Qass_ Book- COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT y i A^' ^^ f I THE TRIALS FOR TREASON AT I INDIANAPOLIS, DISCLOSING THE PLANS FOR ESTABLISHING North-Western Confederacy. ; "jg th3 Official Record of the Trials before the Military Commission convened hy Special Orders No. 129, Head- Quarters District of Indiana ; Brevet Major General A. P. Hovet, Commander of the District. Brevet Brigadier General Silas Colgeove, President; H. L. Burnett, of the Department of the Ohio and Northern Department, Judge Advocate of the Commission. Containing the Testimony, Arguments, Finding and Sentence, in the case of Harrison H. Dodd ; also of William A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heffeen, Lambdin P. Milligax, and Stephen Horsey. Developing the Origin, History, Extent, Names of Officers, etc., of the Secret Orders of Knights of the Golden Circle, the Circle of Honor, the Order of American Knights, and Order of the Sous of Liberty — their Organization, Rituals, Password.s, Grips, Oaths, Obligations and Pen- alties ; their ostensible and real purposes. With accurate Illustrations of the Greek Fire Shells, Hand Grenades, Kockets and Infernal Machines of the Con- spirators, introduced in Evidence on the Trials. To which is added the full Report of Judge Advocate General Holt on the Order of American Knights, alias th« Sous of Liberty ; a Western Conspiracy in aid of the Southern Rebellion. EDITED BY "^ BENN^-PITMAN, EECORDEK TO THE MILITARY COMMISSION. .,/ / ^"■'l PUBLISHED BY ""1 THE NEWS PUBLISHING COMPANY / SALEM, INDIAN A. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1865, By MOORE, WILSTACH & BALDWIN, In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Soutliern District of Ohio. Record of assignment to E. B. STEPHENSON, Jb. Entered in the year 1S92, in conformity with tlie laws of the United States respecting copyrights. In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington, D. C. NTRODUCTORY. DOUBLE interest attaches itself to the records contained in the following pages : first, they contain the exposure of a plot to overthrow the National Government — a more perfidious, and, perhaps, more gigantic conspiracy than is found in the annals of any nation; and, secondly, the fact and incidents of its suppression by Martial law. The Northern sympathizers with the Southern Rebellion sought to give it aid, and insure its success, by designs both daring and malignant ; and with no other purpose than to perpetuate an institution at once a reproach and an outrage to civilization. These designs were checked, and a great calamity averted, by the strong arm of military power. The chief criminals were seized by military ■authority, and tried and condemned by a military tribunal. For the first time in the history of the world, this mighty power, heretofore hut too frequently used by kings and despots for the purpose of aggression, or personal aggrandizement, has been exercised in a spirit of wise beneficence, to conserve the liberty of a great and free people. But, it is asked, is not this the attainment of a right by doing a great wrong? Such is the argument of the enemies of the Government. Has, then, the military power been unlawfully exercised? Has the supremacy of the Constitution been questioned, or have its wise provisions been ignored? Has Liberty — the priceless jewel for which the wisest and noblest have died — been confided to faithless hands? These are among the vital questions discussed and decided in the able arguments contained in this volume. Thanks to the institutions that have so ordained, and to the progress that has prepared us, the People are now the makers and directors of this potent, and 3 IV IXTKODUCTORT. necessarily despotic arm ! It is for the people, then, to determine -whether they or a faction shall rule; whether freedom shall continue to be the privileged birthright of our children, or whether an oligarchy shall plot to destroy this Great Republic, and erect a barbarism upon its ruins. These are questions upon which. every one desiring or deserving to live under the shield of a free and great nation, should satisfy himself; and he can not fail to be instructed, as well a-* deeply interested, in the developments contained in this volume. L^ TABLE OF CONTENTS. PAGE. Explanation of Illustrations 7 Illustrations 8 Commission, Special Order for 9 Jurisdiction of the Commission, Plea to the ■ 9 Jurisdiction of the Commission, Argu- ments in support of the Plea 10 Judge Advocate's Reply to Argument of Counsel '. 12 Charges and Specifications preferred against H. H. Dodd 17 Felix G. Stidger. Testimony of. 19 George E. PcGH, " " 37 Joseph KiRKPATRicK, " " 38 William Clayton, " " 39 "Wesley Tranter, " " 47 Elliott Robertson, " " 49 Affidavit of Counsel on the escape of H. H. DoDD 50 Report of Colonel Warner on the escape of H. H. Dodd 50 Argument of Judge Advocate, on pro- ceeding to findings and sentence in absence of the accused 50 J. W. Gordon, Reply of 53 *' " " Argument of, on the Ju- risdiction of the Commission 55 M. M. Ray, Argument of. 64 Judge Advocate, Reply of. 67 Commission, Special Orders for 73 Counsel, Introduction of 74 Charges and Specifications preferred against William A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heffren, L. P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey 74 Severance, Motions for 77 J udge Advocate, Reply of on Severance. 78 VVilliam M. Harrison, Testimony of.... 80 Circular of the 0. S. L. to County Temples 83 Letter of L. P. Milligan to General H. H. DoDD 88 Edwin A. Davis, withdrawal of as Coun- sel 89 Wesley Tranter, Testimony of 93 Stephen Teney, " " 96 V Joseph J. Bingham, " " 97 Felix G. Stidger, " " 106 Thomas R. Cobb, Introduction of, as Counsel for Stephen Horsey 114 Colonel A. J. Warner, Testimony of.... IIS C. L. V. (Vallandigham), Letter from... 119 Elliott Robertson, Testimony of. 119 Henry L. Zumro, " ".... 120 Horace Heffren, Charges and Specifi- cations canceled 123 Horace Heffren, Testimony of 123 Cyrus L. Dunham, Counsel for Heffren, Statement of. 128 Colonel J. T. Wilder, relieved 137 James L. Mason, Testimony of 141 Harrison Connell, " " 141 Elisha Cowgill, " " 141 James B. Wilson, " " 143 William S. Bush, " " 150 Speech of L. P. Milligan, Argument on admissibility of newspaper report of 151 Speech of L. P. Milligan, loyal or dis- loyal character of. 153 Nicholas Cochrane, Testimony of. 156 Testimony on the part of the Govern- ment closed 157 William G. Moss, Testimony of 157 Argument on the admissibility of state- ments made by the accused in his own favor 157 5 VI TABLE OF CONTEXTS. Character for loyalty, etc., of A. Hum- phreys 163 D. O. Dailey, Testimony of 165 Rev. Richard A. Currem, Testimony of 166 Argument on admissibility of state- ments not expressed to any public assembly 166 John J. Scotton, Testimony of. 169 William Sayler, " " 169 George Bailey, " " 169 William Allen, " " 169 William Wolf, " " 170 W. M. SWASEY, " " 170 Geo. Bailey (recalled) " " 170 William WixEs, " " 171 William Johnson, " " 171 William C. Kocher, " " 172 Joseph Johnson, " " 172 Samuel Winters, " " 173 G. R. CoRLEW, " " 176 Samuel F. Day, " " 177 OcH^UG Bird, " " 177 B. F. Ibach, " " 179 Captain Samuel Place," " 180 G. R. CoRLEw (recalled)" " 180 Moses W. MiLLiGAN, " " 180 Edward Price, " " ISO S. G. Burton, " " 181 Speech of A. Humphreys, Argument on the admissibility of what he said as to right of secession, etc 181 Willis G. Neff, Testimony of. 185 John Roach, " " 186 Wilson B. LocKRiDGE, " " 186 Samuel McGaughey, " " 187 Cutter S. Dobbins, " " 187 Harrison Connell, " " 187 William N. Ranney, " " 187 Gen. Alvin P. Hovey, " " 188 M. B. Brant, " " 188 W. J. Smith, " " 18^ Samuel Chandler, " " 189 D. Garland Rose, " " 189 Edward Harrison, '' " 189 John Nave, " " 189 \V. C. Smock, " " 189 David Stockman, " " 189 PA OH. Jacob Farlixg, Testimony of. 189 Wm. R. Taylor, " " 190 R. C. Booking, " •' 190 Wm. H. Chapman, " " 191 William Johnson, " •' 191 Samuel D. Price, " " 191 Thurston W. Bitting, " " 191 BORZILLAI MeSSLER, " '' 191 Thomas G. Smith, " " 192 Mrs. Elizabeth T. Simons, Testimony of 192 Impeaching of the Testimony of Rich- ard A. Curren, Argument on 192 Jonathan W. Gordon, Argument of 195 M. M. Ray, " " 224 J. R. Coffroth, " " 23S Judge Advocate Burnett, Reply of 249 Explanation of Initials employed in the Rituals 295 Knights of the Golden Circle, Ritual of 297 Sons of Liberty, First Degree (I) 299 Sons of Liberty, Vestibule Lesson, (S. L. ) 3u2 Sons of Liberty, First Degree (0. S. L.) 30a Sons of Liberty, First Conclave or Sec- ond Degree (I) 306 Sons of Liberty, Second Conclave or Third Degree (II) .' 308 General Laws of the Order of Sons of Liberty 30S Constitution of the Grand Council of S. L. of Indiana 311 Constitution and Laws of the Supreme Grand Council 314 Proceedings of the Grand Council State of Indiana 315 Address of the Grand Commander State of Indiana 316 Resolutions of the Grand Council State of Indiana 319 Report of the Grand Secretary State of Indiana 319 Holt, Judge Advocate General, Official Report of 323 Letter from General Heintzelman to Major General Halleck 339 H. H. DoDD, Letter of, to the Cincinnati Enquirer 340 EXPLANATION OF THE ILLUSTRATIONS. No. 1 is a seemingly harmless portmanteau. No. 2 exhibits its internal arrangement. An alarm-clock, with the bell removed, set to any given time, springs the lock of a gun, the hammer of which, striking and exploding a cap, placed upon a tube filled with powder, fires a train connected with a bottle of Greek fire. The explosion of these combustibles ig- nites the tow, saturated with turpentine, with which the remainder of the portmanteau is filled. No. 3 is a conical shell, three and a half inches in diameter. Nos. 4 and 5 exhibit the same unscrewed. No. 7 is a case to contain powder, with a nipple for a cap at its upper end. No. 7 screws into 6, the space between the two being filled with Greek fire. Nos. 6 and 7 make an inte- rior shell, fitting loosely in No. 3, and which, on striking any object, explodes the cap on the top of 7. No. 8 is a spherical shell, or hand-grenade. Nos. 9 and 10 exhibit the same unscrewed. No. 11 is an interior shell, with nine nip- ples for caps, fitting loosely so as to leave space for concussion. No. 11, also, is made to unscrewjn the center, to hold No. 12, a small vial containing Greek fire — the space between the two being filled with powder. The drop- ping of this shell a quarter of a yard from the floor, invariably explodes one or more of the caps. The string attached to No. 8 ena- bles a person to throw it a greater distance, as a sling, with less danger of explosion in his own hand. No. 13 is a letter in secret cipher, sometimes employed by the Order of Sons of Liberty in their communication with each other, upon matters requiring secrecy. " Headquarters, 10th District, \ Grand Marshal's Office. / " Dept. Marshal: "We have 40 rifles and 100 pistols for your township. It is necessary that they are placed in the hands of our brothers immediately. Inform your company that the arms will be ready on Wednesday night. "Yours, "A. A. D. C. lip Yfj' 7 APPROVAL OF THE SECRETARY OF WAR, ETC. Cincinnati, O., Nov. 7, 18C4. Major H. L. Burnett^ Judge Advocate Depart- ment of the Ohio and Northern Department : Messrs. Moore, "Wilstach & Baldwin, of this city, will publish in permanent and respec- lable book shape, and I will edit, the official reports of the trial of H. H. Dodd, also of W. A. Bowles, and others, adding thereto the report of the Judge Advocate General, if I can obtain your sanction and co-opera- tion, and the approval of the Military au- thorities. I am, very respectfully and obediently, (Signed) BENN PITMAN," Recorder to the Militarif Commission. [KDORSEMEXT OF H. L. BURNETT, JUDGE ADVO- CATE DEPARTMENT OF THE OHIO AND NORTHERN DEPARTMENT. Judge Advocate's Office, Department of the Ohio and Northern Dejiartment, Cincinnati, C, Nov. 7, 1SG4. Respectfully referred to Brigadier Gen- eral J. Holt, Judge Advocate General, U. S. Army. The within application of Mr. Pitman re- ceives my approval, and, in the enterprise which he proposes to undertake, I will give him such assistance as I am, from time to time, able to render. I think the publica- tion of these treason trials will be of great public service in showing the people the contemplated anarchy and bloodshed from which they have been delivered, and, as a result, confirming them in their patriotic resolves to support the Government in its efforts to maintain law, order and civiliza- tion. It will tend to unite the Northern people more completely in their support of the Government in its efforts to maintain the integrity of the Republic as the only means of establishing a permanent peace. (Signed) H. L. BURNETT, Judge Advocate Department of the Ohio And Northern Department. INDORSEMENT OF BRIGADIER GENERAL J. HOLT, JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL. Bureau or Militart Justice, Nov. II, 1804. Approved. (Signed) J. HOLT, Judge Advocate General. INDORSEMENT OF ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF WAR, C. A. DANA. War Department, Nov. 15, 1364. Approved. By order of the Secretary of War. (Signed) C. A. DANA, Assistant Secretary of War. PROCEEDINGS MILITARY COMMISSION, Which convened at Indianapolis, Indiana, by virtue of the following Special Orders, to wit : ..} Headquahters District of Indiana, Indianapolis, September 17, 1864. Special Orders No. 129. A Military Commission is constituted to meet at the United States Court Rooms, in the city of Indianapolis, on the nineteenth (19th) day of September, 1864, at 10 o'clock, A. M., or as soon tliereafter as practicable, for the trial of Harrison H. Dodd, and such other prisoners as may be brought before it. DETAIL FOR THE COMMISSION. 1. Brevet Brigadier General Silas Col- grove, United States Volunteers. 2. Colonel William E. McLean, 43d In- fantrv, Indiana Volunteers. 3. Colonel John T. Wilder, 17th Infantry, Indiana Volunteers. 4. Colonel Thomas I. Lucas, 16th In- fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 5. Colonel Charles D. Murray, 89th In- fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 6. Colonel Benjamin Spooner, 83d In- fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 7. Colonel Richard P. DeHart, 128th In- fantry, Indiana Volunteers. Major Henry L. Burnett, Judge Advocate Department of the Ohio and Northern Department, Judge Advocate. The Commission will sit without regard to hours. By order of Brevet Major General Alvin P. Hovey. AND. C. KEMPER, Assistant Adjutant General. Headqtjaeters DisTKirT OF Indiana, \ Indianapolis, September 21, 1804. j Special Orders No. 131. 2. Colonel Ambrose A. Stevens, Veteran Reserve Corps, is appointed a member of the Military Commission, constituted by Special Order No. 129, of the 17th of Sep- tember, instant, from these Headquarters. By order of Brevet Major General Alvin P. Hovey. [Signed] AND. C. KEMPER, Assistant Adjvtant General. CorRT KOOM, iNDtANAPOUS, INDIANA, September 22, 1804: 10 o'clock, a. M .} The Commission met pursuant to the foregoing orders. All the members present.* Also, the Judge Advocate. The Commission then proceeded to the trial of Harrison H. Dodd, a citizen of In- diana, who was present before the Commis- sion, and who, having heard read the order appointing the Commission, also the order detailing Colonel Ambrose A. Stevens as a member, was asked by the Judge Advocate if he had any objection to any member named in the orders, to which he replied, " I have none." The members of the Commission and the Judge Advocate were then duly sworn in the presence of the accused. Benn Pitman and W. S. Bush were duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, as Recorders to the Commission, also in the presence of the accused. The accused applied to the Commission to be jjermitted to introduce J. W. Gordon, Esq., and M. M. Ray, Esq., as his counsel, which application was granted, and they appeared as counsel for the accused. The accused, through his counsel, then offered the following plea to the jurisdiction of the Commission: The defendant, Harrison H. Dodd, pro- tests and objects to the jurisdiction of the Commission appointed to try him upon the aforesaid charges and specifications there- under, and claims the right, as a citizen of the LTnited States, and of the State of In- diana, to have the said charges and specifi- cations presented by a grand jury of the '■' If a member of the Commission w.'\s, in any case, absent from sickness, or other unavoidable cause, th« case was proceeded with, on the cousenl of the accused being given in open Court, and such member took his seat again on the Commission only with the consent of the accused being given in open Court, after having first heard read all the testimony taken during his absence. 10 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. district wherein said several oftenses are alleged to have been committed, to the proper District Court thereof; and to be tried by a jury of the said district, duly- elected and sworn according to the Consti- tution and laws of the United States of America. This he claims as a citizen of the United States, and of the State and District of Indiana, and as being in no wise con- nected with the army or navy of the United States, as a member thereof, or as attached thereto. • Respectfully submitted, HAERISON H. DODD. The Commission adjourned, to meet on Friday, September 23, at 10 o'clock, A. M. Court Koom, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ September 23, 1864, 10 o'clock, A. M. j The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused, and his coun- sel. The proceedings were read and approved. The accused, through his counsel, sub- mitted the following brief in support of his plea to the jurisdiction of the Commission: Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Commission: In support of his objection to the juris- diction of the Commission to try him upon the charges preferred against him, the de- fendant respectfully submits the following considerations: I. These charges involve capital and infa- mous crimes, and the Constitution of the United States expressly provides that "no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment by a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger." {Amend. Coiist. Art. 5.) And again: "In all criminal cases the prisoner sliall enjoy the right of a speedy and public trial, by an im- partial jury of the State and district where the crime shall have been committed," etc. {Amend. Const. Art. 6.) These provisions were adopted after tlie organization of the Government of the United States under the Constitution, and for the purpose of placing the trial by jury entirely beyond the power of Congress, and of all other branches of the Government. The Constitution, as originally adopted, contained the following provision on the subject: "The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachments, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the State where such crime shall have been commit- ted." {Article 4, section 2.) So jealous were the peojjle of the right in question, that they required the amendment quoted, not- withstanding the original provision. The defendant is a citizen of the United States, and of the State of Indiana, not in the land or naval forces, or in the militia in actual service. He is, therefore, not within the exception of Article 5 of amend- ments above cited. That exception does not affect his right any more than if it did not exist. These several provisions of the Constitution are absolute as to him; and if any constitutional provision can protect a right, it would seem that he ought to be protected from a trial not in conformity with them. It seems that he can not, in fairness, be tried without first being pre- sented by a grand jury; or tried without a petit jury of the district wherein his al- leged oftenses were committed. II. But it may be said that we are in a state of war; that the writ of habeas corpus is sus- pended; and the provisions in question are under similar suspension. But there is no provision for the suspension of any branch of the Constitution. The Constitution, in- deed, authorizes the suspension of the ha- beas corpus act — a law of the land, generally adopted in the States prior to the adoption of the Constitution. The right of trial by jury, however, is placed on a difterent and higher ground. It is secured by these sev- eral absolute provisions of the Constitution, against all chances, and under all circum- stances. The fiat that suspends it must be potent enough to abolish every principle of tlie Constitution, and all those primordial riglits that existed before the Constitution, and so far as human foresight could provide against their invasion, protected by plain constitutional provisions. If it should be contended, then, that the power necessary for the suspension of the habeas corpus involves in its exercise the sus- pension of the right of trial by jury, he begs leave to say that, in his opinion, it can not for the following reasons: 1. The trial by jury is placed by the Con- stitution among the original reserved rights of the people, and must, in favor of natural liberty, be held safe as against the exercise of any doubtful power, upon the principle of construction applied to constitutions, that grants of power are to be construed strictly as against the power, and in favor of liberty. 2. But, being last in point of time, and of equal authority with the provision in re- lation to the suspensions of habeas corpus, the amendments must be held to restrain that provision so far as may be necessary to the perfect enjoyment of the rights asserted in the amendments. 3. Simply, however, because they are amendments to the Constitution, every thing contained in that instrument that may, in any view, be held to impair rights therein asserted, must give way to them. To that extent they change and modify the powers conferred on the Government, in the original instrument. The right of trial TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 11 by jury in the cases referred to, can not be impaired, much less taken away, by a sus- pension of the habeas corpus, nor, indeed, by any order of the Executive, or law of Con- gress. To this effect see 2d Story on Const, section 1778 to 1795, inclusive. III. But not only may this right of trial by jury be regarded as affirmatively assert- ed, and secured to the citizen, by the pro- visions of the Constitution, but any and every other mode of trial must be taken to be excluded and prohibited. Thus: "No person shall be held to answer for any cap- ital or otherwise infamous crime, unless in case of presentment and indictment by grand jury," etc., clearly precludes the no- tion of any other form of trial. The old common law, and great statutes of England, brought over with them by the founders of the English colonies, and in force at the time of the adoption of the Constitution of the United States, excluded all other modes of trial of any citizen, not in the military service, and expressly that by military com- mission. Mr. Justice Story, as already cited, expressly appeals to and quotes Magna Charta upon this point, and in support of this position. The 39th chapter of that great act is as follows: "No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or disseized, or outlawed, or banished, or in any way de- stroyed; nor will we pass upon him, unless by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land." "The judgment of his peers, here alluded to," says Story, "is the trial by jury, who are called the peers of the party accused, being of the like con- dition, and equal." He also expressly says: " When our more immediate ancestors re- moved to America, they brought this great privilege with them, as their birthright and inheritance, as a part of that admirable common law, which had fenced round and interposed barriers on every side against the approaches of arbitrary power." {Sec- tion 1779.) But this denial of any other form of trial, and especially that by mili- tary commission, was asserted in the " Pe- tition of Eight," passed in the third year of Charles I. It is therein enacted and estab- lished, " that no man, of what estate or con- dition that he be, should be put out of his land or tenement, nor taken, nor imprisoned, nor disherited, nor put to death, without due process of law;" and in speaking of the commissions aforesaid, the act employs the following terms: "Which commissions, and all others of like nature, are wholly and directly contrary to the said laws and stat- utes of the realm." Similar language was employed in the Bill of Rights, passed at the time of the revolution of 1688, and it may safely be stated that since that time no proceeding of this nature has taken place in England, against any person not a member of the army or navy, or in the mili- tia in actual service. Indeed, a distinguished English Judge has said that " martial law, as of old, does not exist in England at all," and is contrary to the Constitution, and has been for a century exploded. {Grant vs. Gouid, 2 H. BL, 69; 1 Hale P. C, 364; Hale Com. Law C, 2, 36.) This, it has been remarked by a learned Judge, "is cor- rect as to the community, both in war and peace." IV. By an act of Congress, approved July 31; 1864 ( Vol. 12, Statutes at large, p. 2184), con- spiracies are defined, and the mode of pun- ishment prescribed, namely, by trial in the Circuit or District Courts of the United States, of the proper circuit or district. Can these parties be tried before any other tri- bunal? The defendant holds not. By the President's proclamation of September 24, 1862, suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, it was ordered, " That dui'- ing the existing insurrection, and as a necessary measure for suppressing the same, all rebels and insurgents, their aiders and abettors, within the United States, shall be subject to martial law, and liable to trial and punisliment by court-martial or mili- tary commission." Without stopping to inquire whether this proclamation was au- thorized, and if so, whether it embraced persons charged with committing a substan- tive offense, within a State not in insurrec- tion, and where the United States Courts were in the full exercise of their powers, the defendant claims that it has been su- perseded by the act of Congress of the 3d of March, 1863 ( Vol. 12, Statutes at large, 755), relating to the writ of habeas corpus, and the President's proclamation based thereon, of September 15, 1863. The first section of the act of 1863, authorizes the President to suspend the writ of habeas corpus. The sec- ond requires the Secretaries of State and War to report to the Judges of the United States Circuit and District Courts the names of all persons held in military custody, by order of the President, in their respective districts, and if the grand juries of the proper districts fail to find bills, it is made the duty of the Judges to have all such persons discharged on taking the oath of allegiance and giving bond, if required. The third section pi'ovides that all persons so held and not reported, shall be entitled to a discharge in the same manner as is provided in the second section, after a fail- ure on the part of the proper grand jury to indict them. Here are all the sections of this act which bear on the question, and it will be seen that while they contemplate and sanction military arrests, they do not countenance or authorize military trials. On the contrary, they fairly discountenance them. The President's proclamation, based on this act, limits the suspension of habeas cor- pus to persons amenable to military law, or to the rules and articles of war. No order 12 TREASON TRIALS AT IXDIAXAPOLIS. is contained in the proclamation in regard to trial, and the inference is irresistible that the proper courts are left to act under the rules of law u^Don that subject, and these are too well defined to require comment. Civil courts try offenses against the law committed by citizens — military courts and commissions try such as are subject to the rules and articles of war, and the de- fendant claims that he does not fall within that class. V. The recent act, giving military courts jurisdiction of offenses against the civil laws when committed by soldiers, excludes citizens, by its silence, from any such pro- vision, and leaves them to be tried by the civil courts, for all sucli offenses. {Revised Reg., 1863, ;x 544.) VI. The defendant further desires the Commission to consider this question, in determining that of jurisdiction, namely: Can the sentence of the Commission be pleaded in bar to a prosecution upon in- dictment for the offenses charged in the civil courts? It would seem not, in view of tlie recent legislation of Congress already cited. That legislation clearly gives tlie Jurisdiction of tlie case to the civil courts, and upon the failure to try or convict him, entitles him to be discharged, either upon terms, or absolutely. In view of these considerations, the de- fendant respectfully submits that he is not triable by this Commission, not being within tlie jurisdiction thereof, or of any other military tribunal whatever. All of which is respectfully submitted. HARRISON H. DODD. JUDGE advocate's ANSWER. The Judge Advocate, Major Burnett, then made the following rejily : To support the jurisdiction of the Com- mission appointed to try this case, 1 submit: 1. The proclamation of the President of the United States, published in Genei-al Orders No. 141, dated September 25, 1862. 2. Tlie general principles of the laws of nations, and the laws and customs of war — the military lex non scripta of ev6ry land. The proclamation of the President is as follows : War Depaktmf.nt, Adjutant General's Office, \ Washington, September 25, 1804. j General Orders No. 141. The following proclamation by the Presi- dent is published for the information and government of the army, and all concerned: BY THE PRF.SIDF.NT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA — A PROCLAMATION. "Whereas, It has become necessary to call into service not only volunteers, but also portions of the militia of tlie States by draft, in order to suppress the insurrection exist- ing in tlie United States, and disloyal per- sons are not adequately restrained by the ordinary process of law from hindering this measure, and from giving aid and comfort in various ways to the insurrection; now, therefore, be it ordered, First. That during the existing insurrec- tion, and as a necessary measure for sup- pressing the same, all rebels and insurgents, their aiders and abettors, within the United States, and all persons discouraging volun- teer enlistments, resisting militia drafts, or guilty of any disloyal practice, affording aid and comfort to rebels against the authority of the United States, shall be subject to martial-law, and liable to trial and punish- ment by courts-martial or military commis- sion. Second. That the writ of habeas corpus is suspended in respect to all persons arrested, or who are now or hereafter during the re- bellion shall be imprisoned in any fort, camp, arsenal, military prison or other place of confinement, by any military authority, or by the sentence of any court-martial or military commission. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed. Done at the city of Washington, this, twenty-fourth day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, and of the independence of the United States the eighty-seventh. ABRAHAM LINCOLN. By the President : William H. Seward, Secretary of State. By order of the Secretary of War : L. Thomas, Adjutant General. In determining the action of the Com- mission, this is sufficient, but in support of the position held, I submit: That it is an admitted principle in ethics, that self-preservation is the first law of na- ture; that self-preservation, or self-defense, is the right of every unity or community. This nation is engaged in suppressing a gigantic rebellion, to which end it has brought into the field a vast army. Every fiber of this great nation is quivering in its effort to sustain this army in its present vast proportions. That army being organized and put into the field, becomes a living, sentient, and, to a certain extent, independ- ent body. A blow is sought to be struck at that body — at that great army of the Re- I)ublic — to sever it, and render it power- less — a blow all the more mischievous and malignant, because it is covert and con- cealed. To preserve itself, to maintain its integrity when it finds itself thus secretly attacked, it docs not wholly fall back on its Government to protect it, but it protects itself by seizing the antagonistic force. It is one of the innate principles of every ex- isting thing, that it is endowed with the right to meet and overcome the force that seeks to destroy it. Here, then, is a power being organized — it is true, in a loyal State, TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 13 but with the purpose of moving into a semi- disloyal State, a portion of which is occu- pied and held by forces seeking to destroy this army, and with the intent to co-operate with those forces to render powerless our army, and, if possible, to destroy it and the Government. This army, therefore, with- out waiting for its Government to move, through the slow machinery of civil law, against this military force that is being ar- rayed against it, seizes it, and says to it, " You are not meeting us in open battle, but you steal upon vis in the night time, and attempt, assassin-like, to stab us in the back while we are facing the common enemy in the front. You are not fighting us accord- ing to the recognized military law of na- tions, but by the secret arts of the assassin. We. therefore, wheel upon you, and grapple you, from an instinct of self-preservation." It is as though a stealthy foe should creep into a camp or garrison at night, and seek to ignite the magazine, and destroy the lives of the entire garrison. If caught, would that garrison hesitate to convene a court, and try the offender as a secret, military assassin ? In like manner, when foes, cun- ningly avoiding all show of open hostility, secretly arm themselves, not as enemies particularlj' of the Genei-al Government, but as enemies of the military power of the Government, the military laws of the land give power to seize the persons of these secret foes, and hold them responsible for their acts to the common law military. Take the case in hand, as it is claimed to be, that there was an organized, formidable conspiracy, military in its character, and created and held in existence for the puv- pose of aiding the enemies of the. country and destroying the armies of the nation, numbering in the States of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, as claimed by its leaders, one hundred thousand men, the avowed pur- pose of these conspirators being to release the rebel i^risoners held in those States, numbering between forty and fifty thousand veteran soldiers, arm them with guns to be seized from the arsenals of these States, and then to move into Kentucky, seizing all the large cities by the way, take possession of the Louisville and Nashville road, and, in- trenching at Nashville or Chattanooga, cut GeneralSherman's communications, thereby placing him between two large armies, sev- ering him from his base of supplies, and thus eftectually, as they thought, destroying this great South-western wing of our army — this right arm of the Eepublic — thereby giving to the rebels the power to dictate to the United States terms of peace and sepa- ration. It was a far-reaching, villainous scheme, and had in it many of the elements of success. The Government stood on the brink of a precipice. But the conspirators were foiled by the military power of the Government. Will it be said that when the military authorities discovered this plot, they should have waited for affidavits, for an arrest and hearing before a United States Commissioner, and then have released these conspirators upon bail, permitting them to again take the lead of their hosts to work out their schemes of treason against the Government? Such a course might have involved the destruction of the nation. Self-preservation demanded that these men should be seized by the military power. Foreseeing this danger, martial law had been declared by the President, and mili- tary courts given jurisdiction. In support of tire powers of the Govern- ment, in cases of insurrection, or in case of great public danger, to suspend the opera- ^tions of the civil law, I cite the opinion of Chief Justice Taney, in a case before the Supreme Court, where the Government of the State had declared martial law in Rhode Island. In rendering an opinion on that case, he says: "Unquestionably a State may use its military power to put down an insur- rection too strong to be controlled by the civil authority. The power is essential to the existence of every government — essen- tial to the i^reservation of order and free institutions, and is as necessary to the States of this Union as to any other government. * * * Without power to do this," he again says, "martial law and the military array of the Government would bo mere parade, and rather encourage attack than repel it." Justice Woodbury, dissenting, said that "a State could not declare martial law, inas- much as the war power, of which it forms a part, was lodged exclusively in the General Government." Certainly no one will deny that if the Government of a State can de- clare martial law for suppressing an insur- rection within thatState, with much stronger reason can the General Government, when an insurrection exists against it, declare and enforce martial law, either in part or in whole. The main question raised by the defense in their argument, is, whether the legisla- tive branch of this Government, or the President, has the power of suspending the writ of habeas corpus, and declaring martial law throughout the land. In reply to the argument of the counsel for the accused, I propose to cite a few quotations applicable to this case: Martial law is the suspension, for the time being, of all constitutions and civil laws, the closing of common law courts, and the forcible inauguration of a new, temporary, arbitrary systein of administering justice; and is only to be justified by the over- whelming necessities of the case. I propose, first, to examine English author- ities upon this subject; and tlien refer to American jurisi^rudence as to the right to proclaim martial law. 14 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. It may be premised that martial law in England as completely violates and sus- pends the Magna Charta as in this country it does our own Constitution. Section 39 provides: "No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or disseized, or out^ lawed, or banished, or in any way destroyed; nor will we pass upon him, unless by the lawftll judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land." The Mutiny Act of 1689, which has been re-enacted at every session of Parliament for more than one hundred and seventy years, contains the following declaration: "Whereas, no man may be forejudged of life or limb, or subjected to any kind of judgment by martial law, or in any other manner than by the judgment of his peers, and according to the known and established laws of this realm," etc. It is impossible to conceive of any doc- trine more irradically graven upon the Con- stitution and civil polity of England, than this right of habeas corpus^ and exemption of the subject from the operation of mar- tial law. But notwithstanding this clear provision of the Magna Charta, as often as it is necessary, martial law is proclaimed. In the riots of 1780, after the mob had in- sulted a majority of Parliament, and the residence of the Chief Justice, the King in council issued his proclamation : '' We have, therefore, issued the most di- rect and efl'ectual orders to all our officers, by an immediate exertion of their utmost force, to suppress the same." After which the Adjutant General issued orders to the army as follows : "In obedience to an order of the King in council, the military are to act without awaiting the direction of the civil magis- trate, and to use force for dispersing the illegal and tumultuous assemblies of the people." In subsequent debates in Parliament, the conduct of the King was approved. Lord Mansfield and Lord Thurlow claimed that it was not a prerogative of the King to de- clare martial law, or to use the military to suppress riots ; but they defended the act on the ground of necessity. During the Irish rebellion in 1798, Lord Camden, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, pro- claimed martial law, which existed a year without any legislative action, and after that the Irish Parliament sanctioned the act. In 1801, after the union, this subject was discussed, and a bill was introduced to continue martial law in Ireland. In this debate, both those who approved, and those who opposed the bill, conceded the right of the Executive Government to proclaim martial law when necessary. Sheridan, opposing the bill, said: "In case of rebeUion or invasion, His Majesty has, by virtue of his prerogative, a right to martial law." Lord Castlereagh, in defense of the bill, said: "I perfectly understand that the prerog- ative of the crown authorizes those acting under its authority to exercise martial law. I maintain that it is a constitutional niode for the Executive Government to exercise martial law in the first instance, and to come to Parliament for indemnity after- ward, and is preferable to applying to Par- liament first. ***** "The only circumstance in mind is whether, if the necessity exists, this is the proper remedy? If it be so, we ought not to take alarm at a dejjarture from princi- ple, which is necessary for the preservation of the Constitution itself" Sir L. Parsons, opposing the bill, said : " He thought the measure unnecessary. The Executive Government could resort to martial law, if it was necessary to suppress rebellion." Mr. Gray, who also opposed it, said: "It was better that the Executive Gov- ernment should resort to what has been called (he thought, not legally) its preroga- . tive of proclaiming martial law. That was no prerogative of the crown, but rather an act of power sanctioned by necessity, mar- tial law being a suspension of the King's peace. But it was better that martial law should proceed from the Executive Govern- ment in urgent moments, than to be the work of the Legislature, on every slight pre- tense." In the rebellion in Ceylon, in 1848, the Governor proclaimed martial law, and tried and executed many rebels. His conduct was severely criticised in England, upon the ground that it was unnecessary; and in an able review in the Quarterly, volume 83, page 127, it is said : "We shall define martial law to be the law of necessity, or defense. The right which a Governor of a colony has to pro- claim martial law over subjects, may be said to bear a close analogy to the right which an individual, in absence of legal protec- tion, has to slay an assailant. In both cases, the evil must be grave. In both cases, all regular means of defense must be exhausted, or beyond reach, before the ag- grieved party resorts to extremities. In both cases, the burthen of proof lies on him who has ventured on such an expedient, and, if he fails to vindicate himself, he is liable to severe punishment." Hallem I, Const Hist, p. 240, says: " There may, indeed, be times of pressing danger, when the conservation of all de- mands a sacrifice of the legal rights of a few; there may be circumstances that not only justify, but compel the temporary abandonment of constitutional forms. It has been usual for all governments, dur- ing an actual rebellion, to proclaim martial law, or the suspension of civil jurisdiction. TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 15 And this anomaly, I must admit, is very far from being less indispensable at such un- happy seasons, in countries where the ordi- nary mode of trial is by jury, than where the right of decision rests in the Judge." Coming now to our own country, the same doctrine is laid down even more explicitly, and by higher sanctions than in England. In the debate in Congress upon the subject of martial law proclaimed by General Jack- son in New Orleans, Robert J. Walker, in the Senate, submitted a report upon this subject, in which he said: " Thfe law which justified this act, was the great law of necessity; it was the law of ' self-defense. This great law of necessity — of defense of self, of home, and of coun- try — never was designed to be abrogated by any statute, or by any constitution." Mr. Payne, of Alabama, also speaking upon this subject, said: " I shall not contend that the Constitution or laws of the United States, authorize the declaration of martial law by any authority whatever ; on the contrary, it is unknown to the Constitution or laws." And, commenting on th^ argument that if the Constitution did not authorize it, the General ought not to declare martial law, he says : "Who could tolerate this idea? An Ar- nold might, but no patriotic American could. I may be asked, upon what princi- ple a commander can declare martial law, when it is so evident that the Constitution or laws afford him no authority to do so? I answer, upon the principle of self-defense, which rises paramount to all written laws; and the justification of the officer who assumes the responsibility of acting on that principle, must rest upon the necessity of the case." Mr. Livingston, in a written document submitted by General Jackson to the Court, gave his opinion as follows : " On the nature and effect of the procla- mation of martial law by Major General Jackson, my opinion is, that such proclama- tion is unknown to the Constitution and laws of the United States ; that it is to be justified only by the necessities of the case," etc. During the Dorr revolution in Rhode Island, when an attempt was made to array a military force against the old State Gov- ernment, and supplant it with a more dem- ocratic form, the State Government pro- claimed martial law throughout the State. A house was brpken open to make an ar- rest without warrant, under martial law; and subsequently an action of trespass was commenced to try the legality of the act. It was taken to the Supreme Court of the United States, and is reported, Luther vs. Borden, 7 Howard, 1. It is to be noticed that this case presented the precise question at issue now before this Court, for the determination of the highest Court in the land. The case was not the suspension of the habeas corpus, but it was for trespass, by breaking into houses with- out warrant, which was clearly illegal, un- less the existence of martial law could be recognized as. affording a defense. Chief Justice Taney says: "Unquestionably, a State may use its military power to put down an armed in- surrection too strong to be controlled by the civil authority. The power is essential to the existence of every government, es- sential to the preservation of order and free institutions, and is as necessary to the States of this Union as to any other Gov- ernment. The State, itself, must determine what degree of force the crisis demands ; and if the Government of Rhode Island deemed the armed opposition so formidable and so ramified throughout the State as to require the use of its military force, and a declaration of martial law, we see no ground upon which this Court can question its au- thority. It was a state of war, and the established Government resorted to the rights and usages of war to maintain itself, and to overcome the unlawful opposition. And in that state of things, the officers en- gaged in its military service might lawfully arrest any one who, from the information before tliem, they had reasonable grounds to believe was engaged in the insurrection, and might order a house to be forcibly en- tered and searched, when there were rea- sonable grounds for supposing he might be there concealed. Without power to do this, martial law and the military array of the Government would be mere parade, and rather encourage attack than repel it." Justice Woodbury dissented upon the ground that a Stat« could not declare mar- tial law, inasmuch as the war power, of which it formed a part, was lodged exclu- sively in the General Government. The question, then, for this Commission to determine, is, whether, with this armed force threatening the life of the nation, the leaders here among you, secretly and cov- ertly, as it is claimed — for this is to be a matter of proof — attempting to strike at your camps, destroy the military forces that are guarding them, release the rebel pris- oners there confined, then to move into a State, partly occupied by rebels, seize your supplies and munitions of war at Louisville and other points throughout the country — the question, I say, is, whether these men shall be dealt with by the civil or by the military law; whether in this crisis they shall be permitted to avail themselves of the slow process of civil justice, to be re- leased upon bail, again to take the lead of these disloyal forces, and move again in their work of treason and anarchy — or whether the Government shall use the power rightfully belonging to it for its self- 16 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. preservation? I repeat the language I have quoted, and say, that only an Arnold would, in such a case, hesitate in the course he would recommend. Xo officer who is faith- ful to his ti'ust, who respects his Govern- ment, who loves his home, and desires the peace and prosperity of the citizens of that home, would desire to wait till it was too late to save the Government, and, with it, all he holds dear. Seeing this necessity for action, the military arm of the Govern- ment moved. It seized this man, believed to be one of the leaders — whether he be or not, will be a matter of proof before this Commission — and of the power of this Com- mission to try him there can be no more doubt, than of the power of the Govern- ment to declare martial law. As to the question of the power of the Government to declare martial law throughout a part or the whole of this land, there can be no doubt, that having been decided by the mightiest tribunal of the land — the Court of last resort. It only remains for this Commission to take up the facts of the case, and determine whether or not they are as presented in the charges and specifi- cations. In conclusion, I submit, that while the rights and liberties of the citizen are in all cases to be held most sacred and invio«l late, we are uot, in our admiration of thatj general principle, to lose sight of that higher and still more sacred duty of protecting the hfe and liberty of the nation; I might say of the lives and liberties of the millions who compose that nation. Let us not, in our attempt to protect the forms of the Constitution, sacrifice its life. What is that Constitution worth to this land if the na- tion, which is its life, be destroyed? Shall we, in our fear of interfering with the forms of that Constitution, hesitate to stop the wound that is bleeding its life away ? There is something beyond the rights of a single individual — something more sacred than his personal liberty, when that hberty can be shown to have been used to imperil the life of the nation — and that is, the life and lib- erty of the millions of loyal citizens for whom this Government was established, and by whom, with God's help, it wiU ever be upheld. The court-room was then cleared for de- liberation. On being reopened, the Judge Advocate announced that the plea was overruled, and that the Commission would proceed to the trial of the accused. The Commission adjourned, to meet on Tuesday, September 27, at 2 o'clock, P. M. TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 17 CouET Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) September 27, 1804, 2 o'clock, P. M.( The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. The same members present as on Friday, September 23d; also the Judge Advocate, the accused, and his counsel. Colonel C. D. Murray being in Court, and having heard read the Order convening the Commission, the accused was asked if he had any objection to Colonel Murray taking his seat on the Commission, to which he re- plied, "1 have not." Colonel Murray being then duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, in the presence of the accused, took his seat on the Commis- sion. The accused was then arraigned on the following charges and specifications : CHAKGES AND SPECIFICATIONS PREFERRED AGAINST HARRISON H. DODD, A Citizen of the State of Indiana, United Sialei of America. CHARGE FIRST.— Coyispiraaj against the GovernmeM of the United States. Specification First. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd did, with William A. Bowles, of Indiana, Joshua F. Bullitt, of Kentucky, Richard Barrett, of the State of Missouri, and others, consjiire against the Government and duly constituted au- thorities of the United States, and did join himself to, and secretly organize and dis- seminate, a secret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, having a civil and military organization and jurisdiction, for the purpose of overthrowing the Govern- ment and duly constituted authorities of the United States. This at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about the 16th day of May, 1864. Specification Second. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd, during an existing rebellion against the Government and au- thorities of the United States, said rebellion claiming to be in the name and on behalf of certain States, being a part of and owing allegiance to the United States, did com- bine and agree with one William A. Bowles, to adopt and impart to others the creed or ritual of a secret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, denying the author- ity of the United States to coerce to sub- mission certain citizens of said United States, designing to lessen thereby the pow- er and prevent the increase of the armies of the United States, and thereby did re- cognize and sustain the right of the citizens and States then in rebellion to disregard and resist the authority of the LTnited States. This at or near the city of Indi- anapolis, Indiana, on or about the 16th day of May, 1864. Specification Third. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd, then a citizen of the State of Indiana, owing true faith and allegiance to the Government of the United States, and while pretending to be a peace- ful and loyal citizen of said Government, did secretly and covertly combine, agree, and conspire with one William A. Bowles, of the State of Indiana, Joshua F. Bullitt, of the State of Kentucky, Richard Barrett, of the State of Missouri, and others, to overthrow and render powerless the Gov- ernment of the United States, and did, in pursuance of said combination, agreement, and conspiracy with said parties, form and organize a society or order, and did assist in extending said secret order or organization, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, whose in- tent and purpose was to cripple and render powerless the efforts of the Government of the United States in suppressing a then existing formidable rebellion against the Government of the LTnited States. This on or about the 16th day of May, 1864, at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana. Specification Fourth. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd did conspire and agree with William A. Bowles, David T. Yeakle, L. P. Milligan, Andrew Humphreys, John C. Walker, and J. F. Bullitt— these men at that time holding military positions and rank in a certain secret society or or- ganization known as the Order of Ameri- can Knights, or Order of the Sons of Lib- erty — to seize, by force, the LTnited States and State Arsenals, at Indianapolis, Indi- ana, and Columbus, Ohio; to release, by force, the rebel prisoners held by the au- thorities of the United States, at Camp Douglas, Illinois; Camp Morton, Indiana; and Camp Chase, Ohio ; and at the Depot of Prisoners of War, on Johnson's Island ; and to arm tliose prisoners with the arms thus seized; that then said conspirators, with all the force they were able to raise from the secret order above named, were, in con- junction with the rebel prisoners thus re- leased and armed, to march into Kentucky, and co-operate with the rebel forces to be sent to that State by the rebel authorities, against the Government and authorities of the United States. This on or about the 20th day of July, 1864, at or near the city of Chicago, Illinois. CHARGE SECOND.— Affording aid and conrr fort to rebels against the authority of the Urn- ted States. Specification First. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd, being then a member of a certain secret society, or order, knowu 18 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. as the Order of the American Knights, or Or- der of the Sons of Liberty, the United States then being in arras to suppress a rebellion in certain States against the authority of the United States, and said Dodd, then and there acting as a member and Grand Com- mander, so styled, of said secret society or order, did design and plot to communi- cate with the enemies of the United States, and did communicate with the enemies of the United States, with the intent that they should, in large force, invade the ter- ritory of the United States, to-wit, the States of Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois, with the further intent that the so-called secret so- ciety, or order aforesaid, should then and there co-operate with the said armed forces of the said rebellion against the authority of the United States. This at or near Indian- apolis, Indiana, on or about the 16th day of May, 1864. Specification Second. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd, while the Govern- ment of the United States was attempting by force of arms to suppress an existing re- bellion, and while guerrillas and other armed supporters of said rebellion, were in the State of Kentucky, did send a messen- ger — then a brother member with him of a secret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights or Sons of Liberty — into said State of Kentucky, with instruc- tions for J. F. Bullitt, Grand Commander of said secret society or order in said State, and other members of said secret society or order in said State, to select good couri- er or runners, to go upon short notice, and for the purpose of assisting those in rebel- lion against the United States, to call to arras the raerabers of said secret society or order, and other sympathizers with the ex- isting rebellion, whenever a signal should be given by the authorities of the said secret society or order. This at or near Indian- apolis, Indiana, on or about the I6th day of May, 1864. Specification Thiro. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd, during an existing rebellion against the authority of the Uni- ted States, he knowing that in Kentucky there were various armed forces in the inter- est of said rebellion, and that said State was in constant danger of invasion by fur- ther rebel forces, did attempt tlierein to organize and extend a secret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, having for its object to aid and assist said rebellion, and to treat the United States Government, in its efforts to suppress said rebellion, as a usurpation. This at or near Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about the 16th day of May, 1864. Specification Fourth. — In this, that the 8aid Harrison H. Dodd, being a citizen of the State of Indiana, United States of America, owing true allegiance to the said United States, did join himself to a certain secret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, the object of which society or order was hostile to, and designed for the overthrow of, the Government of the Uni- ted States, and to compel terms with the citizens or authorities of the so-called Con- federate States, the same being portions of the United States in rebellion against the authority of the United States, and did com- municate the designs and intent of said order to those in rebellion against the Gov- ernment of the United States. This at or near Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about the I6th day of May, IS64. CHARGE THIRD.— Inciting Insurrection. Specification First. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd did, during a time of war between the United States and armed enemies of the United States, or- ganize, and attempt to arm, a portion of the citizens of the United States, through a secret society or order, known as the Amer- ican Knights, or Oi'der of the Sons of Lib- erty, with the intent to induce them, with him, to throw off the- authority of the United States, and co-operate with an armed insurrection, then existing against the le- gally constituted authorities of the United States. This at or near Indianapolis, Indi- ana, on or about the I6th day of May, 1864. Specification Second. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd did, by public ad- dresses, and by secret circulars and coniniu- nications, and by other means, endeavor to and did arouse sentiments of hostility to the Government of the United States, and did endeavor to induce the people openly to revolt against said Government, and to se- cretly arm and organize themselves, for the purpose of resisting the laws of the United States and the orders of the duly elected President thereof This at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about the 16th day of February, 1864. CHARGE FOURTH— Disloyal Practices. Specification First. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd, during an armed rebellion against the legally constituted au- thorities and Government of the United States, did counsel and advise citizens of, and owing allegiance and Military service to, the United States, to disregard the au- thority of the United States, and to resist a call or draft, designed to increase the armies of the United States. This at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about the 16th day of May, 1864. Specification Second. — In this, that the said Harrison II. Dodd did accept and hold the office of Grand Commander, or Com- mander-in-Chief of the Military forces, for the State of Indiana, in a certain secret society or order, known as 'the Order of TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 19 American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, which said officer and order were unknown to the Constitution or Laws of the United States, and were not in aid of, but opposed to, the constituted legal authori- ties thereof. This at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about the 16th day of February, 1864. Specification Third. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd did appoint, and aid to appoint, and did recognize, within the State of Indiana, and within the ju- risdiction of the United States , and while acting as Grand Commander, or Command- er-in-Chief, of certain Military forces, in the State of Indiana, a certain secret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or the Order of the Sons of Lib- erty, certain persons by the title and grade of Major General, the same being unknown to the Military Laws of the United vStates, or to the Military Laws of the State of In- diana, and did treat and accredit them as such, subordinate to him as Grand Com- mander, for the purpose of creating and perfecting a military organization within the United States, hostile to, and designed to overthrow, the Government and the legally constituted authorities of the United States. This at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indi- ana, on or about the 1 6th day of May, 1864. Specification Fourth. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd did, while assuming to act as Grand Commander, or Command- er-in-Chief, of certain Military forces in the State of Indiana, and within the jurisdic- tion of the United States, of a certain order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, recognize as the highest Military authority in the United States an officer unknown to the Constitution and Laws of the United States, styled Supreme Commander, or Command- er-in-Chief of all Military forces belonging to the order in the various States, for the United States, said officer being recognized by said Dodd as clothed with authority over all the military forces of said order within the United States when called into active service, and holding his, the said Dodd's, obligation of obedience to said Su- preme Commander to be absolute and un- limited, and paramount to the laws of the land, or orders emanating from the author- ities or President of the United States. This at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about the 17th day of February, 1864. Specificatiox Fifth. — In this, that the said Harrison H. Dodd did attempt to pre- vent the further enlistment of citizens in the armies of the United States, declaring the Government thereof to be a usurpation, and to be expelled by force of arms ; and did take, and cause other citizens to take, a solemn oath, inconsistent with and in violation of their duties as citizens of the United States, and did attempt to armi cer- tain disloyal citizens of the United States, for the purpose of resisting the laws and duly constituted authorities of the Unite A xmall account book, contaiDing a list of the mem- bers of tho Order of the SoiiB of Liberty, iu Inilianapo- Ub; also lists of several cowpauies of rebel priiunen, couliued iu Camp Morton. TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 27 manner of keeping them. He told me all the names in this list, (witness pointing out the list of names, with numbers "1" and "3" opposite in parallel column) were those of members of the order. Those numbered "1" at that time had taken the first degree, and those marked "3" had taken the third degree. He had a number of other books in which he kept the accounts with the county temples — the amount they had paid in for organization fees, for books, for regular monthly dues, and for annual dues. They also gave the names of the officers of all the county temples which had reported to him, the amount due from them, the amounts paid, and what for. I have seen this book before. It was kept by Harrison, and contained the names of the members of the order here. The book entitled the "Roll of Prison- ers," was here introduced in evidence by the Judge Advocate. Q. Does that book contain the names of officers of the county temples? A. Harrison had other books which con- tained the names of officers of the county temples. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Wednesday, September 28, at eight o'clock. Court Koom, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) September 28, 1864, 8 o'clock, A. M.) The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present; also the Judge Advocate, the accused, and his counsel. The proceedings of yesterday were read and approved. Felix G. Stidger, a witness for the Govern- ment, then proceeded with his testimony, as follows: Question by the Judge Advocate. State to the Commission what interviews you had with Mr. Dodd at his house, or other- wise. A. I was at Mr. Dodd's house twice, but only saw him there once. It was on a Fri- day night. Mr. Harrison was there also, and in speaking of the uprising of the Sons of Liberty, said something about their being rather dilatory. It appeared they had not enough arms to be of service. Mr. Dodd remarked, that if they did not rise he would leave the country, for he would be damned if he would live under such a Government as the present Administra- tion. Q. Was or was not that in the con tin gency of the order not rising to destroy the present Administration? A. It was. Q. About what date was that? A. That was on the Friday night before Judge Bullitt was arrested on the Satur- day. It was probably the last Friday in July, though I will not be sure. Mr. Har- rison, Grand Secretary of the State of In- diana, was present at the convention. Q. Was any plan determined upon at the meeting of the order on the 14th of June, as to the manner of disposing of Mr. Coffin, and how it was to be brought about? A. Mr. Dodd expected to find him at Hamilton, Ohio, the next day, pick a quar- rel with him, if possible, and shoot him. Q. How do you know that? A. Dodd so expressed it at that meeting. The roll of the members of the order for In- dianapolis was here handed to the witness. Q. Please to look at that roll, and designate any of the names you know belonging to the Order of the Sons of Liberty. A. W. M. Harrison, H. H. Dodd, Joseph Ristine. I conversed with him on the sub- ject of the order, but never met him at any lodge. Q. Did he display any knowledge that he could not have acquired outside the lodge of the order? A. He did. Q. Who is Joseph Ristine? A. Auditor of the State. I have seen him in his office. Q. Do you recollect the purport of any conversation you have had with him ? A. I do not recollect any, except some thing that was said about a letter which was supposed, at the time, to have be^n written by Dick Bright. The counsel for the accused objected to the witness relating any conversation of Mr. Ristine, as it had not been shown that he was a member of the order, the witness having said that he never saw him at any lodge of the order. The Judge Advocate, in reply, said that it had been proved that the book or roll in question was kept by an officer of this se- cret society; the witness also tetitifi€>d that the names on the roll were memb>ja"s of the order. The evidence, therefore, fur- nished by the book was more reliable than if Stidger, the witness, had seen Ristine at the lodge. The Court was then cleared for delibera- tion. On being re-opened, the Judge Advo- cate announced to the accused that the ob jection was overruled. Answer of the witness continued: The conversation was in relation to a let- ter written to Dodd, Bowles and Ristine, and signed "Dick," and supposed to have been written by Dick Briglit. The letter was a warning against Coffin as a United States Detective; that he was watching them, and reporting every thing they did. I was kept at Ristine's office nearly all day, for young Ristine to point Coffin out to me, in case he should pass the office. Q. Did you ever meet in the Grand Coun- cil, persons from other parts of the country, besides those here named? 28 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. A. I have. There was an old gentleman by the name of Oty, Dr. Lemans, a Judge Borten, from Allen county. He was a large, fleshy man. A Mr. Everett, of Yanderberg county; Mr. Leech, of Burnt District, Union county; Mr. Myers, of Laporte county, and Mr. A. D. Kaga of New Amsterdam. These were some I became acquainted with on the 14th of June.. Q. Did you ever meet in any of their lodges, or as a member of the order, a Mr. Lassalle ? A. I do not think I met him. On the 14th of June, he was elected a member of the Supreme Council of the United States. Mr. Lassalle resides in Cass county. Q. State who else was elected that day ? A. John G. Davis. Q. Did you ever meet a Mr. Heffren ? A. Yes, sir, I met him in Salem, Indiana, twice. Q. Was he a member of the order? A. Yes, sir, he was. He was recognized as such. I was told by the order that he was Deputy Grand Commander of the State of Indiana. His name was called on that day, but he was not present. He was for- merly a Lieutenant Colonel of an Indiana regiment. Ue told me himself that he and Dodd had a right to call the order together at any time they might think proper. Q. Did he ever explain, in detail, the na- ture and object of the organization? A. He told me that they were to co-ope- rate with the Confederate forces. The first lime I saw him, he supposed I was a Com- missioner, sent by the Confederate forces. I saw him in Salem, Indiana, on the 6th day of May. Q. How are you able to fix that date ? A. By its being the first day I left Louis- ville to join Bowles. Q. Did you know Heffren before? A. I never saw him before. There was a man there by the name of John Drom, who pointed him out to me; he is a clothier. He took Hefi'ren out and told him that I was from Kentucky. This man told me that IletiVen was one of the leaders of the order. Hetiren then came to me, suppos- ing I was a Commissioner sent to him from the rebel force. Q. Did he approach you as a member of the order, making any signs? A. No, sir, he did not. When he first ap- proached me, he asked if I came on that bu- siness. I told him I did not. I then men- tioned to him about some regiments of For- rest's being disbanded in Kentucky. He 'Raid he knew it, and that they were to have four more, who were to remain at home for a time and to concentrate when neces- sary. Q. For what purpose were they disband- ed? A. He did not tell me for what particu- lar purpose, but, he said, he was expecting a commissioner from three of those regiments, and he thought I was the person. Q. ^Vhat was that commissioner to ar- range with him? A. I do not know, sir. Q. What else was said? A. I do not remember any tiling particu- lar. A gentleman on the street asked him why a certain lady was sent to Salem, Indi- ana, and he said they expected trouble in Kentucky very soon, and it would be safer in Salem than it would be ii:i Kentucky. Q. Did Heftren inform you then that this organization was for tlie purpose of co-oi^erating with the rebels? A. Yes, sir, he did. Q. Did you ever meet at Louisville a man by the name of Piper, that you say was on Vallandigham's stafi:*; if so, was he a mem- ber of the order ? A. Yes sir. I met him there, and he was a member of this order. He told me he resided in Springfield, Illinois. I do not know his first name. Q. What was he at Louisville for? A. He had been traveling in the eastern part of the State, initiating men into the order. He was present at the meeting of the Grand Council in Kentucky, and assisted in opening the meeting. Q. What rank did he claim to have on Vallandigham's stall'? A. He told me he was on his stafl' but he claimed no particular appointment. He told me that James A. Barrett, formerly of St. Louis, now of Chicago, was Chief of Staff to Vallandigham, and that Captain Hines, of the rebel army, who also was on Vallandigham's staft", had charge of the re- leasing of the rebel prisoners on John- son's Island. Q. Was this the man you referred to yes- terday ? A. It was, and by mistake I gave his name as Dick Barrett. It was James A. Barrett I referred to in my testimony yes- terday. Piper said he had a communica- tion from Vallandigham and Bowles, giving him charge of the releasing of the rebel prisoners at Rock Island, and which was to be effected at the same time. Q. Where was Hines at that time? A. He was in Canada, waiting for the time to come. Hines was the same man that was afterward captured with Mor- gan. Q. Do you know where this man Piper is now ? A. I do not. Q. Did you learn of any specific action that the branch of the order in Illinois had resolved upon, in case Kentucky should re- sist the enlistment of negroes? A. Piper told me that he had attended a meeting of the Grand Council of Illinois, and that they had passed a resolution, unanimouslv, that if Kentuckv considered TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 29 it advisable to resist the enlistment of ne- groes, that the members of the order in Illinois would see that none of the State Militia or Loyal Leaguers, as they were called, should be allowed to be sent by the Government to enforce the measure. A shell about the size of a 32-pounder, of conical shape, was here handed to the witness. The butt of the shell being screwed off, showed an interior shell, which contained an iron case for the charge of powder. Q. Have you ever seen this instrument before ? If so, state where, and what it is. A. I saw an instrument of that kind at Bocking's room, at the Louisville Hotel, about the 29th or 30th of June. Bowles was present, also Dr. Kalfus and Charley Miller, and a number of other gentlemen. Bocking explained it. The space between the innermost case and the inner shell was to be filled with liquid Greek fire. The space between the inner and outer shell was to give room for it to move, so as to ex- plode the percussion cap, on its being thrown and striking any object. Q. What was it to be used for? A. It was contemplated to be used for the destruction of Government property. Q. Is this the same thing that was exhib- ited there at that time ? A. Yes, sir, and it was for the use of these conspirators. Q. Was any thing said about their using such an instrument ? A. Yes, sir ; they said it was just such a thing as they wanted. A spherical shell was here handed to the witness, which unscrewed in the center and showed a smaller spherical shell inside. Q. Have you seen this before ? A. Yes, sir; I saw it at Bocking's room; he explained the working of it. The inner shell was to be filled with powder, and a cap placed on each of the nine nipples to be seen on its surface; and round a glass vial, which this inner shell con- tained, was placed the powder. The glass vial contained the Greek fire. On its being thrown against any object, and striking, it would explode and ignite and set on fire whatever it touched. It was designed to be used by the hand, and it would require Very careful handling to prevent its ex- ploding, as the least blow might explode it. Bocking mentioned its weight and proba- ble expense. Q. Did you learn that this instrument had been used in the destruction of Gov- ernment property; if so, state when and where. A. I was told by Dr. Bowles that the Greek fire had been used for the destruc- tion of Government property. Two boats had been destroyed at Louisville, in the spring, and a number of boats, down the river, by the same means, in April or May. I am not sure that he did not say some boats loaded with Government stores in St. Louis. Bocking explained the manner in which this Greek fire could be used outside of the shells. It might be kept in a thin glass vial, and when you wanted to destroy any object, all you had to do was to throw the glass vial against it, by which the liquid would be scattered about, and it would set or\ fire every thing it touched. Bocking said it might be made so as to ignite in- stantly it was scattered, or some time after- ward. Bowles said it might be arranged with the clock contrivance, to take fire some hours afterward. Q. Did you learn of the change of the name of this order from American Knights to the Order of the Sons of Liberty; if so, state what time that change was made in the different States. A. When I was here, I saw Dodd tho first of June; he told me that Judge Bullitt and Dr. Kalfus had gotten some new work i of the order. He told me that the order kad been changed. The work on the American Knights had been distributed over the State, and he wished me to assist in distri- buting the new work. I had seen the first degree of the Order of American Knights, but had never read it. I only saw what kind of a looking book it was. Q. Was this a new order, or merely a con- tinuation of the old one, with changes? A. It was a continuation of tlie old order, but the name was changed to the Sons of Liberty. Those of the Order of American Knights were not admitted into the Order of the Sons of Liberty, unless they were considered worthy. Q. Do you know any thing of Dodd's at- tempt to extend and increase this order, by disseminating the sentiments of the order ? A. No, sir; I do not know that he did in this State. He urged tlie extension of it in Kentucky, and organizing it as quickly and as thoroughly as possible. Q. Do you know of his issuing an ad- dress, to be sent to the different members of the order? A. Yes, sir; I know of the circulation of the address exhibited here yesterday. I know there were some of them given to me to take to Kentucky, and 1 saw Harri- son give some of them to persons, whom he told me were members of the order in this State. Q. Was it inculcated in this meeting and elsewhere, to the members of this order, that in case this order should be called into the field, its members were to obey their chiefs, and that tlieir oi-ders were to be un- questioned, and their commands supreme? A. The orders of the chiefs of this or- \ ganization were to be above all orders, and • above all laws of the United States. They were to pay no respect to the orders of the 30 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. civil authorities, or orders of the General Government, but were instructed that the orders of their chief were supreme. [Close of the examination in chief] CROSS-EXAMIXATIOX. Became a member of the Order of the Sons of Liberty on the 5th of May, 1864. Was instructed in the Vestibule degree by a United States Detective. Took the first degree, in the city of Louisville, about the 12th of May; did not take the second de- gree at all, and was instructed in the third degree by HaiTison, the Grand Secretary of Indiana, in Indianapolis, about the 1st of June. In taking these degi'ees, witness participated as a bona Jide member of the order; but acted in the character of a de- tective from the beginning. Was employed by Captain Stephen E. Jones, of Louisville, Provost Marshal of the District of Ken- tucky, at witness' request, but not in that particular service. Was shown a letter, written by General Carrington to Captain Jones, requesting him to send a Kentuckian to Dr. Bowles. Witness was sent in accord- ance with that request. Did not at the time know of the existence of such an order as the Sons of Liberty. Eeceived the Vestibule degree before going to Dr. Bowles. There were three Temple degrees besides the Vestibule degree. The meeting at Indianapolis, on the 14th of June, was a meeting of the dele- gates of county temples and chiefs of tlie order. Heard the roll of names called; but not being personally acquainted with the members, could not recall them. Respecting the contemplated assassina- ation of Coffin, the United States Detective, I was sent from Louisville to give Dodd and Bowles the opinion of Judge Bullitt, name- ly : that it was necessary for the interests of the order that Coffin should be put out of the way. The matter was discussed in Council. Dodd did not discountenance the project; but, on the contrary, considered it necessary. Was taken to the State Au- ditor's office by Mr. Dodd, who requested Mr. Ristine's son to show him Coffin should he pass. Was there, off and on, in Mr. Ristine's front office nearly all day. About sundown Coffin was pointed out to him. Did not express a wish to meet him and kill liim; the words used were, he hoped to meet Coffin hereafter " under more favor- able circumstances. " This was after the Hamilton meeting, which was on the 15th of June, the day after the meeting of the Council in Indianapolis. Did not, in that meeting, insist on going to Hamilton, in order to kill Coffin: did not speak in the Council that day. Did not know of the Hamilton meeting till it was brought up in the Council. Went with Dodd and Bowles to the meeting at Hamilton. Was appointed Grand Secretary of the order, of the Grand Lodge of Kentucky, by Judge Bullitt, until an election, and was afterward told that he had been elected at a meeting of the Grand Council. Never met Mr. Coffin at any meeting of the Council, nor in any of the lodges: knew he was a United States De- tective, but did not act in concert with him, nor communicate any thing to him. Be- came acquainted with Coffin about the 1st of June. The pretense of not knowing him was a sham, to cover up ulterior ob- jects. Met Dr. Gatling at Mr. Bingham's office, when he (Stidger) first saw Dodd. Gatling was at the Grand Council, and was present at the discussion of the assassination of Cof- fin. Do not know Mr. Humphreys person- ally. A gentleman they said was Andrew Humphreys, was present at the Council: he was a fleshy gentleman — fine-looking — about forty years old. Saw Mr. Milligan also that day, for the first time. He was a tall, bony, tolerably slender man; and was an active participant in the proceedings of the meeting. He was there morning and evening. A man by the name of Thomp- son was there; he was appointed on a com- mittee. Mr. McBride, of Evansville, also was present; he was a very active member, and was on the military committee. Did not know positively that the order was a military organization, never having seen the members drill, or with arms in their hands; but had heard members of the order say that it was a military organiza- tion. The Order of the Sons of Liberty extended over Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Wisconsin, New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Maryland. From the North-eastern States they ex- pected money, but not men — those States were theoretically organized, as far as the military phase was concerned. Dodd told him of tlie meeting at Chicago on the 20th of July, and of the plan of ac- tion determined on; did not remember whether Dodd said he was present at the meeting or not: but he was at Chicago at the time. In speaking of the meeting, he used the words, "We came to such and such conclusions." In conversations with members of the order, he learned tliat they did not intend Indiana and Illinois to be invaded by the rebels, if they could help it. The war was to be confined to Kentucky and Missouri. Indiana and Ohio were to co-operate with Kentucky, and Illinois with Missouri. The order expected the co-operation of the rebel forces, and were to rise at their advance The order was to organize and join the rebel forces on the border. The point set- tled on was Louisville. Dr. Bowles said he cared nothing about the draft, or the politics of the Govern- ment — he said they were engaged in a scheme of rebellion against the Government TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 31 of tho United States. In speaking of the movements of tbe order, Dodd and Bowles expressed themselves confident of success. Dr. Athon, of this city, counseled caution and delay, till they were more thoroughly organized, and until they could see what could be done at the polls. He wa» present at the meeting on the 14th of June. He also said they should use their military power at the polls, if the Government attempted to control the elections by bay- onets; and that there would be a time when it would be pi^oper to use their military power against the Government, but that time had not yet come. He said it would not be changed after election; that an outbreak would come after the election to resist the Government, both as to its po- litical and military policy. The usurpation of the Government, such as the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, freeing of the negroes, and the general tyrannical acts of the Government, they deemed sufficient to warrant military operations against the Government. Dr. Athon expressed this opinion to witness, in his office, in pri- vate conversation; Judge Bullitt and Mike Bright had given the same opinion to him before. Did not know that Mike Bright was a member of the order. Bright thought twenty thousand men could be raised in the State of Indiana to further insurrectionary movements, but that the State would not furnish more. This expressed opinion of Bright was an exception to that of the chiefs of the order, so far as witness had heard them express themselves. Pijier professed to have official orders, from Vallandigham, of a military character. Vallandigham had been represented to witness as the Supreme Grand Commander of the United States; elected on the 22d day of February, in New York. Under- stOOTi~frDill ■np'^r that Vallandigham had knowledge of this insuiTectionary move- ment, and had given his sanction to it; that he had supreme control of it, and the particular day for the rising was left to his discretion. Witness understood that Val- landigham knew of the action of the meet- ing at Chicago, and apj^roved of it. Heard Vallandigham speak at Hamilton, on the 15th of June, but had no interview with him. In addition to the rituals, etc., there w-as the unwritten work of the order, which could not be gathered from the printed books. The unwritten work of the order w-as mainly confined to the third degree members. It consisted of signs, colloquies, etc., by which members make themselves known to each other, and gained admittance to lodges where they were not known. There were also instruc- tions as to the designs of the order, im- parted to members who were thought wor- thy of the three degrees, that were not considered suitable to be known to less re- liable members of the order. The printed works did not say any thing about the mili- tary character of the order, or about co-op- eration with the South, or resistance to the Government by force of arms; but to a third degi-ee member they gave that instruc- tion and information. To second degree members, who were considered worthy, they imparted the same instructions. First degree members were not considered wor- thy to receive these instructions. If they got them at all, it would be through the friends who were considered worthy. Did not know the relative proportion of first, second and third degree members. As a general rule, first degree members were more numerous than second degree members ; while second and third degree members were about equal. In Indianapo- lis township, the second and third degree members numbered only about sixty odd men ; but Mr. Harrison said one thousand or twelve hundred could be got into the order. They thought it advisable to take in only responsible men, who would influ- ence others to join when the proper time came. As to the available means of the order, in arms and ammunition. Dr. Bowles said he knew a man who would furnish any amount of arms and powder, at any time and place the order might designate. Did not know that the order had any storehouses, arsenals, or depots for arms, or that the members had arms beyond what citizens usually have. Did not know of any funds raised to pur- chase arms, though that question was dis- cussed at length at the meeting of the Council in this city, on the 14th of June. At that meeting, a committee of thirteen was appointed, to act for the Council in any emergency, during the recess of that body, and Avhose acts were to be as legal as though the Grand Council had passed them. Had not been under arrest. Witness' testimony was not given to save him from prosecution. Eesided now at Matoon, Illi- nois. Was raised in Kentucky, and had lived in difierent parts of the State ibr eleven years ; principally engaged in car- jjentering, and in the dry goods business. Had been in the army, in Comjjany E, 15th Kentucky ; but was detailed as clerk from the first. Left the army on the 14th of February, honorably discharged for disabil- ity. Went into the detective service on the 5th of May. Applied for business generally, and was appointed to this particular duty. Never saw Bocking before meeting him at his room in the Louisville Hotel, when he explainedhis infernalmachines. Bowles. Kalfus and Miller were there, and others, who were members of the order. Had heard that Bocking had brought the coni- cal shell to the notice of the Government, but did not know that he had ofi'ered the 32 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. spherical hand grenade. Dr. Bowles invited these members to Booking's room, to see whether these instruments could not be made available in carrying out the schemes of the order against the Government. Bowles said Bocking was a member of the order. The project of assisting the South was discussed that day in his room and in his presence, and Bocking said these shells, with the clock arrangement, and the Greek fire, were the very things that should be used, as I understood, for the destruction of Government property. Bowles further said, that he had tested Bocking well before they initiated him ; that he had been sent by the order to Canada, and made to spend his own money in experimenting and test- ing this thing for the benefit of the order. Bowles also said that he, Bullitt, Dodd, a chemist, and one or two others, had spent one Sunday in a basement in this city, ex- perimenting with the Greek fire, when peo- ple thought they were at church. Had been at Dr. Bowles' house three times. Had seen him once at Paoli, once at Louisville, and once in Indianapolis, at the meeting of the Council of the order. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Thursday, September 29, at 2 o'clock, P. M. CocKT KooM, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) September 2o o'clock, P. M. j The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- ment. The same members present as at the morning session ; also the Judge Advocate, the accused, and his counsel. The proceedings were read and approved. Tlie Commission then adjourned, to meet on Wednesday, October 5. at 10 o'clock, A. M. CovBT Boom, Indi.vnapolis, Ini^iana, 1 October 6, 18ti4, 10 o'clock, A. 51. J The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- ment. All the members present: also the Judge Advocate, the accused, and his counsel The proceedings were read and approved. William Clayton, a witness for the Gov- ernment, continued his testimony as fol- lows : Question by the Judge Advocate. State whether or not the league to which you be- longed, sent delegates to the Chicago Con- vention, or to the Chicago Grand Council, that met in that city in July last. A. The temple to which I belonged was subordinate to the countj"- temple. 1 be- longed to the organization in Eoseville township. The W^arren county temple sent delegates to the Grand Council for the State of Illinois. Q. Did you learn any thing of the doings or designs of the Grand Council, or the re- turn of the delegates? A. Not a great deal. I was at the War- ren county temple at Monmouth, and Mr. Griffith and McCarthy, who were officers of that temple, had been to the Chicago Grand Council. They spoke of the Mili- tary Committee. The Grand Commander of the State, they said, had the selecting and appointing of the Military Committee in the State. That committee was not known to any person whatever, except to the Grand Commander. Q. Did you learn what that was? A. No, sir; I did not. The committee reported to the Grand Commander all their proceedings, and such a part as he thought proper he reported to the Grand Council. Q. Did you, after the Chicago Conven- tion, hear any thing about the obligation of secrecy being removed? A. No, sir, I did not ; I never heard any thing of it till I saw it in the newspa- pers.* Q. Was that the first time you, as a mem- ber of the order, heard of the obligation of secrecy being removed? A. It was. * The Indiaiir.j)olin-.S«niifi October 15, 1864, 9 o'clock, A. M. J The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- ment. All the members present ; also the Judge Advocate, and the counsel for the accused. Absent, the accused, Harrison H. Dodd. The proceedings were read and approved. The Judge Advocate then addressed the Commission as follows : As I intimated at the last session of the Commission preceding our late informal meeting, I propose now to submit the case of the accused, Harrison H. Dodd, on the evidence already introduced, and to ask the Commission to proceed to their finding in the case, and, in the event of finding against the accused, to sentence. For authorities in support of such a course, I propose simply to cite certain late decis- ions in similar cases, by the Supreme Court of Ohio, and also by the Supreme Court of this State. The first case is from the Ohio Reports, vol. VII, page 180. Charles Fight vs. The State. The plaintiff was arraigned at the August term of the Brown Common Pleas Court, plead not guilty, and, on his motion and giving security, the prosecution was continued to the November term. He was placed on trial before the jury on the fourth day of the succeeding term, and the testi- mony being partly heard, the Court ad- journed until the next morning, at which time the Court met, and the plaintiff being called, made default. The Court then is- sued a bench-warrant for the plaintiff, and proceeded to charge the jury. On the next day the jury rendered a verdict of guilty, which was received by the Court in the ab- sence of the plaintiff. At the succeeding March term, the plaintiff asked for a new b-1 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. trial, assigning, among other reasons, that the jury had heard only a part of the testi- mony, and that the verdict was brought in during his absence. This was overruled, when the plaintifl" moved an arrest of judg- ment for substantially the same reasons. The case was argued before the Supreme Court, and the opinion delivered by Judge ^Vood was concurred in by all the Court. The synoj^sis gives the point of the case in these words: "Where, pending a trial upon a criminal prosecution, the accused, being on bail, ab- sconds, it is legal to proceed with the case, and to receive a verdict of guilty in his ab- sence." The opinion of the Court is as follows : '' In England, in misdemeanors, where the defendant is on bail, a trial, a conviction and sentence may be had in his absence. He is present or not, at his option. In felonies, a difterent rule, it is true, prevails. The ac- cused must be present when every principle of the law is discussed and determined in which he is concerned. The reason of this difference in the mode of proceeding in the two cases can not, perhaps, at this time, be satisfactorily ascertained ; or, rather, no sat^ isfactory reason can be given for it. A prisoner in close custody may be so easily oppressed and deprived of his rights, and it would be so extremely difficult for him to make known his injuries and obtain redress, that to prevent unnecessary restraint, and to afford the accused an opportunity of be- ing fully and fairly heard, the rule in refer- ence to him may be reasonable and salutary; but it would apply with force to all classes of oftenders. But in felony, the accused is not necessarily confined within the four walls of the prison. Both before and after the conquest, all felonies were bailable by the common ancient law. The Stat. WeMon, 1 and 3 Ed., 1 c, 15 ; 23 Hen., 9, c. 9 ; and 1 and 2 Ph. and Mar., c. 13, except treason and mur- der, and certain other crimes from those for which the King's justices may bail. {Bl Com., 4 vol., 208.) But the Court of King's Bench, or any judge thereof, in vacation, may, at their discretion, admit persons to bail, in all cases whatsoever. (3 East., 163, 5 J. R, 169), but none can claim this benefit de jure (2 Hale, 129). If on bail, I apprehend, neither the courts of Great Britain nor the United States would proceed to impannel a jury, in a trial for felony, unless the ac- cused were present to look to his challen- ges. If the trial, however, is once com- menced, and the prisoner, in his own wrong, leaves the Court, abandons his case to the manage- ment of counsel, and runs away, I can find no adjudged case to sustain the position, that in England the proceedings would be stayed. Such a case must form an exception to the general rule, and the verdict may be legally received in the absenre of the acc^ised. The prisoner can not be deprived of his right to I be present, at all stages of his trial; but that he must be, under all circumstances, or the proceedings will be erroneous, can not, we think, be sustained." The next case I shall cite is from vol. 14, Indiana Reports, page 39. It is an opinion delivered by Judge Perkins, of this State,in the case of McCorkle vs. Tlie State. I shall read only that portion of the opinion appli- cable to this point: " The constitution and laws provide that a defendant in a criminal case shall be pres- ent at his trial. This is for a twofold object: " 1. That the defendant may have the op- portunity of meeting the witnesses and jury face to face, and of directing the causes of his trial. " 2. That the State may be in possession of his person, so that judgment may be ex- ecuted thereon. "Now, the question is. are not these pro- visions, so far as they are in favor of the de- fendant, designed to confer a privilege which he may waive? He can waive a trial alto- gether, and plead guilty. He can waive the constitutional and legal privilege of trial by jury. He can waive the constitutional and legal privilege of being a second time put in jeopardy. And shall it be said that he can not waive his privilege of being present when his witnesses are examined, or any one of them ? Then did he, as a question of fact, make such waiver in this case ? If he had voluntarily arisen in Court, and asked to be absent in the custody of an of- ficer, or otherwise, for a period of time, re- questing that the trial should proceed in his absence, the waiver would be clear. But how does such a step differ, in substance, from a voluntary deiiarture without asking that the trial shall stop ? In one case the consent is vocally, in the other, tacitly, but equally clearly, expressed." This was a case in which the prisoner ab- sented himself during a portion of his trial. The next case in point is reported in the Sixteenth Indiana Reports, page 357. The State vs. Wamire. The opinion was deliv- ered by Judge Perkins, and is the last case in point, on record, that I know of " 3. The court is not bound to discharge the jury because of the voluntary absence of the defendant during the trial, he hav- ing been present at the commencement, \_McCorkle vs. The State, Fourteenth Indiana, 39; Fight vs. The State, Seventh Ohio {Ham.) Reports, Part 1, page 181], but may proceed on to verdict, at all events, in his absence." In all the cases I have cited, the authori- ties go further than I ask the Commission to proceed. I do not propose to introduce testimony in the absence of the accused, but simply to submit the case to the Com- mission upon the evidence already intro- duced, and upon this evidence 1 ask the Commission to proceed to its finding and sentence. The reason for such a course is- TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 53 stronger in a court of this kind, than it would be before a civil tribunal. The mo- ment I am able to say to the Commission, ''The evidence in the case is closed,'" the accused would have to withdraw by the rules of the court, and the court-room would be cleared, and the Commission would at once proceed to deliberate upon the evidence and to arrive at their finding and sentence. When that finding and sen- tence is arrived at, it is not made known to the accused by this Commission ; it is not known as possessing vitality or even exist- ence, vmtil it has been submitted to the convening authority, and by him reviewed and approved. If approved, it is made known to the accused by the Commanding General, or, in technical phrase, it is "pro- mulgated " in General Orders. In this case the accused has waived — as is frequently done by prisoners — his right and privilege of introducing rebutting tes- timony, and also his right and privilege of submitting his final appeal or address to the Commission. I therefore submit the case to the Com- mission, and ask them to proceed to their finding and sentence. REPLY OF J. W. GORDON, ESQ., COUKSEL FOR THE ACCUSED. May it please the Court : I wish to say one word in relation to the position taken by the Judge Advocate upon the authorities he has just read. These au- thorities — more properly decisions — at least in the State of Indiana, have been gravely and severely questioned by learned mem- bers of the jjrofession, and by the profession generally ; and I doubt whether in the future they will not be overruled. They yet stand, however, as the opinion of our Supreme Court. If it be granted, therefore, that they are law — that they govern to a certain extent the proceedings of our State courts, in the trial of felons, is it quite cer- tain that they are applicable to the case now before this Commission ? Is it certain that they can be properly emjiloyed as au- thorities even analogically, in a military court, upon the trial of a military ofltense? Precedent makes law. I ajjprehend, how- ever, that no military man, or. indeed, any one else, will be able to find, after the most thorough examination of the military au- thorities, a single precedent, where a mili- tary jjrisoner, having been once before a military court, entered upon his trial, pro- ceeded to some length therein, and then escaped, and has yet been proceeded against in that trial unto sentence. I apprehend that no precedent can be found to that effect. I am quite certain that the books which I have been able to consult, furnish no such precedent ; and I think it is so for the best of all possible reasons — the reason that there does not exist such a precedent. In all military^proceedings of this charac- ter, the accused is arrested. If he be an officer, the order of arrest confines him to his quarters, or to the camp, or gives him such limits as the commanding officer may think proper to prescribe. If he be an en- listed man, he is generally confined, and especially if the ofiense be heinous, to the guard-house, a close prisoner. There is no bail in luilitary cases ; no such thing as allowing the accused to go at large ; and, hence, when his trial begins he must be present. He is accordingly brought before the court, if he be an enlisted man, under guard; if an officer, by citation; but, in either case, he is always required to be present when the trial opens; present all the way along through the trial; and, as I said before, I have yet to find the first j^re- cedent in military law, where, in a military court, a prisoner has been proceeded against in his absence. The case before the Commission is not unlike that of an enlisted man. The ac- cused here, not being an officer, had the limits of no camp allowed him. He was confined to his prison, to his room, with a guard at his door, and subjected to pretty severe surveillance. I know it has been said that he was on his parole of honor ; and no doubt he did give his word to the General, or to the party who enlarged him and placed him in more comfortable quar- ters in this building; but it was not a case of parole of honor, as that existing in the army with prisoners of war. It was not a case in which there was any provision made by the law of the land, or military law for paroling. On the contrary, it wtis a case in which the order of the Pi'csident, the only law on the subject, provided that there should be no writ of habeas coj-piis ; and, of course, no enlargement of the prisoner. He was, then, a prisoner under guard. He has escaped. These authorities, therefore, can not, as I conceive, be held applicable to this case, however fit to be followed in civil courts, where all felons, except traitors and murderers, may be at large during their trial, as in the case of McCorkle, and, I think, of the others whose cases have been cited. If, therefore, the accused has escaped, the law must, in my opinion, be held to be different in his case in this court from that maintained in the civil courts of the State of Indiana upon the cases cited; and, I think so, not only for the protection of the accused, should he be again arrested, but also for the protection of the rights of the Government True, the Government may waive its rights as against him ; but, as I understand, there is yet more evidence to be adduced against him. Should the case, therefore, be now submitted to the Com- mission, upon the evidence already before them, and should that evidence turn out, 54 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. in their opinion, not to be sufficient to sus- tain the charges and specifications against him, why, then, the Government, by this course — which, I admit, is not my affair, and I only make the suggestion by permis- sion — will lose forever the opportunity of bringing him to condign punishment, even should he be really guilty of these offenses. If the cause is submitted now upon this evidence, and the constitutional provision shall be held to apply to this case, he will not be allowed to be put in jeopardy again for any one of these offenses. This is a consideration, however, which belongs en- tirely to the Government side of the case. The prosecutor may introduce further evi- dence if he think proper; or may stop at any stage of the proceedings. But the accused is not here; and the nature of the punishment that may be in- flicted, should he be found guilty, affords another reason why he should be present before proceeding to sentence him. These are all of a corporeal, physical nature, oper- ating upon the person. The leading charac- teristic of them all is, that they operate upon the person ; and there is, indeed, no means of enforcing a pecuniary punishment inflicted by such a court as this, except where the prisoner is in custody ; and much less certainly of punishing him ppr- sonally without having him first in custody. In view of these considerations, then, the first question before you will be : 1. " Shall we proceed with the case now before us to final sentence?" If this question should be determined in the affirmative, upon the authorities cited by the Judge Advocate, then the second question for your decision will be : 2. " Shall we proceed in pursuance of these authorities, and admit further evi- dence should it be offered, because these authorities go to that extent?" If the prisoner had escaped during the trial in a civil court, that court would have allowed the trial to go on to verdict and judgment in his absence, just as it would have gone on in his presence. Evidence would have been adduced, and argument of counsel heard, just as if the prisoner had remained present. If we take civil prece- dents for our guides, and abandon the path generally followed by military tribunals, we should confer upon the absent defendant the right to go on to final judgment by tlie same stages, that he would have been allowed to proceed in, had he remained personally present. The cases cited go thus far. I submit, then, that, in the first place, the court will not proceed to final sentence in this case; and, in the second, that, if they do, they will proceed by the same stages indicated by these authorities, allow- ing evidence to be adduced in behalf of the defense, and the case to be closed just as it would have been, had the accused remained present. The Judge Advocate, in reply, said : With i-espect to going forward with testi- mony on the part of the accused in his ab- sence, the Commission will find, on an ex- amination of the cases cited — especially the Seventh Ohio and Fourteenth Indiana Reports — that a prisoner's counsel has no authority, the prisoner having abandoned his cause, to introduce evidence and make a defense. He certainly can not do it in a military court But the authorities go further, and say that the Government shall not be pre- judiced by the action of the prisoner. Now, I apprehend that if the prisoner was not present at the commencement of the trial, and proof was introduced in his absence, and the case begun while he was away, that the court, seeking for truth and justice, would decide that the defendant's counsel should have the privilege of coming in with evidence in his behalf; but the case sup- posed is not analagous to that now before this Commission. Here the prisoner sits on until the Government has proved its case, and if at that stage of the proceedings he abandons his case, he says, in fact, "I have no defense;" and, having thus waived his right of a further hearing, he can not come in by counsel and ask that he may be heard, when he is not present for the law to act upon him. On the evidence already before the Com- mission, produced in the presence of the accused, and subjected to the cross-examin- ation of his counsel, I submit the case, and ask the Commission to proceed to their finding and sentence. The Commission may grant to the coun- sel for the accused, as a matter of courtesy, and not as a matter of right, the privilege of putting in their views on the evidence before the Commission. The court-room was then cleared for de- liberation. On being reopened, the Judge. Advocate announced that the Commission would proceed to their finding on the evi- dence already introduced, and that no more evidence should be heard in the case; but tliat, as a matter of courtesy to the counsel for the accused, they would be permitted to put in their argument on the proof already submitted. Tlie Commission then adjourned, to meet on Monday, October 17, at 10 o'clock, A. M. Covet Boom, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ October 17, 18G4, 10 o'clock, A. M. j The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- ment. All the members present; also the Judge Advocate, and the counsel for the ac- cused. The proceedings were read and approved. The counsel for the accused then sub- TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 55 mitted the following argument to the Com- mission : Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Commission: This cause has been brought to an abrupt conclusion by an unforeseen contingency, which otherwise might have been preven- ted. No men regret the fact more sincerely than we, the counsel for the defendant. We regret it both for public and private reasons; for we have no doubt that the cloud of suspicion which must have arisen from the testimony for the prosecution, as it now stands unimpeached, uncontradicted, and seemingly corroborated by the sudden disappearance of the defendant, might have been, in a good degree, if not indeed, al- together, dissipated by counter-proof and a thorough defense. Just as little do we doubt that a more thorough and complete investigation of the whole case, by an ex- amination of all the witnesses, and a careful discussion of the great questions of law in- volved, would have limited the apprehen- sion of danger to the peace of society and the stability of the Government, which may have arisen in the public mind from the testinnony already before the country ; and thus have restored confidence between man and man, as well as general tranquillity. The absence of the defendant, however, prevents the further development of the facts of the case ; and the sudden determin- ation of the trial puts an end to investiga- tions of the law applicable thereto, which we had determined should be thorough and exhaustive. In both respects, there- fore, we feel that we have reason for sin- cere and profound regret, for we are under the necessity of giving up to you for final judgment an imperfect cause — the broken fragment of what we had fondly hoped to make it ; and upon this fragment you are expected to render complete justice to the whole of which it forms but a part. While this labor and the difficulty thereof are yours, we shall follow your action with a soli- citude for the result far more painful and pro- found than we should have felt had our own labors been more thorough and complete. Duly grateful for the privilege accorded to us by the Commission of addressing it upon the whole case, before it is finally submitted for adjudication, we shall pro- ceed at once to the consideration of the questions arising in the record. These questions are of two kinds: I. Questions of law; II. Questions of fact. I. OF QUESTIONS OF LAW. These again naturally divide themselves into classes. Thus, we have questions: 1. In relation to the jurisdiction of the Commission to try the defendant upon the charges and specifications preferred against him: 2. In relation to the liability of the de- fendant to be tried before any court for certain alleged oft'enses charged against him; and 1. Of questions in relation to the jurisdiction of the Commission^ etc. Of these questions we should not have spoken at this time had the determination of the Commission been final; for the question of jurisdiction has already been presented and decided. The whole case, however, we understand, will be reviewed before any sentence can be inflicted upon the defendant; and in order, therefore, that the reviewing officer may have all the lights we can furnish upon this important point, we recur to it in this place. And we feel that, whether this Commission shall deem itself authorized to review its deci- sion in relation to its jurisdiction or not, its members will not take offense at our recur- rence to that topic, nor deem it an abuse of the privilege accorded to us of submit- ting this final address. If this Commission has jurisdiction to try the defendant upon the charges preferred against him, it must be because martial law had been proclaimed before these offenses were committed, and is still in force in the State of Indiana; for it will hardly be con- tended that, if martial law was not in force at the time of the alleged offenses, or has ceased to operate since that time, this Com- mission can have jurisdiction of this cause. The question then, which meets us at the threshold of this discussion, is this : Is martial law in force in the State of Indi- ana at the present timef Upon the right answer to this question must depend the right answer to the ques- tion: Has this Commission jurisdiction of the cause now before it? Before we can determine whether martial law is in force here or not, it is important for us to ascertain what martial law is. What then is martial law, the presence of which alone can authorize this trial, and give valid- ity to its results? We will answer this question by the au- thorities. " Martial law is the law of war, and de- pends on the just but arbitrary power of the king, or his lieutenant; for though the king does not make any law but by com- mon consent in Parliament, yet, in time of war, by reason of the necessity of it, to guard against dangers that often arise, he xiseth absolute power, so that his word is law." — Smith on the English Republic, Book 2, ch. 4. " Martial law may be defined as the law, (whatever it may be,) which is imposed by military power." — 2 Steph. Comm. on the Laws of Eng., p. 561. " Martial law is neither more nor less than the will of the general who commands the 56 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. army." — Duke of Wellington in Hmisards Debates in Parliament, (3 series) vol. 115, p. 880. '■'■ Military law" [employed here as synon- ymous with martial law,'] "' as applied to any persons, excei^ting the officers, soldiers, and followers of the army, for whose govern- ment there are particular provisions of law in all well regulated countries, is neither more nor less than the will of the general of the army." — Dispatches of the Duke of Wel- lington, vol. 6, p. 43. "I am sure that I was not wrong in law, for I had the advice of Lord Cottenham, Lord Campbell, and the Attorney General, Sir J. Juves, and explained to my noble friend, that what is called proclaiming mar- tial law is no law at all, but merely, for the sake of public safety, in circumstances of great emergency, setting aside all law, and acting under military power." — Earl Gray, as cited by Hough in Precedents in Military Laia, p. 515. "When martial law is proclaimed, courts- martial are thereby vested with such a sum- mary proceeding that neither time, place, nor person are considered. Necessity is the only rule of conduct ; nor are the punish- ments which couiis-martial may inflict under such authority, limited to "such as pre- scribed by law." — Hough on Courts^iartial, p. 383. " In truth and reality, it " — martial law — " is not a law, but something indulged rather than allowed as a law. The neces- sity of government, order, and discipline in an army, is that only which can give those laws a countenance ; qtwd enim necessitas cogit dffendi." — 1 Hale His. Com. Law. Sergeant Runnington's edition, London, 1794, p. — . This, then, is martial law — " the will of the general; ' "the arbitrary power of the king, or his lieutenant;" the means whereby "he useth absolute power, so that his word is law;" "the law which is imposed by mili- tary power;" "not a law at all;' the "set- ting aside all law and acting under military power;" a state in which "necessity is the only rule of conduct;" and "neither time, place, nor persons are Cjonsidered;" and wherein "the punishments which courts- martial may inflict" are neither limited nor prescribed by law. Does this law exist here, at this moment? Has it ever existed here ? Is it, indeed, our law? Are the people of the State of In- diana thus stript of all their legal and con- stitutional rights; and reduced to this ab- solute bondage? Are the Constitution and laws of the United States suspended? Have tlie State Constitution and laws in like manner ceased to operate? If not, i then, martial laiv does not exist here. If so,' then, by what authority have they ceased to operate? By wliom have they been sus- pended? Whence was the power derived that has suspended them? All power, the' underived power of Almighty God, must have an origin. But from whom comes this power to put an end, for the time being, and. it may be, forever, to the Federal and State Governments of the United States ; and to all the rights they were organized to protect and defend ? These questions must be answered before martial law, as insisted upon, can stand justi- fied in the presence of the intelligence of the nineteenth century. But how shall we answer them ? It has been insisted by the Judge Advo- cate, that martial law is in force here for two reasons. These are as follows : 1. Because the President of the United States proclaimed martial laiv on the 24th of September, 1862, in tlte following terms : " First. That during the existing insurrec- tion, and as a necessary measure for sup- pressing the same, all rebels and insurgents, their aiders and abettors, within the United States, and all persons discouraging volun- teer enlistments, resisting militia drafts, or guilty of any disloyal practice, affording aid and comfort to rebels against the authority of the United States, shall be subject to martial law, and liable to trial and punish- ment by courts-martial or military commis- sion. "iSfeconc?. That the writ of habeas corpus is suspended in respect to all persons ar- rested, or who hereafter dui-ing the rebel- lion shall be imprisoned in any fort, camp, arsenal, military prison, or other place of confinement by any militaiy authority, or by the sentence of any court-martial or military commission." 2. Because the enforcement of martial law is essential to the preservation of the life of the Republic. It may be that we do not state these rea- sons in the order in which they were pro- pounded, nor in the language employed. But the order of statement can not effect the questions they present ; and the sub- stance of the reasons are here given as pre- sented. Let us, then, proceed to consider them. I. Does the Proclamation of the Presi- dent just cited, suspend the Constitution and laws of the United States, and of the several States ? This question involves two others, namely: a. Had the President authority to pro- claim martial law, and suspend the habeas corpus as to the subjects thereof, at the time he issued this Proclamation? b. If so, is this Proclamation still in force ; or, if rescinded, has it been followed by a subsequent one of equivalent force ? a. It will be admitted that if the Presi- dent had no authority to suspend the privi- lege of the writ of habeas corpus throughout the United States, at the date of the fore- going Proclamation, he could have had no autliority to proclaim martial law to the same TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 57 extent ; for a proclamation of martial law in- volves not only the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus^ but, also, the privileges and immunities of all other laws, whether State or Federal, common or statute, municipal or constitutional. Had the President power, then, to sus- pend the privileges of the writ of habeas corpus ? It would seem not, both on princi- pal and authority. During the progress of our country, this question had been judi- cially considered and settled before the commencement of the present war , and the authorities stand thus on this point : " Practically, as yet. Congress has never authorized the suspension of the writ. It is understood that as the unlimited power is vested in Congress, the right to jvidge of the expediency of its exercise is, also, abso- lute in that body." — Sedgwick on Stai. and Const. Law, p. 598 ; Martin \s. Mott, 12 Wheat., p. 19. " But it is at any rate certain, that Con- gress, which has authorized the courts and judges of the United States to issue writs of habeas corpus, in cases within their juris- diction, can alone suspend their power, and that no State can prevent those judges from exercising their regular functions, which are, however, confined to imprisonment professed to be under the authority of the United States. But the State courts and judges possess the right of determining on the legality of imprisonment, under either authority." — Rawleon the Const., pp. 114, 115. " Hitherto, no suspension of the writ has ever been authorized by Congress since the establishment of the Constitution. It would seem as the power is given to Congress to suspend the writ of habeas corpus in cases of rebellion or invasion, that the right to judge whether the exigency had arisen, must exclusively belong to that body." — 2 Story on Const, § 1342. The list of American authorities might be indefinitely extended; but these are deemed sufficient. The only instance in the history of the United States since the adoption of the present Constitution^ in which an effort was made, prior to the present insurrection, to procure a suspension of "the habeas corpus, occurred during the Administration of Mr. Jefl^'erson ; and, in that instance, the author- ity was conceded by all departments of the Government to reside in Congress. The President submitted the question to that body ; and they treated it as belonging without question to them." — See 3 Benton's Abridg. Debates in Congress, pp. 488-491 ; 504- 515 ; and 520-542. The English authorities are not less de- cisive of the point in controversy ; for when- ever the king in the recess of Parliament imprisons ofi'enders, and denies them the privilege of the writ of habeas coipus, he is under the necessity of submitting his action to Parliament at its next session, and ask- ing an act of indemnity for what he has done. Otherwise, his officers and agents en- gaged in such unauthorized imprisonments of his subjects, would be held liable for the arrests so made. Such had been the prac tice in England for near a century before our Declaration of Independence. A dif- ferent course even in England, could not have been allowed without giving full sanc- tion to the frequently assumed, but almost constantly denied, prerogative of dispens- ing witli the laws of the land. The habeas corpus is the creature of law — originally of the old Common Law; but since the 31 Car. II, of the Statute Law of England; and hence to allow its suspension by pro- clamation, would be to permit the King to dispense with the laws of the land. We can not better present the light in which these attempts on the part of the King to suspend this great vnAi are viewed by English statesmen, than by the follow- ing observations of Lord Brougham upon the subject: " This is a far worse measure," he ob- serves, "at all times than the restriction of public meetings; but the exercise of the power is, at least, under some check; for a bill of indemnity is always required to se- cure the government which has used such power of imprisonment; and, as the bill must be carried through after the alarm has passed away, possibly when a new min- istry is in office, they who have occasion for it, are exposed to considerable risk, if they have at all abused the power tem- porarily bestowed. I have conversed with ministers who have been parties to such proceedings; and I have invariably found in them a very natural, may I add also, a very wholesome aversion to the whole plan." — Brougham on the British Const, pp. 283 and 284. In the language of Mr. Justice Wood- bury, "it would be a little extraordinary if the spirit of our institutions, both State and National, was not much stronger than in England against the" exercise of such powers. — 7 How. U. S. I. C. Rep., 62. It may be well questioned, we think, whether an American Congress possess au- thority to pass a valid act of indemnity in such case. Certain it is, it can not be done without a violation of the spirit of the Constitution, which prohibits the passage of e.v post facto laws and bills of attainder. There is little difference between subject- ing a man to punishment for an act, not criminal when committed; and dej^riving him of a remedy for a wrong done him, after his right to redress has accrued. An act of indemnity is, in such case, an act of injustice and oppression; and clearly within the spirit of the prohibition against ex post facto legislation. But while this objection to such legisla- 68 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. tion lies in full force against it in this country, no such objection exists to it in England. There Parliament is omnipo- tent. No constitutional restraints are im- posed upon it. It has, at all times, all the power that we could confer upon a consti- tutional convention. Hence, it is entirely competent for it to give legal validity to an act that was before entirely illegal and void. Congress has no such omnipotence, however. Such power does not exist in this country, except in the hands of the people. We are, also, led to the same conclusion by the contemplation of the manner in which the executives of the two govern- ments have originated. In theory yet, and undoubtedly original in practice also, they start from different and absolutely oppo- site principles. The Government of Great Britain pro- ceeds from the King. He is the fons et origo of power, justice, and honor. He is im- mortal — can do no wrong — stands above the law. Acts of Parliament are acceded to by him in language which still implies, that he but grants the petition of the two houses of Parliament. Originally acts of Parliament not unfrequently became laws by being first presented to the King in the form of humble petitions on the part of the two Houses, the prayers whereof he was graciously pleased to grant. Such was the justly celebrated Petition of Right. An- other form, equally indicative of this claim of absolute power on the part of the King, is that of charters. In these the King speaks the law, thus: Dedimus et concessimus^ etc. — we give and grant, etc. Such is the style of the Magna Charta, and many other ancient statutes of England, still extant. This power of the King to gi'ant charters to corporations is still claimed as one of the royal prerogatives; and may, at any time, be exercised in the creation of new bodies politic. The great city of London derived its charter thus originally from the King ; and it was said to have been sealed by William the Conqueror, who granted it with wax, which was Bitten with his tooth In token of sooth. In order, however, more fully to grasp the whole vast extent of the power thus ex- ercised by the King in the granting of char- ters of government, it must be remembered that under them legishitive, judicial and ex- ecutive powers have been exercised amoun t- ing almost to absolute sovereignty. This is illustrated in the charter governments of America, one of which, since its separation from the parent country, has declared mar' iial law. But the power is far more grandly illustrated in the career of the East India Company — a corporation created by Queen Elizabeth, still existing, and ruling an Empire embracing vast territories in the fairest portions of the earth, and teeming with a population of more than a hundred million of souls. Starting thus with a ruler, in theory at least, if not in fact, absolute, we can only arrive at a knowledge of his present pow- ers and prerogatives by a careful study of what he has already granted to his Parlia- ment or people in the way of charters, peti- tions and acts of Parliament mjorojon'a/orwia. and in the private charters of different cor- porations, which have from time to time been created by him, both in Great Britain and other parts of his dominions. Whatever has been thus given away, he can not resume. It is in the hands of his subjects, and constitutes the body of their liberties. The perfect sphere of a power once absolute in his hands, has thus, as it were, undergone, through a succession of ages, a slow but constant disintegration, and the golden sands thereof have as con- stantly been gathered up and hoarded by his subjects, in whose hands they have be- come rights. Thus, according to the theory of the British Government, rights are the gifts of the crown to the people. Whatever has not been thus given, is still in the hands of the King — constitutes his prerogative. The Government of the United States, on the other hand, presents exactly the re- verse of this picture. It is the creature of the people, in whom all power is inherent. It can have no power which they have not conferred upon it, either by express grant, or by necessary implication. In order, therefore, to determine its powers, we have only to turn to the charter of its creation — the Constitution of the United States. A careful examination of that instrument will, we think, satisfy any candid mind that aU the implied powers conferred upon the Gov- ernment thereby must, in the first place, be ancillary to some substantive power ex- pressly granted ; and must, in the second place, whenever it is not a mere matter of form, become the subject of legisla- tion before it can be constitutionally ex- erted by any department. This view is, in our opinion, sustained by the language of the Constitution, in which these implied powers are supposed to be embraced. Thus, it is declared that '" Congress shall have power * * * to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitu- tion in the Government of the United States, or in any department thereof" It is plain to our minds, from this lan- guage, that as often as the Executive may hnd his powers, as expressed in the Consti- tution, about to fail of their legitimate pur- poses for want of some ancillary power not expressly conferred, instead of seizing upon and exercising such necessary power with- out an act of Congress authorizing him to do so, that functionary must first aak Con- TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 59 gress for the required power. Otherwise, he transgresses a plain provision of the Consti- tution. For, if the power belonged to the Executive prior to the passage of a law, why was it provided that Congress should have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into exe- cution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department thereof? If the President had a right to exercise the power in the first in- stance, why empower Congress to make the law necessary and proper to enable him to do so? It was, therefore, plainly not the inten- tion of the people that the President should exercise any implied powers. If we are right in this conclusion, then how can any one concede a right in the President, as ancillary to his executive functions, to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas carpus'? If the King of Eng- land, all the vast residuum of power not embodied in charters, petitions granted, and acts of Parliament, must still look to an omnipotent Parliament — himself constitu- ting one equal and independent branch thereof — for authority to enable him to sus- pend the habeas corpus^ or indemnify his of- ficers when, by mere power, they have al- ready done so, shall we admit that a greater power over the priceless privilege of that writ, resides in the hands of the republican President of the United States ? And more especially we do so, when no such power is expressly granted him in the Constitution ; and when, by the fairest intendment, all im- plied powers are denied him, until conferred and made express by law ? But the privilege of the writ of habeas cor- pus is conferred by a law of the land. To allow the President to suspend it would, therefore, be to enable him to suspend a law of the land ; in other words, to legis- late. But, as Executive, he must see that the laws are faithfully executed ; and it is not for him to select what laws shall, and what laws shall not, be thus executed. All laws must stand alike to him, until, by sus- pension of one or more. Congress enables him to neglect or disregard those that are suspended, in his execution of the rest. The Act of Congress, of March 3, 1863, cited in our previous argument on this sub- ject, and the President's subsequent procla- mation in conformity therewith, are equiva- lent to a clear declaration that the power to suspend the habeas corpus does not originally reside with the Executive ; and as the President approved that act. and issvied that proclamation under it, we must hold that he now accepts the power from Congress, and does not claim it as properly pertaining to his function. If this were not the case, then his second proclamation was entirely unnecessary — a mere work of supereroga tion. If the proclamation of September 24, 1862, had already suspended the privil- ege of the writ of habeas corpus, what occa- sion was there for the proclamation of the 15th of September, 1863?— See 12 Stat at Large, App. pp. 6 and 7. Hence, we hold it established, that the President of the United States does not pos- sess an original constitutional authority to issue such a proclamation as that of Sep- tember 24, 1862, in so far as it relates to the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus; because, 1. Precedents, both English and Ameri- can, are against — precedents both legislative and judicial ; 2. The King of England never exercises the power without going to Parliament for an act of indemnity, while it may be well questioned whether Congress has power to indemnify the President; 3. The authority is not conferred upon the President by express ; and all implied powers are, by the terms of the Constitution,, denied him ; 4. The habeas corpus exists by law. To suspend it is a legislative function ; and one plainly, therefore, not conferred upon the President ; and 5. Congress by the act of March 3, 1863 ; and the President by his subsequent Pro- clamation, in pursuance thereof, in effect negatives the Proclamation of September 24, 1862; and the assumption of authority by which the same was originally issued. But, arguing from the less to the greater — from 07ie of a species to all — we conclude, that if the President has not authority to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, until it is conferred upon him by Congress, he can not have power to declare martial law. which we have seen is, for the time being, the suspension of all law, both Federal and State — municipal and constitu- tional. No lawyer will contend that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is placed upon higher ground by the Constitution, than any other constitutional privilege. On the contrary, it does not stand so high as any other ; for it is provided that it may be sus- pended, " when in case of invasion or rebel- lion, the public safety may require it." It stands alone subject to this contingency of suspension. All other privileges of the Constitution stand high above it therefore ; and yet we have seen it stands above the reach of Executive power until Congress in- tervenes. All other constitutional privileges stand above the reach even of Congress itself Among these vital elements of pop- ular freedom are placed the right of every citizen to be exempted from answering " for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the iiand or naval forces," etc.; and that other 60 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. great right parallel thereto, that " in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall en- Joy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the State and dis- trict wherein the crime shall have been committed." etc. There is no provision for a suspension, in any contingency, of these sacred rights. The power that suspends them may, without any further stretch, overthrow every other constitutional and legal right. It can be done by no power derived from the Constitution ; for it strikes down and destroys its most sacred provis- ions. The people have never conferred any such power. Congress has never assumed to sanction it; but have, on the contrary, expressly provided a method by wliich the public safety may be secured, and the liberty ■of the people preserved. The Act of March 3, 1863, already so frequently cited, after providing for military arrests, and for the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, as to persons so arrested, pro- vides also for their trial in a strictly consti- tutional manner ; and, if they are not pre- sented or indicted by the grand jury of the proi^er district within twenty days after they have been reported to the proper Cir- cuit or District Court, or after they have been imprisoned, provided such grand jury shall, in the mean time, have closed its ses- sion, for their discharge ft'om such military custody, either absolutely or conditionally, according to the circumstances of each case. Here is an express limit, then, to the suspen- sion of the habeas corpus in ca&'e of such per- sons as the defendant; and an express pro- vision for their trial wholly incompatible, as we conceive, with the jurisdiction of this honorable Commission. It is, therefore, not within the constitu- tional authority of the President to declare martial law, and thereby deprive the defend- ant of his right to a constitutional trial by jury, upon an indictment duly presented by the proper grand jury. Congress has no power, under any known or conceivable state of afl'airs, to pass a valid act to deprive him of such a trial. Any such power, if it ' exist at all, as part of the resources of our Government, iluist result to it from a pres- ent military necessity — a necessity in the presence of which the functions of Congress are suspended, and all the powers of civil government at an end. Then, and then only, when the laws are silenced by the din of arms, can such a power be admitted upon the public thoater; and it may be well questioned whether it is not to be regarded as rather the successor than the instrument of the Government whose constitutional organs have disappeared from the scene — whose constitutional functions have ceased. And this naturally brings us to the sec- ond proposition we are controverting, namely : 2. Martial law is essential in the present emergency to the preservation of the na- tional life. In the discussion of this proposition, we were informed that " it is one of the innate l^rinciples of every existing thing, that it is endowed with the right to meet and over- come the force that seeks to destroy it." And this is true. But how endowed? The right of self-defense may legitimately call into play all tlie forces of the self to be defended. Has it any claim upon any more? any right to extrinsic aid ? " Every exist- ing thing" must exercise its right of self- defense according to tlie principles of its constitution; and it can not find one thing to defend, or one capability of defense out- side of its constitutional existence and power. The analogy to which the prosecu- tion thus appeals, is against the position in support of which it has been invoked. If it shall be said that it is not an argument from analogy ; but an argument from all, to one of the same kind — from "every existing thing" to the Government as one "existing thing," then it proves nothing at all; for the- question recurs upon us : How is the " existing thing" known as the Government of the United States endowed with the right to meet and overcome the force that seeks to destroy it? Plainly by virtue of its Constitution ; and only to the extent of its Constitution. Whenever this constitu- tional endowment ceases, there we are bound, according to the argument, to hold that its creator — the peojDle — intended it should cease to live. If it is not constitu- tionally qualified to make good the battle for its life without an entire subversion and destruction of its Constitution, then it must die. It may be well questioned whether an emergency requiring a declaration of mar- tial law in all parts of the United States at the same time, would not be equivalent to the death of the Republic. Indeed, we can not see how it could be otherwise. While we hold these opinions, we con- cede, on the other hand, that there may be large sections and districts of the country in such condition as to require the exercise of martial laiv. Wherever lawless force has subverted all other law, there this "rude substitute," known as martial law, may properly enter, and control the relations of persons to each other and to the Govern- ment, until the reign of law and order re- turns. Again, wherever lawless force con- fronts lawful force in martial array, and the contest of the two puts an end to the civil administration, th(>re martial laiv is called for and may properly be declared; or rather, it exists without any declaration at all. In tlie camp of an army in the field, or near the enemy, martial law may become neces- sary for the preservation of discipline, and thereby of the fidelity, and even of the ex- istence of such army. But in all such cases, the "existing thing" to be preserved Ls more TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 61 immediately the army involved in the case than the Government ; and it must be re- membered that an army is always a mere instrument of force — and to martial law as the sum of organized force — for that end. But, even then, it can only take such an extreme step, when compelled to do so, by necessity — a present controlling necessity. Now upon this point, it seems to us, that the Judge Advocate has already conceded the question in dispute, for he says : " The Government stood on the brink of a preci- pice. The conspirators were foiled by the mili- tary power of the Government. * * * Self- preservation demanded that these men should be seized by the military power. Foreseeing thedanger, martial law had been declared by the President^ and military courts given juris- diction." Upon these sentences, which, we think, fairly represent the Judge Advocate, are we not entitled to say, that they do not imply a present necessity for martial law ? He informs us that " the Government stood," i. e., at some indefinite past time, ''upon the brink of a precipice." There is no pre- tense that such is its present condition owing to the defendant and his associates, for he declares that " the conspirators were foiled by the military authorities." How had they been foiled ? By being " seized by the military power." From all which it is plain that the necessity had passed, and that this defendant might safely have been delivered over for trial to the civil courts, which have never yet been closed in this district. But, if the necessity that led to the organized declaration of martial law did not exist at the commencement of this trial, or has since ceased to exist, the juris- diction of this Commission has ceased with it. But it seems that the President's decla- ration of martial law was prospective — to meet a necessity foreseen, but at the time non-existent. Now, granting the Presi- dent's power in proper circumstances — in the presence of an existing and controlling necessity — to declare martial law, it surely will not be contended that he may, without such present necessity, fulmine such a Pro- clamation in an anticipation of its future existence. In this view, then, the Proclamation was premature — two years almost in advance of the necessity in which alone it can find a valid excuse for appearing at all. Of course, it was not valid at its date, on the hypothe- sis of a present necessity, and being invalid then, it can not be revived for the present occasion. That the one sole ground upon which it IS competent for a military commander to declare martial laiv, is the existence of a present and controlling military necessity, we beg leave to oft'er some authorities: "The only principle which the law of England tolerates what is called martial hw, is necessity; its introduction can be justified only by necessity ; and its continuance re- quires precirsely the same justification of necessity; and, if it survive the necessity in which alone it rests, for a single minute, it becomes instantly a mere exercise of law- less violence. When foreign invasion or civil war renders it impossible for courts oi' law to sit, or to enforce the execution of their judgments, it becomes necessary to find some rude substitute for them, and to employ for that purpose the military, which is the only remaining force in the commun- ity. While the laws are silenced by the noise of arms, the rulers of the armed force must punish, as equitably as they can, those crimes which threaten their own safety ; but no longer — every moment beyond is usurpation. As soon as the laws can act, every other mode of punishing supposed crimes is itself an enormous crime. If ar- gument be not enough on this subject — if, indeed, the mere statement be not evidence of its own truth — I appeal to the highest and most venerable authority known to our law. ' Martial laiv,' says Sir Matthew Hale, ' is not a law, but something indulged rather than allowed as a law. The necessity of government, order, and discij^line in an army, is that only which can give it counte- nance. Necessitas enim, quod cogit, defendit.' — Sir Jame^ MachintosK s Miscellaneous Essays and Speeches. Gary and Hart's edition, p. 540. "Suppose," says Lord Brougham, "I were ready to admit that on the j^ressure of a great emergency, such as invasion or rebel- lion, when there is no time for the slow and cumbrous proceedings of the civil law, a proclamation may justifiably be issued for excluding the ordinary tribunals, and di- recting that oftenses should be tried by a military court — such proceedings might be justified by necessity ; but it could rest on that alone. Created by necessity, necessity must limit its continuance. It would be the worst of all conceivable grievance — it would be a calamity unspeakable — if the whole law and Constitution of England were suspended one hour longer than the most imperious necessity demanded. * ■" * * * * I know that the proclamatioi of martial law renders every man liable to be treated as a soldier. But the instant the necessity ceases, that instant the state of soldiership ceases, that instant the rights, with the relations of civil life, ought to be restored. * * Only mark the dilemma in which the Governor might have found himself placed by his own acts. The only justification of the court-martial was the Pro- clamation. Had that court sat at the mo- ment of danger, there would have been less ground of complaint against it. But it did not assemble until the emergency had ceased; and it then sat for eight-and-twenty days. Supi^ose a necessity had existed at the commencement of the trial, but that, in the course of the eight-and-twenty days, it 62 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. had ceased ; suppose a necessity had existed in the first week, who could predict that it would not cease before the second ? If it had ceased with the first week of the trial, what would have been the situation of the Governor ? The sitting of the court-martial at all, could be justified only by the proclama- tion of martial law ; yet it became the duty of the Governor to revoke that proclama- tion. Either, therefore, the court-martial must be continued without any warrant or color of law, or the proclamation of martial law must be continued only to legalize the prolonged existence of the court-martial. If, at any moment before its proceedings were brought to a close, the urgent pressure had ceased, which alone justified their being instituted, according to the assump- tion I am making in favor of the court, and for the Governor's sake; then to continue martial law one hour longer would have been the most grievous oppression, the plainest violation of all law." — Speeches of Lord Brougham, vol. 1, pp. 390, 391. It is distinctly said by the Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of Jjuther vs. Borden^ 7 How., pp. 46 and 47, that " no more force can be used than is necessary to accomplish the object,"' under a declara- tion of martial law. From this we infer that the same rule must apply to the adop- tion of force — martial law — in the first in- stance. "In time of war, by reason of the neces- sity of it, he" — the King — "useth absolute power, so that his word is law;" and this is martial law — "the law of war." — Smith on the English Republic, supra. And Hale says it is "indulged" on account "of the necessity," etc. It was never, the same author assures us, "so much indulged as intended to be executed, or exercised upon others" than soldiers. "For others who were not en- listed under the army had no color or rea- son to be bound by military constitutions, applicable only to the army whereof they were not parts. But they were to be or- dered and governed according to the laws to which they were subject, though it were a time of war. * * * The exercise of martial law, whereby any person should lose his life, or member, or liberty, may not be permitted in time of peace, when the King's courts are open for all persons to re- ceive justice according to the laws of the land. This is in substance declared by the Petition of Right, 3 Oar. I, whereby such commissions and martial law were re- f)ealed, and declared to be contrary to aw." — Hale's His. of the Common Law, pp. 54 and 55. Thus, it appears that a controlling mili- tary necessityalone can afford a just ex- cuse for a declaration of martial law — a ne- cessity that closes the civil courts of jus- tice, or prevents the enforcement of their judgments by the or^Ainary process. Mili- tary necessity has been defined by the Gov- ernment in General Orders, No. 100, 1863, to "consist in the necessity of those meas- ures which are indispensable for securing the ends of the war," etc. Has any such controlling necessity ex- isted in the present instance? Does it still exist? Have the courts been closed and the laws silenced by the din of arms? Are they still closed? If not, then, we think, we are authorized to say that no necessity has existed, or still exists, for declaring wiar^/a^^aw, for suspending the constitutions and laws, and proceeding against citizens charged with high crimes and misdemeanors in a manner never before resorted toin this country since the first settlement at Jamestown and Ply- mouth ; and one wholly disused in England since the abdication of James II. It is the fact of the civil courts being open, and justice having its ordinary course, that distinguishes a state of peace in any country from a state of war; and to this etiect Lord Chief Justice Coke lays down the law. He says: "When the courts of justice are open, and the judges and minis- ters of the same may by law protect men from oppression and violence, and distri- bute justice to all, it is said to be a time of peace. So when by invasions, insurrections, rebellions, etc., the peaceable course of justice is disturbed and stopped, so as the courts of justice be, as it were, shut up, then it is said to be a time of war." — See Coke upon Littleton, 249, b. n. 1; and Viner's Abridgment, tit. Prcerogative, (L. a.) War. In view of this great authority, is not this a time of peace in Indiana, at least in so far as the administration of justice is con- cerned ? If it is a time of war, it can not be said, in that respect, to be made so by the rebellion — by any act of the common en- emy. The courts are open, and "the peace- able course of justice is not disturbed and stopped." But if it be a time of peace, if " the courts are open for all persons to receive justice according to the laws of the land," then according to Lord Hale, supra, " the exercise of martial law, whereby any person should lose his life, or member, or liberty, may not be permitted;" and this is in sub- stance declared by the Petition of Right, 3 Car. I, whereby such commissions of martial law were repealed, and declared to be contrary to law. And accordingly was that famous case of Edmond, Earl of Kent, who being taken at Pomfort, 15 Edw. 11, the King and divers lords proceeded to give sentence of death against him, as in a kind of military court, by a summary proceeding, which judgment was afterward, in 1 Edw. Ill, reversed in Parliament." * * "For viartial law, which is rather indulged than allowed, and that only in cases of necessity, in open war, is not per- mitted in time of peace, when the ordinary courts of justice are open." TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 63 But even if this were a time of " open war," and "the ordinary courts" of law "were shut up," and the "peaceable course of justice disturbed and stopped," so that "the judges and ministers of the same may" not, "by law, protect men from op- pression and violence, and distribute jus- tice to all," has the Government of the United States taken the necessary steps to the enforcement of martial law, according to the usages of war ? It will not be de- nied that the Duke of Wellington under- stood as well as any man of his times, the duties and rights of a military commander in this respect. His whole great life was devoted to the profession of arms; and the administering of governments according to the rules and usages of war. Speak- ing upon this subject, he says: "In fact 7nartial law is no law at all. Therefore the general who declares martial law, and com- mands it to be carried into execution, is bound to lay down distinctly the rules, and regulations and limits according to which his will is to be carried out." — Hansard, supra. Now, if martial law has been declared, and is in force in the whole United States, as claimed by the Judge Advocate, we have been able to find no order whereby the President, Lieutenant General, or others acting under either, have laid "down dis- tinctly;" or, indeed, at all, "the rules, regu- lations and limits according to which his" or their "will is to be carried out." If this is not done, the declaration of martial law must become a snare to entrap the un- wary; and, indeed, the wary also; for where the law resides in the breast of the ruler until it alights upon its subject in the form of a prosecution for a "capital or otherwise infamous crime," the good have no assurance of safety above the evil. All are alike insecure. Such a system would be worse than that of the Emperor Caligula who wrote his edicts in a small character, and hung them on high pillars the more eflfectually to ensnare his subjects. 6. But that it may not be said that we have overlooked the military character and power of the President, we beg leave to say, that this discussion has proceeded upon a consideration of his entire character; and if this method of considering his pow- -ers, is not so clear as one founded on the separation of his character and powers as a civil magistrate, from those belonging to him as the commander of the arrny and navy, we have been led into it by the method in which that functionary himself has proceeded in the exercise of those powers. Thus, the Proclamation relied upon in this prosecution as a declaration of martial law, was originally issued from the office of the Secretary of State; and is published with the acts of Congress, as an ordinary civil document of the kind. Had the President not given us evidence of the fact, that he is in the habit of distinguish- ing between his war powers and his civil functions, this course might not have led us to regard' the Proclamation in the light of a purely civil act. But it is well known that he has issued several war orders purely as such. Hence, we had a right to look to the War office, and not to that of State, for so important an order as that which declares all the provisions of the Constitution and the laws suspended ; and martial law — the President's mere will — sub- stituted therefor. If the Proclamation is not a war order resulting from a paramount and controlling military necessity, then we submit, it is not, and can not, possibly be a declaration of martial law; and so we con- tend, martial law has not been in force, and can not be under it. If it be regarded as a war order and in force at its date, has it not been since re- scinded by act of Congress? We think it clearly has been, provided the legislative function of the Government has not been suspended by its operation ; and it would seem from the President's recognition of Con- gress, as not suspended, by delivering to both Houses thereof sundry messages; by approving their acts; and, in some in- stances, by afterward acting upon laws passed by them, that he still regards the national legislature as still existing and in full life and power. If it is, then it may prescribe rules to govern the exercise of his power as Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy. It may say how far he shall declare martial law; and where his power, in that respect, shall cease. And this it has done. The power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus Congress have already given him, if, indeed, they have power to delegate that dis- cretion — a proposition not involved in this discussion ; but one which we should other- wise controvert upon authority. That sus- pension, however, of the writ of habeas cor- pus, while it provides for military arrests and imprisonments, is not coupled with any power of military trials. On the con- trary, it is expressly provided that a trial, in case of military imprisonmentSj shall not be postponed indefinitely; but shall be had at the next term of the proper Circuit or District Court, provided the grand jury of the district find an indictment; and if not, then that such court shall, upon proper application made, discharge persons so im- prisoned, either absolutely or conditionally. Here, then, is a legal limit to the Presi- dent's power even to imprison; and a clear denial of his right to punish, by military law, such offenders against the United States. He approved this limitation upon his power, as asserted in the Proclamation upon which alone it is contended this pros- ecution can proceed. It, is therefore, plainly rescinded, if it ever was valid. And 64 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. we desire to observe that the law which does this, expressly refers to the same classes of persons declared subject to mar- tial lato by the Proclamation of September 24, 1862; and provides, as already said, for their trial, or discharge from custody, by the ordinary civil tribunals. — Act of Congress of March 3, 1863—12 Stat, at large, p. 766, §§ 2, 3 et seq. We conclude, therefore, that martial law does not now exist in the State of Indiana; and, in fact, never has so existed; because, 1. It was not competent for the President to declare, or proclaim it ; 2. If it ever were proclaimed, the Proclar mation has been rescinded by act of Con- gress, with the full approval of the Presi- dent. And, as the existence of martial law is conceded to be necessary to the jurisdiction of this court, we conclude, therefore, that this court has no jurisdiction of the defend- ant upon the charges and specifications now pending against him. [Of questions of the second and third classes, namely : II. In relation of the liability of the de- fendant to be tried before any court for some of the ofienses alleged against him ; III. In relation to the nature and suffi- ciency of the evidence adduced against him to support the charges. These two classes of questions are here considered together.] ^Ir. M. M. Kay continued the argument, as follows : In approaching the evidence of the case, we are almost subdued and awed into si- lence, by considering the perilous precipice on which society, in the North-west, so lately hung, if the testimony, in the plenti- tude of its details, or even in its general scope, is to be believed. But, when we con- sider that much of that evidence is open to criticism from the perfidious relations which one or more of the witnesses bore to the defendant, and especially that the evidence is entirely ex parte, we are reassured that an exalted duty rests still upon us, as well as upon this Court, to analyze the testimony and apply it to the case according to the eternal and unchangeable rules of justice, of truth, and of good faith; even though the defendaiit may have fled from the perils of his situation. And just here we beg to en- ter our protest against the dangerous legal heresy that the escape of a defendant dur- ing trial and before judgment, carries with it any inference of either law or fact preju- dicial to his innocence. The most that can be predicated of the fact is, that he has waived his constitutional right to be present, in person, for the remainder of tlie trial — leaving the whole question of his guilt or innocence, intact, before the Court to the same extent as if he had chosen to remain absent from Court in his prison. To this extent, the cases cited from Seventh Ohio, Fourteenth and Sixteenth Indiana go, and no further. Such absence gives no additional weight to the Government's testimony. Such absence is no confession of guilt. Such absence, whether by escape from cus- tody, or by voluntary absence in his prison, only waives his right to be present at the trial and at the rendition of judgment, in the civil tribunals, but it waives no legiti- mate matter of defense — no defects of law or evidence in the case which the Govern- ment has made. We will be pardoned, therefore, for dwelling with emphasis in denial of this most unwarrantable assump- tion. The most obvious and intelligible manner of treating the charges against the defendant and applying to them the evi- dence, is to consider, first, the charges and specifications based simply on the sup- posed character of the secret organization of which the defendant was a member, and the evidence applicable to the same — and, secondly, the charges and specifications based on the extraneous acts and declara- tions of defendant and the evidence in their support. To deny that the defendant was a member of a secret political society of the name charged, would be to ask the Court to discredit- the only corroborated testimony in the case. So it may be ac- cepted as true, that there was such a society, and that the defendant was a member, and at the head of the organization in this State. But we deny that the organization was, by its framework, rituals, written and unwritten work, a conspiracy, as the specifi- cations assume. We also deny, in the light of the evidence, that the order is intrin- sically disloyal or treasonable, however vicious and unjustifiable it may be on gen- eral principles, in other respects, and how- ever bad and ambitious men may pervert and use it to surprise a misguided society and betray into the great crime of conspi- racy, insurrection and treason. If we can feel justified in assuming this position, in the light of the ex parte case made by the Government, how much more fortified we would feel, were we at liberty to draw on the supposed support which rebutting testi- mony might have furnished us? We feel warranted, from the evidence, in saying that the Order of the Sons of Liberty did not spring at once from chaos, nor from the plastic hands of one man or council of men, but, in its present framework and pro- portions, it is the symmetrical edifice of three years of experiment, change, failure, and elaborate reconstruction. Starting from the rude home-made order of self-protection, thence matured into the " Circle of Honor," " Knights of the Golden Circle," thence into the " American Knights," and finally into the " Sons of Liberty." Springing at first from real or fancied necessity, it was at first a crude, immature, stupid, and in many re TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 65 Epects a ridiculous imposture and a gross political fraud on the credulity of unsophis- ticated people. Still, in all, or any of these stages and changes, we look in vain for the criminal element, or conspiracy, or treason. The members glided from one name into another without any conscious change of purpose oi' character, and without assuming any new obligations, or realizing any shame or criminality by virtue of the change. Hence, the conclusion forces itself upon our minds that there was neither conspiracy or treason in the written work of the order, per se ; nor was there any treason or conspiracy in the unwritten work of the order, for the mass of the members, without any new light, passed from one stage of the order to another, believing it only a political society. So, if we are right in this, the first, second, and third specifications of charge first, fall, as they are based on the theory that the organization is, joer se, a conspiracy. In saying this much, we do not forget that the evi- dence shows much loose and unreliable hearsay, in regard to the purposes of the order in certain localities; but then we re- member at the same time, and this Court will not fail to recollect, that all this testi- mony comes from the three witnesses, viz. : from Warren county, Illinois, Martin county, Indiana, and Eandolph county, Indiana, and in the case of the latter two, from men who only knew the " Knights of the Golden Circle ;" an organization without system, uniformity, community of creed, and with- out national, state or county head to the organization. The defendant can not be held responsible for any light, trivial, loose or wanton utterances of irresponsible, discon- nected associations, whose names are not even mentioned in any of the charges. We do not feel called upon, as counsel for the defendant, to apologize for these or any other secret political organizations, and es- pecially in revolutionary times like these. But we do feel called upon as a mark of respect to this Court, and in the interest of a common country, to place on record our unqualified reprobation of all secret politi- cal orders, by whatever name or party affili- ation, as, at best, but pestilential hotbeds for the most incendiary political heresies, leading to the worst fruits of Jacobinism. It is in vain for the purest and wisest pa- triot to offer words of truth and patriotism to the people, if they conflict with the de- crees of a secret, irresponsible, bloody tribu- nal. Through the machinery of secret or- ganizations, the worthless and irresponsible place-hunters come to the top, get the popular ear, and have nioi'e weight and influence in directing the popular mind, than all the lessons of history, or the ap- peals of our most learned, independent, unselfish and trusted public men. Who, then, that has had the sagacity to detect the baleful influence of secret societies in the whole political atmosphere for two years past, can find any apology or palliation for them? We offer none. It would be too much labor to go into the evidence in detail, so we can but classify it, and be con- tent with very general observations in its application. If we have not erred in the foregoing speculations in regard to the char- acter of the order, tlien the specifications, Nos. I, 2 and 3, of charge first, are in no wise proved. For we may observe that it is not competent to fix the character of the order as treasonable in Indiana, by produc- ing an obligation of a highly objectionable character, thi'ough a member of a different order, in a particular locality, in the State of Illinois, when the printed ritual of the whole order in Indiana is in evidence con- taining no such obligations. This remark applies to Wm. Clayton, a witness from Warren county, Illinois, and it applies with equal force to the verbal testimony of the witnesses from Martin and Randolph coun- ties, in this State, whose experience relates to irregular organizations anterior to the existence of the "Sons of Liberty," and revelations have no warrant in the ritual of that order, in this State. How can Dodd be held responsible for the insane ravings of persons with whom he had no connection ? For it will be steadily borne in mind, that, before the defendant can be chargeable with the dictations and acts of others in this or any other order, the evidence must estab- lish the essential preliminary fact thc.t the order is, per se, a conspiracy, for it travels on the ground that they are co-conspirators. We leave the fourth specification of charge first, as falling within class of charges based on positive independent acts, and pass to charge second. The four specifications of charge second, charge treason, if any thing. The task of disposing of the whole of this charge is easy. By article 3d, of section 3d, Constitution of United States, it is provided that ''No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act." We submit, with entire confidence, that no overt act has been proved by even one witness. It is true, the witness, Stidger. talks vaguely about the " order " having patronized the Greek fire machine, and about the burning of Govern- ment stores ; all of which was mere hearsay, coming from Bowles, which is not admissi- ble against defendant, except on the suppo- sition that the order is a conspiracy — and even then it would only have the force of one witness, if that. The same logic disposes of the same wit- ness' testimony in regard to the starting of couriers into Kentucky to give notice of the culmination of the scheme ; but the cour- iers were never started. All the specifica- tions of charge third, we suppose, fail for want of proof We do not remember any 66 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. evidence on the subject of arming and in- citing the people to insurrection, except what tends to support the fourth specifica- tion of charge first, involving a conspiracy to put on foot an insurrection. The evi- dence in regard to the arms bought in New York, and shipped to one Parsons, does not connect the defendant in any degree with that transaction. The evidence of all the witnesses touching the arming of the order is very unsatisfactory and inconclusive, even in the irregular local organizations. And as to supposed insurrectionary character of the defendant's official addresses and casual speeches, we have only to suggest that there is not now, never was, and in the nature of things never can be, any test or standard of legitimate debate. Where the press and speech are as free as they have been in this country in the past, more or less abuse and licentiousness must exist, and must be tole- rated. And it is respectfully submitted as a sound maxim in statesmanship, and a safe guide for legislators and courts, that great errors and abuses in this respect may be safely tolerated, if reason is left free to com- bat them. Why shall the defendant be ar- raigned for insurrectionary appeals, while the carnival of licentious utterance goes on all around us? Power, in all ages, has been jealous of a free press. While on this sub- ject, we conceive that we can do our client and country no better service than to com- mend to the attention of the Court an elo- quent passage from the speech of the great English orator, Sheridan, on the liberty of the press. Mr. Sheridan says: "Give me but the lib- erty of the press, and I will give the Minis- ter a venal House of Peers — I will give him a corrupt and servile House of Commons — I will give him full swing of the patron- age of office — I will give him the whole host of ministerial influence — I will give him all the power that place can confer up- on him to purchase submission, and over- awe resistance; and yet, armed with the liberty of the press, I will go forth to meet him undismayed ; I will attack the mighty fabric he has reared with that mightier en- gine ; I will shake down from its hight, cor- ruption, and lay it beneath the ruins of the abuses it was meant to shelter." There are five specifications under charge fourth, for "disloyal practices;" a charge suggestive of boundless elasticity, and an illimitable field of inquiry. What is a dis- loyal practice ? When we say that no law has defined it, no court has expounded it, and no precedent has illustrated it, we have shown the dangerous character of a convic- tion under that charge. As to the two specifications under charge fifth, for a violation of the laws of war, is it not enough for us to say, that the defend- ant was not in the military or naval service of the United States, and that if the rules and articles of war are meant, he owes no duty to them; and that if the international common law of war is meant, then it can only relate to the rights and duties of bel- ligerent powers, and not to the rights and duties of government and citizen. We have now traversed over all the charges, and recur to the fourth sjsecification of charge first. If the evidence establishes any spe- cification, it is the one under consideration. This charge rests, not upon the supposed treasonable character of the order, but up- on extrinsic testimony of particular facts, and those facts consisting of admissions and communications made by defendant to a Government Detective by the name of Stidger. If this witness' testimony is to be taken without any deduction, it would con- vict the defendant of a willingness to commit murder, as well as treason. The witness appears to be an intelligent and accom- plished detective, and all the more danger- ous on that account, unless strictly honest and impartial. A professional detective is quickened by the same instincts, and stim- ulated by the same motives, that influence even the better class of practicing lawyers in their zealous pursuit of the interest of a client. Such a detective starts out with hope, pride and professional ambition, all involved in his success in making a case against some one. His zeal leads him into every .species of sham intrigue ; his strategy leads into the confidence of the ambitious, the vain, the visionary, or the corrupt, and he sedulously cultivates the germ of every prurient weakness to folly, ambition or crime, so that in the end he has deliberately manufactured half the circumstances of guilt, and stands before God a joint criminal with the accused — standing with a guilt of twofold enormity — the guilt of treachery and dishonor in betraying the confidence of his dupe, and the guilt of an accomplice in the crime itself Or, to say the least of it, in every case he stands dishonored in the