CTION I.

George Arthur, Esq., fourth Lieutenant-governor of Van Diemen's Land,
arrived in the _Adrian_, on the 12th May, 1824. Formerly superintendent
of Honduras, he was extensively known as an officer of inflexible and
energetic disposition: his administration had occasioned considerable
debate, and was the subject of parliamentary and judicial enquiries.
Honduras, an establishment on the American coast, was occupied by
adventurers from Jamaica. At first interlopers, their presence was for a
time unnoticed by the Spanish crown. A hundred years were passed in
unavailing protests and opposition, when the court of Spain reluctantly
recognised the location of the cutters of logwood within its undoubted
territory.

In 1814, Arthur was appointed superintendent by the Duke of Manchester;
at the same time he received from General Fuller the government of the
troops in the following words: "I do hereby constitute and appoint you,
the said George Arthur, to command such of his Majesty's subjects as are
now armed, or may hereafter arm for the defence of the settlers at the
Bay of Honduras; you are, therefore, as commandant, to take upon you the
care and charge accordingly." In virtue of these appointments he claimed
both the military and civil command, until he quitted the settlement in
1822.

In 1820, Bradley, an officer stationed at Honduras, was promoted to the
rank of lieutenant-colonel on full pay, and knowing that the regiment of
which Arthur was colonel (the York Chasseurs) was disbanded, he
considered himself entitled to the military command, by the seniority of
rank, according to the rules of military service: he refused to
acknowledge longer the authority of Arthur, or to attend a council of
officers to which he was summoned. Arthur instantly caused Bradley to be
arrested, and his sword taken from him; and he was detained a prisoner
for seventy-three days.

An account of this transaction was transmitted to Jamaica, when General
Fuller, the superior officer, ordered the colonel's liberation; but
forwarded to the authorities in Great Britain a statement of the
dispute. The conduct of Colonel Bradley was deemed inconsistent with
military subordination: he was dismissed from the service without trial;
he was, however, allowed to dispose of his commission.

Colonel Bradley instituted an action against Arthur for false
imprisonment: his counsel was the present Lord Brougham: Arthur was
defended by the law officers o