The daily morning journal and courier., 1905-12-13
MERIWETHER ESCAPES
 WITH MILD PUNISHMBN I
(Continued from First Page.)

Continued from First Page.)
 ings and this acquittaI. The specified tion was drawn upon the information as to the cause of the late Midship
 man Branch's death, which the depart ment had prior to the autopsy perform ed during the trial That autopsy dis closed certain facts which might justi fly a reasonable doubt whether the death was in fact due to blows inflicted by the accused, there being at least a possibility that it resulted from a fall of which several occurred during the fist fight in which these blows were dealt. There is ground to claim with some force that the manner 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 disclOses a state of proof which, if 1t did 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 were practically no disputes of the facts and that the department has no hesitancy in approving the several findings of the court lastly above mentioned. Of the large amount of testimony offered for the purpose of showing that fights had been of frequent occurrence 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 immaterial as affect ing the guilt or innocence of the accus- ed. There can be no such thing as lawful custom to commit crime, and the fact that, through the laxity or want of vigilance Of other persons in the service, other old offenders had es- capped punishment should in no wise l justify the accused in violating the law. l That the participants in the fight all knew they were doing something wrong 1 is sufficiently shown, in the opinion of the department, by their interrupting the fight when an officer was believed to be approaching the room where it occurred. They may not have expected to receive adequate punishment, but 1 they felt it was to their interest to avoid discovery. There was also evil dence tending to show that the accused was unfamiliar with the articles for the 1 government of the navy and had not l been especially informed of the prohi- 1 bition against quarreling and fighting 1 contained in the third paragraph of ar- ticle eight. It appears very clearly, | however, from the record, that the ar ticles for the government of the navy 1 were conspicuously posted on one of the practice ships during the summer cruise and read once each week to the midshipmen on board (the accused be- l ing one of the lattei), and, since the 1 oath which he took since his admission to the academy referred specifically to these articles, the department holds that he can claim no immunity on the ground of ignorance of a law which it was clearly his duty to know"
 l Of the sentence the secretary says,
 The department has no difficulty in holding that this sentence is amply jus tilleu Dy tle oiISilS5 CoIillIllIlSu. lHsIs 1 is, indeed, room for some doubt whether the punishment imposed might not have justly been made more severe, but as to this the department need express no opinion. In one respect however it seems proper that the sentence should be mitigated so as to permit the accus- ed to participate in the next annual practice cruise"