Treaties of the Ottoman Empire. Gallipoli Selymbria Venetian peace treaty Szeged. Cancel Save. Universal Conquest Wiki. This page uses Creative Commons Licensed content from Wikipedia view authors. Sign in. Not registered? Sign up. British Academy Scholarship Online. Publications Pages Publications Pages.
Recently viewed 0 Save Search. Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Find in Worldcat. Whose speech was it that the noble Earl really and virtually rose to answer? He rose evidently to reply to the speech of the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who had quite adopted the reasoning and conclusions of the noble and learned Lord Lord Lyndhurst ; and it was in despair at this that the noble Earl the First Minister of the Crown, rose, and—"out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh"—had given vent to his own sentiments in the speech which had excited such universal astonishment and indignation that the noble Earl now came down to the House to endeavour to explain it away and mitigate its effect.
It was in his the Marquess of Clanricarde's power to produce a most impartial witness as to the effect of the speech. Let it be remembered that the noble Earl had attempted to justify the vacillation, delay, and hesitation which have characterised the whole of our proceedings in regard to Russia, from a desire to carry with him the Go- vernments of Europe, and especially of Germany.
Well, here was a paper published on the borders of Germany, and circulating most widely in that country. How did it sum up the substance and the scope of the noble Earl's speech the other night? The gentleman who reported for it endeavoured to exercise a very impartial judgment, and in his telegraphic despatch, which, of course, gave a very few lines to each speech, the speeches, including that of the noble Earl, were thus reported— Londres, Mardi. That was a just, though terse, summary of the speech of the noble Earl, and that was the view that was entertained of it over the whole Continent.
He would appeal to their Lordships whether even assuming that these were not the sentiments of the Cabinet, but only of the noble Earl it was well that such opinions should be put forth by the First Minister of this country at such a period. So far from directly or indirectly "pleading the cause of peace" at such a crisis, the language of the Minister of the Crown ought to have been of a totally opposite character. He ought to have used such language as would have stimulated the zeal and the exertion of every one engaged in the service of the country, from the admiral and general down to the humblest private soldier, seaman, or drummer-boy, by the conviction, that the war they were engaged in, and in which they were exposing their lives and enduring all sorts of hardships, was absolutely necessary; that it was a war against unjust aggression, and that it was carried on only because the interests of the country and of Europe imperatively demanded it.
The noble Earl said that he had been the most of all urgent in hurrying forward the preparations for the war; that was a question between the noble Earl and his Colleagues, although he had certainly come to a very different conclusion, and he wished the noble Earl, who had thought it necessary to correct other misapprehensions, had taken an earlier opportunity of correcting misapprehensions which were entertained throughout the country and the Continent with regard to his sentiments upon the war; because he could state that to his knowledge it was believed throughout Germany, and he believed it had gone still further, that from first to last the noble Earl had not hesitated to say repeatedly, that such was his recollection of the horrors of war, that, come what might, to war he would be no party.
This now turned out to be a misapprehension, for the noble Earl now told them that he was engaged at the time he was supposed to have such feelings in hastening the preparations of war. Their Lordships were now in possession of a good deal more in formation than when this subject was discussed at the beginning of the Session. The information they now had from Russia was more full and accurate than at that time, and they knew more now of what was passing in that country, as many persons who had been residing there had since been obliged to return to England.
They knew now what had been going on in the Russian capital in the month of December last, and also what was taking place in other considerable towns of that empire. He could state it as a fact, that he knew the plan of the campaign, which had been attempted to be executed, had been drawn up by the highest military authorities in Russia—that it had been communicated to the heads of the different military corps in the month of December last.
He contended that it was impossible that this Government could not have had information of the fact, that the plan was not for the occupation or retention of the Principalities alone, but it was one for crossing the Danube, for the siege of Silistria, for the establishment of magazines on the opposite bank, for the masking of Schumla, and proceeding with the army by the lower road, with every contingency provided for during the march, to the other side of the Balkans. This complete plan had been discussed in military circles at St.
Petersburg, and the other towns of the empire, in the month of December last. It was impossible that the Government of this country could not have been aware of the fact at least in the course of the month of January.
