These circumstances were not alluded to by the witness until his cross-examination. They are given by him when repeating on cross-examination a conversation had by him on the 9th of January, 1865, with one Dr. Jeffries, in which he swears he first divulged Anderson's revelations made the October previous. His testimony in this matter loses, however, somewhat of its weight, because by his own showing he kept to himself his knowledge of the intended attack on Chicago till after the commencement of the trial. He subsequently swears that he made no mention of Anderson to Jeffries, but confined his remarks to Grenfel only. He swears that he cannot tell how the prosecution knew of his interview with Anderson so as to interrogate him on that point. Colonel Absalom B. Moore, 104th Illinois volunteers, testifies to a conversation in his hearing immediately after the battle of Hartsville, in December, 1862, between two rebel officers, of whom Grenfel was one; in which conversation one of the two remarked that if he could have his way he would raise the black flag and show no quarter to prisoners. This, however, he is not certain to have heard said by Grenfel, though he is positive that it was not opposed by him at the moment. Nothing inculpating Colonel Grenfel in any way was found on the search of his private baggage. The direct evidence to Grenfels complicity in the conspiracy is chiefly that of Shanks. Through the illegality of the testimony introduced to discredit him, and its necessary rejection by the court and this bureau, he stands unimpeached and is entitled to implicit credit. His testimony is minute, direct, and full, and completely implicates the accused in one of the most stupendous projects of causeless and profitless crime known to modern times. It should be stated, however, that the other defendants at this trial, many of whom were by the testimony as deeply involved in the conspiracy as Grenfel himself, were spared by the court the shame of an ignominious death on the scaffold, and two of them received a full acquittal at its hands. It is for the President to determine whether, in the exercise of the mercy vested in him by the laws, some mitigation of the sentence pronounced by the court may not, without detriment to the interests and the safety of the nation, be extended to the accused. For the accused, himself the subject of a foreign power at peace with our government, and who, without pretence of provocation or wrong, united himself with traitors and malefactors for the overthrow of our republic in the interests of slavery, an institution abhorred by his country and people, there can be neither sympathy nor respect. In the altered condition of public affairs, however, growing out of the overthrow of the rebellion and the arrest or flight of its leaders, and the security for the future thus afforded, it may be that the President will feel justified in sparing even so unworthy and dishonored a life as that of the accused is shown to be. If the death sentence is commuted, it is believed that the punishment substituted should be severe and infamous. J. HOLT, Judge Advocate General. WAR DEPARTMENT, BUREAU OF MILITARY Justice, January 2, 1866. Like Respectfully returned. No reason is perceived for making Grenfel's case an exceptional one. other convicts, he is fed and clothed by the government, and it is due to the interests of public justice, and to an impartial administration of prison discipline, that, both in regard to food and clothing, as in regard to his confinement, he should be held strictly to the status assigned him by his commuted sentence. As this view, and nothing more than this, is doubtless enforced by the prison authorities, it is not recommended that any action be taken on his application. J. HOLT, Judge Advocate General. The SECRETARY OF WAR. BUREAU OF MILITARY JUSTICE, Respectfully returned to the Secretary of War, to whom this bureau on yesterday reported its opinion upon a similar application, which had been presented through the British minister, as follows: 66 No reason is perceived for making Grenfel's case an exceptional one. Like other convicts, he is fed and clothed by the government, and it is due to the interests of public justice, and to an impartial administration of prison discipline, that, both in regard to food and clothing, as in regard to his confinement, he should be held strictly to the status assigned him by his commuted sentence. As this view, and nothing more than this, is doubtless enforced by the prison authorities, it is not recommended that any action be taken on his application." J. HOLT, Judge Advocate General. BUREAU OF MILITARY JUSTICE, January 4, 1866. Respectfully returned to the Secretary of War. This is a petition from certain inhabitants of Cornwall, England, transmitted through the American minister at London, and forwarded to Mr. Seward, Secretary of State, praying, as a pure act of grace, the release of St. Leger Grenfel. Inasmuch as the justice of the punishment is not denied, and no new facts are presented, this bureau can only refer