The Sun. — London, England, 1865-05-27 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE .OF LORDS—LAST EVENING. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at the usual hour. ROYAL COMMISSION. The Royal assent was given by commi ss ion to the fol lowing bills :—Customs and Inland Revenue, Exchequer Bonds (.£1,000,000), Union Officers (Ireland) Superannua tion, Isle of Man (Disafforestation) Compensation, Private Bill Costs, Poole and Bournemouth Railway, Redhill Gas, South Metropolitan Gas, the Folkestone Gas, Ban bury Water, Luton Water, Athenny and Ennis Junction Railway, Liverpool Improvement , Bill, Shrewsbury and North Wales Railway, Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Companies, Preston and Wyre Railway, Harbour, and Dock, Luddender Valley Railway, Bath Gas, Bristol Water, West Worthing Improvement, Farehan Gas, Exmouth Gas, Crystal Palace District Gas, Bristol Docks, East and West India Docks Company, Metropolitan and St. John's wood Railway, Carmarthen and Cardigan Railway (capital), Losthwiel Railway, Midland and Great Western Rail wa y of Ireland (No. 1), St. Albans Water, Tyd &slay with Shakerley Local Board, Chesterfield Water and Gas, Winchester Water and Gas, Great Southern and Western Railway, Kingston and Eardesley Water, Runean, Weston, and Halton Water ; tafford and Uttoxeter Railway, Dublin Port (Tramway), Bnckfastleigh and South Devon Railway, Bristol and Exeter and Devon and Somerset Railways, Rastrick Gas, East London Railway, Glasgow and South-Western Rail way, and London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway (St. Leonard's Line and Deviations.) The Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, Earl St. Germans, and Viscount Sidney. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a second time :—Sutton Railway, Glasgow Bridge, Kidderminster, Stowport (and Bewdley Water), Belfast Gas, Belfast New Streets, County Antrim and Belfast Borough, Scottish North- Eastern Railway, Hammersmith and City Railway, Lynne and Sutton Bridge Railway, Beddegelert Rail way, and Peterborough, Wisbeach, the Galway Water, the Rhyl and District Water, the Gainsborough Water, and the North Eastern Railway (Pelaw and other branches), were severally read a third timeand passed. CLERICAL SUBSCRIPTION. Lord LYTTLETON presented a petition from the Church Union Society against the Clerical Subscription Bill. THE PARISH OF ST. MARTIN'S, LIVERPOOL. The Earl of DERBY presented a petition from the clergy and laity of the parish of St. Martin's, Liverpool, com plaining of the difficulties thrown in their way of a church in their parish. The Bishop of CHESTER explained that he had de clined to consecrate the church, because some dispute had arisen among the trustees as to the patronage. After some little discussion the matter was dropped. IMPERIAL GAS. Lord RAVENSWORTH, on'the motion for the second reading of this bill, moved as an amendment that it be read a second time that day six months. Amongst his objections was the tendency which he asserted the bill would have to create a gigantic monopoly in the supply of gas. Their lordships then divided, when the bill was thrown out upon a division by 46 to 43. The Parsonages Bill and the Locomotives on the Roads Bill were read a second time. Earl GR2UTVILLE moved the second reading of the Clerical Subscription Bill, which, he stated, was based upon the recommendations of a very numerous select committee of their lordships' house. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY having expressed his approval of the bill, the motion for the second reading was agreed to. The County Voters Registration Bill and the County of Sussex Bill were also read a second time. The select committee on the. Sewage Utilisation Bill was nominated The Pheasants (Ireland) Bill,, and the. Tories, Robbers, and Rapparees (Ireland) Bill were read a third time and passed. Their lordships • adjourned at 20 minutes past seven o'clock. - . • •, , • HOUSE OF COMMONS-LAST EVENING. The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. PRIVATE .BUSINESS The following bills were read a third time and passed:— Burton-upon-Trent Connection Railways, Crieff and Corn rio Railway, Great Western Railway, North Eastern and Cleveland Railways, and Riclanansworth, Amersham, and Chesham Railway. ROYAL COMMISSION. The Usher of the Black Rod here appeared at the bar, and summoned the Speaker to the House of Peers to hear the Royal assent given to several bills:. RAILWAY BILLS, Mr: THOMPSON moved that the special report from tho committee' on group 8 of railway bills bo referred to the standing orders committee, together with the minutes of the evidence taken before the said committee on the 18th of May, with reference to the Skipton, Wharfdale, and Leybuni Junction Railway Bill. That it be an instruc tion 'to the committee that they do report whether, in their opinion, the proceedings therein disclosed involve any infraction or evasion of the Standing Orders, or of the Acts relating to Parliamentary Deposits. The hon. mem ber said his object in making the motion was to bring before the committee the inannerin which railway bills were got up. An engineer and solicitor having nothing to do had but to take up a map and select a spot on which there was not a railway running, • and immediately they struck one out ; and by stating that valuable minerals were to be found in the neighbourhood, the shares were taken up, and the only persons deluded when the bubble burst were those who had taken up the shares. He thought the time had arrived when the whole system of getting up companies • should become known to Parliament. After a short discussion, the motion was withdrawn, with a view of making some amendment in the terms of the motion. EAST INDIA ESTIMATES. Mr. HANKEY moved for a return from the Govern ments of Bengal and the other Presidencies in India, giving their opinions as to the efficiency of the present system by which the Civil Service was recruited from this country, and whether they considered that the service bad been improved by the present mode of election by competitive examination. The return was ordered. MAIL TO INDIA. Mr. CRAWFORD moved for a copy of any memorials (with the signatures attached and covering letters) received by her Majesty's Postmaster-General from the Indian Pre sidencies relative to the despatch of a weekly mail between England and India. The return was ordered. INSPECTOR GRAHAM'S REPORT. Mr. O'REILLY asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether his attention bad been called to tho misstatements contained in the report of Inspector C. Graham on the National School of Coote-street, Ireland, published in the return had been laid upon the table of the house ? Sir R. PEEL said he had read the report in question, but he was not aware that any misstatements were made in Inspector Graham's report. He would make inquiry into the matter, and communicate the result to the house. ENGLAND AND AMERICA—THE ALABAMA. Sir J. WALSH asked the First Lord of the Treasury whether her Majesty's Government had received from the Government of the rnited States any formal and official demand for compensation to American subjects for losses sustained by the Alabama or any other Confederate cruisers alleged to have bean equipped in British ports ? Lord PALMERST9,N said a correspondence on the matter had been going on between the two Governments during the last two years on the subject of the prizes taken by the Alabama and other vessels of the same description. A letter had been received from Mr. Adams that day, which had not yet been replied to. Each party had stated their views on the matter. He assured the house that the correspondence had been carried forward in very friendly terms. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) PROPOSED NEW MUSEUM. Mr. DOULTON asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether ha would, before the house adjourned for the Whitsuntide holidays, lay upon the table of the house the estimate for the now Museum of Natural History ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the estimates for the new building could not be brought for ward until the matters respecting the land upon which it was to be built was settled. M r. DOULTON asked whether the right hon. gentle man could state any time after which he would bring the matter forward? (Hear, hear.) Tho CHANCELLOR of the EXCAEQUER replied that the last thing he should dream of doing was bringing for ward any estimate at a time when the house was not in a position to give it the fullest consideration. STORAGE OF GUNPOWDER. Mr. A. EGERTON asked whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Govern bring in any bill this session to make regulatiogunsowpoittwho(pe view to prevent acci dents by the explosion of wasr? toin t l . lreparation, but Mr. BARING said such a bill Captain Boxer's report, with respe c t sale of that material, had been so lately presented that, until the trade and manufacturers of gunpowder had cl e i,nted with its purport, he could not say when it would intro duced. It appeared impossible to bring in the bill before Whitsuntide. SLAVE TRADE. Mr. BAXTER asked the First Lord of the Treasury whether, looking to the changed aspect of affairs in Ame