0% found this document useful (0 votes)
17 views1 page

Military Justice Administration Insights

The document summarizes an interview with an assistant in the Judge Advocate General's office regarding the policies and procedures for applying General Orders No. 7 prior to the time when General Ansell went to Europe. The assistant states that the disciplinary division had gotten into the habit of advising reviewing authorities on cases covered by General Orders No. 7 and signing reviews themselves without oversight from the Judge Advocate General's office. The assistant directed that this practice be stopped upon taking charge of the office in General Ansell's absence.
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
17 views1 page

Military Justice Administration Insights

The document summarizes an interview with an assistant in the Judge Advocate General's office regarding the policies and procedures for applying General Orders No. 7 prior to the time when General Ansell went to Europe. The assistant states that the disciplinary division had gotten into the habit of advising reviewing authorities on cases covered by General Orders No. 7 and signing reviews themselves without oversight from the Judge Advocate General's office. The assistant directed that this practice be stopped upon taking charge of the office in General Ansell's absence.
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

ESTABLISHMENT OF MILITARY JUSTICE .

83 5
Q . How long were you on duty in the office of the Judge Advocate General?
A. I came on the 3d of April, 1914, and remained until the 10th of August ,
1918.
Q . What was your status in the office?A . Until the war came on I was an
ordinary assistant in the office . Then I went with the division and in Novem-
ber, 1917, came back and was a sort of a special assistant to the Acting Judg e
Advocate General, Gen . Ansell, and then when he went to Europe I was prac-
tically in the same position that Gen . Ansell had been ; that is, I signed myself
as Acting Judge Advocate General . Of course, that was a mere administrativ e
title.
Q . You were senior assistant and as such in the absence of the Judge Advocat e
General was the Acting Judge Advocate General?Yes, sir ; that was my
position .
Q . And you continued in this status until Gen. Ansell's return from Europe?
A . Yes, sir ; and then I went to Europe.
Q . You are familiar with General Orders, No . 7, of 1918, are you not?
A . Yes .
Q. What was the policy of the office relative to the application of Genera l
Orders, No. 7, prior to the time that Gen . Ansell went to Europe?A . I ca n
answer that only by what I found was going out of the office . When I took
charge of the office upon Gen . Ansell's departure I insisted, since I was responsi-
ble, that everything pass over my desk . In that way I found what had been goin g
on . The disciplinary division had not been sending its matter through u s
except, I might say, occasionally . I found that they were advising reviewin g
authorities with reference to matters clearly under the law, and under tha t
order within the discretion of the reviewing authority. General Orders, No. 7,
gives no room for such advice, neither does the law where punishments are dis -
-cretionary and where the law has not been vided . The discretion as to the
amount of punishment is in the court and the reviewing authority . I directe d
that such advices be stopped and the application of General Orders, No . 7,
be limited to its stated purpose. The assumption of an authority to advise a re -
viewing authority that a sentence is too heavy carries with it the necessar y
corollary that this office could advise a reviewing authority that the sentence was
too light and that would be unspeakable. It was for this reason that I directe d
that that be stopped .
Q . I understand you to state that you found the policy of the disciplinar y
division had been to make such recommendations?A . Yes. They had gotte n
into the habit of signing their reviews themselves . Col . Davis signed them and
sent them to the reviewing department . The great majority of them we never
saw in our part of the office, Gen . Ansell and I . They had a direct connection
with Gen . Crowder .
Q . You are referring now to the cases which came under General Orders ,
No . 7?-A. Yes.
Q . You are not referring to cases which were reviewed and went forward?
A . Not to the cases that go to the President ; no . I can not vouch for absolute
accuracy, but I think this statement will cover it, that those cases which wer e
forwarded by reviewing authorities having authority to take final action o n
theta were forwarded to The Judge Advocate General merely for the revie w
and advice directed by General Orders, No . 7, concerning which a letter woul d
go back to the reviewing authority, advising him as to the result of the exami-
nation, and upon which the reviewing authority would then take final action .
All these cases, with some exceptionsthere were some of them sent throug h
our desks--were acted upon by the disciplinary division and a letter sent to th e
reviewing authority by the disciplinary divison . All cases requiring the actio n
of the President were, I am quite sure, passed over our desks. There may hav e
been exceptions to that rule .
Q . Was it your understanding during that period that Gen . Ansell was
relieved from all responsibility with respect to the administration of militar y
justice and all matters pertaining to courts-martial?A . I have to answer
that question practically . There was no order relieving him, but the disci-
plinary division took things directly to Gen . Crowder and assumed to send ou t
these letters, whether by Gen . Crowder's knowledge or not I do not know . The
effect was to practically leave us out of the disciplinary cases except as the y
went up to the President .
Q. A's I understand from what you say, it practically left you out in so fa r
as pertained to the cases which came under General Orders, No . 7?
A . Yes, sir.

You might also like