The Sun.
London, England, 1856-07-23 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING JULY 23, 1856;

ing ? The hon. member observed that the parties io
whom his motion referred, along with several others,

plea-led guilty on the second day of their trial on condi-
tion that their lives should be spared. Ten of them were
transported for life, and the others were imprisoned or
transported for various periods. When an amnesty was
proclaimed in favour of Frost, Williams, and Jones, an
application was made to him to inquire whether that
amnesty would be extended to these men. On applying
at the Home-office ho found there was no record of

their conviction, and his object in now asking the ques-
tion of which he had given notice was to proclaim to
these men that they had received her Majesty's pardon.
Sir G. GREY said the offences of which these parties
had been convicted were of a similar nature to those for

which pardons had been granted, and instructions
would be sent out to the colonies for their liberation.
BILLETING IN SCOTLAND.
Sir A. AGNEW asked the Under Secretary for War
whether her Majesty's Government were disposed to re-
lieve private families, as much as possible, from the in•
convenience of the present system of billeting in Scot-
land, by making other arrangements for the accommo-
dation of recruiting parties, and of the permanent staff
of the militia ?

➢Zr. PEEL said the number of the permanent mi-
litia was very limited, and the Government would con-
sider whether some mode could not be adopted of ac-
commodating them without inconveniencing private
families. With regard to the recruiting parties he was

unable to give any answer.
MAILS TO THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.
Mr. H. BERKELEY asked the Chancellor of the

Exchequer if he had 'received tenders for carrying the
mail to the Cape of Good Hope, and whether he had
any objection to lay those several tenders, if decided on,
upon the table of the house ?
Mr. WILSON replied that several tenders ha I been
received for the conveyance of these mails. These ten-
ders were under consideration, and he hoped that in the
course of to-morrow a decision would be come to on the

subject. After that there would be no objection to lay
the tenders on the table.
LESSEES OF CHURCH LANDS.

Mr. INGHAM asked the right hon. member for the
University of Cambridge if it was the intention of the
Church Estate Commissioners to act on the recommen-
dations of the committee on ecclesiastical commissions,
ai to the consideration to be shown to the lessees of

church lands for their beneficial interest in settling terms
of enfranchisement
Mr. WALPOLE said it was the intention of the com-
mission to act bona fide on the recommendations which

had been given. Indeed they had already begun to con-
sider and act upon those recommendations.
FINANCE ACCOUNTS.
Dr. MICHELL inquired why the finance accounts
which were laid on the table on the 15th June had not

yet been delivered ?
Mr. WILSON replied that the delay had arisen from
the peculiarity of the accounts of the land revenues of

Scotland.

OUR DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH THE
-UNITED STATES.

Mr. M. GIBSON wished to put a question to the noble
lord at the head of the Government with respect to our
diplomatic relations with the United States. Five or
six weeks ago the noble lord informed the house that the
post of British Minister in the United States had become
vacant, and furnished the house with papers and expla-
nations of the circumstances which caused Mr. Crampton
to take his departure from the United States. The noble

lord also stated that the amicable relations between the
two countries had not been disturbed, and that the
diplomatic intercourse between the two Governments
would be continued. He would now ask the noble lord
whether her Majesty's advisers contemplated the early
appointment of a Minister from England to the United
States?

Lord PALMERSTON said it was by no means an
unusual circumstance that a mission should for a time
be vacant. That frequently happened from a variety of
causes. With regard to the particular mission to which
the right hon. gentleman referred, her Majesty's Go-
vernment had as yet come to no decision on the subject.
THE BIBLE.
Mr. HEYWOOD then rose to move for an address to
the Crown praying that she would be pleased to issue a
commission of learned men to examine into the alleged
defects in the translation of the Bible, and to report the
amendments which they may be prepared to recommend.
He went at some length into the history of the autho-
rised translation, and cited several passages to show that
the translators had rendered the original carelessly and
inaccurately. He anticipated opposition from the Bible
societies of the country, as a new translation would ren-
der their stock valueless ; but the work would not be
done in a moment, and he thought they would have
plenty of time to dispose of their present stock before
the new translation was ready. He was anxious to bring
public opinion to bear upon this question, and therefore
he had thought it proper to bring the matter before the
house.

