Military Law, and the late Courts-Martial. MR. EDITOR,-With that judicious zeal for the best interests of the service which ever pervades your editorial exertions, you advert in your last Number (Portfolio, leading remark,) to the recent opinion given by Chief Justice Tyndal on the opening of the Special Commission at Bristol. You preface the extract made from it by remarks which are equally apposite and conclusive, but you say, we have at length an opinion from an authority whose competence cannot be questioned." From this observation, Mr. Editor, many of your readers will infer, that the army has hitherto been without competent and unquestionable authority as to the extent to which soldiers are in duty required, and legally called on, to interfere on an emergency, for the suppression of riots, and to prevent the commission of felonies, without the intervention of the civil power. In the 188th page of the General Regulations, the following very lucid opinion of Lord Ellenborough is inserted for the guidance of the army; and an opinion equally clear and to the purpose, by Lord Mansfield, is given at page 405 of Capt. Simmons's recent work on Courts-Martial. I extract them both, and submit to your judgment, whether, from their insertion in your widely-circulated Journal, at this particular crisis, benefit to the service may not be anticipated. Lord Ellenborough says, "In case of any sudden riot or disturbance (the latter phrase being permitted to imply a breach of the peace by an assembled multitude), any of His Majesty's subjects, without the presence of a peace officer of any description, may arm themselves, and of course may use ordinary means of force to suppress such riot and disturbance. This was laid down in my Lord Chief Justice Popham's reports, 121, and Reding's, 76, as having been resolved by all the Judges, by the 39th of Queen Elizabeth, to be good law, and has certainly been recognized by Hawkins and other writers on the Crown Law, and by various Judges at different periods since. And what His Majesty's subjects may do, they also ought to do for the suppression of public tumult, when an exigency requires that such means be resorted to. Whatever any other class of His Majesty's subjects may allowably do in this particular, the military may unquestionably do also. By the common law, every description of peace officer may, and ought to do, not only all that in him lies towards the suppressing of riots, but may, and ought to command all other persons to assist therein. However, it is by all means advisable to procure a Justice of Peace to attend, and for the military to act under his immediate orders, when such attendance and the sanction of such orders can be obtained, as it not only prevents any disposition to unnecessary violence on the part of those who act in repelling the tumult, but it induces also, from the known authority of such magistrates, a more ready submission on the part of the rioters to the measures used for that purpose; but still, in cases of great and sudden emergency, the military, as well as all other individuals, may act without their presence, or without any other peace officer whatever." Sir James Mansfield, "Since much has been said about soldiers, I will correct a strange mistaken notion which has got abroad, that because men are soldiers they cease to be citizens: a soldier is gifted with all the rights of other citizens, and he is as much bound to prevent a breach of the peace or a felony as any other citizen. In 1780 this mistake extended to an alarming degree; soldiers, with arms in their hands, stood by and saw felonies committed, houses burnt and pulled down before their eyes, by persons whom they might lawfully have put to death, if they could not otherwise prevent them, without interfering; some because they had not the commanding officer to give them the command, and some because there was no Justice of the The pressure upon our space compels us to proceed at once to the practical part of our intelligent correspondent's letter. The opinions he cites were familiar to us, and doubtless to the service in general; but we deemed it sufficient to quote the latest, namely that of Sir Nicholas Tyndal, as a digest of all those which preceded that clear exposition. It may, however, be satisfactory to append the former, as given by our correspondent.