Report of the Judge Advocate-General. OFFICE OF The Judge Advocate-General, THOS. J. STEWART, Adjutant General, Philadelphia, Penna. My Dear Comrade: I have the honor to submit herewith my Third Annual Report as Judge Advocate-General, consisting of seven opinions given at the request of the Commander-in-Chief, The duties of my office have been agreeable, no controversies of an unpleasant nature having come before me for consideration. My third appointment to this high office was an unexpected honor and I wish to make it a matter of public record that I greatly appreciate the confidence reposed in me by the Commander-in-Chief and am sensible of the increasing obligations resting upon me to serve the Order with unceasing zeal and fidelity as long as I live, Very truly yours, ELL TORRANCE, Judge Advocate-General. CASE No. 1. SYLLABUS. Taking the oath of allegiance to the Southern Confederacy unaccompanied by any service in its behalf of either a civil or military character, does not render one ineligible to membership in the Grand Army of the Republic. STATEMENT. From the Department of Tennessee. A convalescent Union soldier on a forced march fell behind, was captured at his home in the enemy's country, and to protect himself, "takes the oath of allegiance to the Southern Confederacy but does not bear arms against the United States." Subsequently he rejoined his command and thereafter received an honorable discharge from the United States service. Is he eligible to membership in the Grand Army of the Republic? OPINION. Every person who served in the Confederate army either voluntarily or involuntarily, and all those who in any manner aided the Confederate government either in a civil or military capacity are ineligible to membership in the Grand Army of the Republic. It is immaterial how short the term of service, or unimportant the aid rendered-the disqualification is complete. Nevertheless, I think the phrase, borne arms," as used in Article 4, Chapter 1, Rules and Regulations, should be limited in its application to some actual service rendered either of a civil or military nature. It should be more than lip service. It would hardly be contended that one who had expressed disloyal sentiments, and to that extent given aid and comfort to the enemy, would come within the disqualifying clause of Article 4 above cited, provided he afterwards, as many did, repented and became a good soldier of the Union. Neither, in my opinion, would the taking of the oath of allegiance standing alone, and followed by no service either civil or military in aid of the rebellion, render one ineligible to membership in the Grand Army of the Republic Decision 9, page 51, Blue Book, 1895. CASE No. 2. SYLLABUS. The Assistant Adjutant-General of a Department has no authority to issue transfer cards to members of consolidating Posts, either prior or subsequent to the act of consolidation. STATEMENT Two Posts consolidate in accordance with the provisions of Section 5, Article 1, Chapter 2, Rules and Regulations. The vote to consolidate was not unanimous and the objecting members declined" to go into the consolidated Post or to accept transfer cards from it" on the ground that they are not members of it, never having joined it, and are entitled to transfer cards from the Assistant Adjutant-General of the Department by the same right as when a Post disbands or surrenders its charter. OPINION. When two or more Posts consolidate, the membership of all comrades in good standing in either Post at the time of such consolidation becomes merged in that of the new Post without any act or ceremony on the part of the individual members. Those voting against consolidation or not voting at all are equally bound with those voting for it, and should any member feel dissatisfied with his new Post relations, his only remedy is to withdraw in the manner provided by the Rules and Regulations. The Assistant Adjutant-General has no authority to grant transfer cards in such cases either prior or subsequent to the act of consolidation. CASE No. 3. SYLLABUS A Post is at liberty to accept less than one year's dues upon the reinstatement by another Post of one of its dropped members. STATEMENT. This is an appeal from the decision of Commander Gilman of the Department of Massachusetts approving the action taken by John A. Andrews Post Number 15, of said Department, waiving a portion of its yearly dues, to enable one of its dropped members to be reinstated by another Post in the same Department. The appeal is prosecuted by two members of John A. Andrews Post and a reversal asked on the ground that the reinstating Post was required to pay to the dropping Post the full amount of one year's dues, and that it was not within the power of John A. Andrews Post to waive any part of said dues. OPINION. The Rules and Regulations provide that a reinstated comrade shall not be required to pay a sum exceeding one year's dues. It may be less, but never more. If the dropping Post reinstate him it may be less. Decision 1, Blue Book, (1899) page 225. If he is reinstated by a Post other than the one from which he was dropped the latter Post is entitled to receive one year's dues, but the right to accept a less sum exists in the one case as well as in the other. As evidencing the tendency to remove all obstacles to the reinstatement of dropped members, attention is called to a decision of the Thirty-first National Encampment sustaining the action of Post No. 376, Department of Illinois, in reinstating nine dropped members from another Post, and accepting from them “as an additional fee" the sum of five cents each. This trivial sum was regarded as a sufficient compliance with the requirement of Section 4, Article 4. Chapter 5, Rules and Regulations, which provides that when a member is reinstated by a Post other than the one dropping him he shall pay "such additional fee as may be agreed upon, not exceeding the amount charged upon application for membership by transfer." Judge Advocate-General Clarke was of the opinion that in such cases the receiving Post was required to exact a fee of not less than $1.00, but the Encampment decided otherwise. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the decision of Department-Commander Gilman was right and should be affirmed. CASE No. 4. SYLLABUS. Honors lost by dishonorable discharge are not restored by remission of the sentence, and reinstatement to membership in the Grand Army of the Republic. STATEMENT. H. Clay Hall, Past Department Commander of the Department of New York was tried by a general court martial, found guilty and sentenced to be dishonorably discharged from the Grand Army of the Republic. The sentence became effective September 10, 1886, and continued in full force until July 23, 1898, when the same was remitted by order of Commander-in-Chief Gobin, and the comrade restored to membership in the Grand Army of the Republic. He now claims that his restoration to membership invests him with all the rights and honors of a Past Department Commander, and that he is entitled to have his name placed on the roll of the Past Department Commanders of the Department of New York, and to a seat in the Department and National Encampments. OPINION. A Past Department Commander when honorably discharged from the Grand Army of the Republic loses all honors acquired in its service. (Opinion 94 B. B. page 147); and they can only be restored by action of the National Encampment, (Journal of the Seventeenth National Encampment, page 128); and then only in case where they have been lost without fault on the part of the comrade. (Opinion 1, page 172 Proceedings of the Thirty-third National Encampment). One who has been dishonorably discharged should not, when restored to membership, stand in any better position than his honorably discharged comrade when he re-enters the Order. To prefer him would be to honor wrong doing, and to clothe him with a dignity that ill becomes him. In this case the sentence was an executed one for a period of almost twelve years, during which time the comrade had ceased to be a member of the Grand Army of the Republic, and the action of the Commander-in-Chief in remitting the sentence and restoring him to membership took effect only from the promulgation of the Order. In the Regular Army, upon the legal execution of a sentence of dismissal, the officer is wholly separated from the military service and becomes as completely a civilian as if he had never been in the army. He may be restored to the service, but only by a new appointment which carries with it none of the rights and emoluments enjoyed by him by virtue of his former appointment. A pardon is an act of grace by which an offender is released from the consequences of his offense so far as it is practicable and in the control of the pardoning power, but it does not make amends for the past, nor restore offices or honors forfeited. The Commander-in-Chief has neither the power to degrade from office nor to restore honors lost. The former is lodged in a court martial, and the latter in the National Encampment. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the remission of the sentence and the reinstatement of Comrade Hall to membership in the Grand Army of the Republic does not entitle him to be enrolled as a Past Department Commander of the Department of New York nor to a seat and vote in either the Department or National Encampments. CASE No. 5. A Post that passes a resolution endorsing the candidacy of one of its members for Congress as well as the officers of the Post who promulgate such resolution are subject to discipline for a violation of Article XI, Chapter 5, of the Rules and Regulations. STATEMENT. Complaint has been made to the Commander-in-Chief that Post of the Department of Ohio has been guilty of a violation of the Rules and Regulations in passing a resolution at a regular meeting of the Post endorsing the candidacy of one of its members for Congress, and in publishing and distributing a printed circular subscribed by the Commander and Adjutant of the Post in their official capacity setting forth in full the Post's action in the premises. OPINION. The Post in passing such a resolution as well as its Commander and Adjutant in promulgating the same directly violated both the spirit and the letter of Article XI, Chapter 5 of the Rules and Regulations, which prohibits the use, in any manner, of the organization for partizan purposes. No justification or excuse can be offered for such conduct, and it merits not only the unqualified condemnation of all comrades who love the organization with an undivided affection, but calls for prompt discipline on the part of those officially charged with maintaining the integrity and preserving the good name of the Grand Army of the Republic. The organization can never be successfully assailed by any power outside of itself. For more than a quarter of a century it has been able, during the heated political contests which have agitated the country, to maintain a non-political attitude and to command not only the respect and confidence of all good citizens, but to preserve in their integrity the cardinal principles of the Grand Army of the Republic. The only danger we have to fear is from within, and experience has demonstrated that partizan politics is the only thing that can disrupt the bond of fraternal feeling or impair the prosperity and usefulness of the Order. It is the "unpardonable sin," and the one element of discord which, if introduced and persisted in, will disintegrate and eventually destroy an institution, the grandeur and nobility of which has never had its equal in the world's history. Political aspirations, ambitions and friendships must not be permitted to mpair or dissolve the fraternal ties, which, with advancing years and increasing bodily infirmities, should daily strengthen and draw us closer together. I, therefore, recommend that the Commander of the Department of Ohio be directed to fully inquire into the action of said Post in relation to said matter, and take such proceedings as may be necessary to redress any violation of the Rules and Regulations in the particular complained of, |