Mr. W. BIGGS seconded the motion.
Sir G. GREY admitted the importance of the quell.
tion, bat reminded the house that it would be unwise on
their part to take up a subject to which public opinion
was in decided opposition. There were, no doubt, cer-
tain errors and inaccuracies in the authorised translation,
but as a whole it could not be denied that it was justly
entitled to the respect and reverence of the English
people.
The motion was then withdrawn.
MEMBERS' SPEECHES.

Mr. WILKINSON proposed a resolution to restrict
the length of speeches. He cited himself as a model of
short speaking, and pathetically lamented that he had
incurred reproach for so doing, as he had received an
anonymous letter imploring him to make longer speeches,
and adding—quite gratuitously of course—let them be
on subjects which be understands. The reading of this
letter excited great laughter.
Mr. 'T. DIINCOMBE seconded the motion.
Lord PALMERSTON rose amid cheers and laughter
to reply to it. He admitted that the resolution in the
abstract must have the assent of every member, but he
could not agree to restrain the freedom of speech.
Mr. M. MILNES opposed, and Sir W. BIGGS supported,
the motion.
Mr. FOX suggested that much would be done if the
leaders on both sides would speak early in the course of
a debate, by which means the subject would be exhausted,
and other members would not for shame stand up to
reiterate that which had been better said before.
Mr. HADFIELD supported the motion. He thought
time might also be saved in the present management of
the business of the house.
After some remarks from Mr. WILKINSON,
The house divided, when the numbers were—
For the motion 3O
Against it
Majority —27
SPANISH BONDS.

Sir. J. FITZGERALD, in moving to submit the just
claims of certain numbers of persons, her Majesty's sub-
jects, on the Spanish Government, for an honourable set-
tlement of the Spanish Committee Certificate of Coupons
not funded, said, in submitting this motion for the pur-
pose of persuading her Majesty's Government to take an
interest in a questidn which most materially affects the
rights and property of her Majesty's subjects, and,
in this instance, of those who, depending on the;faith
of nations, have on such grounds advanced their
money on loan to the Spanish Government at a
certain rate of interest ; and when an attempt is
ma le to defraud her Majesty's subjects by the
Government of Spain, by a decree of settling the d'hts
thus contracted with her Majesty's subjects by confiscat-
ing part of the interest due upon that debt, I do think
the British creditors of Spain have full right to appeal
to their Government to protect them from the effects of
such an arbitrary and unjust decree, by a remonstrance
to the Spanish Government. In 1851 there was an
arrear of ten years' interest due on the capital debt of
Spain to British creditors, when the Spanish Govern-
ment passed this arbitrary decree that the Five per
Cent. Stock should be converted into a One per Cent.
Stock, gradually to increase in the course of nineteen
years into a Three per Cent. Stock. This converted
Stock now goes on the Exchange under the name of
New Deferred Stock. This arbitrary decree left no op-
tien with the British creditors of Spain, but enacted that
they must accept these hard terms or get nothing, and
under this compulsion the Spanish bondholders' commit-
tee took what they could get, and issued they certificates
for the confiscated over-due interest, which it is now
sou;_ ht that Spain should acknowledge and pay. How
has the Government of Spain settled the ten years' in-
terest due to the British creditors (which is considered
the most sacred portion of all debts) ? Can it be believed ?
But so it is. Five years only of the ten years' interest
of 5 per cent. is acknowledged and capitalised into the
One per Cent. Stock, and the other five years' interest
due absolutely confiscated. Why, sir, if we bad been
guilty of treason towards the Spanish Government the
British creditors could not be worse treated than by con-
fiscating what property the Spanish Government might
have of theirs in possession. Whereas it is notorious
that the money so lent materially contributed to establish
the present constitutional Queen and Government in
Spain. Here is a splendid statement of facts, and, let me
ask, have not the subjects of the British Crown a full
right to appeal to her Majesty's Government to endea-
vour to seek redress against such an act of spoliation,
and in addition to which the British creditors of Spain
are informed, if those bard terms are not accepted that no
acknowledgment whatever of the debt due to them would
be made to those who declined accepting the terms
proposed. A noble lord, now no more, but whose me-
mory is still
revered in this house, I mean Lord G. Ben-
tinck, when a member of the House of Commons,
brought forward this question, seeking redress from the
tShpea nniosbhle
lord Governmentno
w atowards
htaithec f
Brither
Majesty'ss h
creditors, when
vern.
client stated "That though at that period he could not
press the subject on the Government of Spain, neverthe-
less a time might come when her Majesty's Government
would and must interfere." Sir, Ido think there could
not be a moment more propitious than the present, when
Spain herself, on the very grounds which I now repre-
sent, actually equips an armament against Mexico for
the purpose of obtaining redress and compensation for
Spanish subjects who have claims on the Mexican Go-
vernment. Here are the orders issued to the officers
commanding the armament proceeding to Vera Cruz to
enforce the rights of Spanish subjects—" M. Alvarez
has been instructed by Gen. Z ibala to notify to the
Alexican Government on his arrival in the Bay of Vera
Cruz, that he was ready to present his credentials pro-
vided the bonds taken from the panieh creditors were.
restored, the interest due on them paid, and the legit?.
macy of the debt, already sanctioned by a treaty, again
acknowledged. Should the Mexican Government agree
to pay and restore the bonds, M. • Alvarez will land and
immediately deliver his credentials; i f lot, be will return
to the Havana, on board one of the steamers, and leave
the three other ships in observation before Vera Cruz."
In conclusion, it may be stated that it appears a treaty
existed between Spain slid Mexico regarding this question,

