The Elk advocate. [volume] (Ridgway, Elk Co., Pa.) 186?-1868, 1865-07-06

STATE OF MICHIGAN, EXECUTIVE I
OFFICE, FLINT, June Is, '65.
Hon Z. w. Stanton, Secretary Of Var,
Washington, d. c.
S1R-I have the honor to acknowl-
edge the receipt of your communication
Of the 5th inst, requesting me to ire
quire of the civil officers Of Detroit,
Michigan, to turn o7cr to the military
authorities at that place, in order that
they may at once be brought to trial be-
fore a court martial Lieutenant John
4. Schwartz and Lieutenant Arthur G.
Ellis, of the ID regiment Veteran Re
serve corps, who are charged with the
homicide of one Wasso, hack-dri-
vCr."
The facts in this case, as they have
been represented to me, and substan-
tally these;
a number of officers on the night Of
the homicide, were absent from the bar
racks, either on leave cfabsencc or 9TH
crwiso, and not on duty, and were in a
diiukin saloon very late in the night.
While there, they made some arrange.
mcnt with the hackman referred to, to
carry them to the barracks, and after
wards declined going. The hackman
domurred at this, and became abusive,
and gathered together number of 9TH
er hackmcn, threatening the officers.
At this, the officers went to Fireman's
Hall, where a guard Of soldiers were
stationed, and, without any right to do
so, ordered them into the street, where
some difficulty occurred between the
soldiers and hackmen. The one who
was shot jumped upon his hack and at
tempted to drive off, when some one
gave the soldiers orders to fire on him,
which they did, and he was shot from
his seat and died soon after As | un-
derstand the affair, the officers had no
business to call out the guard, as it was
not under their control, and the soldiers
had no right to obey them under the Cir.
cumstances. 1t was, in fact, nothing
lEorc than a street row.
These lieutenants, together with pri.
vate Bachelor and five others, are now
held in custody by regular process of
court having jurisdiction, charged with
the murder of said Wasso, and the trial
Of the case is set down in the Recorders
Court of the city of Detroit, for Monday
the 10Th inst.
Your request for the transfer of these
men from the custody Of the civil off,
GERS of the State to the military authori'
ties at Detroit, necessarily involves two
considerations Have l the power to
comply with the request and if so,
would the exercise be polotic and
wise?
do not propose in this communica-
tion to argue these questions, nor is it
necessary that should do SO, but sim
ply to state very plainly the grounds up
on which must decline to interfere in
this case with the due administration of
the civil laws of the State.
Although it be admittad that these
parties we're and are officers in the mill
tary service of the United States, yet at
the time of the commission Of the alleged
offense by them, neither of them were in
discharge of military duty. The homi-
eide was committed, not within the linn
its of the camp, but in the streets Of the
peaceful city Of Detroit and in no sense
and to no extent, in this unfortunate af-
fair connected with the army beyond the
simple fact that the accused were at the
time within the military service of the
United States. 1t was not an offense
against the peace and sovereignty of the
United States.
Any principle or construction that
would exempt men from accountability
to the State of Michigan would exempt
any person in the military service of the
General Government tor accountability
to the civil government for crime COM
mittcd anywhere within the length and
breadth of the United States.
Whether the provisions of the act of
Congress, approved March 3, 1868, en-
brace ofFenses committed by persons who
may be in the military service of the
United States, but who, at the time of
such commission, are not engaged on
military duty, is point which it is un-
necessary for me to discuss or decide.
Concedinc, however, that it does so
apply, it is perfectly plain to my mind
that military courts are not by law in
vested with the exclusive jurisdiction of
certain crimes (among which are murder
and manslaughter), when committed by
personasin the military service.
1t never could have been the intention
Of Congress that in time Of war, insurrec-
ton or rebellion, each and every person
in the military service of the United
States, and subject to tie articles of war;
should not be exempted from responsible
lity to the civil tribunals of the country
for the crimes commit cd by him away
from camps, and under circumstances in
no way connected with the discharge of
military duties.
But suppose should deem it cxpedi,
ent to grant your requst to the effect that
r A., n;r;1 ofonr, e Ia