Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-08-17

service in which he had made great sacrifices in
sustaining the honor and reputation Of his country,
and deprived of high and honorable station, which
he had dgni6ed by his official conduct and deport-
ment, without trial or even the semblance OF a
trial; and if such . course can be sustained or
even excused in the functionary pursuing it, IL
must be under the provisions OF some positive law,
or under state of circumstances, so imperative
in their character, to admit of no delay resort
10 other and less Objectionable remedies.
The undersigned know OF no law that justified
il. The constitutional provision which makes the
President the r-in-chief of the army and
navy, certainly did not, otherwise the system Of
military tribunals which seems 10 have been con-
templated by that instrument, and which has since
been provided for by law, would be nuliity and
even mockery, as the President might in the ex-
ercise OF the supposed power conferredin the con-
stitulional provision making him commander-in-
chief OF the army and navy, caprciousy dismiss
every officer from either or both branches Of the
service at his mere will and pleasure. Such power
| is rarely supposed TO exist in those countries
where the will of the sovereign is the law Of the
land; and it can hardly be imagined, that the fra
mers Of our constitution, imbucd as they must have
BEEN in the midst of a revolution for the suppress
sion Of tyranny, with feelings sensbly awakened
10 the rights of the citizen, would have been incor-
porated in the instrument they were preparing TO
| guarantee those rights; provision which might
| be exercised for the most tyrannica purposes
| Such was not their intention, ms the undersigned
| believe. No fair construction of the language
would justify the inference that il was, and the
principles OF the institutions for the establishment
of which they were then laying the foundation, and
| the history of the times, repel the imputation.
IT, then, there is found no authority in the Con
| stlution for the exercise of the power which was
brought into action on this OCCASION the commit
! tee are at a loss 10 know from whence it was de-
| rived. If there is any statute which con(ers il,
| the undersigned have been unable TO discover il
but in their researches upon the subject they have
found statute. which expressly declares, that it
shall not hereafter abe lawful TO deprive any Off
Ger in the military naval service OF this repub-
lic for any misconduct in Office, Of his commission,
| unless by the sentence Of court MARTIAL This
| law was approved on the 4th of February, 1871,
and has never been repealed II was therefore in
full force and operation on the 10Th of July, 1913,
| when Captain Moore was dishonorably dismissed,
| and deprived of his commission in the naval
service OF this republic, "by the order ofthe Pres
| ident," without sentence of a court martial"
So direct and palpable violation of the positive
| provisions Of a statute well known TO the Execu-
tive at the time he gave the order cannot be iusi-
| fed In the opinion of the undersigned it might
| be excused under very extraordinary cifcum-
stances; but The circumstances that would e1-
cuse it must be of such character as to admit
OF neither delay nor resort to different mode of
| Furnishing the refractory officer. In this case,
| even if there existed in fact, any just cause for
punishment, the committee perceive no rea-
! son why positive law should have been violated
and set at naught by the executive 10 accomplish
the object. There certainly existed no emergency
| which would have rendered delay either danger
Gus TO the country or injurious to the service.
The navy, at the time the order was given TO
Captain Moore, and for ten days previous, was in
| The harbor Of Galveston, and that officer might
have been removed from the actual command by
suspension and arrest, with little difficulty as
was found in depriving him of it, by dismissal
from the service. That course would have obvi-
aied the necessity Of violating the law, and have
accomplished all the Executive should have de-
sired, as Congress could have constituted tri-
bunal 10 investigate the matter and 10 dismiss the
officer provided that his conduct, upon investiga-
ton, should appear TO have deserved punishment
TO that extent
The undersigned, however, cannot discover in
the papers and documents submitted 10 them the
! grievous ofenses and crimes imputed 10 Captain
Moore in the letter from the Secretary of War and
| Navy, conveying 10 him the order OF the Pres
ident for his dishonorable discharge, and which
are the alleged grounds upon which that order was
| predicated.
These imputed ofTenses and crimes are
/. That Captain Moore had not accounted for
| large sums Of money received from the authori-
ties Of Yucalan and the Government of Texas, in
/ July 1912.
2. That he had disobeycd orders issued 10 him
on the 29th Of October, on the 5th Of November,
and on the 10th Of November, 1912, directing him
10 report with the vessels under his command at
| Galveston.
! g. That he had disobeyed orders issued on the
/ I'd OF December, lS42, and on the I'd OF jan
vary 1913, directing him TO repair 10 Washington
and report IN person TO the Department of War
| and Marine.
| a. That he had failed 10 obey perempiory order
issued on the 22d Of January, 1913, ito turn over
the command TO the senior officer in the naval SER
vice present, and report 10 the Department Of
War and Marine, at this place, (Washington,) in
person"
| s. That he was guilty OF treason in entering
! into compact with the authorities OF Yucaian,
without the sanction or knowledge of this Gov.
\ eminent.
! g. That he was guilty OF mxrler in causing TO
be executed, on the 26th OF April, lS43 certain
! mutIneers, who had been condemned by a court
martial, alleged 10 have been illegally assembled.
after he had received an order, issued on the 2lst
OF March, 1919, suspendng him from the com.
mand Of the navy, and directing him 10 report
\ 10 the Department Of War and Marine in arrest.
l And,
z. That he wa. guilty Of piracy in cruzing
I upon the high seas with armed vessels, under the
Nag OF this nation, while under suspension and
arrest
/ With regard TO the first charge, the undersigned
/ have found abundant evidence in the correspon.
| dence between Captain Moore and the Depart
| Inent, showing that be had expended more money
/ for the use Of the navy than he is charged with
having received they therefore consider this
| charge as wholly groundless, and one which does
| not in the slightest degree, excuse the order, in
/ support Of which il was made
As to the second charge, Il was necessary 10
refer 10 the evidence to see how far IL is sustained
| by the facts.
| For several months anterior 10 the order Of the
| 9th Of October, 1872 il seems from the cores
! pondence between the Department and Captain
Moore that IL was the earnest desire ofihe presi-
dent that the navy should be prepared for sea as
early as practicable, 10 cruizc along the coast Of
Mexico; 10 lay under contribution the towns and
commerce Of that country. This desire Captain
| Moore appears 10 have labored hard and assidu-
ousiy 10 crafty, but from various diffc uties and
embarrassments, growing out Of the refussl'of tho
| government 10 furnish him with the money sppro-
priaied by Congress to 81 out md support the navy
he had been unable to accomplish the object al the
time that order was written, but still entertained
| hopes Of being able to do 40 nj future period.
The order itself seems TO have been written under
the anticipation that II might be done; and, after
speaking OF the subject in general terms, and ex-
pressing regrets at the detention Of the vessels
and wishes respecting their being on the gulf, il
proceeds thus: "lfyou cannot, with the means at
your command, prepare the squadron for sea, you
will immediately with all the vessels under your
command, sail for the port Of Galveston, and, on
| your arrival there. make a special report" &c
This order, then, was evidently conditional one