§ On the Motion that the House at its rising do adjourn till Monday,
MR. OWEN STANLEYsaid, he would take that opportunity of asking the hon. 1531 Gentleman the Under Secretary for War whether any distinguishing mark of honour or reward was to be given to those officers and men who had been engaged in the arduous duty of the trenches, and attacks upon the works of the enemy during the siege of Sebastopol; or whether it was intended that the Crimean medal and Sebastopol clasp, which was bestowed upon all, however employed, was to be the only mark of the enduring constancy displayed by those gallant men through all the hardships and dangers of that protracted siege? Many distinguishing marks of honour and rewards had been given for the various battles that took place during the Crimean war. The Alma, Inkerman, and Balaklava clasps, the Crimean medal, and the Sebastopol clasp had been distributed with a lavish hand; but he did not complain of that, for there were reasons why the whole army actively engaged in the war should partake of the honours bestowed by the country. But he wished to ask the question of which he had given notice, because it related to a body of men who had borne the brunt and hardships of the war, day and night in the trenches, many of whom had been engaged in the attacks on the Redan, in the night attacks, and yet had received no distinctive mark for those services. To illustrate the inequality he could name one young man who was for ninety days and nights in the trenches, from October 1855 to September 1856—who was at the attack on the Redan and at the other battles, and yet had no distinctive mark; while another, who had gone out a few days before the attack, and had only been one night in the trenches, had an equal reward. The Crimean medal and Sebastopol clasp adorned the breast of each; but what had the services and hardships of the one been compared to those of the other? Some distinctive mark surely ought to be given for such services. The struggles to which he had referred, not having taken place under the eyes of the General, the names of those who had distinguished themselves in those attacks had not been given, and hence the reason they were still unrewarded.
§ MR. FREDERICK PEELsaid, that there could be no doubt whatever that the duty in the trenches—when the dangers and the difficulties and the privations under which it had been performed were considered—was one of the most arduous duties that a gallant army had ever been called upon to perform, and every one must grate- 1532 fully acknowledge that it had been performed by our soldiers with the most generous bravery and zeal. It was, therefore, quite natural for the hon. Member to inquire whether the Government intended to confer any mark of distinction upon that portion of the army which might be called the "hardest worked" portion of the army. In reply, he (Mr. Peel) begged to state that it was intended that the Sebastopol clasp should include this among other services, its object being to reward those who had contributed to the reduction of Sebastopol. Of those who had so contributed none had done more than the officers and men engaged in the trenches. He did not think that it altered the character of that clasp that others wore it whose degree of merit was possibly of an inferior order; nor did he think that it would be possible to give any distinction the principle of which should be that all who wore it should be of precisely the same degree of merit. He could not, therefore, recommend a separate distinction for those who had done duty in the trenches, meritorious as he admitted that duty to have been.