Whereupon the court adjourned, to meet again to morrow, October 23, 1849, at 2 o'clock p. m. U. S. SLOOP-OF-WAR WARREN, BAY OF SAN FRANCISCO, The court met pursuant to adjournment. Present: the president, all the members, and the judge advocate. The proceedings of yesterday were read over, and found correct. Whereupon the court adjourned, to meet again to morrow morning, October 24, 1849, at 10 o'clock a. m. U. S. SLOOP OF WAR WARREN, BAY OF SAN FRANCISCO, October 24, 1849, 10 o'clock a. m. The court met pursuant to adjournment. Present: the president, all the members, and the judge advocate. John K. Duer, U. S. navy, was called as a witness on the part of the defence; and, being duly sworn, said: Question by the accused.-Do you recollect a conversation that took place between Captain Johnston and myself relative to one of my division not being at his quarters on the call of his name? Please state it. Answer. I recollect the circumstance. Captain Johnston asked Mr. Stanly why he had [not] reported that man absent. Mr. Stanly replied that he did not think it his duty to report the man absent, when he was there. He said he thought it his duty to report the reason why the man was not present when his name was called. Captain Johnston then told Mr. Stanly that he kept all hands waiting. Question by the accused.-Did I keep all hands waiting? Did not Mr. Marchand report his division after I reported mine? and do you recollect about the time we had been at quarters? Answer-1 recollect that Mr. Marchand did report his division after Mr. Stanly, on that occasion. The time we had been at quarters had been about five minutes. Question by the accused.-Have you ever had any reason whatever to question Mr. Stanly's character for veracity? and if so, state them. Answer. I have never had any reason whatever to question Mr. Stanly's character for veracity. The evidence of the witness was read over, and found correct; and he withdrew. The court was cleared, to take into consideration a paper hereto ap pended, and marked E. There being no further evidence, either on the part of the prosecution or defence, Mr. Stanly was informed by the president that the court was ready to hear his defence. He replied that he had not prepared it, and asked until the day after to-morrow, Friday, October 26, 1849, at 12 o'clock. Whereupon the court adjourned, to meet again to-morrow morning, October 25, 1849, at 9 o'clock a. m. U. S. SLOOP OF WAR WARREN, BAY OF SAN FRANCISCO, The court met pursuant to adjournment. Present: the president, Lieutenants G. F. Emmons, Joshua Humphries, and William G. Le Roy, and the judge advocate. The proceedings of yesterday were read over, and found correct. A communication from Commodore Thomas Ap C. Jones, hereto appended and marked F, was next read. The court then adjourned, to meet again to-morrow, October 26th, 1849, Friday, at 12 o'clock m. And in compliance with the aforementioned communication, marked F, the court will meet on board the U. S. sloop-of-war St. Mary's, in the bay of San Francisco. U. S. SLOOP-OF-WAR ST. MARY'S, BAY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Friday, October 26, 1849, 12 o'clock m. Pursuant to adjournment, the court met on board the U. S. sloop of war St. Mary's. Present: the president, all the members, and the judge advocate. The court was opened, and the accused came in. The president of the court now informed Mr. Stanly that the court was ready to hear his defence. Lieutenant Stanly now read paper hereto appended, and marked "Defence. " The court was cleared, and proceeded to review the evidence in the case, and to consider the matter contained in the Defence. After a very full and careful deliberation, the court proceeded to declare the following finding: That specification 1st of charge first, as contained in letter No. 1, is proved in part. That specification 2d of charge first, as contained in letters Nos. 2 and 3, is proved in part. And the court do find, that Lieutenant Fabius Stanly of the charge first is guilty. And the court do further find that specification 1st of charge second, as contained in letters No. 1 and No. 2, is proved in part. That specification 2d of charge second, as contained in letters Nos. 1 and 2, is proved in part. Aud the court do find, that Lieutenant Fabius Stanly of the charge second is not guilty. The court now adjourned, to meet again to-morrow morning, October 27, 1849, at 10 o'clock a. m. U. S. SLOOP OF WAR WARREN, BAY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Saturday, October 27, 1849, 10 o'clock a. m. The court met pursuant to adjournment. Present: the president, all the members, and the judge advocate. The proceedings of yesterday were read over and found correct. The court then proceeded to declare that, "in finding the accused guilty of disobedience of orders," and not guilty of "conduct unbecom ing an officer and a gentleman," the court, before pronouncing its sentence, deems it proper to remark, that the only evidence which appears in support of the first charge is that which relates to Lieutenant Stanly's having transgressed a general order of the squadron, on or about a certain day of last May, while the sloop-of-war St. Mary's was lying off the town of San Francisco; but it also appears that at the time of committing the transgression, the accused was promptly admonished by his immediate commander, and then told by that officer "he would pass it over." Furthermore, from the embarrassing manner in which the charges are framed, the court even doubts whether the instance in question was intended to be confined to purposes of narrative, or amplified to the import. ance of a specification. As to the occurrence at Callao on the occasion set forth in the correspondence appended to the charges, it does not appear, in any of the evidence adduced, that the accused knew, or had been at any time apprized, of any specific order of his captain, requiring an officer on the sicklist to obtain the surgeon's sanction or recommendation, either in writing or otherwise, to visit the shore. Nevertheless, it does appear that the accused did consult the senior medical officer of the ship as to the relief that would probably be afforded his disease of neuralgia by an operation on the part of a dentist, and that the doctor, in effect, recommended the experiment, although he did not in terms recommend, or in any special manner decide, that the accused was to go on shore on the day he did, to have it performed. Hence arose, in the opinion of the court, a mere misapprehension on