Q. Did you not state that he came from England to Canada? Do you know if he brought a letter of introduction to Mrs. Morris from her father, Dr. Blackburn?

A. I believe he did.

Q. Did he explain to you why he was there under an assumed name?
A. It was because he wanted to remain quiet.

Cross-examination by Judge BARTLEY :

Q. I understood that he was introduced to your house by a letter from Mrs. Morris.

A. I will not be positive whether it was from Mrs. Morris or the judge. Q. Have you that letter?

A. No, sir; I did not preserve it.

The commissioners then adjourned to meet Wednesday, February 15th, 1865, at 11 o'clock a. m.

COURT-ROOM, CINCINNATI, OHIO,

February 15, 1865–11 o'clock a. m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment. All the members present; also the judge advocate and the assistant counsel, the accused and their counsel. The proceedings were read and approved.

The judge advocate introduced in evidence a paper taken from the valise of the accused, B. Anderson. Said paper and accompanying affidavit, marked C C, hereto attached and made part of this record.

The judge advocate announced that the testimony on the part of the govern

ment was closed.

T. M. KEY, esq., on behalf of R. T. Semmes, said:

We now submit the case of R. T. Semmes, the accused, to the judgment of the commission, without further evidence, and without argument, that it may be passed upon by the commission. If this course is considered improper, then we ask that his case be considered upon a motion to overrule the testimony and to dismiss the charges and specifications, so far as the accused, R. T. Semmes, is concerned. It is contended that there is not sufficient evidence before the commission to put him upon his defence.

The JUDGE ADVOCATE, in reply, said:

If the accused submits his case without argument, and without further proof, it is done, of course, at his peril, and the court will at once proceed to pass upon it. No rebutting testimony can be introduced, and the commission can offer no objection to the course recommended.

J. O. BROADHEAD, esq., on behalf of Vincent Marmaduke, said:

As counsel for Vincent Marmaduke, I ask that the court will not pass upon his case upon the testimony already submitted. We propose to introduce no testimony for the defence, and to offer no argument. The course asked for is usual in civil and criminal cases, in the ordinary courts of justice in the land. When several parties are indicted for conspiracy, if, after the introduction of all the testimony on the part of the State or government, a counsel for one of the accused charged is desirous, he can ask the court to instruct the jury to pass upon his particular case. No practice is more common or better recognized than this. And I think that the practice of military tribunals will be governed by courts of similar jurisdiction in the common law. If any one of the parties is willing to submit his case without argument, the introduction of further testimony would be a hardship upon him-to be compelled to remain during the whole

progress of the trial. I conceive, therefore, it is but justice to the government, in whose interest this commission are here to administer.

The JUDGE ADVOCATE, in reply, said:

I do not see how a practical result can be attained by the course asked for by the counsel for the accused. If the commission proceeds to its findings and sentence in this case, there can be nothing definite arrived at, because the sentence of the court is not promulgated except until after being approved and promulgated in general orders. And it is not probable that the cases of the two accused will be acted upon by the commanding general until the findings and sentence in the remaining cases are submitted.

The court was then cleared for deliberation.

Having maturely considered the evidence adduced, the commission find the accused, R. T. Semmes, as follows:

Of the specification, first charge, guilty.

Of the first charge, guilty.

Of the specification, second charge, guilty.

Of the second charge, guilty.

And the commission do therefore sentence him, the said R. T. Semmes, to be imprisoned at hard labor, at such place as the commanding general may direct, for the term of three years.

C. D. MURRAY,

Colonel Eighty-ninth Indiana Volunteer Infantry,

President of the Commission.
H. L. BURNETT,

Judge Advocate D. O. and N. D.,

Judge Advocate of the Commission.

Having maturely considered the evidence adduced, the commission find the accused, Vincent Marmaduke, as follows:

Of the specification, first charge, not guilty.

Of the first charge, not guilty.

Of the specification, second charge, not guilty.

Of the second charge, not guilty.

And the commission do therefore acquit him, the said Vincent Marmaduke.

C. D. MURRAY,

Colonel Eighty-ninth Indiana Volunteer Infantry,

President of the Commission.
H. L. BURNETT,

Judge Advocate D. O. and N. D.,

Judge Advocate of the Commission.

On the court being reopened, the judge advocate announced that the commission had proceeded to its findings and sentence in the case of the accused, R. T. Semmes and Vincent Marmaduke.

