the army, without attaching to it the declaration of his opinion, that the punishment it awards bears little proportion to the heinousness of the crimes of which the prisoner has been found guilty. Death would not have been too severe an atonement for such traitorous and mutinous conduct, devoid as it is of any palliating circumstances. Under this impression, Lieut.gen. Sir T. Hislop has not approved, although he confirms, the sentence. (Signed) T. M MAHON, Col. Adj.gen." N.B. Private T. Dunn, 84th regt.. was sentenced to receive 1,000 lashes for the same crime, and abusive language to the regt., G. O. C. C. 30th April 1816. CASE 2] G. O. H. G. 30th March 1812. At a gen. ct.-mar., Capt. G. H., of the Wiltshire regt. of militia, was arraigned upon the undermentioned charge, viz. For writing and causing to be published a letter to the editor of the Morning Chronicle, dated Gosport, Nov. 30, 1811, containing sundry expressions unbecoming an officer, highly disrespectful to H. R. H. the P. R., and tending manifestly to the subversion of mil. discipline, viz. "To the Editor of the Morning Chronicle, Gosport, Nov. 30, 1811. "Sir;-Having read in the Courier, and other newspapers, a paragraph signed A. B., containing the P. R.'s opinion on the proceedings of a ct.-mar. on the hon. Capt. B. and Capt. H. of the Wiltshire militia, asserting the former statements given to be partial, I would beg leave, through your paper, to submit a few remarks thereon. "In the first place, I think nothing could be more cruel or unjust, at this remote period, than the reviving a subject which must very much affect the friends of the hon. Capt. B., who has so lately paid the debt of nature, more especially as the full sentence was most correctly given, without any invidious remarks whatever. "I beg fully to contradict the assertion, that the statement alluded to was partial, the sentence and opinion of the ct., as well as the opinion of H. R. H. the P. R. being given. A. B. appears to have shewn more zeal for Lieut.col. W. than judgment, in reviving a subject that can so little redound to the credit of Lieut.col. W.; he might have reflected that the opinion of the P. R. was only that of an individual opposed to 14 members of the ct., who, after the most careful and accurate investigation of the whole case, were induced to observe, that although there was no positive evidence before the ct. to warrant the conclusion that Lieut.col. W. had been instigated by private pique, or by personal prejudice, yet they were of opinion that he was not actuated solely for the good of the service; and after having been ordered to revise their proceedings, upon a more mature deliberation, confirmed their former opinion, most justly observing they had the prosecutor's bare assertion alone of the forbearance and kindness which he introduced in the opening of the case, and upon which the P. R., can only have formed his opinion; not one proof or shadow of it appearing to that effect. I am, Sir, your obt. humble servt. "An Officer of the Wiltshire Militia." (Signed) FINDING-Guilty. SENTENCE-To be dismissed from H. M.'s Wiltshire regt. of militia. In awarding the above sentence, the ct. feel strongly inclined to believe that the prisoner, from intemperate zeal to defend the character of departed friend and brother officer, was prompted to use the disrespectful expressions alluded to in the charge, without any wilful intention of reflecting on the high authority of H. R. H. the P. R. In consequence of this feeling, therefore, and the evident contrition of the prisoner, and the solemn assertions that his expressions were not intended to convey any thing disrespectful to H. R. H., they humbly recommend him to the most gracious consideration of H. R. H. the P. R. By command: Approved and confirmed by H. R. H. the P. R. (Signed) Penalty of Disrespect to the General or Commander in Chief. Art 2.] Any officer, non-com. officer, or soldier, who shall behave himself with contempt or disrespect towards the Gen. or other Com. in chief of the forces, or shall speak words tending to his hurt or dishonor, shall be punished according to the nature of his offence, by the judgment of a gen. ct.-mar. 1. As to Contempt.] An officer or soldier may behave with contempt towards the Gen. or other Com. in chief (8), in various ways, such as by acting in contempt of his authority, as in the case of Capt. S., 20th Bengal N. I., published in G. O. C. C., 10th Aug. 1822, "For pertinaciously continuing in a strain of hostility against Capt. M. of the same regt., after the Com. in chief had, upon a careful inquiry into the circumstances, ordered the affair to be set at rest, and the letters on both sides to be withdrawn;" or in any case where the decision of the Com, in chief becomes necessary, and such decision shall be treated with contempt, by acting contrary to the intention of the same, and thus setting his authority at defiance. 