The Express.
London, England, 1863-09-10 00:00:00

asrrexxu.

THIN EMMA, LADY At DLEY'S SEZRET. THE GREAT
oftocir EFFECT. Madame' Varnol,l and Cranford.—Ur.
Parker. Madame Ikon, and Mr. W Emllll —Aud nix ADVEN
TURES OF A TICKET OF LEAVE.

MGM WATAR AT I.SIIIUUN 15151DeL
TVs DAY —Meaning. Oh 11m.... Attaimma. lA 34,5-
L:110161011 —Moran. • 55A. .Afisemoms. lh. 15m

Lo DON, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 10.

Tuz case of ex-Paymaster SMALES evidently
excites considerable interest ; and it is natural
that it should. There is no public man who enjoys
a higher reputation for honesty and impartiality
than Lord Da GREY. It is impossible to believe
that for the sake of sheltering men of influence
and officers in high command he would willingly
do an act of injustice to the most friendless pri-
vate in the ranks. Most certainly the present
SECRETARY for WAR would usel the utmost
caution before ruining an old officer—unless
the evidence against him were of the most
conclusive character. But it must be confessed
that the whole series of transactions connected
with the Mho, Court-martial has been of the most ex•
traordivary character. The bias in favour of Colonel'
Caswtev exhibited by the military authorities both
in India and in London was too plain for conceal-
ment. The reluctance to re-open the business was
manifest, but to re-open it was inevitable ; nor
was it without considerable pressure that the
COMMLNDE&-IN-CHIEF gave his assent to putting
Colonel Caawtrt on his trial As for Paymaster
SMILES, the course to be pursued was full of em-
barrassment. The Court-martial at Mhow had
sentenced him to be cashiered on the 9th of June,
1862. A month after, this sentence was con-
firmed by Sir Hyatt Rosa, on the 11th of
July. On the 30th of May, 1863, nearly
a year after, Mr. Sxass was Gasetted
out of the service, and a new paymaster was
appointed in his place. And yet it was only
in June—a few days later—that the proceedings
of the Mhow Court-martial were submitted to
the JUDOE.APEOCATZ.GENY.ALL, the result of whisk
was that the proceedings of the Court were set
'aide as illegal, and Mr. Swains was pardoned but
not reinstated. What can be more inconsistent
An officer is tried by court-martial—he is sentenced
to be cashiered—after nearly a year, with the
sanction of two Commanders-in-Chief in India, and
the COMMANDER-11q-C111.17 here, he is cashiered.
The proceedings of the Court-martial are then for
the first time submitted to the JUDaa•AnvocATE.
They are pronounced illegal—the cashiered officer
is pardoned, but the pardon is accompanied with
the singular condition that be is still a civilian,
and will not again be employed. Upon the
face of things it is impossible to understand such a
course of proceedings—apparently it is both in-

consistent and unjust. It is inoonsistent because
the officer is pardoned and yet remains cashiered ;
it is unjust because the proceedings ought to have
been submitted to the JUDONeADVOCATZ before the
finding of the Court was confirmed by the Cox-
isarrnrs-rir-Cater.
Under these circumstances it is not surprising
that attempts should be made to explain
matters. And, accordingly, we have ourselves
received private communications the substance
of which has been published in other quarters,
to the effect that the accounts of Mr. Swum,
as Paymaster, were proved to be deficient.
If this charge be established there is no-
thing more to be said in favour of Mr. Swami.
Unquestionably the authorities ought to be satis-
fied that an officer who aspires to fill the office of
Paymaster is a man as strict in honour as in
his accounts. But so serious a charge as
this ought to be conclusively established.
And therefore it is very desirable to know the
foundation upon which the accusation in question
rests. It is undoubtedly true that during the
time when Mr. SKALES was undergoing his trial
before the court-martial at Mhow the Commander-
in-Chief at Bombay, at the instigation of Colonel
CRAWLEY; did order a regimental cone of inquiry
to investigate the accounts of the Paymaster. To
select such a time for assembling this court—to
try the same man in two different courts at the
same time, was somewhat unusual, and certainly
was not marked by much consideration. But
when it appears by official documents that the
officer who nominated the court was Colonel
CB.AWLLL, the prosecutor before the Court-martial ;
that the officers nominated had just appeared as
witnesses spinet the Paymaster, and that they
proceeded to sit notwithstanding the reasonable
remonstrances of the Paymaster, the value of the
judgment delivered by such a tribunal is seriously
impaired. Even if their judgment had been
adverse to Mr. Swung, it would have been hard
and even Unjust to act upon it. But, unfortu-
nately, there are no official documents to allow the
precise nature of their judgment, or the evidence
upon which it was founded. Mr. SMALLS has,
indeed, published a statement, which is now before
us, in which he says that the judgment was
in his favour—that, " notwithstanding the con-
" stitution of this Board, they made a report
" on (his) accounta, attesting that all
" his transactions were correct and balances ac-
" counted for, and a balance standing to his
"credit." There is also a letter addressed by Mr.
Sesi.r.s to the War Department on the 3rd of
January, 18G3, in which he requests to be in-
formed whether up to that date any pecuniary
claim had been preferred by the Bombay Govern-
ment against him. Mr. SMALLS declares that no
such claims had then been made, and that since
that date, until the end of last June (when the
statement was published), " no claim nor commit-
" nication had been made to him relative to any
" accounts for which he might be considered re-
" sponsible." Such are the statements
of Mr. SMALLS ; they are most dis-
tinct, and if true completely satisfactory.
Nor are they without probability. Mr. 81tALIII
has been in the army more than thirty years. He
has constantly occupied the position of Paymaster.
The various officers under whom he has served
have furnished him with testimonials, and in 1855
Mr. Hawes, then Under-Secretary of War,
selected him as paymaster of the Turkish Contin-
gent under General Vivistr, and spoke of his
" known correctness in the performance of his
" duties " in that capacity. Until Colonel

CitawLEv assumed command of the regiment the
character of Paymaster Sstaise was unimpeached ;
nor was it until three partisans of the Colonel
met to examine the accounts that any
whisper was heard against the Paymaster—if
indeed it can truly be said that they gave any
countenance to the injurious charge. But the
matter does not rest here. A Paymaster is in
the position of a public accountant, and is, there-
fore, under a bond to the Crown. Have, then, any
proceedings been taken under this bond—or has
any money been paid by Mr. SKALD; in consequence
of threats that such proceedings would be taken I
Mr. SMALICS distinctly says no. " Although," he
writes, "as a public accountant, I am under a
" bond to the Crown, no one has ever dared to
" make a demand either upon my sureties or myself,
" on any matters connected with these transac-
" tions." If no such proceedings have been
taken or even threatened, the character of Mr.
SMALLS is placed beyond cavil. At all events, is
is in the power of Lord DE GREY to satisfy him-
self •upon this point: nor is there a doubt that,
considering the character of the man, he will
gladly do so. If Paymaster Sliauts be a de-
faulter, let him be told so plainly. But till then
we must repeat that the conduct of the WAR
MINISTER and of the Commarams.rs-Cnls7
t wards Mr. SMALH has been marked by distressing
inconsistency and grievous injustice.