rica, her Majesty's Government, either separately or i n conjunction with the Government of the United States, would consider the propriety of sending a squadron to the coast of Cuba, for the purpose of preventing the importa tion of slaves into that island, and thereby effectually putting an end to the slave trade ? Lord PALME'RSTON said, 12 months ago her Maje st y 's Gove r nment communicated with the Government of the United States in respect to the co-operation of their ves sels with the cruisers of her Majesty's navy on the coast of Africa, with a view to the prevention of the carrying on the Slave trade. Difficulties then arose with respect to the neutrality this country had assumed, which con: d not at that time be overcome. Things had, however, a:tered in America, and application had again been mal3 I o the Ame rican Government that every privilege grunted to the most favoured nations would be offered to th 3 cruisers of the United States. The difficulties, he felt fuly persuided, would be overcome, and that the evil so long complained of on the coast of Cuba would be put an end to, (Hear, hear.) MASTERS IN THE NAVY. Mr. CORRY asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the proposed scheme for the abolition of the rank of master, which the First Lord of the Admiralty had stated was to be laid before Parliament previously to its final adoption, would specify what increase it would occasion in the numbers on the active lists to which the officers now in the line of masters would be removed ; and whether, in order to obviate stagnation of promotion fromthose lists so increased, it would provide for a proportionate increase of the superior lists : also whether it would comprise an estimate of its immediate and prospective' effects on the amount of the vote for half-pay and retirement to officers of the navy? Lord C. PAGET replied in the affirmative. The pro position to be laid on the table would refer to the matter and give the fullest information. THE ECLIPSE SCHOONER. In reply to Mr. C. Fonnit, Lord C. PAGET said no official importance had been received of the destruction of the schooner Eclipse. The information that had been received at the Admiralty had been brought by a small trading vessel. - NEW ZEALAND. In reply to an HoN. MEMBER, Mr. CARDWELL said the mail just in had brought two despatches. They were not yet in type, but he might in form the house that the principal topic mentioned was the triumph of the friendly natives over those in opposition. It would no doubt be satisfactory to the house to know that the mail also brought from the Colonial Government £500,000 for their debentures. SUPPLY—THE CASE OF COLONEL DAWKINS. Lord PALMERSTON said it would be for the conve nience of the house if hon. gentlemen having notices on the paper previous to the right .hon. member for Devizes would give way, in order that that motion might be taken as early as possible. Mr. Neate, Mr. H. Tracy, and Mr. 0. Stanley having assented, Mr. D. GRIFFITH moved an address to her Majesty fora copy of all correspondence relating to the first court of inquiry on Lieut.-Colonel Dawkins in or about July, 1864, including all communications which had been made on the subject, from the Field Marshal Commanding-in- Chief to the Major-General commanding the Brigade of Guards, during the interval between the first and second courts of inquiry which had been held on Lieut.-Colonel Dawkins, and up to the present time. The hon. member said there could be no doubt that, as a court of last resort, that house was one to which this case might be properly referred. The case of Lieutenant-Colonel Dawkins was not only one of great harshness, but it was also, he believed, without precedent, as he had not heard of any instance where an officer had been put on half-pay against remons trances and without a court-martial. The question was one affecting future generations of officers, and therefore it was one which was entitled to the consideration of the house. The House of Commons was a supreme court of appeal in all cases, and he would point to the case of 1809 as a proof that it was so considered even with regard to the highest military authorities. The resolutions proposed by Captain Vivian, June Ist, 1858, and carried by the House of Commons, made the Commander-in-Chief respon sible to that house, the only objection to the motion by the Government then in power, and by the present Govern ment, being that it was unnecessary, as that responsibility already existed. The seconder - and one of the tellers of that motion was Viscount Goderich, the same noble lord who was now Secretary of War. On April the sth, 1857, the Commander-in-Chief giving evidence before the select committee on purchase and discipline in the army, said that veto on promotion had never been exercised inlis time or in that of Lord Harding°, and could only be exer cised when backed by public opinion. He (Mr. D. Griffith) wished to know whether in the present ease the exercise of that power had been. backed by public opinion. On the contrary had not a strong public feeling been expressed in favour of Colonel Dawkins ? They had a legal officer, the highest authority on military law, who, when asked his opinion, got up very much in the style of a ladies' waiting chambermaid, and declined to give any opinion on the sub ject. (Laughter.) The house, therefore, knew nothing of what was the opinion of the law officers of the Crown in re gard to the case of this officer. All this had taken place in regard to an officer of whom not a. single word had been said in disparagement, but to whom testimony or efficiency had actually been furnished by one of his accusers. Was not voting Mutiny Acts for the government of tho army a farce, when they were told that the Commander-in-Chief was paramount and could misuse the prerogative of the Crown? lie was going to make use of a stronger term, but respect for that Royal functionary restrained him, and he would content himself with using the expression per version of the prerogative of the Crown. It was perfectly well known that there was a want of unanimity on this court of inquiry. One gallant officer had signed under pro test, and there. was good reason to believe that another had done the same, leaving the matter . to. be decided by the casting vote of the president, who. was a veteran of great reputation and honour in bygone days—(laughter)—but who, as he received his first commission in 1791, must be 86 or 87 years of age. .Ought the fate of any other officer to depend on the casting vote of a single man of that age, however distinguished and gallant ? The charge against Col. Dawkins was one which it was impossible to disprove. The only charges against him wereinfirrnity of temperand unpopularity, charges so vague that no serious penalties ought to be attached to them. If hon. members of that house depended for their seats upon their popularity, how few would remain. (Laughter.) In order to meet this charge of unpopularity, Colonel Dawkins sent a brief cir cular to all the officers of his . regiment. It was as follows : " The proceedings.in the -court .of inquiry render it neces sary for me to-ask you.whether I have ever quarrelled with you ?" (A laugh.) Fifty-two answers were favour able to Col. Dawkins, and only six were unfavourable. He would, for the information of the house, read a letter from a noble lord, a member of .that house. ;It was to this effect March 26, 1865.—Dear Dawkins—Certainly you and I never quarrelled while I was in the Cold stream Guards, nor did any unfriendly word pass between us." That was from the . noble lord the member for Galway (Lord Dunkellin), whom all appreciated for his I . courteous demeanour and talents. Another noble lord wrote to say that no quarrel had ever occurred be tween them. Another wrote, " The time I quarrelled with you was, in Rome, five years ago." (A laugh.) A lieutenant-colonel, who was . probably present in the house, wrote, "My dear Dawkins—(a laugh)—Can't say we have ever quarrelled ; because it takes two to make a quarrel, and I was not willing to be one." ,(Much laughter.) That was the epigrammatic way in which_ the officer expressed himself. It was curious that_the letter of another officer, the Hon. Percy Fielding, said the same thing in so nearly the same way that it was obvious the two had consulted each other. In another letter, relating to the spring of 1860, the writer said, " I remember there was a suggestion that you should not speak in terms of abuse in the presence of shopkeepers and officers of the line. (Laughter) There was an instance in which a request to Colonel Dawkins to leave the guard-room at eleven o'clock at night was alluded to; but these were all matters of discipline. Therefore, he could not but contend that the charge of unpopularity was reduced to nothing. (Move, move.) Colonel Daw kins had been abroad, and had improved himself, as was the honourable custom amongst gallant officers, in the manners and languages of foreign countries. With regard to the charge against him, surely it was no breach of mili tary discipline to refuse to take a man's hand when it was offered. Why, a man's hand ought to be as sacred a part of his person as a maiden's heart. (Much laughter.) The customs of this