in public appointments, to party and family | valued the difficulties of a contest with Russia, influences, and to a blind adherence to routine, has given rise to great misfortunes, and threatens to bring discredit upon the national character, and to involve the country in grave disasters." The house went to a division, and the resolution was negatived by an immense majority; but during a two nights' debate many of the evils complained of were admitted, and the subject was at all events "ventilated." It was at this time, that by an order in council, candidates for the public service were ordered to be subjected to educational tests, and this was afterwards extended to a more public and competitive examination. But a still more important parliamentary event had occurred before the disposal of the report of the commission of inquiry, and the motion that arose out of it. Lord John Russell had again resigned--unwillingly this time, and in consequence of the false position in which he was discovered to have placed himself, and of a severe resolution which was brought forward by Sir E. L. Bulwer. Mr. Milner Gibson had on the 6th of July asked the government for some further explanations of what had really been done at Vienna, for an avowal of their candid opinions and their true designs. He, as a representative of those who desired peace, had understood that Lord John Russell had gone to Vienna in order to make peace; but his colleagues seemed to have thwarted him. It appeared to him that, assuming Count Buol's statement to be correct, Lord J. Russell, when he was calling upon the house to continue the war, inust have known that proposals had been made, likely to lead to a peaceful solution of the question at issue. If this were so, the house should be informed of the fact. and was of opinion that the war could not terminate in a treaty between that power and the allies, but rather in a general treaty, in which all the great powers of Europe must take part and give their security for maintaining the integrity of Turkey. In this view of the case he thought it of the highest importance to secure the co-operation of Austria, to which government he attributed no bad faith whatever. He thought the proposition emanating from Count Buol, combined with one by which there should be a counterpoise to any force which Russia might have in the Black Sea, did afford a basis for a treaty of peace. That proposition was, that a treaty should be entered into between the powers,-France, England, and Austria,―guaranteeing the integrity and independence of Turkey. He was not authorized to agree to this; but he told Count Buol that he would communicate them to his government. Those propositions were deliberately considered by the British government, which came to the conclusion that they did not offer a safe basis for a peace. The French government came to the same conclusion-Austria still declaring that she thought the third point admitted of more than one solution, and that she was not therefore bound to go to war with Russia. He was of a different opinion, although Austria had represented that her proposition should be made an ultimatum to Russia. If he had left office on the decision of the government he would be assuming as a plenipotentiary a course of conduct which could not be justified by such a position; while on the other hand, as a minister of the crown, he felt it his duty not to embarrass a government placed in the difficult circumstances which surrounded that of his noble friend. On the contrary he felt that he ought to support his government, and he was open to the censure of those who entertained a different opinion. This statement roused Mr. Cobden to indignant remonstrance. He had never, he The answer given by Lord John, though it showed that he was not at one with the ministry which had appointed him as their representative on a mission of the utmost importance, and was therefore exceedingly damaging to the government, might have been less remark-said, heard a speech that filled him with more able but for his former warlike and uncompromising speeches, delivered after his return from Vienna. He said he had never under grief than that of the noble lord; for he could not help thinking that he had not dealt with fairness or candour towards the country, nor DISRAELI DENOUNCES RUSSELL AND PALMERSTON. 181 with a proper spirit in not resigning. Such a course of proceeding on the part of the noble lord was calculated to destroy all confidence in public men. He was of opinion that a change of ministry would give the only chance of an honest party in the house and in the country. The position of the government was indeed precarious. Lord Palmerston, with his usual loyal pluck, attempted to defend the conduct of his colleague, and declared it to be a novel proposition to say that a minister should retire from a government because he thought terms of peace might have been accepted when his colleagues were of a different opinion. But it was evident that Lord John Russell must resign. Denunciations of his conduct followed from Mr. Roebuck; and Mr. Disraeli with severe irony said that, having arrived at a favourable solution of the difficulties with which he had had to contend, and having in his own mind accomplished measures which would secure peace to his country, all he had to do was to communicate those measures to his colleagues in the cabinet; that