§ EARL FORTESCUE rose, pursuant to notice, to inquire whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to erect a Monument to the late Lord Raglan? and said, my Lords, I wish to state as shortly as possible the reasons which impel me to ask this question, and the grounds which induce me to hope that my noble Friend the Secretary for War, if he should not feel it inconsistent with his duty to answer me at this moment in the affirmative, will at least be prepared to say that my suggestion is received by the Government in a friendly and favourable spirit as a matter for future consideration. Above eighteen months have now elapsed since the close of the war, and the last of those distinctions which have been fitly described as "the choicest and chariest prizes of the war," were a short time since bestowed by the hand of the Sovereign upon their fortunate possessors. The events of the war henceforth belong to the province of the historian, and, in briefly alluding to some of those events which have an important bearing on the conduct and character of the late Lord Raglan, I shall confine myself strictly to what rests upon incontestable authority, and shall call in question as little as possible the conduct of other parties.
§ The expedition to the Crimea was determined upon jointly by the Governments of France and of England as early as July, 337 1854. Circumstances, however, occurred to delay its execution till the September of that year. But on the 8th of that month, when the troops were actually on their way for the Crimea, doubts and difficulties arose in the minds of some of the French generals which made it questionable, even then, whether the expedition would be conducted to the place for which it was at first designed; and it required all the energy, all the address, and all the influence which Lord Raglan possessed in the Councils of our Allies, to induce them to adhere to the destination originally selected. That influence happily prevailed. The landing at the point suggested by Lord Raglan was effected without the loss of a single boat or a single man, and was shortly followed by the expulsion of the Russian troops from the heights above the Alma in little more than as many hours as they had expected to hold them weeks against any force with which we could assail them. It is well known that immediately after that victory Lord Raglan strongly urged the pursuit of the enemy, and it has been admitted by the Russians themselves that had that bold counsel been acted upon Sebastopol would have been ours in a few days, and all the distress and privation endured by our army during the ensuing winter would have been spared. And here let me say, with reference to the sufferings of our army, that in my humble opinion the British public and the British press were somewhat unjust in the amount of censure they cast upon all those who, abroad and at home, were connected with the Crimean expedition for not having taken beforehand all the measures which were necessary for the comfort and convenience of our troops while passing that winter before Sebastopol. It will be recollected that the expedition was undertaken with the full, I might almost say, with the enthusiastic assent of all parties in this country; and it was confidently anticipated that Sebastopol would fall within a few weeks after the siege was commenced. On two or three separate occasions reports were circulated and currently believed in England and in France that Sebastopol wss actually in our hands. It is no part of my business to justify all that was done or all that was omitted to be done in, this campaign; but with the expectations generally entertained by the public as to the issue of the enterprise, and which there is every reason to suppose would have been realized had Lord Raglan's advice been 338 followed in the first instance, I do not think the British people would have viewed with complacency the incurring of any large expense in the early preparation of winter accommodation which they believed would never be wanted. To return, however, to the events of the campaign. After the battle of Inkermann similar advice was given by Lord Raglan to that which he had given after the battle of the Alma, and which, like that, was unfortunately rejected, with respect to the pursuit of the disordered masses of the Russian army, and I understand that the gallant and high-minded officer who succeeded Marshal St. Arnaud in command of the French army, has unhesitatingly acknowledged that, in not following the counsel of Lord Raglan on that occasion, he committed a grave error and lost a great opportunity. I will touch lightly on the expedition to Kertch. The plan originated with Lord Raglan; its execution was delayed, it was abandoned at the eleventh hour, after the British contingent was actually embarked. It was again resumed three weeks afterwards, and carried out with an amount of success which left nothing to be regretted except that it had not been undertaken before. I now approach with more pain the last of the instances in which the plan agreed upon between Lord Raglan and the French generals was altered at the eleventh hour—in which on the 18th of June, that bombardment with which Lord Raglan proposed to preface the assault upon Sebastopol was given up, and the hour of the attack altered under circumstances which led him to apprehend that failure that cost him some of the flower of his army—because it must be remembered that the bravest and best are generally among the first who fall on such occasions. The distress and vexation caused to Lord Raglan by this unhappy failure so preyed upon his mind as, if we are not much misinformed, to have sown the seeds of that malady which within ten short days afterwards brought him to his grave.
