Evening capital. (Annapolis, Md.) 1884-1910, 1906-01-04
THE KAVY'S THUMB CODE.
STARTLING REVELATION MADE
IN TESTIMONY.
Thumb Wig Wagging Plays An
Important Part In The
Naval Academy
Cases.
"PLEBES" DARE NOT DISoBEY
THE SIGNALS.

"PLEbES'' DAl<E NOI DlSUbE1
THE SIGNALS.
During the course of the testimony
adduced today in the eourt martial
proceedings against Midshipman Worth
W. Fos6sR, of New Albany, Ind..
charged ~sah four acts of hazing in
which Fourth Classman Chester $.
Roberts was alleged TO be the victim,
it was brought out that there is code
of signals in which the position of
the upper olassman' S thumb indicates
to the lower elassman that re must
answer certain questions as to himself
and finally to stand on his head.
The 'plebe' is ordered into one of
the small rooms and only tho arm of
the upper claSsman protrudes. Thus he
is unable 10 say whose body is attach
ed to the arm, though he dare not dis
obey the signals of the wagging thumb.
The code is this: The perpendicular
thumb means What's your Nance
The thumb to the left. "Where are
you from - To the right, "Who is
your pred. ?'' predecessor in the Aoad-
emy from the same Congressional dis.
trict. The inverted thumb Get on
your head. - The prosecution had the
handicap today of having TO face the
most evident reluctance of the prose
cutting witness and the other members
of the fourth class to say anything
that would fix the OifenSe on the &C.
cused They had the appearance Of
being coached TO fall back on the lack
of definite recollection'as 10 anything
which fixed upon Foster as the man
who had done any hazing Roberts
was particularly in this position and
finally the court warned him that he
was under his oath TO tell to the best
of his knowledge and belief all that
he knew about the circumstances upon
which the trial was founded.
IL was noticeable, however, that the
second classmeu particularly Midship-
ann Maunier while they were un-
doubtedly just as anxious TO avoid in
juring oonrade, gave their testimony
in q straight forward manner and
their failure to recollect certain points
was evidently due to a natural indis-
tinctness of recollection as to matters
which made no particular impression
ON them at the time. The four speci.
fications under the charge of bazing
all referred TO Roberts. They alleged
in order that he compelled him TO
| hang from a clothes locker. on or
about December 10, 1905 that he com
| pelled him to stand on his head about
| 90 times at about the same period
that he compelled him to get under
the table and eat his desert on Decem-
Der II, 1905, or thereabouts, and that
| he did the same sometime between
October II, 1905. and December 10,
1905. To all the charges and speoifoa-
tions the accused plead not guilty.
Mr.. T.. S. Theall. Fosters counsel,
then filed an objection to the first,
second and fourth specifications in the
nature of demurrer for lack of def
niteness as to the time and place of
the occurrences. The court held, how
ever, that the charges and specifica.
tions were technically correct and in
proper form.
The first witness called was Mid.
shipman Chester S. Roberts. whom, il
is alleged, Foster hazed It was most
| difficult for the Judge Advocate TO
get satisfactory answers from this wit
/ ness, but at last it was elected that
he had been ordered by the accused
| to come TO his (the accused 50 room
and there had been compelled to stand
on his head and then hang from the
llocker. Foster then asked him if he
thought he could hear better at the
| table. The witness had said that he
had done the best he could before and
was ordered back on the locker. He
was also ordered to do "No. lG - The
witness then told of being ordered
under the table Foster who is the
ranking cadet officer at his end OF the
| table, had ordered him under twice,
| he said, for not reporting the dessert
correctly. He fixed the dates as near
| ly as possible and said that on one Of
| the occasions bananas were the dessert
and the other it was zig dates He had
| been passed the desserts by either
Rice or Campbell Of his own class.
| On cross examination Roberts said
| that he was not absolutely positive
| that Foster had been tie person whose
| signals be had obeyed, but his state
i ment "that Foster had ordered him
| to the room, dismissed him and had
| ordered him under the table were IN
| shaken. Midshipman Will Il. Man
nier, a second classman, was the next
| witness. At the request Of the ac-
cused's counsel, he was warned that
he need not give any testimony that
| incriminated himself When asked if
he had ever seen Roberts ordered nm
der the table the witness asked the
court if being present when such a
| thing was ordered and not reporting
itjW ould incriminate him. The court
ruled that il would not If lie had moi
actively engaged in it. MANNER then
said that he had seen Roberts sent
under the table on one occasion anC
that he was under the impression tEa
Foster had sent him under there. II
asked by a classmste casually, th'
witness said. who had sent Robei Il
under the table, he would have saiC
that it was Foster who had sent hin
under. Still, he said, the circum
| stances had made small impression OF
him at the time and this fact was thu
only reason for any doubt in his mine
about the matter. He also said tina
| Foster was the only first classman a
the end of the table and that he un
derstood sending under the table to b
a first class late" or exclusive priv
ilege.
Midshipman William L. Beck au'
lC. r. HYATT we're both second class
/ men and said that they were at tn
table with Foster and Roberts whel
the latter was sent under the table
They both gave testimony along tn
lines Of that given by MANNER, to th
| effect that their belief was that Foste
| had given the order; that he was IN