476 



HABEAS OOKPUS. 



Mr. Vallandigham : That is not in the specification. 

 I did not hear cheers for Jeff. Davis, but I heard a 

 shout in the crowd that " Jeff. Davis was a gentleman, 

 arid that was more than the President was." 



CROSS EXAMINATION BT MR. TALLANDIGHAM. 



Q. Did not I refer in my speech to the Crittenden 

 Compromise propositions, and condemn their rejec- 

 tion ? 



As the witness was about answering, the Judge Ad- 

 vocate objected to the question, on the ground that it 

 was bringing in matter foreign to the charge and spe- 

 cification. The Court allowed the question to be an- 

 swered. 



A. When endeavoring to show that the party in 

 power had not the restoration of the Union in view in 

 conducting the war, and that that was not their object, 

 he stated a number of means by which that could have 

 been accomplished ; and from the fact that none had 

 been adopted, he considered it proof that the restora- 

 tion of the Union was not the object for which the war 

 was being waged. 



Q. Did" I not quote Judge Douglas's declaration that 

 the rejection 



Mr. Vallandigham: I desire to prove that in my 

 speech I stated that Mr. Douglas had said that the re- 

 sponsibility for the rejection of the Crittenden propo- 

 sitions was with the Republican party. 



The Judge Advocate stated that his objection was 

 that the question was bringing in political opinions 

 and discussions with which the Court had nothing 

 to do. 



The room was cleared for deliberation, and the doors 

 closed. 



After an interval of fifteen minutes, the doors were 

 again opened, and then the Judge Advocate announced 

 that the question would not be admitted. 



Q. When speaking in connection with Forney's 

 "Press," did I not say that if other democrats in 

 "Washington and myself had not refused all idea and 

 suggestions of some pfominent men of the party in 

 power to make peace on the terms of disunion, that I 

 believe the war would have been ended in February. 



A. When speaking of the propositions before refer- 

 red to, and that this war was not being carried on for 

 the restoration of the Union, he stated that if the 

 democrats in Washington had united in influence for 

 the permanent separation of the Union, it would have 

 been accomplished in February. 



Q. Did I not refer expressly to myself in that con- 

 nection, and say that I had refused, and always would 

 refuse, to agree to a separation of the States, in other 

 words, to peace on terms of disunion ? 



A. Well, that idea is not exactly as it was express- 

 ed. He stated something to that effect. That he wish- 

 ed to have a voice in the manner in which the Union 

 was to be reconstructed, a_nd that our Southern breth- 

 ren should also have a voice in the matter. 



Q. Referring to the "Richmond Enquirer" article, 

 did I not say that Jeff. Davis's organ had called Dicta- 

 tor Lincoln to lock up Mr. Cox, Senator Richardson 

 and myself in one of his military prisons, because of 

 pur doing so much against Southern recognition and 

 independence. 



A. That is substantially what he said. 

 Q. Referring to General Order No. 38, did I not say 

 that, in so far as it undertook to subject citizens not in 

 the land or naval forces of the United States, or militia 

 of the United States in actual service, to trial by court- 

 martial or military commission, I believed it to be un- 

 constitutional, and a usurpation of arbitrary power' 



A. Yes ; except in the words " in so far.'* 

 Q. Referring to two citizens of Kentucky, tried by 

 military court in Cincinnati, did I not say that if what 

 they were charged with was actual treason, punishable 

 by death, and that if guilty, the penalty by State law 

 was hanging, that they ought to be hung, after being 

 tried by a judicial court and a jury, instead of which 

 they had been tried by a military court, and, as I un- 

 derstood, sentenced to fine and imprisonment one of 

 them $300 fine. 



A. I don't think he put those " ifs " in. I think he 

 said they were improperly tried, and by a usurpation 

 of power. 



Mr. Vallandigham: Strike out the "ifs" then. 

 Witness : That was substantially what he said. 



Q. Did I not also say in that connection that the 

 rebel officer who was tried as a spy by the military 

 court of Cincinnati, was legally and properly tried, 

 according to the rules and articles ; tried and con- 

 victedthat that was a clear case, where the Court had 

 jurisdiction ? 



A. It is my recollection that he denounced the Court 

 as an unlawful tribunal, and did not make any distinc- 

 tion? 



Question by Judge Advocate: Did he refer to the 

 case of Campbell, the rebel spy, and make any distinc- 

 tion? 



A. No. He denounced the Court first, and then gave 

 the instances, which I have already related in my di- 

 rect testimony. 



Question by Mr. Vallandigham : Do you not remember 

 my speaking of the Campbell case, and saying that he 

 was properly tried ? 



A. He may, but I don't recollect it. He probably 

 did refer to the Campbell case. 



Q. May I not have made the distinction, and youiiot 

 have heard it? 



The Judge Advocate said he would admit that the 

 accused did draw the distinction between the cases, and 

 that he admitted the right of the court to try the spy. 

 In other words, that he condemned the trial of the But- 

 ler county man, and approved the case of the spy, who 

 was tried and convicted. 



Q. Did I not distinctly, in the conclusion of the 

 speech, enjoin upon the people to stand by the Union 

 at all events, and if war failed not to give the Union 

 up, but to try by peaceable means, by compromise, to 

 restore it as our fathers made it ; and that though others 

 might consent, or "be forced to consent, I would not 

 myself be one of those who would take any part in 

 agreeing to a dissolution of the Union ? 



A. Yes. He said that he and the peace men were 

 the only ones who wished the restoration of the 

 Union. 



Q. Did not one of the banners you refer to as dec- 

 orated with butternuts, bear the inscription, " The 

 Constitution as it is, and the Union as it was." 



A. The banners were numerous. One of them, I be- 

 lieve, did bear that inscription. 



Q. Do you mean to be understood to say that I heard 

 the reference to Jeff. Davis in the crowd, or gave any 

 assent to it whatever? 



A. I cannot say that he did. Did not see or hear 

 him give any assent to it. There were many other re- 

 marks of that character uttered. 



Q. What was the size of the crowd assembled there? 



A. I do not know the proper estimate, but the crowd 

 was very large. 



The Court then adjourned to Thursday morning at 

 ten o'clock. 



SECOND DAY. 



The Court met at ten o'clock A. M. President as be- 

 fore. Yesterday's proceedings and testimony wore 

 read and approved, and were signed by the President. 



Capt. Hill was again called to the" stand, and bis 

 cross-examination was resumed by Mr. Vallandigham. 



Q. In speaking of the character of the war did I 

 not expressly say, as Mr. Lincoln in his proclamation, 

 July 1st, 1862. said, "This unnecessary and injurious 

 civil war? " 



Judge Advocate: So, Mr. Vallandigham, was tl 

 used in your speech as a quotation from the President's 

 proclamation ? 



Mr. Vallandigham: Yes, it was. 



Witness: I do not recollect that he did. The lan- 

 guage he made use of I understood to be his own. 



Mr. Vallandigham : Of course I could not put the 

 quotation marks in my speech. 



Q. Again, in speaking of the character of the war, 

 did I not expressly give the President's proclamation 



