The nation . be necessary and proper for car-rying into effect the foregoing. . IT IS FAIR to say that until theCourt, in June, 1957, reversed a deci-sion it had made only a year earlierin the same case, every Americancourt had given credence to the ar-gument that those employed by, at-tached to, or accompanying the mil-itary in the field were subject tomilitary law. In fact, the SupremeCourt in 1952 upheld the convictionof a civilian accompanying the Armyin time of peace who was tried bv acourt (appointed by the Executiveto sit in the American zone of Oc-cupied Germany) which had muchless con
The nation . be necessary and proper for car-rying into effect the foregoing. . IT IS FAIR to say that until theCourt, in June, 1957, reversed a deci-sion it had made only a year earlierin the same case, every Americancourt had given credence to the ar-gument that those employed by, at-tached to, or accompanying the mil-itary in the field were subject tomilitary law. In fact, the SupremeCourt in 1952 upheld the convictionof a civilian accompanying the Armyin time of peace who was tried bv acourt (appointed by the Executiveto sit in the American zone of Oc-cupied Germany) which had muchless constitutional validity than acourt-martial. It is wryly amusing;that in the 1952 case the Courtdenied the defendants claim of aconstitutional right to be tried bvcourt-martial; the less well-validatedcourt was deemed sufficient. The above line of thinking wouldappear to coincide with the intent ofthe framers of the Constitution whowere aware that civilians constitutedan important part of the Continental 500. Army, and that more than one-sixthof the Articles of War — the lawgoverning our Armed Forces, adoptedin 1775 and revised the followingyear — were devoted to trial bycourts-martial of various classes ofcivilians serving with the military.(Included among these classes, be itnoted, were camp followers, thoseperennial sources of romantic inspira-tion for the historical novelist. Con-temporary Army orders indicate thateach company of troops was alloweddaily rations for the distaff memberswho accompanied them.) One hundred years before theadoption of the Federal Constitution,England had permitted trial of hersoldiery by court-martial in timesof peace as well as in times of that time — a time when civil-ians attached to the Army were re-garded as part of the military —through the Revolutionary War, andfor six years thereafter until theadoption of the American Constitu-tion, first the colonials and later thecitizens of the several states were inmuch closer contact wi
Size: 1325px × 1885px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1800, bookdecade1860, bookidnation191jul, bookyear1865
