as politicians, but as men and as Englishmen—there
cannot be a heart that does not throb with honest and
generous pride that these much-enduring, all-daring,
all-achieving men, were our countrymen; that they
were British subjects like ourselves; and there is hardly
an eye from which a tear will not spring unbidden when
we reflect that so many of them are numbered with the
dead. But I will only dwell upon that portion of the
subject which relates to the glory which that gallant
army achieved; I will not dwell upon the sacrifices
they have made, or the sufferings they have endured.
Their country will remember them. Their country
will know how to value those who still remain;
and, whatever may be the honours and rewards
by which this country can show its gratitude to
those who, in such unequalled circumstances and
under such serious difficulties, maintained, upheld,
increased the glory of the British flag, those honours
and those rewards will certainly be granted with
no niggard hand, but with universal approbation,
and with the cordial consent of a grateful country.
He added a suggestion, that it would be due to the
gallantry of the French forces, if it were possible, to
confer some mark of military honour upon General
Canrobert. He criticised the shortcomings of the
Government, not to revert to the past, but to insure
attention for the future. He would not cavil at details;
but it must be remembered that government had received
the assistance of an additional Secretary of State, so that
greater attention and fewer omissions might have been
expected. That there must be mistakes and omissions
at the commencement of a war, he was aware; but his
charge against the government was, that from the
commencement of the war they have lived "from hand to
mouth," showing a total want of prescience, providing for
each successive emergency after and not before it arose.
The fatal words "too late" have adhered to the whole
conduct of the war. When we went to war, ministers
proposed to increase the army by 10,000 men; and Mr.
Gladstone calculated the additional expense at £1,250,000
for defraying the cost of sending 25,000 men to "Malta
and back again." When the Emperor of Russia read
that, he must have been convinced "either that ministers
were gulling parliament and imposing on British credulity,
or that they were not really in earnest." Government
sent out from 25,000 to 30,000 men in March,
April, and May; took great credit to themselves for
their unparalleled exertions; and then held their hands,
saying, We have done all that is necessary. There were
no reinforcements, no army of reserve; the 25,000 men
were launched forth to depend on their own resources,
because the British government lacked foresight. It
might be said that the troops were sent to defend
Constantinople; but the Queen's message in March, and
Lord Clarendon subsequently, said that the war was
intended to settle the question of Russian supremacy.
The 25,000 troops were totally inadequate to attain that
ulterior object. The expedition to the Crimea was
decided upon by the government at home, in the face of
representations made by generals of high distinction, "of
the insuperable difficulties of an attack upon Sebastopol;"
they were doubly bound, therefore, to neglect nothing
that would contribute to its success; yet no steps were
taken to reinforce the troops before the battle of
Inkerman except sending some 5,000 men. Lord Derby
read from a private correspondence to show that the
delay at Varna and Scutari did not arise from the army,
but from the blundering in the shipment of stores. He
blamed the government for the deficiencies of medical
comforts and attendance in the hospitals at Scutari; and
he cast censure upon them for the loss of the Prince,—
alleging that the First Lord of the Admiralty had been
warned in writing, by a distinguished officer, that her
captain was unfit for the command. He made these
statements in order that ministers might refute or
repudiate them. As another proof of the unconsciousness
of the government as to what it was about to do,
Lord Derby instanced this suddenly-summoned
parliament. On the 10th November, government actually
prorogued the parliament to the 14th December; but
by the 20th, they had heard of the battle on the 5th,
and they immediatly summoned parliament to meet two
days earlier than the day to which it had been prorogued.
Was it only on the 20th of November that it
was thought necessary to increase the effective strength
of the army? Ought it not to have been foreseen that
the militia would be wanted? Referring to the Baltic
campaign, which was preceded by a certain reform
dinner, opened by such a boastful order, conducted by
such a powerful fleet, he said that its results, as far as
the war goes, are literally nil; and he condemned the
government for sending out such heavy ships, instead
of ships of lighter draught. No doubt, (said Lord
Derby,) they have done their best; but if we are to come
to a successful issue of this great and serious war—if we
are to look to conquering an honourable peace—we
must strike decided blows. I say "conquering" an
honourable peace, because I feel assured that without
conquering a peace you will not obtain it. Depend upon
it, knowing as I do the resources of the Russian empire,
and knowing the character of the great man who rules
it, (for he is a great man, although now employing his
vast resources for unworthy purposes,) you will gain no
peace unless you conquer it. You must obtain by your
arms such advantages and such a superiority as to force the
Emperor to submit to your terms of peace; but if you
do not achieve some great successes, you may have a
prolonged, a sanguinary, and possibly a disastrous war,
but an honourable and successful peace you cannot have.
Lord Derby's last topic was the treaty with Austria;
upon the sincerity of whose policy he threw great
doubts; alleging that she concluded the treaty with
Turkey for the occupation of the Principalities after the
siege of Silistria had been raised by the unassisted valour
of the Turks, in order that she might prevent the Turks
from following the Russians; thus enabling the Czar to
throw these forces upon our troops in the Crimea. He
objected to an expression of satisfaction with the contents
of a treaty known only to her Majesty's advisers;
and suggested that the address should simply declare
that the House was gratified at the satisfaction felt by
her Majesty from the conclusion of the treaty. At the
close of his speech he dilated on the importance of
unanimity; so that the world might see the spectacle
of a great nation sinking all political animosities, all
party contention, and uniting heart and hand to
prosecute the war; he exhorted the army to persist in
its gallant course, supported by fresh reinforcements,
fresh supplies, and the sympathies of the whole country.
—The Duke of Newcastle entered into a defence of
the government, against the charges of Lord Derby.
He was (he said) far too sensible of his own
shortcomings to make an "out-and-out" defence of the
policy of the government. If we had now to begin
again, with the knowledge and experience acquired
since the 26th of March, some things not done then
would be done now, and some things done then would
be now omitted. But before he commented on the
charges of Lord Derby, he pointed out that Lord Derby
had first declared that government began the war for
other objects than the defence of Turkish territory, and
then, to suit his own purpose, had tried to prove that
until the siege of Silistria was raised, government had
no notion what was to be done next. From the outset,
the war had a double object,—first, to defend Turkey;
and secondly, to obtain securities against the recurrence
of an attempt upon the integrity and independence of
the Turkish empire. That policy had been identical
with the policy of the Emperor of the French. It was
not dignified in Lord Derby, by a reference to miserable
election-speeches, to endeavour to sow dissension between
the government of this country and France. He must
have been aware that the policy of Lord Aberdeen was
always to cement and strengthen that alliance; and the
alliance was perhaps firmer now than ever, in consequence
of the present character and open-handed
spirit of confidence shown by the Emperor Napoleon.
The Duke vindicated the campaign in the Baltic;
pointing out that by the destruction of Bomarsund a
great object was attained, for, had it not been destroyed,
in a few years it would have been a fortress compared
with which Cronstadt or Sweaborg would have been as
nothing, and the Gulf of Bothnia would have become a
Russian lake. Passing from that subject, the Duke of
Newcastle entered fully into the campaign in the East.
Wherever Lord Derby got the phrase "Malta and back