country were not such as to require a man to shake hands when he did not desire to do so. (Move, move.) This was a slight offence, but for it he was put under arrest for an illegal, period, and his application for a court-martial had been refused. How the house and the public would allow a power of that kind to be exercised he could not understand. He would, therefore, move his resolution, - and leave the subject , in the hands of the house. The Marquis of HARTINGTON did not think it neces sary to follow the hon. member through the first part of his speech, in which he had attempted to defend the course he had taken in bringing forward a matter of that kind for discussion in that house. On a former occasion, when the subject was introduced, hon. members on both sides had expressed their opinions that this was a matter which ought, under no circumstances, to be discussed there. (Hear, hear.) The arguments the hon. gentleman had employed were that he was justified in bringing the motion forward, inasmuch as the Commander-in-Chief was subordinate to the Secretary of State, who was respon sible to that house for the administration of the army. He quite admitted that the hon. gentleman had rightly quoted the . authorities on that question, but it seemed to him that there was the greatest difference between the responsibility of the Minister to the house and the course that was now pursued of entering into a discus sion on the details of the management and administra- tion of the army. (Hear, hear.) As the opinions of the hon. member seemed to be shared by a few only of those who had supported him, he did not think it necessary to enter further into that part of the subject. With regard to the whole question, he must repeat his protest against what seemed to him to have been the extremely unfair and scarcely courteous manner in which the subject was I brought before the notice of the houso. It was the first time in his experience that a question of public import mice, and also involving the character and reputation of several officers, some of them of high rank and position in the army, had been brought forward and statements made without any public notice whatever. (Hear, hear.) It was quite true the hon. gentleman had given him no tice of his"intention to ask a question, and he had pre pared a reply ; but he was not aware that the unusual course of moving the adjournment of the house would be taken. [Mr. Glum= said he only decided upon that course in the afternoon of the day of his question:) question of the kind ought not to ha:ye been entered upon without the fullest notice, in order that the parties con cerned might have the opportunity of defending them selves.' It was said that. Colonel Dawkins had received a notice so extremely brief that no alternative was left but to bring the question forward in that house without delay. A reference to the dates in this transaction would show to the house how unfounded that statement was. On the 26th of April Colonel Dawkins was sent for by the Lieutenant-General, and the opinion of the court of in quiry, with the opinion of the Commander-in-Chief on the finding of that court, and the course proposed by the Commander-in-Chief, were told him, and the alternative he had to adopt was presented to him. On the 4th of May the same information was sent to him in a written form ; and Colonel Dawkins requested he might have time to consider what course he would take. On the 9th of May Colonel Dawkins addressed an appeal to the Secretary of State for War against the decision of the Commander-in- Chief. On the 14th of May a letter was sent to Colonel Dawkins, urging him to come to some conclusion. On the 17th a letter was sent him, saying that Lord de Grey de clined to interfere with the decision of the Commander-in- Chief. On the 19th he was informed that he must adopt some course. Therefore, from the 19th of April to the 26th of May, this case was under the consideration of Colonel Dawkins, and he did not think any charge of undue haste could be supported. He must ask the house to consider what was the power exercised by the Commander-in-Chief in this instance. In his evidence given before the Royal Commission in 1857, his royal highness said, in answer to a question put by the noble lord the member for King's Lynn, he was aware that when a man had some notorious defect, some want of temper, or some deficiency in the un derstanding, that would render him unfit to command, he might be preventedfrom succeeding in due course, although there was no stigma on his character. He considered that public opinion must back up the Commander-in-Chief in the ordinary and usual exercise of his power, and not by any means that the Commander-in-Chief should be backed up in a particular instance by public opinion. He believed ' public opinion would back up the Commander-in-Chief in 1 his exercise of that power, and he believed that if public opinion did so back up that power, it would be for the ad vantage of the public service. (Hear, hear.) The report of the commission expressed regret that the power of veto was not more frequently exercised. It was recommended that a system of selection should be adopted, which of course was a different system to that now in force ; but the Government did not attempt to carry that change into effect, because they were not supported by a party in that house large enough to warrant them in going to that extent. The appointment by seniority and by purchase was the only other alternative, and the only condition attached to it was the exercise of the power of veto in extreme cases by the Commander-in-Chief. He admitted that was a power which had not often been exercised, and of course it would be invi dious to mention instances. The questions before the house were, whether the power ought never to be exercised at all—in fact, whether appointments to one of the most responsible positions in the army were to go entirely by seniority—or whether the house was prepared to remove from the commander the. responsibility of passing his veto on an appointment, and to take the responsibility on itself as to whether or not an officer was fit to take command. (Hear, hear.) He believed there were members in that house who thought it ought to exercise that responsibility. He could not say he agreed with that opinion. Still, if members held such an opinion, it ought to be discussed on the general merits. He should,' he thought, be justified, after what he had stated, in declining to decide the question of the fitness or unfitness of Col. Dawkins for this appoint ment ; but the tone that had been taken in that debate had been such that it was impossible that he should altogether refrain from entering into the particulars of the case. As far as he understood the charge, it was that a cabal had been formed against Col. Dawkins. Mr. D. GRIFFITH—I beg the noble lord's pardon. I never made use of such a word. The Marquis of HARTINGTON was not referring par ticularly to what had been said by the hon. member ; but he understood the allegation to be that Col. Dawkins bad been very harshly treated by the officers of his regiment — (hear, hear)—and certainly that those officers had taken a dislike to him, and had persecuted him upon, most trifling charges, which charges had been. investigated by an in competent tribunal, and that, upon the report of that in competent tribunal, he had been ejected from his regiment. It was, however, perfectly erroneous to suppose that the court of, inquiry which had been held the other day was appointed to inquire into any charge against Col. Dawkins. The fact was, it was appointed to inquire into charges brought by Col. Dawkins against his superior officers. (Hear, hear.) The circumstances were these : Ever since 1859 Col. Dawkins had had a series of misunderstandings, and sometimes of disputes, with different officers of his regiment, some his superiors, others his inferiors. These were of a nature so trifling as to be capable of being dis posed of, and they generally were disposed of, by the com manding officer of the battalion ; and, indeed, in any other case nothing more would have been heard of them. But Colonel Dawkins was unwilling that these occurrences should be so disposed of. He addressed a series of letters to the Adjutant-General, in which he recapitulated the his tory of these differences, and requested that they might be laid before the Commander-in-Chief. His complaints were investigated by the Adjutant-General from time to time, and he was informed of the result. But he never appeared to have allowed any one of these matters entirely to drop. He might withdraw a letter, or he might for a time appear to be satisfied, but as soon as fresh differences arose ho always revived his old charges. One of these complaints was against Lord Frederick Paulett, and that was made the subject of investigation before a court of inquiry. The whole, or the greater part, of the correspondence between Colonel Dawkins and the Adjutant-General was laid before the court. Iu the end the court eame to the conclusion that Lord F. Paulett had misunderstood the orders given by the Commander-in-Chief with reference to Colonel Dawkins, and that he had somewhat exceeded his autho rity in declining to allow Colonel