having done so and finding no sympathy among them, he had quietly pocketed his own opinions and remained in a cabinet of war a minister of peace." This was the end of the government, the head of which was to have been a minister of surpassing energy, and no doubt transcendent experience; this the end of the ministry which was to put the right men in the right places; this the end, that even peace and war had become mere party considerations; that the interests of the country were sacrificed to the menace of a majority, and that the tumults and turbulent assemblies of Downing Street were to baffle all the sagacity of all the conferences of Vienna. On the 10th Sir E. Bulwer Lytton gave notice of the following motion:-"That the conduct of the minister in the recent negotiations at Vienna has, in the opinion of this house, shaken the confidence of this country in those to whom its affairs are intrusted." Two days later Lord John Russell explained to the house that although at the end of April and in the first days of May he thought the Austrian propositions might have been assented to, he did not consider that they could now, "after the events and proceedings which have since occurred," form the foundation of a satisfactory peace. Neither the house nor the public showed any disposition to accept the statement in mitigation of their displeasure at the position in which they found themselves placed, before their adversary and Europe, of carrying on a war condemned by a leading member of the executive government. The explanation was generally regarded only as making bad worse. Lord John Russell, anticipating the effect of the coming discussion, announced his resignation, and he was succeeded in the colonial office by Sir William Molesworth; but it was said that he would still have retained office but for the outspoken advice of candid friends, among whom was Mr. Bouverie, the vicepresident of the Board of Trade. The government had a narrow escape, and the comments on the political situation both inside and outside the House of Commons were bitter enough. "There have been many instances of friends and friendships," said Mr. Disraeli. . . . "There is the devoted friend who stands by one like the noble lord (Palmerston); but there is another kind of friend immortalized by an epithet which should not be mentioned to ears polite.1 We all know that friend. It was, I believe, a brilliant ornament of this house who described that kind of friend; and I must say, that, although the devoted friend, the prime minister, must after to-night be allowed to take the highest position, still, for a friend of the other description-candid and not bad-natured-commend me to the president of the Board of Trade." But Dis raeli's satire developed into denunciation: "The foremost of your statesmen dare not meet the controversy which such questions provoke. He mysteriously disappears. With the reputation of a quarter of a century, a man who has reformed parliament, who, as he has told us to-night and often before, is 1 "Sir Fretful," in Sheridan's Critic, says that if one is abused in print "why one is always sure to hear of it from one d-d good-natured friend or another." 2 Canning who, in his "New Morality," wrote: "But of all plagues, good Heaven, thy wrath can send, Save, save, oh save me from the candid friend!" the French government. the successful champion of civil and religious | pendent of them; in fact, by the opposition of liberty, in the cause and the name of which he has accomplished great triumphs-he who has met the giants of debate-he who has crossed his rapier with Canning, and even for a term shared the great respect and reputation which the country accords to its foremost men, with no less a person than Sir Robert Peelhe dare not meet the debate. But who dares meet it? The first minister of the crown has shown by his language and the tone of his mind that if the honour and interests of the country be any longer intrusted to his care, the first will be degraded, and the last, I believe, will be betrayed.” It is curious to note that the tone adopted by Disraeli towards Lord Palmerston arose ostensibly in defence of Sir E. B. Lytton, of whom Palmerston had said that he had in his speech misrepresented the views of Lord John Russell, and charged Lord Clarendon with expressing only his own opinion in his despatches. Palmerston had said that he would hold the honourable baronet to that statement, and he would give him his choice whether that statement showed misrepresentation or the grossest ignorance. If the honourable baronet ever obtained high office, as his friends expected, he would certainly afford an illustration of his own remark-that the changes of our government made us ridiculous in Europe. He admitted that he had refused to accept the resignation of the noble lord; and had offered to stand or fall with him. But, in answer to the taunts of the honourable baronet, he could tell him, in the name and with the authority of his colleagues, that the cabinet was a united one. It was upon this that Disraeli rose and began his damaging speech by taunting the noble lord with the bullying tone which he had assumed towards the honourable baronet. The noble lord stated that his cabinet was a united one; but he had good reason to believe that their union consisted in this-that when the noble lord returned from Vienna his proposals were favourably received by all