§ But from this sad event I turn with more satisfaction to the page of history which will record the personal qualifications of Lord Raglan. The historian will note, I am sure, with patriotic pride, that calm and imperturbable gallantry in the field described by Marshal St. Arnaud—no mean judge of the military qualities of a general—as worthy of the heroic ages of antiquity, and that rarer quality of cheerful fortitude amid reverses and 339 distresses which was said to "throw the spell of his undaunted spirit on all around him," and these combined with a frank courtesy of manner that won their hearts and affections, as his manly sense convinced their understandings. Nor will the historian omit to notice his constant exertions to promote the comfort and alleviate the sufferings of his soldiers, or the enthusiastic affection with which he was received by those devoted soldiers upon every occasion when he was recognised by any portion of them during his frequent but unostentatious visits by day or by night to their camps or their quarters. It is not extraordinary that Lord Raglan, with his singular modesty of mind, should not have valued himself upon what he regarded as the common attributes of a soldier or among the simplest merits of a commander. But it may be asked why a man of his energy and promptitude never thought to justify himself from the charges which were brought against him of slowness and inaction? I reply, that Lord Raglan, though he freely expressed his views and his disappointments in the intimacy of his private correspondence, never suffered a line to go forth to the public which would convey an idea of any difference of opinion between himself and the French Commander, because, in the true spirit of a patriot and a hero, he preferred taking the blame of errors and shortcomings not his own to risking for a moment the interruption of that cordiality between the allied armies which he held to be the first thing needful for the success of the common cause.
§
These are the grounds, my Lords, upon which I ask Her Majesty's Government whether it is their intention to confer upon Lord Raglan that distinction which has been conferred upon other commanders who have died in the service of their country. Shall I be told by my noble Friend that, with the exceptions of Lord Heathfield and the Duke of Wellington, no public monument has ever been erected to any general officer who has not been killed in the field? My Lords, if my noble Friend can find me a precedent of a general in command of an army who, within six months after his appointment, and within three months after the departure of an expedition under his command, won two of the greatest battles on record—battles of such importance as entitled him, at the end of the second, to receive that highest step in the military service which was not accorded to the Duke of Wellington until
340
after the battle of Vittoria, in the fifth year of his glorious campaigns—if my noble Friend can show me any such precedent, I will admit the force of his objection. Although Lord Raglan did not fall by the bullet or the steel of an enemy, he may be said to have died at the head of his army, in the full performance of his laborious duties up to within forty-eight hours of his death, for the last despatch that he wrote was dated on the 26th of June. The manner of his death has been described by the pen of one who was the constant associate of his labours in the field and at the desk, and the sorrowing witness of their close—
Toiling always from the early morning, and continuing his labours deep into the night, and bearing in his own noble way those cares and sorrows which fall to the lot of a British commander in the field, he sank and died in the midst of us all at head-quarters before his great task was done; but if there was glory for the allies in the fall of Sebastopol, it will sooner or later be seen and understood, and be thenceforth remembered, that that great result was prepared by the audacity of the original invasion and the enduring heroism of the winter campaign; and the more the singular history of those transactions shall become known, the greater will be the pride with which our countrymen will cherish Lord Raglan's fame.
My Lords, these are the words of Sir Richard Airey in his noble vindication of his chief before the Board of General Officers at Chelsea, and I will not weaken their effect by another word of my own. I will only say that in what I have spoken I have not been actuated by any feeling of personal friendship, because my acquaintance with Lord Raglan was but slight. But, as an humble Member of your Lordships' House, and also as an humble member of that great British public which, although it may sometimes be misled as to the merits of its best servants, always desires to do justice to those who, like Lord Raglan, have raised high the glory of the British army under difficult and adverse circumstances, and whose whole life was an ornament to the profession to which he belonged and to the country which he served, I beg to ask whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government, or whether they will be prepared at a more favourable time, to consider the question of erecting a public monument to the late Lord Raglan?
