The Sun.
London, England, 1867-08-07 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESOAY EVENING, AUGUST 7, 1867,

ducting the affairs of the House of -Commons. I propose
to follow the precedents—fortunately, rare precedents—in

cases of this kind, and on Thursday, when I move that
the amendments of the Lords be considered, I Shall take

the opportunity, before asking the House to consider them
seriatim, of taking a general view of these amendments,

and I shall state the course which Her Majesty's Govern-

ment are prepared to recommend the House to follow.

THE SIMLA COURT-MARTIAL.
Mr. BRETT called attention to the Simla Court-martial,
and moved an address to the Queen, praying that its find-

ing may be reconsidered with a viewtothereinstatement

of Captain Jervis. In a lengthy and circumstantial re-
view of the papers laid before Parliament he traced the
history of the dispute between Sir W. Mansfield and Capt.
Jervis from its origin, contending that at an early period
Sir W. Mansfield's treatment of Capt. Jervis had been

manifestly actuated by strong personal dislike, which, com-
bined with the false charges of fraud he preferred against
him in a vindictive spirit, and of which the Court-martial
had righteously acquitted him, had provoked him into the

acts of military disobedience of which ho had been found
guilty, and which Mr. Brett did not attempt to justify

Somo of the extracts which Mr. Brett read from the mem:,

rands of Sir W. Mansfield as to the conduct of his house-

hold created much laughter, but he was loudly cheered
when he commented in strong and indignant language on

General Mansfield's conduct, on the subtlety with which
ho had laboured to convict Capt. Jervis, on the manner in
which he had given his evidence before the court-martial,

on tho vindictiveness with which he insisted that the

court-martial should reconsider their first finding, and on
the flagrant injustice of his General Order in which he

reiterated the charges which had been disproved, passed a
judgment in his own favour, and inflicted the punishment
which the court-martial had reported ought to be remitted.
Of the despatch of the Duke of Cambridge and the memo-
randum of the Judge-Advocate-General he spoke with ap-
probation, but insisted that full justice would not be done

unless Captain Jervis were restored to his rank, for he re•

pudiated with scorn the offer of £l,BOO as a salve to his

honour.

