The Sun.
London, England, 1830-01-21 00:00:00

COURT-MARTIAL AT PORTSMOUTH.

On Monday, the 13th instant, a court-martial
x‘as held on hoard the Victory, in Portsmouth har-
bour, to try John Miller, a seaman of the Espiegle,
on a charge of disobedience of orders, but involving
he liberty of the sukject.
The prisoner was a fisherman at Bexhill, in Sus-
sex, and had been convicted on the 22d of De.
cemhcr, 1824, under the Revenue laws, of having
eight gallons of contraband spirits in his possession,
and sentenced to five years' servitude in the l\avy ;
and it expiring on the 21st of December last, he then
applied for his discharge, which was refused till the
ship was paid off. The prisoner hail sustained an
unexceptionable character in the service ; but be-
coming reluctant to the duty of the ship, on being
entitled to his liberty; his Captain reported his con-
duct to the Admiral in command at Portsmouth :
and the Admiralty then ordered him to be tried
thereon by a Court-martial.
The Members were—Captain Hayes, President;
Captain the Hon. G. Elliott, Captain Napier, Cap-
tain Carroll, and Captain Lord Win. Paget; Moses
Greetham, Esq., Judge-Advocate.
The prisoner was assisted in his defence by Mr.
Minchin.

The following is the letter containing the
charge :
" His Majesty's ship Espiegle, Jan. 12, 1850.
" Portsmouth Harbour.

" SIR,—I beg leave to submit to your considera-
tion the following statement of an an occurrence on
board his Majesty's ship under my command.
" John Miller, a smuggler, was discharged from
his Majesty's ship Barham to his Majesty's ship
Espiegle, as part complement, last September. On
the 23d of December, the ship being at sea, he re-
ported on the quarter-deck that his period of five
years' serve expired that day, which, by reference to
his ticket, proved to be the case. I at that time
expressed to him my opinion, that his discharge
would not be granted until the ship was paid off;
and that therefore I thought it unnecessary for me
to apply for it; he answered—' Then, Sir, I will.'
" During the following night, in a gale, whilst
the hands were on deck, it was reported to me that
he was below, assigning as his reason that he had
left off work, having ceased to belong to the ship.
When called before me, I explained to him the
nature of his offence ; and on his expressing con-
trition, and a wish to be allowed to return to his
duty, I consented, in conside►ation of the high
character he had previously borne.
" Upon my arrival at Plymouth, finding the ship
likely to be delayed, I applied for his discharge,
and, in reply, received their Lordships' direction
that he should be paid off with the remainder of the
crew. This was communicated to him by me.
" He was this day ordered by Lieutenant White
to go in a boat ; to which he replied he could not.'
Lieutenant White repeated his order, and received
the sante answer. On his being filially asked if he
meant he would not do his duty ? be said ' I will
not.' Upon which he was placed in confinement.
" I am perfectly aware that the regulations of the
service give me full power to act in similar cases;
but as I look upon this as involving peculiar consi-
derations, I have thought it advisable to refer it for
your opinion.
" I have the honour to he, Sir, your obedient servant,
(Signed) " R. ELLIOTT, Commander.
" To Admiral the Hon. sir Robert Stopford,

K. C. 13., Portsmouth."
The Members and Judge-Advocate being sworn,
the following evidence was called
Lieutenant George William White—Were you
the Commanding Officer of the Espiegle on the
morning of Tuesday, the 12th Jan. inst. ?—Yes.
Did you desire the prisoner John Miller to go
into a boat, and what was his reply to that order ?
I ordered John Miller, the prisoner, to go into the
cutter. His reply was, " I cannot go." I repeated
my order a second time to him, and he said the
second time, "He could not go." I then said,
" You will not go into the boat ?" and his reply
was, " I will not, Sir." I put him in irons directly,
and reported him to Captain Elliott when he came
on board.

The conviction of the prisoner by Edward Mil-
ward, Esq., produced, dated the 22,1 of December,
1824, for five years, for carrying and conveying
eight gallons of spirits. Commander of the Rami-
lies to take the prisoner.
Cross-examined by the prisoner—How long have
I served in the Espiegle whilst you have belonged
to her?—Between four and five months.
What has been my generaLcharacter and conduct
in the service during that period ?—ln general very
good.
The pay-book of the Espiegle produced, in which
was the entry of the prisoner as one of the crew
from the Barham, and his navy-ticket on his being
discharged from the Barham to the Espiegle, in
wlich it is specified that his servitude expired the
21st of December, 1829.
_ _

Lieutenant White called by Captain ELLIOT.

Did you clearly understand the prisoner's reason
for declining to do duty was because he had com-
pleted his five years' servitude as a smuggler ?
Yes.

Are you quite clear as to the prisoner having re-
fused to obey your order ?—Quite.
Do you believe the prisoner was sent on board as
a srr.uggler ?—I believe he was : he came from the
Barham.

Cross-examined by the prisoner—How long did
you know me in the Barbantf—l believe seven
months.

What was my general character and conduct
during that time ?—Very good indeed.
Here the evidence for the prosecution closed.

When the prisoner was called on for his defence,
he requested a short time to prepare it.
The Court was then cleared.

In half an hour the Court opened, and Mr. Min-
chin read the following defence for the prisoner :
Mr. President, and Gentlemen of this Hon.
Court, may it please you, Sir, and Gentlemen,—
Brought as I am, a prisoner before you, to be tried
for an offence which it is alleged I had committed
against his Majesty's naval service, I now, by the
advice and assistance of my friend, with profound
respect, entreat of the Court its patient and most
serious consideration of what I have to offer on my
own behalf; involving, as it does, not only the
liberty of the subject and the rights and privileges
to which, as an Englishman, I am entitled, but
those privileges which have ever been held sacred
in the glorious Constitution of this realm, and of
which, even the navy itself, is justly deemed one of
the guardians. I might formally, and as I humbly
conceive, effectually,•have pleaded in bar to your
authority by law to try me, as the term of my ser-
vitude in his Majesty's navy had ceased on the
21st of December last, which was just 23 days be-
fore the alleged offence was imputed to me ; and that
my subsequent detention in his Majesty's ship
Espiegle being, as it is, against my will, when the
first opportunity occurred, by the ship's arrival at
Plymouth, and when I could have been liberated
(and which was on the second day after the
offence imputed), my subsequent detention, I
say, i 3 not warranted by any or either of the
Acts of Parliament wider which I had, for an
offence against the Revenue Laws, been originally
sentenced to five years' servitude in the navy.
lam a native of Bexhill, in Sussex. I am a free-
holder of that county, inheriting freehold hereditaT
meats which descended to me from my father.
am now in my 31st year. I was never hot opcp in
my hie accused of any violation of the revenue laws;
but unfortunately, in December, 182,1, having so
small a quantity as eight gallons of contraband fo-
reign spirits in my possession, I became amenable to
the law, an offence, merely as malum prohibilum,
questioned by many whether there I.e mo-4tl tcrpi
tude in it; and for this minor deliniuency in the
fy of the law, I was summoned before Edward M -
ward, ESq.; one of ,his Majesty's Justices of i 4
peace for the county of Sussex, and 1-IVl7lg convictect
of haying those spiTifs in my possession, and my vo-
PtiPil Wing that of a fisherman, I was on the 22d of