whereas the Government of this country was no party to
the transaction between the British creditors arrd Spain.
True ; but, sir, is it not incumbent on all turopean ao-
vernments to actstrictly up to their engagements with their
creditors 1! and if they should by deviating from thorn for-
feit their faith and national honour, and thereby defraud
the subjects of any other power, have not the subjects of
these powers sought the prsteetion of their representative
Gov't rnment against such wrongs? Eavo not the 'United
States always acted upon this rule; has not France followed
the same rule ; and can it be supposed that a power like
Great Britai❑ should be an exception when the rights of
her subjects are assailed? Portugal, a small country
compared to Spain, had done the same injustice to her
creditors ; but finding her national credit thereby im-
paired, has justly and prudently acknowledged the
claims she had repudiated. (Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON said that the course pursued
by the Spanish Cortes had been one contrary to fairness
and justice. The money was advanced when the Spanish
nation was struggling for liberty, and when the Spanish
Government were unable, from pecuniary circumstances,
to wage a contest in its support, and it was only by the
money advanced to them by different individuals they
were enabled to accomplish the objects they had in view.
It was contended by the Spanish Government that they
had not received the whole amount of the capital for
which they became liable. That was necessarily the

case ; for when a government was in difficulties, iti

credit small, and its duration uncertain, because they
might he superseded by the opposite party, who might

disavow their engagements, they must expect to pay
dear for the accommodation given them, and therefore
it was not just to say to the creditor 3 that for every 1001.
indebted they had received but a portion of it. The ques-
tion before the house was one of expediency, viz., what
course this country would pursue to obtain justice under
the circumstances under which these loans had been

Contracted. It was not advisable for the British Go-
vernment to interfere officially, because these loans were
advanced on the discretion of private individuals, and
without any interference of the Government. The bond-
holders could not claim the interference of the Govern-.

