The Irish standard., 1903-01-03


question. For in the first place it is
calculated to endow him in the minds
OF many with sort OF halo of DO.
litical martyrdom, while the legal pro-
cedure in connection with his trial is
of such ponderous and costly char
acter, as we'll as so rarely employed,
that it suggests the harpoon i'll spear
ing Il minnow. The English author.
ties, however, have had their hands ii.
| measure forced by the action Of the
ialway NatiOnalists in electing Arthur
lynch to represent them in parll;l-
nent. 1t is more than probable if he
lad not been returned as a member of
.hc Home Rule party in the house of
commons he would have remained un-
molested, and no notice would have
been taken of the fact that he had
borne arms against the English flag
in the Boer war;
Indeed, there We're during the con-
tiict two or three dozen instances, if
not more, Of men among the Boer
prisoners who We're recognized, not
merely as Irishmen, but likewise as
full tledged Englishmen, some of them
former officers Of the British army and
navy, who had come to grief and who
had drifted down to South Africa and
to the Transvaal, where they had TAX
IN service against their native country.
There were tive of them among the
Boer prisoners interned on the island
of st. Helena from the time of the
surrender of Gen. Cronje until the
close Of the Boer war. But, although
the English authorities, both at the
cape and at st. Helena, were thor
oughly aware of their antecedents, and
would have been justified, both ac-
coriing to the rules of war and the
laws Furnishing high treason, in bring
ing them before Il court martial and
in sending them to the gallows, they
preferred to affect to ignore their iden-
tity. merely Withholding from them
those tokens of regard and courtesy
accorded to those of Cronje's officers
and men who were either bona tide
Beers or foreign soldiers of fortune.
This shows conclusively that the
English government would have pre-
fcrred infinitely to leave Col. Lynch
ummolested and il it has caused his
arrest and is bringing him to trial
Oh Il charge of high treason, it is bc
cause his election to parliament as
Nationalist member from Galway rem
dcrs it impossible for the authorities
to affect any longer ignorance of his
| violation of the statutes against high
treason during the conflict in South
Africa. In fact, they have had 10
alternative but to proceed against him.
High treason during war time i'll the
field is, according to the prerogative of
the British crown, dealt with by means
of court martial In times Of peace
there are two methods by which it is
tricd-by the house of lords, where
the proceedings are sometimes proceed
ed by impeachment, or by court
composed usually Of the lord chief JUS
ticc of the realm and Il jury. If the
offender is Il peer OF the realm he has.
of course. the right to demand trial 10y
his peers. impeachment is resorteu
to i'll cases where the culprit is II
statesman, Il high government official.
or a great dignitary Of the realm, and
is rcsortcd to only ut the instance of
the house Of commons, which acts as
prosecutor, the house Of lords conl-
| hining the functions of judge and
! jury. The course which is about to be
adopted in the case of Col Lynch is Il
trial by the lord chief justice and a
jury.
England's statutes on the subject of
treason date back to the year 1881,
one OF the clauses thereof defining as
high treason adherence to the kings
enemies in his realm, giving them aid
and comfort in the realm or else
where" and the penalties provided for
the punishment on conviction compriS-
ed burning at the stake when the Of
fender was Il woman. and where mon
We're concerned hanging. cutting down
before the extinction of life. dlspm-
bowelment. and ACKNOWLEDGMENT, the
head and the four quarters of the
body remaining ut the disposal Of the
crown.
During the subsequent centuries tho
laws Of high treason We're added to in
Il manner to comprise all sorts OF Of
tcnses against the sovereign and
against the state, King Henry VIII.
actually securing from parliament the
enactment OF a law rendering it high
treason for the consort of the mon
arch to have been guilty of any indis-
erection prior to becoming his queen.
This statute was, need hardly add.
devised for the purpose Of enabling
this royal Blue Beard to rid himself
OF one of his numerous consorts by
sending her to the scaffold for the
crime of high treason. But by sue
ccssivc acts Of parliament in 1877,
lS4S, and lastly 1870. high treason
was defined within more reasonable
limits and the penalties restricted in
the cases enumerated to death by