-ED. Peace with them. It is the more extraordinary, because formerly the posse comitatus, which was the strength to prevent felonies, must, in a great proportion, have consisted of military tenants who held lands by the tenure of military service. If it is necessary for the purpose of preventing mischief, or for the execution of the laws, it is not only the right of soldiers, but it is their duty, to exert themselves in the assisting the execution of a legal process, or to prevent any crime or mischief being committed. It is, therefore, highly important that the mistake should be corrected, which supposes that an Englishman, by taking upon him the additional character of a soldier, puts off any of the rights or duties of an Englishman." The points to which I would call your attention on the Court-Martial are these: Capt. Warrington tenders the deposition of Major-Gen. Pearson; it is not admitted, the reporters of the papers make the Judge Advocate to say, because it is not the best evidence in the case, as Gen. Pearson may receive the court to take his evidence on the morrow; and eventually the deposition is rejected by the President, for the alleged reason, that there are some questions which he deems it necessary to put to Gen. Pearson. The reason given by the President seems to be more sound than that assigned to the Judge Advocate; the deposition ought to be rejected as inadmissible in itself, and that whether or not Gen. Pearson was or was not in a state to promise the delivery of testimony at a future day. It is inadmissible for the reason supplied in the remark of the President-that the opportunity of cross-examination had not been afforded to the opposite party. Capt. Simmons, from whom we have before extracted, says "There are certain cases in which depositions are admitted as evidence in civil courts, but such are little likely to occur on trials by courts-martial; indeed never, except in trials under the hundred and second article of war. Depositions, relative to manslaughter or felonies, taken on oath and in presence of the prisoner, are admitted in evidence, being proved to be the same, without alteration, as those sworn before the magistrate; it being also proved to the satisfaction of the court at the time of trial, that the informant is dead, incapacitated by illness from travelling, or not to be found." The other point to which I would advert is, the extraordinary assumption by the prosecutor, which does not appear to have been placed in its true light, that because the evidence for the defence tended to impugn the chain of evidence, which he thought unbroken, he should therefore be allowed to open the prosecution by the production of other witnesses. Such a monstrous doctrine, Mr. Editor, is no less illegal and unmilitary, than it is unjust and impolitic; the custom of all courts, both civil and military, is decidedly opposed to it. And however impartial the prosecutor may be, and no doubt is, and whatever chivalric feelings may tempt him to desire the acquittal of a prisoner "belonging to a regiment brigaded with his own, on the occasion when he had the good fortune to draw his sword for the first time against the common enemy of Europe in the field of Talavera, in the presence of the gallant General who presided over the court-martial," yet it bears the appearance of anxious zeal to press the charges home with a degree of that ardour, which no doubt the gallant prosecutor evinced, bride abattue and l'epée dans les reins, when he first met the foe on that eventful day. Mr. Tytler's work, which long formed the authority of the army on such points, is quite clear on the subject in debate, and no less so the recent work by Capt. Simmons: at page 168 he says— "He (the prosecutor) must be confined to establishing the character of his witnesses, impeaching those of the defence, and to rebutting the new matter brought forward by the prisoner. A remark of Lord Ellenborough, adverted to by Mr. Phillips, is much to the purpose. "If (observed his Lordship) any one fact be adduced by the defendant, to which an answer can be given, the plaintiff must have an opportunity given for so doing; but this must be understood of a specific fact; he cannot go into general evidence in reply to the defendant's case; there is no instance in which the plaintiff is entitled to go into half his case, and reserve the remainder." This opinion of Lord Ellenborough may be held conclusive; it is important to the best interests of the army that such high authority can be produced. What an inextricable labyrinth would a court-martial afford,-what a predicament the prisoner would be placed in,-if the prosecutor were permitted to reserve such parts of his prosecution as he thought fit, producing it in succession, as it may tend to the conviction of the prisoner, and in this view best accord with the course of the defence ! Believing, Mr. Editor, that what has been offered is of the utmost consequence to the army, whose interest your publication is so admirably calculated to protect, I have the honour to be, Sir, Your very obedient servant, AN OLD SOLDIER. New Rocket Signals. MR. EDITOR,-I hope I do not mistake the plan and character of your patriotic and truly national publication, in requesting insertion therein of the brief correspondence which follows, upon a subject of some present importance to the two services, to whose interests your Journal seems more immediately devoted. From the Brighton Gazette of the 28th ult. was copied into most, if not all, of the London Journals, a notice of some experiments-which had been made on the Chain-pier the previous evening, in the presence of many distinguished officers-of a new description of rocket signals, invented, it was stated, by Lieut. Hughes, R.N. who, by the way, had just previously experimented also in Hyde Park and some other places, before some gentlemen of the Customs, with rockets of my manufacture. Now, Sir, whatever merit belongs to the originator of the idea, belongs to me, and not to Lieut. Hughes. So long ago as August 1828, was my suggestion laid before the Right Honourable the Board of Ordnance, in the following letter, and made public by experiments at Woolwich. Lambeth, Jan. 26th, 1832. I am most respectfully, Sir, (COPY.) J. SOUTHBY. 