The Sun.
London, England, 1859-02-11 00:00:00

THE StTN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, F.

extraordinary prejudice, It was dated the 26th
May, 1858, and addressed to Field-Marshal Viscount
Combermere, and contained the following passages :
"In reference to your lordship's letter of the Ist inst., I
beg to inform your lordship, for the information of the Se-
cretary of State for War, why I consider Lieut.-Col. Dick-
son's conduct rendered it imperative for me, as colonel
commanding the regiment, to suggest his removal from it.
" On the 13th Aug., 1856, the regiment under the com-
mand of Lieut.-Col. Dickson marched to Cremorne-gardens
to assist in a sham attack upon Sebastopol, at which some
of the men of the regiment were injured, as well as some
arms, accoutrements, and clothing lost or damaged. On the
3d Oct., 1856, Col. Dickson received from the committee of
the Wellington College, £79 for compensation, to be
awarded to the men injured on that occasion, and £4O 12s.
for the arms, accoutrements, and clothing lost or damaged.
It has latelycome to my knowledge that a sumof £2l2s. ld.
out of the £4O 12s. for paying the damages stated above,
although nearly two and a half years have elapsed, still re-
mains unpaid."
Now, the facts with regard to that matter were
these :—A " benefit" was given at Cremorne-gar-
dens, on behalf of the Wellington College, the per-
formance consisting of a mock attack by the Eng-
lish and their allies, the French, upon the Russians
at Sebastopol. In consequence of a platform giving
way, several men, including some of Col. Dickson's
regiment, were injured, and the managers of the
Wellington College thought it right to pay the
sums mentioned by the Earl of Wilton by way of
compensation. Col. Dickson received the money,
and he disbursed every farthing of it, as would be
proved by vouchers which would be produced. The
second charge in the letter was thus made :
" Col. Dickson, while in command of the regiment, in total
disregard of the rules, customs, and regulations of the ser-
vice, would not allow any mess meeting for auditing the
accounts, althoug,lapplicationsfor the same were repeatedly
made to him by the officers of the regiment, thereby causing
the officers to searate in total ignorance of the state of the
regimental funds, and preventing the mess debts being pro-
perly discharged!?
The learned counsel saidhe should prove that he
was never required to summon a meeting for the
accounts, and that one meeting for that purpose
was held. He now came to the third charge.
" In consequence of such neglect on the part of Lieut.-
Col. Dickson, I ordered a board of officers, composed of the
major and the two senior captains of the regiment, to in-
quire into and examine the mess accounts, by which it
appears that between the period of embodiment, of the regi-
ment in March, 1855, and the formation of the mess in Oct.
in the same year, there was a misapplication of the funds of
the regiment amounting to £152 18s. 41d., the principal
items of which are for an entertainment, which ought to
have been defrayed by the officers of the regiment."
The explanation which the plaintiff would give
with regard to that sum would be explicit and
satisfactory. In July, 1856, the Earl of Wilton
suggested that his daughter, Lady Catherine Eger-
ton, should present to the regiment their new
colours, and when that ceremony took place, a
breakfast was given by the regiment with the
knowledge and sanction of his lordship ; and the
proper vouchers of the sums paid would be laid be-
fore the jury. This entertainment cost £69, which
had been deducted from the £152, and yet with the
knowledge of that fact the Earl of Wilton made
this charge against Col. Dickson, a charge of
an offence which under the Mutiny Act rendered
him liable to four years' penal servitude. The other
items were made up in this way. There was an
" inspection luncheon" when Gen. Pierrepont came
from the Horse Guards to inspect the regiment,
which involved an expense of £33, and also a din-
ner on the occasion of Col. North retiring from the
regiment, on the 4th August, 1855, which cost £36
25., and the balance, a miserable sum of £2 55.,
was spent in purchasing a topographical work
for the use of the officers. In a second letter,
dated the 24th July, 1858, the Earl of Wilton
renewed his charge against Col. Dickson in the fol•
lowing letter to Viscount Combermere :
" My Lord,---Since my accusation against Lieut.-Colonel
Dickson appearing in the public papers, I have received in-
formation from the sergeants of the regiment, and likewise
the regimental agents, that Lieut.-Col. Dickson drew from
the latter, in August, 1855, a sum of £25, which amount
was given by myself and Col. North for the sergeants'
mess, but which, as will be seen by the enclosed certificate,
was never received by the sergeants. I request you to for-
ward this to the Secretary of State for War, that with your
approval and sanction it may be appended to what on a for-
mer occasion I laid before the court."
To this charge Col. Dickson gave the most con-
clusive answer. About the camp at Woolwich there
were a number of poor people—the wives and chil-
dren of the privates. Col. Dickson benevolently
suggested that a " maternity fund" should be esta-
blished for their assistance. A sum of £5O was Rib-

