The Sun.
London, England, 1855-05-08 00:00:00

ARMY BEFORE SEBASTOPOL COM-

ir,r-r•
I. 1 L4.1.2i•

(Continued from, our first impression of yesterday.)
Mr. Monsell, M.P., Clerk of the Ordnance, had held
the appointment for two years and five months' previous
to the alteration of the War Department. He was a
co-ordinate member of the board, with no more power
of originating anything than the other members of the
board. He was the medium of communication between
the Minister of War and the board. During the latter
part of the war Sir Hugh Ross was the military medium
of communication between the War-office and the board,
whilst witness had the Civil Department ; during the
present war he had the whole to attend to. His tirst
order for warm clothing for the army was on the 21st
June. He received it from the Minister of War, and
communicated it to the board. On the 11th of July he
sent out for patterns to be forwarded co Dr. A. Smith.
The order was signed by himself. An order was given,
signed by Sir Thomas Hastings, on 14th July, fir a
board of medical officers to report on them. They met
on the 15th., and reported favourably. After that the
board gave orders for the supply, but materially changed
several of the articles to he supplied, in consequence of
subsequent patterns being sent in, the adoption of which
was for the advantage of the troops, taking the better
articles at the higher price. Mr. Bynaston had
received an order for the supply of clothing previous to
the board's making the alteration mentioned, part of
which was sent in ; the alteration in the laboratory was
made by the authorities at Wool with, under a misap-
prehension that he had given an order : so far as his
memory served him he did no such thing, but the en-
largement had been of benefit to the service, from the in-
creased demands on the laboratory, and the committee
subsequently approved of it. The outlay of money had
been to the advantage of the country. Captain Collison
(bad it not been approved of by the board) would have
been the responsible person for the cost, he having given
the order.
By Lord Seymour—The work was done by contract,
but he could not recollect when the irregularity was dis-
covered, if the board had the contract before them.
The Chairman—lt appears by your evidence that
public works might proceed upon contract without a
knowledge of these facts cominglo the knowledge of
the Board of Ordnance ?—lt appears so up to the 15th
June.

What steps did the board take on the discovery of
such a great irregularity ?—I believe, none. The alte-
rations cast 2,0001. The approval of the board to the
alterations was after the work must have been com-
pleted, and the contract entered into.
The Chairman—Who is the party representing the
Ordnance in that contract ?—The letter I have here is
addressed to Captain Collison, of the Royal Arsenal,
Woolwich.
How was it that an understanding was made to pay
money, and the board was not aware by whom it was
made ? Ought not the board to know every step that
was taken ? As you now represent the hoard can you
tell who sanctioned the contract 9-1 presume the au-
thorities at Woolwich supposed I authorised the altera-
tion and execution of the work verbally. The contract
was ultimately accepted by the Board, but not until the
work was finished.

Was not the work commenced and finished without
knowing what it would cost ?—I should say not, but it
is impossible for me to know anything about it. I think
you had better examine Captain Collison on it.
Sir J. Pakington—Did you ever know a verbal order
to be given in such a case ?—I should be sorry to
say a verbal order was never given in such a
case, but I cannot recall a case to my mind. The
alteration caused the saving of 1,200/. in the con-
struction of fusees in one week, and the probability of
running short of shot and shell was prevented. In May,
1854, he was alone at the ordnance for a period of a fort-
night or three weeks when this alteration took place, and
there was no board to consult relative to the expenditure.
Captain Boxer subsequently brought under his notice
the making of shot and shell, which was submitted to a
board as soon after as another member of the board
attended. He differed fribrn Sir Thomas Hastings that
the signature of two members of the board was neces-
sary for authorising the expenditure of money. He had
never heird of such an arrangement. Captain Boxer
required 7,000/. for carrying out his intentiens for the
construction of shot and shell. Witness took
no

measures to satisfy himself that sum
was a correct estimate for the work *to be done.
He undertook to produce certain results, and wit-
ness on his own responsibility undertook the expendi-
ture of that sum. Not only did he think his colleagues
would sanction that expenditure, but he considered it
was their duty to do £0 in this case. There had been no
doubt a want of shells during the last 14 months, but
be had heard of no defects in the quality
of the article manufactured within that time.
A pressing order came a short time since
for shells which were supplied earlier than they other-
wise could have been without the machinery of Captain
Boxer, and had they had the appliances earlier the shells
could have been produced much quicker than they were.
The foundry for shells alluded to is in the laboratory at
Woolwich. An estimate was taken for the laboratory
this year at 33,000/.; the expenditure had
been 47.0001., in which was included the 7,0001. for
Captain Boxer.

