"AA. "U. S. SHIP ST. MARY'S, "SIR: I regret to have to introduce myself before you on a subject so inappropriate as a complaint, and a petition for redress. But the injury which I have received, and am still suffering under, from the hands of the commodore of this squadron, renders it impossible for me longer to refrain from petitioning your attention. "I beg, that I may be the better understood, to give a brief review of my cruise. I left the United States, by application, in June, 1846, attached to the Dale.' On arriving at this port, (in December,) I was ordered, against my wish, to the Warren,' for duty on shore, to command a block house. After Upper California became quieted, on the arrival of the Columbus,' I was ordered to her, (April 4.) On the eve of her sailing for home, Commodore Shubrick applying for officers, I volunteered to remain, and was ordered to the Congress,' (July 26,) and remained attached to her until the enemy about Mazatlan was driven off, in command of the outpost La Gluton. As there was no fighting there worth remembering, I will be excused in saying, that, in whatever was done, I had an active part. "In January, 1848, the Dale' going to blockade Guaymas, I was ordered back to her. At Guaymas I was employed four months blockading the coast in boats, which, with the many little fights we enjoyed there, kept the country in such alarm as to prevent the enemy sending troops, and to assist other places. "On the eve of the Dale's' sailing for home, (February, 1849,) I addressed the following to Commodore Jones: 'Sir: I beg leave to renew my verbal application of October last for a leave of absence, or some nominal duty that will allow me to visit the interior, until I can communicate with the Navy Department. I am sensible, sir, that I have no claim to such a request but that which rests in your disposition, and the belief that the views of the department manifested in the leave of Lieutenant Har. rison, and in the duty of Lieutenant Revere, will justify this application,' &c. "The answer was, orders to the 'Warren.' I immediately addressed the commodore again, informing him that I had been thirty two months on my cruise, and therefore entitled by usage to return in the ship in which I had come out; that I had endeavored to make my application to visit the interior respectful, &c.; and, as it appears he cannot grant my request, that I might be allowed to return home in the Dale.' This was refused; an acting lieutenant, who had left the United States subsequent to myself, returning in my place. In March I was court martialed. Charge 1. Disobedience of orders; 2. Treating with contempt my com. mander. The first was in consequence of getting lost in a walk to a village, where the fatigue, the lateness of the hour, (the consequence of getting lost,) and the impossibility of getting horses to return with, prevented my obeying the 'sunset order. Second, not in refusing, says the reprimand, to give my commander my reasons or excuses for having disobeyed the above order when he requested or ordered me to do refusing to put those reasons in writing afterwards, in obedience to his verbal order. "From the finding of the court, I have appealed to the commanderin chief for another trial From the commodore's reprimand, I have appealed to the Hon. Secretary of the Navy-from such remarks as 'Lieutenant Stanly's efforts to convince the court by a parity of false reasoning and vain boasting,' &c., &c., ' evinces a recklessness of dispo sition, or inexcusable ignorance of his obligations to his country, and to his superiors in command,' &c., &c. But, sir, that which draws from me this letter is, that in that reprimand the commander in chief has em bodied and publicly read my orders to this ship: thus degrading my duty; thus adding another punishment to that which the court found against me. This order also places me, sir, as far as the commodore is able, under a banishment of two years from my friends and home, adding two years of service, (not an hour of which can be passed, under the circumstances, with pride in my duty,) for an offence, or an imaginary one, to the three years of honorable service that I have just passed, as above related. "From this unprecedented and violent punishment I respectfully appeal to the honorable Secretary of the Navy, and beg he will give me the only redress now open to me, viz: orders home via Panama, and a hearing to my appeals. "I have seen fifteen years of active sea-service, and have never before had to appeal. "Had not Commodore Jones conducted himself on several occasions, since in command of this squadron, in a manner unpatriotic and unoffi cerlike, I would simply have referred you, sir, to my appeal now in his hands. But, sir, he has violated so many of the laws of the navy, and of society, that I am constrained, suffering