scribed for that purpose—the Earl of Wilton contri-
buting £lo—and the whole of the money was distri-
buted among those people; Col . Dickson never having
had any control over it, and merely signing the
cheques, and handing them to the orderly. At length
Col. Dickson believed that it was the intention of
certain parties, from pique or something worse, to
dismiss him from the regiment without his being
heard, and desirous of having even-handed justice,
he consulted Mr. T. Duncombe, M.P. in July, 1858,
who put a question in the House of Commons to
Gen. Peel on the subject of his case. Afterwards the
Earl of Wilton called upon Mr. Duncombe, and, in
the course of conversation with him, said—" Things
have gone much too far. That is not the worst of

it; for, besides having received and retained the
regimental funds, I have had to pay £5BO for things
he ordered, having been sued, and a writ served on
rat at his instigation." The learned counsel said the
fact was that all the other officers were sued as well
as his lordship, and that the plaintiff never insti-
gated the parties to sue him. Indeed, it would ap-
pear that the Earl of Wilton, finding it extremely
inconvenient to pay the money, suggested that the
other officers shouldbe sued. Mr. James then stated
that a court of inquiry was appointed to inquire
into the charges against Col. Dickson, and that it
held it sittings in August and Sept, but that Col.
Dickson was not heard on oath before it, and that
although it terminated its sittings in Sept. last,
neither the plaintiff nor the public knew at the pre-
sent moment whether the court had made any re-
port. All was kept as secret as diplomacy, and
whether there was or not a report in existence was a
dark, mysterious secret, confined to the archives of
the War-office; but to the surprise of Col. Dickson
he saw in the Gazette of the 28th Dec. last a notifi-
cation to the effect that the Lord Lieutenant of the
Tower had appointed Mr. Samuel Walker to the
regiment, "vice Lieut.-Col. Dickson, displaced,"
thus depriving him of a commission worth between
£3,000 and £4,000. It was under these circum-
stances that Col. Dickson brought this action into
court, in order to vindicate his character from the
gross imputations which had been cast upon it by
the defendant.

Lieut.-Col. Dickson was examined at great length
n support of the above statements.

On cross-examination by the Attorney-General,
he said his first introduction to the Earl of Wilton was
at Chester a good many years tip, when he was
introduced to him by his relative, Lord Ebury.
During the whole time he was h the militia regi-
ment he was always on the most friendly and confi-
dential terms with the Earl of Wilton, and until
the middle of 1857, after the report of the board
with regard to Captain Dickson. he never had the
slightest difference with his lordship. After the
regiment was disbanded, the earl complained that
he had lent the band of the regiment to Sir B.
Hall to play on Sunday in the Regent's-park.
Witness succeeded Col. North as lieutenant-colonel
of the regiment. The first cheque he drew was in
February, 1856. He considered himself president
of the mess, ex gfficio, and that was the reason why
he received and disbursed monies. He took that
office at the request of Captain Brush, who was
inexperienced, and whose accounts had got into
confusion. They tried to allay the impatience of
the claimants upon the regiment , not having suffi-
cient funds to pay all demands. He complained of
the way in which Capt. Dickson kept the accounts,
and Capt. Dickson complained of him. Witness
once met the captain in t'-e Haymarket, and used
violent language to him. Witness also threatened
to report him to the Earl of Wilton. He considered
the conduct of Captain Dickson during the whole
time he was in the regiment as disgraceful to a
Lnidier and a gentleman.
The witness was then cross-examined at consider-
able length as to his differences with Captain
Dickson, and as to tle state of his accounts in con-
nexion with the regiment, and as to his communi-
cations with the Earl of Wilton, both before and
after the disembodiment of the regiment, but
without eliciting any material fact to shake his
examination in chief.

said he ehanqed the note in question for Hatton,
who wrote his name upon it at the time.

