The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1875-12-11
THE BABcOCK COMMISSION.
POstpOnement of the Hearing to
Await the st. Louis Trial.

CHICAGO. Dec. 10.-The Babcock court of in
quiry met to-day. Gen. Hancocluimmediately
read the following:
A sense of duty to TIE laws, to the military
service and to the accused, impels me to ask
your concurrence in the postpOnement of this
inquiry for the present. We are all bound to
oeneve IN the entire innocence of Col. Babcock,
and the presumption cannot be repealed with
out clear evidence 1t is due to him to suppose
that this court of inquiry was asked in good
faith fer reasons given. What were those rea-
sons? In the course of legal trial in st. Louis
Col. Babcock was alleged to be guilty of a high
criminal offence. He asked for hearing in
the same court, but was informed he could not
have it because the evidence was closed. These
circumstances led him to demand court of
inquiry as the only means of vindicatiOn that
was left. Since then he has been formally in
dicted, and he is now certain of getting the full
and fair trial before an impartial jury which
the laws of the country guarantee to all its Cit
liens. The supposed necessity for converting a
military court for the determination of his guilt
or innocence no longer exists.
1t is believed that our action as military
tribunal cannot GUST the jurisdiction of the
court while the indictment is pending. The
President has said through the Attorney Gene
raj that such was not the intention then. The
trial at st. Louis and this inquiry must 60 on
at the same time unless we await the result of
of the inquiry there. The difficulties are very
formidable. The accused must be present at
the trial of the Indictment. Shall we proceed
and hear the cause behind his back, or shall we
vex him with two trials at once? The injus-
tice of this is manifest. l presume from the
nature of the case that the evidence is very vol
luminous, consisting of record papers and oval
testimony. Can we compel the production OF
these while they are wanted for purposes of
the trial at st. Louis? Certainly not If the
military be as the constitution declares, subor-
dinate to the civil authorities, shall we proceed
-
rance of the facts. That cannot be the wish of
anybody. take it for granted that the trial at
st. Louis will be fair, as we'll as legal, and that
the judgment will be according to the very
truth and justice of the cause. 1t will without
question be binding upon us, upon the govern
ment, upon him and upon all the world. If he
shall be convicted no decision of ours could res
cue him out of the hands of the law. If he is
acquitted our belief in his innocence will be of
no consequence. If we anticipate the trial in
the civil court our judgment whether for accus-
ed or against him, will have and ought to have
no effect upon the jurors; 1t cannot even be
made known to them, and any attempt to in
fuence them by it would justly be regarded as
an obstruction of public justice On the other
hand, his conviction would be conclusive evil
dence of his guilt and his acqulttal will relieve
him from the necessity of showing anything
but the record. do not propose to postpone
indefinitely, but simply adjourn from day to
day until the evidence upon the subject of oul
inquiry shall receive that definite and conclu'
sive shape which will be impressed upon it by
the verdict of the jury or until our action, hav.
ing been referred to the War Department with
our opinion, that our proceeding should be stay
ed during the proceedings of the court of law
shall have been confirmed. In the case of &C
quittal BY the civil court the functions of this
court will not necessarily have terminated.
The accused may be pronounced innocent Of
any crime against the statute, and yet be guilty
of seme act which the military laws might
punish by expulsion from the army. In case
of acquittal he may insist upon showing to uE
that he has done nothing inconsistent with the
conduct of an officer and gentleman, as the
article of war runs, but the great and important
question is, guilty or not in the manner ant
form as he stands indicted, and this can legally
be answered only by a jury of his country.
The Judge Advocate then said in substance
that the court had not been fully organized
that he had received communication from
Babcock that he submitted to the court. Thi
communication requested the court to adjourn
for the present in order to admit of his appear
ance in st. Louis to answer there the charges
made against him by the grand jury. In view
of this communication the Judge Advocate
suggested that the trial be postponed for tn,
present, and that the court communicate Il
President Grant the state of the case that tn,
court might adjourn to meet again at the call O
the President. The court room was ther
cleared of spectators for consultation.
On reopenine the doors it was announced tina
the court would adjourn from day to day uu tt
its action had been communicated to the Wa
Department, and an adjournment was immedi
ately announced till noon tomorrow.