The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-03-01 00:00:00

THE TURKISH EMPIRE.

In answer to Mr. BIGGS, who made an enquiry respect-
ing the intentions of the government with regard to slavery
in the Ottoman empire,
Lord PALMERSTON said the government had long ago
urged the abolition of slavery upon the government of the
Porte, and with regard to that which was carried on from
the shores of the Black Sea, it had been completely com-
plied with. The domestic slavery did not come within the
scope of the functions of the government.

EDMONTON REGIMENT OF MILITIA

On the motion for the adjournment over Saturday,
Mr. EVELIN drew attention to the state of the Edmonton
Royal Regiment of Militia.

A.ft:r some remarks from Mr. PEEL,
Mr. LAYARD referred to the officers of the regiment in
question, declaring the selection to be a Government job.
Lord PALMERSTON defended the manner in which the
selection of officers was made, and lauded the conduct of
the officers of militia, who had succeeded, in a very short
time, in rendering the militia force well disciplined and
efficient.
The discussion was pursued by Mr. BYATG, Sir E. PERRY
and Colonel Buck.

Sir DE LACY EVANS complained that in a return of the
Staff in the Crimea, lately presented to Parliament, he had
been unjustly treated. The services of other dicers were
carefully set down, while his own were stated to be at
Chobham, and no reltrence was made to his long services
under the Duke of 'Wellington in Spain and France.
The motion that the House at its rising do adjourn till
Monday was then agreed to.

THE ORIMEAN COMMISSION,

On the motion for going into Committee of Supply,
Mr. ROEBUCK rose to move the following resolution :
" That the appointment of a commission of general officers
to report upon the report of Sir J. 111'Neill and Colonel
Tulloch, is to substitute an inefficient for a very efficient
mode of enquiry, and that the effect of such appointment
will be to hide the misconduct of those by whom various de-
partments of our army have been subjected to the command
of officers who have been inculpated by the commissioners
appointed to enquire into their conduct." The hon. and
learned member referred to the proceedings of last session
with regard to the conduct of the government in the man-
agement of the army in the Crimea, and stated the circum-
stances that led to the appointment of the Sebastopol
committee, alluding afterwards to the effect of his motion
for that committee. The first effect was to drive Lord J.
Russell from the ministry; the next to remove the cabinet
of Lord Aberdeen ' • and the last to learn that all the rumors
of suffering in the Crimea were too well founded. This had
led to the appointment of commissioners by the government
to go to the Crimea and report upon the state of
the army. The commissioners, in their report, had made
charges against certain officers in the army, and these
officers should have been tried by a court-martial; but the
Government had taken another course, and had put their
own commissioners upon trial. By this proceeding, if they
were sanctioned by that House, he contended irreparable
injury would be done to the service of the army, and the
Government wculd never find any ene again willing to
undertake the office of commissioner of inquiry. With
regard to the composition of the board of /general officers,
he observed that there were same who had seen much
service, and were eompetent to consider the question ; but
there were also some officers who had never seen a shot fired,
and he wished to know what claim they had to sit upon the
board. The army had been left uncared for, and the men
had dizd of cold, hunger, and fatigue, and he warned the
House against leaving the army to suppose that they were
deserted by their country.

Sir J. PAiUNGTON said he was one of those who enter-
tained a
nad it w
opinionhis a s
the hon,
intentionthho en.c otananddud crl
eat
awo
rf
attentionot hdemeMinistryb e
tro t
hadhi
n
the stronga
ac ntio n s
toa
a whichsubject ; but he was not then decide I that this was the
proper time to bring forward the question, and had it not
referred,t h transactions
been for the motion of the hon. and learned member, be
should not have placed his opinion on record as he had
done, in the shape of an amendment, which, however, he
was prevented from moving by the forms of
the house. On this, however, he did not impute anything
to the noble lord at the head of the Government,
from whom he had never received anything but courtesy
and fairness. And was convinced that the noble lord had
sufficient reasons for refusing to allow the hon. and learned
member to bring forward the question as a substantial
motion. Though believing that the Government had in-
curred the gravest censure in almost every department, he
. J. Pakington) was not prepared to support the motion
of the hon. and learned member for Sheffield, as there were
scme points upon which he would be content with a censure
upon the ministry, and the motion itself prejudged the
question against the officers against whom the charges were
made. The right hon, baronet then alluded to the case of
Mr. Commissary-General Filder, who, he thought, was
treated:unjustly in not learning of the charges against him, for
seven months after they were made, and to show the
mal-administration of the government, quoted a letter of
Mr. Filder, stating that he was only aware of his recall
from statements in the newspapers, and that if notice of
the recall was sent out, it must have passed him on his
return from the Crimea, in consequence of ill health, in
in August last, and that he had not up to that time
received any intimation of his recall. lie (Sir John
Pakington) charged the government with acting wantonly
in promoting the officers in the quartermaster's depart•
ment, charged by the Crimean commissioners with mis-
conduct, and remarked that although those officers might
be exculpated by the board of general officers, his com-
plaint of the conduct of the government would not be
removed.

