The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-13 00:00:00

of God, what resemblance the Noble Lord thought there was
between those battles. He said that a vote of thanks was re-
fused to Sir E. Codrington because the battle of Navarino was
an accident—an " untoward event " in fact. Sir
Edward Codrington went to Navarino, where ships
were lying of different flags and nations, manned by barbarians,
amongst whom a single musket fired would kick up a general
blast.—(Laughter.) A musket was fired, and a general blaze
took place. But at the battle of Hyderabad, was that an acci-
dent there ? Why, the Ameere attacked the Residency with
strong force ; Major Outram was obliged to retire, after
having gallantly defended himself, and arrived at the camp of
Sir Charles Napier. Now, under these circumstances, he
should like to know what was Sir Charles Napier to do ? Was
he to look idly on? Vas he to retire? What was he. to do?
Why, the only thing he had to do was to fight, and he (the Gal.
lent. Commodore) thought if he had not done that he oneht to
have been hanged.--(Cheers and laughter.) The Noble Lord
said there was no declaration of war. It was true there was no
declaration of war, but it was not the custom to declare war now.
They had been fighting from four to five years with China, and
yet no declaration of war had been made Why ? Perhaps
the Chancellor of the Exchequer could tell. When the
Ameers assisted the Beloochees was not that a sufficient de-
claration of war ?—( Hear.) If the French sent troops to
Ireland, would not that be considered a competent reason fur
declaring war against France ?—( Hear. hear. ) He rather
thought the gentlemen of the House of Commons would be of
that opinion.—( A laugh.) He felt sure that if the Noble
Lord was in the Residency he would say, " I am sure, Sir
Charles Napier, it is high time for you to come and defend
me." He would be anxious to put an end to the state
of uncertainty and danger in which he found himself.
The Noble Lord said there was great military means. What
means ? Two thousand men. What means had the
Ameers? Thirty thousand men. The Noble Lord talked
a great deal about glory, and of the impropriety of encourag-
ing too great a desire for military exploits, in order to obtain a
vote of thanks from the House of Commons. He did not ap-
prehend there would be a great many amateurs who would be
willing to fight against 30,0(0 men with 2,000 men.—( Laughter
and cheers.) And then the glory—where was the glory ?
The glory of running the risk of getting all their throats cut.
The Noble Lord talked about the danger of allowing a mili-
tary man to transact diplomatic affairs. He (Sir C. Napier)
had been in her Majesty's service a loog time, and he must
certainly say that it was a very dangerous practice for him who
had laid aside the sword, to take up the pen. Let them go
back to Constantinople—they had a diplomatic agent there.
But how are our affairs managed by him? Why the flea came
back with its tail between its legs.—( Laughter. ) Sir John
Moore was of opinion that these men always got the countries
they represented into scrapes. When they took up the pen
they d,d not know how to wield it, having been so long accus-
tomed to the sword. They had a diplomatic agent in Sind,—
what did he do? Any man that took up the Blue Book would
see that the diplomatist, so far from bringing things to an amicable
termination, had, in endeavouring to settle matters with his pen,
brought the army into jeopardy, and they had to be rescued
by the sword.—( Hear, hear.) The two offices—diplomatist
and general—ought not to be mixed up together ; and, thank
God ! they had a General who relied upon himself sooner
than the diplomacy.—( Loud cheers.) If it had been to any
other man for whom the vote was proposed, and who had
acted similarly, he would have been just as ready to testif / his
conscientious approbation of his conduct.—(Loud and pro-
longed cheerio... )
Mr. BINGHAM BARING vindicated the manner in
which the papers relating to Indian affairs had been laid before
the House. It had been said that the conduct of Major
Outram had been placed before the House in an unfavourable
point of view. He (Mr. B. ?taring) was net conscious of
having done so. General Napier was not in the situation of ,
responsibility to Major Outram. He certainly had received
certain advices from Major Outram, but he was not bound to
follow his instructions ; and in his (Sir Charles Napier's) letter
to the Governor-General, he certainly justified himself for not
following the course recommended by Major Outram. Sir
Charles Napier entertained a different opinion, and that
opinion he followed upon his own responsibility. No blame
could be attributed to Major Outram—no blame could be at-
tributed to Sir Charles Napier. After some further ob-
servations to the same effect, and reading some extracts from
the Blue Book to justify his views, the Hon. Gentleman sat
down amidst partial cheering.