8, Saville Place, Lambeth Walk, 12th Aug. 1828. MY LORD,-As the inventor of the Crimson Star Rockets, which I have lately brought into notice at the Royal Vauxhall Gardens, I humbly beg to suggest to your Lordship, that an essential good might arise from their introduction into His Majesty's service, in lieu of those at present made use of for signals. It cannot be disputed, that these Crimson Stars, (which were, I beg to repeat, first adapted and exhibited by me,) present, when in the air, a far more brilliant, unusual, and remarkable appearance, than the white flash of the common Rocket, and are, therefore, I presume, the better adapted for Signals: while another and important peculiarity in favour of them, as far as I have been able to learn, would be, that they could not, if proper steps were taken by His Majesty's Government to prevent it, be imitated by any other nation; for the principal ingredient used in the composition of the Crimson Stars, is only to be obtained in this country, where it is indigenous. There are other coloured fires, also of recent invention, which might be usefully applied to the above purpose, but the crimson fire is the most brilliant of any. Should your Lordship deem my suggestion deserving of the consideration of the To the Right Hon. Lord Beresford, CORRESPONDENCE. (Cory.) Office of Ordnance, 7th Nov. 1828. SIR,-With reference to your letter of the 12th Aug. last, I am directed by the Master-General to acquaint you, that the Select Committee of Artillery Officers appointed to consider in how far the Star Rockets proposed by you might be made available as night signals, have made their report, and stated, that having tried your Rockets in comparison with the common Rockets in the service, they were found to be excellent and very beautiful; but the light of the common was deemed most vivid. The Committee state, that Rockets of variously coloured stars might readily be made, and if not too numerous, or so diversified as to create confusion, might be of use as night signals: yet no mode of telegraphing by night (and seveUnder these circumstances, ral have been tried) has hitherto been successful. Lord Beresford desires me to acquaint you that your Rockets cannot be adopted in the service. To Mr. Joseph Southby, Artist in Fireworks, Lambeth. I am, Sir, &c. &c. (Signed) DOWNES. Signals. MR. EDITOR,-As a constant reader of your interesting Journal, I have been much pleased with the correspondence on the subject of adopting a more efficient and less expensive mode of communication, than that now in use by means of semaphores. In deciding on the merits of any invention, that plan alone which shall appear to competent judges the most efficient and least expensive, ought to have the preference. Now I know, Mr. Editor, "there is nothing new under the sun," yet, will you allow me a corner of your Journal to describe a plan, which I feel assured may be introduced, calculated, as it is, to embrace the objects contemplated? Let two pipes be laid down (instead of one, in the manner intended by "Fair Play"); let both ends of each pipe be turned up in a perpendicular direction, and the four ends cut off, so as to be in the same horizontal plane. Near the ends of each pipe, against the sides, fix a hollow cylinder, having a piston, to be worked therein; to each end of the pipes screw on perpendicularly a glass tube, about four feet in length: all the tubes to be of the same diameters. Fill the two pipes with water till it rises in each tube about twenty inches. Move either of the pistons, and the water in each tube, at the ends of the same pipe, will rise or fall according to the action of the piston; and in the same manner, the water in the other pipe may be acted on by its piston, causing it also to rise or fall in the tubes fixed on its ends. Place on the surface of the water, in each of the four glass tubes, a hollow sphere of the same diameter and weight, so that they may float half immersed. Over each glass tube let a miniature mast of a semaphore be fixed, having only one fan. The sphere in each of the tubes is to be considered the power which may be attached to the fans by wires, &c. so as to put them in motion through the whole circle, whenever it may be necessary to do so by working the pistons. The fans must all be connected to the spheres in precisely the same manner, and in whatever