the members of the cabinet, and that their acceptance of them was only prevented by other circumstances which were altogether inde Mr. Gladstone spoke towards the end of the debate, just before the motion was withdrawn. He complained that Lord John Russell had, in his speech on Mr. Disraeli's motion, condemned the last of the Russian proposals, then before the house, though that proposal seemed to him to be substantially the very same measure which the noble lord had himself supported at Vienna. As to the charge made against the government by the right honourable gentleman opposite, that the cabinet was at one time disposed to accept the noble lord's proposals, he thought they were not amenable to it, for it appeared from the papers that, on the very day when Lord John Russell's proposals were received in London, Lord Clarendon expressed to Count Colloredo his condemnation of the plan. So far from blaming the government for hesitating about this offer of peace, he blamed them for not giving the propositions that consideration which their gravity demanded, and for abruptly closing the hope of an honourable peace. The position of the government was constantly assailed, and probably only the widelyspread belief in Lord Palmerston's acuteness and active ability could have sustained it. Only the night after Mr. Roebuck's motion of censure was passed over, the ministry narrowly escaped a serious defeat, and one which would have produced very awkward consequences. By a convention concluded with Turkey on the 26th of June, the governments of France and England undertook to guarantee the payment of the interest of a loan of £5,000,000 to Turkey. The French Chambers had already sanctioned this convention, but the resolutions introduced with a similar object by Lord Palmerston on the 20th of July met with an opposition as determined as it was unexpected. The money was, it was said, absolutely necessary to enable the Porte to bear its share of the costs of the war; but without the guarantee proposed there was no chance of its being raised, yet the resolutions were only carried by a majority of three, the numbers being 135 to 132. The bill to give effect to the resolutions, however, was passed without opposition. RENEWAL OF NEGOTIATIONS-PROSPECTS OF PEACE. There can be no doubt that the antagonism of Mr. Gladstone and of those who were associated with him, numerically too small to be called a party, but at the same time possessing considerable weight and influence, did much to embarrass the government. Mr. Gladstone had already pronounced against the continuance of the war when a door might be left open for reasonable negotiation on terms which, as he believed, would practically secure the conditions, that at an earlier stage had been demanded. This attitude exposed him to sharp criticism and to no little abuse, not only from the friends of the government but from the opposition, who, while they proclaimed the necessity for prosecuting the war, charged the ministry with uncertainty, feebleness, and divided intentions. Bright and Cobden, however, saw in Gladstone a new and powerful, though not a professed ally, seeking to put an end to hostilities, while Palmerston turned upon his former colleague with that slashing style of reprobation in which he was an adept. The occasion arose when Mr. Laing moved for further papers on the subject of the Vienna conferences. Mr. Gladstone strongly protested against prolonging the war, and blamed the ministry for continuing it by rejecting the Austrian proposals as a basis of agreement to which all the plenipotentiaries at Vienna had agreed. Lord Clarendon, he contended, had not shown in his despatches any real desire for peace. It was to be feared that we might increase the breach between ourselves and Austria, and the alliance of Turkey was such as that of Anchises in relation to Eneas on his flight from Troy. We were gradually drifting away from friendly concert with Austria, Sardinia was dragging heavily through the conflict in mere dependence upon England, and he did not believe that France was likely to add £100,000,000 sterling to her debt for a mere difference between limitation and counterpoise. The Western powers could only for a moment control the future destinies of Russia. He placed the undivided responsibility of the continuance of war on the head of the ministry, and believed that in endeavouring to recall the government from the course of policy they 183 were then pursuing, he was discharging his duty as a patriot and a loyal subject of the queen. A few days afterwards Lord Palmerston took an opportunity of retorting. "No man," he said, "could have been a party to entering into the great contest in which we are engaged—no man, at least, ought to have been a party to such a course of policy -without having deeply weighed the gravity of the struggle into which he was about to plunge the country, and without having satisfied his mind that the cause was just, that the motives were sufficient, and that the sacrifices which he was calling upon the country to make were such as a statesman might consider it ought to endure. There must be grave reasons which could induce a man, who had been a party with her majesty's government to that line of policy, who had assisted in conducting the war, who had, after full and, perhaps, unexampled deliberation, agreed to enter upon the war, who, having concurred after that