Friday, 2d April, 1824. The Court meets, pursuant to adjournment, at twelve o'clock ;-deliberates, and closes its proceedings on this trial. The Court adjourns till Monday, the 5th April, to read and sign fair copy of proceedings. OPINION AND SENTENCE. The Court, having most maturely and deliberately weighed and considered the evidence adduced in support of the prosecution against the prisoner, Capt. Thomas Atchison of the Royal Artillery, as well as what he has offered in his Defence, is of opinion, that he is guilty of the charge preferred against him, viz. "Disobedience of orders, insubordinate and unofficer-like conduct, in "not carrying into execution the orders that were conveyed to him "by letter from Acting-Adjutant Somerville, on or about the 9th of "August last, desiring that he would give directions for firing salutes "at Fort St. Angelo on the 9th and 10th of that month ; "And for writing a letter dated the 9th of August, addressed to Major "Addams, his commanding officer, hesitating and remonstrating against "carrying the said orders into effect;" The above conduct being highly subversive of military discipline, and holding forth a most dangerous example to the British army; Being in breach of the Articles of War,-does therefore sentence him, the Prisoner, Capt. Thomas Atchison, of the Royal Artillery, to be DISMISSED his Majesty's service. C. BAYLEY, Capt. Officiating Judge Advocate. F. RIVAROLA, The Court moreover feels itself called upon to animadvert in a particular manner on the conduct of Brevet-Major Addams of the Royal Artillery throughout; as in all probability the spirit of resistance, as set forth in evidence, might have been checked and put down in its origin, but for the indecision on the part of that officer, as then commanding the Royal Artillery stationed at Malta. C. Bayley, Captain, Off. J. Advocate. (Signed) F. RIVAROLA, (The following Letter represented to the General Officer in command the conduct of the Court regarding my Defence, and requested that a copy of it entire might accompany the proceedings to England.) Malta, April 3d, 1824. SIR, Having objected to that judgment of the Court Martial, before which I have been tried, which required me to expunge certain passages from my Defence; and when I consented to proceed without these passages, having reserved to myself the liberty of referring the point I objected to to higher authority, as is shewn by the proceedings. [Wednesday, 31st March.] I have the honour to request you will lay before Major-General Sir Manley Power the following grounds by which I consider I have a claim to have all the matter I think necessary to be urged in my defence brought before, not only the Court, but those higher authorities who have afterwards to judge of my conduct, whatever the decision of the Court may be. Under such circumstances I can only request the Major-General will have the goodness to receive from me a copy of my entire Defence, to be transmitted with the proceedings of the Court to his Majesty's Judge Advocate General, together with this letter, as explanatory of the transaction. My first ground for believing the judgment of the Court is not correct in stopping and expunging from their proceedings an argument in my Defence arises from the well known practice of all Courts, which have a rule to hear all matter which a prisoner urges in his defence, provided there is nothing unlawful in it. In the present case the Court stopped the second head of my Defence, after I had shewn its necessary use in my argument; and had especially dwelt on its importance to me in another point of view, viz.—to convince the Court, and all who may have to judge of my conduct, that I have not been actuated by a spirit of bigotry or obstinacy, but that my conduct had arisen from such a rational and conscientious view of the things to which I objected, as would satisfactorily account for what I had done. The Court admitted the subject in the sketch of the argument,-and heard and admitted this ground for its use: for they retain these passages on its Proceedings, and yet, when I come to the subject, it is stopped. It appears to me that the evidence before the Court in Mr. Greig's letter, and my letter of remonstrance, fairly mooted the subject before the Court as matter of defence; and that I had a right to argue on this evidence, and use it in any way that appeared most beneficial to me. Besides which, the tenor of the whole proceedings previous to the trialy as shewn in evidence, are such as not only to deny my right to the exercise of my Protesting conscience on these subjects; but as coming from such high authority, to deny the very existence of such principles as those which actuated my conduct; so that I consider I had the additional right of asserting our national principles, not in the abstract, as in our creeds, but in their practical, their influential operation. Upon the Court's decision to stop and expunge the authorities I wished to read in the body of my Defence, I would remark, that unless I had been allowed to read them immediately after the argument which I wished to have supported by them, I could not expect they would be of the use intended, first,-from being separated from the argument ;— and, secondly, though referred to, it did not follow that they certainly would be read either by the Judge Advocate to the Court, or by all its members individually; when I considered it was essentially necessary for my cause that I should press these authorities upon the minds of the whole Court, both in their connexion with the argument, and in that train which would make these authorities strengthen each other in my favour. Added to which, any difficulty