things are not matters of police, because the institution and regulation of police are provided for by laws enacted by the representatives of the people. They are simply matters of unauthorized tyranny, which infringe upon the rights of the people and blacken the character of the Government. They were wholly unknown here until the Republicans came into power.

107.-THE TRIAL OF CIVILIANS BY MILITARY COMMISSIONS.

One of the charges against the King of Great Britain, contained in the Declaration of Independence was, that he had rendered the civil authorities subordinate to the military. Precisely the same thing was true in relation to Mr. Lincoln. The civil authorities were made by him entirely subordinate to the military. The law of the land was not the rule of action. It was found in the will of the military. Even the capital was subjected to a military governor, who made laws from day to day as he went along. Military tribunals were established in various places to try civilians not charged with offences against the military statutes. The Constitution confers authority upon Congress to provide for governing the Army. This extends only to those employed in the service, and to punishing spies who seek to destroy it. All others are protected by express provisions calculated to secure speedy and fair trials in the courts of law. It is expressly provided that "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury. . . nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. . . . In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the State . . . and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, and be confronted with the witnesses against him."

These provisions were continually violated throughout the war by arresting and trying persons, not in the military service, before military commissions instituted and organized under executive authority alone. The case of Colonel North, Cohn, and Jones, was one of this class. They were employed in the New York State Agency at Washington to aid and protect the interests of those in the Army from that State, including voting and return

ing the soldiers' votes under a New York statute. They were Democrats. Jones had served as an officer in the Army until taken prisoner, when his health failed.

They were charged with forging and altering soldiers' votes, which was an offence under New York laws. They were arraigned before a military commission and put upon their trial; bail was refused. Their counsel raised the question of jurisdiction, cited the Constitution, and claimed that if an offence had been committed, it was one against New York laws, which Federal authority was incompetent to enforce. On the part of the Government it was contended that the offence was one that impaired the efficiency of the military service, because to cheat the soldier out of his vote by alteration or forgery would make him discontented and angry, and then he would not perform his duty faithfully when subject to such feelings. The commission held that they had jurisdiction and proceeded with the trial. It commenced just before the election in 1864, and continued into January, 1865, when, there being no evidence whatever to sustain the charges, they were acquitted. Colonel North was discharged on the 26th of January, and told to leave. Cohn and Jones were detained until the 8th of February, when they were ordered to leave the Old Capitol Prison. Prior to their leaving, Mr. Stanton, the Secretary of War, had repeatedly told members of Congress and others, that they were convicted and sentenced to State prison for life, while the record itself shows that all three were acquitted on the 4th of January, 1865. The proceedings were filed in the Judge-Advocate-General's office on the 24th of January, the day that Colonel North was discharged. There has never been any explanation in relation to keeping these men in prison so long after they were acquitted, or why Cohn and Jones were not set free when North was. But it is known that great efforts were made to induce Cohn's friends, who were rich, to pay large sums for his pardon and discharge, and one Republican did derive some advantage from them on one occasion. But better advice was followed afterward, and all offering services were bluffed off. The arrest of these three men was made to aid in Mr. Lincoln's reelection by creating the belief that the Democrats were engaged

in great frauds. The expectation was, that the trial could be had and the accused convicted before the election. It was claimed on the part of the Government that the trial could be finished in two days, and the application of their counsel, for subpoenas to bring witnesses from New York to prove their good character, was vehemently resisted, but when granted, so that the trial could not be completed until after the election, then the Judge Advocate ceased to press the trial and the case was postponed at his instance, several times, amounting, in all, to between thirty and forty days. He went to New York City, and had men brought there from various parts of the State, and some other places, who were secretly examined, to try and find out something to the disadvantage of the accused, but he failed. When Jones was first arrested, the Judge Advocate put on citizen's dress, took a stenographer with him, and called on him and pretended to believe Jones was innocent, and got him to talk over things which Jones had said were true, and he would swear to them. The Judge Advocate pretended to believe Jones had been badly treated, merely to draw him out. He and his stenographer departed. The latter drew out a statement, garbled and false, which the former published on the day the trial commenced as the sworn confession of Jones. It was so in form, although he had never seen, read, signed, or sworn to it. This false statement-for the stenographer was put under oath, produced his notes, and proved it to be so-went through the land as a startling confession of crime. This stenographer is said to be employed frequently in the State Department to take down conversations, and has figured as a witness on the President's impeachment, to prove what he said in public on certain occasions. This pretended confession was offered and received in evidence against all the accused, notwithstanding the proof by the party preparing it was clear and complete that it was in several respects untrue and deceptive. If a conviction had taken place before the election, there is good reason to believe that it was expected to lay the foundation for arresting Governor Seymour, who had appointed Colonel North as State Agent, and also sundry Democratic leaders, before the election, charging that they were implicated in the affair, and thereby produce a whirlwind of ex

