ページの画像
PDF
ePub

a reputable housekeeper in London, unless the surety shall be resident in Scotland,

or Ireland, in which case, if the parties cannot give a reference in London, it will be

sufficient that one of the referees should be a person of the above description resi

dent in Edinburgh or Dublin. PALMERston. Colonel of the Regiment.

26th Jan. 1813.−Paymasters are informed that in ascertaining the average of the Allowance granted in aid of the Mess of Regimental Depôts, if, after dividing the total number of officers present at any time during the quarter by four, (the proportion of one Company,) two or more shall remain, they may be reckoned as another Company, and the allowance issued accordingly.—When an increased allowance becomes chargeable, it is to be calculated from the day on which the additional officers join the Mess, at the rate of 25l. per Company for 365 days.-The same rule as to calculations for the number of days, applies to any variations in the allowance that may arise from any reduction in the number of officers present.

17th February, 1813.−Agents are informed that for periods prior to 25th Dec. 1807, it appears that the fee of two guineas, payable at the Treasury on the coun$ersigning of Clearing Warrants, cannot be dispensed with ; but for all subsequent periods it is presumed the counter-signature of the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury will not be necessary, as the full amount of the allowed regimental charges will have been provlded for as ordinary services of the army.

-

COURTS - MARTIAL.

Copy of a Letter addressed by Field-Marshal his Royal Highness the Commanderin-Chief, to Lieut.-General the Earl of Rosslyn, or General Officer commanding the Kent District, dated Horse-Guards, Nov. 14, 1812.

My Lord, Having laid before the Prince Regent the Proceedings of a General same regiment, had had his nose pulled, and his posteriors kicked, or words to that effect, and making similar assertions in Portugal, to an officer or officers of the same regiment, some time between the 1st June and 31st of July, 18 l l ; and also, in having in his possession, and shewing a paper to Capt. Frederick Campbell, of the same regiment, stating the same unfounded calumny, such expressions and assertions of his, Capt. (then Lieutenant) Hylton's, being infamous falsehoods, and highly prejudicial to Lieut. and Adjutant Conner's character, and injurious to the harmony of the 85th regiment.

Court Martial, held at Hythe, on the 4th September, 1812, and continued by adjourn

ments to the 1st of October following, for the trial of Capt. John Hylton, of the 85th regiment of foot, who was arraigned upon the under-mentioned charges, viz.

1st. For scandalous conduct, highly unbecoming the character of an officer and a gentleman, in having maliciously asserted, in the presence of Lieutenant James Grant, Lieutenant and Adjutant John Conner, and other officers of the 85th regiment of foot, in Portugal, some time between the first of June and 31st July, 1811, that the late Lieut. Lewis Appelius, of the 15th regiment of foot, had pulled Major Nicholas Alexander Mein, of the same regiment, by the nose, and kicked him, (Major Mein,) or words to that effect; and in having afterwards, at Silverhill Barracks, in Sussex, between the 12th and 18th of October, 1811, denied ever making such assertions to any person whatever, in presence of Capt. John Gordon, of the 2d (or Queen's Royal) regiment of foot, who had been sent by Major Mein to enquire if he (Capt. Hylton) had propagated the above calumny; and farther, by making a similar denial to Major Mein in person, between the 12th and 18th of October, 1811, adding, that whoever had given Major Mein information that he (Captain Hylton) had made such assertions, had told a direct falsehood, or to that effect.

2d. For scandalous conduct, highly unbecoming the character of an officer and a gentleman, in maliciously and falsely asserting to Lieut. Wm. Gammell, and other officers of the 85th regiment, some time between the 1st February and 1st of Dee. 1812, at Brabourne Lees Barracks, Kent, that Lieut. and Adjutant Conner, of the

3d. For highly unofficer-like conduct, in falsely and maliciously asserting, between the 1st of June and 31st of July, 1811, in Portugal, that he, Captain Hylton, (then Lieutenant) had caught Lieutenant and Adjutant Conner improperly listening at his (Captain Hylton's) window, or words to that effect, with a view of destroying the said Lieutenant and Adjutant Conner's character as an officer and a gentleman, and prejudicial to the harmony of the said 85th regiment.