Dawkins to take the command of a wing of the battalion at a review in Hyde Park. That conclusion was accepted by the Commander in-Chief and Colonel Dawkins. Lord F. Paulett and the other officers of the battalion were informed of the result. In a word, all the notice that could be taken of the occur rence was taken. The court added to its report an expres sion of opinion that, although they were not prepared to say that Colonel Dawkins was unfit to take the command of any battalion, still it would not be beneficial to the service that he should take the command of the Cold stream Guards. Well, that opinion appeared to the Corn mander-in-Chief to be extremely vague, and one on which he could not act. His Royal Highness, therefore, ordered Colonel Dawkins to return to his duty, express ing a hope at the same time that the dispute with his superior and inferior officers would - hence forth cease. However, very few weeks •elapsed be fore Colonel Dawkins reiterated the charges which had been investigated before the court of inquiry. It had for a considerable period become necessary, in accordance with the opinion of the officers of the regiment, which was con curred in by the commander, that, on account cf Col Daw kins's peculiarities, the command of the battalion should not devolve upon him even temporarily. Naturally this could not be a permanent arrangement, and therefore the Duke of Cambridge sent for Col. Dawkins, and told him that, as in his opinion he had failed to make out his case against his superior officers, he hoped that he (Col. Daw kins) would withdraw at once and for ever all those charges, and let bygones be bygones. His Royal Highness added, if he would do so, he was willing to retract his prohibition against Col. Dawkins assuming the temporary command of the battalion, and that he should allow him to be placed in the same position as other officers of the regiment. Well, it was hoped that Col. Dawkins had accepted this proposal. However, on his return home, a letter was received from him, to the effect that he wished it to be understood he withdrew nothing and retracted nothing. The matter had then come to such a pass as to necessitate a full investiga tion into all the charges. The principal point involved was that Lord F. Paulett and several other officers had made false statements with regard to Col. Dawkins, which tended to his injury. Every effort was made to induce Cal. Dawkins to retract that charge, or, at all events, to state it in a less offensive manner. Ho persisted, however, in pressing it in the most offensive terms possible, and there was nothing left but to institute au inquiry. If that inquiry had established a prima fade case, Lord F. Paulett and the other officers im plicated would have been brought to a court-martial. Colonel Dawkins was invited to make his statement, and the fullest opportunity was afforded to him to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and he was allowed to make a complete and final statement of his case. In deed, at the conclusion of the inquiry Colonel Dawkins expressed, through the president, his thanks for the full opportunity that had been afforded to him of bringing forward his case. The court reported their opinion that Col. Dawkins had failed to substantiate the truth of his charge; that in most instances he had entirely failed, and that in every case he had failed to make out the charge of falsification against his brother officers. The court also came to the conclusion that the command of the battalion by Col. Dawkins would be decidedly injurious to the public service. But they added to their report, and the Commander in-Chief fully coincided in the conclusion, that nothing which had come before them had in any way impugned the character of Col Dawkins as an officer. They were of opinion that he was in his own mind convinced of the jus tice of the charges. and that he had not knowingly brought forward charges which were groundless. It was alleged that the Court had not been unanimous in their finding; but the fact was, the report had been signed by the president, and every member of the court, after an intimation had been given to them of the manner in which any one dissatisfied with the result might record his protest. No protest was made, and the first intimation which had reached the Com mander-in-Chief of the court not being unanimous was the appearance of that letter from Col. De Bathe. Sir Alex. Woodford and other members of the court wore then con sulted, and they all stated that, although Col. De Bathe had during the proceedings expressed opinions adverse to the majority of the court, he made no objection whatever to sign the report. It has also been stated that another mem ber of the court had signed a protest. All the members of the court, however, denied that statement, and they had given an a ssurance that throughout the inquiry, with the exception of Col. De Bathe, they had been perfectly unani mous. Therefore, so far as the alleged want of unanimity THE SUN, - LONDON, -SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 27, 1865. was concerned, it appeared to be wholly without foundation. After the report of the court of inquiry, the Commander-in- Chief was of opinion that there was no ground whatever for bringing Colonel Dawkins's superior officers before a court-martial ; and, acting upon his own knowledge as to what had .been going on in the regiment for so many years, and of Colonel Dawkins's character, sup ported no doubt by the opinion of the court, his Royal Highness gave Col. Dawkins the option of retiring upon half-pay and of selling his commission. His royal highness had acted entirely upon his own responsibility and his own knowledge of what had taken place, and he had no wish to shelter himself behind the report of the committee of in quiry. Col. Dawkins' notions of subordination and mili tary discipline, and of the relations which ought to subsist between him and his brother officers, were such, that, in the opinion of his royal highness, it would have been highly injurious to the service if he were entrusted with the com mand of the regiment. He would only refer to the details of one of the charges. It was said that Lord Rokeby had acted illegally in placing Col. Dawkins under arrest for re fusing to take his hand. The facts were these. Two days previously Lord Rokeby had had occasion to speak some what severely to Col. Dawkins on some matter of discip line ; and, wishing to show that he had no personal ill feeling towards him, the noble lord twice held out his hand to Col. Dawkins, and made some civil remark. Col. Daw kins, when his attention was called to the fact by Colonel Chesney that Lord Rokeby was speaking to him, rose from his seat, and saluted him in a manner which was considered highly insubordinate by his brother officers. Lord Rokeby did nothing at the time, but, having taken half an hour or an hour to consider the matter, and having consulted other officers, came to the conclusion that Col. Dawkins' manner had been exceedingly disrespectful, especially considering that there were a great number of junior officers present. Lord Rokeby then placed him in arrest, and reported the matter to the lieutenant-general commanding at the camp. The commander-in-chief happened to be out of town, or from some other circumstance the decision of his royal highness was not received for 11. days ; but Lord Rokeby was not responsible for that,and had been guilty of no ille gality in ordering his arrest. The commander-in-chief,being of opinion there was no sufficient case upon which to bring Col. Dawkins to court-martial, ordered him to be released. But it must not be supposed that Colonel . Dawkins suf fered any confinement whatever pending the decision of his Royal Highness ; for on the second day of the arrest Lord Rokeby, finding that , no communication had been re ceived from the Commander-in-Chief, said it would be of no use to keep Col. Dawkins any longer in camp, although it might be necessary that he should still remain under arrest; he had better therefore proceed to London. Col. Dawkins spent 11 days doing what he pleased, and had not suffered any inconvenience. The other complaints were quite as trivial, and some even more so ; and he (Lord Hartington) did not think it necessary o go into them. He declined to produce the papers which had been asked for, and he did not think the House of Commons was the tri bunal to determine the question in dispute. He considered that no injustice had been done, and that no grievance ex isted to call for the interposition of Parliament. He did not believe that a number of officers would combine together, as had been represented by Col. Dawkins, to make false statements respecting the character and prospects of a brother officer ; and until he heard the allegation supported by arguments very different from those which had been adduced that evening, he should prefer to believe that Col. Dawkins had, owing to some peculiarities of temper, en tirely misunderstood the action of those officers, and taken an entirely mistaken view of their conduCt towards him. He hoped, therefore, that the house would decline to give the papers moved for by such a majority as would prove convincingly not only that they did not