Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-01-26

"a s,er having gotten Colonel Nalle TO
coli ,hc court iust mentioned, did you
call any yourselfy .., T..
existence at that time. o.. .n,,
"DId Il remain in existence Tor any
'',''y "Ycs SIR and think IT tried Private
Bradley. OF Company A. A.
Upon what authority did you cam 'ne
RIGHT 10 call general courts-martiai.
.t-nder General Order No. 3.
"It has been stated that you are In the
habit Of calling general cOurts-martiai 10
consist OF thirteen members. Has that
been your practice" =,
1894"
HOW ORDERS WERE ISSUED.
''The method Of Issuing orders pursued
by us was this" continued Colonel Jones:
I'VE employed a sergeant-maJor. paying
him so a month TO come TO the armory
every night. 1t was customary for me 10
tell him 10 issue orders. There was some
trouble about getting a sufficient number
OF officers To attend. and instructed nm,
forgetful OF the fact that was limited Dy
law 10 eight. TO increase the number, L
did not notice my error until my attention
was called to II by the Governor
Being asked what took place between
himself and Captain Anderson when that
gentleman met him In headquarters-roon
and asked 20 be relieved from service On
I.
clIned 10 relieve him because he did not
consider his reasons sufficient Witness
did not recollect ever having given assent
10 a suggestion from Captain Anderson
that he (Anderson) instruct the Judge
advocate 10 raise the question OF legality
before the court of November 9th. The
first knowledge OF the action OF the court
reached him on December lst when the
proceedings were forwarded 10 him, tie
then wrote letter to Colonel Male,
tnh xnrftk he rArnlV
put in evidence. Upon the return OF the
papers by Colonel Nalle he had the off,
GERS summoned 10 meet him. ana all com
Piled. with the execution Of Captain Cy-
rus Bossieux. The Colonel gave the fol-
lowing statement Of the occurrences
which took place them 81 first read the
proceedings OF the courtmartlal to them.
! then read my letter OF December lst
and then the letter of Colonel Nalle or
December 7th. and | also read portion
of the Adjutant-Generafs letter referring
especially to the subject under considera-
ton
What was your object in calling the
officers there?" the witness was asked.
after getting the decision that the or
der was Illegal considered that II brought
UP very serious issue-One thaJ would
have a grave effect on the regiment-and
] brought the officers there to give them
what information I had up 10 date. and
further TO hear anything they might de-
sire to say on the subject before / took
any action In the matter"
WHAT CAPTAIN ANDERSON SAID.
After having read the papers. tell what
then took place"
Il cannot state at what time the re-
marks of Captain Anderson began, but /
think after | finished reading the paper.
He argued that I had no right to order
the court, and was very positive ] won't
attempt TO quote his exact language. His
argument was that ! hadn't the right TO
general fq-T1u =
seemed 90 firmly fixed in his opinion that
ne was right that no opinion, even one 50
high as the Governors could change him.
lie said further that II IL transpired that
they were to be court-martialled they must
stand together and employ the Judge-Ad-
Vocate-General TO defend them II neces-
sary. lie asked me what / intended to
do and what they must do. His manner
he was very earnest. and seemed some
what excited. He said that the proper
course for me TO pursue would have
been TO return the papers TO the court
martial After the meeting | conferred
with the Leutenant-Colonel and Major
ana we agreed between ourselves that we
would return. / afterwards had an inter-
view with the Governor and he, after
me to wait until heard from him again.
| saw him again with Lieutenant knight,
ana suggested the publication Of State
regulations on the subjects of courts-mar-
Ing TO any conclusion. / sent the papers
on TO brigade headquarters"
NO ATTEMPT TO BULLDOZE.
Colonel Jones disclaimed having at
tempted or intended to bulldoze his off,
GERS. He said that had the Judge-Advo-
larity in the number of his courts he
would have rectihed II at once
Colonel Jones filed with his answer
orders rs, for e9urts,martial issued by Cen
eral Mcdonald Adjutant- General. Novem-
her -, 1892. and by General Anderson
Mr., Meredith: State whether the court
martial before whom DePriest was
brought consisted of thirteen members, as
stated by Lieutenant Mills, or of what
number It did consist.
Colonel Jones: General orders No. 90
detailed for that court five officers and a
| judge advocate.
Colonel Boykin: VIII you please tell me
If you know where the records of said
court are?
Colonel Jones: have them.
Colonel Boykin: Have the records been
referred TO the Brigade Commander?
Colonel Jones: Yes. sir.
Colonel BOykin: Please state whether
you have been able to find a copy Of your
letter to Colonel Male, and his letter t.
you in connection with this matter. II
so where are they; please produce them.
Colonel Jones: | have not been able TO
find them.
Colonel Boykin stated that the Court
had telegrephed to Colonel Nalle for the
papers. and had not yet received reply.
Mr.. Meredith asked that Colonel Jones
| state the contents Of said papers. Objec-
/ ton was made to this question, because
the papers in question had not been pro-
duced.
THE USUAL CUSTOM.
The Colonel in answer TO Colonel Boy
| kin's interrogation. said II was the GUS
| tom 10 forward papers Of such nature 10
the Brigade Commander He said his i'm
preston in this matter was that he sent
certain charges to Colonel Nalle and
Z from him received an order to convene
general cOurts-martial. The general court
/ martial alluded TO in Colonel Joness let
/ ter. he declared. was the one ordered
I July II. 1894. which was on August 29, 1894
| modified by the ordering of anew court
| martial.
There was great deal OF questioning
! OF the witness on the part of Colonel Boy
! kin as to what courtmartial was re-
! fcrred to in the letter written to Colonel
/ Nalle by Colonel Jones. which Is part
/ Of the record OF the court. Colonel Jones
| admitted that court appointed under order
! No. 81 was the court referred to In the
1 letter, and the one whose conduct was
! now being investigated. Colonel Boykin
| speaking upon this question, said his pur-
| pose was to get right at the bottom OF
| this court-martial.
"Will you please state whether or not
| In reply 10 the formal letter 10 Colonel
| Nalle alluded to In your letter OF Decem-
| Der lst you received an order to appoint
a cOurt-martial, and If so II this court
| martial referred to was appointed In pur-
/ suance OF the letter from Colonel Nalle?
! Acting on the authority from Colonel
4 Male appointed and continued TO appoint
! general courts-martial as was necessary
! / wrote that letter to avoid any question
I OF Jurisdiction. AS 10 whether this Is the
! first cOurt-martial since that letter l can
I not tell. This is as near az | can give
my memory of a paper that / have not
I seen for some time" replied the witness
Colonel Boykin asked by what authority
was the cOurt-martial whose conduct Is
now being investigated appointed, and
| Colonel Jones said that he construed the
| reply OF Colonel Nalle TO instruct him "a
| order such courts-martial when needed.
us II your opinion or understanding
! that General Orders No 3 empowers you
| TO appoint courts-martial and detail there
to thirteen men?' interrogated the Re-
| corder.
"No. sir: not as ! understand II now.
| stated this In my direct examination.
The witness In reply to further ques-
tions said that he did not now think that
a court OF nine men and a judge-advocate
was a legally constituted court. lie con-
sidered the action of the members OF the
court-martial "A disobedience or orders,
and he so informed them.