The morning times., 1895-10-05
MAKES KNOWN ITS CASE
War Departments Return Con-
cerning Maj. krmes.
DENIES ALL ALLEGATIONS
The Amended Return Declares That
the Charging of Gen. Schofield With
Unjust and Improper Official Ac-
ton Is Fa4se-Intere>tingD Develop
ments Expected ut the Tearing.

The legal fight of the year is to com Q
| up to-day before Justice Bradley, of the
| supreme court of the District, and will
| begin at 10 O'Clock. The case is that of
| Major George A. Armes, who was ar
| rested by order of Lieut.-Gen. Schofleld
| acting Secretary of War, for writing him
| letter, and who was released from arrest
on petition for writ of habeas corpus
| issued by Judge Bradley and directed to
Col. CioSson. in com mand at the Wash
| ington Barracks, who there held the
| prisoner under close arrest.
AT the hearing before Judge Bradley,
Col Ciosson. through Capt. Coniings, made
| return in writing to the court in winch
ne set up that the prisoner was held on
the order OF Gen. SchoIield, in which
| order no cause OF arrest was specified.
JUSTICE Bradley PROM PITY dismissed the
prisoner on his own reCu;sniZance in $500
nan, anu continued the case for fun
nearing until to-day.
The Eoycr.fn cut, aware that there was
no ground 10 hold hajnr Arm.s has pre-
| pared an amended return to the petition,
a copy of which has been served on Nessrs.
kaiStun i Siudous, ATTORNEYS for Major
ArInes. The attorney Tor Col. CIosson, Mr..
j. N. Morrison. Will eLueavor to have this
tended return considered by the court
this m orning.
ALL THE PAPERS.
The amended return is an interesting
paper for more reasons than that it gives
away the vnole case OF the government.
IL consists OF ali the papers and Correspond-
eice in the case incia,ling Major ArnIes
letter, the original order on which tnat
Oiticer was arrested, and Col. CtoSsDms =
recitation of the advents just prior to and
subsequent to tile uIscbarGe of the prisoner.
section OF the return rcciteS that on
the 10th or September ArIleS held the
office of captain OF cavalry: that he was
retired ON that cate with the rank OF
captain and from that date until the eth
OF september 1880, he was an officer of
the United States Army entitled to wear
UNIFORM and TO draw three-fourths pay
and was daily borne on the army register
and was subject ito the rules and articles
of war and to be tried By court-niartial
for any breach thereof"
Section sets oat that on the 9th OF
September while Gen Schofield was Act
ing Secretary of War, Arnles appea red
at the door or the room in the state, war
ana Navy building, usually used, and at
GlS tine used, as tile office OF the Lieu
tenant General comma ndng the army, and
where the SAID Schor,eld was at the time
Acting Secretary OF War. That when Armes
was told by the messenger NJ the door that
he could rot see Gen. Schofie!d at that
time, Armes delivered To the messenger.
one Richard Jones, type-wrltten letter
signed by ArnieS, directed him, the mes
senser, TO deliver TIE same to the said
SchOfield. The return here reproduces the
letter Of Major a rnes.
Section !. ie.aics ji.di Gen. Sohofieid read
the letter aid that 'he, the said SChofieid,
as Secretary OF War, deemed him, the said
Arnles, to-Eave commit ed in the said Sclo-
fields presence and Hlbin his personal
know ledge grave military oifense in
writing and causing to be delivered the
said letter" that '-the said act WIS highly
insubOrdna-e ard unmiiitary 10 the p reju-
dice of good order and military discipline
as well rs col duct uBhecCming an officer
and n gentleman: that in order to bring
the said ArmeS totrial before court martial
for the saiu oIfci.se, as n cue and reguiag
proceeding preliminary hereto he, Sohoiied,
caused the oTt,er for lis arrest to be Issued
The charges ard specifications, copy
of W hich accompanied the return, are based
IN tern1S on the oIfsnses described by Gen.
Schofield
DIMES ARMES' STATEMENT.
The government Genies all the allega-
tions in Armes' letter. II says the charg-
ing of Lieut.. Gen. Schofield " it'll unjust and
improper Official action tow ard Armes, as
in his communication set forth, is false,
and know b ysaid ATnies 10 lie false. ="
III the return reference Is made TO rule 65
of The Army Regulations, under " hich the
arrest u as made. This rule is as follows:
'Oificcrs charged with crime shall be
arrested and confined in any barracks,
quarters, or tents, and deprived of their
sw ora hy the commanding officer, and any
officer " ho leaves his confinement before
he is set at liberty by his commanding officer
shall be dismissed from the service"
1t VIII probably appear at the hearing
to-day whether this rule applies to the case
or no.. To the general apprehension the
wortlsof this rule indicat that an officer must
be wearing a sword TO he deprived of il and
that the tenor of the rule indicates con-
ditions of actual service and on martial
duty.
Those who have read about the case VIII
also probably inquire how the act was, as
the return says, committed in the presence
of Gen Schoficld, especially in view of
his own account OF the proceeding.
1t is not known what is the plan OF pro-
ceeding or argument of tue counsel for
Major Armes IN the case to-day, but there
is an impression that there will be a lively
time in court between the adoption of the
military law or the application OF the civil
law.