Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-12-01
THE COURT REBUKED
GEN. GRANTS REMARKS ON
LIEUT.. LYNcH's SENTENCE.

Second Lieut.. Arthur ]. Lynch. 18th Cav
airy. was recently tried by general court
martial at Fort Jay. N. Y, on the charge
of conduct to the prejudice of good order
and military discipline and the charge Of
! conduct unbecomfng officer and gentle
man. on account of several alleged financial
irregularities. He was convicted of hypothe-
eating his pay accounts for the months of
September and November, 1908. in viola
ton of the army regulations and sentenced
to be reduced fifteen files in his grade in
one case and five files in another case.
The Court Rebuked.
Gen. Grant commanding the department
of the east, In passing upon the case, took
occasion to administer somewhat severe
rebuke to the court for its findings and SEN
tence 'It appears that on August %
1906 says Gen. Grant, Lieut.. Lynch made
transferred and delivered his pay account
for the month of September 1903, in pay
ment of or security for payment Of note
held by Louis Silverman of New York city
that all of the facts alleged in the charges
and specifications are proved beyond the
shadow of doubt. and that late on October
he wired Mr.. Silverman that he had been
ordered away from his post for five days
and to please hold the vouchers. that is, the
pay account which he had so transferred to
him, until his return, and he would pay
extra for the privilege, without notifying
him that his pay had already been collected
for September, which telegram was received
on October 3. He therefore committed the
fraud and Justification set forth in the third
specification to the second charge and made
the certificate set forth IN the first specifi-
cation and the letter set forth in the second
specification for the purpose of concealing
the fact that he had actually transferred
that pay account on August %, 1905. On
September 80 he collected his pay from the
tod 70 fhrnit hi Tome Of
TENDER 10, 1905, and such payment, though
on an account which ought not to have
been made. was full acquittance of the
United States for his salary for the month
of September, and rendered additionally
false the claim which was mailed on Octo-
Der by Mr.. Silverman. In reference to his
acts set forth in the third specificat ton,
their character seems to be well described
by the views of the judge advocate general
of the army in a case where assignment
was made before the account was due, as
follows:
When an officer assigns a pay account
the account passes beyond his CONTROL no
matter what the purpose may have been
for which the assignment was made, the
assigned account is valid one In the hands
| OF the assignee, and for the officer to make
a duplication of the account is military
CRIME which may be charged under the
siXtieth, sXty-firSt or sixty-second articles
| Of war, or all three of them. Whether the
assignee presents the original account or
not, has nothing to do with the case, If the
original account is in existence and dupli-
| cate account is made and assigned or pre-
scented for payment, the offense is commit
| ted. The law will not take into considera-
| tlon the question of whether the assignee
| holds the account collateral for its face
value or whether he holds it as a club over
| the assignor with the idea that if a certain
debt is not paid the account will be present.
ed to the military authorities with a view to
the punishment of the assignor'
The reviewing authority regrets that the
court sees no offense in the acts of Lieut.
Lynch which have been accurately set forth
In the charges and specifications and proved
beyond any doubt, and that the court holds
such conduct Of less Importance than the
violation of an army regulation as set forth
In the specification to the first charge. Sub
1ect to these remarks the sentence Is ap-
proved and will be forwarded to the War
Department for execution"