Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-11-10
From the Evening Bulletin.
Manner in m Had Position.

Sir Charles Napier, if the statements in the
London papers are to be believed, has put him
self into position not at all enviable. The
circumstances of the case, are recapitulated
thus: The French and English admirals, to.
gether with the superior officers of the Anglo
French feet in the Baltic, held a consultation
as to whether anything should be done to fol-
low up the destruction of Bomarsund. There
was much deliberation on the feasibility of an
attack on Helsingfors and Sweaborg, which are
strongly fortified, and the majority Of the coun-
ell, after hearing the reports from the officers
who had taken soundings of the coast, deter
mined not to make the attack. There was
little doubt that, if made, it would be success
full, but it was questioned whether the fortresses
could be retained, if taken possession Of
Sir Charles Napier, who presided at this
council of war, for such it was, did not express
his dissent from the conclusion arrived at
The minutes Of the council were regularly
drawn up, and duly signed by every officer
present 1t was agreed that copies of the
minutes should be sent to the Admiralty in
London and the Minister of Marine at Paris
But no such copy was then sent to the latter
functionary, Napier assuring the French Admi-
rally that the English government would trans.
init full intelligence to Paris through the
British ambassador there.
The imputation on Napier is that either as
a postscript or as q supplemental dispatch, he
added communication to the British Admi
rally, to the effect that though the minutes did
contain the conclusion arrived at by the naval
officers, they did not contain his own opinion
which was that an immediate attack should be
made upon Helsingfors and Sweaborg. 1t
seems that, contrary to all etiquette contrary,
indeed, to all decent courtesy, Napier did not
communicate this Gdde1ldum to the French
Admiral. He heard of it, however, and lost no
time in drawing up, from memory, assisted by
the officers who attended the council, detailed
account of all that had taken place. and in.
stantly sent this off to the French Government.
Meanwhile, Sir Charles Napier's report, to-
gether with his additional and personal dispatch,
reached London, and was sent to Paris. The
moment that it was considered by the Imperial
Government there, the Minister of Marine tele-
graphed peremptory orders to Admiral Des-
chenes, directing him to attack Helsingfors and
Sweaborg without delay.
Immediately after these orders were sent off,
the Admiral's narrative reached Paris, and,
after perusing it, the Minister of Marine, con-
WINGED that there were good reasons why the
attack should not be made, sent counter orders
to Deschenes. The issue has been, the deter
mination that both fleets shall quit the Baltic
and return home. Napier's conduct exhibits
so much indiscretion, Ito use lenient word, J
that we would fain discredit the whole story.
But the source whence it came is uniformly so
true, that disbelief appears almost out of the
question. Of course, the whole affair will be
investigated, as it cannot remain unexplained.