Edward Dowell, a very intelligent boy, about 12
years of age, who gave his evidence in a remark-
ably clear manner, said—l met Ca&sseldine on the
day of this robbery at the top of Baldivin's-gardens,
and went with her to Field-lane, to steal a pair of
boots.

Alderman Challis—Did she say she was going
to steal a pair of boots.
Witness—Yes, sir. She said, " Come along ; they
are going to get me a pair of boots." Ford then
joined us, and we then went to the Seven-dials,
where she bought a
.pair of boots for sd. We then
returned to Baldwin's-gardens, and I went into
the skittle ground belonging to Hattton's house, and
they went into the house. When they came out
they said they had picked a pocket of a
pocketbook and a key. This was in the middle of
the day on Tuesday, the Ist of this month. They
then went into the skittle ground. and stayed there
until between 5 and 6 o'clock, when Walsh came
in, and we all went to Fleet-street. Casseldine left
us for a short time, and went away with a gentle-
man, and when she returned she said " Let us go
stoop-buzzing."
Alderman Challis—What did she mean by stoop-
buzzing ?
Tyler explained that it was a practice with fe-
males of robbing gentlemen who fell into their
company under peculiar circumstai ices.
Witness—While we were in F 1( jet-street I saw
a gentleman looking in at a shop. •window. Ford
took out his silk handkerchief, and when he re-
turned to us he said he had a purse,. He produced
a pocket-book, which he said he got from the gen-
tleman's pocket, and gave it to Walsh, who handed
it to Casseldine. We then went further up Fleet-
street, and Walsh took the pocket-book again and
opened it, and took out the £5 note. He called
Casseldine's attention to it, and the water mark
upon it. We returned to Baldwin',s-gardens, where
Walsh took the notes out and gave the pocket-
book to Casseldine. They then went into Jesse
Hatton's house, and, after Walsh, had examined
all the other papers which were in the pocket-
book, Ford and Casseldine threw them away in
the water-closet ; Casseldine, after that, gave the
£5 note to Jesse Hatton.

Alderman Challis—How do you know that ?
Witness—Because I saw Hatton come to the
foot of the stairs with the £5 note in his hand. He
remained there a short time, after which he went
up stairs with the prisoners, and they told a big
boy there to keep me from going up after them.
The big boy went into the water-closet and brought
out some of the papers, which he read, and said one
was a cheque for £4O. He burnt them all in the
gas-light. When the prisoners came down Cassel-
dine gave me 2s. and said she had sold the £5 note
to Jesse Hatton, but that she only got 7s. for it,
because it was a bad one. We then went to the
theatre, and they said if I went with them I must
pay for myself. Before they left Baldwin's-gardens
Hatton asked them what they were going to stand,
and they then ordered some gin, but they left before
it was brought in. I did not go home that night,
but went to a lodging in Fulwood's-rents, which
Ford and Casseldine took me to. •

Walsh—He said the other day we sold the note
for £3 10s., and now he says it was 7s.
Witness—They told me they only got Is., but
when they left Hatton's hems° the big boy called
me a little fool, and said they got £3 10s. for the
note.

Ford—He at first said the girl stole the pocket-
book, and now he says I did it.
Witness—l never said the girl took it.

Casseldine—lt is all false What he has sworn to.
He says he never saw me before the Tuesday, when
he knows he saw me on the Sunday before.
Witness—l did not see you on Sunday, as I was
at school.

Casseldine—Why, you have only just come out
of prison. He has only come up against us now,
Sir, because we would not give him a new pair of
trousers:

Alderman Challis—He has given his evidence
remarkably well.
Police-constable 165 G said—l know all the pri-
soners, and saw them together on the day in ques-
tion. I have seen them all in Hatton's house re-
peatedly at different times, but on this occasion
they were together. I am on duty in Baldwin's-
gardens, and know Hatton's house well. I have
seen many other thieves frequently there. There
is a skittle-ground there, and I saw the witness
Dowell there on the same day with the prisoners.
Tyler—l met Hatton yesterday, and he asked
me if I had found out the " bloke" yet, meaning
the owner of the pocket-book. I said I had, and
he then said, " How do you think we shall get
on ?" I said I did not know, but that the boy
Dowell had sworn he (Hatton) had the pocket-
book, postage stamps, and £5 note. He said it was
all a lie, for he never saw either of the prisoners or
the boy there on that day.
Alderman Challis—l think Hatton must now be
given into custody, for I shall certainly send him
for trial with the other prisoners.
Mr. Lewis, jun., who was in attendance watching
the case for Hatton, said—Hatton is here, sir, and
is prepared to give evidence. The whole matter
rests upon the evidence of a little thief, and I am
sure, sir, you will hesitate in ordering a respectable
tradesman into custody upon the unsupported testi-
mony of a thief.
Alderman Challis—l have felt all along that
that was the only course open to me, and I think
it only fair to Hatton to place him in a position
where he may be able to defend himself.

