soned), by whose testimony he was convicted on the main points of the charge, to bring forward an appeal against the decision of the regtl. ct.-mar. by which he was punished, such an appeal would be punished in the severest manner; as the intention of the party would be malicious, and from the absence of the witnesses formerly examined, it might not appear wholly groundless; since all the same facts might not be proved on the appeal. And, in fact, unless it should appear that there is a reasonable cause for the appeal, it will be vexatious and groundless, and to be instituted with the design of giving trouble, since the bare chance that a second trial may terminate in his favour, from some casual circumstances, would be such an appeal as would evince a litigating spirit, which it is highly proper and necessary should be repressed. There is one singular fact deserving of notice, that in the cases given under this art., as appeals, in not one of them is it stated, that the soldier was wronged by his captain, &c. The words are, " from which he was allowed to appeal." This expression, as far as regards the H. E. I. Co.'s soldiers, however, it must be recollected, was necessarily used, as the right to appeal was not given by the former act of 27th Geo. II. N. B. For the mode of proceeding before a gen., in an appeal from a regtl. ct.-mar., see Chap. XXIV. CASE 1.] G. O. C. C. 13th Dec. 1819. Gunner J. Lowe, on the following charge, on which he had been convicted before a garrison ct.-mar., held at the same station, on the 13th Sept. last, and from which he had been allowed (57) to appeal to a gen. ct.-mar. "Gunner Lowe, 2d comp. 1st batt. artil., confined for making use of highly disrespectful language to me (Lieut. H. T.), on the afternoon of the 9th inst. (Sept. 1819.)" FINDING The court, having duly weighed and considered what has appeared before them, are of opinion, that the decision of the gar. ct.-mar., from which the prisoner has appealed, finding him Guilty, is not borne out by the evidence recorded in the proceedings; and that, consequently, the sentence of the court is unjust. The court being of this opinion, do, therefore, acquit the prisoner, Gunner J. Lowe, of the crime alleged against him. Confirmed: (Signed) HASTINGS. The Com. in chief confirms the decision of the court. The passage in the finding, which says, that the "judgment of the former court was not borne out by the evidence," leaves it uncertain on what particulars of testimony the opinion is founded. The Com. in chief persuades himself the gen. ct.-mar. did not admit the plea of the prisoner, that the posture in which he stood, or the tone of voice which he used, when addressing his officer, were unfitly taken into consideration by the court from which he appealed; the charge against him being for highly disrespectful language." It is obvious that tone and manner may (57) The M. A., 27 Geo. II, did not give the right to an appeal. may give to language an unquestionable character of disrespect, while the words simply would be equivocal. CASE 2.] G. O. C. C. 1817. At a gen. ct.-mar., the prisoner before the court being private J. Leonard, Hon. Co.'s Europ. regt,, who appeals from the sentence of a regtl. ct.-mar., and which court reassembled, pursuant to adjournment, on Thursday, the 15th July, 1817, at Berhampore, consisting of Capt. A. (president), Lieuts. G., H., and P., and Ens. C. (members). Charge upon which the appellant was tried before the said regtl. ct.-mar. Private J. Leonard ordered into confinement by me, on complaint of Aeen-oo-Deen, a native merchant, for defrauding him, under false representations, of three silk sashes (58), RESOLUTION of the Court.-It having been clearly proved, that although the appellant was placed in the barrack guard on the evening of Friday, the 11th July, and not brought to trial before Tuesday, the 15th of July, and that during that time he was not furnished with a copy of the crime on which he was to be tried (59); and it also appearing, that, although the evidences against the appellant were natives, there was no regular sworn interpreter (60) to the court; and the officiating Dep. Judge Adv.gen. having declared his opinion, that the proceedings of the regtl. ct.-mar. are thereby rendered invalid and illegal; the gen. ct.-mar., therefore, rest their proceedings until this opinion be submitted to the Most Noble the Com. in chief, and H. E.'s orders be received as to any further investigation. I concur entirely in opinion with the Dep. Judge Adv.gen., that the proceedings of the regtl. ct.-mar, are invalid, through the informality noticed, and direct the prisoner Leonard to be freed from the charge. (Signed) HASTINGS. CASE 3.] G. O. H. G. 10th March, 1818. At a gen. ct.