Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-02-07
Appeal to Civil Tribunal to
Prevent Punishment.
FATHER OUTLINES COURSE
Outcome of Trial of Naval Pay.
master in Boston.
ASSAULTED CIVIL PHYSICIAN
Decision of the Naval Court-Martial
Not Yet Received at the
Department.

department.
The aid of the civil courts is to be in
| voked to prevent the punishment of Pay
| master Geore p. Aud of the navy as a
| result of his recent trial by naval court
| martial at Boston for alleged insult to
and assault on DR.. COwles. a civil ply
stefan and a relative of Rear Admiral
Cowles. retired. That this course is to be
taken was indicated by Maj. Leonard of
the Marine Corps, counsel for Pay
| master Aud, in his argument before
the court-martial, and also by statements
made by Joseph Aud, father of the pay
master. who is now in this city looking
after the interests of his son.
Mr.. Aud, ST., is the editor and pro-
prietor of a newspaper at Burlington,
VT, and says he will stand by his son to
the end. on the ground that he acted the
part of a gentleman throughout, and did
nothing to justify any punishment in adj
dition to the reprimand administered by
the Secretary of the Navy. He has taken
, quarters at the Richmond, and says he
will remain in this city until the case of
his son has been disposed of by the Navy
Department. He called at the depart
| ment this forenoon and had conference
with Assistant Secretary Winthrop, to
whom the cases of Paymaster Auld and
Surgeon Robnett have been referred by
Secretary Meyer for action.
Interview Barren of Results.
| The interview was entirely friendly on
both sides, but was entirely barren OF
results for the reason that the case OF
Paymaster Aud has not yet reached the
assistant secretary. AS he informed Mr..
Aulds the records of the proceedings of the
court-martial, following the usual routine
course, are being carefully reviewed by
the judge advocate general of the navy
to make certain that the proceedings were
entirely regular. and that the finding
and sentence df any were justified by
| the evidence submitted. He told Mr.
Aud further that he had been informed
that the judge advocate general would
not complete his review OF the case be-
| lore tomorrow at the earliest.
| Until he received the papers in the case
| from the judge advocate general. Assist
ant Secretary Winthrop said he would
not know the result of the trial himself.
Consequently he was unable to give MIR.
Aud any information on that point, and.
furthermore, was not in a position to
discuss the merits OF the various ques-
tons involved, legal, ethical or profess
sional. He promised however, to inform
Mr.. Aud as to the action of the depart
| ment as soon as it shall have been taken.
Anticipates Verdict of Guilty.
| In a short conversation with Star re-
| porter this afternoon Mr.. Aud admitted
that while he had no official information
| on that point, he and his friends as
sumed that the newspapers were right
! in saying that Paymaster Aud had been
found guilty on two Of the charges made
L Tt Y, 1, = 81
| fenced him to lose several numbers In
| his grade in the pay corps. His visit 10
Washington at this time, he explained.
was to get the facts of the case and
| to see that his son is not made the VIC
| tim of injustice.
| He had never said, he declared, that he
proposed to take the case to the United
States Supreme Court and it is prema-
ture to say now what he Will do IN case
| the court has sentenced his son to be re-
| duced in his grade. His future course, he
| said would depend entirely on circum-
| stances
| AS has been already indicated by Maj
Leonard, his counsel. the specifica.
tions alleged under the first charge did
not according to Mr.. Aud. ST., consti-
| tute conduct unbecoming an officer and
| gentleman" and the court erred if ii
found him guilty on that charge. Then
again, said Mr.. Aud. his son had al
ready been reprimanded by the Secre-
tary of the Navy for his part in the af-
| fair. According to the view of himself
| and lawyers whom he had consulted. the
| infection of any additional punishment
| for that offense would be a violation OF
! the constitutional prohibition against pun
! ishing man twice for the same offense
| Aud said further that the very regu-
| lations of the navy under which the
proceedings were conducted made the
same prohibition in specific terms where
reprimand had been administered.
Quotes Naval Regulations.
| To support this statement Mr. Aud
quoted article 265 of the Naval Regula-
tons as follows:
"Oficers shall not be allowed to &C.
cumulate in order that sufficient matter
may thus be collectively obtained for a
trial without giving due notice to the
offender; and no officer who has been
| formally reprimanded for an offense shall
be subsequently tried therefor. nor shall
quiry, except when it may be indispen-
sable to prove q particular habit charg-
| ed q private reprimand, however, is no
| bar to subsequent investigation and
| trial"
| On the other hand, it is held that the
| Navy Department acted entirely within
| the law and the regulations in this case,
and that it's position in ordering the
court-martial of Paymaster Auld had
| been sustained by the law officers OF
the government. 1t is stated further that
| fere in the administration of a purely
naval proceeding, especially where the
punishment does not include imprison-
ment or dismissal There is no known