LIEUTENANT WOODS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 533, 19 June 1909, Page 5

LIEUTENANT WOODS.

ACTION AGAINST ARMY COUNCIL DISMISSED. ■- ' ' ' , \' , \ -:' (By Telegraph,—Press Association.—Copyright,) London, Juno 17. The Court of Appeal has dismissed Lioutenant Woods'B action', claiming £7600 damages from the Army Council for his unlawful removal from tho Grenauior Guards. The Court-; characterised tho action ns frivolouß and Toxaticus.

THE CASE AGAINST LIEUT. WOODS. Liout, H. C. Woods' nppealed in 1307 to tho Army Council against reports,mado upon him by two senior, officers, and by;the officer commanding his battalion, appellant alleging that tho reports wero .biased and -unjustified, The Army Council , arrived at, the following conclusions: \: ■. , i '• ■ . "They find that Lieut. Woods is inefficient ai a regimental officer,, and that his retention in the. service is, not in the interests of., the Army. They find that '.misunderstanding would'have been averted if Colonel Gordon-Gilmour, who oommanded the battalion.'.up 't'o .October, .'JOO, : had mado more.wv.rchinf: iiirv, I'.nd'rqiortcd more-thoroughly on the-qualifications of Lieut. Woods for 'his regimental duties, -particularly his power , of commanding mem Whatever,- ore tho good qnalities of 1 Lieut. Woods in other rospeoto, and however capablo he' may. be of/succeeding in- another vocation', tho. Army Council are' isatisfied that lie 1 has failed -as h 'regimoatnl' officer. ' ' .; "They' think that:'at- no'period, of Jiis.career was he ai really efficient regimental officer, nnd . that as liis-responsibilities increased with his service ho fell further and. further short of the standard 'required' of officers of his rank. In tho end .his delioiency beoamo markedly apparent,' and in the earlier stages it would prob"ably havo attracted , notice but for tho unduly favourable; reports rendered on him by' his former commanding officer, .Theso reports,,in the opinion l of tlie'Army Council; afford" Lieut. Woods Some reason to complain that he was not informed earlier of the defects in.his capacity for. command, - whioh have now been brought to light - -»- ■The Armr Council find'that.'in making their reports, neither Lieut.-Colonel Cavendish; Mo)or Ccrkran, nor, Major Gathorne-Hardy was ! actuated by prejudice or, bias.: .They were only doing'what - they conceived to bo their duty, and,' subject-to the observations which follow, tho Army Council concur in ; the snbstanoe ol the reports on Lieut. M'oods maoo by his superior" officers. But as regards tho form, theso reports bear an appearance of abruptness, and ,in some instances have been worded unnecessarily strongly, .- ... ~ . "The evidence and : tho advice given them have led tho Army Council to the conoluaion that any unpopularity that may have existed -in the case of Lieut,, Woods was due, not. as was suggested by him, to . his studious tastes or tampers to habits, or to tho fact' tliat he did not gamble ,or tiike part in field sports, but to the- circumstance that he had not the faculty of associating himself with the modes of thought und work'of his brother otHcere He was undoubtedly anxious to be active, but he _ appears to have' failed -to recognise tho' duty of identifying his life and career with tho working and interests of tho battalion-as a whole, rather than-with what his individual tßßtos led him to prefer. This was, In tho opinion of the Army Council, the secret of his unpopularity. ,< - . "^ he ;4 r ? y Co, ! n<:il havo oomo to the conelusion that sonio dogreo.of, pressnre was more than onco brought to bear on Lieut, Wood" with view to inducing him. to resign, by Lieut.-Colonel - Cavendish, Mrijor GathorneHardy,. and Captain Stuoley. : They boliove that theso ofheors intended mordly'to give Lieut. Woods advico, .which they thought instilled, to the effoof that ho must resign if he desired to nvoid adverse.'reports - which '.they' felt that they would . have: to make oq him. the Army Council desire, h'owever, to record tho opinion.that the duty of superior regimental .Oluccrs- is to , abstain from pivinc such advice, oven, in n friendly Spirit, - Their real outy is to innke , their reports; conscientiousiy , and fearlecsly, bsaring in mind on the one hand that they must be satisfied tl|at th'o reports are just, and. on, tho : other. hand, tliat. the efficiency of tho Army deponds on their oipressing their oandid opinion , whether "favourable or adverse, A, seniqr officer shonld neyor hesitate' to .give :friendly advice to . those. under hirr>, but ffuch ndyice shonld not bo in the direction of resignation, The responsibility for takmg action on adverse reports rests solely trith, higher authority." • The commencement of legal proceedings by i, J! 1 ;, Woods by tho 'ODailv following;—"lt wjil bo rl membcred that as the rosnlt of■! a court of ,Inqniry into adverse reports by his regimental omcersj tlie : Army • Council required Liout \\oods_to resign liis commission in tho Grenadier Guards.' It, is now suggested- that the Army Council wore acting 'ultra vires' and unconstitutionally by exercising what it is alleged was a statutory, power, whereas, by, the Ordcr-(n-Councll by which they wore established, they were merely authorised to exerolsc nonstatutory functions purely within tho -Ebval Prerogative. Writs havo been-served upon the following mombors then on the Council:—Mr HaUlane, Lord Portsmouth, Mr. Buchanan' General Sir Neville Lj-ttelton', General Nicholson. Genornl Douglas, ond Sir E. Ward We understand Hint Lieut. Woods has rrhi'ned no counsol Mr. T. M. Healy, ■ K.C.. M.P Mr Clement Edwards, M,P, and Mr. W. Bowstoad,' and that tho caso is being defended by tho solicitors and counsel to the Treasury."