New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-10-11
GEN. SCHOFIELD REBCKED.
THE ARREST OF MAJOR ARMIES PRO
NOJJNCED ILLEGAL

NOUNCED ILLEGAL
JUDGE BRADLEY ORDERS HIS DISCHARGE FROM
CUSTODY. CHARACTERIzING THE ACTION
OF GENERAL. sc1IoFIELD AS UNJUST.
ARBITRARY AND TYRANNIcAL
AN APPEAL TO BE TAKEN
FROM THE DECISION.
Washington. Oct lO-Major George 4. Armes, a
retired Army officer arrested some days ago on the
order OF Lieutenant General Schohei while act
ing as Secretary Of War. was discharged from
custody this morning in Judge Bradleys court
on the prisoners application for his permanent
discharge on writ OF habeas corpus. The Courts
opinion was read from carefully prepared writ
ten copy and closed with 4 vigorous denunciation
Of the order Of General Schoheld. The quiet crit-
cism Of some Army officers concerning the method
OF the arrest was transformed by the court into
severe structures on General Schofeld. whose
personal feeling" held to be the only occa-
sion for the arresC and confinement or MAJOR
Armes
From the order dIschargIng Major Armes D. ~
Morrison of the dge-Advocate-Generars stan,
the attorney for the secretary Of War gave no.
tlce OF an appeal. Justice Bradley's opinion
closed as tOllOWs.
Being OF the opinion that the arrest and taking OF
the prisoner into custody. carrying MN away from
his home quarters to barracks not ms own, anu anu
holding him In close arrest without any ant1ce
dent charge Of crime preferred In any way asdns'
him. was and IL unjust unlawful, arbitrary yrannn,'
cal and capricious on the part OF Gehcfa ScIloeu
in whatever capacity he acted whether es lleu'eh-
ant-General or as Secretary OF War ana that me
prisoner is entitled to be discharged 1t Is so ORDERED"
The opinion entered largely into a review Of
the Army regulations and the relative standing
OF retired and active officers. OF the 1861 regu-
lations, only one imposed a duty on retifed
officer, that Of informing the Department OF his
address every month 1t true that the
President commander-ln-chief of the retired
officers and the Secretary of War represented
him in that capacity. but this command was not
accompanied by burdenlng care or weighty re-
sponsibilltes The return to the writ made by
Colonel Closson. in whose custody the prisoner
was placed, showed that General Schoheld was
Acting Secretary Of War when the letter Of
Major Armes was delivered to him. and the de-
livery Of the letter said lc be an offence
committed in his presence Whether this meta
physical problem could be maintained was. Judge
Bradley said not material.
STATUS OF RETIRED OFFICERS.
The court dwelt for some time on the fact
that the punishment for the offence committed
was either by reprlrland or dismissal. and, this
being true. his arrest and confinement did not
seem to be essential. The statements made in
the letter delivered 10 General Schofleld contained
some grave charges, but If they were true, or If
Major Armes believed thought they were well
founded was it, the court asked. breach or
military discipline for him to complain or seek
Justice for what he felt to be a grievance! The
Army regulations provided for the investigation
Of grievances OF alleged wrongful acts committed
on an officer or common solder in active
service. ami could It be possible, Judge Bradley
asked thai q retired officer. engaged IN private
business could not complain without being ar
rested and thrown into imprisonment! IL such
the case, an unjust discrimination existed
which should early be brought to the attention
Of Congress.
Judge Bradley referred to the regulations cover
ing arrests Of officers stipulatlng that they should
simply be directed II go t. their quarters. ana
called atteltion TO the violation of that resuId-
ton in this case although without the power
to assign him to duty" said the court, yet the
petitioner. at his residence. having no barracks,
tent or quarters, In violation OF Regulation s9l,
which prescribes the manner in which arrests
may be imposed and In "iolatiOn n the sixty
NTH article of war. without the existence OF the
slightest necessity for either arrest or confne-
ment or any occasion therefor except the graft
hcation of a personal feeling. the petitioner was
taken into custody by an officer with a file or
under the order which required him to be held
under close arrest unde' guard II necessary. If
he were liable at all for arrest and confinement.
the only arrest and confinement that could be
lawfully imposed would be such as Is prescribed
by the Articles Of War
WILL ARMES BE COURT-MARTIALLED?
The announcement by Mr.. Morrison that APP
peal would be taken from the decision Of Judge
Bradley injected an unexpected element of un-
certainty into the speculatOns regarding the fu-
ture course Of proceedings. It was said at the
War Department: wnen the charges based uron
General Schoneld's action fOrmall. uraferred
against Major Armes that court-martial would
be summoned and the prisoner prosecuted before
It, irrespective OF the decision in the habeas
corpus case No date was named however, for
the calling Of the court. and to-day when inquiry
was made at the Judge AdvOca Generals office.
Colonel Lieber replied that he h I'd nothing to say
and no information to give about the Armes case.
From Mr.. Morrison's action in the matter 1t is
inferred that the court-martal proceedings
against Major Armes will be held In allegiance,
awaiting further proceedings IN the habeas corpus
case.
1t has been said also that If the courts found the
action Of General Schofeld to be Illegal and un-
warranted, Armes would bring a suit for dam
ages but IL is not known that he will do so.
4 decision by the Assistant Secretary of War.
issued In circular form by General Miles to-day.
for the information OF the Army. Is not exactly
applicable to the Schofeld-Armes case, but the
present prominence OF that affair makes 1t OF un-
usual interest. The decision in question relates to
the trial by a military court Of a soldier on bail
for trial by a civil court. and is as follows
4 solder on bail for trial by civil court may
while he is in this status be brought before mill
cannot interfere with the civil. and IL term of
court; the military trial must be postponed. As the
ceedlngs, his pay status is not affected thereby.