-mar., Qr.mr. J. J., of the 4th (or R. I.) D. G., was arraigned upon the undermentioned charge, viz. 1st. "Making excessive, exorbitant, and improper charges against the non-com. officers and private soldiers of the 4th (or R. I.) regt. of D. G., (58) As remarked by the officiating Dep. Judge Adv.gen., the charge does not state, as to time and place; and, therefore, the prisoner could not be properly prepared to meet the charge.-(See printed trial, p. 18.) (59) Tytler, p. 217.—The officiating Dep. Judge Adv.-gen., stated in his minute, that the appellant did not even see the charge brought against him, until brought to the quarters where the court were assembled for his trial, when the serjt.maj. brought it out, and read it to him; and that the appellant did complain of it to the regtl. ct.-mar. on being taken before it.-(See printed Trial, p. 18.) (60) There is an interpreter to every regt. At the above period, the qr.-mr. of the Europ. regt, was not an interpreter; but there was one attached to a native corps at the station, who was employed at a Court of Inquiry, and, therefore, this trial might have been postponed till he could have attended. It is usual for H. M.'s regts, to apply for an interpreter from some native corps at the station.-(See printed Trial, p. 10.) D. G., whilst stationed in the centre district, and in Dublin, between the periods of the 19th day of Oct. 1816, and 24th day of June 1817, and insome instances at a later date, in various articles of regtl. necessaries, comprising a stable-jacket, a pair of duck trowsers, a foragecap, and a pair of cloth overalls, for each man; which articles, as charged, he, the said regtl. Qr.mr. J. J., provided and issued to the troops of the regt. 2d. "For having acted in disobedience to the Gen. Regs. and Orders of the Army, dated Adj.gen.'s Office, H. G., 12th Aug. 1811, p. 92, he, Qr.mr. J. J., having, at the times abovementioned, (that is, between the 16th day of Oct. 1816, and the 24th day of June, 1817, and in some instances at a later date,) continued to make the same excessive and exorbitant charges, thereby obtaining a great profit, and defrauding the non-com. officers and private soldiers of the 4th (or R. I.) regt. of D. G., against whom the said charges were made for the articles of necessaries so furnished to them, being highly prejudicial and injurious to their interests, and detrimental to H. M.'s service." FINDING-Not Guilty, and do therefore most fully acquit him. REMARKS. The court feel it to be their duty to observe, that it does not appear that any overcharge has been made, or fraud committed, by any person in the 4th D. G. in the supply of the articles of necessaries, in question, to the non-com, officers and soldiers of that regt. Approved and confirmed by H. R. H. the P. R.-The P. R. at the same time taking into his consideration that (as appears upon the proceedings) a regtl. ct.-mar. had formerly assembled for the investigation of a complaint preferred by some men of Capt. W.'s troop, regarding an alleged overcharge in certain articles of equipment, which the said court declared to be groundless, frivolous, and vexatious; and that notwithstanding the concurrent opinion of the comg. officer of the regt., and the gen. who inspected it, as well as the other gen. officers who subsequently investigated the matter, that there was no ground for the allegation; yet, that as Capt. W. took upon himself, in opposition to all this authority, to persist in urging the complaint, it was considered expedient, in a case involving the interests of the soldiers, to institute the fullest inquiry before the highest tribunal, and Capt. W.'s charges against Qr.mr. J. were accordingly ordered for investigation before this ct.-mar., in order finally to decide whether justice had been done to the men of his troop, as well as to give the qr.mr. an opportunity of vindicating his character from the aspersions which the charges of Capt. W. had cast upon it. Qr.mr. J. having been fully acquitted of all and every part of the charges preferred against him, and the ct.mar. having declared that no overcharge appears to have been made or fraud committed by any person in the 4th D. G., in the supply of the necessaries to the non-com. officers and soldiers of that regt., the P. R. has been fully convinced, by such a result, of the groundless nature of Capt. W.'s representation. As the pertinacious conduct of that that officer, in so obstinately persisting in his accusations, not only evinces a reprehensible opposition to superior authority, but tends mainly to subvert the discipline and good order of the regt., by inculcating groundless discontent and suspicion in the men against their officers; H. R. H. has been pleased, under all the circumstances of the case, to consider that the continuance of Capt. W. in the 4th D. G. would not tend to the advantage, the concord, or the discipline of that corps; and has, therefore, commanded, that it shall be intimated to him, that H. R. H. has no further occasion for his services in the army, but that he will be allowed to retire upon the regulated value of his commission. By command: (Signed) H. CALVERT, Adj.gen. CASE 4.] G. O. C. C. Oct. 13, 1823. At an European gen. ct.