The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-11-16
COURT CONVENES AGAIN.
F7RsTLIEUTENANTmoR MORTON 0FTHE
COLoRED BATTALION TRIED.
L,sutenant-co Colonel George Wayne Ander-
son, Counsel of the Accused ""Hes
Earnest Plight on Legal Grounds

that OF Captain Abt'lbdui - <ot,,o,l1
Iomrerv ". First battalion tcolVt,ur',
v,rcinia Volunteers. he had engaged .ilc
s.rViccs of Colonel George Wayne Ahu,.
son as counsel. and the numerous -, tiI
between him ard Judge AdNoca'J me
took up "A great deal OF TINE. IL p,e''' ,,d
finally necessary to adjourn ne sas',; A. A.
on account OF the absence OF Coioheei, -,
derson from the city. the sass VI" ',.cn-
he taken up again dntil fr""y
IN the meantime. however. ne cases
Of Private H. r. Nib 1rn. ot Ioii,tPptnnhs
- First Regiment. and 81 muslyli .n, Oil
ard r. Dyer. Of the same r.si lIt5 n I'll
be tried the court having pt'il'" ~
again this evening AZ ..ySN'
THE NEWTON CASE. con
Tho co,,rf convened promptly NJ ~
presid.nf Major william p Sinyns.
1siyet Raffaiion. Artillery. The oihtr
member OF the court pr'Scn1 - go,
l. r Christlaa. Of the hIleduc D' t,
Captain T. j. Euker. lIGop -. y
Captain Morgan n. Wells, company =
81, REGIMENT Infantry. captain beOrRe
= Shackclford. Company 1, flrs, reg
nent. Innutry. Captain a. l." ba",'
Brigade STAFF. First Lieutenant -.
S.hcsfwfod Company A. Blues hattaHon
Itentenant r.. A. Williams First Battai-
Ion Artillerv. Captain &. Gray Bossieux,
ronnsnv 4 First Regiment infantry,
copfain Frank Maxwell WoOn. Judge Ad-
yocatc. a.. ,.,..
,,r the case of First Lieutenant Abraham
J. Morton, OF Company Il. First Battaiion
(coiOredl. Virginia Volunteers, tnc Juuse
Advocate administered the oath To inc
members Of the court, and ne was IN
turn sworn in by the president OF the
court. He then administered the oath 10
Nr. j. u. Richie. the stenoSraphcr OF
the court.
order No Sc issued by the Commander
in-Chief through the Adjutant-Gene"al,
under which Major +. Y. Sutton. OF ne
Brigade STAFF, was relieved IRON ser
vice as a member OF the court.
The charges which had been preferred
ly Captain Charles Nichols of that com
pany, were then reod by the 'Cdge AdVo-
cate TO the accused. First Lieutenant
Abraham L. Morton which were IS fol-
THE CHARGES
Charge l. Absence without leave 10
the prejudice Of good order ana military
discipline. I'm violation OF the slNty-secoHu
.'specifcation |. In that First Lieu
tenant Abraham $ Morton, COMPANY -
First Battalion. Infantry, Virginia Noiun-
teers. did. without authority, absent nm
self from his post command ana dutes
Tor two months and five days-to-~lI'
From July /. 1897. 10 September o. 1877.
This at Richmond Va, on and after the
dates mentioned
VIOLATED ARTICLE %.
Charge 2 Absence from company rem
devious. in violation Of the thirty-third
article Of war.
tenant Abraham 8 Morton. Company y,
First Battalion, Infantry, Virginia Nolun-
teers. did fail 70 repair at the time ilXed
and TO the place Of rendezvous appointed
Nv the commanding officer of his COM
pany: he tho said Abraham $. Morton
not being prevented by sickness or other
necessity oil the following dates: ApIli
9Th. 18th Goth 9th. May An, 1lth, 18th,
~ 1ct n Nth JlllV
9Th. 18th. 2Oth. nth. Augnat 30. 10Th,
18th. 2lth 3lst. September 1th. 14th list,
all of the above dates being IN the year
1897 and being the dates for which regu-
lar company drills were appointed. This
B. at Richmond. Va. on the dates specified.
Specification .. In that First Lieutenant
Abraham $ Morton, Company b, First
Battalion, Infantry. Virginia volunteers
necessity, did fail to repair At the time
fixed 10 the place appointed by his COM
handing officer for annual inspection
This at Richmond, Va, on the 1th day
of September 1891"
The accused was then asked how ne
would plead ON these charges and speciii-
cations ana stated that he would Plea1i
through his counsel Colonel
George W. Anderson was next introduced
To the court as counsel Of the accused.
Before pleading counsel moved 10 strike
out the second specification OF the second
charge. inasmuch as Il merely contained
repetition of the contents of the iirst
specification. which already charged him
with being absent on September 18th, the
date fixed for the annual nspectien.
JUDGE-ADVOCATES SUSTAINED.
The Judge-Adyocatc in reply. pointed
out that In Specification l references was
made 10 the absence OF The accused rom
cOmrany drill ordered for September 9TH,
while Specification referred 20 the an
nual inspection only.
After a brief conference Che president
announced that oounsels motion TO eN-
clude Specification was not sustained.
Colonel Anderson next moved TO strike
out Specification l of Charge No = en-
hracing the dates from July L. 1871, 20
September 9th. as being already included
IN Specification / of Charge Z.
The Judge-Advocatc. ia reply, stated
that the accused had the right 10 plead
not guilty TO the different dates mentioned
I'm Specification ., while Specification !
OF Charge / referred 20 the accused as
absenting himself from MS post the state
OF Virginia. II was the custom i'm military
law TO charge the same offence in dif-
fcrent ways. The accused might be round
guilty on one charge and not guilty on
another. The court. therefore, could not
exclude one aud retain the other. The
object OF this procedure was TO have JUS
ticc done.
After some deliberaton the court de-
cided to uphold the Judgc-Advocate and
that the motion Of counsel Tor the &c
cused be not sustained.
This ended the preliminary motions Of
counsel. and the accused then pleaded not
guilty 20 each specification and each
charge
THE EVIDENCE.
Captain Charles r. Nichols, or Com
pany /. First Battalion. virginia NOlun-
tecrs. was TIE first witness.
"The accused Is First Lieutenant in my
company" he said. land ne was absent
from the city during the period mention
cd In specification ]. OF charge ]. l don
know where he was then. for he never
sent me any communication. | cndeavor-
cd 20 find him. nut did not succeed. The
accused was also absent on the dates
menti med IN specification | and of
charge . could not notify him, because
did not know where he was. lie was
not or leave Of absence as far as know.
He reported TO duty on September 18th.
after the charges had been preferred.
On cr)ss-eNamination ny Colonel Ander-
son WI ness stated he knew that the ac-
Cused was absent from the city on the
dates mentioned. He sent him written
notices to his house TO attend drill al
I'VE or six different times. before tho
charges had been preferred. but since ther
he had not sent any notices. He had
seen him after ais return from New YORK
in May last and asked him 20 come &c
drill Since June he dad not sent hin
any more notice The accused knew that
every Tuesday was drill night, and j
therefore did not deem II necessary e
notify him every time. RE had never
asked for a leave OF absence.
ION April 9Th. one of the dates
charged, witness said. the company was
I'm New York 20 attend the unvcilng OF
the Grant tomb. and that date has there
fore been entered into the specification