POSTSCRIPT.

SATURDAY.

The House of Commons, at an early hour last night, was unusually crowded and unusually excited ; and the whole sitting, from five o'clock till two in the morning, was devoted to the last Ministerial resignations, and the expediency of Mr. Roebuck's Committee. Mr. Gladstone took his seat between Sir James Graham and Mr. Sidney Herbert, on that bench below the gangway which is occupied by Mr. Cobden, Mr. Bright, and others of that section. Mr. Cardwell took a seat immediately be- hind the Treasury-bench.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM opened the series of explanations, on the formal motion that the Committee on the Army before Sebastopol should take precedence of the orders of the day. Sir James vindicated the course he had taken, by at once entering upon a statement of reasons against the appointment of the Committee, which his late illness had disabled him from doing before.

First, he remarked upon the amended list of names for the Committee. "If the Executive Government have, on the whole, made up their minds that the appointment of a Committee of this vast importance in the present circumstances of the country shall be granted, I regret extremely not to find, in the list of names to be proposed, any member of her Majesty a Govern- ment included in it. I have a strong opinion, that if this inquiry ie to be conducted, in circumstances so delicate, with due regard to the interests of the country, there would have been great advantage in having a Minister of the Crown present on the Committee, from whom, if subjects of inquiry were opened which, from his knowledge of our foreign relations, appeared to him inexpedient and dangerous, warning might be given to the Committee, and some influence exercised to check inquiry, when venturing upon dangerous ground."

Further, he objected to a Select Committee. Would it be open, or secret ? " If it is to be a Secret Committee, all check of public opinion which has so operated on its appointment will be withdrawn ; the proceedings of the Committee will not be known, and the persons implicated by the evidence will not have the opportunity of defending themselves, of preparing for the defence, of cross-examining the witness, of rebutting false accusation. -Un- til the termination of the inquiry the tendency of the examination will be secret and unknown. If it be an open Committee then the evidence will from day to day be published, and the most adverse comments of a party character will be applied to the evidence so published. Again, the moat er- roneous impressions, bearing hard on distant individuals, who have no power of cross-examination or of defence—the most painful imputations on the character of those filling i high stations will be deduced; and altogether, du- ring the conduct of the nquiry, there will be no appeal from any member of the Committee to this House, when once the delegation has been made until the Committee have presented their report." Such- a delegation would be most dangerous: Ite would prefer an inquiry at the bar, for which there are some precedenta, to inquiry by a Committee, for which there are none.

The motion for inquiry was intended as a vote of censure. But if so, how are the circumstances altered by what has occurred ? If it were a vote of censure in January, surely the nomination of the Committee is a vote of censure in February ; for, with the exception of Lord Panmure, all the im- portant members of Lord Palmerston's Cabinet were members of Lord Aber- deen's Cabinet.

