The Sun.
London, England, 1854-09-05 00:00:00

-

/~ :~~

////
•
•Ar4t
L.N6-1: • ~
,•• ,A;.4
-•
7 • - ,1 `Y
i ftgl— 'IL—L'
.Sc.. -w" ‘, 411 0.414'44
^ • • • •- if-
,
/ cit; 9P4, 111 'f;79.0 (PO:"**1
2<;•:* • • "ROIT.' (."
• ,runt,
-.

LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 5, 1854.

ALBERT SMITH'S MONT BLANC,
J including the BERNESE OBERLAND and the SIMPLON,
I HIS EVENING, and Every Evening at Eight o'Clock, (except
Saturday) ; and Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday Mornings, at Three.
Stalls, 33. (which can be taken at the box-oftics every dav from 11
till 4 ; area, 25.; gallery, 1 3.—Mont Blanc will close for the season
on Saturday, Sept. 16th.—Egyptian Hall, Piccadilly.

duty, that they will obtain the respect and support of their
officers, and the esteem of their fellow-subjects.
By command of General Flardiuge,
Commanding-in-Chief,
G. A. WETHERALL, Deputy Adjutant-General.

very destructive to the social happiness of officers living
together in regiments, and is calculated to lower the high
tone of honour by which the officers of the army always
have been distinguished.

The General Comm anding-in-Chief, with the approbation
of her Majesty, orders that Captain be severely re-
primanded, and removed to another regiment.
That Captain -- be severely reprimanded for being.a
party to these insults; but in consideration of the inter-
cession made in his favour by Lieutenant-Colonel Trollope
he will be allowed to remain in the 62d Regiment, having
served, and been wounded with it in the Sutlej campaign,
where that regiment conducted itself with great gallantry.
That Lieutenant be severely reprimanded, and
removed to another regiment.

APPENDIX—No. 1.
(Copy.)
MEMORANDUM.

TURKISH EXHIBITION and MUSEUM,
ST. GEORGE'S GALLERY, Hyde-park-corner, Piccadilly,
OPEN DAILY, from Eleven till Ten, Saturdays excepted, when it
closes at Six. Admission, 2s. Gd. ; children, Is. Gd. ; Saturdays, ss. ;
children, 2s. Gd. Family Tickets for five, 10s. Schools admitted at
Half-price. Herr Kalozdy and his Band are engaged, and will per-
form Daily, from Twelve till five. Nr. J. Osborne Williams will
preside at the Grand Pianoforte during the evening.

The conduct of Lientgnant -is approved. The Ge-
neral Commanding-in• Chief has no doubt that he has ob-
tained the approbation of his brother officers by refusing
to submit to practical jokes which, by their repetition, had
become intolerable.

THE LATE COURTS-MARTIAL AT

WINDSOR.

Lieutenant-General Sir Edward Blakeney, G.C.8., will
be pleased to give direction to the Major-General of the
district, for the purpose of reading this order torhe
officers assembled, of reprimanding the officers named, and
of admonishing and requiring the whole corps of officers to
assist their commanding officer in eradicating this most im-
proper system.
This memorandum will be printed, and read confiden-
tially to the officers of every regiment in the service.
By command of the Right Honourable General Viscount
Hardinge, Commanding-in-Chief,
(Signed) G. A. WETHERALL,
Deputy-Adjutant-General.

We publish below the official record of the late pro-
ceedings in the cases of Lieutenants Perry and Greer,
to which is prefixed a memorandum by the Commander-
in-Chief, of "Instructions for officers on first joining a
regiment or depot," calculated to prevent the recurrence
of the disgraceful practices brought to light in the re-
cent inquiries. It will be seen, with deep regret, that
the result of Lieutenant Perry's second trial is, that he
has been found guilty on three out of the four charges
brought against him, and sentenced to be cashiered ;
but the extreme severity of this decision is mitigated by
the Crown to the extent of permitting him to receive
the value of his commission. We abstain at present
from discussing the merits of the verdict and sentence
by which Lieutenant Perry has become the victim of a
vicious and disgraceful system—which ought long since
to have been suppressed by the higher military authori-
ties ; but we shall take an early opportunity of com-
menting on the whole of this melancholy and shame-
ful business. In the meanwhile, we will only express
our earnest hope that the late scandalous exposure
will be attended by permanent good, and that, to
use the words of the Commander-in-Chief, the con-
duct of British officers towards each other will hence-
forth be " regulated by a higher standard of what is
due to the honourable position in which they stand as
the holders of commissions in her Majesty's army." We
especially trust that due care will be taken to make the
commanding officers of regiments feel the full weight of
that responsibility which is justly cast upon them by
the Commander-in-Chief, when he says that " a firm
but temperate exercise of authority on their part will
effect the object desired."

APPENDIX No. 3.

OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARY-AT-WAR IN CIRCULA-
TING THE MUTINY ACT AND ARTICLES OF WAR OF 1844.
" I have to draw your attention to the amnnded articles
relating to duelling in the army.
" These alterations have been inserted by her Majesty's
authority for the purpose of more effectually discouraging
and prohibiting a practice which is a violation of her Ma-
jesty's orders, and a flagrant breach of the law of the land.
"These articles declare that it is suitable to the cha-
racter of honourable men to apologise and offer redress for
wrong or insult committed, and equally as for the party
aggrieved to accept, frankly and cordially, explanations
and apologies for the same.
"If such redress be refused to be given, or to be ac-
cepted, and the friends of the parties have failed to recon-
cile the difference, a reference should, in conformity with
the signification of her Majesty's pleasure iu the [lo6th
article, the 17th for the year 1854] be made to the com-
manding officer on the spot, who will use his best advice
and influence to reconcile the parties, and the differences
having been honourably settled by the good offices and re-
sponsibility of the commanding officer, ought never to be
revived by either party, or by any other officer or body of
officers ; if, however, the commanding officer fail to recon-
cile the parties it will become his duty to take such mea-
sures as he may deem necessary in order to prevent a duel,
or to maintain good order in her Majesty's service, and the
person refusing to be reconciled will be liable to be brought
to a court-martial, and, if convicted, cashiered, or suffer
such other punishment as the court may award.
"All parties implicated in duelling are liable, on convic-
tion before a general court-martial, to be cashiered.
"Her Majesty's pleasure is expressed in the [lo7th arti-
cle, 101st of the articles for the year 1854] that officers,
being the friends or seoonds of the parties, shall exert their
influence to adjust a difference on terms consistent with
the honour of each of the parties. The failure in selling a
difference being generally attributable to excessive de-
mands for reparation made by ono of the parties, the con-
duct of the seconds by the [lo7th article, 101st as above]
is made liable to be investigated as well as that of the prin-
cipals in all cases in which a dispute shall be referred for
the consideration of a general court martial.
"Personal differences between gentlemen living together
as brother officers can seldom fail to be honourably and
promptly adjusted, in the first instance, by explanations
between their mutual friends ; the propriety of an early
explanation and acknowledgment of error was so forcibly
pointed out by Field-Marshal the Doke of Wellington in
confirming the sentence of a general court-martial in 1810,
that I insert the following extract of his grace's sentiments
on this point :--` The officers of the army should recollect
that it is not only no degradation, but that it is meritori-
ous' in him who is in the wrong to acknowledge and atone
for his error, and that the momentary humiliation which
every man may feel upon making such an acknowledgment,
is more than atoned for by the subsequent satisfaction
which it affords him, and by avoiding a trial and convic-
tion of conduct unbecoming an officer.'
_ . _

INSTRUCTIONS FOR OFFICERS ON FIRST JOIN-
ING A REGIMENT OR DEPOT.
MEMORANDUM.

