Untitled

Otago Witness, Issue 207, 10 November 1855, Page 1 (Supplement)

the right place" be the motto guiding the appointment, he will assuredly be Lord John's successor.* No one is better qualified for the office, and I should think the Australian colonists would be heartily glad to learn that he had been appointed to the office. It will afford your correspondent great pleasure to announce so desirable a change. For almost the first time the occupant of the colonial office will be a man possessing a colonial knowledge and colonial feelings, although not a colonist.

The Commissioners appointed to investigate the conduct of the Police in Hyde Park have commenced their enquiry. The details show great brutality on the part of some of the force, quite unwarranted by the provocation received, and quite at variance with the generally exemplary behaviour of the police force. One Superintendent Hughes appears to have distinguished himself as a ruffian of the most brutal clunacter.

The Russian Government have informed the court of Prussia that the effective army of Russia amounts at the present moment to 650,000 men. The dismissal of the army of observation by Austria upon her Russian frontier, and her first refusal to give effect lo the treaty of the 2nd of December, have enabled Russia to withdraw the immense force which has been watching the Austrian frontier. General Luders with 80,000 men, and General Grabbe with 60,000 are said to be advancing to the relief of Sebastopol by forced marches, in the hope of compelling the besiegers to raise the siege. This authentic intelligence has, it is said, produced a great sensation at Berlin ; and Austria is every day approaching a more intimate understanding with Prussia.

What is to be the end of all this ? Most assuredly Austria and Prussia will some day turn round upon us. Not until then will our Government awake to the fact of her having been humbugged by Austria, and induced to delay armaments and other preparations.

The Russians, during the last few days, have made several sorties against the French and English works, but have always been repulsed with loss. There was a brilliant affair of this kind on the 14th. But the tone of the recent letters from the Crimea is cheerless, and some of them are even desponding. The check of the 18th June has lost General Pelissier his popularity, and their is no doubt that it was mainly instrumental in finishing poor Lord Raglan.

CONDITION OF THE BRITISH MINISTRY, AND PROSPECTS OF THE COUNTRY. (From the S. M. Herald.) The discussion in the House of Commons, raised by Mr. Giisson and reported in the Times of the 7th July, is of a very stirring character. We read the speeches of these debaters, not to be amused by their retorts, or to mark the cleverness of their evasions, but to sift out, if possible, fiom the mass of words in twelve columns of the leading journal, what is the condition of the Ministry, and are the prospects of the Country.

The conduct of Lord John Russell, as the plenipotentiary of England, and as a member of the Cabinet, was the subject of criticism. Its chief interest to us is the evidence that it gives, that the feelings and views of the Ministers are far from unanimous. It shews that if Lord John Russell's opinion, that the propositions of which he was the bearer from Vienna were a just basis of peace, the continuance of the war which has involved the country in the expense of £100,000,000, and occasioned the loss of 30,000 men, must be indefensible. The secret of Lord John Russell's opinions transpired in an official circular, issued by Count Buol, of which the following is an extract : —

" If, since the outbreak of hostilities, there was any one moment when more than at another the restoration of peace might be considered probable, it was the moment when Lord John Russell and M. Drouyn de Lhuys left our capital. The conferences, it is true, had only led to the rejection of the propositions made by the belligerent Powers, but upon both sides it appeared to be admitted that those propositions offered the elements of peace ; and we were not only able to declare, without opposition, that we believed ourselves especially called to occupy ourselves in seeking out the means of an approximation, but we also put forward a draught of an ultimatum which was to be sent to St. Petersburg, and which we considered not inadmissible by Russia, since an immediate limitation of Russia's sovereign rights in the Black Sea was avoided, but which at the same time; seemed so completely to satisfy the object of the third stipulation, and put an end to Russian preponderance in the Black Sea, that the befoie-named Ministers of France and England, in confidential interviews, showed themselves decidedly inclined towards our proposal, and undertook to recommend the same to their Governments with all their influence. This plan of an ultimatum, the rejection of which by Russia we declared ourselves ready to make a casus belli, consisted of two distinct propositions, of which the Russian Government was to take its choice.

Lord 3 ohn Russell, before leaving Vienna, was made acquainted by verbal communication with these proposals". The French Minister, M. Drouyn de Lhuys, who left Vienna some days later, received a written copy of our plan, and undertook to submit it to the examination of his Sovereign, and also to bring it before the British Government. It is unnecessary to speak here of the regret with which, very soon after, we received intelligence, not of the hoped-for acceptance of England and France, but, instead, the opposition of the English Ministers to the views of their colleague, and of the resolution of the Emperor Napoleon to relinquish the services of the Minister who had just won the admiration and the confidence of the Austrian Court."

