Daily globe., 1883-07-30
THE ILGES COURT MARTIAL.

1hL 1LGES COUhI MAh1IAL.
Conclusion of the Testimony for the De-
fense-Delegate Maginnis' Evidence in
Behalf of the Accused-The ColonePs
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. nges,
the accused, and the testimony was taken
OF the Hon. Martin McGinnis, member of
congress from Montana.
The following questions were PROFOUND
ed by the accused:
Question-Please state your name, occu-
patton and residence?
Q.-Were you member of the last ma
tioual congress, the session of which ex-
plred In the summer of 1882?
Q.-While you were such a 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 CO 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 lived
in the territory of Montana?
Q.-Please state how long you have
known me. personally and by repata-
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 a
gentleman?
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 &C
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
His general reputation as an officer stood
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 telegrams
from prominent pnen of the territory, ex.
pressing the warmest regard for Col. Iges
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 g
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. IIges was then sworn and made the
following statement:
desire to put on record un Ter oath that
| the sum of $2,O91, due me by Nashville s
Chattanooga Railway company, for dam
age sustained by the burning of a 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 l was debarred
from bring ing 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 oi
| dollars on my part, the national congress
in session during the summer of 1882
| passed bill, which became a law, author
izing the payment OF amotlnt of my
| claim, $2,091, and the claims of my Co
| claimants.
| Through a disagreement between 1ny
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 ($2,091), still re
mains in tbs United States treasury, sub
| ject to my draft, whenever 1 satisfy thc
| department that the fee of the attorney ha:
been protected.
1 state under oath that I have not exc
cuted any power or powers of attoTroy, OF
other authority, to any one to Draw this
money from the United States treasury.
This amount still remaining in United
States treasury, which had every reason
to thing available since September, is tht
very money, which was to pay Mr.. Scheffel
for the loans of money granted me. sc
expressly stipulated in my various letters
to that gentleman. At no time did 1 ash
or authorize Mr.. Scheffer to accept my
August and November and December,
1882, pay accounts at their face value, and
at no time have asked or authorized hin
to present these pay accounts for collec-
+, ton. These pay accounts to the contrary
were left with him by me as a persona
security for Mr.. Scheffer, as their redemp
tion at some future day was fully insured
i by Mr.. Scheffer's entire belief IN my honor
and intention of fair dealing.
! here state that it never was my inten.
ton to pay Mr.. Scheffer with the proceeds
: of these accounts.
! L looked upon these accounts the same
as / would upon a due bill to be redeemed