MILITARY CRITICISMS.
In reading the various and innumerable narratives of the battle, and the comments of the 'correspondents,' it is impossible to avoid coming to some conclusions which may nevertheless be erroneous; and I have always thought that people who are totally ignorant of military matters, and who are living at ease at home, should not venture to criticise operations of which they can be no judges, and the conduct of men who cannot explain that conduct, and who are nobly doing their duty according to their own judgement, which is more likely to be right than any opinions we can form. With this admission of fallibility, it still strikes me that there was a lack of military genius and foresight in the recent operations. It is asserted that our position was open and undefended, that General Evans had recommended that precautions should be taken and defences thrown up, all of which was neglected, and nothing done, and hence the sad slaughter which took place. This was Raglan's fault, if any fault there really was. It is admitted that no tactical skill was or could be displayed, and the battle was won by sheer courage and firmness. Then Cathcart seems to have made a false and very rash move which cost his own life and 500 men besides. These are melancholy reflexions, and the facts prove that we have no Wellingtons in our army now.
November 26th.—Government have determined to call Parliament together on the 12th of December, though it stands prorogued to the 14th. This is done under the authority of an Act, 37th George III. ch. 120. In the present state of affairs they are quite right, and it is better for them to have fair Parliamentary discussion than clamour and the diatribes of the press out of doors. The 'Times,' as usual, has been thundering away about reinforcements, and urging the despatch of troops that do not exist and cannot be created in a moment. I had a great battle with Delane the other day about it, and asked why he did not appeal to the French Government, who have boundless military resources, instead of to our's who have none at all, and accordingly yesterday there was a very strong article entirely about French reinforcements.
ADMINISTRATIVE BLUNDERS.
In the course of our talk he did, I must confess, make some strong charges against the Government, and particularly Newcastle. He complained that after the expedition was sent to the Crimea they remained idle, and made no attempt to form an army of reserve or to send continual reinforcements to supply the casualties which everybody knew must occur, and this is true. Again, when he returned from the East[1] he went to Newcastle and urged him to make an immediate provision of wooden houses against the winter, which would in all probability be required, and he suggested that this should be done at Constantinople, where, all the houses being built of wood and the carpenters very skilful, it might easily be done at a comparatively small expense, and whence the conveyance was expeditious and cheap. His advice was not taken; nothing was done, and now that the winter is come, and the troops are already exposed to dreadful suffering and privation, the work is begun here, where it will cost four times as much and, when done, will require an enormous time to convey the houses to the Crimea, besides taking up the space that is urgently required for other purposes. I was obliged to confess that this was inexcusable negligence and blundering, and I repeated what had passed to Granville last night, who could make no defence, and only said that Newcastle, with many merits, had the fault of wishing to do everything himself, and therefore much was not done at all; and that the fact was, nobody ever imagined we should be reduced to such straits, and there was a universal belief that all would have been over in the Crimea before this, and that such things would not be required. I am afraid Newcastle, who is totally ignorant of military affairs of every sort, is not equal to his post, and hence the various deficiencies; nor is Sidney Herbert much better—very well both of them in ordinary times, but without the ability or the resource necessary to deal with such an emergency as the present.
I saw a letter yesterday from Charles Windham, a Q.-M.-General on poor Cathcart's staff, with an account of the battle, and he says that if, directly after the march on Balaklava, Sebastopol had been assaulted, it must have been taken. This corresponds with the reports of Russian deserters, who declare that there were only 2,000 men in the place after the battle of Alma. There is always so much difference of opinion and fault finding in such affairs that it is not easy to come to a sound conclusion thereupon.
[1] [Mr. Delane had gone to the theatre of war in the autumn, and was there with Mr. Kinglake, the brilliant historian of the Crimean War.]
November 29th.—My surviving nephew arrived from the Crimea yesterday morning. He gave me an account of the battle, and denies that General Cathcart ever refused, or was ever offered, the aid of General Bosquet, as has been stated. He says that Cathcart was not in command, and it was not therefore to him that the offer would have been made, and that Cathcart did not go into action till he was sent for by General Pennefather, when he got his Division out, and went on the field. He was killed quite early, about twenty minutes after he reached the field of battle. My nephew confirms what has been said about the non-fortification of the position, which seems to have been an enormous blunder, against which most of the Generals of Division remonstrated. He says Cathcart was opposed to the expedition to the Crimea, not thinking they were strong enough, and he strongly advised, and in opposition to Raglan, that the place should be attacked immediately after the battle of Alma, while the Russians were still panic struck, and before they had time to fortify the town on the south side. He says he left the army in good health and spirits, but not expecting to take Sebastopol this year. Their sufferings had not been very great, though it was a hard life—plenty to eat, but mostly salt meat. He thinks, though the French behaved very gallantly and their arrival saved the army, that they might have done more than they did; and a body of them that came late on the field actually never stirred and did nothing whatever.
In the evening I met Clarendon at the Travellers', and had a long talk with him about all sorts of things. He has been much disturbed at the 'Times,' especially as to two things—its violent abuse of Austria and its insertion of a letter from the Crimea, reflecting severely on Prince Napoleon. With regard to Austria it is peculiarly annoying, because we are now on the point of concluding a tripartite Treaty which is actually on its way to Vienna, and in a day or two it will be decided whether she signs it or not; and nothing is more calculated to make her hang back than such articles in the 'Times.' Then as to Prince Napoleon, it has annoyed the Emperor and all his family beyond expression, and to such a degree that Drouyn de Lhuys has written an official letter to Walewski about it—a very proper and reasonable letter, but still expressing their vexation, and entreating that such attacks may, if possible, be prevented for the future.
We talked over Lord Raglan and his capacity for command, and we both agreed that he had given no proofs of his fitness for so mighty a task. Clarendon said he was struck with the badness of his private letters, as he had been from the beginning by those from Varna, showing that he had evidently not a spark of imagination and no originality. We both agreed that it would never do to hint a doubt about his merits or capacity, and at all events that he is probably equal to anybody likely to be opposed to him. His personal bravery is conspicuous, and he exposes himself more than he ought. It is said that one of his aides-de-camp remonstrated with him and received a severe rebuff, Raglan telling him to mind his own business, and if he did not like the fire to go to the rear. Clarendon says there is no chance of taking Sebastopol this year, nor of taking it at all till we have an army strong enough to drive the Russians out of the Crimea. For this, 150,000 men would be required to make it a certainty; but with this force, no Russian army, however numerous, could resist the allies, and then the place would fall. This is a distant prospect. I expressed my wonder at the Russians being able to obtain supplies, and he said they got them from the Don and from Kertch.