ment similar to that of Spain on Mexico, because that
was a violation of an arrangement entered into between
the two Governments ; and he thought it undesirable to
make this question an international grievance. The Bri
tish Government had made friendly applications to the
Spanish Government relative to these claims, but un-
fortunately they had not attended to them. He thought
the Spanish nation would consult not only the national
dignity and the national honour by acknowledging these
claims, but by making them good.
After some remarks in explanation from Sir J. FITZ-
GERALD, the motion was withdrawn.
GENERAL BEATSON.
Mr. ROEBUCK rose and moved the following reso-
lution :—That the Under Secretary for War having ad.
mitted that, upon anonymous information, a secret in•
quiry had been ordered into the conduct of a genera:
officer, this house feels itself bound to express its repro
bation of such a prooeedink. He stated he was induced
to make the motion in consequence of the following
statement made by the Under Secretary for War, in an-
swer to a question put to him on a former occasion by
Col. Dunne:—Mr. Peel said that the hon. and gallant
member had correctly stated the nature of the employ-
ment which had been given by the Government to Gen.
Beatson. That officer was instructed to raise a body of
irregular cavalry in Asia Minor, Syria, Bulgaria, and
Albania, and to take the command of the men when
raised. This force first came under the command of Gen.
Beatson in the month of June, and in the September fol-
lowing it was deemed expedient that it should form part
of the Turkish Contingent under Gen. Vivian, and-that
another body of irregular cavalry should be placed under
Gen. Beatson. The charges brought against Gen. Beatson
were connected with this transfer of his command to the
officer who succeeded him. They were to this effect—that
he had instigated some of the commanding officers of the
regiments under him to decline to serve under any other
officer than himself, and had soughttoinduce the natives
of the force to prefer remaining under his command ra-
ther than that of any other person. These accusations
were sent anonymously to Gen. Vivian, who forwarded
them to the War Department. Further inquiries are
ordered to be made for the purpose, if possible, of verify-
ing the charges thus anonymously preferred : and certain
questions were put to the commanding officers of the
regiments formerly under General Beatson, at
Schumla, the answers to which had been sent home
by General Smith, the successor to the accused. These
inquiries were still pending, and the correspondence on
the subject was not yet closed. The inquiry was neces-
sarily secret, because it was merely a preliminary one,
and instituted to discover whether it was a prima facie
ground for taking further preceedings against General
Beatson. It was only right to add, that the statements
received from the commanding officers of the regiments
did not confirm the anonymous charges above described.
For these reasons it would be improper to publish the
correspondence." He appealed to the house if any man
of honour was safe under such a system, and he fear-
lessly appealed to a British House of Commons to pro-
tect the service from its operation. (Hear, hear.) The
hon. and learned gentleman having commented on the
anonymous information on which the inquiry was made,
and the term " accused" being applied to General Beat-
son [Mr. F. Peel dissented], said the honourable gentle.
man must give him credit for believing his ears. (Hear.)
He protested against the use of such tenni, under the
circumstances, and said that after he had placed this
motion on the paper, he had received a letter from the
Earl of Ellenborougb, highly laudatory of the gallant
general's conduct as a soldier and a man of honour. It
was desirable that the house should know that it was a
man who had thus served for thirty years who was now
accused of wanting his troops to mutiny. General Beat-
son entered the Indian army in 1820. He was a Major-
General in the British and a Lieutenant-General in the
Turkish service. The circumstances under which he
was employed in Turkey were as follows. It appeared
that in the late war the government found that the army
was in want of irregular cavalry to meet the Cossacks,
and General Beatson was appointed to collect to-
gether and organise a body of irregular horse.
He was appointed by the Duke of Newcastle, and
persons appointed by him seldom found favour with
his successor. Many obstacles were thrown in his way,
and it was not until June, 1855, that he found himself
at the head of a body of troops when he established
his camp on the Dardanelles. On the 28th July he
offered his resignation, which was not, however, ac-
cepted ; but he was soon after placed under the com-
mand of General Vivian, and on the Bth of September
he resigned again, and this time his resignation was ac-
cepted by Lord Panmure. Having received that letter