Mr. C. WOOD thought that the Hon. and gallant Com-
modore had unjustly censured his Noble Friend Lord Herrick.
His Noble Friend had discharged a duty very painful to him, in
declaring his opinion in favour of the course which he meant to
pursue; but at the same time he gave the highest praise to Sir
C. Napier for his military skill and courage, and that, too,
from the beginning to the end of his speech.—( Hear, hear.)
But his Noble Friend was of opinion that it was in this case
impossible to separate the military from the political, and so
it appeared to him (Mr. Wood). The present vote of thanks
was utterly inconsistent, in the manner in which:it had been
drawn up, to that which had been proposed to Sir Edward
Codrington, and to those principles which had been on that
occasion laid down by Mr. Huskisson and the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman opposite. According to the opinions professed by both
these Members on that occasion, the present vote of thanks
could not consistently be given to Sir C. Napier, for they were
of opinion that a formal declaration of war must take place
before a vote of thanks could be voted by that House.
The Hon. and Gallant officer ( Sir Charles Napier) says that
it is not the practice of later times to snake a declaration of
war—where there was danger we fought at once, and so at
once did away with the danger. On this principle he had ar-
gued war was commenced against Denmark. Toulouse, too,
had been referred to. That was a strong case in favour of his
Noble Friend the Member for Sunderland. We were engaged
in a war—in a war recognised by all the usual formalities—and
which had been preceded by a regular declaration—and having
no reason to know that peace had been agreed on, the Duke of
Wellington fought one of his hardest battles, and gained one of
the most brilliant of his victories. The country heaped honours
upon him, but Parliament did not vote thanks. But the Hon.
and Gallant Officer (Sir C. Napier) said that we had voted
thanks to armies for services in India and China, in connection
with wars which had not been preceded by any declaration.
Now, in Affghanistan there had been a declaration of war ;
but in the case of China there was this distinction, that the
power of peace or war, of remaining at the one or com.
mencing the other, was not vested in the military corn-
mander.—( Hear, hear.) The rule of Parliament was
that the person in whom centered the power of continuing at
peace, or entering upon war should not be entitled to the
thanks of Parliament. In all that his Noble Friend ( Lord
Howick) had uttered he had borne the strongest testimony
to the skill, intrepidity, and valour of General Napier, and
every man under his command. The objections he had ad-
vanced were solely on the grounds of uniformity, and in con-
sonance with all previous precedents and principles. If the
loose was prepared to disregard these, as he believed it was.—
( Hear, hear, hear)—it was but right it should know that in so
doing it was acting in direct inconsistency with its own re-
corded decision.

Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD said, it gave him no small
surprise, after the speech of the Noble Lord ( Lord Howick)
that he was not prepared to pet the House to the test of the
sentiments which he had uttered, by bringing it to a division.
—(Loud cries of "Hear, hear.") He (Mr. Crawford ).for one
felt strongly the force of those arguments which had been
used, and others which had not been used, in reference to the
question then before them. He felt that the House, by such
votes as that now proposed, identified itself in some degree
with the origin of the causes of these wars. He did not
wish to identify himself with such wars as those in India,
and China, and he thought the House should always limit its
thanks to such wars as they could approve of the origin. He
meant to cast no slur on General Sir Charles Napier ; far
from it; but he felt that many officers had net fair play, for
they were used almost like mere machines, and were often
forced to engage in wars which they could by no means ap-
prove. He could never approve such wars as those which
had lately taken place in India and China. Disapproving,
as he did, of those wars—disapproving, as he did, the conduct
of the Noble Lord (Lord Howick) in quoting the excellent
precedent of Mr. Huskisson, and yet declining to follow it,
he (Mr. Crawford) should give him an opportunity of prov-
ing his sincerity by new moving the " previous question."—
(Cheers. )
Mr. BROTHERTON seconded the motion.
Mr. B. ESCOTT said it was most important that a great
country like this should bestow its grateful thanks on meri-
torious and gallant officers in a free, generous, and ungrudg•
ing spirit. It would have been much fairer, far more noble
in the Noble Lord ( Howick) and his friends to have met the
motion by a direct negative, rather than have attempted, as
they had done, to pare it down, and throw discredit on the
motives and actions of the chief parties in the transactions.
