National Republican., 1884-05-09

tion and the witness answered that, so far as
he knew, IL was q matter of public notorlety'
as 1t had been mentioned in the newspapers.
The witness was then uuestioned as to his
statement made yesterday that Gen. SWAIN
had threatened to prevent the bankers VINO
had made this arrangement from BettlnE
their money unless they paid him small
sum owed him by Col. Morrow. he said he
was discussing the matter with Gen' SWAIN
in Mr.. Parker's office, the latter being present
when Swain said: "Now, Bateman, ii Cooke
and the rest of you don't chip in and help
me out on what he owes me Will squeeze
him at tho war department so that~none OF
you will get your money"
A recess was taken at thistm after which
the witness was questioned in regard to the
due bill for S., 600 given by him to Swain, the
suit on which precipitated this trouble. Wit
ness said tho first intmation he received that
the due bill was considered note, was when
il was presented for payment by MIR. Hum
phreys, to whom it had been transferred by
Con. Swain. The bill was presented for
payment during his (witncsss) absence in New
York, and he had directed tho bank
not to pay any attention to it. On
his return he sent for Mr.. Humphreys
and when the latter told him the circum-
stances under which he had taken the due
bill from Swain Stated in tho direct testi-
mony Wednesday and repeated yesterday he
making a cat's.paw of you" and showed him
swaim's check drawing out his balance,
whereupon Humphreys said, swain can't
mako u cats paw of me, and left. About two
months afterward suit was brought on the
note. In the meantime he (witness) had not
gone TO sec Swain about it,
Being asked why he had not seen Swain,
witness replied: Because | considered ii a
mild species of blackmail and paid no atten-
ton to It," He added that he had sent for
Humphreys day or two after tho note was
presented and had tried to get him to mako
an affidavit before notary public as TO tho
circumstances under which the duo bill was
transferred TO him. which affidavit he had
intended to use as tho basis for tho charges
he had since filed with tho secretary OF war
against Gen. Swain. Humphreys would not
make the affidavit then, and had not since
made it.
When suit was brought against the firm
on the duo bill, and it became noisod about
the city that Bateman * Cos paper had gone
to protest, ho had written the letter to the
secretary of war making the charges against
Swain. He had taken the letter to the
department, but being unable to see Mr..
Lincoln had left it with tho latter's private
secretary.
Witness wished to explain why he had
given the letter to the press, in order, he said,
to meet criticisms which this act had called
out, but Gen. Pope refused to lot him speak,
saying that the court was not dealing with
that matter and that he (Bateman) must bear
those criticisms.
Witness was then questioned at length
concerning tho agreement between himself
and Gen. Swain, made on the day after tho
charges were filed with the secretary Of war;
by the terms of which he was to withdraw
his charges against Swain, the latter was to
withdraw the suit on the due bill and sur
render the due bill to him, and the differ
ences between them were to be submitted to
arbitration. His statement did not differ
from that made Wednesday. The principal
point brought out in the close cross-examina-
tion on this matter was that witness was
positive that the due bill was not considered
matter for arbitration, but was to be sur
rendered to him before his charges were
withdrawn. The difference to be ar
few hundred dollars between him
self and Swain, to force the
settlement of which, Swain, he said, had
told him the suit on the note had been
brought. Witness had believed that this
statement of Swaims was honestly made,
until he read Swaim's reply to the secretary
of war, when the latter referred his bate
man's) charges to Swain for explanation.
Witness was still under cross.examination
when the court adjourned. 1t is learned at
the war department that no charges for du-
plication of pay accounts were ever preferred
against Col. Morrow at the department, nor
any communication or information on that
subject ever received there. The only action
ever taken in his case by the secretary o
war was to pass upon request made by Col
Morrow to the paymaster general, that hi
pay might be stopped in all places, except
Washington, to enable him to relieve himself
from debt.
This request was submitted to the secretary
of war by the acting paymaster general
Tho secretary declined to place his name
upon the usual stoppsge circular on the
ground that he had not tho right to do so
but, to enable Col. Morrow to arrange to fret
himself from his indebtedness, the secretary
informed the paymaster general that he haC
no objection to his making such arrange
ments as would insure the payment of Col
Morrow's pay vouchers by only one paymsste
stationed in Washington. The question o
prosecuting him, or refraining from prose
cutting him, was never considered by tn
secretary of war. When, however, a shor
time subsequently charges of drunkenness
were preferred against Col. Morrow the sec
retary of war promptly appointed court 70
his trial.