Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1885-03-17
THE HAZEN COURT.MARTIAL.
Gen. HaZen's Counsel AssailS the Late
Secretary Of War.

Secretary of War.
AT the afternoon session Of the Hazen court.
| martial yesterday, Mr.. Mackey, for the defense
offered an endorsement by ex-Secretary Lin.
coin, and other memoranda for the purpose, he
| said, OF showing the animus which inspired
the prosecution, but the court ruled out the tes.
timony as irrelevant. Mr.. Mackey called at.
tention to the fact that while the Secretary
stated that Ger. Hazens S letter of February IL 7th
last was received by him March 26th the Chi.
cago Tribune article, which was the basis OF
The STARS interview,was printed March 25th
The witness having stated that he had kept the
letter locked in his desk, Mr.. Mackey asked il
1t had not recently happened that letters had
pee oeen pnaioined n nom desks in the signal office
The witness applied in the affirmative before
the judge advocate had time to state his obiec.
Mr.. Mackey, in his reply, said that he would
| show that not only had letters been purloined
but the person who committed the larceny had
aIterWaros been given special employment by
the Secretary; further, that nothing in the sig.
nal Office was safe or sacred from the hands OF
the Secretary of War;
Mr. Mackey was allowed to ask whether the
paper had gone out OF the witness possession
ana the latter said it had gone out OF his hands
only TO the adjutant to be engrossed; it proba-
bly went into the hands of the chief clerk.
Cen HaZen then gave his version of his con-
Versatlon with THE STAR reporter, not differ.
ing materially from that testified to by Mr..
Kaufman.
GEN. HAZEN'S VERSION OF THE "sTAR" INTER.
VIEW.
The court met this morning at the usual hour
and General Hazen again took the stand
MI. Mackey asked if Mr.. Kaufman said
anything at the time of the alleged interview
to indicate that it was to be published
General HaZen replied that nothing was said
70 lndlcate such an intention, adding: al knew
ar: hauitInann Very well. and at the time did
not think OF his being a correspondent. / have
talked with him ten times when nothing has
Deen puDllShed to once when there has BEEN"
Mr. Mackey then read the interview published
In IHE STAR and questioned witness as to the
language used.
Witness said that the language was not ex-
actly what he had used. Some expressions, he
SAID, he did not use in the form presented in
PRINT; others were his exact expressions. He
SUBSTANTIALLY correct in the article, but that he
had not intended his statements to be pub
iished, and had had no intention of rejecting
upon or crlflcislnS the Secretary of War.
. MI. Mackey asked the court to strike out the
secretary of Wars endorsement on the letter as
a part OF the charges and specifications against
the accused. The endorsement he held was
simply statement of the inferences the Secre-
tary OF w ar drew from the letter, and was not
emitted TO consideration by the court. The
court must construe theletter for themselves.
lhe Judge advocate opposed the motion, saying
that ina the endorsement was an important part of
the SpeclficatIon, as 1t was charged that after
the Secretary of War had thus called General
Hazen,s attention to the impropriety of the
le..er, n, ne had given statement OF it to a STAR
MIR. Mackey held that if the letter itself was
not an of1ense, the endorsement could not make
itsuch.
The court overruled the motion of the defense
Mr.. Mackey then examined Gen. Hazen upon
the endorsement. He asked if witness had in
tended TO charge the Secretary of War with a
neglect of duty because he did not organize a
relief expedition in two days
Gen. Hazen replied that he did not.
SECRETARY LINCoLN'S ENDORSEMENT OF
HAZENS LETTER.
The Secretary was wrong in his conclusion
That such was his intention. AS to the charge
that he had criticized the Secretary of War for
past act, for which he Gen. Hazen) had no
responsibility, witness said that he was not re-
sponsible for the Secretary's decision, but that
he was responsible to do all in his power to res
cue the men on the expedition. This he did.
vate funds to effect the rescue of these men so
heaTlly did he feel the responsibility. In fact
IN 1882, he actually engaged the Neptune on
his own responsibility. Congress, however re-
heved him.
Mr.. Mackey further questioned the witness as
where he said that the question of the wisdom
OF the conduct OF the relief expedition was not
proper matter of controversy between the
asked if the Secretary had not actually criti-
cised and passed harsh structures upon Gen.
HaZen in his annual report.
Witness replied that he had.
Further questions were asked for the purpose
of bringing out the fact that Gen. Hazen was
aetuated in everything he did by a. desire to
rescue the men who were periShing in the Arc
TIC region, and not by any desire to crticise the
Secretary of War;
QUESTION NOT ALLOWED BY THE COURT
The Judge advocate objected to a question in
tended to bring out the fact that the Secretary
of War was not present when the remains of
the officers who perished under Greely arrived
at the depot.
In SUPPORT of his question, Mr. Mackey said
that the purpose of the defense was to show
that the Secretary of War had such an antip-
atny Tor the arctic explorations under Gen. Ha-
zen that he carried it to the grave, and was not
present to receive the remains, though other
nign o1lc1ais were present to do honor to the
dead heroes.
The court then retired to consider the obec.
tion:
When the court returned the Judge advocate
announced that the judge advocates objection
was sustained.
COUNSEL FOR DEFENSE NOT TO COSTtNIyg HIS
STRUCTURES ON SECRETARY LINCOLN.
He further announced that the court had de-
cided that the structures of the counsel for the
defense upon the Secretary of War were not
warranted by the evidence now before the
court, and that he would not be permitted to
make such structures.
Mr: Mackey protested that the defense should
be allowed to show the aninus of the accuser
The court then, at o'clock, took recess of
90 minutes.
THE Lazy SPECTATORS TAKE SIDES IN THE
! ls.ssts fSfsISN CONTROVERSY.
The fadiessin the court room take Sides some
with Gen. Hazen and some with the Secretary
a discussion of the case. They generally agree
with the fine looking officer in uniform on
trial, and one declared boldly to-day that she
admired Independence while those around her
added that they liked to see an officer who was
not afraid to speak to his superior.
When the court re-cOnvened, Mr.. Mackey
asked whether the decision of the court that
the Secretary of War should be exempted from
structures, applied to the specific case in point
or whether it should be general in its applica-
ton.
The court replied that the counsel must pro-
ceed under the decision of the court, and if he
violated their rulings he would be called to
order.
The examination of Gen. Hazen was then
continued. He said in answer to further OueS-
tions by his counsel that he had frequently had
occasion to address the Secretary of War upon
various matters
He was asked If his communications were
without special leave, and the judge advocate
objected, but afterwards withdrew the Obiec-
ton.
Gen. Hazen then said that he answered with
out leave.
lie replied that according to law there was, at
certain times, two sergeants to be promoted to
lieutenants upon recommendation of the chief
signal officer. The Secretary refused to send two
names Gen. HaZen had recommended to the
President, because he held that the signal office
did not belong to the army.
=, At this point the judge advocate objected to
the further reply to the question, and the court
sustained the objection.
Mr.. Mackey then asked If the Secretary of
War had protested against these communities
tions.
Witness replied that he had not.
--<D<-
The Presidents Callers.
SOME OF THOSE WHO VISITED THE WHITE
HOUSE TODAY.