selected by the War
Department, and now down comes the War Department
and complains of them. (Hess'. hear.) It seems to be in-
tended to lay dowi a rule that everything may be said
about any one excepts to these officers who have a con-
nexion with the Court. I cannot help saying that I be-
lieve the public imagine different justice is administered
by the Government to noble lords and lion. gentlemen fa-
voured at Court than that awarded to humble and friend-
less individuals. (Hear, hear.) I confess, too, I did not
like the announcement of the noble viscount (Palmerston)
that this Board or Commission is to c,lose its doors occa.
sior aly whenever its members may dees;de to do so. le t
us understand whether evidence is to be beard while these
doors are closed. (Hear, hear.) I have also heard it said,
and aim not sure that there is no foundatie n for the state.
anent, that one of the modes by which Uses° gentlemen
who consider themselves inculpated intend to essape from
censure is to cast all the blame upon the late Lord Raglan.
Sir, Lord Raglan and the Adjutant-General can no longer
defend thein‘elves, and I would advise the friends of the
late Lord Raglan, of whom there must be many in this
house, to be upon their guard against any attempt on the
part of certain individuals to exonerate themselves at the
expense of the late Commander-in-Chief. (Hear, hear.)
Why is there to be any secrecy at all ? Tell ns that. A
distinction has bees drawn between the Co *mission or
Board and that .whick.sat'after the Convention of Cintra.
Upon that occasion there was ample reason for caution and
I even for secrecy— there were great strategicaLpoints to be
discussed. 1 myself have been placed in a false position in