General Beatson withdrew; and what occurred I On
the 26th of April, 1856, he received a 'letter, purport.
ing to have been signed by General Vivian, and for-
warded to the Wets office by General Smith, then in com-
mand of the Osmanli Irregular Horso at Schumla. In
that letter General Vivian states that, in consequence of
circumstances that had come to his knowledge in con-
nection with-the recent inspection of that force, he con-
sidered it was important that certain charges involving
the character of General Beatson should be investigated.
These charges were stated to be that when General
Smith arrived at the Dardanelles for the purpose of su-
perseding General Beatson, the latter assemb:ed the
commanding officers of the regiments and tried to per-
suade them to raise a mutiny in their regiments, where-
upon two of thorn, Lieutenant-Colonel O'Reilly and
Major Shelley left the room, saying that they were sol-
diers and could not listen to such proposals. It was
added that General Beatson had a round robin drawn up
by the interpreter and circulated amongst the troops,
containing a declaration that they would not serve under
any one but himself. The letter thus sent to General
Beatson from the War-office was certified by Mr. Ram-
say to be a true copy, but in a subsequent copy which he
procured two additional paragraphs appeared, and he
(Mr. Roebuck) therefore charged Mr. Ramsay with having
falsified the document. He now came to the result of
the inquiry made at Schumla by Brigadier Smith • and
let hies say that he did not think it consistent with ho-
nourable conduct on the part of the Government to have
instituted this inquiry without letting General Beatson
know ; and if he had, as a soldier, been ordered to con-
duct such an inquiry, he would have replied that he was
a soldier, and must therefore obey, but that he did so
deeply groaning in spirit, that a Minist,r of War should
give him such instructions. With respect to the first
point adverted to in General Vivian's letter, General
Smith said that when he waived in the Dardanelles Col.
O'Reilly and Major Shelley came to him, and stated
that they understood that some officers were about to
resign their command, but that they were ready to serve
under him. - With respect to the second point, -none of
the intenareters stated that they had prepared a paper
of the kind described, but they added that they had
heard that such a paper was sent round by some one at
the time, and that they did not think that the soldiers
had got it up voluntarily. These men were not even on
oath. And he must say that he did not think that on
anonymous information of this kind a general officer
should have been subjected to this kind of secret inves-
tigation. That the information on which the investiga-
tion was founded was anonymous was admitted by the
hon. gentleman the Under-Secretary for War on a pre-
vious evening. He appealed again to the House of
Commons to protect our gallant soldiers from conduct
like this. He charged the Government with having in
this case broken through all the rules that should dis-
tinguish a liberal Government. They had done much to
shake the faith of the army in those who rule it, and, in
so doing, they had done their utmost to endanger the
safety of the country. The hon. gentleman concluded
by moving a resolution censuring the Government.
Mr. F. PEEL said it was quite possible he had been
misreported on a previous evening, when he was re-
presented to have said that General Vivian had in this
matter acted on anonymous information. If he had said
so he hat', however, stated what was incorrect, because,
although he did not know it at that time, Gen. Vivian
had acted upon information derived from a source on
which he was justified in placing reliance. After repu-
diating the idea that Lord Panmure entertained any
hostility to Gen. Beatson in consequence of his having
been appointed by the Duke of Newcastle, the hon. gen-
tleman said that soon after the irregular cavalry first
began to assemble at the Dardanelles in June, 1855,
disputes and difference arose between Gen. Beatson and
the local authorities, who complained that he did not
lend them as effectual aid as he might do in preventing
the irregular troops coming armed into the town, where
they created disturbances and riots. It was in conse-
sequence determined to make the irregular horse a part
of the contingent under the command of Gen. Vivian.
Gen. Beatson on this resigned his command, and his re-
signation was accepted by Lord Panmure, but before the
acceptance got out to Turkey circumstances occurred
which, in the opinion ofsboth the ambassador and Gee.
Vivian, rendered it necessary that Gen. Beatson should
be at once superseded, and accordingly Gen. Smith was
appointed to the command. Gen. Beatson then joined
the Contingent at Kertch, while Gen. Smith went to
Schumla with the Irregular Horse. He soon after fell
ill, and the command devolved on Gen. Szni,,h, Some

