New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-05-09
THE SWAIN COURT OF INQUIRY.
SOME SINGULAR FACTS ABOUT THE MORROW CASE
COMMENTED UPON.

COMMENTED UPON
rBY TELEGRAPH TO TIE TRIBUSE.l
WASHINGTON, May SIT is likely that thetes-
tmony already in before the Swain OF Inquiry viii
make il necessary before the dropped
tain responsible for the failure TO have official
Investigation made year ago into the duplication of the
nay accounts OF Colonel A. p Morrow. IN THE TRIBUNE
Of May "a and May 20, 1888, the matter was dis
cussed, and the fact was mentioned that while
Colonel Morfow's offence failed by reason
10 receive official attention at the War Depart
ment Lieutenant Colonel Ilges and one or two other
officers guilty of like offences subjected TO trial ny
c0urtmartal II supposed at that time that Coonei
Morrow had perhaps only carried months pay over
Short time and that he had made arrangements 70 settle
ihe matter without its being called to the at
sentiOn Of the military authOuties but it seems
that In his case there was only dup Ca
zion. bat quadruplication, Of pay accounts;
chat meeting OF bankers who hed the duplicate &C
souuts was led and that by official authority an
srru cement was made by which portion of MOrrow's
pay be handed monthly 10 the bankers The
issued circular the subje
time from which It would appear that proper nOthca-
ton required by army regulations in such
By the TO the War Department One OF
she questions remaining to be answered is who
sayed Colonel Morrow from court martial 1t is re-
menDered that one OF two officials OF tue War Depart
ment al the time said no official charges had been pre-
cation been received indicate that he had guilty
Of the offence charged Flu Their proceedings Of the Swain
ess-
SOME POINTS OF THE TESTIMONY.
WASHINGTON, May 6.-The session of the
Court Of Inquiry to-day up 10 the time of recess
occupied in the crossexamnatiOn OF Mr. Baieman
This crOssexamination directed principally 10 show
ing that there been dissatisfaction on the mart
of General Swain with respect TO the manner ia when
certain business had been transacted for him bv Rate
man Co., with the object for General swain
f1plalned OF showing thai there might have been an
honest difference OF opinion between SWAIN and Rate
man 10 accounts OF the former.
After Dir. Batemdn SAID that Colonel Morror In
denying the accusation OF fraud explained how he had
made ont schedule OF his debts for General swain and
supposed The latter had shown 10 Bateman Be as
serted that MOrr0ws agreement with tns bankers Was
showH saer ~ tho Secretary OF War the General OF
Army and was a matte OF public notOrtety
Mr.. Bateman questioned IN regard 20 the duebin
for $1,000 gwen by him 10 SWAIN the suit which pre-
cipitaed this trouble Hc said the first ntimaton re
ceiYed that the due-bl considered note when
was presented FOR payment by Mr. Humphreys 10 whom
u LAC been transferred by General Swain. The bill
presented for payment during his absence In NewYOrz
ana Do had ecied the bank not attention
H. On hs veturn lie sent Tor Mr Humphreys, and when
Tie latter tOd him tie circumstances under which he had
taken the due-Dn from SWAIN he had said: Humph /
Keys, bwaii Is making caispaw OF you" and showed