" Allow me in passing to observe, that on Friday last, when the head of the Government, the noble Viscount the Member for Tiverton, opened the policy of the Cabinet, he appeared to me to distinctly recognize the exist- ence.of this Committee of inquiry, if passed, as a difficulty not to be lightly regarded. He volunteered to the House the functions of the-Executive as their-Committee. It willbe said to me, how came you to accept office under the noble Viscount, if such were your impressions with respect to this Com- mittee? I wish to stale the case with perfect frankness. I had great diffi- culty, when the noble Lord paid me the undeserved compliment of wishing me to become a member of his Government. The House will pardon me for saying that I was confined to my bed, and not in a condition to carry on a lengthened correspondence, or to make many inquiries. I should tell the House that there was one difficulty on which I required explanation. I wished to know from my noble friend whether there was to be any change in the foreign policy. pursued by Lord Aberdeen's Cabinet, to which, as colleagues, we had given our united consent; and whether, with reference to negotiations now pending at Vienna, any alteration was contemplated in the terms which in our opinion were held consistent with the attainment of a safe and honourable peace. I thought it my duty to satisfy myself on that single point. My noble friend, in the most frank manner, gave me an explanation on that head w'hic'h Was entirely satisfac- tory. The explanation having been satisfactory on that point, I made no further difficulty on any other subject; neither did I make any other in- quiry. I frankly said, that, having been satisfied on that point, I would do my best, if he thought my services necessary, to serve him and to assist his efforts. Sir, perhaps greater caution might have been exercised with respect- to this Committee." He had been of opinion until lately, that the changes made—two Ministers sacrificed and unjustly loaded with ob- loquy, and the measures proposed—would have satisfied the country. He thought the Committee unnecessary, unjust to officers, and dan- gerous. Taking his own department, Sir James showed one source of danger by a reference to the question of the blockade. "Suppose the Com- mittee calls for the Admiral who was charged with the execution of that duty, and asks him to go into the reasons to which I have referred. He, under the compulsion of the Select Committee, is forced to disclose all the reasons which led to delay. It depends on the questionable prudence of six out of eleven gentlemen whether this inquiry shall not be so prosecuted ; and if, unhappily, imprudence should prevail, I state positively that I am confident this- inquiry will run directly into questions connected , with our great and powerful ally with whom it is of the last import- ance nothing unfriendly should occur. I warn the House, distinctly, that it isdelegatingita powers, unaccompanied by anyoheekor control, to the chance-medley of six out of eleven gentlemen, and that it may thus involve the country in the most fatal consequences. I have said this with respect to the delay. Let me carry this one step further, and let me allude to the position of Lord Raglan, which bears distinctly on the question of the state of the army in the Crimea. I imagine that of all the difficulties with which the most splendid human talents can be tried, the successful command of an army in the presence of superior forces of the enemy is the most severe trial —that the elements of success in that command rest mainly on an undivided authority. It has been truly said, I think, by one of the greatest commanders of antiquity, 'Id est viii et duels non deesse Fortnum priebenti, se, et oblato case flectere .ad contiiliurn '--that is, the operations of one undivided superior intellect. But if you command an army by the side of an ally,,there must be constant communications, involving complicated considerations ; there must be-differeneed of opinion ; there must be, more or less, a compromise of de- deltas, which is almost weakness in itself; and in the direction of their rela- tive forces there must be inequalities." He demurred to the doctrine that the demand for inquiry is irresistible— itself a most dangerous doctrine. He denied that he is a deserter from his colleagues. "I took my position, in common with them, on the resolution to resist this inquiry. It was resisted ; the position was taken ; the post was firmly occupied ; I still stand to my guns, and the position is not un- tenable. They have abandoned the position—they have proclaimed it to be untenable, and have spiked the guns and fled away."

If Ministers of the Crown are convinced that a course is dangerous, it is

their duty to stand in the breach and resist ; and that unpopular and pain- ful duty it was his to perform. Nothing can be more dishonourable than to assent to measures, adopted by the majority of your colleagues, which you believe to be dangerous, especially when you feel that you have not the con- fidence of Parliament. There were indications, not to be mistaken, that the new Administration constructed by Lord Palmerston did not really possess the confidence of the House.

Sir James declined to say much about the future. " Honied words of part- ing with colleagues are almost always nauseous, generally delusive, and, like lovers' vows in similar respects, always unavailing and laughed to scorn." But with strong friendly feelings towards them, he should generally support them, and prove by his conduct that with him the safety of the state is pa- ramount to all other considerations.

Mr. BRIGHT, approving of the honest course taken by Sir James Gra- ham and his two colleagues, pleaded hard for peace, and strongly urged the Government not to draw back from the terms agreed upon by Lord Aberdeen's Government and accepted by Russia. The Angel of Death is abroad, flapping his wings at every homestead. He trusted Lord John Russell had power to enter into an armistice ; and he implored Lord Pal- merston to close his political career by returning the sword to the scabbard. Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT, suffering from physical inability, took the same ground as Sir James Graham. Admitting the right of the House of Commons to institute the inquiry, he avowed his readiness to go before any Committee—there is nothing which he is afraid to place before the light of day. But he objected to the Committee, because it must en- danger our alliance ; could not inquire into the causes of calamities ; would be a " fraud," a " delusion," an " immense sham." He was told that the motion was " irresistible " ; but he had seen resistance made to feelings quite as strong and quite as universal as that which now operated on the House. He had seen the House, after reasons gravely and fully stated, rescind a vote at the bidding of Sir Robert Peel. Only two years ago, he had seen the eloquence of one man induce the House to reverse its conclusion that we could have none but a graduated income-tax in this country. Our one want is a strong Government; but you do not obtain a strong Government by inducing strong men to take a weak course. He would not be a party to what he knew to be wrong because he could not prevent other men from doing it. It was mere Parlia- mentary " red-tapism " to pretend that the Committee could accomplish what is professed to be sought.

