The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-03-20

death penalty on a spy. though under the
rules of war even a spy is not to be pun
ished without some sort of a trial. though
it be no more than a drum-head court-mar-
tial. "a spy taken in the act" says one of
the rules of war adopted by the recent in
ternational conference at The Hague. can
not be punished without a preliminary
trial" Under this rule the trial Of a spy
taken in the act may be very informal and
by a tribunal organized to convict. but
there must be a trial Of some kind. But
what constitutes a spy? To quote again
from the rules adopted by The Hague con-
ference:
An individual cannot be considered a spy
unless, acting clandestinely or under false
pretenses, he obtains. or seeks TO obtain,
information in the zone of a belligerents
operations. with intent to communicate ii to
the opposite party. Military persons. there
fore. who. not being in disguise. have pene-
trated into the zone Of operations of the
enemy 5 army. with a view 10 OBTAIN IN
formation, are not to be considered as spies.
1t is very clear that under this definition
a soldier who has not penetrated into the
zone of the belligerent's operations.
and who is not trying to obtain
information for the use of his own
side, but who is fighting in the
open. is in no sense a spy, even though he
wear the enemy's uniform and be captured
with it on. Whatever his motive may be
for wearing the enemy's uniform-comfort,
convenience, economy or some other-it is
not for spying purposes. 1t is true that
wearing the enemy's uniform may give the
wearers some advantages, but is it any
thing more than a ruse of war, or is it
worse than an ambush? Unless wearing
the enemy's uniform in broad daylight and
openly fighting with it on constitutes a spy,
soldiers captured while wearing it are en-
titled to be treated as prisoners of war.
Some light is thrown on the subject by a
recent life of "%StonewalI' jackson written
by an ex-Confederate officer. Early in the
book. writing of the first month of the war,
the author says that Jackson's two assist
ants, like himself, still wore the plain blue
uniform of the Virginia Military Institute"
Three months later he writes that ]. L. b..
Stuart. operating with Jackson. still vore
the uniform of the United States army"
He tells how Stuart, still wearing the uni
form of the United States army, captured
a squad of Union infantry, as the enemy
suspected nothing, taking him for one OF
their own cavalry" In another place he
says: The only standing order in the Eng
lish Army of the Peninsula which re-
ferred to dress forbade the wearing of the
enemy's uniform. 1t was the same in the
Army of the Valley, although at a later pc
riod even this order was of necessity ig-
nored." He says the Confederate soldiers
depended to a large degree for their cloth
ing on what they captured. and when his
uniform fell to pieces he waited for the next
victory to supply himself with a new out
fit" These statements are chiefly interest
ing as showing that if the Beers
are wearing the British khaki uniform they
are probably doing so for the same reason
that our rebels wore the federal uniform,
~namely-that they cannot do any better.
But they ought not for that reason be
treated as spies. Once captured they
should be treated as prisoners Of war. no
matter what they were wearing when cap
fured