The Washington times., 1906-01-04
Decatur's Fate in Hands
Of Admiral Sands

Of Admiral Sands
The fate OF Midshipman stephen De
catur. jr. first class. whose court martial
on the charge of hazing Mdshipmen Nc
Crary and Church of the fourth class
ended last evening. is now in the hands
of Admiral Sands, superintendent of the
Academy
Everybody is guessing what the yer
dict of the court Will be. II will not be
offeiany known. however. until made
public by Secretary Bonaparte.
The sympathy seems To be with De
catur and If the courts verdict is guilty.
which carries with it dismissal. there
will be about the Academy but few. if
any. to approve the findings.
The prosecution absolutely failed to
produce a single witness TO give direct
testimony against the accused. True.
Midshipman McCraTy testified that it
was Decatur who ordered him to stand
on his head and to do the IL" but he
could not specify the day on which the
hazing was done And the day mem
toned by McCrary-the day on which a
photograph was taken-as the one on
which Decatur hazed him. was shown
by the defense to have been impossible.
lively that they were present in Deca-
tul's room at the time and they did not
see McCrary there
And so far as Church was concerned.
the defense raised a doubt as 10 the
testimony. There was no denial made
that Church was in Decatur's room. and
that he was there by Decatur's order
But it was not shown that Decatur told
Church to do the 10" the witness him
self saying that on this point he might
he mistaken. And the witness. Marzoin
who was present when Church entered
the room, swore positively that Deca-
tar did not give the order 10 Church To
90 into the closet and do the 'I6'' exer-
else.
Church Charge Serious
But it's the charge of hazing Church
that may convict Decatur. for the ac-
oused admitted that he ordered Church
10 report 70 his room. and the hazing
followed. A conviction on this charge.
however, would not be in full accord
wi h the specihca tions.
d. G. Randall. associate counsel for
the defense. argued that not only the
testimony of the witnesses for the de-
Tense. but that the testimony of Nc
cuion, had raised a doubt and according
20 all the authorities Decatur should
have the benefit OF that doubt. He
stated that McCrary had testified that
the order for the picture had been read
out at supper formation. and il had
been shown that such orders are never
read at supper formation.
r. 5. Theau. senior counsel for the de-
fense, confined his argument TO the
fourth specification, which charged De
eatur with hazing Church He said thar
the prosecuting Witness himself had
raised such a rea asonable doubt that so
far as the defense was concerned IL
might very well stand alone on that
very testimony. He then quoted from
Churchs testimony 70 show that the
latter was by no means certain that De
catur had ordered him 10 10 the .l6''
exercise. Mr.. Theall charged that
Church impeached his own testimony
when he told his classmates last Sunday
that the more he thought about it the
less willing ne was 10 swear that De
catur told him to do IT,
Counsel argued with force that
Church's testimony was indefinite and
uncertain. He spoke Of Decatur's excel
lent character Tor truth and veracitv
and in view OF the testimony gwen on
this point the court must accept the
statement Of the accused as having
equal weight with that Of the prose
cutting witness. Mr. Church If there
were no other testimony admitted in the
case, a reasonable doubt must be raised
in the mind Of the court. because OF the
fact that Mr.. Church himself admits
that he might have been mistaken" Mr..
Theall made quite an impression.
Judge Advocates Argument.
Judge Advocate Harrison took only
few minutes 10 sum up for the prose-
cution. He paid a tribute to Midship-
man McCrary. who. he said. was one Of
the best witnesses in the case. The
manner OF the witness. he said, was the
best, perhaps. OF any who was on the
stand. His TESTIMONY" said he. was
as direct as could be desired, and I
think he came out Of his CrOss-examina-
ton with flying colOrs."
The judge advocate said he believed
McCrary was mistaken as to the date
of the occurrences. but he was honestly
mistaken. The mistake should not dis
credit his testimony He identified the
accused without hesitation Referring to
Midshipman Church. the Judge advo-
cate said ii was admitted by the ac-
Cused that he ordered Church 10 report
10 his room. Church went there and
was hazed by some one not positively
identified
II was a few minutes past 3 o'clock
when the case was submitted 70 the
ss=z~=zzzzszz.lz.s.zz>s