It is well known that these suggestions were Tejected by the Cabinet of England and the Emperor of France ; but it was never imagined that the plenipotentiary considered them sufficient until the disclosure was made by the Austrian Minister. The question raised therefore is this — Was it not the duty of Lord John Russell, when he found that the British Cabinet was opposed to what he deemed a safe and honourable peace, to resign his place at once ? The inconsistency and fearful responsibility of his equivocal position was the subject of complaint. His excuse was, that events had so shaken the confidence of England in public men, that he dreaded lest his retirement should occasion another ministerial crisis, and injure the cause of the Allies both, at Home and abroad. The justification will, however, scarcely be deemed complete. War is an evil of so great a magnitude, and its issue in this instance clouded with so much uncertainty, that to sanction its continuance, excepting under the strongest conviction of its necessity, will appear almost a political crime. The following, from his lordship' 6 speech, gives his own defence, or rather

apology, and it will doubtless be accepted in the light of that career of patriotism which has gained to Lord John Russell so large a share in the esteem of the Empire. It cannot be denied, sir, I think, that these circumstances have given an appearance of instability to our councils — an appearance of instability which ought, above all things, to be avoided ; but more than that, it was imposssible for me not to perceive, , though at a distance, the tendency that there was to cry down all authority, to distrust all persons in whom the Administration might be placed. If there were one man more than another whom the country thought ought to be entrusted with the supreme place in the councils of the Soverign it was my noble friend who is now First Lord of the Treasury ; and yet, no sooner had that appointment taken place, and, as far as I can see, with no other reason than that he held a place of authority in her Majesty's Councils, be became subject to the most violent attacks, and a very general endeavour was made to run down his Administration and to deprive him of power. (Hear, hear.) This was not the effect of the extreme violence of parties. Far from it. It would be wrong if I accused the great body of the Opposition of such conduct, but it did show the tendency of the public mmd — a tendency much to be feared — to run down all authority, to distrust all persons who might be the depositories of power, and to give way to a restless desire for something different without exactly knowing what. Now, Sir I did conceive that in that state of the public mind, whatever might be my sentiments as to a great question — and a very great question it was (hear, hear) — it was my duty to give every support to my noble friend, and I am sure that if I had then left office, though. I might have promised him every support, it would have increased that instability to which I have made allusion — it would have been considered as a symptom and precursor of other changes. I believe that, whether it regards our position abroad, or whether it regards our position at home, it is the duty of the members of the Cabinet of my noble friend to consider, as well as they are able, the position of affairs ; to make the best decisions which they can ; for the minority to yield to the majority, if there is a minority or a majority ; for an individual to defer his sentiments to those of the Cabinet in general; and to leave it to this House to decide whether or not they are fit to be trusted with the conduct of public affairs. I believe that my noble friend and those who act with him are as well qualified to make those changes in our administrative affairs, to make those reforms which the conduct of public business may require, as any set of men whom Her Majesty may call to her councils. I be- | lieve that after a time that persuasion will be fixed in the public mind. I believe it would be a very great misfortune if any change were to take place, unless it were a total change, to the men who are opposed to Her Majesty's Government. If the House think they will be the better depositories of power, they ought to have every confidence and every support given to them in the execution of their duty. I will not say that these affairs — important as they are, involving such great consequences, bearing upon the position of England in the world, bearing upon her internal fate, and the maintenance of her institutions — have not cost me many painful reflections. (Hear, hear.) I have made the best decision, which, with my lights, I have been able to make. That decision may be contested. It may be said by many that I betrayed the interests of my country when I told Count Buol I was ready to agree to those terms — not officially, but to recommend them to the Government. It may be said that, having so declared my concurrence, I ought to have persisted to the end, and to have resigned office immediately those teims were not agreed to. Upon either of those grounds I am liable to be cast, and I have no reason to complain of the censure. All I can say is, I have made a fair statement to the House of my conduct and my motives, and I leave the House to pass judgment upon them. (Hear, hear.) The taunt of Mr. Cobden, that the conduct of Lord JonN Russell had shaken the public confidence, was not without power. Whether from the nature of the war itself, or from an original indisposition to enter upon its prosecution, which the violence of public sentiment overruled, the ministers with whom Lord John Russell has acted have lost the full and cheerful confidence which it is most essential they should possess. They retain their power bc-cause no party exists which can show a title to displace them. Mr. Cobden observed :—