to its former report fully treating the merits of the case. The commutation of his death sentence was an act of rare clemency, in granting which the President probably yielded only to the pressing intercession of the prisoner's highly respectable friends, through the British legation at Washington. That exercise of the pardoning power, rescuing him from the gallows, to which his merited punishment had consigned him, is believed to have extended the extreme measure of mercy that can be asked in his behalf. It is therefore recommended that his application be refused. J. HOLT, Judge Advocate General. WAR DEPARTMENT, BUREAU OF MILITARY JUSTICE, Respectfully returned the Adjutant General. May 5, 1866. This bureau has heretofore expressed the conviction that the prisoner Grenfel, found guilty of complicity in the plot known as the Chicago conspiracy, and now undergoing sentence of imprisonment for life for that offence, should be made to expiate his crime by suffering the penalty imposed. The within statement and testimony to his good behavior in confinement are not considered to warrant any action by the Executive. He protests his inocence and says: "Were I allowed an opportunity, now that the war is over and witnesses are to be obtained, which at the time of my trial was not the case, I could satisfactorily prove that I was not a party to the Chicago conspiracy, either in word or deed; besides which, I could, from knowledge obtained in prison, give information which would, if required, (although I rather think it might not now be welcome,) throw light upon the whole affair." The prisoner has been confined, in all, about a year, and it is for the President to determine the weight which shall be given to this fact and to the statement quoted, in view of the altered condition of the country, and of public affairs. A copy of the former report in the case is enclosed for the President's information. This bureau does not feel justified in submitting any favorable recommendation. J. HOLT, Judge Advocate General. WAR DEPARTMENT, BUREAU OF MILITARY Justice, June 8, 1866. SIR: Your application for remission of sentence, forwarded by General Hill, to the Adjutant General, April 8, has been duly considered by the President, in connection with the record of your trial, and I am instructed to inform you that it has been decided not to extend executive clemency to your case. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, The within letter from Hon. S. Hooper, M. C., enclosing abstract of application from Mr. Freshfield, solicitor of Bank of England, in behalf of Colonel G. St. Leger Grenfel, an Englishman, now a prisoner for life at the Dry Tortugas, is respectfully returned. Mr. Freshfield asks for Grenfel's release on condition that he return at once to England. It is manifest from the within abstract that Mr. Freshfield is not familiar with the facts established at the trial of the prisoner Grenfel, and Mr. Hooper, in his accompanying letter, admits a similar lack of information concerning the merits of the case. The record of Colonel Grenfel's trial was subjected to a very careful examination by this bureau, in June, 1865, and the conclusion reached that his conviction under the charges alleged was fully justified. The opinion then arrived at and submitted to the President, and since frequently reiterated on applications similar to the present, is still adhered to. No facts on consideration are presented in the within papers which can in any way modify that opinion. It remains for the President to determine whether Grenfel shall receive the executive clemency which has been so many times prayed for in his behalf. This bureau is aware of no grounds for favorable action, and therefore makes no recommendation. J. HOLT, BUREAU OF MILITARY JUSTICE, Respectfully returned to the Secretary of War, with a copy of the original report of this bureau, dated June 29, 1865, upon the record in the case of the within named Grenfel. This case has been the subject of seven reports by this bureau, and it is deemed unnecessary again to reiterate at length the views heretofore expressed, especially as this application suggests no ground for clemency, except the duration of the imprisonment which, it is incorrectly asserted, "the prisoner has already suffered alone of all his partners and comrades for nearly three years;" when, in fact, the commission which tried the prisoner commenced its sessions only in January, 1865. Whether the confinement undergone is a sufficient expiation of a crime which the court regarded as worthy of death, and for which the capital penalty was only commuted to imprisonment for life, in view of the changed condition of public affairs, is for the President to determine. This bureau cannot recommend any mitigation of the sentence. J. HOLT, Judge Advocate General. WAR DEPARTMENT, BUREAU OF MILITARY Justice, Respectfully returned to the Secretary of War. In a report dated January 3, 1866, this bureau reported respecting a similar application for the amelioration of the prison fare of Grenfel, as follows: "No reason is perceived for making Grenfel's case an exceptional one. Like other convicts he is fed and clothed by the government, and it is due to the interests of public justice, and to an impartial administration of prison discipline, that, both in regard to food and clothing, as in regard to his confinement, he should be held strictly to the status assigned him by his commuted sentence. As this view, and nothing more than this, is doubtless enforced by the prison authorities, it is not recommended that any action be taken on this application." The view so expressed is adhered to. In regard to the specific request within contained for permission to furnish the prisoner with money, books, and tobacco, it is to be remarked that this office is without information concerning the present restrictions of discipline in that behalf established by the government, alike for the security and the proper comfort of convicts, and cannot, therefore, undertake to advise whether they should be enforced in this case; but it is presumed that they have been adopted upon due consideration, and are such as may be uniform in application. If further information is desired for the purpose of deciding what action shall be taken by the government, it is suggested that a reference be made to the mili tary commander at Fort Jefferson for a report. J. HOLT, EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, D. C., July 22, 1865. The proceedings and findings in the case of G. St. Leger Grenfel are hereby approved; but in consideration of the recommendation of members of the court, and of the successful progress of the government in suppressing the rebellion, and in accordance with the suggestion of the Judge Advocate General, the sentence is hereby commuted to imprisonment for life, at hard labor, at the Dry Tortugas, or at such other place as the Secretary of War may designate. ANDREW JOHNSON, President of the United States. Referred to the Adjutant General to execute the President's order. The Dry Tortugas designated. AUGUST 19, 1865. EDWIN M. STANTON, Secretary of War. [General Court-martial Orders No. 452.] WAR DEPARTMENT, ADJUTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE, I. Before a military commission which convened at Cincinnati, Ohio, January 11, 1865, pursuant to Special Orders No. 278, dated December 29, 1864; No. 4, dated January 5, 1865, and No. 8, dated January 10, 1865, headquarters northern department, Cincinnati, Ohio, and of which Colonel Charles D. Murray, 89th Indiana volunteers, is president, were arraigned and tried G. St. Leger Grenfel and others, citizens. Charge 1.-"Conspiring, in violation of the laws of war, to release the rebel prisoners of war confined, by authority of the United States, at Camp Douglas, near Chicago, Illinois." Specificaton." In this: that they, the said Charles Walsh, Buckner S. Morris, Vincent Marmaduke, R. T. Semmes, Charles Travis Daniel, George E. Cantrill, G. St. Leger Grenfel, and Benjamin M. Anderson, did unlawfully and secretly conspire and agree among themselves, and with one Captain Hines, so-called, alias Dr. Hunter, of the confederate army, and others, in violation of the laws of war, to release the rebel prisoners of war then confined, by authority of the United States, at Camp Douglas, near Chicago, Illinois, numbering between eight and nine thousand persons, by suddenly attacking said camp on or about the evening of the eighth of November, anno Domini eighteen hundred and sixty-four, with a large number of armed men, overpowering the guard and forces then and there stationed and on duty, seizing the cannon and arms in the possession of said guard and forces for the purpose of guarding and defending said camp, forcibly opening the gates of said prison camp and removing all obstructions to the successful escape of said prisoners confined within its limits. This at or near Chicago, in the State of Illinois, within the military lines and the theatre of military operations of the army of the United States, at a period of war and armed rebellion against the authority of the United States, and on or about the first day of November, anno Domini eighteen hundred and sixty-four. Charge 2-Conspiring, in violation of the laws of war, to lay waste and destroy the city of Chicago, Illinois. Specification." In this: that they, the said Charles Walsh, Buckner S. Morris, Vincent Marmaduke, R. T. Semmes, Charles Travis Daniel, George E. Cantrill, G. St. Leger Grenfel, and Benjamin M. Anderson, did unlawfully and secretly conspire and agree among themselves, and with one Captain Hines, socalled, alias Dr. Hunter, of the confederate army, and others, in violation of the laws of war, to lay waste and destroy, on or about the evening of the eighth of November, anno Domini eighteen hundred and sixty-four, the city of Chicago, Illinois, by capturing the arsenal in said city, cutting the telegraph wires, burning the railroad depot, taking forcible possession of the banks and public buildings, and leaving the city to be sacked, pillaged, and burned by the rebel prisoners |