Mr. GASKELL contended that the disasters warranted inquiry. Mr. DaumssoND promised that the inquiry should be no sham. It would be dangerous ; but were they to be scared by the report of danger ? Lord SEYMOUR [presumptively designated by several Members as Chairmay of the Committee] believed that such an inquiry would be fraught with inconvenience to the public service, embarrassing to the next campaign, and dangerous to our alliance; but, on the advice of Mr. Ellice, he bad suffered his name to be put on the Committee by Govern- ment. All the military departments would be engaged in prepara- tions for the spring campaign ; but the inquiry must be strict and search- ing, and they must have the officers of those departments before them. Those officials would say, " We did all in our power, but ,the error arose in the Crimea " ; and then charges would be hanging over officers there, for three months. There are great objections to a Secret Committee ; but if it were public, the whole accusations would be published in the news- papers the next day, unanswered, and inflicting injustice. He believed, however, that the public could be satisfied on the question how the mis- management in details had happened, without entering on matters which it would be dangerous to deal with.

Mr. LOWE, Mr. 6-saliva ix VERNON, and Mr. STUART WORTLEY, ad- dressed the House against the Committee. General PEEL took up a simi- lar position to that of Lord Seymour. Mr. Pala, Mr. Scorn, Mr. LALNO, Sir Jonsi PAK1NGTON, and Mr. WALPOLE, argued for inquiry. Mr. GLADSTONE went over the same ground as Sir James Graham, with

a more argumentative development of those reasons, practical and con- stitutional, against the appointment of the Committee, that had induced him to retire when the Cabinet took the " fatal choice" of granting the inquiry. But there were several important points in addition. He referred to the very inaccurate accounts of the communications that had passed when Lord Derby was endeavouring to form a Government, and particularly to one by Mr_Disraeli, so varying from what he had understood, that he was to this day in ignorance what " offer" had been made to him. Mr. Gladstone read the letter that he wrote on that'occasion, which was the beginning and the end of his communication with Lord Derby.

" Downing Street, Jan. 31, 1855.

"My dear Lord Derby—Lord Palmerston has communicated to me the wish you have been so good as to express, that, in common with him and with Mr. S. Herbert, I should become part of the Administration which you have been charged by the Queen to form. I also learn from him that he is not of opinion that he could himself render you useful service in that Administration, but that he would have every dis- position • le.nout oj•!vmee?ro the best sr:tot wiLhitsopyoowuearn; aannsr,Ivehret has just left m" i" [I may, perhaps, here interpolate an explanation, that my noble friend did not at the moment when he made the announcement to me of Lord Derby's wish,a e ,inform me that he did not think that he himself could accept the offer I made to him. It was at a later period, when my noble friend made some further communications to me, that he expressed to me that opinion. My letter proceeded thus]- " I think it only remains to me to reply in similar terms. Any Government, owing its origin to the late vote of the House of Commons, and honestly endeavouring to do its duty, must have peculiar claims to support in connexion with the great na- tional interests involved in the question of war and peace. On public ground I am disposed to believe that the formation of a Government from among y • own political connexions would offer tawny facilities at this moment, which other not

within view would not present ; and, unless when my opinions might leave me a choice, it would be my sincere desire to offer to an Administration, so constructed under you, an independent Parliamentary support."

