DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16864#0009
♦
VOLUME XXXVII.-JULY TO DECEMBER, 1859.
THE PALMERSTON CABINET.—1859.
THE DERBY
First Lord of the Treasury
Lord Chancellor
Chancellor of the Exchequer
President of the Council
Lord Privy Seal
Home Office ....
Foreign Office
Colonial Office .
War Secretary
India Secretary ....
Admiralty ....
President of the Board of Trade
First Commissioner of Works
and Public Buildings .
CABINET.—1859.
. Earl of Derby.
. Lord Chelmsford.
. Right Hon. Benjamin Disraeli.
. Marquess of Salisbury.
. Earl of Hardwicke.
. Rr. Hon. Spencer H. Walpole.
. Earl of Malmesbury.
. Sir E. G. Bulwer Lytton, Bt.
. Right Hon. Jonathan Peel.
. Lord Stanley.
. Sir John S. Pakington, Bart.
. Right Hon. Joseph W. Henley.
j Lord John J. R. Manners.
Fii'st Lord of the Treasury
Lord Chancellor . . . .
Chancellor of the Exchequer .
Chancellor of Duchy of Lancaster .
President of the Council
Lord Privy Seal . . . .
Home Office .
Foreign Office . . . . .
Colonial Office ....
War Secretary . . . .
India Secretary .
Admiralty . . . . .
Postmaster-G eneral
Poor Law Board . . . .
1 Chief Secretaiy for Ireland
Viscount Palmerston.
Lord Campbell.
Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone.
Sir George Grey, Bart.
Earl Granville.
Duke of Argyll.
Sir G. Cornewall Lewis, Bari
Lord John Russell.
Duke of Newcastle.
Right Hon. Sidney Herbert.
Sir Charles Wood, Bart.
Duke of Somerset.
Earl of Elgin.
Right Hon. Thomas M. Gibson.
Right Hon. E. Cardwell.
POLITICAL
PAGE
HHHE new Administration under Lord Palmerston having
met with the approval of the people by the re-election of
Ministers to their vacated seats, Parliament reassembled on
the 30th of June, and proceeded at once to state the policy
of the new Government as set forth in the “ Essence of
Parliament.”
Sir Charles Napier called the attention of the House to
the deficiencies of the Navy, and other Members spoke as to
providing vigorous measures of defence against any aggression
■which might be made upon England ; and a most powerful
stimulant to the public excitement was given by a speech
delivered by Lord Lyndhurst on the subject in the House of
Lords on the 5th of July. His remarks were made with a
view to defence and not aggression. As this remarkable
speech created a deep sensation throughout the country, we
give it at some length :—
“ Hitherto, he said, we had relied on what we called our wooden walls as
our best defence, and experience justified our reliance. Another source of
confidence was tiie difficulty of transporting troops from the opposite coasts
to our own, and under the old system we had perfect security. But now a
change had occurred. No one could tell what would be the result of the
application of steam power to naval warfare. In a great measure it would
deprive us of the advantage we derived from skilful sailors and give numbers
an advantage; and, therefore, we could not rely perfectly upon our naval
defences. At present we surpassed France in line-of-battje ships, but she
was and would be superior in steam frigates. The French could man a ship
as soon as she was afloat with perfectly trained men ; we could not. We
required a reserve, France did not; because, if we were beaten, we were
at her mercy; if she were beaten, we could not invade her. We ought to
have a Channel fleet able to combat France and Russia ; and a Mediterranean
fleet to hold the road to India. We should have a squadron in the West
Indies, and a reserve of seamen, which should be created without delay.
“ Steam bridges the Channel, as Lord Palmerston' had said. France
could bring an army together, place it on board without exciting observation,
and land it in a few hours on our shores. ‘I know,’ continued the Noble
Lord, ‘that in 1849, when France sent troops to Civita Vecchia, one frigate
SUMMAKY.