position they are placed at London, by the motion of the pistons causing the balls to rise or fall, the very same position will be exhibited at the other ends of the pipes, "however distant the extremes ;" and vice versa. This being an exact miniature representation of a semaphore, (excepting that the fans are not worked on the same mast,) the present code of signals may be used, a consideration of no trifling importance in these piping times of economy and retrenchment. That such a mode of communication would be both efficient and economical, I think there can be no doubt. By the pipes passing through the table of a board room, the whole may be so fitted as to form a very handsome piece of furniture. Your humble servant, London, 20th Jan. 1832. SIGNAL HALLYARDS. A Glance at Affairs, General and Regimental. MR. EDITOR,-As a constant reader of your excellent Journal, I have been much struck with the good sense and right feeling expressed in the "New Year's Preface" of the Number for the present month; its application to the circumstances of the present time, with reference to the situation and prospects of the army and navy, have appeared to me singularly felicitous. Although politics are not within the pale of military vocation, yet it is not possible for the members of the services to behold the present crisis without taking a deep interest in its result upon the prosperity of that country they have so often saved; nor can they disguise from themselves the painful truth that the voices that once exalted the conquerors of Waterloo, the Peninsula, and Navarino, now loudly unite in the popular clamour for disbanding and despoiling of their hardly-earned pittances, those whose exploits, it is to be feared, are, if not forgotten, at best but ungraciously acknowledged. The voices of agitators and demagogues are too successfully labouring to extinguish the small remains of chivalrous feeling in our island, that feeling that once poured honours and rewards with an unsparing hand upon the conqueror of Waterloo and his army. I am a plain soldier, Mr. Editor, and wholly unversed in those graces of style and diction which might excuse the presumption I am guilty of in obtruding any opinion or ideas of mine upon you or the public, but a fable that I was in my schooldays familiar with, has just struck me as so apposite to what is at present passing before us, that I cannot forbear relating it. A wolf who had long marked a flock of sheep as his prey, baffled by the vigilance and sagacity of the shepherd's dog, saw no chance of entering the fold unless he could render the simple sheep themselves accessory to their own destruction, by prevailing on them to discard the services of their faithful guardian. He skilfully commenced by pointing out what a restraint upon their pleasures the presence of the dog was-"You are unable," says he, "to ramble beyond the narrow limits of the fold, and are strangers to the happiness of being your own masters; besides, where we are all friends and brethren, why should you submit to so humiliating a durance?" The silly flock listened with ready ears to these insidious representations, rose en masse, expelled their trusty protector, rushed forth from the fold, and were quickly devoured by the artful tempter and his colleagues. Before concluding this letter, I must beg leave to offer a few remarks upon "Regimental Grievances," as set forth in a letter that appeared in this month's Number of the U. S. Journal. A thirty years' experience of the service leads me to believe that the complaints of the author are rather unfounded; or should he have been unfortunate enough to have met with one ill-regulated corps, where those abuses were suffered to exist, he would have done well to have looked farther before he formed and expressed his opinions of the army at large. The first cause of complaint is, if I mistake not," the opening and detaining of the papers, army lists, and periodicals, by the commanding officer, (especially if he be married,) before they reach the mess-room, and quarrelling with the President of the Mess Committee, should his right to do so be questioned by that officer." In every regiment properly commanded, the commanding officer, it is well known, is fully as amenable to the mess rules as any other individual; nor can he either infringe them himself, or suffer them to be infringed with impunity by others, without a violation of a most important part of his duty. The orders of the General commanding-in-chief are most particular in directing the attention of commanding officers to the maintenance of due order and regularity in the affairs of the mess, the comfort and respectability of which is especially committed to their charge. It is not, therefore, to be supposed, that any officer made thus responsible, would so commit himself, as first to violate rules and then quarrel with a junior officer for endeavouring justly to enforce them. With respect to the distribution of quarters, an allotment of rooms |