believe the state ments of tyranny which had been brought forward, but also that they did not approve of cases such as this being brought forward for discussion in the House of Commons. (Loud cheers.) General PEEL said there were two points on which he thought the house were almost unanimous, and he agreed entirely on both points, although apparently contradictory and antagonistic to each other. He agreed that it was not proper nor convenient, for the House of Commons to interfere in questions of discipline, and constitute itself a court of appeal from military decisions. He equally agreed that if any individual had a grievance to com plain of, he had a right to come to the house for redress, let the grievance be what it might. The question was, how were they to reconcile the action of the house so as not to ; interfere in the one instance with the discipline of the army, nor in the other to allow injustice to be done to indi viduals. Nothing could be more inconvenient than for the house to interfere with the discipline of the army. Such interference would be a great question as to trenching upon the prerogative of the Crown, while he held it to be per fectly undeniable that it was in the power of the Crown to dismiss or dispense with the services of any officer. On the other hand, they had a Minister of the Crown respon sible to Parliament for the manner in which that preroga tive was exercised ; and if they had reason to believe that justice had not been done in any particular case they had a right to demand from the Minister an explanation of his conduct. 'He did not know how ho could better explain the difference between the exercise of such powers by that house and by the Minister.of the Crown than by quoting the words of the late Earl Grey, spoken in 1812, and em bodied in the report of the Royal Commission on Military Organisation. Earl Grey said : " The whole notion of there being anything unconstitutional in bringing the army more under the Ministry of the day seems to me to arise from a confusion between the powers exercised by the responsible Minister of the Crown and the powers exer cised by .a Parliamentary committee, or some mode of the kind. Undoubtedly it was very unconstitutional in the Long Parliament, that all the powers of the State should have been assumed by committees of the House of Com mons, but the power over the army exercised by a respon sible servant of the Crown appears to be consistent with, and an essential element of, our constitution." He quite agreed in that opinion. In the report of the Royal Com mission on Purchase it bad been laid down most decidedly that the Commander-in-Chief had the power of exercising a veto on the appointment of officers to command regi ments. The present Earl Grey, in his evidence before that commission, expressed this opinion : " I am bound to say I think that in our service hitherto there has been a want of sufficient firmness in refusing promotion to those who do deserve it." And Sir Charles Yorke said that the less delicacy and indulgence that was exercised in such matters the better it was for the service. The hon. mem ber for Devizes (Mr. D. Griffith), without any notice what ever in the first instance, had called upon the house to in sist upon the decision of the Commander-in-Chief being suspended until further inquiries should have taken place. Now, what inquiry could take place? It would be answered, "a court-martial." But was the house prepared to say, in opposition to the report of the Royal Commissioners and to the undoubted rights of the Commander-in-chief, that no person should be prohibited from having the command of a regiment unless he should have committed some military crime which would subject him to be cashiered ? If they were prepared to go that length, were they still prepared to hold the Commander-in-Chief responsible for the efficiency of the army ? (Hear, hear.) It was not merely a hard case that would justify the interference of the house. If any officer could show that. the Commander-in-Chief had used his authority contrary to law, then he admitted that any hon. member had a right to demand from the house of Commons justice for the party aggrieved. With respect to the present case, he might mention that he did not know Colonel Dawkins, but he was acquainted with some of the other officers whose names had been mentioned, and he might possibly have a feeling against the colonel, from what he had heal d from them. But this was now the case, not of Colonel Dawkins, but of the military authorities, and in the present instance the Secretary of State for War was directly responsible, if the house, having heard the statement of the noble lord opposite, still thought there was a case. He must say that this case was a proof of the inconvenience of the Secretary of State for War not hav ing a seat in that House ; for if he had been there he would have been able to tell them that they were not called upon to interfere in the case of an individual ; and if the Judge Advocate had answered what appeared to him to be a very simple question, he thought the house might at once have come to the conclusion—as he trusted they would do now —to refuse to enter into an individual case, and also to re fuse the production of the papers. (Hear, hear.) Mr. HEADLAM explained that the reason why he did not answer the questions addressed to him on this subject the other evening was that he had no official or real know ledge of the proceedings which had taken place, and under these circumstances he did not think he should have been acting respectfully towards the house if ho had risen in his place, and pledged his character that the proceedings had been legal. (Hear, hear, and cries of Divide.) Colonel DICKSON expressed his regret that the Govern ment would not interfere to to put a stop to the unfortu nate cause of dispute hetween that house and the military authorities—(no, no)—which must prove most injurious to the service, and might eventuate in one of those great mili tary scandals which were so much to be deplored. He perfectly agreed with the broad principle laid down by the noble lord the Under-Secretary for War as to the conduct of this house in regard to the Horse Guards, for he be lieved the army to be a Royal and not a Parliamentary army, and the interference of the house ought to be limited to the annual expression on the vote of supply of approval • or disapproval• of its general direction. It was, in his opinion, beneficial to the State that the army should be commanded by a Prince of the Blood who by his zeal and ability had proved himself worthy of his position. (Loud cries of Divide.) But still, though he had the highest re spect for the military 'authorities, he had greater respect for the independence and legal influence of the House of Commons. All that was asked now was that the case of Col. Dawkins might receive further consideration, and that ) the papers should be produced in order to afford. the public an opportunity of forming a direct opinion on the subject. • (Divide.) 1 After a few words from Mr. 0. STANLEY, who was interrupted by cries of "Divide," ) The motion was negatived without a division. PROTECTION OF THE COLONIES. - - Mr. MARSH directed attention to the cost of the pro tection of . the colonies, and the advantages which the mother country derived from them. After taking a rapid view of the military requirements of the different colonies, and the extent to which these. were met, he contended that the possession of colonies was indispensable for the circulation of the commerce of this country, for without them we should be compelled to establish garrisons and coal depots and maintain great naval stations all over the world. Observations were also made by Mr. BAZLEY, who argued that the colonies were bound to rely for protection chiefly upon their own resources. Mr. CARDWELL said the policy adopted of late years towards the colonies had established as a principle that they were to be self-supporting, and with regard to the civil service especially, if any vote were taken for them it must be justified upon strictly exceptional grounds. As to the colonial military expenditure, a committee had sat and reported in 1862, and, in making certain recommendations, had distinguished between such places as Gibraltar, Malta, and Bermuda—the strongholds of the country—and maintained for purposes not strictly of colonisation, and those possessions which they termed colonies proper. Since 1862 arrangements had been made by which New Zealand was to contribute a substantial sum towards its military expenditure. In the Australia s there were scarcely any troops, and similar arrangements were being made there. The number of troops on the West Coast of Africa and in the West Indies had been diminished. Hong Kong, Mauritius, and Ceylon were in like manner required to contribute towards their military protection. So that there was scarcely one of the recommendations of the committee which had not engaged the practical attention of the Government, and in which some progress had not been made. The Government highly valued the connection subsisting between the colonies and the mother country, and were fully sensible of the great advantages to the latter of those great, free, enterprising, and