§ On the Question that the House at its rising adjourn till Monday,
§ LORD ELCHOsaid, he would take advantage of it to ask a question of the hon. Member for Bristol with reference to a Motion which stood in his name to move that an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that She will be graciously pleased to give directions that an inquiry may be instituted into the conduct of Lieutenant General Lord Lucan for ordering a charge of the Light Cavalry at the battle of Balaklava. He wished to ask the hon. Gentleman whether it was his intention, and if so, when he intended, to bring forward that Motion? The House was doubtless aware that his noble and gallant relative (Lord Lucan) had read in the other House of Parliament a letter addressed to the Minister of War by Lord Raglan. That letter, dated the 16th of December, contained charges so grave that his gallant relative, though refused a court-martial on his first arrival in England, felt it incumbent on him to address a letter to the Commander in Chief praying him to reconsider that decision. His gallant relative, referring to Lord Raglan's letter of the 16th of December, said—
This letter contains entirely new matter, and is replete with new charges reflecting more seriously than before on my professional judgment and character. There is now imputed to me, and for the first time, inattention to and neglect of another order, and, again, a total incapacity to carry out my instructions, and to avail myself of the means placed by his Lordship at my disposal. Charges so grave, and of a character so exclusively professional, cannot, I submit, be properly disposed of without a military investigation. I find myself, therefore, compelled to express my anxious 347 wish that the Commander in Chief would be induced kindly to reconsider his decision, and consent to my whole conduct on the day of the action of Balaklava, on the 25th day of October, 1854, being investigated by a court-martial.His noble and gallant relative felt that, if his conduct were investigated by a court-martial, he could refute these new charges, and, as he was himself confident the only object of the hon. Member for Bristol was to do justice to all parties concerned in this unhappy affair, he hoped the hon. Member would postpone his Motion pending the inquiry which his gallant relative wished might be granted, but with respect to which he had as yet received no answer.
MR. H. F. BERKELEYsaid, the noble Lord had only done him justice in supposing that the inquiry which he proposed to institute was entirely on public grounds. He felt that a great and grievous wrong had been done to the British army, that it was necessary an inquiry should take place into that wrong which had caused so wanton a sacrifice of life. He had no wish at all to prejudge the case of the noble Earl, and should be glad to postpone his Motion until some decision was come to. After that time he should consider himself at liberty to proceed with his Motion.