The National tribune., 1890-10-16

Justification, however, for his enlistment under tho
enemy's standard and thus, even for limited time,
give him aid and comfort IL IL were allowable for
n captured soldier to join tho enemy for the pur-
pose of escaping the privations and hardships OF
prison life, the principle would be established that
a prisoner of would become simply n recruit
for the enemy. In law, a mans intentions and
motives are to Judged by his overt acts. Such
being the case. and in view of the provisions of
the statute, it must he held that the soldier did
render voluntary aid and comfort TO the late re-
bellion against the authority of the United States
Gen. Bussoy attacks this ruling upon strictly
legal grounds. and in an exhaustive argument
controverts its conclusions. He shows that it
was contrary to rulings of previous Secretaries
of the Interior, and of ge-Advocate-Gon-
eral Holt He concludes as follows:
Tho records in the case show that the claimant
was veteran soldier, whose reenlstment In the
Union army. after gallant service of two years.
was dated Sept. IL, 1863 He captured In bat
tie July 30. 1864. He was conveyed to rebel mill
tary prison and kept in Distressing confinement Mt
Andersonvic, Ga number of months. Finally,
on Jan. %. 1865. he accepted the alternB-
tive of enlistment In tho rebel service, with view
To escape from the enemy, rather than continue in
tho walls of AndersonvilleP Prison In fact his list
ment under the circumstances was but the contin-
uaton, in another form, of the durcss and impris-
onment To which he had been subjected, and should
be so construed.
Can such enlistment by a veteran soldier
under such circumstances be properly regarded ~
voluntary? Was IL not, In fact. repulsive? And
wns IL other than n device whereby the soldier
sought to return TO the Federal lines reoin the
company OF his old comrades aud again enjoy the
protection of the flag for which he had fought and
imperiled his life during four years of nrduous
service? He swears that the said enlistment
just such device, and proof of the statement Is
found in the fact that he did return to the Federal
lines; that, having effected his escape
practicable he came under the OF the Federal
authorities, and was returned by them to his COM
pany st Camp Pratt, w. Va, June 3, 1865; that he
was received by his commanding officers and by
his comrades IA worthy associate. and that he
honoraby discharged from the Federal service
This record is 81 complete viudicntiou of the SOL
dier's motive, LOYALTY and honor A deserter, as
auch, cannot bc discharged from the service, but
must bc hold for trial and punishment. II does
not appear, however. that the soldier whose Hp-
peal Is under consideration was ever subjected to
trinl nor to the slightest penalty. Surely,
an honorable discharge equivalent to AN hon
escape from the enemy was believed then by his
comrades u was, ~ shown by the record. accepted
IA true by the War Department aud II - no part
of the duty Of this Department nt this late period
to try and convict him upon allegation which
was neither preferred against him Contem-
plated at the time when he returned from captivity
to the shelter OF his cOuntry's standard
Apart from the fact that the Department in the
administration of the pension systcm-which Is in
no sense penal syStcm-has no authority either
to prescribe or to enforce penalties for alleged
oncnses against the articles OF war hold that IL
must be controlled in NIL coming before 10 for
adjudication by the fundamental rule that the
rights of the soldier aud the citizen alike never
he taken away nor forfeited except 10y the express
terms of the law. the uctunl aud obvious meaning
of which should be taken without resort to sub
tie and forced construction, / respectfully over
rule the former decision of your office, aud grant
the pension sought