General PEEL expressed deep regret that the Govern
ment had consented to produce the Duke of Cambridge's
despatch to Gen. Mansfield—in every word of which,
however, he concurred, and for which he was responsible,
having given his sanction to it as Minister of War. But if
he had expected this private and confidential communica-
tion of the Duke's opinion for the General's future guid-
ance to be made public, he should rather have advised Sir
W. Mansfield's recall—a conrso which, indeed, had been
discussed, but which the Commander-in-Chief thought
was not called for, as there was nothing illegal in General
Mansfield's conduct. He pointed out also that if the Duke
had intended it to be published he would have taken
means for that end without leaving it to a chance motion,
and that its publication would put an end to all this kind
of confidential communications. Reminding the house
that General Mansfield's wrong did not make Captain
Jervis right, and that from the treatment of General Mans.
field it must be assumed that the Horse Guards had fairly
considered Captain Jervis's case and had done him justice,
he earnestly pressed on the house not to consent to the
motion unless it was prepared to deny that the Crown
had a right to dispense with the services of any officer
without assigning a reason. This dictum was received
dissent, d,
haatndt,nereprilgyhintg
wasto
e
responsibility of the Ministry,
them,with
exorcised s oGme
ne rnaedlxe: Pr eetsehli: up
os
and that this motion, therefore, was virtually a cen-
sure on the Minister of Nar. He warned the house
that in assenting to it the house must be prepared
to reopen the proceedings of ovary court-martial on every
private in the army.
Mr. DUTTON, speaking as a connexion of Sir Wm.
Mansfield, defended his conduct, denying that ho had been
moved by dislike to Capt. Jervis, and asserting that it was
the captain's own fault that ho had not cleared himself of
these charges without a court-martial ; that the general
would have referred the dispute 'to a civil tribunal had it
been possible ; and that it was with groat pain ho had felt
himself compelled to disregard the recommendation to
mercy.
Lord W. HAY, concurring in the Duke of Cambridge's
despatch, and admitting that General Mansfield was re-
prehensible, declined to acquit Capt. Jervis of all blame,
pointing out that the court had not "honourably" acquitted,
only simply "acquitted" him—a distinction well under-
stood, and corresponding to the difference between " not
guilty" and " not proven"—and that there had been no
answer given to the charge that ho had used the general's
stores for the entertainment of his own friends.
Mr. KARSLAKE declined to support the motion on the
general ground that it was not the function of the house
to reopen the decisions of competent tribunals.
Mr. HOWES defended Sir W. Mansfield.
After some remarks from Sir P. O'BRIEN,
Sir J. PAKINGTON, accepting the full responsibility
for the conclusion of the War-office in Captain Jervis's
case, defended the publication of the Commander-in-Chief's
despatch, which had been done after great consideration
and by a decision of the Cabinet, maintaining that it was
not a privato letter, but a public State paper, and that its
publication was necessary to enable the public to under-
stand the justice of the case. His first answer to the mo-
tion was that justice had already been done, and that he
1 could not have urged unless this despatch had been pub-
-1 llshed ; and his second answer was that the house was not
competent to revise the sentence of the court-martial and
the decision of the legal authorities hero and in India, a
course which he earnestly deprecated as highly inconve-
nient and improper. Pointing out that the court-martial
had not "honouiably acquitted" Captain Jervis, he dis-
cussed his conduct to show that it would not have been
p
o
m
d
tcrmaookspmel
esoei
rrrns.
et
Bwloi
ußhsrsoeEyt
krren
eesishth,,aea reinstate
hadhb ie menu,
ndwhichsonn otet
consulted, and
him,aa sn dt haond opinionthe contended t oha t all the
sub-
stantial
recommen-
dation to mercy virtually carried out by giving him the
compensation of 4800.
injustice had
gwgib eetshet
entdh
edaonn done by
The Marquis of HA.RTINGTON, though concurring in
the censures on General Mansfield's want of judgment, ac-
quitted him of personal feelings, and gave him credit for
having acted entirely on public grounds. Lookingat all the
circumstances of the case, ho was of opinion that no sub-
stantialavciost srot
oremovaltritoi
motion,
from the army, and that it would be most unwise in the
pt.
houser. to
o T w interfere
A y
s u
decisione of a
amendmenttjh:i
and the military authorities.
M
so that it should run in the form of an address, r • the'
Queen to carry out the court-martial's recommendation to
mercy, and made some observations on the conduct of the
taken
Nt
hOelt
transaction, T I 1 C O E ,
awnldt
after explainedsom e
observations
rva tshareheinns f
from
India-office in paying the compensation out of tho Indian
funds, which called up
accepted Mr. Otwa '
on a division wrnasureghjetciten dabbyil6l6(stuop4:BlBo.
maemnetanryd mteontt,hwathiicnh-
Mr. MILL b
muTnniceipraelngmoivneirnngmbennstinoef
ssthewmasetdriospponlsiesd.
troduced at an early period of this session) for the better
of, and the House
adjourned at half-past 1 o'clock.

so magnificent, holding most inflated ideas of his own
importance,was n ot likely to be checked or cooled down
by the influence of his wife. The memoranda drawn
up by his Excellency for the guidance of his aides-
de-camp are fine specimens of what men may come
to when thrust suddenly and unexpectedly into a

position of high dignity and power. His Royal
Highness characterises these orders as documents
such as had never before come to his notice, in the

propriety of which he is unable to concur, and as
involving duties which could in no way increase the
measure of any officer's liability to military criminal
law. It is a well known fact that those who exer-

cise with the greatest severity the official power with
which they may be clothed, who exact the most
rigid and unhesitating obedience, are often the first to
question and rebel against the commands of their
own superiors. Sir WILLIAM MANSFIELD has been
proved to have brought on the army a deplorable
scandal. He has been shown to have acted through-
out with an amazing want of judgment—he has
driven an officer to ruin, by trumping up false charges
fatal to that officer's honour, and using the intern-
_

perance he had thus excited in the man he disliked
to blight all his prospects—then urging as a full justi-
fication for himself the repeated, prolonged, violent
insubordination of the gentlemen thus accused as
the most conclusive reason for destroying him.

