The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1808-06-04 00:00:00

HACKNEY
_CYIACH ES.

Mr. Murton s nsov.ll for leave to bring in a
Bin fwr the celiefof 'blames Coach Owners. 'There
persons now laboured under great disadvantages,
from being compelled, by tliv Police of tI.Q. (,►ty,
to carry fai es at the or;gival prices es which. thaw
had, by the Init Act of Parl►ament, been fixed.
This Act reggired, that these farts should be in.
creased, wheueres the fodder of horses 0,41,

be increased beyond a etrtain pritsi Fodder now
exceeded that pricecoasiderably. ytt no alteration
had taken place iroheir favour. ft was tho

lion of this° SU to, regv u!ote these fares st a more
equitable rote. beanies this. the province of hark-

ney- - vouches eras every day ilitrtulA on-by ',puled*
of anu stage coaches, which, in their ple.aage
through the City, con*tantly took up fares within
the cif Lawton and Ireatroinater, and to other
part,. of the sued cities. This it was alio intruded
to prevent.
Le:ive was then given to bring in the DAL •
COURTS MARTIAL.
_ .

Mr. Liret.vio; titr;eirionbntit to the Dente
the reasons which netti:.:4l hint in hringinz Irefure
them a iuilyect of coa.itlershle magnitude, and
Caught with reat Ti.e patter of the
sword he acknonledged wa., with viral propriet),
veNted in the crown. es ,vas the pCIA er of 3uance in
the hanit., of the Parkameat. %WI not inclined
tel ..rest from the King the liege and pre rogativre

of appoinuing to comiliiissiq;r. and va,-41;cies ;Le the

twiny. These were ..acrediy his. H.. %AI eater
only to contrsul the nbNol:ate poorer Hl4 Mojesty
11,,weesed of tootrootin4. annul.ioe, or supprts-
wiz.: the scalene* of Courts-M.4a. former
tuns tho supremo power in the ark- wet vested in
she sun lent Court of C.'hivsiry, corcr which the
High Coustattio of the realm prosiihd, wit]: it 2

I

oppropriate suite of under eaters,. Rory the
kighth was the first of the English King" who
summed any considerable authority over the army.
This gradually increased in the years of violence
that succeeded his reign, until by the Inuring of
the Mutiny Bill, in the reign of King William the
'Third, the right of Parliament to regulate the
army. was admitted. The reform he meant to
submit to the House was not without precedent
for the exertion of sods an authority. Ifivvislied
to reform only the present abuses in the system of
Courts Martial. There existed great danger of
persons composing them being influenced by the
present extraordinary controul the Crown pos-
sessed over the army, as officers were totally de-
pendent ma the Crown for advancement: but this
• was a comparatively trifling cause of complaint to
another. The King's Judge-Advocate presided
at this Court, and, by the representation which
he made of the case to his Sovereign, the
future prospects of the accused were regulated.
Thns there was ti great possibility of the Crown
interfering, fur the purpose of prohibiting the ad-
vancement, or of discharging from the service,
man of the best character and utmost worth.—

There hail heen in the last Parliament a Petition
from an Officer of distinction, who had uumeriteslly
fallen a sacrifice to the inordinate power of the

Crown, by the reversion of a sentence of a Court
Martial, by which be hail been honourably ac-
quittal. Thu" Petition, he was sor:y to say, lay
on the Table for a considenible time, %about the

