The
Vol. XIV.
Green
Bag.
BOSTON.
No. 3.
March, 1902.
A LEGAL VIEW OF THE INQUIRY GRANTED TO REAR-ADMIRAL SCHLEY AND OF OTHER INQUIRIES BY MILITARY COURTS. Bv Charles E. Grinnell. Conflicting Principles, Courts of Inquiry-, Dewev's Dissent Sampson's Equitv Right to Exclude Open Sessions, Appeal to the President, Exclusion of Command, Task of Judge Advocate, Bias in Examinations Ingenuitv in Advocacv, Evidence of Opinion
....
PAGE 100 102 108 114 118 120 122. 123 125 126 128 129
AT the request of the editor of The Green Bag the present writer has ex amined the printed edition of the record1 of the recent Court of Inquiry before which Rear-Admiral Schley appeared as applicant for an investigation of his conduct as Com modore in the Santiago campaign, in order to give, as nearly without bias as one can after a court's report, a view, not of the evi dence or of the proof, but of the proceed ings of that court as a military instrument in the light of old and new precedents and of authoritative treatises upon military law in England and the United States. Principles ■ Record of the Proceedings of a Court of Inquiry convened at the Navy Yard, Washington, by virtue of a precept signed by the Hon. John D. Long, Secretary of the Navy, in accordance with the request of Rear-Admiral W. S. Schley, for the purpose of investigating his conduct during the war with Spain. See note at end for specifitions, opinions, recommendations, and decisions before and after appeal.
Hearsav Evidence, Cross Examination, Court's Attention Court's Control Instructing the Court, Points of Practice, Naval Peculiarities, Disqualifving Howison, Rulings and Arguments Characteristic Powers, Value of the Case Legal Results,
131 132 133 133 134 134 136 136 141 142 144 145
underlying the decisions of the Secretary of the Navy and of the President of the United States concerning those proceedings have also been studied in order to understand the legal side of our military system. gotten The which sagacious was warning given byhas WilTes,'^ not beenfy^ijf'rt tofold case, that " Military mattery between * military men are for military tribuna^f^to determine."2 j fcjj sion, Yetand there since is athe liberal navysi and members of the bar ar^tra^tied to end'ur* contradiction, it seems professional were professions points engag^l in a maylbl fftsfTjjsfcelhX/ with mutual interest.
«~l Ok ifll I I It is intended to cons a Dawkins v. Lord Rokeby, 4; ^p*tef)and Finlaso 806 (837).