By
B Lord Seymour—ln November, 1854, the Duke of
Newcastle sanctioned the expenditure of 10,0001. for the
erection of a shell foundry. It first originated in his
grace's office, and on its coming to witness he consulted
with Collison and others upon the best place
for putting it. Collison did not then make any
objection. He passed over the head of the de-
partment (Col. Wilson) in the construction of this
foundry, and went to Capt. Boxer, whom he considered a
more competent person.
How did you proceed with this building ? Was a re-
gular contract entered into by Capt. Collison believe
it was so ; the building proceeded in the regular way,
but the machinery in an irregular manner ; the greater
part of the expense was for the machinery.
By General Peel—The irregularities mentioned in
connection with those buildings were carried on with
the signatures of two members of the board, Sir Thomas
Hastings protesting against it.
The hon. gentleman was proceeding with the reading
of a correspondence connected with the appointment,
and dismissal of officers connected with the laboratory
when the committee adjourned.

OFFICIAL DESPATCH FROM FIELD-
MARSHAL LORD RAGLAN.

(Front a Supplement to the London Gazette of Friday.)
WAR-DEPARTMENT, MAY 7.
Lord Panmure has this day received a despatch and
its enclosures, of which the following are copies, ad-
dressed to his lordship by Field-Marshal the Lord
Raglan, G.C.B.:—

_
Before Sebastopol, April 21, 1855.
My Lord,—Nothing material has occurred since I
made my report to your Lordship on the 21st instant.
The Russian rifle pit, immediately in front of tbat
which was taken on the night of the 19th, was destroyed
by a party of volunteers on the morning of the 21st
inst. These were headed by Lieutenant and Adjutant
Walker, of the 30th Regiment, who is stated to be an
excellent officer, and to have conducted himself on the
occasion in the most spirited manner.
The pit was found to be empty, and being useless was
immediately levelled and filled in. The enemy did not
interrupt the work.
I inclose the list of casualties, which, I regret to say,
Ls heavy. The nearer we approach the place the more
use is to be apprehended. Hitherto it has been less
;han might have been expected.
I have, &c.,
RAGLAN.

The Lord Panmure, &c. &a.
Enclosure 1.

RETURN OF CASUALTIES FROM THE 20TH TO
THE 22n OF APRIL, INCLUSIVE.
9th Regiment of Foot-1 rank and file, wounded.
17th Foot-1 rank and file, killed.
19th Foot-1 rank and file wounded.
38th Foot-3 rank and file wounded.
41st Foot-1 rank and file, killed; 15 do., wounded.
46th Foot-1 serjeant, wounded.
47th Foot-3 rank and file wounded.
49th Foot-1 rank and file killed, do. wounded.
55th Foot-1 serjeant, 1 rank and file wounded.
57th Foot —2 rank and file, killed; 2 do., wounded
624 Foot-1 rank and file, killed ; 1 officer, wounded
77th Foot-2 rank and file, wounded
89th Foot-1 rank and file, wounded
2d Battalion Rifle Brigade-7 rank and file, wounded
Royal Artillery-1 serjeant, killed; 1 rank and file,
wounded
Total-1 serjeant, 6 rank and file, killed; 1 officer, 2
serjeants, 39 rank and file, wounded.

J. B. BUCKNALL ESTCOURT,
Adjutant-General.
Enclosure 2.
NOMINAL RETURN OF OFFICERS WHO HAVE
BEEN WOUNDED FROM THE 20TH TO THE 22n
APRIL, 1855, INCLUSIVE.
•
WOUNDED.
APRIL 21.
62d Regiment of Foot.
Lieutenant-Colonel R. A. Shearman. slightlY
J. B. BUCKNALL ESTCOURT,
Adjutant-General.
Enclosure 3.
NOMINAL RETURN OF NON-COMMISSIONED
OFFICERS AND PRIVATES KILLED FROM THE
20TH TO 22D APRIL, 1855, INCLUSIVE.
KILLED.
APRIL 20.
57th Regiment of Foot.
Private Alexander Graham.
Private Foster Murray.
Royal Artillery.
Serjeant James Bratton.
APRIL 21.
17th Regiment of Foot.
Private Charles Higginson.
41st Regiment of Foot.
Private William Maitland.
49th Regiment of Foot.
Private Michael Kelly.
62d Regiment of Foot.
Private John Furlong.
J. B. BUCKNALL ESTCOURT,
Adjutant-General.
Enclosure 4.
NOMINAL RETURN OF NON-COMMISSIONED
OFFICERS AND PRIVATES WOUNDED FROM
THE 20TH TO THE 22D APRIL, 1855, INCLUSIVE.
WOUNDED.
APRIL 20.
38th Regiment of Foot.
Lance Corporal James Mullens, slightly
Private Win. Archer, slightly
Private John Dignan, slightly
41st Regiment of Foot.
Corporal Samuel Allum, severely. • Corporal James Davies. slightly
Private John Burke, dangerously, since dead
Private Win. Coughlan, severely
Private John Gaffney, slightly