§ LORD PANMUREMy Lords, I have listened with the greatest satisfaction to the tribute which my noble Friend has thought it right to pay to the merits of Lord Raglan. And he must not suppose, and I trust your Lordships will not suppose, 341 that because Her Majesty's Government have not proposed to the other House of Parliament a vote for a marble monument to his memory, it is because they undervalue the services he rendered to the country, or from any feeling that those services were not attended with great and beneficial results to this country. I will not follow my noble Friend through all the history upon which he has entered, and all the justifications that he has thought it necessary to make in reference to Lord Raglan's military services. I think, my Lords, you will not say that the public of this country failed to express their opinion upon the unhappy death of the gallant General. The public have marked their sense of his great actions by expressing in both Houses of Parliament their testimony of those actions, in according to his family the means of sustaining the honour of the peerage. This, my Lords, was no mere matter of pounds, shillings, and pence. I look upon it as a public testimony to the public services of Lord Raglan, and in that spirit alone it was proposed. With regard to public monuments, however, a Government is compelled to be cautious how they distribute those honours. I believe that in the military history of our country, with the exceptions my noble Friend has pointed out, every public monument on the walls, either of the cathedral in the city of London or of the minster in this city, has been dedicated to military commanders who have fallen in the execution of their duty. I cannot trace a soldier who has a monument, with the exception of Lord Heath-field, who did not die before the enemy, or of wounds received in battle. But what, my Lords, were the actions of Lord Heathfield? He defended and maintained against an overwhelming force that great fortress which is the brightest jewel of the British Crown—the fortress of Gibraltar. But, my Lords, Lord Raglan will not be without a monument; Parliament has voted a large sum of money—nearly £20,000—for the purpose of raising in the land rendered glorious by their gallant actions a monument dedicated to the memory of all Her Majesty's soldiers, sailors, and marines who fell in the Crimea. The most conspicuous object as one approaches Constantinople will be that monument raised by England in honour of her sons, and the first name that will be inscribed upon that monument will be the name of Lord Raglan, in association with those of his gallant comrades in arms who 342 perished in, the late war. In making this statement in answer to the question of my noble Friend, I do not mean to say that the Government may not at some future period entertain the subject of erecting a memorial to Lord Raglan in this country. But a monument, whether erected in honour of a statesman or a warrior, should be erected in obedience to the opinion and approbation of the whole community; and in order that these memorials should be valued they must be rendered to the highest services which a soldier or a statesman can perform.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid: If, my Lords, private feelings had the only or the chief place in this discussion, my sorrow for the loss we have sustained must have imposed silence upon me; or even if his most amiable personal qualities were alone in question, the gentlest nature in its accustomed alliance with the most brilliant valour; or his signal merits and invaluable services in subordinate stations, from the time when, in early life, he was, to the wonder of his young contemporaries, selected by the unerring sagacity of the great Captain whose loss we hourly deplore, whithersoever we direct our eye, at home or abroad, to Europe or to Asia,—who attached him to his person and gave him his entire confidence to the end of his illustrious life, and who, had he fortunately been spared, would this day have been performing with the resistless weight of his authority that duty, not to the memory of his cherished friend, but to his army and his country yet more cherished—that duty which we are now feebly attempting to discharge. Were we even confined to those parts of Lord Raglan's career, we should find ample ground for the eulogy which my noble friend (Lord Fortescue) has pronounced. But it is in another and a higher capacity that we must view his services and his merits upon the present occasion. We are called upon to regard him as occupying the position of first in command of, perhaps, the most arduous enterprise committed to any expedition that ever left our shores; when, under the pressure of difficulties all but overwhelming, and of all kinds, he led our troops, and the troops of our gallant Allies with whom his kindly nature, tempering not relaxing his firmness of purpose, maintained uninterrupted and cordial friendship—led them to the achievement of a victory for which, in some respects, a parallel cannot