notice of any individual of that Blouse ; and simi-
lar instances 'night again occur of such treatment,
to the great prejudice of the military service. In
the naval Courts Martial to such prerogative was
granttd to the Crown ; and in one case, wherein the
Admiralty had interfered with respect to Captain
ileac Coffin, there was a decision given in his
favour by the fosr Judges, that ;to such au-
thority was vested in the Admiralty. as could
supersede the sentence of a naval Court Martial.—
The chief of these Judges was Lord Kenyon, a
num by no means iuclined to diminish the prero-
gative of the Crown. There existed, then, but
too just ground to apprehend, that this species of
arbitrary interference might agein occur, to the
greet prejudice of the service ; and its the case of
the trial of several Officers of the Perthshire Re-
giment, the Colonel by his influence prevented
their honourable acquittal from lacing made pub-
lic, by procuring from the Crown the suppression of
the sentence. lie did not wish to give to Officers
tried by these Courts a right to challenge any of
the Court peremptorily, for it was not consist,oit
with the high ideas tier! entertained of military ho-
Dour, nor did he wish to take front tLe Crown the
right of gift, appointment, promotion, or dismissal,
but was anxious to prevent any recurrence of those
infractions of military custom, against which, he
was sorry to say, he had heard repeated and loud
complaints. He then luov..sl for leave to bring in
a Bill to pre:vent the iitterferenee of the Crown in
over-ruling the decisious of Geueral Courts 'par-
tial throughout the ein?ire.
The Scveaswaay at WAR opposed the motion,
and hoped to hr able to convince the lion. Member,
that the propositint, was inconsistent with the fun-
damental principles of the military system. The
mutiny act was made in direct contradiction to the
principle in gad by him ; by one of its enactments
no person on that Court could, without a violation
of his oath, disclose the sentence, until approved of
by the King; (Mr. Lyttleten said, Areas his inten-
tion to change that oath ;) but there was yet an-
other
objection, and that was, that in the Mutiny
Act there could no change take place for tke pre-
sent year. Hence the alteration was impossible.
The best preservation the country had for the pro-
per conduct of the army was in the annual vote of
the supplies ; this restrained the military, and di.-
played the power of Parliament over that depart-
ment ; but no other authority could consistcutly
he exercised over that body.- If the army were not
• ultimately subject to the King, there would no
imager ally military spirit subsist. There would,
its tact, no longer exist an army for our defence.
There was certaiuly not too much severity in the
British army or its Governor*: sad the greatest
objection that could he urged against the present
• power of the Crown was, that it could pass everany
individual, and promotehis jonior in his stead ; yet
- even this was necessary in the delicate structure of
• the army.
Sir Pierre's Suanret said, that no reply had
heels made to the parallel which had been drawn by
the Honourable Mover, between the.; iiiirdiction of
naval mid military courts martial. The same
principles of honour and emulation were to be
maintained in both. lie contended that the first
case alluded to—viz. that of Colonel Cochraue
Johnstone., was one of extreme hardship, having been
acquitted on all the chances, and afterwards super-
seded by the King's command. A similar Willa-
encomight again 10, put into action for the injury
of some deserving member of society. No other
hopes of advancement should be beld out, but
those dependent on exclusive merit and military
pre-eminence. The greatest possible breach of
decorum, with respect to the character or honoura-
ble feelings of au etc sr, who had beets honourably
acquitted, was to pays him over in the list of pro-
anotious, except that which reversed the sentence of
the Court by which he was tried. Seeing, as he
did, the necessity of reformation, and the wide
door which had been opened to abuses, he should
support the motion, and proceed to a division;
should the House seem so disposed.
Sir ARTHUR WELLEntv coutended, that such a
legislative eiliscuseut would be a direct violation
oe the military system. 'i'he military and naval
services differed as much as their respective articles
of war. Such on innovation would in truth be a
tiolation of the King's prerogative anal the Coasti-
tution. This was certain, that no such alteration
could take place, from the formation of the mu-
tiny act itself, at least until the expiration of the
present year.
General FITZPATRICK thought the change would
be attended with hazard to the public and the
Crown, be rendering the army too independent of
either. The annual rote, he admitted, was our
best protection agaiatit the great increased power of
the army, but every other check should be added
olso. 14e considered *ease of Col, Johnstone as
ostreinelv kijorions to the service, and Ewald not
Iselo tiMsking it was owing to some mierepresent-
atioa which must have reached the Crown ; yet he

could not lee this bore much open the roestien
and the objection ou the poiut of the ;ltutitly Act
was altogether incontrovertible, and mast prove fa-
tal to the motion. . . .

The SMASTAILY at WAR explained.
Mr. Lvrrt.Avost couseuted to withdraw his ino-
Cori, though he could not help °harrying, lits wish
had been misinterpreted, as well as some of his
words. He was out desirous to trench on the Royal
right ; his Bill would only have referred to Gene-
nil Courts Martial, and iii this point of view he
could not see what distinction could be drawn be-
tween naval and military courts. He might at some
future period bring forward his tion, when lie
hoped to have the assistance of the Members in ren-
dering it palatable to the House.