The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-06 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JUNE 6, 1863.

regard to England, they had a complete map on the 1-inch
scale, which was perhaps the most convenient; but for
other purpos-Fs it might be necessary to have a larger one,
and the most-advantageous would be a 25-inch scale. They
had also two complete maps for Ireland—one on the 1-inch
scale, a second on the 6-inch scale, and a third upon a 1-inch
scale with all the physical features, was in progress. But
what was the case as regarded Scotland ? Of the 30,000
square miles of Scotland only 6,438, or little more than one •
filth, had ben surveyed and published upon the 6. inch
scale; and only 4,022, or less that one-seventh, had been
executed upon the 1-inch scale.
31r. E. ELLICE corroborated the statement of the hon.
member, and said that Scotland had good reason to be dis-
satisfied at the manner in which she was treated with regard
to the ordnance survey. Scotland had been 40 years wait-
ing for a map, but it was now proposed to make a second
survey of England, which would have the effect of postpon-
ing the completion of the Scottish survey to an indefinite
period.

Mr. DODSON thought that the demand made on behalf
of Scotland was like the fable of the dog in the manger.
The low parts of Scotland had been surveyed, and what
remained were the Highlands. During half the year the
Highlands could not be surveyed, owing to the severity of
the weather there; but they were called upon to do nothing
in England until the whole of Scotland was completed. He
trusted the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not pledge
himself to such a course.

Mr. FINLAY said it was a mistake to suppose that all
the low ground of Scotland had been surveyed.
The matter then dropped.
THE TRINITY BOARD ELECTRIC LIGHT FOR

LIGHTHOUSES.
Lord LOVAINE called attention to the correspondence
between the Trinity Board and the Board of Trade, and
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in his
opinion, the experience of the electric light for the past two
years was not sufficient to wart ant its adoption at Portland ?
Mr. M. GIBSON said whatever power was exercised by
the Board of Trade with reference to lighthouses, and the
mode of illuminating lighthouses, was in accordance with
the provisions of the M?rchant Shipping Act. But that act
had given them no authority to incur expenditure in the
experiment of lighting lighthouses. The duty of the Board
of Trade was simply to control expenditure ; and it was no
part of their province to force upon the Trinity Corporation
any expenditure of which they themselves did not approve.
Some time since the Trinity Corporation proposed the re-
constructing the Portland Lighthouse, and the Board of
Trade suggested that before the work was undertaken it
might be well clearly to ascertain whether Portland Light-
house was not fitted to receive the electric light, and also to
take care that the light itself had a full trial. The Trinity
Corporation decided that for the present it would not be right
to adopt the electric light at Portland, and in coming to that
conclusion they had the assistance of the advice of that most
able man, Mr. Faraday. As for himself, if he had an opi-
nion upon the subject, he should say that the trial which
took place at Dungeness was most satisfactory—(hear)—
and that, too, was the opinion of Mr. Faraday. The noble
lord might rely upon it that no unnecessary obstacles would
be thrown in the way of the adoption of the light, but
then reasonable time must be allowed to ascertain if the
invention could be safely applied.
Sir J. PAKINGTON having listened very closely to the
statement of the right hon. gentleman, was nevertheless
quite unable to ascertain what were his intentions. He
could not avoid saying that the official experience of the
right hon. gentleman had made him the most perfect speci-
men of Ministerial caution ever heard in that house. (A
laugh.) The generalities of the right hon. gentleman were
really quite bewildering. He said that he was anxious to
obtain the aid of scientific experience in the matter. Well,
it surely was not to the Trinity Corporation that he
should go for scientific experience. Mr. Faraday was in
favour of the light—and if the right hon. gentleman
wanted further time for investigation, what time would
satisfy him ? The Portland Light wanted repairs, and so
also did the " Start" Light, and it became an important
question whether the commerce of the country ought ito
be any longer deprived of the advantages of a great dis-
covery for reasons so unsubstantial.

Lord H. VANE drew a more favourable augury from
the statement of the President of the Board of Trade than
the right hon. gentleman opposite. It was true, the Trinity
Corporation had shown no great alacrity in the matter;
still, they were at the head of the navigation of the country,
and unless they took the lead, it was impassible for the
Board of Trade to do anything. His right hon, friend how-
ever, had admitted that he himself saw the advantage of
the light, and therefore it was to be hoped that before any
very long time the Trinity Corporation would be brought
round to the same opinion.
Mr. P. HENNESSY read extracts from the report of
Mr. Faraday, to prove that the opinion of that gentleman
was unmistakably in favour of the new apparatus.
The subject then dropped.
THE CASE OF SERGEANT-MAJOR LILLEY.

