The Sun.
London, England, 1863-11-19 00:00:00

THIRD EDITION

SUN OFFICE, SEVEN O'CLOCK.

THE CRAWLEY COURT MARTIAL.

THIRD DAY.

ALDERSHOT, Thursday.
The Court sat at a quarter past eleven. Paymaster
Smales was present during the day.
Col. Crawley wished to put slew more questions to
Major Champion.
The Court assented.

Major Champion recalled—l was in constant communi-
cation with Col. Crawley during the time of the arrest of
Sergeant Major Lilley and the other two sergeant majors.
I never remarked the existence of a vindictive and mali-
cious feeling on the part of Col. Crawley towards them.
After the death of Sergeant Major Lilley, Major General
Farrell wade an address to Sergeant Major Wakefield,
at which I was present. The address was in my hand-
writing, and the adjutant of the regiment took it round to
the officers to be read to Sergeant Duval. The address, it
dated at all, was read out on the 6th of Tune, and I have it
in my possession,

The address was then read as follows :
" Colonel Crawley, officers, and non-commissioned officers.
" His Excellency the Commander• in-Chief desired me,
in a letter dated the 6th of May, to dispose of the cases of
the late Sergeant Major Lilley and Troop Sergeant Majors j
Wakefield and Duval when the general court martial
should have finally closed its proceedings. The ob.
ject of your being here assembled this morn-
ing is to hear read to you those instructions, and
also a dispatch which reached me yesterday evening from
the Commander -in- C hief. The Assistant-Ad j utant-
General will now read, first, a memorandum dated June 2,
and second, a letter, No. 13,747, May 6." (Read accord-
ingly.) "Sergeants Wakefield and Duval, you are now
released from arrest and from the consequences of your
folly. Circumstances over which I had no control have
lengthened the period of your arrest and confinement, and
by the will of the Almighty, your comrade, Sergeant Major
Lilley, has been taken away from among you, and I deeply
deplore his sudden death, and that he cannot, have the
consolation of forgiveness granted him in your-presence.
All of you must bear this in mind, and re-
member it to the last day of your service that
subordination to the authorities placed over you is the
golden rule of conduct of all soldiers serving her graeious
Majesty. The late transactions, so clandestine and im-
proper, so closely resembling mutiny towards your com-
mander, have brought all this sorrow and trouble upon
you. The consequences of such conduct were inevitable ;
and I trust you will hereafter show, by your conduct, that
you have seen your fault in its true light, and strive
to regain the confidence of your commanding officer.
To the rest of you I have to say that discipline
and your own honour and happiness can only he maintained
by your individual conduct iu right feeling and subordi-
nation."

Witness continued—Sergeant Major Wakefield was pre
sent, and apparently in good health, at the reading of that
address. He did not seem to me to be a raving maniac.
By Sir A. Horsford (the proeecutor)—Since Sergeant
Major Wakefield was released, has he been placed in any
position of responsibility in the regiment ?
Witness—l think ho returned to his duty as a sergeant,
and, to the best of my knowledge, took his discharge about
a year subsequently, on the completion of his service.
Sir A. Horaford—Were any other quarters occupie by
Dibble (referred to yesterday) than those which had een
occupied by Lilley ?

Witness—l forgot to mention yesterday, and lam glad
of the opportunity of saying that Quartermaster Sergeant
Dibble, to the best of my belief, had additional accommoda-
tion on the north side of the quarters in whicJi Lilley died,
and also another room of similar dimensions.

By the President—l sin sure that Major General Farrell's
address was delivered on the Gth of June.

Colonel Crawley—Have you any means of proving that
the address was not delivered on the ith of June ?

Witness (after referring to certain memorandums
handed to him) I find on refreshing my memory that I
have made a mistake. Major General Farrell's address
was read out on the morning of the 17th of June.
By the Court—You stated in your evidence yesterday
that the height of the wall in Sergeant Major Lilley's
second bungalow was 121 feet in height. The plan shows
tbat it was 9 feet 9 inches. Which is correct ?