Horse Guards, Sept. 2, 1854.
1. The General Commanding-in-Chief had, in the course
of last year, been twice under the necessity of expressing
to every regiment at home and abroad his apprehensions
that a few inconsiderate officers might bring their regi-
ments into disrepute, unless, in their social conduct to-
wards each other at their mess table and in their barrack-
rooms, their behaviour should be regulated by a higher
standard of whit is due to the honourable position in
which they stand as the holders of commissions in her
Majesty's army.
2. The first case which required Viscount Hardinge to
assemble a court-martial on any officer was that of the 50th
Regiment, on which occasion four subalterns were tried
for forcibly seizing a young ensign, taking him to a pump,
and there pumping upon him.
' Two of these officers were sentenced to be dismissed the
service, and two were reprimanded.
The memorandum containing Viscount Hardinge's com-
ments was dated sth July, 1853, and was read to the offi-
cers assembled of every- regiment in the service. It is given
in the Appendix.
3. The second instance occurred in the 62d Regiment in
October, 1853.
A captain in command of two companies had repeatedly
annoyed and disturbed the subaltern of his own company,
and, accompanied by other officers had been in the
habit of bursting into his room, and taking his bed to
pieces, &c.
The lieutenant had the proper spirit to make his report
to the major of his regiment.
The officer commanding the regiment did his duty firmly.
He supported the subaltern, and reported his case to the
Horse Guards.
The captain was removed to another regiment, and lost
five steps towards his advancement. Another subaltern
was also removed, and the other captain was retained in
the 62d, at the intercession of the commanding officer, on
account of his good services in the field in India.
The facts of the case, and the punishment awarded, were
printed and circulated, and read to the officers of every
regiment assembled.
4. A third instance has now occurred. It is that in the
46th Regiment. The case originated in a disgraceful scene
of deep gambling in a barrack-room at Windsor, between
Lieutenant Greer and Lieutenant Perry, terminating in a
violent assault, in the course of which the most disgusting
language was applied by Lieutenant Greer to Lieutenant
Perry.
5. At the close of the trial of Lieutenant Greer, a letter
was handed in to the President of that court-martial by
Lieutenant Perry, charging his commanding officer, Colonel
Garrett, with grave acts of injustice, and stating that he
(Lieut. Perry) had sent a letter to his commanding officer,
threatening to appeal to the general officer of the district,
&o. Colonel Garrett denied these acts of injustice imputed
to him, and ho denied that any such letter had ever been
sent to him by Lieut. Perry.
6. The General Commanding-in-Chief took the same
course in this case as he had done in that of the 50th, and
for the same reasons, viz., his determination not to consent
to a compromise in any of these cases, but to eradicate the
unmanly system. The charges made by Lieut. Perry against
Colonel Garrett were specific. They amounted to a breach
of her Majesty's regulations, and apparently were in de-
fiance of the admonitions and orders circulated in July and
December, 1853.
The General Commanding-in-Chief resolved, therefore,
that the truth'or falsehood of these charges should be in-
vestigated by a court-martial on oath.
7. The result of that court-martial, as well as of the two
preceding trials in the 46th Regiment, is given in the Ap-
pendix, in order that every young officer may have on his
first joining his regiment, by means of these examples, a
clear understanding of his own position.
He will carefully read the Articles of War, given in the
Appendix, together with a letter of the Judge-Advocate-
General of 1844, which was published to the army, with
the Mutiny Act and Articles of War of that year.
If the ensign is firm, and has the proper spirit of an
officer and a gentleman, he can have no difficulty, without
any loss of honour or of temper, in resisting coarse practi-
cal jokes.
But if he submits to them on the plea that they aro the
customary probation of an officer entering the British army
he will justly subject himself to the charge of having tamely
submitted to insult ; and it is his duty, ou every account,
and especially for the purpose of insuring his military effi-
ciency, which depends upon character, that he should not
suffer any liberties to be taken calculated to expose him to
the derision of his brother officers, and the men under his
command.
8. These coarse irregularities, termed practical jokes, and
the use of disgusting language, have increased, it is said,
since the introduction of those Articles of War, in 18-14,
which more strictly prohibited duelling in the army.
Public feeling had, in the preceding year, been greatly
shocked by two officers, who were brothers-in-law, having
fought a duel, in which one was killed.
The better and truer reason, however, for the increased
strictness of the articles prohibiting duelling was that the
tone of society had improved, and that all men were united
in reprobating so barbarous a mode of settling a dispute.
A few men of coarse and ungenerous tempers, since the
severer Articles of War have been published, may have
sought to take advantage of the apparent impunity which
the prohibition afforded, and have taken greater liberties
with their brother officers than they did when under the
apprehension of immediate personal consequences.
Such practices cannot be permitted ' • they must bo re-
pressed, for they are degrading to the character of an offices.
They render him unfit to command his men, for they cannot
feel for him the respect which is the basis of all enduring
authority. They render him unfit to associate with his
brother officers, who must hold him in contempt, or must
have themselves sunk so low as not to shrink from contact
with men of such coarse vulgarity.
It can never be endured that the manners of British
officers shall fall below the standard recognised by gentle-
men.

"In reference to the 31a, Article of War, [l2th Article
of War for 1854] and to the framing of charges in certain
cases, arising out of differences, or out of reproachful
speeches and gestures, I have to direct your attention to a
letter which the ,Judge-Advocate•General of her Majesty's
forces has addressed to me."
(Copy.)

Judge-Advocate-General's-office,
20th March, 1844.
Sir,—The recent discussions on duelling in the army, and
lie alterations in the Articles of War, have directed my
attention to the language of charges, under which officers
alleged to have submitted to indignity and insult, or to
the imputation of dishonourable or unworthy conduct,
have been, in repeated instances, brought to trial.
An grroneous notion has, to a limited extent, obtained,
that an officer can be brought to trial and punished for
not challenging another, or for refusing to accept a chal-
lenge, or to tight a duel ; and in charges upon which
officers have been 'cashiered, or otherwise punished, ex-
pressions may possibly be found which, if detached from
the context, and considered without reference to the un-
doubted law of England, and to the clear and unambiguous
language of the Articles of War, might afford some colour
to this error.
But it must be remembered that,by the common law of
England, duelling, unattended by any injury to either
party, is an aggravated offence against the public peace,
punishable by fine and imprisonment. Thus, Mr. Justice
Blackstone says :—" The punishment of common affrays
is by fine and imprisonment. Where too persons coolly
and deliberately engage in a duel, this being attended with
an apparent intention and danger of murder, and being a
high contempt of the justice of the nation, is a strong ag-
gravation of the affray, though no mischief has actually
ensued." Under a recent statute, such persons may be-
come liable to transportation. If depth ensues, the parties
implicated may be tried for murder.
The military code has been, and will continue consistent
with this.

The 107th Article of War, 1844 [l7th Article for the
year-1&.54] renders all parties, principals as well as seconds,
implicated in duelling, liable to be cashiered.
The 103 d and 104th Articles [4th and 15th Articles for
the year 1851] prescribe to a commanding officer the duty
of preserving order in his regiment, and of placing under
arrest all who use reproachful speeches and gestures ; a
duty enjoined, with a view of preventing duels, and of
bringing to trial by courts-martial parties who offer insults,
and who will not offer redress by apology and acknowledg-
ment of their error. Moreover, officers in command of
guards are under the GOth Article [lOll Article for the
veer 1854] punishable for allowing persons to go forth to
fight a duel.
By the 101 th Article [lsth Article for the year 1854],
officers of inferior rank may place under arrest those who
are engaged in quarrels, frays, or disorders ; and by arti-
cles 35-11 and 144-15 auy officer, though of superior rank,
who refuses to obey, is liable to be cashiered ; while in the
105th article [lGth article for the year 1851] her Majesty
points out to the army that those who, being willing to
make or accept frank explanations, apologies, or redress,
refuse challenges, act as is suitable to the character of hon-
ourable men, 710 their duty as good soldiers, and are not
only acquitted of all disgrace, but of all opinion of disad-
vantage.
It is manifest then that an officer cannot be subjected to
trial and punishment for leaving undone that which tho
law thus expressly forbids, or for doing that which is thus
distinctly declared not merely to be no offence, but to be
suitable to the character of a man of honour, to be con-
formable to military duty, and to be conduct above all
blame and reproach.

Still an officer who allows the stigma of dishonourable
conduct to rest upon him, or passes over, without notice,
an insult offered to him, is liable to be brought to trial be-
fore a court-martial, not because he declines to fight a duel,
but because, having failed to obtain speedy atonement
through the intervention of mutual friends, or by other
lawful means, lie neglects to report the matter to his coin-
uranding officer, and thereby to invite a searching investi-
gation into his character and conduct. By such neglect he
seems either to acquiesce in the justice of the imputation
cast upon him, and to admit that there is something in
his conduct which he fears to lay bare before honour-
able men, or to show that regardless of his ewn
reputation and honour, he knows not what is becoming the
character of an officer and a gentleman, and that, indif-
ferent to the peace and order of the regiment, he is un-
mindful of the rules of military discipline. His conduct
then becomes the proper subject of inquiry and adjudica-
tion before a court martial.

In all such cases, however, it must be desirable to ex-
clude the possibility of misconstruction. And as the new
articles point out with clearness the course which is con-
sistent with the character of honourable men, it will be
the duty of those who have to frame charges, as well as
of those to whose revision and correction, or approval
charges may be submitted, to take care that the offence
be described in language which shall distinctly state those
particulars in which the letter or spirit of her Majesty's
Articles of war has been neglected or violated.—l have, &c.
(Signed) J. NICHOLL.

As far as duels were permitted at all, they were suffered
as means supposed to be conducive to the end of maintain-
ing in the barrack and mess-room the language and be-
haviour of gentlemen.
But it would be a fatal mistake to infer that because
duelling has been prohibited, any lower standard of man-
ners will be tolerated in the British army. The language
and behaviour which formerly were held to justify a chal-
lenge must now, therefore, be visited by the removal of the
offender from the society of which he has shown himself
to be an unworthy member.
9. Every assistance and support Will be given to the
young officer in his endeavours to avoid rendering himself
liable to these consequences.
In May last, before the spring inspections, the general
officers and staff officers, inspecting regiments, were or-
dered to report "whether any practical jokes have been
carried on at the mess table, or elsewhere, or any steps
taken to prevent them."
The reports are satisfactory : few regiments, however,
have been inspected, owing to the greater part of the regi-
ments having previously embarked for foreign service.
10. The captain of the company to which the ensign, on
joining, is appointed, will give him advice and support. •
The major entrusted by the commanding officer with
this branch of the interior discipline of a regiment will do
the same, and be held responsible that he does it effec-
tually ; and if any ease should arise requiring interference
or a reprimand, the terms of the reprimand, and the re-
cord of the letters must be forthcoming, to be shown to the
general officer, and sent up to the Horse Guards. The
necessity is apparent after the recent trials in the 46th Re-
giment, and all serious cases will at once bo reported to the
Adjutant-General, for the decision of the General Com-
manding-in-chief.
11. No case of a practical joke appears to have occurred
in the 46th Regiment since October, 1853, with the excep-
tion of the case of Lieutenant Dunscombe, 46th, at Wee-
don, in 1854.
12. •General Viscount Hardinge confidently asserts that
the regimental system of the British army, now so long
established, has proved its efficiency as being admirably
adapted for all the varied duties of war and peace.
He trusts that the irregularities and mischievous ten-
dencies resulting from practical jokes can and will bo cor-
rected, and disappear for ever.
A. firm hut temperate exercise of authority on the part
of commanding officers of regiments will effect the object
&aired ; they will And, by a faithful discharge of their

"This Letter of Instruction is so well calculated to set
at rest any erroneous impressions which may have existed
on this point, and places the question of framing charges
in reference to the 31st Article of War (12th Article of
War for 1854) on a footing so clear and intelligible, that
It is only necessary for me to express my entire concurrence
in the principles so ably laid down by the Judge-Advocate
General.—l have, &c.
(Signed) " H. HARDINGE, Secretary-at-War."

APPENDIX, No. 4.

/

i l

f/
/
,~ /j~ /~~/L ~C'

[PRICE SD.

mission; sc-hich recommendation her Majesty has been
cionsly pleased to sanction.
By command of the General Commanding-in-Chief.
C. YORKE, Mil. Secretary.

refuse to obey any other officer (though of inferior rank),
who shall order him into arrest ;—or shall draw his sword
upon or offer violence to such officer, shall, for each and
every one of the aforesaid offence; en conviction thereof
before a general court martial be cashiered.
101. Every officer who shall give, send, convey, or pro-
mote a challenge, or who shall accept any challenge,
to fight a duel with another officer, or who shall assist
as a second at a duel, or who, being privy to an inten-
tion to fight a duel, shall not take active measures to
prevent such duel, or who shall upbraid another for refus-
ing or for not giving a challenge, or who shall reject or
advise the rejection of a reasonable proposition made for
the honourable adjustment of a difference, shall be liable,
if convicted before a general court-martial, to be cashiered,
or suffer such other punishment as the court may award.
In the event of an officer being brought to a court-mar-
tial for having assisted as a second in a duel, if it shall
appear that such officer had strenuously exerted himself
to effect an adjustment of the difference on terms consis-
tent with the honour of both parties, and shall have failed
through the unwillingness of the adverse parties to accept
terms of honourable accommodation, then our will and
pleasure is that such officer shall suffer such punishment,
other than cashiering, as the court may award.

APPENDIX No. 5.

Horse-Guards, August 9,1854.
The General Commanding-in-Chief having had the honour
to lay before her Majesty the Queen the proceedings of the
general Court-martial holden at Windsor on the 12th July,
18'4, and continued by adjournments until the 14th July,
1854, for the trial of Lieutenant James Edward Perry, of
the 46th Regiment, who was arraigned upon the under-
mentioned charge, viz. :
Charge—" For conduct unbecoming an officer and a
gentleman, and to the prejudice of good order and military
discipline, in having at Windsor on or about the night of
the 28th, or morning of the 29th June, 1854, committed
an outrageous assault on Lieutenant Mamas Fergus Greer,
of the 46th Regiment, and grievously wounded the said
Lieutenant Greer, by beating him on the head and face
with a pair of candlesticks."
Upon which charge the Court came to the following
decision :

APPENDIX No. 7.
GENERAL ORDER.
No. 543. Horse Guards, Sept. 2, 1854.
At a general court-martial holden at Windsor on the
28th of July, 1854, and, continued by adjournments to the
21st August, 1854, Lieutenant James Edward Perry, of
the 46th Regiment, was arraigned upon the undermen-
tioned charge, viz. :
" For scandalous, infamous conduct, unbecoming an
officer and a gentleman, in the following instances :
First—" For having, in a certain letter, dated Windsor-
barracks, July 24, 1854, and addressed to Colonel the Hon.
Arthur Upton president of the court-martial then and
there assembled for the trial of Lieutenant T. F. Greer—
which letter bore the signature of the prisoner, and was
then there delivered to the said Colonel Upton—made the
following slanderous statement respecting his commanding
officer. Lieutenant" Colonel Garrett, viz. That after re-
peated acts of violence against myself (meaning the pri-
soner) (by other officers of the 46th while the regiment was
in Dublin) in my bedroom, I reported the circumstances
to Colonel Garrett, who reproached me, and called me a
fool for my pains;' he, the said prisoner, then well-knowing
that so much of the said statement as relates to Lieuten-
ant-Colonel Garrett, viz.: `who reproached me and called
me a fool for my pains,' was false."
Second—" For having in thesaid letter made the follow-
ing statement : I then patiently submitted to a series of in-
dignities, when I complained to Major Maxwell, who re-
presented the facts to Col. Garrett, upon which he gave the
offenders a reprimand; so weak was the effect of the repri-
mand or caution given by Colonel Garrett, that though the
acts of aggression were discontinued I was persecuted in
other ways, until I threatened to appeal to the general of
the district, and sent a letter to that effect to Col. Garrett.
On it being known that I was determined upon such a
tahnedafaronm7athnacetstianmde
course, I was earnestly entreated, by several of my brother
olafbtohneredsai,
said statement,
tahteempriinzwerltthhreenfewreellnee
offioers, to forbear making any fromt I did forbear,
ilttwthasgniretielisevunedderwhicanh iy
had
ftiotirmeonril
tt
,district,
as is comprised in the foll •
to appeal to the general of thneg words'
'Until
threaten
threat to Colonel Garrett,
knowingant o
dC Colonel on that
ntea
o
either by word of mouth or in that effect to Colonel , was false, and that he, the
prisoner, had never made
peal to the general of the disiti;ict.”.ting, that he would op-
et much
Garrett,
ue
r cet
Third--r` For
_havioi, on the 21st da of Windsor; *hen:. exiibuzi. ea As s witsmir 13afm..- J.'"vt5.18242,t.5at
martial, which was then and th --
of Lieutenant Thomas Fergus Free • 'frbd
Freer in reply to the follow-
ing question Will you swear positivel
Nicholas did not reprimand officers • y that Captain
against whom you had
made a complaint to the commanding officer m e the
following answer I have taken an oath alread made the
following answer h—' I have taken an oath already, C
Nicholas never, to my knowledge, censured anybOily;aPhte.
himself (meaning Captain Nicholas) having ill-treated
othdrs on joining, he, the prisoner, then well knowing that
so much of the said answer as is comprised in the follow-
ing words, 'he himself having ill-treated others on join-
ing,' was false."
Fourth—" For having on the day and year aforesaid, in
a certain letter addressed and delivered by him the pri-
soner, to the deputy judge advocate officiating at the trial
of Lieutenant Thomas Fergus Greer, made the following
statement : Major Maxwell has stated on oath that Cap-
tain Nicholas never ill-treated young officers. I could put
questions to prove that he did, and that he (meaning Cap-
tain Nicholas) aids and abets nearly everything of the kind
that takes place,' he, the prisoner, then well knowing that
so much of the said statement as imputes to Capt. Nicho-
las, that he ill-treated young officers or aided and abetted
others in so doing,' was false."
Upon which charge the Court came to the following de-
cision :

