The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-10-11
District Court Sets Capt. Armes
at Liberty
AND CONDEMNS HIS ARREST,
says Confinement in Prison Was
Unlawful and Oppressive.
Inc Lieutenant Generals Action To-
ward His Old Enemy Declared to BE
Unjust, Unlawful, Arbitrary, Ty-
ranaical and Capr.cious.

Washington City, Oct. Io.-Judge Brad
ley, OF the district supreme court. TO-DAY
ordered the discharge from custody cf
Capt George y, Armes, arreSted4un the
order OF Lieut.. Gen. Schoiield lust bel lore
the iatter's retirement from the command
OF the army. for having written him an in
Sulting letter. Judge Bradley character
ized the action OF the late general as un-
lawful. tyrannous and capricious The
Judge advocate generals Office OF the war
department has determined to take an ap-
peal from the decision OF Judge Bradley
This VIII carry the matter 10 the court OF
appeals OF the District OF Columbia
In discharging Capt Armcs. whose ar
rest and confinement Gen. SChoneld lad
ordered by virtue of his position as acting
secretary OF war. Judge Bradley says.
The arrest and taking of Armes into GUS
tody, carrying him away from nis home
TO barracks. and holding him IN close ar
rest without any antecedent charge Of
crime preferred in any way against him
was and is unjust unlawful. arbitrary.
tyrannical and capricious on the part or
Gen Schofield. in whatever capacity Re
acted, whether as lieutenant general or as
acting secretary OF war. The petitioner
Is discharged
The judge then went into the matter at
considerable length and said: NO barge
was preferred against Armes at the time
OF his arrest; no crime has been charg
since and for the offense alleged no ar. est
was necessary. The arrest and contine-
ment were unlawful and oppressive. As
the ofense charged would upon substan-
tiation result only in reprimand. suspeu-
sion or dismissal. the possession OF the
body Of the accused was not necessary %
carry out the charges. as would nave been
the case II imprisonment or death was 10
be the sentence"
Speaking Of the presidents power in
army matters the Judge said The pres
ident Of the United States IS commander
in-chief of the officers Of the army on the
retired list. This function OF the chief
executive. however. is unaccomps MED
by narrowing care or weighty responsi-
biity. His title Of commander 'n-chief,
80 far as II relates to retired officers, Is
shorn OF all power to impose duties. and
appears 10 be an empty name
Judge Bradley expressly recognized tho
right to court martial retired army Of
ficer. Speaking OF the letter written 70
Gen. Schohcld by Armes, he cited the
article OF war relative 10 complaints by
officers and men. and said This was a
personal and private communication 10
that officer. IL makes grave charges OF
persecution. injustice, wrong and unjust
aud improper official action by Gen. Scho-
field 10 the petitioner. II these charges
were true. would their making be conduct
unbecomng an officer and gentleman, or
conduct preiud!cial % good order and
military discipline2 If the petitioner be
ieved or thought that they were fouDd-
e-i would IL be such conduct is 80 pos
sihle that an officer in active service may
lawfully seek redress from the COM
handing officer Of his regiment who
he thinks has wronged him. and that
common soldier may lawfully complain
OF an officer If he thinks himself wronged
by him. but retired oficer. out OF active
service, engaged in the pursuits Of civil
life. cannot complain 10 the general com
rnandiuC the army Of wrongs he believes
that general has inflicted upon him, with
out being subjected 70 summary arrest
and incarcera ton and ultimate trial by
court-martial? If so. then there Is
rigid unwritten discrimination against
such an officer that should receive early
attention from our national legislature.
The war department officials were
much disappointed aud chagrined 1T the
decision ~ Judge Bradley. Secretary La
mont refused 20 say what his purpose
was but IL is inferred, IN view ~ the
breadth 81 the decision. that no attempt
viii he made Ia try the captain by court
martial pending the action Of the anne,-
late court upon the appeal noted To-Day.
The case has outgrown its original Inn
n0rtance. I'm view Of the courts action To-
dav. and now involves. 81 is sad. he
whole question Of the amenabihty OF re-
sired officers TO discipline.