The Sun.
London, England, 1863-12-28 00:00:00

SPIRIT OP THE PUBLIC JOURNALS,

EXAMINER.—The question really interesting the
country is whether Sergeant Litley was treated
justly, not the narrow issue whether the severity
exceeded what was necessary to the purpose of his
confinement. Was the man wronged ? Was any
right ea a soldier contravened in the confiuement
which hastened his end? The article of war limit-
ing duration of an untried man's imprisonment is
the main safeguard of the soldier's liberty; it is to
him what the habeas corpus is to the civilian.
This important law was violated in Lilley's case.
Colonel Crawley's defence in that respect, as in
others, is " Macbeth's "Thou canst not say I did
it!" The arrest was commenced by him without
any infraction of military law, but it was continued
by the direction of General Farrell indefinitely. and
afterwards of the Commander-in-Chief, Sir. Wm.
Mansfield, in contravention of the articles of war.
We have advisedly used the word direction instead
of authority, because those Generals had no autho-
rity to set aside or nullify one of the articles of war
framed for the Government of the army, and to
control the highest as well as the lowest in the
service. The notion in Colonel Crawley's mind
was that he had to deal with a mutiny. There
had been mutiny in India, so mutiny was always
to be apprehended in India. There had been
mutiny in native forces, so mutiny was likely to
break out in an English regiment. The question
in his mind, as he avers, was mutiny or no mutiny,
because, forsooth, Mr. Smales had written an in-
discreet letter, and three sergeants had read some
proceedings the publication of which was forbid-
den. In one of Dickens's novels two characters
go on the stage representing a general rebellion.
Here we have three sergeants bringing
within a step of mutiny, though thea regiment
corps was
sound, the discipline intact. But nevertheless
" the crisis had arrived, the danger was immi-
nent !" The Colonel was in a dream, or in a
passion, and made mountains of mole hills.
It is a highly significant fact, that to clear Colonel
Crawley's character no less than seven reputations
must be destroyed. Four officers and three ser-
geants must be believed wanting in truth and duty,
in order that he may stand fair in the eyes of the
world. We cannot join in the praise that has been
given to the defence. In the conduct of it there
was, indesd, much of the Old Bailey cleverness,
and a success in disposing of it. As for the con-
cluding speech, which hes been strangely admired,
it was tawdrily rhetorical, and in the prevailing
taste of works of sensation. Such passages as those
seem borrowed from the penny dealers in fine
wetting How in the dark and dreary night of
calumny and wrong have I longed for the day when
the truth might be legitimately known, and when
the foul vapours of malice and falsehood a. ould dis-
solve like a morning mist before the sun P Some
parts of his speech ere more gravely reprehensible,
for instance, his insoh nt remark upon a statement
of Mr. Smales's, " I think it just possible that upon
this occasion Mr. Smalcs told the truth." Now it
has been her alsjestyas pleasure to reinstate Mr.
Smales in her service, a reparation which certainly
would not have been made if Mr. Smales had been
void of truth, and therefore unworthy of her cene.
mission and a place amongst men of honour. The
insult strikes higher than the restored paymaster.
And the man who deals in such foul imputations
mouths about libellers and calumny. From
such outbursts it is easy to underatund
what he must have been in his regiment.
He has, however, been acquitted, honourably ae. '
quitted, and will resume a command for which he
has shown such rare qualifications. But here the
matter cannot rest. The question evaded must be
raised, whether or not a wrong was done to Lilley,
and whether the articles of war do or do not protect
a good soldier against injustice. If it can be shown
that a court martial could not have been assembled
to try the prisoners, well and good, but they were
detained by direction of the two Generals without
any view to trial, and for another purpose. At the
meeting of Parliament more will be heard of this
question, and of the soldiers' rights involved in it.
LONDON REVlEW.—Summary justice seems likely
to overtake those violators of the law, Messrs.
Heenan and King. The magistrates of the county
in which they fought seem resolved not to let the
matter drop to the ground. They are quite right.
Even bad laws ought to be kept, and the law which
prohibits the brutality of prize fights deserves
especial conservation. The practice is itself demoral-
ising—the training, as has been shown by the
.Lancet, is often thoroughly prejudicial to health—
and though Messrs. Heenan and King themselves
may not be worse than their ordinary associates,
there is no doubt that the prize ring is full of ruffians
and vagabonds belonging to all classes of society.
Bell's Life, the chosen organ of prize fighters, has
more than once seemed thoroughly ashamed of its
mission. The champions of England and America
themselves, who have nearly killed one another for
the amusement of a degraded and sensation-hunting
mob, know pretty accurately and measure pretty well
the depth of their degradation. What Mr.Thos.Sayere
feels upon the subject may bejudged by the reso-
lution he at one time formed of retiring definitely
from the Ring--a resolution which he has not
seemingly been man enough to keep. Heenan while
in training at Brighton expressed himself in no
light language of the occupation in which he is
engaged. "Isn't a bloody and brutal thing," he is
reported to have said, " a man like me to be getting
ready to stand up and knock another man about for
some money ?" The scene at the railway station on
the morning of the fight was thoroughly of a piece
with past experience, though the strenuous efforts
made by the Company, and favoured possibly by
the police, put it out of the power of the very
poorest ruffians to be present at the fight. The
character of prize fighting may be estimated by the
history of the police-courts the next day. To foreign.
nations it perhaps appears incredible that, in de-
fiance of the law, such rude and violent exhibitions
should with impunity take place on each occasion
when it pleases the noble patrons of the
sport
t!
back one man's muscles against the muscles of
an
not
other. They would conclude (and they wouldl.s
be far wrong in concluding) that the withfaulteeasily
the Executive. Ordinary law breakers e
ra l
reached by the strong arm of justice. In tho case
.
vigilant as their
of a street row the police are as
native slowness of pace permits tarieNz.mig_tro he, and the
fj,-hter scowls
severity which winks at thrci p
reply that it
- complaints of this
grimly at the pickpocket.
description the advocates of the° Rata
a )the
does not do to be in advance of the m.° or rt of
age—a proposition which is as ludicrous as a pro_
Either the immoral age is
position well can be.
lawis right. If the age is not
right or the moral
means the penalties
wrong, abolish by all and the
commandment. But if the law is unimpeachable,
and its defiers belong to the scum and ices of so-
ciety respectively, let the law stand, and let the age
learn to obey or to submit to the fitting punishment.
That gentlemen and scholars should dare still to
upheld a practice condemned by law and morality
alike, is enough to discourage The
Most men.
efforts of a minority must, however, quickly prove
impotent before the common Opinioncock-
of society.
Worse than
Why is prize fightingfighting on
Shrove Tuesday ? Both are E equally ancient, equally
national, and equally d* • The cock
lareputauLe spoi ts.
of
has been succeesfull
' y taken under the wingthe
Legislature; but human beings are still allowed
a and
encouraged—in the Legislature's despite—to grac-