The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1843-01-15

The PEOPLE, VS.. MACKENZIE AND GANsEvoORr.-
CHARGE OF MURDER ON THE HIGH SEAs-There
seems to be a strong disposition on the part of a
portion OF the Press, to screen these individuals
from the ordeal of trial by jury, and to insist that
they are amenable only TO Court Martial because,
forsooth, they happen to be officers in the United
States Navy, and the alleged offence was commit
ted on board of United States vessel. The able
opinion Of Judge Belts has been misconstrued and
misrepresented to suit their purposes. Judge Belts
does not say that the Circuit Court of the United
States has not jurisdiction over case of murder
committed on board of United States vessel. Such
an assertion would be directly in the teeth Of the
Crimes Act of 1925, which expressly give that court
such jurisdiction. Neither does Judge Belts refuse
to grant warrant tor the arrest of Mckenzie and
GansevOort, on the ground that Naval Court Mar
tial has exclusive jurisdiction OF the case. Under
existing circumstances, a Naval Court of Enquiry
having been ordered, and being now engaged in the
investigation of the transactlon-he deems It i'm
proper for him TO interfere judicial necessity of
action on hls part is not presented, and he does not
feel himself required to take cognizance of the
offence This is the substance of Judge Belts rea.
these Individuals at the present time. Unless it is
perfectly clear that Naval Court Martial has exclu
sive jurisdiction of case Of murder committed on
board Of U. States vessel, we insist that II is pre-
csely such a case a court and Jury should take
cognizance Of Let military or naval offence be
tried by military naval tribunal-but one OF the
highest offences known to the common law, ought
to be tried before court OF common law We be.
lieve that the statutes OF the United States only in
tended to give Court Martial jurisdiction of cases
of murder on board of United States vessel as
matter Of necessity. The words are NAV have jurls
dictiCn-not shall have jurisdiction, &c. And it
could not be brought before civil tribunal without
great inconvenience and delay-as for instance,
in the case of squadron outward bound. Where
the matter can be brought before civil tribunal,
l,rn nvd, y,oc md actin of
the common law, II ought to be brought before such
tribunal. Shall it be maintained that officers of
the army navy, charged with murder, are 10 have
the privilege OF being tried by court Of their own
"a court of officers-having a felow-feeling with
them, and inclined to pass lightly the offence
Are these gentlemen to be recognized as a priv-
legged class in our community, not amenabe TO the
ordinary tribunals for offences against the commo
law Of the land What is this but the arrogant as
sumption OF the clergy in the dark insisting to
be tired tor similar offences before Court OF Ec-
cleSiastcs- from which conviction dismissed them
merely with the nictlon OF a slight penance Even
in those days of ignorance and oppression however,
these nsoent claims on the part OF the clergy were
not submitted to but the distinction was properly
made between offences strictly OF spiritual cha
racter and offences against the common law,t the lat
ter of which were made cognzable by the COM
mon law tribunals
If these men are innocent-if they are satisfied
that they can make out sufficient justification or
excuse for putting three human beings to death on
board of the Somers, why shrink from trial by
Jury! Is there any reason 10 fear the fairness and
honesty Of an American jury Are they so thirsty
for human blood that they are not to be trusted
when life is at stake We have no fault to find
with Courts Martial. They are generally composed
OF men of integrity and honor but we must be per-
mted TO prefer the mode of trial which prevails in
our civil courts. We believe that it is be ter cacu-
lated to elicit TRUTH and accomplish the great ends
OF public justice and we will further add, that we
| can perceive good reason why officers OF the
army or navy should be protected from having their
| alleged violations of the common law Of the land
| investigated by the same civil tribunals to which
our other citizens are amenable.
CITIZEN.