The Sun.
London, England, 1863-11-18 00:00:00

THE SIIN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 18, 1863,

The Court Mgatial on Colonel Crawley,

ALDE'X'SHOT SOUTH CAMP, Tuesday.

The proceedin gs of this long-talked-of court mar-
tial commenced to-day, at the Club, Aldershot,
which had beer 1 extensively prepared for the event.
The court wa As opened at eleven o'clock precisely.
The preside at, Sir G. Wetherall, G.C.8., having
taken his 'seat, the members of the Court were first
sworn by the officiating judge., advocate, Colonel

Pipon.
Tables were arranged on each side of that at
which the members of the court martial eat, that
on the right being occupied by the official prosecutor
Sir A. Horsford, assisted by Mr.: Denison, the
deputy judge advocate. The judge advocate was
also presen t. At the table on the left the prisoner
sat with his legal advisers, Mr. W. Vernon Har-
court, Q.C., and Mr. Waller, of the Chancery bar.
At the same table sat Colonel James Crawley, the
brother of the prisoner. A number of officers occu-
pied seats at the upper end of the room.
Tho Court having been sworn and the warrant
read,

The officiating Judge Advocate read the charges,
and e•sked the prisoner whether he pleaded guilty
or I,lot guilty.

Colonel Crawley—Mr. President and Gentlemen
of the Court—l humbly submit myself to the judg-
ment of the Court whether I ought to be called
upon
ut
to plead to the charges as they are at present
framed. I protest against the charges on two
grounds—First, because the charges are so limited
in their nature that they do not admit of my going
into the substantial merits of the
wholeonswhich have
case with
Tespect to the grievous imputations
an officer and
-been made on my character
a gentleman. And
while
am charged with
the same time pre-
cludedcertain acts, I am,
from showing at
the circumstances out of
which those acts arose, and
.the. condition of
things which const.itutaesd the true justification of my
to the first charge, I have
conduct. . secondl
an objection to
.offer37.ota different character. The
while does not deny but explicitly
first charge,
admits that the order for the.c ose. arrest under
"which Regimental Sergeant Major Lilley was con•
fined was, proper and justifiable, does not allege in
what the unnecessary and undue severity of which
I am accused is supposed to consist. I am, therefore,
left in ignorance of the particular acts with which
I am charged, and am much embarrassed in not
knowing with what evidence I ought to be prepared
to meet them. In this respect I am advised, that the
framing of the first charge differs altogether from
the course pursued in any other tribunal, criminal or
civ-.1. In a criminal proceeding the prisoner is in-
fo/ Tied by the indictment and the depositions of the
details of the case he is called upon to meet. In a
:civil cause the court will always take care that the
defendant be supplied with the particulars of the
charge bronght against him. It has been laid down
on the hig/iest authority that vagueness in the charge
is as obk:ctionable in proceedings before military as
before civil tribunals. I have applied to the prose-
cution to be allowed to inspect and have copies of
the; depositions of the witnesses taken in India, which
Would have informed me of the particulers to which
the first charge is pointed. This request has, how-
ever, been refused. I beg leave to read to the court
the correspondence which has passed between me
and the authorities on the subject :
"5, Suffolk-street, Pall-mall East, London,
Oct. 14, 1863.

" Sir,--11 lave the honour to request that you will be
pleased to bring to the notice of his Royal Highness the
Field Marshal Commanding in Chief the following state-
ment wit b. reference to the charges which, as I am officially
informed., are to be preferred against me at my approach..
ing trial. Nearly two years have now elapsed since I first
becam'3 the subject of attack from the press in India, and
for upwards of a twelvemonth past my character as a
gentt.eman and my conduct as a commaniing officer have
Seca assailed and impugned by the press at home in a
manner which I believe to be almost unprecedented. I
have been branded as a murderer and a tyrant, threatened
with an indictment for manslaughter, as well as with pro-
ce,ediugs in the civil courts of this country, and learned
Viat on my arrival in England I should be hooted and
pelted by the mob, and that the fate of Governor Wall
awaited me. In fact, I believe that within living memory
the character of no man has suffered more from public in-

ilignation and execration than haA mine. I admit, however,
that the statements of interested an't unscrupulous parties,
which have been too hastily believed, may have justified
expressions of public opinioa against rue. If I were really
guilty of the accusations which have been brought against