General PEEL rose in consequence of the observation of
Mr. Roebuck in reference to him and others of the Board
of Officers who had seen no service, to show that though
such was the case it was his misfortune and not his fault.
The hon. and gallant member stated that he had been
gazetted three days before Waterloo to the 90th Begt.,
with every chance of seeing service, but that battle had put
an end to the war, and he thought be was deprived of the
chance of being sent on active service. In the present war
he had repeateuly asked to be sent out to the East in any
capacity, and under such circumstances he thought it unjust
to make attacks such as had been made by Mr. Roebuck.
But that hon. and learned gentleman was in the habit of
assuming guilt upon the slightest grounds, neglecting taw

principle that every man should be considered innocent till
he had been found guilty.

Mr. PEEL replied that it was impossible to discuss the
question raised by the hon. and learned member for
Sheffield, without encroaching upon the duties of the board
of general officers. He denied that the object of the con..
mission was to report upon the report of the Government
commissioners, and stated that it was appointed further to
examine into the matters touched upon by the Crimean
commission, and to ascertain why certain stores were not
issued to the troops. He believed that there were good
grounds for believing that the officersinculpated . the
report of Colonel Tulloch, and Sir J. M'Neill, were guilty
of the charges made against them ; but the Government
considered it unjust to condemn them, without giving them
an opportunity of exculpating themselves, if possible, and
it was therefore provided that they should be heard before a
court of general officers. With regard to an
observation made by Sir. J? Pakington, that the
report of the commissioner ought to have been sent to the
Horse Guards before it was laid before Paliament. He
remarked that there had been very little delay in placing it
before the Horse Guards, and it was considered by the
Government that the papers should be laid before Parlia-
ment without any delay. The principal officers whose
conduct had been censured by the committee were Lord
Cardigan, Lord Lucan, General Airey, and Colonel Gordon;
and the Government were charged with promoting those
officers pending the report of the committee. In the first
place, Lord Cardigan received his appointment of Inspector
General of Cavalry before the Government came into
existence by which the committee was appointed, and when
all I neland was ringing with praises earned by the
famous Balakiava charge. Lord Lucan had received
the appointment for which the Government was censured
by Sir J. Pakington, and before the committee bad reported,
and he held that they were justified in promoting the
officer when no charge had been made against him. With
regard to the case of Colonel Gordon, he was recommended
twice to the offices of deputy quartermaster-general and
Queen's aide-de-camp by Lord Raglan, but that recommen-
dation had not been acted upon, and the only appointment
be had recsived was that of colonel, to which be became
entitled by seniori.y. General Airey received the appoint-
ment of quartermaster-general through the influence of
Lord Raglan. The hon. member proceeded to explain the
circumstances alludad to by Sir J. Pakington in reference
to Mr. gilder, and stated that the no.ification of the recall
of that gentleman did not reach the Crimea till he had left.
The charges made against him in the report of the com-
mission of June last were kept from him, as the report was
into mplete•

Mr. BENTINCK charged Mr. Roebuck with making asser.
tions without proof, and enquired by what right the hon.
and learned member attacked the government, 'unless ho
was prepared to suggest a remedy for the evils of which he
complained ?