PAGE
carried a distance of 300 miles 2000 soldiers with all the munitions of war. I
am further aware, that a much larger force than that can be embarked for a
short period of time on board a frigate, and a force still greater on board a
ship of the line. I know from information which I have received, and the
accuracy of which I do not doubt, that the French are at the present moment
building steamers for the purpose of transporting troops, each of which is
being constructed to carry 2500 men with all the necessary stores. This,
therefore, is the description of force .which you must prepare yourselves to
meet. What then, my Lords, does it become our duty to do? What pre-
cautions does it behove us to take? What force ought we to maintain in
order to be prepared for any emergency which may arise ? My answer is, a
force of regular troops—-not Volunteers—not undisciplined men, but, I repeat,
a force of regular troops, capable of opposing any military force which in all
probability can be landed on our shores. It is absolutely imperative upon
us to maintain such a force. It is a duty which we owe to ourselves. It is
a duty which we owe to the character of our country. But. my Lords,
independen tly of all this, we must provide for our garrisons, and also for
that which is of greater importance still—our arsenals. They are, I regret to
say it, at present in a very imperfect state of defence.’ He placecl the force
required at 100,000 men, including the trained Militia. ‘ Every observation,
my Lords, which I have made on this object applies as well to Ireland as to
this country. Perhaps the precautions which I have indicated may be even
more necessary in the case of the former than the latter. Ireland may pos-
sibly be looked upon on the other side of the Channel as one of the ‘ ‘ oppressed
nationalities” ; as a country trampled upon by a nation differing from her in
customs, in language, and in religion. We cannot tell what misrepresenta-
tions may be made. We must, at all events, my Lords, provide equally for
the safety of Ireland as for our own.’ He could not glance over the past and
compare it with the present without feelings of humiliation. ‘ I recollect
the day when every part of the opposite coast was blockaded by an English
fleet. I remember the victory of Oamperdown and that of St. Vincent, won
by Sir J. Jervis. I do not forget the great victory of the Nile, nor, last of
all, that triumphant fight at Trafalgar, which almost annihilated the navies
of France and Spain. I contrast the position which we occupied at that
period with that which we now hold. I recollect the expulsion of the French
from Egypt; the achievement of victory after victory in Spain ; the British
Army established in the South of France, and then that great battle by which
that war was terminated. But I may be asked, “ Why do you think such
measures requisite ? Are we not in alliance with France? Are we not on
terms of friendship with Russia ? What other Power can molest us ? ” To
these questions, my Lords, my answer shall be a short and a simple one. I
will not consent to live in dependence on the friendship or the forbearance
of any country. I rely solely on my own vigour, my own exertion, and my
own intelligence. Does jiny noble Lord in this House dissent from the
VOLUME XXXVII.-JULY TO DECEMBER, 1859.
THE PALMERSTON CABINET.—1859.
THE DERBY
First Lord of the Treasury
Lord Chancellor
Chancellor of the Exchequer
President of the Council
Lord Privy Seal
Home Office ....
Foreign Office
Colonial Office .
War Secretary
India Secretary ....
Admiralty ....
President of the Board of Trade
First Commissioner of Works
and Public Buildings .
CABINET.—1859.
. Earl of Derby.
. Lord Chelmsford.
. Right Hon. Benjamin Disraeli.
. Marquess of Salisbury.
. Earl of Hardwicke.
. Rr. Hon. Spencer H. Walpole.
. Earl of Malmesbury.
. Sir E. G. Bulwer Lytton, Bt.
. Right Hon. Jonathan Peel.
. Lord Stanley.
. Sir John S. Pakington, Bart.
. Right Hon. Joseph W. Henley.
j Lord John J. R. Manners.
Fii'st Lord of the Treasury
Lord Chancellor . . . .
Chancellor of the Exchequer .
Chancellor of Duchy of Lancaster .
President of the Council
Lord Privy Seal . . . .
Home Office .
Foreign Office . . . . .
Colonial Office ....
War Secretary . . . .
India Secretary .
Admiralty . . . . .
Postmaster-G eneral
Poor Law Board . . . .
1 Chief Secretaiy for Ireland
Viscount Palmerston.
Lord Campbell.
Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone.
Sir George Grey, Bart.
Earl Granville.
Duke of Argyll.
Sir G. Cornewall Lewis, Bari
Lord John Russell.
Duke of Newcastle.
Right Hon. Sidney Herbert.
Sir Charles Wood, Bart.
Duke of Somerset.
Earl of Elgin.
Right Hon. Thomas M. Gibson.
Right Hon. E. Cardwell.
POLITICAL
PAGE
HHHE new Administration under Lord Palmerston having
met with the approval of the people by the re-election of
Ministers to their vacated seats, Parliament reassembled on
the 30th of June, and proceeded at once to state the policy
of the new Government as set forth in the “ Essence of
Parliament.”
