The Press.
London, England, 1855-03-24 00:00:00

6orrtsgonttrat.

GENERAL VIVIAN'S APPOINTMENTS.
TO THE EDITOR OF " THE PRESS."
Sir,—l observe in your number of Saturday, the
17th inst., a letter signed "Honos." I conclude that
letter was written, with all honesty of purpose, to
uphold the character of the Turkish contingent.
Your correspon.lent states that " General Vivian has
nominated to high commands two persons who were
cashiered the Bengal army some years ago for
scandalous and infamous behaviour." He adds—
" One person in that category was invited by the
directors to meet the Prime Minister at dinner, &c.,
and was at the last levee presented by General
Vivian to the Queen." No officer at the London
Tavern on the occasion alluded to, or presented by
General Vivian at the levee, had been cashiered by
a court-martial for scandalous, infamous conduct.
The Conservative member will, therefore, perhaps
hesitate before he brings such a subject before the

house.
Your correspondent has sent you the names. I
think there can be no doubt what gentleman are
meant. I therefore send you the names, and if '
they correspond with those sent by " Honos" you
will judge how far his communications are to be de-
pended upon.•
The " one person in the category " was never
brought to trial for scandalous and infamous conduct :
he was not, therefore, dismissed for that; and had
the court-martial or the commander•-in-chief been
aware of what was not brought before them, he would
not have been dismissed at all.
Lord Gough was the comm ander -in-chief and
approving officer : he wrote as follows :
I can assure you it would afford me satisfaction to find
that an officer who has served his country well and
creditably may be enabled to bring facts to the notice of
the present head of the Indian army+ which can justify
him without injury to the service in taking your case into
public consideration.
The whole case was submitted to Sir Charles
Napier, and the following is his decision :
The commander•in-chief and the c ourt appear to me
fully exonerated from all blame ; but on reading this letter
I found a new case which the court had notseen and could
not judge of. Captain —'s case had been placed before
the court in a false light by ignorance ; it is now placed iu
its true light by subsequent research ; and in my opinion
he stands acquitted of all dishonourable conduct. He is,
I believe, an honourable man, who has fallen the victim of
folly and gambling.
Lord Gough again wrote :
I am very glad to find by your letter that the late com•
mander•in•chief has recommended his case to the favorable
consideration of the Court of Direct os. I shall be de•
lighted to hear of a favorable result in the case well deserv-
ing sympathy, that of a gallant officer more sinned against
than sinning.

[* The names inclosed ire the same as those sent by
'Rona."—Ed. Puss.)
+ sir Chides 'Septa,

THE PRESS.

The charge was headed, "For conduct unbecoming
the character of an officer and a gentleman." It was
not an easy matter to move the Court of Directors,
although two commanders in-chief had written
favorably of the case. It was reserved for a still
higher authority to give a decided opinion on this
person's case. The nobleman who commands the
army in chief took the trouble to investigate the
case, and stated distinctly his conviction that this
distinguished officer was worthy of the favorable
consideration of the court. He was restored, and I
believe the same noble lord has, with a liberality
which is his wont, introduced him to high authorities
abroad for employment in Turkey. He possesses
many testimonials of gallant and good conduct.
The other officer alluded to was not dismissed
for "scandalous, infamous conduct." It was
charged against him, but he was acquitted
of that. The offence was one against morality
and religion. It becomes a military crime only
when coupled with the above epithets; and
having acquitted him of those he should have
been acquitted altogether. The court erred in sup-
posing that they were compelled to record the sen-
tence "to be cashiered." They recommended
strongly to mercy, pointing out their belief that they
were compelled. Four very celebrated legal authori-
ties, Thesiger and Fitzroy Kelly being two of them,
were of opinion that the prisoner should have been
acquitted. The offence was one which if (per se) con-
sidered a military crime would endanger the com-
missions of some very distinguished officers. This
officer was restored to the service. Sir Charles
Napier, the commander-in-chief and confirming
officer, after his return to England, was further
informed of the case, and he wrote that " None of
the officers' friends would have more pleasure than
he would have at this officer's restoration by the
Court of Directors."
Lord Gough has borne testimony to his high
character, and so has the late Adjutant General of
the Bengal army : he has also many strong testi-

monials.
He was restored to his rank and pay by the
Court of Directors on a conviction that there were
some conflicting, if not illegal, circumstances attend-
ing the trial.
With regard to General Vivian, his character as
an officer and as a gentleman requires no defence.
His selection to the command has given very general
sa►isfaction, although " Honos" dces not approve.—
I am, sir, your obedient servant, JUSTUS.

Sir,—Assuming that the person alluded to by
" Honos" in his letter of March 15 is the gentle-
man whose name I inclose on a separate piece of
paper, I have to request that you will kindly give
insertion to the following in answer to your corre-
spondent's statement.
The officer who dined at the London Tavern on the
occasion referred to, and who was presented by
General Vivian to the Queen, was not cashiered the
service, but was dismissed on an erroneous con-
struction of the charges, which have since been dis-
pelled by the restoration of that officer to the ser
vice, in consequence of the strongly-expressed
opinions of no less personages that the late General
Sir Charles Napier, who wrote that in his estimation,
" he stood acquitted of all dishonourable conduct,"
and that " were itin his power he would restore this
brave man to the service ;" of Lord Gough, under
whose administration the court-martial took place,
who stated that he hoped the new commander-in•chief
(Sir Charles Napier) would see sufficient matter to
recommend for restoration one "more sinned against
than sinning ;" of the present commander-in-chief
of her Majesty's army, who gave the strongest sup•
port in his power to the case ; of Lieut.-General Sir
John Littler, Sir George Pollock, and of many other
distinguished officers.
Many officers having solicited to be placed under
the command of this " person" in the Turkish con-
tingent, and much influence having been used by
them to be appointed to the regiment destined to be
commanded by him, it cannot be said of them that
they object to " be compelled to obey, or to consort
with him ;" even noblemen, high in office, and well
acquainted with the case of this much injured officer.
having been desirous to place those in whom they
are interested under his command.
In answer to the third paragraph of "Honos'"
letter, I have to acquaint him that the officer in
question never received or courted any directorial
patronage, the Director alluded to purposely with
drawing from all interference in the case, fearing ht
might damage his relative by supporting the appeals
made to the court for restoration. And, further, the
now ex-director, having been abroad for many
months, had no part in the appointment of his rela-
tive to a command in the contingent, he being simply
indebted to his high military reputation for his
nomination to the post which he holds, and to the
support he has received, not only from general and
other officers in the East India Company's service,
but also to that of the commander-in-chief of the
Queen's army;

283

To say that there has been any "outrage on
society, on the army, and on the Sovereign of these
realms," is as outrageous as the whole of " Honos' "
statement, for the name of the officer thus attacked
stands on the list of retired captains of the East
India Company's service, and be consequently can
claim the right, equally with " Honos," to be pre-
sented to his Sovereign without injury to the scru-
pulous feelings of your correspondent, and is at
liberty to accept the invitation of the chairman of
the East India Company without disparagement to
the character of a Prime Minister who may be a
guest at the same table.
Apologising for the length of this letter, which
"Honos'" ignorance of facts has called forth from
me, I remain, sir, your obedient servant, W. I.
March 22, 1855.