The New York herald., 1878-11-02
THE P0RlER INVESTIGATION.

THE BOARDS DECISION TO ACCEPT DOCUMENTS
COURT MARTIAL IN 1868.
In Thursdays HERALD was published the decision
Of the Board Of Investigation in the Flz John Porter
case to admit certain documentary evidence offered
by tho Generals counsel The documents referred 10
were written by General Pope since the martial
IN 1863 aud the Judge Advocate objected to It's rscep
tion that ground Following 10 the text In full OF
the Boards decsion read by General Terry at the
Presidents directi -
the opinion af the board there one feature Of hs
Of great mportancs n qasstions Of svidsncs
l. h.. tue q the a . made to .ss
This Board was not appointed 70 retry the original case
hearing All svcencs presented 70 IL. to advise
ss 8. .Ss .
% thai the o M SO e. u ns I.
that the Congress. should be invoked n the petit
Now the Board that IL should admit any evil
denee which would be proper Tor the President to
determining whether or not should exercise his
81 s on sas
nsn than evidence tnas one o. the prinsip.
qaenty made declarations contradictory 70 Or
s ns wit. n S n - 10
such evidence That
Again 50 far AS this oard Is concsrned all the test
sns come. simply
evidence wn.sa !. 70 oe eSnsiassea ~ 1nnecsoa with
ton SO far as we are acle 70 zee this record testimony
had 1sen ssp...sd before Us orally Dy the witnesses
themselves. and il is entitled 60 neither more nor
i. been % 80 given Had II been sivsn undoubisdy the
petitioner would have entitled after laying
.n, heretofore made Sy .%y wsns' asSa'sn WITH
should be applied the which CON
eisasd to Ss the sssinony
made = sas sm puSr 20 sh9 %s wssa @ ias rsSG,a
nation; This is true; but the witness whose subse-
an ali the which the Board
been exercised to bring him Eere He has declined TO at
stands the M would forod the very in
question These facts IN the opinion Of the Board. amply
nat tioa should precede the proof Of in
The President OF the Board mere remarked :--"The
Board desires add also 10 tnat that the military
code under which we are acting, whether II be the
common law OF the military service or the article OF
war Interpreted by uniform decisions OF courts
martial for0ids any distinclon in our action or In
our minds between any testimony gwen by an OH Ger
his deliberate pubic statemsnts, either IN the form
OF Official reports or OF pubic declarations rho OBJ
jcctivn is held universally TO be the same In both
cases; the penalty iof alseho0d Is In military
malion. the same in both. Therefore We do not and
cannot IN this ease recognize any difference
the sworn testimony OF officer presented here OF
record in the trial Of General Porter bstore court
MARTIAL ana his deliberate public state.
msnls In rofsrencs to that important oase,
or personal rights. We therefore admit al
printed, public, authentic declarations OF witness
before that court TO be considered hore in that light
Whether may be possible under this general ruli
10 determine what disposition TO make OF all these
papers IN question the counsel and the Recorder
assist each other IN deciuR, and thus perhaps save
the necessity OF detailed examination OF the sspa.
rate papers. So far as that not be done. the
Board win examine the papers separately and de-.