Evening capital. (Annapolis, Md.) 1884-1910, 1906-01-08
MARTONrS TRIAL CONTINUED
LITTLE EVIDENCE WAS INTRO
DUCED IN TESTIMONY.
Decatur To Be Given Another Hear
ing Before The Court Mar
tial In The Near
Future.
AN OFFICIAL DENIAL MADE OF
NEWSPAPER REPORTS.

II The court martial now in session at
the Naval Academy continued the trial
of the case of Midshipman Petersen
B. Marzoni, alleged to be connected
with hazing in six different instances.
today. Little evidence was introduced
by the defence and none by the Judge
Advocate in rebuttal, so that most Of
the morning session was devoted to
the remarks of Mr.. George Ii. Mann,
for the defence. and Judge Advocate
Harrison for the prosecution.
Mr.. Mann claimed failure OF proof
in the first. fifth and sixth speoifca-
tions, in all of which the requirement
of physical exercises was alleged. and
that the other specifications, relating
TO the bringing of food to Marzoni by
under classmen. did not sufficiently
establish hazing, though the facts we've
admitted. The sixth specification was
practi sally abandoned, though the
Ju 1ge Advocate maintained that the
first and fifth were established. He
also urged that the bringing of food
by the under clsssmen was done under
compulsion and that il was a menial
service, and as such was clearly haz-
ing.
The next midshipman TO be tried is
Stephen Deactur, Jr.. a member. of
the first class, who has already been
tried aud acquitted on charges of haz-
ing. The new case against Decatur
consists of two charges The first is
under the Act Of 1874, and it is alleged
that he sent Midshipman Chester $.
Roberts, of Joliet, H., TO Marzopi's s
room with the message, ''If she had
been a dog, do you think she would
have taken it, This led to Roberts
being hazed, it is stated. The second
specification is that Decatur compelled
Fourth Classman Charles G. w.
Mailley, of Stroumsburg, Neb., to
bring him articles of food.
The second charge is of "enoourag-
ing or countenanoing hazing' under
the Act of 1903. The only specification
is that he countenanced the hazing of
Gaylord Church, of Meadville, Pa.
One of the specifications in the charge
of which Decatur has been acquitted
was that Decatur had hazed Church,
but there was failure of proof, De-
catur admitting. however, that he was
present when Church was hazed by
being ordered to do the sixteenth. ="
There may be a defence under this
specification that the accused is being
put in jeopardy twice for the same
act. Mr.. Il. S. Iheall, of Washington,
will continue az Deoatur's counsel.
1t is likely that delay will be asked
until the opening OF tomoIrow's ses-
sion Of the court.
It,was absolutely denied at the office
of Superintendent Sands this morning
that it was contemplated to bring ad.
ditional charges against Decatur or
Marzoni in@s.case OF their acquittal
The bringing Of additional charges
de pends entirely, it was stated, upon
the facts brought cut by the court Of
inquiry and the fact that a midship-
man had been tried and acquitted did
not make the authorities in the least
degree anxious to get charges upon
which they could convict him. A pub
lished report put the Naval Academy
authorities in the position of deter
mining to secure the dismissal Of any
midshipman against whom charges had
once been filed. This attitude is alb
solutely denied in an official way.
The only " illness introduced in Mar
zoni's case this morning was Prof.
Stimson j. Brown, a professor of math-
ematics at the Naval Academy and a
graduate of that institution. One of
the points in the case upon which Mr..
Mann relied was that the Congress of
1874 lad in mind a system when they
provided the penalty of dismissal for
hazing than what goes on under that
name at the Naval Academy at present.
Professor Brown was a midshipman
at that time and it was sought TO be
proved by him that PRACTICES of 6
much rougher aud more cruel nature
were then in vogue and became known
to the members of Congress. Tlis.
he thouhgt. shed light on the practices
which were meant by hazing at that
time. particularly as the Act referred
to the practice commonly known al
| hazing.
An objection was lodged to this line
of questioning by the Judge Advocate
on the groundIthat it was irrelevant
and the objection was sustained by
| the court. This shut out line OF ties
timony which would have been inter
esting, if not applicable, as several
other former midshipmen, now in tht
Navy aud out of il, were on hand and
they would have given an interesting
comparison between the systems Of
hazing in the old and new navy. One
of the witnesses, now dentist in thG
city of Annapolis, had been summoned
| TO tell of how he had been compelled
| to tear down a section of gas pipe K
drive upper classmen from his room
This was not allowed to appear in evi
dence, however.
Although Mr.. Mann did not get thii
line Of evidence before the court di
rectly, ne resorted TO the old expe
dient of lawyers Of telling in his ar
gument what would have been proven
/ if the witnesses had been allowed Il
| testify. He took the ground that the
newspapers had pTejudiced the public
against the midshipmen by publishing
exaggerated accounts cf bazing anC
| that the settlement Of the case of hi
client would be regarded as affirming
or denying the assertion that the mid
| shipmen were brutes. As none hal
made this charge and it is hard Il
see where the court could be affected
| by newspaper accounts when the evi
dence in the case was before them, j
was difficult to see the bearing Of thi
line of argument. The prosecution
did not offer any witnesses in rebuttal
Mr.. Mann, in his remarks, treated
| the first, fifth and sixth specification
| together, as they all alleged some form
of physical nazing. He said that the
| testimony of the accusing witnesses al
to the first and fifth specifications wa
not certain, while in both intAnces i
was absolutely denied by Marzonl
The sixth specification, alleging tina