Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston

THE CRIMEAN ENQUIRY

Buckingham Palace, 16th February 1856.

The subject to which Lord Palmerston refers in his letter of last night, and upon which the Cabinet is going to deliberate to-day, has also caused the Queen much anxiety.

A Civil Commission is sent out by the Government to enquire into the conduct of the officers in command in the Crimea; this is done without any consultation with the Commander-in-Chief. They report to the Government, inculpating several general officers and others in high command; this report is not communicated to the military authorities, nor to the persons affected by it, but is laid on the table of both Houses of Parliament. These officers then for the first time find themselves accused under the authority of Government, and that accusation communicated to the Legislature without ever having been heard in answer or allowed an opportunity to defend themselves. It is stated in both Houses by the Government that the officers may send papers in reply if they choose! But who is to be the Judge on the trial? The Press, of course, and the Times at the head, have already judged and condemned, and the House of Commons is now moving in default of another Judge to constitute its tribunal by a Committee of Enquiry.

It is quite evident if matters are left so, and military officers of the Queen's Army are to be judged as to the manner in which they have discharged their military duties before an enemy by a Committee of the House of Commons, the command of the Army is at once transferred from the Crown to that Assembly.

This result is quite inevitable if the Government appear as accusers, as they do by the report of their Commission, and then submit the accusation for Parliament to deal with, without taking any steps of their own!

The course suggested by Sir James Graham and alluded to by Lord Palmerston, of following the precedent of the enquiry into the Convention of Cintra, appears therefore to the Queen to be the only prudent one.

The Queen thinks it most unfair to the officers to publish their statements beforehand, as these will not go before judges feeling the weight of their responsibility, but before the newspapers who are their sworn enemies and determined to effect their ruin, for which they possess unlimited means.

The Queen wishes Lord Palmerston to read this letter to the Cabinet.

Footnote 12: Sir John MacNeill and Colonel Tulloch had been sent out to the Crimea early in 1855 to investigate the breakdown of various military departments. They had issued a preliminary report in the summer of 1855, and a final one in January 1856, which was presented to Parliament. The officers specially censured were Lord Lucan (who had been given the command of a Regiment), Lord Cardigan, Inspector of Cavalry, Sir Richard Airey, Quartermaster-General, and Colonel Gordon, Deputy Quartermaster-General. Lord Panmure wrote on the 17th of February that the Government recommended the appointment of a Commission of Enquiry, consisting of General Sir Howard Douglas and six other high military officers. The Commission sat at Chelsea, and made its report in July, exonerating the officers censured.

Footnote 13: The Convention of Cintra was concluded on the 30th of August 1808. It was founded on the basis of an armistice agreed upon between Sir Arthur Wellesley and General Kellerman, on the day after the battle of Vimiera, and some of its provisions were considered too favourable to the French. A Board of Enquiry, under the presidency of Sir David Dundas, in the first instance exculpated the British officers; but the Government having instructed the members of the Board to give their opinions individually, four were found to approve and three to disapprove the armistice and convention.