eyes of those he has betrayed, and when honor is lost, truth holds precarious sway. Honor and truth are the Siamese Twins ; if you sever the ligament that binds them, they sicken and die together. The scheme of murder and insurrection developed in that evidence is most atrocious and revolting, and whatever visionary schemes of ambition and adventure may have entered into the calculations of the de- fendant, we can not believe that murder was one of them. And although it consti- tutes no part of the charges on which he is tried, and although a conspiracy in aid of the rebellion is a crime of sufficiently dark a hue, we would fain vindicate his charac- ter from the infamy of a foul murder — a deed so foreign and repulsive to every ele- ment of his nature. But the evidence to support this degrading accusation is sup- plied by the same detective, and by the ab- TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 67 rupt termination of the trial, has denied us even the chance to disprove what is said to have taken place in open council in reference to the assassination of Coffin. And, indeed, the Court will be bound to receive all the evidence of the witness Stidger, with all that hesitation and doubt to which the treacherous relations which the witness bore to the defendant, expose it, and subject to the force of the fact of the abrupt and un- expected termination of the trial, operating with exclusive detriment to the defense. If the Court find the defendant guilty on this specification, it will be by giving full force and credit to the witness Stidger, and by taking a different view from us as to the true standard that measures the character of a professional detective, and weighs the credibility of his testimony. If we have not done injustice to the position of that class of witnesses, he stands not only dis- honored, as taking all the obligations and vows of secrecy of the order, with the de- liberate and premeditated purpose to violate these oaths, and to betray his comrades, but he stands, by virtue of his own machina- tions, progressing step by step to the clear and confessed relations of an accomplice, ■morally and legally. The rule of law upon the subject is, that while the testimony of an accomplice is to be received, yet it should be received with great caution, and when received, is entitled to less weight than the testimony of other witnesses. — See 2 Ind., 652; 4 Ind., 128; 7 Ind., 326; 9 Ind, 106. With much solicitude and anxiety, we ■commit the cause of the defendant, in his absence, to the learning, to the patriotism, to the honor, and to the justice of this Court. To the learning, because the great legal question of jurisdiction, lying at the threshold of your inquiries, is still open; to your patriotism, because the highest in- terests of public liberty, and the victory of reason over passion, are in ,your hands ; to your honor, because the graces of magna- nimity and mercy should follow the weak, the unfortunate, and even the guilty, and plead against the calamities of conviction ; to your justice, because she sits blind to the scenes of our national drama, unseduced by the blandishments of power, and deaf to the cries of resentment and passion. M. M. RAY, J. W. GORDON, Counsel for H. H. Dodd. REPLY OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE. Gentlemen of the Coynmission : I do not propose to go into an extended argument upon the question of jurisdic- tion. The Commission having already passed upon that question, it would be a vain and use- less labor for me to collate and review all the decisions and authorities that might be brought to bear upon that question. It is not necessary to occupy the time of the Commission in making an argument simply to meet what the gentlemen may say upon their side, for the arguments made by the counsel here, are not those of the accused, and are received by the Commission merely as a matter of courtesy, and, therefore, do not force me to take issue upon what they personally may place before you. I, how- ever, desire to submit, very briefly, one or two points, and then leave the case with you. On the question of jurisdiction, volumes might be written, and digests innumerable compiled. The question of martial law has, for centuries past, been a subject of thoughtful consideration by the ablest jurists; what it was, and what were the necessities that justified it. Martial law is born of necessity, and it is but a matter of opinion and judgment as to when that ne- cessity exists. He who is to judge of that necessity, is the chief executive power of any government, or the subordinate milita- ry officers acting under the orders of that executive. All the argument in the case resolves itself into one proposition, namely : that martial law can only exist, and does only exist, in times of great, controlling, over- powering necessity. Martial law, as has been well said, is a setting aside of the whole machinery;of the civil law. The civil law must go down before it, and nothing but a great and all-powerful necessity should be permitted to take from the people of any land the rights, privileges and immunities of the civil law. And who shall be the judge of that necessity ? It can only be the Chief Executive who wields the mili- tary power of any government. Congress can not be the judge. Our legislative body. Congress, usually convenes but once a year, not oftener than twice a year, and, in times of foreign war, invasion or rebellion, shall we wait the expiration of that year for the declaration of martial law, to preserve the life of the Government? Such a course would be suicidal and destructive of the Government itself The statement of the proposition shows its absurdity. If the ne- cessity for action should arise between the sessions of the legislative body, where is the power that must step in to save the Govern- ment before that legislative body meets ? The circumstances of the times necessitate martial law, and when this necessity exists, martial law must be proclaimed, and the civil law, for the time being, remains silent, to be revived in its native force when the necessity for proclaiming martial law shall have passed away. The civil law sleeps ; it is not dead. In this case the President has not said that martial law shall be proclaimed through the length and breadth of the land. On this point the counsel for the accused have gone astray. The President has not de- clared that the whole machinery of the civil 68 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. law sball remain dormant, that there shall not be any punishment of civil offenses in our courts. But he has said, that when men step in and undertake to assist tliis great rebellion, by acting in concert with these armed rebels against tlie Government, thus threatening the Hie of the nation, that they then clothe themselves with a certain mili- tary garb that brings them within military law, and that the military law shall act upon them, and thus far martial law is proclaimed; no further. When men, for instanca, here in the State of Indiana, undertake to bring about an insurrection, undertake to release and arm these hordes of rebel prisoners, here in our midst, they then become part and i^arcel of that rebel army, and make themselves subject to military law. They are as soldiers for the time being, and, like them, subject to military regulations. Take the case as it exists. We are engaged in a war ; and the ways of war are not the ways of peace. That which may be lawful in times of war is unlawful in times of peace. Let me illustrate. Would it be lawful in times of peace for the military commander of this district to go out to the ground on which Camp Morton now stands, and take possession of five hundred acres of land on which to build structures, in which to con- fine these rebel soldiers? Would it, in times of peace, be lawful for him to seize and take possession of a house to occupy as his head- quarters ? Would it be lawful for him to go upon another man's land, and camp his troops, and seize his corn and provisions ? Would not each single act be a trespass, for which he would be liable to prosecution ? But it is no crime under the circumstances supposed, that is in times of war. And it is no higher assertion of military authority to take possession of the person, than it would be to seize that person's property for mili- tary service, if the safety of the Government demanded it. All these things come as a concomitant to a state of war. Again, in times of peace, do we recognize or know of any such officer as the Commanding General of a Department? Take, for instance, the Com- manding General of this Department, Gen- eral Hooker, who commands the States of Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan — not one of which States is in rebellion; what are his powers and duties? Is he simply a man of straw? Is his position recognized by the civil law ? And yet will any man claim that he can be prosecuted for any acts done in the exercise of his authority, not one of which is recognized by the civil law, and but for the condition of war, would be without legal sanction. The position of General Hovey is another illustration. At present he exercises in his military super- vision as much power over the people of the State as the Governor himself, and yet in times of peace, his office has no existence. If peace were declared to-day, he would be as powerless as any private citizen in the land. It is because the foundations of so- ciety are broken up, that we are forced to recognize the necessities that grow out of this new order of things. The state of things now existing in this country, has never before been exactly paralleled in any age of the world. The whole country has been taken possession of by military force. Why ? Because, and only because of its necessity. To preserve even the form of government, it was necessary that the whole force and energy of the nation should be employed against those who were arraying themselves against it. The whole nation, each man individually, and all collectively, constituted a physical power that might be used to preserve the nation against its ene- mies. The civil rights of the citizen became dead for the time being, if necessary to pre- serve the life of the nation. The counsel for the accused, in quoting my arguments respecting the jurisdiction of this Commission, evidently misconstrued my remarks as to each existing thing exer- cising its rights of self-defense according to the law of its organization. I am, for in- stance, organized and created as -a single, in- dividual thing, without weapons or means of defense, save my hands, and if my life were threatened by an antagonist, 1 must not, according to the theory of the gentle- man, take up a club or any weapon to de- fend that life, or call in the aid of my friend, but I must defend it according to the law of my organization, without any ex- trinsic aid. Is not the fallacy of the position apparent? Self-defense, self-preservation inevitably carries with it every means which that power can bring to assist in that self-de- fense and self-preservation. Just as defensive war may become offensive-defensive war. For the sake of saving yourself from invasion, you may invade the enemy, and yet it is but a defensive war. Each individual — every ex- isting unity or community — is endowed, by the very laws of its creation, with the power and the right to defend its own existence. That right is not lessened when individuals- join together and make communities. A man who has that right of self-protection does not, by joining himself to fifty or a hun- dred others, make his individual right less sacred; and when communities combine to form a government, the life of that govern- ment is at least as sacred as the life of an individual. In defending the life of the nation and its constitution, necessity be- comes the sole law. Whatever is necessary to be done, the Govei-nment is not only authorized, but is in duty bound to do. I accept it as a maxim that the only criterion for the exercise of martial law is its neces- sity. Whenever an officer, or the Chief Executive of this Government, acts with- out that necessity, he commits an act unauthorized; but so long as he keeps TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 69 within that necessity, the law and the people — the givers of all power — will indorse him. It was not my intention to refer to the exigences that might necessitate martial law, or to the distinctions between martial law and military law — a distinction often disre- garded — but 1 beg to submit the following from the New American Cychjfedia which very clearly states the distinction: "'Martial law has often been confounded with military law, but the two are very dif- ferent. Military law, with us, consists of the'Eules and Articles of War,' and other statutory provisions for the government of military persons, to which may be added the unwritten or common law of the 'usage and custom of military service.' It exists equally in peace and in war, and is as fixed and definite in its provisions as the admi- ralty, ecclesiastical, or any other branch of law, and is equally, with them, a part of the general law of the land. But in the words of Chancellor Kent, ' martial law is quite a distinct thing.' It exists only in the time of war, and originates in military necessity. It derives no authority from the civil law, (using the term in its more general sense,) nor assistance from the civil tribunals, for it overrules, suspends, and replaces both. It is, from its very nature, an arbitrary power, and extends to all the inhabitants (whether civil or military) of the district where it is in force. It has been used in all countries, and by all governments, and it is as neces- sary to the sovereignity of a State as the power to declare and make war. The right to declare, apply and enforce martial law, is one of the sovereign powers, and resides in the governing authority of the State, and it depends on the Constitution of the State whether restrictions and rules are to be adopted for its application, or whether it is to be exercised according to the exigences which called it into existence. But even when left unrestricted by constitutional or statutory law, like the power of a civil court to jjunish contempts, it mu«t be exercised with due moderation and justice; and, as a permanent necessity alone can call it into existence, so must its exercise be limited to such times and places as this necessity may require ; and, moreover, it must be governed by the rules of general public law, as applied to a state of war. It, therefore, can not be despotically or arbitrarily exercised any more than any other belligerent right can be so exercised." (^Cushings Opinions of U. S. Attorney General, vol. 8, p. 365; Wolner's Jks Gaiiinm, sec. 865; Grotius De Jus Bel, B. lib. 3, cap. 8 ; KlvLer Dicit des Gens, sec. 255 ; O Briens American 3Iititary Law, p. 23; Hal leek's International Law and Laws of Tlar, p. 303.) It is one of the concomitants of an army, as the counsel for the accused well remark- ed, that wherever that army goes, it carries with it martial law; and just to the extent that we here are under the rule of an army, just to that extent are we subject to the rules of martial law, vvithout any proclama- tion of the President on the subject. And furtlier, martial law, in my judgment, is not a tiling to be authorized by Congress. The decision of our ablest legal authorities may be shown to that efl:ect. It is an Executive power, only to be exercised under circum- stances of all-controlling necessity, by the Connnander-in-Chief, or the executive power of the Government. It is one of the preroga- tives of the Executive, and it can only be used by him and his subordinates — his lieu- tenants. If, for instance, the commanding officer of Kentucky, acting under the authority of the Chief Executive, the President, con- ceives there is a necessity for martial law to be declared in his district, he can de- clare it at his will ; but his superior will hold him responsible that he did not de- clare martial law till there was a necessity for it. So with General Hovey and his or- ders while commanding in this District. Martial law has, during the war, been de- clared by almost every commanding Gen- eral in the field ; and the power and the right to do so, have not, to my knowledge, ever been questioned in any department, and no prosecution has been known for the unlawful exercise of that power by any military commander. When General Hovey convened this Com- mission within the limits of his jurisdiction, and committed the case of Harrison H. Dodd, the accused, to this Commission, with orders to try it, he, by virtue of his mili- tary power, acting under the authority that was given to him by the Commander-in- Chief of the army, namely, the President of the United States, he suspended the civil law, and put in operation the military or martial law. The officers of this Com- mission could not, under the oath that they have taken, i-efuse to obey the orders of the officer placed over them. They could not stop and go back of that order, and refuse to hear and determine this case. Benet, who is our best authority upon mil- itary law, says, p. 13: "In the United States, martial law is a thing not mentioned by name, and scarcely as much as hinted at, in the Constitution and statutes. The former declares that ' the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspend- ed unless, when, in cases of rebellion or in- vasion, the public safety may require it.' " Upon that point much might be said, in connection with the condition of Indiana, as to whether the public safety did require the suspension of habeas corjms, and the declaration of martial law. I did not sup- pose there were two opinions on that ques- tion. BenSt continues: "The opinion is ex- 70 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. pressed by the commentators on the Con- stitution, that the right to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, and also that of judging when the exigency has arisen, belong ex- clusively to Congress. But the rebellion or invasion may demand such suspension during a recess of the national legislature, and, by the laws of war, the executive has then the right to assume the power for the public safety. The relation between the proclamation of martial law and the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, is extremely intimate; al- though it is but one of its consequences, and by no means the largest or gravest, since, according to every definition of martial law, it suspends, for the time being, all the laws of the land, and substitutes in their place no law ; that is, the mere will of the military commander." Here is another sentence in which much, very much, is included. I cite it, that it may be reflected upon : " It must be observed, however, that many of- feiises which in time of peace are civil offenses, become in time of war military offenses, and are to be tried by a military tribunal, even in places where civil tribunals exist." p. 10. I will only add a woi'd further in respect to the necessity that existed for martial law to step in at the time it did, here in the State of Indiana. It may be asked, did the necessity exist? The proof shows that there existed in this State an organization numbering from fifty to eighty thousand men, military in its character, and, about two-thirds armed, ready at any time to be called out to obey the orders of their su- periors, regardless of the law and authori- ties of the United States. That organiza- tion was armed and drilled with the avowed purpose of assisting the enemy as against the Government. This organization was ready at any moment to be called into the field, to release in our midst large numbers of rebel prisoners, feebly guarded. Did not such a state of things warrant the in- terference of the military power to stop this insurrection, and the possible bloodshed and anarchy that might have ensued here at our very door? I now pass for a moment to the fact of the absence of the prisoner. While I ad- mit that his absence should not prejudice him in the consideration of the proof, nor should it be taken, perhaps, as any confes- sion of guilt. When, however, the counsel attempt to argue on the force of the testi- mony that might have been introduced by the defense, they touch upon ground which they have no right to approach. This Com- mission does not know that any more proof could come before it. They must consider the evidence they have heard, and only that. The accused, by his absence, as I have before said, waves his right to any re- butting testimony, and says, in fact, " There is no further defense to be oft'ered in this case." If nothing is confessed against him, nothing certainly can be said for him by his act of escape. The counsel who last addressed the Com mission, contends that the organization known as the Order of American Knights, or the Order of the Sons of Liberty, is not a conspiracy. Then what is a conspiracy ? As defined by law writers, it is a combina- tion or agreement between two or more persons to do an illegal act, or to do a legal act in an illegal manner. If we take this association and try it by this rule, what do we find ? A body of men who were bound together by the most binding of oaths — the oath itself an unlawful thing, and the very organization of the society being unlawful in and of itself — recognizing military as well as civil officers unknown to, and in violation of, the Constitution and laws of the land. And for what purpose does the proof show this organization to have ex- isted? For the express purpose of defeat- ing and overthrowing the Government, while engaged in war against its enemies, for the purpose of aiding those enemies in their rebellion against the duly constituted authorities of the land. Other witnesses swear it was for the additional purpose of resisting the draft ; but every witness testi- fies directly to the fact, that the exj^ress pur- pose of the organization was to resist the Gov- ernment in its efibrts to suppress tlie exist- ing rebellion. Is this lawful, or unlawful ? Is this conspiracy, or is it not? It seems to me that one moment's consideration of the principles upon which this society was or- ganized, would determine the question be- yond dispute. It needs no argument. I refer the Commission to the proof The counsel saj'^ further that while this organization was vicious, it was not treason- able. Why, my God, what is treason ? What does a traitor do but try to destroy his Government ? Is it treason to organ- ize a society, the members of which take a solemn oath that when the enemies of their Government come over into their State, they will receive them as friends, shake hands with them, and, as opportunities oflFer, give them information from time to time of the movements of the Government forces ? Is it treason to assist in turning loose upon us the tigers that we have imprisoned here in our very midst, to arm those very men who are our avowed enemies, and the en- emies of our Government? Is it trea- son to endeavor to oi-ganize those rebel prisoners into a formidable military body to assist in the general rebellion against the Government? Is it treason to send messengers to the enemies of the Govern- ment, to tell them of the number of friends they have here in a loyal State, and assure them of sympathy and support? I can not conceive how a doubt for one moment can exist as to the treasonable nature of these designs. TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 71 I wish to say one word with respect to the testimony of the witness Stidger. No mem- ber of this Commission, and I think I may say that no person sat in this hall, who did not believe that the witness testified to the truth. If he had not testified to the truth, he was a witness who could more easily have been convicted of falsehood than any one brought upon the stand. There was not a fact to which he testified, for which he did not give the place, date and person. When a wit- ness does that, every lawyer knows that you can trace up that man's history in his cross- -examination. If Captain Jones did not send him on a certain day to a certain person, to have a certain conversation, nothing would be easier than for Captain Jones to be called upon the stand to testify to the fact. If the witness Stidger had not met Bowles at the time and place he mentions, and have the conversation narrated, it would be easy to show that Bowles was elsewhere at the time. If he did not meet Dodd, and talk with him, at the time and place he says he did, how easily it could be refuted! When Stidger came upon the stand, he expected that he was to be met by every possible proof that could be brought against him. This witness testified that when he entered into this or- ganization, it was with the express intent and determination to develop its end and pur- poses. True, he was a Government detective; he states that he was so hired and employ- ed. As a rule, I have no kind of fellowship or sympathy with this class of men. But I believe that such a work could be engaged in and accomplished with a good intent and purpose. It is a species of strategy fully just- ified by the circumstances of the case, and is not unlike that to which our command- ing Generals in the field often resort in their efforts to deceive the enemy. They send false messages, write and forward false missives, on purpose to mislead them. They employ every means in their power to induce them to believe in and rely upon a certain state of things, the opposite of that which really exists. Stidger engaged in the work of revealing the designs of this treason- able organization, with the express purpose of giving information to the Government and saving bloodshed, and possibly National disaster. Such a man engaged in such a cause, and for such a purpose, can not be called an accomplice. Such a man can not be called a criminal, or a scoundrel. On the conti'ary, he perils his life to obtain facta which have proved of the greatest import- ance to the cause of justice, law and order. In such a cause, every man, loyal and true to his Government, will stand by him; and it ill becomes any man, especially in this State, to withhold that meed of praise which is his due for the services rendered to the Govern- ment. The case is now submitted to this Com- mission on the evidence before it; and I am content to leave it in your hands, after simply quoting the opening remarks of the counsel who last addressed you: "In ap- proaching the evidence in the case, we are almost subdued and awed into silence by considering the perilous precipice upon which society, especially in the South-west, so recently hung, if the testimony, in the plenitude of its details, or even in its gene- ral scope, is to be believed." Eespecting that testimony, this Commission is abund- antly able to judge. If this testimony is to be believed, this Government was on the brink of a precipice; and the evidence given upon this stand, under the solemnity of an oath, and with the eye of Almighty God resting on each witness, is of such a character that no argument of counsel, or finely drawn so- phistries, can change the perilous and trea- sonable nature of the circumstances testi- fied to. The Commission then adjourned, to meet at 3 o'clock, P. M., to deliberate on the find- ing and sentence. Febbuaet 26, 1866. It is not thought advisable to longer de- lay the publication of these Treason trials, for the final action of the President in the matter. When the findings and sentences are ap- proved, they will be promulgated in General Orders, and will then be generally made known by means of the daily press. PROCEEDINGS MILITAKY COMMISSION, Which convened at Indianapolis, Indiana, by virtue of the following Special Orders, to wit : Headquarters District of Indiana, 1 Indianapolis, September 17, 1864. j Special Orders No. 129. A Military Commission is constituted to meet at the United States Court Rooms in the city of Indianapolis, on the nineteenth (19th) day of September, 1864, at 10 o'clock, A. M., or as soon thereafter as practicable, for the trial of Harrison H. Dodd, and such other prisoners as may be brought before it DETAIL FOR THE COMMISSION. 1. Brevet Brigadier General Silas Colgrove, United States Volunteers. 2. Colonel William E. McLean, 43d In- fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 3. Colonel John T. Wilder, 17th Infantry, Indiana Volunteers. 4. Colonel Thomas I. Lucas, 16th In- fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 5. Colonel Charles D. Murray, 89th In- fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 6. Colonel Benjamin Spooner, 83d In- fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 7. Colonel Richard P. DeHart, 128th In- fantry, Indiana Volunteers. Major Henry L. Burnett, Judge Advocate Department of the Ohio and Northern De- partment, Judge Advocate. The Commission will sit without regard to hours. By order of Brevet Major General Alvin P. Hovey. AND C. KEMPER, Assistant Adjutant General. Also Special Orders appointing as mem- bers of the Commission : Colonel Ambrose A. Stevens, Veteran Re- serve Corps. Colonel Ansel D. Wass, 60th Infantry, Massachusetts Volunteers. Colonel Thomas W. Bennett, 69th In- fantry, Indiana Volunteers. Colonel Reuben Williams, 12th Infantry, Indiana Volunteers. Colonel Albert Heash, 100th Infantry, In- diana Volunteers. Also a Special Order, authorizing the Judge Advocate to employ an additional phonographic reporter. Court Koom, Indianapolis, Indiana, 1 October 21,* 1864, 11 o'clock, A. M. J" The Commission met in compliance with the foregoing Special Orders, and pursuant to adjournment. All the members present; f also the Judge Advocate. The Commission then proceeded to the trial of William A. Bowles, Andrew Hum- phreys, Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milli- gan and Stephen Horsey, who were present before the Commission, and who, having heard read the orders appointing the Com- mission, were severally asked by the Judge Advocate if they had any objection to any member named in the orders, to which William A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heflner and Stephen Horsey sever- ally replied : " I have none." Lambdin P. Milligan replied, " I have no objection to any member but Colonel Wass." Colonel Wass having withdrawn from the court-room, the accused, Lambdin P. Milli- gan, stated his objection as follows: "I object to Colonel Wass, because he is from a locality where there are extreme prejudices against Western men, and he is likely to be influenced by those prejudices." The Court was then cleared for delibera- tion. J On being reopened, the Judge Advo- * An informal meeting was held on the 19th, pursuant to adjournment, but the case not being ready for trial, the Commission adjourned over to the '21st. f If a member of the Commission was absent from sickness, or other unavoidable cause, the case was pro- ceeded with only on the consent of the accused being given in open Court, and such member was only allowed to agaiu take his seat on the Commissi©!! with the con- sent of each and all the accused being given in opea Court, and after reading the tsstimony taken durin; tba absence of such member. I During the trial of these treason cases, the Commis- sion, iusiead of " clearing the Court," as is the custom ia 73 74 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. cate announced to tlie accused, Lambdin P. Milligan, that his objection was over- ruled. Colonel Ansel D. Wass then took his seat as a member of the Commission. The members of the Commission and the Judge Advocate were then duly sworn in the presence of the accused. Benn Pitman and W. S. Bush were duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, as recorders to the Commission, also in the presence of the accused. The accused, William A. Bowles, requested permission to introduce M. M. Ray and J. W. Gordon, Esqrs., as his counsel. The accused, Andrew Humphreys, re- quested permission to introduce M. M. Ray, E. A. Davis, Cyrus L. Dunham and J. W. Gordon, Esqrs., as his counsel. The accused, Horace Heflfren, requested permission to introduce Cyrus L. Dunham, E. A. Davis, M. M. Ray and J. W. Gordon, Esqrs., as his counsel. The accused, Lambdin P. Milligan, re- quested permission to introduce John R. Coftroth, Esq., as his counsel. The accused, Stephen Horsey, requested permission to introduce John Baker and C. L. Dunham. Esqrs., as his counsel. The requests of the accused were granted, and their counsel appeared in Court. The Judge Advocate stated that he had consented, by agreement with the counsel for the accused, that the question of the ju- risdiction of the Commission should be considered at the close of the case, with its full force and effect upon the Commission, as though it were taken up and considered now. It was also agreed between the Judge Advocate and the counsel for the accused, that any substantial objection to the charges and specifications, as now jDresented, should be considered at the final summing up of the case. The accused, William A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan and Stephen Horsey were then ar- raigned on the following charges and speci- fications: CHARGES AND SPECIFICATIONS PREFERRED AGAINST WILLIAM A. BOWLES, ANDREW HUMPHREYS, HORACE HEF- FREN, LAMBDIN P. MIL- LIGAN, AND STEPHEN HORSEY, CUieent of the S(ate of Indiana, United Stntea of America. CHARGE FIRST.— Conspiracy against the Government of the United States. Specification First. — In this, that the Baid Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, military courts, retired to an adjoining room for delibe- ration, \t> aviiid the incouveiiitnce of diBmissiug the audi- ence assembled to listen to the proceedings. Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milh'gan, and Stephen Horsey, did, among themselves, and with Harrison H. Dodd, of Indiana, Joshua F. Bullitt, of Kentucky, J. A Bar- rett, of Missouri, and others, conspire against the Government and duly consti- tuted authorities of the United States, and did join themselves to, and secretly organize and disseminate, a secret, unlawful society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, having both a civil and military organiza- tion and jurisdiction, for the purpose of overthrowing the Government and duly constituted authorities of the United States. This, at a period of war and armed rebel- lion against the authority of the United States, at or near Indianapolis, Indiana, a State within the military lines of the Army of the United States, and the theater of military operations, and which had been, and was constantly threatened to be, in- vaded by the enemy. This, on or about the I6th day of May, 1864. Specification Second. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey, during an existing rebel- lion against the Government and authori- ties of the United States — said rebellion claiming to be in the name of, and on be- half of certain States, being a part of and owing allegiance to the United States — did combine and agree with one Harrison H. Dodd, of Indiana, Joshua F. Bullitt, of Ken- tucky, J. A. Barrett, of Missouri, and others, to adopt and impart to otliers the creed or ritual of a secret, unlawful society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, denying the authority of the United States to coerce to submission certain rebellious citizens of said United States, designing thereby to lessen the power and prevent the increase of the armies of the United States, and thereby did recognize and sustain the right of the citizens and States, then in re- bellion, to disregard and resist the authority of the United States. This, at a period of war and armed rebellion against the* authority of the United States, at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, a State within the military lines of the Army of the United States, and the theater of military operations, which had been, and was threatened to be, invaded by the en- emy. This, on or about the 22d day of Feb- ruary, 1864. Specification Third. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey, citizens of the State of Indiana, owing true faith and allegiance to the Government of the United States, and while pretending to be peaceable, loyal citi- zens of the Government, did secretly and covertly combine, agree, and conspire, TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 7S among themselves, and with one Harrison H. Dodd, of Indiana, Joshua F. Bullitt, of Kentucky, J. A. Barrett, of Missouri, and others, to overthrow and render powerless the Government of the United States, and did, in pursuance of said combination, agreement and conspiracy, form and organ- ize a certain unlawful, secret society or order, and did extend, and assist in extend- ing, said unlawful secret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of Sons of Liberty, whose intent and purpose was to cripple and render powerless the efforts of the Government of the United States, in suppressing a then existing formidable rebellion against said Government. This, on or about the 1st day of October, 1863, at a period of war and armed rebellion, at or near the city of In- dianapolis, Indiana, a State within the mili- tary lines of the Army of the United States, and the theater of military op- erations, which had been, and was con- stantly threatened to be, invaded by the enemy. Specification Fourth. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heftren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey, did conspire and agree with Harrison H. Dodd, David T. Yeagle, John C. Walker, and Joshua F. Bullitt, and others, these men at that time holding military positions and rank in a certain secret, unlawful society or organization, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, to seize by force the United States and State Arsenals at Indianapolis, Indiana, Columbus, Ohio, and Springtield, Illinois, to release by force the rebel prisoners held by the authorities of the United States, at Camp Douglas, Illi- nois, Camp Morton, Indiana, and Cam^D Chase, Ohio, and the Depot of Prisoners of War on Johnson's Islajid ; and arm those prisoners with the arms thus seized, and that then said conspirators, with all the forces they were able to raise in the secret order above-named, were, in conjunction with the rebel prisoners thus released and armed, to march into Kentucky and Missouri, and co-operate with the rebel forces to be sent to those States by the rebel authorities, against the Government and authorities of the United States. This, on or about the '20th day of July, 1864, at a period of war and rebellion against the authority of the United States, at or near the city of Chi- cago, Illinois, a State within the lines of the Army of the United States, and the theater of military operations, and threatened by invasion of the enemy. Charge Second. — Affording aid and comfort to Rebels agahist the authority erf the United States. Specification First. — In this, that the Baid Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heflren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and, Stephen Horsey, being then members of a certain secret, unlawful society, or order, known as the Order of American Knights,, or Order of the Sons of Liberty — the United States being then in arms to suppress a rebellion in certain States against the au- thority of the United States — said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Hef- fren, Lambdin P. Milligan, Stephen Horsey, and others, then and there acting as mem- bers and officers of said secret, unlawful society or order, did design and plot to. communicate with the enemies of the United States, and did communicate with the enemies of the United States, with the intent that they should, in large force, in- vade the territory of the United States, to-wit: the States of Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois ; with the further intent, that the- so-called secret, unlawful society, or order,, aforesaid, should then and there co-operate with the said armed forces of the said re- bellion against the authority of the United States, and did communicate to said armed forces the intent and j^jurposes of said secret, unlawful society or order. This, at a period of war and armed rebellion against the authority of .the United States, at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, a State within the military lines of the Army of the United States, and the theater of military operations, which had been, and was constantly threatened to be, invaded by the enemies of the L^nited States. This^ on or about the 16th day of May, 1864. Specification Second. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys,. Horace Heftren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey, while the Government was attemj^ting by force of arms to suppress- an existing rebellion, while guerrillas, and other armed supporters of the rebellion, were in the State of Kentucky, did send a messenger, and brother member with them of a secret, unlawful society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, into said State of Kentucky, with instructions for Joshua F. Bullitt, Grand Commander of said secret, unlawful society or order, in said State, and other members of said secret society or order in said State, to select good couriers or runners, to go upon short no- tice, and for the purpose of assisting those in rebellion against the United States, to call to arms the members of said secret so- ciety or order, and other sympathizers with the existing rebellion, whenever a signal should be given by the authorities of said secret society or order. This, on or about the 20th day of July, 1864, at a period of war and armed rebellion against the author- ity of the United States, at or near Indian- apolis, Indiana, a State within the military lines of the Army of the United States, and the theater of military operations, and 76 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. which had been, and was constantly threat- ened to be, invaded by the enemy. Specification Third. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heftren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey, being citizens of the State of Indiana, United States of America, and owing true allegiance to the said United States, did join themselves to a certain un- lawful, secret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of Sons of Liberty, designed for the overthrow of the Government of tlie United States. and to compel terms with the citizens or authorities of the so-called Confederate States, the same being portions of the United States, and in rebellion against the author- ity of the United States, and did communi- cate the designs and intent of said order to those in rebellion against the Government of the United States. This, on or about the 20th day of July, 1864, at a period of war and armed rebellion against the au- thority of the United States, at or near In- dianapolis, Indiana, a State within the mil- itary lines of the Army of the United States, and the theater of military operations, and which had been, and was constantly threat- ened to be, invaded by the enemy. CHARGE THIRD.— Inciting Insurrection. Specification First. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey, did, during a time of war be- tween the United States and armed enemies of the United States, and of rebellion against its Government, organize and attempt to arm, and did arm, a portion of the citizens of the United States through an unlawful, se- cret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, with the intent to induce them, with themselves, to throw oflF the authority of the L^nited States, and co-operate with said armed enemies of the United States, against the legally constituted authorities of the United States. This, on or about the 20th day of July, 1864, at or near Indi- anapolis, Indiana, a State within tl>e mili- tary lines of the army of the United States, and the theater of military operations, and which had been, and was constantly tlireat- ened to be, invaded by tlie enemy. Specification Second. — In this, that the said William A. Bowles, Andrew Hum- phreys, Horace Hoffren, Lambdin P. Milli- gan, and Stephen Horsey, did, by public addresses, by secret circulars and commu- nications, and by other means, endeavor to, and did arouse sentiments of hostility to the Government of the United States, and did attempt to induce the people to re- volt again.st said Government, and secretly organize and arm tliemselves for the pur- pose of resisting the laws of the United States, and the orders of the duly elected President thereof This, on or about the 16th day of February, 1864, at a period of war and armed rebellion against the au thority of the LTnited States, at or near In- dianapolis, Indiana, a State within the military lines of the army of the United States, and the theater of military opera- tions, and which had been, and was con- stantly threatened to be, invaded by the enemy. CHARGE FOURTH— Disloyal Practices. Specification First. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Hetfren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey, at a time of war, and dur- ing an armed rebellion against the legally constituted authorities and Government of the United States, did counsel and advise citizens of, and owing allegiance and mili- tary service to the LTnited States, to dis- regard the authority of the LTnited States, and to resist a call or draft, designed to in- crease the army of the United States, and did make preparation, and attempt to arm, and did arm, certain citizens of the LTnited States, belonging to a certain unlawful, se- cret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, for the purjiose and with the intent of resisting said call or draft. This, on or about the 1st day of July, 1864, at or near Shoal's Station, Martin county, Indi- ana, a State within the military lines of the army of the United States, and the theater of militai'y operations, and which had been, and was constantly threatened to be, in- vaded by the enemy. Specification Second. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Hetfren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey, at a time of war, and dur- ing an armed rebellion against the legally constituted authorities and Government of the United States, d^id counsel and advise citizens of, and owing allegiance and mili- tary service to the United States, to disre- gard the authority of the LTnited States, and to resist a call or draft, designed to in- crease the army of the United States, and did make preparation, and attempt to arm, and did arm, certain citizens of the United States, belonging to a certain unlawful, se- cret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, for the purpose and with the intent of resisting said call or draft. This, on or about the 1st day of November, 18f)3, at or near Green Fork township, Randolph county, Indiana, a State within the mili- tary lines of the army of the United States, and the theater of military operations, and which had been, and was constantly threat- ened to be, invaded by the enemy. Specification Third. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humi)hreys, Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan and TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 77 Stephen Horsey, at a time of war, and dur- ing an armed rebellion against the legally constituted authorities and Government of the United States, did -counsel and advise citizens of, ai?':' or,'in^ al.^giance and mili- tary service to. the united States, to dis- regard the authority of the United States, and to resist a call or draft, designed to in- crease the army of the United States, and did make preparation, and did attempt to arm, and did arm, certain citizens of the united States, belonging to a certain un- lawful secret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of Sons of Liberty, for the purpose and with the intent of resisting said call or draft. This, on or about the 16th day of May, 1864, at or near Indianapolis, Indiana, a State within the military lines of the army of the United States, and the theater of mili- tary operations, and which had been, and was constantly threatened to be, invaded by the enemy. Specification Fourth. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey, at a time of war, and dur- ing an armed rebellion against the legally constituted authorities and Government of the United States, did counsel and advise citizens of, and owing allegiance and mili- tary service to, the United States, to dis- regard the authority of the United States, and to resist a call or draft, designed to in- crease the armj' of the United States, and did make preparation and attempt to arm, and did arm, certain citizens of the United States, belonging to a certain unlawful se- cret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, for the purpose and with the intent of resisting said call or draft. This, on or about the first day of August, 1864, at or near Salem, Washington county, In- diana, a State within the military lines of the army of the United States, and the theater of military operations, and which had been, and was constantly threatened to be, in- vaded by the enemy. Specification Fifth. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey, did accept and hold offices of the military forces for the State of Indi- ana, in a certain unlawful secret society, or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, which said offices and military forces were unknown to the Constitution and laws of the LTnited States, or of the State of In- diana, and were not in aid of, but opposed to, the legally constituted authorities there- of. This, on or about the 16th day of Feb- ruary, 1864, at a time of war and armed re- bellion against the authority of the L'^ni- ted States, at or near Indianapolis, Indiana, a State within the military lines of the army of the LTnited States, and the theater of military operations, and which had been, and was constantly threatened to be, in- vaded by the enemy. CHARGE FIFTH.— Violation of the Laws of War. Specification First. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Hefi'ren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey, did, while the Govern- ment of the United States was carrying on war with the enemies of the United States, engaged in rebellion against their author- ity, while pretending to be peaceable, loyal citizens of the United States, violate their allegiance, and did, as citizens of said Gov- ernment, attempt to introduce said ene- mies of the United States into the loyal States of said United States, thereby to overthrow and destroy the authority of the United States. This, on or about the 16th day of May, 1864, at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, a State within the military lines of the army of the United States, and the theater of military opera- tions, which had been, and was constantly threatened to be, invaded by the enemy. Specification Second. — In this, that the said Wm. A. Bowdes, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and Stephen Horsey, did, during a war between the United States and the said enemies of the United States, engaged in rebellion against their authority, and while pretend- ing to be peaceable, loyal citizens of the United States, organize and extend a cer- tain unlawful, secret society or order, known as the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, having for its purpose the same general object and design as the said enemies of the United States, and with the intent to aid and in- sure the success of said enemies in their resistance to the legally constituted au- thorities of the United States. This, at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about the 16th day of May, 1864. HENRY L. BURNETT, Judge Advocate Department of the Ohio and Northern Department. To which charges and specifications the accused, all and severallj', to each and all the chai'ges and specifications, pleade«l not GUILTY. The Judge Advocate then asked the ac- cused if they were ready for trial. J. W. Gordon, counsel for the accused, William A. Bowles, Horace Heffren, and Andrew Humphreys, moved for a separate trial in their behalf, and submitted the fols lowing reasons : Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Commission: Recognizing the law which governs this Commission — as the common law, the old English common law, which has been adopt- 78 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. ed by every State in the Union — as the law ■which shall influence this Commission in determining how these defendants shall be tried, I ask you to favor them each with a sep- arate trial. All the States, I believe, have enacted statntes on this subject. Our own State has enacted a statute providing for separate trials of defendants jointly charged with criminal ofienses. The civil courts of the United States generally accord to the defendant, or person charged with an offense, the same rule of practice which they enjoy as a right in their State courts. But we do not ask a separate trial on that ground. We put the plea on the discre- tion of this Court, as governed by the com- mon law, believing that these defendants have interests that can not be subserved by trying them together, and as a matter of justice I ask the Court for their sever- ance on trial. In behalf of Horace Hef- fren, Andrew Humphreys and William A. Bowles, for whom I appear, I move the Court for a separate trial for them. I may also state to the Court a fact which will be apparent on the trial of these causes. Each will have separate witnesses, and will pursue a different line of defense. Each has his own character to defend. The trial going on as one trial during the prose- cution, will assume in the defense tlie at- titude of separate trials, and the defendants and their counsel will labor under great in- conveniences and difficulties in their behalf Another point I make is, that as these men are all charged as citizens of Indiana, they are entitled as such to separate trials, as there are no rules laid down for the reg- ulation of these trials, and one might put in a plea on that ground. We trust the motion for a separate trial for the defendants to the discretion of the Commission, as a matter of justice to the accused. Cyrus L. Dunham, counsel for Stephen Horsey, one of the accused, moved for a separate trial for the accused, for the follow- ing reasons : It is, in my opinion, entirely without pre- cedent in Military Courts, to put two pris- oners on trial at the same time. Defend- ants, jointly charged, are entitled to all the benefits they can derive from separate trials. In a joint trial, the evidence introduced against one defendant might militate against another, and bear more strongly against him than if he was tried separately. Tlie prosecution, he presumed, would, in its evidence, follow the line pursued in the Dodd trial, proving one act of one party by one witness, and separate acts of other parties by other witnesses. The defense would branch out into separate lines, ac- cording to the side issues presented. The evidence might not bear as strongly against one defendant as against the other, and this might confuse the Commission when it comes to a final decision. Lambdin P. Milligan, one of the accused, moved in his own behalf, for a separate trial, for the following reasons : "It is exceedingly inconvenient for me to be present at the trial, on account of sick- ness. I wish as short a trial as possible, and the evidence introduced against others may protract the trial to great length. It is impossible, I am advised by my physi- cians, to be in any position but a recumbent one, without permanent injury to my limb. If granted a separate trial, I will waive all technical objections in the progress of the case. For these reasons, I ask the Commis- sion to grant me a separate trial" The Judge Advocate replied : Gentlemen of the Commission: An application has been presented to the Commission, from each of the accused, for a separate trial. I do not propose person- ally to object to those applications. I only desire to put before the minds of the Court the reasons and facts that present them- selves to my mind against the grant of the application. The offenses charged against these de- fendants are joint. They are in the nature of a conspiracy. Conspiracy is the gist of the charges, and the other offenses charged grew out of this. Once having established the conspiracj', the acts of any one of the conspirators are liable to be brought in proof as evidence against any other mem- ber of the conspiracy. About that princi pie of law there can be no question. Not only ca"n the acts of any member of a com- mon conspiracy be brought as proof againsi other co-conspii'ators, but also their admis- sions, their letters, their writings, and the records they leave behind them. In that case, the proof on the part of the Govern- ment will be no more comj^licated in the matter of proof against the accused in a joint trial than if separate ti'ials were granted. The proof against one is proof against all the accused. That being the case, we may prove against Milligan the acts of Dodd, and the testimony introduced by Milligan that he did not do these acts himself, con- stitutes no defense for him. When he takes upon himself the responsibility of joining an unlawful body, he takes upon himself the responsibility for every unlaw- ful act of that body. The law also holds that when men combine together for such . purposes, having greater power for evil through such an organization, they shall be held to a greater accountability. There is also a greater latitude given in proof against conspirators than against any other class of criminals known to the law. That being the case, the argument for a separate defense has but little weight. Even if it is important that each man should put his character in issue and prove his good char- acter, he can do that as well when on trial TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 79 jointly as singly. You, gentlemen of the Commission, make up your verdict against each one of these defendants separately. If you find that any one of these men has been misled, you may take into considera- tion the absence of evil intent in joining this organization, as well in a joint trial as in separate trials. There is no argument the accused can advance against joint trials which will show that they are deprived of any rights and privileges which would ac- crue from separate trials. They can not, and do not claim that under the common law they may sever these prisoners and in- troduce them as witnesses, one in favor of the other. They know that they can not do that. No benefit in that respect would accrue to thera from a separate trial. The question submitted to the Court is a matter of policy simply, and in respect to that, there are two important considera- tions. There are the rights and privileges of the accused to be considered, and also the rights and privileges of the Govern- ment. One should be weighed and bal- anced against the othei'. I would say to the Commission, give to the defendants the greatest possible latitude consistent with the interests of the Government, where no rights will be waived. I will grant them every thing that involves mere form and courtesy. 1 will go further to issue processes to bring in witnesses for the accused than I would for the Govern- ment. But while granting all possible lati- tude to the accused, I can not forget that there comes up a strong plea from unnum- bered thousands who have an interest in the results of this Commission. There are sitting around me officers, none under the rank of Colonel ; one who presides over the Commission, with the rank of Brevet Brigadier General. Each of you is entitled to command a regiment of one thousand men ; and some, if not all of you, were in command of brigades in the field, numbering from one to three thou- sand men. You are the representatives of fifteen thousand men at least, who, un- der your leadership, would do gallant ser- vice for your country. You, gentlemen of the Commission, are needed in the field, and whether you shall consume unneces- sary time by protracting these trials, is a matter of importance to the Government, and to the untold millions who look forward with interest and hope to the future for the success of its armies. There is also another consideration of some importance to the Government. You git on this Commission at a great cost to the Government, for the pay of members, of witnesses, and other expenses. That is a point to be considered in determining the motion for separate trials. If no rights of the accused are to be prejudiced by a joint trial, the question in economy becomes an important argument in favor of proceeding with the trial of the prisoners as arraigned. I would also add, that if any single right of any one of the accused would be preju- diced by a joint trial, I would not urge it. I have looked at this matter in all its lights, and can not see that, individually, they will be prejudicial in a single right which they would have if separate trials were accorded them. As Judge Advocate of this Department, I have vast rights, duties and responsibilfties. My detention here will result in holding hundreds of persons now in prison, charged with military oflfenses, who are waiting their trials. I have to organize Courts for their trials, to prefer the charges against them, and exercise a general supervision over the pro- ceedings of these courts. There are other men besides the prisoners now in Court, who are asking of the Government a speedy hearing. They have rights at stake as well as the accused here. While, therefore, I ask of you no one thing which can do the accused any wrong, or which will limit them in bringing every fact, which will accrue to their benefit, before this Commission, while I would grant them every possible courtesy, I must ask the Commission to use its discre- tion so wisely, that it shall not wrong others, or the Government. One of the counsel for the accused states that he has examined military books, and has not found a single case where prisoners have been jointly arraigned before a military court. I will state that in my military ex- perience, and as Judge Advocate, I have not seen a single case that did not make pre- cedents. This war has been constantly ma- king precedents. The army of the United States has exceeded in magnitude, during this war, any thing conceived by the found- ers of this Government. The army has pro- gressed in all respects further in two years than it would have done in two centuries at its former rate of existence. This fact has given rise to new conditions. We do not act entirely in accordance with the common law, as recognized two centuries ago, but settle its principles, as applied to military oflfenses, and make precedents, in every case which we try in military courts. We make precedents in the government of the army, and in the military courts. All that the accused have a right to ask here is, that this Commission violate no law, and do them exact justice. I, therefore, submit to you for decision the application for a severance of the defendants. The court-room was then cleared for the purpose of deliberation on the application of the accused. On the re-opening of the court-room, the Judge Advocate announced that the. Com- mission proposed to hold the application of the accused under advisement until 2J o'clock, P. M. 80 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. The Commission then adjourned, to meet 6t half past 2 o'clock P. M. AFTERNOON SESSION. Court Boom, IsDtAX'APOLis, Indiana, \ October 21, 1864., 2>^ o'clock, P. M. J The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused and their counsel. The court-room was then cleared for de- liberation on the question of granting the accused a separate trial. On the re-opening of the Court, the Judge Advocate announced to the accused that the Commission, after a full and careful de- liberation of the question, had concluded that in view of the fact, that no right or rights of any of the accused, inany particular, would be prejudiced by a joint trial, it was their duty to proceed with the trial of the prisoners as they were arraigned. William M. Harrison, a witness for the Government, was then introduced, and being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: Question by the Judge Advocate : Please give to the Court your name and residence? Answer. William M. Harrison; I reside in this city. Q. State your business for the last year or two? A. I have been in no particular business for the last year. I was traveling and col- lecting for George W. Howes a portion of the time during last year. Q. Have you had any other employ for which you received pay and compensation? A. I was employed as Grand Secretary of the Grand Council of the Sons of Liberty in the State of Indiana, at a salary of $800 per annum. I became a member of the Grand Council, on or about the 27th of August, 1863, and became Grand Secretary of the Grand Council on or about the 10th of Sep- tember, 1863. Q. When and where did you first have any knowledge of the Order of American Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, or Knights of the Golden Circle? A. The first knowledge I ever had of the <;)i'der of American Knights was at Terre Haute, on or about the 27th of August, 1863. I received a letter from H. H. Dodd at Terre Haute, requesting me to go there; when there I was invited to attend a meet- ing that night. I did so; there were but twelve or fifteen present. Q. Whom did you meet there? A. Among those I recollect were P. C. Wright, and a person by the name of D. R Eckles, John K Risley, Galium Bayley and John G. Davis. Most of them were strang- ers to me. Q. What was done at that meeting? A, Mr. Wright appeared to have charge of the meeting. He stated that it was called for the purpose of organizing a secret society. He proceeded to initiate members, and, after that, to organize the Grand Coun- cil of the State of Indiana. Those who were initiated, were initiated in the three degrees at the same time. Q. Were you initiated in the three de- gi-ees at that time? A. I was. Q. Who were elected oflBcers? A. D. R. Eckles was elected Temporary Grand Commander; H. H. Dodd, Temporary Deputy Grand Commander ; John E. Risley, Temporary Grand Secretary, and I was elected Temporary Assistant Secretary. Q. Where was the next meeting held? A. In this city, about the 10th of Septem- ber following, at the Military Hall, over Talbot & Co.'s jewelry store. It was an adjourned meeting of the Grand Council that had met at Terre Haute. It convened about 9 or 10 in the morning of, I think, the 10th of September. They adjourned at noon, and met again at 2 o'clock. Q. What business did they transact? A. In the morning, those persons who were delegates from various counties, who had not been initiated into the Order, were initiated by Mr. Wright. Q. Who was President? A. Mr. Dodd, both in the forenoon and afternoon. Mr. Wright initiated members present who had never received degrees ; after he got through initiating those, he ini- tiated the members present in the Grand Council Degree, and declared the Council open for business. I was initiated in that degree. Q. In what did it differ from others? A. Simply in the sign of recognition and colloquy. Q. Who were initiated that day ? A. David T. Yeakle and Dr. Bowles. The great majority of the memberswere initiated on that day. Q. Were any other citizens, now present in this court room, initiated that day, that you remember ? A. No, sir. Q. Was any other business done besides the initiation of members ? A. After the members had been initiated in the Grand Council Degree, Mr. Wright declared the Council ready for business, and proceeded to the election of officers, which resulted in the election of H. H. Dodd as Grand Commander, and David T. Yeakle, Deputy Grand Commander. I was elected Grand Secretary. We immediately pro- ceeded to other business. A committee, under the name of a military committee, was appointed to draft a military bill. Mr. Dodd was a member, and Yeakle and Bowles. I think there were one or two others, but I do not remember their names. Q. Was any military bill drafted by them? TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 81 A- It was the subject of discussion in the afternoon. Q. What became of it ? A. It was in my possession, and I des- troyed it. Q. When? A. I destroyed all the papers belonging to the organization after the exposition in the Indianapolis Journal. Q. Give the Court the features of that bill, as near as you can recollect. A. It provided for the division of the State into four districts; the National Road divided the north and south parts of the State. The names of the districts were the North-eastern, North-western, South-eastern and South-western. The counties in these districts were divided as nearly equal as could be. It also went into detail to pro- vide for the organization of the whole mili- tary force, the number and size of the regi- ments to be raised, duties of officers, etc. Q. What was to be the size of the regi- ments ? A. They were to consist of nine compa- nies of infantry, one company of rifles, and one section of artillery. The bill provided for the election of major generals; and they spoke of providing that major gener- als should appoint brigadiers, the brigadiers appoint colonels, colonels appoint the cap- tains, and captains the subordinate offi- cers. Q. Were any major generals appointed ? A. Yes, sir; David T. Yeakle and Andrew Humphi-eys were appointed under that bill; Mr. Milligan, and Mr. Conklin, living of this city. These four were all. Q. Was Milligan appointed one of the major generals? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know him ? A. I see him there. The witness here pointed to the accused, Lambdin P. Milligan. Q. Is that the Milligan you have refer- ence to? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you see any others present in the court room who were appointed major gen- erals ? A. Dr. Bowles I see present, and Mr. Humphreys. The witness here pointed to the accused, Wm. A. Bowles and Andrew Humphreys. Q. Is that the Dr. Bowles who was pres- ent at that meeting? A. It is. Q. Is that the Andrew Humphreys who was appointed major general ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Were any other appointments made then? A. No, sir. Q. Were any of those appointments made outside of the membership of the order ? A. Mv understanding of the matter was, 6 that appointments were made among mem- bers of the order only. Q. Were any speeches made at that meeting? A. Dr. Bowles spoke at considerable length, but I do not remember the matter of his remarks, except that they were on the features of the military bill. Dr. Year kle spoke on the same subject. Q. State whether or not, at that meeting, he urged the arming of the members of the order. A. As far as I recollect, I can not say. Q. To what time did it adjourn ? A. To meet during the month of Novem- ber following. Q. State if it met, and if so, who pre- sided. A. It did, at the former place of meeting. Harrison H. Dodd presided, and I acted as secretary. Q. Who were present ? A. Mr. Milligan and J. J. Bingham, and delegates were present from some thirty counties. Q. Were any others present at that meet- ing that you now see in this court room ? A. I do not think there were. Neither Stephen Horsey, Andrew Humphreys, nor Horace Hefiren was present. Dr. Bowles was present. Q. Was L. P. Milligan present? A. Yes, sir. Q. State what was done at that meeting. A. There was not much business trans- acted. A committee was appointed to get up a prospectus of a newspaper, to advocate the distinctive principle of the order. That was discussed at considerable length. There was some discussion in regard to the exten- sion of the Democratic party. The exten- sion of the order in the various counties was particulai'ly talked of Discussion on ed- ucation also took place at that meeting. No speeches were made at that meeting, as far as I can recollect ; they did not go be- yond an organization for political purposes. Q. What was said at that meeting about the object of the military organization? A. Nothing was said about it, except that it was necessary to organize in a military capacity, to protect the rights of the mem- bers against the encroachments of the Ad- ministration. Q. Where was the next meeting ? A. It was held in this city, on the 16th or 17th of February, 1864. Q. Were there present any of the per- sons now in the court room, as far as you remember ? K Mr. HeflEren, Mr. Milligan and Mr. Bowles were present. Mr. Humphreys and Mr. Horsey were not present. I can not say positively whether Mr. Milligan was present or not; he was absent from one meeting, and I think it was that one. Heff- ren and Bowles made speeches. 82 TREASO!» TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. Q. "What was the general object of this meeting of the 16th or 17th ? A. It was the regular annual meeting of the organization. It had been said that the anniversary of the order was the 22d of February. It was called in advance of the meeting of the Supreme Council to be held in New York on the 22d, to enable dele- gates to attend that meeting. At that meeting an election of officers took place. Q. Who were elected ? A. H. II. Dodd, Grand Commander, Hor- ace Hefiren, Deputy Grand Commander, and myself Grand Secretary. Q. AVas there any voting in regard to ma- jor generals? A. The election of major generals took place at the same meeting. Humphreys was elected in his district, Milligan in his district, and Bowles was elected in the south-west district. Walker was elected in the north-western district. Q. Did Yeakle or others resign? A. No, sir. Q. How did they get out of office ? A. All officers were to be elected yearly. The fii'st elections were made until the 22d day of February. As this was the annual meeting, a new election was held, that re- sulted as I have just stated. Q. Who were the delegates to the New York meeting? A. Several delegates were elected by the Grand Council at the New York meeting. I can not say positively who were elected in February. Q. Can you state some of the delegates to the various meetings in September and November? A. At the meeting in September, John G. Davis and D. R. Eckles were elected dele- gates to the Council in Chicago, in Septem- ber, 1863, and I think Humphreys also. Q. To what Council ? A. The Supreme Council. Milligan was elected delegate to the Supreme Council. Dodd was elected to the Supreme Council by virtue of his office. How many attended ? A. I understood Dodd that Milligan was present at the meeting of the Supreme Council at Chicago or New York, and Hum- phreys was present either at the Chicago or New York meeting, I do not recollect which. Dr. Bowles was present at one or both places. The first meeting was held in Chicago, in the latter part of the month of September, 1863. Q. Was Dodd at that meeting? A. He left to attend it ; I understood he was there himself I understood also that Humphreys was present at that meeting, and Yeakle and Dr. Bowles. I got this in- formation from Dodd. Q. Have you no means of telling whether Milligan was present at that meeting ? A. None but the information I derived from Dodd. I have no means of saying positively. Q. Was any written address read at the meeting of February 16th and I7th ? A. Yes, sir ; an address was read by Mr. Dodd, which was subsequently printed and circulated among the members of the order. Q. How? A. An order was passed that the address of the Grand Commander and such portion of the proceedings of the State Council as was necessary should be printed. Q. What was that? A. That the address of the Grand Com- mander, the report of the Grand Secretary, and the report of the Finance Committee, should be printed. After the meeting ad- journed, it was printed in pamphlet form; and I sent two copies to each branch Tem- ple in the State. Q. Did you send to any of the lodges where Mr. Milligan lives? A. I sent them to Huntington county, directing them to Mr. Milligan. Q. Did you send any to Mr. Humphreys' county ? A. Yes, sir ; directing them to Mr. Hum- phrej's ? Q. How many did you send? A. Two of the addresses to each one. Q. Did you send any to Dr. Bowles? A. I think I did ; I generally sent two to each county. Q. Did you send any to Mr. Heffren ? A. I can not say positively whether I sent any to Heffren or not. Q. Is that one of the pamphlets you have spoken of? [A pamphlet entitled " Proceedings of the Grand Council of the State of Indiana," was here handed to the witness by the Judge Advocate.] A. It is. Q. What does that pamphlet contain ? A. It contains an address delivered by Dodd, and proceedings of the State Council, and the reports of committees. Q. Was this pamphlet sent out to the counties in which the order existed ? A. Yes, sir. [The pamphlet entitled " Proceedings of the Grand Council of the State of Indiana," was here put in evidence by the Judge Advocate. See Appendix.] The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Saturday, October 22, 1864, at 10 o'clock, A. M Court Boou, Indianapolib, Indiana, > October 22, 1864, 10 A. M. / The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused, and their counsel TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 83 The proceedings were read and ap- proved. The accused, Andrew Humphreys, then made the following application to the Com- mission: "I respectfully request that E. H. C. €avins, Esq., and William Mack, Esq., may be admitted to act as counsel for me upon the trial of this cause. [Signed.] Andrew Htjmphreys, "For himself." Which application was granted, and the counsel appeared for the accused. The testimony of Wm. M. Harrison, a witness for the Government, was then con- tinued as follows: Question by the Judge Advocate: State what the circular now handed you is? Answer. This circular is one I sent out to the various County Temples, with a copy of the Constitution and By-Laws for the County and Branch Temples. The circu- lar was read to the Court by the Judge Ad- vocate. Said circular introduced in evi- dence.* Q. Did you, or did you not, inclose one of these circulars with all the addresses you sent to the different County Temples? A. With that circular I sent out a copy of the Constitution of the Grand Council, and one or two copies of the proceedings of the meeting held here on the 16th and 17th •days of February. Q. For what purpose was this assessment referred to made ? A. For defraying the expenses of the Grand Council. Q. What was the nature of those ex- penses? A. Payment for printing, the salary of the Secretary, and the payment of the assess- Mr. ^'Office Gbamd Secbetabt, S. L., t Indianapolis, , 1864.5 Dear Sib: Inclosed please find the Constitution for the goTernment of County and Branch TempUi, the Constitution for the government of the Grand Council, and a portion of the proceedings of the Grand Council at their meeting held on the 16th and 17th days of Febru- ary, 1864:. You will find, on reference to the Report of the Finance Committee, that the Grand Council has assessed a tax of twenty cents on each memberof the organization through- out the State, to be paid on or before the first Monday in May next. It is also required that each and every County Temple in the State send the Grand Secretary full reports of the number of their membership, names of their officers, and the number of branches organized on the first day of May and each three months thereafter. Prompt attention to the above is urgently requested. The assessment of 820.00 on each county, in addition to the twenty centg for each member, is still in force, as far as those counties are concerned that have not paid that assessment. You will please present the papers to your County Temple immediately, and see that the above require- ments are promptly carried out. By the authority of the Supreme Council of the United States, there have been some material changes made in the Bitual, etc. You will please send an accred- ited member of your Temple here, as soon as possible, for instruction ; and with him you can send the amount due from your county, as the money is absolutely neces- •ary, and must be forthcoming. ment of the Supreme Council, as well as for the payment of rent and other expenses. Q. Were any members of the different County Temples sent in pursuance of the last clause of this circular? A. Members were sent with respect to the change in the Eitual of the organiza- tion. The obligations and the lessons and a portion of the passwords and colloquie.» had been changed. Q. Was there any change in the name of order ? A. Yes, sir; the name of the order had been changed to the Order of the Sons of Liberty. Q. When and by what authority was that change made? A. It was made at the meeting of the Su- preme Council. I was informed by Dodd that the change was made by the authority of the Supreme Council on the 22d day of February. Q. Do your records show any change in the name of the order? A. No, sir. 1 never made any record of the change in the proceedings of the meet- ings. Q. From whom did you first receive infor- mation of the change? A. From Dodd. Q. What position did he occupy ? A. That of Grand Commander of the State of Indiana. Q. How soon after the 22d day of Febru- ary did you learn of this change? A. Immediately after the arrival of Dodd here ; but 1 can not state positively. It was within two or three weeks after the 22d of February. Q. Was that change made known to the subordinate lodges throughout the State? If so, how? A. It was made known by means of the circular just read, and through the agents sent out to give information. Q. Did any messengers come up from Mr, Milligan's district? A. I believe there were some from his Congressional District. I have no recollec- tion of any messengers coming up from his county. There were a number of counties in that Congressional District that were or- ganized in this society. Q. Was any person sent up from Mr. Humphreys' district or county ? A. No, sir; but persons came up from Sullivan county to obtain instructions, and I believe persons also came up from Vigo county for instructions. Q. You may state what these changes were. A. A change was made in the name of the organization ; a change was also made in the colloquies of the order, in the obli- gations, and also in the lessons. A pamphlet was here handed to the wit- ness. 84 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. Q. Please to examine and state Trhat that pamphlet is? A. That was the ritual of the Order of American Knights; the vestibule lesson and the first degree of the Order of Amer- ican Knights. Q. Does this contain the obligation that was required to be taken by every member of the Order of American Knights? A. I beUeve it does, sir. The obligation of the first degree also required in the ves- tibule. A pamphlet entitled V. was here offered in evidence by the Judge Advocate. The counsel for the accused objected to its introduction, and proposed to ask the wit- ness some questions respecting the authen- ticity of the pamphlet, to which the Judge Advocate objected; the counsel for the ac- cused replied: May it please the Court: As I discover now that many of these documents are to be introduced, it is important that we should settle the course to be pursued as to their introduction, and, therefore, I desire to submit the question now. It is not sufficient for the Judge Advo- cate, in my judgment, to offer such a doc- ument as this to the witness, and the witness, after glancing over it, to say that it is the ritual, without being asked how or where he knew it to be such, and by what authority it was promulgated. Before the document is introduced as evidence, the witness should be passed over to the other side, and we should be at liberty to cross- examine him with respect to this isolated fact, of where this document comes from, how he knows it, and how he knows it was promulgated by competent authority. How does he know that it was received and act- ed upon. In all courts of justice, before a document can be offered in evidence, all these distinct facts as to its identity are gone into and proved. And when a docu- ment has once gone into evidence, we can not object to it. If it goes in evidence on insufficient identity, how are we to rem- edy it? It may be said, that if, after the docu- ment has once gone in evidence, we show, on cross-examination, that it is not prop- erly authenticated, the Commission would reject it, or give no weight to it. That might be true with this Commission, but we ought to have the rules of law and cross- examination applied here. We all know that if we were trying a case of this kind before a jury, that the evidence, after once getting before the jurors, would have its influence, though it were testimony that ought not to have been introduced. I submit, that before the document can be submitted to this Commission, we ought to have the privilege of cross-examination, confined strictly to the document, its au- thenticity, and the propriety of its admis- sibility to the Commission as evidence. I do not know that this is a matter of very much importance, but it is one which we may as well settle at once, that we may know how we are to be governed here- after. The Judge Advocate replied : It has already been proved before this- Commission, that the witness on the stand, Mr. Harrison, is Grand Secretary of a so- ciety or order, known at present as the Order of the Sons of Liberty. That that order was changed from the Order of Amer- ican Knights. Mr. Harrison stated that he belonged to that order ; that he assisted at the inauguration of the order, and was one of its first members in this city, and that he has been its Grand Secretary fi'om that time to this. I hand him this paper, and ask him what it is. After a careful exam- ination, he answers, that it is a ritual of the Vestibule and First Degree, and obli- gation of the First Degree of the Order of American Knights. I then propose to in- troduce this paper before the Commi.ssion as evidence ; before that they know nothing of its contents. I differ from the counsel. His right, un- der the common law, is to object that the paper has not been sufficiently proved. The question then arises, has it been so brought before this Commission as to make it material, and been sufficiently connected with the matters in issue to make it im- portant that this Commission should call that paper before them for their examina- tion ? I do distinctly say that the coun- sel for the accused can not stop my ex- amination, nor have the power to cross-ex- amine the witness before I turn him over to them for that purpose. He can object that I have not sufficiently laid the foun- dation of any question, or for any paper which I propose to place before the Com- mission and thej' pass upon that objection ; but he can not ask at my hands that I shall turn that witness over to him, until I am through with him, and I do not pro- pose to do it until the Commission or- ders it. The objection, as I take it, is to my mode of examination, and I insist on the intro- duction of the paper, because I consider the foundation has been sufficiently laid. If the objection is not insisted on, there is no question before the court. The counsel for the accused replied : I interpose the objection that the paper should not be received in evidence until we have the power at some time — I do not care whether it is now or after the Judge Advocate has closed his examination, as to the paper — to test by a cross-examination the authenticity of that document. The members of this Commission know, that at least in this State, when a note is intro- duced into court, before that note shall be TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 85 offered in evidence, the counsel on the ■other side are permitted to examine the ■witness as to its identity and authenticity, but not as to its contents. And not until that identity and authenticity have been test- ed and proved, is the document introduced. The court was then closed for delibera- tion upon the objection of the accused, as to whether the pamphlet should be re- ceived in evidence, before the counsel for the accused have an opportunity to cross- examine the witness upon it. On the re-opening of the court, the Judge Advocate announced that the objection was overruled, and the pamphlet was re- ceived in evidence. [See Appendix.] Q. State what that is, commencing on page 5 ? A. That is the obligation of the Neophyte in the First Degree. The Neophyte lesson Avas the first in the Order of American Knights, and given in the Vestibule. Q. Wherein do they differ, if at all ? A. A person elected to become a member of the Neophyte organization, received that lesson and no other; he never attended any of the meetings of the Order of Amer- ican Knights ; he was simply taken into the Vestibule, received the obligation, and was discharged. Q. What was the status of a person taking the Neophyte degree ? A. All persons becoming members of the organization were obliged to take the Neo- phyte degree, as the preliminary ; and those considered only worthy to take the first degree were taken, and the oath adminis- tered without their having any knowledge of any further degrees. Q. State whether or not the change in this order released the members from the obligations they had taken in the Ameri- can Knights? A. My understanding was, that when the change was made, the members were re- leased from the obligations of the Ameri- can Knights, and took those of the Sons of Liberty. Q. Were there any cases in which no changes were made in the order, or in the change of name ? A. We endeavored to make the changes as perfect as possible. Each of the counties was organized under the Order of Ameri- can Knights, and I can not say positively that there were any counties in which the change was not made, though there may have been some that did not send up dele- gates. Q. Did the Supreme Commander of the Sons of Liberty exercise control over the American Knights ? A. Yes, sir; it is my opinion that he did. Q. Upon what do you base that opinion ? A. The difference between the Order of American Knights and Sons of Liberty was this, that when the ritual and obligations were changed, it was not necessary for the American Knights to take the obligations of the Sons of Liberty, but simply to as- sume them. It was the same organization with a different name, and different ritual and colloquies, as I understood it. Q. Do you know of any thing being done by the Supreme Commander of the Sons of Liberty, as to exercising control over the American Knights? A. I do not know that the present Su- preme Commander was ever in the Ameri- can Knights? Q. Who is that ? A. Vallandigham. The Grand Command- er of this State was Grand Commander of the Order of American Knights, and exer- cised the same powers over the Sons of Lib- erty. Q. After the change, did he exercise the same control as before ? A. It was considered the same organiza- tion. Q. I understood you to say that it was not necessary to take the obligation of the Sons of Liberty, but to assume it. What do you mean by that? A. The persons taking the obligation of the Order of American Knights were not required to re-obligate themselves, and take the obligation of the Sons of Liberty; it was understood that they assumed the obligation, and no requirement was made or carried into force. None of those who took the obligation of the Order of Ameri- can Knights took the obligation of the Sons of Liberty. Q. I understood you that those who went into the Sons of Liberty were released from the obligation of the Order of American Knights — how do you explain it ? A. I understood that they were released so far as the change was concerned. The obligation had been changed, and it was understood that they assumed the new obli- gation. Q. If they took any new obligation, were they or were they not released from the ob- ligation ? A. I never perfectly understood whether they were or not. Q. Were they held to the old obligation, supposing they took no new obligation? A. They were supposed to be held to the obligation they had taken. [Certain pamphlets were handed to the witness.] Q. State if you know what those are? If so, state what they are? A. This book (entitled "S. L.") I know to be the ritual of the first degree, containing the first lesson of the Order of Sons of Libert J'. This (entitled "General Laws of the S. L.") is the Constitution of the County Temple of the State. This (entitled ''Con- stitution of the Grand Council," etc.,) is the Constitution of the Grand Council of this 86 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. State for the Sons of Liberty. This (entitled "I") is the ritual of the First Conclave de- gree, or second degree of the Order of Sons of Liberty, and also the Second Conclave or third degree of the Order of Sons of Lib- erty. Q. Who were required to take the obliga- tions contained in these Rituals? A. All persons who became members of those degrees. Those who had become members of the Order of American Knights (of the second and third degree) simply assumed the obligations of the new order. The above-named Rituals were here put in evidence on the part of the Court. [See Appendix.] Q. I understand you to say that this new order of things was brought about after the return of the Grand Commander from New York. Am I correct? A. Yes, sir ; it was after his return from New York, but I can not say positively' how long after. Q. When was the next meeting after that of the 16th and 17th of February? and where? A. The next meeting of the Grand Coun- cil of this State was on the 14th of June, 1864, at the Hall of Marion Temple. Q. How many counties of the State were represented at that meeting? A. About thirty counties. Q. How many delegates to a county? A. Some counties had one, some two, and some more than two. Q. How many delegates were present at the meeting? A. I should judge about forty members. Q. Who presided at that meeting? A. The Grand Commander, Mr. Dodd. Q. Who was Secretary ? A. I was. Q. Who, if any of the accused, were present at that meeting? A. Mr. Bowles, Mr. Humphreys, Mr. Mil- ligan and Mr. Horsey were present at that meeting. A gentleman by the name of Stephen Horsey was present, but I do not know whether he (the accused) is the man or not; I do not recognize him ; at all events he was a delegate from Martin county. Q. Did any initiations take place at that time? A. Those members who were present who had not received the Council Degree, received it at that meeting, but I do not recollect who took it. Q. Do you remember whether a Mr. La- salle was present at that meeting? A. Yes, sir. Q. Where is Lasalle from? A. From Cass county. I do not know his name, but I think it is Charles. Q. Do you remember any persons of this city who were initiated? A. There were no persons from this city initiated. Q. Commence at the convening of the Council and give to the Commission, as nearly as you can, what took place in de- tail; how and by whom it was opened, how you gained admittance, and what was done? A. The Grand Council convened about 10 o'clock on the morning of the 14th of June, and was in session till 5 or 6 in the evening. I remember that I was very late at the meeting. It was delayed on account of my absence. It was convened by the Grand Commander, who delivered a short verbal address at the opening of the meeting. I have no recollection as to what was said in the address. The next business in order was conferring the Grand Council Degree upon those members that had not received them. Q. Was the Grand Council Degree supe- rior to the Third Degree? A. Yes, sir. Q. Who was entitled to receive that de- gree? A. Those persons who were present who had not received it before. Q. Did any member receive that degree ? A. No person was given that degree un- less he was elected as a delegate to the State- Council ; every delegate to the State Coun- cil was bound to receive that degree before he could act as a member of the Council. Q. What was done after the sj^eech? A. There was general business transacted, the most important, I think, was the apiDoint- ment of a committee of thirteen, whose duty it was to act in the interim of the meeting of the State Council, and to exer- cise the same power that the State Council had. Q. Who was appointed on that committee ? A. I can not say; it was a secret commits tee; tiie appointing power was placed in the hands of the Grand Commander, Dodd, wha was suj^posed to be, ex oficio^ a member of that committee, and had the appointing of them. It was intended to be a secret com- mittee, that should not be known, even to the members themselves, until they were called together. Q. Do you know whether or not they were called together? A. I do not. Q. Do you know of any address being is- sued by them? A. I have no knowledge of any, save a printed one, that I have seen since 1 have been in jjrison; but I knew nothing about it before. Q. What was done after the appointment of the committee of thirteen? A. After discussions on political matters, there was a resolution to appoint a com- mittee of five to proceed to Hamilton, 01. io, on the next day, the 15th.