The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-14 00:00:00

_TOR

STING EDITION

Len arranged in a-manner satisfactory to the feelings of
both parties. The officer, who had received a reply in a
taw:tient of irritation, which he (Lord G. Lennox) admitted
Otlght never to have been given, had subsequently - re-
elver' a satisfactory explanation from the Earl of Car-
gan—aa explanation which was equally honourable to
the Noble Earl who had given it and to the officer
twho bad. received it.--(Cheers.) The Hon. Member had
ailed to the returns of the number of punishments which
tititd taken place in the regiment since it had been under
kne command of the Earl of Cardigan. He (Lord G. L.)
new not what those punishments were, but he did know
men regiments returned to the United Kingdom, after
go!! absence of 20 years in India, soldiers were in the habit
rsquandering their money, and that the discipline of
_eganents returning from foreign stations was, generally
4Peaking, more lax than that of regiments which had
Passed the same period at home. After all, the
hell. TY reason urged by the Honourable Member for
motion was, that the Earl of Cardigan had
helged a man on a Sunday, for all his other acts
been approved by the Horse Guards, and if
ZY thing wrong had been done they were the
T.Ter people to be attacked.—(Loud cheering.)
ith regard to the flogging the soldier on a Sunday, no
plan „
; coutu regret the occurrence of that unfortunate
trenmstance more than he (Lord G. Lennox) did, and
be believed that at that moment no .man regretted
t more than the Earl of Cardigan himself. He
Fuld ask that House, if it had been any other
dividual than the Earl of Cardigan (Opposition
bleer,s).---he would ask the Hon. Member for Bir-
o-fingnam, if it had been any other commanding
sh suppose an unfortunate captain of a man-of-war,
beo,..uld Hon. Members ever have had that case brought
rore them ? They never would have heard of it. Such
lilstanees had occurred, and there was not a
benaber of that House but was not aware of the fact.
maintained that the Earl of Cardigan had been a
most abused man. The press would never have risen
%as it did against any other man than that Noble
,11. The most abusive epithets had been applied
" tyrant," "convicted felon," and such other op-
PEebrious 'lmes ; and he had been brought before a judi-
cial tribunal for having done what no British officer could
reuse to do. For let it be remembered that officers of
army were placed in a very trying situation with re-
tard to duels. If an officer resented an insult, it seemed
it'
was liable to be tried for felony ; if he did not resent
hei'ttine Horse Guards would direct a cocourt-martial to be
the on his conduct, and would order him to be dismissed
service. Many Hon. Members knew instances of
hweers being dismissed the service, not merely for not
~,41:ing fought a duel, but because they had not called
(L‘ the individual who gave the insult soon enough. He
rnu,rd G. Lennox) knew an instance where an individual
"Ing fired four shots against his adversary, was re-
°v
Led from the army because he had not taken notice
of.
ihtue,subject of quarrel in sufficient time.—(Hear, hear.)
e Hon, and Gallant Member for Armagh (Colonel
s,':111011) could corroborate what he (Lord G. Lennox) had
w'd with regard to that case. He would not detain the
c'nse any longer. Although the Earl of Cardigan
(In,uld be glad to have his conduct inquired into yet he
°l'd G. Lennox) thought that it would not beer ight to
t;rant the address which the Hon: Member for Birming-
rn. (Alr. Muntz) had moved, for. He-would therefore
va
ote
against the motion.
'ir• W. 0. STANLEY differed from the Noble Lord
who had just sat down. He asked what would be the
itinflitation of officers, many of whom, without relations or
aftenenee, had expended, perhaps, all their money, if,
in r having spent a great portion of their lives
active service in the most unhealthy cli-
mates, they were to be placed on their return
the mother country under the command of
of lan of such ungovernable temper as the Earl
_Cardigan was. He (Mr. Stanley) could not concur
ivhith the
Noble Lord (Lord George Lennox) in
the vote which he had intimated his intention of
livings on the present occasion.
thesir
-IL VIVIAN said, that however he disapproved of
ruotion then before the' House, he could not but ex-
sile,,s,s his unqualified censure of the case of flogging on a
......(1-tay brought forward against the Earl of Cardigan.
Earl
ear, hear.) He could not understand how the Noble
h"' had committed such an act ; but, at the same time,
I,4`.,was thoroughly persuaded, from a conversation he
cud with the Earl of Cardigan, that that unfortunate cir-
tZinstance arose entirely from an error Of judgment ; and
e"..e IN'oble•Earl had authorized him (Sir H. Vivian) to
re4ress to the House his deep regret at what had occur-
to, and lie declared distinctly that it on in a mis-
th' of the judgment on his part, and that he hoped
nit} no one would attribute to him any
or y harshness towards the soldier who
thbeen flo an
gged.—(Hear, hear.) It had been stated
aat the Earl of Cardigan had given the lie to an officer,
lit be (Sir Hussey Vivian) could not believe that such
fact had occurred. He was sure that if any officer in
the
h.army communicated such a circumstance to Lord
11, that he would receive from his Lordship immediate
446, and that the Commanding Officer would have
been called to account. He should again repeat in the
name
of the Earl of Cardigan, the regret of the Noble
'arl'for the flogging on the abbath.
Colonel VERNON said, that as he had been referred
Eby the Noble Lord opposite (Lord G. Lennox), he 1
Lgged to say that it was a fact within his own
nwiedge that an officer in the army, who had fought
h2nel with a civilian, and had fired four shots, had'l dismissed from the service because he had not noticed
