Whatever hopes or expectations might have been previously entertained as to the speedy fall of Sebastopol, the battle of Inkerman, at all events, utterly and rudely dispelled them. The facts were now plain enough--nearly 100,000 Russians were on the spot, with an almost unlimited supply of guns and ammunition to defend their city, whilst the allies had not much more than half the number of men; and their siege material was nearly worn out and its ammunition expended. The fortresses in the Mediterranean might in some degree help us to replenish our batteries, but there was no hope of efficient operations being renewed until the allied armies had been largely reinforced, both with men and material. Months must thus elapse, during which time the enemy would have leisure to strengthen their armaments and complete their defences. Thus the first attempt on Sebastopol had failed. But even these were by no means the worst features of the case. The allies had open trenches to maintain, and at the same moment a widely extended frontier to guard from attack. It is as well to pause for a moment and to consider the circumstances of the English army at the time. In the first place the force sent to the East had been raised with difficulty, was quite inadequate to the occasion, and was insufficiently provided with commissariat and transport. Mr. Sidney Herbert, Minister for War, said: 'The army in the East has been created by discounting the future. Every regiment at home or within reach, and not forming part of the army, has been robbed to complete it.' Again, it was entirely devoid of reserves. The House of Commons Committee of 1855 reported 'that the men sent to reinforce the army were recruits who had not yet become fit for foreign service. When the Duke of Newcastle acquainted Lord Raglan that he had 2,000 recruits to send him, he replied that those last sent were so young and unformed that they fell victims to disease, and were swept away like flies--he preferred to wait....'