all duties as such, and no farther than is allowed by the Act of Parliament, &c." mean, where the debt is under 200 Sa. Rs.; as provided for by the above-quoted sec. lv, of the M. A. Officers are forbidden by this art. to give protection to any person from his creditors, under the pretence of his being a soldier, when in fact he is not so; or to any non-com. officer or soldier who does not actually do all duties as such,— as those who may have been enrolled as such, but who have never done, or ceased to do duty,-have deserted or been discharged the service, invalided, &c.—or who, having been tried and convicted of any crime, are in gaol, and the term of imprisonment has not expired. The protecting a debtor from his creditors may be, by affording him an asylum or place to conceal or secrete himself in, or when it is ascertained by the bailiff or other officer sent to arrest him, that the debtor is in the house of the party concealing him, by knowingly and designedly shutting the outer door to prevent the access of the bailiff, &c., and pretending that the person in question is a soldier.

on

3. Charges.] See Forms Nos. 39 and 40, Chap. I. That A. B. did at ―, protect C. D. from his creditors, and from the serving of a process or writ to arrest the said C. D., by E. F., duly authorized so to arrest, and sent to serve a writ issued from the Supreme Court, on the pretence of the said C. D. being a soldier, whereas the said C. D. was not a soldier, enlisted, or in pay, or entitled to the protection of the M. A. or Act of Parliament relating to debtors.

The same being in breach of the Arts. of War.

4. Evidence.] Nos. 1 and 2, as at Chap. III. sec. ii. art. 1. 3. Prove C. D. not to be a non-com. officer or soldier, enlisted or in pay, or entitled to protection. 4. Prove the writ to have been shewn to A. B. 5. Prove that A. B. did protect C. D., &c.

One witness to prove that C. D. was not entitled to protection, whether the amount of debt be above or under 200 Sa. Rs. One witness to prove the attempt to arrest, and the protection given; the production of the writ or process will shew the amount. 5. Punishment.] Shall be cashiered.

CHAPTER XI.

SECTION 10 (1).-OF REDRESSING WRONGS.

What an Officer must do if he thinks himself wronged.

ART. 1.] If any officer shall think himself wronged by his col., or comg. officer of the regt., and shall, upon due application made to him, be refused to be redressed, he may complain to the gen. comg. in chief

(1) Sec. xii, Ann. Arts. of War, and sec. ix, for Bengal Native Troops.

the

the forces, in order to obtain justice, who is hereby required to examine into such complaint.

1. Penalty of addressing anonymous Complaints to the Public, through the Newspapers, respecting professional Grievances.] Ext. G. O. by H. E. the Com. in chief, 8th June, 1822. "The Com. in chief has observed with great dissatisfaction, a practice, indulged by officers or by persons assuming that character, of addressing anonymous complaints to the public, through the newspapers, respecting imagined professional grievances. It is visible the reader cannot assure himself that any particular case so stated, is not fallaciously represented, through the inexperience, the miscomprehension, or the perverse views of the writer; consequently, the appeal is essentially devoid of any possible utility. But it is obvious, that in this procedure, the legitimate sources of redress are neglected: so that the purpose must be to give a general impression of inattention, oppressiveness, or injustice, in those with whom the superintendence of such concerns is lodged. The extreme mischief and improbity of these endeavours have probably not been perceived by the writers; whom the Com. in chief is willing to regard as having yielded only to a momentary inconsiderateness. The habit, however, of an officer's thus casting off his just and requisite dependence on his mil. superiors, must not be permitted. The Com. in chief, therefore, in the strictest manner, prohibits officers from sending to the newspapers any such anonymous representations as are above described. Should a letter of that nature henceforth be traced to any officer (and means will be taken to make the discovery almost inevitable), the Com. in chief will immediately submit to the Gov.gen. in council, the necessity of suspending the individual from duty and pay, while a solicitation is made to the Hon. Court, for his entire removal from the service."