be found even in the proud military 343 annals of our country. But before the great fight, and as leading to it, we must accord the tribute of our unstinted praise to that mighty operation, the joint movement of our naval and military forces, the landing of both armies on the shores of the Crimea, which the most experienced judges, whether of the land or the sea service, declare to be a feat all but unparalleled. That movement, at the most critical juncture, we owed to the firmness and wisdom of Lord Raglan, though its successful execution redounded to the honour of the Naval as well as the Military Commander. Marshal St. Arnaud, whom it is impossible to name without expressing sorrow for his loss and admiration of his valour, stricken with the malady which soon after proved mortal, withheld at first his assent to the operation; but, pressed by the reasons which Lord Raglan urged with his wonted firmness and kindly forbearance combined, the Marshal yielded with equal wisdom and candour. The landing was at once effected without the loss of a man or a boat, and the battle of the Alma was fought. Had our own Commander's advice been followed, eight-and-forty hours after that glorious day would have seen us in possession of Sebastopol. I state this not as wise or well-informed after the event, but upon unquestionable evidence—the confession of the enemy himself. Instead of this happy consummation, came the famous march which conferred the highest honour upon the Commander's genius in war, but un happily only led to new victories fruitful of glory and barren of immediate results. Hostilities were prolonged, and loss of men incurred from the unfortunate errors acknowledged to have been committed in disregarding his counsels. To the climate but much more to the cruel disappointment of his hopes deferred, he fell a victim though he died almost in sight of complete success. That triumphant conclusion of his labours, though thus delayed, finally arrived; and by his deeds, and his counsels, and his sacrifice, we have won trophies that added, if anything could add, new lustre to the armies of England. And shall we refuse to commemorate acts like these? Shall we begrudge—I speak of a sacrifice not to economy, but to the servile following of precedents on which my noble friend (Lord Panmure) would seem to rely—shall we scruple to raise a monument which, I venture to assert, the opinion and the feeling of the country not only accept but demand on behalf of this 344 great Commander? There wants, I am well aware, no memorial to hand down such deeds through after ages. Of illustrious men, said an ancient orator, the whole earth, the world itself, is the monument. Yet let us yield to the prejudice of local association, so powerful with the bulk of mankind, and in the ordinary manner record his name among the names of our greatest warriors, while we feel how superfluous is any attempt to perpetuate his imperishable renown. This let us do, not for his sake but our own, that we may thus encourage others to follow his bright example.
§ THE EARL OF DERBYAs no Motion has been made upon this occasion, it may, perhaps, be deemed irregular to enter into a discussion with reference to the subject under our consideration. I cannot, however, my Lords, resist the impulse which prompts me to pay the fervent tribute of my admiration to great and singular merits such as those by which Lord Raglan was characterized, and at the same time to express my great regret at the answer which has been given upon the part of Her Majesty's Ministers to the question which has been put to them by my noble Friend opposite. I cannot help thinking that my noble Friend in introducing the subject to our notice, dwelt rather more exclusively than was necessary upon the expedition to the Crimea as conferring upon Lord Raglan a claim to public gratitude. His claims to that gratitude occupy, in my opinion, a much wider field. I believe there is in history scarcely any record of a public man—I hardly except the Duke of Wellington—who for so long a time devoted his unwearied energies and his great talents in the highest and most important offices to the military service of his country as Lord Raglan. But distinguished as were the merits displayed by Lord Raglan in the Crimea, and valuable as were his services, these were not more distinguished than was his conduct considering the position which he occupied in this country, considering his time of life, in undertaking the arduous and difficult duty of commanding the expedition to the East. Well, my Lords, the noble Lord has given what I must consider a direet refusal to accede to the request of the noble Earl to erect a monument to Lord Raglan. It is not altogether, indeed, a refusal, because, after stating all the reasons why Her Majesty's Government could not accede to the request, he added that he begged 345 that what he had stated might not be considered an absolute decision upon the part of the Government, for that they would at some more convenient or suitable season take the matter into their consideration.