time afterwards Gen. Vivian considered that the Os-
manli cavalry should be inspected, and he directed Gen.
Sh:riey t ) undertake that duty. In the course thereof
that General heard certain circuinstancesi which he corn-
municet.ted to Gen. Vivian, and there was therefore not
a shadow of foundation for saying that the tatter gencral.
acted on nnonynioes information. Surely, then, having
received sodii in rani ation, be could neither suppress it nor
could be send it home without taking stein to ascertain,as
far as could be done in the East, how far the accusations
made against Gen. Beatson were well founded. It might,
however, be said that he should have let Gen. Beatson
know what was going on. But as all official relations
had ceased between Gen. Vivian and Gen. Beatson,
and as the latter officer was then in the East, it was im-
possible for General Vivian to communicate with him
except through the War-office, and therefore the proper
course for him to take was the one he actually did take,

in apprising the Secretary of War of what was going on.
When General Vivian's first letter arrived at the War-
office, finding that it would soon be followed by onefrom
General Smith, the Government did at once communi-
?ate with General Beatson, but waited to see whether
the letter from General Smith afforded a foundation for
judicial proceedings or not. About the beginning of May
that letter was received, and the War-office immediately
wrote to General Beatson, and requested his answer.
General Beatson, in reply, expressed his perfect readi-
ness to enter upon the investigation; for he said that he
should be able to prove not only that the charges were false,
but that they were got up with malicious intent by the
same parties whose intrigues led to his resignation in the
September previously. He requested, however, that a
little delay should take place, as he had not all his papers
at hand, and some of his friends were out of town. In
the meantime, the Government communicated with Gen.
Smith, in order that he might ascertain whether the
statements of Col. Reilly and Major Shelly were corro-
borated by other officers. He did not know what other
course the Government could have taken. It was the
usual course to collect evidence before corning to a final
decision as to the desirableness of instituting a formal in-
quiry. But in the meantime General Beatson was ac-
quainted with what was going on. The hon. gentleman
said that Gen. Beatson was atipfficer ofmerit. No doubt.
And it was very painful tha charges should be made
against an officer of that description, and every one must
desire that they should turn out to be unfounded. But
when they were made, and there was a prima facie
case for inquiry, it was the bounden duty of the Govern-
ment not to suppress them ; but to take such proceed-
ings with regard to them as might enable them to decide
whether it was desirable to proceed further. That was
the course they had taken.
Mr. I. BUTT said that the hon. gentleman had said
that the War-office had a prima facie case against
General Beatson. Why, then, had he not been placed
before a court-martial ?
MG:. PEEL did not say that there was a prima facie
case against General Beatson.
Mr. BUTT was bound to accept the hon. gentleman's
denial ; but if he did not speak the words he had imputed
to him, he must believe that some one else spoke them
out of his mouth. The hon. gentleman had said that
General Vivian had not acted on anonymous authority,
but on that of General Shirley. He wanted to know
whether the statements in the letter from General Vivian
to General Smith were made on that authority ? He
was in hopes that the hon. gentleman the Secretary for
War would have cleared up these matters, but he re-
gretted to say that, instead of doing so, he had put
General Shirley in a bad position, and General Vivian
in a worse. The hon, gentleman had quoted from a
document which emanated from the War-office, and yet
he said that the War-office was not responsible for it,
but that document was signed "E. W. Ramsay," who
was the private secretary to Lord Pane:Jure, the Secre-
tary at War. Colonel Beatson had written over and
over again to the War-office, requesting to be informed
who was bis accuser, and he received in reply a letter,
in which Lord Panmure stated that he did not know
from what source the lieu:6 :ant-general derived his in-
formation. Here, then, was an officer like General
Beatson, high in the service of his country, accused
upon anonymous information, that anonymous informa-
tion being acted upon by Lord Panmure, and yet no in-
formation forthcoming as to the author of that informa-
tion, or as to whether the Government believed the
charges made against him bad been disproved. What
he (Mr. Butt) charged upon the Government was this,
that the writer of the information was still withheld from
the person he bad slandered. He did not deny that the
information was given to General Shirley, and that he
communicated it to General Vivian ; but he complained
that the man who had been cruelly wronged was still
deprived of that information to which he was entitled.
The Minister of War, when he got the report ought to
have consulted General Vivian upon the matter, Gene-
ral Vivian being at that time in England ; but now he
had been five months under the imputations that had
been cast upon him, and no intimation had been con-
veyed to him from any of the authorities whether or not
these charges had been disproved. Hitherto, the army
bad been looked upon as the soul of honour, but these
things, which the honourable gentleman (the Under-
Secretary for War) ha I stated were usual in the army
were inconsistent with that honourable spirit of fair play
which he believed to have been the characteristic of the
English army, and which he was sure was the charac-
teristic of English gentlemen. (Cheers).
Colonel FRENCH wished to make an appeal on this
subject to the noble lord at the head of the Government
who was always ready to supply the omissions and to
atone for the faults of his colleagues. Nothing had
been said exculpatory of General Beatson, and he