2. If an Officer shall think himself wronged by his Col. or Comg. Officer.] It appears to be clearly the intention of the article, that if any officer thinks himself wronged by his comg. officer, in any way, whether relative to matters of a professional or private nature, he should represent the case to his comg. officer, or address a statement to him, in writing, if the case requires it. If it is on a subject relating to professional duties, it should, if in writing, be addressed by a letter, through the adj.; and it would appear to be better to be in writing, that no question may subsequently arise, as to a supposed mis-statement; or the original cause or nature of the complaint. This would be a due application, complaining against a comg. officer to his superior officer; but if not through the former, or without his knowledge (2), it would not be a due application as intended by the article. Such comg.

(2) This is in accordance with the mode of proceeding against a magistrate, as provided for by 24 Geo. II, c. 44, sec. i, which enacts, that "no writ shall be sued out against, nor any copy of any process, at the suit of a subject, shall be served on any justice of the peace, for any thing by him done in the execution of his office, until Q 3 notice

comg. officer is then bound to pay attention to the complaint, and either to redress the same, or to assign his reason for not so doing; and, as an appeal, lies to superior authority, such refusal or declining to give redress, should be in writing, to enable the officer, who is to represent the case to higher authority, to state truly, and without the possibility of misstating, the grounds of his comg. officer's refusal. But a little delay in replying to the letter, is not to be construed into a refusal to pay attention to the complaint, or to warrant the officer to immediately represent the case to higher authority; a second application should be made, before the adoption of the latter measure.

3. If upon due Application, be refused to be redressed.] If the comg. officer positively refuses to redress the complaint, or declines to take any notice of it, the article directs the officer to complain to the Com. in chief: but such representation is not to be made direct. The comg. officer having refused to give redress, a copy of such refusal, if in writing, should accompany the statement made by the officer, who still thinks himself wronged, which should be transmitted by him through his comg. officer, and by the latter be forwarded to the comg. officer of the station; by him to the gen. officer, &c., commanding the division or district (through their staff officers): by whom it will be sent to the adj.gen. of the army, to be laid before the Com. in chief (3), as in case 2; but not to be sent direct to the comg. officer's next superior officer, as in case 1. If the comg. officer refuses to forward the complaint, still it is not to be transmitted direct to the Com. in chief, the next step is to send it to the officer comg. the station; but, should all the intermediate authorities, between the comg. officer and the Com. in chief, decline or refuse to transmit it; then the officer is justified in sending it direct, to the adj.gen. of the army, for the information of the Com. in chief: accompanied with an explanation of the necessity of adopting such a mode of communication. The Com. in chief is required, by the article, to examine into such complaint. It would appear to be the intention, to give the officer the benefit of such high authority in deciding the question between him and his comg. officer; and though the intermediate authorities may have endeavoured to dissuade the officer from forwarding the complaint; it would not appear that the officer is any way bound to comply with such advice. Such comg. officers may represent their endeavours to adjust matters between the parties; but still the article arms them with no authority to settle such differences.

The Com. in chief, on a due consideration of the whole case, would,

of

notice, in writing, of such intended writ or process shall have been delivered to him, or left at the usual place of his abode, at least one calendar month before; in which notice shall be clearly and explicitly contained, the cause of action," &c.

(3) Letters not addressed through the proper channel, are directed to be returned to the parties sending them, and are not attended to, unless it is shewn that there has been a refusal to transmit them; and which should be stated, whenever a direct communication takes place.

of course, take such steps as should appear to be necessary, and the disobedience of an officer to conform to the decision of H. E. has been the subject of a charge against such officer (4). Where an officer had represented the conduct of his comg. officer, for remitting the punishment awarded by a ct.-mar., to a soldier whom the former had brought to trial, such case was, by a very high mil. character (5), considered to be one that should be decided upon, without reference to the Com. in chief. Such a case is not within the intention of the article to interfere with, and relates to mil. discipline, of which the comg.. officer is supposed to be the best judge: at all events, the officer comg. the station would have sufficient authority to decide such cases: unless a repetition or wilful neglect of duty should require it to be brought to the notice of the Com. in chief.-(See case 3.)

