Birmingham state herald., 1895-10-11
MAJOR ARMIES DISCHARGED From the Custody of the Militia
 " Authorities. GEN. SCH0FIELD ROASTED
His Action Was Unwarrauted, Illegal, Unjust
 and TTannical.
HE MAY YET BE COURT MARTIALlD
Judge Bradley Says the Arrest and Con- finement of the Major Violated Not Only the Spirit, but the Let
 ter of the Law.


 Armes, retired army officer, arrested some days ago on the order of Lieuten-- ant-General Sehofield while acting as sec retary of war, was discharged from cus- tody this morning in Judge Bradley's court on the prisoners application for his permanent discharge on a writ of habeas corpus. The courts opinion was read from a carefully prepared written copy, and concluded with orders of Gen eral Schofield. The quiet criticism of some army officers concerning the meth cd of arrest was transformed by the court into severe strictures upon the com manding officer, whose personal feel ing" was held to be the occasion for the arrest and confinement of Major Armes. From the order discharging Major Armes, MT. J. N. Morrison of the judge advocate-generars staff, the attorney for the secretary of war, gave notice of an appeal. Justice Bradleys conclusion was as follows:
 Being of the opinion that the arrest and taking of the prisoner into custody, carrying him away from his home quar- ters to barracks not his own, and holding him in close arrest without any ante cedent of crime preferred in any way against him, was and is unjust, unlaw full, arbitrary tyrannical and capricious on the part of General Schofleld in what ever capacity he acted, whether as lieu tenant-general or as secretary of war, and that the prisoner Is entitled to be dis charged. It Is so ordered"
 The opinion entered largely into re- view of the army regulations and the relative standing of retired and active officers.
 The return to the writ made by Colonel Closson, in whose custody the prisoner was placed, showed that General Scho- field was acting secretary of war at the time Major. Armes' letter was delivered to him and the delivery of the letter was claimed to be an offense committed in his presence Whether this problem could be maintained was, Judge Bradley said, not material. The court dwelt for some time on the fact that the punish ment for the offense committed by Major Armes, If any offense had been commit ted by him, was by reprimand or dis missal. and, this being true. his arrest and confinement did not seem to be es- sential.
 Judge Bradley referred to the regula- tions covering arrests of officers, stipulat- ing that they should be simply notified to repair to their quarters, and called attention to the violation of that regula- tion 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 violations of regulations 991, which pre- scribe the manner in which arrests may be imposed, and in view of the 65th arti- cle of war, without the existence of the slightest necessity for either arrest or confinement or any occasion therefor, ex- cept the qualification of a personal feel ing, the petitioner was taken into GUS tody by an officer with a file of sol diers and carried to the Washington bar .I4- ,Izt Lt to be held under close arrest, under guard if necessary. If he was liable at all for arrest and confinement the only confine- ment that could be lawfully imposed is such as is prescribed by the articles of war"
 that there would be an appeal taken from the decision of Judge Bradley injected an unexpected element of uncertainty into the speculations regarding the future course of proceedings. It was stated at the war department. when the charges based upon General Schofield's action were formally preferred against Major Armes, that a court-nSartial would be summoned and the prisoner prosecuted before it, irrespective of the decision In the habeas corpus. No date was named however, for the calling of the court and today when inquiry was made at the judge advoca te-generals office in respect of this matter Colonel Lieber replied that he had nothing to say nor any informa- tion to give about the Armes case
 From MT. Morrison's action in the mat ter it is inferred that the proceedings against Major Armes in court-martial will be held in abeyance. awaiting further proceedings in the habeas corpus case.
 It having been stated that in the event the courts found the action of General Schofield to be illegal and unwarranted, Major Armes would enter suit for dam pI1fi f a this will be done.