Daily independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 188?-1915, 1890-07-02
ABOUT COURTSMARTIAL.
The Methods OF Procedure In the
Navy and Army.

formalities that at present obtain do not
go back quite 80 far. Our methods, says
the New York Times, arc based largely
upon those of the English navy, and it
was not until the Long Parliament in
1913 passed an ordinance in relation to
mart;cl law for tho navy that written
records of the proceedings were re-
quired.
In ITS the first law for governing our
navy was passed by Congress, and it re-
ferred to penalties for the losing Of q
man-of-war through negligence or mis-
conduct. During the following year q
Board Of Admiralty was established,
having, among other things, the power
OF ordering courts-martial, and it was
recommended to the executive authori-
ties OF different States to compel tho at
tendance of witnesses before courts
martial. A Secretary of Marine was
authorized a year or 80 later, and no was
vested with authority to order courts
martial and was ordered to transmit to
Congress the proceedings Of any court re-
commencing capital sentence. Cap
tains Of vessels were authorized to APP
point courts for all but commissioned
but the proceedings of these summary
courts. as they arc called, are to be ap-
proved by tho senior officer present
after revision by the captain, excepting
In cases where men arc sentenced to loss
Of pay, which are always submitted to
tho Secretary of tho Navy.
The earlier law stated that general
courts wero to BIO composed of not moro
than thirteen members nor less than
five, and the Judge Advocate was at that
time tho only ono bound by oath not to
disclose the vote or opinion or any mem
bcr of tho 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 tho
Same articles, courts wero empowered to
imprison in cases of contempt of court
or refusal to give evidence.
The conception of courts-martial as
courts of honor rs well as courts of
justice is acknowledged by tho great
limitation given by tho expression cor
such other punishment as court
martial may direct" which is found so
frequently as an alternative for penal
Sentences extending to loss of lifo re-
quire the concurrence of two-thirds of
tho members present, whereas less
sev ere sentences require only amajority
of tho votes. Sentences Of death, as
we'll as those Of dismissal OF COM
missioned or warrant officer, must DO
approved by tho President.
Whom oil of tho evidence for the
prosecution and the defense has been
submitted, and tho accused has mado
any statement he may caro- to mako, tho
court is cleared for dolibcration, and
then tho members arc ready, tho voting
is taken on tho specification of tho first
charge, each member writing his
opinion as to whether or not tho
specification is proved, proved in part
or not proved. Tho votes arc recorded
by tho Judge Advocate, who announces
tho result, and the voting on tho charge
is thon proceeded with rs to whether
tho accused is guilty, not guilty, or
guilty in less degree than charged,
and so on through all tho charges and
specifications.
Should guilt or partial guilt DO
proved, thon each member writes down
"nat no Considers an adequate punish
ment, and when zach ono has submitted
his opinion, thoy arc all carefully read
over, and tho voting is taken on tho
mildest penalty first. Tho opinion of
tho junior Is FIRST takon then tho next
in rank, and 30 on through tho list, and
If majority BIO declared in favor of
that sentence, 1t stands as the punish
ment awarded; II not, tho next mildest
is taken up and the samo proceeding
gone through with until sentence APP
proved by tho majority 10 agreed upon.
This custom OF having tho junior vote
before the others originated in France,
and the reason for it was that tho
Junior in rank was presumably tho
youngest member Of tho court, and in
order that his vote should be independ-
ont and uninfluoncod by tho maturcr
opinions of his seniors, no was obliged