Evening journal., 1919-02-28
DIMES PERSHING
DIrO]EYS OI.DERS
Baker Says General Hasn'I
eglected Court Martial
Revision Rule
BAKER DEFENDS
u. S. COMMANDER
By The United Press.


shlng has not refused TO obey War
department Number 81 providing re-
view Of court martials by the Judge
Advocate General in France, according
to a statement by Secretary Of War
Baker.
After receiving a personal report
from Judge Advocate General Growder
today the secretary authorized an ex-
planation Of the situation surrounding
the order and this explanation contra
dicted charges made yesterday by Rep
resentatove Royal Johnson.
In the first place il was pointed out
order Number 81 was issued September
A., 1918, PRIOR 10 the recent Campbell
court martial revision controversy.
This order provided for a review by
acting Judge Advocate General Creigher
with the A. E. F. This involved a new
policy since Judge Advocate General
Bethel Of the A. E. F., ordinarily re-
views cases.
According 10 Baker, Pershlng ques-
TONED the legality Of No. 81 and want
ed an Interpretation OF 1t on the
grounds that it was contrary to orders
swing supreme command abroad. The
request for Interpretation is now be-
fore CrOwder who will soon render
decision. Why the request was so
long in reaching Crowder was not ex-
plslned.
Pershlng's request cannot possibly
be construed as being insubordinate,' ~
II was stated.
Representative Johnson. who was
wounded In the Argonne fighting while
serving with the American expedition
ary forces, declared yesterday the
court martial laws OF the army ARE ar
chaic and belong to medieval times" A
too strict and technical Interpretation
Of them, he said, had resulted in all Of
the difficulties that arose over extreme
and unjust sentences being imposed for
minor Oflenses.
4 Repr sentative Johnson declared he
was discussing the subject because OF
The refusal Of General Pershing to sub
NIT the court-ma tial cases from over
seas for review. He said:
Il would not inject this discussion
at this time but for the fact that / am
Informed that general order eighty-four.
issued by the War Department in the
/ last few days since the discussion Of
this question, ordered the commanding
chief OF the American expeditionary
forces in France 10 return for revision
all cases Of men sentenced under court
martial In France in the American ex-
| pedliionary forces.
The oommsnder-in-chief OF the
American expeditionary force in France
has absolutely refused 10 comply will
that order and has refused 20 send then
for revision to the Judge Advocate
Generals once in Washington on IN,
theory that the articles Of war do nof
provide that he shall be forced 10 make
the return. ! am informed and believe
IL to be the fact that among those case:
which they refuse TO send back for re
vision there are about six cases where
men are sentenced to death and will die
unless some action is taken by this
House prior to the next session.
in discussing the court-martial sit
ustion / have no desire to criticize
either the Secretary OF War or General
Crowder. Both Of them realize they arc
not responsible for the court-martial
system.
Justice must be national. The nation
cannot establish justice In one class
and deny 10 In another. Justice must
be applied uniformly TO all. There can
be no such thing as justice to the citi-
zen and injustice TO the soldier. The
national thought and interest should be
more scute and anxious that justice bt
done in the army, for in the military
rather than In civil administration. Il
there greater opportunity for an op-
pressive, tyrannical and unjust exercise
Of power.
III followed, in many cases, the eX-
isting military code does not permit ot
Justice. The code and procedure un-
der II are offensive TO any enlightened
sense Of natural justice and 10 flinda
mental p.-aclples Of law.
THE Secretary Of War has admitted
the unjust judgments Of court-martia
during this war and has resorted e
partial palliatlon through the pardon
ing power. High officials in the Wal
Department have said the whole sys
TEN OF court-martial procedure 4
archaic, crude and unjust; that thou
sands Of soldiers during this war havl
suffered unjust and unlawful punish
ment and that there should be an i'm
mediate revision Of the system Of Con
gress.
The civil war leaves no stone un
turned in building up protection foi
an accused man placed in jeopardy
But the military and the practice un
der Il leaves his life to the hazard o.
What unframed, unskilled and unad
yised army offlcers may be disposeC
to do.
General Ansell has insisted repeat
edly upon a supervision Of courts-mar
tial procedure After four months stud,
Of systems Of military justice amonl
onr Allies in Europe, he returned las
July and made a report pointing on
many elements in which their system
was far superior TO our work. That re
ro-t was disregarded. ignored and new
er reached the Secretary Of War.
Charges may be and frequently ar
the result Of caprice and petty tyranny
There Is no judicial Investigation or de
termination OF whether the charge
actually allege an offense and whethe
: there is prima fscie proof TO sustain
J them. The power TO take a soldier
I life or imprison him for life or TO i'm
: nose other harsh punishment can b
|, turned on by any offlcer Of the arm,
, regardless OF his rank and experience
; There Is no ofleer Of legal or judicis
r training who is in authority to inter
pose.
Notwithstanding heavy punishments
the records are legal. Right here Is on
! OF the few criticisms Of the Judge ad
vocate general and the Secretary o
!. War. They content themselves with
;. strict technical legality Of the proceed
e ings the strict letter OF an archai