The counsel for the accused, Charles Walsh, Buckner S. Morris, and G. St. Leger Grenfel, here moved for an adjournment of two weeks, for the purpose of preparing the defence and procuring testimony.

The court was then cleared for deliberation.

On being reopened the judge advocate announced that the commission would adjourn to meet on Thursday, February 23, at 2 o'clock p. m.

The commission adjourned to meet on Thursday, February 23, 1865, at 2 o'clock p. m.

H. Ex. Doc. 50-18

COURT-ROOM, CINCINNATI, OHIO,

February 23, 1865-2 o'clock p. m.

The commission met pursuant to adjournment. All the members present; also the judge advocate, the assistant counsel, the accused, and their counsel. The proceedings were read and approved.

The JUDGE ADVOCATE said:

I have to announce to the commission, and to make it a matter of record, that one of the accused, Charles Travis Daniel, made his escape from the guard, towards the close of the last session of this commission.

I have also to announce that one of the accused, Benjamin M. Anderson, has committed suicide.

The cases of two others of the accused, R. T. Semmes and Vincent Marmaduke, having been passed upon by the commission, there remain for this court to try B. S. Morris, Charles Walsh, and G. St. Leger Grenfel.

The accused Grenfel is to-day unable to be present. The physician reports that he has a violent attack of inflammatory rheumatism, almost entirely paralyzing one side of his body, and that he cannot be present before Monday next

at soonest.

I object, on the part of the government, to proceed in the absence of Grenfel, but if he gives his assent, and presents, by his counsel, a written request that these cases go forward, I would ask the commission so to do.

The counsel for G. St. Leger Grenfel informed the commission that they would by to-morrow be prepared with his written assent to go forward with the trial.

T. W. Bartley, esq., counsel for B. M. Anderson, with the consent of the judge advocate, then submitted a statement; said paper, marked D D, hereto attached and made part of this record.

The commission then adjourned to meet on Friday, February 24, at 11 o'clock

a. m.

D D.

Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Commission :

One of the accused in this trial, Colonel Benjamin M. Anderson, died since your last adjournment. His death occurred on Tuesday, the 21st instant. That manly and graceful form, so expressive of gallantry and noble qualities, which has heretofore appeared before you, will be seen no more. His death, which necessarily stops further progress in his case, occurred at the most unfortunate period in the trial. The evidence for the government had just been closed, but the evidence in his defence had not as yet been adduced. Were it admissible I would gladly now proceed with the evidence on his behalf; but as that cannot be done, I beg the indulgence of the commission for a very few minutes in stating what could have been, and had he lived, would have been proven in the defence, in order that the world may not do injustice to the memory of this unfortunate man.

with

The charge is, that Colonel Anderson was engaged in a conspiracy others, on or about the evening of the 8th day of November, 1864, to release the confederate prisoners at Camp Douglas, and to sack and burn the city of Chicago, in the State of Illinois. Now the evidence in his defence would have shown beyond the possibility of a doubt that although he was at Chicago with the immense crowd congregated there at the time of the national convention, held about the last of August, yet that he left Illinois in a few days afterwards and reached his home in Kentucky early in September. From that time he never returned to Illinois, but engaged with General Boyle in the petroleum business, which engrossed his entire attention, in the State of Kentucky, until after the first of December.

The scheme of a conspiracy, to be consummated about the time of the Chicago convention, is shown to have been abandoned, and before its abandonment, Anderson not only declared it absurd, but changed his boarding-house to withdraw from association with the men who were urging it. This is shown by the testimony of Langhorne, one of the principal witnesses for the government. His hasty and inconsiderate letters, written under great excitement at Marshall on the 2d of September, amount to nothing at all, when the facts appear, which can be proven, that the very next day after writing these letters he left the State of Illinois, and in a few days thereafter returned to Kentucky and engaged in private pursuits, which occupied his entire attention until after the time of the alleged plot at Chicago. The scheme of the alleged conspiracy to effect a criminal purpose at Chicago on the evening of the 8th of November, if even it had any existence in the imagination and thoughts of some persons on the second day of September, was then in embryo-had not been consummated. The plan, the scheme of the conspiracy, the part to be performed by each and the concert of action, had not then been matured and consummated. Anderson, left, and hundreds of miles distant engaged in his private pursuits, and never returned to the scenes and localities of the alleged conspiracy, and was not in a situation in which he could possibly have aided, assisted, or participated in the alleged conspiracy of November.

