Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 14.pdf/164

 A Legal View of the Schley Inquiry. a witness, asked about some previous state ment of his. Upon objection, the court re quired that time, place, and individuals should be stated in such a question, in order that the witness might know about what he was being examined. The president, in making this ruling, said, "We know more law now.'' THE COURT'S ATTENTION. The record indicates that the witnesses re ceived constant attention from the court. The court's attention was shown when the government asked a witness concerning sig nals, "Did they excite comment on board the ship?" The president said, "What is the use of these questions? It seems to me we are taking up time for nothing." Later, a witness was asked, "Did you de liver the despatches?" He began to answer, "I took them,'' when the president said, "You have not answered the ques tion." Again, a witness testifying as to the weather stated the force of the wind. The Solicitor said, "You need give only the direc tion." The president said the court would like the force also, that it was very important. The president, with reference to coaling, asked an officer, "Did you say that Cape Cruz did or did not look like a favorable place?" A witness said, "I believe" so and so. The court said his own knowledge was what was wanted. THE COURT'S CONTROL. The court's control of both sides and of the whole proceedings appears from the fol lowing instances: The Judge Advocate asked a witness, "How old are you?" The president said, "That has no bearing." The Judge Advo cate asked the witness how long he had been in the service, and the question was an swered.

133

A witness said, with reference to a vessel, "I assumed" her tactical diameter was so much. The president said, "We don't want that." The Judge Advocate on cross-examination of a witness, asked him whether he had not made some mistake in service at Newport. The president ruled this out—"Whether there is law on it or not," since the court had discretion. The applicant took the stand. In the course of his testimony he said, ironically, that as "evidence of promptness a despatch dated May 27 did not reach him until June 10." The president said, "Just state the fact. It is not worth while to criticise any body." The applicant then said, with reference to the commander-in-chief, "I never had any difference with him, and nfcver "The president said, "I would not go any further." The chief boatswain on the "Brooklyn," when testifying to the applicant's conduct during the battle of July 3, when others were naturally dodging shells, said that the applicant's "head never bent." At this, there was applause. But the president said, "Xv, no demonstrations here." The Judge Advocate asked a witness, "Have you ever said that there is no doubt that the applicant was worried and afraid to take the responsibility?" The witness re plied, "I said that in my own private notes, my diary, as my opinion at the time." The president said that the question was proper, and the answer was, but went a little too far. The court ruled that a witness can be called and recalled, to make correction or additions at any time, but "not to reiterate." The president's control of the trial was shown when the Judge Advocate interrupted questions which' were being put by Mr. Rayner to a witness. The president said: "I would rather you would not interfere with this examination. ... If counsel put words into the mouth of a witness you can bring it out at the proper time."