Mr. LAY RD said he wished the Crimean commissioners'
report to be fairly discussed in that House, and for that
purpose he preferred the motion (of which ho had given
notice) to that proposed by the hon. and learned member
for Sheffield. He referred to a statement made by him when
the commission was appointed, that it would prove a sham,
and urged that that prognostication had been ful-
filled. The Under Secretary of War (Mr. Peel) had
entered into an elaborate criticism of the report• He (Mr.
Layard) demurred to the new commission on several
grounds, among which were : "Because it was appointed
to enquire and report upon a report ;" " Because the
Government had sanctioned the report of the first commis-
sion
;" " Because the witnesses called would not state the
truth ;" " Because the men who were to act as commissioners
were not competent to conduct the enquiry, and would not
receive the confidence of the country ;" and " Because the
very terms of the warrants were condemnatory of Sir J.
M'Neill and Colonel Tullock." He quoted several opinions
in reference to enquiries in similar cases to show that it
would be better to conduct the enquiry in the usual manner
with closed doors, and that the effect of opening the pro-
ceedings to tl.e public was to give a show of truth
and sincerity to an incomplete investigation. He
then alluded to the promotions of officers and
stated that Dr. Hall had been condemned by the
Sebastopol Committee, and by Sir J. M'Neill and. Colonel
Tulloch, and had been rewarded with a K.C.8., and the
defence set up by the hon. under secretary fpr war would
not apply in this case.
Colonel NORTH lauded the conduct of officers commandinz
in the Crimea, against whom (both old and young) Mr.
Layard had been entering upon a_crusade, in the last and
present session. With regard to the report of the Crimean
Commissioners, he stated it as his opinion that the officers
should have had an opportunity of presenting a reply,
simultaneously with the production of the report, and
added that now it was little matter what course was pursued,
as whatever explanations were made by the officers they
would not be believed by the public.
Sir DE LACY EvAers remarked, with regard to the last
statement of the hon. and gallant gentlemen, that he was
sorry to say that, owing to the blunders of the Government,
it was very likely the explanations of officers would be
discredited by the country. He referred to the conduct of
Colonel Gordon, stating that it frequently happened, when
they sent to Balaclava for knapsacks and baggage, that the
vessels containing them had sailed for Constantinople on
other service, and the explanations given by Colonel Gordon
was, that be did not think any ill consequence would have
resulted from the knapsacks being mislaid. Quoting from
the report of the commission, he showed that the loss of
officers were so much less per cent than that of the men of
the army, from which he contended that it was not the
climate that killed them, but that there was culpable neglect
of the non-commissioned officers and privates, The
Government had preferred to produce the entire report,
which showed that they wished for concealment, which was
wholly inconsistent with the statement of Mr. Peel, that
the Government only wished by this inquiry to elicit the
truth. He was alarmed when he heard that Colone
Gordon was made deputy Quartermaster genera
at the Horse Guards, for he might soot
be made Quartermaster-general in the field, and he ha(
sufficient knowledge of Colonel Gordon to apprehend most
serious consequences if he were placed in that position
from his want of judgment and discretion. On this sub-

ject the hon. and gall'a'ut gentleman related that- on-one
occasion Colonel Gordon gave him an order from Lord
Raglan to move his division down to the Teliernaya Valley,
to intercept a Russian convoy, which he refused to do, as
certain destruction of the division would have been the

result, and as no Russian convoy was there. He had
written a strong letter to I ord Raglan on this matter, com-
plaining of the conduct of Colon?l G)rdon, and of his bad

memory and self-opinion, to which Lord Raglan replied
that the order was, not to take any serious step, but
to endeavour to harass the convoy, if convoy there was. The
hon. and gallant gentleman mentioned a number of other
instances of maladministration of the army, and amongst
them, the motions of the Turkish contingent without object
when they should have been sent to act with the army in
the Crimea. The hon. and gallant gentleman referred to
the fall of Kars, and stated that he had warned the noble
lord at the head of the government of the position of that
fortress, but everything was left to anybody, and
anybody left the matter to everyhsay else ; so
that nothing was done: and the place fell in
consequence of the War Department neglecting
its duties. After referring to the improvement in
the state of things in the Crimea, which he attributed to the
exertions of Sir John M'Neill and Colonel Tulloch, and
not to the government provisions, the honourable and
gallant gentleman concluded by stating his intention of
supporting the motion of the honourable and learned
member for Sheffield, in order that the men who had
done so much for the army should not be disparaged.
Mr. Gordon defended the conduct of his gallant relative,
and expressed his surprise at the attacks of the honourable
and gallant member for Westminster, as he had always
heard Colonel Gordon speak with pride of the friendship
which the gallant general hid for him, and of his
being selected to act as Quarter-master General to the
_ _

division under Sir De Lacy Evans, after the battle of
Alma. He denied that Col. Gordon owed his promotion to
court favour, and stated tint he had seen active service in

