The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-01-24
A MILITARY WRANGLE.

George Perault was, IN 1867 elected member OF
Company +, Seventh regiment. He served six years.
being arraigned before court martial upon
charges OF alleged dclinq and Deficiencies
expelled Last fall he appealed to be reinsated the
ground that the meeting OF the company which he
WAS expelled was not legal meeting, Tor the reason
that the captain OF the company, whose duty
1t was 10 preside, did do, although
present tho time. The matter having been
brought before Juage Westbrook. thou holding
Special erin, he, after hearing an elaborate
argument entered an order renstating Mr.. Pcrault,
whereupon the latter again entered upon his duties
a member OF tho regiment. Later stil, Peraut was
served with another notice 20 appear at another court
martial to be held nc tho armory TO answer charge OF
'delnqucncies and Deficiencies" he appeared as
requested and told by George W. Rand and others
comprising the court martial that the charges were
the that had already been preferred against him
previous martial and had already been passed
upon. Upon being informed OF this he asked 10 be
allowed 10 see counsel but was refused. The trial
through his counsel, Mr.. Henry II. Morange obtained
AN injunction restraining the defendants, Rand and
others, from rctrying him on tho same charges.
Judge Brady however, dissolved this Injunction. and
appeal taken irosn this order to the General
Term
MIR. Morange yesterday made motion before Judge
Donohuc, ia supreme Court, Chambers, for Judgment
asmuch us 1t admits all the allegations upon which
tho plaintiff relies. Perault, IT Is claimed, not
only insists that tho answer admits that the
present court martial are about to retry him on tho
charges, but that they aver they have right SO
DO Mr.. Morange contendcd that the constitution Of
the State OF New York provides:-''No person shall be
subject to be twice put In jeopardy for tho same Of
fence" And admitting, simply Tor the sake Of argu-
ment, that defendant Is not in jeopardy, as above
stated, yet there can be no question whatever that
party against whom verdict has been rem
dercd has been put IN jeopardy. II the
decndant--i E., the party accused-has actually
suffered the punishment Of the law future proceed
ings carried on against him. And prisoner
against whom wrong judgment has been pronounced,
upon regular trial and COW cton cannot be subjected
TO another trial The court martial which tried tho
plaintiff herein, in March. 1873, u legally
constituted tribunal. Tho offence and charges
preferred subjected the plaintiff to penal
ties, among which expulsion, the loss OF
right exemption from military duty, entire obter
alton Of the six years he had already served immunity
IRON certain amount Of State and city tax, the prv
lege of entering the Veterans corps shall 1t be
SAID that this case not one within the meaning
purvlcw and almost literal sense Of the prohibition
that he shall not DO again placed IN jeopardy.
Even what Is termed "American Military Jurispru-
dence' condems and actually prohibits party from
beng twice placed in jeopardy Tor the same offence
And the British statute enacts THAT no officer or
soldier being acquitted or convicted O! any offence
shall be liable to be tired second time by the or
any other court martial Tor the same offence" TO
demonstrate TO the Court how tender and wachiul
the compors OF the articles OF war, the eighty
eighth article declares that mo officer, nOn.com
stoned officer soldier follower Of tho army shall
tried second time tor the offence" In conclu-
sion 1t claimed that the motion should be
granted. Judge Donohue after an argument IN opp0-
sitiOn took the papers. reServing his DECISION.