The morning times., 1895-10-06
His Case Ably Argued Before
Judge Bradley.
DECISION WAS RESERVED
Right of Gen. SchofieId, to Order the
Arrest Disputed by the Prisoners
Counsel-Lnrge Crowd of Lawyers
and Law Students Attracted TO the
Courtroom.

Schofield, Acting Secretary of War, Tor
writing him an alleged improper letter,
came up for hearing before Judge Brad
ley at 10 O'Clock yesterday morning on
the petition for writ of habeas corpus
filed by Major Armes' counsel.
The proceedings began with the offer
of Mr. Morrison to file an amended return
on behalf OF Col. H. w. Closson, commander
of the Fourth Artillery, to whom the
writ was directed. There was some ques-
ttion as TO the right of Col Closson to make
an amended return, but Judge Bradley adj
United H..
Mr. Ralston made the opening speech,
first moving for the discharge of Capt.
Armes upon the showing made by tie re-
turn. lie said that Capt.-.irmes had been
taken into custody upon a charge that
to the civilian mind was ridiculous and
prepostcrous. Capt. Armes, he asserted,
was not subject TO the orders OF the Presi-
dent, nor of the Secretary OF War, nor
yet amenable to the articles of war, ex-
cept in so far as they We're applicable TO
one in his condition
DISTINCTION IN THE CASE.
There was a distinction between Of
fjccrs in active service and those on the
retired list and the text of the sixtyfifth
article. governing the arrest OF Officers
charged with crime, showed that it was
applicable TO and referred only tO Officers
on the active list. The arrest of an officer,
active or retired, Mr.. Raiston continued.
was not necessary preliminary to court
martial. and the proceedings in the present
instance could not be said To be an inter
ference with military justice. The War
Department knew 1t had no right to make
the arrest under the conditions existing
at the time. and the amended return was
an attempt to bolster up a case in behalf
of Gen. Schofield.
II was now pretended that the offense
imputed to Capt. Armes had been com
mitted in his tSchofieldsl presence
fact which was disgraceful 10 the military
establishment as the return was thereby
rendered -cvasive, inconsistent and practi-
cally false. No crime had been charged
against Capt. Armes at the time of his
arrest. 1t would not do for Gen. Schofield
to say that the charge lay in his own
bosom. that lie was personally cogniZant
of Armes' crime, and that that was SUI
ficient. 1t must be such a charge that the
court could take hold of.
wREAK PERSONAL SPITE.
That officer could now take advantage of
an accidental occupancy OF al office, which
| lasted but twenty-four or forty eight hours.
| to wreak his personal spite upon fellow
/ officer. The return showed that no charges
were preferred against Capt. Armcs until
October 2. five days after the arnat.
In conclusion, Mr.. RaistOn asserted that
the right of the civil authority TO interfere
in this matter had been questioned, but
without ground. The military power, he
said. was always subordinate to the civil
power, and that wrongs perpetrated by the
| former had been repeatedly corrected by the
latter.
Mr.. Morrison. responding for the military
| authorities, made an exhaustive statement
of the case I'M the course OF which two or three
suggestive colloquies occurred between
counsel and Judge Bradley. In the first
place, he said. he desired to correct the
impression which had been created in the
/ minds of the counsel for Capt. ArInes and of
| many others. by the exaggerated, Gnau-
thoriZed and ill-advised statements by
military men, that this case presented
conflict between the civil and military
powers of the government.
1.-THE only controversy is between capt.
Armes and his superior officers" he said,
land it has been referred TO this tribunal
for arbitration"
BOW TO CIVIL AUTHORITIES.
at is the only place where such dispute
can be arbitrated. and we recognize that
this court did only wha IL was bound to do,
when IL issued its writ Of habeas corpus.
When its decision is announced we shallow
to 1t; the military must Always suDihit 10
the civil
Judge Bradley asked Mr.. Morrison
whether or not he knew of any definition
of the word "crime'' in the article pro-
viding that Officers charged with crime
shall be arrested. ,
Mr.. Morrison read from Winthrop's Mil
| tary Law to the effect that the word
| included all offenses known to military
law as well as offenses against the civil
law.
Judge Bradley-"Is any distinction made
in offenses committed by officers on the
active list and those on the retired list?''
Mr.. Morrison-"None whatever. There
is nothing in the character of the position
or status of a retired officer making 1t
different from that of an active officer"
To warrant the arrest of Armes Mr..
Morrison claimed that it was sufficient
that the offense was committed within
the personal know ledge of the officer
directing the arrest.
SUBJECT To THE SECRETARY.
1t had been charged, he said, that the
return was practically false, because it
asserted that the offense had been COM
mitted in the personal presence OF Gen.
Schofield This was substantial lily the
fact; the offense was committed when
Gen. Schofield opened and read the letter.
Judge Bradley-"How can he be IN
When ne Is 10 TIC
orders of the President only"
Mr.. Morrison-"He is subject to the
Secretary of War as the organ of the
President. To say that he ca mot be in
subordinate is to say that he is under the
control of no one"
Judge Bradley-"At the time of the arrest,
were there any charges against Captain
ArDles in existence? The statutes seem
|. to recognize distinction between charge
.tf that time and na formal
upon which a trial is founded"
Mr.. Morrison 1.-THE return shows that
Gen. Scliofield deemed him 10 have been
guilty of crime, in his own mind guilty of
crime committed within his personal
knowledge"
arrest usually express or state the cause,
the crime with which the officcris accused?"
GLAD HE'S NOT IN THE ARMY.
Mr.. Morrison-"No. And in that question
lies the difficulty which persons familiar
with processes in civil courts find in COM
pretending the operation of military law.
There is no such thing as process in the
militarS service; an order is given to make
the arrest and that is all there is of it."
Judge Bradley-"Then an officer may
cause subordinate to be arrested for any
reason that may exist only in his own mind,
by verbal or written order, which does not
contain the cause for the arrest?'
Mr.. Morrison-.There issno doubt of it."
Judge Bradiey-"Then l am very thank
full that am not in the Army"
Mr.. Siddons concluded the argument, and
at its conclusion, Judge Bradley announced
that he would take the case under advise
ment.s A decision is expected within q
week.
Wants Her Guardian TO Account.
Ollie 4 r. Hamilton nv her next friend