we I should justly deserve the measure of punishment with

which I have beeu threatened. I have the consolatiou of
k-aowi:ag that before I left India the more respectable por-
tion of the Indian press ha honourably and candidly ad-
mitted that it was grossly misled by the misstatements and
misrepresentations of parties hostile to me, and that in
making the acknowledgment it has done me all the justice
in its power. I did hope that the court martial by which I
am about to be tried would have afforded me the opportu-
nity of meeting, not only the very limited and narrow
charges, on which it is at present proposed to try me, but of
satisfying my countrymen how unjustly my character and
conduct have been assailed. I have hitherto, in deference
to the well-recognised rule of both naval and military ser-
vices, which in matters of duty and discipline enjoins that
no officer shall enter into a controversy with the public
x...-ess, persistently abstained from, in any manner, noticing
the attack to which I have been subjected ; consequently I
have heretofore been unable to offer any explanation of my
conduct, or to vindicate my character in any way what-
ever. Under these circumstances the perusal of the
charges on which I am to be arraigned has produced
in me a feeling of cruel disappointment, inasmuch
as I am satisfied that the present charges will not en-

able me to give that account of my conduct which
the justice of the case so imperatively demands. Indepen-
dent of my own wishes, too, I was led to believe from the
tell" of the debates in both houses of Parliament that an
90
1,7 of the very fullest description would on my return
to
Bx4".4lllL%._lanfi be made, and it is my earnest entreaty that
y shall now be ordered. I, therefore, confidently
appeal ytir
ing ;°lllllists Royal Highness the Field Marshal Command-
afford sae tna't°o cause the charges to be so extended as to
limited aacuattl'Portunity of publicly meeting not only the
tried, but 4:073 on which I am informed I am to be
reference to the !efuting the allegations affecting me with
sion into hoepitroth of Sergeant-Major Lilley, the admis-
maniac, and all the 18:,rgeant-Major Wakefield as a raving
ciliated respecting eel:
slanders so pertinaciously cir-
obedient, humble serve:4 have the honour to be your
(Signed) 'lt'
T. R. CRAWLEY, Lient.-Colonel,
It 13th Dragoons."
44 sir,—With reference tc'tße Guards, Oct. 17 1863.
letter of the 14th inst.,
concluding with the follswin7°llr
dently appeal to his RoyelLN"da, 'I therefore confi-
Commanding in Chief to cease teas the Feld Marshal
tended as to afford me the opportuhitharges to be so ex-
not only the limited accusations ore ws;:t_Publicly meeting
lamto be tried, but also of hiti:
the
I am informed
allegations
affecting mo with reference to the death
01
maniac,' and all the inforanaj:r Wake-
Lilley, the admission into hospital of &rattan:la:ld-Major
field as a raving
so pertinaciously circulated respecting me;
midst:slanders
his Royal Highness to inform you that he does ni,t
...lred by
to make any alteration in or addition to the charger:_°??Be
have been already notified to you as the charges hpajiyttrhe
you will be arraigned at the court martial about to beu2e.b_,
for your trial.—l have the honour to be, Sir, your
tau
Quid
obedient servant, Adjutant General.
" J. YonicE SCARLETT,
" P.S. lam desired to take this opportunity of asking
on what date after the 4th proximo yln will be prepared to
meet the said charges.

"J. Y. ' cAILLETT, A.U."
a buff ek-scree Out. 23.
" Sir,—l have had the honour to receive your letrerthoef
the 17th inst. acquainting me that his Royal Highness
Field Marshal Commanding in Chief does not propose _
to
make any alteration in or addition to the charges already
notified to me as those upon which I am to be arraigned at
the court martial about to be held for my trial.
" In reply I must express my exceeding great regret at
this intimation, but I am very hopeful that his Royal High-
ness will be graciously pleased to reconsider the matter, for
the reasons which I shall lay before him, as I am quitesure
it is hie wish that substantial justice shah be done to all the
parties implicated in these transactions, and that the gene-
ral public shall be satisfied by means of the impending in-
quiry that nothing is held back either on the part of the
prosecution
fo
or the defendant which is essential to be made
k. r their clear and impartial judgment. I am ad-
visedby my solicitor, who has carefully studied and consi-
dered all the documents
nts submitted to him, together with the
n
charges as they are
o:framed, with a view to preparing
my defence, that the
charge is too vague in its nature
to enable him satisfactorily to
of meet it. He informs me that
in civil actions in like easeasupposed injury the judges
would compel the prosecuting
nearly as he could, the specincP:l:ty.to state in suiting, as
Committed,
complained of, and
the dates when they were
he. believes
there is no different law or practice ,Parmiaa.ls.
applicatiinogn thein same
martial, he thinks tbheat
ruepnotnedafproper
me by his Royal Highness.
it is essential to my
privilege Nvillini .
g now
advises me twat
dyeLeceL'and justificationbetfore the public that the
me to put in
completeAglil' m
charges should be further enlarged, to enable
evidence all the official correspondence concerning the
course and the particulars of the arrest of Sergeant Major

