The sun., 1903-12-23
Did nr. Wood Pervert MIR. Roots
Instructions"

Among the charges preferred in the
Wood investigation by the Committee on
Military Affairs there appeared one in
reference to the use of eI pdrte testi-
mony in the postal cases. Compare
lively little seems to have been said upon
this point during the hearings, but a
question of no small Importance is in
volved in it.
review of the proceedings of that
now celebrated case gives prominence
to two features of interest in connection
with the alleged Use Of e1 pdrte testimony
IN the course of the trial. One of these
lies in the fact that Gen. WOOD appears
10 have violated the orders Of the Secre-
tary of War; and the other III the fact
that interrogatory letters, whether used
as eI parte testimony or otherwise, we're
admitted in the postal trials contrary to
the provisions of Spanish law.
The first of these features requires
review Of a series Of communications
upon this topic which passed between
Gen. WooD and the War Department. In
response to request for an opinion on
the subject, the War Department, on
Nov. q, 1901, sent to the Military Gov
ernor letter of instructions, which laid
down the broad principle of Anglo
Saxon law that er pdrte testimony was
inadmissble, and informed Gen. WooD
that "in case it be the intention OF the
prosecution to make use as evidence in
the trial of the testimony applied for in
the United States, you shall Immediately
inform the proper judicial authorities
hat this cannot be allowed.
The communication proceeds with
reference to an act Of Congress, passed
.fune 4, 1900, in regard to the "eXtradition
nf persons accused of crime in any for
eign country, or any territory occupied
by or under the control of the United
States" This act guaranteed to all such
persons "a fair and impartial trial The
letter Of instructions declares that Il
trial in which er pdrte testimony is used
cannot be regarded as "a fair and i'm
martial trial" and therefore such testi-
nlonv cannot be used at the trial. 1t
further states that -any one Of the facts
testified TO in said dispositions that may
hn considered necessary to sustain the
prosecution shall have to be proved by
oral testimony given by the witness
before the Court, with opportunity to
cross-examine. This letter states not
only n law, but a principle OF law.
Replying to this. Gen WOOD addressed
to The Secretary of War a letter which
declared that the procedure employed
was lin strict accordance with the laws
and practice in force in Cuba and that
every opportunity had been afforded to
the defence to submit cross-interroga-
tories. The letter, dated Dec. l. 1901,
closes with the statement that the Mill
tarv Governor strongly recommends
that the Court be permitted to judge
in all that pertains to the admissibility
nf evidence. whether documentary or
oral.
Apparently enlightened by the eluci
tlation of an intricate point in Spanish
law as interpreted by doctor of medi-
,ine. Secretary Root replied, under date
of Dec. G. that in view of the fact that all
appeared to be straight and proper, his
letter Of Nov. 9"is therefore to be deemed
modified" so far as it affected letters
reouisi,orial upon which full and fair
opportunity to file cross-interrogatories
was afforded" This communication also
provided that the Court should be left
to determine the admissibility of such
evidence upon its submission.
In view of this modification OF the pro-
hibitory letter Of Nov. Q, quoted above,
transmitted to the courts on Nov. "A,
some interest attaches to the following
extract from letter addressed to the
ludiencia of Havana by the Cuban
secretary Of Justice, on Dec. @;
The Military Governor directs me 10 inform
YOU that the letter OF Nov "A lquoted aborel and
me instructions therein contained are by this letter
rfmacd and tha, the use OF the results OF Inter.
Iogaory letters Is allowed In the trial of the postal
csses.-
Thus Secretary RooTs instructions of