Mr. FORTESCUE rose to call attention to the circum-
stances attending the death, after four weeks' imprison-
ment, of Regimental Sergeant-Major Lilley of the 6th
Dragoons, at Mhow, in India, on the 25th of May, 1862;
and to the imprisonment at the same time, for a still
longer period, of Troop Sergeant-Majors Duval and Wake-
field, of the same regiment, without either of the three
having been brought to trial, or any formal charge having
been preferred against them ; and to ask whether the
commanding officer under whose authority those things
took place, was still to be left in command of the regi-
ment. The hon. member at the outset disclaimed all inten-
tion of making an attack upon the Commander-ir -Chief,
whose abilities and character he held in the highest respect.
He was quite sure that if the action of his Royal Highness
had not been in the first instance interfered with by the
strange course taken by the high military authorities in
India, not a day would have been lost in insuring that ample
justice was done. The hon. member then recapitulated the
well-known history of the case : the irregular arrest of the
three sergeants by order of the commanding officer of the
regiment (Col. Crawley), on the eve of their appearance as
witnesses at a 'court-martial which was being held on the
commanding officer, in consequence of charges brought
against him by Captain Smale, the paymaster of the regi-
ment; their being kept in most rigorous confinement, with-
out—as had been admitted by his Royal Highness the Com-
mander-in-Chief—a shadow of evidence being brought for-
ward against them, a confinement from which one of them
—Sergeant-Major Lilley—was only released by death, and
anither to find himself lodged in an asylum as a raving lu-
natic. On the death of Lilley no inquest was held, and the
surgeon reported that his death was caused by apoplexy, in-
duced by the painful circumstances in which he was placed.
The hon. member then described the place where the sergeant
was confined, and narrated all the eircumstancer attending
the death of his wife, which have long since been in posses-
sion of the public. It was too late to offer reparation to
Sergeant Lilley, for the poor fellow was dead, but it was not
too late to punish the man who had been the cause of his
sufferings. (Loud cries of "Hear, hear.") The hon. mem-
ber next adverted to the memorandum recently published
by his Royal Highness the Commander-in-Chief, and ox,
pressed his astonishm, nt at the strange leniency which had
been exhibited towards Colonel Crawley in permitting him
to remain in command of the regiment. In conclusion, he
stated that it was the fixed intention of the relatives of Ser-
geant Lilley to indict Col. Crawley for manslaughter in case
that officer ever put his foot in England.
Mr. CONINGHAM said that although the question of
Colonel Crawley's conduct had been already within the last
few days under the consideration of the house, the memo-
randum just issued by his Royal Highness the Commander-
in-Chief completely altered the aspect of the case. The
Horse Guards, by condoning the conduct of Col. Crawley,
had made themselves responsible for that conduct ; and he
sincerely trusted that the full weight of the indignation of
that house would be directed against the course taken by
his Royal Highness. Having quoted portions of the me-
morandum of his Royal Highness, the hon. member pro-
ceeded to say that if his Royal Highness could issue such a
memorandum, he was not fit to be in command of the Bri-
tish army ; for if anything could tend to sap the high spirit
which animated our soldiers, it was to see conduct such as
that of Colonel Crawley remaining uncondemned by the
heads of the army. He trusted, therefore, that when the
noble marquis rose to make his reply he would address him-
self not merely to the justification of Colonel Crawley, but
like .vise to the justification of his Royal Highness the Com-
mander-in-Chief.

The Marquis of HARTINGTON having explained that
the delay which had taken place in connection with the
ordnance survey of Scotland was occasioned by the difficul-
ties attending the survey of the mountainous districts, ad-
dressed himself to the case of Sergeant-Major Lilley, and
explained that the arrests of the three sergeants had been
ordered by Colonel Crawley, on a charge of conspiracy
against himself. It could not be denied, however, that their
examination previous to arrest had been most irregularly
conducted, When they were arrested, Colonel Crawley in-
formed the major-general in charge of the Mhow district,
requesting instructions as to bringing them to trial, and
requesting also his sanction for placing them under close
arrest. With regard to the placing the sergeant-majors
under close arrest, it was added that Colonel Crawley had
been insts ucted that, pending the investigation, the arrest
should be closed. On the 28th of April Sir Wm, Mansfield
wrote that the evidence did not appear to substantiate the
charges against the sergeant-majors. That opinion was
chiefly grounded upon the fact that the sergeant-majors had
not been warned before their examination that their evidence
might be used against them. He went on to say, however,
that their conduct had clearly been highly improper, and
that Sergeant-major Lilley ought to be dismissed, and he
directed that the latter should be kept in close arrest until
the end of the court-martial. Shortly afterwards, at the
beginning of May, the court-martial had been unexpectedly
adjourned in consequence of the illness of the paymaster,
Captain Smalo. The sergeant-majors were kept in close
raartiai t-irta jor Lilley,
arrest during the interval. On the 24th May Sergeant-major
LoilleY was reported sick, and on the 25th he died. (Hear.)
4 the 2d June Sir W. Mansfield wrote to Gen. Farrell
'Qat Ike,— .
a seraearluac!. heard, through
mdtun +►~o stated thought the court-
butthethaputblhiec papers, of the death
of the o,,der7tolava been terminated shortly after the arrival
rimed at the deat
anardrees:Dreih,_
,•e_elp him in close arrest arrived at Mhow,
nicated wiiirsbsuxurise that he had not been commu-
Tha rumor telegraph to obtain a release from the
b. 0! Lille the regret he expe-
YI and his reasons for continu-

