be, would be liable to commitment during the sitting of the Court, for all courts of record have an inherent right to repress contempts in the nature of immediate interruptions. To invest any jurisdiction with a power of either fining or imprisoning, makes it a court of record instantly. A naval court-martial, then, since it has the power to imprison, must consequently be deemed a court of record. Now, the doubt is, whether the 17th section of the act referred to, respecting contempts of Court, which section is applicable only to "persons in the fleet," does not restrict the general power of committing for contempt to the particular case of those persons. Mr. Twiss, counsel for the Admiralty in 1825, was of opinion that the power of the Court in this respect was general, if the contempt amounted to an interruption or obstruction of its proceedings. Such commitment, however, could not extend to a lengthened imprisonment, but must naturally terminate with the dissolution of the Court originating it.

If in evidence given before a court-martial, "any person or persons" should commit wilful and corrupt perjury, or procure or suborn any person to commit perjury, they would be liable to all the pains and penalties attached to the crime of perjury, notwithstanding they may not have been subject to naval discipline.

To make a false answer to a question in the course of a legal investigation the subject of an indictment for wilful and corrupt perjury, it is

essential that the question itself should be one which is material to the issue. If any person in the fleet should refuse to give evidence on oath or affirmation, or should prevaricate, the Court is authorised to punish such person by imprisonment for any period not exceeding three months; and if any person in the fleet should behave with contempt to the Court, he would be subject to imprisonment for one month.

If the attendance of civilians to give evidence before a court-martial be required, care should be taken, at the time of serving the notice, to tender a reasonable sum to defray their expenses to and from the place of trial, and for their maintenance during the period of the trial. Lawyers, and members of the medical profession, are entitled to remuneration for loss of time; so, also, are those witnesses who may be in "poor circumstances." Naval and military officers are entitled to a reasonable sum, to cover the expenses they may incur by attending on the Court.

If the evidence of prisoners of war be required, their attendance will be ordered by the Secretary of State.

By the 43rd of Geo. 3. cap. 140., any judge of the Courts of King's Bench, or Common Pleas, or any baron of the Court of Exchequer, is authorised to award a writ of habeas corpus for bringing any prisoner, confined in any gaol in England, before a court-martial, either for trial, or for the purpose of being examined on any matter depending before such court-martial.

81

CHAP. XI.

CRIMES COGNIZABLE BY COURTS-MARTIAL.

-

Crimes cognizable by Courts-Martial. - Civilians not subject to Naval Discipline unless found to be Spies. - Case of Daniel King, tried for endeavouring to corrupt a Sentinel to betray his Trust. Offences specified in the Articles of War. Crimes committed on Shore by Persons in the Fleet. Crimes committed within the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty. Suggestion for extending the Jurisdiction of the Act 22 Geo. 2. c. 33. — Jurisdiction of the Court of Admiralty. Acts of Parliament define the Powers of Courts-Martial. Persons not amenable to CourtsMartial for Crimes committed on board the Queen's Ships after being discharged from the Service. - Officers and Men taking Passage in Ships of War to join other Ships ; or borne for Wages and Victuals; or for Disposal; or as lent to do Duty; or employed in Prize-Vessels. Opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown respecting Officers and Men employed in hired Vessels, &c. - Subjects of a Foreign State voluntarily entering the Service amenable to Naval Discipline.-Prisoners of War should not be permitted to enter the Service. - Pressed Men not subject to Naval Discipline until rated in some Ship.- Officers and others employed on the Lakes in North America. Case where a second Court-Martial was held on an Offender before the Sentence of the first Court-Martial was carried into execution. - Officers on Half-Pay, or who have quitted the Service, may be tried for Crimes committed by them when serving. Persons released from Arrest may be tried at a subsequent Period. Peers of the Realm,

G

when in the Service, subject to Courts-Martial. — Privileges of Parliament do not exempt Persons from Trial by Court-Martial for Offences committed by them in a Naval or Military Capacity.—Marines, when employed in Ships, subject to Naval Courts-Martial; or may be sent to Head-Quarters for Trial.-Circumstances under which the Crimes of Murder and Manslaughter may be taken cognizance of at Courts-Martial. Case of Francis Ansell, of H. M. S. "Trave," tried for a Murder committed by him on board that Ship when in the River St. Lawrence.-Case of Mr. R. Phillips, Midshipman, against whom a Coroner's Inquest returned a Verdict of Wilful Murder.-Case of Captain Whitby, of H. M. S. Leander, who fired into an American Coasting Vessel, and killed one of the Crew.

THE consideration of the crimes cognizable by courts-martial and the extent of the jurisdiction of those courts demand our next attention. The laws for the government of the Royal Navy were framed only to ensure that degree of discipline and order which is necessary for the maintenance of its safety and efficiency. The members of the naval profession are equally amenable to the law of the land as citizens in a private capacity; but citizens in a private capacity can never be subject to naval discipline except for a breach of the 5th article of war, which provides, that "All spies and all persons whatsoever who shall come or be found in the nature of spies to bring or deliver any seducing letters or messages from any enemy or rebel, or endeavour to corrupt any captain, officer, mariner, or other in the fleet to betray his trust, being convicted of any such offence by the sentence of the

court-martial, shall be punished with death, or such other punishment as the nature and degree of the offence shall deserve, and the court-martial shall impose."

"The employment of spies is a kind of clandestine practice or deceit in war. These find means to insinuate themselves among the enemy, in order to discover the state of his affairs, to pry into his designs, and then give intelligence to their employer. Spies are generally condemned to capital punishment, and with great justice, since we have scarcely any other means of guarding against the mischief they may do us." *

The article of war which we have quoted provides not only against spies, but all persons who shall bring or deliver seducing letters from the enemy or rebel, or endeavour to corrupt any captain, officer, or other in the fleet to betray his trust. In November, 1797, His Majesty's ship "Diana" captured "La Mouche," a French privateer, and amongst the people on board was one Daniel King, an Irishman, who had been taken by the privateer a few days before in the "John and Richard," an American ship from the Brazils. The "Diana" had a number of French prisoners on board at the time, and King was observed to be in very frequent conversation with these prisoners and some suspected men in the ship, expressing his great regard for the French, for whom he said he would lose his life, and inquiring at the same time * Vattel's Law of Nations, 375.