The Sun.
London, England, 1863-11-20 00:00:00

.WL EY COURT

THE ORA'

MARTIAL,

FOURTH DAY.
ALDERSHOT, Friday.
The proceedings were resumed this morning, all the
members of the Court being present.

The cross•examination of Lieutenant Fitzsimons was
proceeded with. We shall continue the report in our late
edition.

THIRD DAY.
[The following appeared in the Third Edition of " The
Sun" of last evening] :

ALDERSHOT, Thursday.
The Court sat at a quarter past eleven. Paymaster
Smales was present during the day.
Col. Crawley wished to put a few more questions to
Major Champion.
The Court assented.
Major Champion recalled—l was in constant communi-
cation with Col. Crowley 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.
Atter 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, if
dated at all, was read out on the 6th of Juno, and I have it

in my possession,
The address was then read as follows :
"Colonel Crawley, officers, and non-commissioned officers. I
• "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
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-Chief. The Assistant-Adjutant-
General will now read, first, a memorandum arce 2,
and second, a letter, No. 13,747, May 6." Head rd-
ingly.) "Sergeants Wakefield and Duval, you are now
released from arrest and from the consequences of your
lolly. 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 h cannot have the
consolation of forgiveness granted him in your presence.
All of you must bear this in mind, and re-
member it to toe last day of your service that
subordination to the authorities placed over you is the
golden rule of conduct of all soldiers serving her gracious
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 li ht 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 be maintained
by your individual conduct in right feeling and subordi-
nation."
Witness continued—Sergeant Major Wakefield was pre-
sent, and apparently in good health, at the reading ot that
address. He did not seem to me to be a raving maniac.
By Sir A. Horsford (the prosecutor)—Since Sergeant
Major Wakefield was released, has he been placed in any
position of responsibility in the regiment ?
Witness—I think he 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. Hereford—Were any other quarters occupied by
Dibble (referred to yesterday) than those which had been
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 which Lilley died,
and also another room of similar dimensions.
By the President—I am sure that Major General Farrell's
address was delivered on the 6th of June.
Colonel Crawley—Have you any means of proving that
the address was not delivered on the 7th 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 7th 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
that it was 9 feet 9 inches. Which is correct ?
Witness-1 find that it was a sloping wall. The 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 tnerefere inaccurate. I do
not remember myself ever having occupied Government
quarters in India. I have lived in smader 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--I define close arrest to mean the fact that a
sentry must be over the quarters in which the prisoner lives,
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 in the Bombay Presidency. It is a
discretionary matter altogether.
The President—What do you mean by quarters ?
Witne:s—l mean wherever the prisoner is confined.
The Court—Are you aware whether Major General
Farrell's definition ot close confinement agrees with that of
Colonel Crawley, as stated by Lieutenant Fitzsimons, " that
the sentry ehouid not lose sight of his prisoner night or
day ?"
Witness—l am not aware of the definition Major General
Farrell would give, but in the case of Sergeant Major Lilley
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 Lino' 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 Ser-
geant-Major Lilley except by Colonel Crawley's express
permissbn ?
Witness—Yes; it was so stated in one of the letters pro-
duced yesterday. The letter of the 28th of April, 1862,
contained the whole of the instructions ever given.
Lieutenant and Aijutant Fitzsimons was re-called for

cross-examination.
Colonel Crawley—ln your opinion were the quarters in
which Sergeant-Major Lilley was confined comfortable or
uncomfortable ?
Witness—The Ira quarters were comfortable ; the second
I do not think so, especially for a married man ?
Colonel Crawley—Were they as good as the quarters oc•
cupied by the married men of the Inniskillings now ?
described \Vitness—l think they were about the same.
Colonel Crawley—Could they properly be
bombproof oven, and unfit for human habitation and inju-
rious to human health—is that, in your opinion, a true a s
o a
r
false description?
Witness—What I recollect of the second quarters was
that it was a bombproof building, although I never took any
particular notice of it.
Colonel Crawley—l wish the question to be answered
specifically. Was it a bombproof building ?
Witness—l do not think the description which has been
given of it is true.
Colonel Crawley—Could those quarters be called unfit for
human habitation—is that statement true or false ?
Witness—I 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?
Witness—My opinion is 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 regiment.
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—I 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. CI awley—Were the quarters in which Sergeant
Major Lilley was last confined the quarters provided by
Government for the use of the regiment ?
Witness—Yes.
ter pa Col. Crawley—Was it in your opinion the faultrtooffCtohle
Crawley that the quarters in which the grea .
families resided were injurious to health?
Witness—No.
tations which you admit to be unt
fi d
Col. Crawley—Have you ever heard
oof
tothtehmme
ebislurielpdtriheosagetniin.-t
which Sergeant Major Liiley was
conhanbeiti:tiloan ?
was bombproof and unfit for human . h
card it t o papers. Ido
swear
t that
ot
have never any.
not rc Vor ilet.cnocel I bloat. nnl gvk haveay rod osfwb
i etelsewhere.ty
—fll
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 rip= (officiating Judge Advocate)—lle 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—llave you taken any
steps,
officer of the Inniskilling Dragoons, to correctaa
san
misrepre-
sentation so injurious to the honour of your commanding
officer ?
Witness—l did not take steps.
you,
Colonel Crawley—have sinceyour return to Eng-
land, been in communication with th Mr.Sinales ?
Witness—He has called on me at my hotel twice or three