wished to know whether the Government would allow
matters to remain in that state ? He thought it would
be but common justice on the part of the Government to
state whether or not the charges which bad been made
against General Beatson had been disproved. As to
the War-office itself, he thought it had proved a serious
impediment to the successful working of the noble lord's
Government.
Lord PALMERSTON said he thought it must be clear
!rem the discussion that the resolution which had been
proposed by the hon. and learned gentleman the mem-
ber for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) could not be adopted,
because it did not apply to the case. The facts which
had been adduced appeared to him (Lord Palmerston) to
exempt from blame those who had been parties to them.
(Hear.) It appeared that when Gen. Shirley went to in-
spect the fort at Shumla, representations of a grave cha-
racter were made to him in reference to the conduct of
Gen. Beatson, and it would have been highly blameable
on his part if, as a general officer receiving such informa-
tion, he had concealed it, and not given to the officer
c mcerned an opportunity of refuting it. (Hear.) With
regard to Gen. Beatson, her Majesty's Government knew
full well the circumstances of the distinguished career he
had run before he was employed upon the service in which
the present question arose, and it was with sincere regret
that her Majesty's Government found, from circum-
stances that occurred, that it was impossible to continue
him in the service he held. Ho resigned that post, as of
c elm he had a perfect right to do so. Gen. Shirley was
informed of charges against Gen. Beatson, which it was
of course his duty to make known to Gen. Vivian,
What was Gen. Vivian to do ? Was he to put them aside
or to to content himself with sending them to the War-
office in England ? As he was in communication with
the officer in command at
,Shumla, he was perfectly
right to order an inquiry in order that the result
might be made known to the War-office at home. It
had been said that General Vivian should have made
a representation to General Beatson, but the honour-
able gentleman the Under Secretary for the War
Department had given due reasons why that course
should not have been adopted. The honourable
aed leareed gentleman opposite (Kr. Butt) had stated
that when the War-office considered that a prima
facie case against Gen. Beatson had been made out, they
should have brought him to a court-martial. He (Lord
Palmerston) disputed that proposition altogether. They
might have a prima facie case against an officer, and still
find that it would be very wrong to bring him to a court-
martial. They should undoubtedly ascertain first whether
there was sufficient ground for such a course. (Hear.)
Nothing was better known in the service than this, that
when there was a prima facie case against an officer, in-
quiries were made for the purpose of ascertaining whether
or not there should be a court-martial. In this case it
was impossible to summon a court-martial when General
Beatson was in England, and it was absolutely necessary
to make further inquiries at Shumla. Although be made
allowances for the nice feelings of honour that influenced
General Beatson in repudiating what he conceived to be
an unjust imputation, and allowances also for those
friends of his who would not wait for the result of the
official investigation, but called upon that house to inter-
fere pending the result of the official investigation Oat
was going on, yet he ditnot think that the impatience of
General Beatson's frien 'or the natural feelings of Gen.
Beatson himself, were sufficient grounds for that house
to go upon. The house, he thought, would agree with him
that it would be but right to wait until the War-office
had ascertained whether there were sufficient grounds to
proceed further against General Beatson, or whether the
War Minister should 'be satisfied that no further steps
should be taken upon the anonymous information that
had been received. (Hear, hear.) Supposing the accusa-
tions to have been entirely anonymous, it would have been
the duty of those to whom they were communicated, out
of respect for General Beatson's character, to bring the
matter under the consideration of the authorities at
home. But it had been distinctly stated by the Under-
Secretary for War that in this case the accusations were
not anonymous, became they proceeded from General
Shirley, an officer high in the service, and that General
Vivian, who received them from General Shirley, con-
ceived it to be his duty to forward them to the War-
office. As far, therefore, as the War-office was concerned,
the accusations were not anonymous, for they came from
two officers high in the service, and upon those repre•
sentatione the War-office was bound to act. The War-
office received the a.ecu•ations from two responsible offi-
c, rs, transmitting them in the order in which they them-
selves had received them. (Hear, hear, hear.) The
matter was then put in train in the only way in which
the War•office could proceed, and there was, therefore,
really no charge against the authorities. The hon. and
gallant gentleman opposite (Colonel French) bad stated
that the War-office was a mortification to her Majesty's
Government. He (Lord Palmerston) could say, with-
out any hesitation whatever, that he felt exceedingly
obliged to Lord Panmure for the zealous manner
in
which he had performed his duties ; and it would be
sufficient to contrast the state of the army when it went
out to the Crimea with its condition when it returned,
to show in how admirable a manner that noble lord had
discharged his duties. (Hear, hear.)
Colonel LINDSAY thought the speech of the noble
lord was a premium upon anonymous slander. If these
anonymous attacks were to be listened to no one would
be safe.
The CHANCELLOROf the EXCHEQUER thought
the gallant gentleman who had just spoken bad misun-
derstood and unintentionally misrepresented what had
fallen frbm the noble' lord. The theory
Of anonymous
letter writing was not in any respect applicable to the