More than that, the common talk in military circles was of what would be done by the other foreign Powers; it had even been discussed what should be done in the event of 30, or 40, English and French troops being met at or behind the Balkans;—and this contingency was always held to be impossible and incredible, in consequence of the language which had been held by the English Government, so that it never entered into the calculation or hypothesis of the Russian authorities. If the British Government was ignorant of these things, they were extremely ill-informed by their agents; and if they were informed of them, was it right or proper that the noble Earl should have come to that House in the month February last and talked of peace, and held out hopes of a pacific settlement, while he neglected to give orders for those preparations which he should have given in the month of January or February?
But when were our preparations begun? That was a question that had not been yet ascertained; and of course he could not be supposed to have access to any official information on the subject. At the same time things would creep out, because the subordinate officials of the Government would not labour hard without taking to themselves the benefit of some little credit for their exertions—and God knew they had little else to get—in the service of the Government.
He had reason to believe, although he might be wrong, that no instructions were given by the Cabinet to the Minister of War until quite the end of February, if not the beginning of March. When the noble Earl took credit for being the most urgent to commence preparations for war, he would tell him that these preparations should have been made in November or December last; and instead of taking credit for finishing off some gunboats in an incredibly small number of days or weeks, he should have had the fleets in the Baltic and the Black Sea supplied with them long previously, and if proper measures had been taken in time their armies would have been transported at half the cost, and suitable preparations would have been made to receive them on their landing.
Looking at the general colour of affairs, it was impossible not to see that upon this subject there were very great differences and variations in the statements made. The language of the noble Earl the other night was not only inconsistent with that of the noble Earl the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, but last year, and in the early part of the present year, the whole tone of the noble Earl was not that taken by the Members of the Government in another place; and he would say that this had shaken the confidence of the country very much in the measures that had been taken.
He must also mention what he thought was a matter, although of a personal nature, yet of the very greatest importance. The Government had found it necessary to strengthen its position by a new arrangement of the Cabinet; and the noble Duke who who had previously held the seals of War and the Colonies recommended that his department should be divided and the efficiency of the administration thereby increased.
Now, at least for the personal composition of the Cabinet the head of the Cabinet was responsible. He was sure the noble Duke who filled the situation of War Minister would feel that he was not guilty of the slightest personal disrespect in the observations he was about to make, and he had no doubt that in the discharge of the duties of his present office the noble Duke would exhibit the same powers and application, the same impartial uprightness, and the same sober and temperate judgment, which he had shown in other situations; but he must say that on such an occasion as that in which the nation was now placed, and upon which the noble Earl at the head of the Government had lately to act, no party favour, no favour to any section of a party, no personal favour to any man or set of men, ought to have weighed in the decision.
He did not say that favour had weighed in the decision, but he did say that there was one man, and one man only, in this country, whom the voice of all parties in the country, and he believed all classes, pointed out as the proper and fitting man to be selected, and the best Minister of War to be found on either side of either House—he need hardly say he meant Lord Palmerston—a nobleman to whom a rare conjunction of circumstances had granted a long experience in military administration, and at the same time of great knowledge of foreign affairs—aye, and even of foreign armies—beyond any man in this country.
What his talent, and his power, and his vigour in the administration of different departments had been, he need not say; but he did say that when Lord Palmerston was retained at the Home Office—and the country had no reason to believe that any proposition had been made to him to undertake the post for which the whole country thought him the fittest—there was a neglect on the part of the Government of an opportunity for adding greatly to the strength and efficiency of the Cabinet and of organising the resources of the country.
The Parliamentary position of the Government was one not only unprecedented, but one which he was sure must suggest the most serious reflections—he might say the gravest apprehensions—in the mind of any man who understood anything about the conduct of public affairs in this country and the working of our Constitution.
Let their Lordships consider for a moment what that position was. The present House of Commons was elected about two years ago, in the midst of the heat of a party contest.
He thought, in round numbers, the decidedly Conservative party returned to that Parliament way something a little short of Members. The Liberal party, which had previously held office, returned about the same number. Those who were considered the followers of the late Sir Robert Peel amounted to between twenty and thirty.
There were, besides, a certain number of Members who might be termed neutral. The result was that, by a combination of forces, the Conservative Government was overthrown, and the new Administration took office with the support of or Members; but there had been in the ranks of the supporters of the noble Earl opposite the Earl of Derby a very considerable number of persons who, although they might prefer his Government to any other, were ready to support any Government sufficiently Conservative to ensure the maintenance of the great institutions of the country, and who, therefore, were not indisposed to support the present Administration.
