"On the arrival of Lieutenant-Colonel James Innes at Masulipatam on the 7th ultimo, to assume the command of the Madras European regiment, he was invited to dinner at the regimental mess, where there were several strangers present. In the course of the evening a toast was proposed, which it was conceived could not be objected to by any one, whatever might be his opinion of the recent acts of Government that have excited such general discontent amongst the officers of the coast army; viz. "The friends of the Madras army." We were therefore much surprised to hear Lieutenant-Colonel Innes express his disapprobation of it, and his wish that it might be changed to a more general one; viz. "The Madras army." Several observed, that there were officers in this army who were not its friends, and it appeared to be the general opinion of the Company that the toast should be given out as at first proposed. Colonel Innes immediately arose from the table; and as he was going out of the mess-room, the toast was drank with loud applauses. This, we have reason to think, he construes into his being hooted out of the mess. Next day Lieutenants D. Forbes and Maitland were informed, that if they did not apologize for some observations said to be made by them at the mess in the presence of their commanding officer, their conduct would be reported to head-quarters. Those officers were, however, acquainted that they should be furnished with a copy of the report. As no specific observations were mentioned by Colonel Innes, and as those officers had neither said nor done any thing that required an apology, they of course refused to make any. When it was supposed that Colonel Innes intended to recommend himself to Government by informing them of the conversation of a convivial party, the officers of the regiment resolved to have no further communication with him, except in cases of duty. Some days afterwards, Lieutenants Spankie and Hancorn waited upon Colonel Innes, and explained to him fully their motives for declining to hold any private intercourse with him. In the course of a long conversation he repeatedly told them, that he had not reported Lieutenants Forbes and Maitland; and at last assured them, unless obliged to do so by some future conduct of theirs, he would not. With this assurance the officers of the regiment were so satisfied, that they altered their behaviour towards Colonel Innes. His declarations, however, were equivocal and false, as will appear by the letter No. 1, which was published in the regimental orders of the 22d ult. He has acknowledged by the letter No. 2, that it was written in consequence of information communicated by him in a private letter, but which he pretended he did not think would have been acted upon. Agreeably to the orders, Lieutenant David Forbes submitted to the punishment inflicted upon him; but, previous to his departure for Condapillee, he requested the Commander-in-Chief to give him an opportunity of proving his innocence of the charge laid against him before a general court martial. The answer he received to this was, that 'the Commander-in-Chief deemed his application inadmissible:' but no reason whatever was assigned. Vide letters, No. 3 and 4. Colonel Innes put Lieutenant Fenwick's name in orders, to succeed to the situation of Lieutenant Maitland; but that officer begged leave to decline acceptance of it under the existing circumstances. The quarter-mastership was then offered to Lieutenant Spankie, who was told, that if he refused the situation he would be brought to a court martial; that the regiment would be disbanded, and the officers placed upon half-pay. Vide the Memorandum, No. 5, written by Lieutenant Spankie in the presence of Colonel Innes, by whom they were dictated. He was also desired to recollect the situation of Captain Yard, a married man with a large family, and to reflect upon the misfortunes he would bring down upon his brother officers; but if he would accept the appointment, there were favours for the regiment in contemplation of Government. Thus the fate of a regiment, and the favours or frowns of a Government, depended upon the will of an individual; and officers of all ranks were to be punished, if his conduct (over which they had no control) proved unsatisfactory!—Vide letter, No. 6, from Colonel Innes to Lieutenant Spankie.—On the receipt of the general order appointing him quarter-master, Lieutenant Spankie did, however, send a letter to the Honourable the Governor in Council; and upon Colonel Innes's refusal to forward it through the regular channel, he forwarded it direct, in which he requested to relinquish the situation.—Vide letter, No. 7.—To this letter no answer was ever returned. At the same time that Colonel Innes forwarded the application of Lieutenant D. Forbes for a court martial, he transmitted an official statement of what had occurred at the regimental mess, in his presence, on the evening of the 7th ult. When Lieutenant Maitland was acquainted with this circumstance, he applied to him for a copy of such parts as concerned himself.—Vide letter, No. 8.—Colonel Innes refused to comply with this request, stating that Government would be guided by his report of that day, and decide accordingly. He also mentioned, that, as far as he knew, private information would not have been acted upon, had the expected apology been made; and he imputed to Lieutenant Maitland an observation which he said was made at the mess that evening regarding the Hyderabad subsidiary force.—Vide letter, No. 9.—-Lieutenant Maitland informed him, in reply, that, until the receipt of his note of this day, he did not know for what words or actions of his an apology had been required, and most solemnly denied having made any observations regarding the Hyderabad subsidiary force on the night alluded to, or at any other time, in Colonel Innes's presence.—Vide letter, No. 10.—The letter, No. 11, was signed by every officer present with the regiment, excepting one, to whom it was not sent. On the receipt of it, Colonel Innes wrote an official note to the adjutant, in which he promised to forward the above letter, and requesting the officers of the regiment, who were present at the mess on the 7th ult., to draw up a statement of the circumstances which induced him to quit the mess-room on the evening of that day.—Vide letter, No. 12.—The letter, No. 13, is a copy of their answer. On the 2d of June arrived an order, directing Lieutenant D. Forbes to proceed forthwith to the Presidency, and there to embark for Penang for the purpose of taking charge of a few men of the regiment stationed at that island. Lieutenant Maitland was at the same time ordered to hold himself in readiness with thirty men of the regiment to go on board the Samarang sloop of war, as marines. In consequence of this order, a deputation from the officers of the Madras European regiment waited upon Colonel Innes, and earnestly requested him to select two other officers for the above duties. They strongly pressed upon him the impropriety of selecting two officers whose conduct had been branded in orders. If those gentlemen had been guilty of conduct contrary to every principle of military subordination, they were unfit to be sent on command with that stigma hanging over them; and if innocent, as the officers of the regiment asserted them to be, they ought not to be ordered from the coast until an investigation should take place, and the charge as publicly retracted as it had been preferred. It is here necessary to observe, that during the conference between Colonel Innes and the deputation, he read to them an extract from a letter received from the Commander-in-Chief, threatening the regiment's being disbanded. Respecting Lieutenants Forbes and Maitland, he said he could not select two others, as those officers had been nominated by the Commander-in-Chief. He acknowledged that he might have been mistaken as to Lieutenant Maitland's person, and that he now saw the matter in a different light to what he did at first. He also said, that the letter, No. 1, should be expunged from the orderly books; and that if Lieutenants Forbes and Maitland would offer some slight apology, he would endeavour to get the latter reinstated in his appointment. The apology was positively refused.