§ LORD PANMUREThe noble Earl is putting into my mouth words which I never used. Those were the words used in the Question of the noble Earl (Earl Fortescue), but they were not used by me.
§ THE EARL OF DERBYWell, then, a more favourable opportunity.
§ LORD PANMUREI did not use that expression.
§ THE EARL OF DERBYI hope the noble Lord will pardon me, but I certainly understood him to use that expression; but if he now disclaims it—
§ LORD PANMUREI do not disclaim the expression—I utterly deny having ever used it.
§ THE EARL OF DERBYWell, then, my ears deceived me, for I certainly thought that I heard the noble Lord say that at a more favourable season the Government would take the matter into consideration; and if I am not much mistaken, the error which I committed was committed by many who sit near me; for I believe that more than one noble Lord was under the same opinion as myself, that the noble Baron did say that the Government would at a more favourable season take the matter into their consideration
§ LORD PANMUREI again utterly deny that I used those words, and I am surprised that the noble Earl will not accept from a gentleman a denial such as I have already given, for I have already said that I never used those words.
§ THE EARL OF DERBYThe noble Lord is making a very unnecessary display of temper, for I have accepted his denial, and stated that my cars deceived me.
§ EARL FORTESCUEProbably the noble Earl has misunderstood what fell from myself, and that which was stated by my noble Friend. The Question which I asked was, whether it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government, or whether they would be prepared at a more favourable time, to consider the question of erecting a public monument to the late Lord Raglan?
§ THE EARL OF DERBYCertainly that was the question of the noble Earl; but, while I accept the denial of the noble Lord, I can only say that my ears deceived me; for I thought that I heard the noble 346 Baron adopt the words "a more favourable period," in his reply. Of course I accept the denial of the noble Baron, but, unless I am greatly mistaken, many noble Lords were of the same opinion as myself. The noble Lord has founded his refusal to accede to the proposal of the noble Earl upon two grounds. First of all, he said that it was not customary to give a monument to any officers who had not distinguished themselves by great and signal services to their country; and in the next place, he stated that it was not customary to erect a monument to any military officer who had not actually fallen in battle or died from the effect of his wounds. Now, my Lords, with regard to the first point I am not willing to draw the inference which can naturally be drawn from that statement. I will not admit that Lord Raglan has not deserved a monument because he has not rendered the greatest and most signal services to his country. I believe that his devotion to the public service, his great talents, the many admirable qualities which he displayed both as a soldier and as a civilian, his long services in the Peninsula, his services at Waterloo, his twenty-five years' service at the Horse Guards, his ready acceptance of the arduous duty of commanding the expedition to the Crimea, his many struggles against almost overwhelming difficulties—difficulties under which any ordinary man would have sunk—the confidence with which he inspired not only his own troops, but those who were associated with them, the general esteem in which he was held by all, as we know upon the universal testimony of every man who held high command under him in the Crimea, the services he rendered to the common cause, his eminent military services,—all these entitle him to be placed in that category of men upon whom monuments ought to be conferred—those, namely, who have conferred great and signal services on their country. Then again, with regard to the second point advanced by the noble Lord, that it was not customary to confer a monument upon a naval or military commander, unless he fell in battle or died of wounds—[Lord PANMURE did not say naval officer.] But, surely, the expression "military" in this sense includes officers of both services, and there are many instances in which officers in the military service of the country have deserved well of the country, and have had a monument erected to their memory 347 although they have not fallen in battle or died of wounds. Lord Collingwood did not die in battle or of wounds, but a monument was erected to his memory. Lord St. Vincent was treated similarly, and I am not quite sure, but I think that Lord Cornwallis had a monument erected to him also. Historically, therefore, the objection of the noble Lord is not a valid one. But I go still further, and I say that if there ever was a man of whom it could be said he died in the service of his country. Lord Raglan was that man. He did not fall in battle; his death was a more wasting and painful one; but as much as any man ever did he died through devotion to his country and from efforts made in her cause. The