Evening capital. (Annapolis, Md.) 1884-1910, 1906-01-15
SHORT SESSION Of COURT.
MIDSHIPMAN MILLER'S TRIAL
Is CONCLUDED.
His Counsel's Lengthy Address
Chaffeur Failed to Pull Head
lights Ear of Hu
man Auto.
STRONG PLEA IS MADE FOR
THE DEPENDENT.

The trial of Midshipman John p.
Miller, of Ian 3atSer. KY, on allega.
tious of haziDg foul fourth claSsmen,
was concluded this morning shortly be-
fore noon and the CONT was closed "a
consider its findings Contrary to
expectations, the defence introduced
no more witnesses and the morning s
session was occupied with a Lengthy V
address of Col. Lauchheimer, counsel
for the defense and a concise reply
from Judge Advocate Harrison
The counsel for the defense made his
strongest point on the contention that
the four midshipmen had come to
Miller's room in a disorderly manner
and that Miller had exercised his dis
cretion as a cadet officer to punish
them. He did not dispute the evil
dence of the facts as presented by the
prosecution. but denied the intent to
haze had been established beyond a
reasonable doubt. "TLis," he said,
'must be established, and | submit
that nothing more than an error of
Judgment has been shown in this
case. -
Col. Lauchheimer went over the in.
cident, as related by the different
witnesses, in detail. He said that the
four under classmen had come to
Miller's room unlimited and had sim
ulated an automobile. "They had run
around the room several times,'' he
said, because the chaffeur had failed
TO pull the headlights ear and had
jostled the accused. He was very
properly indignant at such treatment
and had reprimanded them, told them
to do the SIXTEENTH" as punishment
and then reprimanded them again.
Three of the plebes appear to have
taken it in the proper spirit. and the
fou nth, De Mott, had not so that the
latter was summoned to the room on
several nights and the exercise con-
tinued. To show the accused's sim
cerity in the matter. he also sought
out the upper classmen who had sent
the automobile to his loom and ad-
monished them in strong terms
Col. Lauchheimer then urged that
the regulations of the Naval Academy
imposed the duty upon cadet officers of
suppressing disorders and unseemly
noises and that Miller was acting
Witain the powers of discretion grant
these powers in mistaken manner, 4"
he urged, tbut as long as the discre-
tion was exercised. you are bound
to give him the benefit of any doubte,
in the matter, you cannot find him
guilty of any wrongful intent. The
intent, he said, was the essence of this
as of every other offence of criminal
nature. 1t cannot be assumed and it
is excluded unless no other theory can
fit the facts. 1t must be established
by a preponderence of proof. The evil
dence of his officers has shown that
Miller was a conscientious cadet off,
e IL. 80. 4
tive. He was led into this thing
He did not seek it. If he did things
that were indiscreet, and we admit
that, it was valid mistake, not a de-
liberate attempt to fly contrary to the
laws against haZing and the regula-
tions of the Academy.
In conclusion Col. Lauchheimer
called attention TO the fact that after
nearly four years Of hard work Miller
was about to graduate near the head
his class, and that the testimony of
the officers who knew him had been
that hes had the makings of a splendid
officer. He asked the court to resolve
every doubt as to the intent in his act
in favor of the accused.
The Judge Advocate, in reply, said
that the marrow question involved
was whether or not Miller had right
to make under classmen do physical
exercises as q punishment. 'This was
admitted, he said, in regard to all
four plebes and even that it had been
continued on several nights in the case
of DeMott. All lthe officers who were
called testified that no such power
is exended to cadet officer and no
further argument to substantiate that
fact was needed before a court of
naval officers. -