in finding out the passages, with the time which would be consumed in so doing, would be a sufficient cause to expect they would be neglected. I consider this rule as bearing particularly hard on the last head of my Defence, on which, employing only authorities to assert my right, when these were expunged, this main point of my Defence was left to fortuitous circumstances; and the application, which I wished to make of them in my appeal to the Court, might have been worse than nugatory; it appearing only as a piece of idle declamation, because the matter referred to was not on the minds of those addressed. I expressly said to the Court that their decision in this case must have the effect of making me appear as a fool to themselves and the public, as no one could tell to what things I was referring, but by surmise. I may be allowed to say, that having to contend before a Court which I had a right to expect would be only intelligent judges of all I had to plead in defence of my character and situation in life; that meeting with such checks is one of the most distressing and discouraging circumstances that could possibly occur to any one so situated; such that I trust will never again be the lot of any British officer. Having thus experienced the practical disadvantages of these judgments of the Court, namely, to exclude one branch of my argument, and to take from me the liberty of using my authorities according to my own views of what was best for my Defence, I am assured they cannot be right; for all the rules of courts of justice have for their end substantial justice, and to give a prisoner the utmost advantage consistent with justice. I cannot conclude without expressing my sense of the marked kindness of the Court to me in every other respect: I only appeal from the effects of what I consider to proceed from an erroneous judgment. Capt. Bayley, I have the honour to be, Sir, Your most obedient servant, THOMAS ATCHISON, (Signed) &c. &c. &c. Officiat. Dep. Judge Adv. Military Secretary's Office, SIR, I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of yesterday's date, which, agreeable to your request, I have laid before MajorGeneral Sir Manley Power, and I am directed by the Major-General to acquaint you that the request therein contained cannot be acceded to. I have the honour to be, Sir, [Letter to Mr. Becket, Judge Advocate General, in London, sent with a copy of the entire Defence, after Major-General Sir Manley Power had refused to forward it.] SIR, Malta, 9th April, 1824. The General Court Martial before which I have been tried having prevented me bringing forward certain matters which I thought essential to my Defence, and having ordered that the matter objected to should be expunged from the proceedings, to which acts I submitted, reserving to myself (as appears by the Proceedings) liberty of referring the point to higher authority. And having represented the same by Letter, No. III., to Major-General Sir Manley Power (accompanying this) requesting he would forward a copy of my entire Defence with the Proceedings, giving also my reasons for my appeal; which request he refused, as seen in Letter, No. IV. I have the honour to transmit my Defence to you, with other documents relative to this trial, which I request you will have the goodness to lay before whatever authorities have to judge of my conduct, as represented in the Proceedings of the General Court Martial. Letter, No. I.,* is a complaint preferred through the Officiating Deputy Judge Advocate to the Major-General commanding, at the manner in which my Charge was made out; with a request to have the same rectified. Letter, No. II., shews that my request could not be complied with. The next document is my Defence.-I have marked in it all the passages which the Court ordered to be expunged; also, some which were read in Court and not objected to, and have been expunged, from mistake, I imagine. I applied for eight or ten days in which to draw up my Defence ;from the quantity and nature of the matter I had to plead, and from my weak state of health; and afterwards said, seven days was the least I I could do with. The Court gave me only six days. The consequence was that I did. not complete my Defence in several of its parts; and having matter to prepare to nearly the last moment, I could neither superintend what was transcribed, nor have an opportunity of calmly reviewing either the whole or some of its parts. I had not read the Defence once through when the officer arrived to conduct me to the Court; and I went into Court with an entire part of the last head of my Defence deficient, though the most of it was nearly prepared for insertion;—and also knowing there were passages misplaced, and some omitted which I felt to be essential to their subjects. I have rectified one misplaced passage, as mentioned in Court ;—and while feeling that it would be in the highest degree wrong to add to or alter a sentiment which might affect the grounds of the Court's present decision, I have thought myself at liberty to add two omitted passages to the subject not allowed to be read, and which was expunged; as I have reason to think I should have supplied them in Court had I been permitted to proceed without interruption. I have marked them as added; and I think it will be obvious they form a part of my train of thought, and are necessary to illustrate my views of the subject. I have allowed all the expunged papers to remain with the Officiating Deputy Judge Advocate, in order that the integrity of what I now send to you may be proved. I have to add to what I have stated respecting the Court's decision to * Inserted at the commencement of the Proceedings. |