prosecution of the war, the provision of proper food and clothing for the Army, which was then undergoing terrible privations and sufferings, a better concert between the different Departments, and between the English and French camps, and, especially, the appointment of a Minister of War of vigour and authority.  “As the welfare of the Empire and the success of the present conflict are concerned,” he wrote at the end of November to the head of the Government, “the conduct of the war ought to be placed in the hands of the fittest man who can be found for the post.”  He laid the greatest stress on more efficient administration.

The miseries of the campaign increased.  On January 30, 1855, Lord Malmesbury wrote:  “The accounts from the Crimea are dreadful.  Only 18,000 effective men; 14,000 are dead and 11,000 sick.  The same neglect which has hitherto prevailed continues and is shown in everything.”

He held very strong views as to the duty of the House of Commons in regard to these calamities.  “Inquiry is the proper duty and function of the House of Commons....  Inquiry is at the root of the powers of the House of Commons.”

He had been induced by great pressure from the highest quarters to join the Cabinet, and on patriotic grounds remained in office against his desire.  He continually but unsuccessfully advocated Reform.  Several times he asked to be allowed to resign.

    When, therefore, Mr. Roebuck brought forward a motion embodying the
    opinion which he had frequently urged on his colleagues, he could
    not pretend the opposite views and resist the motion for inquiry.

The resignation was not so sudden as represented.  On the 6th of December, 1854, when the Cabinet met, he declared that he was determined to retire after Christmas; after some conference with his colleagues, he wrote on December 16th to Lord Lansdowne:  “I do not feel justified in taking upon myself to retire from the Government on that account [the War Office] at this moment.”  It is not the case that a severe judgment was pronounced upon these proceedings by the “universal” opinion of his contemporaries.  His brother.  Lord Wriothesley Russell, wrote:  “It makes one sad to hear the world speaking as if straightforward honesty were a thing incredible, impossible.”  And the Duke of Bedford:  “My mind has been deeply pained by seeing your pure patriotic motives maligned and misconstrued after such a life devoted to the political service of the public.”  But the whole world was not against him.  Among many letters of approval, I find one strongly supporting his action with regard to the Army in the Crimea and his course in quitting the Ministry, and quoting a favourable article in The Examiner; another strongly approving, and stating:  “I have this morning conversed with more than fifty gentlemen in the City, and they all agree with me that in following the dictates of your conscience