o your Majesty.[56] The defence of
Lucknow and the relief of the defenders are two exploits which,
each in their kind, will stand out brightly in the history of these
terrible times.

... Lord Canning has not failed to transmit your Majesty's gracious
message to Sir Colin Campbell, and has taken the liberty to add your
Majesty's words respecting his favourite 93rd, which will not be
less grateful to the brave old soldier than the expression of your
Majesty's consideration for himself.

Your Majesty has lost two most valuable officers in Sir Henry Havelock
and Brigadier-General Neill. They were very different, however. The
first was quite of the old school--severe and precise with his men,
and very cautious in his movements and plans--but in action bold
as well as skilful. The second very open and impetuous, but full of
resources; and to his soldiers as kind and thoughtful of their comfort
as if they had been his children.

With earnest wishes for the health and happiness of your Majesty and
the Prince, Lord Canning begs permission to lay at your Majesty's feet
the assurance of his most dutiful and devoted attachment.

[Footnote 56: Sir Colin Campbell had relieved Lucknow on
the 17th of November, but Sir Henry Havelock (as he had now
become) died from illness and exhaustion. General Neill had
been killed on the occasion of the reinforcement in September,
_ante_, 12th November, 1857.]

[Pageheading: ARMY ORGANISATION]

_Queen Victoria to Lord Panmure._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _29th December 1857_.

The Queen has received Lord Panmure's letter and Memorandum of the
24th. She must say that she still adheres to her views as formerly
expressed. Lord Panmure admits that the two plans don't differ
materially in expense. It becomes, then, a mere question of
organisation and of policy. As to the first, all military authorities
of all countries and times agree upon the point that numerous _cadres_
with fewer men give the readiest means of increasing an army on short
notice, the main point to be attended to in a constitutional and
democratic country like England. As to the second, a system of
organisation will always be easier defended than mere numbers
arbitrarily fixed, and Parliament ought to have the possibility of
voting more or voting fewer men, according to their views of the
exigencies of the country, or the pressure of finance at different
times, and to be able to do so without deranging the