Canada during the year 1838, and had been now in the
army for a great many years.
Mr. GLADSTONE declared the latitude that had been
given to the debate might be attributed to the speech of the
Under Secretary of War, who, he thought would have
acted with greater prudence if he had refrained from
mentioning the names of officers charged with misconduct
by the report of the Crimean Commissioners. When
he perused the motion of the hon. and learned member
for Sheffield, imputing incompetency to the commissioners
appointed by the Government, he felt convinced that the
Government would at one repel the choice ; but he con-
fessed that he was disappointed in the speech of Mr. Peel,
which gave a colour to that imputation. He was also sorry
that the tinder Secretary for War had neglected to answer
the challenge of Mr. Roebuck as to whetter it was intended
to try the report of the commissioners. The right hoe
gentleman commented upon the warrant for the appoint-.
.
ment of the board of general officers, which he said was
indefinite in its terms, as it was not
Nie,ven stated who were
conadnct
the officers whose
as to be tried.
He held it to be
importance to know what matter of very great
position the two Crimean
Commissioners were to hold in the new commission, as he
understood that they were to be admitted with the public, but
would not have the power of taking part in the proceedings.
The commissioners in the Crimea had great difficulties to
contend with, and he was only astonished at the small
discrepancies, which it was the duty of the War Depart-
ment to correct. He wished, in conclusion, to ask what
position the commissioners held in the eyes of the Govern-
ment with regard to their report
Mr. Wilaissorr opposed the motion of the hon. and
learned member for Sheffield.
Lord PALMERSTON commenced by defending the speech
of Mr. Peel, who, he said was compelled to enter upon the
details that he had done by the terms of the motion. He
considered it unfortunate that the debate had led to
animadversions upon officers who were then about to have
an opportunity of explaining their conduct. The hon. and
gallant general, the member for Westminster, had com-
menced his speech by regretting that the debit. had taken

a personal turn, but his whole speech had been devoted to
personal attacks upoa officers in the army high and low.
Lord C. HAMILTON, as a relative of Colonel Gardon, gave
some observations in his vindication, deprecating the
course taken by Sir De Lacy Evans, in making an attack
upon an absent man, and charging the gallant general with
suggesting counsels, which, if followed, would hive led to
shame.

Sir DE LACY EVANS made some explanations, stating
that in the case referred to after the battle of Inkermann hi,
weakened both in body and mind, suggested to Lord
Raglan that arrangements should be made to take up some
other position rather than expose the army to the risk of
further reinforcements being taken to the enemy.
Mr. ROEBUCK said as he felt that he was palpably in
a minority, he would not divide the House.
The motion was accordingly withdrawn.
SUPPLY.
The House went into Committee of supply, but objection•
were made to proceedings with the estimates at such a late
hour, and only one vote of £6,500,000, on account of the
pay of the Army was agreed to.
The Consolidated Fund (£1,63],000) Bill was read a
third time and passed.
The Marine Mutiny Bill and the Mutiny Bill passed a
second reading.
The other orders were disposed of, and the House ad-
journed at ten minutes past twelve o'clock.

POLICE COURT.-YESTZADIY.

(BEFORE MR. E. EVANS.)