4th. For highly improper and unofficer-like conduct in asserting to Ensign Donald Robertson, and other officers of the same regiment, at Brabourne Lees Barracks, Kent, some time between the 1st of May and 1st of December, 1810, that Lieut. Richard White, of the same regiment, was a coward, or words to that effect, and in making similar assertions at Campo Maior, in Portugal, to some officers of the 85th regiment of foot, some time between the 23d June and 20th of July, 1811, and for positively denying having made such assertions before a Regimental Court of Inquiry, in the garrison at Hythe, between the 8th and 14th of July, 1812, and in associating with the said Lieutenant Richard White, in the habits of friendly intimacy, subsequently to having made the above assertions; such conduct being highly injurious to the established rules of the service, and subversive of good order and military discipline.

5th. For disgracefully boxing with Serjeant Joseph Taylor, of the 85th regiment of foot (now a private) between the 1st of September and 20th of November, 1810, at Brabourne Lees Barracks, Kent, when he (the said Joseph Taylor) and Captain (then Lieutenant) Hylton, severally knocked each other down; such conduct being known to the non-commissioned officers and men of the 85th regiment; and highly injurious to Captain Hylton's character as an officer and a gentleman, subversive of good order and military discipline in the 85th regiment of foot, and contrary to the established rules of the service.

Upon which charges the Court came to the following decision:

The Court having most maturely deliberated upon, and most attentively weighed and considered the whole of the evidence and matter that has been brought forward in support of the prosecution, together with what the prisoner has offered in his defence, is of opinion, with respect to the first charge, that he, the prisoner, is not guilty of the same, and the Court doth therefore acquit him, Captain John Hylton, of the said charge; in preferring which the prosecutor does not appear to have been actuated by any improper motive, as the misconception of the prisoner's mode of expression gave rise to the charge. The Court are of opinion that the prisoner, Capt. John Hylton, is guilty of the second charge exhibited against him. The Court are of opinion that the prisoner, Capt. John Hylton, is not guilty of the third charge preferred against him, and the Court doth therefore acquit him, the Prisoner, of the same. The Court are farther of opinion, that the prisoner Capt.J. Hylton, is not guilty of the first part of the 4th charge exhibited against him, namely, highly improper and unofficer-like conduct in asserting to Ensign Robertson, and other officers of the same

Wol. II. F

regiment, at Brabourne Lees Barracks, Kent, some time between the 1st of May and 1st of December, 1810, that Lieut. R. White, of the same regiment, was a coward, or words to that effect, and in making a similar assertion at Campo Maior, in Portugal, to some officers of the 85th foot, between the 23d June and the 20th July, 1811, and the Court doth therefore acquit him of the same; but the Court are of opinion that he, Capt. John Hylton, is guilty of the latter parts of the 4th charge, namely, positively denying having made any such assertion before a Regimental Court of Inquiry, in the garrison at Hythe, which Court was held between the 8th and 14th June, 1812, (instead of the 8th and 14th July, 1812, as set forth by mistake in the special warrant containing the charge,) and in associating with the said Lieut. R. White in the habits of friendly intimacy, subsequent to having made the above assertions; such conduct being highly injurious to the established rules of the service, and subversive of good order and military discipline. The Court are of opinion that the prisoner, Capt. John Hylton, is not guilty of the fifth charge preferred against him, and the Court doth therefore acquit him, the prisoner, of the said charge. From the culpability of the prisoner's conduct, on such parts of the charges as the Court have found him guilty, viz. the whole of the second and the latter parts of the fourth charge, the Court doth sentence him, the aforesaid Capt. John Hylton, to be cashiered. The Court have not failed to remark the palpable falsehoods which the witness Joseph Taylor has been guilty of, and which seemed to have afforded the grounds for the fifth charge against Captain Hylton; and they regret that it does not appear to them they have sufficient jurisdiction to punish the said Joseph Taylor for his evident prevarications and false assertions. The Court consider it necessary to explain their verdict relative to the fourth charge : their intention is to acquit the prisoner, Captain John Hylton, of highly improper conduct, in asserting to Ensign Donald Robertson, &c. &c.; but the Court do not acquit him of asserting. Therefore there exists no contradiction in their finding the prisoner guilty on the latter parts of the said charge, relative to his denial of having made the assertion before the Court of Inquiry alluded to in the fourth charge, and in his associating with the said Lieutenant White on terms of friendly intimacy after having made such assertions, &c. I am to acquaint your lordship that his Royal IIighness was pleased, in the name and on the behalf of his Majesty, to approve and confirm the finding and sentence of the Court. Your lordship will therefore acquaint me with the day on which the Prince Regent's pleasure is made known to the prisoner, Capt. Hylton, as from that day he will cease to receive pay in his Majesty's service. (Signed) FREDERICK, Commander-in-Chief.

