§ MR. BAKER (Portsmouth)I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if his attention has been called to the case of Private Harvey, of the Royal Marino Light Infantry, stationed at Gosport, who was charged with drunkenness, and convicted, whereupon he demanded a Court Martial, was found guilty, and sentenced to one day's imprisonment, having been under arrest 20 days; and will he inquire into this case, as, though witnesses were called to testify to his being sober on the occasion, and to his unimpeachable character, and to his being a well-known life-abstainer, recognised as such throughout the corps, nevertheless he was convicted upon the evidence of the military police, and a stigma cast upon his character for life?
THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Sir U. KAY-SHUTTLE-WORTH, Lancashire, Clitheroe)Private Harvey, Royal Marines, was legally tried by District Court Martial under the Army Act at his own request, instead of submitting to the summary award of his Commanding Officer. The charge was "drunkenness." For the prosecution four witnesses were called, all of whom swore positively that he was drunk, two of them adding that he was also disorderly. For the defence two privates of his own corps swore that he was sober. His father also deposed that the accused had left him about an hour previously perfectly sober, and said that he was a teetotaler. The Court found him guilty and sentenced him to a day's imprisonment. There was thus a conflict of evidence; and in such a case, so long as there is legal evidence of the offence charged, it is not the practice to interfere with the finding of the Court, who are sworn to do justice, and who, from their personal observation of the witnesses, have an advantage over any person not present in determining on which side is the balance of credibility. Harvey was under arrest 18 days. Delay in 673 bringing him to trial arose from the unavoidable absence of one of the witnesses for the prosecution.