|
General Court Martial of John Arrensdt |
Tuesday the 29th Febry. 1780 The Court being met pursuant to Adjournment.
The Court Adjourned ‘till Thursday morning 11 o’Clock.
Thursday 2nd March 1780. The Court being met pursuant to Adjournment.
Serjeant Lewis MILLER, of Captn. De DIEMAR’s Troop of Hussars being duly sworn was examined. Q:(by the Prisr.)— By whose order was he (the Prisoner) confined and where? Q:(by the Court)— Does he (the Witness) know how long the Troop was stationed at Jerico, before he came with the Prisoner to New York? Q: How long was he (the Witness) at Jerico, before he came to Town with the Prisoner? Q: During that Interval of one day that he was at Jerico, does he know whether the prisoner was confined or whether he did his duty? Q: Did he know when he was coming to Town with the Prisoner, that he was to be put in Confinement? Henry HUGHTHOUSEN, private Soldier of Capt. De DIEMARs Troop of Hussars, being duly Sworn was examined. Q:(by the Prisr.)— Did not he (the Witness) carry an Order from Capt. De DEIMAR to have the Prisoner released after he had been confined by Capt. De DEIMAR at Kings Bridge; and was he released? Q:(by the Court)— Did the Prisoner do duty with the Troop after he was released? Q: Was he (the Witness) with the Troop when the Prisoner was ordered to New York? Q:(by the Court)— Was the Prisoner in Confinement from the time that he was released at Kingsbridge, till sent from Jerico to the Provost at New York? Capt. Frederick De DEIMAR of the Troop of Hussars, being duly sworn was examined. Q:(by the Prisoner)— Did not he (the prisoner) beg of him for Gods sake to send another man in his room when he was ordered upon Vidette the same day that he was confined at Kingsbridge? Q: Did not he (the Prisoner) always behave as a good Soldier, and a brave Soldier, and always Obedient to his Orders, previous to his being confined at Kingsbridge? Q: Did not the prisoner do duty as a good Soldier in the Troop after he was released at Kingsbridge, till he was sent Prisoner from Long Island to Town? Q:(by the Court)— Why was the Prisoner released from his confinement for mutiny, and permitted to do duty in the Troop after the 13th Novr. last? The Court having considered the Evidence for and against the Prisoner John ARRENDSDT, together with what he had to offer in his Defence, Is of Opinion—that he is Guilty of having disobey’d the Orders of Lieut. ALBUS on the Outpost of Kingsbridge, in a breach of the fifth article of the Second Section of the Articles of War; and doth therefore Sentence him (the said John ARRENDST) to receive three hundred Lashes, on his bare back, with Cats of Nine Tails; but as it appears to the Court that he (John ARRENDST) had on previous occasions distinguished himself in Action; & that immediately subsequent to his Confinement he was released by Capt. De DEIMAR, & very chearfully obey'd his Orders, and with alacrity did his Duty; these considerations added to his Long Confinement, Induce the Court to recommend him as an Object of Clemency. John SMALL Majr. Comdt. 2 Battn. Mathw. WOODD Approved Click here for ---> Arrensdt Court Martial, Part 1 Arrensdt Court Martial, Part 2
Click here for ---> More On-Line Courts Martial
The On-Line Institute for Advanced Loyalist Studies
|