which brought this tribunal into existence, sustains it in the exercise of its functions, and which approves and executes its decisions, will share in the common approval of mankind, or will stagger under the weight which will rest upon and finally crush it. Both the honor of the Administration and of the country are involved in the decision you shall make. In my judgment, honor follows acquittal. I speak plainly, because it is my duty frankly to express what I believe. The case of my clients is now with you. I ask no sympathy, but demand justice for them in the name of the Constitution and laws of my country."

The final argument before the commission was on the 7th of January, 1865, although the record, General Holt says, shows no proceedings after the 4th. The finding of the commission, as shown on the record as certified by Judge Advocate General Holt, was in these words:

FINAL DECISION.

"The commission was then cleared for deliberation, and, after due consideration, do find the accused, Samuel North, Levi Cohn, and Morven M. Jones, as follows:

"As to the defendants Samuel North and Levi Cohn:

"As to the specification - not guilty.

"As to the charge-not guilty.

"As to the defendant Morven M. Jones:

"As to the specification - guilty, except as to the words with the intent and for the purpose of having such blanks, so signed, used as and for the deed of the soldier whose name purported to be signed thereto, and in fraud of the true electors.'

"As to the charge — not guilty.

"And do therefore acquit said Samuel North, Levi Cohn, and Morven M. Jones.

"Signed-John A. Foster, Colonel and Judge Advocate. "Signed-Abner Doubleday, Major-General Volunteers, President M. C.

"Official — J. Holt, Judge Advocate General."

General Ho.t, in a letter to Hon. J. L. V. Pruyn, states that these proceedings were not filed in his office until the 26th of January, 1865.

Where were they between the close of the argument and making the decision, and their being filed in the Judge Adrocate General's office? This was a period of painful suspense to the prisoners. Public rumor said they were all convicted, then that North was pardoned. The "New York Tribune," of the 27th of January, contained the following from its Washington correspondent: "Colonel North has been released by the War Department. He was convicted by the finding of the Court which tried him. Before his trial was concluded, it was felt here that North would escape all punishment. The pressure to have his trial stopped was immense. This was nearly done, but finally desisted from. The pressure for his unconditional release has been irre sistible."

Why this reiteration of the falsehood that Colonel North had been convicted? The record had been withheld for weeks, either by the Judge Advocate, John A. Foster, or by Edwin M. Stanton, Secretary of War, as it did not reach the Bureau of Military Justice until the 26th of January, 1865, to the great injury of the accused, who had been proved not guilty. This neglect of a public duty doubtless led to the rumors that North had been convicted, and, when released, to the further falsehood, that he had been pardoned—all with the view of satisfying the public that there was good reason for the arrest and trials. The delay in filing the record was to allow the public mind to become occupied with something else, and to have these great wrongs forgotten. Colonel North was discharged on the 26th of January, 1865, under an order from the Assistant General's office, stating his acquittal, and directing his immediate release from confinement. which was not then communicated to him. He was merely told by the keeper "to pick up his traps and leave the prison d--d quick-to go where he had a mind to." It was not until a subsequent time that he was furnished with evidence

of his acquittal. It is probable that, but for deep censure emanating from Congress and leading men in all parts of the country, Colonel North would not have been released at the time he left the prison. He was well known to a large portion of the American people, who saw nothing in the published evidence to warrant conviction or detention, and hence their efforts to secure his restoration to liberty. This accounts for the doors of his prison being thrown open. He was too prominent a man to render it safe and prudent longer to continue his illegal imprisonment-to deprive him of liberty without an adequate cause. Fear, and not justice, prompted this tardy action.

But why were Major Cohn and Lieutenant Jones detained two weeks after his release? Was it to avoid showing the whole failure at once, or because they were much less known, and deemed more friendless, and might more safely be kept shut up? It is certain, that E. M. Stanton, Secretary of War, and Joseph Holt, Judge Advocate General, told Mrs. Jones and the Rev. Mr. Corey, that they had been convicted and sentenced to the State prison for life. Mr. Stanton twice told the Hon. John Ganson, M. C., from Buffalo, the same thing, and did the same to others. Mrs. Jones returned home to Utica believing that her husband had been found guilty and sentenced to the State prison for life. This belief became general. Major Cohn's friends, supposing that the story was true, went to Washington to ascertain what could be done to secure his release.

What object had Stanton and Holt in telling and repeating these unmitigated falsehoods? Why strike an almost deadly blow at a poor woman who had nursed our wounded and dying soldiers? Why inflict pain and torture upon Major Cohn and Lieutenant Jones, and compel them to remain in a loathsome prison, when they knew they had been found not guilty, and were entitled to be discharged and to enjoy freedom? Were these untruths for the supposed benefit of their party or friends? Truth compels us to say, that it is quite probable that a willingness to allow friends to levy

black mail bad had something to do with these false pretences. At that time there were many men in Washington who made very large professions concerning their power and influence with the President and his Cabinet and their ability to procure pardons. Major Cohn's father and uncle were deemed rich merchants in Albany. The latter, when in Albany, and often when in Washington, was approached in mystic language in relation to the release of his nephew. Except in the single instance of Governor Thomas Ford, of Ohio, he turned a deaf ear to all such suggestions. Ford's promises proved fallacious. After being detained two weeks after the release of Colonel North, on the 8th of February, 1865, the prison doors were thrown open, and they were ordered to leave as quick as possible. They were unable, until the 12th of February, 1867, to ascertain what was the actual decision of the commission. Neither the Secretary of War nor Judge Advocate General would give either the information desired. Whether this refusal was because they disregarded their claims to the information, or for fear it would conflict with their oral statements, we can only conjecture. It may be both.

We place this arrest, imprisonment, and trial on record, that our countrymen and their descendants may learn the appalling consequences that flow from disregarding the Constitution and laws, and violating both, to secure and continue the ascendency of a political party, who claim to act under a law higher than the Constitution, and who ridicule that acred instrument, when its provisions are appealed to as the fundamental law of the land.

H.

H. W. NEWLAND.

W. NEWLAND was arrested at his residence near Benton, Franklin County, Illinois, on the night of the 19th of August, 1862. The arrest was made by Major Board, Deputy Provost Marshal, accompanied by a detachment of United States soldiers. He showed neither warrant nor other legal authority, merely arresting the persons whose names were written on a slip of paper which he carried in his hand. Newland was carried away from his family, who, like himself, were ignorant of the cause of his arrest. He was taken to a station on the Illinois Central Railroad, and! placed, in company with eight others who had been made prisoners at the same time, on a car, and conveyed to Springfield, under guard.

At dark, he and his fellow-prisoners were ironed for safety. At Decatur, however, they were met by United States Marshal D. L. Phillips, who ordered their irons to be taken off. Here they remained during the night, and on the following morning were forwarded to Washington City, arriving there on the 23d. Mr. Newland was confined in the Old Capitol Prison, fed upon meagre and badly cooked food, and suffered much from the presence of vermin, and the many indignities that were heaped upon him, until the 25th of September, when he was released without a trial, and told to go home and keep aloof from politics.

He in vain demanded to hear the charges against him, and to know the cause of his arrest.

Mr. Newland is by occupation a farmer. Born and reared in Indiana, he emigrated to Illinois in 1848, and lived in Stark County until 1859, when he removed to Franklin County, where he has since resided.