industrious commu nities ; at the same time they expected from them that they would manifest a spirit of self-reliance. Thus helping themselves, and doing their duty towards the mother country, they might confidently rely upon receiving her encouragement and support. Subsequently the house went into committee on .the navy estimates, and discussed the vote of £527,985 for new works, buildings, machinery, and repairs, which was agreed to. Certain votes were also taken for the civil service. On the order for going into committee on the Dockyard Extensions Bill, Sir J. ELPHINSTONE moved that the expense of the contracts for dockyard extensions to be authorised by this bill would best be defrayed by terminable annuities, as in the case of the fortifications under the act 26th and 27th Vic., cap. 80. The motion was opposed by the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, on the ground that its object was to de fray the cost of dockyard extensions, not by annual votes of the house, but by having resort to the ignominious expedient of casting the burden upon posterity, and making it an addition to the public debt. The proposal was a futile one, and he hoped the house would reject it. Discussion followed, Mr. Corry, Mr. Bentinck, and Mr. Lygon supporting, and Lord C. Paget opposing the mo tion, which, having at length been negatived, the bill was passed through committee. The other orders of the day and notices on the paper were then disposed of, and the house adjourned. Naval and Military Intelligence. VALETTA, May 22.—0n1y three days having elapsed since the departure of the last mail, I have little to notice of interest or importance. The En chantress, Royal steam-yacht, Staff Commander J. E. Petty, arrived on the 20th inst. from Venice, where she landed Prince Arthur on the 16th. She leaves to-morrow afternoon for Lisbon, taking Mr. Bulwer Lytton, Secretary of Legation at that place, and will thence proceed to England. The Royal Oak, 35, and Resistance, 16, returned into port this morn ing, having been outside for several days, undergoing a series of steam trials and exercising the crews at target practice. The Victoria, 102 (flagship), has also- returned to harbour. The Wizard gunboat, Lieut.-Commander G. 11. Lawson, came in this morning front Tunis, having on board Capt. Saulez,_ appointed to command the Cossack. Mr, Boyne, R.N., also arrived by her. The Egyptian Govern ment screw steamer Tantah arrived on the 19thinst. from England, and left soon afterwards for Alexan dria. The Magicienne, 16, Capt. W. Armytage, was suddenly ordered off to sea this morning, and left, it is said, for Salerno. The object of her departure has not transpired, and people are wondering what can be the reason for sending her so unexpectedly to such an out-of-the-way place. The last advices from Naples say that the brigands are again giving trouble in the immediate neighbourhood of that city ; but we have no doubt that the Italian Government are well able to protect the lives and property of foreign residents without our assistance. The Supply, Government storeship, is discharging stores at the victualling-yard, and is expected to leave on return to England early in June. Colonel Laffan, Royal Engineers, has proceeded from Malta to Ceylon to take part in a commission on the trans fer of Ceylon from the Indian to the Imperial esta blishment. Col. Montagu, R.E., has been ordered home from Malta, and will be relieved by Major Nugent, from Weymouth. Capt. Bland is on sick leave, and will be relieved by Lieut. Brine. Deputy Commissary-General De Fonblanque, another member of the commission mentioned above, has passed through Malta for Ceylon." Her Majesty's screw line-of-battle ship Edgar, 74, Capt. Geoffrey Hornby, flagship to Sir Sidney Colpoys Dacres, in command of the Channel Squa dron, arrived in Portland Roads at four o'clock on Thursday morning. The Trinculo, Commander Craig, also arrived with the flagship. Her Majesty's ironclad ship Pallas was yesterday successfully docked at Woolwich for completion, having been detained on the preceding day by the heavy collection of mud and other refuse at the en trance of the dock. A similar difficulty would have been experienced on her being launched but for the precautions taken by Mr. Turner, the master ship wright, who was awarded a gratuity of 140 by the Lords of the Admiralty for the success of the launch. The launch of her Majesty's ironclad frigate Lord Warden, 24, 1,000 horse power, will take place at Chatham Dockyard this afternoon at high tide. The following appointments were made yesterday at the Admiralty :—Capt. W. R. Rolland, to the Phoebe, vice Capt. Fortescue, deceased ; and Capt. Richard D; White, to the Cossack, vice Captain Rolland. SPIRIT OF TEE PUBLIC JOURNALS TIMES.—The intelligence of the capture of Mr. Jefferson Davis will produce a feeling of uneasiness and anxiety in every country in Europe. We had hoped, and we seemed to have good reason to hope, that either through the skill of his own dispositions or by the wise connivance of his enemies, Mr. Davis would have effected his escape from the land where he has played his stake so boldly and lost it so com pletely. The hopes of the South are evidently crushed beyond all chance of redemption, and it would have been a wise as well as a magnanimous policy to suffer its leaders to escape. To a politic and generous conqueror there is nothing more embarrass ing than the capture of a vanquished enemy ; it is, one of those positions which he would anxiously en deavour to avoid. A long experience has taught Europe at least this lesson. When William of Orange found that King James had returned from Fever sham, he determined, if possible, to escape the diffi culties which would arise if he were compelled to make him prisoner, and took very good care to do nothing which might seriously tend to his arrest until he knew he was completely out of danger. The Pro visional Government of France in 1830 conducted Charles X. to the coast with all honour and respect, and eighteen years afterwards Louis Philippe was exposed to no molestation in his less dignified flight to our shores. We confess it is with much anxiety we look forward to the probable fate of the Southern President. The utterances of Mr. Johnson have for some time been such as to cause the liveliest uneasi ness in the minds of all who are anxious to see this great strife terminated without the effusion of more blood. If slaughter can heal the wounds of the Republic, enough of human hecatombs have been offered at its shrine ; there needs not another life to establish the fortune of the victors: But the Pre sident has, ever since his accession, continually talked of the guilt of treason, and we fear he has determined to conciliate the extreme party of his supporters at whatever expense of policy or of mercy. We beg we may not be misunderstood. The inhabitants of these islands have little reason to sympathise with Mr. Jefferson Davis. He is known to us as one of the most inveterate cal umn i a t ors o f this country, whose policy it was to stir up the feel ings of every class of his countrymen against us. We also remember him as the author and originator of the famous Mississippi scheme of repudiation. His plan of _rebellion was founded on the idea that the deprivation of cotton would be intolerable, and that, driven by hard necessity, we should find our selves compelled to support the South with the whole force of the empire. For the person who can thus speculate as his means of success on the miseries he can inflict on his neighbours we have little respect, and if we plead for the life of Mr. Jef ferson Davis it is not from any esteem for Ins mo tives or sympathy with his character. Itis purely in the cause and for the credit of the American Union that we urge its statesmen, if there is yet time, to consider again and again the extreme im policy of shedding the blood of a man whom a little success would have transformed from an attainted traitor into something very like a successful monarch. The stake has.been played fairly, it has been lost entirely, and the victor should be content with his success. Of course it is quite possible for a Govern ment able to put its own interpretation on the Con stitution which the sword has established to declare Mr. Davis and all who have acted with him during the great civil war entitled to mercy, and to treat the insurrection as an unsuccessful attempt to sepa rate two Sovereign States. We cannot, however, help fearing that it is more in accordance with the disposition of the present President to rule every point in his own favour, and to treat an attempt to break up a Confederacy as a rebellion against the Government of a lawful Sovereign. Even if this be his view, we venture to propose to him our own example. We had a rebellion in 1848 in Ire land, but we disdained to dip our hands in the blood of the rebels. We pardoned Smith O'Brien, and Mitchell, and Meagher. In their case there was no difficulty in ascertaining the law ; the crime was perfectly well known, and the punishment equally notorious. The capital punishment of Charles 1., whatever people may think of it now, was undoubt edly a great mistake, and probably one of the prin cipal causes of the long and