Why ought-the public — why does the public — why should the public — have any faith in public men, except it be because they believe that those public men have certain opinions, that they are swayed by certain principles, and that they may be reckoned upon to act up to their convictions ? (Hear, hear.) What does the noble lord tell the public — he who has been for twenty odd years the almost exclusive leader of this House — who has gathered about him so much of the hope and confidence of the country— who for years and years has led a majority of this House ? He says, " 1 am willing to abandon my opinion, I am willing to surrender my judgment — a judgment which you, the public, have believed to be founded on long experience and great abilities. I am willing to surrender it all at the instance of my colleagues, and to retain my seat in the Cabinet, to carry on a war on the policy of my colleagues and against my most solemn convictions. 1 ' (Hear, hear.) Does not the noble lord sec that he has taken the exact course to strike at the very foundation of all confidence in public men, and to render it impossible for the representative system to be carried out ? (Hear, hear.) The noble lord seems to me to have abdicated his reasoning faculties. Why, docs he not see, does not a child see, that the country does not want him bodily in the Cabinet merely to represent somebody else's opinions ? What the country wants is, that in the noble lord the member for the city of London they will have the benefit of his long experience, his eminent abilities, and his cool judgment. But the noble lord has struck at the confidence of the public in public men still more fatally by the way in which he has allowed this matter to transpire.

The explanation of the views of Ministers in reference to Hungary and Poland, disclaims any sympathy with the patriots of those nations. The language of Ministers, however, has been tantalising and equivocal, and Lord John Russell, while vindicating himself from complicity with the friends of Poland, confesses that he had suggested the only ground upon which the nationality of Poland could be contemplated. Lord John Russell observed :

We have never promised or held out hopes of the restoration of Poland, for we have always considered, in conformity with the declaration of the First Lord of the Treasury, that, if that restoration be accomplished at all, it will be accomplished by Austria. Being on. terms of intimacy with many Poles, when they have spoken to me on this subject, I have always told them, "If Austria will take your part, and should consider the restoration of Poland attainable, you may then entertain some hopes of accomplishing such a result; but do not imagine that England and France will alone undertake to accomplish it." I statedrecently to a Polish nobleman, of whose friendship any one may be proud, that I had no conception that England and France would attempt the restoration of Poland, and that, if they did not attempt it, I thought it would be the great-

est crime to encourage expectations which must be disappointed.