wawftilolenrigethotihe
opinions of his
Yetwhen his Royal Highness, SirWILLI/01's superior,
rnepcllyeairn
alasntgyuleagoef
are patent to all
E
comments on the case, shsio(t
then
thinlygerrorslaEngland),
i)
ghonfe
does
e notc
contempto course r ce
own commander. There is something
ngraollsesglyeeabas-
surd in what Sir WILLIAM MANSFIELD
being his conviction of the course proper for him to
adopt. He says :—" My view has been that it was
for the Commander-in-Chief simply to elevate him-
self above the whole matter, as if he were not a
party concerned." Either the infatuation or the
hypocrisy of this is beyond the comprehension of
ordinary minds. Here is a man who has pursued
with a rancour that imperilled a splendid position,
and what might have been a great career, to gratify
the most paltry spite, talking of achieving the most
difficult accomplishment of the calmest and greatest
judicial. mind. If Captain JERVIS had given his
Excellency tough mutton and indigestible pickles,
he is very properly punished, for only tough mutton
and indigestible pickles, aided by a long residence
in India, could have so lowered the mental calibre
of the Indian Commander-in-Chief as to betray
him into so gross a scandal. What would Sir
WILLIAM have said to the boy, who, by crackers,
tinpots, and other means by which juveniles worry
dogs, insisted on destroying poor Tray, because
by such worry the brute had been driven to
bite ? No doubt the boy would have dwelt
on the bite as the conclusive reason for the execu-
tion, and dogs that do bite ought to be destroyed ;
but then all dogs will bite under certain circum-
stances. It is quite evident from Sir WILLIAM'S
answer to H.R. II that the Duke could very easily
have extracted a bite from him. Had the English
Commander-in-Chief written in plain terms his
opinion of Sir WILLIAM MANSFIELD he would have
probably stung that officer to the quick, and he
would probably have taken a " JERVIS" mode of
expressing his dissatisfaction. But Sir WILLIAM'S
insubordination would have assumed in his eyes quite
a different aspect. It would then be the high spirit
of an English gentleman resenting an unmerited
insult. We would have heard nothing of the in-
subordination of private soldiers never being over-
looked, and a different law for them and for the
officers. It is also an extraordinary factthat a clever
man, such as is General MANSFIELD, should put for-
ward the opinions of the officers by whom he was
surrounded, such as the Judge-Advocate-General,
the Adjutant-General, and the Deputy-Adjutant-
General. He must have known what all men
know, that these gentlemen merely reflect the
othpeiynionhsaveof
nethegveCatomminatenvdeeart-ini-aChitehfe, where
but where the Chief's feelings are deeply
Y
in-
terested. We are all aware what the evidence was of
a ph
i epnuttly,-e J
Supremeu Ad e-
cou artt of 'ttaw,hsTateoeln his
oatthat
he had no opinions of his own apart from the dge-vocCr, e
Calcutta,
at whose breath he lived! What
then can be the. use of bringing forward such testi-
mony in support of his case? Had he been influenced
by the exalted sentiments to which he pretends, he
would have resigned on receipt of the Duke's de-
spatch. The words of the English Judge-Advocate-
General were quoted by the Duke with his entire
concurrence that the Court-martial censured by
General MANSFIELD had performed their difficult
functions with marked impartiality and sound judg-
ment, and Sir WILLIAM is directed, as an act of
justice to the officers composing it, to make known
this opinion to them. This pleasant pill his Excel-
lency swallowed, which we hope may prove an
antidote to the indigestible pickles.
But there is a moral, and there is an end to this
story, which we wish to arrive at. Is Captain
JERVIS to be ruined? and is Sir WILLIAM'S observa-
tion to stand on
record, backed by this extraordi-
nary instance of its truth, that there is one law for
commissioned and another for the uucommissioned,
and one law for the commander and another for
lie commanded ?—Anglo-American Times.

