Barbour County index. [volume] (Medicine Lodge, Kan.) 1880-current, 1890-06-25
ABOUT COURTS-MARTIAL.
The Methods of Procedure in the
Navy and Army.
An Institution Which Had It's Origin Away
Back in the Days Of Chivalry-How an
Independent and Unbiased YER
dict Ii Secured.


The naval court-martial of to-day has
its origin away back in the days of chiv-
airy, although the many customs and
formalities that at present obtain do not
go back quite so far. Our methods, says
the New York Times, are based largely
upon those of the English navy, and it
was not until the Long Parliament In
1643 passed an ordinance in relation to
martial law for the navy that written
records of the proceedings were re-
quired.
The military punishments in the time
OF Charles II. were inflicted very spar
ingly, but so quickly that public notice
was not attracted. About this time
code OF laws was framed by which crimes
and offenses were specified, and were
directed to be inquired into and punished
by courts-martial held for the purpose
Provision was also made for Judge Ad-
vocate, who was empowered to admins
ter oaths, examine witnesses, and SO
forth. 1t was only a few years later
that an amendment was added to bill
assigning death or such other punish
ment as court-martial should adjudge,
for desertion or mutiny, to the effect
that no sentence of death should be
passed except between the hours of six
in the morning and one in the after
noon. This, according to Macaulay, was
because dinner was early, and hard
drinking being one of the qualifications
OF gentleman, it was not supposed that
any member of a court-martial, after
dining, would be in state in which he
could safely be trusted with the lives of
his fellow-creatures.
In ITS the first law for governing our
navy was passed by Congress, and it re-
ferred to penalties for the losing of a
man-of-war through negligence or mis-
conduct. During the following year a
Board of Admiralty was established,
having, among other things, the power
of ordering courts-martial, and 1t was
recommended to the executive authori-
ties of different States to compel the at
tendance of witnesses before courts
martial. A Secretary of Marine was
authorized year or SO later, and he was
vested with authority to order courts
martial and was ordered to transmit to
Congress the proceedings of any court re-
commending capital sentence. Cap
tains of vessels were authorized to ap-
point courts for all but commissioned
officers, power that they still hold,
but the proceedings of these summary
courts, as they are called, are to be ap-
proved by the senior officer present
after revision by the captain, excepting
in cases where men are sentenced to loss
of pay, which are always submitted to
the Secretary of the Navy.
The earlier law stated that general
courts were to be composed of not more
than thirteen members nor less than
five, and the Judge Advocate was at that
time the only one bound by oath not to
disclose the vote or opinion of any mem
Der of the court unless obliged so to do
in due course of law; whereas now all of
the members are obliged to add that
clause to their oaths, ''to we'll and truly
try the case now depending" BY the
same articles, courts were empowered to
imprison in cases Of contempt of court
or refusal to give evidence.
The conception of courts-martial as
courts of honor as we'll as courts of
justice is acknowledged by the great
limitation given by the expression ''or
a
martial may direct" which is found SO
frequently as an alternative for penal
ties prescribed for certain offenses
Sentences extending to loss Of life re-
quire the concurrence of two-thirds of
the members present, whereas less
severe sentences require only amaiority
of the votes. Sentences of death, as
well as those of dismissal OF a COM
missioned or warrant officer, must be
approved by the President.
When all of the evidence for the
prosecution and the defense has been
submitted, and the accused has made
any statement he may care to make, the
court is cleared for deliberation, and
then the members are ready, the voting
is taken on the specification of the first
charge, each member writing his
opinion as to whether or not the
specification is proved, proved in part
or not proved. The votes are recorded
by the Judge Advocate, who announces
the result. and the voting on the charge
is then proceeded with as to whether
the accused Is guilty, not guilty, or
guilty in less degree than charged,
and so on through all the charges and
specifications.
Should guilt or partial guilt be
proved, then each member writes down
what he considers an adequate punish
ment, and when each one has submitted
his opinion, they are all carefully read
over, and the voting is taken on the
mildest penalty first. The opinion of
the junior is first taken. then the next
in rank, and so on through the list, and
if majority be declared in favor of
that sentence, 1t stands as the punish
ment awarded; if not, the next mildest
is taken up and the same proceeding
gone through with until sentence ap-
proved by tho majority is agreed upon.
This custom of having the junior vote
before the Others originated in Franco,
and the reason for it was that the
Junior in rank was presumably the
youngest member of the court, and in
order that his vote should be independ-
ent and uninfluenced by the maturer
opinions of his seniors, he was obliged
to be the first to vote.
Taught Him Lesson.
Etiquette is responsible for queer
legal decision. traveller on a German
ilwav train aftaTnpfod RI oaf a Iunob