Mr. Lewis:--Whoever orders him into custody
will of course take the responsibility of such a pro-
ceeding.
Alderman Challis—Oh, certainly. Let Hatton
go into the dock at once.
Hatton was accordingly placed at the bar with
the other prisoners.

The boy- Dowell was then recalled, and on being
cross-examined by Mr. Lewis, said—l joined the
prisoners for the purpose of thieving. I have been
in the habit of going out thieving for the last three
months. I was taken once for stealing a waistcoat,
about a month ago, and had 14 days for it, from
Marylebone Police-court.
Alderman Challis—You have given your evidence,
as I understand it, very clearly indeed, but whether
it is true or false it is not for me to determine.
Witness (crying)—After leaving here, sir, the
last time, three of the prisoners' friends threatened
to stab me.

Alderman Challis—You need not be afraid; they
will not do anything of the kind.
Mr. Lewis made a very energetic appeal on
behalf of Hatton, urging that there was not the
slightest corroboration of the thief's story.
Alderman Challis—l cannot agree with you there,
and I assure you, if I were on the jury trying him,
I would find him guilty on the evidence before me
as it stands. I will take bail for him.
Mr. Lewis—l suppose his own recognisances will
be sufficient.

Alderman Challis—Oh, dear, certainly not. His
own recognisance in £lOO, and two sureties in £5O
each.

The prisoners were then remanded for the at
:endance of the owner of the property.

LAMBETH.-SCLUABBLES AMONGST FIREMEN,

—Mr. Elliott was engaged for upwards of an hour
in investigating a charge of assault preferred by.
Frederick George. Newing, a fireman belonging to
the Brigade, against Thomas Whitaker, the fore-
man to the private fire brigade of Mr. Hodges, the
distiller, and m whose charge a powerful engine
belonging to Mr. Hodges is placed.
Mr. Giffard, the barrister, instructed by Mr.
Humphreys, jun., appeared in support of the com-
plaint; and Mr. Solomon attended for the defence.
Mr. Braidwood, the superintendent, and Messrs.
Henderson and Holloway, the engineers to the Fire
Brigade, were also present to watch the proceedings.
It appeared that for some time past a misunder-
standing has existed between the brigade men and
those belonging to the private engine belonging to
Mr. Hodges, arising in a great measure from the
hasty temper and dictatorial manner of the foreman
belonging to the latter. Some weeks ago the file-
fendant Whitaker had been summoned to this
court, and was convicted in a penalty, for assault-
ing a policeman at a fire, and on that occasion he
was shown to have acted with a want of temper.
The cause for the present complaint arose on the
26th, at a fire that took place in the house of Mr.
Silver, a baker, at Kennington-cross. The complain-
ant was the first to arrive at the fire, and having,
with the assistance of others, thrown several buckets
of water on the fire, managed to confine it to one
room, and was on his hands and knees looking for
the cause or source of the fire, when the defendant,
who had brought his engine, rushed upstairs. On
seeing him, the defendant, addressing him, said,
" Get out of the way, you fire-escape man ; what
can you know about putting out a fire?" The com-
plainant replied that he belonged to the brigade,
and to the Waterloo-station, and exhibited his
number, 90 ; upon which he said he only belonged
to the brigade a few days, caught him by the collar,
and pushed him out of his w 437-
In his cross-examination the complainant ad-
mitted that he was not much hurt, and that it was
the indignity of being treated so that he thought
most of. He also admitted that the defendant
brought with him a hand-pump, an instrument
generally used by firemen in putting out slight fires
in rooms ; and Mr. Holloway, who was called as a
witness,' admitted that this pump had been used to
extinguish the remaining fire in the room.
Mr. Giffard, in his address to the magistrate,
assured the Bench that there was not the slightest'
feeling of vindictiveness on the part of Mr. Braid
Woo(1) the §uPerhltendent of the. brigade, or the