2. As to Disrespect.] An officer or soldier may behave with disrespet towards the Gen. or other Com. in chief, by neglecting to pay him the customary salute, when he appears abroad, or passing him unnoticed in a disrespectful manner. Or, if an officer, in a personal interview, should use any disrespectful language, or declare an intention to act in disobedience to his orders, though communicated by another officer. 3. Speaking Words tending to his Hurt or Dishonour.] "It is not necessary that the words, constituting the offence in question, should be such as must hurt or dishonor the Gen. or Com. in chief, actually, or at all events; it is enough, under the terms of the art., if they have a ten (8) H. R. H. the Com. in chief is one of the Royal Family, and the case would fall under the 1st. art., q. v. The master gen. of the ordnance, and all officers commanding any where in chief. The Com. in chief in India, (Bengal,) Madras, Bombay, &c., having a com as such are Comrs, in chief. a tendency thereto. Words used in derogation of persons in eminent office and trust, are not, when they are ascertained, to be too rigidly weighed, as to their import; for where they are such as might not be thought to bring any great scandal on an ordinary individual, or entitle him even to any legal redress, they are nevertheless taken to be greatly injurious in respect to the high office and dignity of those to whom they are applied, and are on that account punishable (9) There is no clear definition laid down in this case; but it may be, "whatever the cts., in their discretion, shall judge to be derogatory to the high character of the person of whom the speech is spoken" (10), accusing him of undue partiality, favour, &c. 4. As to Writings.] An officer or soldier may behave with contempt or disrespect by writing a threatening letter, as in case 1, to the Com. in chief himself; or as in cases 2, and 3, by addressing a memo. rial or letter to a superior authority, containing insinuations against, or reflecting on the conduct of the Com. in chief, whether in his private or mil. capacity. Disrespect to all other officers is cognizable under art. 2, sec. xxi. Arts. of War. 5. Charges. See forms, Nos. 39 and 40, chap. 1. That A. B. did behave with contempt or disrespect (as the case may be, insert particulars) towards the Com. in chief, or did speak words tending to his hurt or dishonour (as the case may be, insert particulars), or did write a letter, &c. (which set forth) being in breach of the Arts. of War, &c. 6. Evidence.] Nos. 1 and 2, as at Chap. III, sec. ii. art. 1. 3. Prove the words used, or the hand-writing, if in writing. 4. One witness sufficient to prove the words, another to prove the hand-writing. 7. Punishment.] Discretionary. (See cases 1, 2, and 3, and art. 1, sec. xxi, Arts. of War, and Punishments at Chap. XXIV. If by a gen. regtl. ct.-mar.)" see Warrant, sec. xiv, art. 14.) CASE 1.] G. O. H. G. 18th Sept. 1811. At a gen. ct.-mar. Capt. L. S. of the 1st batt. of the 84th regt. was arraigned upon the undermentioned charges, viz. 1st. "For conduct highly unbecoming the officer [in misapplying certain sums of money received from some soldiers and others of the regt. in trust,] by not having deposited the amount in the hands ofagents, as [specifically] set forth to be done in his receipts, in consequence of which the re-payment of the said sums of money has been withheld, to their injury, though [repeatedly] called for by the parties. 2d. "For conduct highly improper and disrespectful, in writing a threatening a letter to his Com. in chief, the Hon. Major-gen. J. Abercromby, on or about the 11th of April last, tending to his hurt and dishonour. (9) Samuel on M. A. and Arts, of War. p. 243. Christian's note-(Blackstone, vol iii. p. 124.) F FINDING FINDING-Guilty (except of the words in italics). SENTENCE-TO be Cashiered. Approved and confirmed by H. R. H. the P. R. By command: CASE 2.] G.O.H.G. 8th May, 1812. At a gen. ct. mar. Lieut. G. L. of the 67th regt. was arraigned upon the undermentioned charge, viz. "For scandalous and infamous conduct, unbecoming the character of an officer and a gentleman, in having transmitted to H. R. H. the Com. in chief, on or about the 20th of Dec. 1811, a memorial, purporting to be a petition for remuneration of service, together with other documents, pretending to be explanatory, and in corroboration of the same, but the whole, in fact, containing most unfounded and unwarrantable insinuations, tending to the prejudice of the character of his superior officer, Maj.gen. Hatton, during the period of his comg. H.M.'s forces in the island of Alderney." FINDING-Guilty. SENTENCE-To be dismissed. Approved and confirmed by H. R. H. the P. R. By command: (Signed) H. CALVERT, Adj. gen. CASE 3.] G. O. C. C., 9th Nov., 1822. At a gen. ct.