NAVAL AND MILITARY COURTS-MARTIAL.
[TO THE EDITOR OF TEE "SPECTATOR."] Sr,—Mr. Horace Wyndham in your last issue admits that the sentence of a military Court-Martial requires confirma- tion by a superior authority. That is my point in differen- tiating between the Courts-Martial of the two Services; and the fact of my being mistaken, apparently, in the nature of that authority makes no essential difference in the position to which I still hold. In my former letter I wrote from my own observations and recollections as a naval man. Since then I have turned to the article " Courts-Martial " in that excellent publication " Chambers's Encyclopaedia" (to which I beg to refer Mr. Wyndham), where I find :—" All sentences [of military Courts-Martial] must be confirmed before they are carried out The sentence [of a naval Court- Martial]. is final, and needs no confirmation." Permit me to add an illustration, though it really seems superfluous. Lieu- tenant A, R.N., is tried by a naval Court-Martial in Malta Harbour for an offence, found guilty, and sentenced to be dismissed his ship. He could be sent home, should it be thought necessary, on that very day. Lieutenant B, 200th Foot, is tried by a military Court-Martial on shore on the same day for the same offence. What happens ? According to "Chambers," "the confirming authority may commute, mitigate, or remit the whole or part of the sentence, and may order both finding and sentence to be revised (unless the prisoner is acquitted), but cannot increase the sentence."—I [We cannot continue this correspondence.—ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
