The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-06-28
3ns new Naval Courts Of Inquiry-A Hard
Case Made Worse.

lns new Naval Courts Of InQuirT-A Hard
Case Made Worse.
We sec that A. ue OF the journals which earned
an upenysable dssd ,ctio' by backing up the high
handed and srbit'sry proceedings of the Naval
Retiring Board ore exceedingly wrathful at the
szIctures we have felt 1t necessary to make on
the manner in which the new Naval Courts are
COZ Quoting their inqSiries We are told that
these new courts are not courts martial, but
courts Of inquiry, and that therefore they are not
sutiect 10 any Of the rules and restrictions which
govern regularly constituted tribunals Again
il is urged that because the o1us of the applica-
ton or redress il unfairly thrown upon the re-
tired or dismissed officer, he is therefore to
b denied all title to the constitutional and legal
guarantees by which, a. simple citizen, or in.
Deed as an ordinary criminal, his rights would be
protected.
Taese are strange times Of political aud legal
confusion. Between the usurpations of authority
and HE casuistry of jurists and pesifoggers, it is
difficult for men to define what position they
really occupy gts els Of the constitution and the
Law. The once boosted distinction Of being an
down to very small and mean proportions.
Very soon, if things 60 on in this fashion,
We ball find ourselves swindled out of every
paiural or acquired right that we possess, and
reduced TO live dependent on tho good will and
pleasure of our eelfcoustituted masters, like the
slaves of the European dospotisms
This is the priaoIpls that was carried out so
ais.s., o.sly IN the proceedings Of the Naval Re
tu6Ig Board, and which continues 70 guide those
of he new Courts Of Inquiry. To set CT defaoce
all tht rules Of civil and military law, to ignore
the aatlral and institutional riehts which arecon-
csded wen to the most criminal, and to disregard
the voice Of public opinion, seems to have been
the course determinedly pursued BY both. When
the act Of January last was passed, to repair the
mischiefs ceused by the first laundering effort of
Congress to re organize the Navy, we stated that
the remedy was almost as cruel as the wrong.
The passage of the second bill was in itself IN
acknowledgement that Congress had over-stepped
its profaszed objects and inflicted unmerited dis
grace and suffering on many deserving officers.
WHAT right had it, under such circumstances, to
throw apoa the victims Of their Own mistakes the
eLus Of exposing them aud Of extOrting
justice at their hands9 And axe we
now to BE- told that, after being placed
under this unfair aud odious necessity
by second oblquity Of Legislation, the retired
and dismissed officers are to have it pleaded
against hem that because forsooth they volunta-
ri,y come before these courts to seek redress and
reinstatement, they have no claim to the coustisu-
tional and ioesl privileges by which, az accused
parties they would otherwise be surrounded: In
other ,Sogds, they are punished first and thea
htard. But The injustice does not stop here; for
tleir defence is crippled end limited by the ar
gunent hat they come into court with the brand
Of tn Board upon their foreheads. This is the
French legal doctrine of rehabilitation, with an
extra spice CT newly tedgad republican despot-
ism in it. Ii may well be asked to what violent
changes are We drifting, when such indications
az these present themselves on the current of
public affairs.
Admitting the argument that the new Naval
Courts are courts Of inquiry, and not Of ap-
pe1late jurisdiction, we again repeat, that
that fact docs not Justify them in de-
and entering upon Geld Of Investigation which
Is deberred to them not only by the cons,itu-
tional rights OF the accused, but by the common
law. THUS, il il be a well established principle
that q man cannot be twice .arraigacd end pun
isheTfor the same offence AID furthermore, if
the rules Of military law forbid inquiry into de-
linqutncies beyond a certain period-say two
ycars-it follows that the new courts have no
right TO investigate oiftnces which have already
been punl.hed and atoned foe. Besides, the of.
fences which have been thus visited are not. in
many co %, those which imply either moral or
professional unftacss Taken singiy, they prove
only Isolated errors Of Judgment or temper.
Iniroaucld In the catalogue Of an officers sins
during long professional career, hcy help TO
weigh lin down AMI to distrac! his attention
from tire point. 10 which his defcoce ought 10 he
rcallS directed Thus ne e punished doubly FOR
the sarae oticnce-a purpose which Congress
rove. ocaid have had in view, aud which
cCrtaioiy Gan in no way contribute to the
moral elevation and efficiency Of the service.
We maintain. therefore tbat however closely
tie new naval courts may have followed he let
tet OF the law Of January !ast. they bavc en-
tirely misunderstood its spirit They are the
more blamcaho for this rom the fact that their
course was distinctly marked out by authorities
and precedonts which il was their first duty TO
make themselves acquainted With III Nd they
done soft would not nov be necessary for them
TO resort 10 the columns OF the Washington
papers with lame defence OF the PRINCIPLES, or
rather absence Of principlcs, On which they con.
duct their proceedings Tho conclusion to be
drawn from the arguments which they have put
forwardis alike upfayorablc TO their professional
consciousness and sense Of public duty. To
set themselves right with the public they must
make out better case than this
HARD SWEARING SosEwHERE.-Thc Traaft,