The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1838-02-01

tue of precept from the honorable the Sc
cretary Of the Navy, bearing date the seven,
teenih day Of August:
Present--Caplain James Barron, President
captains VIM. M. Crane, Robert II. Spence,
John ID. Henley, Jesse ID. Elliott, Stephen
+. Cassin, James Renshaw, Thomas Brown,
Charles @. b. Thompson, Alexander s. Wads-
worth, George W. Rogers, and George G.
Read, members; and Richard s. Coke, Judge
Advocate.
This court having fully and maturely inves-
tgated the matter submitted 10 il in the case
of captain Charles Stewart, and considered
tho charges and specifications. the evidence
and defence Of the accused, proceeded this
third day Of September, in the year aforesaid,
to which time the court had been adjourned,
from day TO day, To determine upon the same.
And after such deliberations, it is of opinion
that the first and second specifications Of the
first charge are not proved, that the third spe-
cification is so far proved, as il alleges that
the said captain Stewart did prevent the
captain of the Peruvian brig Belgrano, from
taking and sending in for adjudication, the
American ship Canton, then engaged ina law
full trade that in so doing the said Charles
Stewart was acting in strict obedience to his
duty, as indicated both in his instructions and
by the laws of nations; and that his conduct
on this occasion was highly meritorious and
praiseworthy. The court is also Of opinion
that the residue Of the specification is not
proved. The court is also of opinion that the
fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth
specifications are not proved. IL is of the OPT
Mon that the tenth specification is so far proved
as it alleges the purchase Of the articles there
in mentioned to have been made from The
Canton, but the court is decidedly Of opinion
that there was no improperly in the act, that
it was proper and correct, and that the resi-
due of the specification is not proved. In re-
lalion TO the eleventh specification, the court
is Of opinion that it is so far proved as il re-
lates to the employment Of the carpenters and
other persons attached 10 the Franklin, in the
manner stated, but it is also of opinion that
such employment was, in all cases to which
the proof reaches, proper, consonant TO the
practice of the service, and in every view
perfectly unobjectonable; and that the resi-
due of the specification is not proved. The
twelfth specification is not proved. The thir-
teenth is so far proved as that il is shown by
the testimony that the said Eliphalet Smith
was on one occasion employed as matter
OF convenience to captain Stewart, and in aid
OF the public interests, to carry despatch,
which had no other than public objects, and
that this employment Of captain Smith was
designed for the public good, and had not the
remotest reference to, or effect upon, any other
interests, and that the residue Of the specif-
cation is not proved The court is also of
opinion that the fourteenth, fifteenth, and six
ha
seventeenth is so far proved as relates to the
building Of three small schooners, with the
aid of the carpenters, &c. ofthe Franklin, but
not out of government property; that this was
in the judicious and faithful exercise of an
unquestioned right, and that the individuals
thus employed were thus employed by their
own free choice, for their own benefit, and
compensated for their labor. 1t is also of OPT
Mon that the eighteenth specification is
proved, but the act therein alleged is in con-
formity with the practice of the service, in
fulflment of one Of the duties which public
vessels owe TO the commercial interests of the
nation, and essentially useful and necessary.
In the circumstances accompanying this par
ticular act, it was wholly unobjectionable and
not attended with any loss or injury to the
public The nineteenth specification is also
proved in point of fact, but this likewise IS
deemed by the court one Of those acts which
the convenience and comfort of those engaged
in commerce may be essentially promoted
without the slightest public injury, and that
in this instance il was wholly unobjectiona-
BILE. AS regards the twentieth, twenty-first,
twenty-second and twenty specifications,
it is tho opinion of the court that the said
Weaver was absent from the Franklin, with
permission granted on proper and sufficient
grounds, till the arrival of the Franklin at Cal
lao, on or about the first of August, 1922, that
subsequent to this period he was absent with
out leave; that the muster rolls transmitted to
the department did not precisely accord with
that on board the Franklin, but the variances
between them were wholly immaterial such
as could not have been designed, because not
calculated to produce the smallest inconve-
nence or injury, and which the court believes
were purely accidental; nor can the court
perceive any grounds upon which to attribute
this mistake, innocent and unimportant as II
was, to any inadvertence of the accused. 1t
is also of opinion that the muster roll, which
was approved in November, 1924, was APP
proved in regular manner, and at proper
time; that the entry contained in it cores
pended with the fact, and with the informa-
ton previously communicated to the depart
ment The court is likewise Of opinion that
the twenty fourth, twenty twenty-sixth,
twcnty-seventh, twenty-eighth, and twenty
ninth, the only remaining specifications ofthe
first charge, are not nor is either Of them,
proved, and it does adiudge and declare that
the said Carries Stewart is NOT GUILTY OF the
first charge
The court is also of opinion that the first,
third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh specif-