Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-02-06
THE WHITE HOUSE,

.7st-H LIE WHILE f1OOoEss
WASHINGTON. February 1. 1eO6.
''Sir: have directed that Q pardon be IT,
sued to John Paul Miller. midshpman al
the United States Naval Academy. recently
convicted OF hazing and sentenced to dis
missal from the academy In the discus
sion Of this case my attention has been call
ed forcibly to the unsatisfactory condition
OF the law on this subject. A midshipman &C.
cused Of hazing. whether the extent Of his
ofrense be great or small. must be tried by
court-martial. The findings OF such q
court. II approved by the superintendent OF
the academy, are declared final and cannot
be reviewed by the Secretary OF the Navy
or even by me, and neither the court itself,
nor the superintendent. nor the Secretary of
the Navy has any discretion as to the pun
ishment to be imposed. 1t Is declared that.
In all cases OF conviction. the offender shall
be dismissed and be ineligible for appoint
ment as commissioned officer of the
Army. Navy or Marine Corps during q
specified time. These provisions of law seem
to me neither just nor judicious. and I am
seriously concerned at the injury which i
rear may be done to the discipline of the
academy and even to the future efficiency
or the navy II they are permitted to remain
IN force without amendment. heartily
dlsapprove OF the practice OF haxing and,
IN common with all those interested in the
welfare of the academy wish to see this
practice thoroughly eradicated there.
Punishment Disproportionate.
But the punishment Of dismissal IL alto
gether disproportionate to the culpabflity
involved In some forms Of hazinG. In many
cases these amount to nothing more than
exhibitions Of boyish mischief, attended
with no consequences Of any moment to
those hazed. and indicating on the part of
the hazers only some exuberance of animal
spirits. UnQuestionably they ought to be
punished. for under any circumstances haz-
ing constitutes a breach Of the rules and
the future officers Of our navy must he
taught. first Of all and as foundation for
all other merits. strict and unQuestioning
youth by deprfvinE the young man con-
youth by depriving the young men con-
cerned Of his career In life is to commit a
glazing injustice. Moreover. 1t frequently
defeats the object Of the law itself by caus-
Ing the offenders fault to be forgotten In
the sympathy felt for his misfortune. so
that it becomes hard to get conviction.
and when one is obtained the pressure q
very great on Congress to pass a law re-
storing the offender In addition. this dis
proportionate punishment of what may be
q trivial o1ensc may result in depriving
the government OF a promising officer on
whose education 1t has already expended
several thousands of dollars. do not mean
that dismissal is too severe a penalty for
any form of haZing; on the contrary, when
hazing is a mere pretext for brutality and
involves cruel and ignominious treatment
of the less experienced. and therefore more
helpless midshfpmen. l should be glad to
see 1t punished even more severely But It
seems clear to me that to impose dismissal
as the one invariable penalty for the Of
Tense, without any regard to the attendant
circumstances, Is altogether indefensibIe.
In the case of Midshipman Miller the Navy
Department in recommending his pardon
expressed the opinion that he ought to be
punished, but that to punish him with dis
missal would be greater injustice, under
the circumstances of his case, than to let
opinion, and it has dictated my course in
this instance
Error to Try by Court-Martial.
I think further that it is an error to try
midshipmen accused of hazing by court
power lodged in some administrative officer
or body to deal summarily with such Of
lenses. In none of our colleges or univer-
stiles is 1t considered necessary that a stu
dent whose conduct Is unsatisfactory, and
who Is believed to be an injury to other
students, should be found guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt by judicial tribunal of an
meal accuracy before he can be separated
from the institution. Such a requirement
would be disastrous to the good order and
discipline of college or university, and
ducing these unfortunate results at our
academy. Whether this discretionary au-
thority should be intrusted to the Secretary
of the Navy or to the superintendent. sub
ject to the Secretarys approval, or to the
academic council with the like proviso, IL
of altogether subordinate importance. What
seems to me of real moment and no less
real urgency is that 1t should be lodged
somewhere, and that the present cumbrous,
uncertain and otherwise highly objection
able method OF enforcing the law against
this particular offense should be done away
with. I see no objection, however, to the
departments being allowed. in its discre-
ton. to try midshipmen at the academy
by court-martial for hazing or other Of
lenses, II by reason of peculiar circum-
stances the Secretary of the Navy should
think this course proper to attain the ends
of justice.
have written to you thus fully and
frankly because / learn that there Is under
consideration by your committee a bill, or
perhaps several bills, intended to remedy
the present very unsatisfactory condition
of the law. I express no opinion as to any
matters of detail connected with this sug-
gested legislation. but would see with
much regret the present session of Con-
gress end without some remedy being
found for a situation full of embarrassment
for the Navy Department and OF danger for
the best interests of the navy.
Very truly yours,
THEODORE ROOSEVELT.
NORTHUMBERLAND ~