as I am under his displeasure, to give this information to the department, both as a petition from what I believe to be tyranny, and as information on what I believe is injury to the service in a permanent manner. I am prepared, sir, to specify the offences of the commander in chief, to which I have alluded. "I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant, "FAB. STANLY, "Lieutenant U. S. Navy. "To the Hon. SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, "Washington, D. C." The most charitable construction that can be put upon the conduct of the writer of the annexed letter is that it results from insanity, of which he has at times been suspected. Lieutenant Stanly dates his narrative of complaints against the commander of the squadron long anterior to Commodore Jones's leaving the United States, and when the squadron was commanded by Commodores Biddle and Shubrick. He forgets his urgent applications at Guaymas and La Paz to return to the United States in the Congress, and the sudden change of his views and fancied rights, when he became tainted" with the gold mania at Monterey, in October last; he forgets that, upon the eve of the Dales's" sailing from San Francisco for home, in March, 1849, he applied to Commodore Jones to perpetrate a fraud upon the government by assigning him to some "nominal duty, that will allow me (Lieutenant Stanly) to visit the interior," alias the gold mines. The accompanying copy of Commander Long's letter of complaint. against Lieutenant Stanly, upon which he was recently brought to trial, and the transcript of the record showing the finding and sentence of the court, is a sufficient answer to Lieutenant Stanly's complaints under that head. As to the reprimand, that was by the sentence of the court, and I executed it as, in my opinion, the premeditated offence merited, by expressing the " quo animo" of the accused in the whole affair, and the subterfuge he endeavored to practise in the court. Lieutenant Stanly's transfer from the Warren to the St. Mary's is complained of as additional punishment! Strange notion; but indicative, however, of the lieutenant's ideas of naval service. A punishment to be transferred from a second-rate sloop, doing guard or harbor duty, to one of the first-class cruising sloops in the world! Moreover, when Lieutenant Stanly was ordered to the St. Mary's, that sloop had but one lieutenant for duty, and the Warren had three: the transfer was especially designed to relieve Lieutenant Stanly from the unpleasant situation which a return to the Warren would have placed him in, and did not necessarily doom him, as in his fevered imagination he supposes, to two years' longer service on the station. It was my intention to have sent him home in the Southampton, the ship that will probably be the first to return to the Atlantic States. THOS. AP C. JONES, Commander in chief Pacific Squadron. APRIL 18, 1849. "U. S. SHIP WARREN, "San Francisco, U. C., March 7, 1849. "SIR: I have the honor to inform you, that I have suspended Lieutenant F. Stanly from duty, for absenting himself from this ship without leave, and disobedience of orders. "The facts are these: Yesterday afternoon, about 1 f. m., Lieutenant Stanly entered my cabin, and applied for permission to remain on shore all night. This indulgence was promptly denied him. He expostulated, and endeavored to convince me it was my duty to allow him to remain on shore. Failing in this, he left the cabin, with a positive refusal to remain on shore all night. Lieutenant Stanly soon after this interview left the ship for the shore, and did not return again until this morning, near the hour of 8 a. m. Soon after 8, I sent for Lieutenant Stanly and Lieutenant Buchanan, of, marines, (who had also absented himself without leave) and said to them: "Gentlemen, you have absented yourselves without permission from this ship: what have you to say in justification of your conduct?' To which Lieutenant Stanly replied: That he had been out to the mission, and found the distance greater than he expected,' (or words to that effect,) &c., notwithstanding he (Lieutenant Stanly) told me yesterday afternoon that the trip he wished to take would prevent his getting back in time to take the sundown boat. I then said: Gentlemen, you will make that state ' ment to me in writing.' To which Lieutenant Stanly replied, Captain Long, I have made my report; you may put it in writing yourself, sir.' You can consider yourself suspended, Mr. Stanly,' was my reply. "Lieutenant Buchanan made his statement in writing, which to me is satisfactory. "I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, "Commodore THOS. AP C. JONES, "A. K. LONG, Commander. "Commander-in chief U. S. Naval Forces, Pacific Ocean." Upon which letter or report were founded the following charges and specifications: CHARGE I-Disobedience of orders. Specification. In this: that the said Lieutenant Fabius Stanly did, on or about the sixth day of the present month, A. D. eighteen hundred and forty-nine, being at the time attached to the U. S. sloop-of-war Warren, then lying in the bay of San Francisco, Upper California, under the command of A. K. Long, commander U. S. navy, remain absent from the said U. S. ship Warren, during the night of the sixth of March, A. D. 1849, and until the morning of the seventh of March, A. D. 1849, without the permission of his commander, and after the said Commander A. K. Long (his commanding officer) had, when applied to, expressly refused permission to the said Lieutenant Fabius Stanly to remain absent from his ship. CHARGE II.-Treating with contempt his superior and commanding officer. Specification. In this: that the said Lieutenant Fabius Stanly, on or about the 7th day of March, A. D. 1849, on board of the US ship Warren, at the time lying in the bay of San Francisco, Upper California, in the cabin of said ship, when called upon by his commanding officer, A. K. Long, of the U. S. navy, for his reason or excuse for absenting himself from his ship without permission, as fully set forth in the specification to the first charge, and desired by said Commander Long to make a statement, in writing, of those reasons or excuses, did reply to the said Commander A. K. Long, his superior commanding officer, in a disre spectful and contemptuous manner, and say to him: "Captain Long, I have made my report; you may put it in writing yourself," or words to that effect; all of which is contrary to the laws and discipline of the naval service of the United States, and in violation of an act entitled "An act for the better government of the navy of the United States," approved April 23, 1800. U. S. FLAG-SHIP OHIO, Saturday morning, March 17, 1849. The court met pursuant to adjournment; the president, all the members, and the judge advocate, being present. The proceedings of yesterday were read, and the accused (Lieutenant Fabius Stanly) was next called upon for his defence, when he read the paper hereto appended, and marked "defence;" which the court received and permitted to accompany the record. The court was now cleared to deliberate upon the charges and specifi cations; and after mature consideration, the following was the finding and sentence: Specification of the first charge proved, and guilty of the charge. Specification of the second charge proved, with the exception of the words "in a disrespectful and contemptuous manner," and not guilty of the charge. The court therefore sentenced the accused to be publicly reprimanded by the commander-in chief of the squadron, at such time, and on board of such ship of the squadron, and in the presence of such officers of the vessel present, as he may think proper. Sentence approved: C. K. STRIBLING, President. J. CROWNINSHIELD, Commander. WILLIAM NORRIS, Judge Advocate. THOS. AP C. JONES, Commander in Chief of the Pacific Squadron. The foregoing is a true transcript from the record, of the finding and sentence of the naval court-martial in the case of the United States against Lieutenant Fabius Stanly, of the navy. FLAG-SHIP OHIO, WILLIAM NORRIS, Judge Advocate. Bay of San Francisco, April 13, 1849. Synopsis of nine letters, applications and counter applications, from Lieutenant Fabius Stanly, to leave, and not to leave, the Pacific squadron; written and made between the 1st of July, 1848, and the 9th of April, 1849; all addressed to Commodore Thos. Ap C. Jones, commanding Pacific squad on. Lieutenant Stanly's first appeal to me against the alleged oppression of Commodores Biddle and Shubrick was at Guaymas, in July, 1848-first verbal, and then followed by one in writing before we left there. The second was in writing, at La Paz, July 13, 1848, followed or preceded-not now recollected which-by a long oral criminating explanation, and reasoning to show his right to return home in the Congress, for which there was not the slightest shadow. The third was both written and oral, at Monterey, asking to be released from duty in the squadron to enable him to go to the interior or gold regions to engage in private bu siness. The fourth was his renewed application on the 2d March, 1849, for leave of absence, or for orders to "nominal duty," to afford him an opportunity to visit the interior, alias gold mines. The fifth was his letter of the same date, (March 2,) asking a revocation of my order of that day, by which I sought, by ordering him to the Warren, to comply with his request, as far as by attaching him to a vessel remaining in California, to put him in a position to make available the indulgence if granted by the Hon. Secretary of the Navy. The sixth was his letter of 8th March, calling on Commodore Jones |