The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1880-03-19
COCKS NOTION TERMINATING
49, :: PROCEEDINGS. rr.

Gen. VS.. Hancock arose in his place
and addressing the Court, said:
| Mr.. President: i have q motion to
make to the Court which will be pro-
per to he made before the Court Is
sworn, If it be made at all. If the
Court are prepared to hear me, will
proceed at once. -, r-.F
Lieut.-Gen. simultaneously Gen.
eral the Court will hear you.
| Gen. Hancock then read the follow
ing motion: A sense of duty to the
laws, to military service, and to the
accused impels me to ask your con-
currence in a postponement of this
inquiry for the present. We are all
bound to believe in the entire innocence
| Of Gen. Babcock, and this presumk,-
ton cannot be repealed without the
evidence. 1t is due to him to suppose
that the court of inquiry was asked In
good faith for the reasons given. What
were these reasons? In the course of
a legal trial in st. Louis, Col. Babcock
was alleged to be guilty ola high GRIM
| inal offence. He asked for a hearing
in the same court, but was informed
that he could not have it, because the
evidence was closed. The circum-
stances had led him to demand a,
court of inquiry, as the only means of
vindicatfon that was left. Since then
he has been formally indicted, and is
now certain of getting that full and
fair trial before an impartial jury which
the laws of the country guarantee to
all its citizens. The supposed necessity
of converting q military court for the
determination of his guilt or innocence
no longer exists. 1t is not believed
that our action us n military tribunal
can Dust the Jurisdiction of the court In
f<1R, 1Sntsr
President has said, through the At
t0rney-Gcneral that such was not the
intention. Then the trial at st. Louis
and this inquiry must go on at the
same time, unless Wo await the result
of the inquiry there. So.
The difficulties are very formidable.
The accused must be present at the
trial of the Indictment. Shall we pro-
coed and hear tho cause behind his
back, or shall we vex him with two
trials at once? The injustice of this
is manifest. ~
1 presume, from the nature of the
case, that the evidence is very volum-
inous, consisting of records, papers, and
production of these while they are
wanted for the purpose of the trial at
st. Louis? Certainly not, if the milit-
ary be, as tho Constitution declares,
subordinate to the civil authorities.
Shall we proceed without evidence,
and give an opinion in ignorance of
the facts? That cannot be the wish OF
anybody. I take it for granted that
the trial Mt 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, he binding and conclusive
upon us, the Government, upon the
accused, and upon the world. If he
ours could rescue him from the hands
of the law. If he is acquitted, our be-
lief in his innocence will be of no con-
sequence. If 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 know to them, and any attempt
to influence then, by it would justly be
regarded as an obstruction of public
justice. On the other hand, his con-
victiOn there would be conclusive owl
dence of his guilt, and his acquittal
will relieve him of the necessity of
showing anything but the record. /
do not propose to postpone indefinitely,
but simply to adjourn from day to day
j
until inquiry shall receive that definite
and conclusive shape whichwil bc inn
pressed upon it by the verdict of the
jury; or until our action, having been
referred to the War Department., with
our opinion that our proceedings should
DO stayed during the proceedings of
tho court of law, shall have been con-
firmed. In case of acquittal by the civil
court, tho functions of this court will
not necessarily have terminated. The
accused may DO pronounced innocent
of any crime against the statute, and
yet be guilty of some act which the
military law might punish by expul-
sion from the army. In case of &C.
quittal, he may insist upon showing 10
us that he has done nothing inconsis-
tent with "thc conduct Of an officer
and a gentleman" as the article OF war
runs; but the great and important
question is, "Guiity or not in manner
aud form as he stands indicted ?'' and
this can be legally answered only by a
jury of his country.
| now TO OBTAIN SLEEP.
The following is recommended rs Il
cffrv. FIR alocbleSSnaSs. H\Vot half n