New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1879-05-03

- Ru,lding in which the Stanley Court-martia is
ia was filed Yesterday with spectators, among whom
80 Generals Emerson Opdyeke, Thomas sweeny, W.
- mailman John c. Robinson and G. Pitcher,
C,rol. y r. Davis and Ware, Major W B.Wetmore' and
Co,toin ItchheId. General Mcmahon asked that the
- ~ -oo,ened in order that the report of General
tTr on the battle OF shiloh might be read since there
a contradictions he said. between the statements IN
ir and in General Hazens testimony, no menuon Dehg
do in the report that Hazens brigade was cut to
ses Judge-Advocate Swain objected, but the report
was read
Co., reviewing the movements OF his command up to
the time of the last attack General Hazen continues il
his report as follows;
rirnc commenced after advancing few hundred
,9rds and was kept necessarily, the enemy IdlHue
49, ef1re MS fOr bout three-Q uarters Of mile, where
W found another line opposing US; also battery GI
Trsaed direct mp 10 the months Of the guns, which
were manned until the cannoneers were cut down ny
,,v mon me enemy were still pursued. when we were
oped upen with grape from battery Oh our nahk,
creating considerable havoc There being arse h1oet
eibeG the pursuit was here discontinued TIE ist OF
casualties Is herewith sppendSdi IL WI ~ ST. +o
fight with 81 commissioned officers ana le3. Ans4
mi Two missing. The casualties or the Oler relLl-S
ar pcuousiy great The track Of the entire br-
gade showed the efficiency Of ITS service.
GENERAL NELSON'S REPORT.
Judge Advocate swain then introduced the following
extract, from General Nelson's report OF the battle
maintaining that they necessary for the complete
understanding of the case;
colonel Hazeu commanded the right brigade Of this
diys0U carried 10 action and maintained II there
,-cs+ ca ontlv The heavy loss his brigade ettests
he herceness the conflict at This point lie drove the
enemy ana captured the battery which SO distressed US
bur was forced back on his reserves.
rade beg also to invite the Generals attention The
canty with which he led his troops TO the attack vas
o ior id bloody action the forttude the Fourth
% US sorey fried pressed as il was by such
peuor numbers, but 10 maintained ltsen giorlousIy.
= The loss of the division regret TO inform you,
Is heavy It went into action Ash strong Of Tnom
6otcers and - enlisted men were killed. 80 ollcer5
and SOS enlisted men were Wounded ana oc enllsteu
hall Of which occurred IN Hazen's brigade.
LETTER FROM GENERAL STANLEY
The Court then stated that II ready 10 hear the
arguments Of counsel and General McAahon' counsel
for the defence preliminary to his summing up
read q letter addressed 70 the Court from General
stanley In the course Of this letter. which was dated
MAY .. General Stanley says:
Nv official relations with Colonel ". B. Hazen com
p,snced i'm July 1854 before Atlanta. Ga. The first
day 1 commanded the Fourth Corps Colonel HazeIs
DIVISION commander told me he could only get nm on
hi picket line by shamng him. THAI Is gong nrst MN
sell This led TO my making INQUIRIES, 49, en-
1,I Ta me account given 6y General Hazen
testimony The first story was that COione Hzen went
IL find road on which TO move ms brigade ana mus
sy * knowledge Of Colonel Hazens standing in the
AMY of tie Cumberland extended Iar Dey9nUU
ANYTHING developed in TINS court III Fo ,re Ia
kota. l had returned from hard summers woIk
on INC Yeowsone he was on ms annual UP 20 WASH ISL
words an OF which now regret and concede that my
though would not ike u put my sen III us pace
agreed 70 change modify and reverse my opinion OF
wrote from Cincinnati, lnclosing the let
Ter read before THIS Court directed 10
Sc md letter from Of bis staff officers certifying his
con met different battle l knew bOt4 ceI th9atts'
rs ibev NAV be called, untrue, and closed the
correspondence knowing well that Colonel Hazens Cd
iect was only deceive me. Up 10 1871 ana uhUI the
tine my fling The charges against hlIu C0oneI hazeh
appeared TO me ID the character Of preender. ~,
As far my personal feeling toward colonel Hazen
Is n. feeling OF
1 fought the vices OF the Inan the utterly uh-
deavCred ID shove himself into notice. would do the
same IN the case of any other officer of the Army
ARGUMENT FOR The OFFENCE.
General Mcmahon then proceeded with his argument
for the defence. The two actual offences and charges
against the accused said BE. may be briefly stated TO
be that he wrote the forth in nrs specification
the charge, and that he preferred the charges
forth in the sixth specification Of he first charge He
admits that preferred these set forth IN the
sixth specification. He MAINTAINS that he not only had
the right to prefer these charges but he asserts further
that il was his duiy as an officer If he believed them 70
be true 10 prefer them. and 70 hold himself ready to
maintain them before a general court-martal TINS
Ice or evil intent As 10 the truth Of she
think the Court must IN my conviction that Cen
Hazeus explanation OF his absence from his brigade
durinr most critical period FOR certainly four hours,
and untl the at shiloh at an eud, Is wholly
unsatisfactory, and woald have been so held by any
convened az that time for his trial viii conn
GENTLY submit TO this Court that the accused was fully
Justified believing that the conduct Of General Hazen
was nm becoming IN soldier IN the ranks and In
the brigade commander simply diseracetul. ,
Of Pckett's Mills II is perhaps unnecessary 10 speak
i not mentioned II me STANLEY eer DuJ reIerTed
tom the newspaper article, for when General stan.ey
Acknowledges no responsibility. WIN respect 10 me
oonumrut W stone River not necessary 20 do more
refer 20 IL showing on the part or the prose
Dc lv around loose and 10 concentrate IA himself All
glory Of the various actions IN which DC took part
lore those tat heard yeu testify that General sran-
lev ntIra ed uaf
conviction is sufficiently manifest from the iact
that he preferred them. and was willing
10 stand Tie consequences threatened in the
dispatch of General SHERMAN nov 60 III ey.uchce;
There was no prior hostility no nyashlp, professional
personal, 40 rnpelng reason whatever outside OF
manly senseof duty (uch should induce any officer
familiar The facts have recitcd 70 take the scuon
one 10 himself ms associates ana the sesTieeJ
successive Steps that have strangely enough re-
suited IN his arrangement ana tFlsi'
Il been told more than one occasion since nS
tral commenced that II the accuser mere Was not al
lowed by this Couri vndicare himself Iuly he TGulG
will saw however 10 thls. mat civil SUIT has
who ont o. strong sense OF 9uty
20 TIE service consented 70 risk his commission ana ms
Whole future upon manly effort % yiudcae the good
name o the Army and DO not MINK .nat a,s Cur t
Will take any other view VIII hnC III any acI OF the
accused as shown in evidence aught mat misOe,
gentleman or is prejudela TO good order and
military discipline"
TIE JUDGH-ADvoCATEs ARGUMENT
Judge-AdvOcate swain began his argument for the
prosecution with of the several charges and
Specifications. ard cited the articles Of war providing
ior tie punish ment following conviction for the
offences OF which tie accused stood charged. he
defined libel meaning according to the rules Of law
" any writings, pictures, or other signs which immed-
aJey tend 10 nJure the character OF an ind-
Ndua or 10 occasion mischief 20 the
public" Continuing he said: 1t must be
with reference this offence, That O'Brien uses the
Following language: Is Oricer injured or insulted.
Tue Commanding officer TIE guardian Of his honor, viii
require the offender Nuke prompt and ample
apology. Is the offence serious a c0urt-mattal
an la o