Lilley and his two companions, because this correspondence •
discloses every material circumstance connected with the
procedure, and will, as he advises me, prove to the public
that I only discharged my duty in the steps I took on that
occasion. I feel persuaded that the advice my solicitor has
given me is based upon his long experience ; and as I
have the fullest reliance ou his judgm-nt, and in his
desire to see substantial justice done both to me and to all
who are concerned in the pending court martial. I submit
his matured suggestion with confidence to his Royal High-
ness, and venture to believe they will be graciously ac-
cepted. lam most anxious that the court martial should
be proceeded with as soon as possible, and after I shall have
received your reply to this 'application I shall be able to
name on what date after the 4th proximo I shall be ;
i
pre-
pared to meet the charges in accordance with the request
contained in the poetcript to your letter of the 17th in at.—
I am, Ste.
"T. H. CRAWLEY.
" To the Adjutant General, Horse Guards."
" Horse Guards, Oct. 31, 1863.
" Sir,—Having had the honour to lay before the Field
g from
Marshal Commanding in Chief your letter of the 23d, I am
letter
suggestion, the l 7 th
d directedoesnnot
tfionadc
thereinuaint an youy in reply
sufficientt heaatuhs
cause
s for Royaldev tHighnessfu
itnst.,
se
tdecision
and a
communicated
to
add, withreference
that. the specific injuries complained of, and the dates when
to
youinmtyo
y o ur of
they were committed, should be stated in writing, that his
Royal Highness is informed by his responsible legal adviser
in matters of this nature that he sees no sufficient reason
why that should be done.—l have the honour to be, sir,
your obedient humble servant,
"S. YORKE SCARLETT.
gc To Lieut. Colonel Crawley, 6th Dragoons."
" South Camp, Aldershot, Nov. 5, 1863,
" Sir,—l have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of
your communication dated 31st ult., in reply to my letter
of the 23d, informing me that his Royal Highness does not
find therein any sufficient cause for deviating from the de •
cision communicated to me in your letter of the 17th Octo-
ber—and with reference to my suggestion that the specific
injuries complained of, and the dates when they were coin-
milted, should be stated in writing, his Royal Highness is
informed by his responsible legal adviser that he sees no
reason why that should be done. I hope I shall be par-
cloned by his Royal Highness for expressing how much I
lament his final decision on this point, as I cannot
but feel that I shall have no opportunity on my trial to repel
or to refute the terrible calumnies with which I have been
assailed, nor to give that straightforward and full explana-
tion of my conduct which is essential to its being properly
understood by the public, and it will still be open to the
unscrupulous men who have traduced me to persevere, as
I understand is their disclosed intention, in their efforts to
injure rile in public estimation. I bow, however, in all
humility to his Royal Highness's decision, and have merely
to add that I shall be prepared for the assembling of the
court martial on any day that may be named."

With these remarks I humbly submit to the judg-
ment of the Court.

Sir A. Horsford, in reply, said that Colonel
Crawley desired to be tried on other charges. It
has been decided, however, that the prisoner shall
be tried upon the charges submitted to the Court,
and which 'the judge advocate general has decided
are sufficient in law.
The members of the Court then retired for delibe-
ration, and on re-entering the chamber,

The President said that the Court had considered
the matters adduced before them by the prisoner,
and saw no reason why it should not at once pro-
ceed with the trial. He now begged to ask Colonel
Crawley whether he pleaded guilty or not to the
charges.
Colonel Crawley—l plead not guilty to both the
one charge and the other.
Sir A. Horsford, as official prosecutor, then pro-
ceeded to address the Court as follows :—I appear
before you, with the deputy judge advocate, gen-
tlemen, on the part of the prosecution, and I think
it my duty both towards the Court and the pri-
soner to state at the outset, with as much pre-
cision and clearness as I can, what are the issues
which we consider to be raised by the charges on
which the prisoner is arraigned, and to give the
general outline and bearing of the evidence by
which those issues will be supported. The charges
are two in number. The first charge alleges in sub-
stance that Sergeant Major Lilley and his wife were
subjected to great and grievous hardships and suffer-
ings, by reason of trio unnecessary and undue
severity with which the order for close arrest of
Serjeant Major Lilley wee carried into effect, and
that for this unnecessary and undue severity the
prisoner was alone responsible. To substantiate
this charge it will be necessary to prove the follow-
ing matters :—First, That Sergeant Major Lilley
and his wife were subjected to great and grievous
hardships and sufferings. Secondly, That those
hardships and sufferings were caused by the unneces-
sary and undue severity with which the order for
the dose arrest of Sergeant Nl,:jor Lilley was carried