Whatever may be the result, an officer cannot demand a ct.-mar. upon himself, though placed in arrest: unless a charge is preferred against him (6). Nor can he refuse to do his duty pending the decision (7). The complaint might be one that related to the officer's promotion, such as a representation made to his disadvantage, by which his promotion might have been retarded. In such a case (referring to H. M.'s officers), the officer in question would be at liberty, to request his memorial should be transmitted to H. R. H. the Com. in chief, or even to H. M., as is implied by the words, "who is hereby required to examine into such complaint; and either by himself, or by our Sec. at war, to make his report to us thereupon, in order to receive our further directions." In any similar case it is also open to an officer in the Co.'s service, to address a memorial to the Hon. the Court of Directors. These are extreme cases, but as they do fall within the possibility of occurring, and being connected with the subject in question, it is not thought to be improperly noticed in this place.

Persons in a civil capacity having any complaint to allege against an officer, &c., may prefer it to the Com. in chief, by making a written statement of the case.-(See case 4.)

4. Charges.] See Forms, Nos. 39 & 40, Chap. I. That A, B. did on ———,` at, prefer a complaint against C. D., his comg. officer, direct to E. F., maj.gen., &c. comg. the divison, &c., instead of transmitting the same through the regular channel of the said C. D., although the said. C. D. did not refuse to transmit the same (or did offer to do so, &c.) The same being in breach of the Arts. of War.

5. Evidence.] Nos. 1 & 2, as at Chap. III, sec. ii, art. 1. 3. Prove that the complaint was made by A. B. to E. F. (and, if in writing, prove the hand-writing of A. B.) 4. Prove that C. D. did not refuse to forward the complaint, (or offered to do so, &c.) One witness to prove the complaint (5) Earl Cornwallis, case 3. p. 235.

(4) See case 8, p. 191.

(6) G. O. H. G., 1st Feb. 1804.

(7) G. O. C. C., 12th Feb. 1820. Case of Shaik Khodabuksh, Jem. Seharunpoor, Pr. Bn.

complaint made to E. F. (by) E. F. himself. One witness to prove that C. D. did not refuse to forward, or was not requested to do so by A. B. 6. Punishment.] Discretionary.-(See case 1, and Punishments, at the end of Chap. XXIV.)

CASE 1.] G. O. H. G. 1st Sept. 1808. At a gen.-ct. mar., Capt G. J. H., of the 10th regt. of foot, was arraigned upon the following charges, viz.

2d Charge." For conduct highly unbecoming the character of an officer, in preferring complaints against Lieut.col. N., his comg. officer, to Lieut.gen. Lord C. Fitzroy, in the month of June, 1808, without allowing the same to be forwarded through the regular channel, although Lieut.col. N. had offered to forward any complaints Capt. H. might have to make against him, or any other officer of the regt., being highly prejudicial to good order and mil. discipline."

FINDING-Guilty of the second charge.

SENTENCE-To be suspended from rank and pay for the space of three months (8).

REMARKS. Having thus performed a very unpleasant part of its duty, with respect to the prisoner, the ct. considers itself compelled to turn its attention to the conduct of those officers of the 2d bat. of the 10th regt., who composed the mess of that bat. at the time the sentence of the late ct.-mar. on the prisoner, was officially communicated to him; and who refused to re-admit the prisoner as a member of their mess, after it had come to their knowledge, that H. M. had been graciously pleased to extend his forgiveness to the prisoner, and to re-instate him in his rank as a capt. in the 10th regt.—The ct, has felt great concern at the inattention of those officers to the merciful consideration which H. M. was pleased to show towards the prisoner, not having been, by any means, satisfied with the reason which was attempted to be given for the resolution to which those officers came; for the ct. considers that it was the duty of those officers, if they had any charges against the prisoner for ungentleman-like conduct, whilst he was so under arrest and awaiting the publication of the sentence of the late ct. mar., to have submitted them to the comg. officer of the bat., for the purpose of their being laid before the gen. officer comg. the district, as soon as the offences on which such charges could be founded came to their knowledge.

The ct. is concerned to be obliged to notice the conduct of Lieut. col. N. (the prosecutor), in having confirmed an improper arrest of Lieuts. S. and S., and at the same time continued to associate with those officers, and to permit them to dine at the mess so under arrest, and also in having, on the present occasion, preferred the 5th charge(9) against the prisoner, when he (Lieut. col. N.) must have been conscious that he had before punished the prisoner, for the offence in such charge

(8) Not now legal in the case of H. M.'s officers.-(See sec. xvi, art. 12.) (9) Quitting the parade without leave.