-mar. assem bled at Bombay, on 1st of Oct. 1822, Lieut.col. W. R., of H. M.'s 24th regt. of foot, was brought to trial on the following charges, preferred by order of the most noble the Com. in chief in India : 1st. "For conduct incompatible with the duty of an officer, in traducing the govt. under which H. M.'s orders had placed him, by describing and characterizing a public resolution and measure of that govt., relative to Lieut.col R. as a mil. officer, as an unwarrantable, tyrannical exercise of authority, which reduces every officer in India to a state of slavery equal to that of the gentlemen in the Russian service; the above malignant expressions forming part of the first para. of a letter, dated 9th June, 1822, addressed and sent by Lieut.col. R. to, and received by, the chief secy. to the supreme govt.; and in which, instead of offering any explanation of his conduct, or soliciting any redress, he declares, that he does not entertain the smallest hope of justice or redress from a govt. capable of acting as the govt. (as he therein alleges) had acted towards him.' 2d. "For having pointed insulting [and scandalous] remarks at the head of the supreme govt., who was at the same time Lieut.col. R.'s mil. com. in chief, in the 8th para. of the above letter; and in particular in stating, that he hoped the head of the govt. would promulgate that it "is resolved to turn any officer out of the country at 24 hours' notice, who dares to publish a single comment or sentiment upon public affairs displeasing to them, no matter what motives actuated him; if the govt. fancy it contains the least offensive matter, the writer shall be turned out of his house and quarters, like a dog with the mange, at the point of the bayonet, and left, sick or well, ready or not ready, to march march off and embark for Europe, if the sea-coast be 700 miles distant.' 3d. For abusive and grossly insubordinate language, applied to and highly reflecting on the Com. in chief, in the 10th and 11th paras. of the above letter, charging the Com. in chief with taking to himself the peculiar merit of inflicting on him (Lieut-col. R.) truly despotic, degrading, and inhuman measures;' and accusing the Com. in chief of more inconsistencies, acts of injustice, and barefaced abuses of power and patronage, during his command of the army in India, than are to be found in the annals of mil, transactions for 50 years before he came out to India.'' FINDING Guilty, except of the word "scandalous" contained in 2d charge, of which they do therefore acquit him. SENTENCE-To be reprimanded in such manner as the officer approving this sentence may think proper. The court are induced to award this lenient sentence in consequence of Lieut.col. R.'s long and meritorious services, and the high character which he has produced on his defence from the late Gov.gen. as a confidential servant of the govt. (Signed) R. Cook, Maj.gen. and President. Disapproved. (Signed) HASTINGS.. REMARKS by H. E. the Most Noble the Com. in chief.-The Com. in chief of all the forces in India disapproves the above sentence, from considering it to be incommensurate to the crime found by the court, and not disavowed by the prisoner, as to be in H. E.'s opinion a serious attaint to discipline. The court, exonerating the prisoner only from the imputation of "scandalous," attached to the procedure set forth in the 2d count, pronounces Lieut.col. R. guilty of two offences; one, being an outrageous insult to that govt. which, under the orders of his sovereign, he was bound to reverence and obey; the other being a virulent and gross crimination of the Com. in chief, applying unequivocally to H. E.'s official conduct in that character. Then, to such flagrant violations of mil. subordination, the court awards a punishment appropriate solely to the lowest class of deviations from mil. regularity. To account for the extraordinary nature of the sentence, the court states its advertence to Lieut.col. R.'s long and meritorious services. The consideration was not within the competence of the court in the mode assumed. If such were the court's opinion of Lieut.col. R.'s professional deserts, it would have been fitly brought forward with a recommendation grounded on it to clemency in the quarter where alone the circumstances could be duly appreciated. But the oath which each member of a ct.-mar. takes, binds him to judge strictly on the substantiation and the degree of the crime submitted to his verdict, and to pass such a sentence upon it as the established rules or practice of the army prescribe in a special case of that quality, without contemplating matter foreign to the immediate charge. |