The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1849-05-01
Law Intelligence.
WAsHINoTor, April IS, 1s49

CIRCUIT COURT.
Before Judges Cranch, Morsell and Dunlap
Dnsiaan Charles Wilkes, Commander Of the United
States Exploring Expedition
Owing to circumstances beyond our control, we were
not present when this commenced, but from
friend who was, gather the following condensed
count Of the proceedings
The tried before this court April 1915 the orr
gina action being trespass, by marine in the Explor
ing Expedition, against its commanding officer. The
injury complained Of, was punishment inflicted on the
plaintiff (Dinsman) by the defendant (Wkes), in No
vember 1S40 for disobcdence of orders refusal to
perform duty, when directed the plaintiff claiming
that the term for which he bound to marine
had at that time expired that the defendant had
right or justification to detan him longer on board,
and that his refusal to do duty longer being the only
reason, and an insufficient one for Furnishing him
under such circumstances he entitled to
damages OF the defendant for subectng him to receive
twelve lashes and repetition OF it, u subsequent
day after another request and refusal by him to obey
and combining him in native prison. the island of
Oahu. The court found Capt Wilkes guilty Of the
charge and he fined in the sum Of five hundred
dollars damages. The carried to the Supreme
Court of the United States, and that tribunal
the decision of the Circuit Court, in the following
words-"The judgment below must therefore be
ed and renire de awarded and the trial be
governed by the principles here decided.
The trial in 1916 reported large in the columns
Of the New York Herald, by friend the Doctor"
The charge now against Captain Wilkes is malice.
May for the plaintiff Bradley for the defendant
MIR MAY opened the case, by stating the grounds of
the complaint, to wit:-that malice dictated the
tons Of Captain Wilkes in OBTAINING the plaintiff in
the Exploring Expedition, in causing him to be
fined in native prison the Island of Oahu, and in
Furnishing him for q refusal to perform duty
Mr. BRADLEY replied or stated the grounds Of the
defence
The first witness for the plaintiff called to the stand
Pencil, a marine belonging to the Exploring Expe-
dition. He stated that he confined in the native
prison; saw Dnsman there, and was punished for
fusing to do duty. His testimony was given with
view to sustain the charge against the defendant
Lieut. PINcKNEY testified that he was lieutenant in
the Exploring Expeditions visited Dinsman in prison,
but not officially being ut the time under arrest
His evidence was much the same that of Pencil,
tending to sustain the charge against the defendant.
f,ott
tive prison to ascertain their condition. and he of
the opinion that the action of Captain Wilkes in the
matter of combining the prisoners Shore tyran-
meal, and savored of persec ution.
Mr.. WALKER who first lieutenant of the Peacock,
testified that the vessels of the Exploring Expedition,
while at Honolulu were in condition to secure any
number OF prisoners less than her the ships
fully provided with the of combining and all
appliances that there was no open spirit of insubor
dnation among the men, at first, he did not know the
plaintiff and the next sment remarked that he knew
him very we'll On being examined by the counsel for
the defence, he admitted that at least had to
be confined in the coal hole board the Peacock and
that there were always some confined in the brig "a
place of incarceraton)
Lieut. DE HAVEN, who was attached to the Exploring
affair but thought that it not necessary to confne
the men on shore.
On the day of the trial the only witness exa
mined was Lieut.. Walker. The most of the time was
occupied in debate by the respective counsel arising
out Of the defendant Offering as evidence document
signed by six of the officers of the Peacock setting
forth that several of the nsubordinatc for
long time previous to the arrival of the vessels at Oahu
and frequently mutnous in their conduct which the
court decided was legal evidence. Walkers evidence
principally, to the effect that there nsub
ordination on board the Peacock.
To-day Walker again on the stand. No evil
dence given differing from that Of yesterday,
ceptng that he very particular in stating that the
Of the Peacock than usually attentive
to duty remarkably submissive and very obedent; in
fact, he never saw such Most of the time
occupied by the counsel each sde arguing whether
1t would would not be proper to permit Walker to
give his opinion as to the condition Of the crew, whe
her subordinate or otherwise basng said opinion upon
the remarks in the log books Of the vessels Without
coming to any conclusion this subject, adjourn
ment OF the court took place until Monday. q.