Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1884-12-03
SWAIN TIME
THE COURT SEES THE TRICK
AND STOPS IT.

Bateman Co.'S. Original Entry Books
Demanded in Support of Witness
Browns Statements The Copies Held
to be Sufficient by the Jndge-swaim's
Questioning of the Accounts.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 2.-Upon the OPEN
ing of the proceedings before the Swain
court-martial this morning, the Judge
Advocate called the attention of the court
to the great length of what he termed the
interlocutory arguments in this case, and
asked for a rule of the court limiting such
arguments upon motions, etc., to twenty
minutes on each side, except in cases
wherein in the discretion of the court the
matter under discussion is of sufficient
| Importance to warrant an extension OF
| time.
Judge sheIlabarger, of the counsel for the
| defense, objected to the adoption of any such
rule. He said that the court can see that the
| questions which arise in this case from time
to time are often of vital Importance, and he
| hoped that the court would not forget the
gravity of this trial as affecting the accused
or that the accused is enti led to the beneit
of the fullest presentation of his case, He
hoped, he said, that no iron rule would be
adopted that would cut the accused off from
opportunity to make the fullest presentation
of his case.
The court announced that it would take
the question under advsement.
BATEMAN'S BOOKS.
Judge Shellabarger then read a motion on
behalf of the defense relative to the question,
pending yesterday, when the court adjourned,
whether or not a rule should be made reouir-
ing the Judge Advocate to produce the books
Of the banking firm of Bateman 4 Co. This
motion recites that the prosecution having i'm
the direct examination of witness Brown nut
in evidence an alleged copy of the book ac-
count, of prosecuting witness with the
o ron FINN had FOL
Swain by Bateman & Co, on July l, 1882.
the accuracy of which cannot be fully tested
without an examination and the inspection OF
all previous like accounts between the par
ties, and, having refused on the demand of
the accused TO produce such original book
entries here for the purpose of cross -examin-
ing witness Brown, the accused moves the
court to rule out and exclude from evidence
an alleged copy of the accounts referred to as
having been put IN evidence, unless the prose-
cutlon bring into court, for the purpose OF
cross examination. the original entries in the
books of Bateman " Co. of all accounts OF the
accused with that firm.
The Judge Advocate argued against the
proposed rule. He said that the counsel for
the defense knew very well that if the books
of the firm of Bateman Il Co. are necessary
to the defense for legitimate and proper pur-
poses they can be obtained by subpoena
duces tecum.
THE COURT NOT TO BE FOOLED.
He said that the counsel had msde this
matter in the middle of the cross examination
OF the witness, apparently with the idea that
he could impose upon the judgment of the
court so far as to have the prosecution make
the evidence for him for the cross -examina-
tion of this witness. The motion was
09erruled, and the defense were informed
that they could resort to subpoena duces tecum
if they desired, and the books will be pro-
duced.
Witness Brown then resumed his story. He
explained more in detail the manner in which
the money obtained by him as a loan from
Gen. Swain had been placed to his tthe wit
nessD credit on the books of Bateman s. Co.,
and afterwards transferred TO Gen. SWaim's
credit with Bateman & Co., when Mr. Brown
Withdrew from the firm. He was then ex-
amined at great length as to various stock
transactions between Gen. Swain and Bate
man Y Co., and as to the manner in
which Gen. Swaim's accounts were
computed. Among the statements
drawn from the witness was one
that Gen. Swain had frequently complained
TO him that he did not understand the ac-
counts as rendered The first Of these COM
plants was made, the witness SAID, when the
first account of GeIN Swaim's stock transac-
tlons was rendered, and they continued until
the time he twitnessl severed his connection
with the bank.
The Judge Advocate and his assistant Mr.
Chandler, finally objected TO the waste of
time occasloned by the methods of the defense
In examining the witness, and upon their mo-
tlon the defense were notified that whatever
objection they made to any part Of the ac-
counts produced in evidence. must be specific
as to Items. The court then adjourned.