* That resolution afterward was amended, by authorizing all *Thc occasion of Mr. Vallandigbam's return to Ohio. TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 87 the members to consider themselves mem- bers of that committee. A resolution was also brought up with respect to Govern- ment detectives becoming members of the organization. It was understood that some Government detectives had become initia- ted as members of the organization, and a discussion took place, to find whether it was the case or not. Q. Was any one named ? A. A man by the name of Coffin was said to belong, and there was a general discus- sion in reference to the looseness of the manner in which the initiations were car- ried on, and an appeal made to the mem- bers to be more particular in future. Q. Was any thing said as to what was to be done in the matter ? A. Nothing within my recollection or knowledge came before the meeting in a business capacity. Q. Did any thing come before the meet- ing in an unofficial capacity ? or did you learn what was to be done ? A. No, sir; I did not; but I heard Mr. Dodd remark that a person who came into the organization as a Government detective ought to be made away with ; it was a re- mark made in private conversation, and was not brought before the meeting offi- cially. Q. Was that remark made during the meeting? A. It was during the meeting that I heard it. Q. What other business was done at that meeting ? A. I can not recollect any other particu- lar business, save that there were resolu- tions pa-ssed in reference to the increase of the organization. I looked upon it at the time as an unimportant meeting. There was no important business transacted. Q. Do you know whether or not any per- son did go to Hamilton ? A. Not of my own knowledge. Q. Were any other officers or men ap- pointed ? or any other formal business done at the meeting ? A. No, sir; the officers for the present year had all been appointed at the meet- ing in February. Q. How was that meeting adjourned? A. Sine die. Q. Was the June meeting a regular meet- ing of the Council ? A. It was a called meeting, called by the Grand Commander, through printed no- tices issued by me, and sent by mail. He requested me to issue notices to the various County Temples, calling a meeting on the 14th of June. That was the last meeting of the Grand Council held that I attended, and I believe there has been no other meeting of the Grand Council held since that time, either here, or in any portion of the State. Q. Do you remember what the strength of the order was computed to be at the meeting in June ? A. At the meeting in February I received reports from seventeen counties, who re- ported the strength within their limits at something over five thousand members. There were some seventeen to twenty other counties that made no reports. I computed their number at twelve thousand. From the reports made in June, there was an in- crease in the organization of about twenty per cent, making it about fifteen thousand. Q. What did you compute it to be in September, from the best data you had at that time ? A. Taking the ratio of increase from Feb- ruary to June, I should not have put the organization to exceed eighteen thousand members. Q. In this number do you include the Order of American Knights, and Sons of Liberty, all who had taken any of the de- grees ? A. I mean that it includes the members of first, second and third degree, members of the organization, but it would not in- clude the members of the Vestibule, sim- ply because there was no report made of those members, they were not considered members of the organization. As a gen- eral thing, the Vestibule members were very few. Q. You may name the counties in which this organization existed as far as you can ? A. I can not name all of them. The or- ganization, so far as I have received reports, existed in the counties of Marion, Marshall, Allen, Huntington, Laporte, Fulton, Cass, Harrison, Washington, Orange, Grant, Madi- son, Crawford, Posey, Vanderburg, and War- rick. The reports received were from forty- five counties in all. Q. Did this order exist in Eandolph county, to your knowledge ? A. 1 never received any report of the es- tablishment of any County Temple. There may have been branch Temples; but the order existed to no extent in that county ? Q. How about Dearborn county ? A. So far as I can recollect, there was no organization in that county. Q. Was Eandolph county represented in any of these meetings by delegates ? A. I think not, sir ; but I will not state positively. Q. Was Cass county represented ? A. Yes, sir ; by Mr. Lasalle. Q. Was Howard county represented ? A. No, sir. Q. Do yovi know any thing of the strength of the organization in adjoining States? A. Nothing positive. I understood that the order was better organized in Illinois than in any other State in the Union. But I had no information that was official. Q. State to the Commission whether any 88 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. steps were taken, to your knowledge, and if so how far, for the arming or drilling of the organization? A. There was, to my knowledge, no reso- lution passed at the meeting of the State Council to arm this organization, or looking to the arming or purchase of arms, or to the drilling of the organization. Q. I ask you whatt, to your knowledge, was done ? A. I have no knowledge of the ai'ming or drilling of the members of the organization. Q. Do you know of any attempt to arm the organization ? A. I do not know any thing at all about arms, except those that were seized here last August. Q. What was done or said in an official way, looking to the drilling and arming of the organization, and any acts of the leaders. A. I have no knowledge of the purchase of any arms, or any attempt to arm the organization, or of the organization or any portion of it being under drill. Q. What do you know about the arms seized here? A. I had no knowledge of the purchase or the shipment of these arms until about four or five days previous to their arrival. Mr. Walker came to my house one night, be- tween 9 and 10 o'clock. He asked me if I knew whether Mr. Dodd had informed Parsons that there would be some boxes coming here addressed to him. I told him I did not. He then said that he should like me to say to Parsons that there would be some boxes arriving in a day or two, which he would like him to take in and take care of until he returned. I can not say whether Walker stated at that inter- view that these boxes contained arms or not. I went down the next morning and asked Parsons if Dodd had informed him that these boxes were coming. He said that he had, and that he had received the information. I left the city on that day, and was absent three or four days. The morning after my return to the city, I went down to Dodd's office, and I saw on the sidewalk five or six boxes addressed " J. J. Parsons, Indianapolis, Ind." Parsons was engaged in getting these boxes into the building. I asked him if these were the boxes spoken of, and he said they were. The boxes were taken up to the second floor, and put in a back room of the build- ing. I went there as they had been placed there, and asked him if he knew what those boxes contained. He said he did. I asked him what they contained. He said pistols. Q. Was Mr. Parsons a member of the Order of Sons of Liberty ? A. He was, sir. He gave me the infor- mation as to what the boxes contained. Q. Did he say what they were for ? A. No, sir. Q. Did Dodd say what they were for ? A. No, sir. Dodd never mentioned the boxes or pistols in any manner. Q. How many boxes were received here at that time ? A. I understood ten boxes were received. Q. Were any more received? A. Yes, sir. Twenty-two boxes were re- ceived about two weeks after. Q. Did you learn who had purchased or shipped these arms ? A. I never learned who purchased these arms until after I was arrested, when I saw the card published by Mr. Walker. I do not know of my own knowledge. Q. What became of these arms ? A. I understood that they were seized by the authorities here. Q. Did you have any conversation with Parsons about the dispositions of these arms ? A. No, sir. I think Mr. Parsons knew nothing about the matter until the arms had been shipped, and until a few days previous to their arrival. It is my im- pression he derived his information from Dodd. The Judge Advocate here handed the witness a letter, and asked : Q. Do you know by whom that letter was written ? A. That letter is in Mr. Walker's hand- writing, I should judge, but I could not swear particularly to it. Q. Did you ever see that letter before? A. I never did, sir. The letter dated "New York, May 11, 1864," addressed to "My Dear Dodd," and signed " Yours truly, W.," was here intro- duced in evidence by the Judge Advocate. The Judge Advocate handed a letter to the accused, L. P. Milligan, and asked: "Is that your handwriting?" A. The accused, L P. Milligan, replied "that is my handwriting." A letter, dated "Huntington, 9th May, 1864," addressed to "Gen. H. H. Dodd," and signed "L. P. Milligan," was here in- troduced in evidence by the Judge Advo- cate.* ■fHuNTiNOTON, In»., 9th May, 1864. Gen. H. H. Dodd— Dear Str : Tours of the 2d inst. came when I was absent at Notre Dame, and I have now just read it, and am unable to make any definite reply. I will barely allude to what may afford a text for reply in future. As to the Gubernatorial question, it may not have oc- curred to you the unenvialile connection in which my name has been used. It was announced in consequence of the declination of the Hon. J. E. McDonald to be a candidate, conceding that if he was a candidate there was no desire to use my name ; now I understand he «s; hence I am not called upon by any public notice to be such. But waiving all this as the result of mere accident, and not proffered as an indignity to me, by placing me second in talents and imtriotisra to J. E. McDonald, there is a still more grave difficulty in the way. The announce- ment of my name for Governor, was made by McDonald's friends. Now it is due to them that I should decline, because I could not represent thom ; there is no similar- ity between us. And all this is not so discouraging as the fact that men of the stamp of Judge Hanua, whose pro- TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 89 Q. Do you know P. C. "Wright? A. The first time I met him was at Terre Haute, about the 27th of August, 1863. In a conversation I had with him, he informed me that he had originally resided at New Orleans. That he had been compelled to leave there on account of his Union senti- ments, and removed to St. Louis, Missouri. At the time I saw him, he was staying in Chicago, and represented himself to be an Attorney at Law. Q. Do you know where he is now? A. I do not know positively, but I under- stood he was in Fort Lafayette. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Tuesday, October 25, at 2 o'clock, P. M. CouET Boom, Indianapolis, Indiana October 25, 1864., 2 o'clock, P. M The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused and their counsel. The proceedings were read and approved. Edwin A. Davis, one of the counsel for Andrew Humphreys and Horace Heffren, submitted to the Commission the following paper: To the President and Members of the Military Commission : At the commencement of this trial, two of the defendants asked and obtained leave of this Court for me to act as their counsel. I now, with their consent, desire to withdraw from the position I have since then occu- pied, in such a manner as not to prejudice their interest before this tribunal. The determination of the Court that all the defendants should be tried jointly, in- sures them all able and experienced coun- sel. I may also say, that when I was retained in behalf of the defendants, I had but little idea of the nature of the charges and evi- fession of principles I conld represent, prefer McDonald on account of his supposed ayailability, it detracts much from my confidence in our ultimate success. When men of so much seeming patriotism are willing for mere tem- porary purposes to abandon the great principles of civil liberty, what will those of less pretensions do, when the real contest comes, when life and property all depend on the issue, when bullets instead of ballots are cast, and when the halter is a preamble to our platform ? For un- less Federal encroachments are arrested in the States by the effort as well of the legislators as the executive, then win our lives and fortunes follow where our honors will have gone before. I am willing to do whatever the cause of the North-west may require, or its true friends may think proper, but I am" as well convinced that upon mature reflection they will not ask me to obtrude myself upon the public, nor will they ask me to be McDonald's contingent. I have great confidence in your good hard man sense, and cool judgment, hence I find it difficult to disregard your advice in the matter, and before giving to the world my position ou the question I wish to see vou per- sonally. Yours truly, L. P. MILLIGAN. N. B. My last was confidential ; this is more so, be- cause I have given vent to feelings that are purely private. L. P. MILLIGAN. dence that would be produced against them; but from the nature of these prosecutions, and for other reasons growing out of my re- lation to the Government as United States Commissioner, which renders it improper that I should defend a class of cases fre- quently brought before me as an examining officer of the Government, I ask of this Court that my request be granted, and these reasons for my withdrawal be spread upon the records of the Court. EDWIN A. DAVIS. The request of Mr. Davis was granted by the Commission. The testimony of William M. Harrison, a witness for the Government, was then re- sumed as follows: Question by the Judge Advocate: State whether a Military Committee was appointed at the meeting of the Grand Council, on the 14th of June? and if so, who were appointed? A. I have no recollection of the appoint- ment of such a committee at that meeting. Q. Did you receive any reports from any of the accused, relative to the strength of the organization in their respective coun- ties? A. I received a report from Mr. Heffren, at the meetings of the 16th and 17th of February, of its strength in his county. I have no recollection of any report from others. The Judge Advocate here handed the witness a letter addressed to " H. I. Stew- art, Boundary, Indiana," and signed " H.," and asked : Q. Do you recognize the handwriting of that paper, and know by whom it was written ? A. Yes, sir. It was written by me as Secretary of the order, on the day on which it is dated, in reply to a letter addressed to me as Secretary by H. I. Stewart. Q. Was he a member of the order ? A. The letter was from a man I had never heard of before I had received it. The writer purported to be Secretary of a County Temple. He wrote on business connected with the order. The Judge Advocate here proposed to in- troduce the letter in evidence. The coun- sel for the accused objected for the follow- ing reasons: That the letter is a reply to a communi- cation from a person not yet proven to be a member of the order. It is an immate- rial letter, and proves nothing in issue be- fore this Court. The Judge Advocate replied : There are several issues presented in this case, which I view differently from the counsel for the accused. Mr. Harrison says this letter was written by him in his official capacity as Grand Secretary, to a man whom he supposed was a member of the order. Any instructions the witness gave, 90 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. whether written or verbal, in reference to the order, are competent as evidence, and are competent as showing how the order worked, and whether its affairs were conducted in an open or secret manaer. Instructions given to any temple, are also competent evidence. The counsel for the accused wished the objection to go on record, that the letter might go in as evidence, under protest. The Judge Advocate replied : There can be no protest in this Court. If objections are made by the counsel for the accused, they come before the Court to be sustained or overruled. The court room was then cleared for de- liberation. On the re-opening of the court room, the Judge Advocate announced to the accused that the objection had been overruled by the Commission, and the letter was received in evidence.* The letter was here read by the Judge Advocate. Question by the Judge Advocate: I un- derstood you to say this letter was never sent ; how was that ? A. I wrote the letter the same day I re- ceived the letter from Stewart. I had in a measure become dissatisfied with the or- der, and had resolved to abandon it. I hesitated about answering any letters, but wrote this on the spur of the moment and placed it in my pocket, without determin- ing whether I should send it. I was arrest- ed, and this letter was found upon me and taken from me. Q. When were you arrested? A. On Saturday, the day the letter was written. Question by the Court: Q Did an answer to the letter from H. I. Stewiirt come within the general scope of your duties as Grand Secretary ? A. I answered every letter that came di- rected to me as Grand Secretary, without any special directions from the Council. Question by the Judge Advocate: State to the Court if there ever came to yoiu" knowledge any plan for the intended uprising of this order? If so, state from whom you obtained that knowledge, where the uprising was to be, and all the circum- stances connected with it. A. I received my information from Har- rison II. Dodd, that there was a design in progress, or in contemplation i'or the release of the prisoners of war confined at this point, at Chicago, and at Rock Island, Illi- <• Indianapolis, August 20, 1864. Mr. H. I. Stewart, Bouudnry, Indiaua — Dear Sir: YoiirH uiiiier date (if the 17th instant is at hand. Any infiirniatinri that you niaydi'siic can be had by sending an accredited jierROn here. Written coinmunicatione are jpUiyed oitt, as all letters are ojiened and read by Lincoln spies and hirelings during their transmission through the mails. The Keader can be had at SI -0 per dozen. Truly yours, H. nois. That plan had not been fully de- cided on ; but if decided on, he was to have charge of the release of the prisoners at this point. He desired to have a Demo- cratic mass meeting called about the 16th of August, and used his influence to induce the Democratic State Central Committee to call that meeting. If they did so, he in- tended to send out circulars to the mem- bers of the order in the various counties, authorizing the members to come up to that meeting armed. If the meeting had been held at that time, there would have been an uprising. Q. When and where did he state this to you ? A. At his residence, on the evening of the 29th of July I think. It was on Fri- day evening, the same evening that the bulletin board of the Journal office an- nounced that there would be a full exposi- tion of the Order of the Sons of Liberty in the Journal of the next morning. Q. Was that prior or subsequent to the meeting at Chicago, to which you have al luded? A. It was after the Chicago meeting. Q. Did Dodd at that time state to you when and where this plan for revolution had been agreed upon ? A. He stated to me that he had been to Niagara Falls, and from there to New York City; that he returned again to Niagara Falls, and from there he went to Chicago. I understood him that this whole plot had been arranged at Chicago. Q. Did he give the names of the persons whom he consulted in reference to this plan? A. He mentioned no names, Q. Did he mention whom he had met at Niagara Falls? A. He stated that he met there the par- ties representing themselves as Peace Com- missioners. Q. At what date and to whom did he re- fer ? A. It was about the time of the meeting of the Peace Commissioners at Niagara Falls. I suppose he referred to the Peace Commissioners on the part of the rebel States. Q. Did he state what the rebel prison- ers were to do after the uprising on the 16th? A. He stated, in an informal way, that they were to aid and assist in the uprising here. Q. What were they to do after the upris- ing? A. If successful in the upi'ising, they were to be taken South. Q. What was that success to consist in ? A. In revolution. Q. What was to be revolutionized ? A. The Government, as far as the State was concerned. TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 91 Q. Did he have reference to the General Government ? A. He said nothing about the General Government. It was a revolution which was to take place in this State. Q. How was this uprising to take place, and at whom was it aimed ? A. By the aid of the rebel prisoners, who were to be released through his instrumen- tality, and that of the persons who came in to the meeting to be held here on the 16th, they were to have an uprising and overturn the State Government. Q. Who was to be Governor after that rev- olution ? A. He did not state. Q. Did he state particularly his plan for the release of the rebel prisoners, and how the guards were to be overpowered ? A. He said if the thing was decided on, he was to release the prisoners here. He was to surprise the camp, and seize the ar- tillery here, and in the confusion and ex- citement of the moment effect the success of the plan. He thought he could do this with about one hundred and fifty men. That was his idea which he communica- ted to me? Q. You may state whether there is an unwritten work of the order ? A. There is. Q. You may now give to the Court an ex- position of what that is, giving the collo- quies, signs, grips and passwords. A. The unwritten work of the order con- sists in the signs, grips, passwords and col- loquies of the order. That portion of the work of the organization was never written, but communicated verbally. Q. You may now give the unwritten part of the Vestibule degree? A. The Vestibule lesson is that in which all persons who design to become members of the order are first instructed. It was so arranged that a person who took the Vesti- bule degree, knew nothing beyond that. In a large city they could have societies of the Sons of Liberty, composed of members who had gone no further than the Vestibule lesson, and meet as general political clubs. They would be bound by the obligations of the Sons of Liberty, but know nothing further of the organization than that lesson. The sign of recognition was made by standing erect on both feet, placing the heel of the right foot in the hollow of the left, with the arms folded in the ordinary man- ner. A member of the order noticing me in this posture, would suppose he was challenged. He would place himself in the same position and challenge me. He would extend his right foot to meet mine and use the following colloquy: I would say "nu," he would answer "oh," I would reply "lac," he would say "S.." I would answer "L.," he would say, "Give me liberty" — I would an- 6wer "or give me death." There is also a signal of distress. You place the left hand on the right breast, and raise the right hand directly in front to its full hight once. This is given in the day-time. If at night, you give the cry of distress "oak-houn," repeated three times. You wait a moment, and then repeat it three times, and continue this un- til assistance comes. The members of this degree were also instructed that it was the duty of each member of the order to repair immediately to the spot and assist the mem- ber giving the signal. They were also in- structed that the acorn was the universal emblem of the society. If the person was not deemed worthy to take any further de- grees he was dismissed. The members of that degree never knew any thing officially of the further organization of the order. In the first degree the sign of recognition is the same as in the Vestibule degree, ex- cept that the index finger of the left hand was placed on the right arm, when the arms were folded. We were instructed that this meant State rights and State sovereignty. If a member gave that sign, it was the duty of another seeing it, to advance and recog- nize him. The grip of the first degree is an ordinary grip, in which the index finger is placed upon the wrist, extending upward. That is entitled the grip of the acorn. The colloquy is repeated thus: "If I go to the East" — "I will go to the West." "Let there be no strife" — "between mine and thine" — "for we" — "be brethren." "0 ' — "S" — ^"L" — "Resistance to tyrants" — "is obedience to God." [The colloquies are pronounced al- ternately, as indicated by the dashes.] This is the colloquy of the first degree. In this degree members were instructed in the mode of entering a temple. The password of that degree was changed monthly in each County Temple, which adopted its own password. The members were instructed that the acorn was the universal emblem of the order, representing strength, growth, and durability. Those initiated into this degree were welcomed as full members of the Order of Sons of Liberty. The sign of recognition of the second de- gree is given with the body in the same po- sition as in the first degree, the hands being crossed on the abdomen, the right hand on the left and the thumbs pointing ujjward to a point, which is said to represent the star Arcturus. The colloquy is: "What — a star — Arc — turns. What of the night ? — Morning cometh — Will ye inquire ? — inquire ye — re- turn — come." Members wei'e instructed that a five-pointed star of any metal could be used as an emblem of that degree. The password was "Orion," pronounced as a test, by giving the long sound to "i" in the sec- ond syllable. This is the unwritten por- tion of the second degree, except the man- ner of entering the temple. The third degree is similar to the second in the position of the body. The signof recog- 92 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. nition is made by crossing the arms on the chest, the right arm upon the left, and the fingers pointing to the shoulders. The col- loquy is: "Whence — seir? How — by the ford ? Name it — Jaback — Your password — Washington." The response is "Bayard." The distinct pronunciation of the last syl- lable, "yari," being a test of membership. The sign of the Grand Council degree is given by clasping the right hand, and taking hol'd of the elbow of the right arm with the left hand ; then give a simple shake of the hand; turn one quarter to the left, with the arms folded, and repeat the colloquy : " Whence — Amei'ica — North — South." The password of the Grand Council degree is "America." A member who wishes to enter a Temple of the first degree, makes some alarm at the outer door If he is known to be a Son of Liberty, he would be admitted on giving the password, without any further trouble. If not known, he gives the password and is admitted into the ante-room, and sends in his name and that of the County Temple to which he belongs, and states that he is a visiting brother. His name is reported to the presiding officer. When the name is an- nounced to the members present, if any know him they vouch for him ; if not vouched for, a committee of two is appointed to test him in the degree in which the Council is work- ing. If found perfect, he is admitted ; if he fails, he is rejected. The manner of entering Temples working in other degrees, is the same, with the exception of the pass- word used. Close of the direct examination. CROSS-EXAMINATION. There were no other lessons or teachings pertaining to the unwritten work of the other degrees, than those I have given. The military features of the Order of the Ameri- can Knights and the Sons of Liberty were the same. From what Dodd communicated to me, I was impressed that the revolutionary scheme included Illinois as well as Indiana, and that himself mainly, and certain others who knew of the intended scheme, as far as it was decided upon, were to participate in carrying it out, and in the event of circum- stances favoring, the whole organization was to be drawn into it. The intended revolu- tion was not discussed in Council; Dodd seemed to look rather to the action of in- dividual members of the order in this State. He was to take charge of the liberation of the prisoners at Camp Morton, near this city. Dodd remarked to me that he wanted to influence the State Central Committee to call a Democratic mass meeting here about the 16th of August. If it had been called he was to issue secret circulars to members of the order, and have them come armed and prepared for an uprising. I do not be- lieve that the majority of the first and sec- ond degree members ever knew or thought that revolution in Indiana was contemplated. Dodd, I know, contemplated holding a meet- ing here, of the leading men of the organi- zation, for the discussion of his plans, and the meeting, I understood, took place on the Tuesday following the Friday on which I had the conversation referred to. The meeting was convened by circular sent by Mr. Dodd. The military bill adopted in the Council, referred to in my direct examina- tion, was introduced in pursuance of injunc- tions received from Mr. Wright, the origi- nator of the organization in this State. His instructions were that the order must have a certain number of major generals, briga- diers, colonels, etc. Mr. Wright was Su- preme Commander at the time. The mili- tary bill was in Dodd's handwriting. The military appointments were made by the delegates present from various military dis- tricts, who selected a person for major general for their district; that person was announced to the Council, and die nomina- tion confirmed in Council. I can not state positively whether Mr. Milligan was present or not when the military bill was discussed. Neither Mr. Heflren nor Mr. Humphreys was present. These appointments were made at the first meeting held about the 10th of September, 1863. Heflren was present at the meeting of the 16th and 17th of February, and that was the only meeting I ever saw him at. Bowles in the February meeting declined becoming a major general unless certain changes were made in the length of the term of service. The change I understood was made, and I did not hear him object after that. I have no knowledge as to Humphreys accepting his nomination. He was not present at either the February or September meetings; but was present here at the June, 1864, meeting; though I did not see him in the room till the even- ing, and then only for half or three-quarters of an hour. I did not see him at the Terre Haute meeting. I know that Mr. Hum- phreys was a member of the order from the fact that I saw him at the meeting on the 14th of June, but have no knowledge of his initiation, nor of that of a majority of the members of that Council. No person who was not a member, ever, to my knowledge, entered the Grand Council. It convened in the Marion County Temple, in the fourth story of Dodd's building, and was in session from 10 in the morning until 9 in the even- ing, adjourning for dinner and supper. Mr. Humphreys was there at night. I saw him there, and also saw him at my office after the meeting adjourned. Mr. Dodd told me he saw the Peace Commissioners at Niagara Falls, and had conversations with several of them, but did not say any thing about meet- ing them in a secret manner; I do not know whether he was conspiring with them, or was simply introduced to them. I know that TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 93 Mr. HeftVen was Deputy Grand Commander, but never heard from him in reference to the organization after the 17th of February; he was not present at any meeting after that. RE-EXAMINATION. Question by the Judge Advocate: Who were the parties that were sent for to be present at the Tuesday meeting ? A. Mr. Dodd informed me that he in- tended sending for Mi-. Milligan, for Dr. Bowles, Mr. Humphreys, and Dr. Yeakle; those are all that I recollect his mentioning to me. Q. Did you learn whether he sent for those persons ? A. I did not; from him. Q. Did you learn it from any other mem- ber of the order? A. Dodd told me he had sent his boy for one of those parties, and he sent me for another of the parties. He said he sent his boy to Dr. Bowles; I went to Mr. Milligan. Q. Did you see him? A. I did. Q. Did you tell him your message? A. I did. Q. What did he say? A. He said that he did not know whether he could be present, but would try to be. I was instructed by Mr. Dodd to say that there would be a very important meeting, and he ought to be present. I do not know whether they were present or not. Q. How do you recollect the presence of Mr. Humphreys on the 14th of June? A. He had never been present at any meeting before. Q. Was your mind specially directed to him? A. No, sir. Q. Did you see him enter the room? A. I do not recollect seeing him enter it. I saw him in the room just previous to the adjournment. Q. Were any persons admitted to the Grand Council who were not members be- fore ? A. No, sir; not to my knowledge. Q. Could any person have obtained ad- mittance except through the regular pro- cess of working into the meeting ? A. No person who was not a member could gain admittance. Those delegates who were not members of the Grand Coun- cil degree, were initiated. They had to be delegates to be initiated in the degree, and become members of the Grand Council. Q. In case that uprising was to have taken place, who was the proper ofl&cer to lead the uprising ? A. I should judge Mr. Dodd was the of- ficer. Q. Had he the power, in an oflBcial capa- city, to order that here? A. It was vested entirely in Mr. Dodd. Q. Had he the power to order members of the order at will ? A. He had. Q. Did he have the power to call all meetings? A, Yes, sir. Question by the Court: Was the circular sent which said he would send to the difierent temples, directing the members to appear here at the Democratic Convention armed? A. He did not send any to my knowledge. He did not say he had sent them. Q. Was the convention called? A. It was not. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Thursday, the 27th of October, 1864, at 10 o'clock, A. M. CotiRT Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ October 27, 1864, 10 o'clock, A. M. j The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- ment. All the members present. Also, the' Judge Advocate, the accused, and their counsel. The proceedings wei'e read and approvea. The whole of the session being occupied in reading the testimony, the Commission adjourned, to meet at 2 o'clock, P. M. CocET Boom, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ October 27, 1864, 2 o'clock, P. M. j The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused, and their counsel. Wesley Tranter, a witness for the Gov- ernment, was then introduced, and being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : Question by the Judge Advocate: State your name and place of residence. Answer. Wesley Tranter ; Shoals Station, Martin county, Indiana, has been my home for four years. Q. What has been your business for the last year ? A. I have been running a saw-mill and building bridges down South. My occupa- tion before was that of a miller. Q. State whether or not you ever joined a society called the Knights of the Golden Circle, American Knights, or Sons of Lib- erty? A. Yes, sir; I joined an order in May, 1863, called the Circle of Honor; the last I joined was called the Knights of the Golden Circle. Q. Where was that? A. It was close to the Shoals. Q. How long did you belong to that or ganization ? A. Up to January, 1864, when it was turned into the Knights of the Golden Cir- cle, the second degrea 94 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. Q. State the circumstances of your join- ing the Circle of Honor. A. I saw Mr. Horsey, the man sitting there (the witness here pointed to the ac- cused, Stephen Horsey), at the Shoals, in May, 1863. He came to me and said they ■were getting up a concern ; he did not state what it was, but it was something in de- fense of the countrj'^ — but he did not ex- actly tell me what it was at first, nor the name of it. I joined it, and they called it the Circle of Honor. Horsey said they wanted to find out what was the strength of the Democratic party at that time. Q. Where were you initiated? A. In an old house belonging to a man by the name of Gaddis, about a mile and a half from the Shoals. It was a vacant house at the time. Q. How many were there ? A. I could not say, exactly; I reckon about ten. Q. Who initiated you ? A. Mr. Horsey and Clayton initiated me. Q. Who presided at that meeting ? A. Mr. Horsey. Q. Did you take any obligation at that time? If so, state what it was. A. Yes, sir ; but I do not recollect what the oath was; it was pretty long. There was something about being torn into four parts before we would reveal the proceedings; one part was to be cast out at the east gate, one at the north gate, one at the south gate, and one at the west gate. Q. Did you learn what the gates meant ? A. No, sir. Q. Was any business transacted at the meeting besides the initiation? A. None at all. Q. When was the next meeting you at- tended, and where]? A. I think the next meeting was across the river, at the Pinnacle, at a little vacant house. About the same persons were pres- ent as at the other meeting. Mr. Horsey presided at that meeting. Q. What was done at that meeting ? A. They took in two others. Q. When and where was the next meet- ing? A. In the latter part of the summer of 1863, somewhere in the woods, about a couple of miles from the Shoals; it was back and east of Horsey's place. About eight or ten were at that meeting. Q. Were any steps taken, by the order, toward arming or drilling? A. Something was said about it; they wanted to give me an oflBce, but I would not accept it. They said we were to drill, and be ready; that we were to have our guns fixed in case any thing should happen or the soldiers should ever molest us, or any thing of that kind. Q. What was the purpose of this organi- sation. A. Its purpose came out toward the last, that we were to support Jeff Davis; that we were to have our guns fixed; that we did not know what hour we should be called on to have a general turn-out to support Jeff Davis, either North or South. That is what they said in the Knights of the Golden Circle ; but in the Circle of Honor they did not go so far. Q. You say this meeting in the woods was in the latter part of the summer ; when was the next? A. About the 27th or 28th of January, 1864, when the order was changed to the Knights of the Golden Circle. Q. Who were the officers of that organi- zation ? A. The head man was John W. Stone. Q. Where did you meet? A. At Gaddis' house. Q. How many were present? A. Somewhere about thirty. Q. How did you happen to go to that meeting ? A. I was asked to go by Anderson Scar- lett. Q. Whom do you remember seeing at that meeting ? A. John W. Stone, John Teney, William Teney, Ike Teney, Stephen Horsey, the ac- cused, Golden Green, and some few others. Q. State, as nearly as you can, what was said and done at that meeting. A. I went there from the Shoals, and got into the meeting by giving the sign. It was a grip. After we were in, Horsey made a little speech, and said we were to have something different from the other order. He had a book, and said something about the K. G. C.'s and Knights of the Golden Circle. He said that before any man was taken in, two persons were to stand good for him, that he should not divulge any of the secrets. William Teney and Hiram Apples rose and stood for all. Some ten or fifteen were sworn in. The oath differed from the former oath, but I can not recollect it; there was something about supporting Jeft* Davis, North or South. In a speech that John W. Stone made, there was something said about putting Governor Morton out of the way. Q. Was Horsey present during this speech ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he make any speech ? A.. Not that I recollect. Q. Was any thing said at this meeting as to how these purposes were to be carried out? A. Yes, sir; they stated they were first to put Morton out of the way. A man who signed himself M. D. was to pay Gov- ernor Morton a visit, and he was to live but a short time afterward ; this visit was to be made about the 26th or 27th of March. There was to be a raid made ou TKEASON TKIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 95 this place about five days from the 1st of April. Q. "Who were to make this raid ? A. The men of the lodge, and we were to arm ourselves to be ready. We were to take this place, wear out the soldiers, and release the prisoners. Q. What was to be done with the rebel prisoners ? A. Nothing that I recollect ; only that we were to go at the blue coats. Q. Was any thing said about the invasion of Ohio or Indiana by the rebels? A. They said that when we made the raid on this place, the members of the order in Illinois were to make a raid on Springfield, and those in Missouri on St. Louis. Wash- ington was to be attacked, and Forrest was to make a dash into Kentucky. He did make a raid a few days from the 5th of April. Q. Who developed these plans ? A. John W. Stone. Q. State, as far as you can, the signs, grips, and passwords of the Knights of the Golden Circle. A. If you wished to know if a man be- longed to the order, you gave him a chal- lenge, by placing the right foot in the hol- low of the left, then you folded your arms ; if he is a member and notices you, he does the same thing. Then each advance his right foot and touch toes and shake hands, running the fore-finger up the wrist, and giving a single shake. After you had shaken hands you were to say 0, he says A, and you answer K, and he pronounces Oak. He was then known as a brother. Q. What were the signs of the Circle of Honor ? A. To know if a man was a member of the order, you draw your hand across the upper lip ; he answers by doing the same thing with the left hand. You then step forward and give one single shake of the hand. If you doubt the fellow, you ask him if he saw that star ; if he was a mem- ber, he would reply by saying he saw that star in the East. You would ask what it represented, he would answer, " five points."' That proved to you that he was a full mem- ber. To recognize and test a person at a distance, the hands were clasped and raised above the head. He would answer by placing his hands upon his shoulders. Q. When was the last meeting you at- . tended of the Knights of the Golden Cir- cle? A. On the 26th or 27th of January. Q. Have they met since ? A. Not to my knowledge. Q. Why did you not continue with them? A. Because I thought they were getting along a littl-d too far for me, when they talked about helping the rebels; and as I had been in the army, and as what they avowed was against my principles, I came here in March, 1864, and reported to the Lieutenant Governor ? Q. What, if any thing, was said in refer- ence to acting with Morgan ? A. Something was said about Morgan's making a raid, but I do not recollect what. Q. Was any thing said about oftering him assistance in case the State was invaded ? A. We were to go to his assistance, as I understood it. Q. Who advocated going to the assistance of Morgan in case he invaded the State ? A. John W. Stone. Q. What has become of Stone ? A. I don't know. He had some difficul- ty with the men of the 17th Indiana, and some of the boys went after him when he made ofl", and the boys fired, and I under- stand he has since been seen, minus a finger. Q. Who were the most active members of the organization ? A. John W. Stone and William Clayton. Q. Was the order armed ? A. Not to my knowledge. Something was said about a box of pistols. Shirk- liff" and a man named Coffin got oft' at a station five miles from the Shoals, and Shirkliff had a box that was rather heavy. Coffin asked him what the box contained, and he said jewelry ; but Horsey and Shirklift' told mfe afterward, the box con- tained pistols, and laughed at Coffin for the way Shirkliff had fooled him. Q. Did he say what became of them? A. No, sir. Q. Or who they were for ? A. No, sir. He said there would be pis- tols taken round the country, and any one could have them at cost and carriage. Q. Did he say whom you could get them from ? A. No, sir ; but I suppose he meant from himself, Q. Have you been in any lodge since that meeting? A. No, sir. I have had no connection with the order since January. Q. Who did you first reveal this order to? A. To my father, who was vexed at my having joined it. 1 then went to my uncle at Washington, and told him. I then came and had a talk with Captain Henly, of the 17th Indiana, andgothim to write outan affi- davit. And the statement he made out was, I understood, sent to the Lieutenant Governor. Q. In case Governor Morton was assass- inated, who was to succeed him? A. H. H. Dodd was, according to what was said at the meeting. CROSS-EXAMINATION. I forgot to mention in my direct exami- nation that the signs of raising the hands above the head and the answer, were called 96 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. the Morgan signs. If we joined the army and were captured, we were to give these signs, and then we should be better treated. This was told us by Horsey or Clayton at the time of giving us these signs. I did not understand that because they were given us, we were to join Morgan, but I under- stood they were for self-protection. We were not sworn in the Circle of Honor to help the South, nor were we pledged to do so. It was changed to the Knights of the Golden Circle in June, 1864, by John W. Stone. A man named Baker asked why the order did not come out at first as the Knights of the Golden Circle, and Horsey and Clayton said they wanted to find out how far the Democratic party was in favor of such an order, and if they came into it well, then they would change it into the Knights of the Golden Circle. By the two men standing good for us at the initiation into the Knights of the Golden Circle, I mean that they were to kill us and report us dead to the lodge, or bring us up for trial, in case we divulged the secrets. In the obli- gation that we took there was something said about having Jeff Davis for the next President, and voting for him; I can not remember how it was worded; we were sworn into the service of Jeff Davis, and were to support him whenever called upon. They said that all Jeff Davis asked, was .that the three States of Indiana, Illinois, land Missouri should join him, and he would I soon thrash out all the blue-coats, and then • they would go eastward, and clean out all the rest like a hurricane. I took the oath voluntarily ; I thought I would see what they did, and if it did not suit me I would report the order. The first time I divulged the order was to my father the next day, and to my uncle William Tranter, at Wash- ington, soon after. About the last of Feb- ruary I mentioned the matter to Captain Henley, here at Indianapolis. I came here on purpose, and found him at the Bates House, and got him to write out my state- ment for me. John W. Stone said there were 100,000 members in the Circle of Hon- or in Indiana, and about 60,000 in the Knights of the Golden Circle. When they changed to the Knights of the Golden Circle they dropped off a little. I took one degree in this order. John W. Stone said publicly that if we took the oath of the order, and were caught, we should not be hung, but treated as prisoners of war. I had a conversation with Horsey near the railroad, within two or three days after the last meeting I at- tended. We were talking about Stone get- ting me into a difficulty, and I said some of the soldiers would come and take us. Hor- sey said he did not think the soldiers could do it. He also said that Stone had stated what was false, and that there was no truth about paying Gov. Morton a visit. I said that a man who would preach such doctrine ought to be rallied, and I wanted Horsey to go with me and tell him of it, but he would not. Horsey might have said that Stone's doctrines were too secesh, but I do not recollect his saying so. If Mr. Horsey had gone over there with me, there would have been no Mr. Stone. RE-EXAMINATION. Question by the Judge Advocate: Q. When was it that you had this conver- sation with Horsey? Answer. It was a few days after the meet- ing. Q. Who first induced you to join the order? A. Horsey was the first man; he initiated me. Q. Did he make any objection to your ta- king the Morgan sign ? A. No, sir. Q. Did he make any objection to your taking the oath ? A. No, sir; he took me into the organiza- tion and administered the oath to me. Stephen Tenet, a witness for the Govern- ment, was then introduced, and being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : Question by the Judge Advocate: State to the Court your name and resi- dence. Answer. Stephen Teney ; I live at Wash- ington, Daviess county, Indiana, where I have resided about a year. Previous to that I lived for seven years at Pleasant "Val- ley, Martin county. Q. What is your business ? A. I am a cooper by trade Q. Did you ever know Stephen Horsey ? A. Yes, sir. Q. When and where did you make his acquaintance ? A. At the Shoals. It is about five years since I first knew him. Q. Did you ever join any secret order called the Circle of Honor, Order of Amer- ican Knights, or Sons of Liberty? A. Yes, sir ; I joined the Circle of Honor. Q. Where, and when? A. In Columbia township, Martin county, near Connell School House, in the fall of 1863, at Mr. Horsey's solicitation. Q. Is Mr. Horsey present in this room ? If so, point him out. [The witness here pointed to the ac- cused, Stephen Horsey.] Q. What, if any thing was done at that meeting? A. Fourteen members were taken in that night? Q. How many were present at that meet- ing? A. About twenty-fave. Q. Who presided? A. Mr. Horsey and a Mr. William Clay- TBEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 97 ton were the presiding oflScers at that meet- ing. Q. Were you sworn in that night ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you remember what obligation you took? A. We were to be cut into four pieces if we told any thing. One part was to be cast out at the east gate, one at the north gate, one at the south gate, and one at the west gate, if we told any of the secrets ? Q. What were the secrets? A. We were not to tell who belonged to the order, nor any thing that was done at the meetings. Q. What did you learn to be the objects and purposes of the order ? A. From what I saw and learned, we were to assist the South, if called on. Q. Were any of the ways by which you could assist the South talked of? A. Yes, sir. If we were called on we were to rally, each in his township. Q. Under whom? A. I do not recollect, but we were to rally in each township to assist the rebels if they came through. Q. With arms or how ? A. They did not say. They also said if we did not rally, and stick up one for an- other, that the Democratic party would be torn down. Q. What had that to do with giving as- sistance to the rebels ? A. I do not know; that is the way Horsey and Clayton talked to us that night. Hor- sey told us about it first, and then Clay- ton. Q. Did Horsey say any thing about oppos- ing the Government? A. He told us we were to hold ourselves in readiness at any time to be called out. Q. State whether or not there was any arming or drilling in this order ? A. We drilled a few times in the town- ship ; we just marched. Q. Do you know any thing about an at- tempt to arm the order ? A. I was told by one of my brothers, Wil- liam Teney, who was a member of the or- der, that they were getting arms all the time. This was after I removed, and went back, that he told me this. The order was then called the Knights of the Golden Circle. Q. Who was the chief of that order ? A. I do not know. I went there once, and they told me the oath, but I would not take it. Q. What did your brother tell you about arms ? A. He said that they had three hundred pistols in that county ; and that Baker, of Dover Hill, went to Cincinnati and got some, and some he got from Philadelphia. Q. Had you any talk with Horsey ? A. Not about the arms. 7 Q. When was the last talk you had with Horsey ? A. It must have been some four or five months since. He told me they were get- ting along finely with their order. Q. What order did he refer to ? A. I suppose he meant the Golden Cir- cle. Q. Did you ever hear Horsey make any other speeches ? A. No, sir. CROSS-EXAMINATION. I am in the army now, and have been since the draft. No inducements have been held out to me to testify in this case, but McDonald, who is a Government de- tective, told me if I told all I knew, he would do what he could for me, and relieve me from the draft. Nothing was said in the obligation about supporting the Constitu- tion of the United States, or the Constitu- tion of the State of Indiana. Mr. Horsey said we were to support the South ; he swore us to support Jeff" Davis, North or South. That was a part of the oath, and we were to suifer ourselves to be torn into four pieces if we did not support Jeff" Davis North or South. My brother told me this last summer that he was a member of the Knights of the Golden Circle. During the summer, when I visited my brother, I went with him to the Knights of the Golden Circle, and they wanted me to take the oath, but I would not. RE-EXAMINATION. Question by the Judge Advocate: Has any officer of the Government held out any inducement to you that you should receive any benefit for testifying in this case? A. No, sir; only what that detective said; he promised to do all he could for me. Q. Have you ever asked any officer of the Government to relieve you ? A. No, sir. Q. Do you expect to be relieved from the draft? A. No, sir. Q. Do you testify from any such induce- ment? A. No, sir; I think more of my oath than that. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Friday, October 28, 1864, at 9 o'clock, A. M. Court Koom, Indianapoiis, Indiana, ) October 28, 1864, 9 o'clock, A. M. j The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment All the members present Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused, and their counsel. The proceedings were read and approved, J. J.J BiNGHAM , a witness for Government, was then introduced, and being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: 98 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. Question by the Judge Advocate: State your name, place of residence, and business? Answer. Joseph J. Bingham; I reside in the city of Indianapolis, and am editor of the Daily and Weekly Indiana 8tate Sentinel. Q. BBow long have you resided in Indian- apolis ? A. Since August, 1856. Q. "Where did you reside previous to that? A. At Lafayette, in this State. Q. IIow long have you published the In- diana State Sentinel? A. Since the 26th of August, 1856. Q. Did you ever join an order called the American Knights, or Sons of Liberty? A. I joined an order which was called the American Knights, in the latter part of October or the beginning of November, 1863. Q. Where? A. In this city, in the Military Hall, on Washington street, between Meridian and Pennsylvania. Q. Who was in possession of the Hall? A. It was leased by the Democratic Club of this city. Q. Was it under their control ? A. It is my impression that it was under their control at the time. Q. What was the first meeting of the American Knights that you attended? A. The first meeting, if you can call it such, was my initiation; there were very few present. Q. M'^ho were present? A. Mr. Dodd, Mr. Harrison, a man by the name of Jacobs, Dr. Johnson, and I think a person of the name of Vandegrifi^ Q. Was Mr. Ristine or Hord there? A. Not at that time. Q. AVhat took place at that meeting ? A. It was only an informal initiation ; we did not go through all the ceremonies, the greater part was omitted. Q. State to the Court how you came to join the order, and at whose solicitation you joined? A. In the latter part of August, or the first of September, I was introduced by Mr. Dodd to a man by the name of P. C. Wright. He brought him to my oflSce and left him there; said he wanted to have a talk with me. Mr. Wright went on to state his business; gave me a little history of himself; he stated that he was a lawyer in business in New Orleans, at the breaking out of this rebel- lion; that he was forced to leave on account of his Union sentiments ; that he went to St. Louis, and practiced alternately between St Louis and New Orleans — in St. Louis in the summer, and New Orleans in the win- ter; he said he was a lawyer in the celebrated Gaines case, and that in examining the papers of General Gaines, he came across what purported to be a secret organization that existed during the Revolutionary War. He told me that General Lee was President of the Association, as appeared from the papers; that Madison, Jefferson, and I be- lieve Washington, had belonged to it; that it had exerted a very powerful agency in maintaining the contest during the war, and establishing our present form of govern- ment; that he thought he would establish a similar order. He told me that the prin- ciples of the oi'der were the same as existed during the Revolution; that the ritual and obligation were nearly the same; that the papers were not perfect, but the omissions were supplied; and that he came to this State for the purpose of extending the order here. He said it existed in Missouri, Illinois, and even in the Central American States; it was not confined to the United States, but was to extend over all the world, not limited by any geographical divisions. He urged me to join, and take part in it, and be one of the persons to establish the order here. I said 1 was opposed to all secret political organizations — that I never saw any good come from them — and declined. He visited the prominent Democrats of the city, and used the same arguments, but most of them declined. I do not know whether Mr. Dodd was a member of the order at that time; I understood he intended to be. Mr. Dodd is a gentleman very fond of excite- ment ; he has a natural taste for secret asso- ciations. He was a prominent and one of the most active members of the Know Nothing order; and he was head and front of the Sons of Malta, in this city; his taste runs that way. I have known Mr. Dodd for many years; for three or four years I have had business relations with him that threw him constantly in contact with me. After Wright left, Dodd urged me to join the association. I declined at first. Finally he told me what its objects were; that it was to be a permanent organization; polit- ical, but not partisan ; that it was to sym- pathize with the principles of the Demo- cratic party. He said that the object was to educate the people in the old fashioned republican doctrines, the same as those en- tertained by Madison and Jefferson; that it was designed to establish a paper here, to be the organ and advocate of its principles, and that it was intended to have a large university near the city, to educate young men in what he termed correct polit- ical doctrines; and that the organization was to be permanent, like the Odd Fellows or Masons. When the proposition of the paper was started, he said he wanted to advise with me about many matters which he could not unless 1 was a member of the organization, and that he could not even tell me the names of the members of the order; that was one of the obligations of secrecy; but if I would join, he would not put me through TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 99 the regular ceremonies, but would initiate me informally, and if I did not like it, as I joined voluntarily, so I could leave it when- ever I pleased. I thought I saw in this the seeds of discord, so far as the Democratic party was concerned. Being a party man, X thought the only way to secure success was by the uniting of the different elements in opposition to the Administration. With that view of the case 1 joined at the time I named. Dodd informed me that he had appointed me a delegate to the State Coun- cil, which met in November, 1863. I at- tended; took what they called a Council degree; but what it is I can not now tell, I paid so little attention to it The meeting was held in the Military Hall. Dodd pre- sided at the meeting, and Mr. Harrison was Secretary. I do not recollect what other oflficers were there. 1 saw Mr. VandegriiF at the meeting; and I think Dr. Athon, Mr. Ristine, and Mr. Milligan, the accused, were present. A gentleman named Cush- man, from thenorthern partof the State, was present. Q. Were any others of the accused pres- ent? A. No, sir. Q. What business was done at that meet- ing? A. The Council was opened in due form; those that had not taken the Council de- gree were initiated, and then various com- mittees were appointed. I found myself placed as Chairman of the Committee on Literature. Q. What other committees were ap- pointed? A. I do not recollect. Q. Was a military committee appointed? A. I do not recollect. Q. Were any appointments made by Dodd? A. Not in my hearing. Q. At what time of day was the meeting held? A. It convened at 10 o'clock in the morn- ing. Q. How long did it last ? A. I was there about an hour, but I un- derstood it lasted till evening. Q. Why did you not remain ? A. I withdrew to write my report. I wrote a brief report, advising, as far as a paper was concerned, that nothing be done until means were raised to support it a year ; and I recommended the indefinite postponement of the university scheme until the next meeting of the Council. I returned then, and some other business was going on, but I do not recollect what. I handed my re- port to the committee, in which was a Dr. Bryant. 1 told Cushman that my engage- ments were such that I could not remain, and he would oblige me if, when the report was called, he would read it. Q. Did you learn from any members present about the appointment of mtyor generals ? A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever hear of any military ap- pointments being made? A. No, sir. I did not know that the or- ganization embraced any thing of a military nature till the exposure of the Sons of Lib- erty. Q. You will please proceed with your nar- ration? A. I never attended what is called the meeting of the temple. On the 16th of Feb- ruary another State Council was held. Mr. Dodd informed me that by virtiie of my ap- pointment, I had a right to attend. 1 went in on the morning of the 16th. I had been to the post office, and stopped on my way to my own office, for a few minutes. I had nothing to do with the meeting, and did not feel much interest in the matter. 1 was in again for a little while in the after- noon, when I went to the post office a sec- ond time. When I went in there was a gentleman of this city making a speech. Major Conklin, and this was the first time I recollect hearing about any military appoint- ments. I suppose he had been called on for a report of what he had done, for the drift of his speech — what I heard of it — was, that he had not drilled any body, and had not any body to drill. That is all my recollec- tion of that meeting. Q. How did he come to report that fact? A. I suppose he had been called upon for a report; that was what I gathered from the nature of his speech ; and that was the first idea I had of its being a military organ- ization. I never read the rituai, or the con- stitution, or by-laws. I think Mr. Heffren was present at that meeting. Mr. Ueffi-en is an old friend of mine, and came to my office to see me several times. At one of those inter- views we exchanged our opinions as to this association. 1 told him that 1 thought no good would come of it. Mr. Heffren coincided with my views, and said he believed it was a humbug. These are the only meetings I attended. I did not wish to belong to the organization. I paid my fees, and asked Mr. Dodd if any formal withdrawal was necessary; he said that my joining was vol- untary, and I might withdraw when 1 liked. I did not consider myself a member of the organization since that time, and have not been a member, though my having been in the order gives me the confidence of the members, and I have learned many things that I otherwise should not have known. Q. Did you hear the address of Dodd at the meeting of the 16th or 17th of Feb- ruary ? A. No, sir. Q. How long were you present? A. I was not there over twenty or thirty minutes. I heard afterward that he had delivered an address, but I never read it 100 TREASON TRIALS AT IXDIANAPOLIS. till I saw it in the Journal of the 30th of July. Q. Who was present at that meeting ? A. Colonel Bowles, the accused, Dr. Bry- ant, Mr. Blake, of Terre Haute, Mr. Cush- man and 'Squire McBride, of Evansville. There must have been some thirty or forty there, but few that I was acquainted with. Q. Was Mr. Milligan or Mr. Humphreys present '! A. Not to my knowledge. I did not see them there. Mr. Heflren was present. Q. Did you learn what business was trans- acted at that meeting ? A. I asked the question after the adjourn- ment of the meeting, and was told nothing particular had been done Q. Did you learn who had been appoint- ed to the Supreme Council ? A. No, sir. Q. Do you know who composed the Com- mittee of Thirteen? A. No, sir. The Committee of Thirteen, in my opinion, was a myth. The next thing that came up, in connection with the order, was this : Dr. Bowles, Mr. Dodd, Judge Bul- litt, and Barrett were at my business office. I met them on the platform as I was going down from my room; I was introduced to them, and supposed they were all members of the order, tliough nothing was said about it; I supposed so from their as- sociation. Judge Bullitt I had known pre- viously, I think fifteen years ago; he had done me a great kindness; we renewed our acquaintance, and he asked me to call and see him at the Palmer House; said he had some fine Kentucky whisky, and in- vited me to take a drink. About half past II I thought I would go to my dinner early and stop in and see him. I knew where the room was, it was No. 28 ; I went right up stairs and knocked at the door. He said, "Come in," and I opened the door. The first man I saw was a person of the name of Coffin. I did not know then what his occupation was, but from his asso- ciations I thought he was a Republican, and I thought it was queer company ibr Democrats. I walked up and shook hands with him; he whispered to me, "I've have caught you at last." I thought that was very strange, very singular; I walked around the room, and mentioned to one of the gentlemen that it was a singular company. We passed the salutations of the day, and I then said to Bullitt, "If you have any good whisky, bring it out." He brought it out, and we had a drink. I asked Coffin if he was going to dinner; he said he was, and we walked together. As we walked out, I asked an explanation of the remark he had made to me, "I've caught you at last." He told me a story not necessary to be repeated here, and applied it to me; said that was all he meant. A few days after- ward I met Joseph E. McDonald, on Wash- ington street. I told him the circumstance, and he remarked to me, "Don't you know who this Coffin is?" "He is a United States Detective; he is in the employ of the Gov- ernment, and has been for two yeai's." I remarked to him that it was a singular se- cret society, the members of which should sit in council with a United States Detec tive. Q. Did you at that time unfold to Mr. McDonald your association with that or- der? A. No, sir; I do not think I told him till sometime subsequent. Q. What was done by these gentlemen? A. They never told me their business ; and to this day I do not know what they met together for. Q. You say that you met McDonald, and that you remarked to him that it was a sin- gular secret association that should have a United States Detective in it; how did you come to tell him that, if you did not make known to him that you were a member of the order? A. We had talked upon the subject fre- quently ; I do not know if he knew wheth- er I was a member or not. Q. Did you ever give him to understand that you were a member? A. No, sir. Q. From your conversation do you know whether he was aware that you were a mem- ber of the order ? A. No, sir. Q. When was this conversation with Mr. McDonald? A. The interview occurred about the middle of May, and it was, I think, within a week afterward, that I had this conversa- tion with McDonald. Q. Where were you first introduced to Mr. Stidger — in your office ? A. I first saw him there. Every Sunday morning, about 9 o'clock, a number of political friends met in my office to hear the telegrams read. One Sunday morning, about the 1st of June, I was coming down to my office, and I met Dodd and Stidger. Dodd introduced him to me, and I recollected the man, though not his name; he said he was the Private Secre- tary of Judge Bulhtt ; and either at that interview or within a short time, a day or two, Dodd or Stidger made this remark, that this man Coffin had compromised Judge Bullitt, or that Judge Bullitt thought he had, I don't recollect which. The next meeting of the order here was held in June, but I know nothing of its proceed- ings, as I was not present. That brings U9 along to about the first of August. In the mean time 1 had seen Colonel Bowles once; he came to my office one evening ; said ho wanted to talk with me about matters gen- erally ; and he asked me if I thought thir man Coffin was a detective; he had hf« TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 101 doubts about it I told Iiim there was no doubt about it. Q. From whom did you have it? A. Mr. McDonald. Another circumstance it may be well to relate; it shows the per- fect system of espionage here. [The Judge Advocate remarked that it was unnecessary to state that here.] I do not recollect any thing special oc- curring until the 2d or 3d of August. About that time, one morning Mr. Dodd came into my room and said, "I want to have a talk with you." He said he wanted to tell me something; "but," said he, "you must give me your word of honor that what I say to you, you will not reveal to any living being." Not knowing what it was, I said, ^'Certainly." He went on to say it had been determined at a meeting, or Council, I do not recollect which, I think he said at a Council of Sixteen ; I believe he said some- thing about its being composed of four from Indiana, four from Illinois, four from Kentucky, and four from Missouri; I do not think any names were mentioned but Judge Bullitt and Mr. Bowles ; he said that at the Council, a resolution had been deter- mined upon, and he went on to explain it. He said that ari'angements had been made to release the prisoners on Johnson's Island ; at Camp Chase, near Columbus, Ohio ; at Camp Morton, and also at Camp Douglas, and that the prisoners at Camp Douglas, after their release, were to go over and re- lease those at Rock Island. At the same time there was to be an uprising at Louis- ville, at which the Government stores, etc., were to be seized. Q. An uprising of what and who ? A. He did not state what or who; he said an " uprising." I looked at the man in astonishment. I thought it was a wild dream; I could not believe it possible. I studied a moment, and said, "Mr. Dodd, do you know what you are going to under- take ? Do you know the position of mili- tary atfairs here at this post ? Do you think you can accomplish this scheme with any number of unarmed and undisciplined men you can bring here ?" Another thing he remarked to me was that this revolution was going to take place at several points on the 16 th of August, and that I was the only person he communicated this to in the city. I asked " how is this revolution to take place, and nobody know any thing about it?" As to the way in which it was to be done here, and at Louisville, he made a suggestion to me, as I was Chairman of the Democratic State Central Committee, which was that I should call a mass meet- . ing of the Democracy on the IGtlj of August. I said we had had experience enough of Democratic mass meetings, and there would be no excuse or apology for calling such a meeting here. I asked him what excuse he could give for calling the meeting. He said to take some expression against the draft, and to give some instructions to the delegates who attended the Chicago Con- vention, which was to be held on the 29th of Augyist. I told him I could consenTTb nothiiig of the kind, and would be a party to no such scheme. W. H. Talbot, Chair- man of the Democratic Central Congres- sional District, had gone to New York, and he left me to act in his absence. Dodd knew this, and on my declining to call a meeting, as chairman of the Democratic State Central Committee, he wanted me to call a District mass meeting to nominate a candidate for this Congressional District. I told him I would not. Dodd then made application to others, also to McDonald to urge him to induce me to call a mass meet- ing, but I declined to do it. I then began to think seriously about the matter, and to reflect what was best to be done. I had been intrusted with an important secret, and it was of such a nature that 1 thought I ought not to keep it. I then determined to investigate the matter. I first called on Mr. Ristine, and I put leading questions to him to find out whether or not he knew of any such project, as that which had been communicated to me by Mr. Dodd, and I felt satisfied that he did not. I then called upon Mr. Athon, and in the same way I asked him leading questions to find out what he knew about the matter, and I felt satisfied he knew nothing about it. I spoke to others, to Mr. Hord among the rest. I went to bed and slept over it In the morning I went to see Mr. J. E. McDonald. I told him I had secret infor- mation that I wished to consult him about; that it was a matter involving us all, and that some action had to be taken immedi- ately. He said he was willing to listen to all I had to say. This was on the night of the 4th of August I told Mr. McDonald all that Dodd had told me, and the circum- stances under which he had told it, and that I had come to advise with him as to what was my duty in the matter. We talked the matter over sometime, and finally came to the conclusion that we would sleep over it, but that the thing must be stopped at all hazards. I left him at 9 o'clock, and went to my office. As I walked down Washington street I saw a gentleman coming up rapidly, and 1 stopped him : " Halloo ! Kerr, what has brought you here ?" I said. He seemed very much exci- ted. "Do you know any thing?" he said; and I said, "Do you know anything?'" "Yes," he replied. "What is it?" said I. He then said, "The devil's to pay in our section of the State; the people of Washington, Har- rison and Floyd counties, and that neigh- borhood, had got the idea that a revolution was imjiending; the farmers were fright- ened, and were selling their hay in the fields and their wheat in the stacks, and all 102 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. the property that could be was being con- verted into greenbacks." Q. What Kerr was that? A. Michael C. Kerr. "Is that all you know?" I said. "No," said he. Then he went on and represented to me just what Dodd had before told me. He went over the whole schenie,ju6t as Dodd had revealed it. As we walked along, he turned around once or twice to see if any detectives were follow- ing us. I didn't let him know that I knew anything about the matter. I said, "This is a most important matter, and I insist that you go up to Mr. McDonald's with me, and tell him what you have told me." We got him up, and I said to him, "Kerr has got some important information, and I want him to tell you the same story that he has told me." Q. Did you, previous to that time, or at that time, as a matter of safety to yourself, state to McDonald your whole connection with the matter? A. 1 think he understood that I was a member of the order. Q. Did you give him the whole history of the matter ? A. He undei'stood I was a member of the order. In this conversation with Mr. Kerr, he involved Dr. Athon in the scheme. I think, also, he told me that Governor Mor- ton was to be captured or taken prisoner, and that Dr. Athon was to be Provisional Governor, and that was to be part of the scheme. McDonald said we would all meet in the morning, as had been agreed upon. Coming out, I said that I could not rest under the suspicion that Dr. Athon knew any thing of the scheme. I did not think that Vie did; and I said that although it was after 12 o'clock, I would go to his house. We went and called him up. He came down, and I told him, that although it was such a late hour, yet as Mr. Kerr had come with such important information he ought to know it that night. He agreed to meet with us the next morning at Mc- Donald's office. Coming out, I asked what he thought of Dr. Athon ? He said, " He is an innocent man. He knows nothing about this scheme." Athon Avould scarcely be- lieve that such a scheme was entertained. I think he said: "It's all gas; such a scheme can not be entertained by sensible men." The next day we went about 8 or 9 o'clock to McDonald's office. I had invite, those persons who did not know it, that it was true? A. We did, sir. All present understood it thoroughly. We conversed an hour or two before these gentlemen came in. We had a meeting of the Central Com- mittee on the 12th of August. I stated in the notice sent out on the 6th of August, that matters of grave importance demanded a large attendance, and it was hoped that all the Committee would attend, and we in- vited other prominent men in the State. We had quite a large meeting. We filled up the vacancies on the State ticket, and then this matter came up for discussion. Mr. Kerr was present, and at my request he laid this whole affair before the members of the Committee, and the same resolution came up there we had in our previous consulta- tion, that, if the thing had not been stopped, it must be now. We had to be satisfied on' that point. Colonel Walker came to that meeting. We had a two-days meeting — the 12th and the 13th. And he assured the Committee that it was stopped, that nothing of the kind should take place. Q. Was it previous to, or after this meet- ing of the Council of Sixteen at Chicago, that you met Mr. Walker here, and had a conversation with him, in reference to any rebel officers going to Hlinois, to take charge of the rebel prisoners ? A. I saw Mr. Walker previously, once or twice, while he was here. I met him on the street, and he complained that I had not seen him. He was sleeping at Colonel Rose's room, in this building, at the time. Colonel Rose was absent at the time. He is a brother-in-law of Colonel Rose. This was on the morning of the 11th. He went to the Bates House, and said he regretted to have to go to the Bates House, it was a bad place to stop at. I asked him why he was going. He said he had to meet these gentlemen by appointment. I understood him to say they were rebel ofiacers. They would be there that day, and unless he was there, they would not know where to find him. He said they were on their way to Chicago to take charge of the rebel prison- ers when they were released from Camp Douglas. It was necessary that he should see them, to tell them that the whole scheme was stopped. He met me afterward, and said he had seen them, and they had gone on and stopped all operations at that time, for the release of the prisoners. CROSS-EXAMINATION. Question by the accused: To what extent was this scheme of revo- lution known and entertained in this order, and out of it, as far as you know ? A. All that I know is that it was commu- nicated to me under those circumstances, and I know nothing further than those to whom I communicated it in this city and those who came from a distance. Q. To what extent did Dodd state that he had communicated the matter ? A. He stated to me that I was the only person to whom he had communicated it. That was about the 2d or 3d of August. Q. Did Mr. Kerr get his information from the same source? A. No, sir. I do not know where he got it. Q. Do you say this Council of Sixteen had resolved upon this revolutionary scheme when it convened at Chicago ? A. Yes, sir. Q. How long before that? A. I don't think he told me, when I saw 104 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. him here from Chicago or New York; he got back about the 29th of July. Q. Did you not know, from other sources, and through other medium, that, so far ' from Mr. Dodd's statement being true, the proposition had actually been voted down in that Council? A. Yes, sir. I heard that. Q. Did you hear it from the members of the order? A. I heard it, but it did not come directly from a member of the order. Q. Did you learn from Dodd, that Bowles was a member of that Council? A. That is what I understood. Q. Did you understand from Bowles, as a member of the Council, that the proposition for revolution had been voted down? A. Not directly. Q. Who were the members of that Coun- cil? Was either of the accused — Heftren, Horsey, Milligan,or Humphreys a member? A. I did not understand that either of them was. Q. You say that it was not until a very late period of your connection with the or- der, that you got any knowledge of its mili- tary feature. Did it, either with or without its military feature, contemplate in its teachings, as you got them in the order, or in the ritual, or any of its written or un- written works, any such revolutionary scheme as the purpose and object of the order ? A. I did not so understand it; I never read the Constitution or Ritual until long after I joined; not until the 30th of July. Q. What was the purpose of the organiza- tion as you understood it ? A. Purely political. That was my under- standing of it at the time I joined it. Q. This conflict of the Government, then, that was concocted by these men, you say was not within the scope or contemplation of the order? A. Nothing was ever mentioned in the order, or by any member of the order, until it was communicated by Dodd to me. Q. Do you know any thing about the Com- mittee of Thirteen ? A. I think it* was some time in August. On the Saturday that these arms were dis- covered, a young man came to my house after supper, and brought me a communica- tion from Dodd and Walker. I think they were in Chicago. They inclosed an address from what was called a Committee of Thir- teen, and requested me to publish it in the Sentinel; and if 1 did not publish it, they wanted to have it printed in Dodd's ofiBce. I told him 1 had not time to look at it, but if he would come in on Surjday morning, I would let him know. I declined to pub- lish it, and I told him that as I had an in- terest in Dodd's establishment, it could not be published there. I inclosed the communication back to Mr. Walker. Q. You say, do you not, that Walker said he wrote the address, and was authorized to use Dodd's name as chairman of the Com- mittee of Thirteen? A. I understand there was no such com- mittee. Q. Had you any evidence that Walker signed the communication.? A. Yes, sir. It was in his handwriting. Dodd also wrote to the same efiect from Chicago. Q. Had you any more than one conversa- tion with Heffren? A. Yes, sir. Heflfren came to my office several times; the night before and the night after the meeting on the 16th and 17 th of February. Q. Was it on that occasion you said you would have nothing to do with the oi'der? A. Yes, sir; and Heffi^en said he con- sidered it a humbug. Q. Did he express any opinion about abandoning it ? A. Yes, sir. I so understood him. He coincided with my opinion and would do as I had done. Q. Did you have any information of Mr. Heffren' s meeting with the organization after that ? A. No, sir. Q. You stated, did you not, that Mr. Milli- gan was present at the State Council in No- vember ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was that the only time you met him at the State Council ? A. I met him only that time, and that was the only knowledge I had of his con- nection with the order. Q. Have you not stated that nothing was discussed in the order but pure politics, education and literature ? A. That was all that was discussed in my hearing. There may have been other mat- ters that 1 did not hear. Q. What was the date of the time when you expressed your determination not to have any more to do with the institu- tion? A. It was after the February meeting. Q. Did you not after that time maintain your previous intimacy with members or persons belonging to the organization? A. Yes, sir. Q. From October until the 15th of Au- gust, when Dodd revealed to you the pur- pose to inaugurate a revolution, did you hear, in or out of the order, of any purpose to inaugurate a revolution by the order itself? A. Nothing of the kind. Q. Then what was the organization? Was it not purely political ? A. That was my understanding. Q. Then I will ask you to state whether this conspiracy that Dodd revealed to you was not a conspiracy of Dodd, Walker and TREASON TRIALS AT mDIANAPOLIS. 