Witness—l find that it was a sloping wall. Tho mea-
surement of the inside was upwards of 10 feet by scale, on
the outside about 9. The height mentioned from memory
by me of 12 feet 6 inches was therefore inaccurate. I do
not remember myself ever having occupied Government
quarters in India. I have lived in smaller rooms and worse
ventilated private bungalows than those last occupied by
the late Sergeant. Major Lilley.
The President—As Assistant-Adjutant-General to the
division of the Bombay army at Mhow, will you be pleased
to define close arrest as carried out in that Presidency ?
Witness—l define close arrest to mean the fact that a
sentry must be over the quarters in which the prisoner livea,
and that it is a mode of arrest resorted to where serious
crimes are charged against a prisoner. There are no local
orders as to close arrest iu the Bombay Presidency. It is a
discretionary matter altogether.
The President—What do you mean by quarters ?
Witness—l moan wherever the prisoner is confined.
The Court—Are you aware whether Major General
Farrell's definition of close confixement agrees with that of
Colonel Crawley, as stated by Lieutenant Fitzsimons, " that
the sentry should not lose sight of his prisoner night or
day ?-
Witness—l tan not aware of the definition Major General
Farrell would give, but in the case of Sergeant Major Lilley
it was necessary to prevent communication with outside
parties.
The Court—Was Major General Farrell aware that at
any time a sentry was placed in the same room with Ser-
geant Major Lilley and his wife?
witness—To the best of my belief, he was not aware of
any such occurrence.
The Court—Did Major-General Farrell, in addition to
ordering close arrest, order that no person should see
geant-Major Lilley except by Colonel CrawleYB Ser.
permission ? express
Witness—Yes ;it was so stated in one of the letters pro-
duced yesterday. The letter of the 28th of A
give_ .pnr.ii 1862,
contained the whole of the instructions ever ,
Lieutenant and Adjutant Fitzsimoa was re-called for
cross-examination.
Colonel Crawley—ln your opinion were the quarters in
which Sergeant-M Lillajor eY was c
uncomfortable ? onfined comfortable or
Witness—The irk quarters were comfortable ; the second
I do not think so, especially for a married man ?
Colonel Crawley—wercupied by the married na e they as good as the quarters oc•
Witness—l think en of the Inniskillings now ?
they v.,
Colonel Crawley—C were about the same.
bombproof oven, and mild they properly be described as a
rious to human healt unfit for human habitation and inju-
false description 9 11—i s that, in your opinion, a true or
Witness—What I
recollect of the second quarters was
that it was a bombproof
of it.
building% although I never took any
particular notice
Colonel Crawley—I wish the uestion to be answered
specifically. Was it a bombproof r
building
Witness—l dthink has been
given tbe description which
given of it is true.
Colonel Crawley—Could
those quarters be called unfit for
human habitation—is that statement true or false.
Witness—l consider they were fit for habitation, but not
comfortable.
Colonel Crawley—Could they be called unfit for human
habitation ?

Witness—No, not unfit.
Colonel Crawley—Could. they be called injurious to health
—is that true or false?
is opinion,
that they could not have been
healthy, because it was very warm there. My opinion is
that they were injurious to health.
Colonel Crawley—How. many families of the Inniskilling
Dragoons occupied similar quarters while you were acting
as adjutant to that regiment?
Witness—l cannot state the number, but the greater
part of the families of the 7 egiment,
Colonel Crawley—Do I understand you to say that ,the

