The Sun.
London, England, 1863-12-08 00:00:00

TEE CRAWLEY COURT-MARTIAL.

(FROM OUR OWN IiEFORTEII.)
SIXTEENTH DAY.
[The following appeared in the Third Edition of " Thio
sun" of last evening] :

ALDERSHOT, Monday Morning.
The members of the Court did not assemble till 11 o'clock
this morning, having remained in consultation in the Ir
private room an hour.
When the Court broke up on Friday evening the subject
of Dr. Barnett's evidence, relative to certain statements of
Mrs. Lilley as to her husband's drinking habits and other
matters, was under consideration, the prosecution urgin g
that the witness should be allowed to state all that Mrs.
Lilley said on that occasion.
The President stated the circumstances of the case, and
said that the matter had been referred to the Judge Advoe
cate-General, who had stated that if the questions proposed:
by the prosecution were put it would not invalidate the,
proceedings, and that it would not invalidate the pro-
ceedings it refused to be put. On receiving this informa-
don the Court decided that the mat ter should be fully ilia
vestigated. The Court now called upon the prosecutor ea
proceed with any further evidence he might have to adduce.
Sir A. Horsford said he could not say that the case for
the prosecution was closed until the Court asked Dr. Barnett
the questions proposed.
The President said the matter would be thoroughly sifted,
but they saw objections to putting the question at the pre-
sent period.
The Court again retired, and after an absence of an hour
and a half, the President announced that the Court had
been closed for the purpose of considering a remark of the
prosecutor. The Court had decided on referring the matter
to the opinion of the Judge Advocate General, and in the
meantime to proceed with the cross. examination (by the
Court) of the witnesses for the prosecution.
Sergeant Edward Mills was recalled.
The Court—You have stated in your examination in chief
that you have frequently seen Sergeant Major Lilley drunk.
Specify the particular occasions alluded to.—The first time
was in 1844, at Mr. Daniel's, the Three Crowns, Parlia-
ment-street, Nottingham. I saw him drunk at Mr. Wil-
liams's, the Victoria, Newcastle-upon-Tyne; also at Bala-
klava, when lie was in company with Sergeant Major
Moreton. He sent me down for three bottles of gin and
gave me a sovereign to pay for them. I saw him drunk
at Scutari on Christmas-day. On that occasion I pulled
off his boots, and covered him up in bed. I saw him
drunk at Durham, when we were on recruiting service
there. I also saw him drunk in the female hospital,
which he occupied when the regiment first marched into
Mhow. On the day we marched into Mhow I was regia
mental orderly sergeant. I went up to my tea, and he
ordered me out like a dog. He was then drunk and I went
away without my tea. At Burhampore I saw him drink in
his tent on the line of march. That is all.
The Court—Did you report him as being drunk on the
day you were orderly sergeant, and say you saw him drunk ?
—I did not.
Did any one else, to your knowledge, see him drunk on
those occasions P—Not to my knowledge.
Lieutenant Fitzsimons recalled.
The Court—When ordered on the 26th of April to place
wthheetthherreae
sentry
should be
sergeant majors under arrest why did you ask
placed over them P—l do not re-
collect whether Col: Crawley said hiwould ask the major
general whether a sentry was to be placed over the sergeant
majors, or whether I proposed it to him. Of course, if they
were to be placed under close, arrest, it meant having a,
sentry placed over them.
You have stated distinctly that when ordered to place the,
sergeant majors under arrest you asked whether sentries
should be placed over them. Reconcile your two answers P
—I did ask the question. lam not certain whether my
commanding officer first spoke to me about it or not.
Who defined the post of the sentry first placed over Ser..
geant Major Lilley when ordered into close arrest on the
26th of April, 1862 P—l believe it to have been the acting
regimental sergeant major after receiving a written order
from me.
collect.
Did you define the post of the first sentry P—l do not re.
Who drew up the orders for the sentry first posted over
Sergeant Major Lilley ?—The first order was given to me
by Colonel Crawley in his own handwriting.
Did you sign them and show them to the sentry, and
have them hung up at hie post ?—As far as I remember I
must have done so. All orders to the sentries were signed
by me and hung up at the main guard. The orders were
not hung up at the post, but at the main guard, in order
that they might be read out to the sentries before they went
to their posts.
You have stated that a few days subsequently to the
arrest of Major Lilley you laid a written order for the
posting of the sentries before Colonel Crawley for approval,
Who wrote those orders ?—They must have been written,
by one of my clerks. I cannot say by which one.
Did you dictate those orders ?—I gave the general mean.
ing of the orders to the clerk.
Did you approve them before submitting them to Colonel
Crawley ?—Yes ; I read them through.
In those orders was the post defined for the sentry over
Sergeant Major Lilley ?—lt was not defined further than it
was mentioned that they were not to lose sight of him day

