The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1880-07-01
The Babc0ck Court General HancOck't
motion terminating proceedings.

The Babcock Court-GeneraI HancOck'8
motion terminating proceedings.
Gen. W. S. Hancock arose in his place
and addressing the Court, said:
Mr.. PRECEDENT l have a motion to
make to the Court which will be proper
to be made before the Court is sworn, il
it be made at all. If the Court are
prepared to hear me, l will proceed at
once.
Lieut.. Gen. Sheridan-Proceed, Gen
eral; the Court will hear you.
Gen. Hancock then read the following
motion A sense Of duty to the laws, to
the military service, and to the accused
impels me to ask your concurrence in a
~postponement of this inquiry for the
present. We are all bound to believe in
the entire innocence of Gen. Babcock,
and this presumption cannot be repealed
without tie evidence. 1t is due to him
to suppose that the court of inquiry was
asked in good faith for the reasons given.
What are these reasons? In the course
of legal trial in st. Louis, Col. Babcock
was alleged to be guilty of a high crimi.
nal offence. He asked for a hearing in
the same court, but was informed that he
could not have it, because the evidence
was closed. These circumstances had
led him to demand a court of INQUIRY as
the only means Of vindiCation that was
left. Since then he has been formally
indicted, and is now certain of getting
that full and fair trial before an impair.
tial jury which the laws Of the country
guarantee to all of it's citizens. The sup
posed necessity of conYening a military
court for the determination of his guilt
or innocence no longer exists. 1t is not
believed that our action as a military
tribunal can GUST the jurisdiction of the
court in which the indictment is pending.
The President has said, through the At.
torney.G General, that such was not the
intention. Then the trial at st. Louis
and this inquiry must 60 on at the same
time time, unless we await the result 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
injustice of this is manifest.
l presume from the nature of the case
that the evidence is very voluminous,
consisting of records, papers, and oral
testimony. Can we compel the produC.
ton Of these while they are wanted for
the purposes Of the trial at St. LouisP
Certainly not, if the military be, as the
Constitution declares, subordinate to the
civil authorities. Shall we proceed with.
out evidence and give an opinion in ig.
norance of the faCts2That cannot be the
wish Of anybody. I take il 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 jus.
tice Of the cause. It will, without ques-
ton, be binding and conclusive upon us,
upon the Government, upon the accused,
and upon the world. 1t he should be
convicted, no decision offs our could res.
cue him from the hands of the law. II
he is acquitted, our belief in his limo,
cence will be Of no consequence. II we
anticipate the trial in the civil court, our
judgment, whether for the accused or
against him, will have, and ought to have
no effect upon the jurors. 1t cannot even
be made known to them, and any at
tempt 10 influence them byit would Justly
be regarded as an obstruction of public
justice. On the other hand his Convic.
ton there would be conclusive evidence
of his guilt, and his aCquittal will relieve
him Of the necessity Of showing any
thing but the record. l do not propose
to postpone indefinitely, but simply 10
adjourn from day to day until the evil
dence upon the subject of our inquiry
shall receive that definite and conclusive
shape which shall be impressed upon it
by the verdict Of the jury; or until our
sction, having been referred to the War
Department, with u opinion that our
proceedings should be stayed during the
proceedings Of the court of law, shall
have been confirmed. In case Of acquit.
tai by the civil court, the functions Of
this court will not necessarily have end.
ed. The accused may be pronounced
innocent Of any crime against the stat
ute, and yet be guilty Of some act which
the military law might punish by expul-
sion from the army. In case Of acquit-