greater part of the families of the Inniskilling Dragoons•
occupied quarters that were injurious to health?
Witness—l think so. 'I here were continual complaints
about them,
Colonel Crawley—By whom, and to whom?
Witness—By both men and women of the regiment
complaints have been made to me.
Col. Crawley—Were the quarters in which Sergeant
Major Lilley was last confined the quarters provided by
Government for the use of the regiment ?
Witness—Yes.
Col. Crawley—Was it in your opinion the fault of Col.
Crawley that the quarters in which the greater part of the
families resided were injurious to health ?
Witnes s—No.
Col. Crawley—Have you ever heard of the misrepresen-
tations which you admit to be untrue as to the building in
which Sergeant Major Lilley was confined, namely, that it
waNsv bi
tonme
sbs
_....p r oi
otfhainnkd Iu nht iatvfeo rhhe humant hi anbti
the
aet i on
papers.?
not recollect having heard of it elsewhere.
, I do
Col. Crawley—Will you swear that you have never any
where heard such a representation ?
Witness—As I have stated, Ido not recollect having
heard it elsewhere.
Colonel Crawley—Allow me, Mr. President. Will the
witness swear to it ?
Colonel Pipon (officiating Judge Advocate)—He is on
his oath, and whatever he says is under the sanction of
that oath.
Colonel Crawley—Have you any knowledge or idea from
what quarter such misrepresentations originated ?
Witness—No.
Colonel Crawley—Have you taken any steps, as an
officer of the Inniskilling Dragoons, to correct a misrepre-
sentation so injurious to the honour of yolk commanding
officer ?
Witness—l did not take steps.
Colonel Crawley—Have you, since your return to Eng-
land, been in communication with Mr. Smales?
Witness—He has called on me at my hotel twice or three
times. Otherwise not. I one day met him in the streets
in London, and once here in the ccurt martial room.
Colonel Crawley—On the occasion on which you saw Mr.
Smales, did you converse with him on the subject of this
trial ?

Witness—l did.
Colonel Crawley—When did you last converse with Mr.
Smales on the subject of this trial ?

Witness—The day before yesterday in the court martial
room.

Colonel Crawley—How came you to cease to be adjutant
of the Inniskilling Dragoons ?
Witness—l was suspended in consequence of my com-
mending officer reporting me.
Colonel Crawley—For what did your commanding officer
suspend you ?
Witness--I believe that it was for having partaken of
the paymaster's hospitality, and he also seated that I was
incompetent to perform the duties of adjutant. I have in
my possession the correspondence relating to it.
Colonel Crawley—On what Lccasion did you partake of
the paymaster's hospitality when your conduct in that
respect was complained of.
Witness—l do not recollect at what date, but it was
when the paymaster was under arrest at Mhow.
Colonel Crawley—Was Mr. Sutales tried for insubordi-
nation to ?
Colonel Crawley, as commanding officer of the
regiment

Witness—Yes.
Colonel Crawley—Do you regard the adjutant of a regi-
ment as the confidential and right hand man of his com-
manding officer ?

Witness—Decidedly.

Colonel Crawley—Do you think it consistent with the
duty of a person in such a position to be living on terms of
intimacy with a person standing in such a relation to the
commanding officer as Mr. Smales then did P

Witness---I consider that having known : Captain Smales
and his family for a long time—since they came to the re-
giment—and having always been on terms of intimacy with
him, I was not wrong in partaking of his hospitality.
Colonel Crawley—Was your removal from the adjutancy,
confirmed and approved by General Sir William Mans-
field?

Witness—l sent in my resignation, and it was approved
and confirmed.

Colonel Crawley—Look at that letter, and see whether it
is the letter of Sir William Mansfield, in which your resig-
nation was approved. _ _

_ .
The witness said at first he thought it was the letter, but
was not sure, but on the letter being produced, signed by
defendant's adjutant general, the witness said that, seeing
tho signature to the letter, he supposed it must be the
letter.

The letter was then read, and expressed the opinion of
the Commander-in-Chief that Lieut. Fitzsimons had been
guilty of indiscretion in visiting the paymaster while a
court martial on him was in progress, especially looking at
the state of the regiment (Gth Dragoons) at that time, and
further saying that it was fortunate for Lieut. Fitzsimons
that he had been permitted to tender his resignation.
Colonel Crau ley—Were you censured by the court mar-
tial at Mhow for the evasive character of your evidence on
that occasion 2

Witness—l was censured by the Commander in Chief.
I don't remember that I was censured by the Court.
Colonel Crawley said that if the witness were ordered to
withdraw he would put the Court in possession of the facts.
Witness was requested to withdraw, and Colonel Crawley
said it was impossible for him to conduct his dbfence if the
questions put to the witness were discussed by the Court in
his presence, and he was aware of their bearing.
The witness then returned.