full and mature deliberation in the commencement of the war, had also joined in calling upon the country for great sacrifices in order to continue it, and who had, up to a very recent period, assented to all the measures proposed for its continuance; there must, indeed, be grave reasons which could induce a man, who had been so far a party to the measures of the government, utterly to change his opinions, to declare this war unnecessary, unjust, and impolitic, to set before the country all the imaginary disasters with which his fancy could supply him, and to magnify and exaggerate the force of the enemy and the difficulties of our position." Mr. Gladstone would have said that he had grave reasons for opposing the continuance of a war after terms had been suggested by which it might cease, but there were few more opportunities for discussion. On the 14th of August parliament was prorogued, and it was well for the ministry that events almost directly afterwards occurred which quickly led to the proclamation of peace. In fact it may be said that without those most interested being aware of it, the terms for renewed negotiation were already in sight. It is now necessary to indicate the successive events which brought the war to a close more rapidly than anybody in England had anticipated. The destruction of Kertch had been a blow to the Russians, and the bombardment of the arsenal and dockyard of Sveaborg by the allied fleets in the Baltic, where Rear-admiral Dundas was able to effect operations, which, for want of heavy mortars, Sir Charles Napier had declined to hazard in the previous year, was an equally important manifestation that the war had really assumed the proportions of a deadly struggle. From the morning of the 9th till the morning of the 11th of August the furious assault was continued almost without intermission. It was computed that 10,000 shells must have been poured into the fortress in one day, and that not less than 1000 tons of shot and shell had been fired by the English alone. "The enemy is now firing thirty rockets a minute," said a Russian account of this tremendous bombardment. The fire was from our gun and mortar boats and from batteries which the French had established on a neighbouring island. Finding the destruction of the stores and arsenals and every building of importance to be complete, the admiral resolved to make no further attempt on the fortifications themselves, as this must have cost many lives, without any corresponding advantage, even if successful. As it was, he was able, when reporting to the admiralty on the 11th the success of his operations in the destruction of this important arsenal and dockyard, to add that few casualties had occurred, and that no lives had been lost in the allied fleets. Report said that the condition of the Russian forces showed that their supplies of food and ammunition were beginning to fail, but that the whole military resources of the country were being concentrated on the Crimea, with a view to some supreme effort. Men without end, it was said, were being sent thither as reserves, and a great blow would shortly be struck at the besieging forces. Prince Gortschakoff had not attacked them before, because he had not hitherto had sufficient men. Now everything he could desire had been placed at his disposal for carrying out his plan of bringing an overwhelming force against the allies, and the numbers at his command were said to be so great, that it was thought they must bear down any resistance. At the same time we were told at what a frightful sacrifice of life the enemy was bringing up the hordes on which he relied so confidently, to destroy us. The route from Sebastopol to Simpheropol, it was ascertained upon the authority of a Russian eye-witness, speaking at St. Petersburg, was already so encumbered with dead bodies, dead horses, and dead cattle, that the whole line was infected with pestilential vapours, was impassable for vehicles, and could only be traversed on horseback. Meanwhile, the losses of the allies in the trenches were very great. On the 21st of July, General Simpson had reported to Lord Panmure that his trenches were advanced to within 200 yards of the Redan and could not be pushed further, and, moreover, that the Redan itself had been so much strengthened since the attack in June that any attempt upon it must fail. A combined attack by the French and English on the Malakhoff was, in his opinion, the only practicable operation, and the Malakhoff was the key to the position. The troops were waiting for General Pelissier to announce that he was ready for the assault. But the Russians probably understood this well enough, and their endeavour was directed to raise the siege before any further successes were achieved by the allies. It was a desperate effort to concentrate the whole Russian force upon the invaders, but on the 16th of August, the day before we were to recommence a fierce bombardment during which an attempt was to be made on the two fortresses,-from fifty to sixty thousand Russians, including five divisions of infantry, six thousand cavalry, and twenty batteries, which collected during the night under the command of General Liprandi, descended into the valley of the Tchernaya near the Traktir bridge. This attack was only a portion of a general assault (planned, it was said, at St. Petersburg), by which, from the inside of Sebastopol as well |