The Tenth Hussars.
The Times, 1824-04-10T00:00:00

Mr. Battier has ub hed a replytoSir Herbert Taylotrs letter, which he analyzes with great spirit. He givesflat contradictions to the staUiements of Colonel Quentin -and. Lor1ldoidoliderry. wesubjoin thiree principal passages of ?Jr.-iattierAs statement:- . Military xeaders do not Xequire to be told, that the Commander- ia-Chief's orders are . strict and.'ereriptory with reard to the in- asruction andithe drill of ongg'o icersjoining.regiments- .WiEa5t not then excite some-little durpris4?rrhen they are told, that Colonel Sir A3eprg; Quentin, the. then comiianding officer 'f the-lOth-Hus- ears,ordered mneon twodiff er6ntoccosions to attend no drills, no pa- mics, no duties wbatever ? If onr joiuing the. regiment I could not boat of much proficiency a.;acayalry.offlcer; wasitfobeexpected that I shouldattain itbyinspiration? Orwas'itlikely tbat the:smanldpor tion of knowledge vhich I could lay 1iiim tbo woula be improved 4nd augrnented by an order frotm the commanding offlcer to do no duty whatsoever, and to attend to no. dzill, nor instruictibon that might enable me to learn that dutv ? I call upon 3Major- .General Sir Colquhoun Grant to corroborate the assertion I uave just mnade. He, at least, possessed judzment to see through 'the cQDspiracy formed against me,' and feeling and princple to despise it. I a ppeal to him byr his -frankness as a soldier, by his honourable feeling as a gentleman, and by his candour. atid amuth as a loan, to conSrm'my statement. I bring to liis retoll,e tion, that on the last'of "trie two occasions alluded to, I caUed On ira at his apartments. in the Royal Barracks Dublin and that th-riand there, in the presence ofAla3or England, his aide.Ae-.Amp, I distinctly ieported to hin the fact I havce lust related. I stated, ,that for'two distinct periods, each compnsing the space of six -eeks. and upwards, I was expressly ordered by Sir George Quehtirm *to attend to no .drilLs, and to do no duty with the regiment; and I nvrO. fir the purpose of impressing this event more forcibly on Sir C. Gnats mind, recaU to his memory the conversation which he ield with me in reply.' He significd his intention of inspecting the zegmert- in a few days, and stated that he would examine me alor og with other officers as to my proficiency in my riding drills, .:anduiy ethe duties. I then took mydeparture. I a a I- -now offer some remarks on the defence set up by Lord London- .Aerry for his conduct on thp evening of the 24th when his lordship 'din&te a tEie mesa. LT the 'first place his lordship states his entire iporance of -the proceedings wbich had incurred his Royal High- essdis leasurc .and of the reproof conveyed to the officers con- ettar. 3On this head I have to observe the very greatimprobability, .not to say the utterd impossibilitv, of his lords'in's ',entire igno- I e _p=11*0the pioceedings.alludedlto were matter of public notoriety; -they vcre as glitring as the noon-day sun; they were freely dis- cussed in places of public resort; they were tie topic of conversa- *iorm in the circles of private society ; they were made the theme of ribaldry' aoug the very outcasts of society, whom the officers of the 1iDth on these occasions patronized as their xelected confi- dent,, 'd anethe chosen depositaries of their secrets. But, -sowever, as the most no'le marquis professes total ignorance ef ie tamstances that ercurred in his own regiment, and that were so lain asil palpable to all the world beside, I beg to ask himA a uw quesions. Previouslyto his lordship orderiignmeout of the imess-room on the 24th, did not Sir George Quentin submit for his 1ordsbip's perusal the er.tire of the documents relating to mne ? and Nhich comprised my report to Sir C. Grant, together wir.a tbe Commander-in-Chief's reproof to the officers concerned ? Did not his lordship retain these papers in his possession for an en- tire day ? and on the foUowing morning, when he returned them to Sir George Quentin, did he not state that lie had made himself .ma3ter of their contents? Verbun s spin'tL - g With regard to the officers of the IOch at large, I have little to a?L. Sir Herbert Taylor lhas admitted, that their conduct was most unjustifiable, and His Royal Highness lhas more tlan once expressed hig disapprobation. Why the Commander in Chief shoudd have oc.Casion to express his aispleasure at the conduct of an3y of his; 'ifficers more than once, is a question that will perhaps remanil for ever unanswered. The nmilitary secretar has endeavouiad to establish, that the officers of the l0th, atlength convinced of thr impropriety of conduct, subsequently endeavoured to atone for mistaken prejudice. 'Tis true, that by the command of his Royal Highness, they made their formal and af- fected obeisance ; tey honoured mc withl their official salaani ! fixt where was the altered conduct that might have redeemed past error? Where was the courtesy that uright have aflayed wounded f.oeings P Where the genuine politene"s that marks the gentleman, and- might have given some pretensions to husianity, to honour, and wse's >? The mandate of authority enforced the ceremonious ac- ,know gi-gnent * the hand of Vower compelled the lips to move, whil*t f;'cling was frozen in the neart. It was, indeed, a laughable aned pitia2Ale sight to see these high spirited gentlemeni, whomn their own good *tbcling could not induce to act with conimon decency, fbrced at lxzt to obey a power which yet they had not sense to resecst. ' TITE TENTH HUSSgAIRg.