into €ff:,et. Tbet fir this unnecessary and
uudu. everity the prisoner must be deemed respon-
sible. That part of the issue which is comprised in
the words " great and grievous hardships and suffer-
ings," involves several considerations, and will be
supported by several distinct kinds of proof. Your
attention will first be directed to what may be
termed the mere physical incidents of the case. And
with reference to these will be produced before you
models of the buildings in which the sergeant major
was confined; and you will be enabled to judge how
far the place of confinement tended to produce the
hardships and sufferings in question. Secondly,
your attention will be directed to the constitution
and habits of the sergeant major, and to the state of
his wife's health, in order that you may judge how
far a man E 0 circumstanced was likely to be affected
by such confinement. Thirdly, you will have
brought before you medical evidence of the actual
consequences of the confinement ; this will comprise
generally the evidence respecting the hardships and
sufferings sustained by Sergeant Major Lilley and
his wife, and will enable you to determine
whether those hardships and sufferings were great
and grievous. The next consideration will be
whether those hardships and sufferings were caused
by the unnecessary and undue severity with
which the order for close arrest was carried into
effect. With reference to this part of the case,
the models of the buildings and position of the
sentry will have a direct and obvious bearing, and
you will be enabled readily to determine whether
even assuming it to have been right that the close
arrest was to be strictly enforced for the length of
time daring which it was enforced, it was necessary,
or even reasonable or proper, that the sentry should
have been placed where he was placed, and if not,
whether the placing him in such a position did not
show undue and unnecessary severity on the part
of the authority, whomsoever you find him to be,
who caused the sentry to be so placed. With regard
to the length of time during which the confinement

lasted, it is important that I should show at the
outset, with as much precision as the matter admits,
the mode and degree in which I consider it to be a
bearing on the case, and I think it my duty to let
it be distinctly understood that I do not consider
blame to be attributable to the prisoner for the du-
ration of the confinement, except in the manner and
to the precise extent which I am now about to in-
dicta°. It is to be borne in the mind that the pri-

miner received an order from the commander in

13444 at Bombay to keep Sergeant Major Lilley
"der arrest until the trial of Paymaster Similes
arrest, tie lon
Wftg •ft_
eu
ratt"9.4nlcleY aorifjourned. Therefore, for the mere cir-
keeping the sergeant major in close
your
consideration,
Crawley omig as the order was in force, Liott. Col.
of time durniZt be held responsible. But the length
lasted, and the w. hich the imprisonment actually
signed to it by thi:definite duration which was as-
signed at
ipepee, earn tod o baebcoemere.
imogatteenrsthfoerfirst
eh
artiede; havetomet
arraigned, when it is ratiatowhich the prisoner stands
efinement (by the strange terms that as the con-
be uncertain in its durstioetunl, of the order) was to
made by the officer entrusted to !night to have been
little grievous as possible from its
very commenceits execution as
went ; and as the course of events seemed to to be ren-
dering the confinement one of a
mart,
protracted
character than could have been intended to
be as-
signed to it by the commander in chief, it
11r1 be
for you to consider whether some ate psollll
not to have been taken either to ascertain
whether any definite limit was intended to
be
assigned to it, or to represent to the authority
who gave the order that the duration of the confine-
ment seemed to be becoming greater than he could
have intended it to be. I therefore propose to sub.
mit for your consideration whether, both in what
the prisoner did do in this matter, and in what he
failed to do in the matter in respect to the duration
of the confinement, undue severity was not shown
towards Sergeant Major Lilley. The evidence that
will be brought before you in support of the alle-
gation that theorder for the close arrest was carried

into effect with undue severity, will have at the
same time furnished proof that will enable you to
determine the third point which I mentioned to you
as requiring proof, viz., whether for the undue seve-
rity with which the close arrest was carried into
effect the prisoner is to be deemed responsible. On
this point I will not take up your time by going
into details of evidence, for you will have clear
statements about it from several witnesses. There is
one more matter for your consideration with regard
to the first charge on which I wish to make a few
observations. I have said that one branch of the
evidence that will be submitted to you in support of
that part of the issue that relates to the words

