The Sun.
London, England, 1845-09-15 00:00:00

CASE OF LIEUT. HOLLIS.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUM.
Sin,—ln my letter of the 30th ult., addressed "to Viscount
Jocelyn, M.P., Secretary to the Right Hon. the Board of
Control," (which, together with my petition_ to Parliament,
you did me the favour to insert in your paper of the 3d inst.),
the following words are attributed to his Lordship as forming
part of his statement in the House of Commons relative to
my case :—lt was " found necessary to put Lieut. Hollis
under arrest while out on his voyage to India. Lieut. Hollis
broke that arrest—a very grave offence, and used harsh lan-
guage to his superior officer."—Morning Herald, Aug. 6.
Yesterday, however, I had the honour to receive a letter
from his Lordship, informing me that "the sentence which it
is your intention to allude to, as having fallen from me in
the course of my reply to Mr. Escott, was (to the best of my
recollection), that Capt. Align= considered himself justified
in placing Lieut. Hollis under arrest on the outward passage
to Bombay, which arrest was broken by Lieut. Hollis (a very
grave military offence), who, at the same time made use of
language which one gentleman would not be justified in
making use of to another, much less a subordinate to a supe-
rior officer. These I believe to be nearly the words I made
use of in the debate, and not the sentence you attribute to
me."
Making every allowance for the difference—if there b 3 any
—between these two statements, they clearly lead to one and
the same conclusion, viz , " that there were just grounds for
the arrest; that it resulted from some misconduct—some
breach of discipline ;" of which I complained in my letter as
being contrary to the facts, and "most prejudicial to the
merits of the case." How can it be said " that Captain
Mignan considered himself justified in placing Lieutenant
Hollis under arrest," when he never preferred the slightest
charge in its justification—when he acted throughout maid
d e—mato anima ?.—and when his whole conduct has been
condemned—not by the Noble Secretary to the Board of
Control, but by the Commander-in-Chief at Bombay—as
" most irritating," " highly objectionable and censurable,"
and " neither called for nor suitable from a commanding
officer ?"
I have the honour to be, Sir, your obedient and obliged
servant, 'WM. HOLLIS,
Late Lieutenant Madras Army.

Camberwell, Sept. 9, 1845.
* " The Court think it their duty, before closing the pro-
ceedings, to advert to the long and irritating correspondence
entered into by Captain Mignan with Lieutenant Hollis, and
continued after that officer had been placed in arrest ; and
further to record their opinion, that the many frivolous com-
plaints preferred by Captain Mignan against that officer, and
particularly the galling, and, as it appears to the Court, un-
warrantable taunt, marked B in page 25 of the Correspond-
ence, in a great measure led to those acts en the part of
Lieutenant Hollis which have been made matter for their in •
vestigation."— Opinion of the Court of Inquiry.

