The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-04-11
LATEST BY TELEGRAPH.
Unlawful Naval Punishments.
Order Of Secretary Robson.
Our Fleet in the West Indies.
FROM WASHINGTON.
Importnnt NnvnI Order.


WASHINGTON, April 1.-THE following i'm
portant order has been issued by the Navy De-
partment in the case of al court-martial where
unlawful punishments were executed
First At naval general court-martial held
on board the United States steamship Ports
mouth, in the Bay of Rio Janeiro, January 13,
1870, by order of Rear Admiral Joseph Lanman,
United States Navy, commanding South Allan
tic fleet, of which court Captain Stephen ID.
Trenchard, United States Navy, was president,
was arraigned and tried Joseph King, ordinary
seaman, United States Navy on the following
charges and Specifications
Charge first. Violation of article z, section 4,
articles for the better government of the navy.
Specification first In this, that the said Joseph
King, ordinary seaman, and serving as such on
board the United States ship Portsmouth, third
rate, on or about the 7th day of May, one thou
sand eight hundred and sixty-nine, at anchor in
the bay of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, being ordered
by his superior officer, Lieutenant John Schou-
Ter, who at the time was officer of the deck of
said ship, to go aft and take the hoops out of
the cabin wind-sail, did use disrespectful Ian
guage to the said Lieutenant John Schouler,
saying, I'm not going to take seven days on
the black list from a dirty drunken - like
Mr.. Robertson, the executive officer of the
vessel" or words TO that effect, and whenSbeing
placed under the charge of a sentry by the
master-at-arms the said Joseph King, ordinary
seaman, did say, "There is not an officer on the
ship who is not a - beach-comber," or words
10 that effect
Specification second. In this, that the said
Joseph King, ordinary seaman, and serving as
such on board the United States ship Ports
mouth, third rate, on or about the eighth day of
May, one thousand eight hundred and sixty
nine, said vessel being then at anchor in the
bay of Rio de Janeiro, did say to his command
ing officer, Commander A. A. Semmes, In the
presence of the officers and crew of said vessel,
who were assembled on the quarterback to hear
the sentence of summary court-martial in his
case, "Hell will not be full until you and old
Robertson get there's" and few minutes after
wards, in presence of Lieutenant Commanders
j. G. Robertson and Fl. III. Corning, did use the
following language to his commanding officer,
Commander A. A. Semmes, ''You old -
-" And a short time after the foregoing
occurrence, while his commanding officer, Com
mander A. A. Semmes, was passing the launch
confined, he, Joseph King, ordinary seaman, did
hail Commander A. A. semmes with the words,
Charge two. Violation of article Z, section 10,
articles for the better gOVernmentO of the navy.
Specification. In this, that the said Joseph
King, ordinary seaman, and serving as such on
board the United States steamship Portsmouth,
third rate on or about the 7th day of Decem-
Der, 1869, said vessel being then at anchor in
| the Bay of Rio de Janeiro, did in company with
| others, attempt to desert in the dingey of the
United States ship Portsmouth, and did not
| desist therefrom until brought to by shot from
a carbine striking one of the oars of the boat.
| Charge third. Violation of article section 2,
| articlestfor the better government of the navy.
| Specification. In this, that the said Jos. King,
| ordinary seaman, and serving as such on board
| the United States steamship Portsmouth, third
rate, on or about the 7th day of December, 1869,
| said vessel being then at anchor in the Bay of
| Rio de Janeiro, did when arrested in the act
| of desertion from said vessel, brandish boat
hook at and otherwise threaten Lieutenant j. Z.
Craig and Ensign G. p. Shaw, his superior
! officers, who made the arrest, challenging Lieu
| tenant j. E. Craig to personal combat. To the
first specification of the first charge the accused
I.1a lnl T. hnn Af al IL,
cused pleads in bar of trial to the first specifca-
| tion of the first charge that Immediately after
the date of said specification, viz, 9TH of May,
| 1869, he was tried by summary court-martial
| and sentenced to confinement in double-irons,
on bread and water for thirty days, loss of three
months pay and extra police duties for three
months, and that this sentence having
| been carried in.o effect he was
! fully restored to duty, nor was he informed that
charges were pending against him, and he
therefore prays the court to dismiss this speci6-
cation to the charge as against the spirit and
! letter of naval regulations, article 80 section 1.
The. Court sustained @ this plea, and dismissed
the said specification. They did this upon evil
dence produced in secret session when the
court was closed for deliberation, and in the
| absence of the accused That evidence should
have been produced only in open court, by the
accused, as part of his case and in support of
his plea. Thus, while the conclusion arrived at
upon the proof was correct and is approved by
the Secretary of the Navy, the mode of intro
ducing that proof was wholly irregular and is
| disapproyed,
To the second specification of the first charge
the accused pleaded in bar as follows:-
As to the second specification of the first
charge the accused pleads that he was tried by
a summary court-martial on the 7th of May,
1862 received a certain sentence, which he be-
lleves to have been approved in due form, and
that after the finding and sentence of the court
were published, he was punished in addition to
the sentence of the court as follows
On the morning of the Sth of May he was con-
fined in the launch of the Portsmouth, his feet
ironed to q ring-bolt, his hands in irons exposed
to the burning rays of the sun, and was forced
to remain in this position without food or drink
until towards evening" when he was taken from
the launch to the berth deck of the ship, and
there gagged and cOnfnedin In a sweat-boX of such
dimensions that it was impossible to sit down in
il. In addition to the i'll ventilation of the
place. which he was not allowed to leave, a
bucket was placed in the sweat-boX for purposes
of nature that was emptied but once in the
twenty-four hours. His health was affected to
such an extent that 1t was thought eXpedient he
should be put under medical treatment and he
was so treated still remaining in confinement;
and the sentence having been carried out, he
was fully restored to duty, nor was he inforned
that charges we're pending against him, and he
therefore pTays the court to dismiss second
specification to the first charge, as against the
spirit and letter OF naval regulations, article ~
section /.
The Court overruled this plea, aud thereupon
the accused pleaded not guilty to said specifca-
ton, and not guilty to charge first.
To the specification of the second charge the
b. accused pleadedin bar as follows:-To the specl-
fication of the second charge the accused pleads
in bar of trial that article 10, of the act of July
II, 1862, for the better government of the navy,
empowers commanding officers of vessels to in
flict certain kind and degree of punishment
J upon officers and others under their command