d"egnrcieevoof utshehardships
ns andeg suue ffn ec re isnogf s
t, '
h'
ew
co
ounl
fid
nbeemeevni t-
upon the sergeant major in respect of his health. I
think it my duty to state with precision what I con-
sider to be the bearing of that evidence, and what
limits seem properly assignable to it, so as to confine
It strictly to the issue. It will be proved to you that
in the opinion of the medical gentlemen who made
a post-mortem examination of the body the death
was not traceable to any excess in drinking brandy
or other spirituous liquors of any kind, but to apo-
plexy caused by the confinement, and that the an-
noyances to which Lilley was subjected during his
confinement contributed to the breaking-down of
his health, and that had he not been in confinement
there were no medical reasons to suppose that he
would not have been in perfect health at the time
when he died. Their opinion, therefore (which you
will learn from their own mouths), is that the
annoyances to which he was subjected, combined
with the length of the confinement, were the sole
known and assignable causes of his death. In this
view of the case it is manifest that those annoy-
ances in some degree contributed to cause his death,
and that they did so by in some degree tending to
break down his health, and so to accelerate his end.
That is a matter which will be submitted for your
consideration, and it will be for you to determine
whether so far as the evidence of the medical gen-
men is not of weight as bearing on that part of the
issue which is comprised in the words " great and
grievous hardships and sufferings." For hardships
and sufferings that in any appreciable degree con-
tribute to kill a very strong man in so short a space
of time, seem to be fitly characterised as great and
grievous. The evidence of the medical gentlemen
will, therefore, be lai I before you, not as showing
that the prisoner is chargeable as having caused the
death of Sergeant Major Lilley, but only as evi-
dence that so far as that death is in any degree (be
that degree what it may) attributable to the hard-
ships and sufferings he sustained,so far is it evidence
that those hardships and sufferings were " great and
grievous." The circumstance that the length of
the confinement itself might have been far more
instrumental in causing the death than the hard-
ships and sufferings to which he was subjected dur-
ing the confinement, becomes in this point of view,
and to that exact extent, immaterial to the issue
which you have to determine. For if it be granted
that the death was mainly attributable to the length
of the confinement, it still leaves as much operation
to the hardships and sufferings as you may think
the evidence warrants you in assigning to those
causes, and therefore just to that extent, and no
more, will the hardships and sufferings be proved
to have been great and grievous. I believe that,
so far as regards the first charge, I have now shown
sufficiently the nature and limits of the issues which
I propose to support in evidence. Wan regard
to the second charge, the issue thereby
raised is shortly this : whether the prisoner's
statement that "it was Lieutenant and Adju-
tant Fitzsimon's fault if Major Lilley's wife had
been incommoded or annoyed by the precaution
taken for the sergeant major's safe cus-
tody," is correct, and if it be not correct, whe-
ther, at the time when the prisoner made the
statement, he knew that Lieutenant and Adjutant
Fit zsimon had acted in the matter by his (the pri-
soner's) express order and directions. It may be of
service here to call your attention to one or two
dates. The prisoner made this statement to the
court-martial on June 7, 1862. Sergeant Major
Lilley gave his evidence to that court on May 7,
1862, so that the inconvenience and annoyance to
his wife then spoken of by Sergeant Major Lilley
must have occurred between April 26, on which day
ni4 was pieced in arrest, and M.y 7. It will ne
proved to you that up to the time of Lilley's giving
his evidence the prisoner's orders about the posit ion
01 the sentry had ly!en most positive and precise,
and issued in a manlier that made it unlikely
that they would not be attended to ; that these
orders were given by the prisoner himself in
the orderly-room to Lieutenant Fitzsimon,
in
the presence and hearing of several witnesses, a
very few days before May 7, notwithstanding ob-
jections being raised to them by Lieutenant and
Adjutant Fitzsimon himself, and Sergeant Major
Cotton at the time of their being given, on the
ground that they would, if enforced, cause incon-
venience to Mrs. Lilley and annoyance to her hus-
band. If this be proved to the satisfaction of the
Court it will be for you to consider whether Lieu-
tenant and Adjutant Fitzsimon could have been to
blame for what took place with regard to the post-

ing of the sentries, and whether the prisoner on
June 7, when he made this statement, could have
really thought that Lieut. Fitzsimon was to blame
for it. I think it right, in concaision, to state that
so far as the prisoner is concerned the legality of
the order for the confinement of Sergeant Major
Lilley will not be, called in question. I shall now
proceed to call my witnesses.
Mr. J. Skollicy, chief clerk in the judge advocates
office, handed in the official proceedings of the Mhow
court martial. _ _