Having no differences with Lord Palmerston, but a warm and high regard

e of had not him, whatever he might think of the Parliamentary prospects ) Cabinet, he- should have felt wanting in duty if h . to his country d not accepted his proposals. It was acute suffering to him to be separated from Lord Aberdeen : in office it was difficult for Mr. Gladstone to defend his friend from attack, but now that he was out of office he was free to express his opinion. "Lord Aberdeen has been dismissed by a blow darkly aimed from an official hand I believe him a man who has been much': misunderstood. Twenty years have elapsed since I heard Lord Aber- deen denounced in this House by one of the most honest statesmen of his day as a person holding principles that made him the enemy of mankind. Such was the idea that men could then entertain of Lord Aberdeen. I am unwilling to name the individual who uttered those words, but I am quite sure he has long since deeply regretted the attack he then made on Lord Aberdeen. But after that, Lord Aberdeen lived to become the trusted colleague, the admired colleague, the eulogized colleague, of Sir Robert Peel, his faithful ally, and the first to encourage him in every mea- sure that had for its object the benefit of the people. Now, again, Lord Aberdeen has fallen from his former friends; but as that, I will not call it calumny, but error of twenty years ago, was dispelled, so, you may rely -upon it, these prejudices will also be dissipated, and the fame of that man, not so much on account of the high office he has held, as from his elevated and admirable character, will not only live, but his name, I venture to say, will be enshrined in the grateful recollection of his country." Objecting to the Committee on grounds identical with those employed by Sir James Graham, Mr. Gladstone showed that, not being a Committee of punishment, nor a Committee of remedy, it must be a Committee of go- vernment, taking from the Executive the most important and delicate of its functions. And he explained in a similar way, but with more clearness, how the want of an understanding with Lord Palmerston recurred. " I May be told that I ought to have thought of this three weeks ago, and ought to have known that the House of Commons would not reverse its judgment. It is a much smaller matter that my right honourable friends and myself should be convicted of levity and inconsiderateness three weeks ago, than now of a great public delinquency. Let it be granted that we have made a great omission ; that would not justify us now in concurring in a policy which we say is false and erroneous. But I do not plead guilty to the charge of inconsiderateness. I never doubted that my noble friend at the head of the Government would and must enter- tain the same opinions with respect to the Committee which he entertained when he first besought the House in earnest language not to grant it ; and my noble friend is aware that, before my acceptance of office under his Go- vernment was announced to the world, I had the satisfaction of conversing with him on the subject of this Committee, in which conversation he ac- quainted me of his continued opinion that the opposition of Government ought to be offered to its appointment. This can be no secret, because the right honourable gentlemen opposite, and indeed, I might say, the whole world, must have observed that this, and this only, was the meaning of a portion of the speech delivered by my noble friend when he addressed the House after the formation of his Government."

Lord PALMEI1STON spoke briefly. He refrained from criticizing the conduct of his late colleagues ; he doubted not they had done their duty. His argument for inquiry was, that the demand could not be altogether resisted, and that the House could not be persuaded to rescind its own vote. If he had resisted the smanijnous sentiment of the people by at- tempting to prevent inquiry, Be should have been wanting in the per- formance of his duty. He did not cling to office from a paltry love of power ; and so long, he said, "as we have the support of public opinion, the House may depend upon it we shall exert ourselves to the utmost, and we shall not fly from the posts in which the confidence of the Crown has placed us."

Mr Dunkin.' almost disregarded the arguments for or against inquiry, and aimed at damaging Lord Palmerston. It is all very welt to say, "We will retain our places so long as we retain confidence" ; but who are the "we"? The noble Lord has rapidly changed his opinion, and is now prepared to do what a week ago he declared was unconstitutional. And is this the man whose firmness, consistency, and energy, are to save the country 1 Why, he formed his Government on the basis of resisting this Committee; and the people had recourse to its own House of Com- mons.

Mr. GLADSTONE and Sir GEORGE GREY pointedly corrected Mr. Disraeli's mistake : the Government was not founded on the basis of re- sisting this inquiry, but, said Sir George, on the basis of a vigorous pro- secution of the war. Sir George had considered his resignation final; he would have preferred that a totally new Government should have been formed. It was not ; and when the Government was reconstructed, he thought the House would have abandoned the demand for inquiry. But he was mistaken.

At the close of the debate, the Committee was appointed according to the amended list as follows- Mr. Roebuck, Mr. Drummond, Sir John Pakington, Colonel Lindsay, Mr. Layard, Mr. Ellice, Lord Seymour, Sir George Lewis, General Peel, Mr. Bramston, and Mr. John Ball.

There were two divisions on these names. Captain Scobell was proposed in the place of Mr. Bramston, but the motion was negatived by 101 to SO ;. and Mr. John Ball's name was retained by 98 to 62. On the mo- tion of Mr. ROEBUCK, seven to be a quorum.