Military Justice Review Procedures
Uploaded by
EsLebeDeutschlandMilitary Justice Review Procedures
Uploaded by
EsLebeDeutschlandESTABLISHMENT OF MILITARY JUSTICE .
797'
punishment. He suggested, in view of this limitation, that whenever a recor d
was reviewed and the officer reviewing it considered the punishment too sever e
he should make a memorandum to that effect, signed by himself, and appende d
to the record, so that it would immediately attract attention when the ques-
tion of clemency arose in that particular case . This was the practice of th e
office . After Gen . Ansell returned from France and assumed charge of th e
office, I called his attention to this matter and told him the construction whic h
C1ol . Mayes had placed on General Orders No. 7, and which construction I
thought was legally correct . We discussed the matter several times, accordin g
to my recollection . Gen. Ansell agreed that the sentences in some instance s
were too severe, and, if possible, some action should be taken to bring about a
correction in this regard . Shortly after he instituted the first board of review ,
which was in the early part of August, 1918, the board of review and I discusse d
the question with Gen . Ansell on one or more occasions, and my recollection i s
that he some time thereafter verbally directed that in those eases which cam e
before the hoard of review we would not be bound by the limitations o f
General Orders No. 7 in regard to recommending a reduction in the amount of
punishment if we thought that course advisable . Some tune in October, how -
ever, he formally reduced those instructions to writing and we have followed
that procedure since that time. I subsequently informed him that the instruc-
tions did not authorize me to -make recommendaions in the matter of th e
reduction of sentencesin those eases which did not go before the board o f
review and he directed me to follow the same policy with regard to all case s
where we thought the punishment was too severe. I might say right here tha t
in August I submitted a memorandum to Gen . Ansell, prepared by myself, in
which I called attention to some of the sentences which, in my judgment, were
too severe, and in that memorandum I referred to the fact that while I thor-
oughly realized that the sentences were imposed by courts for their disciplinar y
effect and that the courts in imposing the sentences were actuated undoubtedl y
by the very highest motives, I thought, among other things, that unduly sever e
sentences might have an unfortunate effect upon the civil community . Some
time after I submitted this memorandum we had a conference in Gen . Ansell' s
room, at which were present, if my memory is correct, Gen . Ansell, Col. Morrow ,
Col . Davis, Col . Power, Col . Reedy, Col . Tucker, and myself. There may hav e
been one or two others, but I am not sure . My recollection is that it wa s
understood at that conference that a general order be prepared by me fo r
submission to the War Depai rtment, with the recommendation that it be promul-
gated to the service, calling attention to the severity of certain sentences an d
suggesting the advisability, particularly within the continental limits of th e
United States, of adhering wherever possible to the limits-of-punishment order ,
which, of coarse, was no longer in effect ; it being limited to a time of peace .
In September I prepared this general order myself, and submitted it to th e
board of review, but due to the overwhelming press of work before that board ,
and which press of work subsequently necessitated the formation of the second
board of review, they were unable to complete consideration of the propose d
general order prior to the time of the armistice on November 11 .
Q . Is General Orders No . 84 in force at the present time as originally promul-
gated, so far as you know?---A. No, sir ; it has been amended within the las t
few clays by a new general order, which was prepared in my division under
my direction . It was in force up until the time when the branch office was
discontinued, March 1 .
Q . In one of his statements Gen . Ansell says that about 10 days before hi s
appearance before the Military Committee, all matters pertaining to militar y
justice were ordered routed in other channels . What was the situation with
regard to that?A . I would have no information about this . All papers leav-
ing my division normally go to the Judge Advocate General or the acting hea d
of the office direct .
Col . B . A. READ. Referring to Gen . Ansell's report, made as a result of his
observations while in Europe, I personally have never seen that document . O n
at least two occasions, once while the office of the Judge Advocate General
was located in the State, War, and Navy Building, and once since the office was
moved to the Mills Building, he has assembled the officers of the departmen t
and delivered a talk, or lecture I presume it might be called, based on his ex-
periences and observations abroad . At the time he delivered the lecture in th e
Mills Building I recall that he had in his hand and read from a ty pewritten
document which contained, from its appearance, a good many pages, and this