dreary period which we had to wait before the accomplishment of our liber ties was finally attained. Equally impolitic was the execution of Louis XVI. Had we seized Washington in the earlier days of the revolutionary war, we might have considered ourselves justified in executing him as a deserter, for he had once borne the King's com mission. But long before the end of the war we had learnt to know him and respect him, and had he fallen into our hands he would have been considered entitled to all the courtesies due to a generous and noble-minded adversary. All this is of co urse,written on the supposition, the truth of which we do not for a moment doubt, that it will be found impossible to connect Mr. Davis in any way with the atrocious plot for the assassination of Mr. Lincoln. Our ob ject is not to palliate that enormous. crime, and, if it be possible to show that Mr. Davis was cognizant of it, we have nothing to say in his defence. We desire only to take the first opportunity of repre senting how enormous would be the guilt of com mencing a proscription which would give the tone to all political contests in America for the next century. We do not doubt that the punishment of death has its uses, but they arise when it is em ployed really as a punishment and not as an act of vengeance. Wise conquerors make as few martyrs as possible, and for one cause that has suffered by too great lenity, it is easy to point out a hundred that have been ruined by too much severity. Punishment is for the violation of municipal law. The man who is able to set up a Government and carry on a tremendous conflict for four years has elevated himself beyond the reach of mere criminal proceedings.. Burke could not draw up an indict ment against a nation, and on Mr. Jefferson Davis were concentrated the hopes and the feelings of a brave and most unhappy people. Modern Europe affords but one precedent for capital punishment in such a case—the treatment of Poland by Russia - ; and that precedent is not one to encourage imita tion. When a people rise for a common object they are not likely to be deterred by the prospect of individual punishment, and when punishment ceases to deter it ceases to be justifiable. HERALD.—The cavalry who captured Mr. Jeffer son Davis did their duty to the Government which employed them, but they did it a very ill service. If it were ever wise to build a bridge for a retreat ing enemy it was so in this case,, and instead of offering a reward for the apprehension of Mr. Davis, the Northern Government should have ordered its officers to facilitate his escape. It has caught him ; what will it do with him ? It cannot let him go scot free without falsifyinc , all the declarations of its head, and renouncing all purpose of punishing the rebels ; it cannot inflict upon him the penalty. which his chief has , threatened without covering itself with everlasting infamy and perpetuating the discord which it should be its object, as it certainly is its interest, to allay. To confiscate the property of Mr. Davis ' to banish him, are measures which the Northern Government might take without any very great reproach, but they are measures which Mr. Davis would have saved it the trouble of tak ing. It has set a price upon his head with very dif ferent intentions. It must bring him to trial for participation in the murder of Mr. Lincoln, or for treason. His acquittal, which in a fair trial must follow, will cover it with shame. His condemnation, obtained by the foul means from which Mr. Andrew Johnson it is known will not shrink, and his execu tion in consequelice of that condemnation, would excite it against all the best of his own citizens and earn for it the loathing of the rest of the world. It is the misfortune, we will not say of Mr. Jefferson Davis—for to him it can be a small sacrifice to die for the cause in which he has so often risked his life, and to survive the overthrow of which must be an inextinguishable anguish, but of the Northern people, that the chief magistrate of the United States, in whose hands the fate of the President of the Confederacy lies de facto, although not de jure, thirsts for the blood of his vanquished adversary. Mr. Andrew Johnson is one of those arrogant men who, professing the utmost disregard for their opponents, keenly feel and never forgive their superiority. He has fought, he tells us, against the Southern aristocracy. We know that he is a renegade from the cause of the South. He has had many a sharp encounter with Mr. Jefferson Davis, and suffered many a humiliation which he burns to revenge. The ignorant, rough, fanatical tailor, who by force of great demagogic powers has won for himself a position in the party, had not a few slights and rebuffs to put up with from the in telligent and educated gentlemen of the South amongst whom he strove to make himself a leader. All these slights, party and personal, he has treasured up, and promises to revenge. Before the bright idea struck him of forging evidence to denounce Mr. Davis as an accomplice in the murder of Mr. Lincoln he laboured to stimulate the animosity of the people against his foe by talking constantly of treason and the necessity of punishing it; and we must suppose that the Southern President will therefore be ex posed to a double ordeal—be tried for a murder in which he had no more part than Mrs. Johnson, and if acquitted of that charge, in spite of all the intimi dation and corruption which will be employed to assure his conviction, tried again for treason—that is to say, for interpreting the Constitution of the United States in precisely the same spirit in which it had been construed by the dominant political party ever since its enaction. We do not believe that there is a man in the Northern States who believes that Jefferson Davis was privy in any way to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, but we are far from assured that he will not be found guilty of that I crime by some tribunal, and condemned to death. Andrew Johnson has set his heart upon murdering , his old foe, and he is a man who will sacrifice every thing to his hatreds. He has tools enough to hishand. The dispenser of power for four years, he can easily find a military tribunal which will accept the incre dible, the clearly disproved, stories of suborned wit nesses, or meeting secretly without even goinc , through the form of taking evidence and hearing the accused, declare him guilty. Nor will such a court make much difficulty in discovering that a treason, provided for by the constitution of the United States, and incurring the penalty of death upon the scaffold, was committed by Mr. Davis and all who threw in their lot with secession. Where the law has been deliberately set aside, as it has been in the Northern States ; where, as in these States, the President of a republic has assumed an unlimited and despotic power. and a state of siege de facto, been established as cruel as any ever decreed in Poland, there can be no difficulty in destroying any man whose destruction the chief of the State de sires. The only hope that Mr. Davis may be treated honourably and justly—that the reunited States may not commence their new career by an act branding them to all future times—rests in the possibility that the. nation may revolt against the outrage which its chief proposes to commit in its name, and make it impossible for him to gratify is infamous designs. But that hope, we must confess, is a very small one. The news papers of the largest circulation and greatest in fluence announce the capture of Mr. Davis in lan guage of fiendish exultation. They gloat over the prospect of his judicial murder; and knowing, as we must assume, the character of the public they address ; promise it a glorious satisfaction in the in dignities and pains to which the rebel President will be subjected. Still we would fain hope, for the sake of our common humanity, for our common kindred, that the American people may show itself in this critical hour more just, more generous, and more sagacious than the drunken blackguard whom, after the fashion of an ignorant African tribe, it has chosen for its ruler, and the unscrupulous writers who try to earn its favour by flattering its lowest passions, and insist that the man whose rare abilities and high character have conferred a lustre upon the United States should be treated with fairness and justice, if not with magnanimity. To express any pity or anxiety for Mr. Davis himself would be to insult him. Whatever fate his enemies may pre pare for him he will meet it, doubtless, with the courage which has sustained him during the trying, but glorious, years of his presidency. He has done his duty. He has defended the cause of freedom and of right with almost superhuman energy; and having seen the noblest of his countrymen lay down their lives for that cause, sacrifice themselves in the hope and the trust that their country would be suc cessful, now that the struggle is seemingly over, and the South has sunk into despair, he must the rather desire to seal his testimony with his blood. To such a man there must be something inspiriting and consoling in the prospect of such a death. His blood, he will feel assured, will not flow in vain.. Broken as may now be the strength, crushed as may now be the spirit of the South, the spirit is not dead ; the strength will be recovered, and the cruel martyrdom of its great chief, kindling it to revenge, will keep alive the love of liberty until the hour comes in which to renew the fight, which for a race of freedom can only finally end with victory. COUNTRY MARKETS LIVERPOOL-FRIDAY. The arrivals from Ireland and coastwise since Tuesday have been moderate, and consist of 669 qrs. wheat, 894 qrs. oats, and 120 sacks flour The trade has been quiet but firm for all articles. At this day's market there was a thin attendance of the town and country trade and a very small business was transacted, Wheat and flour met with a slow sale at Tuesday's rates. Oats and oatmeal were in very limited request, although offered on rather easier terms. Barley, beans, and peas were neglected, and nominally without change in value. Indian corn scarcely inquired for, and fine Danube obtainable at 29s 3d per 4801 b. WAXEFIELD.