Col. Crawley said that it must be taken subject to
any inaccuracies.
Major J. Hyde Champion, of the Bombay Staff,
proved the accuracy of the models produced of the
two bungalows in which Sergeant Major Lilley was
confined, but added that one of the models was not
taken from the actual bungalow, which had subse-
quently been palled down, but from a similar one.
Col. Crawley applied to postpone the .cross-exa-
mination of this and the subsequent witness to the
following day.
The official prosecutor made no objection, and the
application was allowed.
Lieut. and Adjutant Fitzsimon sworn—l was adjutant of

the regiment on the 26th of April, 1862, at Mhow. I had
a conversation with Colonel Crawley that day on the sub-
ject of the arrest of Sergeant Major Lilley. I was sent for
to Colonel Crawley's house. He asked me if I knew who
was in the conspiracy going on against him. I said I was
not aware of it. He said, then I did not do my duty as
adjutant, for I should know everything. He told me that
Regimental Sergeant Major Lilley, and Troop Sergeant
Majors Wakefield and Duval were in a conspiracy against
him. He ordered me to place them under arrest, which I
did. I asked if sentries wore to be placed over them. He
told me he would let me know, because to the best of my
recollection he wished to speak to the general about it. Sub-
sequently he gave me a written order to place sentries over
the quarters of the prisoners. The order now produced by
the prosecutor is the one I received. The order was that
each of the parties mentioned should be placed under close
arrest with a sentry over each, and that no person was to
hold communication with either of them. It was signed by
Col. Crawley, dated April 28, 1862. When I received it I
gave it to the acting sergeant major, Cotton, and told him to
have the sentries posted. I did not see them posted, but went
afterwards and inspected them. The sentry was in the ve-
randah outside the building. I cannot say that the Ant
sentry I visited was the first posted. I had some sub-
sequent conversation with Colonel Crawley a few days after
in the regimental orderly room in the barracks. Colonel
Crawley said to me that persons held intercourse with the
prisoners, and asked me if I knew what close arrest meant.
Ho said that it meant that a sentry was not to lose sight of
his prisoner night or day, and gave me the order that a
sentry should be placed inside so as not to lose sight of the
prisoner. The acting regimental serjeant major, Cotton,
made a remark to Colonel Crawley that Serjeant Major
Lilley was a married man. The answer of the colonel was
to the effect, officer or soldier, married or single, he did not
care. lam not sure whether the words "a damn," were
added, but I rather think they were " duty shall be done,"
andelaphtaeinor_dweiteerd tle acting sorjeant major to see it done. I
,t.i.4:ichaatioanoytt
ci.t_mos wascal,
s.d eas
iinaoobri ei)sgmtwehacrntl:loai
‘,(krit
lor
bawas
thesLaso
peeesrytel ofliniment
ani
mamt
esoyni
trhe
to, recollection lthde
ec trthi
occasion,coahnt chest
herist
tw every
uel orsa
yno.
n
I laid Sergeant
befolVrehhpe'inprarlov Major Woodin, and Sergeant Major
it, He
received the order from Colonel Crawley
andtri e s
then for h
signedi written order for the posting oithe Ben-
major that he might pl added to it one or two words,
I gac:eththe order to the acting sergeant
a
was
?lir ntries. I have not got that.
Thatabout
wast hat
abouttim e , andth Cornetltli
nr
order or a copy of it.
Snell became acting adjutant

sth of May. I resumed my duties on the 16th of May. I
was suspended from the adjutancy on the 22d of May. I
had known Sergeant Major Lilley ever since I had been in
the regiment, at the commencement of 1859. I always
heard the highest character of him. I never saw him in
the least intoxicated. He had never been reduced to my
knowledge, and I believe his name had never appeared in the
defaulters' book. I never visited the sentries posted over
him as orderly officer. I never received any order from
Colonel Crawley to remove the sentry from inside Sergeant
Major Lilley's quarters. There was an order given about
his having exercise some time after the arrest. After the
proceedings of the Mhow court martial the witness proceeded
to state that he had leave of absence. On his return from
leave of absence he wrote a letter to the acting adjutant of
the regiment for the information of Sir Hugh Rose. He
wrote that in consequence of remarks made by his excel-
lency with regard to him on the court martial at Mhow,
and also in consequence of certain remarks made by Colonel
Crawley with regard to him on the court martial. On the
day after, on the same day that he forwarded the letter,
Colonel Crawley sent for him to his house, made several
remarks on his letter, and gave it back to him, saying that
if witness wished he would forward it, or that he might
make any changes in it he might wish. He took the
letter, and after considering the matter he sent it back, with
a request that it might be sent on to the commander in chief.
About a fortnight afterwards Colonel Crawley again sent
for him, and read out a letter from Major Champion, who
wrote it, he was told, by direction of General Farrell. He
had not got a copy of the letter, which was simply read out
to him.

Sir A. Horsford said if the letter could be produced it
should be.

