"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