Last year, therefore, the Government might be considered as at the head of a party of about Members. But what was the state of things now? That was a very serious consideration, and he would ask to what was that owing? Let him not be told that it was owing to the Reform Bill , and to the fact that there were no longer close boroughs in existence, which would enable a Minister to count his adherents beforehand.
Since the passing of the Reform Bill there had been Governments of different parties and of different complexions, which had been as well able as any before the Reform Bill to exercise sufficient influence to enable them to carry on the business of the Crown in Parliament; and if the assertion were true as to the difficulty of managing a reformed Parliament, he would ask, how could any Minister, while he made such an excuse, if it were one, or such an assertion—how could any Minister make that assertion, and at the same time propose a further Reform Bill?
He voted for the Reform Bill , and he maintained that it had had no such effect as to prevent the servants of the Crown from possessing a due influence in Parliament for the purpose of carrying such measures as the exigency of the time and the expediency of the case required. They could not look at the constitution of the House of Commons as affording any clue to this. Was the reason for this state of things to be found in the want of ability in the Members of the Government who sat in the other House?
He need hardly say anything with regard to the reputation, the ability, and character of Lord John Russell, a statesman respected by all men, followed by many, than whom no one possessed greater practical Parliamentary tact and experience. Was he unaided upon the bench on which he sat? He had upon the one side Lord Palmerston, indisputably the most popular man with the country in either House of Parliament, and on the other side Mr.
Gladstone, a most accomplished debater, undoubtedly the most acute logician in either House, whose power of reasoning had almost persuaded them the other day that black was white.
The Government consisted of a combination of men eminent for administrative capacity, who were at the head of a great party, and who, besides that party, were supported by a great number of other, although, perhaps, less attached friends. How came it, then, that they were in the predicament he had described—for no one could deny that they had been defeated day after day, and obliged to withdraw measures they had proposed, so that, practically, the servants of the Crown could not carry on the business which they thought it desirable to carry.
He attributed it fairly to the First Lord of the Treasury. The noble Earl had invited that discussion, and he the Marquess of Clanricarde would not shrink from it. He thought it lied arisen because neither the Houses of Parliament nor the country had confidence in the noble Earl in the exigency and emergency in which they were at present placed.
It was his firm belief that the country did not think that his councils had been salutary, either in averting war or in preparing to meet it in a manner becoming this country. The noble Earl said, and he believed truly, because in all he had said he made no attack upon his private character, and he hoped he had not said one word inconsistent with the perfect and sincere personal respect which he felt for him—the noble Earl had stated that he had been actuated now and always by a love of peace, and that his endeavours had been directed to preserve peace.
He, however, must say that his endeavours were mal-directed for peace. He did not doubt the sincerity by which he had been impelled to make those efforts, but he thought that, as in former times, the noble Earl's connection with and influence in our Government had conduced to disorders and revolutions and troubles in Europe, so his counsels were at the present time the cause of our now being engaged in war.
He had never altered the opinion he had expressed when these unhappy transactions were first debated, and he would say that if a proper and clear—he had almost said an honest—tone had been taken by the Government twelve or fifteen months ago, there never would have been a war. Every day proved that. How did the noble Earl talk about Turkey in former times? He spoke about the power of Russia in such a manner that lie evidently thought it a hopeless case to defend Turkey, and that, as one noble Earl had said in that House, that country ought to be left to its fate.
Having, then, the misfortune to attribute the present state of the Government, and the war, and the enormous and loose expenditure that had been entailed upon the country by its not having made preparations in time, to the noble Earl, he did not hesitate to say that he thought it was not to the advantage of the country that he should continue to be the Minister, either to direct the war or to superintend the negotiations for peace, when peace might be attainable, of which he feared at present there was no great prospect.
No doubt he might be told that, holding this opinion, it might be expected that he should have moved an Address to the Crown, or move directly for a vote of want of confidence in the noble Earl. That was usually the answer of Ministers when their conduct was criticised. He quite agreed that in this case it was an objection very difficult for him to answer. He knew he ought to make that Motion, and he would do so if he could see his way clearly afterwards; but in the humble position in which he stood he did not think it would be wise or advantageous in him to make such a Motion.
Publications Pages Publications Pages. Recently viewed 0 Save Search. Your current browser may not support copying via this button. Subscriber sign in You could not be signed in, please check and try again.
Username Please enter your Username. Password Please enter your Password.
0コメント