The Washington union., 1858-03-18
ARMY INTELLIGENcE--TH COURT MARTIAL OF
COL. L. V. SUMNER.
GENERAL onDsrr,
WAR DEPARTMENT,
ApJurANT GENERALS OFricr.


CH.raE C0ndao % ~ prejudice Of good ordsr snd nil
ttary discipline.
Syracuse New York, the 18th January 1858, attempt
TO make personal affair with said Harney out Of an
official Inattertha to s~y. The answer RAsie BY said
Harney to general court martial which inquircd Of him
in regard to his prejudice or bias against said sumn4
CHARGE IT, Sending challenge 10 another c5ter 10 egi
dsl, IN violation Of the 25h Of the articles NJ ledr.
Srfcation In this, that he, tho said Sumner didss
Washington d. Co. ON the 18th February 1858, on &c
count of said by said Harney TO said court mar
tia send challenge to said Harney TO fight duel in
words as follows
WASHINGTON, d. c., February Is, 1858
SIT AS more than twenty four hours have passed
since my note TO you Of yesterday, have right to pre-
sumo that you do not intend to answer It, have.
therefore, invite you to leave this city with iue TO-
morrow morning to go any place you may designate
send this note privately, to avoid committing any friend
rs long possible. An carly answer is requested
E, " SUMNER,
Colonel lst Cavalry
Brev Brig General W. s. HARNxY
Colonel I'd Dragons.
CHANCE Ill - Jp1raidng anoher.oct Jv refusing eAas
leooe in riolanon of Inc 2SH Of the aSfees Of uar
Specification In this, that hc tho said Summer, did, at
Washington d. c., the 10th February. 1883, upbaid
the said Harney for refusing to fight duel in words
follows
WasnINGrox, d. G., Feb. Ii, 1858.
sR: rccevel with great surprise your note Of last
evening and have only to say to You, that who
could insult brother officer, FROM official covert
and afterwards refuse to apologize to give him that
satisfaction which he had right 10 demand is utterly
unworthy Of any further notice from me-
Colonel Ist Cavalry
Brevet Brig Con. w. S. HARNgy, Col. I'd Dragoons
r. & This correspondence will be sent TO every
her of the court E.v.S
;6.ot;r tbs II l,,,,
cd ''not guilty
EiNp,sas THE coUrr.
The court after maturey considering the eydsncs
find the accused Colonel Kfpin " Sum,pr lst casslry
follows
CHARGE I.-Soccidcaion, mot guilty." and not gull
ty of the CHARGE.
CHARGE H.. Specification, mot guilty. and mot gull
ty of the CHARGE
CHARGE LII Specification, mot guilty and mot gull
ty of the CHARGE :
The proceedings Of the general court martial in tbs
foregoing case have boon laid before the Secretary Of War;
and the following the orders thereon
WAR DEPARTMENT, March 10, 1858,
There IL no dispute to the facts in this The
only question is the conclusion to be drawn from them
The verdict of the court amounts to this TINT General
Harney's answer 10 the courtmartial at Fort Ieaven
worth was not ''eal matter and that Colonel SUM-
ners letter OF the 18th February is not challenge TO
duel The department disapproyes the finding OF the
l. General Harney's statement TO the court was not
volunteer. When objected to member by Colonel
Sumner and the Of tho challenge stated he made
answer until interrogated and required to tas ss
cifaly wheer he Ind bias or prejudice. Nc Then las 10
prejudice, he admitted that he ''nsrn had any, wy
inle, respect for COL Sunmeros SOLDIER and a 10 M
charges which, Colonel Sumner had stated 10 the
court Gen. Harney had preferred against him. and the
War Department had refused to entertain that SO H.
leuod they ,rould hdce been brought 10 trial improper and
true statements had not been made 10 the Secretary Of Wa
In this answer Gen Harney went further than
sary and proper But he called upon TO state syf
e.ly his prejudice &c. Such inquiry ought not to b.
made unless by the accused, who may bring out
favorabie opinions Of himself to sustain his chaens,
The answer however made in good fnth, is official and
priyilegcd Ii It goes too far the court should ntepose
q Col Sumner note of the 18th February IL a cls.
lenge within the meSnng of the article Of Tbs
military authorities and e decision Of courts martial are
clear in this regard They las down what IL, indeed the
necessary doctrine to give effect to the law that par
tacay ,I,aaolgy no set FORM necessary ehaeyt,
"a torah irritation TO fga, but :" 'aeys I'm or aVr
ton is sufficient. and even such defiance - cds' ms
burden on tie other party. As challenges are IN yt'aion
of law ingenuity is not uncommonly exercised to a,c
a plain expression of their purpose But these srt
fees to defeat the law which courts of law Will never
favor And when The meaning is so clear as to be intel
lgbe to the party who receives the challenge It answers
its purpose, and il neIligble to the tribunal which us
it, In this case, however, the challenge is plainyu
pressed, If 1t were not concusvely interpreted y
the rest Of the correspondence and expressly as "e@
naana Of satisfaction.
Tho doctrine of the findings in this would rendc
the article OF void and imperative by indicating
mode of doing without breach Of the law what It Tie
exact purpose of the law to forbid.
rigid enforcement Of strict discipline n the army
the most essential requisite for s honor and efhcien!
Ii the bonds of discipline oosened, II is only qus
ton of time when the army will become mob, ana
public opinion will nscribe to it that character. even
fore it would be fairly catted to it.
JOHN D. FLOYD,
Secretary Of War
III. The general court martial OF which Brevet Maw
General Thomas S. Jesup is president, Is dissolved
~. Colonel Edwin " Sumner, LIST cavalry, is rcieosa
from arrest, and will join his regiment in Kansas
BY order Of the Secretary of War
S. COOPER Adjutant GcncnI
LATEST BULLETIN FROM KANSAS
The st. Louis Republican Of the 18th Instant contA~
the following paragraph Kansas affairs which
quote indicating continued quiet and good order
The Pacific railroad Saturday night broug'