-mar. at Nagpore, on 12th Sept. 1822, private G. Renwick of the H. Co.'s European regt., was arraigned upon the undermentioned charge, on which he had been convicted before a regt. ct.-mar. held at the same station, on the 30th Aug. last, and from which he had been allowed to appeal to a gen. ct.-mar. Charge. “Private G. Renwick, Lt. com. confined by me on complaint of Pay serjt. Westcott of that company, for breaking open his box, and taking therefrom the sum of 92 Rs. (Nagpore) or thereabouts, on the evening of the 28th inst." Nagpore, Aug. 29, 1823. (Signed) J. AURIOL, Capt. Lt. Comp. Upon which charge the Court came to the following decision: FINDING-Guilty, and also that his appeal is frivolous and without foundation. SENTENCE-To receive 620 lashes on his bare back, at such time and place as H. E. the Com. in chief may deem proper. Approved and confirmed: (Signed) CASE 5.] G. O. C. C. April 3, 1822. E. PAGET, Com. in chief in India. At a gen. ct.-mar. at Di napore, on 22d Dec. 1821, Serjt. S. Johnson, H. M.'s 59th regt., was arraigned on the following charges, on which he had been convicted before a regtl. ct.-mar. held at the same station on the 10th of Nov. last, and from which he had been allowed to appeal to a gen. ct.-mar. Serjt. S. Johnson confined by order of the comg. officer. 1st. "For disobedience of orders in [drinking with the private soldiers of the regt., or] encouraging them to drink, on or between the 27th Oct. and 2d. Nov. 1821. 2d. "For embezzling or misapplying the money entrusted to his care for the payment of the company of which he was pay serjt., between the 1st Aug. and 2d Nov. 1821. 3d. "For aiding or abetting, or conniving at the removal of his own chest out of the barracks, on or about the morning of the 2d Nov. 1821, for the purpose of framing a false report of his having been robbed of the sum of 300 Rs., or thereabouts, entrusted to his his care, for the payment of the 1st comp., and which sum he, the said Serjt. S. Johnson, had embezzled or misapplied." Upon which charge the court came to the following decision : "The court also consider the prisoner has not sustained his appeal, having only been acquitted of the 1st part of the 1st charge, viz.• Drinking with the private soldiers of the regt.' SENTENCE-To be reduced to the rank and pay of a private sentinel; to receive a corporal punishment of 500 lashes, in the usual manner, at such time and place as H. E. the Most Noble the Com. in chief may be pleased to direct, and further to be put under stoppages, not exceeding the half of his pay, till such time as the deficiency may be made good. By order of the Most Noble the Com. in chief. HASTINGS. (Signed) T. M MAHON, Col. Adj.gen. CASE 6.] G. O. H. G., 13th July 1809. At a gen. ct.-mar., private E. Salter, of the 7th (or Queen's) regt. L. D., was arraigned upon the undermentioned charges, viz. "Writing a paper, addressed to Lieut.col. V. his comg. officer, which was found fixed against the barracks, at Guilford, on or about the 2d day of April last, which paper contained false, scandalous, and infamous insinuations against Lieut.col. V., such conduct having a tendency to excite discontent and mutiny in the regt., and to create dissatisfaction against the comg. officer, being highly injurious to Lieut. col. V., and to the prejudice of good order and mil. discipline." FINDING-Guilty. SENTENCE-To receive 500 lashes; which sentence H. M. was pleased to approve of. The court, at the same time, declared their unanimous opinion, that the conduct of Lieut.col. V., in his attention to all complaints and granting redress, when justly founded, and in the whole of his conduct, as comg. officer of the 7th regt. L. D., has appeared particularly zealous, exemplary, and highly meritorious, and totally free from any of the aspersions thrown out on him by the scandalous paper in question. By order: (Signed) H. CALVERT, Adj.gen. CHAPTER XII. SECTION 11. (1)-OF STORES, AMMUNITION, &c. Penalty on Officers selling Mil. Stores without Order, or embezzling, or misapplying them, or suffering them to be damaged by Neglect. ART. I. Whatsoever commis. officer, storekeeper, or commissary, (1) Sec. xiii, Ann. Arts. of War, 1824. shall |