The Noble Lord brought forward his precedents, but, to his
(Mr. Escott's) mind they were precedents which did
not at all apply. The circumstances of the case
were altogether unprecedented. Sir Charles Napier's
position was unprecedented, his energy and valour, and the
energy and valour of those under him, unprecedented—and the
result of the battle unprecedented.—( Hear, hear.) But what
were the terms in which the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R.
Peel) asked for this vote of thanks ? Why for "military ope-
rations in Sinde." These were the words. The Noble Lord,
and those who agreed with him, all bore testimony to the mili-
tary skill arid valour of General Napier and his troops—the
words of the motion referred to " military operations" alone—
and where, then, was the ground on which they proposed their
opposition should rest ? He was unable to account for their
conduct, or to reconcile their practice with their professions.
He trusted, however, the Hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr.
Crawford) who was always consistent and straightforward in
his conduct in that House, would test the sentiments and
sincerity of the Noble Lord and his few friends, by dividing the
House on the "previous question."
Dr. BOWRING could not agree to the motion before she
House, as ho disapproved of all oressive war, and he
could not honour its instruments.— Cries of" Divide.")
Lord PALMERSTON—As the ouse is going to divide
upon this question, Sir, I wish to state, in a few words the
grounds upon which I found my intention to give the motion
of the Right Hen. Gentleman my most cordial and warm
support.—(Cheers.) I cannot allow myself to consider this
motion as one involving in any degree whatever any political
considerations. I look upon it simply as a proposal to confer
upon most distinguished merit the thanks of this House, which
are the greatest reward that can be conferred upon those who
have bled in the defence of their country.—( Cheers.) I dis-
card willingly from my consideration all those topics which
bivalve the question of whether the treatment of the Ameers
was justifiable or not ; or whether the policy pursued by Lord
Ellcnborough was or was not contrary to justice. I will not
permit myself to look at the political transactions in India in
which Sir Charles Napier was involved in his political capacity.
—(Cheers.) 1 see that the most brilliant exploits have been
performed by the British troops. These exploits are almost
without example, both with reference to the disparity of the
forces, and the results of the victories. I think there never
has been a. occasion on which it would be more becoming
in the House to mark its approbation of the skill and valour
displayed. I say skill as well as valour, because I think that
the sagacity Sir Chat les Napier, as shown in the course of
his military operations —I mean military sagacity—was not
less conspicuous than the bravery displayed in the action it.
self. Now, my Noble Friend, and others on this side, con-
ceive that what took place at the battle of Navarino ought
to prevent our agreeing to this motion. I eannot see any
identity in the two cases. The battle of Navarino was an
a.cidental conflict which took place between our Beet, a cornhinod
feet, and the fleet of a nation with vain; we were not
at war, and with whom we did rut afti.rwards become at war.
We remained upon terms of peace with the Sultan, and Par-
li!tme'.lt stated that its thanks could not be voted for the victory,
on account of the conflict having been an accidental owe. We
did not wish to disturb our peaceful relations with Turkey by
adopting a proceeding which would have been exceedingly dis-
courteous to Cesium. 'But no man will say that we were
Nt ai. war with the Ameers. If that is not war what:; begins
with a battle, and ends with dethronement, !, certainly am at a
loss to know what war is. lam auze the Ameers would not at
all be disposed to acquiesce in the interpretation my Noble
Friend has given of tlse transactions which have taktql place.
I give this vote my most cordial support, reserving myself as to
any opinion 4 may entertain with regard to those political ques-
tiens with which the late transactions have been connected.
Mr. 0. STANLEY would not take part in the divisioi;, but
he would take that opportunity of saying, that in Pi opinion the
letter of Sir Charles Napier to the hetineers of Sinde, had
greatly tarnished the laurets of tlAt gallant officer.—(Cries
s' Divide, of
stratigere 'film ordered to withdraw, and the Honsc di-
vided, when the numbers were—
Far the motion
Against it
Alajority
' PRESENCE OF STRANGERS AT DEBAfES4
' Mr. CHRISTIE 5c3.9
bring --i4wern wan' respect-