Colonel Crawley objected to the purport of the letter being
stated.

The President said the evidence might be compared with
the letter when it was produced.

Colonel Crawley said it might not be produced at all.
The President--What became of the letter?
Witness said that Major General Farrell read the letter,
and on stating that it was insubordinate, he withdrew it.
(The letter was put in.)
On the request of Colonel Crawley the letter was read,
and contained a reprimand of the witness on account of his
appeal, and permitting him to withdraw it.
Witness—He held in his hand a letter, which he forwarded
for the information of the commander in chief, and which
the major general considered insubordinate.
The President thought that the letter had nothing to do
with the case, When an officer withdrew a letter it ought
to become a nullity.

Sir A. Horstord said the objeet was to show that when
he heard what Colonel Crawley had said about him he was
anxious as soon as he could to state what had really
occurred,

The President thought it would be bettter not to put in
those letters. The evidence already disclosed that Mr.
Fitasimon received certain orders, and that he carried them
out. The letters were useless.

After some conversation the letters were admitted and
read. The original letter expressed the regret of the writer
that Sir Hugh Rose had considered his evidence unsatis-
factory, and had animadverted on his conduct in placing
the sentries, explaining that all that had been done under
the direction of Colonel Crawley. On being recommended
to withdraw that letter he wrote a conditional letter of
withdrawal. He was again sent for to Colonel Crawley's
house. Colonel Crawley read out a letter from Major
Champion, in which it was stated that he was to assign no
reason for withdrawing his letter. His (witness's) present
position in the regiment was that of lieutenant and adju-
tant, but not doing duty.
The President—ln what year did all this happen that
you have stated ?
Witness --In 1862. The conversations between himself
and Colonel Crawley might not have been what he had
stated, but he had given the substance of them.
The cross-examination of the witness was postponed
until to-morrow.

Colonel Crawley said he did not wish that there should
be any delay with regard to the letters. The letters which
had been produced he admitted.

Private Cuthbert Blake, of the 6th Dragoons, being
sworn, said he was corporal of the guard oa the let of May
on Sergeant Major Lilley, at Mhow. He posted thesentries
outside the doors. He was confined in consequence on a
charge of neglect of duty—for not posting the sentry inside.
'So such order had been given. After he had been placed
under arrest he was tried by a regimental court martial, the
charge against him being neglect of duty to a regimental
order.

The cross-examination was postponed till to-morrow.
l
against
gi
martialrEae advocatecdnt Nsy
tdao.r
nd
himtGhwre
general'si
The
affil
court
os
fhut Sims,crrWfutni
teonete,martials
posting
confidential
ntdi
nu thefounde tdt ttehhh ieronof clerksentriesrgguilty
aiilnyt
ya. inaos:of
hhLthehera breach
a hcjudgetebaoheruegor
been
orders. ( rho proceedings of the court martial were read,
and he was sentenced to 42 days' imprisonment. The Court
recommended him to mercy, and Colonel Crawley, attribut-
ing his conduct to stup'dity, remitted the punishment, and
allowed him to rejoin his regiment as a private dragoon,
depriving him of his office of corporal.)
Edward Mills, serjeant of the 6th Dragoons, said he first
mounted guard on Sergeant Major Lille), on the Ist May,
1862. Ou visiting the sentry about 20 minutes before 12,
he found the sentry outside of Sergeant Major Lilley's
bungalow. He asked him the reason, and he said that was
where the corporal placed him. He went to the guard-
room and called the corporal out, asking him the reason
why he placed the sentry outside. lie gave no reason, but
asked witness not to report him. He immediately went and
reported bins to the acting regimental sergeant major, who
ordered him to be placed under arrest. He went into his
room and got another corporal. The offending corporal (the
last witness) was brought before a court martial and sen-
tenced to 42 days' imprisonment, which Colonel Crawley
forgave him. Sergeant Major Lilley was allowed to take
an hour's exercise twice a-day by the doctor's order. He
was always accompanied. At first they went jogging and
trotting all round the race course together. The second
time the sergeant in charge was to walk in the rear of
Lilley, so that there might be no conversation between
them. Lilley was a man who consumed a great deal of
drink : he was a great, coarse, ignorant man ; he drank
very heavily, and could carry a great deal. He had many
times seen him in drink, but never drunk on duty. He
used to ride about a great deal on a pony. He could not
walk much, as he had bad feet. Witness mounted
guard a second time on the 19th of the same month
of May, and all day on the 20th. On the first time no one
was allowed to see Lilley. On the second occasion the rule
was relaxed in favour of the medical officer. On the second
occasion the sentry was posted in the servants' room, on
the first occasion outside. On the 19th the sentries were
in the troop bungalow, in the verandah, where Sergeant
Major Lilley slept that night. The order to the sentry was
that he should never lose sight of the prisoner, day or night.
He was to allow no one but the medical officer and the na-
tive servant to hold communication with him, and he was
to search the native servant when he went in and out, and
take from him any letter or scrap of paper, and hand
it to the sergeant of the guard, to be by him taken to the
adjutant, and submitted to the commanding officer. These
orders were written and posted up in the guard room, and
signed by the adjutant, Lieut. Fitzsimon, and the acting
adjutant. He did not know what had become of those orders.
Sergeant Major Lilley was taken from his room to the troop
bungalow, because the former was taken down for barracks
to be built on the same spot.

