The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-05-11

w NJ l..
Major Francis o. Wyse, of the Third Artillery,
was put upon his trial last Wednesday by a
court martial. charged with disobedience of or
ders and conduct unbecoming an officer aud a
gentleman. The whole time the court has been
in session has been employed in the examina-
ton of witnesses not for the purpose of PROV
ing the truth of the first of these charges, which
is sufficiently clear, but to establish the fact
that the steamship Falcon is unseaworthy, and
therefore should not have been engaged for the
transportation of troops. The second charge,
that Major Wyse has been guilty of conduct
unbecoming an officer and gentleman has
not been taken up yet by the court, and will
not till the first is disposed Of
With regard to the first of these charges it
appears from the testimony that Major Wyse,
after he had received orders from General Scott
to be prepared to sail with his command for
California, on board the Falcon, demanded
that board Of inspection should examine the
vessel and report upon her condition before he
could consent to trust himself at sea in her.
In compliance with this demand, Board was
appointed by General Scott, consisting of Lieu
tenant Colonel Thomas, Brevet Lieutenant Colo
mel Swords, and Lieutenant Colonel Abercrom-
bic, who, after inspecting the vessel, reported
that she was not only seaworthy, but that she
had ample accommodations for the troops As
this report was not satisfactory to Major Wyse,
he appointed a board of his own, who, after
examining the vessel, arrived at the conclusion
that it was not safe to go to sea in her. Acting
on this report, and in defiance of the orders of
General Scott, Major Wyse refused to go on
board, determined. as he stated in a letter ad-
question to an ISSUE The Falcon sailed on the
appointed day-the 18th of April-and was
forced, in consequence of her defective ma
chinery, after being few days at sea, to put
into Norfolk. This established the fact that
she was not a proper vessel to he en-
ployed as a transport; but beyond this it
proves nothing which would exculpate Msor
Wyse from the charge Of having dis
obeyed the orders of his superior officer
The first duty Of soldier is obedience to those
who are placed in command over him. for upon
it depends the efficiency, discipline and govern
ment of the army. He should in fact have no
will Of his own when it conflicts with the orders
Of his SUPERIOR and it is no plea to urge in JUS
tifcation Of insubordinate conduct, that such
orders, if complied with, would put bis life il
jeopardy. What, for instance, would he thought
Of an officer who, when commanded to attack a
fort should refuse to do so on the ground that
it was dangerous-that he might be killed
Such q man would be guilty of an act of in
subordination which, if tolerated, would even
tually lead TO the utter extinction of all mill
tary law and authority. We can see no differ
ence in the act for which Major Wyse is now on
trial: he has refused TO obey the commands of
his superior officer, and thus set an example
which, if followed, would be attended with the
most pernicious effects. Suppose one Of his
own men bad been guilty of similar act OF
disobedience, would he have tolerated it for an
instant; and yet if he acted consistently he
could not refuse him the exercise of the same
right which he claims for himself.
1t is clear then that Major Wyse had no more
to do with the character of the vessel than the
most humble soldier on board. OF his whole
command he was the only one who refused to
70 in her when ordered, although among his
men were the officers who composed his board
of inspection. But while this is a matter in
which he, in consequence of his position, had
no right to act as be did, we regard It as our