105 one or two others, and not a conspiracy by the order ? A. That was my understanding, sir. RE-EXAMINATION. Question by the Judge Advocate : Do you say that was your understand- ing ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was it not your understanding that the leaders of the order were to use the or- der to accomplish this revolution? What position did Dodd hold in the command of the order ? A. He was Grand Commander. Q. Had he not, according to the Consti- tution and Ritual, the power to call it to- gether? A. Yes, sir. Q. Were they not sworn to obey implicit- ly his order ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Then could he, or could he not, order them to come here armed, as he chose, Was that not in accordance with the obli- gations of the order? A. It was not so far as I understood it. Q. I ask you the plain, simple question, whether or not, according to the Consti- tution of that order, you were not to obey him implicitly over and above all other commands ? Did you ever see the consti- tution and laws of the order? A. I saw them as they were published in the Indianapolis Journal I saw the book containing them, but never read it? Q. Would you recognize them if you saw the books? A. Yes, sir ; I think I should. Q. The Judge Advocate here handed the witness a copy of the Constitution of the Supreme Council of the oi-der, and asked, is this one of the books you saw ? A. It looks something like it. Q. Will you read section 17 of the Gen- eral Laws? A. The witness read the following : "Sec. 17. The Grand Commanders shall be the presiding oflficers of the Grand Coun- cils of the States, execute all laws passed by such Councils, and shall be commanders- in-chief of the military forces of their re- spective States." What I saw was the ritual and the oath ; I never saw this before. The Judge Advocate here handed the witness a pamphlet containing the Ritual of the third degree, and asked : Q. Is that not the Ritual of the third de- gree? A. That is what it purports to be. The Judge Advocate then read the fol- lowing portion of the obligation: "I do further swear, that I will, at all times and in all places, yield prompt and implicit obedience to the utmost of my ability without remonstrance, hesitation or delay, to any and every mandate, order or request, of my immediate M. E. G. C.,* in all things touching the purposes of the O. S. L., and to defend the principles thereof, when assailed in my own State or country, in whatsoever capacity may be assigned to me by authority of our order." Q. Is that one of the obligations taken by the order ? A. Yes, sir. Q. I will ask you again, whether the Grand Commander had power to call this order together, and to give them such or- ders as he sa-w proper? A. Yes, sir. That matter came up for discussion, I think. I asked the Grand Commander the question, when I went into the order, whether there was any obliga- tion that would violate my duties or my obligations as a citizen, and he said there was not. I think that was the construc- tion placed upon this obligation : that there would be nothing violating our obligation as citizens. Q. You have spoken of this uprising on the 1 6th. By whom was it contempla- ted? A. Dodd gave me no information but this, that he desired me to call a mas5 meeting of the Democracy, and under cover of that he could accomplish his ends. Q. How? A. By revolution. Q. Who were to inaugurate that revolu- tion? A. He expected the men that cam© here to do it. Q. Who were to come here? A. That he never explained to me. Q. Who, did you gather from what he said, would do it? A. I should infer from what he said that he expected the assistance of the members of the order. Q. Were any promises or pledges, or threats made, on behalf of the Govern- ment, to induce you to give this testimony? A. None whatever. I think it is due to this Court and to the Judge Advocate, to state that this state- ment is made voluntarily. That I intended to have made it in writing and pubUsh it for my ovvn vindication. The Commission then adjourned, to meet at 2 o'clock, P. M. AFTERNOON SESSION. CouET Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ October 28, 18C1, 2 o'clock, P. M.t The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present; also, the Judge Advocate, the accused and their counsel. Moat Excellent Grand Commander. 106 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. Felix G. Stidger, a witness for the Gov- ernment, was then introduced, and being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testi- fied as follows: Question by the Judge Advocate : State your name, place of residence, and business for the last two or three years ? Answer. Felix G. Stidger: I live in Mat- toon, Illinois. For the last two or three years I have been in the dry goods business, and I have been a carpenter, and served in the army. Q. Where did you reside immediately pre- ceding your liviYig at Mattoon, Illinois ? A. At Louisville. Kentucky. I came there on the 15th of April, 1864. Q. Where previous to that? A. At Taylorsville, Kentucky. Q. How long did you reside there ? A. Two months after leaving the army. Q. When did you leave the army ? A. On -the morning of the 14th of Feb- ruary I received my discharge. Q. From what regiment were you dis- charged? A. From the 15th Regiment Kentucky Volunteer Infantry. I was discharged for physical disability. Q. Were you with your regiment ? A. No, sir; not a day. I served as clerk in the Adjutant General's ofBce, 1st Divis- ion, 14th Army Corps. Q. Who was the Adjutant General ? A. Major McDowell, Captain Taylor, now Colonel 15th Kentucky Volunteers, Captain Nevin, Lieutenant Colonel Lyme Starling, formerly chief of General Crittenden's staff, and when I left Captain Wells was Assistant Adjutant General. Q. Who commanded the corps ? A. General Thomas, and part of the time General Palmer. Q. What particular duties did you per- form as clerk ? A. Applications for resignations, leave of absence, furloughs, sometimes reports of the troops, and special and general orders. Q. Please state to the Court how your attention was first called to the Order of the Sons of Liberty ; and when, if ever, you joined them ? A. 1 was in Captain Jones' office on the morning of the 5th of May, 1864, and he showed me a letter from General Carring- ton, stating something in reference to Dr. Bowles being a dangerous man, and re- questing him to send a Kentuckian to him; on the receipt of that letter, Captain Jones sent me to Dr. Bowles. I I'eceived instruc- tions in the Vestibule, or Neophyte Degree, on that morning; Mr. Prentice instructed me before I went to see Dr. Bowles. That was on the 5th of May, 1864. I started to see Dr. Bowles on the morning of the 6th, and arrived at his house on the 8th. He re- Bides at French Lick Springs, Orange coun- ty, Indiana. Q. Did you go directly to his house? A. No, sir; I stopped at Salem, thinking that was the nearest railroad point, but I found it was twenty odd miles to French Lick Springs, and no regular conveyance. By going further up the railroad to Orleans, it was not so far; there was a regular con- veyance all the time. I stepped oflf the train at Salem about 11 in the morning of the 6th of May, and remained there until the night train came along, which was probably 10 o'clock; I then went to Orleans and staid there till 12 o'clock the next day, Saturday the 7th, when I took the regular conveyance out to Paoli. On the 8th 1 went to Dr. Bowles' house. On the way to Mr. Bowies', I saw Mr. Heff'ren at Salem. Q. State how you happened to meet him, and your conversation with him. A. I fell in with a man by the name of Drom. I think he stated his name was John, but I am not sure whether it was John or S. He is a clothing merchant, and keeps a store. He saw Mr. Hefifren walking across the square, and remarked that there was one of the Democratic lead- ers of that part of the country. He said something about Heffren wearing a butter- nut pin, and that there had been something said about taking it oft" him, and that if it had been done there would have been one thousand or fifteen hundred men ready to revenge the insult. Drom told Heffren that I was from Kentucky; HeSren came up and asked if I wished to see him. He then went on to tell me that he was ex- pecting a commissioner from Kentucky, from the rebel forces there; and I told him about three of Forrest's regiments being disbanded there — in the State of Ken- tucky. Q. Did he explain what he meant by the word "commissioner?" A. Not at that time; afterward he did. I told him of the three regiments of For- rest's men having been disbanded, and he told me that there were four more to be disbanded. This was what he was expect^ ing to hear of, and was expecting a com- missioner from the forces in Kentucky to see him that day or the next, and he did not know but 1 was probably the man, as I came from Kentucky. I knew nothing more about these three Kentticky regi- ments being disbanded than what I had seen in the newspapers. I understood they were furloughed soldiers who were to re- main at home a certain time, and at a cer- tain signal they were to concentrate when- ever ordered. Mr. Ileftren told me during the evening that he could call together, within twenty-four hours, from one thou- sand to fifteen luuidred armed men in that section, in connection with that secret or- ganization. He did not say particularly for what purpose he could call them. He asked me if I knew any thing about the TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 107 Democratic organization ; I said I was a member of the first degree of it. He did not mention the name of the order. Q. What further conversation had you with Heffren? A. 1 had no particular conversation with him that evening; he promised to see me after supper; but his wife being ill, he did not come. Q. Did you state your name and business to him ? A, I believe I told him my name was Grundy, but 1 did not state my business at all Q. What time did you leave him ? A. I suppose it was about sundown when he left me to go home. He warned me of some twoorthreegentlemen whom hepointed out; one was Joe Faulkner; that I must be par- ticular about what I said ; for he told me he was a United States Detective. He also re- ferred me to the Persise House as being of a difi:erent stripe to the one I was stopping at, which was known as a Union House. He remarked to a gentleman that evening, or a gentleman asked him why a certain lady was sent from Kentucky; he said he didn't know why it was, except that they expected trouble in Kentucky, and that this would be a safer place. He also said, that if Lee succeeded in permanently holding Pennsylvania, and some one else some other point, as he understood it — "things would be difl'erent." Q. What "things" did he refer to? A. I suppose he meant the workings of the Government. I left him that night and went to Orleans? Q. When did you see Dr. Bowles ? A. I went there Sunday morning ; got there about 10 or 11 o'clock. He was from home, and did not return till 6 or 7 in the evening. His wife gave me an introduction to him. My name was given as J. J. Grundy. 1 gave this name to Mr. Banning, the keeper of the house, and he so registered it. My first conversation with Bowles was on Mon- day evening. He asked me if I knew any thing about the Democratic organization. I told him I was a member of the first de- gree of it. He did not test me as to whether I was a member. He told me I was sur- rounded by members of that order. He told me that he was a military chief of the order, and that a man by the name of Wright, of St. Louis, was the civil chief, and that the order was numerous. He gave me the name of Mr. Halloway. and said he was the only man in Illinois that he could put his finger on with reliability. He said the forces of Indiana would concentrate in Ken- tucky, and make Kentucky their battle ground ; that the forces in Illinois would concentrate in St. Louis, and co-operate vrith the forces in Missouri; that Illinois would furnish 50,000, Missouri 30,000, and Price was to invade the State with 20,OUO men; with that 100,000 men they were to hold and permanently occupy that State, and the troops of Indiana and Ohio concen- trate at Louisville. I also heard him speak of a man by the name of Stone ; who said he had organized a regiment of men in six weeks in this State, (Indiana,) and that he expected him to raise another regiment. He spoke of another man named Dickerson, who went to Richmond at his pleasure. He lived in Baltimore. H-=, wanted to know how many men Kentucky could fur- nish, and stated that a rebel force under Buckner would come into the eastern part of the State, and with these forces they in- tended to hold Kentucky. At that time no time had been set for the movement. Q. Did you learn from him, or not, that this organization, or secret order, was to act in conjunction with the rebel forces? A. They were. He told me that thia order was made out of the Knights of the Golden Circle, of which he had been a mem- ber, and that he resurrected this order out of it. He appeared to claim a great deal of credit. Q. Was any thing else said at that meet- ing between you and Bowles ? A. These were the important parts. Q. Where did you go afterward ? A. 1 went back to Kentucky. He was anxious I should use all my exertions in ex- tending the order as much as possible. Bowles told me there was to be a meeting in Indianapolis in about two weeks tiom then ; and said he would get other reports from Kentucky, but he wanted me to go to Ken- tucky and see what could be done; he was anxious to know what he could report at that meeting. I arrived at Dr. Bowles' on the 8th of May, 1864; stayed at his house four days, and re- turned to Kentucky about the 12th or 13th of May. Q. Who did you see upon your I'eturn that was connected with this order ? A. Dr. Kalfus was the only one I knew to be connected with it. I had some talk with him, and he further initiated me into the order. Q. What degrees did you receive from him ? A. He gave me the first degree. I had previously taken only the Vestibule degree. Q,. Did you meet Judge Bullitt, of Ken- tucky? A. Not until after the second interview with Bowles. I started from Louisville about two weeks after my return from Bowies', probably on the 24th or 25th of May. I did not go direct to Dr. Bowles, but stopped at Salem to see Heff'ren. I saw him and had some talk with him. He told me he had been to Indianapolis, and had seen Mr. H. H. Dodd, and that they had concluded to call a meeting of the organization some day be- tween the I3th and IGth of June. He said 108 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. they were the only two men in the State who had the power to call that meeting; that was himself (IletiVen) and Dodd; and that the organization of the State was now about complete ; that it would number be- tween 75,000 and 80,000 men. Q. Did you register your name at Salem ? A. If I did, it was as J. J. Grundy. Q. Where did you have this talk with Heffren? A. It was in the sitting-room of the Per- sise House, on or about the 25th of May. Q. How are you enabled to fix that date? A. By its being on Wednesday, near two weeks after my return from seeing Dr. Bowles the first time. Q. Did you make any report of your visit at that time ? A. I made my report to Captain Jones, and lunderstandhe sent it toGeneral Burbridge. Q. State the particulars of your second visit to Dr. Bowles ? A. I left Salem about II o'clock in the morning, and arrived at Dr. Bowles' that evening. He was not at home. That was on Wednesday. He returned Saturday, at noon. At his home no one appeared to know where he had gone. He told me him- self, that he had been to Indianapolis ; had seen Mr. Dodd, Mr. Barrett, of Missouri, Judge Bullitt, and some other gentlemen; and that there would be a meeting of the Grand Council on the 14th of June. He told me that Barrett pledged from Missouri 30,000 men, and that Illinois pledged 50,000. The leaders of those States pledged that number of men. The forces of Illinois and Missouri were to co-operate with Price. He said that 20,000 men or more, if Jeff Davis could spare them, were to be sent into Mis- souri. He told me, also, that Indiana pledged 40,000, which were to co-operate "with those from Ohio, concentrate near Lou- isville, and co-operate with whatever troops Jeff Davis could send into Kentucky under Buckner or Breckinridge ; or, if he thought it advisable, he would send Longstreet with them. They had no regular communication ■with Ohio, but had made arrangements to open up regular communication with their friends there. He also told me of the change in the Supreme Commander to Val- landigham, and that he had been appointed a commissioner to visit Vallandigham in Canada. Q. What further conversation had you with Dr. Bowles, at that time ? A. He told me that on the Sunday which was the 22d of May, that himself, Mr. Dodd, and a Dutch chemist, whom he had known for years, and a number of other men, while people thought they were at church, were in a basement, experimenting with Greek fire, which they had now brought to perfec- tion, through this Dutch chemist; that they intended to use it for the destruction of Government property ; that the Jeff Davis Government was to pay them ten per cent, for all the property destroyed, taking the estimate, as given in the Northern jiapers, of the amount destroyed. He also told me that the two boats burned at the Louisville wharf last spring, and boats belonging to the Government that had been destroyed on the Mississippi river, and elsewhere, had been burned by this Greek fire. Q. Did he then, or at any other time, show you an instrument that would be used for that purpose? A. Yes, sir, he did. A conical shell was here handed to the witness. [See Illustrations.] Q. Have you ever seen this or a similar instrument? A. I saw a shell similar to this, at Mr. Bocking's room, at the Louisville Hotel, Louisville. Q. Who were present ? A. Dr. Bowles, Booking, Kalfus, Boyd, Winchester, Miller, and a number of others. Q. Were they members of the order ? A. Yes, sir. Q. You may explain how the shell works. A. The space between the innermost cast and the inner shell was to be filled with liquid Greek fire. The space between the inner and outer shell is designed to give room for the inner shell to easily move so as to strike the percussion cap, when projec- ted from a gun, at the moment of striking an object, igniting the powder and bursting the shell. At the same time the Greek fire is ignited. A spherical shell was hero handed to the witness. [See Illustrations.] Q. Was there a weapon similar to this shown you by Booking? A. Booking had none of them at that time, but he di-ew a diagram of them, and explained the principle of their action to them. Q. You may describe its mode of action? A. The glass vial inside of the inner shell contains Greek fire, and after it is placed in the inner shell, is surrounded with powder. The inner shell is capped with percussion caps placed on the nipples, which are so arranged that at the moment it strikes, the three caps will be exploded, no matter how it falls. It could be thrown by the hand, and on strik- ing any thing the caps would burst, igniting the powder and bursting the shell. Booking, who had some of the Greek fire and experimented with it, also said that the liquid fire if thrown in a vial would burn any thing against which it was thrown. Ho also explained a kind of clock machine, which, being wound up, would run a certain length of time, and at that point would in some way ignite the Greek fire, and a con- flagration would be the result. He did not have one of these machines, but said he could make them for the benefit of the Order of Sons of Liberty. He also showed 1 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 109 the muster roll of a battery, which he said he had been authorized to raise, and this musterroU exhibited nothing but a listof the rebel prisoners confined in one of the prisons of the United States, and he said that every one of those enlisted in his battery, were enlisted with the understanding that at the first opportunity they were to desert to the enemy, and that one section had deserted and taken over two of the guns. This was said in the presence of Dr. Bowles. Q. When was this meeting held? A. On the 28th of June, at Louisville, in Bocking's room. Q. State what took place in the interview with Dr. Bowles on the 26th of May. What did he say in that interview about Greek fire? A. He said they had been experimenting, and had got it about perfect ; that Bullitt knew how it was made; that he wished me to go home and get the order organized and spread over the State, and he wanted me to impress upon the people the idea of this Greek fire, that they would thereby come more readily into the order. He was arixi- ous I should make Judge Bullitt's acquaint- ance, and assist him all I could. From Dr. Bowles I went back to Louisville, and carried a message to Judge Bullitt. He told me to make Bullitt's acquaintance, and say to him that he had seen Mr. Andrew Humphreys since their meeting in Indian- apolis, and Mr. Humphreys had agreed to take the position of a brigadier general and charge of the forces in the rear in case of an uprising of the order. Q. Did you not speak of Hefiren as the person you saw at Salem ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Can you identify him as one of the ac- cused? A. Yes, sir. [The witness here pointed to the accused, Horace HeftVen.] Q. Is that the same man with whom you had the conversation at Salem? A. It is, sir. Q. You stated, did you not, that Hum- phreys would take charge of the forces in the rear? A, Yes, sir. But Bowles did not say what they were to do. We were talking of the order, and I suppose he meant the forces comprised all the members of the order. Q. Did you see Judge Bullitt? A. I did. Q. Was he a member of the order ? A. Yes, sir, he was. Q. You may state what was done and said in your interview with Judge Bullitt. A. I made his acquaintance, and told him what Bowles had told me to tell him. He said it suited him exactly, that Humphreys was willing to take that position. Q. What position did he refer to? A. It seems that Humphreys had been known as a Major General in the order. Bullitt said: "I have spent a good deal of money in this affair, and I am willing to spend every cent I have; for I hope soon to be able to steal a good living from these damned sons of bitches." Q. What official position did Bullitt hold at that time? A. He was one of the Judges of the Su- preme Court of Appeals of the State of Kentucky. Q. Had you any further conversation ? A. Not until a day or two afterward. There were Judge Bullitt, Dr. Chambers, of Gallatin county, Mr. Kalfus, D. C. Whips, Mr. Piper, of Springfield, Illinois, and my- self, in Kalfus' office — in his private room. Chambers had just come down from Gal- latin county, for the purpose of getting in- struction in the work of organizing his county; there was something said about a man by the name of Coffin having been in the room with Dr. Bowles and others in this city. Chambers said he knew Cof- fin, that he was a United States Detective, and called him a good many hard names; he knew he was a United States Detective, he had been a stanch Union man — and that was the only evidence he had of his being a United States Detective. After talking the matter over, they decided he should be murdered. Dr. Bowles had been instrumental in getting him into the order, and they thought that Bowles ought to be instrumental in getting him out. They de- termined to put him out of the way ; he was a United States Detective, and he should be murdered at all hazards. They sent me with these instructions to Bowles, and I was to go to Indianapolis and get some constitutions of the order, and I was to inform Dodd, and whoever I might see, to be on their guard, and do all they could to get shut of him. Q. Who sent you ? A. It was with the unanimous consent of all parties that I was sent. Q. Who were they? A. Judge Bullitt, Mr. Piper, Dr. Cham- bers, Dr. Kalfus, and D. C. Whips; they gave me that message to Dr. Bowles; I started on the next day, which was about the first day of June, and took the message to Dr. Bowles. I saw him that same eve- ning. Q. What did you say to him ? A. I told him what was the decision of Judge Bullitt and others in Louisville; that Coffin was unquestionably a United States Detective; and that as he had been instru- mental in getting him into the order, he ought to be instrumental in getting him out. He said he knew that two men at the Shoals had initiated Mr. Coffin, and he knew he had been in the United States employ, but he could explain that to their satisfaction. " But," he said, " I will put two no TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. men on his track." He gave me their sur- names, but I do not remember them. He told me to say that he would put two men on his track. He did not seem to think CofRn was a dangerous man at all. Q, Where did you go after that inter- view ? A. To Indianapolis. Q. Had you any further conversation with Bowles? A. I revealed to him my true name, and explained to him why I had come to him under an assumed name. I told him that when I came to Louisville, I had been watched on the streets by a United States Detective — which was true — and to avoid being troubled by that man I had to go somewhere else, and that I had come to his house to escape him, and that was the reason why I had come to his house under an assumed name. Q. At that time did you hold any office? If so, what? A. Not until the first of June. From Dr. Bowles' I went to Indianapolis and saw Mr. Dodd and Mr. Harrison. I also received an introduction to Mr. Bingham and Dr. Oatling. The first man I saw to whom I made myself known was Mr. Dodd. I stopped at the Palmer House and register- ed under my real name, Felix G. Stidger. It was on the first Saturday in June that I arrived here. Q. Where did you see Dodd? A. Judge Bullitt directed me how to go from that house to Dodd's building that I might be able to find it without inquiring of any one, and creating suspicion. I went there, but did not find him. I inquired where he lived, and went out to his house. I was told there he had gone down town, and that I would probably find him at Bingham's office. I went to Mr. Bingham's office and found him there. I gave him the letter of introduction from Judge Bullitt ; and Mr. Dodd then called out to Mr. Bing- ham and Dr. Gatling and gave my intro- duction to them. Mr. Dodd invited me and Dr. Gatling to go up to his office. Q. What passed between you and Dodd at his office? A. I told him that he had neglected to put up the constitutions in the books Bul- litt had brought. I also spoke about Coffin, and said that Bowles would put two men on his track, but I had forgotten their names. Gatling came up in the office dur- ing the time I was there, but I do not re- member whether he was present at the lime or not. Q. What else occurred ? A. Dodd went with me to Harrison's house, and he inquired of some persons in the building if they knew where Mr. Har- rison lived. Some one told him where he lived, and we went out to Harrison's house. He showed him my letter of introduction from Bullitt, and said that I would like to see him at his office in the evening. I saw him at his office in the evening, and had some conversation with him. He gave me the rituals and constitution of the or- der, and the address of the Grand Com- mander of the State of Indiana, delivered on the 16th or 17th of February, and also instructed me in the third degree of the or- der; I never took the obligation, but he in- structed me in it. Q. Did you receive any money from mem- bers of the order ? A. Judge Bullitt gave me a check on the Bank of Kentucky for $25. Q. Did you have any conversation with Dr. Gatling in Dodd's office? A. There was something said about his coffee-mill gun, and he remarked that he was glad the Government did not take it, as he wanted it for the South; that he had sent a man to Europe, or had made ar- rangements to send him, to have it patented for the use of the South. Q. Was Dodd present? A. Yes, sir ; he was. The Judge Advocate here handed the witness a pamphlet containing Dodd's ad- dress. [See Appendix.] Q. Is that the address you referred to? A. Yes, sir ; Harrison gave me a copy of that for Judge Bullitt. Q. Did you take them to Judge Bullitt ? A. Yes, sir. I saw many copies of them in Harrison's office. This is the book they used for their secret cypher in this city. By it they sent all important communica- tions through the mail. Harrison told me that was the book they used for their se- cret cypher. Bullitt and Bowles also told me about the secret cypher, and that a person might get hold of that secret cypher, but if he had not the key, he could not read it. Q. You may explain how the book is used for the secret cypher. A. We counted from the left, and used fig- ures entirely to spell words. If I wanted to spell the word "the," I would put the figure "3" at the top of the page to indi- cate the page of the book I used. I would put the figure 6 in brackets, as indicating the line of that page, and then 1, 2 and 3, to denote that they were the first, second, and third letters of that line. Q. Did any thing take place at Dodd's office that day? A. No, sir; not that I recollect. Q. Did you see Dodd again at that time ? A. I came here on Saturday evening, and went home on Monday morning. I did not see Dodd again, and had so further consultation with him. I saw General Car- rington and Governor Morton while here, and I made known to them what I had done. General Carrington copied the works TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. Ill I had with me. I went back to Louisville from here, and took some books. Q. What were those books ? A, The constitutions of the county tem- ples, of the Grand Council of the State, and of the Supreme Council of the United States, and one or two rituals of the order, also an address of the Grand Commander of the State of Indiana. I delivered them first to Dr. Kalfus, and when Dr. Kalfus returned them I gave them to Judge Bul- litt. I arrived at Louisville on Monday, about the 4th of June. It was immedi- ately after my appointment as Grand Sec- retai-y of the State of Kentucky by Judge Bullitt. The date of that appointment was about the 4th or 5th of June. Q. Was that appointment vei'bal or writ- ten? A. We did nothing in writing that we could avoid. I was to receive a salary, but there was nothing stipulated ; we were to go according to the Constitution of the Grand Council of the State of Indiana. I was to receive, as I understood, about $800 per annum. Q. Did you ever receive pay for the posi- tion you held? A. I received pay from the members of the order, and I collected the initiation fee, and was told by Kalfus and Bullitt to keep it for my pay. I received about $200. Q. What office did Judge Bullitt hold? A. He was elected Grand Commander of the State. At that time he was the only Grand Councilman in the State. He was elected at the meeting of the Grand Coun- cil by members of the different counties of the State of Kentucky. I was not at that meeting. I was at the meeting of the Grand Council in Kentucky on the night of the 27th of June, 1864. Q. Who was present at that meeting? i. Judge Bullitt, Mr. W. K. Thomas, a Mr. John J. Felix, of Lawrenceburg, Ken- tucky, two gentlemen from Paris, and Mi-. T. J. Bosley ; D. C. Wipps, who was treas- urer of the Grand Council, was there ; also Judge G. Williams, of Hancock county, and some others 1 do not now remember. There was also a Mr. Tirrell, of Owen coun- ty, or Boone county ; he had formerly been in the Federal army. There were about sixteen or seventeen persons present. Q. Was any business transacted ? A. Delegat.e8 were elected to attend the Supreme Council in Chicago on the first day of July. Judge Bullitt, by virtue of his office as Grand Commander, was a member. Prior, Winchester and Wipps were all three elected. Q. Was any other business of importance transacted at that meeting? Any talk there with reference to the sentiments of the order? A. Mr. Bosley made a short speech about the operations in his part of the country ; he is from Shelby county ; and Judge Wil- liams also made a short sjDeech, I believe, about the operations and organization of his county, and of its action in connection with the uprising to resist the Government. This received the general sanction of all present. Q. Did you attend any meeting in this State before that ? A. Yes, sir; on the 14th of June. I was told by Dr. Bowles when the meeting would be held, and also by Mr. Dodd. They both said they would like me to be here if I could come, and I did come. Q. Who was present at that meeting ? A. The meeting was held ijn the building occupied by Dodd as a printing establish- ment. Dodd was present 4nd presided over the meeting. Mr. Harrison was there as Secretary. Mr. Heffren's name was called as Deputy Grand Commander, but he was not present. Mr. Bowles, Mr. Milligan and Mr. Humphreys were there. Mr. Dodd told me it was Andrew Humphreys. I think I know Mr. Humphreys, but I could not swear to him positively. Mr. Milligan, whom I see present in this room, (the wit- ness here pointed to the accused, L. P. Milligan,) is the same that was present; also Dr. Bowles, one of the accused. There was a Judge Borton, or Borden, also pres- ent. A Mr. Otey, an old gentleman, was there; also, Mr. Gatling, and Dr Athon, Secretary of State; Mr. McBride, from Evansville, and a Mr. Everett, from Evansville, also a Mr. Thompson. I re- member his being appointed on a com- mittee. Thompson and, I think. Dr. Athon and McBride were the three gentlemen appointed on that committee to exam- ine an invention that had been inven- ted by a member of the order, and the committee reported that the invention was a good one, and ought to be adopted by the order; they recommended that it be turned over to the Committee of Thirteen, who should distribute it to those members of the order that in their judgment might be intrusted with it. I know he was on two committees during the day. There was also a committee on military affairs, and one on the subject of education. Mil- ligan, Bowles, McBride and Dr. Gatling were four of the military committee, the other I do not remember. Q. Was any thing reported by the Mili- tary Committee? A. Yes, sir ; they reported a bill setting forth their views, that the order ought to be organized as a military organization at once, and armed. Q. When was this ? A. This was on the 14th of June. Dodd, at the opening of the meeting, read an ad- dress to consider if the order had any poli- tics, and if so, what they were. The sub- ject of education was considered, and also 112 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. if the time for action was not at hand. These were the main points of his address. Q. "Were any military appointments made at that meeting ? Yes, sir; one Mr. Walker was elected a Major General. There were elections of delegates to the Supreme Council, which was a meeting of delegates from the differ- ent State Councils, to be held at Chicago on the first day of July. Q. Who was elected ? A. Mr. Dodd, by 'virtue of his rank as Grand Commander, was one; J. G. Davis and Mr. Lasselle were elected; and the Major Generals, by virtue of their rank, were ex officio members. Q. Do you know who were the Major Generals of the order at that time ? A. Mr. Milligan, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Humph- reys and Mr. Walker, who was elected vice Mr. Yeakle, who, it seems, had been a Ma- jor General, but was now thrown out. Walker was said to be a man who had some military experience. Q. Was there any protest on the part of Milligan on his accepting this appointment? A. Not a word. They were not elected that day; they had been elected before. Mr. Dodd called over their names as Major Generals. Walker was the only Major Gen- eral elected that day. Q. Did any thing else take place at that meeting? A. The subject of Mr. Coffin was dis- cussed at considerable length. McBride, of Evansville, had a great deal to say about it. He knew Coffin about Evansville as a Government Detective; that he had been engaged in sending contraband goods South, they were taken, and it got the people into trouble; he believed that he was still in that kind of business. McBride also said he had a report of the order known as the Loyal League; that he had men in the order who reported to him every thing that occurred; he said a good deal about the Government damning secret organizations, when here was one they supported them- selves. He also said that the men of Van- derburg and Posey counties were members of*thi8 order, and also several of the Home Guard companies of the Legion, and he said that two or three companies there who had Government arms, were under his con- trol He said something about an election there, when the members of this order went to the polls armed; the members of the Home Guards were there, also armed, he said, but they knew the members of the order were armed, and did not attempt to do any thing. He did not say how he knew those other men were armed, but McBride said the members of the order were armed. Q. What else was done at this meeting? A. The meetmg. generally, was appointed a committee to attend a meeting at Hamil- ton, Ohio. Coffin was expected to be there. He had not been seen for several days, and was supposed to be there. Dodd volun- teered his services to go to Hamilton, and if Coffin was there, pick a quarrel with him and shoot him. He wanted to know who would go with him. McBride said he knew Coffin, but he was sorry, he said, that his business was such that he could not go. Bowles, Dodd, Milligan and myself, went to Hamilton the next day. Q. Did you see Dodd or Bowles at Ham- ilton? A. Yes, su'. I went up to Dodd and Bowles after Vallandigham had got through speaking, to bid them good-by, as I was starting for Cincinnati; and Bowles leaned down and asked me if I had seen Coffin. I said, "I don't know the man." They then remembered that I had previously told them that I did not know him. They said they did not think Coffin was there, as they could not find him. Q. What did Dodd say at the meeting? A. I do not remember any thing, sav** that he said that Government detectives ought to be murdered; he might have said killed. He said if Coffin was at Hamilton, he would pick a quarrel with him and shoot him. Q. Where did you go then? A. To Cincinnati, and thence to Louis- ville. Q. When were you here next ? A. I got to Louisville on Thursday night, and came up here about the first of the next week — some time during the week. I then saw Dodd and Harrison, and Mr. Jo- seph Ristine, Auditor of State. Q. Was any thing said or done? A. I was sent by Judge Bullitt to see about the dispatch which he had received? Q. What was that ? A. The dispatch was something about Aunt Lucy being sick, and he wanted to know if such a dispatch had been received. Dodd knew nothing about the dispatch. He asked me if I knew what Aunt Lucy meant. I said I did, and told him it had reference to the Southern Confederacy; and he seemed to be satisfied. Bullitt also said something about a letter that Mr. Dodd had gotten. It was a letter to Dodd, Bowles and Ristine, and signed "Dick." He warned them against a man named Coffin. Dodd showed me the letter; he then took me down to the office of Ristine, and they said they supposed the letter was written by Dick Bright. Dodd gave me an introduc- tion to Ristine's son, and requested me to stay pretty much all day, and see if Coffin passed by — if so, have Ristine's son point him out to me. They succeeded in point- ing him out to me, about sundown. I staid there pretty near half a day. I had some talk with Ristine about this letter, but I don't remember whether any thing was said about the order or not. TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 113 Q. Did any thing further take place at Indianapohs during that visit? A. Not that 1 recollect. Q. Where did you go next? A. From here I went back to Louisville. There I saw Thomas, Bullitt, Kalfus and others, in Kalfus' office. I was initiated into the order at Louisville. Q. When were you here next after that? A. I was here the next time about the last of July. I then saw Dodd, Dr. Athon and Mr. Harrison. Q. Did you learn any thing of import- ance? A. Yes, sir; Judge Bullitt had started to Chicago on the evening of the 19th of July. He said that Dodd and a number of the other leaders of the order from this State and Illinois were to be at Chicago to have a conference there. Bullitt started to Chi- cago on the 19th of July. We expected him back in four or five days, and as he did not come on Thursday night, July 28, I came up here, and on Friday morning I saw Dodd coming up from toward the depot. I went down to his ofiice about 10 o'clock, and he told me he had just come into the city on a train. He said Judge Bullitt would be at home on that day or Saturday; He thought likely he might go through here, but he was not sure. He therefore wished me to go home and get twenty or thirty good runners, so that as soon as Judge Bullitt returned they might be sent off. He said the programme was arranged, and every thing ready. I went to see Dr. Athon, and had some talk with him. Dodd went around without me, and said, "You can come around after a bit." He didn't want both of us seen going there together, as he thought it would look suspicious. Q. What did Dodd tell him ? A. He did not tell him that the time was set, but I told Dr. Athon afterward what Dodd had said. Q. When did you tell him that ? A. I told Dr. Athon of it the same day. Athon did not seem to think that the time had come yet for revolution, but that it would come. He said it would not be suc- cessful now. Q. Did he discourage you in any way ? A. No, sir. He said the time had not come, but that the time would come when it would be successful. Q. Did Dodd open to you this scheme, in any way ? A. No, sir. He told me there was to be a meeting of some of the heads of the order here on the Tuesday following, and he would like Judge Bullitt to be here; and he wished me to tell him to come, or send some reliable man that he could depend upon to learn what their conclusion was. Q. What were those couriers to do ? A. They were to notify our men where and when to concentrate. Q. What was decided at Chicago ? A. There was a difference of opinion there as to the day when the programme was to be carried out, and the time was to be settled here at the meeting on Tuesday. Q. When did you see Bullitt next? A. When I was on the cars the next day 1 saw Bullitt. He was dusty, as though he had been traveling. He said he had come in on the Bellefontaine train, and that he had left a note for Dodd, but had left it at the house of some one else. He asked me to go on into the front car. He said he had been registering his name as Charles Smith. We went into a car where there were but a few people, and he told me the programme was all arranged for this up- rising, how it was to be conducted, and all about it. When we got to Jeffersonville, he got him a buggy. On Saturday he wished to have A. 0. Brannan and Dr. Bayless sent out to him, and on Sunday Kalfus and Thomas, and to those four he would com- municate the uprising of the order. He said he expected to be arrested, but if he saw all these men, he didn't care if he was arrested. When we got to Louisville, as soon as the ferry boat landed, a young man came on board for his arrest. Young Hewitt did it. On Monday night I was sent back here to Dodd by Kalfus and Thomas, to get the final arrangements as soon as they were con- cluded on. and I was to go back and report to them. I came on Monday night. On Friday night, when we were at Dodd's house, he said he would send his son for Bowles to be here, and that he sent Mr. Harrison to go after some other gentlemen. Mr. Harri- son was to go to Lafayette for one person, and he pulled out his money, and gave him sufficient to pay his expenses. I went to see Dodd after I came back. He seemed very much excited, gritted his teeth, and said that he hoped they had acted the gentlemen, and had not searched Bullitt, as he had drafts on Montreal. He then went to work and gave me the programme. I think this was about the 2d of August. He showed and read me letters from two or three gentlemen. They were not signed by any name, but they were fully concurring in the mattei". He had sent them word, and they didn't come here. Then he told me what the programme was, and impressed upon me the importance of secrecy. He said if Bullitt had not been arrested, I could not have got the programme at alL He said they had abandoned the idea of holding the secret meetings, but would hold them hereafter as Democratic mass meet- ings, and that one was to be held at Peoria, III, on the 3d of August, I think. Another here on the loth or 16th of August, and that his men would be instructed to come here armed : that they were going to work to release the prisoners here, and seize the 114 TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. arsenal here, at Springfield and Chicago, 111., and Columbus, Ohio, on the same day, and to release the prisoners at Johnson's Island and Camp Chase, Ohio, and at Camp Doug- las and Eock Island, 111., and then proceed to Louisville, and take possession of the arsenal there and at Frankfort, Ky., and with the rebel prisoners armed they would go to work. Their diflerence at Chicago was whether they should wait until the rebel forces should be sent into Eastern Ken- tucky to co-operate with them, or to make their uprising now, and co-oj^erate with the rebel forces when Davis could send them. Q. What was Dodd's opinion ? A. Ilis idea was to go ahead on the 15th or 16th of August, and these letters from these men agreed with him. Mr. Walker was to be here from New York on the Thursday after I saw Mr. Dodd, which was on Tuesday. Q. Do you know why this insurrection was put off? A, I do not. I never saw Dodd afterward until I saw him here. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Tuesday, November 2, at 9 o'clock, A. M. Court Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ November 2, 1864, 9 o'clock, A. M. j The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused, and their counsel. 'I'he proceedings were read and approved. The accused, Stephen Horsey, presented the following: To the President and Members of the Military Commission, now in Session : The undersigned, Stephen Horsey, one of the defendants now on trial, being with- out counsel, respectfully requests that the Hon. Thomas R. Cobb be admitted as coun- sel for him on this trial. [Signed] STEPHEN HORSEY. November 2, 1864. The examination of Felix G. Stidger, a witness for the Government, was then re- sumed as follows : Question by the Judge Advocate: State whether in any of those conversa- tions with either Heffren or Bowles, they stated to you what this order numbered in the States of Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and Ohio. Answer. Heflfren told me that the organ- ization of the order was about complete in Indiana, and the number was between seventy-five and eighty thousand men. I never understood any definite number in Illinois or Missouri, but I understood that the heads of the order from those States pledged ffom Illinois fifty thousand to go to the field, and thirty thousand from Mis- souri. Ohio never stipulated any definite number, but would furnish men. Q. What, if any thing, was said to you by Heffren or Bowles, as to the extent of the arming of the organization, and with what kind of arms ? A. Bowles made a statement in the Coun- cil of the 14th of June, that the organizar tion in his county numbered about six hun- dred men, but that there was a military organization amounting to nine hundred men, armed and equipped. Q. Was this military organization outside of the order? A. I do not know. He said the Order of the Sons of Liberty numbered six hundred men in his county, and nine hundred men armed and equipped; but he did not say with what arms. He also stated that he had an arrangement with a man to furnish any number or kind of arms. He made this statement in the Grand Council of the 14th of June, in the way of a speech. Q. Who was present at the time he was making that speech ? A. Mr. Dodd was present; Mr. Harrison and Mr. Milligan were there, and Mr. Hor- sey was there at one time. Mr. Bowles made a remark two or three times during the day. Q. Was Mr. Bingham present at that meeting? A. No, sir; not on the 14th of June that I saw. Q. Was it stated what Stnte should be made the battle-ground ? A. Kentucky and Missouri; that was what Bowles and Dodd told me. Q. What was said, if any thing, in refer- ence to any understanding with the Con- federate forces ? A. Bowles said they would go to Ken- tucky and have a regular understanding with the Confederates, and act in concert with them ; and that they had sent a man named Dickerson to Richmond to have the Confederate authorities send an invading force to act in concert with their order. Q. Was there any concert with the rebel forces in Kentucky or elsewhere ? A. There was communication between this order and the guerrillas in Kentucky. Bullitt instructed a man to try and get a place appointed for him to meet Colonel Jesse, said to be a rebel Colonel in com- mand of the rebel torces in Kentucky ; and he instructed this man to go to Colonel Syphert, a rebel Colonel, said to be in com- mand of a rebel squad, and have a confer- ence with him about the capture of Louis- ville. Q. Had you any conversation with Bowles in reference to communication with the rebels ? A. I had. Bowles at first objected to this uprising, until the rebels should invade the eastern part of the State, as he said they would. This man Dickerson was sent South to communicate with the rebel forces. TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 115 Bowles said he would consent to the upris- ing on the 15th or 16th of August, as Dodd had said, provided Colonel Syphert, Colonel Jesse, and Walker Tajdor would assist in the capture of Louisville until the forces of this State could get there. Q. What forces of this State were refer- red to ? A. The uprising of the Sons of Liberty. Q. Have you any knowledge of attempts or efforts on the part of any members of this order to procure arms r If so, what kind ? A. Not directly. The question of arming was discussed on the 14th of June. Some said, tax the members of the order ; others contended that each district should arm itself; while others contended that each individual should arm himself, to resist the Government, and that to do so, they would dispense with the luxuries of life, to pro- cure money to get arms with which to re- sist the Government. Q. Had you any talk, individually, with Bowles, or any other member of the order, in reference to procuring arms ? A. Bowles wanted to know, the last time I saw him, if I knew Peters, of Cincinnati ; he wanted to get arms of him; and also B. C. Kent, of New Albany, Indiana; he wanted to communicate thi'ough him with Dr. Gordon, of New Albany, that he might have arms shipped to Gordon, and wagoned out into the country. Q. Have you any knowledge of any ef- forts to procure lances ? A. Di". Bowles asked me if I could have three or four thousand lances made; he wanted that number, and thought they could be made in Kentucky without suspi- cion. He wanted three or four thousand men armed with lances and revolvers; he said he could make them of great ser- vice. Q. I think you stated, did you not, that Bowles was present at the meeting in New York? A. He told me he was. Q. Did he tell what was done at the meet- ing in New York, on the 22d of February ? A . He said that Vallandigham was elected Supreme Commander that day ; that there was a change in the name of the order, that the ritual was changed, and- a slight change in the colloquy, though I do not remember what it was. There was a committee ap- pointed to make a change in the ritual, and after it was made, the manuscript was sent to Vallandigham for his revision. He re- vised it and made one or two additions. He made the addition, " Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God." This was said by Mr. Piper, by Mr. Bowles and other members of the order to have been made by Vallandig- ham. And there was an invocation at the end of the first degree said to have been added by Vallandigham, and a reference to a passage of Scripture, which occurs in the first or third degree, was also said to have been added by Vallandigham. Q. Have you any knowledge of money being raised or expended, to procure arms and organize the society? A. I was told by Mr. Kern, a member of the order, that Judge Williams, of Ken- tucky, had given $100, and other members $200 for organizing the order, and that he had expended that money in the purchase of arms, and that they had sent the men with the arms South. Q. W^here did Kern live ? A. In Louisville. Q. How do you know him to be a mem- ber of the order ? A. By having met him in Council, and having conversations frequently with him. Kalfus also told me that Bocking was fur- nished with money for the purpose of get- ting this Greek fire. Q. Have you known Bowles to spend money? A. He told me he had spent $2,000, for the benefit of the order, and would spend all he had, were it necessary. He did not say in what way he had spent the money. Q. Have you ever had any talk with Bowles with respect to the uprising, and when he favored its taking place? A. He told me he cared nothing about the election; he was satisfied Lincoln would be elected; he wanted the time spent in perfecting the organization and getting ready for the uprising. He said he would agree to the uprising on that day, provided the rebel Colonels could be got to act in concert with the order. Q. What do vou know about this Commit- tee of Thirteen? A. The question of a Committee of Thir- teen was discussed in the Grand Council of the 14th of June. They were desirous to have this Committee of Thirteen to carry on the concerns of the Grand Council during its recess; and it was a question whether they should be appointed by the Grand Council or by the Grand Commander, and known only to him. There was a Commit- tee of Thirteen so called, in Kentucky, but I understood from Kalfus it was composed only of seven; they were to carry on the business of the order during the recess. Q. State whether or not this organization appointed any men to act as spies upon the Government. A. McBride said on the 14th of June that he had men acting as spies in the Loyal League, who reported to him every thing that was done. Mr. Harrison also said they had men from outside the order, so that they should not act both ways, employed as spies and acting for the benefit of the order. Dodd wanted me to act in that capacity. Q. Have you ever met, or had consulta- tion with a man by the name of Hines ? 116 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. A. No, sir. Piper told me that Hines was appointed on Vallandigham's staff, and that he was then waiting in Canada to take charge of the releasing of the prisoners on Johnson's Island, or Rock Island, and Bowles of the other. Hines was formerly a Captain in the rebel army, and made his escape from the Ohio State Penitentiary with John Morgan. Q. Have you any knowledge of members of the rebel army being initiated into this order ? If so, when and where ? A. There was arebel Colonel Anderson, of the 3d rebel Kentucky regiment of Infan- try, initiated into the order, about the last of June, 1864. Q. Who initiated him? A. Kalfus told me that he gave him the first degree, and directed me to give him the second and thii'd. There was also a Captain Van Morgan who was initiated into the order, and had the full confidence of the members of the order in Kentucky; also Dick Pratt and Jim McCracklin. There was also another who said he was a Captain of a squad of guerrillas. I saw him initiated in Kalfus' office. Q. Who initiated him? A. Either Kalfus or myself, I do not recollect which. Kalfus I know gave me an introduction to him. Kalfus I know initiated those other men. Q. Where? A. He told me that he did it in his office. I conversed with one of them afterward, and satisfied myself that he was a member of the order. Q. You may now give to the Court some of the signs, grips, passwords, and colloquies of the different degrees of the order. [The witness here replied substantially and in detail as on page 51.] [A pamphlet was here handed to the witness by the Judge Advocate.] Q. What is that ? A. It is the Constitution of the Supreme Council. I recognize it by having seen it frequently before, and from having been instructed by Dodd, Bullitt, and Harrison, that it was that work. Q. Have you ever used it in instructing others ? A No, sir. I do not know that I have. We only had one or two copies in our State. I have frequently told persons of such a book. A pamphlet entitled Constitution and Laws of the S. C. was then introduced in evidence by the Judge Advocate. [See Ap- pendix.] Also, a letter bearing date October 8, 1863. Also, a letter bearing date June 28, 1864. Q. Are there any private marks of the order on the letter of June 28th ? A. Yes, sir. There are. The letters 0. S. L. are written under the date, in small characters, and would be calculated to mis- lead a person who did not particularly no- tice them. S. C. means Supreme Com- mander; or it may mean Supreme Council. These letters make it an official letter. CROSS-EXAMINATION. I was initiated in the Vestibule degree of the Order of the Sons of Liberty on the 5th of May, 1864. I took the first degree about the 25th or 26th of May, 1864. I -entered the order as a regular member, and as a United States Detective, and I took the sev- eral degrees for the purpose of disclosing its secrets to the officers of the Government. I kept the authorities posted by reporting sometimes as often as twice a week. While a member of the order, I was engaged part of the time in Nelson and Bullitt, Ken- tucky, in extending the organization. I organized some county temples, and initia- ted probably forty or fifty members. The authorities knew that I was engaged in this work. Q. Then your private and ostensible pur- poses were different. Your private purpose was to commit as many as possible to the treasonable schemes of the order, and to keep the Government officials advised of it, and to bring them to justice at the proper time ? Question objected to by the Judge Advo- cate. The counsel for the accused said it was always competent to show the character of the witness, his feelings, and the connection he has had with the transaction he details. The Judge Advocate replied that the counsel for the accused were at liberty to show what were the feelings and purposes of the witness, by inquiring as to his acts, but they could not inquire as to his pur- poses and feelings. The Court was cleared for deliberation. On being reopened, the Judge Advocate announced to the accused that the objection was sustained. Before the Court was cleared, the counsel for the accused, W. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heffren and Stephen Horsey, desired to withdraw the question. It was insisted on, on behalf of L. P. Milli- gan. The only instructions I gave to members were those I received from Judge Bullitt, Dr. Kalfus, Dr. Bowles, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Piper and other members. Piper represented himself as from Springfield, Illinois, and as having an appointment on Vallandigham's staff He said he had orders from Vallan- digham to Judge Bullitt and Dr. Bowles, respecting the time set for the uprising of the order. Judge Bullitt was Grand Com- mander of Kentucky. I carried messages from Bullitt to Kalfus and Bowles about the murder of Coffin. At a meeting in Dr. Kalfus' office, at which Bullitt, Kalfus, Pi- per, and Dr. Chambers, of Warsaw, Gallatin TREASON TRIALS AT liSTDIANAPOLIS. 117 countj'-, Kentucky were present; Bullitt and Chambers were t-ie strongest in their ex- pressions that Coffin should be killed, and no one disagreed. [A lengthy cross-examination on the wit- ness' interviews with Horace Hefiren here took place, but no additional facts were elucidated.] I understood from Dr. Bowles that Book- ing was a member of the order. Bocking is a foreigner. Dr. Bowles, Dr. Kalfus, Charley Miller, Boyd Winchester and oth- ers, were present when Bocking explained, in his room at the Louisville Hotel, Louis- ville, his different applications of Greek fire. He exhibited his shell, and drew a diagi'am of his hand-grenade, and explained it, together with his clock invention. I never heard of these things being brought to the notice and offered to the United States Government. Dr. Bowles said that the rebel Government would pay ten per cent for all Government property destroyed, taking the estimated amount from North- ern papers. He wished me to impress it upon the people of Kentucky that this was a fact, and the inventions of Bocking and the Greek fire were to be spoken of to give the people confidence in the order as to what it was to accomplish. Bocking, I know, had been to Canada with his inven- tions. Bowles, in referring to this, said, "We sent him to Canada to see if he was willing to spend his money for the benefit of the Order of the Sons of Liberty." Bowles, in making his speech before the Grand Council on the 14th of June, when the Council was getting an estimate of the number of men in the order that they could depend on, said they numbered six hundred in his county, and that he had an organization of nine hundred men armed and equipped. He did not state what they wei'e to do, or what they were armed for. Dodd, in the course of that meeting, said it was for the purpose of forming a military organization, and to see if the time of ac- tion was not near at hand. I do not know that there had been any military organiza- tion up to that time, but the object stated then was, to perfect a military organization; and to this end a Committee on Military Affairs was appointed to report on a plan for its complete military organization. At the June meeting of the Council there was a Mr. Andrew Humphreys, or Dr. Humphreys. He was called by both names. The Mr. Humphreys I refer to, resembles that gentleman (the witness here pointed to the accused), but I could not swear posi- tively that he is the man. Mr. Heffren's name was called as Deputy Grand Com- mander, but he was not present. I could not say, positively, that Humphreys was ever initiated into the order, unless he was the same that was present that day. I heard it said that he was a Major General. There were three sessions that day, the first from 10 to 1, another in the afternoon, and another after supper. Dr. or Andrew Humphreys was present at the morning and afternoon session. I do not remember whether he was present at the evening ses- sion- or not. This Humphreys sat just back of me, and was referred to once or twice. I met Bowles in the Council of the 14th of June, and at the meeting of members of the order at Booking's room at the Louis- ville Hotel. Horsey was at the Council of the 14th of June, but he came in late. He was asked why he was so careless as to initiate such men as Coffin into the order, which he had done. The murder of Coffin was discussed in open Council. Dr. Bowles participated in that discussion. There was not a dissenting voice with respect to the murder of Coffin at that or any other time. I did not know that Coffin contemplated being at the meet- ing, though I expected that he would be, and I started a Mr. Prentice, a Government Detective, to Hamilton that evening, the 14th, to inform Coffin of his intended murder. I told him to tell Coffin if he was at Hamilton, to be on his guard, as there would probably be an attempt to as- sassinate him. Coffin did not go to Hamil- ton. I do not know with respect to this State, but in Kentucky, members of the order who were initated, were instructed in the mili- tary character of the ordex'. Judge Bullitt, Dr. Kalfus, myself, or whoever initiated members, always instructed them that the order was for the purpose of resisting the Government by force of arms, and for as- sisting the South. More or less of these instructions were given, according as the members were deemed reliable or other- wise. The order had a means of ascertain- ing the number of arms possessed by the members, by having returns made by the County Temples, in or under the guise of a subscription list for certain Democratic newspapers. For instance, a person pre- tending to subscribe for the Cincinnati Enquirer^ meant that he had a revolver ; if for the Chicago Times, that he had a shot gun ; if for the Louisville Democrat, that he had a rifle; and under the head of Miscel- laneous, would be indicated the amount of ammunition he had on hand. This method of obtaining returns was resorted to, that it might be kept a secret from those who were not acquainted with the plan. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Thursday, November 3, at 9 o'clock,A. M. CouBT Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ November 3, 1864, 9 o'clock, A. M.) The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- ment. All the members present; also the Judgo Advocate, the counsel, and the accused. 118 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. The proceedings were read and ap- proved. The cross-examination of Felix G. Stid- ger was then resumed as follows: As a detective, I was in the habit of com- municating the progress the order was making to General Carrington, Captain Jones, Provost Marshal, and afterward to Colonel Thomas B. Farley, when he occu- pied that post. Governor Morton I proba- bly met two or three times, and communica- ted to him what I knew. My reports to General Carrington were sometimes writ- ten and sometimes given in person. I was entirely free and confidential in my com- munications with the General, and as a gen- eral thing he left me entirely to my own discretion, as to the course I should adopt in my investigations. The man named Dickerson, referred to in my direct exam- ination, Bowles told me, lived in Baltimore, and that he went to Richmond at his pleasure. Bowles also told me, that he had received a letter from Dickerson, who was just home from Richmond. He wan- ted to know how many men Kentucky would give. I told him probably forty, fifty, or sixty thousand men; as it was a revolutionary State, I thought she would furnish that number to assist in the design he was speaking of, namely, revolution in the North and assisting the South, The last conversation I had with Dr. Bowles was about the 6th or 7th of August, when I was at his house with the pro- gramme which I got from Dodd. He re- marked tliat Dodd had no right to change the programme; that they should have , awaited the action of the rebel forces; but finally he determined that they would act without the co-operation of the rebels, if they could not get it. Bowles told me he had received notice of the change. That was the time I met Dodd's son returning from Bowles' house, and Bowles told me he had been there. When Milligan's name was called as a Major General, he made no particular re- sponse, and he made no objection that I heard; the list was called by the Grand Commander. The Council at Chicago, at which Dr. Bowles was present, was about the 2Uth of July. I do not know whether Mr. Milligau was present or not. The meeting at Hamilton, at which Mr. Milli- gan was present, was a Democratic mass meeting to nominate delegates to the Chi- cago Convention. Bowles, Dodd, Milligan and myself wt-nt on the same train to Hamilton, but I had no conversation at all with him. KE-EXAMINATION. At the meeting of Bowles, Kalfus and others at Booking's room, at the Louisville Hotel, Louisville, Booking explained, but did not exhibit, some kind of clock ma- chinery that could be wound up and set to run any specified length of time; it had a Greek fire attachment. This machine could be put into a box or trunk, and with- out exciting any suspicion, be left on board a steamer, or in a building, which would be set on fire at any time at which the clock might be set. The nine hundred armed men, of whom I have spoken, that were in Dr. Bowles' county, were all amenable to the officers of the order ; and though someof themhadonly been initiated into the Order of American Knights, they were amenable to the officers of the Order of the Sons of Liberty, Those members of the Order of American Knights who had only taken the first or vestibule degree, and were armed, were counted on in case of necessity. I was requested by Judge Bullitt, Dr. Kalfus, Mr. Thomas and other members of the order, to organize the order as fast as possible ; they furnished me with money to pay my traveling expenses. They also sent me down the Nashville Rail- road to learn the position of the Federal troops, and the number of guns on that Railroad at different points. 1 went down as far as Bowling Green. Colonel Warner, a witness for the Gov- ernment, was then introduced, and being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: Question by the Judge Advocate : State your name and the position you hold? Answer. A. J. Warner, Colonel of the 17th V. R. C, and Commander of the Post at In- dianapolis. Q. State to the Court where you met with that letter ? [The Judge Advocate here handed to the witness a letter marked Government Ex- hibit "N."]- A. This letter was taken by me among other papers from the office of Mr. H. H. Dodd, at the time the arms were seized. This letter was found either in the safe or desk, I am not certain which. 1 recognize it es- pecially by the signature, and some words which I could not make out. Q. In what capacity were you acting, and under what orders, when you seized those papers ? A. On Saturday evening, I believe about the 20th of August, I received information that a lot of arms had been shipped secretly to this place, and had come to the Bellefon- taine Depot. 1 immediately, in the absence of the District Commander, ordered the Provost Marshal of the Post to seize the arms, and arrest all jiarties known to be connected with the transaction. From the time I first heard of the shipment of those arms to the time tlie Provost Marshal reached the depot with wagons, etc., they had been removed to the old 6'e>ifiuel building. That night, I think, twenty-six boxes of arms and ammunition were taken. TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 119 Q. State what those boxes contained, and how they were marked ? A. The boxes were shipped to J. J. Par- sons. On the way-bill they were marked "Stationery," I think. On some of them there were marks indicating that they were Sunday School books, or tracts. Twenty-four or twenty-six boxes contained fixed ammu- nition for large sized revolvers ; the balance conta,ined large sized revolvers. They were self-cocking; and were the largest sized re- volvers I have ever seen. Q. What was done with those arms? A. They were taken possession of by me, and are now deposited, with the ammuni- tion, in the United States arsenal. Q. How many arms were there? A. Between three hundred and fifty and four hundred revolvers. The boxes con- tained mostly ammunition. Q. Did you find any others ? A. On Sunday morning I went down my- self to make a thorough search of the build- ing, and found secreted in the office or room occupied by H. H. Dodd, under books and stationery, six more boxes, making in all thirty-two boxes. Q. What did those six boxes contain ? A. Part of them contained arms, and part ammunition ; of the same description as those taken on Saturday night. Upon find- ing those arms there, I concluded to look further and see what papers I could find re- lating to them, to see what parties were im- plicated ; consequently a search was made in the desk and safe in the room occupied by Dodd. A search was made in other rooms in the building also. Q. State whether this instrument was found there? [A stamping press was here handed to the witness.] A. This was found in the room said to have been occupied by the Grand Secretary of the Order of the Sons of Liberty, together with about two bushels, or more, of rituals, constitutions, etc., of the order. Also, a roll of the members of the order in this city, and papers relating to the order. Ther^ were also blanks, note books and orders, some of them printed, and others stamped. Q. You may state to the Court whether you recognize that letter. [A letter bearing date May 12, 1864, was here handed to the witness.] A. This letter was also taken from the office of H. H. Dodd; but I do not remem- ber whether from his safe or desk. Part of the letters were found in his desk rolled up in bundles, and part were taken from a little drawer in the safe. [The letter was here offered in evidence by the Judge Advocate.*] * Windsor, Canada W., May 12, 1864. Dear Sib: Your letters. Am waiting to hear from you at Dayton as to time of the District Conventiou. Elliott Robertson, a witness for the Gov- ernment, was then introduced, and being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: I am a farmer, and live in Randolph county, Indiana. I became a member of the organization called the Golden Circle, in the spring of 1863, in Greenfork town- ship, Randolph county ; our place of meet- ing was in the woods; we met at night, and about fifteen or twenty persons were pres- ent. John D. Burkebile initiated me. There were between sixty and seventy-five mem- bers in our township; among them I re- member Nathan Brown, John D. Burkebile, Henry Robbins, Augustus Bunch, John Fudge, Abraham Piatt, Henry Wooden, Amos Cren, Francis Durvidge. Burkebile was Captain, Amos Cren Lieutenant, Henry Wooden Sergeant, and Eli Thomas In- spector. The Captain and Lieutenant were appointed by the members of the order; the Sergeant was appointed by the Captain. A week after I was initiated, I appointed a meeting of the order in Washington town- ship; a part of the members of Greenfork township were present ; Daniel Barnes pre- sided, and some four or five additional members were initiated. From the time I was initiated, to September or October, I mostly met with them once a week. The members of the order were ordered to drill; but I did not. One Sunday I met the Cap- tain, who asked me why I did not attend drill ; he said I should have gone, for they had had some good sport. About one-half the members were armed; revolvers were the principal arms. I heard from the mem- bers of the order that they drilled every week or two. So far as I learned, the ob- ject of the order was to oppose the Admin- istration in putting down the rebellion, and in making arbitrary arrests; this was to be done by force of arms; but exactly how it was to be done, had not been decided. The information I got from the Captain, was that the members of the township were to compose the company; we were to act in squads, under the direction of the Captain, in case the guerrilla mode of warfare was adopted. We were to take up arms and resist the enforcement of the draft. This, I understood, had been decided by the au- thorities here in Indianapolis. The Captain and Nathan Brown spoke of the State being divided into four military districts; and that a man by the name of Milligan com- No announcement yet. Will give you notice immedi- ately. J8®"Send for your friend here to return at once and work at home. Nothing to do here. So, also, says our mutual friend. Be ready for Dayton meeting. Grant has been worsted by Lee, and no mistake. It ia Grant who has fallen back six or eight miles, and not L., who has advanced from west to east. L. is not, and never has been, facing northward, but eastward. Truly, C. L. V. Sherman, too, has been brought to a dead stand first having been driven back. 1-20 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. manded our district. I know of members of the order having assembled to resist ar- rests. Burkebile, our Captain, expected to be arrested, and he called a meeting of the members. I had notice to go to his house, with other members, to i^revent his arrest, in case it was attempted. I was at his house two nights; four or five others were there; among them Burkebile's two boys, Henry Bobbins, Heiwy Wooden, John Fudge, and John L. Mack. Some were armed with revolvers, and two of them with shot-guns. Our instructions were to resist the authorities, and not to let them take our Captain. John D. Burkebile induced me to join the order; he said it was an or- ganization for self-protection among the Democrats. He did not at first give me the name of the order. A meeting was ap- pointed to take place on the next Thurs- day, and I went and was initiated. The last meeting I attended was in September or October, 1863. About that time they changed their name, and were called the Order of American Knights. They did not change their plans or principles, that I know of; I did not take any new obligation, but was instructed in the change by the Captain. I attended one meeting of the American Knights in Preble county, Ohio, about August, 1864; the password by which we entered, was "Liberty." I learned of the change of name to the Order of Amer- ican Knights from the Captain. Nathan Brown was sent to Indianapolis in Septem- ber, 1863, to represent our township, and when he came back the change was made. He called a meeting, and the Captain wished me to go into the new order; I told him I would have a few days to study over it; he insisted, and told me it was a nice thing, but I would not go into it. The signs by which members recognized each other, are these: You pass the right hand down over the mouth and beard, with the fore-finger of the right hand down the right side of the nose. If the man you are. testing is a member, he will reply by taking the lobe of the left ear with the left hand between the thumb and finger, and draw it down. You then take a grip, and give one shake of the hand, with the fore-finger run- ning up the wrist as far as possible. They had some military signs, which, we were told, would protect us in case of battle, or being taken prisoner. The hands were clasped in front, and raised over the head, in which position you stood a few minutes, or till the sign was recognized; the answer to this sign being made by placing the hands, with the tips of the fingers resting on the shoul- ders. There was another sign, which con- sisted in writing the number thirty-three on a piece of paper, which, being handed to a member, signified that he who used it was in danger. I understood that the arms were procured from the authorities at Indianapolis. It was stated that Beck & Bros, had agreed to furnish arms. Kathan Brown and Burkebile were sent as rej^resentatives to a conven- tion at Indianapolis, in the latter part of July, 1863. The Captain, on his return, stated, as I undei-stood, that most of the States, including the rebel States, were re- jDresented ; and he also said that they had not concluded what was to be done in case of a draft. I entered the order in good faith, but I left it because I thought it was disloyal. I first reported the order to 'Squire Hough, I think, in October, 1863. Henry L. Zumro, a witness for the Gov- ernment, was then introduced, and being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testi- fied as follows: I reside at Markle, Huntington county, Indiana, and am a practicing physician; have resided there ten years. I became a member of the Order of the Sons of Lib- erty on the 20th of July last, at the so- licitation of Dr. Horton, directly through Mr. Hantz. Dr. Horton was said to be a member. I was initiated in the first de- gree in Isaac Decker's barn; at the same time there were initiated John Hantz, Isaac Decker, Edward Decker, Williain Decker, Daniel Highland, Adam Young, Edward Johnson, Joseph Johnson, William Lever, Nathan Johnson, William Hantz, and Wil- liam Cashman; fourteen were initiated by Dr. Horton. The society numbered in that township between forty and fifty. John Hantz was Grand Seignior; Isaac Decker, Treasurer; Joseph Johnson, 0. G. ; Nathan Johnson, G. D.; Daniel Highland, G. M.; William Decker, G. S.; Henry John- son, A. D.; I was Secretary. [The witness was unable to explain the initials.] The obligation I took was that of the first de- gree of the Order of American Knights. Dr. Horton told me that there were from eighty to one hundred thousand members of the order in this State. I understood there was a military organization connected with the order. We got up a constitution and organized a company of about forty members. David Lash was Captain ; Josejih Johnson, First Lieutenant; Henry John- son, Second Lieutenant ; Isaac Miller, Or- derly; there were none but members of the order in this company; it did not com- prise all the members of the order in that township; some were aged, and these we did not consider good fighting material ; but all that were considered able were in that company. I did not know of our com- pany drilling. At Bluflfton, Wells county, they drilled ; I went to see them drill ; that was in the early part of September, in this year ; some forty to sixty were drilling on the commons back of Blutt'ton. Some of the members of our company were members of the Bluti'ton company ; that is TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 121 how I come to know that the BluSlon com- pany belonged to the order. After Dr. Horton initiated us, he told us that the object of the order was to subdue the Abolitionists, resist the draft, and to assist the Southern Confederacy. I heard of the contemplated uprising of the order, but learned nothing definite with regard to it. I attended, perhaps, ten or twelve meetings ©f the order. After Huntington county was drafted, a meeting of the order was held, and a committee sent to Bluffton, and one to Huntington, to ascertain if there was a concert of action in regard to resist- ing the draft; Jacob Farling was the com- mittee to Bluffton, and I was appointed the committee to Huntington. At Hun- tington I saw Mr. Cummings; he could not tell me any thing about it, and the Sheriff referred me to Mr. Milligan, whom I saw about the 16th of September last. I was instructed to ascertain if there was a con- cert of action, and if so, what arrange- ments were to be made to resist the draft. I asked Mr. Milligan his opinion as to whether we had better resist or not; he said it was as good a time now as any to re- sist. I did not know that Mr. Milligan held any military position in the order; the Sheriff referred me to him because he was the leading man there, and he would know. His message I brought back to the order, but as there was no concert of ac- tion, the members felt somewhat disap- pointed, and took the papers of the order into Decker's barn yard and burnt them. The order was disbanded about the 17th of September, when we found the thing was a failure ; and we agreed not to meet any more. On the same day that I saw M.V. Milligan, I also saw Mr. Winters, the / editor of the Huntington Democrat, who, 1 believe, was a member of the order. I asked him the question that I had put to Mr. Milligan, and he advised resistance. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Friday, November 4, at"lO o'clock, A. M. Court Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) November 4, 1864, 10 o'clock, A. M. ) The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused and their counsel. The proceedings were read and approved. H. L. ZuMRo, a witness for the Govern- ment, proceeded with his testimony as fol- lows : In my conversation with Mr. Milligan, on my visit to him, as a committee sent to Huntington, after advising resistance, he said, that if he was well, and in the woods, he could kill twenty men himself before he would be taken. When I asked him in what way we should resist, he concluded that we should form in companies or BQuads, just as we could; that ten men would be sufficient to start with in resist- ing tlie draft, and in resistance to the Ad- ministration. Shortly after I was arrested. I had a conversation with Mr. Milligan in reference to my own arrest; he thought it was a bad thing to be arrested as I had been, and he said if a man were to arrest him, he would kill him, even if he had to go forty miles to do it. Something was said in the conversation as to whether we should need horses in this resistance, when Mr. Milligan said that we should ; that we might find it necessary sometimes to assist a squad ten, fifteen, or twenty miles dis- tant, and should need horses to do it. I came to join the order from a conversa- tion I had in the early part of March, with Colonel James R. Slack, of the 47th Indiana, in his office; he resides in Huntington, He asked me if there was not a secret organiza- tion in our neighborhood ; I told him there was. He then wanted to know if I could not get the secrets of it ; and said they were not Democrats, but a set of traitors who would undermine the Government. He wished to know if I would not go into the matter to find out their purposes, and to aid in keeping down this strife. I told him that I could, but I did not think it would be prudent to do it, from the fact that my practice was here; and if at any time it should be found out that I had been opera- ting in favor of the Government, in all proba- bility they would endeavor to injure me. He said there was no danger at all, from the fact that the loyal portion of the Democratic party would only think the better of me; and that the traitors to this Government would go down so that there would not be enough left to make a boot black ; that was just his language. He afterward had a conversation with Colonel Schuler and Governor Morton, and Colonel Schuler came up and induced me to operate in that way. My purpose in joining the order was to endeavor to keep down any treasonable uprising. My subse- quent operations I reported from time to time to General Carrington. CROSS-EXAMINATIOX. No inducements have been held out to me to testify in this case. I was arrested by order of General Carrington, and placed under bonds ; but this was simply a pretense on the part of the authorities. After I was placed under arrest,- and before I reported at Indianapolis, I went to Mr. Milligan to consult him in reference to my arrest, and I stated to Mr. Coftroth, a counsel, when I met him at Peru, that I might employ Mr. Milligan to assist in my defense. I made application to be admitted a member of the order at Huntington at different times. ] joined the order at Rockcreek township. I was solicited by Mr. Milligan's student to go into the temple. 