The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-10-06
OBJECTIONS DISCUSSED
NO ERROR IN REFUSING WEST
COTTS EVIDENCE.
CARRIERS RAPIDLY RISING BANK ACCOUNT
His Story of Dealing in the Funds of his Father
ln-Law Westcott improbable. No Proof
of his Efforts to Get West
colt To Testify.

NdSiilHglOn, Oct. O.-Ihe opinion or
Attorney General Griggs in the case of
Captain Oberln NJ Carter of the army,
upon which the President approved the
nhdlng of the court martial was made
pubhc today. After dismissing certain
OF the minor charges as unproyen the
Attorney General takes up the more
serious questions involved, first con-
sldering the objections that the charges
upon which Captain Carter was found
guilty We're incongruous. He says that
unlike the ordinary criminal procedure
the military usage and procedure permit
OF an indefinite number of offenses being
charged and adjudicated, together in one
and the same proceeding. 1T is not
necessary he says, ''to discuss whether
this practice is wise, or whether it is
prejudical to the rights Of the accused
1t appears to be established by long
continued practice, and, so far as /
am able on investigation to discover
without previous challenge"
But even if this objection were well
founded, the Attorney General says,
he does not think the accused should
be allowed to avail himself of the OBJ
Jectlon now because he proceeded to
trial without objection to this alleged
missioner and permitted the court to
enter on an investigation Of all the diff
ferent specifications, and himself brought
forward his defense as to each of them.
The objection should have been promptly
taken u be made available.
The objection concerning thaadmission
IL Ia
limitations is disposed of by saying thar
TINS evidence was mot offered for the
purpose Of proving against the accused
the particular offense as to which he had
lnterposed this protective plea, nor of
having him declared guilty thereof, but
for the purpose of showing the relation
between the accused and the other alleg-
ed consplrators, and their course and
conduct with reference to matters of
nature similar to those, and in many
respects connected with those, involved
IN the transaction under trial" For
this purpose he thinks the evidence was
admissible.
Other objections relating to the adj
mission OF evidence Of conversations and
acts of the alleged co-conspirators ante
dating the time of the particular con-
spiracy charged, he also thinks were
admissible.
Referring to the seizure of the private
papers of Captain Carter, Mr. Griggs
says the facts do not show that the |
seizure was unreasonable, and that
Carter practically consented to the use
made of the papers. The point is made
IN this connection that even in the alb |
sence of such consent it was not in I
competent to offer the papers as evil |
dence. The use of letter written by |
Witness Cooper to Captain Gillette, is |
condemned, but it lis argued that the let |
ter did not injure Carter The Attor-
ney General also finds that the court |
did not err in refusing to admit certain
evidence offered by Carter, including
theeetter of his father-in-law, Mr.. II. i. |
Wescott
This brings the inquiry to the investi-
CATION of the main charges upon which
the conviction was based. Summing up
many of the specifications, including
Captain Carters intimacy with Greene
and the Gaynors, the method of adver-
tising for the work and of letting the
contracts, the character of the Atlantic
Contracting Company, the large profits
made on the contracts, ETC., the At
torney General says that they might
justly be considered as failing to fix
upon the accused criminal knowledge
and purpose to defraud the Government
if it were shown that he had no corrupt
personal motive, that he had not profit
ed by these loose methods and irregular
and questionable proceedings.
he then proceeds to the investigation
of these motives. He shows that in
1891 the Captains salary was only
S252 per month and that from that time
forward his personal expenditures In
creased very rapidly, being $6047 in
1891 and $29,611 in 1896. The fact
is also pointed out that in 1892 Captain
Carter began to make notably large
deposits with the Union Trust Company
of New York and also to buy investment
securities these increasing until 1895
when his holdings had increased to a
market value of S463,000.
Mr.. Griggs does not accept Captain
Carter's explanation that he was dealing
in the securities and with the funds
of his father-in-law, Mr.. Wescott, and
was the recipient of large presents
from him.
II 1t be true, as commended, that Mr..
Wescott had such an extravagant af-
fection and regard for his son-in-law as
to induce him ta confida to him so