Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1884-11-22
SWAIN FACING THE MUSIC
THE ATTACKS OF HIS FOES MET
WITH A STUBBORN FRONT.


THE ATTACKS OF HIS FOES MET
WITH A STUBBORN FRONT.
Gen. Grosvenor Doing the Hardest Part
of the Fighting for the Defendant
MIR. Chandler Rubbing the Nose of the
Alleged Culprit ON the Grindstone of
Duty.
WASHINGTON, Nov. 21.-The interest
which is felt in army circles in this city
in the proceedings of the court martial
trying Gen. Swain upon charges of con-
duct unbecOming an officer and gentle
man and of neglect of duty in falling to
report alleged duplication of pay accounts
by another officer, is shown by the pres
ence in the court room during the session
OF prominent army officers and officials
of the War Department.
To-day the attendance of this class of spec
tators was largely increased, and larSe part
OF the court room was set apart for the accom-
mediation of these prominent officers and
the ladies Of their families. When the court
adjourned yesterday a demurrer had lust
been presented by the defense to the specid-
cation to the second charge of the Indictment.
The counsel for the defense had expressed
their willingness to submit this without argu-
ment If the prosecution would do likewise
but, on statement by the Judge Advocate
this morning that he desired Go argue the
demurrer, Gen. Grosvenor, of counsel for the
defense, opened the argument in support of
the demurrer.
SWANS DUTY.
He attacked the specification on the ground
that it alleges no facts that constituted duty
on the part of Gen. Swain to make report
GpOn the knowledge said TO be in his possess
sion of lhe duplication of Col. Morrow's pay
accounts. 1t was he said, a matter OF inter
est to the army whether an officer of the
army, whenever he has reason to suppose that
a brother officer is offending against any law,
civil or military, is or is not obliged to 80 at
once to the War Department and report his
information. This was The question in this
case. Ought Gen. Swain, having been in
formed by an outsider that Col. Morrow had
duplicated his pay a. counts. to have
taken upon himself the office of an
informer and gone to the War Depart
ment with this information, or failing
duty. Such decision would place premi-
um on scandal mOnging in the army. He con-
tended that the prosecution could not under
take to prove in this court that Col. Morrow
had frauduenJly duplicated his pay accounts,
because Col. Morrow had not been arraigned
on such charge, and the proving of such
substantial conviction of an officer for a crime
with which he had not been charged.
THE GENERAL SHOULD HAVE TOLD.
Mr.. Chandler, following in opposition to the
demurrer, said that the counsel for the de-
fense had attempted to destroy this charge by
making it appear that the act which Gen.
Swain was charged with neglecting to do was
the act OF an infOrmer, and was consequently
Odious. This, he said, was not a fair view Of
the case. The act which Gen. Swain failed
to do was not, he said, the act of an informer.
Gen. Swain as Judge Advocate General was
the confidential legal adviser of the head of
the War Department, and was required to
report to him any information in his
(Swaims) possession OF value TO him. The
act of a prosecuting attorney in a civil
case in bringing the prosecution by informa-
tiOn is not, he said, the act OF an informer and
the bringing by Gen. Swain to the knowledge
of the War Department of Information he had
received of tlagrant violation OF the army
regulations by a brother officer would not
have been the act of an informer.
MORROw'S DANGER
Coming to the point made by the defense that
the prosecution could not in this case attempt
to prove that Col. Morrow had duplicated his
pay accounts in order to show that there had
been duplication, of which Gen. Swain had
knowledge, he said that such evidence was
com petent In this case and that the proof of
such duplication by Col. Morrow, If made in
this case, would have no value as evidence in
Col. MOrrOw's case.
The Judge Advocate followed Mr.. Chandler
in the same line of argument. He defined the
duties OF the Judge Advocate General of the
army as compatible with his giving, and in
fact requiring him to give, such information
to the Secretary of War as he was charged
with having failed to give in this case.
The transaction which il was charged gave
Gen. Swain the information he failed to re-
port arose, he said, in consequence of his
(Swaim'sJ having sent Col. Morrow to Bate
man X Co. with a note of Introduction, and
having by his personal representations in
duced Bateman Co. to purchase Col. Nor
rows pay accounts. This takes the matter
out of the ordinary case of an officer hearing
anything against a brother officer and failing
to report IL.
SWAIN AN ORIGINAL AGENT.
It is charged here, he said, that Gen. Swain
is the original agent in the action by which
Bateman & Co. advanced money on pay ac-
counts of Col. Morrow, which were after
wards discovered to be fraudulent.
At the conclusion of the argument the court
Overruled the demurrer of the defense. The
Judge Advocate then asked leave, before pro-
ceeding with the arraignment OF Gen. Swain
on the second charge, to file an amendment to
the second specification to the first charge,
demurrer to watch had been sustained by the
court. The leave having been granted he
read the specification as amended. In this
state 1t charges that after Mr. Bateman had
made the accusation against Gen. SWAIN 10
the Secretary of War, and after Gen. Swain
had learned that these accusations had been
made, he Swami sought and procured an in
terview with Mr.. Bateman. and improperly
and Wrongfully tried to prevent any lDVestl-
cation into the accusations by procuring from
Mr. Bateman a second letter to the Secretary
of War, which letter, II alleges, was prepared
at the request of Gen. Swain upon false
statements made by Gen. Swain &c Mr. Bate
man.
GROSvENOR EQUAL TO THE EMERGENCY.
Gen. GrosYenor, after consultation with his
associate, said that this was in the nature of
new charge and inadmissible. The court
would not put an officer on trial thus on new
charge. If it were admitted, it would be
necessary to request that the charges be re-
ferred back to the Secretary Of War
with the request that they be not tried before /.
this court at this time.
The Judge Advocate contended that it was
undoubtedly the right of Judge Advocate in
a military court, before the conclusion of an
argument, to submit an additional charge, If
the facts as discovered warrant such action.
This being his right, he argued that 1t could
not be denied that he has the right before the
conclusion of the arraignmenG to amend
specification to a charge.
The court then went into secret session to
consider the new question. When the court
room was reOpened the Judge Advocate an
nOunced that the motion to amend had been
Overruled. He gave notise that tomorrow
he would proceed with the arraignment OF the
accused, and should present an additional
charge upon which to make an arrangement.
The court then adjourned until tomorrow.