I have given due attention to the evidence on the part of the prosecution, and I have made myself fully acquainted with the testimony which could have been adduced in Anderson's defence, and I deem it but an act of justice to the memory of the deceased to state here my solemn conviction that he was innocent of the charges preferred against him, and that had he lived to make his defence, every member of this commission would have found it his duty to have rendered a judgment of acquittal in his favor.

No consciousness of guilt existed to disturb or annoy Anderson's mind. Formed by nature with a high and delicate sense of honor, and taught to estimate the respect of the world as more valuable than life, he was extremely sensitive, and grieved, and his heart wrung with anguish at the idea of being suspected of perfidy or any other dishonorable act. In the frequent and anxious consultations of my associate counsel and myself with our client we could not fail to discover the peculiar qualities and condition of his mind. That he was a man of many elevated and manly qualities, none capable of appreciating him will doubt. In the beginning of the great struggle now pending to preserve the union of the States, he committed the fatal error of enlisting in the army the rebellion; but we have evidence in our possession showing that while acting with the confederate army, not only was he a gallant and efficient officer, but that his bearing and conduct towards federal prisoners were marked by kindness and generosity never to be forgotten.

of

Observation and experience taught him the folly and error of the cause of the rebellion; he abandoned it and returned to his home in Kentucky, surrendered himself to General Boyle, then in command at Louisville, and was discharged on taking the oath of allegiance. And "the obligations of this oath," whatever inconsiderate expressions he may have made under excitement, (to use the language of General Boyle, than whom no one knew him better,) he never violated."

Regarding his honor and the esteem of the world as more valuable than life, his highly sensitive mind was tortured by what he regarded as unjust charges and suspicions until despair and morbid sensibility clouded his intellect, and at an unfortunate moment, shutting out the light of reason, drove him to that rash act which resulted in his death.

Richly endowed with high qualities fitting him in many respects for the most elevated pursuits of life, he was wanting in that stern fortitude and stability essential to enable a man to face the dark clouds of adversity, and stand up

against the severest blows of misfortune. His brilliant prospects, which but a few years since gilded his high hopes of the future, contrasted with the deep and solemn tragedy of the close of his life, should remind us all of the uncertainties and dangers which beset our paths through the diversified conflicts of this life, and solemnly teach us "what shadows we are, and what shadows we pursue.'

COURT-ROOM, CINCINNATI, OHIO, February 24, 1865-11 o'clock a. m. The commission met pursuant to adjournment. All the members present; also the judge advocate, the assistant counsel, the accused, and their counsel. The proceedings were read and approved.

A paper was here submitted by counsel on behalf of the accused, G. St. Leger Grenfel, waiving his right of attendance, and requesting the case to proceed in his absence; said paper, marked E E, hereto attached and made part of this record. The JUDGE ADVOCATE then said:

The accused, Charles Travis Daniel, having voluntarily withdrawn himself, I ask the commission to proceed to their findings in his case. He has, by his escape, said in effect that he has no witnesses to produce and no defence to make before this commission. I therefore submit his case to the commission upon the evidence already before it.

T. M. Key, esq., on behalf of the accused, Charles Travis Daniel, objected to his case being passed upon at this stage of the proceedings, but in the event of its being passed upon the counsel desired to be heard, at the same time objecting to his case being passed upon until all the evidence was in.

The JUDGE ADVOCATE replied, that military courts do not recognize the presence of counsel as counsel for the accused, but rather as next friend of the accused, and they could not present argument in the absence of the accused.

T. W. Bartley, esq., also counsel for the accused, Charles Travis Daniel, said that Daniel's escape was a matter of sincere regret and mortification to his counsel; at the same time they felt responsible with regard to the final decision of his case. The accused, Daniel, might return before the trial was completed, or he might be secured, in consequence of the reward offered by the government. He therefore objected to his case being passed upon at this stage of the trial.

On motion of a member of the commission the court was cleared to deliberate upon the cases of G. St. Leger Grenfel and Charles Travis Daniel.

The court being reopened, the judge advocate announced that the commission would suspend their judgment in the cases referred to till Monday next. The commission then adjourned to meet on Monday, February 27, 1865, at 11 o'clock a. m.

I hereby waive being personally present at the sittings of said commission, and request that the examination of witnesses proceed during my absence as though I was personally present. This waive and request is not in any way to be construed to affect the question of the jurisdiction of this commission in the premises, which jurisdiction I do, as heretofore, most respectfully obey. In presence of John W. Millspaugh, lieutenant 37th Iowa infantry. G. ST. LEGER GRENFEL.