sti4offielently early an insult he had received. An intima-
mitted
'1
had been given to that officer that he would be per-
sold °Litt° quit the service, and he had accordingly
Air, ts
obli,„e',s4WAßT said it was very painful to him to be
t() Come forward to support a charge against an
that ''',naL—(Hear, hear, hear.) He regretted to say
his - I,lle had not heard such a defence from
4, 'light Honourable Friend, the Secretary at War,
tsl:cmild convince him that that inquiry, should not
opi; I)mee• He thought the House bound to give an
th'9rtunity to the Noble Earl of ascertaining whether
these charses were true or false. It was admitted by
thee iligiHon. the Master-General of the Ordnance, that
ease Noble Earl had committed an error of.,udgment in one
not why, then, should they not inquire whether he had
"nrnitted a similar error in other instances? The Noble
tl's!' (Lord G. Lennox) had stated that the Earl of Car-
ittl'ilist was a deeply injured man, and he hoped that such
hgs"t be proved to be the case. If the falsehood of
pert° charges was capable of proof, why not afford an op-
qa.l„tinitY of ascertaining that fact ? Feeling that in-
sh,;Pas due to the Noble Earl and the country, he
iii"r. ~support the motion of his Hon. Friend.
WARBURTON said, after the statement of the
expres Bon. Gentleman that the Noble Earl had
shcul d sed his regret for flogging a man on Sunday, he
ivks say nothing on that point. In his opinion that
The An ifghtest of the charges against the Noble Earl.
Was "allant Officer opposite had denied that any censure
h aid in the letter of the Adjutant-General, but
it ett since consulted the document, and he found that
pear contain a censure upon the Noble Earl. It ap-
offie(d to him that when the character of a commanding
of
mentioned in such terms by the Commander-
aft
e ` :her, namely, that the discipline of the regiment was
tea-e y the conduct of the commanding officer, the
4 'I let of that officer should be inquired into without
43' delayLortl .
HOWICK had heard no reasons which would
oe,nee him to alter the opinions he had given on a former
-asion, but still he was not prepared to concur in the
will!" of the lion. Member for Birmingham. He agreed
th ta the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary at War,
et,: although the House had a right of advising the
wn as to the exercise of power over the
s„lnsv, still that was a right which the House
wsktitst to use with great caution—it was a right
iulneh nothing but a very extreme. case of abuse would
Ihstify them' in having recourse to. He did not think
laid
in the present case there had been sufficient.grounds
Clifor exercising the power, and on that ground. simply
help
refuse to vote for the motion. He could not
,ell 3 adding that he greatly regretted his Right Hon.
cr'end had in the course of his statement made an asser-
tion which was not called for by the circumstances of
the case, and which, if uncontradicted, might lead to in-
Convenience, he meant the statement that no officer of
the British a..my should under any circumstances be re-
nioved from his commission unless he had been guilty
of some offence which a court-martial might take cogni-
zance of. To that proposition he entirely ode-
naurred. An officer might show himself gene-
rally unfit for command and incapable of performing
his duty, and it then would be the painful duty of the
Crown to remove that officer. That necessity did not
appear, in his opinion, to be removed by the circum-
stance of the officer having purchased his commission,
because in such cases he was permitted to sell out.
After a few words from Sir A. DALRYMPLE,
Colonel SALWEY said he rose, in discharge of a
lsinful duty, to support the motion of the Hon. Member
Or Birmingham. The conduct of Lord Cardigan had
created not only dissatisfaction but :disgust in the
`has
of the British army—(Hear, .hear, hear.)
there any person in the House that would be bold
enough to say that the Earl of Cardigan hadnot incurred
!be displeasure of the Horse Guards ? He would only
Trther say that all HOn. Members who would vote for
e inquiry' would show' an act of friendship. 'to the
Gallant Earl.
WARBURTON and Mr. MACAULAY ex-
plained.
General SHARPS thought that interference in the
Private affairs of the Army did not become that House.
„ollr.-MCNTZ, in reply;, complained that the Right •in Gentleman had misrepresented him, and put words
this mouth which he had never used, and he would
et rm. it no man to put anything into his mOuth.—(4.
_ 1-01.) He had merely asked for inquiry, without sug-
zstings what that inquiry should be. The country de-
a„nded it, and it was due to the Noble Earl himself.
de-
.The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it 135
Majority against it —77
Nell
C GREY moved for Returns of all Tolls, Duties,
e._4onies levied or received by the Corporation of New-
xs•cstle-upon-Tyne, for goods imported into the port of
,ao'w.eastle-upon-Tyne, and of the application of all Such
18:„Ies, during the last eight years, namely, 1833, 1834,
1836, 1637, 1838, 1839, and 1840.
On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, Orders of the
ti'n,
IVafter the Ist ere ordered to t
nak. e precedence of Notices of DIo-
Jue
ADJOURNED DEBATE.
jou;, 'tie Order of the Day for the resuming of the Ad•
o_ed Debate being read,
fe:tr• GLADSTONE, alluding to what had fallen
last4lllT Noble Lord, the Member for Northumberland,
p96,1.1,14t1t, requested the House would give him an op-
ef 6111 t. when the Noble Lord should be in his place,
hued • Owning the circumstances to which the IN tittle Lord
4,i`trall:ded, in connection with a person who was very
dear to him—(Cheers.)
-petitions, in favour of the. Ministerial measure,
11-31-c-vtltreiestrAsd, - •
4 fowautl rose ro e and said that he wished in
woad 0 Stato tl
t 'iationee himhim.tenEl49 13 0 which wonted '77-7