CORONER'S INQUEST.
An inquest was held on Thursday afternoon at the Adam and Eve
public-house, Eton, Bucks, before Mr. John Pacton, one of the de-
puty coroners for the county, on the body of a man named William
Archer, twenty-nine years of age, who had held the situation of
under-gardener for the last four years in the service of Mr. Gran •
ville Penn, of Stoke-park, near Slough, and who met his death by
drowning under the singular circumstances detailed in the following
evidence. Mr. Penn and several of the most respectable inhabitants
of the neighbourhood were present during the inquiry.
The first witness examined was Mr. Charles Stewart Voules,
solicitor, of Windsor, who deposed as follows :—I was returning
to Windsor from a party at Slough, accompanied by Mr. Legh,
between 1 and 2 o'clock on Tuesday mornings and on arriving at
the turnpike-gate in the Slough road, I distinctly heard the screams
of a female. On proceeding further I heard called out, in a
woman's voice, " For God's sake, leave me alone, don't treat me
so; let me get up : don't drag me!" On reaching Willowbrook,
near Eton College, I saw a man (deceased) and woman
standing together quietly in the shade. I asked the man
what the disturbance had been about, when he replied,
" Oh, nothing ; the woman who cried out has just gone on
before, so you are mistaken." I said, " That can't be, for
I can see up to Fifteen Arch-bridge, and no one is there." I
went up to the woman, and asked her what the man had been
doing to her. She was then sobbing, and made no answer. I
again put the same question to her, and she replied, " Nothing."
I then said, " Well, if you are satisfied, we cannot be otherwise."
I told the man he must be a great brute to ill.treat a woman at
such an hour and in such a place, when he replied, " I have not
ill-treated her, and I'll make you prove your words." We then left,
but had not gone more than a few yards when the man came after
us, and after taking hold of Mr. Legh by the eollar, and striking
him a severe blow on the head, breaking his hat, he made several
blows at me, and at last we closed. In the struggle which ensued
he got me on to the bridge, and when close to the low parapet he
exclaimed, "D— you, I'll throw you over." I tripped him up
and threw him upon his back, having previously sent Mr. Legh for
a constable. I let him get up on his promising to go quietly, and
on his telling me his name and who he worked for. He was no
sooner on his legs than be again attacked me, and I a second time
got him down, and so kept him until Mr. Legh returned with one
of the Eton police, to whom I gave him in charge. When we
reached the Chrlstophor Inn, at Eton, on our road to the station-
house, I saw the man put his hand into his pocket and take out
something, I told the policeman to open his hand, when he found
in it a gardener's knife. I said, " What do you mean by that, you
rascal V The man turned to the policeman and said, " This per-
son knocked me down in the road, cut me with this knife, and
robbed me of my watch, and he has got it." When we reached
Perkins's house, the Inspector of the Eton police, I said to him,
" Now, if the inspector knows you, you may go." He then ran
off down the road, the constable after him, and just as they got out
of my sight I heard a splash in the water. (The water referred to
is a mill-stream, running nearly parallel with- the Thames,
very deep in the centre, and about 25 feet in width.) The
constable came back, and said," He is gone through the water."
I then ran down to the stream, but as I could neither hear nor see
anything of him, I thought he had escaped across to the osier bed.
We then got a candle and lantern, and searched about for upwards
of an hour without discovering any traces of him, and it was our
opinion, from seeing some fresh wet weeds on the banks of the
stream, that he had got out at that spot and escaped. I think the
man was sober.
Henry Carter, the constable who took the deceased into custody,
stated that when the man started off towards the water he followed
' him and saw him go in, over a camp-shedding (or wharf). Wit-
ness afterwards saw him walking in the shallow water, close by the
camp-shedding, a distance of 15 feet, and he then returned and
gave the alarm that the man had got away. Witness was present
during the search.
Mr. Granville Penn rose, and stated to the deputy-coroner that
he had attended the inquest, not only as being the master of the
unfortunate deceased, but as one of the magistrates of the county ;
and as the man had met with his death while in the custody of
the police he begged to suggest, in order that a correct conclusion
might be arrived at, that the jury should view the place at which
he had fallen into the water.
This was assented to, and on the return of the coroner and jury,
Samuel Perkins, inspector of the Eton police, was examined,
and corroborated the evidence of Mr. Voules and Carter as to the
search which was made to discover the man. This witness also
deposed to the finding of the body at seven o'clock the same
evening by means of drags, nearly in the centre of the stream,
where the water was about S feet deep.
Mr. William Legh, one of the magistrates of Windsor, who was
with Mr. Voules at the time he was attacked by the deceased,
was then examined. He stated that it was his impression, from
what the policeman said, who had seen the man go into the water,
that he had got out again and escaped across the gardens of the
neighbouring houses.
This being the whole of the evidence, and the deputy 'Groner
having summed up, the room was cleared for the jury to consider
their verdict.
The jury, after having been in consultation for half an hour,
returned a verdict of " Accidentially drowned while escaping from
the custody of a police-constable."
The deceased received an excellent character from Mr. Penn,
who stated that he had lived in his, service for upwards of four
years, and that during that time he had been a most quiet, peace-
able, and industrious man, supporting his widowed mother en-
tirely out of his earnings, and was much respected by his neigh.
hours and friends.
A subscription was made in the room for the mother of the de-
ceased, the jury and witnesses handing over the fees they were en.
titled to to a relative of the poor woman for presentation. The
man's watch, money, and other property found upon him, were
given to the same party for the mother by the deputy coroner.