The Express.
London, England, 1864-01-04 00:00:00

HAYMARKET.

TEII3 ETRIONG, OUR AMERICAN COUSIN. Meows. Sothero,
Etirkstone, tie. Gordon, Rogers, Cw, and Clark;
Slesonmet Angel an I Snowdon.—And KING ARTHUR.
11r. Compton ; M.:td.trues L Keeley, Terry, Lindley, t Romer.

PRINCEKA'S.

Tilts EVENIN I. THE IIttNET Hilt/N.—And HARLEQUIN
Lit I 1.1 TO ‘I TUCKER. Nles.rs rkeyhm, Cathcart. A. and C.
1,.!• and g.tn, NIiI no, Na.tlur, nod Chapiho ;
11,-; haat" uctt. tatal Howard

LYCEUM.

Tura Evrarua. THE LT:T—T iif LD. Mr. Widdlcomb and
31 Cu P. Leclerai —BaL ME 00E10. a fore %tory. Meters.
Fechtet. Bubo imery, ( hark
s,anda Jortlail ; Mimed
a,
Terry, Lavtaue, and Lisa-array, fttld Mn. Lee.

RRITANNIA.

Tilt, EVENM the Nevtiitniomime HICKORY, DICKORY,
D. It K. Sin Line and Itrst•rate Pantom mitt:.—The Marvels
of Porn. - THE GREAT till.ktf EFrEer. trthlt r att./ Bertrand.
ry Euuutaio....And lIIE GORILLA 111 NI.

tUaH WATIMAT r • •NDON BRIDOF

111+ DAY Mnrntrut. *h v±m Afternoon. 911.
2-‘,.igoisow— Morning. .4h. s:kn. . .Aheroooe.lob. 30a.

LONDON, MONDAY, JANUARY 4.

THE country is not permitted to forget the
CLIWLEY Court-Martial, as it might be glad to do,
with the other failures of the Old Year. Although
the War-office did not succeed in vindicating mili-
tary justice at Aldershot, the expenses of the trial
are as heavy as if 1.11.1. Ev had been triumphantly
avenged. The abiding result of the CRAWLEY
Court-Martial is a " bill" of a magnitude we
believe hitherto unknown at the War-office.
The costs of bringing over and maintaining the
witnesses for the prosecution have been enormous.
They were incurred, however, in the attempt
to right a great wrong, one which as long
as it existed must inflict damage upon that
Service on which the nation relies for
defence. .tad alth,iuth the prisoner was acquitted
it is by nu ILICAIIi certain that the money has been
thrown away. Attention has now been power-
fully directed to the weakness which mingles with
the harshness of military law ; and the utter un•
suitableness of courts-martial, as at present con-
stituted ar.d governed, to secure the ends fur which
they are instituted, has been placed in a strong
light. When Parliament meets we shall hear
more of all these things, together with the costs of
the CRAWLLY trial.

At present, however, " the bill "of the Alder-
shot Court-M.rtial is not made out. Before it can
assume its final shape the authorities will have to
resolve in what manner to deal with the demand
of Colonel CRAM LZY to have his expenses reim-
bursed. It appe.us that the stories which have
been published of the spirited munificence of his
comrades in the hither military circles at home are
not altogether correct. For instance, that noble and
high-souled Hussar who was said to have subscribed
lnidf. in honour of the triumph of the Colonel over
the Sergeant-Major, declines the impeachment
of an untimely liberality. The Colonel himself,
it is understood, takes high ground. He has
been fully and honourably acquitted, and
therefore will consider himself an injured man
unless his expenses are altogether borne by the
public, which has troubled him without cause.
The argument based on this view will not, however,
bear to be pushed too far. The verdict of the
Court-Martial, of course, cannot be overlooked by
the War.ollice. But neither, onthe other hand, can
the evidence of the Court Martial be overlooked by
Parliament and the public. It is impossible to read
that evidence without seeing that illegal pre-
ceeclings took place in the regiment under Colonel
CRAWLEY'S command, and that those proceedings
tended to cause the death in confinement of a non-
commissi)ned officer, who had previously borne a
blameless character, and who was pronounced in-
nocent of any crime. The trial was, therefore,
necessary. Moreover, the Colonel's representations
to Ins superiors in India must have had a good
deal to do with, if they were not the sole cause of,
Sergeant-Major LILLEY'S arrest. Neither General
MANsFIELI, nor General FARRELL, upon whom
Colonel CRAWLEY has attempted to throw all the
responsibility, had any animosity against LI LLEY.
Again, it is clear that the provisions of the Mutiny
Act designed fur the protection of the soldiers were
violated by the excessive imprisonment to which
Colonel CnAWLEY subjected Litter. That act
plainly prescribes that "no officer or soldier
" who shall be put in arrest or confinement shall
" continue in such arrest or confinement ruo-e
" than eight days, or until such time as a court-
" martial can be conveniently assembled ;" and it
enacts that " any officer or soldier who shall un-
" necessarily detain any prisoner in confinement
" without bringing biiii to trial shall be liable to
"be cashiered." Now it is evident that Litter
was charged with a crime, and that, although
General MANSFIELD, the proper authority for
ordering a trial, said that " there did not
" appear, as shown by the documents which had
" been sent to him by Major-General FARRELL, any
" sufficient grounds for bringing the non-commis-
" !Coned officers concerned to trial for conspiracy,"
Litter was kept in close confinement for nearly a
month. Colonel CRAWLEY has contended that it
was not his fault that the prisoners were not tried,
and that he only yielded to the judgment of hie
superiors. The Colonel, however, knew the law
very well ; knew that Litter and his comrades
were, after a certain day, entitled to either their
liberty or a trial. According to his own account, he
lent himself to theexecution of unlawful commands,
although be is only hound by the Articles of War
to carry out such as are lawful. We have no desire
to re-open the case tried at Aldershot, but these
facts are important in aiscertaining the justice of
Colonel CRAWLEY'S claim. Ile has been acquitted
on the two charges preferred against him by the
official prosecutor, but the country is not pre-
cluded from a broad review of the whole case when
be asks that it shall assume the burden of his
defence.

Looking at the trial itself, and taking the evi-
dence and the verdict together, there appears no
reason for conceding COkillei CRAViLIY.I4 demand.
If the trial has resulted in his acquittal on the
technical charges preferred against him, it
is clearer than ever that it had been