"Upon a candid consideration of the preceding circumstances, it will not excite surprise when we state, that alarm and indignation were excited in the minds of the officers. The false aspersions cast upon their characters might have tended to have lowered them in the opinion of the men, ignorant as they must have been of the circumstances which occasioned it. The two officers were naturally supposed to have been selected for some punishment, as Colonel Innes had publicly declared that such was the intention by their being appointed to those commands. At any rate, their feelings had been wounded by the severe reflections against them, contained in the letter of the Commander-in-Chief, which was published to the regiment. A court martial had been positively refused to the application of one of those injured officers, which was the only means he knew to clear up his character before the world.

"All the circumstances above stated took place previous to the 10th of June. We afterwards found that two more detachments were ordered from the Madras European regiment, to act as marines. We found that the officers of various stations concurred in opinion with the officers of this garrison regarding the illegality of the order respecting Lieutenants Forbes and Maitland, and the unjust treatment experienced by the Madras European regiment in general; and we heard from different quarters, that it really was intended to disband the regiment, which circumstances rendered extremely probable. On the arrival, therefore, of the Piedmontese and Samarang ships of war, a deputation from the officers of the garrison waited upon Colonel Innes, and requested him to suspend the execution of the orders regarding the three detachments of marines, until we had made a representation on the subject to the Commander-in-Chief, for the decision of the Honourable the Governor in Council. With this request he positively refused to comply, and threatened to enforce obedience to his orders by an appeal to the men. Next day he seemed determined to abide by the resolution he had expressed to the deputation, but appeared to be sensible that the officers ordered to act as marines would not be allowed to embark, and that the men respected their officers too much to go without them.

"He therefore stated, his determination to carry his orders into execution, with the assistance of the detachments of H. M. 59th regiment, the artillery, and a body of men which he said would be landed from H. M. ships then in the roads, as more particularly mentioned in the reasons signed by the deputation, and forwarded to head-quarters by Major Storey, with his official account of what occurred here on the 25th June."

[APPENDIX]

TO THE
STATEMENT OF LIEUT.-COLONEL INNES.
Copy of regimental Orders published by Lieutenant-Colonel
Innes in the Orderly Book of the Madras
European Regiment.
R. O. BY LIEUTENANT-COLONEL INNES.

Masulipatam, 22d May, 1809.

Lieutenant David Forbes, of the Madras European regiment, is appointed to command at Condapilly, and directed to proceed to that station in the course of twenty-four hours after the publication of this order. The officer now in command of that garrison is directed to join his corps on being relieved by Lieutenant Forbes, who will not be permitted to be absent from Condapilly unless it becomes necessary for his health.