Sir Charles Napier called the attention of the House to
the deficiencies of the Navy, and other Members spoke as to
providing vigorous measures of defence against any aggression
■which might be made upon England ; and a most powerful
stimulant to the public excitement was given by a speech
delivered by Lord Lyndhurst on the subject in the House of
Lords on the 5th of July. His remarks were made with a
view to defence and not aggression. As this remarkable
speech created a deep sensation throughout the country, we
give it at some length :—
“ Hitherto, he said, we had relied on what we called our wooden walls as
our best defence, and experience justified our reliance. Another source of
confidence was tiie difficulty of transporting troops from the opposite coasts
to our own, and under the old system we had perfect security. But now a
change had occurred. No one could tell what would be the result of the
application of steam power to naval warfare. In a great measure it would
deprive us of the advantage we derived from skilful sailors and give numbers
an advantage; and, therefore, we could not rely perfectly upon our naval
defences. At present we surpassed France in line-of-battje ships, but she
was and would be superior in steam frigates. The French could man a ship
as soon as she was afloat with perfectly trained men ; we could not. We
required a reserve, France did not; because, if we were beaten, we were
at her mercy; if she were beaten, we could not invade her. We ought to
have a Channel fleet able to combat France and Russia ; and a Mediterranean
fleet to hold the road to India. We should have a squadron in the West
Indies, and a reserve of seamen, which should be created without delay.
“ Steam bridges the Channel, as Lord Palmerston' had said. France
could bring an army together, place it on board without exciting observation,
and land it in a few hours on our shores. ‘I know,’ continued the Noble
Lord, ‘that in 1849, when France sent troops to Civita Vecchia, one frigate
SUMMAKY.
PAGE
carried a distance of 300 miles 2000 soldiers with all the munitions of war. I
am further aware, that a much larger force than that can be embarked for a
short period of time on board a frigate, and a force still greater on board a
ship of the line. I know from information which I have received, and the
accuracy of which I do not doubt, that the French are at the present moment
building steamers for the purpose of transporting troops, each of which is
being constructed to carry 2500 men with all the necessary stores. This,
therefore, is the description of force .which you must prepare yourselves to
meet. What then, my Lords, does it become our duty to do? What pre-
cautions does it behove us to take? What force ought we to maintain in
order to be prepared for any emergency which may arise ? My answer is, a
force of regular troops—-not Volunteers—not undisciplined men, but, I repeat,
a force of regular troops, capable of opposing any military force which in all
probability can be landed on our shores. It is absolutely imperative upon
us to maintain such a force. It is a duty which we owe to ourselves. It is
a duty which we owe to the character of our country. But. my Lords,
independen tly of all this, we must provide for our garrisons, and also for
that which is of greater importance still—our arsenals. They are, I regret to
say it, at present in a very imperfect state of defence.’ He placecl the force
required at 100,000 men, including the trained Militia. ‘ Every observation,
my Lords, which I have made on this object applies as well to Ireland as to
this country. Perhaps the precautions which I have indicated may be even
more necessary in the case of the former than the latter. Ireland may pos-
sibly be looked upon on the other side of the Channel as one of the ‘ ‘ oppressed
nationalities” ; as a country trampled upon by a nation differing from her in
customs, in language, and in religion. We cannot tell what misrepresenta-
tions may be made. We must, at all events, my Lords, provide equally for
the safety of Ireland as for our own.’ He could not glance over the past and
compare it with the present without feelings of humiliation. ‘ I recollect
the day when every part of the opposite coast was blockaded by an English
fleet. I remember the victory of Oamperdown and that of St. Vincent, won
by Sir J. Jervis. I do not forget the great victory of the Nile, nor, last of
all, that triumphant fight at Trafalgar, which almost annihilated the navies
of France and Spain. I contrast the position which we occupied at that
period with that which we now hold. I recollect the expulsion of the French
from Egypt; the achievement of victory after victory in Spain ; the British
Army established in the South of France, and then that great battle by which
that war was terminated. But I may be asked, “ Why do you think such
measures requisite ? Are we not in alliance with France? Are we not on
terms of friendship with Russia ? What other Power can molest us ? ” To
these questions, my Lords, my answer shall be a short and a simple one. I
will not consent to live in dependence on the friendship or the forbearance
of any country. I rely solely on my own vigour, my own exertion, and my
own intelligence. Does jiny noble Lord in this House dissent from the