New-York tribune., 1885-03-12
GENERAL HAZEN ON TRIAL.
prcyNNING OF THE COURT MARTIAL.
.ur CHARGE AND sPEcIFicATIoNs-wHAr THE Ao-
cUsEp MAN WILL ADMIT.

sur CHARGE AND sPECIFicAIioNs-"hAi i"i' nv
cUsEp MAN WILL ADMIT.
WASHINGTON, March 1.-THE General Court
S,al convened by direction OF the President iof tno
s-,a, Of Brigadier-Gcneral William b. Hazen' ch'ei
s,snal officer U. s. A.. met at the Ebbitt House TINS
orn,ns The detail OF the court is as follows: MAJOR
s,.pera Winfield s. Hancock. president; MaJor-1eheri
Iohn NJ schoheld, Brigadcr-General Ohver u ho""'u,
nyeadier- General Alfred H. Terry, Brigader-uene'a'
christopher C. Augur, Brigadcr-Generai hoper' 4o
Yeely commissary-gcneral OF supsis'ehce' eo.o,
ceneral william j.. Rochester, paymaster general
p,gaaier- General Samuel B. Hoabrd, Q'nrtefhas'cr
General: Brieadier-Genera Robert Murray, surgeon
General: Brigadler- General John Newton ch'oi " 0
s,neers; Colonel George /" Andrews -''n r :,
Co,onel Wesley Merritt, 5tb Cavalry; ooiohei hoi' %
Back, 23d Infantry; Captain john W. oious' ,'n -.
fan,ry. tuage-advocate. General hazeh was "ooo.'
,,sd bv r. T. Mackey and n Dumont, Of this CITY, VINO
rnear as his counsel The courtroom was CROWDED WIN
spectators - l,.., n,o
rcelv and Mr. Maekey stated the ground OF thc ooJec
tion which was in substance, tnat' III io.o' So"o.
wacFeely then head of the Subsistence Department.
rote o General azcn in terms OF gross insult accus
ing him OF committing gross breach of discipline; an"
that in consequence the relations between the TWO
officers have ever since been such as usually cAS' oo
tween those who are avowed enemies.
In reply to the objection General MacFeeiy sau 'ha'
M had no prejudice against the accused man. athougn
~ had called the attention OF his superior officer 10
statement made by General Hazen which was ho'
ricty in accordance with fact; and SINCE he hau haa
no social relations with him.
The court took the matter under consideration anu an
pounced that the challenge was sustained Geherai
Macreely was excused from serving. The court was
then .sworn aud the accused man was arraigned Inc
is OF conduct to prejudice OF good order ana
military discipline, in violation OF the sixty
Article Of war;" -
! The first specification is that the accused man. Know
ing that tho Secretary Of War had decided that WAS ~
practicable In the year 1888 to send expedition 10 the
Arctic rec,ons for the relief OF Lieutenant Greey ana
his marty in his official annual report us CHIEF sisna
officer on October 49, 1884 criticised the action OF inc
Secretary OF War; by saying that on tho return VI '''
escort ship bringing the relief party 10 ST. Johh o
septembcr 49, still time, as known from proV
os experience and by subsequent facts to send
effective relief
The second specification that General Hazon sent to
The seevetary of War; on February 1885, the following
communication: 81 respectfully submit that am
justified In the conclusion that the tragic termination OF
the International Polar Expedition was finally due to the
decision not to dispatch steam scaler to eneet ts
rescue on September 49, 1Ss3 which 1 did all III IN!
power TO have done; starting from ST. Johns
n F. only thirteen days steaming from Cape SABINE IN
oil probability could have reached ana rescued
the party Before there any interruption 10 hea
The third spec iAcaon is that General Hazens com
nnicafion OF February IL 1885, contained also the fol-
lowing language: ~The Secretary Of War in his annual
sBiect Of severe sictures because in my official
of the final disaster to the International roaf p,
have been avered had snip of rescue been dispatched
from ST. Johns n. F.. after the return OF Leutenant
a. nrsea by me- but not adopted by Of War
As my silence In view Of these structures might pe CON
sfred as Implying my TO their Justice beg leave
to place on record the evidence thst:asupporhe cor
recess Of Judgment In the grsmlsesm - WN, GS 20 So to
Chief Signal officer with the statement tnat u was not
proper subject OF discussion between the Cnie signal
fha secre nj
that breach of military discipline which coula not DC
cSiei Signal ocer Of n the paper hands Never
theess in response to an inquiry made 9y per
Secretary Of War such letter containing criticism and
imputation of blame the Secretary of war for his
OF the Chief Signal officer to send expedition for the
relief OF Lieutenant Greedy AMI MS party lmmedatey ma
the loss of the steamer Proteus General Hazen sara
further that mis- Recommendation mad oeen entireiy
Before pleading to the charge and specifications
for the man 70 to o The Charge
and insufficient in law TO sustain It, He snosltted
said that there was nothing in the ctauot from General
Hsseus report quoted in the first specicaton 70 snow
thai General Hazen knew that the Secretary OF war had
decided not 10 send relief expedition and nothing In
that citation that brings II within the he OF ree't
proprety OF the decision OF the secretary OF War He
eontended that il was not dsrespecul for the chief
signal 0TsT 9eSor to to express tSe sscetary of Var
with regard TO the second speculation Mr mackey sad
termination OF the expedition was finally due 10 the
failure to dispatch sealing steamer TO the relief o the
party, after the return OF the ieei ID
be charged 10 be conduct to the eudlce OF eoou
order etc. because the chief signal Oncer was NOT re-
quesed by the secretary OF War; or authorized Dy h
70 write the letter in which the statement "a appeara
tions for the government OF the Army whch maSes "
incumbent npon bureau officer TO request permission Oi
the Secretary address letter 10 MIN, upon
any matter upon which he has acted Ill the line oi MS
The Judge Advocate in reply said that for
On officer of the Army to criticse the ac-
tion OF the Secretary of War, is an offence
against military law He pointed out to the court also
that the criticism made nearly year ana a nan
after the secretarys action taken and that the ac
cused man must have known of that action.
The considered the questions IN secret session
and the JndgeAdyocatc announced that the oemHIeis
had been oyerrued ,.,., a, .
General Hazcn then pleaded not guilty Ito all the
said that he had admissions 70 make when the
court should be ready to hear them.
The Judge Advocate said tDat he knew what tne cnar
actcr of these admissions would be- and that they would
tighten the abors OF the court he suggested therefore
recess 10 General Hazen TO prepare them and the
court adjourned until tomorrow morning for TINS pur-
it Is understood that Genera, Hazen viii
admit writing the report and the letter isd
citations are madc when appear in the specifications.
but will deny any intenon OF being dsrespecfu TO the
Secretary OF War; or Of impngning the proprs 1 % ns
interview which he is charged in the third spechcaton
with having had published and will deny that he knew
that such publication was 10 be made, put VIII adnlt
that reporter having asked him concerning
the truth of newspaper statement that ne haa w1tte
the letter quoted in the specifications to the Secretary
o. War (Which statement was not made by his authority
or by his nformation) that he acknowledged having
written snch letter and also that in answer TO qucs
ton by this reporter be said that bis
had been adopted the disaster Oh the preeiy party
woold not have occurred.
DOlNGS OF THE SENATE.