-FRmAY. The fine genial weather has caused the wheat trade to become less active, and to-day but little progress can be made in sales although some concession in price wou ld generally be yielded. Spring corn in limited demand, and there is no material change to note in value. Averages, May 22 :—Wheat, 3,079 qrs, at 45s Ild ; bar ley, 103, at 30s 61d ; oats, 50, at 24s 6d. LINCOLN.—FRIDAY. New white wheat, 42s to 45s ; new red, 38s to 41s per 3 6 stone.. -Barley for malting, 32s to 348 per qr ; grindingi 27s to 31s per 30 stone. Oats, 22s to 255. Beans, 42s to 46s per qr. DEBBY—FRIDAY. New white wheat, 46s to 50s ; new red, 39s to 44s per 3 6 stone. Barley for malting, 32s to 35s per qr. ; grinding, 28s to 30s per 30 stone. Oats, new, 21s to 255; old, 25s to 28s per 24 stone. Beans, old, 40s to 455; new, 38s to 41s per qr. S TAMP ORD.—FRIDAT. New white wheat, 41s to 445; new red, 36s to 39s per 36 stone. Barley, malting, 31s to 335; grinding, 28s to 30s per qr. Oats, new, 22s to 265; old, —s to —s per 24 stone. Beans, 36s to 40s per 38 stone. Peas as heretofore. COAL MARKET. . Price per ton at the close of the market. s. d. s. cl• Walls End Haswell... 18 0 East Hartlepool Tunstall Cassop Cowpen Hartley l5 9 Heugh Hall l7 0 Hartlepool Northumberl'd Main. 13 6 Stewart's 18 0 Ships at market, 32; sold, 13. Railway Traffic Returns for the Week. Miles Opened. ReeeiptO. Railways. ......___..A.--....„..--..--- -- . , 1866. 1864. 1865 1864. .£ A Belfast and N, Counties lO3 100 1,856 1.7 6 2 Belfast and Couuty Down 49 49 819 79 , 4 ' Blyth and Tyne . 28 28 2,489 I, Bl ', Bristol and Exeter l2l/ 1214 9,0L8 7, 150 Caledonian 2Bll 2.14 19,911 18,870 Cambrian Cockermouth K & Penrlth - - - Cockermouth and Worain Cork and Bandon 2O 20 . 380 6 .,,,' Cork, Blackrock, & Passage 64 64 1 91 21. 1 Cornwall 654 651 2,034 2./ 70 Deeside ' 17 17 4 8 La Dublin & Belfast Junction 63 63 1,400 Lo_T x , Dublin and Drogheda 75 75 . 2,080: 1 . 61, Dublin and Meath Dub. & Wicklow and Wextd 914 914 3,159 3 . 3. ; Furness, &c • 50 6 i 3,104 3. 3 '; Glasgow & South-Western Gt. Eastern,Nrik.,&E.Union Great Northern 4Ol 365 35.,33 29,6' Great North of Scotland 99 99 3,464 3,336' tit: Nortlin. & Westn..(lrel.) 714 714 4. 5 4 85 rit.Southn. & Westn.(lrlud.) 3874 373 i 8,652 9.81 9 Great Western l2BB 1225 69,1_05 72, 241 Hull & Hornsea - 165 -- Inverness & Aberdeen Juno- - 1174 1174 1,677 1. 4 1 Inverness & Perth Jiin,tion 1191 1195 1,929 1, 6 „',1 Irish North-Western 145 145 3,712 1 ,6 ?„„" Kent Coast 27 27 - 1,500 3 9 1 ,,"",, Lancashire& Yorkshire 403 402 40,137 5 3,2 ,r Limerick and Ennis... 244 2 135 4 • 38 20 Limerick and Foynes - Llanelly 46/ 4 ' 778 662 LlYnvi Valley London & North-Western mi London and Blackwall ..... London & South-Western Lorid. Brighton, &S. Coast 267 261 4 19,567 2 2 4'7, I London, Chatham, & Dover 72 724 5,737 6 .;,.11,," Do. Metropolitan Extension 11 104 2,500 1. , • , 1 Lou., Tilbury, & Southend Man.,Shetlield,& Lincoinsh • 24:4 - 2122 18,242 2 '+ 9 ` v 8 blanch. blanch. S.J un.& Altrincham.. 01 94 1e42 2 - 9- hlaryport and Carlislel,423 153). 28 . 28 „,•„ 1 Metropolitan Midland (incl. N.-Western) 6634 641 45,126 COI, Midland Gt.Westn. of Irind 262 262 4.517 4.7 8 ' Monkland 44 • 3,459 3, 229 Monmouthsh. Rail. & Canal 4 4714 714 I ' sll 1.653 North British, Edin., Perth 28 and Dundee N-Eastern and Stock. & DarL 1110 1095 61,571 0 4, L 5, !. North London 9 9 3,44 3,..,,'„- North Staffordshire 254 258 8,284 9 . IF:: Rhymney 395 191 925 1,( 9 1 Scottish Central Scottish North-Eastern l3B 138 5,781 5.34!, Somerset and Dorset 66 66 1.0 2 7 3 ' South Devon South-Eastern 3OB 305 22,054 21,0 0 Tall Vale 57 57 1,1 . .:6 5,032 Ulster lO9 1054 2:427 1:46S Vale of Clwyd. l - 10 191 201 Waterford and Kilkenny 3l .31 :iB6 3 41 Waterford and Limerick 77 77 1,213 1, 17 ; . West Cornwall 274 27i b. 9 il: W.Haztlepool Ilarbr.& Rail— 52} 521. 4. , 34 4. 1 " Irhaven,Cleator,& Egrmnt lO 10 C 95 839 Whitehaven J unction l3 13 904 1,16 1 W intehaven & Furness Jun 35 35 b 55 9 ' - FOREIGN AND COLONIAL. Austrian B_2B_ 825 33, 93 27.2_," Bahia and San Francisco 761. 761 ra s Belgian Ea.st ern J unction 261 261 353 "- Bombay, Baroda, & Cen. India 306 1851 6,815 3 , ,2 2 7 6 Detroit and 31 i lwaukie lB9 189 6,n7 4 '''' Dutch Rhenish loBk bBl 5,840 5,3 ,„ 1 ?, Eastern oi France Eastern Bengal East Indian Grand Trunk of Canada 1377 1435 ;26.:198 22,4 ,,„.. - Great Central of Belgium 295 272 6,485 ra ,/ Great Indian Peninsula 590 553} 1 ,314 10 , " a 341 Great Luxembourg 134 134 6,258 •• ,4 Great Southern of India Gnat Western of Canada 345 315 12,'21 1.0.71 4 92 Madras - R4O Madrid, Saragossa &Alicant (.131 650 15,334 x' 7g ) Northern pf Canada ... ..... Northern of France 728 728 '68,0313 57 .' 7 4 Norwegian Trunk ' ' '44 44 507 4 9 0 Ottoman ' 481 481 729 , 442 Paris, Lyons, & Medlterrn 1967 1784 149,331 1 ' v l ' 4- 0 ~ Paris and Orleans 1616 1611 71,936 • • 25 92 Recife and San Francisco, &c 771 771 1,4€ 6 I'3 o 9 28 Sc:nde lO5 105 1,484 -. 02 Do. Punjab, &a ' 34 32 283 3 r , vil South Austrian, &o ~.. . 1651 1527 56,508 o'* 09 oh 1 Southern of France 423 , . 770 31,276 - -- 49 Victoria 1 Welland 25 25 136 West & N-Wn. of France Foreign Mail Packet List. Australia and New Zealand, via Southampton June 18. Ditto, via Marseilles ..June I** Brazil and Cape Verds. by British pac.et Juno 6 .. Ditto, by French packet .. Juno 2. "' Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helena.... June 22• China, Penang, and Singapore. via Sou:hampton. Jane 2 ' Ditto, via Marseilles May 27 ' Falkland Islands Gibraltar, via Southampton • •2 India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Southampton.... June Ditto, via Marseilles Mel 2 , 1. India (Bombay), via Southampton Ditto, via Marseilles ... . Juno Mauritius, via Southampton Ditto, via Marseil e 3 Newfoundland Juno 7 ' Portugal Ditto, by private ship to Lisbon... United States and British North America, by Bri tish packet Ditto, by United States packet, via Southamp ton Ditto, via Curk Ditto, by Canadian packet, via Londonderry.. Jun e !" 0 . West Coast of Africa, Madeira, and Teneriffe . Juno West Indies and Pacific (except Bahamas, Cuba, 0 9, and Mexico gal * Bahamas, via New York. Juan r. Bermuda, ditto Cuba and Mexico ... . .. 101 MILITARY SAVINGS-BANKS.—The account of 133iii' tary savings-banks, which has been issued by the ax, office, made up to the end of March, 1864, shows thlo 13 that date there were 17,911 accounts open and £392,2_„4 due to depositors —an increase of 290 accounts £13,121 since the corresponding date in 1863. ths. GANDY.—On the 25th inst ß ~i r at Roe Field, near Ou''' the wife of Captain H. Gandy, of a daughter. PARISH.—On the 25th inst., at Chisl e h ur st, the vr's" Alfred Parish, Esq., of a daughter. I f g V II. TEwsoN.—On the 26th inst., at Upper Clapton, A- 1.- * Tewson, of a son. E. C' SMITH.—On the 24th inst., at Enfield, the wife of Smith, Esq., of a son. Marriages. tio ol BYLES—IINwnr.—On the 26th inst., at the Congree-icleo Church, Lion-walk, Colchester, William Pollaral ,itratt son of Wm. Byles, Esq., of Bradford, Yorkshire, to P oo l- Anne, daughter of Stephen Unwin, jun. , s c il chester. „„ r eb, HUDSON—LYE.—On the 25th inst., at the old Brighton, John Hudson, Esq., of Fenchurch-builaW,st London, and Southend, Essex, to Charlotte, youtes daughter of the late John Lye, Esq., of Lancaster -P. Strand, and Walcot-place, Kennington. Deaths. 011/1 CASTLE.—On the 25th in . st.,llenry Castle, Esq.'? °) ' Lodge, Wandsworth, and Millbank, aged 58. ~,, n ig, DALRYMPLE.—On the 23d inst. it at Purbi ook-heath, -u'"--,10 Mary, wife of the late Major-G enera l Sir Joh n Pr iu ' Dalrymple, Bart„ of Newhailes, aged 76. MARS Gen I e A raTA . ant -74. Yu /3 — n O th n on th y e m 2s ar th sha in ll s , t o ., f t a h t e r ß ly o mo l u E th , gin Li e e o rs te ,as ea e ' PHILLIPS.—On the 23d inst., at Towyn, Merionethshir John Bowen Phillips, Esq., aged 70. . r .,. 'lOO OO OLE.—On the 24th inst the Rev. Henry v an ,„ a P Pole, M.A., of Waltham-place, Maidenhe4w.te.r;aciiiit WEsq., aged 78. 5, Springfield Villa Kilburn, --.-------- ------ WBt London : Printed and Published brWILLIAIt AND/t 6 t o, of No. 112, Strand, Plinter, Kt' S avoy SUN ttice , 14° 0 Of Strand, in the Precinct of the ,in the COP ' Middlesex.—Saturday, Kay 27, 1865. ' a ;, t;