citement which could not be resisted. This would have rendered the election of the Republican tickets everywhere a matter of certainty. Bold and unyielding efforts of the counsel of the accused defeated these purposes.

Since this trial, a case came before the Supreme Court of the United States from Indiana-Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wallace, 2-involving the authority to establish these military tribunals for trying persons not in or connected with the military service. That court held that they were unauthorized by the Constitution, and had no jurisdiction whatever over such persons. This military tyranny tended to spur up the secessionists to fight on, and thus prolonged the war. They were told that if the Union was restored, they would be thus dealt with, regardless of the Constitution and laws, which was believed.

108.-THE EARLY AVOWED OBJECTS OF THE WAR.

When Sumter was taken, the whole North and West felt and promptly resented the blow. The South avowed their object to be, as it really was, to secure a separate and independent sovereignty, where her peculiar institutions should not be the subject of condemnation and continuous controversy. They mistakenly thought they could have a republic without perpetual political contests, and where rival interests would cease to produce vexatious conflicts. Even during the short life of their Confederacy, painful contests sprang into existence, and sometimes weakened its efficiency. At the North, there was a seeming common object and purpose in view, but which did not really exist. Mr. Lincoln sometimes acted with one branch of his party, and at others with the other branch, whose purposes were wholly distinct and conflicting. This acting first with one branch, and then conforming to the other, has occasioned so much question as to his truth and sincerity, that it has been damaging to his reputation, and justly so. For a long period after the commencement of the war, both he and Congress distinctly avowed that their sole object was to put down the rebellion, and restore peace and harmony to the Union. In his proclamation of April 15, 1861, Mr. Lincoln said:

"I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, integrity, and the existence of our national Union, and the perpetuity of popular government, and to redress wrongs long enough endured."

In that of May 3, 1861, he said:

"Whereas existing exigencies demand immediate and adequate measures for the protection of the national Constitution, and the preservation of the national Union, by the suppression of the insurrectionary combinations now existing in several States for opposing the laws of the Union and obstructing the execution thereof, to which end a military force, in addition to that called forth by my proclamation of the 15th of April, in the present year, appears to be indispensably necessary."

On the 9th of May, 1862, General Hunter issued a proclamation, in which he said: "Slavery and martial law in a free country are altogether incompatible; the persons in these three States, Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina, heretofore held as slaves, are therefore declared forever free."

Mr. Lincoln, by his proclamation of May 19, 1862, thus annuls General Hunter's proclamation:

"I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, proclaim and declare, that the Government of the United States had no knowledge, information, or belief, of an intention on the part of General Hunter to issue such a proclamation, nor has it yet any authentic information that the document is genuine. And further, that neither General Hunter, nor any other commander or person, had been authorized by the United States to make proclamations declaring slaves in any State free; and the supposed proclamation, now in question, whether genuine or false, is altogether void so far as it respects such declaration."

It will be remembered, when Fremont in Missouri granted freedom papers to slaves, Mr. Lincoln disavowed the act, and forbade its repetition. The retirement of Mr. Cameron from the War Department was understood to have been occasioned by his making very strong recommendations in favor of compulsory abolition in one of his reports. He went beyond what Mr. Lincoln thought right and politic, and in conflict with his own oft-expressed views