reputation for veracity, he suddenly dragged his

hands from his trousers' pockets, and in doing so
dragged out a shalt pipe. The pipe fell with much
noise on the floor, which attraetel the attention of
the magistrates, but he managed to slip it in again,
and appeared as unconcerned as possible. Defend-
ant had to pay the usual fine in such cases.

The Universal Code of Signals.

More than twelve years ago the British Board of

Trade engaged in a work which well became Eng-
land as the leading commercial country of the world.
That work but awaits the adoption of a few mari-
ti►ne nations to be complete, for it will then be uni-

versal. The Commercial Code of Signals for the
Use of All. Nations was prepared and first published
in April, 1857. It was framed by a committee

appointed by the Board of Trade in July, 1855, to
investigate the subject. Previous to the introduc-
tion of this code MARItYATT'S system was in general
use. his system was based on numerals, which
gave a range of ten flags, a number insufficient for
supplying a distinguishing signal to each national

merchant vessel as well as for communication

where the great object was to make the code

universal. Nor was the range inadequate only,
for, compared with the present plan, it was

clumsy and inefficient, although to Captain MAR-
RYATT is due a great advance in the power of sig-

nailing--an advance that has been of unspeakable
utility for many years. The objects sought by
the committee were to form a comprehensive, clear,

and inexpensive code, to embrace the greatest range,

so as to render it applicable for international commu-
nication ; to make the signal complete in one hoist ;
to limit the number to four flags, so arranged
that the nature of the communication might be
designated by the number and shape of the signs
employed. Thus two flags together, denote urgent
and important signals, three flags together, relate to
general topics of information and inquiry ; four
flags belong to geographical and vocabulary signals

and ships' names. Beyond these no signals are
required, the two Answering Pennants simply signi-
fying " yes" and " no." To obtain the necessary

range the Committee threw aside numerals in
favour of the alphabet. They estimated the requi-

site number of signals at not less than 70,000.

and set to work to secure that number by the

simplest method practicable. They found that a
range, amounting to 78,612 signals, could be given
by 18 flags, limiting the hoist to 4. The table
showing the number of cominunications, of which
signs are capable, is curious. From 18 flags can be
extracted in a hoist of 2-306 signals ; in a hoist of
3,-4,896 ; in a hoist of 4-73,440 ; and if an extra
flag be addel to the hoist, making the number 5, the
communications swell at once to the prodigious total

of 1,028,160. The 306 communications obtained by
hoisting any two of the eighteen, being the most
simple, were used by the committee to denote urgent
and important signals. The 4,896 communications
obtained by the combination of any three of the 18,
were given to general topics of information and in-