Colonel Crawley—Do you not know that the court
martial at Mhow thought it right to reflect upon the eva-
sive character of your testimony ?
Witness—l really cannot at present say whether thd
court martial made any remarks to me or not. I did not
road the report of the court martial through. I read chiefly
my own evidence in it.
Colonel Crawley—ls it possible thst an officer can receive
a censure from a court martial before which he is witness
for giving evasive evidence, and yet forget the circum-
stance
Witness—l have already stated that 1 don't recollect it.
arac
you
were a
towriting of
Colonel Crawley—Can you recollect conversations in the
orderly room, and even oaths which you have uttered, and
no remembert
thea censure
u ecnosurrt martial
e o n 3,' u
before
r wn ch tercommitted
which
witness.

Witness—l can. To the best of my recollection when
the remarks of the Court were made I was away on leave.
On my return when I saw the remarks of the Commander-
in. Chief it was the only thing I paid attention to.
Col. Crawley—Look at page 92 of the blue book (upon
court martial on Senates), and see whether you have before
read that passage which animadverts on your evidence be-
fore that court martial ?
Witness—To the best of my belief I have read that pas 4
sage before, but I did not recollect my name being mend
tioned in it.
Colonel Crawley—Did the Commander in Chief, after
perusing your evidence on the court martial at Mhow, pro-
nounce it to be evasive and unsatisfactory, and such as
showed your entire ineffieiency for the adjutancy 2
Witness—lle did pronounce it as such.
Colonel Crawley you have said that I gave you a writs
ten order on the 26th April for the arrest of the eergeants•
Was any one present on that occasion ?
Witness—I really cannot say.
Colonel Crawley—You have stated the names of all the
persons you allege to have been present when the secondre
order was issued. Why cannot you equally state who we
present on the first occasion?
that
the was in reference to the second occasionnioirn
the Commander in Chief remarked on the positiont'he time,
the sentries were posted, and, as I understoodr:,_n of the
'to write a letter of explanation for the indfoorf '
/lumbers Of
Commander in Chief. I naturally inquirietnd whether thd°3l
my commau
officers whether they were present or not, and
remembered the orders I had received r
ing officer,
to
to
Colonel Crawley—Then your 8
alluded to
depends not from
and n
who were present on the occasion alluded
People,
the information given to you by 0
resent
been p,
your own knowledge P
them to have
der I had re-
Witness—No.
I believed
collected the or theperusponoln
o_cetra.ternent
a
commandingo:
eived from my
c Colonel Crawley—
but inquired whether theye
Was strong to have enabled you to
occasion sufficienttlayny
v belief as to their presenc
other assistance ?
on that
p se to the fact without
like to
depose
should not like
They might have been out of
have deposed to the fact
without previously
the room %"1e- thye.—What remark of Sir Hugh Rose do
given to me.
Colonel
allude to, and
you CranWie
orderhow was given
it appear that it referred to
must have referred to the second order, as
Witness—It .
could not have been inconvenienced by
ant major
the serge • which the sentry was posted according to
er in
the mann
the first or second order ?
the first order.
[The witness was under cross-examination when the
court rose,]

Bank of England Return,—This Day.

An Amount, pursuant to the Act 7th and Bth Victoria,
cp. 3, ,
8 for
6the week ending on Wednesday, the 18th day
of Nov. 1.3:

ISSUE DEPAILTMENT.
Notes issued ........C.:7,375 910
Government Debt £11,015,1t0
Other Securities .. 3.(134,900
Gold Coin tic Bullion 12,725,910
Silver Bullion .....

X'47,375,9-10
BANKING D,
Vroprietors' Capi-
tal .............. £14,553,000
Rest ............. 3,n3,201
l'ublic Deposits. (in-
cluding Exche-
quer, Savings'
Baulks, Commis-
missioners of Na-
tional Debt, and
Dividend Ac-

£27,375,V10

:PARTMENT.
Government SeCa-
rities (including
DeadiVeight.A.n-
nuity) C1,810,330
Other Securities 20.499,915
Notes ........... 6,276,47°
893,4302
Gold and Silver
Coln

Counts) 6,451,859
Other Deposits 13,403,442
Seven Day and
other Bills 680,881

£38,282,377
ZL.

X 33,282,377
1.t6'114.LL, Chief Cashier.