Copy of a Letter addressed by Field-Marshal his Royal Highness the Commanderin-Chief, to Lieut.-General the Earl of Rosslyn, or General Officer commanding the Kent District, dated Horse-Guards, 14th Nov. 1812.

My Lord,—Having laid before the Prince Regent the Proceedings of a General ‘Court Martial held at Hythe on the 22d October, 1812, and continued by adjournments to the 30th of the same month, for the trial of Lieut. Edward Powell, of the 85th regiment of foot, who was arraigned upon the under-mentioned charge, viz.

“ For highly improper and disgraceful conduct, unbecoming the character of an officer and a gentleman, in having entered into a personal contest with Mr. Henry Knight, (then an Ensign in the 85th regiment) by repeatedly striking and receiving blows with a horse-whip from the said Mr. Henry Knight, at the Ship Inn, in New Romney, on or about the evening of the 21st July, 1812.

Upon which charge the Court came to the following decision:

The Court having most maturely deliberated upon, and most attentively weighed and considered the whole of the evidence and matter adduced in support of the prosecution, together with what the prisoner hath offered in his defence, is of opinion, that he, Lieut. Edward Powell, 85th regiment of foot, or Bucks volunteers, is not guilty of the charge preferred against him ; for it hath clearly appeared to the Court, that he did not enter into a personal contest with Mr. Henry Knight, but on the contrary, that his (the Prisoner's) conduct on the occasion alluded to, was perfectly consistent with propriety and the demeanour of a gentleman, until he received so gross and violent personal assault, that his retaliation in striking the said Mr. Henry Knight with a horsewhip was nothing more than sudden resentment and irritation might have and did occasion. The Court doth therefore fully and honourably acquit him (the Prisoner) of all and every part of the charge.

I am to acquaint your Lordship, that his Royal Highness was graciously pleased, in the name and on the behalf of his Majesty, to approve and confirm the finding and sentence of the Court.

(Signed) FREDERICK, Commander-in-Chief.

Copy of a Letter addressed by his Royal Highness the Commander-in-Chief to Lieut. General Wynyard, or officer commanding the troops in North-Britain, dated Horse-Guards, Jan. 2, 1813.

SIR,-Having laid before the Prince Regent the Proceedings of a General CourtMartial, held in Edinburgh Castle, on the 15th of October, 1812, and continued by adjournment to the 21st of the same month, for the trial of Captain James Hamilton, of the 3d West India regiment, who was arraigned upon the under-mentioned charges, viz. 1st. For conduct highly subversive of military discipline, in addressing to me an improper letter, under date 17th September, 1812, complaining falsely of my conduct towards him, while a Captain in the 94th regiment, and under my command. 2d. For writing and publishing, or circulating (in September, 1812) a false ungentlemanlike letter, under date 24th of that month, prejudicial to my character, and that of Captain Kingdom, of the 94th regiment. 3d. For conduct unbecoming the character of an officer and a gentleman, in waylaying me, and in company with another person, assaulting me, on the streets of Edinburgh, on or about the 24th day of the said month, September 1812. JAMES ALLAN, Major 94th Regt. Com. Depôt.