the part of Lieutenant Stanly. He understood the doctor's impression of the experiment to carry with it an assent that he should visit the shore at once to have the experiment performed; whereas the doctor, it appears, really intended nothing of the sort. Regarding this point of the case in the light just indicated, the court therefore feels itself bound, by its own sense of justice and propriety, to express in the most unqualified manner its decided conviction that the accused did not intend to practise the slightest deception whatever towards either Lieutenant Pickering, Commander Johnston, or anybody else, and that his character for veracity stands wholly unimpeached. In view of the above consideration, and of every other feature of the case, the court decides that the accused, Lieutenant Stanly, has already sufficiently atoned for the disobedience of orders of which he is now technically convicted, and the court therefore, in the exercise of its discretion, awards that no further punishment be pronounced against him. The court also adjudges that the accused, Lieutenant Stanly, is fully acquitted of the second charge, viz: "Conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman." The court cannot in justice dismiss this case without expressing its belief that Commander Johuston, as he apprehended the affair from the reports made to him, was not only justifiable in making his complaint to the commander of the squadron, but was called upon by his duty to do so. P. F. VOORHEES, President of Court. E. S. HANDY, Lieutenant. JOSHUA HUMPHRIES, Lieutenant. W. MAIN NORRIS, Judge Advocate. Proceedings, findings, and sentence disapproved. THOS. AP C. JONES, Commander-in-chief Pacific Squadron. FLAG SHIP SAVANNAH, Sansalito, October 29, 1849. SIR: When the court-martial meets to day, adjourn sine die, but do not dissolve, as it is probable the proceedings in the case of Lieutenant Stanly, will have to be returned for amendment as soon as I can more thoroughly examine the same, having already discovered two very material errors, viz: Lieutenant Hardy's name does not appear on the record except as an absentee, until we find it signed to the proceedings. 2d. The decision of the court whereby the charges and specifications were not allowed to be read to the witnesses. The excursiveness, too, of the testimony, the irrelevant matter given in evidence, and particularly the testimony of Lieutenant Duer, except so far as relates to the general character of the accused, is altogether inadmissible in courts of law and justice. Respectfully, Captain PHILIP F. VOORHEES, THOS. AP C. JONES, Commander-in-chief Pacific Squadron. President of the Naval General Court-Martial. FLAG-SHIP SAVANNAH. SIR: The naval general court-martial of which you are president, and which was, on the 29th instant, by my order of that date, adjourned sine die, is hereby dissolved. The several members thereof will return to their respective duties. The proceedings of the court in the case of Lieutenant F. Stanly are not approved, for the reasons intimated in my letter of the 29th instant adjourning the court; but a press of business preparatory to the departure of the mail steamer to-morrow, and the public interest not admitting of any further delay in sending off the St. Mary's, Southampton, and Massachusetts, obliges me to dissolve the court without being able to refer back the proceedings, with such comments as, in my judgment, said proceedings call for. Respectfully, Captain PHILIP F. VOORHEES, THOS. AP C. JONES, Commander-in-chief Pacific Squadron. President of the Court-Martial. [No. 1.] UNITED STATES SHIP ST. MARY'S, Bay of San Francisco, October 2, 1849. SIR: It becomes my duty to report Lieutenant Fabius Stanly for absenting himself from the ship in direct violation of orders, and under circumstances of an aggravated character. About the 6th of May, a few days previous to my sailing from San Francisco, I issued an order that no person should leave the ship whose name was on the surgeon's report, without first having obtained the surgeon's permission and recommendation. This order was issued in consequence of Lieutenant Stanly having absented himself all the night before (he being then on the sick-report) without permission from me, or consultation with the surgeon. The same day the order was given, Lieutenant Stanly went off the sick report and to duty. During the stay of this ship in the port of Callao, between the 6th and 10th of August, Lieutenant Stanly applied to the first lieutenant, Pickering, for permission to go on shore; as he was then on the sick report, Lieutenant Pickering asked him if he had the surgeon's permission, and he replied he had. The question was repeated, and again answered in the affirmative. A short time after, I saw the surgeon, (Dr. Addison,) who informed me he had not given Lieutenant Stanly permission to leave the ship, and that Lieutenant Stanly had not asked his permission, or consulted with him as to the propriety of his going on shore. It is due to the discipline of the service to state, that the official course of Lieutenant Stanly on board this ship has been, in my judgment, calculated to destroy discipline and break down distinctions so important to the good of the service. I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant, Commodore T. AP C. JONES, Z. F. JOHNSTON, Commander. Commander in chief U. S. Naval Forces, Pacific Ocean. Original letter received by me. THOS. AP C. JONES. [No. 2.] U. S. SHIP ST. MARY'S, Bay of San Francisco, October 13, 1849. SIR: The enclosed communication from Lieutenant Stanly, purporting to give somewhat a chronological history of his course on board this ship, renders it necessary for me to lay it before you, with the following ex planations. A few days after I was appointed to the command of this ship, on the 24th of April, at the time designed for an active cruise on the coast of Chili, Peru, &c, Lieutenant Stanly, one of the watch-officers, being then, and for some time previous, on the sick report, I sent for him to the cabin, and observed to him that I was about to sail on a cruise that would require considerable activity, and asked him if he thought his health would permit his keeping his regular watch? He replied, he thought he could get along tolerably well at sea, but that in port he generally suffered most. I observed that it was particularly desirable to have offi cers who could do their duty in port as well as at sea, on this station, where men were deserting every day; and remarked at the same time, I |