A RATHER SUSPICIOUS CASE.—ERcn Stephenson,
female of anything but prepossessing appearance, was charged
with having, on the 26th of December last, stolen the sum of
£175 from the person of Francis Davis, a clerk to Mr. John
Watkins, a shipowner. According to the statement of the
prosecutor, he was, on the evening in question, in Parker.
street, not exactly sober, when the prisoner accosted him, and,
in a moment, took the money from him. On the following
day, the prisoner deposited £2O, in gold, with a publican in
Clifford-street, Islington, observing that she was afraid of
losing it. The publican heat(' of the robbery, and deposited
the money at the Police-court. On the following daY tb
prisoner called at the vaults for the money, but as it was not
given up to her on the instant, she made her escape, and
nothing further was heard of her until Thursday, When sh 6
again applied for the money. When it was refused her, AN
attempted again to escape, but the barman succeeded iri
getting her into the house, and securing her, until the arrival
of the police, when she was given into cusody. Previous to
this, however, she offered to give the publican half the money,
provided he would let her go. Mr. Block appeared for the
prisoner, and, in the course of the cross-examination, elicited
that the prosecutor had never seen the prisoner before the
robbery, or since, until he saw her at the Police-office ; but
he was certain that she was the woman who had robbed Mm,
and that the money was his own property. At the time of
the robbery, he never spoke a word to her. The magistratti
considered it a case of purely circumstantial evidence, bell
would commit her for trial, for a jury to deride the case.
ROBBERY OF £so.—Thomas James, John It. Boat-opt;
and James Sarjeant, were charged, the first two with having
stolen, and the latter with receiving £5O, the property of Mf:
James, watchmaker, Mulberry-street. It appeared that tise
prosecutor had deposited the money in a small box, which had
been discovered by the apprentice, Bookroyd, who commu.,►
cated the intelligence to James. James took it away, and
after spending £5 of the money, deposited the box and the
remainder with Serjeant. After he had come to his soh*
senses, James went to Serjeant for the money; but the hail*
professed not to know what had become of it. In the mote:
time, information was given to the police, who, after interros
gating the two youths, went and searched Serjeant's house,
and in the mangle found a tin box containing £45. The
prisoners all admitted the facts. The prosecutor, who appeared
much affected, said he did not wish to press the prosecution
against Setjeant! because he had a wife and a large family.
The prisoners were remanded.

(BEFORE MESSRS. AIKEN AND BOITON.)

STEALING GAs.---In our impression of Thursday We stated
the brief facts that two persons, Emily Coursons, and kobt:
Blacoe Ellis, had been apprehended by detective °teed
Cozens, on information he had received from Mr. Steel, AO
manager of the Liverpool United Gas Company, on a charge
of fraudulently consuming gas, which, in point of law,
amounts to a felony. The case was adjourned until yester-
day, when it was again brought forward. Mr. Raffles
appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Snowball for the
prisoners, when the following evidence was adduced. Marie
Gore, of No. 4, Dryden-street, said she was formerly in
the employ of the female prisoner. Last summer she re,
moved from Chatham-street to Moss-street, to which hotted
she conveyed the gas fittings and the chandeliers. The
male prisoner put them up. They had each lived together
as man and wife. There was no meter in the house, but she
had never seen the male prisoner do anything to the piping
produced. Gas was always burnt in the house after the
shutters were put up, and the female prisoner had told her
to say, should any person inquire, that there was no meter'
in the house, and that would be sufficient. The foreman of
the fitters of the United Gas Company proved that he dent
to the prisoners house on the 14th of this month, when 118
saw gas burning, and asked to look at the meter. StfbeB•
quently he went into the coal vault, where he found the pipa
had been joined where the meter formerly stood, thus con-
necting the pipes in the house with those from the main. It
was usual when a tenant left to have the gas turned of on
the outside, and he should infer that it was done so in the
present instance. Samuel Holmes corroborated the evidence
of the last witness. .Tosep.: Edwards stated, that in the
month of July last he was at the prisoner's house, when be,
the male prisoner, asked him how they joined gas pipes
together, and he told him by solder or a blow-pipe. Mr.
Steel, the manager of the gas works, deposed that the female
prisoner had called at the office, and in answer to a question
put by him, said that they had only burnt the gas since
Christmas. The gas was consumed in the house without the
knowledge of the gas company. Detective officer Cousens
stated that he had apprehended the two prisoners, who were
living together as man and wife. Mr. Raffles said that was the
case, upon which he should ask for a committal of the prisoners,
Mr. Snowball, for the prisoners, contended that the pipe was
the pipe of the tenant, and that as the gas had not been
turned off on the outside of the house, it was clear that the
gas was, by the company's own act, forced into the tenant's
pipes, and that the prisoners had a right to use it. Mr.
Raffles replied to :he remarks made by Mr. Snowball, after
which the Bench decided upon sending the case for trial at the
next sessions.

