Daily globe., 1883-07-29
THE ILGES COURT MARTIAL.

COlOn6IS
Statement in His Own Behalf.
The court martial trial of Lieut.. Col.
Ilges, of the Eighteenth infntry, charged
with duplicating his accounts, was re-
sumed in Mannheimer block yesterday
morning. Judge Advocate Capt. John R.
Myrick conducted the trial and all the
members of the court were present.
The defense was conducted by Col. Hges,
the accused, and the testimony was taken
OF the Hon. Martin McGinnis, member of
congress from Montana
The following questions were propound-
| ed by the accused:
Question-Please state your name, occu-
| patton and residence?
| Q.-Were you member of the last ma
| tional congress, the session of which ex-
| pired in the summer of 1882?
Q.-While you were such member of
| congress did you, during the session of
1882, become cognizant of the fact that a
bill passed both houses and became law,
authorizing the payment of certain sums
of money by the United States treasury to
| myself and some twenty three o-claimants,
officers and soldiers of the United States
| army?
Q.-Do you remember the source from
which the money emanated?
Q.-Do you remember how many years
| this money was kept on deposit in United
| States treasury and withheld from myself
| and co-claimants?
Q.-Do you remember the amount of my
claim?
Q.-Have drawn this amount?
Q-Please state how long you have live5
in the territory of Montana?
| Q.-Please state how long you have
known me, personally and by reputa-
| ton?
Q.-During your residence in Montana,
and with your acquaintance in the COM
munities through the whole territory, have
you been enabled to form an opinion of
| my general reputation as an officer and a
gentleman?
Q.-What is my general reputation as an
officer?
Q.-What is my general reputation as 4
gentlemanf
The witness first testified to having been
a member of the national congress which
| expired in 1882, and to the passage of a
| bill at that session authorizing the pay
ment of certain sums of money to the ac-
cused and some twenty three co-claimants,
| officers and soldiers of the United States
army. So far as the witness could recol-
lect, the money represented by the claims
had been kept back since the war. The
amount of the claim held
| by Col. Ilges was $4,000, which still
remained in the treasury department sub
| ject to his draft. Witness had known Col.
Ilges since the advent in Montana of the
| Seventh infantry about twelve years ago.
ery0, 4,4s -
| very high and he was very much endeared
to the people of the territory, who honored
him for his gallant services in the Indian
campaign, and who held him in the great
| est possible esteem.
Before leaving Montana the witness had
| received numerous letters and kilograms
| from prominent men of the territory, ex-
pressing the warmest regard for Col. Hges.
| Witness had also been handed a petition
from the citizens of the territory, address,
ed to the president and expressing sympa-
| thy for the accused. In response to a
question witness explained that the reason
| why the claim of Col. Ilges had not been
| $500, which had been considered exorbi
tant, and that the money would be paid as
soon as the government was satisfied that
| the fee was proper.
Col. llges was then sworn and made the
| following statement:
desire to put on record under oath that
| the sum of $2,091, due me by Nashville &
| Chattanooga Railway company, for dam
age sustained by the burning of train at
Murfreesboro, Tenn, in 1869, has been
| withheld from me and kept on deposit in
United States treasury since the early part
of the year 1870. The money was deduct
ed from the amount due the company for
army transportation, and 1 was debarred
from bringing suit for damages by order
| of the secretary of war, who assumed the
collection of the claim. After eleven years
| of labor and expense of many hundreds of
dollars on my part, the national congress
in session during the summer of 1882
passed a bill, which became a law, author
izing the payment of amount of my
claim, $2O91, and the claims of my CO.
claimants.
Through disagreement between my
attorney in Washington and myself in re-
gard to the excessive amount of fees
demanded by the former, he claiming $500,
this amount of money ($2,Q9D, still re-
| mains in the United States treasury, sub
ject to my draft, whenever l satisfy the
| department that the fee of the attorney has
been protected.
I state under oath that I have not exc
cuted any power or powers of attorney, or
other authority, to any one to draw this
money from the United States treasury.
This amount still remaining in United
States treasury, which 1 had every reason
to thing available since September, is the
very money, which was to pay Mr.. Scheffer
for the loans of money granted me. so
expressly stipulated in my various letters
to that gentleman. At no time did ask
or authorize Mr.. Scheffer to accept my
August and November and December,
1882, pay accounts at their face value, aud
at no time have I asked or authorized him
to present these pay accounts for collec-
tion. These pay accounts to the contrary
were left with him by me as personal
security for Mr.. Scheffer, as their redemp-
ton at some future day was fully insured
by Mr.. Schefer's entire belief ID my honor
and intention of fair dealing.
l here state that it never was my inten-