in
n
f
as
te
thhawtbje.hya that ir
some\V
gragerarttohwcerleiymlOcess:caaanprrdeedistt(,wi
they
yel
necessary
a'st
hdslo,fahef‘
oheTrirbrmyseattyheu
nitaaocraeotpt hfaoekpi
keep
it:eshpteoehre
tgeehceuhear
occurrence.
commissionret
gn-oeun
set sergeant-majors of:ro,
brought
hadih at
might be no tampering
temp-
tation—(oh, oh)-2d, That
beenw chargei t h t e w
discoveredt
l necessarye
fye
rt shouldhee
m theforthcoming.
go t.
be broughtcondoned
The opinionof the Judge
Un-
fortunate," hear, hear.)
them was that Col. Crawley had
Advocate-General releeavidenee thereCwwraasaws
not sufficient evidence
Such were the facts bny e againststsbweesh ;ata d
thems
e3d
that the arrests were
. Ivpelantssofinesldwweerree
tnoo tv
blame.ali d.
evidently thought he was simply
afosrunsrheow the blams°enewrass untotbilet ditishteaid-
buted. Sir W.
and ar
igHa against
aant
rrbs te)) thereTla hts soewenrciasgue eaeal
question
itge upono-oaemfrd
policea a Mansfieldmdeargi
Col.ei magistrate t
ercaffirt eae wouldewr
eyt f e
ata
av have
himselfod
to n
toe be
enn
forgottens rt eifimead n
bdy-
n d delicacy required to be observed by
great caution at
ttianhilegaetitona:gipdnraeidrsseooaanfeihnrigs3 superior
officers of their distinction and ser-
vices,htehCe o
rme Commander-in-Chief; a at
invde esr -oifn
the-Chsi eoft
g;
ebauntt
-amclaim
r
hhaisviintgoybaelellnimgh:deeis Highness
circumstances, who had been de-
pendentpon
,n the o
fGaobvoeur Government
been same had
amountthought
si righttwo ulwould
in died. (Oh, oh.) It was to be
instead of
twhoahvaowe wahreder eetanpne payableallowancers o''n.
had Sergeant• Major Lilley been dis-
chargedgallall having
hkegncoowl collateral
ye ander
dal
te
accountcircumstances
ohf had not,
several of
that to
thwhaoevuel
Crawley. He did not doubt
.many persons w
satisfactory if a victim could have been pro-
ducedhyFoei borne
z -beSeiycnommmoeinnstd,h whoothroaut had just arrived, contradicted
chargest against Colonel
could
alone
loerhecriminate
. punishment.to tthhToesheoar
het
oewlelraaest.enr
aolt
circumstancesso;
Great baust
had
feudl l
been
einquiryewnhti howhich
important
eh:ear moreia
andte particularsslaa
pain and disgust caused by that story of scandal and mis-
management, the Secretary for War must not allow himself
for a moment to be diverted one hair's breadth from the
strict rule of military justice.
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY thought the explanation of the
noble marquis would be very unsatisfactory, and that had
the parties implicated been ordinary civilians a very diffe-
rent course would have been pursued. When such men as
Col. Crawley were retained in command for only the strange
reason that they enjoyed the confidence of their Com-
mander-in-Chief, it showed a negligence of the lives and
liberties of men which would tend to endanger the confi-
dence of the whole army. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord
had not said a word about the gross indecency that had
been shown in the treatment of Lilley's wife. (Hear.)
Colonel BARTTELOT defended Colonel Crawley, who he
said was ready and anxious to come forward with full ex-
planations.
Mr. PIGOTT did not think the noble lord could be
censured for any want of tenderness in his treatment of the
officers in question. The subject was one of the greatest
importance, and the investigation ought not to cease until
the really responsible parties were discovered. (Hear.)
Captain ARCHDALL said that, as there was to be
further inquiry, he would merely express his gratification
with the vindication of the regiment pronounced by the
Commander-in-Chief.
Mr. HEADLAM said it was clear that Colonel Crawley
was protected by the order of his superior officer; and
therefore he could not be removed from his command on
that ground.
The house then went into committee of
SUPPLY.
On the vote of £165,000 for harbours of refuge,
Lord C. PAGET said, in answer to Mr. Lindsay, that it
was not intended to extend the works at Dover beyond the
present plan,
Mr. LINDSAY moved the reduction of the vote by
£B,OOO, the sum proposed for the harbour of Alderney. It
was unfit for a harbour of refuge, and would be useless in
time of war. Alderney was entirely out of the way of ships
entering or leaving the channel, and no sane man would
attempt to run into Alderney in a gale of wind. Already
more than a million of money had been expended on Al-
derney, and the best thing for the committee to do was to
boldly admit they had committed an error, stop the works,
and thereby save a million of money. Every penny spent
there was so much money thrown into the water without
any corresponding advantage.
Lord C. PAGET gave a detailed history of the progress
of the works at Alderney, from the commencement to the
present time. Arrangements had been made with the con-
tractors to give them compensation for the plant, &c., pro-
cured, and the expenses they had incurred necessary to carry
out the breakwater of the eastern arm of the harbour which
the Government had stopped. They were only completing
their substructure to a certain point, whieh was now just
under the surface of the water, and if allowed to remain in
its present state would be dangerous to shipping.
Sir J. ELPHINSIONE thought the money might be
better laid out in improving harbours of refuge nearer
home.
Mr. EVANS supported the vote. The works could not
be left unfinished.
After some further discussion,
Sir S. M. PETO said he wished to know from the noble
lord the Secretary to the Admiralty whether or not it was
intended to extend the pier at Dover further than the foun-
dations had been laid. Unless he received a distinct answer
he should take exception to the vote for Dover as well as
for Alderney,
Lord C. PAGET replied that there was no intention of
extending the Dover pier farther than the limits of the
foundations, and said the Government had also given up
the eastern arm of the breakwater at Alderney.
Mr. BAXTER expressed his amazement at the noble
lord's change of opinions with respect to Alderney. Two
years ago the noble lord thought Alderney would be valu-
able as a 100k-out station, now the noble lord recommended
it as an important naval station.
Viscount PALMERSTON said he could understand if
they were only beginning the work why hon. members
should hesitate to vote the money but, considering that
the works had been some time in progress, and were ap-
proaching completion, he could not see why the committee
should refuse to pass the present vote.
The committee divided. The numbers were—
For the amendment ........ 62
Against it ....................
Majority against
—l4
The vote was then agreed to.
On the vote of £68,359 for works at Holyhead and Port-
Patrick.
Sir H. CAIRNS moved the reduction of the vote by
£5,000 on account of Portpatrick, on the ground that it
could not be made a harbour of refuge or a packet station
unless at an extravagant outlay.
The amendment was withdrawn, after an explanation by
Mr. M. GIBBON, and the vote was agreed to.
Upon the vote for £89,618 balance of the sum of £114,618
for public buil Hugs in Ireland,
Mr. MAGUIRE proposed to reduce the vote by £3,000.
The committee divided—
Ayes • . • • .
Noes
Majority for the vote —6s
The vote was then agreed to.
The Chairman reported progress, and the house resumed.

INLAND REVENiJE BILL.
The bill as amended was considered and agreed to.
DRAINAGE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LAND

(IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion for the third reading of this bill,
Mr. RENNESSY moved that the bill be re-committed,
frruhPurpose of having the principle of arbitration in-
d.

After some discussion,
Lord
PALMERSTON moved that the debate be ad-
j°ll,lll,ed until Monday, and the proposal was agreed to.
Cayman Islands Bill passed through committee.
The house Wag counted out half-past two.