This language, while it acquits the speaker of J stimulating any immediate effort, was calculated, in some measure at least, to kindle hopes which, if likely to be utterly disappointed, it is most dange. rous even to suggest. The success of the Allies, according to the Prime Minister, if not equal to expectation is full of hope. He maintains that the position of the parties is far more favourable to England than at the commencement of the war. Some of our successes he thus enumerates. Every fair and candid man comparing the position in which Russia stood at the commencement of this war with that in which she stands now must confess that we have gained considerable advantages, and that Russia is by no means so well pff either in a political, diplomatic, or military point of view as she was when the war began. We have cooped up her fleet in the Baltic now for two summers — that position at Barmasund winch threatened to become another Cronstadt, has been entirely destroyed,and she has not ventured to re-occupy it. He adds further — At the beginning of the war Russia had actually invaded the territory of our ally. Now, we have not only forced her to evacuate the territory of our ally, but we are occupying an important position within her territory. Therefore I am justified in saying that our position now is very much better than it was at the beginning of the war. The lion, gentleman who spoke last wants to know if we expect to conquer the Crimea with 30,000 men, but, instead of 30,000 men, let me point out to him there are at least 180,000 men of the allies there at the present moment. The events of the future are beyond the prescience of man, but there is every reason to believe that before a very long time has .elapsed we shall find ourselves successful in the expedition which we have undertaken. Some gentlemen, I know, contend that it was unwise to send an expedition to the Crimea, but I totally differ from that opinion . To have sent an army to invade the Russian territories in the south, to wander about in Bessarabia, would indeed have been an act of great military folly. The object was to strike at the centre of the Russian power in the Black Sea, and that was the Crimea and Sebastopol. Whatever may be the difficulties which we have had to encounter — and no doubt they have been greater than was expected — yet I am of the same opinion now as I was when the expedition sailed, that it was in the Crimea and at Sebastopol that the most effectual blow could be struck at the preponderance of Russia in the Black Sea. The attack of Mr. Disraeli was, as usual, brilliant and bitter. After describing the failures of the military both in the field and in the Council, he imputes to them a studied concealment, calculated to bewilder the nation both as to the objects and prospects of the war. How, he asks, are you to extricate yourselves from the peculiar difficulties in which you are now placed ? How are you to remove all those disadvantages except by coining forward frankly and speaking to the House and to the country after this fashion. — " Oar eminent colleague exerted himself for a great object. We are of course, as all are, favourable to peace ; but our colleague was too zealous for the good cause in which he embaiked — he made admissions which we considered fatal to the interests of the country, and we could not support him in the I course he took. We do not think that he showed that prescience, that acquaintance with the subject, that statesmanlike sagacity that are necessary. It is painful for us to make these admissions ; but we must do our duty to our country, and we tell you that the noble lord entered into arrangements which we entirely disapprove. Our policy is different. The policy which we intend to pursue is one of great vigour, which aims at great results, which will not be satisfied unless the power of Russia is materially reduced, and it is entirely opposed to the policy which the noble lord pursued.'' (Cheers and laughter.) But then, unfortunately, the noble lord under I those circumstances would have found it necessary to quit the Cabinet of which he is so important a member. (Hear, hear.) And this is the end of this important session — this is the end of breaking up so many Governments— this is the end of your great national intentions, great national disasters — this is the end of the Government, at the head of winch you were to have a minister of surpassing energy, no doubt, transcendent experience — this is the end of the ministry which was to put the right men in the right places — this is the end that even peace and war have become mere party considerations, that the interests of the country are sacrificed to the menace of a majority, and that the tumults and turbulent assemblies of Downing street are to baffle all the sagacity of all the conferences of Vienna. It is impossible to rise from the perusal of this debate without a profound impression that PitiNCE Albert was right, and that the war with Russia is putting free institutions upon their trial. Without adopting the gloomy forebodings of Mr. Cobden, who declares that statesmanship is decayed, that public men are used up, and that there remains no man in the country of sufficient mark to command its confidence in a time of trial, there is some reason to dread that such would be the position of the nation after a long, expensive, and disastrous war. History instructs us that the English people, valiant in the field and liberal of their blood and treasure, expect victory and success as the inheritance and right of the country, and that when the national pride is not solaced with repeated triumphs, it grows cold towards the objects which once formed the theme of every patriot and soldier; and that the ministry which has failed of success will soon cease to be popular, and be compelled either to retire before pacific councils, or to accept an ignoble peace. These gloomy anticipations may however be totally dispersed, and the Premier may become the most popular man in England, should the fall of Sebastopol and destruction of the Russian power in the Black Sea enable him to satisfy at once the military • ambition of the nation and the wishes of the friends of peace. LlDKrTromTp^^ (From the Morning Herald.) Lord John asserted last night in his defence, that he had thrice tendered his resignation since his return from Vienna, and thrice had Lord Palmerston refused to accept it. What must be the opinion of all rational and honest men, having read these papers at the request of the Premier — papers on which he relies for his triumphant vindication as a war Minister — when they hear from Lord John's own lips that his resignation was prevented only by Lord Palmerston' s earnest entreaties ? Lord John was disposed to take the same course as M. Drouyn de Lhuys — the only legitimate course left to either minister after his expressed opinions at the Conference. The head of the French Government being in earnest in the prosecution of the war, instantly acquiesced in the retirement of M. Drouyn de

