478 APPKNUIX. existed after the 8th of September 1855. It is very true, that after the 8th of iSeptember, FrcHchmen and EngUsh- rnen could go iuto the town of SeLastopol, and make all the necessary arrangements for blowing up the docks with- out serious molestation from the enemy, then occupying the north side of the harbour ; but because officers and men could do thus with comparativ^e impunity, would it follow that a fire from the North Side would have been impotent against the Russian fleet and against the arsenal of Sebastopol ? Sir John Burgoyne says 'Yes.' Generrd de Todleben says ' No.' Upon this question — and it is a question of gunnery rather than of history — I do not de- sire to say more. I must observe that, whilst professing to consider what would have been the value of the ' North Side ' to the Allies, Sir John Burgoyne omits one consideration which is of the very highest importance. He omits to deal with the fact that the possession of the North Side by the Allies would have been compatible with arrangements for operat- ing upon the Ilussian line of communication. In paragraph 17, Sir John Burgoyne says, 'I perceive
- that Mr Kinglake states that Lord Eaglan wished to
' attack the North Side, but quotes no authority for his ' statement.' Sir John must liave written this inadvert- ently. The authority is given in the third footnote, ante, p. 15.* With regard to the 18th paragraph, I refer to my abovc- Avritten comments on Sir John Burgoyne's letter of the 30th of June. In the paragraphs numbered consecutively from 18 to 25, Sir John Burgoyne deals once more with the question, whether when the Allies arrived before the South Side, an immediate assault would have been expedient ; but he does this ujjon the old grounds, and therefore, for a full • In vol. iii. p. 83S of ' Invasion of the Crimea,' Cabinet Editiou.