or night.
On receiving Colonel Crawley's order to the effect that the
sentries over the sergeant major should be placed inside, so
that they should not lose sight of their prisoner night or
day, what alteration did you make as,to.the sentry over the
sergeant major P—On receiving that order I gave over the
written order, which was approved of by Colonel Crawley,
to the acting regimental sergeant major, and told him tai
have the sentries posted accordingly.
Was he posted in accordance with the orders ho had re,
calved from Colonel Crawley ? Did you visit the sentry at
his post?—lt is my belief he was posted accordingly. I did
not go to the post, as I before stated. I only went to the
door of the first bungalow. I saw the sentry on his post in
the second bungalow.
If you saw the sentry on his post, describe the position of
the post ?—ln the first bungalow I went to the back door of
the room No. 4, and the sentry came to the door and opened
it. I did not see his post in the first bungalow. When I
went to visit the sentry he has frequently come and opened
the door for me himself.
How did the sentry know that you were at the back door
when he came out to you P—l have called for the sentry.
You have already stated that you considered it was your
duty to see the place where the sentry was posted. You
now acknowledge you failed in your duty on that point. Is
it so ?—So far as not going in to see him on his post I did,
Did you ever take measures to prevent any improper in-
terference with Mrs. Lilley by the sentries ?—No, I never
gave any orders except those I received from my Commands
ing ofluer.
Where was the post of the sentry in the first bungalow
--I always believed it to have been at the door of the bed-
room—that is, in
case the sergeant major was in the bed-.
t the Crawley
bedroom your ? belief
I do that
not
room. As there were several rooms the sentry had to go
about from room s
ptoreon on theomaftesubject.
Did you uni:a at e
th to e Colonelr
h
Were im
spoken
given that the sentries should not inter-
do orof
f
privacy of Mrs. Lilley ?--I never receive
therecollect
inter-
fare wesentry'sriwith
hanyhaving
t the
orders was
orders to that effect, nor did I ever give any.
Where do sentr.es usually give up their orders ?-0u
their post.
was there any order about the bedroom ?—I recollect no
order about it.
Where did the sentry give up his orders to you on the
first bungalow ?—At the door of No. 4 room.
What led you to believe that the sentry was at the door
of the bedroom ?—From the orders which he gave up to
me, that he should not lose sight of the prisoner night or
day.

Was the sentry so posted as not to lose sight of the
sergeant major night or day ?—lf he carried out his orders
he must have been, as ho was in the house with him.
Was there any difference in the orders given for the
posting of the sentries over the three sergeant majors ?---,
No, I don't recollect any.
Was there any alteration made in the orders during the
time you were adjutant?—No.
Were the two troop sergeant majors, Wakefield and
Duval, married or single ?—Single.
The Court shortly afterwards adjourned.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.

TATTERSALLS'.—LAST EvoNING*
THE GREAT FIGHT.
7to 4on Heenan (taken)
TWO THOUSAND'
....A)
I Fine de l'Air

sto lal

6to 1 agst Paris (offered)
6to 1 agst Scottish Chief (offered)
10 to 1 agst Claremont (oken)
TSB Pg"r•
9to 1 agst Scottish Chief (taken and offered)
15 to 1 agst Paris (offered)
100 to 6 agst Biair Athol (taken and offered)
20 to 1 apt Forager (taken)
28 to 1 apt Prince Arthur (taken)
30 to 1 agst lliet)riau (taken freely)
30 to 1 agst Ackworth (taken)
30 to 1 agst Appenine (taken)

LoRD SI.AmFoRD's STUD.--We have received
authority to state that Lord Stgrnford has repurchased
c3mbuscan, Archimedes, toad the horses bought by Mr.
Teu Broeck, Mr. CartwrOtt, and Mr. Wadlow ; and they
will hereafter be trained by W. Butler at Newmarket.
—N)ortiny Gazette.

THE FAMOUS YIN LYARD OF CLOS- VOTJGEOT i 8 uf
such repute that " when. a French regiment marches past,
it halts and presents arms 1" Mars taking off his hat to
Bacchus I

The Official Journal of Warsaw states that in
the Castricis of Zatnosc and of Hrubleszow there are
no -longer any considerable bands of insurgents to
be secal ; but small detachments make their appear-
ance iron) time to time marching towards thet
Ecoutitlr.