The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-02-21

SECOND.


Approved. I'm so far as il declares that
the officers of Tho court martial acted
from honest motives. and did right in re-
solving not 10 proceed with the business
before them-thc court not having been
called ma accordance with United
states army regulations.
D.sapprcved. I'm so far as 1t declares
that there was nothing improper in the
manner Of the courts proceedings. The
court. after resolving that 1t was illegally
called. should have adjourned Temporal
rily and submitted its conclusions TO TIE
colonel commanding the regiment ana
awaited his orders The record shows
no adjournment. but. in effect, d dissolu-
ton Of the court by itself.
1HIRp
Approved except wherein II declares
that the colonel of the regiment failed
to Indicate either his approval or dis
approval of the action OF the court, in
the regular and proper manner The
record Of the proceedings of the court
martial which was returned 20 the Colo
mel showed that the court had held that
il was not a court, and declined 10 pro-
ceod-that it had put an end 10 its own
existence. The Colonel therefore, could
not indicate his approval or disapproval
10 a court as TO its action after II had
ceased TO exist. tf might nave lf-' oIl-
vened the court FOR a reconsideration Of
its action. with suggestions for its guild
aucc." but this was optional with him
a.. 5 Army Reg. Paragraph 1913. Be
sides. he had every reason 10 believe that
the court if re-convencd. would not
change or modify its conclusion.
FOURTH.
Disapprovcd. The letter of the Colonel
ID bef
.>.a. was q statement Of facts. as he UNI
d.r-tood them. al expression of opinion
as 10 the law. and an appeal for prompt
action u the interest OF discipline. lie
had received a letter from the brigade
commander. sustaining his view OF the
law. and saving. Il know no reason why
the members of this court. who were
present ou the 27th day OF NoVemtor
lNH should not be proceeded against for
disobedience of orders. But YOU will take
such action in the matter as the neccs-
stiles and the facts may. IN your Judg-
mont warrant or demand ~
He was brcIeht face 10 face with Very
serious matter He was 10th TO believe
as stated in his letter TO the brigade
commander. that 1t was the intention
OF these officers TO put the discipline Of
the regiment I'm jeopardy He issued
am order for these officers to convene AT
the armory the night OF December 10th.
That night, prior 10 the meetnS captain
George Wayne Anderson. one or the oli-
GERS named i'm the order met him ana
sked him what the purpose of the meet
ing was. He replied he was in great
trouble: ne did not want to court martial
the whole business but did not see how
he could get out Of it," Captain Ander-
son informed the Colonel IL was incon-
vcnient for him TO attend the meeting
and asked 10 l., excuse G. The Colonel eN-
cuSed him. after some further talk, ana
told him he would not regard his alb
senc, a lisobedienCc Of orders.
II il was the intention Of The colonel
in calling the meeting 10 censure or re-
primand he officers ne would hardly
have excused Captain Anderson from al
tending This action upon the part OF
the Colonel. taken in connection with MS
remarks that he was in great trouble
indicated that his purpose IN conVenihg
the officers was TO confer with them ana
a. certain if some way could not be found
10 relieve him Of a painful duty. II"
states in his testimony that wheh the re-
port OF the action Of the court reached
him. he considered that il brought UP
very grave and serious question ana ne
brought the officers there ito the armory
for the purpose Of giving them such intor-
maticn as he had to date. ara to near
what they had 10 say on the subject ne
fore he took any acton in the matter.
Major Derbyshire testified that he talked
with the Colonel at the armory just be
fore the officers arrived. and the Col
Onel told him that he had called the Of
ncers there Ito ascertain their reasons
for dissolying the court
As to what actually occurred at the ar
mory after the officers arrived. the cyl
dence is conflicting. But certain facts are
established beyond question: First. That
the meeting was informal. Second. That
the Colonel read parts of his letter TO the
brigade commander Of December l, 1924.
and parts Of the reply OF the brigade
commander OF December I. 1871. fdir
summary OF what occurred alter these
letters were read would be as follows:
The Colonel insisted the court was wrong
and the officers had disobeyed orders and
We're liable 10 be court-martialed. The
of GERS. or those who participated In the
discussion insisted that the action OF the
court was right: that the officers acted
honestly and were ready 10 stand by
their action that 1.-The manner OF the
officers was respectful. and the Colonel
treated them with due respect" (See
testimony OF Colonel Phillips) But the
discussion was animated. and both sides
were positive In manner. That what IVES
said and done was not In the nature OF