At this period the court martial was adjourned.

A POACHER SHOT.—On Friday evening last a
keeper named Henry Hill, in the employ of Lord Rivers, of
Rushmore, Wilts, encountered Alfred Dicker, a notorious
poacher, who had just left a wood and entered the high road.
The keeper collared him, and attempted to search his
pockets. Dicker made a determined resistance, and beat the
keeper most severely over the head and breast with the
barrel of a gun which he had about him. A gun which the
keeper carried accidentally went off in the struggle, and the
charge was lodged in the poacher's left thigh. This had the
effect of disabling him, and other keepers hearing the re-
port came to Hill's assistance. Dicker was at once taken
to a publichouse at Ludwell, where he was promptly at-
tended to by Mr. Gregg, surgeon. The wound was not so
serious as to prevent his being taken before the magistrates
at Hindon on the following day. He was there committed
for trial at the assizes on a charge of unlawfully wounding
Hill, who has been seriously hurt. On Saturday evening
the prisoner was conveyed to Salisbury by Superintendent
Dann, and there lodged in gaol. A hare was found upon
him when ho was taken, and also a gun, with powder, shot,
and bullets.

yt'lassOintm personallye n ant
tried
ePdilltas
It LiAs
aDdVmEßitTteldSEMbyENevrery
these
noble remedies for any eruptions, sores, ulcers, &c., or who
have witnessed their purifying and healing effects on others
suffering from such maladies, that nothing more can be de-
sired than these medicaments possess. The ointment relaxes
the swollen muscles, diminishes both redness and inflam-
mation. assuages pain, and alleviates even danger which
may have lasted for months or even years. Holloway s
excellent preparations are stated to be effective singly—re-
sistless in combination, and have been recommended by
grateful patients to be sought as the alternatives when all
other means of regaining health have failed. Their action
is temperate, not violent or reducing.
[ADVERTISEMENT.]—Consumption, all nervous, bilious,
liver, and stomach complaints, is every stage, are only ag-
gravatei and accelerated by drugs of every description, but
perfectly curable by Du Barry's health restoring ltevalenta
Arabica Food, as proved by thousands of cases which had
been considered hopeless. We quote a few.---Cure No. 62,914.
Miss Lange, 18 years of age, cured after the medical men had
abandoned all hopes of her recovery from the last stage oi
Pulmonary consumption, with fearful cough, expectoration,
exhaustion, spitting of blood, perspirations, hollow cheeks,
emaciated to a skeleton. She is now, thank God, a perfectly
healthy, blooming, fleshy girl,---N. Lange, Commissaire de
Police. Cure, No. 48,270. Mr. James Roberts, of Fernley
Surrey, of thirty years' diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liver
derangement. and partial deafness.—Cure, No. 47,121. Miss
Elizabeth Jacobs, of extreme nervousness, indigestion,
gatherings, low spirits, and nervous fancies.—Cure, No.
54,816. Ihe Rev. James T. Campbell, pakenham, Norfolk,
of indigestion and torpidity of the liver, which had resisted
all medical treatment. In tins, 11b, 2s 9d; 21b, 4s 6d; 51b,
115; 121 b, 225; 241 b, 405. Barry du Barry and C 3., No. 77,
Regent-street, London; also Fortnum and Mason; and all
grocers and chemists in every town of the United Kingdom.

COURT OF ALDERMEN.

A Court of Aldermen was holden yesterday at
Guildhall. The Right Hun. the Lord Msyor (W.
Lawrence, Esq.) presided for the first time in his
official capacity, and, as is usual on such occasions,
every member present was attired in his scarlet
robes.

The LORD MAYOR, at the commencement of the
proceedings, made a few observations to his brother
aldermen, and said he felt assured that he should
always receive from them the same cordial and kind
assistance that had been accorded to his predeces-
sors, and that the officers of the Court would also
do the same in their respective capacities. (dear,
hear.)