The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1905-12-15

Charges Against Him-Secretary
BOnaparte Says the Fact That Fights
Have Been Of Frequent Occurrence
Before is ImmateriaI in the Case.
With the Verdict.
Washington, December 12.--COnfine-
ments to the limits Of the naval acad-
envy for the period of one year. and a
public reprimand by the secretary of
the navy is the sentence of the
court in the case of Midchip-
man Minor Meriwether, Jr., tried
by court martial at Annapolis on the
charge of manslaughter. violation of
the third clause of the Sth article for
the government Of the navy, and con
duct 10 the prejudice of good order and
discipline: all three charges arising
from a fist fight between the accused
y Aidshipman James Il. Branch, Jr.,
.S~aashIIser 9th last. Two DAYS later
N~.Hpman Branch died. The ac-
cnVE was acquitted of the first charge,
~Hl ''uAN StIIlS vi Tie SpcOl1u ana
third. Secretary Bonaparte approved
Cue findings, and ordered that the SEN
tence be approved, but that so much
Of the penalty as might debar the ac-
.GLSed from service on any practice
snip attached to the academy be re-
mitted."
Early this morning the secretary re-
ceived a call from Representative
Broussard, of Louisiana, from whose
district Midshipman Meriwether was
appointed to the naval academy, and
made known to him the sentence of the
49, and the departments action
~6n. Mr.. BrOussard expressed his
sktiaaction with both, and it is under
stood that no congressional action will
be asked in the case.
The secretary in his review saws
there is perhaps room for some doubt
whether the punishment imposed
might not have been made more justly
severe, and disapproves the action of
the court in sustaining the challenge of
Commanders a. Staunton. as a mem
Der Of the court, on the ground of pre-
judice, and i'll failing to sustain the
challenge Of Rear Admiral A. II. Nc
COrmick, L. s. n. retired. on several
grounds.
The court found the first charge,
that Of manslaughter- mot proved
and he accused not guilty." and &C
quilted him thereof. OF this finding
Secretary Bonaparte says:
The department approves these
findings and this acquittal. The speci-
fcation was drawn upon the informal
ton as to he cause OF the ate Mid
Shipman Branch'S death, which the de-
partment had seen in the autopsy per
formed during the trial. That autopsy
disclosed certain facts which might
Justify a reasonable doubt whether the
death was i'll fact due to blows inf1ict-
ed by the accused, there being al least
SssSbility that it resulted from Il fall
cHWhich several occurred during the
fist fight in which these blows were
dealt.
There is ground to claim with some
tOrce that the and means
whereby the accused did Kill and slay'
the deceased were those not set forth
in the specification. This contention
Is certainly narrow and technical. and
the department is not TO be understood
as endorsing it; but the accused was
undoubtedly entitled to the benefit of
any reasonable doubt. and the record
d~isclOses a state of proof which, if it
Gid not compel, at least justified an
%acquittal of this charge"
OF the second and third charges, of
both Of which the accused was found
guilty. the secretary says there was
practically no dispute of the facts, and
that the department has no hest
fancy in approving the several find
1ngs of the court lastly above mep-
toned"
OF the large amount of testimony of
fered for the purpose of showing that
fights had been of frequent recurrence
at the academy, and that usually no
penalties whatever had been inflicted
upon the participants, the secretary
says:
This evidence seems to the depart
ment altogether immateria1 as affect
ing the guilt Or innocence of ahe an
cused. There can be no such thing as
a lawful custom to commit a crime.
and the fact that, through the laxlty
or want of vigilance of other persons
In the service. other old offenders had
escaped punishment, should in no wise
Justify the accused in violating the
law"
Secretary Bonaparte holds with re-
spectl 10 the evidence that the accused
was hmiliar with naval regulations
that he could ''claim no immunity on
the ground of ignorance of a law which
1t was clearly his duty to KNOW
At least two Or three men are going