Phillipsburg herald. [volume] (Phillipsburg, Kan.) 1882-1905, 1891-01-29


GTHEN I REFUSE TO DO Ir,n
to give his personal service under the
punishments imposed upon him by the
articles of war. No other obligation
must be put in competition with this;
neither parental authority nor relig-
ious scruples, nor personal safety, nor
pecuniary advantages from other SER
vice. All the duties of his life are. &C
cording to the theory of military obedi-
ence, absorbed in that one duty of
obeying the commands of the officers
set over him"
By principle inherent in the sys-
tenn the subordinate position held by
the person to whom a command is adj
dressed forbids the presumption that
he may decide whether or not the
thing commanded is necessary for the
maintenance of discipline. The person
who gives the command is recognized
as the one who has the means of de-
Gliding as to the necessity, and to him
attaches the responsibility of deciding
correctly.
Whatever the right to give an order
may be, the right to disObey cannot be
founded on the fact that the thing
commanded Is not a usual or recog-
circumstances within the knowledge of
him who gives the command may
bring within sphere of military authori-
ty that to which it would not ordinari-
" extend. While members of the
military service are bound bya solemn
oath to obey all lawful orders of their
superlors, they are not sworn to dis
obey unlawful ones. Disobedience of
an unlawful order is left entirely to
the discretion of the actor in each par
ticular case, subject to approval or
punishment as may be subsequently,
adjudged. In all cases where there is
the least doubt as to the lawfulness of
orders, the moral obligation of the
oath calls for obedience.
Obedience to 1G7Ild10ftCl orders is
often not only iustifable but highly
meritOrious. This is shown by the
readiness and unanimity with which
indemnity laws are passed for the pro-
lection of those concerned, and by
the public approval and favor some
times shown to the most conspicuous
actors In disobedience. The fame ac-
quired by General Dix for his order to
shoot on the spot any man who at
tempted to haul down the American
flag Is case in point.
executed, would effect some palpable
outrage against moral or religious OBJ
legations, which all laws profess to re-
gard, and which cannot be superseded
by the partial regulations of a par
ticular society, that soldiers can hope
for indemnity In resistance of the
commands of a superior. And, even
then, when the alternative Is between
two offenses. and the choice. must be
determined by the adoption of the less
instead of the greater-of the dis
obedience of command, or the com
mission of some outrageous civil or
military crime-the responsibility will
always be upon the inferior to show
that the commands he would otherwise
be bounden to obey are manifestly and
palpably Illegal; else he may involve
himself IN the guilt, and certainly in
the penalty of q positive crime, under
the suppOsition or pretense of avoiding
an imaginary one
Prompt, ready, I'M
hesitating obedience in soldiers to
those who are set over them is
so necessary to the safety of the mill
tary state, and to the success of every
military achievement, that it would be
pernicious to have it understood that
military disObedienee, in any instance,
may go unquestioned.7 Except in the
solitary instance where the legality of
an order is glaringlv apparent on the
face of it, a military subordinate is
compelled to complete and undeviat-
ing obedience to the very letter of the
command received.
- Hence it Is scarcely
possible to imagine a case where
a subordinate would be at hber-
ty to depart from the positive COM
mand of his superior" (Samuel's Law
Military
90 So long as the or
6ers of a superior are not obvious
ly and decidedly in opposition to
the well-known and established Gus
toms of the army, or the laws of the
land-or, if in opposition to such laws,
do not tend to an irreparable result
so long must the orders of a superior
meet prompt, immediate and unhesi-
Eating obedience. Rehec-
ton and consideration, therefore, when
tending to question the order of a
superior, must. IN some sense. be con
sidered as military offense." (Sirl-
mons on Court-Martial.)
And so the substance of conclusions
arrived at by all authorities on military
law is that almost blind obedience is
the safe rule for every subordinate,