122 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. At the time I called to see Mr. Milligan on the 16th of September, Mr. Joseph John- son went with me. Mr. Johnson was present during the whole of the conversation I had with Mr. Milligan. Mr. Johnson lives in Rockcreek township. He is the Joseph Johnson, 0. G., I referred to as being initiated at the time I was. Mr. Milligan was eick in bed, and I understood he had been for a considerable time under the in- fluence of opium and mercury, and he wished me to see if any eftect was being produced by the opium and mercury. After my con- versation with Milligan, I said I thought it worried him; he told me that it did; and I replied that I would then say nothing further. I do not think Mr. Milligan was at the time under the influence of narcotics, or opium. I next visited Mr. Day, to whom 1 was referred by Mr. Milligan. I told Mr. Day that Milligan had advised resistance, but said that he was so sick I did not like to say a great deal to him. Mr. Day said it would be foolish to resist. I asked him as I had Mr. Milligan, if there was to be any concert of action, and if so, that we were ready to resist in our township. Mr. Sam- uel Winters and Mr. Reinbarger were pres- ent during my conversation with Mr. Day. I remember Milligan saying, when I asked him if they were going to resist, that they had no fighting men there ; that there were only five or six fighting men in Huntington. I might have spoken also, but Mr. Ibach and 1 also called at Mr. Coffroth's office. I called at Mr. Coffroth's office at the instance of Mr. Johnson, who wanted to know what was his opinion about resistance. Mr.Cof- froth said he was not a member of the or- der, and would not advise resistance in any way. I did not go to Mr. CoftVotli to act as a spy upon him, but simply because Mr. Johnson said he was an influential Demo- crat, and he would like to know his opinion. When Dr. Harden stated that the objects of the order were to oppose the Administra- tion, resist the draft, and assist the South- ern Confederacy, there were present John Hautz, Isaac Decker, Edward Decker, Wil- liam Decker, Daniel Highland, Adam Young, Henry Johnson, Joseph Johnson, Nathan Johnson, Wm.Hantz, Wm.Cushman, and myself. The memorandum to which I refer for these names, I made at the time. The date of the meeting at which I was appointed as a committee to go to Hunting- ton, and Jacob Farling to go to Bluft'ton, was on the 14th of September. Among those who were present at the meeting of the 14th of September, were Mr. Farling, Joseph Johnson, Mr. Eders and otliers. Mr. Johnson was present at my appointment, and agreed to go with me. David Lash, who was the Captain of our company, is the bi'other of the merchant of that name, and is a carpenter. Though Mr. Winters and Mr. Reinbarger advised resistance, and Mr. Miiligan said it was as good a time as any to resist, I reported that there would be no concert of action; and the consequence was that the papers of the order were burned. ^Mien it came to the test, the order failed. My purpose in going into the order was not to betray its members, but to keep the Government posted as to their designs. There appeared to be a great danger of an outbreak and rebellion at home, and I thought if I could do any thing to prevent it, I was doing the community a kindness, and not injury. I consulted with Esq. Bratton, but he knew my position with reference to the order; it was he who arrested me and bi'ought me from Markle. I never told any one that Mr. Milligan could be got clear or convicted for money ; but a person who, I understood, was a friend of Mr. Milligan, wanted to know of me, if he could be got away from the guards. The idea that I held out was, that I thought he could be. My impression was that they wanted to bribe the guards, but I do not know from whom I got the idea. But I never stated to any one, that if I was furnished with money, I could or would use it secretly for the benefit of Mr. Milligan, either upon officers or members of the guard. The statement of Mr. Milligan, that if he was well and in the woods, he could kill twenty men before he was taken, and also the statement that ten men would be suffic- ient to start with, were made in the pres- ence of Joseph Johnson. The militar}' company connected with this order was organized perhaps three or four weeks before we abandoned the order, which was about the middle or latter end of August, and after the organization had been ex- posed in the papers at Indianapolis. The organization in our township was not un- derstood to be an independent order, but was connected with the order generally, and we were to co-operate with them in any outbreak or resistance to the Government. When I called on Mr. Milligan, I did know him to be a member of the order. 1 represented to Milligan tliat I had been arre.sted at the instigation of Dr. Scott, who, I represented, had been actuated by motives of rivalry, so as to get me out of the way as a practicing phj'sician, and it was in this connection tliat Mr. Milligan said, if he had been arrested at the instigation of any one governed by such motives, that he would go forty miles to kill the man. The Commission then adjourned, to meet at 2 o'clock, P. M. AFTERNOON SESSION. CouiiT Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, I November 4, 1864, 2 o'clock, P. M. ) The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All tlie members present. Also, the TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 123 Judge Advocate, the accused, and their counsel. The Judge Advocate here stated that all proceedings against Colonel Horace Heffren were withdrawn on the part of the Govern- ment; that he was released from arrest by the proper authorities, and that he would now appear on the stand as a witness for the Government. Horace Heffren, a witness for the Gov- ernment, was then called to the stand, and duly sworn by the Judge Advocate. The counsel for the accused said that when the accused were jointly indicted, as in this instance, it was not competent for an accused to testify either for the defense or prosecution, till a verdict of "not guilty" has been entered. The Judge Advocate, in reply, said: The Government can at any time, or at any stage of the proceedings, quash any set of charges and specifications against the accused, when the interests of the service may seem to demand it, and with that is an end of the case. When the Judge Advo- cate says to the accused, the Government withdraws its charges and specifications against you, the man is then free, without any proceeding pending against him. As to this Commission giving a verdict of ac- quittal, or proceeding to a finding before this witness can be used, let me say that no such rule can obtain. It makes the finding, and passes its sentence in any given case; the proceedings are then forwarded t;0 the Commanding General convening the Court, for his approval and confirmation, or disapproval. If it is a case in which he has the power to execute the sentence, it is then promulgated in general orders and made known to the accused and to the woi'ld. If it is a case which the Command- ing General has not the power to execute, he adds his appi'oval or disapproval, as the case may be, and forwards it to the proper authority for approval, and after being acted ,upon by that authority, it is made known. In this case, for instance, the j^i'oceedings would probably have to go to the President of the United States, and be delayed per- haps for months. The very nature and constitution of a military court, precludes the possibility of the existence of any such a rule in this Court. The witness, Horace Hefiren, then testi- fied as follows : Question by the Judge Advocate: Please state your name, place of resi- dence, and businetss. Answer. My name is Horace Heffren ; residence, Salem, Washington county, Indi- ana; my profession, that of an attorney; my office is at Salem. Q. How long have you resided there ? A. Since March, 1857. Q. Please state to the Court whether you ever joined an order called American Knights, or Order of Sons of Liberty; if so, when and where? A. I joined an order called American Knights, somewhere in the latter part of the year 1863, probably in November or Decembei'. I have no means of telling the precise time. I have not my diary of last year with me; if I had, I could tell the precise day. Q. Did you belong to any similar order, or one with similar intents and purposes, of a different name, previous to that? A. I did not. Q. Did you ever belong to the Golden Circle? A. No, sir. I belong to the Freemasons, but to no other secret order. Q. At whose solicitation did you join the order ? A. I do not know that I can say it was at the solicitation of any person. Mr. Bailey, of Terre Haute, came to Salem; I knew his face and recognized him, but could not call his name; he told me what his business was, and I got twelve more men beside myself, and we were taken into the Order of American Knights in my ofl&ce. Q. Who initiated you? A. Mr. Bailey. Q. Where does he reside now? A. I understand he is dead ; I have made inquiries since I have been in prison, and that is what I am told. Q. Who else were initiated at that time? A. James B. Wilson, William C. McCoskey, Townsend Cutshaw, Deloss Heffren, Eli Bouser, William P. Green, and John B. Pitts, I think — I am not certain about him; these are as far as I recollect now. Q. What was the first lodge or county temple you attended after your initiation? A. In order to make my story connected, I must explain. After we had taken the three degrees, I was elected Grand Seignior of the County Temple, James B. Wilson Ancient Brother, W. C. McCoskey as Secre- tary, and Townsend Cutshaw as Treasurer. The lodge was in my office, in the town of Salem. Q. When did you take the first, second and third degrees ? A. I took the three degrees that very night. Q. When did you next attend a county temple ? A. There never was but one county tem- ple after that, in our county, to my knowl- edge; and that was for the election after mj' time was up, and that was not far from the 22d of February, 1864. I was instructed that there was to be a meeting on the 16th and 17th of February, and that, as Grand Seignior, I was the delegate from the county temple. I came here and attended the meetings of the 16th and 17th; when there, I was instructed that there was to be a new 124 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. election of officers for the ensuing year, and we elected officers, probably, a week from that time, when Garrett W. Logan was elected Grand Seignior in my place. Q. Had you attended any meeting pre- vious to the 16th and 17th of February? A. That was the first and only one of the Grand Council. Q. How did you come to that meeting? A. As delegate from the county tem- ple. Q. Who presided ? A. H. H. Dodd. Q. Who was Secretary? A. Mr. Harrison, who was a witness here. Q. Did you meet any of the accused at that meeting ? A. I met Dr. Bowles there, and Mr. Mil- ligan, I think, the second day; I did not see Mr. Humphreys; never met that gen- tleman any-where as a member of the Or- der of American Knights ; 1 never met him except as a Freemason. I never saw Mr. Horsey till I came into Court, and he was required to plead the same time as I was. Q. At that meeting on the 16th and 17th of February, you say you met Dr. Bowles and Mr. Milligan ? A. Yes, sir; Mr. Milligan on the second day, I believe. Q. Give to the Court the business trans- acted, and what you learned was transacted at those meetings on the 16th and 17th of February. A. The Grand Master read an address ; certain committees were appointed — one, I think, upon a newspaper to disseminate the views of the organization, and educate the Democratic mind up to what was thought it ought to be; a Committee upon Litera- ture was appointed ; and a committee to see whether a person by the name of Michael Malott had been divulging the secrets of the organization. Q. Who constituted those committees? A. I could not tell. Q. Were you on any committee ? A. I was, sir. Q. On what? A. To ferret out whether Mr. Malott had been revealing the secrets of the order. Q. What did you do in pursuance of that? A. We called tlie committee together; brought Malott before us, and a person whose name 1 do not remember. We in- vestigated all we could. Mr. McBride, of Evan.sville, was one of the committee; the others I do not remember. It was mere rumor and hearsay; and 1 told the commit- tee that I professed to know something in regard to law, and 1 did not think that the evidence was such that we could report to the Grand Council that the man was guilty, and I recommended that we report that tlie man was not guilty of revealing the secrets. Q. What was the penalty in case he did reveal them? What did the rules of the order enjoin as to the obligation ? A. I took some obligations, but do not know what they were ? Q. Do you not know what the penalties are for revealing the secrets of the order? A. I understand the penalty from what 1 have read, and what I knew at the time and have learned since, to be death, figura- tively speaking. Q. What do you mean by that ? A. The same as in other organizations. Q. Was it a figure of speech, or was it to be carried out as fact ? A. That I can not answer. Q. Did you hear any consultation at that meeting, in reference to a man by the name of Coffin ? A. 1 do not think that I did ; I do not recollect any person mentioning his name. Q. Were you at the meeting of the 14th of June? A. I was not. Q. Were not the Military Committee appointed on the 16th and 17th of Febru- ary ? A. No, sir: they were not appointed in Council as 1 understood. Q. Were any military appointments or elections made ? A. Yes, sir. Q. What were they ? A. Grand Commander, Deputy Grand Commander, and Major Generals for the four divisions of the State of Indiana, a Secretary, and I think Treasurer. Mr Dodd was elected Grand Commander; I was elected Deputy Grand Commander; Mr. Milligan was elected Major General of his district. Q. Was Mr. Milligan present at his elec- tion? A. I can not say that Jie was present till the second day, and the election of Major (ienerals took place on the first day I be- lieve. Mr. Humphreys was elected in his district. He was not present either day. Major McGrane, of Harrison county, was elected in my district as Major General, and Colonel John C. Walker was elected for the North-west district. The State was divided into four divisions. I do not know exactly how the lines run; but it was divided by counties. Dr. Bowles lived in Orange coun- ty, and the line ran between Washington and Orange counties. Major McGrane lived immediately south of Washington. He and I roomed together, and we had a great deal of talk, and he told me he would have nothing to do with it. The next morning Orange county was added to the south- eastern division, in which Dr. Bowles was. Major McGrane declined, and Dr. Bowles was unanimously elected in the place of McGrane. Q. What other business of importance took place at either of these meetings ? TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 125 A. The next thing I recollect was reports from some committees about literature, and I think a university; but I did not pay any attention to it. My impression is that we laid the matter on the table. I VMS on the committee with respect to the n<.^\ -paper; and I think Mr. Bingham was on that committee with me; and we de- cided that it was all a humbug, and we would have nothing to do with it, but recom- mended an indefinite postponement with regard to the newspaper. Matters in regard to the progress of the order were also talked of, and reports were called for. Q. What was said to be the strength of the order at that time ? A. I do not know what the strength of the order was. Q. Was any thing said about the aggre- gate number of the order at that time? A. I think the Secretary reported that he had not received returns from several counties, so that the correct number could not be ascertained. Q. Of what political faith were the ma- jority of the men comprising that organi- zation? A. They were all Democrats. Q. State whether any other class of men were admitted, or was it a sitie qua non that a man must be a Democrat? A. I do not think any one would have got in unless he professed to be a Demo- crat. Q. State to the Court what were the gen- eral purposes and objects of that order, so far as you learned. A. In the first place, I understood there were two organizations, one within the other ; the civil organization, to which the mass of the members belong, and which, as far as I ever knew, was purely political, to bring out the Democratic vote to the polls, and to insure the success of the principles of the Democratic party, by every means in our power to get every voter out to cast his vote; and as we had been told by those who instructed us, that it was the deliber- ate design and arrangement of the Aboli- tion party to prevent voting, we determined to have a free fight or a fair election. I have been told by members of the order that the other portion of the organization had for its object the separating of the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and Kentucky, from the Eastern States, to make a North-western Confederacy; and failing in that, join our fortunes with the South. That was the military part of it, which was not communicated or known to the members of the civil organization; and I presume I never would have known it, had it not been for the position I held as Deputy Grand Commander. Q. What proportion of the members be- longed to the military portion of the organ- ization? A. Only the leaders; they were to control the matter through a Committee of Thir- teen, who were to be known only to the Grand Commander and themselves. They were t-o so control us as to bring us into their trap. That was why I said it was a humbug, and said I would have nothing to do with it. Q. Have any of the schemes of the order come to your knowledge since then? A. Yes, sir. The schemes of a few of the leaders of this military part of the order, and the schemes of these were unknown to the great mass of the order. Q. Do you say that it was to these mili- tary leaders alone this was confined? A. Yes, sir; I think so. Q. Was Dodd considered a military leader? A. He was; but there was a man over him. Q. Who was that ? A. It was Dr. Bowles. Q. Please to explain that ? A. The State was divided off into Mili- tary Departments, and there was an officer of the Military Department, who was Su- preme Commander to the Grand Com- mander of the Civil Department, who had his Adjutant, Staft', etc. He controlled the Military. Department, and saw to the arm- ing, ammunition, and the procuring of funds. Q. Then the civil was subservient to the military ? A. Yes, sir; and knew nothing except the few who were in the confidence of the military. Q. Did you learn who was on the stafi" of this military leader. Dr. Bowles? A. Yes, sir; it is James B. Wilson; he told m-e so himself Q. What is tlie position he held ? A. He told me he was Adjutant General on Di'. Bowles' Staff. In fact, nearly all the information I ever received, except what I received on the 16th and 17th of February, I received from Mr. Wilson, after his re- turn from Dr. Bowles' at French Lick Springs, Orange county. Q. What did you learn in reference to the arming of this order? A. I never understood that the men of the rank and file of the civil organization were to be armed, that is, at the expense of the order. Q. How were they to arm ? A. They were to do it among them- selves? Q. Who was it that was to be armed by the order ? A. These men who were to be under the control of the Commanding General, that is tlie Military Commander. Q. How did they make the division as to who were to be armed by the order, and who were to arm themselves? 126 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. A. There were certain men they selected to whom to communicate that which it would not do to communicate to every body. Q. Did they go into a township, for in- stance, and pick out the men that were to be armed by the order ? A. I think not, sir. Q. Then how could they tell whom they were to arm, and whom they could rely upon to arm themselves ? A. I do not know. They had a way of ascertaining the number of arms of differ- ent kinds that the members of the order had; they would take a sheet of paper and rule it in columns, as for keeping a tally, heading each column with apples, corn, beans, or any thing you please, so that you could understand what these things were intended for. Apples might stand for rifles; corn for shot-guns; beans for pistols, and potatoes for ammunition, and any thing else for lead. This sheet would be a report of the number of arms found by those making the return. Q. Was there any agreement between the members of the order, as to how it should be understood by those to whom the report was made? A. Sly instructions were to report by the secret cypher how many there were. Each township temple reported to the Secretary of the mother temple how many arms and how much ammunition they had, and then that Secretary reported to the Grand Secre- tary of the State Council. Q. Do you know of any attempts on the part of the members of this order to arm the order? A. I only know that from hearsay, from members of the order. I only know what Mr. Wilson told me. Q. Was Mr. Wilson a member of the or- der? A. Yes, sir; he was initiated when I was. Q. What did he state to you? A. He had been to French Lick Springs, to Dr. Bowles. When he came back from there, myself, and I think Townsend Cut- shaw, a man by the name of Purlee, and my impression is that Mr. C. McCoskey also, were sitting or standing at the Clerk's oflBce door. The people in that country were at fever heat, anxious and unquiet, with rumors of this, that and the other; and the matter came up in that conversa- tion, in regard to resisting the draft, when Mr. Wilson pulled a roll out of his pocket, wrapped up like a banker's parcel, and said there was one thou.sand dollars he had just got from Dr. Bowles, to procure arms and ammunition for our county, and there was plenty more where that came from. Q. Did he state any thing else? A. Not at that time, but he did after- ward. Q. What was that? A. That there was a half a million of dollars sent to Indiana, Illinois and Ken- tucky, I think, by rebel agents in ("anada, for the purpose of procuring arms and am- munition for these North-western States, to arm themselves with. Q. Who received this money in this State? A. Mr. Dodd, I was told, and Mr. John C. Walker. Q. By whom were you told ? A. By Dr. Wilson. I never got a word from Mr. Bowles, Mr. Humphreys, Mr. Milli- gan or Mr. Horsey, in my life as to the money. Q. What amount did they receive ? A. A hundred thousand dollars each. Q. How was it to be expended ? A. A portion of it was to go to Dr. Bowles, to be spent in his part of the State in pur- chasing arms and ammunition. Q. For whom? A. For the military order that had its connection with the Order of American Knights. Q. When did you have this conversation with Dr. Wilson ? A. It could not have been far from the middle of June, 1864. I think so from the fact that T was told a Grand Council was to be held here about that time, and it was shortly after that, that he and I had this conversation. It must have been in June. Q. Did he get that information at that meeting ? A. I am not certain that he came to In- dianapolis, but it was shortly after that meeting that he told me. Whether he went to the meeting, or got it from Dr. Bowles, I can not say. Q. Did you learn from him, or other mem- bers of the order, for what purpose those arms were to be used after they were pur- chased and distributed to the members of the Order of American Knights? A. I never heard how they were to be distributed, neither do I know to whom they were to be distributed ; but I supposed, as a matter of course, they were to be dis- tributed to members of the order, and were to be used either to defend themselves from oppression and wrong, or to fight any thing that came to fight them. Q. Were, or were not these arms to be used in carrying out the purposes of the order that you have detailed ? A. I understood they were to be used for the purpose of carrying out the military part of the organization of the American Knights. Q. Do you know when the order was changed ? A. I presume it was changed before June. Q. Before you had this conversation with Dr. Wilson ? A. I think it was. Q. Do I understand you to say that the TKEASON TKIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 127 I object of the military part of this order was to establish a North-western Confederacy in conjunction with the Southern Confederacy? A. I understood the object to be to sepa- rate themselves from the Eastern States, and form a Confederacy of themselves ; or else, failing to do that, join their fortunes to the Southern Confederacy. Q. Then were, or were not those arms to be used in carrying out these objects of the military organization ? A. That was my understanding. Q. Did you ever see more than this one thousand dollars that you saw with Mr. Wilson ? A. I iiever did. Q. Did you learn of any arms being bought by hini ? A. He and I had very little talk for three months past; but I never heard of his offer- ing to buy an arm or ammunition. I never learned from any body that he did. I was asked what he did with the money, but I did not know. Q. Were these military objects of the or- der discussed either individually or publicly, at the meetings of the 16th and 17th of February ? A. The matter was talked of by some of us, perhaps a few of us in a corner, or off to one side. Q. Did you at that time ever talk with Mr. Milligan or Mr. Bowles upon that sub- ject? A. Mr. Bowles was probably there one morning when we were talking about it. I remember there was something about his papers, about his being a major general, that did not suit him; and I know we had talks among ourselves, probably five or six of us at a time. Q. Did there ever come to your knowl- edge, at any time, any intention on the part of this order to take possession of the State Government ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Detail to the Court what you learned in reference to that. A. This I also received from the same source — Dr. Wilson. He told me that upon a certain day, the 16th, but whether of August or July I am not certain, of this year, there was to have been an uprising ; the prisoners were to be released at the camp near Chicago — I think Camp Douglas — at Camp Morton, and a camp near Colum- bus, Ohio, Camp Chase it is called, I believe. The arsenals of the United States were to be seized, and the prisoners armed with the arms and equipments contained therein. Q. What then was to be done ? A. Governor Morton was to be taken care of Q. What do you mean by being taken care of? A. He was to be held as a hostage for those who might be taken prisoners, and engaged in the uprising. Dr. Athon was to be Governor, under the law of the State of Indiana, passed a few sessions since ; in case of the Governor failing to serve, he would be Governor; we should call- out the militia, and have every thing our own way. Q. In case you failed to capture Governor Morton, what then ? A. In case he was not captured and made hostage, he was to be made away with in some way, but I ne-\-x?r was told how. Q. After the arsenals were seized, the rebel prisoners armed, and the members of the order armed, what then was to be done by the members of the order ? A. I did not understand that all the mem- bers of the order were to take part ; it was the military part, and as many as could be induced by excitement or any means, or be drawn into it through the influence of the military leaders. Then the State Govern- ment was to go ahead, with the law and Constitution as we had it, excejjt that Dr. Athon was to replace Governor Morton. Q. Was this scheme known or imparted to any but members of the order ? A. Not that I ever knew of Q. State whether or not leading Demo- crats of the State were given this scheme ? A. It was given only to members of the order; I never knew of its being commu- nicated to any Democrat unless he was a member of the order, and I think it was not. Q. Did a man by the name of John Bow-, man, of Washington county, belong to this order? A. I never met him, but I understood he was a member. There were very few Demo- crats in our county (Washington) but what were members. I think Mr. Bowman knew nothing about the military part; at least not to my knowledge. Q. Did you learn what was done at the meeting in New York on the 22d of Feb- ruary? A. Nothing except that the ritual v^as changed. I am not certain wheth(-r that was in New York or Chicago. Q. Do you know who this Council of Six- teen were? A. I do not know of such .a Council; never heard of it till I was arrested. 1 have some indirect knowledge of a Council of Thirteen. Q. Was Dr. Wilson at that meeting in Chicago ? A. 1 can not state. Q. Did he tell you whether he was or not? A. I am not positive; I do not think he did. Q. You say you did have some indirect knowledge of the Committee of Thirteen? What was it? A. I understood there was such a Com- mittee •, that it was appointed by the Grand 128 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. Commander, and known only to him and the members themselves. Q. Did you ever hear of the appointment of a Committee of Ten ? A. The Committee of Ten that I think you refer to was not a Committee. They were individuals selected, as my under- standing was, to take care of Governor Morton. Q. Did you learn who they were ? A. I did not. Q. What do you mean by taking care of Governor Morton? A. To hold him as a hostage, or in case he could not be held, whether he was to be killed or not, I did not hear; but he was to be put out of the way by some means. Q. They were to dispose of him and get him out of the way; how ? A. I can not say ; but they were to get rid of hiiu in some way if he was not held as a hot" cage ? Cyrus L. Dunham, one of the counsel for the accused, here said : There are peculiar circumstances attend- ing what has taken place this afternoon, and I regard it as my duty to make a state- ment which I ask to be put upon the rec- ords of this Court. My relations to all parties here are well known to this Com- mission. I have not only been counsel for Mr. HeflFren, but as the records show, I am counsel for other defendants. It places me in rather a queer position before them, and perhaps before this Court ; and I desire to make this statement, which I have put in writing, and which I ask to have put upon the records : Indianapolis, November 4, 1864. May it please the Court : Being counsel for Mr. Heffren, and also for other defendants on this trial, I deem it di.e to those other defendants, and to my own professional and personal honor, most solemnly to state to this Commission, and in the presence of those other defendants, that I had no knowledge or intimation that the prosecution against said Heffren was to be abandoned, and that he was- to be put on the stand as a witness, until, in open Court, he was called to the stand by the Judge Advocate; that I was in no wise, or by any person, consulted in regard to it; that I never, directly or indirectly, sought, or even entertained the idea of the bring- ing about of such a result. [Signed] CYRUS L. DUNHAM. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Thursday, November 10, at 2 o'clock, P. M. CouET Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, 1 November 10, 18G4, 2 o'clock, P. M. j The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present, except Colonel Reuben Williams and Colonel Benjamin Spooner. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused, and their counsel. The proceedings of Friday, November 4, were read and approved. Reuben Dailey was then sworn by the Judge Advocate, as Assistant Recorder, in presence of the accused. The examination of Horace Heffren, a witness for the Government, was then pro- ceeded with as follows : Question by the Judge Advocate : Did you not state that Dr.. James B. Wil- son was Adjutant General on Dr. Bowles' staff? Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know of any other staff of- ficer ? A. Yes, sir ; Garrett W. Logan was Quar- termaster. Q. Where did he reside? A. In Salem, Monroe township, Washing- ton county, Indiana. Q. How do you know that? A. David D. Hamilton and Garrett W. Logan went to see Colonel Bowles some- time during the past summer or spring. Hamilton was a member of the organiza- tion, so was Logan, who is now the Grand Seignior of Washington county; he was elected sometime in February. Mr. Ham- ilton told me what Logan was going for; but I had no confidence in him, and I wrote a letter to Dr. Bowles telling him not to trust him, that he would betray him. When Hamilton came back he said that Dr. Bowles had offered him a Brigadier Generalship, and he would not accept of it, and Bowles said their business was at an end, and Lo- gan was appointed Quartermaster; Logan told me so himself; and the reason was, that he had a sore leg, and would have the advantage of riding on horseback instead of going afoot. To my positive knowledge he has had a sore leg for seven or eight years. Q. Were there any other staff officers except Dr. AVilson and Mr. Logan ? A. Not that I know of Q. State whether you have any knowl- edge of a regiment of lancers being organ- ized, or of any provision being made to fur- nish the members of the order with lances. A. I have not of a regiment, but of com- panies composing a regiment. The first I knew of it was from Dr. Wilson telling me that Bowles had made an arrangement to have nine companies of infantry, one of lancers, and one section of artillery, to com- prise each regiment in this order. The lancers were to be armed with lances, of what length I do not know, but there was to be a hook, somewhat after the fashion of a sickle; the lance to punch with, and a sickle to cut the horse's bridle; tliere was to be a thrust and a cut, a thrust for the man and a cut for the horses' bridles; he thought the enemy would become confused TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 129 and distracted, and if a charge was made upon them when they hac no means of controlling the horses, they would be easily mashed up. Q. Were any steps taken toward procur- ing those lances? A. I do not know that ever a lance was made, or contracted to be made ; 1 only know that Dr. Wilson told tne that arrange- ments were on foot to g.et them, but he did not say where, or by whom, or when they were to be furnished. He said they would be a terrible weapon in a tight. I thought he did not know as much about it as I did, or he would not try it. Q. Give to the Court the secret cypher used by the order, as far as you have knowl- edge of it. A. If I wanted to write to the Judge Ad- vocate, he and I would understand what book we would have to write from; it might be Dellart's Military Law, the Bible, or a hymn book, it would not matter what, so that we understood what book was re- ferred to. I would make my date, and place under it in paieu thesis the figures denoting the page, and the figure at the left end of the line would designate the line on which I commenced ; for instance, if it was the figure fifteen, it would indicate the fif- teenth line from the top. The page of the book would be placed on the right hand side, in parenthesis ; and the number of the line on the left. When I could not find the letter 1 wanted on any line in that page, then I left a line in blank and put another number, which was to designate the page to which I wanted to refer in pa- renthesis in that blank line, and then pro- ceeded as before. If 1 wished to write, "I do not want them," I would count the let- ters in the designated line, counting from the left, and put down for "I " the number three ("3"), if that is the third letter, and " 13 " for " d," if that is the thirteenth letter in line, etc. Q. You were appointed as delegate to Chicago, were you not? A. I was told by Mr. Dodd, that, by vir- tue of my otlice as Deputy Grand Com- mander, I was a delegate to Chicago; but I did not go. William P. Green, of Salem, ln en did you organize them? A. It could not have been far from the 134 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 28th of March; it might have been abouti A. I do not know, except by contiibu the 25th of February that we organized that temple. Q. How many members did you take in ? A. About twenty or thirty. Q. Did you take in some each time you met? A. Yes, sir ; of course that was my busi- ness. Q. Were you allowed any thing for the organization of this temple ? A. Yes, sir. I suppose I was ; but I never got any thing, with the exception of what Mr. Jones, of New Albany, paid me, which was about three dollars, which paid my ex- penses to New Albany and back. Q. Had you any correspondence with other members ? A. I never wrote any letters in regard to the order save to Messrs. Vallandigham, Humphreys and Milligan, and one letter I wrote to Dr. Bowles, but did not send. Q. About what time did you appoint Wil- liam P. Green to act as your proxy ? A. I think it was in June. Q. At what time did Dr. Wilson show you the thousand dollars? A. It could not have been far from the middle of June, 1864, or when he came back from seeing Dr. Bowles at French Lick Springs. Q. How long was that before he told you to write to these men, in regard to what you should do? A. The money was shown to me some tim ein June; the writing was some time in September. I know it was near the time of Dodd's arrest. Mr. Dodd had not been arrested when he showed me the money. I do not know whether he had been to Chicago, or to Dr. Bowies'. 1 should state in regard to Mr. Milligan, I think thathe was present at the second day of the Grand Council in February. I have not a distinct and positive recollection of his being theie; what makes me think he was there is be- cause Harry Vandegrift was very anxious that Mr. Milligan should be nominated for Governor. Q. When was the ritual changed, if ever ? A. Mr. Dodd, at the February meeting, reported a constitution, by-laws, etc., oaths and obligations, but when they were changed I do not know; those published are not the same as those read ; I am certain of that. I do not know who changed them, or any thing about it. y. How were the ordinary expenses of the order kept up? A. By tlu', initiation fee; $1 for the first degree, $1 M for the second, $2 50 for the third degree, and twenty cents per month; and they had a right to tax if they saw fit. Q. How were the expenses of the Su- j)reme Grand Council of the United States to be kept up? tions from grand &i*d branca temples Q. Do you know what the expenses of the Grand Council of the State of Indiana were estimated at? A. I do not Q. What was the salary of the Secretary? A. My impression waa that it was to be eight hundred dollars per year. Q. Do you know any thing else about the expenses of the order ? A. No, sir. Q. Mr. Green, then, lied to you when he returned, or pretended to return from the Grand Council, did he not? A. Either he, or Mr. Dodd, or my brother; Mr. Dodd said that Mr. Green did not get in. Q. How did you sign that proxy? A. I signed it "Horace HctlVen," and 1 gave him a letter of introduction to Dodd beside; I do noi know wlielher I signed it officially or not, but I presume it would be signed officially to Dodd. Q. At what time November 11, 1864', 10 o'clock, A. M. ) The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused, and their counsel. The proceedings of yesterday were read and approved. The following Special Field Order was then read by the Judge Advocate: HeASQUABTEBS DePABTMKNT of the CrUBEItT.AND, \ Atlanta, Oa., Ociober 15, 1864. J Special Field Orders, No. 275. EXTRACT. ****!. The resignations of the fol- lowing named officers are accepted, to take efiect from this date: Colonel J. T. Wilder. 17th Indiana Mounted Infantry. Disability. By command of Major General Thomas. SOUTHAliD HOFFMAN, Assistayit Adjutant Oenerai. Some of the members of the Commission having expressed a desire to ask Mr. Hefiren some questions, he was called to the stand, and the following questions were submitted : Question by the Court : Do you know from your own knowledge, or from any member of the order, how many States were represented in the Grand Council of the Order of the Sons of Liberty, at any of their meetings? Answer. 1 was told by Dr. Wilson, when he returned from Chicago, that they were all represented but five ; all the States both North and South. Q. Do you recollect what five were not represented ? A. Florida and South Carolina 1 remem- ber being mentioned, but the other three I am not sure about. Q. Do you recollect any thing about a session of this order about the time of the Democratic Convention at Chicago? A. I know nothing of it except what Dr. Wilson said at a meeting we had called to raise money to buy substitutes for the poor men drafted in our county. He there stated that the object was to concentrate all the votes against McCleJlan, and prevent hia nomination at Chicaso. 138 TREASON TRIALS AT DfDIANAPOLIS. Q. Do you know the names of any who were there ? A. I do not know whether he gave any. At the called meeting there were present Colonel Menaugh, Mr. Kerr, General Cravens, I think, Mr. Trotter, Mr. Hamil- ton, 'Ms. Logan, I think, Mr. Spears, Isaac Baker, George Beck, R. G. Weir, a Doctor, whose name I forgot, he used to live in Little York; Dr. Newland was present, and Mr. Joseph Denny; there must have been fifty; the Sheriff of Washington county, B. F. Nicholson, was in the room. Q. Were these persons members of the order ? A. Some were; I do not think Dr. New- land ever was a member of it. Q. Do you know of this order having any connection with or interest in blockade run- ning, with reference to arms ? A. I was so told by members of the order; I was told by Mr. Dodd and by Dr. Wilson that Vice President Stephens had gone to Nassau ; that a good many arms and ammu- nition had been shipped there for the South- ern States from England, but could not get through the blockade, and he went to make arrangements with Commissioners from the North to have them shipped to Canada, and thence distributed through the North, for the use of the military part of this organi- zation. They were to come to Chicago, through Canada. Q. Do you say General Cravens was pres- ent at that meeting? A. Yes, sir. I think he was; but may be mistaken. I was Chairman of the meeting; and it was held in Salem, in the Grand Jury room, in the Court house, on the Monday after General Harlan, of Kentucky, spoke at Salem. At that meeting a great deal was said conversationally, as to what was to be done, and several persons asked me to make an announcement, which I did, requesting that each McClellan Club in the county would meet at 2 o'clock the next day, (Sun- day,) as the business was urgent, to send five delegates from each township to meet at Salem on the next day. Q. Was General Cravens a member of the order ? A. Not that I know of Dr. Wilson initiated persons that I knew nothing of; but I do not think he was a member. Q. You have seen those shells exhibited here, have you not ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you seen them before? A. Not those, but some similar to them. Q. State when, where, and under what circumstances? A. I can not state the exact time, but it was sometime last summer. Mr. iPersise, who keeps a hotel in Salem, called me, and introduced me to a gentleman who was stopping there ; he requested me to go to his room, and I went — to the stranger's room. He had a box something like a con- ductor's box, but much deeper. He asked me if I had ever seen these things; I said I had not. Mr. Persise told me he requested him to register his name, but he did not. He also had a hand grenade. As soon as I saw the one in Court, I saw it was on the same principle. He said what it was to be used for, but I did not exactly under- stand him, and did not talk much to him. He had a ritual of the first degree, and asked me if it was true. He was a shortish man, about five feet eight, or ten, wore specs, had dark hair and whiskers. He represented himself as coming from back of Louisville. 1 concluded he was a Detec- tive, and did not have as much to say as 1 otherwise might, for J had been threatened with arrest. I did not learn his name ; neither do I know if he was in the habit of wearing spectacles, or not. Q. Do you know if he was a member of the order? A. He said he was; but I did not try him. He unscrewed thehand-grenade, and showed me the nipples on the inner shell, and that is how 1 recognized it as soon as the Judge Advocate brought it up in Court Q. For what purpose did he say it was to be used? A. For the purpose of destroying Gov- ernment property 'I'he Greek fire, he said, had been improved, and was much better than that used before. It was to be so ar- ranged that a person coulii take it in a viol and walk along a building, and throw it down, and it could be so prepared in regard to its strength, as to take fire after three or four, or more hours; and neither vinegar, water nor molasses would put it out. I was told by Becking, when in prison, how it was made; he said it was bi-sulphate of carbon and phosphorus. Q. Was the man you saw at Salem, Mr. Booking? A. I can not say positively; he is a man who fits his description as near as possible, but 1 can not positively swear to his identity. Mr. Humphreys said, from my description, after Booking's arrest, that he was the same man. I am not certain he is. Q. You may describe his personal appear- ance. A. He had on pretty much the same clothes as Booking had; he wore glasses, and talked very much like Booking. Q. Why was he exhibiting this Greek fire and the hand-grenades? A. I can not tell why. Q. What was his professed object? A. He wanted to know whether I had seen these inventions, and asked whether I had not heard that Government stores and boats had been burned at St. Louis and Louisville. He then said, in reference to the Greek fire, " That is what did it." I TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 139 answered that 1 had heard of these shells, but had not seen them. Q. Was bo a member of the order? A, He claimed to be such. Mr. Persise ought to know better than I do. He asked me if I recollected him about the time I was arrested ; and when he told me of these circumstances, I remembered them. Q. Did Booking make this communica- tion to you as a member of the order? A. That is what I understood, sir. I did not know whether he professed to be a member of the order for the purpose of finding out something, and reporting it, or whether he was a bona fide member. I mis- trusted him as a boyia fide member ; but sub- sequent events proved that he was. I was confirmed in my judgment that he was a member from what he told me after I was put in prison with him. I reported to Col- onel Warner what I knew of the gentle- man. He was released on parole on the same day Humphreys was put in with me. Q. Why did you report him ? A. I reported to Colonel Warner that he took a letter out for a prisoner in the next celL I did so, because I did not want to be accused of being with a man who was try- ing to get out and injure me afterward. Q. Is Mr. Booking a member of the order ? A. I understand he is; he told me so himself Q. In this same conversation, did he tell you that he exhibited these machines to any body. else; and if so, to whom? A. I can not say positively whether he did or did not; it seems to me he said some- thing about exhibiting it in J^iouisville. Q. Do I understand you that Mr. Booking told you this while he was in prison with you? A. Yes, sir; and the same conversation took place with him in Salem, if he is the same man. Q. Will you describe the man you saw at Salem ? A. He was a man, I should judge, about five feet nine inches high, darkish hair; he wore glasses, and, from his accent, I should judge him to be a foreigner; he is between thirty-five and forty years of age. Q. Please describe Mr. Booking. A. I will have to give the same descrip- tion for him. Q. Will you describe Mr. Booking as you saw him in prison? A. He was about five feet nine inches, wore dark clothes and glasses ; a foreigner, I judge, and 1 believe he told me so; he is from thirty -five to forty years of age, and used to stay at Ryan & Elliot's store, he Baid, in this city, and does yet, if he is re- leased. Q. Have you seen or conversed with him eince you saw him in pris, n ? A. Yes, sir. Q. What did he say, at any time, of his being a member of the order? A. He did not deny it. When he was in the same cell with me he wanted to see Mr. Gordon, and to know why he was in prison, and said that they had got suspicious of him because he would not tell what he knew, and that was the reason he was put in prison. Q. He always maintained that he was a member of the order, did he not? A. Yes, sir, in all the conversation I had with him. He told me, also, of a man that was put in with him for horse-stealing. Colonel Warner, I believe, said this man was a spy, for he had my name on his books. Q. Was this man, who exhibited the Greek fire at Salem, a fleshy or a lean man? A. I do not think he was either. Q. How is Booking, fleshy or lean ? A. He was just aViout the same in that respect. The very instant I set my eyes on Booking, after I was arrested, I took him to be the same man I saw at Salem. Q. Did you notice the color of his eyes ? A. When at Salem he wore glasses, and I never saw the color of his eyes. Q. Were both these persons foreigners? A. They were. 1 called him at first a German; but he said that he was a Belgian. RE-CROaS-EXAMlNATION. The counsel for the accused requested, as a courtesy, the privilege of cross-exam- ination of tlie witness on the new points brought out by the examination by the Court, to which the Judge Advocate waived all objection. Question by the accused : At what time was this man, who exhib- ited the Greek fire, at the Persise House, in Salem ? Answer. Sometime last summer. Q. You will please fix the time as near as you can? A. I can not fix it with certainty, except that it was sometime in June, I judge. I have no memorandum to fix it by. It was in May or June. Q. Did he give you his name ? A. He did not. Q. Why did he refuse to give it? A. I did not ask him for it. Q. How did he register his name ? A. Mr. Persise said he refused to register his name. Q. Is Mr. Persise a member of the or- der? A. He is. Q. Do you know that this man you saw at Salem is a member of the order, from any thing except from what he said ? A. No, sir. Q. Did you test him ? A. No, sir. 140 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. Q. You stated, did you not, that after you saw Booking conceal this letter fora pris- oner, you told Colonel Warner of the mat- ter? A. I told Colonel Warner of his taking a letter out for a prisoner in the next cell, which was passed to him through a crack. Colonel Warner told me that this man had my name on his book. There was a secret back pocket in the linmg of his coat, be- tween the shoulders, in which he put the letter. I saw him put it there, and lake it out with him when he was released, on parole. Q. At what time was this ? A. I think it was when they called for him and he was released on parole. Mr Humphreys was put in the same cell with me after his release. I think I told Col- onel Warner I thought it very strange he should be released, and we should be kept in ? Q. How did you come to make this state- ment to Colonel Wai-ner? A. From the fact that I did not want any body in the cell next to me, who had con- cealed a saw, and was trying to cut his way out, and have the suspicion of assisting in his escape rest on me, and suffer punish- ment for it. I thought we were in a bad enough scrape, without getting into a worse one. I told Colonel AVarner to search his carpet sack, ana it was searched, so the sergeant said. Q. Did you not, at that time, commence making arrangements with Colonel Warner to become a witness? A. No, sir; and I made no arrangements with the Judge Advocate. When he spoke to me to take the stand, 1 thought he spoke to Dr. Wilson who sat behind me, and supposed he was going to put him on the stand, until he spoke to me the second time. Instead of making any arrange- ment to be put on the stand, on the con- trary I told the Judge Advocate I would not be put on the stand under any })ledge or promise, and only on the condition of making a ful! and true statement, for if sworn I would tell the truth. Q. I will ask you, with the permission of the Judge Advocate, whether that morn- ing, beiore dinner, you did not have a conversation with Governor Morton or General Hovey, either with one or both of them? A. I did. The conversation was confi- dential. Q. Did you not let them know that you were willing to become a witness? A. 1 think General Hovey asked me if I would be a witness; I said tliat if I was put upon the stand, I would have to tell the truth as any other man would. Q. Do you know how long this conversa- tion was before you were put upon the stand? A. It could not have been long before, because the Court was waiting when I came in. Q. Was it in this room or out of it? A. If it had been in this roon>, I would not have come in and found the Court waiting. I had endeavored to obtain an interview with General Hovey, and wrote to him requesting one, but received no an- swer. Q. Why did you seek an interview? A Because I wanted to get out of the sciape. Q. How did you propose to get out of the scrape? A. I made no proposition. Q. Did you tell them you would reveal what you knew? A. No, sir; I told them I would have to testify as any other man would who was sworn. Q. Did you not know that they could not make you a witness without discharging you? [Objected to by the Judge Advocate, and withdrawn.] BE-EXAMINATION. Question by the Judge Advocate: Please state whether you ever had from any Government official any pledge or promise, if you would come upon the stand as a witness ? A. I did not ; I had not received or ex- pected any pledge. Q. Did I ever hint to you that you were to be a witnt\Hs ? A. You did not, sir; and I asked Colonel Dunham, just before 1 was called on the stand, to ask the Judge Advocate if I should have my witnesses sul^penaed or not. The next thing I was on the stand. Q. Your interview with me was without any pledge or promise, and by your own in- clination, was it not? A. Yes, sir. The witness here requested the privilege of making a correction in his previous tes- timony, in regard to Mr. Kerr's taking three degrees. The first night I organized the Council at New Albany, Indiana, they all took three degrees, for it could not be organized unless they had taken the three degrees. Mr. Kerr was not there the first night, and I think he took only the first degree the second night. Q. Do you mejin the first degree proper? Yes, sir. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Saturday morning, November 12, 1864, at 9 o'clock, A. M. CouET KooM, Indianapolis, Indiana, 1 Noviiibor \2, 18*54, 9 o'clock, A. M.j The Commissi •HI met pursuant to adjourn- ment All the members present. Also, tha TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 141 Judge Advocate, the accused, and their counsel. The proceedings were read and ap proved. J 4MES L. Mason, a witness for the Govern- ment, was then introduced, and, being duly bworn. testified as follows: 1 have resided in Greenfield, Hancock county, Indiana, for the past eight years. I am Senator from that district. I do not Know that I have ever joined any secret society except the Freemasons. I never took the obligation of either the Order of Sons of Liberty, or the American Knights; and 1 never read the obligations of these orders until I saw them in the newspapers. A gentleman, a Mr. Hall, who reported himself as from Rush county, came to my office in 1862, and told me about a secret order, and read a ritual to me, but 1 did not consider that I took it, and I really do not remember what was the name of the order about which he spoke; it certainly was not the American Knights, or Sons of Liberty, but it might have been the Circle of Honor. I do not know the purpose of bis visit to our place, nor do I remember that he said it was for the purpose of estab- lishing a lodge. I never saw that gentle- man before or after. He stated what the order was, and certain facts about it, but I do not think he stated the obligation, nor do I remember re[»eating any thing after him. My present recollection is, that I did not; nor did he authorize me to form lodges, that I remember. Our interview did not last more than fifteen or twenty minutes. I believe he came with a letter of introduction from his brother. I do not remember that he had any further business with me than talking about this order. Possibly his object might have been to in- duce me to form a lodge. I did not take any steps to establish the order; nor did I assist in organizing any lodge in the State. Harrison Connki.l, a witness for the Government, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: I reside in Martin county, Indiana. I joined a secret society in our county, about two years ago. I believe it was called the " American Knights." I joined at the so- licitation of Stephen Horsey. We met in the evening at a school-house in Columbia township. Mr. Hoi'sey lives in the adjoin- ing township. I do not remember how many meetings I attended; I never drilled with the order. Some ammunitioti was brought to that neighborhood; by whom I do not know, nor do I know for what pur- pose. Stephen Horsey, the accused, told me to meet him about a mile and a half from the Shoals, on a certain evening, and we went some distance down the railroad, where we found some ammunition lying near the road. We put »t in a sack, and carried it kome. There was a keg of powder, a package ot lead and a package of caps. I do not know where the ammunition was concealed; it was Mr. Horsey wl\o took me to it. When I started, he did not tell me where he wanted me to go with him. He wished me to take care of the ammunition, and I put it in my barn, in the granary, and it was covered over with thrashed oats. When 1 was arrested, I gave it up to the Detectives. I do not know where the money came from with which the ammunition was purchased. It was in August, or the latter part of July, 1864, that I went with Horsey to fetch the ammunition. CROSS-EXAMINATION. I sTiould have stated that William Clay- ton initiated me. I attended a meeting of the order last winter at the Gaddis House, at which a Mr. Stone spoke, and the man who spoke led us to think that we were sworn into the service of Jeff Davis. I re- member the men were very much dissatis- fied with his speech. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Monday the 14th, at 2 o'clock, P. M. CocET KooM, Intiianapolis, Indiana, \ November 14. 1864, 2 o'clock, P. M. j The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- ment. All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, and the accused, (except W. A. Bowles,) and their counsel. The proceedings were read and approved. The following communication from W. A. Bowles, one of the accused, was then read to the Commission, by the Judge Advo- cate: To the President and Members of the Conmiission: My health being such that I can not attend the sittings of your body, I hereby waive my right to attend the same, and authorize you to proceed in my absence with my trial, as if 1 were present. [Signed] W. A. BOWLES. November 14, 1864. A member of the Commission objected to proceeding with the trial during the absence of one of the accused. The Court was then cleared for delibera lion. On being re-opened, the Judge Advocate announced that the objection was over- ruled. Elisha Cowgill, a witness for the Govern- ment, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn, testified as follows: I reside at Greencastle, Putnam county, Indiana. In 1863, I was Provost Marshal in the Seventh District. While in the per- formance of my duties there, I was brought in ccntact with Mr. Andrew Humphreys. It was about the 4th of June, 1863, when 1 saw Mr. Humphreys at the head of about 142 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. four hundred men. When T first came up, Mr. Humphreys was speaking to the crowd. When I rode up toward him, he came to- ward me, and was introduced to me by Edward Price, of Sullivan county. I asked a number of persons who were there, what they were assembled for, and they answered to protect themselves. All that I saw were armed, except perhaps one or two. Mr. Humphreys had command of them. They did not profess to be called out as militia, by the United States, or by the State authorities. I had a conversation with Mr. Humphreys of about an hour. Mr Humphreys talked a great deal about the President of the TTnited States, calling him an old tyrant before the crowd, who was usurping a great deal of power, and wasting the treasure of the United States, and the lives of the citizens. He also stated that he was killing <>!!* about forty thousand men per day. He also spoke of Vicksburg, and asked what I knew about it. Threats were made against me, by men in the crowd, and some of them swore they would kill any man who attempted to enroll Cass town- ship. They called me a "damned abolition rascal," a "Lincoln pup," and a "Lincoln dog," that deserved to be killed. Some said they ought to kill me before I got out of tlio crowd. They wanted me to tell them who the enrolling officer of that township would be. I told them he would be known to them in due time. His name was Fletcher Freeman. I had given him the enrolling papers the night before. He was afterward shot and killed. Mr. Humphreys made a second speech to the people, and advised them to go home and mind their own busi- ness; he asked me if I did not indorse this; I answered that I did. He also told them, "Do not sleep too soundly." I then went off, and a man named Ursey came into Sul- livan with me. I regarded Andy Hum- phreys as a leader of the rabble. CROSS-EXAMINATION. This took place about the 4th of June, 1863, in Sullivan county, and I understood it was in Cass township; just beyond there is a little town called Caledonia. Mr. Hum- phreys did advise the crowd to go home and mind their own business. They manifested no violence toward me except in their talk, and Mr. Humphreys remarked that there was no danger unless they got to drinking. I do not remember that Humphreys said in my hearing, that the people had got ex- cited because some soldiers had shot at a man. A small portion of the crowd were on horseback. 1 thought Mr. Humphreys' remarks were intended to stop them from committing any violence until he told them " not to sleep too soundly." When he spoke about the President as a tyrant, he was standing on a log, and the crowd were close around him. He dealt in about such epithets, as the Democratic speakers used at that time. Mr. Humphreys was armed with a revolver. 1 did not say that I could indorse Mr. Humpheys' speech, except that part where he advised them to go home. I think Mr. Humphreys asked the crowd to hear me ; it was when Mr. Price intro- duced me to Mr. Humphreys, and then he (Humphreys) told the crowd that I was the son of Judge Cowgill, and that he was a mighty good Democrat. I said I did not want any credit on that account, as I dif- fered with my father on poUtical topics. I may have tried to make a speech to them, for I asked them to select a subject if they want«^d to hear me. They selected the Conscription Bill. I then told them that the first thing to be done was to have an enrollment. They all swore that they would not have one. At this point Mr, Humphreys came up and made them keep quiet. In coming out from Sullivan, I met some soldiers that day. They were marching back toward Sullivan. There was probably fifty or sixty of them. When I saw them they were stopping, and were not marching either way. The men in the crowd were armed, some with squirrel rifles, some with phot guns, and others with pistols and buwie knives. The meeting was in the woods, near the little town of Caledonia. The country about there is sparsely settled. I do not know why the crowd assembled beyond what they stated, that they were there to pro- tect themselves, and vindicate theii* rights. Mr. Ursey came to Sullivan and tried to get me drunk. When 1 got him drunk, he became very communicative, and told me that Mr. Humphreys commanded the cavalry and he the infantry. I do not know that the crowd did any violence to any body that day. While I was there, Mr. Humphreys was evidently trying to keep the crowd quiet, and he succeeded to a cer- tain extent. I left before they dispersed. T saw Mr. Humphreys' revolver, for he happened to be in his shirt sleeves, and was sitting down by a tree talking to me; his revolver was buckled on behind. He did not say why he wore it, but remarked that he was expecting to be arrested I remarked his asking me about the news from Vicksburg, as to whether the Government troops would take it ; he also asked me what General Grant's daily losses were. I said I could not tell. He then commenced talking about himself, and asked me whether 1 knew of any arrange- ments being made to have him arrested. 1 said I did not. He did not say what he expected to be arrested for; but I think while we were^u conversation, he remarked that if 1 would go there by myself, he would take care of me over night at his house, and would go over the next mora TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 143 ing to Indianapolis with me, as he did not want any parade about it, if he was to be arrested. There were no flags in the crowd that I paw, and each man wore his own citizen's suit. In answer to interrogatories put by the (.Commission, the witness testified as follows : I do not know that the enrolling ofl&cer was shot and killed while in the perform- ance of his duty. My knowledge of his death came from Colonel Thompson. He had two townships to enroll, and wa« killed while working on the road, after having ut^arly completed the first township. I got his papers, and went down and finished it myself; and got a man to attend to the other. RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION. I have no personal knowledge of the manner of his death; I speak from hear- say. His death occurred about ten days after the meeting referred to. Dr. James B. Wilsox, a witness for the Government, was called to the stand, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : Question by the Judge Advocate: Please state your name, and where you reside. Answer. James B. Wilson, Salem, Wash- ington county, Indiana. Q. What is your profession, or business? A. I am a farmer at this time. Q. How long have you resided in Salem, Indiana? A .\bout fourteen years next February. Q. State whether you ever joined any secret order or society known as the Amer- ican Knights, or Sons of Liberty. A. Yes, air; I joined an order known as the American Knights ; I think it was in September or October, sometime in the fall of 1863. Q. Wh^re? A. At Salem, at the office of Colonel Heffren. Q, By whom were you initiated ? A. By Mr. Bailey. Q. Who else were initiated at that time? A. I do not think I can give the names of all, but I can of some: Mr. HefiFren, Mr. Harris, Mr. McCoskey, Mr. Cutshaw, Mr. Garris, Mr. Green, Mr. Fultz and Mr. Beck. Q. What was the next meeting that you attended after your initiation? A. A meeting at this place. It was said to be a meeting of the members of the order in the State, and was composed of delegates sent from the different county temples. Q. Who presided at that meeting? A. Mr. Dodd; I do not remember who was in the chair at first. Q. About what time in the day, and at what date, did this meeting occur ? A. I think about the 6tii of November. Q. Were any of the accused present? A. Dr. Bowles was present. Q. What business was transacted at that meeting? A. There were some committees ap-, pointed; a Military Committee, a Commit- tee on Education, and one committee in reference to establishing a newspaper to be considered the organ of the organiza- tion. Q. Who composed the Military Commit- tee? A. I can not tell; I thought, from the ac- tions of Dr. Bowles, that he must be the Chairman of that committee, as he made a verbal report. Q. Did Mr. Dodd make a speech ? A, Yes, sir. Q. Do you remember what that speech was? A. I remember something of it ; he spoke about talking treason for awhile; it was to- ward the close of the meeting. Q. State about how he said that, and what he was talking abo^ at that time. A. I can not give his language, because it is so long ago, and I did not refer to it very often. 1 can only give you the impression it left upon my mind. He said that he would "kick down the walls of common decency," or some such expression, " and talk treason for awhile." He said, "if the purposes of this organization could not be carried out, as explained by Mr. Wright, there were oth- ers that could be resorted to; they could very easily, if their organization was fully completed, t«.ke possession of the railroads, cut the telegraph wires, and throw in at one time troops enough at the capital to take the State Government and have things our own way." Q. About what time in the day did he make this speech? A. In the afternoon. Q. Was Mr. Bowles present at that meet- ing? A. I think he was. Q. Was Mr. Humphreys present ? A. I did not know Mr. Humphreys then. Q. Do you know if Mr. Bingham was present at that time ? A. I did not know Mr. Bingham at that time. Q. What else was said, if any thing? A. There was a great deal said. Q. Was there any thing done or said in reference to any member who might have revealed any thing in regard to the order? A. Not that I can call to my recollection. I think there was something said on that subject, bui I can not now recollect it. Q. Did you ever attend any other Grand Council of the State? A. No, sir; I never did. Q. Did you not attend a meeting of the Council at Chicago, or of a committee? A- I did, sir; I understood from a gen- 144 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. tleman who was present in the meeting, that it was to be composed of the military part of the organization; and he had called it at his own instance. . Q. From whom did you learn this? A. Mr. Barrett said that it was to be com- posed of the military men of the order. Q. Did you ever establish any lodges, or take any active part in the propagation of this society ? A. Yes, sir, I did. Q. To what extent? A. I established lodges in three different townships in Washington county. Q. How extensive were these lodges in the townships of your county ? A. There were lodges in all townships in jur county except two. Q. Did you visit all these lodges? A. I think 1 did. Q. When you visited these lodges, what did you go for? A. For the purpose of giving them the work of the Neophyte or First Degree. Q. Did you ever give them more than the Neophyte degree, or the First or Vestibule degree? A. I think I assisted in giving the second and third degrees to a couple of gentle- men. Q. To whom ? A. Captain Hamilton and B. F. Nichol- son, of Washington county. Q. Did you go for any thing else' A. Yes, sir; for the purpose of giving them instructions in the object of the order, and give them information that I thought was reliable. Q. What information did you give them at any time? A. I gave them information about the preparation in Illinois, which I received from a gentleman named Wright, from the State, and formerly from Washington countv. Q. What did he tell you? A. I learned from Mr. Wright that they were ready for any movement; that they had arms in their hands, generally, antl were ready for any emergency that the order might contemplate, or wish to carry out. Q. Did he report to you how extensively the organization was armed in Illinois ? A. Yes, sir; he said they were generally prepared. Q. What were the preparations in Illi- nois? A. In the county where he resided, he said almost the entire Democratic party. Q. Did you learn the extent of the order in the State? A. No, sir. Q. State what you know in regard to the arming and drilling, or the attempt to arm and drill inyour county, preceding your visit to Chicago, lUinois. A. I am not aware of any special efforts made at arming, only as individual mem- bers of the order armed themselves. I know of a great many members of the order buying pistols. Q. Do you know of any attempts to drill? A. I understood that Mr. Hamilton had a company, and that they had drilled. Q. Now please tell the Court about your visit to Chicago; and how you came to go there ? A. I think I went there mostly at my own suggestion; I was in bad health, and thought a trip up there might be of service to me, and suggested that if no one de- sired to go there, I would go myself; I spoke to Ml'. Heffren, Mr. Han-is, and a number of persons about it. Q. Did any one accompany you ? A. Mr. Green did. Q. Is he a member of the order ? A. Yes, sir. Q. What time did you start to Chi- cago? A. I think about the 1 9th of July, 1864, and arrived on the morning of the 20th, I think. Q. Where did you stop in Chicago ? A At the Tremont House. Q. Whom did you see there from this State? A I believe only Mr. Dodd and Dr. Bowles. Q. Give an account of where you went and what you did while in Chicago? A. I think we got in early in the morn- ing of the 20th; and after taking breakfast we went down to the Richmond House, where Dr. Bowles said he stopped, and in- quired for his room ; we were shown to it by a servant of the house, but he happened to be in an adjoining room. There seemed to be a promiscuous conversation going on; they talked about politics a little and on sundry matter.?. After having listened for some time, I think I asked if there was not going to be a meeting. Dr. Bowles re- marked to me that there would be a meet- ing, but they were not ready for it, as the persons they expected had not arrived. il. Who were those persons? A. Mr. Dodd, for one. Q. Where did h«5 say Dodd was? A. He said that he was gone to Niagara Falls, or had started to go there ; but expect- ed to get hiick in time for the meeting. Af- ter remaining some time, we found there was not to be a meeting until the next day. The next morning we went back to Dr. Bowles' room, and learned that Judge Bul- litt and Mr. Williams had arrived. When we had remained a little while in Dr. Bowles' room, these gentlemen came in, and I am not sure but wo went into another room. Q. Who was there ? TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 145 A. Judge Bullitt, Mr. Piper, Mr. Wil- liams, and Mr. Barrett, I remember. Q. What was said there? A. The conversation was again of a pro- miscuous character. After sitting a while, some one suggested that perhaps we had better hear why Mr. Barrett had called the meeting. He said that he had called for a military meeting, to be composed, as he had expected, of the military men of this organization, and that he had used his best eftbrts to get men of that character to the meeting, but that he believed" he had failed. He did not name whom he ex- pected. He then stated that his object in calling the meeting was, that he thoughttheGovern- ment could be restored, and he was satis- fied it could be if we could get the co-ope- ration of the North with the South, or a portion of the North, Ohio, Indiana, Illi- nois, Missouri and Kentucky; he said if the members of the Sons of Liberty in the States would co-operate with the South, he had no doubt the entire Government would be saved through their action. He also said that it had been contemplated to have an uprising at some time soon, per- haps as early as the third of August, but that had fiiiled from some cause; and he thought every thing could be got ready for an uprising, perhaps, by the 10th or 15th of the month, and that the South, in order to show her willingness to engage in some movement that would restore the Govern- D^ient, had authorized him to place at the disposal of members of the organization, a large sum of money, amounting to two millions of dollars. Q. Did he say where the money came from ? A. He said that it had been captured from a United States Paymaster on Red river, and that the organization could have the use of that amount of money in pre- paring themselves to rise against the Lin- coln administration; that it would be dis- tributed to the several Grand Commanders of those States, and by them subdivided among such persons inside of the order as in their judgment was prudent, and to be expended by those who received it for arms and other appliances of war. And he fur- ther stated, that in calling this meeting it was done at hip own suggestion; that this money was to be used for the benefit of the order, and that as he did not wish any of the delegates there to be at any expense, if we would make out our bills of expenses in coming and while there, he would pay us; and he did; at least I got mine, forty dollars. Q. Where did he get this money from ? A. I do not know; but I think he said it was captured from a paymaster on Red river. Q. And did he pay all their expenses? 10 A. I understood they would all receive their expenses if they desired it. Q. What else was said at that meet- ing? A. That was about the amount of what was said ; I do not recollect that any one discussed the matter, or offered any partic- ular opinion at that time. Q. Was any thing said about the destruc- tion of Government property ? A. Yes, sir; but not at that meeting; I think it was on the afternoon of that day or the next, I am not sure which, he stated, in speaking of the money, that it had been used for the purpose of paying for the de- struction of United States property, ar- senals, burning boats, etc. Q. Did he say how this was to be paid? A. He said they would pay ten per cent, on property so destroyed, and were willing to make an estimate upon the value as- sessed by Govei'nment officers, that would generally be announced through the North- ern newspapers; that they would take the Government estimate as a basis for calcula- tion. Q. Did he give any instance where Gov- ernment property had been destroyed? A. Yes, sir; the burning of some Gov- ernment stores in Louisville, on Eighth street, I believe; also the desii'uction of some Government boats on the Ohio river, and one, I believe, at St. Louis. Q. And those persons were to receive ten per cent., you say? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he say what means were used to destroy this property ? A. I afterward learned from Dr. Bowles that the means employed was Greek fire. Q. What else took place at that meeting in Chicago? A. There was an explanation made, I afterward learned from Dr. Bowles more particularly, in regard to a flag ; that the members of the organization should be careful to have instructions sent to their friends that in case of an invasion by the guerrillas, the members should make use of a flag, made of white cloth, with a red ribbon running along the top and carried down the sides and hanging below, like strea.mers; this was to be tied to a stick. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Tuesday, November 15, 1864, at '.' o'clock, A. M. Court Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, > Kovemberl5, 18C4, 9 o'clock, A. M. J The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment- All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused, (except W. A. Bowles,) and their counsel. The proceedings were read and approved. The examination of James B. Wilson, a 146 TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. witness for the Government, was then re- sumed as follows : Question by the Judge Advocate : Did you meet any persons who purported to represent the Southern Confederacy at the Chicago meeting, or convention, to which you have referred? Answer. Yes, sir. A man calling himself by the name of Majors; and Mr. Barrret, also, stated that he was authorized to repre- sent the Southern Confederacy. Q. You say that Mr. Barrett represented himself as a representative of the Southern Confederacy at that meeting? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did any of those gentlemen profess to represent any special States, or only the Southern Confederacy generally? A. The Southern Confederacy generally. Q. Did you learn who were the parties that were expected there, but did not come? A. I do not think I did. I think that Mr. Amos Green, of Illinois, was mentioned as being expected, and it was also expected that Mr. Vallandigham would be there, but they had learned prior to the meeting that he would not be there, and had sent a messenger to him. Q. Who was that messenger? A. I think it was Mr. Green, or Mr. Hol- loway, or perhaps both. Q. Did you learn whether they saw Mr. Vallandigham ? A. I do not think I did. Q. Did you hear Mr. Dodd, or Mr. Hol- loway, or any other person say in reference to this meeting, that they had had any con- versation with Mr. Vallandigham ? A. No, sir. Q. Where did Mr. Dodd come from? where did he represent himself to have been? A. At the Clifton House, near Niagara Falls. Q. For what purpose? A. To meet with the commissioners, or delegates, that were duly authorized by the Southern Confederacy to meet at that meeting. Q. Who were they? A. Holcomb, Clay, Saunders, and another, whom I supposed was this Majoi's, Captain Majors, as he was called. The way I re- member this is, that something was said about a safe conveyance being asked for by Mr. Holcomb in his address to Mr. Greeley for himself, Mr. Clay, Mr. Saunders, and another ; this other man, I understood, was Captain Majors. Q. Is this Captain Majors the one you spoke of as being at Chicago? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you learn of any part that was to be taken by the different leading men in this contemplated uprising? If so, what? Who, for instance, was to lead in this State, who in Ohio, and who in Illinois ? A. I do not think I heard that matter definitely spoken of, except with regard to our State, Indiana ; I understood Dodd was to be the leader in Indiana. Q. Did you hear who was to take care of Ohio? A. I understood from some source that Ohio was to be taken care of by Vallandig ham. Q. In what event? A. In the event of a general uprising. He had some forces athis disposal in Canada, and would bring those forces into Ohio to co-operate with other forces at Cincinnati and Louisville. Q. From whom did you learn this ? A. I can not be positive; my impression is that I learned it from Dr. Bowles. Q. At this meeting in Chicago you say, do you not, that the expenses of the delegates were paid by Barrett out of the two million dollars that he had received from the South- ern Confederacy ? A. I understood it was so. Q. He paid your expenses, do you say? A. Yes, sir. I receipted him for mine and Mr. Green's, which I forgot to mention yesterday. Q. Was that money to be returned or re- paid in any way? A. No, sir ; not that I understood. Q. On what day did you start back from Chicago? A. I can not be positive as to the day ; but I think we were there two days. Q. Have you named to the Court all the persons that were at that meeting when Barrett made that proposition ? A. I can not say, but I wiU state now those that I can remember: Mr. Barrett, Dr. Bowles, Mr. Williams and Judge Bullitt, both from Kentucky; and Mr. Piper was there. Q. Where was he from? A. I can not say. Q. Did he profess to hold any position in the order? A. I understood from Dr. Bowles that he was a kind of general missionary. Q. What does that mean? A. A man that was going about diffusing a knowledge of the order. Q. And carrying light into dark places ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Who else was there? , A. Mr. Majors, Mr. Swem. Q. Who is Mr. Swem ? A. A citizen of Chicago. Mr. Walsh, also a citizen of Chicago, was present, and Mr. HoUoway, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Green and my- self Q. You say that Mr. Barrett announced this as a meeting of the military heads of the order; will you state how you happened to be present? A. I knew nothing of the character of the meeting, but Dr. Bowles afterward told me TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 147 that he had reported me as one of his staff officers, and also Mr. Green. Q. In what capacity ? A. He did not state. Q. Then he reported you simply on his staff, and you gained access in that way ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was Dodd considered the military head of the order ? A. He was to be so considered in this State, I understood. C. What position did Bullitt and Barrett hold, militarily? A. I did not learn. Q. You did not learn the position of any of these men then, except that they were military chiefs ? A. I did not. Q. You started back, did you, about July 23d, 1864 ? A. I think I did. Q. Was any thing resolved upon at that meeting ? A. Not that I know of; the discussion was not of a definite character in my presence. Q. Did they hold any meetings when you were not present ? A. I suspect they did. Q. What made you suspect that ? A. Because I saw other men that I did not know, and to whom I was not intro- duced, in another room, having close con- versation. Q. Did you learn if Vallandigham was expected ? A. Judge Bullitt said so. Q. Did you understand that any one had come from Canada ? A. I understood that Mr. Green and Mr. Holloway had been to see Vallandigham, and that Mr. Dodd had been to Canada to see the Commissioners. Q. Who came back with you? A. Mr. Green, my lady and Dr. Bowles were on the same train. Q. Did you have any conversation with Dr. Bowles after you returned? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you learn of any thing that was to be done, or contemplated to be done ? A. I understood that Mr. Dodd had abandoned the project, and that he had sent his son to say that he would drop it. Q. At what time did you learn that ? A. My best recollection is, that it was about two weeks after my return, near the 7th of August. Q. Did you learn why the project had been abandoned? A. Not definitely. Q. Do you know whether any communi- cation was attempted to be had, or was had, with any rebel forces, commissioners, or messengers ? A. No, sir, I do not; T heard it spoken of Q. By whom? A. It was spoken of at the Chicago meet- ing; I think Dr. Bowles said messengers were sent to the rebels. Q. Where were they sent ? A. I do not know, sir ; I think they were sent into Kentucky and Missouri. Q. Do you know with whom communicar tion was attempted to be made ? A. I inferred it was to be with Price and Buckner, because they were to be the co-operating forces in case of an upris- ing. Q. Will you give to this Court, to the best of your knowledge, how this uprising was to take place, where the rendezvous was lO be, and under what circumstances? A. It was to take place by the order of Mr. Dodd; he was to send out couriers to the different commanders of the several districts of the State, the major generals of the four districts into which the State was divided ; and they were to send out cour- iers into the respective counties composing their several districts, who were to give notice of the uprising in their counties, and then it was expected that that information would be conveyed to certain persons in each county that had been prominent and leading men of the organization, who were to see that it was conveyed to the different townships in the county. The general sig- nal for the uprising was to be the appear- ance of guerrillas or troops in the vicinity of St. Louis and Louisville. It might have been on the 16th August, or a few days later; or, if these couriers got through in time, and the Southern forces were to get the information, they might appear sooner than the 16th. Q. To whom were the couriers to go ? A. To Generals Buckner and Price. Q. Were these couriers to return, and then the uprising to take place ? A. There was nothing said about their returning; the appearance of the troops was to be the signal. Q. Where were the troops to rendezvous? A. The forces of Southern Indiana were to be rendezvoused at a place some eight or ten miles from New Albany. Q. Under whom ? A. It was expected they would be under Dr. Bowles. Q. Where were the forces in this part of the State to rendezvous ? A. I did not learn that. Q. And the forces in Illinois ? A. At several points; in the neighborhood of Rock Island, Springfield, Chicago, and some other points, perhaps. Q. Did you learn who was to be the leader in that State? A. No, sir. Q. Did you learn where the rendezvous was to take place in Missouri? A. I understood that after they had com- pleted the seizure of the arsenals in Illi- nois, they were to march to St Louis, to co- 148 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. operate with Price's forces in the taking of that place. Q. Did you learn what they were to do after the rendeivonsiag at the difierent points in this State? A There was nothing said about it in Chicago, but I learned that what was to be done in Indiana, was to be under the su- pervision of Mr. Dodd. Q. What was that? A. I did not understand what persons were to lead them in particular, but they were to be concentrated at Indianapolis, and perhaps at Terre Haute, New Albany, and Jelfersonville; perhaps Evansville was named, I am not positive. The capture of the State Capitol at Indianapolis was left, as 1 understood, to the special supervision of Mr. Dodd, and he was to do it by getting up public meetings. There was to be an ordinary political meeting called at Indian- apolis, as well as I could understand, east of the city, at some place of resort for Sab- bath school picnics, where water was con- venient; as I understood, at some fashion- able place for public meetings. I do not know whetJ\t;r there is such a place or not. It seemed, as well as I could learn, that tliere were three places in an easterly di- rection, perhaps from Camp Morton; I may have misunderstood it, but I give my best recollections of it. The three points were east of Camp Morton. One meeting would, perhaps, be a Sabbath school meeting ; an- other a political meeting; and tlie third, perhaps, a political meeting — or something of that kind; those of the order who as- sisted at the meeting, and those wlio were members of the organization, would come to these meetings in wagons, bringing their families; as a general thing, they would have arms, secreted in the wagons under straw or hay. After arriving at the difier- ent points, some one would propose, to be in the fashion, that they drill, and they were to come out and drill. Q. Were they to drill with or without arms? A. Without arms. The object of the drill was, that each individual who was to take part in the ali'airs of tlie day, would under- stand where his place was, what was his duty, and what was expected of him. At the time of day when the soldiers came on dress parade, at some place east of the camp ground, some one at the camp would throw up a signal, which would be seen from these meeting places; when the signal was seen, those who uriderstood what they had met there for, would at once seize their arms and march imincdiately in the direc- tion of Camp Moitfjn. At the time they were thus marching, the fences and build- ings of Camp Morton were to be tired. It was understooil that the released rebel pris- oners would particijiate in the aftair, and that these rebel soldiers could come up in the rear, and that the Federal soldiers, find- ing themselves surrounded, would be easily overcome. The rebel prisoners would be armed with the soldiers' arms, and the sol- diers would be held as prisoners of war. At the time this was going on — the work of freeing prisoners and the capturing these soldiers — a detail of persons was to be sent to take care of the Governor, and secure him; in some way take care of him; and then the arsenals at this place were to be seized, and a better quality of arms pro- cured; those that went on with this expedi- tion were to be as fully ai-med from the arse- nal as was necessary. They were also to take such munitions of war as they thought proper with them. They were then to seize the railroad to Jeffersonville, and make use of the cars for the transportation of troops and the rebel prisoners; they were then to go on and complete the same work at Jef- fersonville and New Albany, and also to co- operate in the capture of Louisville. Q. That was the general scheme, was it? A. Yes, sir; a great deal of the minutia I may have forgotten; that is my general imjiression. Q. How extensively was this plan made known to the members of the order ? A. It was made known to all the mem- bers of the order in my county. Q. Can you state how extensively in any other county? A. No, sir. Q. What county do you reside in ? A. In Washington county? Q. Does Mr. Kerr live in your county? A. No, sii". Q. What prominent men was that scheme made known to in your county? A. To all the members of the organiza- tion. Q. How many does the order number in your county ? A. I can not say ; I think above a thou- sand men. Q. Was Mr. Hefifren present at the No- vember meeting of the Grand Council in Indianapolis, that you referred to yester- day ? A. No, sir. Q. Was Mr. Milligan ? A. I did not know him at that time. Q. Was Dr. Bowles present ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know Dr. Athon and Mr Eis- tine, of this city? A. Yes, sir ; I know Dr. Athon. Q. Was either present at that meeting ? A. I do not think they were, sir. Q. Were you ever furnished any money for the purchase of arms for this oi'der? If so, by whom, and what amount ? A. I was furnished with a thousana dol- lars by Dr. Bowles, for the purcnuse of arms for those of the order who were un TREASO^^ TRIALS AT IXDIANAPOLIS. 149 derstood to be unable to procure arms themselves. Q. Were they to be distributed to any particular class, or only to members of the order? A. It was understood that they were to be distributed to those who were unable to arm themselves. Q. Did you make any attempt to pur- chase any arms with that thousand dol- lars ? A. I went to see Mr. Kent, at New Al- bany, about the purchase of the arms. Q. What did you do with this money? A. I gave it out to men to furnish sub- stitutes with. Q. You loaned it, did you not? A. No, sir; I took no note of it: it was only an accommodation loan to personal friends, to men whom I could trust, and from whom I could get it any time I needed. Q. Then this money was diverted from the channel for which it was originally in- tended, was it not ? A. Yes, sir. CROSS-EXAMINATION. Dr. Bowles told me that he obtained my admission to the meeting at Chicago, by representing me as a member of his staff; that is not true, however; I hold no posi- tion in the order. I did not see Milligan, Humphreys or Horsey at the Chicago meet- ing; nor did I get any information of the contemplated uprising from either of the accused, save Dr. Bowles. I never spoke to Mr. Horsey in my life ; Mr. Humphreys I have seen but once, having passed the com- pliments of the day with him at the Chi- cago Convention; with Mr. Milligan I became acquainted at the State Con- vention here in July. From what I saw during the Chicago meeting, I was led to think that there was a meeting inside of the one I was permitted to witness. There were many schemes proposed for carrying out the uprising, the release of prisoners, etc., but the one I have given in my direct testimony was that which was deemed most plausible, and most likely to be adopted; but I do not know that it was resolved upon. The thousand dollars I received from Dr. Bowles for the purchase of arms, he gave me to understand, was from his private funds: and what he said impressed me with that idea. I have been under arrest; but no induce- ment or promise of favor has been held out to me by the authorities to induce me to testify against the defendants in this case; neither has promise of immunity from punishment been held out to me, as an inducement to testify; nor has any one visited me while in confinement to ascer- tain what I could testifv to. Not until 12 o'clock yesterday, did I know that T should be required as a witness ; the guard then informed me that I was required in the court room. Q. Did you tell any one after you were arrested, and before you were called upon, what your testimony would be? Question objected to by the Judge Ad- vocate, and withdrawn. RE-EXAMINATION. It was distinctly stated to me before tes- tifying, that the Government authorities would make me no pledges, nor did any Government official make any threats to me. The only position I held in the order was that of Ancient Brother in our County Temple. Dr. Bowles told me that he would appoint me to the positioa of Adjutant General on his staff, if 1 desired it; but I told him T did not wish it, as I had no knowledge of military mat- ters. I and Mr. Heffren had some talk about it. The organization, which I after- ward understood to be the Sons of Liberty, was in session in Chicago at the time of the Democratic Convention, when General McClellan was nominated. The meeting was at the Richmond House; Mr. Dodd was there. I was there, but not as a dele- gate ; there were no persons there to repre- sent the South, or from Canada, to my knowledge. Mr. Moss, from Missouri, was there, and distinguished himself in the meeting; Mr. Green, from Illinois, was there; and a Mr. Jackson, I believe — a large man — from Ohio; and also Mr. Val- landigham, who acted as Chairman of the meeting of the Sons of Liberty. I was present at only a portion of each meeting. When I first went, Mr. Moss was speaking. An introductory speech was made by Mr. Vallandigham, as Chairman. He spoke in reference to the divided condition of the Democratic party; he said that until very recently he had thought that the Chicago Convention would result very much as the Charleston Convention did; that is, that it would break up; but since he had come to Chicago, and had seen persons from all parts of the country, he had changed his opinion on that subject; he had found a wonderful unanimity of fooling, and oneness of idea, and he believed the party could be made more united and more efficient than it had been for years; and he did not doubt we would be able, through his and others' in- strumentality, to secure a proper platform for the party to stand upon. Vallandig- ham acted as Chairman until the close of the meeting, and adjourned it to the next day, when he presided again. The meeting was held at the Richmond House; I think the rooms were Nos. 94, 96, 98, and 100, in the fifth story; there were folding-doors by which the rooms communicated; and prob- ably from one hundred and fifty to two 150 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. hundred were present. Dodd was there, and I think Mr. Barrett. I did not see Judge Bul- litt, or Mr. Piper, or Captain Majors. I saw Mr. Swem in Chicago, but not at the meeting. ]\Ir. Vallandigham presided at the meeting by a vote. I did not know but that the meetings were open, for no one was present at the doors, and no password was required tliat I know of, nor did I know that all pres- ent were members. Mr. Moss, in his re- marks, gave a history of the condition of Missouri; how the citizens there were ex- posed to both rebel and Union troops; that some really good Union men, and others really rebels, were sutiering great indignities at the hands of the troops. First the rebels would come along and rob them of their pork and crops; then the Union troops came and took the negroes; that if this organization was worth any thing, if it was intended to be efficient in the restoration of the Government under the Constitution, now was the time to strike; that these indignities were unbearable, and if they had true American blood in them they would not bear it any longer, but strike at once. No practical remedy was proposed to meet the emergency. The first meeting was held on Sunday evening, the second on Monday. On the Monday evening going to the Richmond House, somewhat before the meeting, I met John Singleton and Mr. Barrett, of Missouri. They were endeavor- ing, so I understood, to arrange for the burst- ing up of the Convention, in case it dis- owned the order. In that event they would make a public demonstration of the order, and proposed to nominate some candidates other than that nominated by the Conven- tion. John Singleton had a great many mottoes for transparencies made, some of which he read. They were patriotic, and not connected with any secret conspiracy; .some of them vv,ere mottoes from the speeches and writings of Douglas, Jackson, Jefferson and Washington; but they were phrases which seemed to suit the circum- stances of the times. At this second meet- ing Vallandigham pi'esidcd, and made some remarks similar to those he made at the first meeting. He drew out of his pocket a platform, substantially the same as that adopted at the Chicago Convention, which, he said, he had presented to most of the dele- gates, and to members from each of the States, and that it had met with universal approval. H he could get that platfoim as the platform of the party, he should be wil- ling to take McClellan as the Presidential candidate. He said he would be willing to take any man as a candidate if the platform was only right. He aimnuuced his convic- tion that, by the adojjtiun of this platform, the organization woulil merge its action with that of the Democratic party. Single- ton's proposition was not adopted, in conse- quence of the Democratic party being united. This meeting of the organization in Chicago, at which Barrett made his prop- osition for an uprising, was on the 20th of July; the second meeting was on the 29th of August. Barrett, who was present at the meeting, at which Vallandigham presided, made no objection to the course of the pro- ceedings on that occasion. Mr. Dodd was present at the July meeting. The speeches made at the meeting at which Vallandig- ham presided, I thought, were addressed to those who were members of the order, ijklr. Green, of Hlinois, made a speech at the meeting. I have no recollection that the strength of the order was mentioned by any present who seemed to know; but one pei-- son said it had about five hundred thousand members. The organization was referred to by Mr. Moss, and others, as a distinctive organization then existing. Mr. Vallandig- ham presided when these statements were made. RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION. I did not understand that this meeting was a mere caucus of the friends of Mr. Vallandigham, to consider matters that would probably come up at the Convention. The gentlemen who were present at Chicago. representing the Sons of Liberty, were unanimously opposed to the nomination of General McClellan. The Mr. Barrett, of whom I have spoken, is from Missouri. He stated to me that early in this war, Mr. Douglas had suggested to him the propriety of getting up a regiment, and going on the Plains to hold in check marauding bands which might congregate there, in the terri- tory; that he had got up a regiment, and went down to the neighborhood of Pilot Knob, Missouri. Mr. Douglas had promised to get some order for him, but failing to do this ho had resigned. Since then he had been engaged in sending persons across the lines to the Southern Confederacy. I think before the war, he was a resident of Hlinois, and since raising the regiment he has made claim to Missouri as his State. W. S. Bush, a witness for the Government, was then introduced, and duly sworn by the Judge Advocate. The Judge Advocate proposed to intro- duce a speech, as reported by the witness, and printed in the Cincinnati Gazette^ of August 10, 18G4, which was made by tho accused, L. P. Milligan. Some parts of the reportwcre verbatim, and others a condensed report ; and he proposed to examine the wit/- ness in reference to its correctness. The accused objected to its introduction as incompetent, and claimed that a witness must first state his recollection of a speech, or conversation, and might refresh hi.s memoi-y by any memorandum made at the time; but that report could not be used as evidence. It was not competent to intro- TREASON TRIALS AT mDIANAPOLIS. 151 duce a report which was only partially ver- batim, in which the omissions might give a different construction to what was said, and to ask the witness to define what was verbatim, and what was not. The Judge Advocate replied : It seems to me that it is a well established rule that a printed report of a speech, pub- lished in a public journal at the time it was made, the reporter being pres-ent to state whether the report of the speech is or is not correct, can always be introduced in evidence. I recollect a somewhat similar question occurred in the trial of Captain Hurtt, at Cincinnati, which was strongly argued by his able counsel, T. D. Lincoln and Colonel Jackson. I had introduced, on the part of the Government, private letters which had been written by him, containing disloyal sentiments, or senti- ments tending to injure the Government; p,nd, to rebut the force of those letters, his counsel proposed to introduce articles writ- ten by him and printed in the Ohio State Journal^ of which he was one of the editors, showing that he had labored, by his speeches and in the leading articles of his paper, to advocate the general cause of the Govern- ment. We were unable to keep that evi- dence out, although we contested it with as much force as we were able. During this trial we have introduced an address of H. H. Dodd, in printed form, which was de- livered as a speech to the order at one of their meetings in February, and no objec- tion was made by the accused or their coun- sel. The counsel for the accused replied: The address of Mr. Dodd was published as a correct official report of" his speech, while the correctness of the report of Mr. Milligan's speech is not yet proven. The Judge Advocate continued : The gentlemen now make the issue on the correctness of the report, and not on the right to introduce the report of that speech. 1 allow the whole force of his ar- gument to the effect that it is not compe- tent to introduce it as a correct report. Now, then, I propose to show that the speech, as reported in that paper, is a correct re- port, and to prove its correctness by the man who reported it. It may, perhaps, be said that it would be better to introduce the original itself It is a rule that the highest grade of testi- mony shall be introduced which it is pos- sible to obtain, or which the case in its nature is susceptible of; but when the original notes can not be produced, is it not better to go to the printed report of the speech than to trust to the uncertain mem- ory of any witness? The President of the Commission said the document referred to as the address of the Grand Comirander to the Grand Coun- cil, came to us in the shape of an ofiBcial document, in the minutes of the order. This report purports to be a speech made by one of the accused, and published vo the newspapers of the country, and oniy when its identity is proven Ls it compe- tent in evidence. The Judge Advocate replied: One is a speech made in an official capa- city, and the other is simply an ordinary speech to the masses. We can introduce the admissions and speeches of a man, made upon any and all occasions as against him- self, if necessary. I propose to introduce it, if for no other purpose than to show that while the accused was a member of this order, knowing its intents and purposes, and while this order was being agitated with plans for the release of rebel prisoners, marching upon Indianapolis, Louisville, New Albanj'and other places, and attempting to overturn the Government, the accused was abroad through the land addressing bodies of men, and making incendiary speeches certain to have the effect of arousing their passions, and inciting to insurrec tion. The counsel for the accused said": The address comes in the character of an official document, while the other ia that of a reported speech. The charac- ter of these two seems very different. The Judge Advocate replied : I introduce the first document not as an official document, in and of itself. We first had the testimony of Mr. Harrison as to whether it was a correct copy of Mr. Dodd's speech, and whether Mr. Dodd de- livered it at that time. It was only because it was a correct copy that we were entitled to introduce it. I desire to introduce that paper itself, and to submit to the Commission the report of the speech, as a correct report of the speech, and the very words used by the ac- cused. The court room was then cleared for de- liberating. On the opening of the Court, the Judge Advocate announced to the accused that the Court had decided that the objection was premature at the present stage of the examination of the witness, and the objec- tion was overruled. The witness, in reply to the questions of the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : You may state whether you were present at a convention at Fort Wayne, Indiana, on the 13th of August, and if so, whether or not you reported any speeches made at that time ? Answer. I was present at that meeting and made a full report of Mr. Milligan's speech, and partial reports of the speeches of A. M. Jackson, of Ohio, and C. W. Eeeves, of Plymouth, Marshall county. Q. What was your occupation at that time? 152 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. A. I was reporting for the Cincinnati Ga- zette the speeches made at i^olitical meet- ings of both parties in Indiana. Q. Did you at that time make a report of Mr. Milligan's speech? A. I did ; Mr. Milligan's speech was made on Saturday. I wrote my report on Sun- day in part or in whole, and returned to Cincinnati Monday morning. Q. Did you take short hand notes of that speech at the time it was delivered? A. I did, sir. Q. How large an audience was present ? A. I estimated it at five thousand persons. Q. Have you looked at your notes or at the report in the paper, to refresh your memory ? A. My notes were destroyed at the time the report was made. I have seen the re- port since, but have not carefully examined it to refresh my memory. Q. Do you now recollect the main points of that speech ? A. I do, sir. Q. State to the Court what was said by Mr. Milligan on the state of the country, whether it was prosperous or otherwise ? A. He referred to the countiy as desola- ted by this war, and the oppressions of the Administration. That was the general tenor of his remarks on that point. Q. What did he state in reference to the freedom of the press and of speech ? A. He spoke of the freedom of speech allowed as simply that granted by a Lin- coln mob — as a freedom in name rather than in fact. Q,. What did he say in reference to the draft or conscription? A. Prior to Mr. Milligan's speech, a series of resolutions was adopted as the platform of the Democracy of that Congressional dis- trict and of adjoining districts. The audi- ence were expecting to hear from him in reference to the draft. He stated, if the war was right, the draft was right, and if they considered the war right, and were good citizens, they would not grumble about the draft. Q. What else did he say about the right- fulness of the war? A. He denied that the war was right, and proceeded to argue, that under the Constitution the President had no power to coerce a State, and asked if those entered the army would look in the future for their laurels to such battles as Bull liun, Chicamauga, and Red river. He also ap- pealed to them to consider the condition of their wives and children at home, des- titute and dependent on the charity of tlieir neighbors, if they entered the army, and asked whether they considered it a duty to make such a sacrifice. Q. State to the Court what he said about the powers that be; whether they were ex- isting by rightful authority or otherwise? A. I do not recollect his exact words, but the tenor of his remark.? were that the Administration had usur^sed power. Q. What did he say about the President of the United States ? A. He spoke of him as a tyrant, and an usurper, I think. Q. What did he say in reference to the arrests of disloyal persons bj' the Govern- ment? A. I do not remember distinctly the words he used. Q. Did he denounce arbitrary arrests? A. I think he did. Q. What did he say about this war being inaugurated for the restoration of the Union, and its power to act in that di- rection ? A. He held that the war itself was dis- union, and that the Union could not be re- stored by war. Q. How did he treat this Government, as a unit or otherwise ? A. He spoke of the Government as a confederation of the several States, rather than a unity. Q. What effect did he state the war had produced? A. That it had made the Government a despotism.' Q. How did you understand him to speak of the Government at that time, as a Gov- ernment of all the States, or only of the States which were left in the Union? A. I understood him to refer to what were left. Q. What did he say as to whether the Government was still divided or existing as a unit? A. He treated the war itself as a dissolu- tion of the Government. Q. Did he make that statement? A. I think he did. Q. Give to the Court his words as near as you can recollect. A. I have not referred to the report lately for the purpose of refreshing my memory, and can not fitate positively what he said. Q. What did he state as to the right of the Government of the United States to make war upon rebels, or those in rebellion against the General Government? A. He denied the right. Q. Did he state any thing to the audience in reference to the number of men who had been destroyed in this war, and the amount of treasure exjiended ? A. I think ho stated that two millions of men had lost their lives during the war. I do not remember exactly what he said in ref- erence to the amount of treasure expended, but I believe lie referred to it. Q. What did he state about the prospects of the war after that expenditure, as regards the two contending forces? A. He spoke of the Confederate Govern- ment as successful, as holding its own ; and TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 153 that the future prosecution of the war would only tend to greater losses to the United States Government. Q. I will ask you now this general ques- tion, whether his speech at that time was loyal, and in favor of the Government, or whether it was disloyal, and against it? Question objected to by the counsel for the accused. The Judge Advocate stated that he could produce ample authority in favor of the com- petency of the question. The Commission then adjourned to Wed- nesday, November 16, at 10 o'clock, A. M. Court Koom, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ November 16, 1804, 10 o'clock, A. M. / The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- ment. All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused, (except W. A. Bowles,) and their counsel. The proceedings were read and approved. The Judge Advocate then submitted the following in favor of the competency of the question objected to yesterday, by the ac- cused : When the last witness was upon the stand, the accused objected that it was not competent evidence for the witness to state whether the general tenor of Mr. Milligan's speech was loyal, or disloyal. My duties have given me but little time to search for authoriiics on the point at issue, and 1 have not been able to find a large number of decisions applicable to the issue made by the accused. 1 remember very distinctly, in the commencement of this trial, investigating the general prin- ciple of conspiracy, and found the proposi- tion broadly stated, in so many words, that you could ask a witness who heard a speech made by a conspirator to an audience, of which the witness was part, whether the general purport and tenor of the speech was against the Government or for it. I read first a })aragraph not so applicable as others to the question at issue, but for the purpose of bringing to the mind of the Court the class of evidence that may be in- troduced in trials of this character, I read from Roscoe's Oriminal Evidence, page 87: "Not only are the acte, and the written letters and papers, of one of several persons engaged in the same conspiracy, evidence against the others, if done or written in fur- therance of the common purpose, but his verbal declarations are equally admissible under similar restrictions. Any declarations made by one of the party in pursuance of the common object of the conspiracy, are evidence against the re*t of the party, who are as much responsible for all that has been said or done by their associates in carrying into effect the concerted plan, as if it had been pronounced by their own voice, or exe- cuted by their own hand. These declara- tions are of the nature of acts; they are in reality acts done by the party, and gen- erally they are far more mischievous than acts which consist only in corporal agency. All consultations, therefore, carried on by one conspirator, relative to the general design, and all conversations in his presence, are evidence against another conspirator, though absent. 1 Phill. Ev., 95, 1th ed. The etfect of such evidence must depend on a variety of circumstances, such as whether the party was attending to the conversation, and whether he approved or disapproved; still such conversations are admissible in evi- dence. See El/re C. J., Hardy s case, 24 Hoiv. St. Tr., 704. In Lord George Gordon's case, the cry of the mob, being part of the trans- action, was held to be admissible against the prisoner. 21 How. St. Tr., 535. And upon the same principle, the expressions of the mob in the Sacheverell riots, that they de- signed to pull down the meeting-houses, were admitted in evidence. Damorees case, 15 How. St. Tr., 552." I read this to bring before the minds of the Court the general principle of con- spiracy. On page 88, Roscoe's Criminal Evi- dence, I find the following : "As in trials for conspiracies, whatever the prisoner may have done or said at any meeting alleged to be held in pursuance of the conspiracy, is admissible in evidence on the part of the prosecution against him ; so, on the other hand, any other part of his conduct at the same meetings, will be allowed to be proved on his behalf For the intention and design of a party at a particular time are best explained by a complete view of every part of his conduct at that time, and not merely from the proof of a single and insulated act or declai'ation. Fhill. Ev., 499, 8/A ed. On the trial for an indictment to overthrow the Government, evidence was given to show that the con- spiracy was brought into overt act at meet- ings, in the presence of the prisoner Walker. His counsel was allowed to ask, whether at those times, he had heard Walker utter any word inconsistent with the duty of a good subject. He was also allowed to inquire into the general declarations of the prisoner at the meetings, and* whether the witness had heard him say any thing that had a tendency to disturb the peace. Ibid., 23 How. St. Tr., 1131; 31 /(/., 43." I do not propose to go into any lengthy discussion of this subject, as I have drawn from the witness the main points of the speech. I am certain, however, that the law goes further than I have even claimed. That 1 have the right to ask whether Mr. Milli- gan, in talking to that crowd, spoke for or against the Government, is conceded by the authorities; and each loyal man of the land is perfectly cognizant of what is loyalty, and what is disloyalty. This is not a question 154 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. of opinion, but one of fact. It is an old re- mark that every man is for his Government or against it. The dividing hne is clear to the mind of every man veho heard that speech. Now, I propose to ask the witness who reported that speech, whether it was for the Government, or against it. There on the 13th of August, when the uprising was to take place on the 16th, he was making an incendiary speech, at the very time when Dr. Wilson testifies that nearly every man in his county belonging to the order knew that the insurrection was to take place on the 16th of August. The accused replied: I have not had an opportunity to search the law upon this point, but it seems to me it does not support the point made by the Judge Advocate. He states that this speech was made a few days previous to the time when this uprising was to take place. The exposition of the order was made on the 29th of July, and the testimony given shows that the whole project was aban- doned, and that messengers had been dis- patched to the people making that an- nouncement. Instead of that speech being made to goad on the minds of the people, it was made at the time when this uprising had been set at naught, abandoned, and the whole thing exposed in the public print. If Mr. Milligan had knowledge of this uprising, it is fair to presume that he had knowledge of its abandonment. It is said that this speech was made for the pur- pose of inflaming the minds of the popu- lace; but that is a matter for the considera- tion of the Court in summing up the case. It is competent for the prosecution to ask the witness the general question, "Was that speech loyal, and in favor of the Govern- ment, or disloyal, and against the Govern- ment ?" You will notice that Walker had ex- pressed no sentiments ; and when the Gov- ernment undertook to prove his sentiments, he had the right to object, that the Govern- ment could prove intents only by affirma- tive acts, and not by mere opinions. We may, on the contrary, introduce evidence to show that his sentiments were not disloyal, and propose to prove that he made no re- mark tending to such a conclusion as that. If they will ask the witness what was the substance oi' liis remarks, in regard to obe- dience to the Constitution and the draft, or against enforcing the dralt, I make no ob- jection; but they can not ask the witness whether the whole sj)eech was in favor of the Government, and loyal, or against the Government, and disloyal. Look at the fallacy of such a position. There is not a speech made, but what you can find an in- dividual who will come up and swear that it is disloyal; and, on the other hand, you could find some Democrat who would swear that the tendency of the speech was loyal and in favor of the Constitution. I take for granted the witness would say the speech was disloyal ; and, I dare say, a Dem- ocrat would say it was calculated to main- tain the Constitution. You, gentlemen of the Commission, are to decide what this tendency is. The prisoner is charged with disloyal practices, and the opinion of the witness as to the effect of his speech, whether disloyal or not, is not competent evidence. Most of the members of this Commission are lawyers; and they know that it is a question at one time mooted, how the damages were to be ascertained in' a case of actual slander. The facts must be given to the jury, and they must fix the amount. So the facts in regard to this speech, the declarations must be given to the Court, and they must decide whether it is loyal or not. It is a matter of political controversy, whether the Administration is or is not the Government. Some would in- sist that every thing said against the Ad- ministration, is disloyalty to the Govern- ment. Other witnesses would say that the Administration is only one-third part of the Government. We would, therefore, have to inquire of the witness what his political views were, to understand what he meant by loyalty. Mr. Greenleaf, in treating upon the sub- ject of evidence in courts-martial, lays down the same general considerations by which courts of law are governed. He says, in paragraph 476: "It has already been intimated that courts-martial are bound, in general, to ob- serve the rules of the law of evidence by which the courts of criminal jurisdiction are governed. The onlj' exceptions which are permitted, are those which are of neces- sity created by the nature of the service, and by the constitution of the court and its course of proceeding." Again, paragraph 478, he says: " The opinions of witnesses are, perhaps, more frequently called for in military trials than in any others; but the rule which governs their admissibility, is the same here as elsewhere, and has already been stated in a preceding volume. But it is proper here to add, that where the manner of the act, or of the language with which the pris- oner is charged, is essential to the oftense, as whether the act was menacing or insult- ing, or cowardly, or unskillful, or not; or whether the language was abusive or sar- castic, or playful, the opinion which the witness formed at the time, or the imjires- sion it then made upon his mind, being cotemporaneous with the fact, and parta- king of the res ffcsicc, is not only admissible, but is a fact in the case which he is bound to testify." Just so here. The facts are before the Court. Is it fair to receive the opinion of the witness upon the general tenor of the TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 155 speech as to its loyalty or disloyalty? You, gentlemen of the Cc^mission, are thor- oughly versed in the politico of the day, and quite as competent to decide wiiether these declarations are loyal or disloyal, as is the witness. The court room was then cleared for delib- erating on the objection of the accused. On reopening the court room, the Judge Advocate announced that the objection had been sustained, and the question over- ruled. Question by the Judge Advocate : Please state to the Court whether at that time you had any conversation with Mr. Milligan. Answer. I do not know that I had any conversation with him the day of the meet- ing, but I did the day after. Q. Did Mr. Milligan know, at the time he made that speech, what was the action of the State Central Committee at their meet- ing on the 12th and 13th of August ? A. I learned from another gentleman what the action of the committee had been, and I asked Mr. Milligan if he had heard of their action. He answered that he had not. I then told him that General Manson had been nominated as Lieutenant Gov- ernor. He seemed surprised, and remarked that it looked as if it had been done to spite us. Q. That was the next day after his speech was made, was it not ? A. It was on Sunday afternoon. Q. When did Mr. Milligan make this speech? A. On Saturday afternoon, August 13th, 1864. Q. Do you mean the Saturday preceding your conversation with Mr. Milligan ? A. Yes, sir. Q. What did Mr. Milligan say at that meeting in reference to the draft ? Did he advise the people to submit and aid the Government in the enrollment, or did he advise them to oppose it? A. Nothing was said about the enroll- ment. Q. Was any thing said about the draft ? A. The draft was expected on the 5th of September, 1864. This meeting was on the 13th of August. He spoke in favor of the draft as the best mode of getting sol- diers. He said if the war was right, the draft was right ; but the war was wrong, and the draft was wrong; and he spoke of those who went into the army as making a sacri- fice of life instead of a risk. Q. Will you give the substance of his re- marks and the manner in wliich he spoke about the war? A. I think he spoke about the war as un- justifiable, and a dishonorable war. I am not positive about the word dishonorable. Q. What did he say upon the subject of peace and of quitting fighting ? A. He was in favor of stopping hostilities, and allowing the South the terms she had always asked. Q. What were those terms? A. To be let alone. CROSS-EXAMINATION. The meeting referred to was a Demo- cratic mass meeting, called by the Peace Democracy to take action in regard to the draft. I learned this first from Captain Bracken, who said that he learned it from Mr. Barry, who was acting as correspond- ent of the Chicago Times. I understood that on the morning of the meeting there had been a caucus there, composed of indi- viduals who were opposed to adopting any resolution as their platform, as well as of those who were in favor of adopting it. After the radical peace men carried their point in regard to the adoption of resolu- tions, I understood that those withdrew. The convention numbered about five thou- sand. I went to that meeting as the repor- ter for the Cincinnati Gazette. I was not in the employment of the Government at the time. I sent a telegraphic dispatch of Mr. Milligan's speech to the Cincinnati Gazette^ which was confined mainly to the resolu- tions adopted. The report of the nioeting, as well as the telegraphic dispatch of the resolutions, was made by me. I called Kv. Milligan "Dr. Milligan," because I had thus heard him spoken of In his speech he said the war was an unjustifiable and unconstitu- tional one. Then he spoke of the draft, and appealed to his hearers in regard to makin.» a sacrifice of life, and of the comforts and happiness of their families, and then asked them if they thought it best to gr> into the army. In making this argument, he ap- pealed to his audience for approval, and they indorsed what he said. He said if the war was right, the draft was right; and he said that the draft was the best method for raising men. I can not say that he advis(ui submission to the draft. He said that those who believed the war was right ought to go, and not growl about the draft. He did not discuss party difl:erences; but in his remarks he opposed the war and the Government; his remarks against the Gov- ernment were loudly cheered. In speak- ing of the Administration, I do not remem- ber his referring to the difterent depart- ments of the Executive; 1 understood him to speak of the Government as a whole : and he did not single out any one or any department, except, perhaps, the Presi- dent. He said nothing denunciatory of the Constitution, but the whole tenor of his speech was in fiivor of the Constitution as he construed it. His construction of it per- mitted States to secede at will, and denied to the Government the right of coercion. The resolutions adopted referred more to the draft, and were denunciatory of it and the 156 IJIEASON TRIALS AT ETOIANAPOLIS. war generally, rather than to its having influ- ence upon the Chicago Convention. The name of the Chairman of the Committee on Resolutions was Mr. O'Rourke. I was not present at the convention that met in the morning. The resolutions were reported to the meeting before the speaking began; they were first in order. I understood Mr. Milligan to say that about two millions of men had fallen in this war. He spoke of two million seven hundred thousand men having gone into the army and made a sac- rifice of life, while the rebels still held their own; and my deduction was that the great majority of them had lost their lives. He said that while the Government had called out two million seven hundred thou- sand men, we were not able to make any lieadway, while the rebels were holding their own. At the time of the meeting, 1 intended to give a full report of all the points of the speech in Mr. Milligan's own language, condensing his references to Colo- nial history, and his discussion of the con- stitutional right of coercion, and perhaps some minor points; otherwise, I think the report is correct, and many parts of it are verbatim. I consider the report more re- liable than my recollection of the meeting. 1 wrote my report partly or wholly on Sunday, and it was printed in the Gazette on the Tuesday following. I glanced over the report when it appeared in the paper, and I recognized it as the one I had made. Mr. Milligan did not perhaps say, in so many words, that the President liad not the power to coerce the rebels; he was speaking of the right of the Government to subdue sovereign States, and my conclu- sion was that those were rebellious States. 1 think he spoke of the right to coerce sovereign States, and the right to coerce people who had chosen to leave the Union, referring not only to the States, but to the people; and he may have been talking about the right of revolution. I think he denied not only the right to coerce States, but individuals also. The character of the paper for which I was reporting is that of a general newspaper; I do not regard it as a partisan newspaper, and do not think it claims to be the organ of anj' party. It may have been regarded as a Republican paper; it certainly is in favor of the Union. Since I have been acquainted with it, it has taken an independent course, and has sup- ported the Union candidates whenever its editors saw fit to support them, and ap- proved or criticised the Administration whenever they thouglit they had reason for .so doing. I have no recoUection of Mr. Milligan or any other speaker being clieered for speaking in favor ol' the (iovernment. In addition to Mr. Humphreys, Mr. Jaclcson and Mr. Read spoke at that meeting, and were all cheered; and Mr. Humphreys was loudlv cheered when he took the stand. Mr. Milligan was cheered not only «7lien he spoke against tb ^ policy of the Govern- ment, but also wnen he spoke against the war; 1 do not make any distinction be- tween the Government and the Administra- tion; Mr. Milligan's speech was an argu- mentative one, and contained many points calculated to draw out the approval of the audience. My present connection with the Government is only as one of the Re- corders to this Commission. I have acted with both parties. I acted with the Demo- cratic party in 1859. I voted for Mr. Lincoln. Q. Was there any thing more denuncia- tory of the Administration in Mr. Milligan's remarks than in the remarks of the other gentlemen who spoke there on thnt day? Question objected to by the Judge Advo- cate, and withdrawn. There was, perhaps, nothing more offen- sive in Mr. Milligan's speech than there i» in the average of Democratic speeches de- livered during the present campaign. There might have been less abuse in Mr. Milligan's speech than in some other speeches that have been delivered, and more than in others. EE-EXAMINATION. Mr. Milligan in his speech that day used the term Government rather than Adminis- tration, and I do not recollect his making any distinction between the Governmentand the Adminstration. He said that if the war was right, the draft was right; but he denied that the war had been, or could be consti- tutional and right. Nicholas CornuANE, a witness for the Gov- ernment, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : I reside in Jackson township, Sullivan county, Indiana. I am acquainted with Mr Humphreys, one of the accused. I have seen him a few times. I reside nine or ten miles from him. 1 heard Mr. Humphreys on one occasion speak in Jackson township. The occasion was said to be a Democratic picnic. I think it was about the I5th of September, 1863, a year ago; at any rate, it was the day ^fter Mr. Collins was shot in Terre Haute by Mr. Bi'own. Mr. Hum- phreys spoke of that in my hearing. There might have been three hundred people, more or less, present; the meeting was out of doors. .Mr. Humphreys was standing in a wagon-bed. Besides Mr. Humphreys, there were Mr. Hammil, an attorney at law, Mr. Edward Price, and an attoiney named Bur- ton, be.'^ides another person whose name I do not know. Tliis hitler said he was a rebel from the State of (leorgia, I beheve. He said he did not know why he was required to speak to the audience there, composed as it was mostly of farmers, unless it was that they had heard a great deal about rebels and had never seen one, and that he was a TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 157 rebel from Georgia. Mr. Humphreys was pres- ent when the rebel spoke. Mr. Humphreys made the first speech, and a short one again afterward. I remember that he criticised the A.dministration somewhat strongly. He seemed to be solicitous for peace, and to be opposed to the war; and he seemed to think that the Democratic party was imposed upon, and ought to stand up for their rights. He said that the time had come when Democrats should not appropriate their money, or be willing to spend their means in levity, but should be preparing for self-defense. The general run of his speech was in opposition to the present Adminis- tration. The rebel from the State of Georgia remarked that he was not concerned about our State policy, for he did not belong to our State ; but he had a piece of advice that he would give to his friends, and that was, to resist the present abolition Administra- tion at the sacrifice of their means, their fami- lies, and themselves, if necessary; and that for nothing short of that would he call them honorable. I can not say particularly whether these remarks called forth appro- bation or disapprobation. There were sev- eral cheers, and the people said that he was a good-looking fellow; he was considerably cheered at the close of his speech. I do not remember hearing any hissing or any marks of disapprobation at any thing he said. Mr. Hammil, Mr. Burton, Mr. Allen and Mr. Humphreys were in the wagon, but I am not positive they were in when the rebel spoke. He spoke about the death of Col- lins, and advised the crowd to go home. He said he had received a dispatch stating that he would probably be arrested that night; and I heard from another source that such a dispatch had been carried to him. The crowd then dispersed. CROSS-EXAMINATION. I staid during the whole of the speech. I have forgotten the name of the rebel from Georgia, but it seems to me they called him Captain Manderville. He did not say that he had taken the oath of allegiance to the United States Government, or that he had been in the Quartermaster's Department for several months. When Mr. Humphreys spoke of the death of this man and the dis- patch that he had received, and that it was likely that he would be arrested, he spoke quite solemnly. The Judge Advocate here announced to the Commission that he had closed the case on the part of the Government. The Commission then adjovirned, to meet on Thursday, November 17, 1864, at 9 o'clock, A. M. Court Koom, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) November 17, 1864, 9 o'clock, A. M. J The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present, except Colonel Wass. Also, the Judge Advocate, the ac- cused (except W. A. Bowles), and their counsel. The proceedings were read and approved. William G. Moss, a witness for the ac- cused, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : I reside in Green county, Indiana, and am a farmer. I was elected Sheriff of the county in 1856, and served until 1860, when I was elected as Representative, and served in two 'sessions of the Legislature. I wa.s re-elected Sheriff last October. I am ac- quainted with Mr. Humphreys; have been a neighbor of his for about twenty-two years, and was in partnership with him in the mercantile business for nearly a year. I joined an order called the American Knights, in September, 1863. I took the first degree in our store, in Green county. This was before I entered into partnership with Mr. Humphreys. I believe he was at a meeting of the order in Indianapolis on the 16th or 17th of February, 1864. 1 did not know of the meeting at the time I came here to visit Indianapolis on business When here I met Mr. Heffren and Mr. Ma.lott, from Sullivan. They insisted on my going to the meeting. I was present when an election, or an appointment of officers, took place; major generals and dep- uty commanders, probably, but I am not certain, and other officers, were appointed. Mr. Milligan, Mr. Humphreys, Mr. Walker, and probably Mr. Bowles, were elected or appointed Major Generals. I took back to my own county the news of this meeting, and in a few days after the meeting I saw Mr. Humphreys, and I informed him of what had taken place — that he was ap- pointed a Major General. Q. What did he say about it ? Question objected to by the Judge Advo- cate, and withdrawn. Q. Were you autliorized to take the news of that election to Mr. Humphreys? Question objected to by the Judge Advo- cate. The counsel for the accused requested the Judge Advocate to state his grounds of objection. The rule of law is clear, that while in the prosecution of cases of conspiracy, the Gov- ernment may prove the admissions of the accused as against him, he can not, in his own defense, prove counter statements which were made at any dift'erent time than the specific time when the admissions are proven. In illustration of what I mean, suppose I prove that in a certain conversa- tion Mr. Milligan made certain admis.sions to any party, they may call out that entire conversation, and any explanatory facts and statements he then made in liis own behalf. But while I may prove any distinct admis- 158 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. sion as against him, they can not prove any distinct, separate statements in his favor. Such a rule of law as is contended for by the accused, would destroy the possibility of the conviction of any individual for crime. If an individual is indicted for murder, the act may be proven against him, and his ad- missions as against himself; but any counter statements after the deed, to the effect he did it in self-defense, or in defense of his property, can not be admitted in his favor. In conspiracy trials, the rule is: if a person is engaged in a common conspiracy, and addresses a meeting, or is at any of the meetings of the Council where the general purposes of the conspiracy were discussed, if the State proves against him any distinct statements or admissions, the defense may call out all the statements and surround- ings under which it was made, as a part of the res gestcc; but they can not go into any separate statement made at a different time and place. These distinct statements stand alone, and not as part of the res gestos. The accused can not exculpate himself from crime by his own assertions. The accused replied: The accused have come to the conclusion that they have no other resort to vindicate themselves from the inferences which the Judge Advocate seeks to raise against them, than to introduce testimony concerning their own relations to and declarations about the order. If we can not introduce our repudiation and rejection of the oflice which was attempted to be thrust upon us in our absence, and show that from the moment we knew of it until the dissolution of the order, we repudiated it, then we have no opportunity to vindicate ourselves from the charges sought to be proven against us. It has been shown by the prosecution that Humphreys was elected a Major Gen- eral at the February meeting of the order, which he did not attend, and of which he could have no knowledge at the time, nor until he was informed of it, and that is as far as the evidence shows his connection with it. Another fact has been proven, namely, that the military branch of the order was intended for the subversion of the Union, detaching certain States, either to form a North-western Confederacy, or be attached to the Southern Confederacy ; and from this fact will be argued the treasona- ble character of the military part of the order. Now, the accused is only connected with the military part of the order by the fact ot his election as a Major General, which transpired in his absence, and of which there is no proof he had any knowl- edge. Now, we present the counter fact, that when he was informed of that election, he rejected and repudiated the oflSce, and thereafter had nothing to do with that part of the order. That is what we propose to prove. The Judge Advocate objects to it, because it is not a part of the conversation he has seen proper to introduce. The Com- mission can not determine what conversa- tions he has introduced. It is impossible to determine when the conversation he has introduced transpired, and when he said certain things; as, for instance, they have proven, or assume to have proven, that he accepted a Brigadier Generalship, and agreed to command a certain portion of the forces in the order. There is no evi- dence of this fact. The whole history of Mr. Humphreys' connection with the order, from his initiation until the commence- ment of this trial, has been dragged before this Commission, without reference to time or place, or under what circumstances hia admissions wore made. To show his char- acter and real connection with the order, we shall offer, and claim the right to offer, until it is denied us, evidence covering the whole period from his election to a Major Generalship, to the commencement of this trial, to show that he was guilty of no trea- sonable project, declaration, act, or conspir- acy. That, on the contrary, he avowed himself ready to obey and support the laws and Constitution of his country, and even to death, and against every proposition in- imical to the laws and Constitution of his country. You see, gentlemen of this Commission, that unless this is permitted, we can not in- troduce any proof in fact, for written com- munications are not admissible. There is no evidence, but hearsay, that he accepted this Commission. There is no evidence that he is connected with any treasonable acts, or tending to show this fact. Now, we want to show his acts, his life, his confidential com- munications to his intimate friend, his partner. The law, I grant you, is not defi- nite on that point. I read from Roscoe's Criminal Evidence^ page 88: " The acts and declarations of a prisoner, given in evidence in his favor, ought to be connected both in point of subject-matter and of time, with the acts or declarations proved against him. See Phill. Ev., 500, 84, 10 o'clock, A. M.) The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- ment. All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused (except W. A. Bowles), and their counsel. The proceedings were read and approved. William C. Kocher, a witness for the ac- cused, was then introduced, and, being duly !^worn by the Judge Advocate, testitied as follows: 1 reside in Huntington county, and prac- tice law. 1 am Mayor of Huntington bor- ough. 1 have known Mr. Milliiian for ten years; and am acquainted with his general moral rejiutation. in the neighborhood in which he lives; that reputation is good. His rejiutation also as a peaceable, orderly, law-abiding citizen luis been good in that conununity as far as 1 know. The relations existing between myself and ^Ir. Milligan pince the summer of 1855, have not been iViendly. CROSS-EXAMIXATION. The reason why my relations have not b^en very friendly with ^Ir. Milligan are, that when 1 Ci\me to huliana, a young man and a stranger, Mr. Milligan was one of the older members of the bar. and he took a strong position against me. I am not aware that he had any reason for so doing. He opposed other young attorneys in that place in like manner. His opposition took the form of brow-beating when 1 appeared as counsel on the opposite side. In politics I am a Democrat, though I do not belong to Mr. Milligan's party; 1 am a War Democrat. In saying that Mr. Milligan's general char- acter is good, 1 do not refer to his reputation as a loyal man in the support of his (lov- ennnent. JosKPii Johnson, a witness Jbi- the accused, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testitied asVollovrs: I reside in Wells county ; my occupation is farming. 1 am acquainted with Dr. Zumro, of Markle; I have known him some ten years. I an; acquainted with his gen- eral reputation for truth and veracity in the neighborhood in whicli he lives, and know that that reputation is bad, and I could not believe him under oath. I be- came a member of the Sons of Liberty about June or July last, in Kockcreek town ship. Wells county. 1 was initiated in com- pany with Dr. Zvnnro, John Hautz, Isaac Decker, Henry Johnson and Nathan John- son; 1 joined at the solicitation of Dr. Zumro. Dr. Horton, who initiated us, told us it was an organization to support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Indiana, and to protect the rights and liberties of the peo- ple at the ballot-box. He said nothing about the organization being intended to subdue the Abolitionists, resist the draft, or assist the Southern Confederacy. The mil- itary part of the organization was gotten up by Dr. Zumro, or, at any rate, the sub- ject was introduced by him, but for what purposes I can not tell. I went with Dr. Zumro, at his request, in September, to see Mr. Milligan. Dr. Zumro asked him what we should do about the draft ; Mr. Milligan's reply was, "We can not do any thing." Dr. Zumro asked what the boys were doing about Huntington; his reply was, "They are doing the best they can, iliey are hiring substitutes, and every man is taking care of himself in the best manner he can.'' The Doctor said, " I do not like to submit to the draft myself, but 1 think it would be a poor chance tor a man to try to get away. ' Mr. Milligan replied, " If I were to make an attempt to get away, I would not be afraid of twenty men arresting me." Nothing was stated to the etlect that if a revolt was started by ten men, others would Hock in in large numbers ; Mr. Milligan at the time was very sick on his bed. The Doctor spoke a few words to him, and he replied that he was very weak, and did not wish to con- verse. Dr. Zmmo stated to me, after leav- ing Mr. ^lilligan, that if he was drafted he would take n\edicine and be sick all the time, and if 1 was drafted he would serve me in the same way. When Dr. Zumro asked Mr. Milligan what the order was going to do about the diaft, to the best of my recollection Mr. Milligan said that the order was tlisbanded. and that he could not ex pect any thing from it. TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. CROSS-EXAMIXATIOX. Lh\ the morning of the day on which I saw Mr. MiUigan, I called at Dr. Zumro's house, as we had arranged the night before at a meeting of the Sons of Liberty; some twenty-five or thirty members were present, and John Hautz, who was the Grand Seign- ior, presided. At that meeting Dr. Zumro wa.^ requested by some membei's to go to Huntington to see Mr. MiUigan, and the Doctor invited me to accompany him. It is eleven miles from where I live, and we went on horseback. The meeting was held at Jacob Farling's, Koekcreek township, Wells county, and Dr. Zumro was the only member present from Huntington county. I never attended any meeting at Hunting- ton township, I think that Mr. MiUigan had said that the order was disbanded ; it was not at that time in our township; I did not, however, so state to Mr. MiUigan. Dr. Zumro was appointed by the meeting in general, as a committee to visit Hunting- ton ; at the same time Jacob Farling was sent to Blutfton to see what they were going to do about the draft, 1 suppose. Nothing was said in the meeting, to my knowledge, as to what they were to be sent for, or who they were to see; and it was only as we were going along, that Dr. Zumro said that he thought Mr. MiUigan was about as good a man to see as we could go to. The mili- tary article which Dr. Zumro introduced to the order, he said, was written by Mr. Mil- ligan ; at the next meeting he pretended Mr. Ibach wrote it; I do not remember how many members signed it ; I did ; but T never drilled. There was no rule requiring us to drill. I have no arms, except a rifle and a revolver, which I have had for some years. The draft was frequently spoken of by members, but no decision was come to. Some talked of hiring substitutes, and oth- ers proposed running otf. Something might have been said about resisting the draft, but not by the leaders of the organization. Some said, " I will resist;" some, "' I will tight or run off." On our return from Hun- tington we met Mr. Samuel Day ; but I did not say to him or to Mr. Coftroth, or Mr. Winters, whom we saw afterward, that Mr. MiUigan had advised resistance to the draft, nor did I hear it said by any body. Mr. CotiVoth, I remember, advised us to go home and rest easy about the draft, or something like that.* Samurt. Winter s, a witness for the accused, was then introcFuced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as fol- lows : * In giving the testiuiouy of unimportant witnesses, it has been the aim of the Editor to ouiit all irrelevant matter, or matter that did not elicit, or confirm, some fact inquired for. The record of the examination of this witness — an exceediugh' ignorant one — fills thirty-nine pages of legal cap, averaging two hundred words to a page, but the brief synopsis here given contains all the facta to which he tesl:ified. I reside in Huntington, Indiana, where I publish the Huntington Dcmot-rat, a Dem- ocratic newspaper. I became a member of the American Knights — but not of the Sons of Liberty — in Huntington, sometime in October, 1863. Mr. MiUigan was a mem- ber of that association, but held no office. He used his influence to prevent any but responsible and respectable men from be- coming members ; I never knew of any ef- forts on his part to extend the organization or establish branch temples. The order was disbanded sometime in April, and wo ceased to meet as an organization. It never was merged into the Sons of Liberty. I was a delegate from the Huntington tem- ple to the Council held here in February; Mr. MiUigan was not present; I know it from the fact that I asked him to attend with me, and he declined on account of being too unwell. I attended the meeting of the Council on the afternoon of the 17th ; I know nothing of Mr. Milligan's appoint- ment as Major General. I am only slightly acquainted with Dr. Zumro; I know him when I see him. In September last he called at my office in company with another man, and asked me what the order was going to do about the draft: [ asked "What order?" He then asked, "What are the boys going to do abovit the draft ?" I said, " Ido not know." I inquired, " What do you propose to do ?" His reply was, "to resist it;" to which I rejoined, " If you think so, why the devil don't you resist it?" I had no knowledge at the time of the part he was playing, but I did not trust him, and did not want to have any thing to do with him. I understood the object of the Order of American Knights was to disseminate cor- rect political principles in relation to the theory of our Government; and also as an offset to the Union League in our county. I understood it to be a purely political or- ganization, and it had no avowed purpose of resisting the draft or any law of the Government. 1 was present at the Fort Wayne meet- ing, and heard the whole of Mr. Milligan's speech. It was in his usual style, elaborate argument, and, as I thought, not suited to the occasion, and was not calculated to create any enthusiasm among the ma.sses. Nothing was said denunciatory of the Gov- ernment. Mr. MiUigan always separated the Administration from the Government; whetlier he did in that speech or not, I can not distinctly remember. I believe he stated that opposition would occur under any Administration, and that if there were any present who expected him to arraign the Administration, they would be disap- pointed, as he would Ipave that to persons who delighted to arraign it. He spoke of coercion ; he denied the power of the Gov- ernment to coerce States, but admitted its 174 TREASON TRIALS AT mCIANAPOLIS. power to coerce individuals. Nothing to my recollection was said calculated to ex- cite insurrection, or resistance to the draft; if any thing had been said, I should proba- bly remember it. I made a report of that speech at the time, but have not consulted it recently. I have been intimately ac- quainted with Mr. Milligan since the fall of 1858, and I know his general reputation as to moral character in that community; it is good; and also his reputation as a peaceable, law-abiding citizen, which is also good. Q. Are you acquainted with his general character as a loyal man, well disposed to the preservation of the Government ? A. I do not know what you mean by the word "loyal." I am acquainted with his general reputation for attachment to the general principles of our Government, and its preservation ; it is good. CROSS-EXAMINATION. I understand Mr. Milligan to be in favor of the Union of the States, but I do not know that he is favor of the prosecution of the war for the suppression of the rebel- lion. In conversations which I have had with him, he has always maintained that a war waged against foreign States was an ab- surdity, and I have heard him say that he was against the present war, because it was an unconstitutional one. He is, therefore, opposed to the prosecution of the present war, and I have heard him say so. He said at the Fort Wayne meeting, that the existing war was an absurdity. He said tJiat if the war was right, the draft was right; but he did not say that if the war was wrong, the draft was wrong. I never saw any thing of the military part of the order until I saw it in the public prints. The purpose of the order was the inculcation of correct opinions or principles of Govern- ment, among which were the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. These resolutions I understand give the States the right to judge of their own grievances, that they are on an equality with the General Gov- ernment, and are co-equal with it, and may be so construed as to give them the right to dissolve the contract. I was initiated in the three degrees of the order by Dodd, who took us through the three degrees the first evening. I took the obligation and as- sented to its principles. The expression, '' the Supreme Commander shall be Com- mander-in-chief of all military forces be- longing to the order, in the various States when called into active service," I consid- ered a figurative expression. I remember this part of the obligation which I sub- scribed to: "I do further promise, that I will, at all times, if needs be, take up arms in the cause of the oppressed — in my country first of a/^against any monarch, prince, potentate, power, or government usurped, which may be found in arms, and waging war against a people or peoples, who are endeavoring to establish, or have inaugurated, a govern- ment for themselves, of their own free choice, in accordance with, and founded upon, the eternal principles of truth, which I have sworn in the V , and now in this presence do swear, to maintain inviolate and defend with my life. This I do prom- ise, without reservation or evasion of mind; without regard to the name, station, condi- tion or designation of the invading or co- ercing power, whether it shall arise within or come from without." I do not know that it had any reference to an attempt to establish a government within this Government. I did not under- stand that the order was to assist in the establishing of the Southern Confederacy ; 1 did not understand it so, nor do I believe that they have established a separate Gov- ernment; they have established a sort of a Government, but I do not understand that it is their intention to absolve themselves frona their allegiance to the old Union of the States. I believe if the Constitution was construed as the Supreme Bench con- strued it in the Dred Scott case, they would come back to the Union. I do believe that they are waging war to establish a separate Government, but that they intend to come back to the Union. I do not think that the President of the Southern Confederacj', when he said that they were trying to es- tablish a separate Government, represented the people of the South. I could not say that any prominent man in the' South has said other than that they were fighting to establish a separate Government, but I have read something from Alexander H. Stephens in which he does not say they will not come back ; and though he may not have said a word in favor of it, he has said nothing against it. There is not, to my recollection, any thing he has said in favor of any peace, save on the terms of equality. I do not believe that the Southerners are fighting for a separate Government, but for the Con- stitution as interpreted by the Dred Scott decision. That decision is in relation to their slave property — they want guarantees to protect it in transit through the States, and the right to take it into the Territo- ries. This is my own judgment. I have also seen it advocated in public prints, more especially the New York Day Book. I re- collect reading copious extracts from South- ern speeches, avowing that they were not fighting for a separate Government. I as- sert that the South has been fighting for their rights as defined in the Dred Scott decision, and I regard the reason of their flying to arms to obtain that which they already had a right to, by the decision of the Courts of the land, with the whole ex- ecutive power of the Government pledged TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 175 to enforce it; that they supposed their rights would not be sufficiently respected to suit them ; and I do not think the de- cision in that case was enforced to suit them. Q. Can you tell when and where that de- cision was not enforced ? Question objected to by the accused, for the reason that it was not pertinent to the question in issue in this trial. The Judge Advocate said : This witness has undertaken to state that Mr. Milligan was loyal in his sentiments, reputation and character, and devoted to the maintenance of the laws and Constitu- tion of his country; and he further said, that the order had nothing in it but a sim- ple exposition of the theories of the Gov- ernment, as held by certain persons. I deem it material to show this Court that Ml". Milligan's principles were opposed to the Constitution, and to the very life of the Government itself; that the theories pro- mulgated in this order were false, disloyal, and destructive of the foundations of good order and of society. That the foundations of the order were lies, and that it was trea- sonable in its very inception and organiza- tion. This goes to the very foundation of tlie issue. It becomes material to show what these principles were. It is important, further, in this view: they call members of the order as witnesses, who swear that this order is loyal ; that there is no harm in it, so far as they knew. We must get at the foundation of their belief, to judge of the credibility and force of their testimony. Without doing this, the Commission can not judge what principles, theories, or acts, they believe to be loyal, and what disloyal. The court room was then cleared for de- liberation. On reopening the Court, the Judge Ad- vocate announced that the objection had been overruled. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Wednesday, November 23, 1864, at 9 o'clock, A. M. CoTjBT Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) November 23, 1864, 9 o'clock, A. M. ) The Commission met pursuant to ad- journment. All the members present. Also, the Judge Advocate, the accused (except Wm. A. Bowles), and their counsel. The proceedings were read and approved. The examination of Samuel F. Winters, a witness for the accused, was then resumed, as follows : I can not state when and where the Gov- ernment has failed to execute the deci- sion of the Dred Scott case, but there are personal liberty bills or statutes in most of the free States, which are a nullification of that decision, at least in Wisconsin, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massa- chusetts, and I think in Pennsylvania and Maine; and it is my impression that these States punish any person who assists in the capture of an escaped slave. Q. Do not these bills expressly state, and are they not expressly for the punishment of kidnapping in violation of the laws of the State? Question objected to by the accused, and withdi-awn. I took notes of the speech of Mr. Milli- gan at Fort Wayne. I am not a short hand reporter, but I am a rapid writer, and I wrote down as much of the speech as I could in long hand, giving the substance of it as I could recollect. Q. Do you recollect whether this portion of Mr. Milligan's speech is as he gave it: "They (the States) were thirteen nations, and finally formed a Constitution, adopted separately by the several States, Virginia reserving to herself at any time to withdraw from the Union, and what Virginia re- served all the States had a right to reserve. Their action was based entirely on State rights. The Declaration of Independence states who is to be the judge when the Gov- ernment shall be subverted. It guarantees to the people the right of revolution when they can no longer tolerate the invasion of their rights. I do not mean that Governor Morton, or the Legislature, or any ma- chinery of office, getting its authority from the people through elections, is the State. But I mean the free range of all its people is the State. The officers are the mere ser- vants of the people, the mere agents of the Government. Where does sovereignty rest? It is time to settle this question. If you are wrong in your theories, you should change your principles. I know no sover- eignty in the Federal Government, or in the State Government, as contra-distin- guished from the people of the State. I be- lieve in the doctrine of popular sovereignty, instead of sovereignty in the machinery of the Government." I think that is the substance of what Mr. Milligan said on that subject. Q. Do you recollect this portion of Mr. Milligan's speech, and whether it • is cor- rect? "If we have no power to make war upon a State that secedes, was it right to take up arms against a people who were doing what they contracted to do, and what your fath- ers and our fathers did eighty years ago? Was it right? How many believe it was right ? If it was right, shoulder your guns, and go forward, and don't growl about the draft." In speaking of the draft, I think he said something like that ; that if the war was right, the draft was right; that the burdens of the Government should rest equally upon all; and that you might as well leave it to the voluntary act of citizens to raise the 176 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. revenues of the country, as to raise an army by volunteering, or something like that ; the deductions that 1 made from his speech were that the war was unconstitu- tional. Q. Did he use these words: ''Was it right because you were more peaceable than your neighboring States, and unwilling to rebel, to compel them by force of arms to re- main your partners ? When you have an- swered that question, I am ready to talk about the draft." Is that correct? A. I do not think that corresponds with my report, and I do not think he said it. I have not a copy of the paper, in which the speech was reported, with me, nor do I know that I have a copy on file at my office. Mr. Milligan has occasionally writ- ten communications for my paper, but he has never written any of its leaders; they were letters referring to local matters. He wrote several communications last winter, but perhaps not more than a dozen alto- gether. I was present at the Grand Coun- cil that met here on the 17th. 1 went to see Mr. Milligan before I came here; I wanted him to go with me, but he felt too sick. I brought a series of resolutions; they were given me by Colonel Milligan, but I did not see them, nor did I read them; certain resolutions were read at the meeting of the Sons of Liberty. I do not know in whose handwriting they were. [A paper containing certain resolutions was here handed to the witness by the Judge Advocate.] These resolutions were adopted at Fort Wayne, but whether or not these are the ones I brought 1 can not say. These, to the best of my recollection, are the resolu- tions which were read at the meeting of the Order of American Knights. Government exhibit "A" was here hand- ed to the witness by the -Judge Advocate. Q. Are the resolutions in this book the same that you heard read at the February meeting of the Sons of Liberty? A. I believe they are the same, but I could not state positively whether they are or not, RE-EXAMINATION. The resolutions to which reference has been made, that were read at the Fort Wayne meeting, I think, are nearly like the resolutions of the 11th Democratic Con- gressional Convention assembled at Hun- tington. I only know that certain resolu- tions were contained in the envelope which Mr. Milligan handed me, and I know that in the pamphlet reierred to, certain resolu- tions are printed that were read before the Grand Council, but 1 can not say positively that they are the same. G. R. CoRLEW, a witness for the accused, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: I reside in Huntington county, Indiana, and am Deputy Sheriff in that county. T have been in the hardware business. I moved to Huntington in the spring of 1843, and have lived there since. I have been acquainted with Mr. Milligan for the past sixteen years, and know his general moral character in the neighborhood in which he lives; I should call it good. I am acquainted with his general reputatior. as a peaceable, orderly, law-abiding citizen, and it is good. I joined an order called the American Knights, in October or November, of 1S63, at Huntington. Mr. Milligan was connected with the organization. I attended most of its meetings, till sometime in April, 1S64, when we quit meeting. I think about twenty or twenty-five belonged to it. I never knew of Mr. Milligan making any efforts to increase the number of members, nor was he in favor of organizing branch temples throughout the country; the only members that he seemed willing to admit were good, reliable and responsible men. As far as I understood tlie organization, it was entirely political, and was to be an offset to the Ll^nion League. The object of the organization was to influence elections, and to get Democrats to stick together, so as to carry elections, and not by force of arms or any thing of that kind. I never knew any thing as to its military organization. CROSS-EXAMINATION. I know nothing of the purposes of the order, save what I have mentioned; I never heard any thing about arms or ammunition, nor of any attempt to establish a North- western Confederacy. I joined in October or November, 1863, and continued a mem- ber till it was broken up, in March or April, 1864. I think 1 took three degrees in the order, but 1 never attended any meetings, save tliose of our own assembly. For a part of the time 1 acted as treasurer, and re- ceived probably fifty or sixty dollars, with which 1 bought wood, and the rest had to be expended in the rent of the hall, lights, etc.; none of the money collected was, as far as I know, sent to the Grand Council. I know of no assessments having been made on our members for money. I "know noth- ing of members of the order pledging them- selves to each other that they would resist the draft. I have heard other individuals talking about it, and 1 told tliem it was nonsense to resist. I never recollect taking an obligation of which the following is a part : " I do further promise that I will, at all times, if needs be, take up arms in the cause of the oppressed — i)i mi/ country Jirst of all — against any monarch, prince, potentate, power, or government usurped, which may be found in arms, and waging war against a i^cople or peoples who are endeavoring to establish, or have inaugurated, a govern- TREASON TKULS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 177 ment for themselves of their own free choice, in accordance with, and founded upon, the eternal principles of truth, which I have sworn in the V ." I will not swear that I did not subscribe to that obligation, but I do not remember. If it was read to me, I swore to it. Samuel F. Day, a witness for the accused, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : I reside at Huntington, Indiana, where I have hved for four years. I am engaged in the livery business. I am acquainted with the general moral character of Mr. Milligan in that county, and it is good as far as I know. I am acquainted with his general reputation as a peaceable, orderly, law-abid- ing citizen, and that reputation is good. I joined a secret organization last Septem- ber, at Huntington, about the time Mr. Dodd made a speech there; I think it was called the Order of American Knights. We had meetings about once in two weeks up to the time we sent a delegate to Indian- apohs; from that time our meetings were irregular until March or April; and about the last of April the organization was aban- doned from want of interest in it by the members. Between twenty and thirty be- longed to it. It was a County Temple. I learned from Mr. Dodd that the organiza- tion was a political one. All the degrees I ever took, I took the first night. 