National Republican., 1884-05-12
Paymaster General Rochester and Maj. Carey
Are Placed on the Stand
They TestlfysThat He Wanted His Pay
Stopped Except in This City
He Never Said Anything, However, About Dupli-
cation or Triplication Of His Accounts.
Cashier Bealo TestiHss About Hum
phreys's Presentation OF the Due Bill.


pied in reading and correcting tho record of
Fridays proceedings. Then counsel for Mr..
Bateman placed John ID. Beall, cashier for
Bateman & Co.. on the witness stand. Wit
ness said he has been cashier for the firm
since the fall of 1883. Ho identified the duo
bill for $1,000 given by Batcman to Gen.
Swain, and said that IL was presented at the
bank for payment by Mr.. Humphreys, the
contractor, somo time in November last, to
the best of his recollection. lie was asked
by Mr.. Cha ndler what domand was made at
that time by Mr.. Humphreys. Mr.. Callxins
objected that counsel had no right to seek to
impeach the testimony of his own witness
lalluding to that given by MIR. Humphreys
Friday.
MIR. Chandler replied that if n witness
came on tho stand and stated what was not
true there was no rule of law to prevent the
calling of another witness to prove the facts.
The witness on the stand, he said, appeared
merely to show that the due bill was pre-
sented for $1,000 and interest, and the full
amount demanded of Bateman q Co., and
that that was the first time he had over seen
it,
Mr.. Calkins withdrew his objection, and
witness then testified that Mr.. Humphreys
presented the due bill at the bank during the
absence OF Mr.. Bateman and demanded pay
Ulent OIL tnO luIl amOunt ptluClpul anu
and interest. That was the first time witness
saw the paper in question.
On crOss.eXaniination witness stated that
Mr. Humphreys came to he) Mr.. Bateman on
the latters return to the city, few days
after the presentation of tho due bill for pay
ment In answer to the question whether
Gen. Swain had over told him (witness) that
he (Swaim) had n due bill against Bateman
q Co. for $4,000, witness replied that ho had
rot. Gen. Swain had mover mentioned to
IN that he possessed the due bill
On the conclusion Of this witness's testi-
mony, Mr.. Chandler announced to the court
that his side would rest their case with the
understanding that they would have the
privilege of calling one other witness about
whose testimony an agreement had not yet
been reached with the other side
Tho court then took recess for fifteen
minutes, aud on reassembling, Paymastor
General Rochester and Maj. Carey, of the
paymaster generals department, appeared in
court in response to tho order issued by the
court Friday to subpoena them to testify rs to
what communications were made to the war
department on the subject of Col. Morrows
pay accounts, and as to what orders. ii any
were issued from the war department., con-
cerning those accounts.
Maj. Carey was first called to the stand, and
i'll reply to tho questions of the judge advo-
cate of the court SAID, that early in April,
1853, Mr. Bateman came to the paymaster
generals Office and said to witness that he
(Bateman) with others had made ar
rangementS to pool the indebtedness
of Col. Morrow to them, and had his pay
accounts for some two or three years He
wanted to know If arrangements could be
made to have the accounts paid TO u trustee,
and if they could be paid in Washington
Witness told him that tho matter of going
into Morrow's pay accounts rested with Col.
Morrow. Bateman said they wanted TO ar
ranp hnI al ha Ira,
the paymaster here by u trustee to be ap-
pointed by them Witness told him that the
pay department could not go into that, but
that Col. Morrow might make application for
the payment of his pay accounts by the pay
master in Washington, and that the matter
would be submitted to the proper authori-
ties. On the day following this conversation
witness said that Col. Morrow sent an official
communication to tho paymaster general,
stating that he had made an assignment of
his pay to Mr. Middleton, who had been ap-
pointed trustee by his creditors, and request
ing that the ayInaster general direct that his
namo bo placed on the list of stoppages
except as TO Washington in order to ad-
ditional security TO his creditors. Witness
was in charge of the office ut tho time this
letter came, and he took IL to the secretary of
war. The latter he said, read the letter and
stated that he would not authorize tho placing
of Col. Morrow's name on tho list of stoppages;
he had no objection to the payment of Nor
rows accounts by any paymaster. Witness
indorsed Col. M0rrow's letter with this state
menU of the secretary's, and on the 18th of
April instructions were sent to all the chief
paymast0rs not to pay MorrOw's accounts, that
they would he paid by the paymaster in WASH
ington. A few days after these instructions
were sent out witness told Mr.. Bateman that
the matters of Col. MorTow's account had been
settled, and that instructions had been, or
would be- given that his accounts should be
paid only in Washington.
In answer to an inquiry made by Gen. Pope
the witness said that neither in his conversa-
tion with the secretary OF war, or in any
statements made by the secretary to him, had
there been any reference made to the dupli-
cation or triplication Of Col. Morrow's
accounts, and 10 far as witness knew nothing
was known at the war department of the
triplication or duplication OF those accountB.
Paymaster General Rochester was then
called to the witness stand, and in answer to
interrogatories made by Judge Advocate
Scott stated that no communication what
ever had been made through him to the
secretary of war with reference to Col.
Biorrow's accounts, or from the secretary
OF war to him about that matter. He
said that Oh April 14th of last year
Col. Morrow came to his (witnesss) office
aud asked If he (the witness would not have
his (Morrow's) pay stopped, except as to
Washington. witness told him that he
could stop his own pay. Col. Morrow had
then informed witness that his (Morrow's)
creditors would like to haye his pay drawn
in Washington. Witness told him that he
(witnoss) mad no authority to stop any ono's
pay, but Col. Morrow insisted that witness
should put it out OF his (dorrow's) power to
draw his pay except in Washington, where
upon witness wrote to tho chief paymasters
directing them not to pay Col. Morrows
accounts, as they would be paid in Washing
ton.
Witness explained that it is not unusual
for officers to apply to have their pay accounts
paid ouly at one place. He had memoran-
dunn of seven officers who, at this time,
wished to have their pay drawn only in New
York. Officers travelling in Europe, and
officers stationed on the frontier, whose
families remain east, often have this done.
They did not, however, ask, as Col. Morrow
did, to have their pay stopped.
In answer to Gen Pope the witness said
that Col. Morrow had not said anything to
him about the duplication or duplication of
his pay accounts, and he did not think he
(Col. Morrow had said anything about such
duplication or triplicatiOn to any officer of
the war department. Witness then volun-
teerod the explanation that there had been,
up 10 little over a year ago, regulation of
the war department that required the pay
master general, when he discovered that an
oihcer mad drawn on his pay accounts more
than once, to call for an explanation and
then report 1t TO tho war department.. He
had found after coming TO Washington,
that great many officers were drawing on
Al..t. 30