ARMY-Review of the documents communicated to Congress by the President, at the opening of the 2d session of considered, Remarks on the proposed plan for a School for non-com- Report of the Secretary of War, 1st session 23d Congress, Non-commissioned officers, their claims and importance Promotions, Appointments, Resignations, &c. 122, 186, 253, 327 Orders. No. 79. Rescinding 7th paragraph of Order No. 48, 122 No. 91. Relating to Hospital Stewards, No. 100. Prices of Clothing for the Army, Dry Rot-Remarks on the, Proceedings of passed Midshipmen at Norfolk, Infantry and Artillery-Reply to the Memorial of W. to the President of the U. S. by an Officer of Artillery, Communication from an Infantry Officer, INDEX. Page. John Paul Jones, Lines on Fort Putnam, Lines on a Sparrow, 1 39, 123, 187, 252 Uniform-Remarks on, Lyceum-Account of, List of Officers of vessels ready for sea, Resignations and dismissions in the, Thoughts on the present condition of, and suggestions for its improvement, Naval Order, respecting Assistant Surgeons, Academy-Its necessity and utility, Peace Establishment-Plan of, Annual Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 1st ses- "An Old Soldier," in reply to "Wayne," Petty Officers of the Navy-Remarks by a Landsman, continued, of, 112 183, 294 358 381 Columbus, Fort Niagara, Camp Armistead, Fort 305 Explanatory statement by committee at West Point, MILITARY AND NAVAL MAGAZINE OF THE UNITED STATES. VOL. II.---NO. 1.---SEPTEMBER, 1833. FOR THE MILITARY AND NAVAL MAGAZINE. ON MILITARY COURTS MARTIAL. It was long since said, that "laws are like spiders' webs, the large flies break through them, and the small ones only are taken." Admitting that this antique saw is frequently verified in the present age, no one, particularly a small fly,' is willing that it should become the universal doctrine, or even that the liability to the introduction of such a principle should have existence. Laws are evidently enacted for some specific purpose to protect the weak against the powerful-to restrain the vindictive passions of the oppressive-to afford shelter and redress for the persecuted, and to regulate and govern society in all its distinctions. A community must be depraved indeed, when the true meaning of its laws is departed from, and a construction adopted, such as never was intended nor thought of, to subserve a dishonorable object, or to place the reins of authority in hands unequal to their management, and not entitled to their control. These few abstract remarks arise from the apprehension, that a law, passed in the session of '29-'30, has not received the strict observance which its great importance demands. The old Article of War, part of which the law alluded to repeals, was discovered to be open to many abuses; and to an important military trial which took place upon the spot, may probably be attributed the repeal of this long over looked or unheeded liability to abuse in the obnoxious Article of War. Congress, therefore, to avert the danger resolved: Sec. 1.-"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That whenever a general officer commanding an army, or a colonel commanding a separate department, shall be the accuser or prosecutor of any officer in the army of the United States under his command, the general court martial for the trial of such officer shall be appointed by the President of the United States." Sec. 2.-"And be it further enacted, That so much of the 65th Article of the first section of "An Act for establishing rules and articles for the government of the armies of the United States, passed on the 10th April, 1806, as is repugnant hereto, be and the same is hereby repealed." Prior to the substitution of the above, the 65th Article of War authorised, or was supposed to authorise, "any general officer commanding an army, or colonel commanding a separate department, to appoint general courts martial whenever necessary." And such latitude did this article permit, that the general commanding an army, or the colonel commanding a separate department, felt no compunctions in being, at the same time that he was the accuser or prosecutor of any officer, the authority for appointing or detailing the members of the general court martial for his trial-and the authority for confirming or disapproving the sentence of the court, in all cases when it did not extend to his dismissal. All this was sanctioned by the 65th Article of War, and all of it being repugnant to the 1st section of the new law, it is all repealed, or intended to be repealed, by the 2nd section thereof. By examining closely the law passed in 1829-30, it will at once be perceived, that it is far from being explicit. The letter of this law may be strictly adhered to, while its spirit is lost; and the liability of officers to persecution and injustice, every possibility to which the late law was intended to preclude, remains in reality the same as before. The word "appoint" is used. Now, to make the letter of the law express its spirit, the 1st section should close: "the members of the general court martial for the trial of such officer shall be designated by the President of the United States." This is perfectly clear, and the intended meaning; otherwise the new law is almost a repetition of the 65th Article of War. The President of the United States, it is true, must "appoint" the general court martial for the trial of an officer, whenever a general commanding an army, or a colonel commanding a separate department, is the accuser or prosecutor, and also by the requisitions of the law, that functionary must review and decide upon the proceedings of the court martial; but it is, nevertheless, perfectly compatible for the general commanding an army, or the colonel commanding a separate department, who may be the accuser or prosecutor of the officer, to designate the members of the |