Upon which charges the Court came to the following decision:

The Court having inclosed and deliberately considered the charges, defence, evidence on both sides, and whole proceedings, is of opinion, that the prisoner is guilty of the first and second charges.

Under the third charge, the Court acquits the prisoner of the first part thereof, viz. the way-laying; but finds him guilty of the assault, though not in company with another person.

In respect of those parts of the charges of which the prisoner has been found guilty, being in breach of the articles of war, the Court sentences the prisoner to be dismissed from his Majesty's service.

I am to acquaint you, that his Royal Highness was pleased, in the name and on the behalf of his Majesty, to approve and confirm the finding and sentence of the

Court. You will therefore acquaint me with the day on which the sentence is made known to the prisoner, Captain Hamilton, as from that day he will cease to receive pay in his Majesty's service.—I am, &c.

(Signed) FREDERICK, Commander-in-Chief.

GENERAL DISTRICT ORDERS. Head-Quarters, Brighton, Feb. 10, 1813.−The General Court Martial, held at Lewes, on the 16th December last, under a Special Warrant for that purpose, for the trial of Lieut. Cruice, of the 36th regiment, and of which Colonel Cookson, of the Royal Artillery, was president, is dissolved. (Signed) G. A. C. STAPYLTON, A. A. G. Major-General Houston, &c. Brighton.

Horse-Guards, Feb. 6, 1813.-MY Lond, Having laid before the Prince Regent the Proceedings of a General Court Martial, held at Lewes on the 16th Dec. 1812, and continued, by adjournments, to the 5th January, 1813, for the trial of Lieut. John H. Cruice, of the 36th regiment of foot, who was arraigned upon the under-mentioned charge, viz.

“ For conduct unbecoming the character of an officer and a gentleman, while on the recruiting service in the town of Nottingham, at or near Matlock, in the county of Derby, in or about the month of September, 1810, or between that month and the month of May, 1811, in suffering himself to have a horse-whip shook over his head, or being threatened to have one so shook, and receiving the most gross and insulting language from Lieut. John Green, of the Royal Navy, as reported by that officer to Capt. Edward Balguy, of the 36th regiment, on or about the said month of May, 1811.”

Upon which charge the Court came to the following decision: “The Court, having maturely weighed and considered the evidence adduced in support of the charge preferred against Lieut. Cruice, and what that officer has subunitted to repel the same, is of opinion, that he, the said Lieut. Cruice, is not, in the most distant degree, guilty; but on the contrary, that he has laboured under the most oppressive, unfounded, and unjust calumny. “This Court does, therefore, most fully and honourably acquit him, Lieut. Cruice, of all and every part of the charge; and he is hereby most fully and honourably acquitted. “The Court is induced farther to express its entire approbation of the conduct of Lieut. Cruice, in his decided, but respectful and officer-like manner, in so repeatedly demanding an investigation into the circumstances reported to his Commanding Officer, and cannot fail to regret, that an earlier attention was not paid thereto.”

I am to acquaint your Lordship that his Royal Highness was pleased, in the name and on the behalf of his Majesty, to approve and confirm the finding and sentence of the Court. (Signed) FREDERICK, Commander-in-Chief. To Lieut.-General Lord Charles Somerset, or Officer commanding Sussex District.

Horse-Guards, Feb. 13, 1813.−SIR, Having laid before the Prince Regent the Proceedings of a General Court-Martial, held in the Barracks of Dublin, on the 7th of January, 1813, and continued by adjournments to the 25th of the same month, for the trial of Captain Persse O'Keefe Boulger, of the 93d regiment of foot, who was arraigned upon the under-mentioned charges, viz.

« 前へ次へ »