1 suppose there were three degrees. The purpose of the organization, it was stated, was to con- solidate the Democracy, and to get influen- tial men into its ranks, so that we might influence the election, and carry the Demo- cratic ticket. It was also supposed that the organization would counteract the effect and purposes of the Loyal League in that county. I never learned any thing of the order being a military organization. I do not know of any attempts of Mr. Milligan to extend the order; I have known him to blackball members to keep them out, and I have known of his objecting to organizing branch temples ; I never knew of his assent- ing to but one, namely, at Rockcreek town- ship, Huntington county; they were organ- ized there, and had forty-five or fifty mem- bers. I am acquainted with Dr. Zumro, of Markle. I remember a conversation I had with him about the 16th of September, at Huntington. He and Mr. Johnson came to my stable door. Mr. Zumro stepped into my oSice, and stated that he had just come from Mr. Milligan's; he said that he and Mr. Johnson were appointed to come over to Huntington, to see what was to be done about the draft. Zumro said that Mr. Milli- gan did not give him much encouragement as he was sick, and told him to go to me. Zumro said, "AVe are bound to resist the draft, and we want to know if you can give assistance." I said it was foolishness and 12 nonsense to resist the draft; that fol ts were already making preparations to gel substi- tutes. We talked a few minutes, an;l when he went aw'ay, he said, ''I suppose v/e will have to give it up, as we can get no encour- agement here." I do not remember posi- tively whether he said "we" or "they' are bound to resist. C ROSS-EXAMINATION. I was elected Grand Seignior ot i.he or- ganization, and served for two or three months. The man who preceded me was named John Jones, but no one was elected to succeed me. The books and papers of the order were in the care of the Secretary, Mr. Cummings; Mr. Corlew was Treasurer; I do not know what became of the papers. I think there was a meeting in May, but I was not there. Mr. Milligan never gave any reason, that I remember, for not wish- ing to extend the order. He would often say when asked about establishing a branch lodge, "there is no use," or "do not be in a hurry." and the probability was that it would not be done. I never heard of Mr. Milligan being ap- pointed a Major General in the order, until I heard it on the street. I heard nothing of the military organization of the order, or of its army ; Dodd said not a word about it* nor was any thing said about organizing a North-western Confederacy. I have heard Mr. Milligan speak in the lodge, or out of it, of the manner of conducting the war; and he approved of it, if it was conducted on a right policy, namely, for the Union. He objected to it, so I understood, because it was prosecuted for the abolition of slavery, and he believes that the Union could be restored by better means than by war. When Dr. Zumro said "they" or "we" are going to resist the draft, Mr. Johnson said nothing to contradict it, that I remem- ber. I think Zumro also stated that Mr. Milligan had said " we must do the best we can," or something to the eflfect that each one would have to take care of himself, and do the best he could; but he did not say that Mr. Milligan advised him to resist. OcHMiG BiKD, a witness for the accused, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: I reside in Allen county, Indiana, and am a farmer. I am a member of the Legislature. I was present at Fort Wayne, at the Demo- cratic Convention, on the 13th of August last, at wliich Mr. Milligan spoke, but I was not by Ml'. Milligan all the time he was speaking. It was called a mass meeting for the people of the county. Mr. Milligan was one of the invited speakers. Mr. Millij^an's was an argumentative speech on the sub- ject of States rights, and the rights of the Constitution. It did not elicit much enthu siasm from the audience. I judge it had an adverse tendency. Mr. Milligan did not 178 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. denounce the Government, but he did speak against the Administration, and the man- ner in which the war was conducted; and I understood him to discriminate between the policy of the Administration and the Government. I took one degree in the organization called the Sons of Liberty. Its purposes, as I understood then, were to rally the strength of the Democratic party. The entire strength of the order might have numbered about fifty or sixty persons. There was an impression in our place that the Loyal Leagues were armed. We found some papers that they had dropped around re- quiring a very strict organization; it was also reported that they intended to usurp unreasonable authority at the polls; and one of the objects of this organization was to stand by and see that the people had a fair chance at the election, and that no in- roads were made on our party in delivering their votes. CROSS-EXAMINATION. In Mr. Milligan's argument at Fort Wayne, as I understood it, he did not just- ify the States in the right to secede. His argument went to prove that there was a certain way to settle these things peaceably between the States and the Government. My impression is that he did not consider this a constitutional war, from the manner in which it was conducted, and he may have said that the war itself was wrong — that fighting for the coercion of seceded States was unconstitutional, but I am not Eositive. I am under the impression that e treated the States as already out of the Union, and the Union dissolved; but I did not understand him to say that there was no power in the Government to bring them back. I do not know that I have, in conversa- tion, expressed the view that a State had the right to secede, and that there is no power in the Government to coerce it back after having seceded ; those are not my views. I think it possible that a State may be coerced, though I do not entirely believe in the prosecution of the present war for the suppression of the rebellion; but I am in favor of it if prosecuted under constitu- tional principles. Q. What would be a constitutional prose- cution of this war? Objected to by the accused, for the rea- son that the politics of the witness are not u subject of inquiry before this Court. The Judge Advocate replied: The question seems to me to be relevant, Mid most material ; and I insist upon its being put. The accused bring witnesses iiere to prove a good character for loyalty, and the law-abiding nature and conduct of the accused, Mr. Milligan. If they saw proper to bring upon the stand a member of the rebel army, and ask him whether Mr. Milligan was a law-abiding, lo/al man, his test of loyalty would be the lict that any man living in this Governmett would permit those States to secede, and establish a Government ibr themselves, and not in- terfere with them. In speaking of the speech at Fort Wayne, this witness states that Mr. Milligan's speech had no tendency to create insurrection, that it separated the Government from the Ad- ministration, etc. The only way to get at the foundation of these speeches and acts, is to find the basis, or premises, fi'om which the witnesses drew their conclusions. It is, therefore, important, when they bring wit- nesses upon the stand to prove the loyalty of any speech or act, to get at the stand- point from which the witness himself judges of loyalty. This question goes to show the principles of the witness, and his theories of Govern- ment, and enables the Commission to find out what he believes to be constitutional, and what, in his judgment, is loyal, and what disloyal. The court room was then cleared for de- liberation. On reopening the Court, the Judge Ad- vocate announced that the objection was overruled. The Commission then adjourned to 2 o'clock, P. M. AFTERNOON SESSION. CouKT KooM, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) November 23, 1864, 2 o'clock, P. M. J The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- ment. All the members present. Also, the Judg(^ Advocate, the accused (except W. A. Bowles), and their counsel. The testimony of Ochmig Bird, a witness for the accused, was resumed, as follows : As a Democrat, I think the President of the United States has exceeded his power in requiring the abolition of slavery, as the right to hold slaves is guaranteed by the Constitution to every person who holds slaves. I think, therefore, the Emancipa- tion Proclamation is unconstitutional ; out- side of this proclamation I am in favor of the suppression of the rebellion, though I am by no means strenuously in favor of the war, for I believe in settling the diflBculty by conciliation and compromise. I am not in favor of letting the rebel States go, but I am in favor of the union of all the States ; I am in favor of prosecuting the war, if that is the only alternative, and I am in favor of coercion, if that be necessary for the preservation of the Union. We had a Democratic majority of twenty- seven hundred at the last election in ovur county. We organized this society to pro- tect ourselves against the Loyal Leagues. Some of the leading members who belong TREASON TKIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 179 to ihe organization, are Mr. France, who is the principal oflBcer, Mr. Dills, Secretary, Mr. Walkie, Mr. William Jones, Mr. John Murray, Mr. Marshall Noll, Mr. Hogan and Mr. James W. Borden. B. F. Ibach, a witness for the accused, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : I reside in Huntington, Indiana, and have lately been admitted to the bar in our county. I joined a secret political organi- zation in September, 1863. I was initiated on the day that Mr. Dodd addressed the Democratic Convention at Huntington. The objects of the organization were set forth in certain declarations of principles which were read to us, and which I under- stood to be to advance Democratic princi- ples, as we understood them, and also to counteract the influence of a society called the Loyal League. It was a purely political organization. I continued to attend its rueetings till May; at that time it had died out entirely. In connection with the soci- ety of American Knights, we had lectures every two weeks, and no one was permitted to lecture unless he indorsed the declara- tion of principles taught in the order. I was a delegate from that county temple to the Grand Council which met here in June. Mr. MUligan and myself came together, but he did not accompany me to the Coun- cil. I reached the city a little before noon on the first day of the meeting. We had a meeting on that and the next day. I re- member at this meeting a young man from the northern part of the State was very uneasy about the draft, and thought the order should do something. This is tho first I learned that there was any idea among the members that there was a mili- tary part connected with the order; he seemed to be very uneasy about the draft, and thought that we ought to combine. A res- olution was offered by some member of the Council, which was voted down ; the reso- lution was to the effect that the different temples in the counties should organize for the purpose of resisting the Government. It created quite a turbulent time there; some thought that the order was purely political, and others that there was a mili- tary branch in it. The majority of the members did not want any military action, but preferred to wait for a change through the election. The resolution, I remember, was voted down. They thought the ballot- box was the remedy for our troubles. I do not remember that Mr. Milligan took any part in the discussion. It was at this meeting that Dodd, or the Deputy Grand Commander, I forget which, said that they had taken into consideration the appoint- ment of military officers, and that some of those appointed had not accepted their of- fices, and others had not been heard from. There was then a discussion whether their action should be secret, and confined to the Grand Commander and themselves, or whether it should be known to the mem- bers generally. Mr. Dodd said there were some things about the order which all the members need not know. Others said that the whole Council should know what was done, and should not be confined to single individuals. Mr. Dodd said that the ap- pointment of major g^aierals would have to remain as reported until the 4th of ouly, if they did not re})ort then, others would have to be appointed. Mr. Dodd did not press the matter then, because he saw it did not suit the Council, and that they would have voted the military part of it down. CROSS-EXAMINATION. I took the three degrees of the order all at one time. Part of the degrees were not read; only the obligations. The means by which Mr. Milligan and myself received notice of the meeting of the Councu here in .lune was this: a notice was sent o the order in Huntington, addressed to its sec- retary, that we were to appoint delegates to that meeting of the Council. This was re- ceived in May, and we came up here to the State Council on the 14th of June. We had a meeting of the order in May, and I was appointed a delegate, and though our order died out in Huntington, I was here on the 14th representing it. Mr. Milligan was present at the first day's meeting. Mr. Humphreys I did not see here either day. I do not remember Mr. Dodd making use of any such expression as this: "I will now iick down the thin walls of patriotism and talk treason for a while.' I remember they had quite a discussion on the subject of the grievances which the Government had inflicted, but could not come to an under- standing about the matter. The ascendency in the meeting seemed to be of those who concluded that we should rely on the ballot-box as a remedy for the evils we suffered. There was also some expression of opinion in favor of McClellan as candidate for the Presidency; they were in favor of the nomination of a man who favored the prosecution of the war. Dodd and the Deputy Grand Commander were not in favor of the prosecution of the war, and I think were hostile to the Admin- istration. I think from what Dodd said, that the appointment of the military offi- cers was within his province. None of our organizations drilled as far as I know. I had a preamble for organizing a company; the list had fifteen or twenty names upon it, some of whom were members of the order; we intended getting seventy-five members, and then organizing under the State law, and drawing our arms from the State, in accordance with an act of the Leg- 180 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. islature; my luvine, 1 believe, was at the head of the company. It was first com- menced some eifxhteen months back, a long time before I belonged to any secret organ- ization. We intended to drill; our object was to protect oiii-.selves against the soldiers that were coming home. Some citizens, also, had made liireats against our printing otfice, and we thought it best to take the arms in our own hands. Quite a number if our friends had received letters from ; i belong to the Democratic party, t^na joined the Sons of Liberty. I live about five miles from Dr. Zumro; have known him four or five years; he has been my Doctor; his reputation for truth and veracity in our neighborhood, where he doctors most of the people, is good as far as I have learned; the people of that neighborhood are mostly Pennsylvania Dutch. I did not hear any thing against his reputation before these treason cases came up; and I would believe him under oath. CROSS-EXAMINATION. I have not heard Dr. Zumro' s character much discussed; it did not come up; I have not heard people speak against him until of late; since these cases came up, I have heard people speak ill of him. RE-EXAMINATION. I never heard any thing said against Dr. Zumro, till he came on the stand and testi- fied about these Sons of Liberty. William R. Taylor, a witness for the Gov- ernment, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: I live in Eock Creek township, Wells county, in this State, and run a saw mill. I have acted as Justice of the Peace for two terms. Politically I am a Republi- can, and voted for the Union party. 1 have been drafted, and am now a soldier. Have known Dr. Zumro ten years, dur- ing which time he has been my family phy- sician. 1 am acquainted with his general reputation for truth and veracity ; that rep- utation is good, and I would believe him under oath. R. C. Booking, a witness for the accused, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as fol- lows: I am the inventor of certain Greek fire shells, and missiles of various kinds. I made a shell and ap^jlied for a patent, and had a caveat filed for it as well as for the Greek fire, which I invented, and which I claim to be the same as that used by the Greeks, and which burns under water. I have been traveling for the pur- pose of presenting my claims to the public, since the spring of 1863. Have been at Cincinnati, Louisville, Detroit and here. Being short of means, I was trying to find some person to assist me in getting my in- vention through. It was open to the pub- lic ; and 1 came here to try it by order of General Burnside. I brought it before A<^'utant General Noble, Colonel Freybar- ger, Major McClure, General Wilcox and his staff, Mr. Holloway, editor of the Indi- anapolis Journal, and I showed it every- where to the public. General Wilcox was Commander of this State at that time. I am not a member of the secret organization known as the Order of American Knights or Sons of Liberty, and never was. My Greek fire had no connection with the or- der, nor did 1 receive any assistance from it in any way. I know Dr. Bowles. He asked me, when in Louisville, if I would show him and his friends some of the shells and the Greek fire; I told him yes. In the af ternoon he came to my room at the Louis- ville Hotel, with several gentlemen, and I showed it and explained it to them. I told them it was a pity I could not get along with my inventions for want of means, and Dr. Bowles said he would see some of his friends and ascertain if something could not be done, so that I could get along with the shell. In the evening, when I was at the hotel, a young man came to me, and asked me to go up to Dr. Kalfus' oflBce; when I went up, some person, I did not know who, said to me, that some of the gentlemen to whom I had shown my inventions had agreed to help me, and they gave me a little paper with money in it, which I did not count until I got back to the hotel, when I found that it was in the neighborhood of two hundred dollars. This gift had no connection that I know of with the Order of American Knight«, or Sons of Liberty, and not a word was said about any thing of the kind. Nothing was said that I know of,, at the hotel, about using my invention for improper, disloyal or treasonable purposes; when the gentle- men talked together, they were quite far off from me, and they spoke very low. I was never in Salem, Indiana; though I may have passed through the place on ihe train ; nor did I ever exhibit my shells, or experiment with my Greek fire to Mr. Horace Heffren, at Salem. I never saw him until I met him in the cell where I am now confined. I never received from Dr. Bowles any money, or aid in any way; nor did I have any contract with him to fur- nish my missiles to him or to the Order of Sons of Liberty. CROSS-EXAMINATION. Dr. Bowles was present when the money was given to me, but I do not know who it was that furnished it, and never heard any one say. I think it was some gentleman to whom I showed the shell. I did not know the name of any one present, except Dr. Bowles and Mr. Stidger. My object in going to the Louisville Hotel was to try to get help. I knew Dr. Bowles before going there, having seen him at his place, he keeps a watering place; I went there to board at one time when I was sick. When I went to Dr. Bowles' place, h« was not there ; I waited perhaps an hour; when he cama TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 191 back, he asked me what my business was, and I told him that I had an invention. In the conversation it came out that I was out of means, and I thought I would board there, as it was cheaper than here. He said if I would go to Louisville, he would meet me there with some friends, and try to help me. I staid at his house until after dinner, when I left. Q. Do you pretend to say that you told them you were hard up, and they gave you two hundred dollars without mak- ing any agreement, or exacting any prom- ise? A. Yes, sir; they just presented me with two hundred dollars. From Louisville I think T came here, and staid about a week; I then went to Detroit, and staid about another week; from Detroit I went to Cincinnati; from there to Adams county, Ohio; then back to Cincinnati, and from Cincinnati here, where I have staid until now. Q. When was it you were in Windsor, Canada? A. I think it was in April or May. I was there a couple of weeks, but doing nothing, I boarded with a Mr. Steele ; I think they called him ('olonel Steele, but I do not know why. Possibly he was a Colonel in the rebel army, though he never told me, and I never asked him. There wei-e a couple of young men boarding with Colonel Steele; one was a nephew of his, the other I did not know. One of them, I believe, had been in the rebel army. I think 1 went from Kentucky to Canada. I knew Colonel Steele in Kentucky, when I was Major in Metcalf's Cavalry. It was when I was in Detroit that T went over to the Canada side, and saw Colonel Steele in a billiard saloon. I told him how I was situated ; that I wanted a partner to go in with me to get that shell through ; Mayor Barker, in De- troit, became my partner- I slept at Col- onel Steele's, and went over to Detroit every day. I saw Mr. Vallandigham there two or three times, but never spoke to him. William H. Chapman, a witness for the Government, was then introduced, and, be- ing duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, tes- tified as follows: I reside at Markle, Huntington county, Indiana, where I have lived about eight years. I am acquainted with Dr. Zumro, and know his general reputation for truth and veracity, and, from that reputation, I certainly should believe him under oath. CROSS-EXAMINATION. I am a Union man, and have voted with that party for several years. William Johnson, a witness for the Gov- ernment, was then introduced, and, being auly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified aa follows: I reside at Markle, Huntington county, Indiana. I am Captain of a home guard company ; I belong to the Union party. I have been acquainted with Dr. Zumro eight or ten years, and know his reputation for truth and veracity; that reputation is good, and I would believe him under oath. cross-examination. I have heard some people speak against Dr. Zumro, but I believe they have been his personal enemies ; and I do not know that Dr. Zumro has a larger share of men who speak ill of him, than other people who live in a town like Markle. There are between two and three hundred people in Markle. Samuel D. Price, a witness for the Gov- ernment, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: I reside in Rockcreek township. Wells county, Indiana. I am a carpenter ; at present a soldier in the army, which I en- tered about three weeks ago. I have known Dr. Zumro, intimately, for three or four years ; he is our family physician. I know his general reputation for truth and vera- city; it is good: and I would believe him under oath. cross-examination. Dr. Zumro never made any promises, or told me that I should be assigned to easy duties, if I testified in this case. I am not much acquainted about Markle, nor in Huntington county. I never heard any one say any thing against Dr. Zumro, but I have heard several speak in favor of hini before these treason cases came up. Among them I have heard Mr. Dresser, Mr. Kitting and Mr. Taylor. In politics I am a Repub- lican. Thurston W. Ritting, a witness for the Government, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: 1 reside in Rockcreek township. Wells county, Indiana, and am a farmer. 1 live four or five miles from Markle. I have been somewhat acquainted with Dr. Zumro about four years. His reputation is gener- ally good, and I would believe him under oath. cross-examination. I am a Union man. I have heard several people speak of Dr. Zumro, and they have said that he was a fine man, and that he was thought a good deal of BoRziLLAi Messler, a witness for the Gov- ernment, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: I reside in Rockcreek township, Wells county, and live about two miles from Dr. Zumro, whom I have known eight or ten 192 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. years ; his reputation for truth and veracity is good, and I should beUeve him under oath. CROSS-EXAMINATION. 1 used to vote the Democratic ticket, but I voted for Fremont for President, and have voted the Republican ticket since. Thomas G. Smith, a witness for the Gov- ernment, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: I reside in Markle, Huntington county, Indiana; have lived there since 1860; I have known Dr. Zumro since that time. My private relations with him have not been good. His reputation for truth and veracity in the neighborhood where he lives is gene- rally good, and I would believe him under oath. cross-examination. I have said, in times past, that Dr. Zumro was a scoundrel; that was before this con- troversy came up, and it arose out of a per- sonal difficulty, which made me feel un- kindly toward him at the time. I have heard Dr. Zumro spoken against, but I thought medical matters caused it. I have heard Dr. Zumro censured by some in connection with the church which he left; I believe the circumstances were these : In Pennsyl- vania there is a denomination which has a large fund for the education of ministers ; Dr. Zumro was one of their students, and was educated for the ministry at their ex- pense. He afterward changed his course, and instead of preaching, practiced medi- cine. Politically I am a friend of the Ad- ministration; I did not, however, vote for Mr. Lincoln the first time he was elected; in 1859 I voted with the Democratic party. Mrs. Elizabeth T. Simons, a witness for the Government, was then introduced, and, being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : I reside at Lagro, Indiana; formerly I re- sided at Huntington, Indiana. My father's name is Rev. Richard A. Curran. Q. Did you have any difficulty with your father about the time of your marriage ? Question objected to by the accused, as it is incompetent to impeach a witness who is caUed as an impeaching witness. Mr. Curran having been called to testify to Mr. Milligan's good character, and to Dr. Zum- ro's bad character. If it were permitted to call witnesses to impeacli witnesses for character, they might call rebutting witnesses, and there would be no end to such testimony. A witness whose character is impeached, can not call rebut- L.ng witnesses to testify to his good charac- ter, but that ends it. You might inquire whether an impeaching witness has a good character, or whether he has not. It is also u rule of law, that, on all material matters, a witness can not be impeached by calling other witnesses as to a matter of fact. The Judge Advocate replied: The reverend gentleman who testified in this Court, was called for the purpose of cer- tifying to the moral character of Mr. Milli- gan, as well as to his loyalty and law-abid- ing disposition. He testified at length upon that question. To ascertain from what stand-point he testified as to Mr. Milligan's character, in those respects, I asked about his own sentiments, also as to whether he had a difficulty with his daughter on this question, and whether he had not laid vio- lent hands upon her. I asked these questions to ascertain his sentiments toward the Government. When asked whether he had any difficulty with his daughter about her marriage with a Union man, and whether he had laid vio- lent hands upon her, he flatly denied the charges. It is, therefore, perfectly legiti- mate to disprove his assertions. I propose to ask the character of the man by whom the accused undertook to establish his char- acter. The accused replied: I do not remember that the foundation for the iiTipeachment was laid by calling the attention of the witness to the time and place when he made the declarations, or committed the act upon which he is to be impeached. Unless this was done, the wit- ness can not be impeached. I quote from Greenleaf On Evidence^ vol. 1, page 602: "The credit of a witness may also be im- peached by proof that he has made state- ments out of Court contrary to what he has testified at the trial. But it is only in such matters as are relevant to the issue, that the wit- ness can be contradicted." I may here ask whether it was relevant to the issue to know whether the witness choked his daughter or not, or did not want her to marry a Union man ? The author adds : "And before this can be done, it is gene- rally held necessary, in the case of verbal statements, first to ask him as to the time, place, and person involved in the supposed contradiction. It is not enough to ask him the geneial question, whether he has ever said so and so, nor whether he has always told the same story; because it may fre- quently happen, that upon the general question, he may not remember whether he has so said; whereas, when his attention is directed to particular circumstances and occasions, he may recollect and explain what he has formerly said. This course of proceeding is considered indispensable, from a sense of justice to the witness; for as the direct tendency of the evidence is to impeach his veracity, common justice re- quires that, by first calling his attention to the subject, he should have an opportunity to recollect the facts, and, if necessary, to TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 193 correct the statement already given ; as well as by a re-examination to explain the na- ture, circumstances, meaning, and design of what he is proved elsewhere to have said." The present case is one where an attempt is not only made to contradict the witness in regard to verbal statements, but also as to facts not relevant to the issue, and the rule of law just quoted is against the com- petency of the mode of examination pro- posed by the Judge Advocate. The Judge Advocate replied : If the testimony of the witness was not relevant to the issue, he should not have been put on the stand. It is relevant to the issue to find out whether he told the truth or not. The court room was then cleared for de- liberation. On being reopened, the Judge Advocate announced that the objection had been overruled, and the question sustained. The witness continued : I had a diiBculty with my father at the time of my marriage, but he always said that he did not oppose my marriage on account of the politics of my husband, though my impression has been otherwise. I think his words were, that he would as soon I would marry a negro as an abolitionist. He did use vio- lence toward me during that difficulty; he laid hands on me, and caught me by the throat, and made threats against my life. Q. Did he choke you? Question objected to, and withdrawn. He ordered me to leave the house, and forbade me to return. He threatened to knock my brains out if he met me any- where with Mr. Simons. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY JOHN R. COFFROTH, ESQ. My father drove me from his house in the morning, and, by the advice of my mother, I went to Dr. Blount's. In the afternoon of the same day, he came with Mr. Coftroth to the house where I was staying. I re- member my father saying to me^ in an tin- der tone, that he was perfectly willing that I should return home. I had had a con- versation with Mr. CofFroth prior to that. When I got to Dr. Blount's, I wrote a letter to Mr. Simons, stating the difficulty that had occurred. From there I went to his brother's. It was through Mrs. Blount's in- fluence 1 sent for Mr. Cofli'roth. Q. What motive did you have in sending for me? Question objected to by the Judge Advo- cate. The counsel replied: I press the question, because the witness was laboring under strong mental excite- ment, and to show that her father went there with myself, and that the whole mat- ter was talked over and reconciled, and 13 harmony restored between them. I pro- pose, further, to show that she was laboring under hallucination, and misunderstood her father. There are many reasons why this question should be allowed. It is an act of simple justice to the accused, and to the witness, whose character is called in ques- tion, that this course of examination should be permitted. The Judge Advocate replied : The present question is : "What was your motive in sending for me ?" It is perfectly immaterial to the Court what the motives of the witness were; that the counsel can investigate privately, if he desires. The simple question before the Court is, did Mr. Curran tell the truth when he said that he had never laid violent hands on his daughter, and never drove her from his house ? The examination-in-chief was con- fined to that, and the cross-examination must be confined to the same point. If the accused can ask the witness what oc- curred after her father drove her from his house, he can ask her about every transac- tion in her life from that time to this. The Court was cleared for deliberation. On the Court being reopened, the Judge Advocate announced that the objection had been sustained. Question by the accused: You may state whether on the day of the difficulty, your father did not visit you, and whether you did not become entirely reconciled with each other ? Objected to by the Judge Advocate, as involving the same legal question just passed on. Question withdrawn. Question by the accused : When your father came to see you, at that time, you may state, if in the conver- sation between yourself and your father, in talking over the difficulty, was it not ad- mitted by you to him, that the difficulty grew out of your calling your father a liar, and putting his hand on your shoulder he stated to you that you must not speak to him in that manner? A. I did not state any such thing. Q. Were not Mrs. Young, Mrs. Dr. Blount, and Mrs. Wm. Blount present at that in- terview ? A. Mrs. Dr. Blount was present; I am not positive about Mrs. Young being there. They were in the room when you came in, but I think left, except Mrs. Dr. Blount. Q. Was not Mrs. Dr. Blount present? A. Yes, sir. Q. Is it not true, that this matter of choking you was nothing more than the fact that your father laid his hand on your shoulder? A. He did choke me. Q. Where did he choke you? A. He caught me by the throat, Q. Have you not, for the last four or five 194 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. years, been laboring under strong mental excitement, induced by sun-stroke ? Question objected to by the Judge Ad- vocate. Such a question can only be put for one purpose: To prove the incompetency of the witness to testify. It is too late to make that point. It should have been made before going into such a cross-exam- ination as has been had. The counsel for the accused replied: The objection of the Judge Advocate is not well taken as to the proper time of showing the mental condition of the wit- ness. I may show that the witness is en- tirely incompetent to testify as to that par- ticular occurrence, because she was labor- ing under such strong mental excitement that it rendered her statements entirely incredible. AVe may show that the wit- ness was laboring under a partial hallucin- ation. It may be shown that during this excitement, and partial derangement, the witness may have conceived ideas not founded on fact, and I do not confine my question to the particular time of this dif- ficulty. It is well known that the witness had a sun-stroke several years ago, which aflfected her brain, and caused periods of strong mental excitement, and that they existed before the time of this difficulty, at the time, and since then. I withdraw the question as to that par- ticular time. My father has accused me of insanity, but I never understood that his reason for so thinking, was the cause of his objection to my marriage. Q. You may state whether, from that time to this, your father has not been the same kind father you have always known him to be? Objected to by the Judge Advocate, as immaterial. The counsel for the accused replied : I propose to show that for a long series of years, and indeed up to this time, her father has been one of the kindest and most in- dulgent of parents. I think I can show that he did not do what she complained of, and that she may be mistaken in her im- pressions about this matter. The Judge Advocate withdrew the objec- tion. The witness continued: I can not say that my father was kind in his treatment of me. He is naturally a very passionate man. RE-EXAMINATION. When I was suffering from this mental excitement, I was always prepared for these attacks of delirium, by a severe pain in my head several hours before the delirium set in. Sometimes the attacks would last a day and a night. At the time of my father's making that attack upon me, I had not suffered from any paroxysm of deli- rium for more than a year, nor have I had any attack since that difficulty occur- red, except immediately afterward. Within three or four days after this difficulty I was taken quite ill, and was delirious for twenty-four hours afterward, during which I ruptured a blood vessel. Though my father is a passionate and excitable man, he did not use any violence toward me be- fore the difficulty of which i have spoken. He used threatening language to me in the fall, I think, previous to this diffi- culty, which was in the spring of 1863. His threat, I think, was that he would shoot me, and he made this threat several times. I never had any words with my father about political matters until the morning of my difficulty, and I do not recall any other instances of unkindness except the threats in connection with my contemplated marriage with Mr. Sim- ons. I never heard my father make use of any expressions against the Government. The Judge Advocate then announced that the accused and the Government having no more witnesses to introduce, the testimony was closed. The counsel for the accused desired the Commission to adjourn till Tuesday next, to allow time for the preparation of their final argument. The Commission then adjourned, to meet on Tuesday, December 6, 1864, at 10 o'clock, A. M. N THE JURISDICTION OF A MILITARY COMMISSION, JONATHAN W. GORDON. Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Commission : I appear for Colonel Bowles and Mr. Hum- phreys, who have directed me to discuss the question of your jurisdiction to try them. Before proceeding to this discussion, however, I may be pardoned for briefly referring to some preliminary considerations. I will not deny that I am oppressed with the greatness and weight of the labor assigned me. Many circumstances conspire to make this day's work a burden, while but few sources of external encouragement and sup- port are to be found. I meet at the threshold of the solemn duty of this hour, the settled hostility of the Ad- ministration, the fierce and relentless spirit of the dominant party, and a strong tide of prejudice and passion created by a partisan press, which, during this trial, has continually prejudged the questions to be discussed and decided here to-day. Nor, indeed, has this uncharitable work been confined to the press. Public speakers have caught up the testi- mony of witnesses even before their cross-ex- amination; and, with such one-sided, partial, broken fragments of the whole truth, have rushed eagerly into the popular arena, and proclaimed the guilt of the accused in every part of the State. It is impossible that these facts should not have met your observation ; and almost as im- possible that you should not (although you are all unconscious of their influence) be more or less afl"ected by them. They can not, indeed, have passed unobserved by you who have been at liberty, and circulating freely among the people; for they have found their way even into the lonely cells of the prisoners, and made themselves manifest by the dim and dismal twilight of their dungeons. They are, indeed, every-where. They have polluted the atmosphere, and infected the minds of the people. They are like the air around and within us; and pass unheeded and unthought of, while they give color, direction and tone to all our thoughts and actions. Noi; in regard to one of the accused, has it been sufficient for the purposes of those who have joined in this hue and cry, to confine their assaults upon him to the present time, or to the off'enses with which he now stands charged. They have gone back to the days of other years, and have dragged up and scat- tered over the land, old, and stale, and groundless imputations of delinquency orig- inating in the time of the Mexican War. A record, made by interested men, for selfish and ambitious purposes, has been referred to, and old passions and prejudices invoked, upon a point whereon the people of Indiana are justly more sensitive than upon any other — the point of honor. But even that record does not as- sail his courage, his gallantry, or his patriot- ism; and, if it did, "he might still proudly ap- peal from it to the testimony of his illustrious commander, Major General Zachary Taylor, under whose eye he fought on the glorious field of Buena Vista. To the report of that chieftain he appeals against the slanders born of subsequent and interested accounts of that contest; and prays that they may not be al- lowed to give a false and injurious coloring to the present accusation, and to the sentence which you are now about to pronounce. I confess, however, that a still graver source of embarrassment to me, in the performance of my present duty, springs from the nature of the subject to be discussed — the importance of the principles to be defended. In view of these, the lives and fortunes of the accused — and, indeed, of us all — are as nothing. They and we are but mortal men. The worst that can possibly befall them at your hands, can, therefore, but anticipate, by a very few years, the common doom which time, or disease, or both together, will bring to them and to us all; for " To every man upon this earth, death cometh soon or late." It is not, then, merely because the lives and fortunes of the accused are suspended upon the result of this trial, that I confess myself embarrassed — overwhelmed at this moment, in the presence of the duty to which it calls me. That the lives, and fortunes, and good fame of the defendants are all involved in this cause, is, indeed, of itself, a fact of suflicient importance to touch very nearly any one whose heart is not dead to the gentle plead- ings of pity and mercy; and weigh heavily upon him who in any, even the least degree, nmy divide the responsibility of an unfortu- nate result to either. I am not insensible to the weight of responsibility due, in that re- 195 196 TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANArOLIS. spect, to my relation to their cause. I am sure, however, that I should but ill represent their sentiments and wishes, if I allowed my- self, in this defense of their individual in- terests, wholly to lose sight of the conse- quences which must follow to the cause of con- stitutional liberty in our country, by sub- jecting them to a military jurisdiction, to which, by the Constitution and laws of the land, they are, in my judgment, clearly not amenable. The general consequences which must flow from such a precedent, give this trial an importance far above any private in- terests involved in it; and make my sense of responsibility painful in the extreme, for fear that '■'■the good old cause^' may suffer detriment through some default of mine. But amid all these sources of discourage- ment and embarrassment — and there are others which time will not permit me to no- tice — I acknowledge with due thankfulness that there are not wanting some great encour- agements and supports. Among these is the fact of publicity. These things are not done in a corner, nor under a bushel. They will be proclaimed from the house-top; and read and known of all men. They will be recon- sidered and rejudged long after they shall have lost all their importance to us who are now engaged in them. What is right in them will be retained and appropriated by man- kind to aid the great cause of civil liberty, and advancing civilization. What is wrong will just as certainly be condemned and re- jected, as useless or hurtful to the same cause, by the same judgment. The record which we this day make up and complete, will go to the tribunal of history — a tribunal where preju- dice can not wound, nor slander kill. To all who earnestly strive to follow the path of truth and justice this day, the decisions of this tribunal can bring neither harm nor shame; for truth and justice are its eternal founda- tions. Nor am I less encouraged and upheld by the voice of history. The labor assigned me will rest upon facts and precedents, handed down to us by the liberty-loving race to which we belong. If these shall be regarded as of any authority in this forum, then my labors shall not be in vain. Success shall crown them. The character of the members of this Commission, their habitual love of constitu- tional liberty, and of order maintained by law, do not permit me to doubt that they will carefully consider the great question of juris- diction; and, indeed, all other questions prop- erly before them, and render an honest find- ing and sentence according to the Constitu- tion and laws of the land. That Constitution and those laws are but the organization of the facts and precedents transmitted to us with our blood, by our British ancestors. They are mingled with our very being; and permeate all the channels of our social anil political life. To abandon thciii, is to give up our social and political life — is to die. And, indeed, in this time of national sickness, when the pub- lic mind is suffering luiiler a melancholy and morbid excitement, amounting almost to frenzy, it would be madness to give up the sure foun- dations of the Constitution and laws, and the history and customs of a thousand years upom which they rest, for any new-fangled notioa born of these evil times. It would be like a man, amid the delirium of a fever, abandon- ing the business and habits of a whole life- time, for a new business and new habits with which he had no acquaintance whatever. His^ friends would confine him in a straight jacket, and send him to a lunatic asylum. No, therefore, it must not be. The past is the only basis upon which to reconstruct the present. — the Constitution, on which it is pos- sible to reunite the belligerent members of this- once glorious, but now broken Union. But we, who are devoted to this great work of re- construction, must not exhibit to all the world our utter disregard of its plainest provisions, and most sacred principles. We must not throw down and destroy the fences, which it has built about the primordial rights of man- kind ; and then expect our enemies, or even; our friends to believe us sincere in our profes- sions of love for the Constitution, or desire to restore the Union; for, by such a course, wa shall become scarcely less guilty of treasoa to our country, than rebels in arms against it. Indeed, the only distinction, in such case,, would be that which separates /orce from fraud;: and as between two such means to such an end, I am sure you will agree with me that force is by far the more noble and manly. But we stand opposed to both — we who stand for our country; and I am comforted to believe that you who have each offered your lives for- its salvation from the dangers that assail it by force, will not hesitate to interpose your justice to save it from overthrow which may threaten it under the forms of law. It is left for others to discuss the questions of guilt or innocence arising from the testi- mony in its application to the charges. I have nothing to do with it. Only so much of the evidence as tends to throw light on the question of jurisdiction falls to me; and I shall refer to the charges and specifications in so far only as they may aid in the same gen- eral purpose. The argument I am to make would be just as valid if the guilt of the ac- cused stood admitted, as if their innocence- were established by the proof, beyond all question. There are rights which belong to the guilty as well as to the guiltless; and among them is that of a fair constitutional and legal trial, and all the legitimate consequences thereof This right, among the ignorant and unthink- ing, is often lost sight of, and sometimes dis- regarded. It is, nevertheless, as important as- any other. Its denial is, therefore, a crime, not only against the individual, but alsa against society at large. To destroy a mur- derer or a traitor by any other process tlian that prescribed by law, is as much murder as to kill the best man in the country. Dr. Francis Lieber has well presented this subject in his treatise on Political Ethics. He says: "The State never ceases to protect; even the blackest criminal, the moment before his head falls, is protected. It was a most fallacious- argument th&t,/rustra legis auxilitmi inrocal quk TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 197 'legem committit, from the lex ialionis, or as St. John said before the Lords, when he brought in the bill of attainder against the Earl of Stafford (April 29, 1641), 'He that would not iiave others have a law, why should he have any himself?' 'Why should not that be done to him, that he himself would have done to others?' Even modern writers have endeav- ored to derive the punitory power of the ^tate, from the fact that the offender, by doing wrong, declares himself out of the jural soci- ety. Nothing can be more untenable in all its bearings. On the contrary, the State being especially a jural society, can not possibly act except by law, and upon jural relations, and as far as the right of an individual is the ■condition of his union with other rational individuals, punishment is the right of the offender, however paradoxical this may sound at first, because we are accustomed to imagine under right, some specific privileges. State punishment is likewise the protection of the •offender, who, without it, would be exposed to all, even the most extravagant modes of pri- vate redress. No offender would hesitate to acknowledge and claim State punishment as his right, if the choice were left him, between State punishment, which, because it is State punishment, requires a formal trial on the one hand: and, on the other, those summary pro- 'Ceedings against criminals caught flagrante delicto^ which we find, perhaps, in all early •codes, and sometimes acknowledged to a very late period {Blackstone, 4, 308), or to which an excited people sometimes return, when the Tegular trial appears too slow for their in- flamed passions, as has been the case in those riotous and illegal inflictions of death or other punishment, so unfortunately called lynch law in our country. I say unfortunately called lynch law, for it is ever to be deplored, if any illegal procedure receives a regular and sepa- rate name of its own. By this very applica- tion of a technical term, it assumes an air of systematized authority, which has an aston- ishing effect upon the multitude, and, in fact, aipon most men." Book 2, § 345. It is this simple principle that makes it murder for any one to kill even a man con- demned to death by a competent court, in a different manner, or at a different time or place, than may have been fixed by the judg- ment. The law in this respect makes no dif- ference between the lives of the guilty and the guiltless. Hence, when men seek to bring their enemies to justice and punishment by short and easy methods unknown to the law, and, therefore, in violation thereof, they but dig a pit into which themselves may, at any moment, fall and be lost. He who kills even •a traitor in violation of law, kills at the same time the law itself. Whatever may be your opinions, therefore, of the guilt or innocence of the accused, it •can not effect the question of jurisdiction. The next topic to which I desire to call yotir uttention, arises from the language of the several specifications, and is particularly im- portant for the purposes of this discussion, in «o far as it may apply to those embraced un- der the last charge, namely, "Violation of THE Laws of War." It is this; that the alleged offenses were committed ''within the military lines of the army of the United States, and the theater of military operations." AVhatever may have been the purpose of the Judge Advocate in inserting this clause, it is clear to any lawyer that no jurisdiction can arise from it, when taken in connection with the fact that the accused are citizens of the State of Indiana, and of the United States; and that Indiana has always sustained a lela- tion of loyalty to the Union and its Govern- ment. But even if there was no proof of citizenship of the accused, it has not been proven that the State of Indiana is either "within the military lines of the armies of the United States," or "the theater of military operations." Had the averment been that it was within the theater of war, it would have been well; for the whole country is the theater of war. But that can not be said of the lines of the army, or of the theater of military operations. There is no definition of "the lines of the army " that extends so far as is here claimed by the Judge Advocate; and all military writers which I have been able to examine, define "the theater of operations " as follows, contradistinguishing it from the theater of war: ^'The theater of war embraces not only the territory of the two belligerent powers, but also that of their allies, and of such second- ary powers as, through fear or interest, may be drawn into the contest." * ® * "I'Ae theater of operations^ however, is of a more limited character, and should not be con- founded with the theater of war. In general, it includes only the territory which an army seeks, on the one hand, to defend, and on the other to invade." HaUeck's Elements of Military Art and Science, p. 44; Jomini's Art of War, 74, 7a. I conclude, therefore, that "the theater of military operations," of a given army, must be in front of the base of operations of that army. Thus, the base of operations of Gen- eral Buell's army, durin| the winter of 1861 and the succeeding spring, was the Ohio river; and his theater of operations, the whole coun- try south of that base. And so of other armies. The base of our operations has generally been some line separating friendly from hostile territory; and hence, ''the theater of opera- tions," during this war, has generally been upon the enemy's soil. The sea-coast, 1 know, has frequently, during the present war, be- come the base of our operations; but, then, the enemy's country was still, in every instance, the theater of those operations. It is useless, however, to discuss these public and notorious facts; for the citizenship of the accused ren- ders the attempt to make them responsible for a violation of the laws of war, wholly futile. Public enemies, only, are subject to the laws of war. The citizen, on the other hand, must answer for such acts as would, if committed by an enemy, be a transgression of the laws and usages of war, to his own Government, according to its own laws. I will ofi'er a sin- gle example, which I quote from the autobi- ography of Lieutenant General Scott. It la as follows: 198 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. "In time of war all persons, not citizens of or owing allegiance to tlie United States of America, who shall be found lurking, as spies, in or about fortifications or encampments of the armies of the United States, or any of them, shall suffer death according to the law and usage of nations, by sentence of a gen- eral court-martial." "'Not citizens;' because, if citizens, and found 'lurking,' the crime would be that of treason — 'adhering to [our] enemies, giving them aid and comfort;' and is so defined by the Constitution." Vol. 1, pp. 290, 291. But what are "the laws of war? " To whom do they apply? The answer to these questions must forever put an end to all attempts to in- voke the aid of those laws, and of the tribu- nals in which they are administered for the trial and punishment of one of our own citi- zens; for it must be remembered that "the laws of war" constitute that branch of inter- national law which regulates the intercourse and conduct of belligerent persons — public enemies — with eacli other. It is this code that condemns spies, when taken, to an infamous punishment at the hands of their enemy. It is for cruel breaches of tliis code, that we are sometimes compelled, as a measure of self- defense, to resort to the cruel practice of retaliation. It is to this code we refer for authority to punish guerrillas. And so I might go on until I had enumerated all its f)rovi- sions; but I should not find one for the pun- ishment of one of our own citizens among them all, unless it was established that he had first joined himself to, and become part of our acknowledged public adversaries. These laws of war are international — wholly interna- tional; and do not apply to the internal regu- lation of either one of two or more belligerent powers engaged in the same contest. If, however, it shall be said that all persons, or the great body of them, engaged in the present contest, on either side, are citizens of the United States; and, therefore, that a diffi- culty results in the*application of this public code to the parties, and that wliat character any citizen may sustain to either, may not always be clear, I grant it; but what follows? Can we give a man a liostile character before he has openly espoused it? Can we strip him of the rights of citizenship, before he lias ac- quired that relation to the enemy which will entitle him to the protection of this code, as well as subject him to its penalties, in case he violates it? There must be some general rule on the subject; and there can be no other or better one than to hold all persons resident in the States which have seceded and still remain out of the Union, && prima facie public enemies; and all those who have adhered, and still ad- here, to the Constitution and Union, us prima facie citizens of, and subject to the laws and authority of the United States. I know, indeed, that there are at least two States which have hitherto stistained an am- biguous relation to the struggle. I allude to Kentucky and Missouri. They have never eeceded by solemn act; and still maintain their Constitutional relation to the Federal Government. But, then, they are also repre- sented in the Confederate Congress and army. The character of a citizen of either, must, therefore, depend upon his conduct; and he must be treated accordingly. If he has not joined the public enemy openly, but commits a crime against the Government, he is entitled to be tried therefor by the ordinary courts of the Union, in pursuance of the Constitution and laws. If he has joined the public enemy and been taken in arms, or '■'■lurking as a spy," he is entitled to be treated according to "the laws of war:" in the former case to be ex- changed as a prisoner of war; in the latter, to be hung for violating the laws of war. And this is just what our Government has been doing during this rebellion. The form of these charges places the Gov- ernment, then, in the following attitude toward the accused, namely: As claiming them as cit- izens on the one hand, but denying them the rights of citizenship on the other: as fixing upon them, for the purposes of this trial, and the punishment and infamy that may follow it, the character of public enemies, on the one hand; but denying them any of the advan- tages resulting from that character, on the other. Such a course, I submit, is unheard of in the judicial proceedings of our country; and with all deference to my friend, the Judge Advocate, is, in my opinion, wholly inadmis- sible. I have little apprehension, therefore, that you will claim jurisdiction of the accused on the ground that they are guilty of a viola- tion of the laws of war; and, by consequence, public enemies. If you sustain your juris- diction at all, it must, therefore, be upon the basis of martial law. I beg leave to call your attention to a fact, in evidence, which must exercise an important intiuence upon your judgment on the ques- tion: Whether martial law is, or has been, in force in the State of Indiana, or not? and, of course, upon that of your jurisdiction. I allude, of course, to the fact that the courts, both of the State and of the United States, within the State of Indiana, have never, at any time, during the present rebellion, been thereby shut up, and the course of justice therein disturbed and stopped; but that those tribunals have all along remained open, and engaged in the administration of justice; and capable of enfoiciiig their judgments, orders, and decrees, according to the established laws of the land. This fact was not proven in J/r. Dodds case. His escape cut oft" all evidence in his defense; and, of course, this fact among others. Upon this fact, however, and a more thorough argument, 1 build my hopes of an ultimate decision against the jurisdiction. lu pressing the argument and giving utterance to these hopes, I beg leave to say for myself, and for those whom I represent, that our ob- jection to the jurisdiction does not spring from any objection to the individual members of the Court as fair-minded and honorable gentlemen, and worthy to sit in judgment upon any man in the land, subject, under the Constitution and laws, to their authority. It is, on the other hand, simply because as citi- zens, in no wise connected with the military or naval service of the United States, the TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 199 accused are not within any military jurisdic- tion whatever. They claim the right to be tried byoneof the constitutional courtsof theircoun- try, and by a jury thereof. They ask justice at the hands of their peers of the District of the State of Indiana. For justice is properly j ustice only when legal, constitutional, and just means are employed in the attainment of legal, constitutional, and just ends. Your findings may correspond precisely with what would be those of a jury of the country; but if you lack jurisdiction — the right to find at all in the premises — it would be a mockery to call them, or any subsequent proceedings thereon, justice. Justice must have a right origin, or it can not exist. If what is called justice proceed from a tribunal without authority, it is injustice, outrage, crime; and, if it reach the life of him who is made its subject, it is murder. 3 Co. Inst.., p. 52; I Hale^s His. C. P., p. 6, 499-501; 4 Bl. Com., 178; and 4 State Trials, p. 129. A good citizen will not accept even a favor- able judgment at the hands of an unauthor- ized tribunal, much less an adverse one; because it involves the overthrow of the laws and government of his country, on which all rights, whether of person or property, depend. A good State, alive to a proper sense of its duty and dignity, will never allow him to ac- cept the one, nor to be made the victim of the other. Has this Commission, then, jurisdiction of this cause ? May it rightfully, lawfully, con- stitutionally try the accused upon the charges and specifications exhibited against them ? If it may, whence does it derive its authority for that purpose? I am here, to-day, to endeavor to answer these questions. You are here, to-day, to judge whether I give the true response, or not. That you may " the better judge," I ask your attention, your candor, and your patience. I do not believe that you will hold, as was maintained before you on a former occasion, that you are precluded from going into the question of jurisdiction by the mere order of the General convening this Commission, and that sending the accused before you "for trial." That I may not misrepresent the posi- tion taken by the learned Judge Advocate, upon this point, I beg leave to quote the entire paragraph. It is as follows : "When General Hovey convened this Com- mission within the limits of his jurisdiction, and committed the case of Harrison H. Dodd, the accused, to this Commission to try it, by virtue of his military power, acting under the authority that was given to him by the Com- mander-in-chief of the Army, namely, the President of the United States, he suspended the civil law, and put in operation the military, or martiallaw. The officers of this Commission could not, under the oath that they have taken, refuse to obey the orders of the officers placed over them. They could not stop and go back of that order, and refuse to hear and determ- ine this case." Now, whatever may have been your deci- sion in that case upon the question of jurisdic- tion, I am very certain that you did not adopt the doctrine of this paragraph. I know you do not, and can not hold to the slavish and shameful notion, that you sit here to do what- ever the commanding General may order. Obedience of the inferior to the superior ia for the field, the march, the camp, the desk ; and even there it has its limits. The law does not require obedience any-where in contraven- tion of its own provisions. You are sworn to obey the "lawful" commands of your supe- riors ; and there your obligation ceases. The employment of the word "lawful" [Art. War, Sec. 9), clearly excludes the idea of obedience to all but such commands. The unlawful order of a superior, even the highest, can not be given in evidence in justification of a tres- pass — much less of a felony. Can obedience, then, extend to the duties of the court room, and subordinate the justice which, in your judicial capacity, your are to administer there? If it does, what a mockery is all mili- tary justice ! Who would, or could consent to sit as a member of a military court, and pass judgment upon the lives and fortunes of his fellow-men, when his own convictions of the law and the facts, in the case, were to have no control over his decisions! "I had sooner be a dog and bay at the moon." Held on such terms, your commissions would be but badges of the most odious and wicked servitude. Every free mind that has not quite escaped the direction of conscience, must reject such a position with indignation and horror! I think I hear you exclaiming at such a proposal : "No; let the General go di- rectly to his purposes, and punish whom he will, and as he will, without the deceitful and wicked pretense of a trial. I will brave all consequences sooner than thus surrender my manhood. He shall never employ me in a mockery so foul, and so cruel!" Every hon- orable mind would so feel and so speak ; and none, I am sure, more promptly and warmly than my distinguished friend, the General, who now commands this district; and under whose authority you sit. For, if it is all a matter of command and obedience, then let the command and its execution stand together, without the intervention of this hol- low form of justice. Do not mock the pre- destined victims with the delusive hopes arising from the forms of a trial, that, from first to last, on this theory, can not rise higher than a miserable trick to deceive the looker-on ; and divide the responsibility of acts not capable of justification, when placed before the world in their true light. Indeed, on such a theory, you do not constitute a court at all, in any received sense of the term; for "a court is a place where justice is judicially administered." With these observations, I shall deliver this topic to your consideration and judgment. I am thus brought at last to the discussion of martial law, as the basis, and, indeed, the only basis on which your jurisdiction of the present cause can possibly be sustained. If martial law does, in fact, exist in the State of Indiana, you may have jurisdiction. If it does not, you do not, and can not possibly pos- 200 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. sess such jurisdiction. The question, there- fore, recurs upon us: Has martial law an actual existence in the State of Indiana to-day? If so, how has it received such existence? Does it exist by proclamation, by law, or by necessity? If by proclamation, or law, when was the proclama- tion made, or the law passed? If by neces- sity, when did that necessity arise; and wherein does it consist? As the first step toward a satisfactory an- swer to these questions, let us determine what martial law really is ; for this is still a ques- tion. This question I propose to answer from the books. Smith says : " Martial law is the law of war, that depends on the just, but arbitrary power of the King or his lieutenant; for, though the King doth not make any law but by common consent in Parliament, yet in. time of war, by reason of the necessity of it, to guard against dangers that often arise, he useth absolute power, so that his word is law." Smith on the English Re- public, book 2, chap. 4. Sir Matthew Hale, in his History of the Corn- man Latv, says : "Martial law is not, in truth and reality, a law, but something indulged rather than allowed as a law; the necessity of govern- ment, order, and discipline in an army is that only which gives these laws any countenance." 1 His. a L., p. 54. I make this quotation, not because, in the present state of opinion and law, either in England or America, it gives us a very pre- cise and accurate notion of martial law; but in order to bring it into relation to a criticism which, when taken in connection with the Btate of British military law at the time the venerable Hale wrote, is, in my opinion, en- tirely unjust; and, to show that, at that time, this definition was as accurate and complete as covild be given. The criticism to which I refer is that of the late Attorney General Gushing. He says : "This proposition is a mere composite blun- der — a total misapprehension of the matter. It confounds martial law and military/ law; it ascribes to the former the uses of the latter ; it erroneously assumes that the government of a body of troops is a necessity, more than that of a body of civilians, or citizens. It confounds and confuses all the relations of the subject, and is an apt illustration of the incompleteness of the notions of the common- law jurists of England in regard to matters not comprehended in that limited branch of legal science." 8 Opinions of the Ait'ys Gen., SC).'), et seq. Now, I beg leave to say, that Sir Matthew Hale was not a mere common-law lawj^er. His writings show him to have been familiar with the civil law; and to have read extensively the Continental writers on public law. Nor is it true that his observations on the nature and uses of martial law constitute a mere "composite blunder" — "a total misapprehen- sion of the question." The "blunder," on the contrary, is on the part of the learned At- torney General; and not on that of the ven- erable Chief Justice. It will be apparent that I am right, if we refer to the state of Eng land and English military law at the time the History of the Common Law was written. Its author died in 167G. Up to that time England had properly no military cod-e. Her armies were really subject to such laws as the King might impose, where a limit upon his will, in this respect, had not been fixed by Parliament It was not until after Hale wrote, and had been gathered to his fathers, that the first mil itary bill was passed, and military law thereby placed upon a different footing from that of martial law. The will of the King, until then, was the law of the army — a will regulated, indeed, by the principles of the civil law ; but, even, in that respect, controlled no fur- ther than he chose; and this will is the same, whether applied to soldiers or civilians. " It is not, in truth and reality, a law." It was, nevertheless, pretty much all the law known to the British army in the time of Hale. 1 Bl. Com., chap. 13 ; 1 Sullivan's Lectures, p. 257. In this view of the facts of history, and the state of military law when Hale wrote, the learned Attorney General seems to be guilty of the blunder which he attributes to the Chief Justice. The first member of Mr. Stephens' defini- tions of martial law is sulficiently accurate. He says : " Martial law may be defined as the law (whatever it may be), which is imposed by military power." 2 Com. Laws of England, p. 561. The Duke of Wellington was also right when he defined it thus: '■'-Martial law is neither more nor less than the will of the General who commands the army." Hansard's Debates, (3d series), vol. 115, p. 880. And again when he wrote as follows : "Military law" [i. e., martial Zaw], "as ap- plied to any persons excepting officers, sol- diers, and followers of the army, for whose government there are particular provisions of law, in all well regulated countries, is neither more nor less than the will of the Gen- eral of the army." Dispatches, vol. 6, p. 43. The distinction between martial and military law is, in this last definition, made plain, the latter being confined to provisions of law for the regulation of the army; and the former to such as the will of the General may impose upon those— .-not soldiers — under 7narlial law. Earl Grey, in discussing the questions growing out of a declaration of martial law in Ceylon, again expresses the idea with suf- ficient accuracy. He says: "What is called proclaiming martial law, is no law at all; but merely for the sake of public safety, in circumstances of great emergency, setting aside all law and acting tinder military power; a proceeding which requires to be fol- lowed up by an act of indemnity when the disturbances are at an end." Hough's Prec. in Mil. Law, p. 515. Judge-Advocate-General Dundas, in writing upon the subject, says: '^Martial law is not a written law; it arises on a necessity to be judged of by the Execu- tive, and ceases the instant it can possibly be TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 201 allowed to cease. MUitary law has to do only with the land forces of the Crown, mentioned in the second section of the Mutiny Act. Mar- tial law comprises all persons, all are tinder it, whether they be civil or military." Second Rep. on Ceylon, Hough, supra, p. 535. "When martial law is proclaimed," says Hough, " courts-martial are thereby vested with such a summary proceeding, that neither time, place nor persons are considered. Ne- cessity is the only rule of conduct; nor are the punishments which courts-martial may inflict under such authority limited to" such as are prescribed by law. Hough on Courts- Martial, p. 383. Captain Benet, in his treatise on Military Laio vnd Courts-Martial, in speaking of martial law, «ays: " 3Iartial law, then, is that military rule and authority which exists in time of war, and is conferred by the laws of war, in relation to persons and things, under and tvithin the scope of active military operations in carrying on the war, and which extinguishes or suspends civil rights, and the remedies founded upon them for the time being, so far as it may appear to be necessary, in order to the full accomplishment of the pur- pose of the war, the party exercising it being liable in an action for any abuse of the au- thority thus conferred. It is the application of military government — the government of force — to persons and property within the scope of it, according to the laws and usages of war, to the exclusion of municipal govern- ment, in all respects where the latter would impair the efficiency of military law, or mili- tary action." Benet on Mil. Law and Courts- Martial, p. 14. The late Commander-in-chief of the Army of the United States, Major General Halleck, observes : "We remark, in conclusion, that the right to declare, apply and exercise martial laiv, is one of the rights of sovereignty, and is as es- sential to the existence of a State, as is the right to declare or carry on war. It is one of the incidents of war, and, like the power to take human life in battle, results directly and immediately from the fact that war le- gally exists. It is a power inherent in every government, and must be regarded and recog- nized by all other governments, but the ques- tion of the authority of any particular func- tionary to exercise this power, is a matter to be determined by local, and not by interna- tional law. Like a declaration of siege, or blockade, the power of the officer who makes it, is to be presumed until disavowed; and neutrals who attempt, in derogation of that authority, do so at their peril." International Laio and Laws of War, p. 380. Again, he says : "The English common law authorities gen- erally confound martialyiiih military XAVf ; and, consequently, throw very little light upon the subject, considered as a domestic fact; and in parliamentary debates it has usually been discussed as a fact, rather than as forming any part of their system of jurisprudence. Nevertheless, there are numerous instances in which martial law has been declared and enforced, in time of rebellion or insurrection, not only in India, and British Colonial Pos- sessions, but also in England and Ireland. It seems that no act of Parliament is required to precede such declaration, although it ia usually followed by an act of indemnity, when the disturbances which called it forth are at an end, in order to give constitutional exist- ence to the fact of martial law." Id., 374. I desire to remark, in passing, that a care- ful study of the English authorities alluded to, will, perhaps, explain them, and show that their confusion is only apparent, in relation to this subject. In the first place, as already shown, the English had no distinct system of military law until after the revolution of 1688; and before that time, their armies were sub- ject, in a great degree, to simple martial law. It is true, the King's will was, in some meas- ure, restrained by statute. In the second, as the only ground upon which that will — martial law — can apply to others than soldiers within the kingdom, is that of necessity, it was both natural and philosophical for them to regard it as simply a fact. Indeed, it is nothing else but a fact both in its origin and its applica- tion. It originates in necessity, which is a fact. It is the will of the commanding gen- eral, who always determines its extent and the mode of its application. It will thus assume a different form — will be more or less sweep- ing — cruel or merciful, according to the exi- gency of each particular instance of its exer- cise, as well as the character and temper of him who administers it. A thing thus vari- ant and uncertain can not be allowed as a law; for a law must be a rule prescribed, must be uniform in its application, which can never be said of any thing resulting from mere necessity, and subject for its measure and duration to mere human will. The only element common to such a state of administra- tion and law, is that both are applied to the affairs of men. It will, therefore, be subject, of course, to the judgment of public opinion as all other facts are, in which moral agents and relations are involved; but whatever re- straint that imposes, can not change the fact into a law. Nor, it would seem, does the right of a belligerent depend upon the legality of the war, as remarked by General Halleck. On the contrary, we might naturally suppose that he who entered upon an illegal and unjust war, would be most likely to avail himself first of the advantages of martial law, which, in the language of Mr. Adams, would "sweep the laws of his adversary by the board," and substitute his discretion therefor. Hence, up- on the whole, I see no reason why the learned general should criticise the English. The last two authors cited, seemingly without per- ceiving it, confine the operation of martial law to the territory of public enemies, or to the immediate theater of military operations. In either view, their remarks are inapplicable to our condition here; for we may admit the most unbounded authority to exercise martial law in our generals, in carrying on a foreign war in an enemy's country; or in a domestic war '■'■within the scope of active military operations," and it will not follow that any such authority 202 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. can exist in a State devoted to the Govern- ment, and in no sense the theater of "active military operations." In the foreign country, the citizen will be subject to international law; and our public enemy can not look be- yond that to see whether, in the exercise of martial law, we disregard our own Constitution. At home, the fact of war and the immediate presence of hostile armies puts an end to all other laws; and martial laiv, for the time be- ing, exists by necessity. Military power is rather, in such case, a law to itself. They leave us, therefore, in quite as much doubt and confusion, so far as the case in hand is concerned, as they found us. I beg your pardon for introducing here, a little out of place, the observations upon martial law of some of our own leading politi- cians. I say politicians advisedly ; for I do not think that they were generally actuated in the utterance of these opinions by the motives that should govern statesmen ; and I do not think 80, because the whole spirit of the de- bates in which they were delivered, was of a most decided and even bitter partisan tone. I allude to the debates on remitting the fine imposed by Judge Hall upon General Jack- eon, at New Orleans, in 1815, for contempt of court in refusing obedience to a writ of habeas corpus. Democrats in Congress were in favor of the measure; while most, if not all the Whigs, were opposed to it. Mr. John Q. Adams, then in the House of Representatives, made it an occasion for striking at both the Democratic party and slavery. He maintained that the measure was a hobby, on which lead- ing Democrats were seeking to elevate them- selves to the Presidency upon General Jack- son's popularity; and then turned upon the slaveholders of the South, and reminded them how easy it would be, in some fit emergen- cy, to employ martial law for the abolition of slavery. And such generally was the spirit of the debate; a spirit, one would think, little calculated to render opinions remarka- ble for their legal accuracy. It was in this debate that Mr. Adams said: "The power of Congress" — the power to de- clare martial law — " has, perhaps, never been called into exercise under the present Consti- tution. But when the laws of war are in force, what, I ask, is one of those laws? It is this : that when a country is invaded, and tivo hos- tile armies are met in martial array, the com- manders of both armies have power to eman- cipate all the slaves in the invaded territory. "And here I recur again to the example of General Jackson. What ar0 you about in Congress? You are about passing a law to re- fund to Goneral Jackson, the amount of a cer- tain fine imposed ujjon him by a judge under the laws of Louisiana. You are going to refund him the money with interest, and this you are going to do, because the imposition of the fine was un- jast. And why was it unjust? Because General Jackson was acting under the laws of war; and because the moment you place a military commander in a district' that is the tlicater of war, the laws of war apply to that place. "I might furnish a thousand proofs to show that the pretensions of the gentlemen to the sanctity of their municipal institutions, un- der a state of actual invasion, and actual war, whether sei^ile, civil, or foreign, is wholly unfounded, and that the laws of war do, in all such cases, take pr-ecedence. I lay this down as the law of nations. I say, the military authority takes, for the time, the place of all municipal institutions, and of slavery among the rest; and that, under that state of things, so far from its being true, that the States where slavery exists have the ex- clusive management of the subject, not only the President of the United States, but the commander of the army, has power to order the universal emancipation of the slaves. I have given here more in detail a principle which I have asserted on this floor before now; and of which I have no more doubt than that you, sir, occupy that chair." In the course of the same debates, Mr. Bu- chanan, taking it for granted that General Jackson had done no more than his duty in declaring martial law in New Orleans, in 1814 and 1815, said: "If General Jackson did no more than his duty in declaring martial laio, the moment that declaration was made, the oflBcial functions of Judge Hall ceased, with regard to his power of issuing writs of habeas corpus, which might interfere with the defense of the city. As soon as martial law was in force, every citizen of New Orleans, whether sustaining an official character or not, was bound to submit to it. * « « Pqj. [^ yf^g quite a plain case, that, if martial law did not supersede and put in abeyance the civil power, it would be wholly insufficient in attaining the only objects for which alone it could be tolerated or justified." Mr. Douglas, in the House of Representa- tives, maintained the same principles; bu», from his statement of the case, confined their operation to the defense of the citj'; in other words, to a state of siege. Among other things, he said: "I maintain that, in the exercise of the power of proclaiming martial law. General Jackson did not violate the Constitution, nor assume to him- self any authority not fully authorized and legalized by his position, his duty and the ne- cessity of the case. General Jackson was the agent of the Government, legally and constitu- tionally authorized to defend the city of New Orleans. It was his duty to do this at all hazards. It was then conceded, and is now conceded, that nothing but martial law would enable him to perform that duty. His power was commen- surate with his duty, and he was authorized to use the means essential to its performance. This principle has been recognized and acted tipon by all civilized nations, and is familiar to all who are conversant with military his- tory. It does not imply the right to suspend the laws and civil tribunals at pleasure. The right grows out of the necessity. The principle is that tlic commanding General may go as far, and no further than is absolutely necessary to the defense of the place committed to his protec- tion. There are exigences in the history of nations, when necessity becomes the para- mount law, to which all other considerations TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 20S must yield. If it becomes necessary to blow up a fort, it is I'ight to do it. If it is necessary to sink a ship, it is right to sink it. If it is necessary to burn a city, it is right to burn it." Life and Speeches of Senator Douglas, pp. 25, 26. And so I might go on, adding opinions and definitions of martial law to endless extent. I will quote but one more; and that is the opinion of Attorney General Gushing, already referred to. He says: ^'^Martial law, as exercised in any country by the commander of a foreign army, is an ele- ment of the jus belli. It is incidental to a state of solemn war, and appertains to the law of" nations. The commander of the invading, occupying, or conquering army, rules the in- vaded, occupied, or conquered foreign country, with supreme power, limited only by interna- tional law, and the orders of the sovereign or government he serves or represents. For by the law of nations, the occupatio bellica, in a just war, transfers the sovereign power of the enemy's country to the conqueror." Wolff's Jus Gentium, § 255; Grotius De Jure et Pads, ed. Cocceii, lib. iii, cap. 8. Such occupation by right of war is, so long as it is military only, that is, flagrante hello, will be the case put by the Duke of Wellington, of all the powers of the government resumed in the hands of the commander-in-chief. If any local authority continue to exist, it will be with his permission only, and witla the power to do nothing, except what in his plenary dis- cretion, or his own sovereign, through him, shall see fit to authorize. The law of the land will have ceased to possess any proper vigor. Thus, while the armies of the United States occupied different provinces of the Mexican Republic, the respective commanders were not limited in authority by any local law. They allowed, or rather required, the magistrates of the country, municipal or judicial, to con- tinue to administer the laws of the country among their own counirymeu, but in subjec- tion always to the military power, which acted summarily and according to discretion, when the belligerent interests of the conqueror re- quired it, and which exercised jurisdiction, either summarily or by means of military commissions, /or the protection or punishment of citizens of the United States in Mexico. That, it would seem, was one of the forms of martial laiu. A violent state of things, to cease, of course, when hostilities should cease, and military occupation be changed into polit- ical occupation. Elphinstone v. Bedruchund, 1 Knapp's Rep., p. 338; Cross v. Harrison, 16 Uow., p. 164. If we now return, and endeavor to glean from all these authorities and opinions an idea of martial law, as applicable to the internal affairs of a State, we shall find ourselves scarcely nearer to it than we were at the stai-t. The laws of war regulate a state of war, and define the rights of parties to it, with respect to each other; and can only afford, therefore, a remote analogy for our guidance in the internal con- cerns of a State in which riots or rebellions call into requisition the military power. True, when a civil war assumes the magnitude of our present contest, and the parties thereto — rebels on the one side and Government on the other — from the necessity of the case, as well as from considerations of humanity, are com- pelled to adopt the public law of war, and to regulate their conduct according to its princi- ples, the laws of war become, to that extent, a sufficient guide. But all this does not, in the least, help us, in regard to those States which have never been engaged against the Government. Whether any, and if any, what assertion of military power, incompatible with civil institutions and civil rights, is admissi- ble in those States, does not appear from the books that treat of martial law. Earl Grey seems to approach the point more nearly than the rest; for in such case martial law would "ire truth and fact be no law at all; but the setting aside of all law and acting under military power. Supra. And this, he says, can only be done "in circumstances of great emergency," and must be followed "by an act of indemnity." It is, therefore, the substitution of military force for, and to the exclusion of, the laws; and can be justified no further than is abso- lutely necessary. And all the authorities and opinions cited go to this extent, and no further. Has this substitution, then, of military power for civil law, and civil tribunals and institu- tions, taken place in Indiana? And if so, upon what necessity? When was it done? Who determined the necessity, and made the substitution? Where is the act of Congress, the proclamation of the President, or the order of the military commander of the department, or the district? Have these, or has any of them, acted upon this subject; and, if so, to what extent? And above, and before all, where is the grant of authority to any, or all of them combined, or, indeed, to the whole Government, thus to "set aside all law," and substitute "military power" therefor? To assume that any such authority can exist in a limited government, is a self-contradiction. Let us examine, briefly, the nature of the Anglican system of civil liberty — institutional government — a system which, in a very large measure, we have inherited or adopted; and see whether such a system as martial law is at all compatible therewith. Can the two exist together? I shall endeavor to answer this question by a brief review of English history and law; for if this power "to set aside all law," and to "act under military power," be at all con- sistent with such a system of law and govern- ment, we shall thus be able to determine in what emergencies and to what extent. I enter the more cheerfully upon this re- view, because it will enable me to correct my friend, the Judge Advocate, in an assertion which he has frequently made during tho progress of these trials, namely: '■'■We art making new precedents daily." Now. I think, I shall be able to show him that we are follow- ing old and bad precedents — the work of wicked and lawless princes in evil times — which were condemned, disallowed, and re- versed by better princes immediately upon 204 TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. the return of better times; and which are only not known to him, because they have so long remained dead and buried among the rubbish of barbarous ages, that he has not been able, or, at least, has not chosen to dig them up for his own and your guidance on this occasion. I shall aid him in this respect; and, while I do so, must beg his pardon, and that of the Government he represents, for dis- pelling the illusion that either is entitled to patent a new precedent. In this regard they ■will find, after all, and, indeed, they should .have known from the first, that the further back they go in the history of the past, the more precedents they will find for the easy but ruinous substitution of force for law. Wher- ever a free people have lost their liberties, there will be found a precedent in point. The history of Greece and Rome is fruitful of such precedents. Solomon had wiser conceptions of the methods by which history continually repeats itself, than to speak of new prece- dents; and the sum of wisdom on this point, as in his day, still remains happily expressed in these words: "There is no new thing un- der the sun." I will not go back in the history of English law beyond Magna Charta; for that "solemn instrument" has been justly regarded as lay- ing the imperishable foundations of the great political institutions of that country. Creasy on Ihe English Constitution, 3. Ours, in America, rest on the same foundations — are referable to the same origin. The 2yth chapter of that instrument, as given by Henry III, contains these provisions, which have found a place in all our American Con- stitutions: '■^NuUus liber homo capiatur, vel imprisonetur. ■aut disseisielur de l.ibero tenemento suo, vel liberta- tibus, vel liberis consuetudinibus suis, aut utlagatur,