noble Lord has referred to the services of Lord Raglan being recognized by his name standing first in a memorial to be erected to the memory of those who fell in the war. I, my Lords, cannot accept that as a sufficient recognition of his services. I cannot say that, in a monument raised to the memory of all those brave men who fell in the campaign, the single fact of his name appearing first is a sufficient testimony of the gratitude which this country ought to feel, and which I believe it does feel, for the conduct and the merit of the Commander in Chief. I should like to know, my Lords, when will be the time more favourable for the Government to consider this proposal than the present? It is now more than two years since the death of Lord Raglan. In the course of those two years have Her Majesty's Ministers been unable to make up their minds as to whether the character and services of Lord Raglan were deserving or undeserving of a statue; or is it that the Government are waiting to see what pressure may be put upon them by the public before they give effect to the wishes of the Crown, and I believe the wishes of the people? I confess, my Lords, that I was sorry when I heard that the noble Earl had given notice of bringing this question before your Lordships. I was sorry because I felt, that if the Government accepted his proposal a great degree of grace would be taken from the Crown and imputed to Her Majesty's Ministers; while, on the other hand, if they refused to accede to it, then a slight would be cast upon the memory of Lord Raglan, in addition to those undeserved obloquies which when he was absent were cast upon him in his lifetime 348 by some. My Lords, there is no question before the House, and I am aware that I have been irregular in making these observations; but I felt it to be impossible for me not to express the deep regret with which I heard the doubt expressed—the more than doubt implied by the Government—as to the merits of Lord Raglan being deserving of a monument to his memory.
§ EARL GRANVILLEI do not rise to prolong a discussion the tone of portions of which has been that which I much regret. The noble Earl has accused my noble Friend (Lord Panmure) of making an unnecessary display of temper. I saw no such display, and I do not think it unnatural that my noble Friend should object to words being placed in his mouth which he did not believe he had used. I do not rise, I repeat, to prolong this discussion; but merely to say, that I object to the invidious turn attempted to be given to the sentiments expressed by the noble Baron; and that on behalf of my self and my colleagues, having carefully noted every word which has fallen from the noble Earl in praise of Lord Raglan, we agree in every word of that praise. But at the same time we do not feel called upon at once to make a declaration as to whether we shall propose the erection of a monument to his memory, without reference to other circumstances than his admirable qualities, and the noble manner in which he always discharged his duties. The noble Earl has twitted the Government with waiting to see how far public opinion may turn in this direction. Now, I utterly deny that such is the case; but at the same time I think that we ought to consider in a question like this other subjects besides the great qualities of Lord Raglan. We must, for one thing, consider the feelings of his relatives, and also whether it would be desirable for his own reputation, and for the good of those interested in that reputation, to take a step which we were not entirely certain would meet with the full concurrence of the nation. I do not say that such would not be the case, but what I say is that, for the interest of the reputation of Lord Raglan, such a step as proposing a monument to his memory ought not to be taken without a perfect certainty of that concurrence, for unquestionably the value of such a memorial would be greatly diminished if it were only agreed to after many objections had been raised to it. I will now only add that in every 349 eulogium passed by the noble Earl upon Lord Raglan I most cordially and heartily concur.
§ THE DUKE OF BEAUFORT.—I must confess, my Lords, that I have heard with great pleasure the last words of the noble Earl with reference to my noble relative, for during the time that the noble Lord the Secretary for War was addressing the House he never said one single word in praise of that great man who carried out to his best endeavour the orders he received from the noble Lord. In adopting that course, however, the noble Lord has only performed the crowning act of his treatment of my gallant relative, for during his lifetime Lord Raglan was treated by the noble Lord in a manner which very few men would have had the temper to put up with, and now the noble Lord takes this opportunity of, by his silence, disparaging his memory. [Lord PANMURE made a gesture of dissent.] The noble Lord shook his head, but it seemed to him (the Duke of Beaufort), that the last sentence of his speech warranted this expression.