such prizes for men in the royal army. Not
oven the officers of that army were eligible for
staff employ.) So long as a man conducted
himself with sobriety and integrity in these
appointments there was no chance of his being
"remanded to his regiment." He was there
for life, or until he pleased to become a
pensioner.

Had it, in those days, been proposed to hand
over the men of the Company's European army
to the royal army, or to deprive them of the
privileges that belonged to their branch of the
service, there would have been a mutiny to a
certainty; and I speak from experience when I
say that the officers of the Company's army,
native and European, would have sympathised
with the men; for, they would have regarded
the measure as the first step towards depriving
themselves of those privileges which they looked
upon as vested rights. Who can forget the
clamour that the Company's officers made, when
Lord Hardinge appointed the late Captain S.
Fisher, of her Majesty's 3rd Dragoons, to the
command of a regiment of Irregular Cavalry?
The murmurs of these gentlemen flooded the
correspondence columns of all the newspapers
in India, and, unless I am mistaken, they
petitioned against this "innovation;" it is well
known that the Court of Directors, when, out
of respect to Lord Hardinge, they sanctioned the
appointment, expressed their disapproval thereof,
and hoped that " the rules of the service" would
not be again violated.

Now, although the rebellion of 1857
completely altered the state of affairs, and rendered
it prudent that the empire should be held in the
name of the Crown, I maintain that it did not
alter the rights of any man—I care not what his
rank may have been—in the service of the East
India Company. When poor old John
Company died, his old servants, one and all, had the
option to serve its successor in the East, or not,
according to the bent of individual inclination.
Old John had no more power to will and
bequeath them, than I have the power to will
and bequeath my domestic servants to my son
after my decease. And when Lord Clyde
promulgates that " no one can disobey an act of
Parliament," I desire to ask what House of
Commons would ever dream of converting a
British subject into a mere chattel? As well
might Parliament have passed an act that when
the Crown bought from the Peninsular and
Oriental Company, that magnificent steam-ship
the Himalaya, all her crew, from Captain Kellock
down to the cabin-boys, were to belong to the
Royal Navy, and serve therein, without being
asked even, whether it would be agreeable for
them to do so! I have a great respect for Lord
Clyde, and no one can admire more than I do
the tact he has exhibited in order to quell this
serious outbreak; but, when his lordship speaks
of " the act affecting all grades equally," I must,
with all due deference, dispute the truth of that
proposition; I would urge, too, that the
remark itself shows that the men were not
properly dealt with, since it admits that all the

servants of the Company, from the highest to
the lowest, had equal rights with respect to
future service. The officer, civil or military in
India (or in England for that matter), may resign
the service whenever he chooses. He has
simply to send in his " papers"' (if a military
man), or his "resignation" (if a civilian), and he
is released from servitude as a matter of course.
It is not so with the private soldier. If the
Company's European troops had once gone over
to the Crown, by order, there would have been
an end to any remonstrance afterwards. Not
so with their officers. The very day after they
had read to the men the Proclamation by the
Governor-General of India, they might have
requested permission to retire, and it would have
been granted. And so with a magistrate, or
collector, or judge in the service of the late
East India Company.

I have confined rny remarks to what I consider
was the right of the European soldier in the
late East India Company's army. So far as the
prudence of denying that he had such right is
concerned, there can be no question that it was a
most ill-advised measure; and when the point was
referred to the home authorities, it should have
been strongly recommended by the Governor-
General that it, ought to be yielded. The idea
that 50,000/. should be suffered, under such
peculiar circumstances, to imperil, for a second
time, the existence of British rule in India,
says very little for the wisdom of those entrusted
with the management of affairs in the East.

The Times, in an able article on the question,
well remarked, as to this part of the
case (namely, the prudence of the measure),
that the bounty might have been gracefully
bestowed as a reward for, or in recognition of,
the meritorious services so recently performed
by the men who claimed it. The danger of not
complying with this reasonable demand of the
men, so respectfully urged in the first
instance, ought to have been apparent; and it is
impossible to praise Lord Clyde too highly for
the sagacious manner in which he behaved, when
the disastrous news reached him at Simlah. Who
shall say what would have been the consequence
had any of the recusants been fired upon? We
should have had, not only a vast number
of our own countrymen (all trained soldiers and
inured to the climate) up in arms against us;
but, every native rebel chief and all their retainers,
whom those very men helped to subdue, espousing
the cause of the men, with the ultimate object
of serving their own great end—the overthrow
of British rule in India.

FIRST-FLOOR WINDOWS.

I AM not one of those impertinent modern devils
upon two sticks—the men upon stilts. I am not a
window-cleaner (fearful trade!), a house-painter,
nor a performer on the acrobatic "perch," but
simply an omnibus traveller through the London
streets, who always prefers to sit outside. I
spend much time and money on the top of these
useful vehicles, and I never attempt to secure