" The Court having maturely weighed and considered
the evidence in support of the prosecution, together with
what the prisoner, Lieutenant James Edward Perry, 46th
Regiment, has urged in his defence, does now find, and is
of opinion, that he the 'prisoner, Lieutenant James Ed-
ward Perry, 16t1i),Regiment, is guilty of the whole charge
preferred against Litm.
" The Court having found the prisoner, Lieut. James
Edward Perry, 46th Regiment, guilty of the charge pre-
ferred against him, which being in breach of the Articles
of War, does now sentence the prisoner, Lieutenant James
Edward Perry, 46th Regiment, to be dismissed her Ma-
jesty's service."

" Windsor Barracks, July 14, 1851.
" Sir,—l have the honour to acquaint youthat lam re-
quested by the unanimous desire of the members of the
court- martial of which I am president, held upon Lieut.
Perry, of the 46th Regiment, to recommend the prisoner to
the favourable consideration of her Majesty, in consequence
of his youth, and the amount of gross provocation he ap-
pears to have received from Lieutenant Greer, of the same
regiment. --I have, &c.,

"The Court having maturely weighed and considered
the evidence brought forward in support of the prosecu-
tion, together with that which the prisoner has adduced in
his defence, is of opinion, with regard to the first instance
of the charge, that he, the prisoner, Lieut. James Edward
Perry, 46th Regiment of Foot, is not guilty."
" With regard t,4 the second instance of the charge—that
he, the prisoner, Lieut. James Edward Perry, 46th Regi-
ment., is guilty.
" With regard to the third instance of the charge—that
he, the prisoner, Lieut. James Edward Perry, 46th Regi-
ment, is guilty.
" With regard to the fourth instance of the charge—that
he, the prisoner, Lieut. James Edward Perry, 46th Regi-
ment, is also guilty.
" The Court having found the prisoner, Lieut. James
Edward Perry, 46th Regiment of Foot, guilty of the
second, third, and fourth instances of the charge preferred
against him, which being in breach of the Articles of War,
does now adjudge him, the prisoner, Lieut. James Edward
Perry, 46th Regiment of Foot, to be cashiered."
"The Court having found the prisoner guilty of the
second, third, aad fourth instances of the charge preferred
against him, and performed the painful duty of sentencing
him to be cashiered, in strict conformity to the Articles of
War, which deprived them of all discretionary power,
taking into its consideration the youth and inexperience of
the prisoner—the exciting and painful position he stood in
at the time the letters were written on which the charge is
founded—and the circumstances disclosed in evidence un-
der which they were signed by him, begs leave humbly to
recommend the prisoner to her Majesty's clemency on the
grounds of his having acted under ill-judged counsel and
influence, in committing so grave a breach of military
order and discipline." _ _

(Signed) "JAMES LINDSAY,
" Captain and Lt.-Col. and Bt.-Col. Grenadier Guards,
President.
"The Judge-Advocate•General of her Majesty's Forces."

It appeared on the record (page 11) that the court was
cleared for the purpose of deliberating on the following
question put by the prisoner on the cross-examination or
Lieutenant T. F. Greer, first witness :
" Did you not seize me by the breast and throat, and
throw me on my bed; and did I not order you under
arrest, which you refused to obey, saying you would see
me damned first `:"

The court was re-opened, and decided that the question
should not be put to the evidence.
The Deputy Judge Advocate-General, in the absence of
the Judge Advocate-General, being of opinion that the
prisoner has been thereby precluded from putting a ques-
tion to the witness which was legally admissible and rele-
vant to the issue, humblysubmitted that her Majesty should
be pleased not to confirm the proceedings.
For the above reasons, communicated from the Judge
Advocate-General's office on the 7th inst., her Majesty
was graciously pleased not to confirm the proceedings of
the Court.

By direction of the General Commanding-in-Chief,
C. YORKE.

APPENDIX No. 6.
GENERAL ORDER.
No. 542. Horse Guards, Sept. 2, MI.
At a general court-martial held at Windsor on the 21st
July, 1854, Lieutenant Thomas Fergus Greer, of the 46th
Regiment, was arr aigned upon the under-mentioned
charge, viz.:—
" For conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman,
and to the prejudice of good order and military discipline,
in the following instances :
" First. In having at Windsor, on or about the night of
the 28th or the morning of the 29th of June 1854, wilfully
struck and offered other ersonal violence to Lieutenant
James Edward Perry, of the 46th Regiment.
" Second. In having, at the time and place last above-
mentioned, used provoking, insulting, and disgusting
-language towards the said Lieutenant Perry, by calling
him swindler," blackguard,' and by using other expres-
sions towards him of a most offensive and insulting nature."
Upon which charge the Court came to the following
decision :
"The Court having maturely weighed and considered
the whole of the evidence before it, together with what
the prisoner has urged in his defence, are of opinion that
he, the prisoner, Lieutenant Thomas Fergus Greer, of the
46th Regiment, is not guilty of that part of the charge
contained in the first instance of it, namely : In having at
Windsor, on or about the night of the 28th, or morning of
the 29th June, 1854, wilfully struck and offered other per-
sonal violence to Lieutenant James Edward Perry, of the
46th Regiment, and do, therefore, acquit him of the same ;
and the Court are of opinion that hp, the prisoner, Lieu-
tenant Thomas Fergus Greer, of the 46th Regiment, is
guilty of the whole of that part of the charge contained in
the second instance of it, viz. : In having, at the time and
place last above mentioned, used provoking, insulting, and
disgusting language towards the said Lieutenant Perry, by
calling him 'swindler,' blackguard,' and by using other
expressions towards him of a most offensive and insulting
nature; with the exception of using the precise words,
' swindler," blackguard, of which they acquit him.
" The Court having found the prisoner guilty of a part of
the charge preferred against him as above specified, which,
being in breach of the Articles of War do now by virtue
thereof adjudge him, the prisoner, Lieutenant Thomas
Fergus Greer, of the 46th Regiment, to be severely repri-
manded, and further to ba reduced on the list of lieuten-
ants of the 46th Regiment, and to be placed next below
Lieutenant Nicholas Dunscombe, of the 46th Regiment."
It appeared on the record that two witnesses were ex-
amined on the part of the prosecution :
First, Lieutenant James Edward Perry ; second Esther
Major. The first witness gave positive and detailed evi-
dence of several distinct actsof personal violence committed
against him by the prisoner on the occasion in question ;
and the record discloses no ground for deeming the
testimony of this witness as given in chief, to have
been rendered less worthy of credit by cross-exami-
nation. The evidence of the second witness, although
it does not directly confirm that of the first as to
particular details of personal violence, on the one hand
does not contradict it, and on the other seems indirectly
to corroborate it by agreeing with it in many particulars,
the reality of which there seems no reason to doubt, and
which, if they actually occurred, would render it probable
th .1, acts of pera-mal violence were really committed by the
prisoner, and that he made use of the expressions specified
in the second instance of the charge.
The evidence adduced by the prisoner cannot reasonably
be regarded as either contradicting the testimony of the
first witness in any particular materially affecting the is-
sues to he tried, or as showing that the witness was wholly
unworthy of credit.
Nor can the address of the prisoner reasonably be consi-
dered to have impaired the value or altered the effect of the
evidence for the prosecution.
It thus appeared that the finding of the court, on the
first instance of the charge, not without warrant, as being
against evidence, and that so much the finding of the court
on the second instance as is comprised in the words "with
the exception of using the precise words ' swindler," black-
guard; of which they acquit him," was also without war-
rant, as being against. evidence.
The Deputy-Judge-Advocate-General, in the absence of
the Judge-Advocate-General, humbly submitted that her
Majesty should be graciously pleased to order the Court to
be re-assembled, with a view to a revision of the proceed-
ings on the grounds above set forth.
For the above reasons her Majesty was graciously pleased
to order the court to be re-assembled, with a view to a re-
vision of the proceedings. -

Tier Majesty has been pleased to approve and confirm
the finding and sentence of the Court.

The Deputy Judge-Advocate-General having submitted
to her Majesty the proceedings in the case of Lieutenant
Perry, and her Majesty having been advised to approve
and confirm the finding and sentence of the court in all
that regards the legal points relating to the Judge-Advo-
cate-General's department the General Commanding-in-
Chief humbly submitted to her Majesty that the finding
and sentence be approved on military grounds.
The importance of upholding discipline and good order
in her Majesty's service imposed upon the General Com-
manding-in-Chief the necessity of submitting to her Ma-
jesty, that the sentence passed by the Court on the prisoner
should be carried into effect, notwithstanding the recom-
mendation of the Court in his favour, and the reason as-
signed for that, recommendation.

No commanding officer would he safe in the discharge of
his duties if inferior officers could with impunity make
accusations similar to those of which Lieutenant Perry has
been found guilty.
The prisoner has been acquitted on the first instance of
the charge, but found guilty of the second, third, and fourth
instances, and has been sentenced to be cashiered.
When au officer has been found guilty of such charges,
and sentenced to be cashiered, and that the legality of the
proceedings of the Court awarding such a sentence had been
confirmed by the two departments whose duty it is to sub-
mit to 3ier Majesty their opinions, the General Command-
ing-in-Chief has only one means of giving effect to the
Court's recommendation for her Majesty's clemency, which
Was to solicit her Majesty to permit the prisoner to receive
the amount of his commissions ; and this recommendation
her Majesty has been graciously pleased to approve.
Lieutenant Peiry was appointed to an ensigncy in
January, 1853, without purchase, solely on account of his
father's very meritorious services in the army ; he subse-
quently purchased his lieutenancy.
The General Commanding-in-Chief cannot close his ob-
servations on these proceedings without noticing the letter
of Lieutenant William Waldy.
The letter of Lieutenant William Waldy, addressed to
Lieutenant Perry on the 2d June, 1851, is not to be recon-
ciled with 1.i3 evidence given before the court-martial
which tried Lieutenant Perry a few weeks afterwards.
In the letter he states that Captain Nicholas bas applied
a very insulting epithet to Ensign Coote at the mess-table,
and that the latter had given the lie direct to Captain
Nicholas.

Horse Guards, August 11, 1854.
The general court-martial having this day re-assembled in
compliance with the orders of the General Commanding-in-
Chief, signifying her Majesty's commands that the former
sentence shall be revised by the court, and stating that the
grounds on which such commands have been given by her
Majesty ; which documents were laid before the court by
the Deputy Judge Advocate, together with the original
proceedings of the court held for the trial of Lieutenant
Thomas Fergus Greer, of the 46th Regiment ; " The court,
having carefully re-considered the evidence that was
brought before them during the trial, beg most respectfully
to adhere to their former decision."
Her Majesty was pleased not to confirm and approve the
finding and sentence of the court.

The General Commanding-in-Chief felt it his duty
humbly to submit to her Majesty the sense he entertained
of Lieutenant Greer's conduct throughout these transac-
tions.

As a witness on oath, before the court-martial, he denied
or forgets that he had written such a letter ; even if he
did forget, his levity is deserving the severest reprehension.
After the court had closed its proceedings, Lieutenant
William Waldy was called upon by his commanding
officer to explain his conduct iu this matter.
He stated in his explanation, that " he must have given
a higher colour to the affair than it merited"—that " since
the affair scarce an officer has spoken to him" -and that
" in a foolish moment he wrote the strongest language re-
corded against him in his letter."
Lieutenant William Waldy appears to be a weak gos-
siping young man, insensible of the duty of a rigid adher-
ence to the truth in describing the conduct of others ; and
incapable of estimating the mischievous consequences of
exaggerating a contradiction at the mess-table into the lie
direct, by which departure from the truth the character
of his brother officers might have been seriously affected.
He does not appear, however, to have been actuated by
any malicious motives, and in the absence of any proof of
corrupt intention, the General Commanding-in-Chief
hereby directs, with her Majesty's sanction, that Lieut.
Wm. Waldy be severely reprimanded, and cautioned, for
the rest of his life to adhere strictly to the truth. P
By command of the General Commanding-in-Chief,
C. YORKE, Military Sec.

As a witness before the first court-martial which tried
Lieutenant Perry, ho repeatedly declined to answer the
questions put to him by the prisoner, Lieutenant Perry,
which were necessary for the discovery of the truth, on the
plea that he would thereby criminate himself.
When on his own trial, it is clearly established by evi-
dence then taken, that Lieutenant Greer had applied the
most disgusting expressions to Lieutenant Perry.
The evidence on the preceding trial of Lieutenant Perry
is also confirmatory of these facts, and they admit of no
reasonable doubt.
Such ungentleman-like conduct is calculated to degrade
any officer iu the eyes of his men, and to destroy his power
of maintaining discipline.
A person who dues not shrink from the utterance of
such disgraceful language is unfit to preserve his position
of social equality in a regiment amongst his brother
offi-
cers.

He cannot exchange into another regiment, for the offi-
cers would refuse to receive him ; and they would be en-
titled so to do under her Majesty's regulations.
The General Commanding-in-Chief could not omit to
mark with the expression of the severest displeasure the
gambling propensities of Lieutenant Greer.
But, without reference to these propensities,
call for
conduct already adverted to is fully sufficient to
his removal from the army.
ding-in-Chief
the mis-
conduct
these •grounds, the General Cornwell Greer
• submitted to her Majesty that Li
le of his cm.
satenant
' should be removed from the service by the ea

,--.,_---- -, ,40