ESCAPE OF PRISONERS OF WAR

Evening Post, Volume XCV, Issue 23, 26 January 1918, Page 9

ESCAPE OF PRISONERS OF WAR

COURT-MARTIAL

THE SECOND COURT OF ENQUIRY.

A general court-martial will assemble at Auckland on 29th January for the purpose of trying Lieutenant-Colonel C. Harcourt Turner, sometime Commandant of the Internment Camp at Motuihi.

The personnel of the Court will be as foDows: —President: Colonel N. P. Adams, C.MIG., Commandant of Featherston Camp. Members of the Court: Lieutenant-Colonels J. L. Sleeman, D. Pringle, E. W. Porritt, J. A. P. Fredrick, J. Deans, and F. T. Bellringer. Waiting members: Lieutenant-Colonels J. P. Stevenson and T. H. Steadman. The Judge Advocate-General (Lieu-tenant-Colonel J. R. Reed, of Auckland) will be present, and will act as JudgeAdvocate. Captain P. E. Baldwin has been appointed prosecutor. The charge under which LieutenantCokmel Turner will be tried is laid under Section 20 (2) of the Army Act, and is as follows:—The accused LieutenantColonel Charles Harcourt Turner, sth (Wellington) Regiment, being a member of the Defence Forces- of New Zealand, is charged with: (1) Without reasonable | excuse allowing to escape persons committed to his charge, in that he at Motuihi Island, on or about 13th December, 1917, while Commandant of the said island, and having the care, charge, and custody upon the said island of certain prisoners of war and interned alien enemies, to wit, one Lieutenant-Com-mander Count yon Luckner, Lieutenant Kirscheiss, Wireless Operator Grun, Wireless Engineer Freund, Naval Cadets j yon Zalorski, Paulsen, Schmidt, Mellert, Klohn, Seaman Erdmann, and one yon Egidy, a Samoan Government of-1 ficial, allowed the said Count yon Luckner and others mentioned, being prison- ■ ers of war or interned alien enemies, to obtain possession of a launch and to make other preparations for their escape without taking reasonable means to prevent it, and thus permitted the escape of the said Lieutenant-Com-mander Count yon Luckner and other persons mentioned. (2) Without reasonable excuse allowing to escape persons whom it was his duty to keep in, having done the acts alleged in the particulars to the first charge. (3) Without reasonable excuse allowing to escape persons whom it was his duty to guard, in having done the acts alleged in the particulars to the first charge. THE SECOND ENQUIRY. I On 31st January a Court of Enquiry will assemble in Auckland for the purpose of enquiring into and reporting upon the responsibility of Col. G. W. S. Patterson and Major J. Osburne Lilly in respect of the escape of prisoners from Motuihi Island. The personnel of the Court will be-.—President, Col. N. P. Adams, C.M.G.; members, Majors H. A. Cooper and W. H. Fletchor.

The issues upon which the Court will report are as follow : —

(a) Was the Commandant of Motuihi Island' directly responsible to Headquarters, Wellington, or to District Headquarters, Aucfland, for the custody of the prisoners of war?

(b) As to Col. G. W. S. Patterson: (1) Was it the duty of Col. G: W. S. Patterson to ensure that proper precautions were taken to guard the prisoners at Motuihi Island? (2) If it was his duty, did he take reasonable steps to carry out such duty? (3) If .it was his duty, and if he did not take reasonable steps to carry out such duty, did his failure to do so contribute towards the escape of the prisoners? (4) If it was his duty, and if he did not take reasonable steps_ to carry out such duty, was his failure to do so due to culpable negligence, to negligence, to misconception of the duty cast upon him, or to error of judgment! .

(c) As to Major J. Osburne Lilly :— (1) Was Major J. Osburne Lilly aware of the inadequacy of the precautions for ■safeguarding the prisoners? (2) Did the duty of Major J. Osburne Lilly, as a Staff officer, require that he should take any steps to remedy such inadequacy? (3) If Major J. Osburne Lilly was aware of the inadequacy, and if it was his duty to take steps to remedy the inadequacy, did he take reasonable steps to do so? (4). If Major J. Osburne Lilly failed to take steps to remedy the inadequacy, did his failure to take such steps contribute to the escape of the prisoners? (5) If Major Osburne Lilly failed to take such steps, was his failure due to culpable neglect, to neglect, to misconception of the duty cast upon him, or to error of judgment? The official statement furnished to the Press for publication contains the following observations :—"This Court of Enquiry will be held under the same arrangement as the previous Court of Enquiry—that is to say, it will be open to the Press, and the evidence as authorised by the president of the Court may be published. 'It is to be noted that permitting this Court of Enquiry and the previous Court of Enquiry to be open to the Press, with the consequent publication' of the evidence, is an unusual proceeding, and was only allowed on this occasion on account of the great public interest that was excited over the event. Departure from the proper and usual course has always caused some complications, and it must not be taken as a precedent. It is intended that, future courts of enquiry will be held, as they should be held, in camera, and will not be open to public or Press."