occasions. This Letter of Service was the same as that sent to Sir Arthur Wellesley in 1809, and again in 1815, when he took command of the army before Waterloo. As an indirect example of its advantages, Lord Hardinge mentioned that, after the landing in the Crimea, he had given his opinion to the Duke of Newcastle, but not to Lord Raglan, that the spot chosen was too close to Sebastopol.
He was then asked whether he concurred with the Duke of Newcastle in thinking that the line of demarcation between the Minister for War and the Commander-in-Chief was not inconveniently indefinite. He replied: — 'I must say that, during the whole course of my transacting business with the Duke of Newcastle, I am not aware since the war broke out of any portion of the duties between us having been personally unsatisfactory, nor do I know to what the question alludes.' He subsequently said the same as regarded Lord Panmure. The real fact is that the Secretary of State has unlimited authority over the Horse Guards. 'If I were,' he said, 'to recommend an officer to go to the Crimea, and the Secretary at War thought for any reason that he was a person not fit for the post, I should at once give way or request him to send me a list of the best men he could find for my recommendation, as the ultimate appointment rested with the Secretary of State.' If any inconvenience had ever arisen, it was owing to the Secretary of State not expressing his pleasure to the Commander-in-Chief. The Secretary of State did not submit the names to the
