Summary

Joseph McKenna Hartigan v. United States — Opinion of the Court

It is only a commissioned officer, therefore, who is entitled to the protection of a general court-martial, and a cadet is not a commissioned officer.
The argument of appellant, contending against this construction of the statute, is not easy to reproduce or make clear, and it involves the anomaly that there can be an officer in the Army of the United States who is not covered by the Articles of War, notwithstanding the declaration of § 1342, that the Armies of the United States shall be governed by those articles.
Source: Wikisource

Joseph McKenna Hartigan v. United States — Opinion of the Court

The armies of the United States shall be governed by the following rules and articles: The word 'officer,' as used therein, shall be understood to designate commissioned officers; the word 'soldier' shall be understood to include noncommissioned officers, musicians, artificers, and privates, and other enlisted men, and the convictions mentioned therein shall be understood to be convictions by court-martial.'
'No officer shall be discharged or dismissed from the service except by order of the President or by sentence of a general court-martial
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature