The times., 1897-06-22
Taking Of Testimony in the Com
mander's Behalf Ended.
THE EVIDENCE IN REBUTTAL
Lieut.. Bull's Explanation of Why
to Reception When All the Other
Officers at the Navy Yard Were
Given an Invitation.

at the navy yard yesterday morning At
torney Hayden continued the reading Of
the record of the crosse xamination of
Commander Mullan before the court of
inquiry at Pensacola. |The witness ad-
hered to the statements he had made
OH direct examination.
He retold the story of the change in
schedule OF the navy yard launch. He
reached there in the summer'a and he under
stood that it was the custom to run the
launch on extra trips only during the
fall and winter months He did not
command the launch to resume its extra
trips, because he did not think it neces-
sary to burn government coal and oil
and use the services of the navy yard
employees TO transport the friends of
officers and their families from Pensacola
to the navy yard, when there was n
dummy line running between the two
points. He admitted that one of tie
officers at the yard had requested that
the extra trips should be resumed, but
it was merely a personal request, and
he, as conmandant of the yard, did not
grant it.
The ecross-examnation developed the fact
that Commodore Mullan had communicated
with various officers of the yard by means
OF his a.ivants Witness testified that he
did not have an orderly.
The defense objected TO this line of
questioning ON two grounds: That it did
not refer 10 matters brought out in the
direct examination, and, second, that the
questioning was irrelevant to the issue.
The questions and answers were admitted.
Witness recoIlected the visits of Pay
master General Stewart, of the Navy,
and Citizen Kessler, OF Pensacola. lie
testified that he was sober when he Ie-
ceived these gentlemen. IL denied abso,-
iutely that he took drink at the Escambin
Hotel. He never took q drink before
breakfast.
He received orders relieving him from
command OF the yard on March 4 last.
When he turned over the command To Lieut..
Bull he was perfectly sober he believed
that there was continuation among the
officers at the yard 10 get rid OF him,
though ''he had nothing TO 90 on
The officers at the yard were remote and
they never called upon him, other than
officially. He had been in the Navy
thirty-seyen years
Lieut.. BuI and his wife on January go
gave IA reception, to which all the officers
and EIaiy of the civilians at the yard
were invited, as were many of the Off
GERS from Fort Barancas, though the
co,nmandant OF the yard was not invited.
On the day that he was relieved lac had
but ore drink.
The testimony OF Thoma4 ]. Chileson, an
nrt1rs Ia - a Ua Al u.ac
next read 1t was offered as evidence in
rebu.tal Of the, sixth specification of the
second charge. This was objected to by
the prosecution, and this objection being
sustained, il was introduced as evidence
TO prove the good oondsct of Comm ander
Mullan while Ia command az the Pensa-
cola navy yard.
Part OF the testimony w.ls introduced
to show that an attempt had been made
by the Prosecution TO Improperly influence
the witness. He testified that when be
reached the court OF iaquiry he there met
Lieut. Bull. Bull said. What axe you
doing here?' II was coHa manded to
come. l did not want TO come, because
/ am SICK said the witness
well, you may be sieker when you get
through" said Lieut.. Bull, as he turned
on MS ISel anu ieII tIit lODUI.
Witness submitted To- a rigid cross-ex-
animation, but this did not appear to con-
fuse him AS Lieut. Bull was the COM
mandant Of the yard and the principal
factor in the proceedings against Munan,
and as Chileson was an enlploye OF the
yard and a witness for defense, the re
mark OF Lieut.. Bull was deemed signifl-
can't
At the conclusion of the testimony OF
Chileson, Attorney Hayden announced tnat
the case for the defense was closed.
Lieut.. Bull was called in rebuttal, and
denied that he had used language toward
Chileson alleged against him. Bull testi
fled that he did not seek to intimidate
any witness.
Bull testified that he had reported Aims
worth for falsehood He said that the
reception given by him and his wife was
in honor Of Mrs and Miss McMurray, wife
and daughter of the commanding offer
at Fort Barnacas. He did not invite the
coInmandant OF the yard because, the
witness said, he had understood that the
officers did not wish their wives ani
families to meet Commander Mullan and
because Comm ander Mullan had stated
to him that he fMullan) did not wish
to meet the people of Pensacola
Bull, under cross, examination, was asked
il anybody else was present when he
talked to Chileson. He said yes, Writer
Kelly.
Kelly was then call ed and he corroborated
Bull. Kelly filled out the enlistment
record of Ainsworth. Under cross-ex-
animation Kelly testified that he was
employed in Bulls office. He did not
materially deviate from his directexamina-
tion. Kelly was then subjected to re-
direct examination.
Paymaster Jewett was then recalled
by the prosecution. He testified that
he had reported Ainsworth to Munan for
drunkenness Jewett was then asked to
tell of conversation which he had with
Daniel G. Brent. The legal fight which
took place when Brent was asked to teli
of a conversation which he had with
Jewett was repeated. The court ruled
on Friday that the conversation which
is alleged to have occurred between Brent
and Jewett was inadmissble.
After long conference, the court yes
terday reaffirined it's previous decision.
The Judge advocate gave notice to the
court that he might ask for reconsid-
Grafton of this decision.
Clinton Jones, steward to the command
ant, was called by the prosecution to rebut
the testimony of Commander Muiian. The
accused kept liquors in his house. He
rebutted the testimony of the accused In
several unimportant details.
Lieut.. Bull was asked by the prosecution,
''What is the general reputation Of Com
mander MuIlan at Pensacola