Lhuys. The first Minister of the Crown here, in order to secure a measure of Parliamentary support, resisted the resignation of Lord John Russell; and having detained him in the Cabinet for ten weeks after his assent to the Austrian policy, comes down to the House and asks it to believe in his honest resolve to prosecute the war with, vigour. It is not possible, by getting rid of Lord John, to get rid of the consequences of his weakness or treachery. The country is not satisfied, and never has been, with the present Administration, — there is an uneasy consciousness that there is guilt somewhere, and that for all the warlike language of its chief, and for all the straightforward despatches produced in the Foreign Office, the interests of this country are not safe in the hands of x>vlt present rulers. We cannot understand why we should be trifled with — ■ we are determined to know, in the language of Mr. Roebuck, " Who are the traitors in the Cabinet." (From the Morning Advertiser.) The explanatory statement of Lord John Russell, last night, leaves matters exactly where it found them. We could have wished that the finale — for such we may consider it — of the noble Lord's political career, had been less inglorious. But it never has been the character of this journal to trample on the fallen, and therefore we will not recur to the deplorable departure from integrity, patriotism, and straightforwardness, which has for the last few years marked the career of Lord John Russell. There are others in the Palmerston Ministry hardly less culpable than he. There is not a man in the country who does not accuse ministers of treason in England, in connexion with the war against Russia ; but we happened to be something more than twelvemonths in advance of public opinion. We will not, though we could, name parties to whom a charge of such fearful gravity applies. But we will enable the people to form their own conclusions on the subject. There are only five out of the fourteen members of whom the Cabinet consists, who are sincere and resolute in the prosecution of hostilities with Russia. These are, Lord Palmerston, Lord Clarendon, Lord Panmure, Lord Lansdowne, and Sir William Molesworth. The others are all more or less imbued with the pro-Russian spirit. They are for peace at any price. But of these anti-English, unpatriotic persons, Sir George Grey, Sir Charles Wood, and the Duke of Argyll, are the three most noted for their pacific predilections. Sir C. Wood is perhaps the most opposed of all the Cabinet to the vigorous prosecution of the war. The Duke of Argyll, whose namby-pamby conduct would of itself be enough to throw an air of ridicule over any important office in the State which he filled, is probably next to Sir Charles Wood, in his peace-at-any-price propensities. With a majority of such men in the Cabinet, the marvel is, that an ignominous and unsafe peace has not been concluded before. Even now, England is not for a moment safe. She may at any time be sold to Russia. These pacific noblemen and gentlemen must be made to follow their leader, Lord John Russell, out of Downingstreet, as they followed him into it. They must all be expelled. (From the Morning Chronicle.) Whether on this occasion the late Colonial Secretary has really made a clean breast of it, telling us not only the truth, but the whole truth, or whether we have yet to expect some additional sections of his interesting and exculpatory autobiography, we will not venture to decide. At the first glance %ye must admit the narrative with which he yesterday favoured the Legislature bears a very fragmentary appearance. Neither in the beginning, the middle, nor the end, did it fulfil the conditions necessary for epic completeness, or for logical argumentation. Its commencement was provokingly abrupt, and at its conclusion an unsatisfactory impression wa3 left on the mind, that there must be "more to follow" hereafter. For the present, however, we must take Lord John Russell's defence as we find it. It rests upon a single allegation — Austrian subtlety. But here comes the pith and substance of his vindication. He accepted the counterpoise proposition upon the assurance — how conveyed he did not mention — that Austria would present it as an ultimatum to Russia, and consider its rejection a casus belli. His colleagues afterwards refused the proposal, because they had discovered that this supposed assurance would never be fulfilled. This was the solitary plea on which he rested his defence. (From the Daily N*ws.) As was to have been anticipated, Lord John Russell entered into a statement of the circumstances under which he had resigned office, and of the reasons which caused him to do so. The manner of his speech was supercilious and provocative ; not calculated, hardly perhaps intended, to change the opinion of any one on the main subject of interest to which it refers. It adds nothing to the facts,of which we were previously acquainted, and leaves the case as regards the proposal of Count Buol, and its acceptance by one-half of the Cabinet and its rejection by the other, just where it was. As regards the personal part of the affair, the exMinister gave utterance to feelings of not unnatural poignancy at the conduct pursued towards him by the cabal who petitioned Lord Palmerston to save their salaries by his dismissal. Some of these intriguers, as is well known, are indebted for the positions they respectively occupy to the credulity of disposition and penchant for patronising which have ever characterised Lord John. How often has he been warned of the consequences of this weakness, or worse, and of the rottenness of the reeds on which he was habitually leaning ? He has his reward ; and it is edifying to hear from lips so experienced the bitter declaration that the political cowardice and personal selfishness of his patrician proteges is only deserving of his public scorn. (From the Times.) Lord John Russell's "explanation" tells us what everybody knew, and does not even throw upon it a gleam of new light, or a tint of new colouring. The Austrian proposal, he now tells us, had the sanction of the Turkish as well as the French and British Ministers. "What of that? When he left Vienna, he had reason to hope that Austria would form an alliance, offensive and defensive, with the Western Powers on the rejection of her proposal. It was his business, of course, to be sure on this point ; and when it became certain, as it did in a few days, that Austria was only trifling with us, and meant the proposal to bind us to lower terms and herself to nothing at all, he had nothing to do but to return the proposal with the remark that he had been misinformed as to its true character. (From the Morning Post.) Lord John Russell has equally, by his retirement from the Cabinet and by his personal explanation last night, proclaimed in regard to that particular diplomatic act his absolute isolation.