quiry, leaving the 73,140 to signify the names of
ships and of places. Having laid down this simple
plan, they proceeded under the same influence to
mark distinctively each flag. Leaving the vowels
out of the alphabet they took the 18 consonants, and
named each flag after each one of them. This scheme
brought into use two flags more than MARRYATT'S,
if we except the code signal, which simply denotes
the system, being hoisted under the ensign, but can
be dispensed with when this code becomes universal.
Of these 18, one is the Bargee, four are Pennants,
and the remaining 13 are square flags. By adopt-
ing these shapes great additional poweris obtained.
Thus, for instance, in signals of two flags,
the Bargee uppermost, represents " Attention,"
a Pennon/ uppermost " compass" signals, while
a Square flag uppermost means " Danger." When
used in the four-flag hoists, the Bargee or the
pennant, or the square flag uppermost, refers to
geographical, to vocabulary, or to ship names. So by
this co le the nature of a signal is apparent by the
shape of the uppermost flag. A glance at the sys-
tem laid down will show how beautifully it com-
bines simplicity with comprehensiveness. Distin-
guishing pennants arc abolished, and the sailor
perceives, by unmistakeable indications, even
before the colours can be seen, what is meant.
A ship at a great distance runs up two flags, and
the little dots flutter at the gaff. A telescope shows
the character of the hoist—a moment's steady look
the form. If the uppermost flag be square the story is
half told, and the duty of the commander is clear ;
the signalling vessel is in danger and calls for aid.
It matters not to what nationality she belongs, the
language is universal, and will, we doubt not, be
soon understood by all nations ; and he is bound,
if possible, to give the assistance required. If the
Burgee flies uppermost the signalling ship wishes to
attract attention, but there cannot be Urgency
or danger implied, and the captain is at liberty to
continue or alter his course at his discretion till be can
get within range of distinguishing colour. Thus the
first flutter of the flags before their colour is
known, and therefore their alphabetical designation,
signifies by two clear indications what is intended :
first, by the number of the hoist ; second, by the
shape of the uppern?ost flag. The committee, to whom
the world owes this admirable code, was mainly com-
posed of men of nautical experience ; the three mem-
bers appointed by the Board of Trade, we regret to
say, are now dead. liesides those three, the Admiralty
appointed one, Trinity Rouse another, LLOYD'S
Committee sent two, the General Ship Owners'
Society and the Liverpool Ship Owners' Association
each supplied one. WALTER FARQUIIAR LARKINS,
Esq., of the Board of Trade, was the secretary, and
it devolved upon him to complete the labours of the
committee. The first step after perfecting the code
was to induce its general adoption, for the ocean is
truly cosmopolitan, and any code narrowed
to a nationality is little better than worthless. We
need scarcely say the first nation that took
up the sptein was the United States. In
February, 1860, the Navy Department addressed
to the commandants of navy yards an order to put
the code on board all ships in the American navy.
But that fatal war, the monster that swallowed up
or checked for years so many beneficial schemes, in-
tervened. We believe that Professor ROGERS, a
native of Philadelphia, became deeply interested,
and lent his aid in the promotion of the code.
Mr. LARKINS was afterwards appointed by the
Board of Trade, at the request of the French
Government, as one of the International Commis-
sion assembled in Paris in 1861-65, upon the ques-
tion of adopting one universal system of signalling
at sea. That Commission decided upon accepting
the English " Commercial Code of Signals " as the
one best adapted for universal use, and Mr.
LARKINS was directed in conjunction with Lieut.
SALLANSBOURGII DE LAMORNAIX, of the Imperial
Navy, to revise the code. This has been carefully
done, and the Signal Book is now published in
English and in French, by Sir WILLIAM MITCHELL,*
and is edited by Mr. LARKINS.
By a decree of the Emperor of the FRENCH, this
code is directed to be used exclusively on board
French vessels and at all semaphore stations on the
French coasts. The code having been adopted for the
British and French marines, the two Govern-
ments conjointly, and through their representatives
abroad, urged its general adoption in an identical
note addressed to the United States, and to the
principal European maritime Powers. To the parent
nations was confided the task of explaining and
translating together the code with those speaking
the same language. Thus Portugal was left to deal
with Brazil, and Spain with the South Ameri-
can Republics. The work contains what is not
found in other signal books of modern date, a code of
distant signals for and semaphores, and there is added
a code for boat signals, regulations for preventing
collisions at sea, too cautionary or storm-warning
signals, for night and day, giving the most com-
plete range, and embracing every requirement for
signalling under every possible position. As was
the case when the carrying of lights by steamers at
sea was some years ago established and enforced by
England and France, we find that, following
the example of these two Powers, most of the
European maritime States have already adopted the
" Commercial Code of Signals," and several are

* This publisher appeared in last Tuesday's Gazette as
a Knight in recognition of his services to maratimo affairs,
more especially in establishing this code.