New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-05-07
THE CASE AGAINST GENERAL SWAIN.
TIE COURT OF INQUIRY Observation-Disclosures

By COUNSEL. On BOl Ill NlDtN'
WASHINGTON, May G.-The Swain Court Of
Inquiry met this morning and organized Genera! swain
was present with his counsel Representative Cakns and
Jud Johnston and Mr. Baeman who made the charges,
also appeared with his attorney J. Chandler the laIcr o.
whom said that Mr. Batcman in his letters TO the SecTe-
tarv of War stated that General Swain had received
duc-bl from Baeman & Co., for $1,000. This amount
had been placed the credit OF General Swain on the
firms books; that previously Swain had had an account
with Bateman & Co.. and that on the date OF TINS
deposit of $1,000 that account was oyerdrawn
some 1907. j. Stanley Brown had became
engaged in business with Bateman y CO'
and General SWAIN loaned Brown $1,000 and gave him
check for all additional $1,000, which he PROMISED 10
make good Mr. Brown afterward arranged 10 Withdraw
from the firm Indebtedness OF Swain was the sub
iect of discussion and adjustment The due-5 was then
drawn up IL included the $4,000 cash loaned to Hr.
Brown and the check Of 81 900 which had not been paid
A memorandum was made the due-b to this effect
"Ten per cent and per cent interest," the understanding
being that General Swain to have per cent on the
money advanced and 10 per cent on Browns prunS III
the business. This $1,000 then became incorporated
in the general account between Bateman q co.
and General SWAIN The latter drew on the account from
time to time purchases made on his order ana
purchases and sales at reported to him. From
time TO time he drew on the entire $1,000, except
about $50 1t would he shown that the accounts were
correct and received by Swain "a correct ana ta
he never expressed any dissatisfaction with them 1t
would be shown that after the money had been drawn
out General swain had transferred the account and Mr.
Batemau had been sued upon it, This transaction, he
said had injured 3lr. Bacman, being direct attack upon
his credit as banker and in consequence ne had made
the charges a ganst General Swain. Mr. Chandler said
We shall 20 able TO show that this Is an ordinary
straight business transaction far az Baeman Co. Is
concerned that General Swain could have had no posi-
bic reason for mistake this account when drawing ont
this money! that lie had other account there and That
the transfer account for some purpose not
Mr. atkins Tor General swain said that this court was
appointed TO inquire whether Hal9 han p'CR ~
perpetrsted by General swain on me , urn OF
Bateman & Co. The commission Of fraud involved
moral turpttude, and the intention to oonlu Had was
would be able show that the whole ihus was as per
feet transaction as ever happened between Two men
officer had been dealing with Hatrnan had been buy ing
stocks He began long before me tras$'D o. tne
bill When he the $1,000 Gheck OF June l. I7- 70
make mp - 600 for Brown, he had already deposited
several thousand dollars with Batenan co. Iher1
understanding that swain Mas 20 nave more tltl
per cent interest for the use OF his money MI brown
rangemcnt with BatenaI q 90 apJul tne f'VH u ~
never was ntimatOn that this money should he ict
az dep0,it General Swain satisfied mat the nlin
would be responsible for the Hue,liI anu ''e i,ses ~
per cent interest on the dueDu Represented sli-
ing scale OF interest agreed upon between tne'n.
As to the assignment 81 the nue Dill or Oal,'s So
after various transactions between swain ana Ddt"dn
tnG p Nv ~ Co. for his credits hut without success
He put the duC-Db into the hands OF Mr Humphrey
TO PRESENT for payment. lie did not Wish 10 DIhg
sut himself for fear OF newspaper talk. After payment
had been refused lie allowed thirty days To eid before
proceeding against Bateman, and th"h directed te man
10 whom he had transferred the note 10 bring sut Lof
the amount, and this done and was followed Oy the
charges made ny MI Banan. The following day al ar
raprclucut WIS effected between Swain and Bat'indn
and hc suit was Withdrawn, the entire natter being le
ferred 10 Benz amin ButerWOrth as arbitrator IL was
inconce,Vajle that man should 20 INTO a court OF
Justice tor the purpose OF pUpetratnS irart upon
nober and there could have been fraud IN he Trans
fer Of the note as every defence Bateman had against
The note in TIE hands O swain lac had against IL IN he
hands OF Jr. Humphreys.
With respect 10 the alleged negotiation OF trplicates
and Iupicat Of pay accounts Mr.. C2lans sald 'hat
Colonel Morrow having got INTO trouble BY ms specu,
ton. IN OIL applied 10 SWAIN 10 aid him. The lai.ci hau
no idea that Morrow had Implicated his pay account OF
had sold fraudulent accounts
Scott suggested that there was another
subject the inquiry OF te court general chaiSes
IN the final paragraph Nh Batemans letter 10 te sec
retarv of War lie asked that the court require ar
Batcman to explain what he meant by the statements n
question The court ruled that Mr.. BStman should eA-
flan and Mr. Chandler sad that they would loilnuai q
The charge Mr.. Bateman then called TO the stand
He testified in substance TO the facts set foth ~ MI
Chambers general statement ana gave some details OF
the transactions between Ger eral swain and ms LIln