observation, and possessing a certain experience in the army, a perfect treatise on Military Law might be produced; but as to the separate efforts of the lawyer and the soldier, it is to be apprehended that the legal faults which must exist in the essay of the one, would be more than equalled by the unmilitary feeling which would inevitably insinuate itself into and pervade the work of the other. Nor is it probable that these defects would be overcome by combining, in a joint treatise, the knowledge and experience of both the precise research, which the lawyer may uninterruptedly pursue, ill accords with the desultory habits, which are unavoidable by the soldier; and the parts would be so incapable of amalgamation, that the work itself however valuable intrinsically, would yet be too discursive for the purpose of general information,--not readily made use of as a book of reference, and consequently, as a practical work, of little utility. A perfect treatise on Military Law cannot, for these reasons, well be expected; it would be necessary that acquirements should be combined which perhaps are in themselves incompatible and inconsistent. The author is very far from supposing that his work will be free from errors and imperfections. He has no doubt but that, in its degree, it will tend to strengthen an opinion which has been entertained from the time of Tacitus ;"Militaribus ingeniis subtilitatem deesse, quia castrensis jurisdictio, secura et obtusior, ac plura manu agens, calliditatem fori non exerceat." Yet he confesses that, if he anticipated severity of criticism, he should be much more solicitous as to the opinion which may be entertained of the military, than of the legal part of the work. Upon the one subject, he ought to be well-informed, or the experience of four-and-twenty years must have been indeed abortive; on the other, his information must be secondary; and if adequate to the duties of a British officer, and proportioned to the general knowledge required in an English gentleman, it is all that can be fairly expected. Utility, not novelty, a practical compilation, rather than an original essay, being the object of the author, he has not scrupled to adopt whatever matter he could find applicable to his purpose. In every case, he has so far as he is aware, acknowledged the extent of the obligation; yet, as parts of this work were compiled from notes, made at different periods and without any view to publication, it is very possible that, in some instances, he has omitted to make due acknowledgment. With respect to the manner and arrangement of this essay, imperfect as the author well knows it to be, if it be calculated to convey his meaning to the minds of those for whom it is intended, with tolerable distinctness, it is all that has been aimed at: it pretends neither to logical precision, nor to adventitious ornament. For the army the work was undertaken; and to the younger part of the army, the author fancies it may not be without its use; whether he is deceived or not, remains to be proved. One thing is very certain; if the essay be useful, it will ultimately need no apology; if not calculated to be of service, no apology can extenuate its defects; though, perhaps, integrity of motive may be received in palliation of the erroneous judgment which the author had formed of the utility of his performance. 18th September, 1830. Distinctive jurisdiction as to offences Offences cognizable by a general court martial, 112; by a garrison court martial, 113; by a regimental court martial 113 Forms intended to secure English fair play Arraignment, 230; special pleas, 233; prosecution, 239; examination of witnesses, 240; objections to questions New procedure borrowed from ordinary assize courts, 244; defence, 245; evidence in reply, 257; prisoner's closing address, 260; reply, 260; summing up of judge advocate. 261 Prisoner still may have "last word" at minor courts |