PUBLICAN AND BERRHoUSZ INFORMATIONS.
PUBLICANS : John Cullen, Norfolk street, was fined 6i
and costs for selling ale on the previous Sunday, during the
prescribed hour,.

Mary Latham, London road, was also fined in the same
penalty for having her home open at eightee❑ minutes before
four o'clock on Sunday morning.
Lydia Heatley, London road, and William Barnale, were
also summoned for similar offences, but', the cases not being
substantiated, were dismissed.

BEERHOUSES : The following beerhouse-keepers were aloe
summoned for trading on the Sunday—Mary Jones, Park
place, dismissed. Ralph Pickering, Parliament road, dismissed.
Lydia Hodson, Clive-street, fined ss, and costs. Margaret
Rowland, Horatio-street, fined 40s. and costs. Wns. Pitt,
Burlington-street, fined 2s. 6d. and costs. Selina Marks, St.
Martin's street, dismissed. James Young, a table beer seller,
of Henderson-street, Park, was summoned for Sunday trading'
and refusing to admit the police. It was proved that persons
were seen leaving the house on Sunday in a state of intoxica-
tion, and therefore it was assumed by the police that the
defendant had br en selling beer. This accusation the
defendant totally denied, and said if ho had a friend call in and
see him, he had a right to treat him with a glass. I❑ answer
to a question put from the bench, Inspector Chew said the_
fault did not rest with him that such houses were not properly
conducted, but with the excise. Al r. Clough said that although
the Excise had been informed that a number of persons were
selling table beer, even whiskey, without a license, they
would not take any notice, because such parties had not the
means of paying the expenses. The magistrate hoped that that
statement would get to the knowledge of the excise and thb
government, that some steps might bo taken to remedy such
an evil. Mr• Clough said that was his reason for mentioning
the fact.—The case was then dismissed.

THE LONDON GAZETTE

BANKRUPTS —JAMES Royal Exchange, ship-
owner. THOMAS EMERSON, Milton-strect, builder.
Joms
Dor LAS York, tailor. WILLIAM CARTER (the younger),
Leamington, ironmonger. THOMAS SmiTtr, Nottingham,
lace manufacturer. ALFRED JOHN GREEN, Chalcroft,
terrace, New Cut, brushmaker. RICHARD GaresLis,
Pitton, Devonshire,
_carpenter and builder. HENRY Patzva,
Bristol, baker. ROBERT DuLLAm TAMLYM, Tiptoe,
Stafford, chemist. CHARLES Foy, Scarborough, manufac-
turer of cod liver oil. JAMES MEsHIE. Battersea-fields,
engineer and mechanist. HENRY SMITH, Gospol O,lk
r.
Sedgeley, Staffordshire, farmer and licensed victualle
JAMES WILLIAM HENRY SCHAFER, and WILLIAM FIENnt
BROWNE, Fenchurch-street, merchants. GEoRGE DAMS,
Wigmore-street, Cavendish-square, cabinet-maker. Taos.
JOHN non-, Coleman-street, City, rope, twine, and sack-
maker. RICHARD JENKINS POLOLASE, Borough-road, and
Jupp's-te'race, Commerc_iale-_road East, engineer and iron-
founder, &c. WILLIAM Al XECHNEY, late of Santa Crnz,
Cuba ; then of Honduras, 'West Indies; now of Plaistow,
Essex, merchant. THOMAS BURNET, Blaydon, Durham,..
glass
dealer
lass bottle manufacturer. WILLIAM SOTHERN, Liverpool,
g.

R•TAL BENEFICENCE.—Her Majesty the Queen an bees
pleased to present to the London Orphan Asylum, Cl,o!pli,;
the sum of 300 guineas, to purchase for his., Royal High-
ness the Prince of Wales the right to keep one ehild,alwayis
sn the asylum, during the lifetime of his Ra:alitighness.
THE MURDER OF MISS HIND3.—A despatch, dated
Dublin, announces that Mr. Keogh, the Attorney-general
for Ireland, has arrived at Cavan, to conduct in person
the prosecution of the men charged with the brutal
murder of Miss Hinds. One of the prisoners has turned
approTer.